of attending college is approximately $1,480 in public institutions and $2,240 in private institutions. Comparison of these average costs with the current annual median family income of $5,700 indicates immediately that a college education represents an extremely large outlay for most American families. As a major item of expenditure it is second only to the purchase of a home.

It is no wonder, then, that each year between 100,000 and 200.00 able high school graduates who have high aptitude and interest for college fail to continue their education, many because of financial inability to do so. According to the 1962 findings of the Office of Education-financed Project Talent, 30 percent of the high school seniors in the 80 to 90 academic percentile of their class and 43 percent of those in the 70 to 80 percentile failed to enter college.

Moreover, enrollment figures indicate that approximately 40 percent of all students who begin college withdraw before graduation. Many of these are talented but leave college because of financial hardships. Surely this is an intolerable loss to the Nation of urgently needed college-trained manpower. In the case of every American youngster with college capabilities who is denied the opportunity of starting or completing a college education, we not only limit the individual opportunities which come with greater education, but we also retard our scientific advance, slow our economic growth, and deplete our reservoir of future leadership.

The Congress, through the National Defense Education Act, has performed an incalculable service in encouraging and assisting colleges and universities to establish student loan funds to assist talented but needy students to complete their education. A few statistics on the achievements of title II of the National Defense Education Act may be of interest to the committee. Through fiscal year 1962, over 363,000 students borrowed approximately $220 million from the student loan funds of 1,468 colleges and universities. Almost a quarter of a million prospective teachers borrowed under the program, and $1.3 million of loan principal and interest was canceled for actual teaching service. During the rather brief period of 4 years, loan repayment surpassed $5 million, the rate of repayment well exceeded that required by law, and losses to the Federal Government were negligible.

This is not to say that the student loan program does not have problems for, as this committee knows from its diligent examination of the National Defense Education Act in 1961, the present $90 million authorization is far below actual and projected demands for student borrowing. The present restriction of Federal capital contributions to $250,000 per institution per year means that, in fiscal 1964, 123 colleges in 40 States and the District of Columbia will be unable to receive the full amount of their approved and reasonable requests for Federal funds. Because of this institutional ceiling alone, these 123 colleges will lack some $16.5 million and, consequently, will be forced to refuse loans to approximately 38,000 students and or to reduce the size of loans to other students. Even without a technical amendment to remove this restriction our colleges in the coming year could use at least $109 million-$19 million more than the authorized ceiling of $90 million. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like the record to show at this point some basic and detailed facts

6

about the National Defense Education Act student loan program and about the restrictions to which I have just referred.

Just as a college or university would reject the idea that a student loan program is the only effective form of student financial assistance, so should Congress, in my judgment, not regard the National Defense Education Act student loan program as a complete solution to the growing problems of student financial aid. To accept loan funds as the only answer would mean that, generally, those going to college from the lowest income groups would graduate from college with the greatest burden of debt. There is a psychological "peril point" of indebtedness which college student aid counselors frequently encounter among many students from low-income families. To this group of students and their parents, an indebtedness of several thousand dollars is frightening. Too often the student becomes discouraged and withdraws from college "temporarily" in order to earn some money before continuing his college education. But many of those who withdraw "temporarily" never return. A work-study program, augmenting a loan program, would permit many of these students to complete the requirements for their college degree without exceeding what, in their opinion, is a manageable level of indebtedness. With the funds proposed in S. 580 and assuming average annual undergraduate earnings of $500 (50 percent federally financed), some 90,000 students would benefit from the administration's work-study proposal in the first year of operation. To summarize other advantages of the work-study program proposed in title I, part C: It would encourage high school graduates with ability and financial need to continue their education beyond the high school. It would reduce the number of students with demonstrated college ability who now withdraw for financial reasons. It would enable students to gain educational advantages from their work experience, because of the nature of the work itself and because of their close association with college faculties and staff, while earning a portion of their college expenses. It would provide earning opportunities to students attending colleges in rural communities where off-campus work is scarce.

Finally, the work-study program would also contribute to a better utilization of the increasingly limited number of college teachers, with a corresponding improvement in college teaching as a result. Overworked teachers of freshman classes could be provided with seniors or graduate students majoring in the subject to read papers and correct examinations. Graduate students could provide assistance in laboratory classes in the sciences and engineering. Students in English or business administration could gain valuable experience by working for the university press or for the finance or publications offices.

It is also becoming abundantly clear that many families of middleupper income with several children to send to college at about the same time are finding it increasingly difficult to meet the costs of college out of current income. These families are not usually eligible for loan or scholarship aid under the income limitations applied by most colleges. On the other hand, they are typically credit worthy and accustomed to assuming large financial obligations. Since the brainpower of their children may contribute as much to the national welfare as that of less privileged children, the President has proposed a new program of federally insured commercial loans for college students

* See pp. 2396-2398.

from those 6 million families in the middle-upper income category Assuming average annual loans of $1,000-twice that of National Defense Education Act-some 150,000 additional students would be aided, 25,000 in the first year of the program.

Title I-B of the bill would create a self-supporting loan insurance mechanism similar to that successfully developed by the Federal Housing Administration and other Federal lending agencies. By encouraging more banks and other credit institutions to lend for educational purposes on repayment terms suited to the special needs of college students and their parents, this program would permit the high cost of college attendance to be spread over a longer period of time. The proposed college loan insurance program would also greatly supplement with additional private credit the limited lending capacity of the colleges, the direct loans through the National Defense Education Act program, and the pioneering efforts of some State funds and other commercial lenders.

National Defense Education Act student loans, the proposed federally-insured loan program, and the work-study plan may not fully meet the Federal Government's responsibility to enlarge the proportion of well-qualified high school graduates who go on to college. College financial aid officers know that thousands of high school students do not consider college because they cannot see how they and their parents could finance it. As more and more capable young men and women with limited funds seek the benefits of higher education, we must consider very carefully whether they should be denied their opportunity to contribute to our national strength and economic growth merely because they are financially unable to meet the mounting costs of higher education. For this reason, the President has suggested a comprehensive national study to determine the reasons why able young persons fail to attend or to complete college and whether additional sources and forms of financial aid are required.

If

Graduate education is, of course, even costlier than undergraduate studies and, consequently, far too many who begin graduate-degree programs do not complete their M.A. or Ph. D. studies. The loss of this potentially highly trained personnel is an equally serious problem, particularly were some of these men and women to enter the college teaching profession upon completion of their advanced degrees the present dropout rate continues in graduate study, probably only 143,000 doctorates will be earned this decade, and of these only about 46 percent can be expected to enter or remain in college teaching. Moreover, from 1953 to 1962, the percentage of new college teachers holding the doctorate declined from 31.4 to 25.4 percent. We thus estimate that whereas over 40 percent of college teachers possessed the Ph. D. in 1953, by 1970 our colleges will not meet the present minimum acceptable standards-a faculty of which at least 30 percent hold doctoral degrees. These institutions will fall short of this standard by an estimated 90,000 college teachers possessing the doctorate. Indeed, unless checked by vigorous Federal progranis, shortages in many key academic fields will soon become as severe as they are today in mathematics. In this field some 300 Ph. D.'s are granted annually, with over half of the recipients entering industrial research. The less than 150 remaining Ph. D.'s must then be distributed among the 2,100 accredited colleges and universities of the Nation, a ratio

Expanding the number of graduate students, speeding completion of their studies and reducing the dropout rate will make it possible to maintain academic standards as higher education grows to accommodate the larger coming generation of students. Without such an expansion of graduate education, coupled with a determined drive to recruit and retain able professors, the mounting wave of undergraduate college enrollments may well be ruinous to academic quality, rather than a boon to our growing market for trained manpower.

Aside from the need for college teachers, a larger number of National Defense Education Act graduate fellowships will also help meet the growing demand for persons with advanced training, particularly scientists and engineers for business, industry, and government. The President's Science Advisory Committee, for example, reported that we must increase the annual award of Ph. D.'s in engineering, mathematics, and the physical sciences from 3,000 in 1960 to 7,500 in 1970, and increase the number of first-year graduate students in engineering, mathematics, and physical sciences alone from 17,000 full-time students in 1960 to 40,000 in 1970.

Mr. Chairman, for the information of the committee, we have prepared a table showing Federal support of graduate study by various levels and agencies. It is our firm belief that, despite the variety of existing programs, the total output under all federally supported graduate programs is but a fraction of that required by our times.

The National Defense Education Act graduate fellowship program, designed in part to encourage students to prepare for college teaching careers, has demonstrated its success, but the current limitation of 1,500 fellowships per year is much too low. Eighty percent of the applications for National Defense Education Act fellowships have to be refused, chiefly because of the relatively small number of fellowships. Title I-D of S. 580, therefore, proposes that 10,000 fellowships be authorized annually for award to would-be college teachers and other critical personnel and that, in addition, 2,000 summer school fellowships be offered to college teachers and graduates who wish to accelerate their work toward the doctorate.

If we hope to increase the supply of highly trained teachers and other critically needed professional personnel, we must also encourage development of more graduate schools of high quality. The present fellowship programs under the National Defense Education Act, the National Science Foundation and other agencies provide graduate schools with good students but, except for "cost of education" payments on behalf of the fellows, these programs do not provide support for needed faculty, facilities, or supplies. Title II-E would authorize grants to strengthen the basic educational program of the graduate schools, many of which have inclined their direction to absorb research funds from the Federal Government and other sources. These graduate school grants would be aimed particularly at strengthening and expanding centers of high-level study and research in areas. of the Nation now without such centers.

In 1960, there were 11 States in which fewer than 10 doctoral degrees were awarded. In four of these States no doctorates were awarded. It is clear that the 187 institutions conferring such degrees are not distributed proportionally throughout the Nation. On the contrary, there is a high degree of concentration of research funds,

7 See pp. 2399-2406.

fellowships, and degrees awarded in fewer than 30 graduate schools. Only 29 graduate schools awarded more than 100 doctor's degrees in 1960, and in the decade of 1950-60 these 29 institutions awarded 66.2 percent of all doctorates. Indeed, approximately 55 percent of all doctoral degrees are awarded by some 20 universities located in 12 States.

8

The following map provides a picture of the geographic concentration of our great graduate schools in terms of doctorates awarded compared with our efforts under the national defense fellowship program. One of the purposes of this National Defense Education Act title is to develop new and expanded graduate programs. Whereas 62 percent of all Federal Government fellowships were awarded to students in 25 institutions in 1960, only 35 percent of National Defense Education Act fellowships went to 25 institutions. Our success in developing language and area centers under National Defense Education Act-may I have the record give some indication of the scope of this admirable program? 9-has also shown the practicality of this "centers approach" to strengthen new graduate programs and to increase the number of "strong" graduate schools.

Our objective in title II-E is 75 strong graduate centers. The proposal before you would authorize $40 million for fiscal year 1964 to help several such new centers to get started or to develop embryonic ones. If each were ultimately to award 200 advanced degrees annually, these centers would account for 15,000 such degrees. The remaining institutions could be expected to increase their awards so that we might at least develop a ratio of 1 doctoral degree each year for each 10,000 persons in the population-19,000 doctorates.

New centers of graduate and professional studies will do much more than provide trained manpower and the faculties needed for expansion of higher education. These centers will also immeasurably stimulate economic development and will, therefore, contribute to regional and national goals of economic growth and diversification. This, I think, is clear beyond dispute to anyone who has observed that research and development industries locate adjacent to our great institutions of higher learning and that manufacturing plants soon follow in the wake of research and development.

Title II of the bill proposes a 3-year program of loans to public and nonprofit private institutions of higher education for construction of academic facilities, and matching grant programs to the States for the construction of public community junior colleges, to colleges and universities for the training of technicians, and to colleges for the purchase of library materials and for library construction.

Our institutions of higher learning are in dire straits. On hundreds of campuses, students are jammed into obsolete and overcrowded classrooms. The colleges are facing a situation for which there is no precedent in our history. They must try to meet a staggering increase of enrollments while handicapped by shortages or creeping obsolescence of buildings. There are simply not enough classrooms, laboratories, or libraries for the rising flood of appplicants. The accompanying chart 10 dramatically illustrates what has happened and is expected to happen to America's college enrollments. In 1950, we had less than 2.3 million students in higher education. Today we have 4.3 million;

8 See p. 2407.

See pp. 2406-2408.