cient use can be made of personnel, classrooms, and building space. Through videotape recording, instructional materials can be recorded, up dated, and reused to meet complex scheduling problems and to accommodate large numbers of students on different campuses; and materials can be exchanged among institutions. Capital costs of television transmission equipment are high. (Although costs vary for different kinds of systems, it is estimated that it would cost $300,000 to install an adequate compatible closed circuit TV production and distribution system on the average university campus.) Only about 600 of approximately 2,100 accredited institutions of higher education have been financially able to install necessary systems. Although Federal assistance is available (through NDEA and the ETV Facilities Act) to aid educational broadcasting stations and reception in schools, this is the only program of Federal assistance available to institutions of higher education for the acquisition of TV equipment for direct instructional purposes. EXPLANATION OF REQUIREMENTS The amount of the fiscal year 1966 allotment to many States for television equipment will not permit installation of complete systems. In many such States, institutions will be able to utilize the funds for acquisition of only portions of a system or improvement of existing systems. In those States where sufficient funds are available it is estimated that the average cost of a complete closedcircuit television system will be $300,000, with the Federal share, $150,000. However, in consideration of these factors it is estimated that nationally the total requested appropriation of $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1967 will result in 30 to 40 projects being funded, having an average Federal share of $37,500 to $50,000. This compares with the 1966 appropriation of $1,500,000 for television equipment. Due to the small amounts involved in the allotments to the States in fiscal year 1966 for television equipment, the number of Government-assisted projects will be approximately 40, with an average Federal contribution of about $37,500. Through television, instructional materials integrated with formal presentations can be recorded and reused to meet various schedule problems within a given institution and to accommodate large numbers of students on several different campuses; and such materials can be exchanged with other schools providing both institutions with the advantage of especially skilled and otherwise distinguished teachers and professors. Further advantages of recordings are that the material can be updated with relative ease. In addition, the cost of instructional services can be reduced considerably through effective use of television. (2) Other equipment-Program for 1966 and 1967.—Title VI authorizes grants to institutions of higher education for acquisition of equipment and minor remodeling, with the aim of improvement of undergraduate instruction. The appropriation request of $13,000,000 for fiscal year 1967 will maintain the laboratory and other special equipment grant program at about the same level as fiscal year 1966, the initial year of the program. The program will assist in raising the quality of instruction in higher education institutions by supporting acquisition of equipment for use in courses dealing with science, mathematics, foreign languages, history, geography, government, education, the arts, English, and other humanities. The program is particularly aimed at those colleges and universities-both public and private→ which are trying to improve themselves but which, for financial reasons, are unable to participate in the educational revolution brought about through the use of new techniques for learning. To participate in the program, States must submit, through designated State commissions, a plan to the Commissioner, outlining project priorities and their method of determination, and the methods of determining the Federal percent of the cost of each project. Ordinarily this share is limited to 50 percent of the cost, but may be increased to not more than 80 percent where an institution can prove insufficient resources, and the inability to attain them precludes participation. State allotments are computed by formulas which take into account the number of students enrolled in institutions of higher education in each State, and its relative per capita income. EXPLANATION OF REQUIREMENTS The 1966 appropriation totals $13,500.000. Estimated allocations to the States range from a low of $289 to a high of $1,536.250. It is estimated that 1966 funds will support 314 projects at an average Federal contribution of $45,000 per project. Approximately the same level of Federal participation is projected for fiscal year 1967. (b) Institutes Title VI (B) of the act authorizes the Commissioner of Education to arrange through grants and contracts with institutions of higher education for the operation of (1) short-term workshops or institutes and (2) regular-session institutes to train college and university faculty in the effective application of educational media equipment in the classroom. Participants in the institute program (whether regular or summer session) are entitled to receive $75 per week plus $15 per week for each dependent while in actual attendance. No stipends are provide dfor workshop participants. Major advances in educational technology have generated a growth in the use of electronic learning laboratories for individual self-instruction, programed instruction, computer-controlled teaching systems, instructional films, closed-circuit educational television and other new methods of disseminating information in educational media centers in the Nation's institutions. The need now arises for more individuals well trained in the use of informational and media techniques. Persons expert in the theory and practice of new technology are needed to assist and teach others to effectively use these new techniques. No funds were available to implement this section of the Higher Education Act during fiscal year 1966. The $2,500,000 requested for fiscal year 1967 will fund the program in its initial year of operation at the following level: Improvement of undergraduate instruction grants to higher education institutions for acquisition of equipment and minor remodeling, fiscal years 1966 and 1967 estimates EXPLANATION OF CHANGES An increase of $2.700.000 is requested under the Higher Education and the National Vocational Student Loan Insurance Acts of 1965 so that the Office of Education may insure loans of students without access to State or private nonprofit insurance programs. This amount includes $2,500,000 to insure an additional 5,000 higher education student loans averaging $500, for a total of 6,000 new loans in 1967, and $200,000 to increase the vocational student loans from an average of $200 in 1966 to $400 in 1967 for 5,000 new loans each year. Student loan insurance fund, Office of Education Explanation of transfers Transfer from higher educational activities: 1966 estimate‒‒‒‒‒ 1967 estimate--- Purpose: To establish a fund to insure loans of students without access to State or private nonprofit loan insurance programs. Higher education student loans.. Total..... $500,000 Under the Higher Education Act of 1965 and the National Vocational Student Loan Insurance Act of 1965, the Office of Education received authority to insure loans of students in eligible institutions which do not have reasonable access to a State or private nonprofit program of student loan insurance. In 1966 $500,000 was appropriated for the higher education student loan insurance fund, and $50,000 is being requested for the vocational student loan insurance fund in a 1966 supplemental under "Expansion and Improvement of Vocational Education." These funds are being merged and will be known henceforth as the Student Loan Insurance Fund. It is an anticipated that most loans will be guaranteed by a State or private nonprofit agency, but the Federal Government must stand ready to provide an insured loan plan if these other sources do not adequately serve the purposes of the acts. Defaults on any federally insured loans would be very small during the first year and would probably result only from the death of the borrower. At this time it is unknown whether those States which do not now have a plan will initiate a State plan or whether the private plans will have sufficient guarantee funds to meet the demands. Therefore, an amount of $3,200,000 is requested for 1967 to enable the Federal Government to establish a modest insurance fund from which insured lenders would be paid when any of their student loans were in default. Of the total, $3 million is included for higher education loans and $200,000 for vocational student loans. In addition to the amounts appropriated, lenders will pay into this fund an insurance premium of one-fourth of 1 percent per annum of the unpaid principal amount of the loan. All insurance premiums and interest earned on the fund will be retained in the fund to meet additional requirements for payments of defaulted loans. The fund may borrow from the Treasury if at any time the moneys available are insufficient to make payments on defaults of insured loans. It is estimated that the appropriation requested will make it unnecessary to utilize this authority in 1967. The fund will take over loans on which it pays insurance claims and seek to collect on them, but the schedules reflect a full reserve for losses on such loans. It is anticipated that 6,000 higher education student loans averaging $500 will be insured in 1967, compared to 1.000 loans averaging $500 in 1966; and that 5,000 vocational student loans averaging $400 will be insured in 1967, compared to 5,000 averaging $200 each in 1966, |