UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Education, DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I write to express my hope that there will be favorable action on Title XII, Education for the Public Service, as contained in S. 3098. Those of us who are engaged in preparing university students for administrative careers in government service are keenly aware of the rapidly growing demand for men and women who have professional education and training of the type required to carry on the activities of governments which are not only serving an ever-growing number of people but which are also performing functions which are constantly becoming more complex and which must be performed by men and women with professional education. The total number of men and women who are being prepared for service in governments-national, state, and local-is only a small fraction of the number needed each year. Our own experience here at the University of Colorado provides a concrete example of the situation which prevails. In 1967 we awarded the degree Master of Public Administration (M.P.A.) to 27 men and women (23 men and 4 women). Active recruiting by representatives of many units of government and by organizations with government-related programs was much in evidence as these students were nearing the end of their work for the M.P.A. Some with exceptionally good records received from five to ten offers. Of the 27 graduates, ten went with the United States Government, five went with cities, four went with the State of Colorado, two went with municipal leagues, one went with a management consulting firm which works almost exclusively with governments. one went with the staff of a political party, one went with a large newspaper, and three returned to the Royal Government of Thailand to responsible positions from which they were on leave. During 1967-1968 we have in the Institute of Public Administration an enrollment of approximately 100 students who are working toward the degree Master of Public Administration. Representatives of government agencies at all levelsnational, state and local-are communicating with, and interviewing, all those students who are interested in positions in 1968. Organizations such as university research bureaus, municipal leagues, management consulting firms, and citizens' organizations are also seeking staff members. The management consulting firms seem to be able to offer the highest salaries. Within the last eighteen months, one of our graduates, at the age of 26 and with very limited experience, was employed by a management consulting firm at a beginning salary of $15,000. Part of my own work includes rather frequent opportunities to assist units of government in selecting individuals for important administrative positions. For example, I serve as a member of oral boards for state and city civil service commissions and assist city councils in interviewing and evaluating the qualifications of applicants for the position of city manager. On the basis of this experience, I can also state that there is a real shortage of well-qualified persons for the many vacancies which need to be filled. There is beyond question a direct and important relationship between the qualifications of the administrators and researchers who are appointed and the quality of government which we obtain. More able young people must be attracted to the graduate schools and institutes of public administration. I believe this can be done with fellowships of the type provided in Title XII of S. 3098. Even with very limited fellowship funds and with arrangements which provide part-time positions for many of our students, we are attracting able students who wish to enter the public service, but not enough of them. It is, however, necessary not merely to attract more able students into graduate schools and institutes of public administration. These schools and institutes must have sufficient financial support to enable them to offer educational programs which are really designed to prepare students for professional careers. While it is important for a graduate program in Public Administration to include offerings from several disciplines, it is very evident that at least the basic core courses and seminars must be offered by faculty members who are full-fledged and dedicated members of a faculty of a graduate school or institute of public administration. Such faculty members must be thoroughly acquainted with developments within governments and with the kind of professional education 'that is needed by those who go into government service. Title XII of S. 3098 provides for some of the much-needed financial support. You may be assured that many of us in Colorado and elsewhere who are interested in the quality of government, as I am sure you also are, will be most grateful for anything which you can do which will bring about favorable action on this important piece of proposed legislation in the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, and also, of course, in the Senate. Sincerely, LEO C. RIETH MAYER, Director. Senator MORSE. Our next witness will be Mr. Earl M. Aldrich, Jr., acting director, Center for Latin American Language and Area Studies, University of Wisconsin. We are delighted to have you. We are particularly delighted to have you testify while Senator Yarborough is here. He has done great work in Latin American affairs, particularly in the adoption of his amendment to the elementary and secondary school bill last December in bilingual education. It is a matter of interest to you as well. You may proceed. STATEMENT OF EARL M. ALDRICH, JR., ACTING DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR LATIN AMERICAN LANGUAGE AND AREA STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Mr. ALDRICH. Thank you, Senator Morse, for the opportunity to appear before this committee. I am here to speak on behalf of the extension of NDEA title VI, section 601, which would be designated under the higher education amendments as title VIII, section 801. I have a more complete statement which you have in writing, and I would like, in the interests of time, simply to summarize very briefly what I have said in the written statement. Senator MORSE. Mr. Aldrich's prepared statement will be inserted in the record at this point, and you may summarize it as you see fit. (The prepared statement of Mr. Aldrich follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF EARL M. ALDRICH, JR., ACTING DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR LATIN AMERICAN LANGUAGE AND AREA STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN EXTENSION OF NDEA TITLE VI In the following statement, I am concerned with the NDEA Title VI only as it relates to Latin American language and area studies. I favor the continuance of this act on the grounds that (a) it has produced beneficial-indeed impressiveresults and (b) the reasons for its original enactment remain urgent and important. Since the academic year 1959-60, when the first NDEA language area centers began receiving support, the government has contributed approximately 3.5 million dollars to encourage the growth of Latin American studies. The Latin American centers receiving NDEA assistance numbered two in 1959-60. With the addition of new centers in 1961 and 1965, the total reached sixteen.' As of this academic year (1967-68), the student enrollment in courses provided by these centers in Latin American language and social science totals over 25,000. It should be noted that in establishing these centers, the federal government chose always to cooperate with universities which previously had been noted for the strength of their Latin American programs or with those which at least had a unique potential for development in that area of specialization. 1 New York, 1959; Wisconsin, Madison, 1959: California, Los Angeles, 1961; Columbia, 1961; Florida, 1961; Texas, 1961; Tulane, 1961; Antioch, 1965; Cornell, 1965; Illinois 1965; Miami, 1965; New Mexico, 1965; Stanford, 1965; Virginia, 1965; Wisconsin, Milwaukee, 1965; and Yale, 1965. I shall use The University of Wisconsin as a case in point, as I know it most Intimately. Since 1930 The University of Wisconsin has operated a Latin American studies program. Over the years a competent staff has been assembled, an adequate library has been built up, interdisciplinary cooperation has come to be understood, and connections in Latin America have been established. In 1959 an NDEA center for Latin American language and area studies was estab lished at Wisconsin, and since that time the program has been developed dramatically and always with an eye to careful planning. Originally seven departments participated in the program; as of this year, sixteen departments are actively cooperating: Agricultural Economics, Anthropology, Art History, Business, Economics, Educational Policy Studies, Geography, History, Journalism, Law, Linguistics, Music, Political Science, Spanish and Portuguese, Sociology, and Rural Sociology. In fact, since receiving federal support, the program has grown rapidly in every respect: faculty, number and variety of courses, facilities (especially language laboratories and the library), and students. By observation of the other NDEA Latin American centers indicates that they have experienced a similar dramatic growth in their programs as a result of the stimulus provided by NDEA funds. It is important to emphasize at this point that every dollar of federal money that supports the centers is matched by university funds. In fact, most of the sixteen centers have spent considerably more than the matching requirement. Out of the total amount spent on Latin American studies at these universities, the federal portion comes to about 15 per cent. By no means am I implying that the federal contribution has not been significant. Rather, I strongly wish to underscore the point that federal funds, judiciously used, have stimulated the universities to expand their own resources and have provided that financial margin necessary to allow them to enter into training and research activities which would not otherwise have been possible. Another important aspect of NDEA Title VI has been the fellowship support provided for graduate students in Latin American studies, Since 1959 nearly 1200 of these coveted awards, at a cost of 4.5 million dollars, have been given for advanced study in Latin American language and area courses. These fellowships support only a small fraction of the graduate students who specialize in Latin American studies. However, the NDEA fellowship program has contributed in a vital way not only to the education of some of our most gifted students but to the stimulation of interest among students in general. The program accounts in no small part for the growth in the number of students who have obtained advanced degrees in this field. The following chart dramatically demonstrates this. These students have used their training in a variety of professions, including university, junior college, and high school teaching, government service, private industry, and mass communications. A high percentage of the Ph.D. recip ients are now teachers and researchers at universities where they are contributing to the development of Latin American programs. I might add that the statistics take on a special meaning when they include graduates who have held a Title VI fellowship and have been taught or advised under this Act. It is significant that many of these have gone on to make important contributions in Latin American studies. In short I firmly believe that NDEA Tile VI has been exceedingly valuable for Latin American studies in that it has reinforced existing university resources and thus has enabled us to move ahead more rapidly and on a broader front. But if the Act has been successful in its avowed purpose of increasing the number of language and area specialists and thereby improving national com petence in world affairs, surely the job is not complete. No extraordinary perceptiveness is needed to see that the task of promoting a proper understanding of and cooperation with the twenty Latin American nations is only beginning. Professor Kalman Silvert best sums up the reasons for our continuing need to accumulate a national pool of competence in language and area teaching and knowledge about Latin America. He states that the recurrent crisis of the past twenty years in hemispheric affairs can hardly be expected to diminish, since "no Latin American republic has as yet passed through the storms of the tag end of traditionalism into the self-sustaining growth of modernism." In other words, just because the indecision, embarrassment, and frustration caused by the Guatemala, Cuba, the Nixon episodes, Venezuela, Panama, and the Dominican Republic have been largely forgotten and Latin American news is once again relegated to the back pages of our papers and magazines, it does not follow that we can afford to ignore that area which is, by the very nature of its history, location, size and population, inextricably bound to our national interests. To be sure, we have begun to learn something about Latin America in recent years. And hopefully this knowledge will help us overcome some past insufficiencies in our Latin American dealings. But any serious student of the hemisphere recognizes that the progress which has been made also reveals what a complex problem it is to know, understand, and appreciate Latin America. Professor Silvert summarizes the complexity and unfinished dimension of the task clearly and succinctly: Now that the nation urgently needs information and analysis, there is little capital stock of mature, accumulated knowledge of Latin America's special circumstances upon which to draw. I do not mean to imply that there are not brilliant scholars in all disciplines devoting themselves to Latin America; my point is that the number and their experience are as yet short of what is needed to give us reasonably rounded and yet profound analysis of the array of social situations of the several Latin American republics. Foreign studies require a special set of skills and techniques in addition to the knowledge of theory and method normally to be expected of the scholar. The social scientist working overseas must learn another language so well that he can understand the subtle nuance; he must know the history of another country as intimately as that of his own in order to be able to feel the meaning of symbols and stereotypes, and he must recognize when his theory is alien and inadequate to what he is finding. Another great difficulty-one inherent in the nature of the area itself-is that Latin America is not at all an easy theater of research but, on the contrary, is extraordinarily difficult to subdue intellectually. The twenty countries are disparate and growing more unlike each other every day. Worse. they are sufficiently European to look familiar and yet sufficiently special to defy their being forced into the standard categorical boxes of "Westerness" or "underdevelopment." To summarize quickly, my two basic arguments for extending NDEA Title VI are as follows: (a) On strictly pragmatic grounds alone, the Act is proving to be successful in achieving its avowed aims. That is, with the judicious application of a limited amount of funds, the federal government has contributed to the development of sound university programs, which in turn have begun to produce competent language and area specialists and a body of mature. scholarly information. (b) On the other hand, the job has only begun and should not be abandoned after a successful start. The process of strengthening our understanding of and cooperation with the nations of Latin America is difficult and complex. 2 Kalman H. Silvert, The Conflict Society: Reaction and Revolution in Latin America, rev. ed. (New York, American Universities Field Staff, Inc., 1966), p. xi. A glance at the bibliography published in the Latin American Research Review (University of Texas) will show that a number of impressive scholarly works on Latin America has been published in recent years. Of course, this material does not even begin to compare with that which pertains to Western Europe. Silvert, op cit., pp. xi-xii. Finally, I would like to urge the Committee not only to consider favorably the extension of NDEA Title VI but also to make the extension of sufficient length of allow for proper planning by the universities involved. From a university point of view, I cannot stress too much the need for this long-term type of extension. The guarantee of support which will continue over a prolonged period of time allows a university to make the long-range academic commitment necessary for building the strongest and most carefully planned programs. This particular conviction is held very deeply by all of the center directors, and I have heard it echoed repeatedly at our meetings. Furthermore, by its very nature, the NDEA Title VI is not a frantic, shot-in-the-arm approach or a stopgap measure, but rather a long-term approach to a complex problem. This, I venture to say, is doubtless one of the reason why it has worked out so well within the university structure. In closing, I should remind the Committee just very briefly of President Johnson's April 13, 1967, remarks at the OAS meeting in Punta del Este, since they have special significance for the future of Latin American studies at institutions of higher learning. I refer specifically to his final statement: Finally, I shall urge that funds be provided to help establish Alliance for Progress centers at colleges and universities in the United States. Our partnership must be based on respect for our various cultures and civilizations. And respect is built on knowledge. This new education program will offer new opportunities for students and educators of your countries and mine to work together. This statement constitutes both a public and an international commitment which is neither offhand nor unpremeditated. It thus seems to imply not only a need for the expansion and intensification of the current teaching and research functions of existing NDEA Latin American language and area centers but the impartation of an international dimension, which the current operations do not have. It seems likely that U.S. universities, which have the resources of highly competent and specialized staffs, library and training facilities, and experience, will be called upon to prepare greatly increased numbers of students, faculty, and research specialists from both halves of the hemisphere, with a view toward increased professional capacity and the ability to undertake joint research functions on the basis of real equality. The present NDEA language and area centers (and perhaps additional ones to be designated later) could logically become the operational framework for the increased activity which President Johnson's speech implies. It follows also that the need for a long-term extension of NDEA Title VI becomes of paramount importance to the universities which might be called on to bear the responsibility. TITLE VI NDEA SUPPORT Mr. ALDRICH. I suppose that my focus this morning is going to be more limited than that of others who have testified before you. I would like to back my contention that NDEA title VI should be extended by referring to my personal experience with the Latin American language and area studies programs. I favor the continuance of this particular act, this particular section, first, on the grounds that it has produced beneficial results and, second, for the reasons that its original enactment remain urgent and important. I should like to point out that since the academic years 1959-60, when the first NDEA language and area centers began receiving support, the Government has contributed approximately $3.5 million to encourage the growth of Latin American studies. The Government has invested in what have been designated as Latin American language and area centers for the purpose of encouraging the study of language and social science courses, which focus on Latin America. The Latin American centers receiving NDEA assistance numbered two in 1959 and 1960, with the addition of new centers in 1961 and 1965, the total reached 16. |