norms for institutions of higher learning, we feel that $20 million for construction contained in H.R. 16958 will be adequate. We base this upon the hope that surplus Federal land will be available for the The $20 million would not include the cost of site acquisition

in addition to construction.

In addition spatial requirements could cost some $5 million, we believe.

The long range economic returns will offset these costs many fold. In fact the economic returns to the city, above the social benefits, are among the highest from our resources. To illustrate, the lifetime earnings of a man who has completed four or more years of college will exceed by at least $180,000 those of a person whose studies end in high school. The earnings of the graduate of the vocational or technical school will have substantially increased although to a less spectacular degree. These increased earnings result in larger tax returns as contrasted to using tax revenues for welfare programs to otherwise assist these people.

In regard to the actual location of the facilities, it is impracticable at this time to determine sites with any degree of certainty. The National Capital Planning Commission is giving thought to this problem, and, in collaboration with the Board of Commissioners and the Board of Higher Education, will develop final site requirements for the facilities. Incidentally, we have a map showing some of the possible sites under consideration.

We recognize the imponderables and uncertainties that accompany any discussion of the actual construction of a community and vocational college and a four-year college in the District. Consequently, the Board of Higher Education would develop plans and establish, organize and operate in the District of Columbia a public community and vocational college and a public liberal arts college. This Board will have as its mission the analysis and study of the many suggestions that will doubtlessly be made as to physical location and building construction design, and spatial requirements deemed necessary for the two colleges.

Included in the Board's responsibilities would be a particular need for coordinating with the Board of Education the transfer of the Teachers College and all matters relating to vocational education.

The Commissioners believe strongly that the vocational-technicaloccupational program as developed for the District of Columbia by Odell-MacConnell Associates would be a key fact in providing for both high school and post-high age students as well as adults. We anticipate that the Board of Education and the Board of Higher Education will work together to coordinate these programs.

Let me end my statement by recalling President Johnson's words in his message to Congress which accompanied this bill, and I quote: If our society is to move higher, higher education must be made a universal opportunity for all young people. The Nation's Capital should set the pace, not lag behind.

I was encouraged to hear Congressman Nelsen mention this morning that this should be the showcase of the Nation. I think our Board of Commissioners would strongly support that statement because we think so, too.

This bill will provide the mechanisms for the creation of a system of higher learning for the youth of the District of Columbia. The

investment in these two institutions will benefit all who strive to make Washington a city of pride, advantage and productivity.

Mr. Chairman, this is an opportunity for this Committee and the Congress to make a contribution that will benefit thousands of young people in this city.

The Commissioners have been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that legislation such as H.R. 16958 is basically in accord with the Administration's program.

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to appear and to testify on this most important subject.

Mr. DOWDY. Mr. Lowe, do you have a statement?

Mr. Lowe. No, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Dowdy. I have several comments and perhaps you might have something to say in connection with them. It may be a little premature but all of these questions will arise-of course they always arise in anything of this kind.

I might say that I believe that educational opportunities should be made available for all who have scholastic ability. I believe you will agree there are people who do not have either the desire or scholastic ability to go to some phases of schooling. I agree the vocational schools are important. In fact if anybody asks me, any young person who graduated from high school asks me, what do I tell them the first thing to do? "Go to a business college or to a vocational school." I say that because it enables them to hold a job and make a living. "After you get the ability to earn a living then get whatever education you can," I also tell them.

I notice that you are planning on two institutions. Is it the intention to build two separate schools from this, or have one school to follow either of the two lines?

Commissioner DUNCAN. I think in concept we are talking about two programs, one of which is the Higher Education Program, offering the baccalaureate degree and others. Secondly the vocational training which certainly is tied in with the community college is included, that concept. There are two concepts, really three bills within two.

Mr. DOWDY. A long time ago the concept was to get a person through eight years of school, which is what grade school is now, and later it was raised to 11 years and then to 12 years.

It is my opinion that we will soon come to two additional years of free education, through the junior college level.

I am not sure I understood it or not but is it the intent in these proposals to provide free education through the college level or will you charge tuition in these schools?

Mr. DUNCAN. We are talking about tuition-free education, Mr. Chairman. There would be other fees, or course, associated with this training.

Mr. DOWDY. Through the graduate level.

Mr. DUNCAN. Through the Baccalaureate degree.

Mr. Dowdy. Do you feel, or not, for instance, a student going to school, if he is not putting out any effort on his own, would he value his opportunities or would he place a higher value on it if he pays tuition, even if it be nominal in amount? You would have as much value if you had a nominal tuition?

Mr. DUNCAN. It is my understanding that the States are offering similar advantages, Mr. Chairman. We have some technicians with

us today who might elaborate on that. I am not an educator, but this is my understanding insofar as tuition is concerned. It is free for those students living within the jurisdiction. That does not mean that the whole training is free. It means only tuition is free.

Mr. DowDY. I am not an educator, either. I did not know it was true that the States have done away with tuition charges. We have a community junior college in my home town with tuition. It is a nominal tuition but there is a tuition charge, and I believe that to be true of all the colleges and universities in my State.

Mr. DUNCAN. Might I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that this question be referred to the educators who will be following in testimony and from that we might find that there is a distinction. It may well be that in the vast majority of the two-year training period there may be no tuition, whereas for the four there might be a nominal tuition in some institutions. This is a fact we would have to develop.

Mr. DOWDY. I think we still have a tuition charge for two-year schools. State schools do have tuition which is increasing in amount because of the higher cost to run the schools. How are these proposed schools to be supported? Are you going to have an ad valorem tax in the District for this purpose?

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, we would plan to finance this out of the general revenues of the District as far as the operating part of the budget is concerned. Both Mr. Nelson's bill, as well as the bill (S. 293) that has been reported out by the Senate District Committee, envision the capital cost to be financed through an additional borrowing

program.

Mr. DOWDY. I know in your statement you referred only to graduates from the District of Columbia high schools. I would assume that you would anticipate having some out of the District students as well, would you not?

Mr. DUNCAN. I would think so, as in most state universities. I would assume that the fees charged would vary. The full cost would be applied to them.

Mr. DOWDY. I would think so. I think that is true of most of the state schools. I have not gone into that too much but most of them charge more for out-of-state students. You mentioned the cost of tuition in the private schools here. Is Howard University considered a private university?

Mr. DUNCAN. It is a national university.

Mr. DOWDY. Is it considered a private school or a public school? Mr. DUNCAN. It is certainly not a public school although it enjoys some federal support, Mr. Chairman. It operates under a separate board of trustees and has those factors or the appearances of any other private institution, except it is federally supported to some extent.

Mr. DOWDY. I have noticed some of the federal appropriations for Howard University. It appears that in the last fiscal year the federal appropriation ran about $2,500 or $3,000 per student.

Mr. DUNCAN. The mere fact that it is federal opens its doors for students throughout the country. As I stated, some of the youth who come from under-developed countries also attend the university. Mr. DOWDY. I think that is true of all state universities. Mention was made of a board of higher education. Would it oversee all the divisions of the schools, or would you have a separate board of higher education for each school?

Mr. LowE. We would propose a common board of higher education to oversee all three programs. The ultimate result would be the existing Board of Education which would supervise educational activities up through the secondary school level. Then there would be created a Board of Higher Education supervising education above the secondary school level.

Mr. Dowdy. It is proposed to have a different administrative setup for the vocational school and the other school, or are you going to combine them into one? I understand the ideal bureaucratic setup would be to have separate administrations because there would be more administrative jobs.

Mr. DUNCAN. It is supposed to be academically integrated and with a joint use of the facilities, Mr. Chairman. I should think from a purely educational point of view, that would require some difference in administration so that you would almost by necessity have to have an administrator for one and another.

Mr. DOWDY. An independent setup.

Mr. DUNCAN. Because of the nature of training and so forth.

Mr. DowDY. Here is a question that is in my mind. If you have no tuition charges to these schools, is that going to lower-I do not know how to express this-is that going to lower the average scholastic ability of your students so that you will have to lessen the standards or the value of the education they receive there so as to accommodate some students that should not even be going to college?

Mr. DUNCAN. I would think, Mr. Chairman, that the matter of tuition and financing would have nothing to do with the criteria insofar as acceptance and accreditation may be concerned. I can appreciate your point as to whether paying a nominal tuition would create incentive on the part of an individual. Even there, however, we do have persons who are in such great need in the District of Columbia that I am sure they would have the incentive and they suffer the need of a free education beyond high school.

Mr. DOWDY. You may be right. Generally speaking, I have thought that any ambitious student with ability can go to college today. He has to have the desire and he has to have the ability.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Chairman, I should think it is becoming increasingly more difficult to do that. I sit here today as a student who worked his way through college but I can assure you that the tuition at the time was only $33 a quarter. That is a great difference from today.

Mr. DOWDY. When I went to college that was true. There is a point that is worrying me, whether what you are doing is going to hold back-as has happened in many high schools in my state and every place else-hold back the students that really have ambition. and ability in order to take care of students who lack either ambition or ability.

I do not want that to happen in college. I think anybody who does any thinking about it at all knows that is true. Maybe this won't happen. Maybe you will have some entrance examinations and other criteria to take care of the problem. That is what the vocational colleges are for-to aid those who are not fitted for college.

Mr. DUNCAN. It would seem to me the proposal here is the very thing that does answer the problem which you present through your question.

Mr. DowDY. I read the bill and maybe that has been borne in mind in writing the bill.

Mr. DUNCAN. I am not certain that the educators would look at it inductively as maybe you would look at it, or whether on the other hand they would look at it deductively in figuring it. I am not certain because I am not an educator, but I am not certain whether the student should be encouraged along vocational lines first or whether he should be encouraged along lines more in keeping with his ability and therefore maybe the higher education first and then if he discovers that he cannot quite make that grade to have an opportunity to use those credits toward vocational training or other training. It may be the latter. I cannot debate that.

Mr. DOWDY. The reason I had it turned around is that if the student first gets his vocational training, he can use that to hlep him earn his way through the rest of college. That is what I had in mind.

Later on if there is no position available for what he learns in college, he would have a way to make a living. I know in my experience with my children, I so advised, but they took what they wanted to. I wanted them to learn something that they could make a living with rather than taking political science or those things with which there is no way under the sun to make a living.

Mr. LowE. Mr. Chairman, in working on this legislation there often times have been discussions among the drafting groups that the three pronged approach to this legislation tends to cover the points you were just making. It is fully expected that there will be many students upon finishing high school who will first participate in the vocational portion of this program. Then move from that on into the junior or community college offerings to further upgrade from the vocational or trade type of development and to the more skilled levels. Then lastly that a number of those in the community college will become sufficiently interested that they will go on and finish and get a fouryear degree. So the three elements of this program really are significant from the point of view of the long-range development of our population, so that there will become a self-sufficient population.

Mr. DowDY. Probably one of the educators could answer the question better, but my conception of the two-year vocational college would also include a junior college. In connection with vocational training there would be taught such things that they have not learned, or learned well, in high school, like spelling and grammar, and arithmetic, and history. It would be important for the vocational junior college students to take those courses. Perhaps the educators who will testify can give us some idea about this. All of you know of the troubles you have with people working in your office on spelling and grammar. Apparently even colleges have not been teaching that. Are there any other statements?

Mr. DUNCAN. I think not, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DOWDY. We appreciate your splendid statement, and we hope we will work something out. My questions will probably apply later on as this hearing proceeds.

Mr. DOWDY. The Reverend Everett A. Hewlett, Vice President, D.C. Board of Education.