peace, and he says, "There is no single simple key to this peace, no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. "General peace must be the product of many nations. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation," and this is the significant statement, for he says, "Peace is a process, a way of solving problems." I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the President is speaking about what is basically an educational process, a process which must be learned. It includes the skill of problem solving and decisionmaking, which under our system must be mastered, if not by all, at least by a majority of those who value the privileges of a free and open society. My first legal course was with Carl Luellen, at Columbia University. He taught me that for every privilege there is a corresponding obligation, and I submit, sir, that the obligation in this instance is the responsibility of every citizen to maintain a process of continuing learning throughout life, so that the choices which we make may be as wise as possible. In my written testimony, I have emphasized the role of university continuing education, in recapturing the tremendous potential of human resources which are now unrealized. Our failure to provide opportunities for continuing learning is one of the major factors responsible for this wastage. The President has cast the problems in a much broader and more socially urgent perspective, at least in my view, because he has raised the question basically, how can we generate these kinds of citizens attitudes in behavior, which will insure responsible and rational approaches to problems solving and decisionmaking. Some of my colleagues in the social sciences have been working for many years on the difficult problem in human relations of how best we may handle the problem of resolving conflict. They refer not only to the incidents of domestic conflict and controversy but to situations in the international theme, such as those being dealt with in the President's message. There are various alternatives to try to resolved the conflict by means of force, by the use of authoritarian means-which is essentially what the President was protesting against on Monday. But, what has title VI, part A, to do with this problem? I submit, sir, that education is public responsibility, the mastery of problemsolving skills, the ability to avoid a fruitless method of resolving conflicts, can best be acquired by an extension of learning opportunities to adults. ROLE OF COLLEGES IN CONTINUING EDUCATION My written testimony indicates why our universities and colleges are in a uniquely advantageous position to provide such opportunities. It will do us little good, in my view, to win the space race, to maintain our scientific and technological leadership in the world, unless we also help to create the kind of communities in this Nation where, as I say, responsibility is accepted and practiced for the common good. Without this, as Professor Marion, many years ago, said when he was at the University of Chicago, "Without this sort of thing, we might as well blow out the lights and fight it out in the dark." That alternative need not be faced. I am convinced that, through such legislation as is now before you, we support the efforts of the universities and colleges of this Nation, to provide opportunities for a wide range of citizens, in terms of their needs for continuing education. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit to the subcommittee, through Mr. Lee, a few copies of the report which we have just published, a 10-year report of the University of California extension. I do this because I know some of the criticisms of this legislation have included the complaint that these are not college level offerings which you are being asked to support. Willard Libby, whose picture is in this report, said to me at commencement on Friday, "I have just attended one of your university advanced courses in science. It is the sort of thing all of us need, in order to keep up." This, I think, is the illustration of the level of citizenry we are teaching and are serving through our programs of general extension. Senator PELL. This document will be incorporated in the hearing record. The document referred to and the prepared statement of Dean Paul H. Sheats follow: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, A REPORT TO THE COMBINED ACADEMIC SENATE COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, COVERING THE YEARS 1952-62 To the Members of the Combined Academic Senate Committee on University Extension: Gentlemen: In accordance with bylaw 118(B) (3) of the academic senate. I take pleasure in submitting a report on the operations of university extension for the 10-year period beginning July 1, 1952 and ending June 30, 1962. While the newly effective senate regulations call for an annual report to the committee by the dean of university extension, there are important reasons for presenting in this initial review a somewhat more ambitious chronicling of major trends over the past decade. Among these reasons are the following: 1. The last report to the faculties of the university was submitted by my predecessor, the late Baldwin M. Woods, in June of 1953 covering a 10-year span of extension operations from the summer of 1942 until the summer of 1952. Certain statistical data were presented in that report and I have attempted in the current statement to bring most of these quanitative measures up to date. More important, I have identified new program trends and current problems. 2. There is every reason to believe that the academic year 1962-63 will be of major significance in the history of the University of California extension as a year of transition. It will be marked by the completion of a report on higher adult education by the Coordinating Council for Higher Education and by clarification of the regents' own statement of policies regarding University Extension in the light of this coordinating council report. Furthermore, this will be the first academic year during which University Extension operates with the advice and counsel of an official senate committee with responsibilities defined in the bylaws of the academic senate. These far-reaching changes and new developments will most certainly have an impact upon university extension programs, clientele, relations with the faculty and internal organization. It is our hope that this report covering the 1952-62 decade will provide a baseline against which the effects of these policy changes may be measured in future annual reports. The substance of the pages which follow represents the work of many hands, and the programs which are described reflect the creative and imaginative efforts of departmental faculty and extension staff members throughout the mittee and the views of other members of the university faculty and adminis tration. It has been a great privilege for me to serve as statewide head of university extension during the administration of President Clark Kerr. When he wrote, in the first sentence of the regents-approved interim statement of policy for university extension, "*** the University of California intends to continue and to improve its extension services," it was emphatic proof of the kind of strong leadership and bulwarking needed to counterbalance the effect of reduced State financing. Such success as we have achieved, in extending the boundaries of our various campuses to make them coterminous with the boundaries of the State of California, is in large part due to the sympathetic understanding and support which he has given to the officers of university extension. Respectfully submitted. May 15, 1963. PAUL H. SHEATS. The term "extension," as applied to adult education at the university level, though once descriptive, has become a misnomer within the past decade. The statewide extension program is not merely an extension or copy of what the university offers the full-time resident student during daytime hours. Since 1953 when the late Baldwin M. Woods presented the last 10-year report to the faculties of the university, the University of California extension has evolved into an academic entity of unprecedented scope and at the professional as well as postgraduate level. Extension did not set out arbitrarily to accomplish this shift: it is the direct result of a radically changed clientele whose demands and needs are frequently totally different from those of the past. Our challenge truly a challenge to the whole university-was to meet these new, more advanced requirements while at the same time operating without endowment, with diminishing support from the legislature, in a period when the rush of new students was taxing severely the resources of the university. A brief look at the quantity and quality of extension's new clientele may indicate the dimensions of the challenge: 1. Twenty-six percent of all adults registered in extension classes in public universities in the United States are enrolled at the University of California. 2. In the decade covered by this report, enrollments have increased from 93,882 to 184,233. 3. More than 40 percent of all university extension enrollments by 1962 were in postgraduate courses. 4. Currently enrolled in extension professional programs are 1 out of every 3 lawyers in the State, 1 out of every 5 dentists in the State, 1 out of every 6 doctors in the State, 1 out of every 8 engineers in the State, 1 out of every 12 teachers in the State.1 5. In the continuing education of the bar, where extension reaches almost every law office in the State, our registration has advanced in a 10-year period as follows: 1952-53, 914; 1961-62, 21,931. 6. In the engineering programs of extension, 75 percent of all enrollees hold at least one degree in engineering, mathematics, or science. 7. Comparison of the extension students of today with registrants of 10 years ago reveals the percent of college degree holders has risen from 45 percent to 60 percent, and 84 percent now report 1 or more years of college. During this decade, as a result of a recommendation by a faculty advisory committee, the so-called admissions program was abolished. It permitted students who could not meet the university's high admission requirements to make up their deficiencies through extension courses. The removal of this remedial function, of course, has affected the composition of extension's student body. At the same time, the State colleges and junior colleges have assumed much of the responsibility for degree-credit work. Together with the adult education departments of the public school systems, they have freed university extension for its more demanding and innovative role in postgraduate and professional programing. The changed character of extension is a most appropriate one. As John C. Merriam, former dean of the faculties at Berkeley, once said: "The university must leave no room for any similar institution above it." 1 There are, of course, many professionals enrolled in other types of programs, particularly in liberal arts and public affairs courses or seminars. That alternative need not be faced. I am convinced that, through such legislation as is now before you, we support the efforts of the universities and colleges of this Nation, to provide opportunities for a wide range of citizens, in terms of their needs for continuing education. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit to the subcommittee, through Mr. Lee, a few copies of the report which we have just published, a 10-year report of the University of California extension. I do this because I know some of the criticisms of this legislation have included the complaint that these are not college level offerings which you are being asked to support. Willard Libby, whose picture is in this report, said to me at commencement on Friday, "I have just attended one of your university advanced courses in science. It is the sort of thing all of us need, in order to keep up." This, I think, is the illustration of the level of citizenry we are teaching and are serving through our programs of general extension. Senator PELL. This document will be incorporated in the hearing record. The document referred to and the prepared statement of Dean Paul H. Sheats follow: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, A REPORT TO THE COMBINED ACADEMIC SENATE COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, COVERING THE YEARS 1952-62 To the Members of the Combined Academic Senate Committee on University Extension: Gentlemen: In accordance with bylaw 118(B) (3) of the academic senate, I take pleasure in submitting a report on the operations of university extension for the 10-year period beginning July 1, 1952 and ending June 30, 1962. While the newly effective senate regulations call for an annual report to the committee by the dean of university extension, there are important reasons for presenting in this initial review a somewhat more ambitious chronicling of major trends over the past decade. Among these reasons are the following: 1. The last report to the faculties of the university was submitted by my predecessor, the late Baldwin M. Woods, in June of 1953 covering a 10-year span of extension operations from the summer of 1942 until the summer of 1952. Certain statistical data were presented in that report and I have attempted in the current statement to bring most of these quanitative measures up to date. More important, I have identified new program trends and current problems. 2. There is every reason to believe that the academic year 1962-63 will be of major significance in the history of the University of California extension as a year of transition. It will be marked by the completion of a report on higher adult education by the Coordinating Council for Higher Education and by clarification of the regents' own statement of policies regarding University Extension in the light of this coordinating council report. Furthermore, this will be the first academic year during which University Extension operates with the advice and counsel of an official senate committee with responsibilities defined in the bylaws of the academic senate. These far-reaching changes and new developments will most certainly have an impact upon university extension programs, clientele, relations with the faculty and internal organization. It is our hope that this report covering the 1952-62 decade will provide a baseline against which the effects of these policy changes may be measured in future annual reports. The substance of the pages which follow represents the work of many hands, and the programs which are described reflect the creative and imaginative efforts of departmental faculty and extension staff members throughout the mittee and the views of other members of the university faculty and administration. It has been a great privilege for me to serve as statewide head of university extension during the administration of President Clark Kerr. When he wrote, in the first sentence of the regents-approved interim statement of policy for university extension, ***** the University of California intends to continue and to improve its extension services," it was emphatic proof of the kind of strong leadership and bulwarking needed to counterbalance the effect of reduced State financing. Such success as we have achieved, in extending the boundaries of our various campuses to make them coterminous with the boundaries of the State of California, is in large part due to the sympathetic understanding and support which he has given to the officers of university extension. Respectfully submitted. May 15, 1963. PAUL H. SHEATS. The term "extension," as applied to adult education at the university level, though once descriptive, has become a misnomer within the past decade. The statewide extension program is not merely an extension or copy of what the university offers the full-time resident student during daytime hours. Since 1953 when the late Baldwin M. Woods presented the last 10-year report to the faculties of the university, the University of California extension has evolved into an academic entity of unprecedented scope and at the professional as well as postgraduate level. Extension did not set out arbitrarily to accomplish this shift: it is the direct result of a radically changed clientele whose demands and needs are frequently totally different from those of the past. Our challenge-truly a challenge to the whole university—was to meet these new, more advanced requirements while at the same time operating without endowment, with diminishing support from the legislature, in a period when the rush of new students was taxing severely the resources of the university. A brief look at the quantity and quality of extension's new clientele may indicate the dimensions of the challenge: 1. Twenty-six percent of all adults registered in extension classes in public universities in the United States are enrolled at the University of California. 2. In the decade covered by this report, enrollments have increased from 93,882 to 184,233. 3. More than 40 percent of all university extension enrollments by 1962 were in postgraduate courses. 4. Currently enrolled in extension_professional programs are 1 out of every 3 lawyers in the State, 1 out of every 5 dentists in the State, 1 out of every 6 doctors in the State, 1 out of every 8 engineers in the State, 1 out of every 12 teachers in the State.1 5. In the continuing education of the bar, where extension reaches almost every law office in the State, our registration has advanced in a 10-year period as follows: 1952-53, 914; 1961-62, 21,931. 6. In the engineering programs of extension, 75 percent of all enrollees hold at least one degree in engineering, mathematics, or science. 7. Comparison of the extension students of today with registrants of 10 years ago reveals the percent of college degree holders has risen from 45 percent to 60 percent, and 84 percent now report 1 or more years of college. During this decade, as a result of a recommendation by a faculty advisory committee, the so-called admissions program was abolished. It permitted students who could not meet the university's high admission requirements to make up their deficiencies through extension courses. The removal of this remedial function, of course, has affected the composition of extension's student body. At the same time, the State colleges and junior colleges have assumed much of the responsibility for degree-credit work. Together with the adult education departments of the public school systems, they have freed university extension for its more demanding and innovative role in postgraduate and professional programing. The changed character of extension is a most appropriate one. As John C. Merriam, former dean of the faculties at Berkeley, once said: "The university must leave no room for any similar institution above it." 1 There are, of course, many professionals enrolled in other types of programs, particularly in liberal arts and public affairs courses or seminars. |