persons in Congress and by scientists and other persons in Government suggest that they are not cognizant of the many implications national testing programs have. I am sure that any person among those who have endorsed the enclosed statement will be most happy to provide whatever assistance he can to congressional committees or to governmental offices as they face the important problem of helping this country better utilize its manpower. Yours sincerely, RALPH F. BERDIE, Professor of Psychology and Director, Student Counseling Bureau, The attached policy statement regarding nationwide testing of students has been reviewed and endorsed by the following directors of statewide testing programs. Dr. Ralph F. Berdie, director, student counseling bureau, University of Minnesota Prof. J. Spencer Carlson, director of admissions, University of Oregon Dr. John R. Crawford, director, bureau of education research and service, University of Maine Dr. Junius A. Davis, director, State testing service, University system of Georgia Dr. E. F. Lindquist, director, university examination service, State University of Dr. Ernest McDaniel, director, university testing service, University of Kentucky Dr. John Milholland, director, evaluation and examinations division, University of Michigan Dr. Peter P. Muirhead, chief, bureau of examinations and testing, State department of education, New York Dr. W. A. Pemberton, assistant dean of students, University of Delaware Dr. William D. Perry, university testing service, University of North Carolina Dr. H. H. Remmers, director, division of educational reference, Purdue University Mr. Allan B. Smith, bureau of educational research and service, University of Connecticut Mrs. Annie W. Ward, director, Tennessee State testing program, University of Tennessee Dr. Arthur A. Wellck, director, counseling and testing service, University of New Mexico Mr. S. David Winans, supervisor of research, New Jersey State Department of Dr. Alfred L. Wingo, supervisor of research, State department of education POLICY STATEMENT REGARDING NATIONWIDE TESTING OF STUDENTS Never before in the history of the country has so much attention been given to the problem of the early identification of talented high-school students for the eventual purpose of increasing the country's supply of professionally and scientifically trained specialists. Typical of this recent attention is the statement of President Eisenhower taken from a speech delivered November 13, 1957, at Oklahoma City. "We should, among other things, have a system of nationwide testing of highschool students; a system of incentives for high-aptitude students to pursue scientific or professional studies; a program to stimulate good-quality teaching of mathematics and science; provision of more laboratory facilities; and measures, including fellowships, to increase the output of qualified teachers." In future months this statement undoubtedly will receive much attention and suggestions, for many programs will be based upon it. Relatively less attention will be given, we can anticipate, to another statement of the President's in the same speech. "However, what will then be needed is not just engineers and scientists, but a people who will keep their heads and, in every field, leaders who can meet intricate human problems with wisdom and courage. In short, we shall need not only Einsteins, but Washingtons and Emersons." In recognition of the needs so emphatically described in the President's speech, and in light of the many implications suggested programs of action have for our social, cultural, and political life, the following basic principles have been endorsed: 1. Psychological tests are useful means for identifying persons with unusual abilities, aptitudes, interests, and skills. Identification of these persons, however, can be done most effectively when tests are used in conjunction with other measures, particularly information based upon the past achievement and behavior of the individual. 2. Psychological characteristics measured by tests do not appear at the same age in everyone. Any program of identification of gifted students must recognize that for different persons various abilities, aptitudes, and skills appear at different ages. A program of identification aimed at only one age group will miss many potential contributors of great talent. 3. In the long run talented and gifted persons, regardless of how they are identified, will make the greatest social contribution and achieve the maximum personal satisfaction if they are allowed to actively participate in their own educational and vocational planning and if they are provided with the maximum opportunity for selecting their own educational and vocational objectives. 4. Identification of talented persons is only the first step in achieving maximum utilization of these talents. Appropriate and adequate counseling and guidance must aid persons make maximum use of their special talents, and effective teaching and instruction must provide an opportunity for these talents to flower. 5. Programs aimed at identifying talented students cannot be exclusively national or local in nature. Such programs are called for at local levels, State levels, regional levels, and perhaps at national levels. Present experience suggests that local and State testing programs should be provided opportunities to develop and to demonstrate their effectiveness prior to the possible introduction of national testing programs. 6. In our concern with persons with exceptional talents, we must not forget the importance of adequately utilizing the talents of all. For each one scientific genius in the laboratory, many technicians may be needed and for each technician, many more skilled craftsmen. A country cannot maintain its productivity nor its freedom without extending these principles of identification and training to its entire population. 7. High level competencies have always been in critical shortage in all fields— science, business, industry, government, arts, and humanities. Each of these fields is imperative in our democracy and every action considered to influence the allocation and training of talented youth must be carefully examined to determine its effect upon all types of capacities. BELOIT TAXPAYERS' LEAGUE, Congressman CARL ELLIOTT, Chairman, House Subcommittee on Special Education, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN ELLIOTT: The board of directors of the Beloit Taxpayers' League has instructed the secretary to submit to you the attached copy of a resolution adopted this month with the request that it be read into your committee's records. We are including a copy of Teacher Utilization in Wisconsin High Schools for your information. Respectfully yours, LETA LYON, Secretary. RESOLUTION OF BELOIT TAXPAYERS' LEAGUE, JANUARY 14, 1958 Whereas repeated attempts to inject the Federal Government into the educational field through the use of Federal funds for educational purposes have been made in the past several years; and Whereas the most recent attempt is in the form of Federal scholarships for students to attend institutions of higher education; and Whereas an informal poll by taxpayer associations leaders in Wisconsin indicates there is public sentiment that Federal aid would involve Federal control, that sputnik is being used as an excuse for the Federal Government to enter the education field; and Whereas educational authorities indicate a need for a change in emphasis toward science and mathematics in the elementary, high school, and higher education curricula—which can be achieved without Federal aid: Now be it Resolved, That the Beloit Taxpayers' League go on record as being strongly opposed to Federal aid for scholarships because it entails potential dangers of Federal control, and it is not the proper approach to the problem that exists; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be sent to the President, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and members of Wisconsin's congressional delegation. Adopted this 14th day of January 1958. CARL O. ANDERSON. R. WASHBURN. THE DANIEL AND FLORENCE GUGGENHEIM FOUNDATION, DEAR CONGRESSMAN: In view of the national importance of the subject and pending legislation concerning it, I think you may be interested in the attached statement regarding the financing of technical education. The statement grew out of discussions at the recent meetings in New York of the foundation committees of the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Jet Propulsion Centers at Princeton University and California Institute of Technology and the Guggenheim Institute of Flight Structures at Columbia University. It is subscribed to by all those present, whose names and titles are appended to the statement. Yours sincerely, HARRY F. GUGGENHEIM, President, the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Foundation. A MAJOR PORTION OF SUPPORT FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING EDUCATION MUST COME FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT Statement of the foundation committees of the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Jet Propulsion Centers at Princeton University and California Institute of Technology and the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Institute of Flight Structures at Columbia University, meeting in New York City, January 27, 1958 It is evident that Russia has had great success in certain scientific and engineering fields, notably in the launching of satellites and in the development of longrange missiles; and that Russia has placed and continues to place greater emphasis than we do on scientific research and engineering education. We feel that it is now necessary for the United States to adopt a positive and dynamic program, embracing these points, among others: 1. A substantial increase in emphasis on scientific research, especially fundamental research, and on engineering research and development. 2. More and better facilities for university education in research and engineering, at both the undergraduate and graduate level. 3. Increased emphasis on mathematics and science subjects in our secondary schools, and high schools, where students should not only be better taught, but should be held to higher standards of learning and stricter curriculums in techniuical fields. Better training in mathematics and science in the high schools will provide a larger number of competent young people for science and engineering training in the colleges and graduate schools. The present funds available are wholly inadequate to make these advances possible. In the past, funds for educational purposes and research have come primarily from private donors, business, and foundations. But adequate amounts of money are no longer available from these sources to cope with the problems of the space age. We can no longer depend primarily on private donors to support our educational system, if we are to keep up with the progress being made by the Russians in science and engineering education. In future a major portion of support for science and engineering education and research must come from the Federal Government. Individuals, business institutions, and foundations must also be encouraged to continue and even increase their contributions but without neglecting the arts and humanities. These sums should provide, either directly or through matching funds, better salaries for teachers, well-equipped laboratories, suitable classrooms, and other necessary educational facilities, as well as scholarship or other support for able science and engineering students who otherwise could not attend our colleges and universities. Federal support for basic research in the areas of rockets, missiles, satellites, and space flight now comes principally through six agencies; the National Science Foundation, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the three armed services, primarily the Office of Naval Research (Navy), the Office of Ordnance Research (Army), and the Office of Scientific Research (Air Force). The research funds in the above areas available through these agencies should be at least doubled, which would mean an increase of only some $20 million annually. In addition, the application of research funds provided from governmental sources should hereafter be hedged around with fewer restrictions. Some of the major research breakthroughs of the past have been made through freedom to follow bypaths encountered in the course of the exploration of nature, and we believe further substantial discoveries will also be made by this means in the future, if freedom to follow promising leads is made possible by removing restrictions on grants for research. Research and education are a basic foundation for our self-preservation in the supersonic and space age. We also need the proposed program so that this Nation can make its rightful contribution to human progress. Harry F. Guggenheim, president, the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Foundation; Dr. Theodore von Karman, Chairman, Advisory Group for Aeronautical Research and Development, NATO, consultant to the foundation; Dr. Clark B. Millikan, director, Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory, California Institute of Technology; Prof. Courtland D. Perkins, chairman, aeronautical engineering department, Princeton University; Dr. John R. Dunning, dean, School of Engineering, Columbia University; Dr. W. D. Rannie, Robert H. Goddard, professor, California Institute of Technology; Dr. Luigi Corcco, Robert H. Goddard, professor, Princeton University; Prof. Jewell M. Garrelts, administrative director, Institute of Flight Structures and executive officer, department of civil engineering, Columbia University; Dr. Frank E. Marble, professor, California Institute of Technology; Dr. Martin Summerfield, professor, aeronautical engineering, Princeton University; Prof. Hans H. Bleich, technical director, Institute of Flight Structures, Columbia University; Prof. Lee Arnold, professor of civil engineering, Columbia University; Dr. George Herrmann, associate professor of civil engineering, Columbia University; Dr. A. M. Freudenthal, professor of civil engineering, Columbia University; Dr. S. S. Penner, associate professor, California Institute of Technology; Dr. G. Edward Pendray, consultant, the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Foundation. Hon. CARL ELLIOTT, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., March 17, 1958. Chairman of the Subcommittee on Special Education, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I enclose herewith my statement in support of H. R. 9634 which I am sponsoring. I would appreciate your including this in the record of your hearings on the Federal program in the field of higher education. Also enclosed herewith is a statement of the Greater New Orleans Educational Television Foundation in support of my bill. I would also appreciate having this included in the record. When the record of testimony has been printed I wonder if you would be good enough to furnish a copy to my office and to Mrs. Luke Abramson, Jr., WYESTV, 916 Navarre Avenue, New Orleans, La. With kindest regards and best wishes, I am Sincerely, HALE BOGGS, M. C. STATEMENT OF HON. HALE BOGGS, M. C., IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 9634, To EXPEDITE THE UTILIZATION OF TELEVISION FACILITIES IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES, AND IN ADULT TRAINING PROGRAMS I appreciate the opportunity which has been given me to appear before your committee today in support of my bill, H. R. 9634, to expedite the utilization of television facilities in our public schools and colleges, and in audit training programs. The potentialities of educational television are almost unlimited. Yet to date, these have not been exploited to any appreciable degree. The principal difficulty which has stood in the way of the development of this new facility is the lack of funds for providing the proper facilities for transmission, mobile pickup, etc., as well as providing suitable receiving equipment in schools, especially large-screen projection equipment, making it possible to bring these programs to large school assemblies. I believe that my bill would give much-needed help in this connection. To cite an example, an educational television foundation, the Greater New Orleans Educational Television Foundation, has been set up in my own city of New Orleans and operates station WYES-TV. In spite of generous support from the Fund for Adult Education, the public, the New Orleans public school system, New Orleans parochial schools, Tulane and Loyola Universities, the school boards of adjoining parishes, and other civic bodies, the setting up and operations of this station have been established only on a most precarious financial basis. It is still necessary for the foundation to go to the public for large sums each year merely for operating expenses. Additional faciliites (such as a mobile unit) are needed by the station itself, and the local schools which operate educational programs in connection with the station need large-screen projectors for use in large auditoriums, to take full advantage of their program. I am confident that the situation in New Orleans is typical of that of stations all over the country. Although the educational television stations of the country are operating in close cooperation with the various elementary and high schools in presenting in-school training by this new medium, this is but a part-perhaps a minor part of the value of such stations. The presentation of informative and cultural programs for the whole population is equally important. There is no other medium comparable to television in its ability to present through eye and ear, and in an interesting fashion, continuing education for our whole population. I hope the committee will see fit to approve my bill. STATEMENT OF THE GREATER NEW ORLEANS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 9634, To EXPEDITE THE UTILIZATION OF TELEVISION FACILITIES IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES, AND IN ADULT TRAINING PROGRAMS At the January meeting of the board of trustees of the Greater New Orleans Educational Television Foundation, great interest and enthusiasm were expressed for Congressman Boggs' bill, H. R. 9634, to expedite the utilization of television facilities in our public schools and colleges, and in adult training programs. It is felt that the passage of this bill will produce many needed advantages for our educational station, WYES-TV, and similar stations throughout the country. Our foundation is off to an excellent start without formal support from any State agency, and our programs have been so well received by the community that there is need for immediate expansion of the modest facilities with which we began our operations. The contributions which we receive from educational institutions on an annual basis are inadequate to maintain our present tight budget, and we are dependent on contributions from the community to supplement our operating funds. We must necessarily devote every dollar that we can raise to operations, |