Page images
PDF
EPUB

In recent months the Nation has buzzed with excitement and speculation over the latest scientific developments which appear to symbolize either a whole new frontier of learning or the most serious threat to our way of life that we have ever seen. These events have caused many people to seriously examine the status of American education in the area of scientific training. One such group was the Rhode Island department of the American Legion which strongly believes that education is a keystone in the progress of the American people and is interwoven with our national security and the security of the free world. This organization, in collaboration with the Rhode Island Association of School Superintendents has spent much effort and many long hours in attempting to develop a proposal which would speed up scientific education in this country and tend to match the strides being made by Soviet Russia. The Legionnaires and educational authorities held many meetings and conferences on the problem over the past 6 months and eventually produced recommendations which they thought would best promote the Nation's educational program in science and mathematics.

These recommendations, in conjunction with a careful appraisal of the representations which have been made to and before this committee and the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, have been the basis for the bill which I have introduced. Many of the statements which have been made by leading educators and people prominent in the fields of science and industry, as well as Government administration, show that there is an immediate and pressing need for the encouragement of young men and women of ability to pursue studies in the fields of science, mathematics and engineering.

It is unfortunate that the number of pupils trained in secondary schools capable of undertaking studies leading to degrees in the sciences has been far short of current and estimated needs. While some progress has been made, I do not believe that the national trend to shun studies involving mathematics and science has been halted. I do believe, however, that, given the incentives found in the bill I have introduced, this trend will be halted and an everincreasing number of qualified students will go on to higher education in the sciences.

Again, we must work to solve the dilemma of the teaching profession, which remains underappreciated and underpaid in an age of great social progress and scientific advancement. The American people need to give far more regard to the intrinsic value of the teacher's contribution to our civilization. We need to recognize one simple fact-whatever our coming generations think and do about our way of life, about our search for world peace, about our scientific accomplishments-will be determined to a substantial degree by the day-to-day influence of our teachers. With this thought in mind the subject bill attempts to emphasize the training of teachers and to assist high schools and colleges in securing adequate science staffs by supplementing teachers' salaries.

Briefly, the legislative proposal which I have introduced has three main approaches: (1) to provide loans and grants to students; (2) to supplement the salaries of math and science teachers; and (3) to authorize the construction of math and science teaching facilities. It would provide in essence for

1. A system of Federal insurance for loans to high school and college students. To be eligible a student would have to be over 16 years of age and have completed his sophomore year in high school. No loan could be for over $1,500 for any single year but the program would cover the last 2 years in high school, college, and postgraduate work leading to a master's degree. The loans, guaranteed by the Federal Government, would be made by regular lending institutions and would be repayable by the student except that repayment of loans for work toward a master's degree would be waived. The money borrowed for this graduate work would be paid by the Federal Government upon the awarding of the master's degree.

The bill also proposes a grant of up to $3,000 per year to any holder of a master's degree in mathematics, science, or engineering who pursues further graduate work aimed at obtaining a doctorate in philosophy, science, or engineering.

2. The second title of the bill provides for $360 million being made available to the States on a per capita basis for the purposes of supplementing salaries for those teachers engaged in the fields of science or mathematics. Its goal would be to assist high schools and colleges to secure adequate teaching personnel in math and science departments by providing added increment to basic salaries. This title also provides for courses of instruction in science and math for teachers and supervisors. Federal funds

authorized under this title would be matched on a 50-50 basis by local and State funds and would be allocated to States in proportion of their population to the total population of the United States.

3. The third title of the bill provides $100 million for additions, new construction, and equipment for programs in mathematics and science in high schools and colleges. A minimum facilities concept similar to that of Public Law 815 applies to this title. The proposed facilities would include specialized buildings and equipment designed especially for educational projects in the fields of science and mathematics.

Mr. Chairman, there is excellent precedence for the bill which I have proposed. Three decades ago it was determined by Congress that vocational education was a matter of national interest and essential to the national welfare. Congress also determined that Federal funds were necessary to stimulate and assist the States in making adequate provisions for such training.

On February 23, 1917, the 64th Congress of the United States approved an act for the purpose of promoting and developing vocational education through a cooperative plan between the Federal Government and the several States. This act is usually referred to as the Smith-Hughes Act. From time to time supplementary acts have been enacted. The latest of these was the Vocational Education Act of 1946, commonly known as the George-Barden Act. Thus as early as 1917, the Congress had adopted policies which established a cooperative operation between the States and the Federal Government for the purpose of developing vocational education.

Today, it is a matter of national interest and essential to the national welfare that mathematics and science education should also be developed. To do so it is necessary that the Congress make Federal funds available to stimulate and assist the States in making adequate provisions for such training. Essentially, this bill provides for the promotion, development, and operation of programs of mathematics and science education in accordance with the same principles, provisions, and policies that the Federal Government now provides for vocational education.

Consequently, Mr. Chairman, there is nothing new or startling about this proposed legislation. It provides now the needed Federal assistance to help and assist the States to provide for adequate mathematics and science programs in our schools with accompanying advances in the training and economic status of mathematics and science teachers. This is an area in which the Federal Government has an immediate and vital concern and I hope that the committee will see its way clear to vote favorably on this bill.

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY CONGRESSMAN PETER W. RODINO, JR., IN SUPPORT OF HIS BILL H. R. 390, TO PROVIDE FOR LOANS TO ENABLE NEEDY AND SCHOLASTICALLY QUALIFIED STUDENTS TO CONTINUE POST-HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION, APRIL 3, 1958 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, first of all, may I express my appreciation for the opportunity to appear before your committee in behalf of my bill, H. R. 390, which would provide for the establishment of a Federal scholarship fund to enable needy but scholastically qualified students to pursue college, post graduate, and professional education. I would like to call the attention of this committee, first of all, to the appalling wastage of human resources involved in our Nation's present failure to make it possible for those thousands of high school graduates who have high and even outstanding ability to pursue their education up to the very limits of their capacity.

It has been estimated by the President's Commission on Higher Education that out of every thousand children finishing the fifth grade together, 900 have the ability to go through high school, yet only 403 do so. Out of that same thousand finishing the fifth grade, it has been estimated that 320 have the ability to go through college, yet only 70 do so. Thus, every year we are failing to train 55 percent of those who ought to finish high school and 76 percent of those who should finish college.

Mr. Chairman, I would submit that this is a luxury we can no longer afford. It is in fact, a standing reminder of the shortsightedness of this the richest Nation on earth. We who hold the birthright of democratic traditions must recognize that adequate educational opportunity is not merely one of democracy's obligations but rather that it is a necessity if we are to keep America strong and free. We simply cannot afford to let our best minds lie fallow.

Perhaps the No. 1 reason why so many of these young people of excellent ability do not go to college is because of a lack of adequate personal funds to finance this education. Today, this gap can no longer be filled by the private and charitable funds that are available for scholarship and loan purposes. Authorities on financing a college education are agreed that to maintain a student body of first-rate ability, financial assistance of some nature would have to be awarded to between 35 and 40 percent of the total student body. How many of our colleges can boast of this high a percentage?

Not only are the scholarships presently available to few in number but the stipends which many contain are similarly inadequate. Some of these are as low as $5 to $10 a year and many are for only $100 or less. Only in the more financially secure institutions like Princeton, Harvard, and Yale are scholarships available in considerable numbers which cover at least half of the cost of such education.

I am therefore urging consideration of this bill, or some similar bill, which I hope will to some extent help to provide a means whereby those well qualified but needy students may secure that added educational training so necessary to our Nation's well-being. In essence, this bill is intended to give every qualified student the opportunity to obtain the financial assistance necessary to attain a college education if he so desires. It provides for no Government subsidy but rather establishes a central loan fund to which the individual student on his own initiative and through his own State administrative agency may apply.

Under this bill each State is free to choose whether to participate in the Federal scholarship fund program or not. If it chooses to do so it then contributes proportionately to the maintenance of the fund. Initial selection of the recipients of all loans is also left to the State administrative agencies established for this purpose with the proviso that no State shall make any discrimination in its selection because of race, creed, color, or national origin.

My bill further provides that each student selected to participate in the program may choose his own course of study at the insitution of his choice thus taking advantage of the student's natural inclinations and motivations. Likewise, the bill contains what I consider to be adequate safeguards to prevent the Federal Government from regulating or interfering with the courses of instruction or the administration of our colleges and univerities.

The loans provided for under this program are of two amounts. For those engaged in primarily undergraudate-type studies, $1,000 may be borrowed annually for a period of 4 years. For those engaged in postgraduate and professional study, the sum of $1,500 may be borrowed annually for a like period. In neither case may the amount borrowed exceed the cost of tuition by a certain specified amount and in both cases these loans must be repaid at 1 percent interest annually over a 10-year period following the completion of the studies undertaken. Both type loans are made subject to the individual student's demonstrated financial need and both are contingent upon the satisfactory progress of the student in pursuing his studies.

Since I realize that both time and study will be needed to initiate and perfect any such scholarship program, I have provided that $5 million be appropriated initially by the Federal Government for this fund followed by $10 million for the succeeding year and then such sums as may be necessary to fulfill the provisions of this act.

The contribution to be made by the States who have elected to participate in the program will vary on an annually determined sliding scale but in no case will they exceed 10 percent of the aggregate amount of advances made to students from that State during the preceding calander year.

In conclusion, I need not remind the subcommittee that the Soviet Union is currently graduating nearly three times the number of engineers that are coming out of our technical schools. If we hope to keep pace with the tremendous technological development currently taking place within the Soviet Union-and indeed we must-then we must be willing to pay the cost of this development. Not only is this program essential for our national security against the external menace of the Soviet Union, but it is perhaps more important for the intellectual and spiritual growth of our democracy itself. We in this country have, indeed, placed all our faith, placed our hope, upon the education, the intelligence and the understanding of our people. We have said that ours is a government conducted by its citizens, and from this it follows that the Government will be better conducted if its citizens are educated. We have bet all our chips, if you please, on the intellectual improvement of our people.

I sincerely urge necessary action during this session to consider the various legislative proposals for Federal aid to students for higher education. A subject so vital certainly merits the attention and consideration of the Congress.

STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE HUDDLESTON, JR., oF ALABAMA, IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 10381, APRIL 3, 1958

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am very grateful to you for courtesy in permitting me to make a statement at this vital hearing. In my opinion, the appalling state of education in the United States today is a matter of paramount importance. At a time when an enlightened educational system should provide the vision to lead our Nation onward, it becomes the Nation's duty to revitalize our program of public education and lift it from its present low level.

The public neglect and ultimate decline of education presents a very distressing picture. Our schoolhouses are bulging with millions more schoolchildren each year and our school officials must search harder and longer to find good teachers. Rather than an alibi, however, this must serve as a challenge to our educators. The role of education is more diversified, more complex, more exacting than ever. As a result, the American educational system has almost gargantuan responsibilities to the youth of our Nation and time. If America is to maintain its position of world leadership, our graduates of tomorrow must be a most imaginative citizenry, ably prepared to assume its responsibilities.

In addition to being a distinct privilege of far-reaching significance to each individual, education is a long-term investment in our future security and independence. To this extent, education is a matter of national concern although primary responsibility for our educational system must rest with the individual States and school districts. In preparing for the age of space, adequate education is of the utmost consequence. As Benjamin Franklin so aptly stated, "The good education of youth has been esteemed by wise men of all ages, as the surest foundation of the happiness both of private families and of commonwealths."

The Federal Government most certainly has a responsibility, therefore, to make sure that American schoolchildren receive a suitable education to assure our Nation's intellectual preeminence. This is the purpose of H. R. 10381, which is sponsored by my good friend and colleague from Alabama, Mr. Carl Elliott, who is also chairman of this hard-working subcommittee. Particularly am I impressed with the provisions of title III of his bill, entitled "National Defense Student Loan Program." This program would allow loans of as much as $1,000 a year to prospective teachers in order for them to attend college. These loans would be canceled, however, at the rate of 20 percent per year for each year's service as a full-time teacher in an accredited school.

Unfortunately, we are not training nearly enough teachers to meet the needs of our school population, but numbers alone fail to give the complete story. In addition to teachers in quantity, we need teachers who are well trained and amply qualified. Our society demands, rather than supermarket-type schooling. what might be called quality education or education in depth. No student should ever be skipped over in our educational processes, but every outstanding student should certainly be educated to the fullest capacity. If we are to receive maximum benefit from our system of education, there is no place for mediocrity in teaching.

For generations, teaching has been one of the noblest and most honorable professions. In terms of service to humanity, it is beyond doubt one of the most rewarding. Yet a critical shortage of teachers now confronts our country. In almost every section of the Nation the supply of competent teachers falls far short of the increasing demand. More importantly, there is every indication that this shortage will grow much, much worse. This, in itself, is probably the most pressing problem facing education in this Nation today.

Good teachers have become scarce for a number of varied reasons. To some extent, the present teacher deficit reflects the low birth rate of the 1930's. True. the impact of World War II and the Korean conflict have had an adverse effect on our educational systems. Perhaps the heaviest teacher loss, however, is due to the growing demand for college-trained specialists in business, industry, and government. The exodus from the teaching profession in the last two decades has been unparalleled in our history.

Why teachers choose to leave the classroom for shops and offices is indicative of the present decline of our educational system. In a sense, the system has fallen victim to a vacuum of trained manpower which it has failed to fill. Numerous teachers leaving the classrooms have plunged us into an educational depression. What is worse, at least 20 to 35 percent of our potential teachers who have received a well rounded and general education are lost to other occupations before ever reaching the classroom. Interest in teaching is sadly waning. If we are to reverse this trend and revive the desire to teach, the economic and social position of our teachers in the community needs immediate bolstering.

The immediacy of this problem is borne out by the rapidly increasing school population. In the fall of 1957, the United States Bureau of the Census estimated that some 32.9 million pupils were enrolled in full-time elementary and secondary public schools. This comprises almost one-fifth of our entire national population. By 1960, officials figure the school population will total 37 million and by 1965 it is estimated that there will be 41 million pupils-representing an increase of almost 25 percent within 7 years.

Speedy adjustments in our educational system must be made to handle these bumper classes in our elementary and high schools. These are the formative years and an efficient education is all important. The current shortage of elementary and secondary teachers has been placed at 120,000. This mere figure is misleading, however, since teachers skilled in the instruction of science, engineering, mathematics, modern foreign languages, and other disciplines-the courses so necessary in our preparation for tomorrow-are extremely limited in number. It is quite imperative, therefore, that the Nation's overall teaching staff be augmented to accommodate increased student loads, to replace substandard instructors, and also to provide training especially in science and technology which is not now generally available.

In studying the need for teachers in our public school systems, emphasis must placed on the quality of the educational program. There must be assurances that each schoolchild will have adequate opportunity to acquire an education to the limit of his capabilities. Obviously our educational system cannot operate with maximum efficiency by attempting to utilize unprepared teachers. More than 91,000 full-time teachers, or 7% percent of all United States elementary and secondary teachers, hold substandard certificates.

After the less competent are weeded out, our educational system can be further improved by the addition of new teachers to offer special instruction and services. Specialized teachers might give remedial help to the handicapped, encourage talented students in neglected fields, and generally fire pupils' imaginations. This Nation is one of specialists, and there is certainly need for specialized training in our public schools.

In addition, our schools must have more teachers to replace those leaving the teaching field, to relieve overcrowding conditions, and to serve added enrollments. In each of these categories, the teacher demand is ever growing.

The national defense student loan program, such as proposed in the bill now under consideration, would do much to rectify this unfortunate teacher supply situation. By affording worthy and deserving students the monetary means to attend college, it would help them to help themselves. A loan program of this type is, in my considered opinion, highly justified at this time.

As I have mentioned, public education is a basic responsibility of the various States and school districts. Local control of education must be maintained, but the Federal Government has a definite obligation to insure the quality of public education. In these crucial times, Federal grants for educational purposes are vitally needed to stimulate interest and awaken the desire to learn.

A Federal loan program as proposed in the Elliott bill would, in effect, serve as a type of local recruitment program for teachers. Communities and school districts might well plan ahead for their teaching needs by encouraging potential teachers to attend college on Federal loans. In providing that the total loan might be canceled if the recipient returned to teach in the public school system, for 4 or 5 years, this legislation provides assurance that a large number of college graduates trained in the teaching profession would, in fact, return to teach school in their hometowns and sections.

There would be many other benefits to a Federal loan program to prospective teachers. It would make possible a college education for the student who was academically qualified but financially unable to go on his own. Once in college on a Federal loan, a student would be encouraged to earn high marks in order to keep his loan. After graduating and entering the teaching profession, the

« PreviousContinue »