Page images
PDF
EPUB
[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

TABLE I.-National Defense Graduate Fellowship Program-Continued

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Enrollments by white and Negro groups are not available.

Howard University is a predominantly Negro institution. Since its establishment the university has been open to all persons who could meet the qualifications for admission without regard to race, creed, or color.

[subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

10 Specific information about the status of desegregation for these institutions is not
available. The Southern Education Reporting Service presents the following discussion
which is applicable:

"Status before 1954: When the U.S. Supreme Court first ruled in the school segregation
cases on May 17, 1954, 17 Southern and border States, plus the District of Columbia,
maintained complete segregation in elementary and secondary schools except in some
communities having only a few Negro children to educate from time to time. 4 States
outside the region-Arizona, Kansas, New Mexico, and Wyoming-allowed varieties of
local segregation contrary to law. 16 States had laws prohibiting segregation but not all
enforced them. 11 other Northern and Western States had no laws on the subject. The
school segregation cases were Oliver Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kans.,
et al.: Henry Briggs, Jr. et al. v. R. W. Elliott et al. (Clarendon County, S.C.); Dorothy E.
Davis et al. v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, Va., et al.; Francis B. Geb-
hardt et al. v. Ethel Louise Belton (New Castle County, Del.); and Spottswood Thomas
Bolling et al. v. Melvin Sharpe et al. (District of Columbia).

11 See also footnote 8. It should be pointed out that many institutions have no official
records of enrollments by race because State laws prohibit such records.

[graphic]

NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT-LANGUAGE INSTITUTES

Title VI of the National Defense Education Act of 1958 authorizes the U.S. Office of Education to negotiate with institutions of higher education in the United States to provide advanced training for teachers and supervisors and trainers of teachers of modern foreign languages in the elementary and secondary schools, with particular emphasis on instruction in the use of new teaching methods and instructional materials. The National Defense Education Act Language Institutes are designed to improve the quality of instruction in modern foreign languages in elementary and secondary schools.

The school operational costs of the National Defense Education Act Language Institutes are financed by the Office of Education. In addition, a person attending a language institute may receive, upon application, a Federal stipend of $75 per week, plus an allowance of $15 per week for each dependent if the individual is employed or about to be employed in a public elementary or secondary school. The institutes operate either in short term (summer session), or during the regular academic year.

Frame of reference

This report is concerned with the status of desegregation and admission policies with respect to race by those colleges and universities receiving Federal funds for language institutes under the National Defense Education Act. Where information is available, or estimates are given, information reporting enrollments in the individual institutes by whites and Negroes are reported.

Since the period represented in the table for the language institutes ranges from summer 1959 to academic year 1961-62, the following action reported by the U.S. Office of Education should be noted:

*** In the fall of 1961, the Commissioner of Education,
with the concurrence of the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, decided to add the following clause to the con-
tracts under which these institutes are conducted:

"In selecting the individuals for attendance at the institutes and in otherwise conducting the institute the contractor will not discriminate on account of sex, race, creed, color, or national origin of an applicant or an enrollee." The full discussion of the above action by the U.S. Office of Education is presented in the appendix.

A. Method

I. HIGHLIGHTS AND SUMMARY

A survey questionnaire was designed and sent to all colleges and universities ever participating in the National Defense Education Act Language Institute program. Where exact enrollments by race were not available, estimated figures were requested. (A copy of the questionnaire in full appears in the appendix.)

B. Scope of participation

A total of 99 questionnaires was sent to participating institutions. A total of 88 questionnaires, representing an 88.9 percent return, was received. Of 71 questionnaires sent to institutions located in Northern and Western States, 65 replies, or a 91.5 percent return, were received.

Of the 28 questionnaires sent to institutions located in Southern and Border States, 23 replies, or an 82.2 percent return, were received. A total of $9,973,009 in Federal funds went to colleges and universities conducting language institutes represented in table I. Of this total amount, $7,166,372 or 71.9 percent of the funds, went to institutions located in Northern and Western States; $2,806,637, or 28.1 percent of the total funds went to institutions located in Southern and Border States.

The total enrollment in language institutes represented in table I is 5,485. Of this total, 3,891, or 70.9 percent of the students, were enrolled in language institutes conducted by institutions located in Northern and Western States; 1,594, or 29.7 percent of the students were enrolled in institutions located in Southern and border States. C. Categorical analysis of data presented in table I

1. Language institutes conducted by colleges and universities located in Southern and Border States:

(a) Public institutions. State controlled: A total of 18 language institutes was conducted by State colleges and universities. These institutes received a total of $2,256,695 in Federal funds.

(1) Total number of segregated institutes at State colleges and universities, 1.

Total Federal funds to segregated institutes, $70,545, or 3.1 percent of total Federal funds to State schools.

(2) Total number of desegregated institutes, 17; total Federal funds for desegregated institutes, $2,186,150, or 96.9 percent of total Federal funds to State institutions.

(b) Private.-A total of 2 language institutes was conducted by privately controlled colleges and universities. These institutes received a total of $247,219. Both institutes were desegregated.

2. Language institutes conducted by colleges and universities located in Northern and Western States:

(a) Public institutions.-(1) State controlled: A total of 27 language institutes was conducted by State colleges and universities. These institutes received a total of $5,013,028, or 69.9 percent of total Federal funds to institutions in Northern and Western States.

(2) City and municipal: A total of 2 language institutes was conducted by city or municipal colleges and universities. These institutes received a total of $120,041, or 1.7 percent of the total Federal funds to institutions located in Northern and Western States.

(b) Private.-A total of 15 language institutes was conducted by privately controlled colleges and universities. These institutes received a total of $1,645,765, or 23 percent of the total Federal funds to institutions located in Northern and Western States.

(c) Church related.-A total of 4 language institutes was conducted by church-related colleges and universities. These institutes received a total of $387,538, or 5.4 percent of the total Federal funds to institutions located in Northern and Western States.

$3921-62

FIGURE 2

NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT

Language Institutes: Federal Grants to Institutions Located
In Southern and Border States, Summer 1959 through Academic
Year 1961-62

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][subsumed][merged small]
« PreviousContinue »