The proposed substitute for title V, S. 580, to be submitted-when added to the Smith-Hughes and George-Barden Acts, will do much to initiate, stimulate, expand, and maintain vocational and technical education.

Thank you for the privilege of submitting this testimony.

Senator MORSE. Thank you, Mr. Eberle, for this statement.

As you know, Senator Randolph is a member of this subcommittee and he asked me to express to you his regret that he could not be here this afternoon. He finds himself in the same position as the chairman of the subcommittee has found himself so many times. He cannot be in two different places at once. He is detained on other official Senate business. My counsel tells me that he has already communicated with you. I was not aware of that. Earlier I told him that I would extend his regrets.

He has spoken to me of the program upon which you have testified this afternoon with respect to what is being done in West Virginia. He also, as you know, is very much interested in the Appalachian program, which covers not only West Virginia but the whole Appalachian region.

We have one of the most seriously troubled areas in the country. It has unemployment problems. It has a great need for retraining programs. There must be much retraining provided to the area. Many of those unemployed are able to be gainfully employed again.

I am happy to inform you of the cooperation I am receiving from Senator Randolph in connection with not only the vocational training aspects of this bill, but every section of the bill.

Our next witness is

?

Dr. MOBLEY. Miss Catherine Dennis.

Senator MORSE. Miss Dennis, we are happy to have you. Proceed in your own way.

STATEMENT OF MISS CATHERINE T. DENNIS, STATE SUPERVISOR OF HOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION, STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, RALEIGH, N.C.

Miss DENNIS. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I am Catherine T. Dennis, State Supervisor of Home Economics Education, Division of Vocational Education, State Department of Public Instruction, Raleigh, N.C. I represent the American Vocational Association and am speaking for the home economics membership of this association in behalf of Federal appropriations for vocational home economics.

I have presented a statement which I would like to have included in the record.

Senator MORSE. The statement will be included in the record and you may summarize it.

(The statement referred to follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MISS CATHERINE T. DENNIS, STATE SUPERVISOR OF HOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION, STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, RALEIGH, N.C.

Mr. Chairman, I am Catherine T. Dennis, State Supervisor of Home Economics

tion, Raleigh, N.C. I represent the American Vocational Association and am speaking for the home economics membership of this association in behalf of Federal appropriations for vocational home economics.

We believe in the vocational education program and we believe in Federal support of it. Millions of American families have benefited by this program since its beginning under the Smith-Hughes and subsequent acts. We are indebted to the U.S. Congress for its vision in establishing and maintaining the home economics program through these acts and we sincerely urge you to continue the appropriation for it as a part of vocational education. With certain modifications in the wording of the existing and subsequent acts, further expansion in the education of youth, especially girls and women, for gainful employment in occupations involving knowledge and skills in home economics subjects will be possible.

A BRIEF OF JUSTIFICATION

The value of vocational home economics during the preceding years cannot be estimated in dollars. Statistics from the States, as compiled by the U.S. Office of Education for the year 1960-61, show an enrollment of 1,610,334 in vocational home economics programs, 629,225 being women and men enrolled in adult classes. In fact, 42 percent of the total enrollment in vocational education is in this field with the primary emphasis placed upon strengthening home and family living. The ultimate goal of women is marriage and motherhood. Never in the history of the United States have so many women married and at so early an age. One out of every two marriages is contracted by a girl under 20 years of age and one out of every three babies is born to a mother of this age group. Preparation for the most important goal of life can no longer be left to "learning at mother's knee," because mother is apt to be working away from the family 8 to 9 hours daily. Mobility will probably affect the lives of the young homemakers, forcing them to live far from parental guidance, so that decisions related to family life will have to be made in terms of previous training or lack of training. Home economics is the only subject in the high school program centered around the aspects of daily living. Values related to family living in a democratic society form the core of the program-the how and importance of child rearing, the strengths of the individual as developed through living in an atmosphere of love and consideration, the use of the economic resources of the family for satisfying shelter and surroundings, the wise consumption of income to meet individual needs, the well-being of each family as influenced by the emotional, physical and spiritual surroundings so essential to individual security. Thousands of home economics teachers and families view this training as essential to the welfare of our Nation. If the funds are not continued, many schools will be without this program or the amount of instruction offered greatly curtailed. This curtailment will be largely in the innumerable small high schools where it is now the only vocational program offered to girls and adult

women.

The Department of Labor recently stated that in 1960 there were 24.2 million women workers in the labor market. Of this number, only 5 percent were college graduates. During that same year, however, approximately 80,000 home economists, every one of whom held at least 1 college degree, were in the labor market. They are the teachers, extension agents, college professors, dietitians, nutritionists, research workers, specialists, and women economists in business. Research from many States prove that today's professional home economist was influenced during her high school experience, almost 100 percent, to enter this professional field. This is but another evidence of the importance of Vocational home economics at the high school level in contributing to the educational leadership so greatly needed in our society.

The mores of this country have habituated us to the philosophy that a mother's place is in the home, while in actuality the pressures from the labor market for more workers, the less-than-average U.S. income for 50 percent of our families and the desire on the part of families for more of the goods and services in an affluent society, indicate that more women will enter the labor market and remain in it for a longer period of time. The reports from the National Manpower Council in 1951 and 1960 concur with the need for women workers. "Women constitute not only an essential but also a distinctive part of our manpower resources. They are essential because without their presence in the labor force we could neither produce and distribute the goods uor provide the

educational, health, and other social services which characterize American society. They constitute a distinctive manpower resource because the structure and the substance of the lives of most women are fundamentally determined by their functions as wives, mothers, and homemakers."

THE EXPANDING CONTRIBUTION OF VOCATIONAL HOME ECONOMICS

With some modification in the wording of the existing acts and any subsequent act, the program can be greatly expanded to include training for competency in wage-earning occupations.

Many occupations fall within the purview of the skills and knowledge of home economics. These occupations have increasing significance in view of many changes that are taking place in homes and communities and particularly because of the increasing numbers of women who find it necessary to become wage

earners.

According to information from leading U.S. economists, the greatest expansion in growth of our economy lies in the areas of distribution and service. "The Occupational Outlook Handbook" states that the service industry will grow faster than any other in spite of mechanization and automation. These are tasks which machines cannot do. In 1961 "service" expenditures constituted 42 percent of the total consumer outlay. Many of these services are jobs that serve families and homes. It is in this last category that home economics will be able to make a great contribution in training for expanding fields of employment. Service occupations which use home economics knowledge and skills include those that have both a commmunity and home focus. Included in these occupation as are such positions as household managers, homemaker assistants, food service managers, caterers, lunchroom managers, lunchroom workers, dressmakers and home tailors, alterers, hospital aids, hotel housekeepers, hospital housekeepers, child care personnel, cooks and chefs, and personnel for services to the aged.

If history is to serve as a guide, we must conclude that man rarely becomes aware of significant trends until they overwhelm him. This is perhaps the state in which we find ourselves today, but if the Congress will continue the home economics appropriation, leave the responsibility of allocation to the State boards of education approved by the U.S. Commissioner of Education, we can and will expand the vocational home economics program to meet the challenge of our changing society.

Thank you.

Miss DENNIS. Senator, I will not repeat this, but I should like. as the only woman member of the team to talk a little about the need of vocational home economics. I am completing 42 years of service in this area and I feel that we have a dual responsibility.

Senator MORSE. You are testifying before a very biased chairman. Mrs. Morse was a home economics teacher in the University of Minnesota; in fact, that circumstance is partially responsible for my getting through school.

Miss DENNIS. Then you can understand that we have a vocational intent.

EXPANDING CONTRIBUTION OF VOCATIONAL HOME ECONOMICS

Because of the wording of the Smith-Hughes and the George-Barden Acts, we have been, of course, primarily responsible and interested in the welfare of the American family. We have centered our attention. on training for better home and family living.

At this time, we are finding great emphasis on training for actual remunerative positions. Now, we do not feel that we can change our philosophy overnight. We still think that with the number of women leaving the homes for employment, we are more than ever responsible

You can hardly pick up a daily paper or magazine without seeing something about the problems the home should face in overcoming problems or juvenile delinquency, bad manners, early marriages, any of the problems that beset the American family today. We feel we still have a great deal to offer in the training of future homemakers. and we do not want to see that program lessened.

RECOMMENDATIONS ON TRADE TRAINING

Therefore, we are concerned about a section offered in the proposed bill in the House, section 10 (c)2, which makes it mandatory for 25 percent of all appropriations for home economics to be spent on trade training. We prefer section 10 (c) 1, which says it would leave it to the discretion of the local State boards to make that decision.

Now, this does not mean that we do not see a place for us in the training of women for trade occupations related to home economics training. In a recent talk made by the Honorable Governor Sanford of North Carolina on the economy of North Carolina, we heard an economist speak on the future of this country. At this time, he referred to the fact that automation in the plants and mechanization on the farm would mean fewer and fewer opportunities in this particular area and that the future of the country would lie in the distribution and the services to American people. We see in the service area particularly more and more need for home training for people who will work directly with families, such as the homemakers' services which are under the direction of local and public welfare, private welfare. We see the many services needed by the elderly people, people who will go in and work with them on an individual basis in the care of these people.

In North Carolina alone, for example, we have 191 private and public hospitals. Less than 40 percent of these hospitals have a trained home economist as a dietitian. We can see a marvelous opening for training of home economics people to go in as food service workers and as food service supervisors in these centers in the hospitals where you cannot get trained personnel.

With the State department of public welfare, for example, we are as concerned as they in regards to training people in the child care centers. I think there are 701 child care centers in North Carolina alone. Wherever a child is away from its parents, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers say that there must be a mother substitute. We feel that people who are working with small children must be trained to understand their contribution.

In the area of the homes, 222 million women in 1961 were in the labor market. Of this group, only 5 percent were women who held degrees, one or more. Yet of this small percentage, 80,000 trained home economists, each holding a degree, were serving the families of the United States.

We feel that these, the majority of who, Senator Morse, got their training in vocational home economics at the high school level, became interested at that point in going on into this professional field. So while we were at the same time talking about the importance of the family, we were interesting young people in going into a non

competitive field. There are few men employed at the present time in the home economics area.

So we are indirectly influencing a tremendous amount of leadership, future leadership, in the manpower of America.

We know, too, that women are going to have to supply manpower. We no longer have any other source except by the use of women. For wherever a woman leaves or whenever she leaves her family, she must be certain that there is someone to take her place with the mothering ability.

I think both of the councils under President Truman and under President Kennedy have felt that women feel a tremendous responsibility for the management of their home and the care of their children if and when they leave their home for paid employment. So we have a field of service training which we can enter, but we cannot enter this service immediately.

There are no facilities, there is a lack of equipment and a lack of trained personnel. But should we have an appropriation from Congress, so we can train personnel to go into service occupations which are directly related to families and to family members.

So I hope that you will look with your usual consideration on home economics to be included as a vocational subject, both for the training for better home living and also for the possibilities of service training, which seems to be a field that will develop in the next 10 years. Thank you.

Senator MORSE. Thank you very much.

My comment on the changes that the House proposes to which you referred, is that I find it a little difficult to reconcile them with statements which come from the House of Representatives frequently to the effect that the Federal Government should not interfere in the educational process at the local level.

I think my comment applies to this body, too.
Miss DENNIS. States rights, again.

Senator MORSE. If we are going to make statements regarding no Federal control in the educational process, we ought to apply them to Vocational education as well as to other phases of education.

We will meet with the House in conference on the point if they make the bad mistake in judgment of passing legislation in that form. Doctor Mobley, I want to thank you very much for this wonderful panel.

Do you have anything additional to say?

Dr. MOBLEY. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank you very much and to say that once again you have been probably our best witness, as you have in the past on many occasions.

Senator MORSE. You are very kind.

Dr. MOBLEY. We appreciate your attitude toward vocational education and we want to work very closely with you in perfecting a bill that will come from your committee.

Senator MORSE. My brain trust sits behind me here, Mr. Lee. He will be in touch with you from time to time for such additional information as we may find we need when we proceed to mark up this bill.