earned college degrees, opportunities for continuing and broadening learning experiences through the study of the liberal arts and the humanities. It is our experience in Wisconsin that there is a real hunger in many adults for participative experience in the arts or in discussion groups ranging in scope from world affairs and foreign policy to neighborhood problems and family living. As leisure time increases, as the educational attainment level of the population rises, the need for expanded general extension offerings in the liberal and humane areas will most certainly grow. It may well be that the most significant contribution of title VI will be, not the intensifying of technological understandings, but the building of that calm and confident relationship between and among human beings which our cultures so sorely need.

I am impressed, too, with the viability of title VI as a device for attacking what my colleague, President Eric Walker, of Penn State, calls "The underemployment and underutilization of our human resources."

How

Unemployment is, of course, the most extreme case of underemployment. can we explain the present high percentage of unemployment during a period of unmatched prosperity in the United States? The answer, it seems to me, is that our productive structure simply is not being supplied the types of labor it needs. Labor statistics show conclusively that the demand is decreasing in those occupations that require little skill, while the demand in those occupations that require the most skill and education is increasing rapidly. Most of the unemployed fall into the unskilled and semiskilled categories. The labor supply is just not keeping pace with the higher entrance requirements placed upon it by our modern technological economy. It is obvious, I believe, that education must be importantly involved in the solution to this problem.

Carroll Hutton of the United Auto Workers had some very pithy comments to make on this matter before your committee last year. Just how, he said, we will finally instill the required virtuosity in the American work force is difficult to outline in detail, but a preliminary condition of the final solution will be "the universal cultivation in this country of the habit of learning continuously." We must look forward to an era when a man or a woman never will stop going to school. We know that is no longer possible to give a young person a complete education at age 20 that will serve for 45 years down to age 65. A 45-year-old education today is as out of date as a 45-year-old auto or a 45year-old battleship. In title VI we see the opportunity to begin to develop meaningful continuing education programs in which American wage earners can participate creatively and satisfyingly. It is grossly unrealistic to assume that anything less than continuing education will keep pace with our explosive technology. The more things change the more things will continue to change. Some people may say a computer will be invented that will deal with such problems. My guess is the computer is already here. It is called man, and the way to program him for his tasks is to educate him continuously.

When the $5 million grant made by the Sloan Foundation to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to establish a center for advanced engineering study was announced, Mr. Fred Hechinger hailed "lifelong learning" as the "most essential ingredient of the educational revolution" through a column in the New York Times. Mr. McGee called the attention of the Congress to this development by inserting Mr. Hechinger's article in the Congressional Record. As the Washington Post commented editorially, the type of training to be offered by the proposed MIT center "is not graduate education, nor even postdoctoral training, in the conventional sense. It is the recognition of the entirely novel fact that the rapid pace of discovery and the constantly expanding frontiers of knowledge and techniques threaten to expose even the most highly educated teachers and practitioners in modern society to early obsolescence." The seriousness of professional obsolescence was underscored recently by a talk by William A. Douglass, president of a nationwide talent-recruiting organization called Careers, Inc. In his talk, which was printed in the Congressional Record at the request of Senator Howard Cannon, Mr. Douglass said that the records of his firm show that the technical manpower shortage about which we are all so concerned "is really just as much a question of proper utilization" requiring retraining of engineers and scientists to bring their knowledges and skills up to date with the advance of their disciplines.

Mr. Douglass points out that, whatever shortage might exist, 17 percent of those registered with his firm are not just seeking new positions but are actually unemployed. And these are not the unskilled or semiskilled. They are highly

ing specialties not now in high demand. For instance, one out of every five civil and industrial engineers listed with Careers, Inc., is unemployed, as are 18 percent of the chemical engineers and 17 percent of the electrical engineers. This compares with 3 percent unemployment among the aeronautical and space engineers registered with Mr. Douglass' firm.

We can ill afford this sort of waste. Nor do we have to. A person trained as, say, an electrical or civil engineer has all the tools and most of the basic knowledge he needs to serve as an aeronautical engineer. All he needs is some specialized training to adapt his basic knowledge and to bring him abreast of the state of the art in the other area.

Even though Mr. Hechinger refers to the "novelty" of this sort of program, much work of this sort is already being carried out in the colleges and universities of America. The May issue of the Journal of Engineering Education, as a service to its readers, lists 65 special short courses, conferences, and seminars that will be held this summer alone. Some examples of these programs include: The 2-week advanced statistical quality control institute to be held at the University of Connecticut.

A 1-week University of Michigan program on analog computer solutions on partial differential equations.

A 1-week program on nonlinear theories of continuum mechanics at Penn State.

A 2-month course on geometronics at the University of Washington.

A 2-day conference on deformation twinning at the University of Florida. A 1-week conference on artificial satellites at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Twenty-two such programs are listed for the University of Michigan, six for the Pennsylvania State University, four for the University of Connecticut. One of the programs is being offered for the 14th straight year, another for the 11th, several for the 3d or 4th straight years.

It should be remembered that the journal's list is not a survey but simply a service extended to those who write in and request a listing. Further, the listing is limited to engineering. Similar programs are offered in business and management, in chemistry and physics, in medical science and practice, and in a great number of other specialized areas.

In general, these programs are offered through the general extension or continuing education divisions of the universities. A few of them are sponsored by the National Science Foundation, the Atomic Energy Commission, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Most, however, are offered as a service by the university through its division of general extension.

However, as we have pointed out, resources for general-extension and continuing-education programs are severely restricted and must, in most cases, support themselves through fees that cover full costs of the programs. Because of the advanced nature of many of these programs and because of the type of equipment necessary for instruction, fees of $350 for a 2-week program are not at all uncommon.

These fees are normally paid by the firm or governmental agency by whom the engineer is employed. But, perhaps because of this, such programs now reach only a small percentage of those professional people who need the training. In fact, to a very real extent, these programs completely bypass those who need them most-the unemployed on the rolls of Careers, Inc., for instance, who have no way of paying such fees, or the bright young engineer on the staff of a large firm the further advancement of whose knowledge is not yet financially justifiable as an investment by the firm. To meet the needs of the country-as compared with the needs of the firm or company-we need vastly expanded, low-cost programs of this sort. Through their extension divisions, universities are already conducting significant programs to combat the "menace of obsolescence." But much more needs to be done. And for this, the universities need help. This type of educational opportunity, as well as many others involved in the various university extension offerings, is obviously a matter of national interest, concern, and responsibility, as well as of State and regional interest.

There is yet another type of explosion with which title VI can deal. I refer to the significant increase in the life expectancy of Americans. The United States now has over 15 million citizens 65 years of age and older. By 1975 that figure will have climbed to more than 20 million. If their so-called golden years are to be little more than "fool's gold," our State universities must bring

to bear our research facilities and our experience in adult education on all the problems facing our senior citizens-problems relating to health and medical care, recreation, retirement income, vocational rehabilitation, housing, and continuing intellectual development.

To bring such resources to bear involves a cost prohibitive to the majority of citizens needing help. Title VI will help to provide the funds with which to make educational services available to this segment of our population toward the realization of such objectives as to prepare them for the economic, social, physiological, and psychological changes to be encountered in the normal process of aging; to assist them in finding constructive ways to fill potential roles of dynamic leadership, thereby enabling society to benefit from their experiences and mature insights.

I have elaborated on only a few of the social problems in which I see title VI making a measurable contribution. There are many more. It must be selfevident, for example, that an enriched program of general university extension can serve directly to make for a more sophisticated citizenry. Never before in the history of man has the individual voter been called upon to make so many profound decisions, running the gamut from complicated biochemical and nuclear considerations to intricate international economic formulas, as is the American citizen today. Each of us is desperate for understanding. University extension can help. It must be self-evident, too, that in a day when we are faced with threats of being buried, ideologically, economically, or literally, any program that contributes to internal prosperity and external strength is a program the country cannot afford to shortchange. Again, university extension can help shore up our physical and spiritual defenses.

True, continuing education is not a panacea. It is not a magic wand. It has very real limitations, not the least of which is the old truth that "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink." Nonetheless, the possibilities in title VI are much more in danger of being undersold than oversold. Admittedly, I speak as an educator, with, I suppose, a passionate faith in the processes of education; yet, I also speak as a student of history who finds the efficacy of education the easiest of theses to document.

Perhaps this is the place to quote Horace Mann :

"That political economy *** which busies itself about capital and labor, supply and demand, interests and rents, favorable and unfavorable balances of trades, but leaves out of account the elements of widespread mental development, is naught but stupendous folly."

And perhaps this is the place to remind you that Thomas Jefferson chose not to be remembered as the author of the Declaration of Independence, nor as the third President of the United States, but as the founder of the University of Virginia.

Mr. Jefferson would feel very much at home here today. I believe he would say something like this:

"In essence, our State universities and land-grant institutions are not only vast depositories of the cultural achievements and accumulated experiences of mankind: they are also major centers in which, through invention and discovery. through experimentation and research, knowledge is being created. Programs of agricultural extension have demonstrated conclusively how, through a combination of Federal, State, and local resources the application of research findings may be made to increase agricultural productivity and enrich rural life. General university extension, in concert with Federal support and local interest, can provide a similar bridge between the campus and the adult citizens of our urban communities." How best to build this bridge we are constantly seeking. My own institution, for example, is presently engaged in a 5-year experiment designed "to generate a degree of interest and activity in urban investigation, instruction, and action which is commensurate with the problems of urbanization," under a $1 million grant from the Ford Foundation. Similar projects are underway at sister universities. So you see we are not complacent; we are anxious to

move.

Now, let me clarify, if I may, a couple of key points in my testimony:

In the first place, this proposal does not invent any new Government program, in the conventional sense of the term. It certainly does not invent any new Federal principle. Federal aid to education has been part and parcel of the American idea virtually since the inception of the country. And the extension of university resources to the hinterlands, under the aegis of the Federal Gov

What title VI does provide for is simply the democratization of federally supported university adult education. It takes up where the Smith-Lever Act leaves off and extends to general subjects and general vocations what has long been the relationship between the Federal Government and agriculture.

In the second place, this proposal is not "Federal aid to education," again in the conventional sense of the term. This plan is simply a testimonial on the part of the Federal Government to the efficacy of lifelong learning in the national interest. The modest moneys involved cannot be expected, nor are they intended, to finance new facilities or teaching staffs. Their purpose, rather, is to dramatize the faith of the Congress in the principle of adult education and to encourage the States to equalize their educational offerings, irrespective of age, class, and geography. The appropriations will show up directly in the form of institutes, special classes, home study, and other forms of extension enterprise in communities across the country. Thus this plan aids, not our educational institutions, but the urban adults of our country who today are the true "forgotten students."

In no sense does this proposal usurp, or even impinge on, the traditional responsibility of the several States to meet the educational needs of their citizens. It does demonstrate the conviction on the part of the Federal Government that general adult education must be a part of such responsibility.

It might well be asked, "Doesn't the National Defense Education Act accomplish just what title VI proposes to do?" The answer is "No; not at all.” Admirable as it is, the National Defense Education Act is limited to persons of college and university age in colleges and universities, and to teachers. Title VI provides education for people not now served by or in colleges and universities. Educational resources now existing in institutions of higher learning would be made available to adults in their local communities.

Title VI is not a "Johnny come lately" to these halls. In various forms it has been offered since 1944. While its passage takes on added urgency in a sputnik age, its fruits go far beyond the stimulation of technical refresher education. In the sense that it will spur liberal learning as well as scientific advancement, it buttresses the heart of America's defense-the continuing development of a vast body of citizens capable of and committed to the rendering of intelligent decisions on the topics vital to true American security.

The general extension plan, then, is literally a logical extension of the Federal Government's time-honored investment in the education of her citizens. It offers to key groups and individuals the means of lifelong adjustment to rapidly changing conditions. It gives back to America a wellspring of citizenry charged with new life, enthusiasm, know about, and know-how.

Let me summarize briefly:

It is self-evident, I believe, that this generation of Americans faces responsibilities of appalling complexity in adjusting to times that change with breathtaking swiftness. It is self-evident also, that the varied problems of our times, the solutions of which depend upon the personal, social, and political responsibility of the average American adult, demand increased efforts in higher adult education. In such a setting, our citizens are turning to many educational agencies to meet their needs, but they are turning more and more to the State universities, with their great reservoirs of research and teaching talent. With Federal support our State universities can begin to lend to all the people in their communities and regions the background knowledge and practical skills so essential for the solution of everyday problems of living.

The education of adults must become accepted as a public responsibility, just as the education of children and youths is now. It is well to remember that the present generation of adults will make the crucial decisions as to the world our children will inherit. It is incumbent upon us, therefore, to make this generation as wise and skilled as we can. Title VI gives the States a roadmap and a push in that direction.

In its overall mission of maintaining democracy for our civilization, the Congress may well find general university extension an indispensable instrument. General university extension is the agency by which the university can put its scholarship at the service of all the public.

The thirst for knowledge, after all, has no age nor geographic restrictions. The whole public has a right to turn to a land-grant college or State university for every kind of information that will help in the solution of economic, social, and political problems. Yet without Federal assistance in the area of general adult education our universities will do less than an adequate job of

98-466-63-vol. 423

lifting the life of their urban constituents. With Federal assistance the day may well come when higher adult education will eclipse in effectiveness anything ever done with children.

It is, indeed, to the land-grant college and State university and its extension services that adult citizens must turn for help in developing leadership. knowledge, and understanding. Title VI gives us a chance to enhance inmeasurably our role in making the insights of the campus available to men and women throughout the country for the economic betterment, the intellectual stimulation, and the spiritual enrichment of their lives.

The Congress and the State universities have a common destiny in the adventure of building a more secure America. As we move out together to the people and come to grips with the people's problems, it is certain the people, in turn will bring to their democratic institutions the support they need for continued flourishing, no matter what the alien challenge.

As a resident of Wisconsin, I know what a great university extension program can mean to the life of a State. I am pround to recommend this famous "Wisconsin idea" to the country at large.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, may I note that the State Universities Association and the Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges have joined in a series of recommendations on "Desirable National Action Affecting Higher Education." I have copies of these recommendations which can be furnished to each member of the committee, or included in the record, as you may desire. Thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before you, and present the views of a combined group whose enrollments represent about one-fourth of all U.S. college enrollment, and whose members award more than 55 percent of all graduate degrees.

(The recommendations referred to may be found on p. 591 following the testimony of Dr. Mason Gross.)

STATEMENT OF PAUL SHEATS, DEAN, UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, CALIF.

Mr. SHEATS. My name is Paul H. Sheats. I am the statewide dean of university extension at the University of California. My headquarters are on the Los Angeles campus of the university, where I also hold the post of professor of adult education. I speak in support of S. 580 not only on behalf of the institution of which I am a statewide officer, but also as immediate past president of the National University Extension Association, an organization with approximately 100 institutional members representing both public and private universities and colleges of the United States.

It was my privilege to be among those who testified before this subcommittee last year, and I would like to express to you, Mr. Chairman, our appreciation of the consideration we received at that time. and, perhaps more importantly, the fact that the entire Senate agreed with the recommendations of the subcommittee.

Instead of reading a transcript of my remarks, I would prefer to take just a few moments to speak generally as to the importance of this legislation, and I was inspired to abandon the printed material, by the transcript of President Kennedy's address, on Monday of this week, before American University.

LIFELONG PROCESS OF EDUCATION

This is one of the important messages which the President has delivered during his term of office, and I bring the attention of the subcommittee particularly to one paragraph, in which, in his own