S. 1726 provides for the establishment of institutes in the field of English as well as modern foreign languages. The value of language centers and institutes for the improvement of foreign language instruction has been fully demonstrated, and as President Knowles indicated in his testimony, we are pleased that S. 1726 would make them permanent. In the interest of maintaining balance among the various fields of study and especially of keeping the social sciences and the humanities vigorous and meaningful, as they must be in these critical times, the Association for Higher Education strongly urges the amendment of S. 1726 to include provision for a new program of institutes in the social sciences and humanities for college and university teachers. I am enclosing copies of resolutions on the National Defense Education Act adopted by the conference in 1958, 1959, and 1960 (app. A). APPENDIX A RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED AT THE 13TH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGHER EDUCATION SPONSORED BY THE ASSOCIATION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 1958 2. Financial assistance to talented youth.-Because of the great need of the country for the cultivation of the potentialities of its young people for all socially useful areas of service, and because of the financial barriers that at present prevent large numbers of young people from pursuing an education beyond the high school, we urge: (a) State and local governments to make maximum efforts, through public funds, to provide and maintain diversified facilities for higher education of good quality at the lowest possible cost to students. (b) Institutions of higher education to continue to encourage substantial gifts from private donors, corporations, and other nongovernmental agencies for scholarships and fellowships to highly qualified students and also for student loan funds in such institutions as do not at present have adequate capital funds for loan purposes. Because of the present inadequacy of institutional and other programs for financial assistance to students, we urge the Congress of the United States to enact legislation providing Federal funds for scholarship purposes to aid highly qualified students to attend recognized institutions of higher education. We urge further that the amounts of such appropriations be sufficient to provide not less than 20,000 new 4-year scholarships for undergraduate students each year until a total of 80,000 are in use at the end of a 4-year period. We favor a larger number of such scholarships if the Congress can provide the necessary supporting funds. In addition, we urge the Congress to provide Federal funds for the support of a program of fellowships for 5,000 graduate students the first year of its operation. We also urge that students granted scholarships and fellowships under any new Federal program that may be enacted be left completely free to choose their own subject-matter fields of study and occupational objectives in the recognized institutions they choose to attend, without any limitations imposed by their acceptance of such scholarships or fellowships. 6. Science, mathematics, engineering.—We fully support the efforts currently in progress throughout the Nation to strengthen the teaching of science, mathematics, and engineering. We would note, however, that most other academic areas similarly require strengthening. To stress one part of the curriculum to the neglect of others will introduce a dangerous imbalance in the education of the oncoming generation. RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED AT THE 14TH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGHER EDUCATION SPONSORED BY THE ASSOCIATION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1959 1. Higher education and national defense.-The 14th National Conference on Higher Education recognizes that colleges and universities must and will continue to respond to the necessity of maintaining and increasing the intellectual strength and broad competence required for national survival. The Federal Government, in executing its responsibilities for defense, must recognize that enduring strength is built from many talents, and that we must be prepared to engage in a conflict of ideas as well as a competition for technical supremacy. 2. The National Defense Education Act.-(a) The 14th National Conference on Higher Education commends the Congress of the United States for its action in passing the National Defense Education Act and urgently recommends that the Congress appropriate the funds authorized by the act, and adequate funds for its administration by the Office of Education. We also commend the Office of Education for its efforts under adverse circumstances to implement this act. (b) We recommend that the forgiveness provisions of title II of the National Defense Education Act be extended to those recipients of loans who later teach in any institution of higher learning as defined in section 103 of this act. (c) The 14th National Conference on Higher Education opposes the requirement of an affidavit disclaiming belief or membership in subversive organiza tions on the part of individuals receiving payments or loans, because we believe in equality of treatment with respect to Federal assistance and object to singling out students receiving this aid as a special group. We, therefore, recommend amendment of section 1001 (f) of the National Defense Education Act so as to remove this requirement. RESOLUTION ADOPTED AT THE 15TH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGHER EDUCATION SPONSORED BY THE ASSOCIATION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 9, 1960 6. Federal legislation.--The free society of America and its strength as a nation alike depend upon the future strength and quality of American education. From this dependence stems a national responsibility, for which funds must be provided by every level of government, by philanthropy, and by fair tuition charges to students. Present financial support is inadequate to provide the faculties, the facilities, and the equipment necessary for the operation of an educational program of high quality. Greatly increased support must come from all sources including a sizable increase in funds provided by the Federal Government. Following are specific recommendations for early Federal action: (1) On scholarships. We recommend that the Federal Government support a comprehensive Federal scholarship program which would complement the loan program under the National Defense Education Act. We urge that such a scholarship program base selection on academic ability and achievement with stipends graduated according to need, permit students freedom of choice in selecting their own courses and their own institutions, and be free of discrimination because of race, creed, color, or sex. (3) On National Defense Education Act. (a) We urgently recommend that the Congress appropriate additional funds authorized by the act in order to meet the needs for loans in the National Defense Education Act program. (b) We recommend that the forgiveness provisions of title II of the National Defense Education Act be extended to those recipients of loans who later teach in any institution of higher learning as defined in section 103 of this act. (c) We strongly oppose singling out students receiving payments or loans under the act, by requiring them to take a loyalty oath and sign a "disclaimer affidavit." We, therefore, recommend appropriate amendment of section 1001 (f) of the National Defense Education Act. Hon. WINSTON A. PROUTY, THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, Senate of the United States, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR PROUTY: I understand that the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare will soon be considering a bill for the extension of the National Defense Education Act. As dean of the graduate college of the University of Vermont from 1953 to 1960. I was in a good position to observe the immense benefits of the act to higher education in Vermont, and I feel sure that you will feel, as I do, that they should be continued. I was particularly happy to see that title VI (?) of the act, which deals with graduate fellowships, was applied to all fields of learning, including the humanities as well as the natural and social sciences. I note, however, that title IV, which permits summer institutes for schoolteachers, does not go as far. Of the humanities subjects taught in high schools, only foreign languages and mathematics are helped. It seems to me that the subjects of English, history, Latin, and music are equally in need of such assistance, and I should very much hope that if and when the National Defense Education Act is extended, it will be found possible to broaden title IV so that it may, through subsidized summer institutes, assist our teachers of English, history, Latin, music, and art as well as the teachers of other subjects. Sincerely yours, JOHN H. KENT, Professor of Classics. THE CLASSICAL ASSOCIATION OF NEW ENGLAND, Hon. WINSTON L. PROUTY, MY DEAR SENATOR PROUTY: Not long ago I took occasion to write you regarding a matter that was of personal concern to me, the proposed legislation for assistance to older citizens, but confined to those on social security. I am grateful for your kind response and for your own position on the questions at issue. This present letter I have been commissioned to write; and as a member of the Classical Association and a teacher of the classics for more than 40 years, I am in full sympathy with the resolution mentioned below, and on broader grounds than pure self-interest. At the 55th annual meeting of the Classical Association of New England, held at Holy Cross College, Worcester, Mass., on April 7, 1961, the membership voted unanimously to go on record as favoring the inclusion of the humanities in general and of the classical languages in particular in titles III and VI of the National Defense Education Act. The association, which numbers 930 members from all the New England States, believes that the present form of the act is heavily overbalanced in favor of the sciences and modern languages, and that the National Defense Education Act should strive for a better balance by giving strong support to all the humanities. Naturally a classical group has sincere and firm belief in the study of Latin and Greek. Such study is a valuable introduction to general language study; and Latin, in particular, is a sound basis for a better understanding of various modern languages. In fact, the study of Latin and Greek is a prime means for attaining a firsthand knowledge of our humanistic traditions. As the Classical Association of New England representative for the State of Vermont I am writing to inform you of the Classical Association's resolution and to seek your support. It seems only fair that classical teachers should also have some opportunity and advantage under the act. I hope you will see fit to consider the argument and to endorse the validity of the reasoning. I shall certainly appreciate any effort you may make in behalf of this matter. Very truly yours, HOWARD T. SMITH. PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANCIS PARKMAN, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, I am Francis Parkman, executive secretary of the National Council of Independent Schools. On behalf of the executive committee and the membership of the National Council of Independent Schools, we respectfully submit the following statement on S. 1726. THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS The National Council of Independent Schools is a voluntary membership organization, with 31 member associations and about 500 member schools, 95 percent of which are incorporated not for profit. The membership includes elementary and secondary schools of all types and sizes, in 39 States and the District of Columbia. Their enrollment is approximately 165,000 students. Though this number is only a small fraction of the students in elementary and secondary schools, it constitutes a much larger fraction of the college-bound population, as over 90 percent of the graduates of these schools go on to higher education. There are approximately 15,000 teachers employed in these schools. Three hundred and eighty-two of our members, over 75 percent, are nonsectarian. There are about 65 member schools of the Protestant Episcopal affiliation, about 30 with Roman Catholic affiliation, 16 with Friends affiliation, and 14 with other Protestant connections. GENERAL COMMENT ON NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT AND S. 1726 While endorsing in general the National Defense Education Act itself, as well as the changes in it proposed by Senator Hill in S. 1726, we wish : 1. To point out as strongly as we can certain provisions of the original act which we believe are discriminatory in their treatment of teachers in schools other than public schools; 2. To reiterate the request we have made on several occasions in the past both to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and to the appropriate legislative committees to have these provisions amended; 3. To ask that S. 1726 be so revised as to include these changes. In section 101 of title I of the National Defense Education Act, the Congress ** declares that the security of the Nation requires the fullest development of the mental resources and technical skills of its young men and women." This section further states that it is the "purpose of this act to provide substantial assistance in various forms to individuals, and to States and their subdivisions, in order to insure trained manpower of sufficient quality and quantity to meet the national defense needs of the United States." It is clear that the teachers in the independent schools are contributing substantially to the fullest development of the mental resources and technical skills of the thousands of young people they are teaching, and that teachers in independent schools are entitled as individuals to the same assistance that is provided for other teachers. We believe that to exclude them from professional benefits of the act is both discriminatory against them and contrary to the stated purpose of the act. SPECIFIC PROVISIONS RECOMMENDED The specific provisions of the National Defense Education Act which so discriminate and which we seek to have amended are described below. In each instance we refer to the existing portions of the National Defense Education Act and then to the pertinent parts of S. 1726. 1. Section 205 (b)3 of title II This provision of title II, authorizing loans for college students, states that "not to exceed 50 per centum of any such loan (plus interest) shall be canceled for service as a full-time teacher in a public elementary or secondary school in a State * * *." The effect of limiting the forgiveness feature to public school teachers is to discriminate against all other branches of the teaching profession as well as to discourage entry into the profession except through the public school. Many teachers go from public to private school teaching and vice versa and some from college to schoolteaching and vice versa. If any are to have encouragement from the Federal Government, all should have it. Senate bill S. 1726 on page 3, lines 13 to 17, would amend section 205(b)3 of title II by adding the words “in an elementary or secondary school overseas of the Armed Forces of the United States, or an institution of higher education" after "in a State". We endorse this change as far as it goes, but would add further the words "or in a private nonprofit elementary or secondary school" following the words “in a public elementary or secondary school". 2. National Defense Education Act, title V, part B, section 511 This provision of title V authorizing appropriations for institutes for counseling and guidance and for payment of stipends to public school personnel attending such institutes, excludes private school personnel from such assistance. On the assumption that better guidance will serve the general purpose of increasing the trained resources of the Nation, we believe that to provide assistance to guidance personnel in one sort of school and not in another is dicriminatory and contrary to the purpose of the act. We would point out that for many years National Science Foundation Institutes provided stipends for private schoolteachers on exactly the same basis as for public schoolteachers. Senate bill S. 1726, on page 16, lines 21 through 23, would amend section 511 by striking from the second sentence the words "public secondary school" and inserting in lieu thereof "public elementary or secondary school". We endorse this change, as far as it goes, but would add further to the new wording the words "or a private nonprofit elementary or secondary school". We endorse also the wording of the new section 511(b) proposed in S. 1726 on page 17, which provides assistance for personnel preparing to engage in counseling and guidance in elementary and secondary schools on a nondiscriminatory basis. 3. National Defense Education Act, title VI, part B, section 611 The current section 611 authorizing appropriations for foreign-language institutes and for payment of stipends to public schoolteachers attending such institutes, excludes private schoolteachers from such assistance. If more and better language teaching is in the national interest, we believe that assistance to language teachers in one branch of education and not the other again is discriminatory and contrary to the purpose of the act. We would point out that the private schools have long devoted a substantial portion of their curriculum to foreign languages, and a recent study made by the Modern Language Association found that 822 percent of the students in the Nation's independent secondary schools were enrolled in foreign-language courses, as opposed to 25 percent in the country's public high schools. In the year 1960, over 60 schools in the national council's membership were teaching Russian. Senate bill S. 1726, page 18, lines 14 through 16, would insert in the second sentence of section 611 after the words "any modern foreign language" the words "or English". We endorse this change, but would add further after the words "in a public elementary or secondary school" the words “or in a private nonprofit elementary or secondary school". We endorse wholeheartedly the new section 612, part B, title VI, entitled "Foreign Study" as proposed in S. 1726, page 18, which provides for assistance for foreign study for all elementary or secondary schools on a nondiscriminatory basis. We wish to add, in further support of the changes we have recommended. the following comments: 1. In response to a request from the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress last fall, we made a survey of a cross-section of our member schools on the subject of the National Defense Education Act. Of about 100 schools (of 200 questioned) which replied to a question asking if their teachers had attended National Defense Education Act institutes, more than 80 said they had not, and 50 percent of these gave as the reason the fact that their teachers were not eligible for stipends. This, in our opinion, clearly supports the view that the exclusion of private schoolteachers from the stipends provided for the institutes tends to discourage in this branch of education the very sort of improved guidance and teaching which the act is designed to encourage. 2. Our proposals to include private schoolteachers on the same basis as public schoolteachers have been independently advanced by the American Council on Education and were included in the recommendations of the consultants to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare on National Defense Education Act. In addition, it is our understanding that individual bills setting forth these changes have been introduced in the Senate by Senators Bennett (S. 622), Bush (S. 1227), and Humphrey (S. 1271). We appreciate the opportunity to present our views and respectfully recommend them to the committee for serious consideration. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS, Washington, D.C., May 15, 1961. Senator WAYNE MORSE of Oregon, Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Education Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We appreciate this opportunity to respond to the current proposal to amend the Defense Education Act so as to allow further Federal assistance to private and parochial schools. |