Mr. MUIRHEAD. I am sure you have read from time to time in the paper that there are more scholarships than are needed. Mr. MICHEL. Yes, one gets this impression. Scholarships are going begging. Why are they not taken advantage of? The natural question is, "Why don't we take advantage of what we already have,” what is the answer? Mr. MUIRHEAD. The answer in part is that in a great many institutions they do have scholarship funds available but they are earmarked for special purposes. They may be available, for example, to the grandson or great grandson of a deceased Civil War veteran from Putnam County in New York State and he can qualify for the scholarship. Mr. Howe. Many are hangers-on from the classic subjects scholarships. Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. Somewhat misleading stories appear from time to time stating that there is money available that is not claimed. It is not claimed because of the special qualifications attached to the scholarship. I think there is overwhelming evidence to indicate that there is not general scholarship money available to help young people from low income families to get to the college of their choice. Mr. MICHEL. On that point, then, would under this educational opportunity grants program, conceivably the universities and colleges in their recruitment for academic students rather than football players couple the two and say, "We have a scholarship available in such and such field and have this kind of assistance to help take advantage of it." Is that in the prospect? PURPOSE OF OPPORTUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM Mr. MUIRHEAD. I am sure it could be possible. Again the principal purpose of the opportunity grants program is to seek out the youngster who is faced with what can be called almost an insuperable barrier in terms of the cost of education and to help knock that barrier down so he can jump over it. That is not true of a great amount of scholarship money that is available. I think one of the things that has been misunderstood in these times is that we sometimes associate the word "scholarship" with the fact that the money goes only to the brighter student. By implication he is a scholar. As a matter of fact, the main thrust of the Federal interest in helping young people to get a higher education is to remove the barrier of financial need, and to be sure, to insist that he have the ability to profit from a college education but not necessarily be the brightest kid. By and large the youngster that is the very, very bright youngster, who is in the upper 2 or 3 percent of his graduating class, is going to get along. He is going to get a scholarship. Colleges are going to seek him out and use their money to lure him to come and study at their institution. The youngster that we have to help is the youngster that may not be in the upper 10 percent, he may not even be in the upper quarter, but he certainly is of college material-but does not have any money. That is the student these scholarships are intended to help. BRADLEY TV FACILITY APPLICATION Mr. MICHEL. Returning to the matter of Bradley University and our TV problem. Under Public Law 87-447, a million-dollar limit was set for the State of Illinois for TV facilities. Approximately $300,000 was given to the stations in Chicago and Champaign and about $400,000 to a station in Olney, Ill., thereby reaching the limit. Our understanding is, and I want to point out this is not related to the tricounty research foundation request, was that Bradley University made application for some assistance under this program. Was Public Law 87-447 designed specifically for the acquisition of hardware? Mr. CARDWELL. Broadcasting equipment and facilities. Mr. MICHEL. Is this the same purpose of title VI of the Higher Education Act of 1965? Mr. Howe. Title VI would not be limited to that. Mr. LUDINGTON. Title VI of 89-329 provides for educational television equipment but largely closed-circuit equipment to be used by higher education institutions. Mr. MICHEL. Would you say that title III of Public Law 89-10 was designed more for an educational objective rather than for TV hardware? Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes, that is true. Title VI in one of its other provisions does provide for equipment of a rather broad nature for the assistance of higher education institutions in classroom equipment. Mr. MICHEL. If an application under title III of Public Law 89-10 was turned down because too much equipment was needed, is it possible that it could be resubmitted, requesting assistance under title VI? Mr. MUIRHEAD. I would expect that an application that was predominantly for equipment would probably not be entertained under title III. Title III is more directed toward services and the support of faculty and the exchange of faculty. So perhaps in the first place the proposal might be submitted under the general equipment title or provision of title VI. Mr. MICHEL. Would you simply supply that for the record? (The information supplied follows:) HIGHER EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES Title III of the Higher Education Act provides for a program of grants to assist in raising the quality of developing institutions. The program seeks to correct the problems of those institutions which have not met minimum standards of academic quality required for accreditation, or which face the threat of losing their accreditation because of borderline performance. Program objectives are accomplished through two mechanisms: (1) Awards to developing institutions for the support of cooperative arrangements with other institutions, organizations, agencies, and business entities for the interchange of personnel and educational expertise; and (2) national teaching fellowships to highly qualified graduate students and junior faculty members of stronger institutions to encourage them to teach at developing institutions. Title VI-A of the Higher Education Act of 1965 is designed to improve the quality of classroom instruction in institutions of higher education. This purpose is accomplished through a program including (1) grants to institutions for the acquisition of television and other equipment, and (2) grants for minor remodeling. Funds appropriated for the purchase of equipment and/or remodeling are allotted to each State on the basis of a statutory formula. Any institution desiring to participate in the program must do so through a State agency having a plan of participation approved by the Commissioner. The Office of Education, after receiving the project requests recommended and priority ranked by each State agency, will subsequently make grants for the support of approved projects directly to the applicant institutions. Although other Federal assistance is available through the ETV Facilities Act to aid educational broadcasting stations, this is the primary program of Federal assistance available to institutions of higher education for the acquisition of closed-circuit TV equipment for direct instructional purposes. EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION FACILITIES The Educational Television Facilities Act (Public Law 87-447), which is title III of the Communications Act of 1934, authorized the appropriation of an aggregate $32 million for fiscal years 1963 through 1967, to assist in the construction of educational television broadcasting facilities, and thereby to increase the number of operating educational television stations. The act provides for matching grants for the construction of new broadcasting facilities which are to be used only for educational purposes and for the expansion of existing facilities, including towers, microwave equipment, boosters, translators, repeaters, mobile equipment, and video-recording equipment. Grants are made to State educational television agencies, public educational agencies of States and of their political subdivisions, public colleges and universities, and nonprofit associations organized primarily to engage in educational television broadcasting. The total grant for facilities located within any State may not exceed $1 million. Applicants apply directly to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and must notify their designated State educational television authority, if any, of each application. EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY GRANTS TO ILLINOIS Mr. MICHEL. Page 74 of the justification does not have a breakdown of where that $2 million in fiscal 1966 went in my home State of Illinois. Just supply that for the record. (The information to be supplied follows:) EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY GRANTS The Office of Education is in the process of receiving applications for educational opportunity grants from educational institutions throughout the country. Therefore, it is not yet known what the average grant will be. The following table is based on the assumption that the grants will average $500 each in 1966 and $550 each in 1967: MATCHING IN KIND BY THE COLLEGE Mr. MICHEL. On page 83 I noted that effective August 20, 1967, the Federal share of compensation to students decreases from 90 percent to 75 percent. Do you anticipate a decrease in student applications for this program because of the reduction? Mr. MUIRHEAD. No, I do not think so. You will also find in the record that while formerly the institution had to put up cash to meet its particular part of this program, it can now substitute in kind rather than cash the needed matching requirement. As a result of that Mr. MICHEL. When you say "kind" what are we talking about? Mr. MUIRHEAD. For example, the institution may submit services that they are providing in support of this program, or they may submit costs to the student that are concerned with his tuition in support of their part of this program. In other words, they do not have to put up actual cash, 10 percent outlay, or 25 percent, as you have indicated. We believe that the program with 75 percent Federal contribution and 25 percent institutional contribution will provide more money for work-study on the campus than off the campus and probably will result in supporting more students. EFFECT OF DRAFT AND GI BILL ON STUDENT AID PROGRAMS Mr. MICHEL. What effect do you see in these programs with the apparent tightening up in the draft calls to dig into our college ranks, whereas until recently they were practically automatically deferred for at least 4 years? Have you given any thought to the demand to go into our college ranks and take men into the draft? Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. Mr. MICHEL. What effect will this have on all these programs in higher education, if any? Mr. MUIRHEAD. I am speaking now of the student aid programs for a moment, it seems to me that it will have an effect. I am inclined to think not a very large effect. When you consider the higher education enrollment now being over 5 million and the number of students that might be drawn from the campus for draft service would, in the foreseeable future, unless something very dreadful happens, not represent a very large percentage of the college population. The thing that I see having an effect in the other direction will be the passage of the GI bill. The GI bill, as it now stands, will, of course, encourage a great many more veterans to go on with a college education than would have done so otherwise. Many of them will return and find that the GI bill will not be able to support them on the campus and they will have reached an age where they have additional expenses, many having been married. So I think they will be turning to the student financial aid provisions that you are now discussing here and we may very well expect more students participating as a result of the GI bill, than if the GI bill had not been passed. Mr. FLOOD. These laws are not mutually exclusive. Mr. MUIRHEAD. No, not at all. Mr. MICHEL. In other words, as distinguished between those in my age bracket after World War II who came out with a GI bill, with no other higher education act in being, we could point to the veterans of today as getting an additional assist over and above the regular GI bill by way of participating in some of these programs. Mr. MUIRHEAD. Yes, I think it is a different situation today. There are more opportunities to help them today than was the case in the former GI bill. COLLEGE WORK-STUDY PROGRAM Mr. MICHEL. The work-study program is decreased in the vocational education area, while I see on page 81 that it appears to be increased. How does that come about? Mr. MUIRHEAD. I have difficulty making the hookup between the two. This is the college work-study program. Mr. Howe. There is no college youth corps is the answer to that. Mr. MUIRHEAD. That is right, there is no college youth corps. The higher education enrollments are increasing, the number of young people that need to get help with the higher education courses is increasing. I think we can reasonably expect the student financial aid programs will continue to increase. TEACHER CORPS Mr. MICHEL. Winding up my period of questioning, if I might, with a couple of questions on the Teacher's Corps. Into what areas will these Teacher's Corps people be dispatched? Mr. SELLERS. You mean geographic? Mr. MICHEL. Yes. Take my hometown, how do we get into the act? Do we want to get in the act? Mr. FLOOD. What is your job? Who are you? Mr. ZELLERS. I am Charles Zellers, Executive Officer of the Bureau of Elementary and Secondary Education and the Teacher Corps is my other hat. Mr. KARSH. Mr. Zellers has been working on this centralizing all our records in preparation for administering this program. Mr. ZELLERS. The areas where the Corps members or the teams will be assigned are the economically disadvantaged areas. Mr. MICHEL. That is determined by what? Mr. ZELLERS. That will follow pretty closely the formula which applies to title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Mr. FLOOD. Rural as well as urban? Mr. ZELLERS. Yes, sir. Mr. MICHEL. What are the mechanics? Does the local school district submit an application? Mr. ZELLERS. The local school district submits an application to us indicating how many teams and how many team members, for what purposes, they would like to have assigned to them. Mr. MICHEL. Then you make an evaluation as to whether or not there is a need or you obviously evaluate what kind of a program they currently have going. Mr. ZELLERS. Taking into consideration, of course, the areas that have the greatest concentration of economically disadvantaged families. Mr. FLOOD. Where are you going to get the teachers? Mr. ZELLERS. The interns will come from several sources. Mr. ZELLERS. There are two terms. The team consists of an experienced teacher as a team leader and one or more inexperienced people who are known as teacher-interns. One of the purposes, of course, is to train the interns so that they will become experienced teachers and hopefully will stay in the teaching field. NEW YORK CITY PROPOSAL Mr. FLOOD. Did you see the story in the New York Times yesterday, or hear about it, of this New York City proposal? It was very exciting. |