3. Mr. Larry H. Hendon, business manager, University of Redlands, Redlands, Calif. 4. Mr. Francis McMahon, assistant budget analyst, chancellor's office, California State Colleges, Inglewood, Calif. 5. Dr. Robert McCleary, dean of students, Whitworth College, Spokane, Wash. 6. Mr. John Freemuth, assistant dean of students, Foothill College, Los Alpos Hills, Calif. Mr. MUIRHEAD. They will apply their standard of reasonableness to these proposals. Mr. FLOOD. Would a so-called State normal school or college concentrating on teaching, a State institution, rate either of these programs? Mr. MUIRHEAD. They certainly would rate for consideration under the developing institutions program and they would be clearly qualified for participation in the opportunity grants program. ACTIVE RECRUITMENT OF PROMISING TALENT The opportunity grants program, if I might just say so for the record, is designed to encourage the colleges to seek out these young people-to perhaps change their recruiting behavior, so when they do go to the high school to recruit they do not always go to Scarsdale or the rich suburban high school. They will go to the school on the other side of the track and seek out the young people. Interestingly enough, and I think with a great deal of wisdom, the Congress imbedded in this program the concept that the college could make a commitment to a young person early in his high school career. Quite often in the 12th year, he has reached the point of no return. He has given up hope and his family has discouraged him and he is ready to take a job. Yet he might be of rather outstanding ability. This law would permit the college to go to him in his sophomore or perhaps even his freshman year and say, "If you tend to your knitting and do a good job in high school there is a chance and we can help you." Mr. FLOOD. In other words, you are going to do what the football people have been doing for 30 or 40 years. Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. It is high time we did. The football people have been doing it for 30 or 40 years, in order to encourage talent to go on and develop. ADVISORY PANEL FOR UNDERGRADUATE INSTRUCTIONAL EQUIPMENT Mr. MICHELL. In the undergraduate instructional equipment category, do you have an advisory committee? Mr. MUIRHEAD. We do not have a statutory advisory committee, but we do, as we do in all the programs, appoint people to advise us. I am reluctant to say advisory committee because that is statutory language. We do appoint advisory panels to come in and help us review the proposals. BRADLEY APPLICATION Mr. MICHEL. I ask this because Bradley University in Peoria, Ill., assisted in preparing an application by the Tri-County Research Foundation for the Illinois Valley Educational Services Center. Perhaps they were a little ambitious in their proposal, but at the State level they received highest priority. It seemed automatic even though the request was a big chunk of the State's allocation. It was denied. Then subsequent to the denial, or probably coincident with it, there was an announcement that a number of smaller requests had received approval. Are you very concerned about a big request even when it can serve a good purpose or do you favor a number of little ones, nit-picking ones, if we can use the terminology, in order to get everybody into the act so you have a bigger, broader base from which to build. Then you can come before the committee for a more substantial sum in future years. I am concerned personally because it is my hometown and my alma mater. They were very disappointed. Mr. MUIRHEAD. Let me explain for the record the procedures that are used in this program. Following the intent and spirit of the Congress, these program priorities are determined by State commissions, as is the case in the Facilities Act. The Congress used much the same language as in that act. The State commission is representative of all of higher education in each State. They in turn draw up a State plan and they determine what the criteria will be in terms of awarding priorities for award under this program. It could be that in some States they may elect to support many institutions and in other States it might be to their best interests to support a few institutions substantially. These decisions are made by the State commissions in this program. Mr. MICHEL. I wish I could rely on that because I think if that were the only consideration we would have been given a favorable nod. As I say again, in this case it was all squared at the State level. Then it came down here. I do not know whether it was one adviser or more than one who just did not like the fact that there was so much involved in television equipment in order to get the program started and therefore ruled against it. Mr. MUIRHEAD. I think there must be some little misunderstanding here because we have not as yet made any judgments on title VI. That program is just getting established and the State commissions are just getting into place. So there have been no awards under title VI equipment as yet. It could possibly be that this was under the Higher Education Facilities Act. I am not sure. Mr. MICHEL. I will double check. Mr. CARDWELL. It could have been educational TV where they were applying for a Federal grant to purchase television transmission equipment. Mr. MICHEL. This was geared primarily at the elementary and secondary school level in the four-county area surrounding the university. Bradley University has a big audience in that section of the State. We are the second largest metropolitan area in the State, very deserving and a natural focal point to getting this program going. Mr. CARDWELL. It could have been under one of several programs. It could have even been under elementary and secondary grant support. Mr. MICHEL. So we may develop it fully, members of my staff will be in subsequent communication with your office. Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes, we would be glad to. ESTIMATED APPLICATIONS UNDER LIBRARY PROGRAM Mr. MICHEL. How did you arrive at the estimates on page 65? The number of applications expected to be received and approved are shown in the tables for three types of grants. Mr. MUIRHEAD. We are trying to make judgments on the basis of experience this year and what the developments might be in basic grants, supplemental grants, and special purpose grants, and the evidence that we used in developing the justification for the program in the first place. All this led us to believe that this is about the way that it would distribute itself. It is an estimate. We offer no evidence at all that this particular division of the money is now set in cement. It is our best judgment at this time. ESTIMATE OF LIBRARY PERSONNEL NEEDS Mr. MICHEL. How about those in the last paragraph of page 66? How were these determined? The present number of professionally trained librarians for schools, public and private colleges need to be doubled in order to meet the requirement for minimum quality service. Mr. MUIRHEAD. We have, as you would expect, when this particular proposal was before the Congress, developed rather what we consider to be a persuasive rationale for the program. We tried to make some measure of the need taking into consideration the reports from the States themselves, reports from the colleges and reports from the American Library Association. All of them together lead us to this judgment that this represented the magnitude of the need of the Nation. NATIONAL LIBRARY INVENTORY Mr. MICHEL. You have itemized a large number of important specific needs of our libraries in the justifications. Could you tell us what it might take in dollars to bring the libraries up to ideal standards, in your opinion? Mr. MUIRHEAD. You can be very sure that we will make a serious attempt to give you an answer. Mr. MICHEL. I do not think you need to spend any real time on that. I know you have a great number of figures itemized in a number of other categories. Mr. FRANTZ. I am John Frantz from the Division of Library Services. The Office of Education, in cooperation with the American Library Association, developed what was called a national library inventory. This was done for the association with their funds, but using some of the unpublished data in our Office. So we can give you gap figures by type of library that would establish the costs involved in adding the needed number of books, staff, et cetera. We can do this for academic libraries and public libraries and school libraries. We will be glad to submit that for the record. (The information follows:) TABULATION FOR NATIONAL INVENTORY OF LIBRARY NEEDS-PUBLIC LIBRARIES Source: From "National Inventory of Library Needs" published by the American Library Association, 93, 261 0 125, 566 1,999, 504 64, 198 0 0 431, 798 8, 521, 469 841, 680 0 746,088 14,723, 920 74,765 129, 184 |