Women

Tuition and required fees, room rates, and board rates: 1965-66 at member institutions of the Association of State Colleges and Universities, by State Continued

[Figures shown are rates for the typical full-time undergraduate students, for 2 semesters, 2 trimesters, or 3 quarters. Where this year's figures represent an increase over last year's, rate is shown in parentheses.]

$470 ($460).3

Bloomsburg State College..

$150.

$20 4

$612.

$612.

Cheyney State College

$250 to $304.

$320 to $360.

$288.

Clarion State College..

$288.

$324

$324.3

$250 to $300.

$20 4

$288.

East Stroudsburg State College.

$288.

$324.

$324.3

$300 to $350.

$640.

$288.

Edinboro State College..

$288.

$324.

$324.3

$285 to $335.

$204

$288.

Indiana State College.

$288.

$324.

$324.3

$290 to $380.

$20 4

$288.

Kutztown State College.

$288.

$324.

$324.3

$250 to $300.

$20 4

$288.

Loch Haven State College.

$288.

$324.

$324.3

$250.

$204

$288.

Mansfield State College.

$288.

$324.

$324,3

$295 to $385.

$20 4

$288.

$288.

Millersburg State College..

$324..

$324.

$20 4

$612.

$612.

Shippensburg State College.

(3).

$300 to $345.

$685.

$288.

$288.

Slippery Rock State College.
West Chester State College..

$324.

$324.

$310..

$20 4

$288.

$288.

$324.

$324.

$250 to $300.

$640.

$288.

$288.

Rhode Island:

$324.

$324.

Mr. NELSEN. Now, getting to the vocational educational side, do I understand that you have with you today a gentleman who has been active in that field? I wonder if he has any comment to make relative to the vocational aspect.

Dr. MUIRHEAD. Yes, we do have a representative from our vocational educational program in the office, Mr. Arnold, who is the Assistant Commissioner in Charge of Vocational Education.

Mr. NELSEN. I wondered if he would have any observations to make? You noted in your statement that the interest that we have directed toward the vocational side is not in disagreement with the President's Committee, and I am interested in going into some of the details. I think this is a very important part of the needs, and I just wondered if the gentleman who has been in this area dealing with this problem, if he has any particular suggestions to make at this time.

Mr. DOWDY. Will you gentlemen please come forward.

STATEMENT OF WALTER ARNOLD, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION, OFFICE OF EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE; ACCOMPANIED BY LEROY A. CORNELSEN

Mr. ARNOLD. I am Walter Arnold, Assistant Commissioner for Vocational and Technical Education, U.S. Office of Education, and this is Mr. LeRoy Cornelsen, my assistant. I was not sure that I could get here today, and Mr. Cornelsen came to substitute.

I might say, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, that in a general reaction I think that it has long been known that the District is badly in need of expansion of vocational and technical opportunities in the District, and of course, there are different ways in which this can be done.

Our programs that operate under the Federal acts make allocation of grants to the States, and the State boards determine pretty largely what kind of patter of institution and offerings they have that will provide for both young and older people.

The District, to the best of my knowledge, in its history has depended largely on a high school vocational system, partially in comprehensive high schools in the District, and partially in the specialized technical high schools. To the best of my knowledge, it has had no post-high-school type of vocational education. I think the extent of that in the District is largly a few private technical and vocational schools. So, in my opinion, it is very timely that the District would do something about expanding the offerings, increasing the opportunities, for vocational and technical training at a post-high-school level in some form or another.

As I say, the States react to this differently. In some States they use a system of what they call area vocational technical schools at the post-high-school level. For example, Minnesota and Wisconsin do that. In some States they have combined the area vocational and technical school with the junior college, much like this proposal, and that seems to be a growing trend in a number of States and, of course, in some States, as in California, to rely almost entirely on

the junior colleges, some 69 or 72 of those. But they are apparently thinking in terms of some different means of doing this.

I would simply say generally that I think it is very timely that the District might have some additional training opportunities for both non-high-school graduates, as Mr. McKee testified, as well as high school graduates.

Mr. NELSEN. Now, there have been suggestions made that vocational education systems should be geared to training people to hold jobs that exist in the area. I am not in agreement with that for this reason: individuals have varying aptitudes and if their aptitudes are developed, jobs are available in other areas. It seems logical to me to find out the aptitude, to develop it, and jobs will be found somewhere.

Have you any observation on that?

Mr. ARNOLD. Well, I would agree with your observations about this. In fact, the Vocational Education Act of 1963 which the Congress enacted does provide for what you are talking about. It does not confine or limit the employment opportunities to those in the area which the school has built to serve them. But, in fact, in the regulations that are drawn on that act, there is a charge placed on the State to make known the labor force needs in the whole State as well as in a region or, in fact, for jobs that might be a national clearance as exposed by the U.S. Employment Service, and that is a pattern.

Now, it is a fact, however, that, we will say, particularly in the large metropolitan areas, the employment opportunities are so varied and numerous that frequently the offerings are geared to the job opportunities in that area. That seems to be a national thing.

But I think even in those situations when the offerings are examined they are generally geared to nationwide needs. Electronics is a good example. I think there is scarcely a good vocational or technical school of any kind in the country that does not have a good basic electronics program.

Mr. NELSEN. Under the laws under which Federal funds are distributed for vocational education, does the District of Columbia in all cases receive an equal amount of Federal funds with the States?

Mr. ARNOLD. Yes. The District really participates as a State in all the vocational education acts.

Mr. NELSEN. You will recall the vocational rehabilitation bill that Chairman McMillan and I introduced, which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor. In this particular field, we found that the District of Columbia did not, under present law, get equal treatment, so we thought that this was an area that needed correction.

Well, the bill was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, but no bill has been reported to this date. It is a very desirable bill, and I regret that it has been delayed. It seems to me that the elected school board idea which, I think, is a good one, should be handled separately and not tied onto something else to the detriment of an objective with a higher priority.

The reason I asked the question is because I know in this other area the District of Columbia is treated on an equal basis with the States. Mr. ARNOLD. In general, the District of Columbia is treated just as the other States and territories. Its Board is recognized as the equivalent of a State board for vocational education, which is required