and Senate, we were in conference day after day, I know you Texas junior colleges made the real contribution. The president of Henderson County Junior College at Athens, Tex.-my old home county—at that time president of the association of the junior colleges, called me and said, "Our junior colleges are in a difficult position. The elementary and secondary schools got the primary tax money from the local ad valorem taxation. The institutions of the senior colleges in the State get the first moneys from the legislation. The junior colleges came along later; they have to take what is left of the local tax money and what is left of the legislative appropriation. We are the hardest beset of all of the institutions of educational institutions with tax support.'

So with that plea from him we went to work, and I drew an amendment and was able to get it adopted in the conference between the House and Senate under which with the cooperation of an opinion by Attorney General Will Wilson-we were able to get a ruling that junior colleges in Texas are institutions of both secondary education and higher education, that they could qualify for student loans in institutions of higher learning, they could get the science and language laboratories as a high school, so we know that amendment in the law that permitted the junior colleges in Texas and California—incidentally, about eight States came under it to qualify both under the high schools provision and under the higher institutions provisioncame from the Texas suggestion.

I want to thank you gentlemen of this panel for that contribution. It is a very meaningful contribution, and it will be of considerable help here. Did either of you have anything else you wish to add?

Dr. BAKER. Just one thing, Senator, since you are talking about student loans. We came into existence the same year as the student loan. There have been some over fifteen hundred of our students have participated in this and for your information, only six delinquent at this time.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Only six out of 1500?

Dr. BAKER. Yes, sir.

would

Senator YARBOROUGH. I am glad to have that. I wish you write me a letter to that effect. I will tell you we have had constant attacks on this thing in Washington before the committee. They have tried to phase it out and put it under guaranteed loans, banks and lending associations and other institutions, and the people who tried to phase it out, we have had a very strenuous fight to save the student loan programs from direct loans from the Federal Government. They have charged the students don't pay it, they are delinquent, the institutions won't work to get it repaid, and they have used all kinds of attacks on it; you couldn't imagine. This record is so tremendous, it is difficult to comprehend less than 1 percent that have been delinquent in the loans out of 1,500 student loans.

I congratulate you, and I want that letter in the record. I want to show, when I get back to Washington what this junior college has done, because they anticipate that the junior college students might have more problems staying current than the students in a senior college.

(The letter referred to follows:)

Senator RALPH W. YARBOROUGH,

SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE, Levelland, Tex., April 19, 1968.

U.S. Senate, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR YARBOROUGH: Thank you for your letter of April 10 regarding the Education Subcommittee in Austin. I apologize for not being more help to you regarding the Title III Program, but since our institution has not used this program, I was unable to give any first hand information about its success. In our conservation you asked me to send you information regarding our students that have been assisted under federal programs. We are indeed proud of our record regarding the use of these funds and like to brag a little. Our students appreciate this program and as a result very few of them are delinquent in their repayment schedule.

I am enclosing a report from my financial aids officer that will give you better account of what has happened in the 10 years that South Plains College has been operating. Let me assure you that most, if not all, of these students would not have been able to attend college if these three programs had not existed.

Thank you for your continued interest in higher education, and let me know if I can be of any service to you.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosure.

MARVIN L. BAKER, President.

STUDENTS ASSISTED UNDER FEDERALLY SPONSORED PROGRAMS AT SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE THROUGH SPRING SEMESTER, 1968

Note: As of Jan. 1, 1968, there were 6 delinquent national defense student loans in the amount of $689.69, which represents approximately 1.6 percent of the toal money loaned.

Dr. BAKER. This is a problem.

Dr. KING. We want to learn their secret.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Gentlemen, we will recess the hearings for 10 minutes at this time.

(Recess.)

PANEL CONSISTING OF DR. MACK C. ADAMS, COORDINATOR OF FINANCIAL AID, SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY, DALLAS, TEX.; DR. JOHN SILBER, DEAN, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, AUSTIN, TEX.; AND LLOYD DOGGETT, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS STUDENT BODY, AUSTIN,

TEX.

STUDENT FINANCIAL AID

Senator YARBOROUGH. We will next take up the question under these extensions of the Higher Education Acts, the problem of student financial assistance and the universal post-secondary educational oppor tunity amendment, and we have listed as panelists on this panel, Dr. Mack C. Adams, coordinator of financial aid at Southern Methodist University-gentlemen, if you will, come around-Dr. John Silber.

dean of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Texas, Austin, Tex., and Mr. Lloyd Doggett, president of the University of Texas student body, Austin, Tex. If you gentlemen will, come around.

Dr. Adams we will hear from you first. I order your statement inserted in the record at this point.

(The prepared statement of Dr. Adams follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MACK C. ADAMS, COORDINATOR OF STUDENT FINANCIAL AID, SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY, DALLAS, TEX.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: My name is Mack C. Adams. I am Coordinator of Student Financial Aid at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas.

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing and hope that I can make a meaningful contribution to the field of financial assistance in discussing the merits of the higher Education Amendments of 1968 contained in S. 3098 and the Universal-Post Secondary Educational Opportunity Amendment S. 1126. 1. I would like to commend and support the amendments which would allow for a consolidation for funding and for administration of the now separate National Defense, College Work-Study and Educational Opportunity Grant programs. If accomplished, these provisions would help to facilitate the coordination of whole student aid operation.

2. The provision for shifting up to 20% of the monies from one fund to another would give some flexibility to local handling and thus enable the financial aid officer to effect a wiser use of funds.

3. Equalizing the matching requirements on a 90/10 ratio in the NDSL and CWS programs seems appropriate and I would encourage that this provision should be enacted so as to become effective July 1, 1968 and thereby eliminate the change to 80/20 in the CWS program due to take effect in August of this year.

4. Raising the maximum annual undergraduate NDS Loan form $1000 to $1500 and the aggregate loan ceiling from $5000 to $6000 is needed, particularly in view of rising educational costs. Also, raising the maximum EOG from $800 to $1000 is a desirable liberalization.

5. Removing NDSL provision for special consideration to academically superior students, as well as repeal of the $200 EOG incentive awards is consistent with current trends toward equality of educational opportunity and is to be encouraged. Extension of the EOG to five years of availability is also furthering of this trend as is the amendment to provide special services to the disadvantaged. 6. Repeal of the requirement that EOG may not exceed the amount of other assistance to a student will be of value to many students particularly those enrolled in the less costly schools. I recommend that this provision should be made applicable for fiscal year '69 rather than being deferred to fiscal year '70.

7. It is essential that provision for extending both National Defense Loans and the interest subsidy benefits of the Guarantee Loans be changed prior to July 1 of this year so that those benefits will continue to be available to students not yet in the programs on that date.

8. I would want to support the idea of making appropriations for the various programs known as early as possible so as to allow both the schools and the students to make firm plans and commitments for the coming year.

9. Also, I would want to give particular emphasis to the support of the 3% administrative cost formula and believe this to be of special significance to private schools. Also, this provision should help to up-grade and professionalize Student Aid offices and staffs.

10. The move to consolidate the advisory function into one advisory committee seems appropriate, particularly if programs are to be better coordinated. 11. In the field of guarantee loans I endorse the recommendations of the Office of Education dealing with combining the loans to vocational students into the program for Higher Education. Also in encouraging guarantee agencies and lenders to defer repayment of loans while the borrower is serving in the military, Peace Corps or VISTA, or is enrolled for as much as one-half a normal course load of school work; and authorizing the full Federal interest subsidy benefits during such period.

12. Further, I propose that each guaranteed loan should require the prior recommendation of the financial aid officer both as to amount and date of disbursement.

13. In addition, I recommend making the Federal interest subsidy available to all borrowers of guarantee funds, not just to those whose family income is less than $15,000 but with such interest benefit to terminate at the beginning of the repayment period.

14. In order that each loan recommended by the appropriate financial aid officer will have good possibility of materializing, I urge that the guarantee loans should produce a return to the lender sufficient to cause them to want to participate in the program. As to what this return should be is impossible for me to say but it would seem that it should be tied in some way to the Federal Reserve rediscount rate so as to keep the program working in changing times. 15. So as to keep the private loan guarantee agencies, educational institutions and the Federal government in a viable partnership arrangement in guaranteeing student loans, I propose that Federal seed money should be appropriated to states on a 70-30 matching basis and with provision that the states could assess up to the full amount of their matching costs to participating educational institutions on a volume basis. I believe that an arrangement of this kind would produce a relationship between the various partners in the operation so as to keep all elements as responsible as possible and yet causing guarantees to be available as needed.

16. Rather than to further broaden the cancellation features of NDSL, I propose that the existing cancellation privileges should be removed. Cancellation on a discriminatory basis is condemned by most everyone whom I know and who is familiar with the program. The money saved on this feature would probably be sufficient to more than provide the Federal share of seed money in the guarantee loan program.

17. Regarding S. 1126, dealing with Universal Educational Opportunity at the Post Secondary Level, I want to commend Senator Yarborough for his initiative and to endorse the need for the nation to commit itself to leaving no stone unturned in making education beyond high school available to all who can be encourage to use it.

In this connection, I applaud the idea of a study to be conducted by the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. I would hope and am confident that such a study will point up many areas for improvement of existing programs as well as introducing as yet unknown and unthought of areas for action. In moving toward this goal, I want to encourage both the study group and the Congress to be aware of the great contributions already being made by the private institutions and to urge that new and improved programs be designed so as to cause such private operations to want to become even more involved in this great undertaking.

Again, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the members and staff of this subcommittee for their concern, their help and their courtesy.

STATEMENT OF DR. MACK C. ADAMS, COORDINATOR OF FINANCIAL AID, SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY, DALLAS, TEX.

Dr. ADAMS. Thank you, Senator Yarborough and others, I am financial aid coordinator of the Southern Methodist University of Dallas, and I will try to give you some of my impressions to the amendments of the Senate bill S. 3098, and some impressions dealing with Senate bill 1126. I will do this by outlining several points.

I would first off want to commend and to support the amendment which allows for the consolidation of funding and for administration of the now separate defense student loan program, college work-study program, and educational opportunity grant programs. I would also want to commend the amendment that allows for shifting up to 20 percent of the moneys from one fund to another fund, which seems to me to allow for more flexibility at the local level, and thus, we would hope, make wiser packages of aids possible.

We also want to commend the equalization and matching situation moving to the 90/10 ratio in the national defense student loan and college work program, and I would hope that this provision might be enacted before July 1 of this year so as to avoid the shift to the 80/20 ratio that will become effective August 20 in the college workstudy program. I believe that this would be safe for an institution. I would commend also the raising of the maximum annual undergraduate loan of the national defense program from $1,000 to $1,500, and raising of the aggregate loan from $5,000 to $6,000. Also, the raising of the maximum educational opportunities grant from $800 to $1,000, and I believe this to be a desirable liberalization.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Do you have that rather than the $800 with the $200 automatic addition?

Dr. ADAMS. Yes, sir; I feel this is broader, meets more needs than does what we now call the incentive award, $200.

I would also remove the national defense loan provision for consideration, for special consideration to the academically superior student, and would repeal the $200 incentive award in their equality program. I believe these both to be consistent with the movement toward more educational opportunity on a broader basis.

I would also approve and encourage the provisions of the special services to the disadvantaged. There are many youngsters coming into our institution who, while all of their credentials say they are eligible, obviously are not, and if they are really to have equal opportunity, they must have some upgrading, and I believe that the higher educational institution could do this better than might be done in some specially arranged program outside.

Senator YARBOROUGH. You know, we had that in the early days of higher education in Texas, two old State teachers colleges called normal institutes, and they taught through high school and then through college. They get teaching schools later after they officially abandoned teaching of their high school course; they had a teaching school there to teach teaching and permit students to finish the precollege course and then enter college.

I think we have lost something by not having that available now for students who entered institutions of higher learning on individual approval, and in that day, when the percentage of people receiving higher educational instruction was rather limited, many over the age of 21 years were admitted in institutions of higher learning on what was called individual approval.

Sometimes they would finish academically only the equivalent of the fifth or sixth grade, but they had shown by great mental aptitude that they could do college work, and if they had that aid and were serious in their studies and made grades above the college average level, they were permitted to stay and graduate on individual approval.

Is that system still followed in institutions of higher learning

now?

Dr. ADAMS. No doubt it is in some institutions.

Senator YARBOROUGH. It was 30 or 40 years ago; it was in the strongest institutions in Texas 30 or 40 years ago.

Dr. ADAMS. Probably there is less emphasis in that area now than,