Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. MICHEL. And in 1968?

Mr. ZELLERS. You will have to extend the legislation.
Mr. MICHEL. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

EXAMPLE OF COMMUNITY SERVICE

Mr. FLOOD. On page 1, community service and continuing education programs.

I am gun shy on bureaucratic semantics. What is an example of a community service? You have, I see, $20 million which will support 800 programs involving 200,000 citizens. Eight hundred programs. That is a lot of money and people. Give me one decent example. Mr. ZELLERS. One example might be the use of college or university resources and facilities, teaching staff, to aid in upgrading of municipal employees, policemen, firemen, city managers. It might aid in the upgrading of persons engaged in other kinds of community activities. Mr. FLOOD. Instruction to mayors and council members and tax collectors?

Mr. ZELLERS. If the local community feels this is one of their pressing problems, and the university has facilities in aiding in this

connection.

ELIGIBILITY OF ALIENS

Mr. FLOOD. Obviously it does not include aliens since you use the word "citizens."

Mr. ZELLERS. It would be persons in the community-laymen.
Mr. FLOOD. Do you exclude aliens from this?

Mr. ZELLERS. No. They will not be excluded. The participants would be determined by the local authorities and the universities.

Mr. FLOOD. In my area, I have a large number of aliens, you know. Mr. ZELLERS. We have no intention of excluding such persons if they are involved in community programs and activities.

Mr. FLOOD. Since you expressly used the word "citizens," as a lawyer I took it for granted you were excluding aliens.

Mr. ZELLERS. That was not the intent.

INFORMATION SCIENCES

Mr. FLOOD. In the next paragraph, $3,750,000 for training about eight hundred persons in the information sciences.

What in the world are information sciences? I can let my imagination run wild. What is an information scientist?

Mr. MUIRHEAD. That probably should have been written in better English.

Mr. FLOOD. The English is excellent. It is too good.

Mr. MUIRHEAD. In terms of carrying out the purposes of the program, it should have been related to the libraries. What we have in mind here is to train 800 people in the better use of libraries.

IDENTIFYING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH COLLEGE PROMISE

Mr. FLOOD. On the next page the last sentence of your second paragraph:

We are requesting $119.5 million for 220,000 grants and $2.5 million for contracts to identify such youths and to encourage them to complete their education.

What does that mean? You are going to hire some learned society, or some company to do what?

Mr. MUIRHEAD. We are going to hire perhaps some nonprofit organization such as the college board, or the Educational Testing Service, or a number of colleges and universities to find out better ways to identify young people in high school who have college promise, but who are not at that moment indicating it.

Mr. FLOOD. You are going to knock on doors and dig them out from behind the woodpile?

Mr. MUIRHEAD. I do not think we will go that far. We will certainly travel into areas we have not traveled before, and that we should travel a good deal more.

Mr. FLOOD. Do something about that for the record. That is most unclear.

Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes.

(The additional information follows:)

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Since the signing of the Higher Education Act of 1965, the Division of Student Financial Aid has received some 35 unsolicited proposals for contracts to encourage the full utilization of educational talent. With the completion and distribution of the guidelines, this number is expected to increase substantially. When received, the proposal is acknowledged by postcard, assigned an identification number, reviewed by the staff, and filed. Copies are sent to an outside panel of reviewers for their comments. If the proposal is approved by them, the staff, and the Director, it is submitted to the Associate Commissioner for his signature. Upon receipt of his signature, it is sent to the Office of Education Contracts and Construction Service for final negotiation.

Those proposals not approved are returned, with an explanation as to why they are ineligible for funds under title IV, section 408.

KINDS OF AGENCIES SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

Proposals have been received from a variety of agencies. On file, there are proposed projects from

1. Individual colleges and universities.

2. Groups of colleges and universities.

3. State boards of education.

4. City public school systems.

5. Higher education assistance agencies.

6. Private, nonprofit agencies.

TYPES OF PROPOSALS SUBMITTED

To be eligible for funds under title IV, section 408 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, proposals must fulfill at least one of the objectives of the act, as follows:

1. to identify qualified youths of exceptional financial need and encourage them to complete secondary school and undertake postsecondary educational training;

2. to publicize existing forms of student financial aid, including aid furnished under educational opportunity grants;

3. to encourage secondary school or college dropouts of demonstrated aptitude to reenter educational programs, including postsecondary school programs.

Three proposals meeting one or more of these objectives are described below. College entrance examination board

The College Scholarship Service, one of the activities of the CEEB, is an association of 637 colleges and universities. It proposes to assist the Office of Education in assuring proper implementation of the act through a series of up to 100 workshops on financial need analysis for institutional officials. It will also prepare, publish, and distribute a brochure on analysis of financial need.

Michigan State University

Michigan State University, in cooperation with the 24 community colleges in the State, proposes a statewide project of advertising kinds of financial aid available (More Education, More Opportunity). Through a massive advertising campaign, involving newspapers, magazines, television, radio, films, and MEMO pads, the program plans to reach each of the 500,000 students in Michigan high schools. The knowledge obtained about methods and procedures of disseminating financial aid information will be shared with those planning similar activities in other States.

Catalyst

Catalyst is a national, nonprofit organization employing the talents of married women who are college graduates. This group proposes to recruit, screen, and train a volunteer corps of mature women, from among its members, to serve as supervisors, counselors, aids, and tutors for qualified high school students of exceptional financial need.

Mr. FOGARTY. Is there anything else you would like to say?
Mr. MUIRHEAD. No, I am very satisfied, if you are.

ENDOWMENT OF COLLEGES OF AGRICULTURE AND THE MECHANIC ARTS

Mr. FOGARTY. Commissioner, who is responsible for striking out all funds for the endowment of colleges of agriculture and the mechanic arts?

Mr. Howe. As I understand it, and check me on this, this is one of the cuts that was made by the budget.

Mr. FOGARTY. You recommended the $11.9 million?

Mr. CARDWELL. Yes.

Mr. FOGARTY. And the Bureau of the Budget cut it out?

Mr. CARDWELL. Yes.

Mr. FOGARTY. On what basis?

Mr. CARDWELL. For the general reasoning on this program, there were two aspects.

First, this was a year of tight budget decisions in the area of education where there was an effort to expand the educational budget generally, particularly for the support of higher education. It was reasoned, following the enactment of last year's Higher Education Act which provides other means of support for colleges and universities, this older and very specifically directed kind of support be dropped, and we would start moving toward more uniform support of all colleges and universities across the board in the years to come through the Higher Education Act of 1965.

Mr. FOGARTY. This is what you say in the budget:

The appropriation has supported college instruction in agriculture and mechanic arts and related fields in the 68 land-grant colleges. No funds are being requested for this activity for 1967.

Mr. CARDWELL. That is correct.

Mr. FOGRATY. That is quite an explanation.

In the fiscal year 1954 report, this committee gave about the same reason, at that time, for cutting out the $2.5 million annual appropriation which was the authorized level in those days.

Do you know what happened?

Mr. CARDWELL. Yes, sir.

Mr. FOGARTY. You know the legislative history?
Mr. CARDWELL. A little bit.

Mr. FOGARTY. The amount was restored by an amendment which the committee itself was forced to offer because of the overwhelming opposition to the cut.

Mr. CARDWELL. Yes.

Mr. FOGARTY. Is there any doubt in your mind the same thing will happen this year?

Mr. CARDWELL. There is some doubt in my mind as to whether the Congress will support the President's request. However, I think it is a request that does have some basis, the basis being that looking toward the future the Government should move toward more uniform support of all colleges and universities and move away from specialized support of selected colleges.

Mr. FOGARTY. I do not think you are going to get very far with it. We are going to recommend this money be restored. If it will not be in this committee, I am sure it will be in the House.

I am going back over the debate in 1953 on this particular amendment. Even the committee admitted they made a mistake in cutting it out. Of course a different party was in the majority on the committee at that time.

JUSTIFICATION MATERIAL

HIGHER EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES

Amounts available for obligation

1966

Unobligated balance from 1965 transferred from "Economic opportunity pro

[blocks in formation]

Transfer from "Economic opportunity program"

[blocks in formation]

$160, 000, 000
-500,000
59, 123, 000

845,000 24,200,000

1967

$475, 272, 000

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

An increase of $10 million is proposed for an additional 400 community service and continuing education programs in order to assist in the solution of community problems.

A total increase of $24,300,000 is for library assistance, including $15 million for an additional 1,605 basic and special purpose grants for strengthening higher education institution libraries; $2,750,000 for training an additional 559 persons in the information sciences; $3,550,000 to initiate the research and demonstration program and support about 70 projects; and $3 million to implement the college and research library resources program under the Library of Congress. For strengthening developing institutions, an increase of $25 million is proposed for an additional 550 cooperative agreements and 150 teaching fellowships. A total increase of $62 million is proposed for educational opportunity grants. Grants to higher educational institutions will be increased by $61,500,000 in order to support an additional 105,000 awards to students. A $500,000 increase for identification and encouragement of educational talent will permit greater publicizing of forms of student financial aid and expanded programs of identifying and encouraging qualified low-income youth.

An additional amount of $33,500,000 is included for insured loans. An increase of $2,500,000 will provide a total of $10 million, the balance of the $17,500,000 authorization, for advances for State and nonprofit private reserve funds; and an increase of $31 million will provide a total of $33 million in order to pay interest costs for the 300,000 students who obtained loans in 1966 as well as an additional 775,000 students.

For the college work-study program, a $34.977,000 increase will provide a total of $134,100,000 in order to support employment for 150,000 students in the spring of 1967, 90,000 in the summer, and 210,000 in the fall.

A $40.672.000 increase is requested for teacher training and services programs. An additional $18.172.000 for the National Teacher Corps will enable 3,750 teachers to begin service in low-income areas, and an additional 850 members to begin preliminary training. The $22,500,000 increase for teacher fellowships will support an additional 3,446 awards.

A net increase of $2 million for improvement of undergraduate instruction includes an increase of $2,500,000 to implement the institute program and to support training for about 990 college and university faculty in the effective use of educational media equipment; and a decrease of $500,000 for grants at a slightly reduced rate to about 300 institutions, the same as 1966, for acquisition of equipment and minor remodeling.

« PreviousContinue »