large part is determined by the proper combination of the board of trustees, its administration, and its faculty. Mr. DOWDY. What would the disadvantages be or the advantages, either way, if you want to talk about it, of enlarging Howard University and making it what it was originally intended to be, to at least include arts and sciences for the local community, in its consideration of its charter? Dr. MUIRHEAD. Again, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that that response would have to come from Howard University. It would not be proper, I do not think, for an Office of Education spokesman to respond here by saying what Howard University should do or should not do. Mr. Dowdy. The Office of Education has taken upon itself the job of telling the smallest school district in the country what it should or should not do, and I do not know how it would be any different to tell the university what it should do. It is a public institution. Dr. MUIRHEAD. It is in some measure a public institution. It is also in some measure a private institution, and the Howard University has a board of trustees, as other universities do. Mr. DOWDY. So do these little school districts have boards of trustees which are completely ignored by your department. Dr. MUIRHEAD. I am not quite sure that I understand the implications of your questions. Mr. DowDY. I am talking about the smallest school districts in the country; they have boards of trustees, too. Dr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. Mr. DOWDY. And yet they are told what to do. Dr. MUIRHEAD. They are asked to conform with the law. Mr. Dowdy. But you are unwilling to ask Howard University to conform with the law. Do I get you correctly? Dr. MUIRHEAD. I would like to respond to your question by saying that we do not tell any school district what its curriculum should be, or what its particular course of study should be, and I would comparably point out that we would not tell any university what its course of study should be or what its mission should be. Mr. DowDY. Maybe I misunderstood the news reports coming out of the Office of Education about its intention of what is going to be the curriculum in our grade schools and high schools. I was under the impression from the reports that I have had that that is the intention of the Office of Education. But, to get back to one of our problems now, the reason for these questions is that Howard University is staffed and it has plant facilities to do the very things we are talking about, teaching in the District of Columbia, the educating of youth in the liberal arts and sciences. You are an educator, are you not? Dr. MUIRHEAD. Oh, yes. Mr. DowDY. Isn't it your opinion that right here in the District of Columbia it would be a waste to have two schools doing the same thing at Government expense, at taxpayers' expense? Dr. MUIRHEAD. I do not think it would be a waste for the District of Columbia to support a 4-year liberal arts college. Mr. Dowdy. I don't think it would either, but what I am exploring now is the competition with the existing tax-supported university. Dr. MUIRHEAD. I do not think it would be in competition. There are many, many situations in this Nation of other cities of comparable size to the District of Columbia that have private universities and that have their own municipally supported colleges and universities. Mr. DowDY. Oh, yes. There are a number of private universities here in the District of Columbia. But I am thinking of one that is publicly supported, Howard University. Wouldn't this new college, that is, a 4-year college and I am distinguishing this from the 2-year or the community college, and I know that we need more educational facilities, but the point I am making on the question I ask is whether it is going to be a new college; if enlarged, Howard University could take care of these extra students, and Howard already has the staff and the plant facilities and the administration setup rather than duplicate it. Wouldn't a new investment supplement Howard's facilities and avoid duplication? Dr. MUIRHEAD. I do not think we have duplication if we were to establish a new 4-year college in the District. I think there is need for a new 4-year college in the District, and that to ask Howard University to take over the municipal responsibility of the District of Columbia would, it seems to me, place a burden upon them that their present mission would not seem to contemplate. Mr. DOWDY. Well, at least you would duplicate the administration buildings, you would duplicate the administration setup, you would duplicate the libraries and I do not know how good a library Howard has; I expect it has a good one. I am advised it has 400,000 volumes or some such number, and if that is not ample, if it were a consolidated school, the money that would be spent for duplicate books could be used to enlarge that tremendous library. There are a great many duplications that I have mentioned here already. What is it, then, that you would teach at this new school that is not taught at Howard? Dr. MUIRHEAD. I do not think there would be anything that would be taught at this new school that is not taught at Howard. I think, however, that the District of Columbia should have available a 4-year college for its own residents. Mr. Dowdy. Well, it has, Howard. Don't you feel one wellfinanced university would be better than two lesser schools in this immediate area? Dr. MUIRHEAD. Howard University serves a much larger field than the District of Columbia. Mr. DOWDY. Sure; and this school that is being talked about would, too. You are not going to limit it just to District of Columbia residents. No other school Dr. MUIRHEAD. As the report of the President's Committee indicates, it would not be limited to District of Columbia residents, but the very large majority would be predominantly District of Columbia high school graduates. Mr. DowDY. I imagine that would be true. That is true of State schools and probably true at Howard; at least it would be if Howard were enlarged to take care of any additional students who would come out of the local junior college and out of the local high schools. It would have mostly local or area students. Then you think Howard University is not capable of doing this job? Dr. MUIRHEAD. I did not say that Howard University was not capable of doing this job. I think that Howard University, if you are considering Howard University to take over the responsibilities of doing this job, then I think you should confer with Howard University. Mr. DOWDY. To do what? Dr. MUIRHEAD. To confer with Howard University. I am reporting to you on the recommendations of the President's Committee, a distinguished group of citizens, who spent considerable time reviewing this problem and they recommended, after considering the point that we are discussing at this moment, they recommended that a separate 4-year liberal arts college be established in the District. Mr. DowDY. Any questions? Mr. NELSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is my understanding that the tuition at Howard University is $500 a year, approximately. Dr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. Mr. NELSEN. Is that about right? Dr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. Mr. NELSEN. Have you any suggestions as to possible location for the local institution of higher learning as proposed in this bill? Dr. MUIRHEAD. No, I do not, Congressman Nelsen. I think this, of course, would be one of the very first activities of the Board of Higher Education when it is appointed, which would be, in consultation with the administrative staff, to select an appropriate site that would be appropriate for the type of program that the college would offer. Mr. NELSEN. Now, getting back to the Howard University suggestion, the introduction of a bill for a 4-year college in vocational education has at least stimulated the idea that we need something somewhere. Dr. MUIRHEAD. Yes. Mr. NELSEN. And I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that we might gather a little more information as to what the possibilities are, but it certainly is agreed that we need something somewhere, so at least we are not in disagreement on that. Mr. DOWDY. That was the purpose of my questions, trying to get some information about it. (The letter of Chairman Dowdy referred to, and the reply from the Office of Education, follow:) Hon. RALPH K. HUITT, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Assistant Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Subcommittee No. 4, of which I am chairman, is conducting hearings on various bills pertaining to higher education in the District of Columbia (H.R. 16958, H.R. 7395, H.R. 4761, and H.R. 4763), and our next hearing will be held Wednesday, September 21 at 10:00 a.m. It will be much appreciated if you will request appropriate officials of the Bureaus of Higher Education and Vocational Education to testify at that time and give the Committee the benefit of such appropriate information as is available that will be helpful to us in our consideration and disposition of these bills. Dr. Peter Muirhead has already filed a statement with the Committee, which we appreciate. However, there are many specifics lacking which we would like to have which have not been presented to the Committee, and which our staff has outlined to your staff, including the following: (1) Estimated academic area, cost per square foot, and cost per student, which you recommend. This will include basic cost of construction and equipment, but not include site. 68-614-66- -7 (2) Estimate construction program to take care of 2500 students over a 4-year period. (3) Operating cost per student. (4) Summary of average payments of tuition and fees for comparable community colleges in the states, for residents and non-residents. (5) Summary of various Federal programs, such as are contained in the 1965 Higher Education Act, National Defense Education Act, Vocational Student Loan Assistance Act, and any others under which the District of Columbia might be eligible for benefits if appropriate facilities are provided in the District of Columbia. (6) I understand that your studies of facilities and programs throughout the country provide some valuable information which should give us some muchneeded assistance along the above lines. Also, we would like to have you review for us the facilities and program at Howard University, showing capital investment, operating cost, enrollment, current construction, etc., in order to give us a more complete picture of the local situation. (7) Finally, your recommendations as to appropriate facilities to encompass the programs recommended, viz., public community college, vocational college, and college of liberal arts. With kind regards, JOHN DOWDY, Chairman, Subcommittee No. 4. DEAR MR. DOWDY: As I indicated before your subcommittee on September 22, we are happy to respond to the seven questions of your letter to Mr. Huitt of September 16. (1) It is the view of the Office of Education that $50 million would provide amply for the capital outlay needed for new facilities for both institutions to accommodate the enrollments proposed. The basis for this judgment is explained in enclosure 1. Capital outlay needed for a college of arts and sciences is estimated at $12 million to $18 million. Capital outlay needed for a community and vocational college is estimated at $12 to $22 million. Authorization to appropriate $50 million, with discretion to apportion these monies between the two institutions to the extent that more specific plans may recommend, would be desirable. I regret that more precise estimates are not now possible but these must await planning by the authorities which the proposed legislation alone can create. In this context I should like to point out that funds may be appropriated this fiscal year for planning to determine construction requirements under a proposed amendment to the Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963. In this event, and if the State commission under that statute which is appointed by the District Commissioners so decides, the colleges proposed might be able to draw upon these funds for planning purposes. (2) & (7) As to the specific facilities appropriate to each institution and the specifics of a construction program we believe, for reasons noted in enclosure 1, that the development of Rhode Island College and the Northern Virginia Technical College are highly relevant to the two colleges proposed. The officials of both of the institutions named have expressed their desire to give those concerned with launching the new institution the benefit of their experience. The Vice President for Business Affairs of Rhode Island College has expressed the view that a four year development program with the objective of providing additional plant for as many as 600 students each year would be realistic provided that adequate funds for construction are assured from the outset. (3) Operating costs per student would probably amount to about $1,000 per year per student in the community and vocational college. The comparable figure for the college of arts and sciences is estimated as about $1,600. Enclosure 2 gives budgetary data for 1956-66 on annual operating costs of 28 public community colleges in New York State, range from $872 per year to $1,352 per year. (4) The average annual payment of tuition and fees by State residents for colleges comparable to the college of arts and sciences proposed amounts to $242. This is the average figure for the over 190 members of the Association of State Colleges and Universities, most of which are former Teachers' Colleges. Student charges in these institutions are shown in enclosure 3. The figure for Rhode Island College is $245. The average annual tuition and fees for State residents in public two-year colleges in the year 1964-65 was about $100. The figure of $130 charged by Northern Virginia Community College seems to us suitable for this vicinity. There is considerable variation in the charges of two-year public colleges for nonresidents. A cursory examination of the data for 1964–65 indicates that in both New York and Florida charges range from less than $300 to $700. (5) On September 22 I provided the subcommittee with a statement identifying programs of assistance administered by the Bureau of Higher Education and estimating funds likely to be available to the District of Columbia under these programs during this fiscal year. There are, of course, in addition, programs administered by other Federal agencies, including the Public Health Service, National Science Foundation, and Veterans' Administration which would be of interest. (6) Detailed data on the current circumstances of Howard University may be found in the record of Hearings of March 11, 1966, before the House Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, on the Departments of Labor, Health, Education, and Welfare Appropriations for 1967, pp. 1518-1562. I trust that the above information is responsive to your request. I can assure you that the Office of Education will wish to help in any way that it can in this matter. Very sincerely yours, Enclosures. PETER P. MUIRHEAD, Associate Commissioner for Higher Education. [Enclosure 1] ESTIMATES OF CAPITAL OUTLAY REQUIRED TO BUILD AND EQUIP DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC COLLEGES A. COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES Assuming 2,500 full time equivalent students we estimate that the cost of constructing and equipping the proposed four-year college of arts and sciences could range from $12 million to $18 million, depending upon the rate of increase in the costs of construction. It may be useful to present actual figures first concerning the construction cost for a specific college comparable to the college of arts and sciences proposed, before explaining this calculation in the abstract. The Rhode Island College in Providence, Rhode Island is a useful example since it is a former teachers' college in an urban setting for which completely new facilities have been constructed in the last ten years. Mr. Ernest Overby, Vice President for Business Affairs at the college has provided us with the following figures. There are now 3,430 full time equivalent students enrolled by Rhode Island College. The book value of the college's buildings and its site is now about $15 million. Deducting $2.1 million from this figure for the cost of the site and dormitories, and adding $25,000 for master planning for the institution, one arrives at a figure of $13.15 million for the total cost of construction, site, equipment, planning and architectural fees. Among the buildings are a laboratory school ($1 million); a library ($1 million); a dining center ($1 million); and a building for physical education ($1.1 million). The figure of $13.15 million for capital outlay between the years 1956 and 1966 may be used to test a more abstract method of calculation of the cost of constructing a college in the District of Columbia. Under the Higher Education Facilities program it was our experience that average project costs per square foot in the year 1964-65 were about $27. Allowances of academic area per student vary substantially according to the kind of facility in question, but inquiries of State commissions under the Facilities Act suggests that 150 square feet per student is a reasonable standard for general application. Accepting for the moment that the figures of 150 square feet and $27 per square foot are presently valid, the capital outlay needed per student to build and equip a four-year college comes to $4,050. This figure multiplied by the Rhode Island College enrollment of 3,430 equals $13.89 million. This figure comes close to the actual figure for that col |