« PreviousContinue »
An evaluation of this program shows that National Defense Education Act has been most valuable as a stimulating and developing agent rather than in just contributing a quantity of equipment. Probably the most valuable result of the study is proof that small amounts of money, wisely spent, with careful planning can effect a significant impact on the educational program of a district.
The Los Angeles system can feel comfortable in recommending the California State plan as an appropriate method of developing and stimulating educational programs.
If we are allowed to suggest recommendations, it would be that careful attention should be given to making available to the public schools and the public community colleges in particular-research funds. Universities are now receiving a generous number of grants from both private and Federal sources. It is their function to attack problems on basic research. Progress can only come faster to the public schools if funds for experimentation and research are made available. There are broad implications in this suggestion, but if the public schools are to meet the challenge that they face with expanding enrollments and declining financial support, funds must be channeled into an area which can provide the answers to this critical problem.
REDEFINITION OF EQUIPMENT UNDER NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT,
As a second recommendation, I would strongly urge a redefinition of allowable equipment items under title III-A to allow television production equipment. School systems throughout the United States are now on the verge of using this medium as essential support to the instructional program in the classroom. Through this medium inservice training programs can be presented which would help classroom teachers keep abreast of the "knowledge explosion."
I would like to interject here, too, the Los Angeles school system is faced with a critical problem in inservice training. The legislature has said we shall start teaching foreign languages in all elementary schools in the State of California by the fall of 1965. We face the problem of either training 9,000 elementary teachers to teach a foreign language by that date, or through the medium of television provide the instructional program through the television channels. We propose to use our own television production center for the development of an integrated foreign language program.
This does not go on to say how we will use this for inservice training programs, to keep our staffs abreast of the constant change as our knowledge explosion takes place. This would be a vital tool for the advancement of the educational program.
I thank you on behalf of my fellow staff members and for allowing me the time to make this statement during your very busy agenda. Senator MORSE. Thank you, Dr. McMullen.
I just don't see how you can meet your legislative mandate in connection with teaching foreign languages unless your second recommendation is adopted. From the briefing I have had, information I have gathered from listening to qualified people on the subject matter, the whole movement in the field of language teaching is a dramatic
movement in the direction of making use of so-called mass media, television, to do the teaching, to help with the teaching.
I think that recommendation is sound.
I shouldn't think it would take any argument beyond what you and Mr. Sullivan earlier have set forth, in support of your request for expansion of the National Defense Education Act program to cover research funds at the school level to which you testified.
FEDERAL CONTROL COMMENT
We have been given interesting testimony from two witnesses living in the field of education, men who come to grips with it each day, asking for a continuation, as others are asking for the continuation of the so-called impacted area legislation. Both of you gentlemen, as have other witnesses, testified that there is no evidence of so-called Federal interference or control, based on your past experience.
What we need to point out in discussing Public Laws 815 and 874— and that is why I take this moment to make these comments-what we need to point out is you are talking about a Federal aid to education program. We have had it. We have had it for years, covering a third of the elementary and secondary school population of the country. In addition Federal aid is covering thousands of students that have been educated with materials provided by the title III program. It has not resulted in the Federal Government taking hold of the education system in the areas where the money has been spent.
Quite to the contrary.
I think a great vigilance has been exercised on the part of the local school authorities to see to it that not the slightest suspicion of such interference could ever take root.
You know of the prejudicial attitude that exists on the part of many with regard to the Federal Government assuming these responsibilities in this field.
Second, witnesses such as you testify as to the value of this program to the boys and girls themselves. This is the only element that I am primarily interested in. There is just no evidence, in all the weeks of hearings I have held under the years, that would stand up under the examination that there has been any interference.
In my judgment, there is no basis for interfering, as long as we have our system of checks and balances in this country, where the local school districts and the States have the ultimate control.
I listened to three witnesses the other day, renowned in their expertness, point out what is ahead for the next generation in this whole field of space and technology. They told us to prepare the qualified citizenry with the skills to meet the challenges of the space age we just cannot expect the local school district, on the local tax base to do it. It is going to involve Federal programs in the field of space and technology that even defy our present imagination. It has become imminent in view of all the things that have been happening in the space age already. These experts in the field of science, testifying before us, such as Dr. Zacharias, point out that we cannot mark time in our education system by relying now on what has been described as an old horse-and-buggy approach to education.
We don't like to admit in 1963 we are making a horse-and-buggy approach to educational training in this country, but that is exactly what we are doing.
We have tens upon tens of thousands of boys and girls dropping out of school-you have some basic problems that ought to be tended to. They are not going to be attended to with the inadequate support we are contributing to local school building.
That is why I am particularly glad to have your testimony here this morning, because you can answer the question, "Was you there, Charlie?"
You have lived with it each day.
There is one other educational problem we have. We have a terrific job of educating politicians, too, as well as the citizens generally, in the failure of our generation to meet the needs of the next generation in the field of education.
My counsel, Mr. Lee, has handed me a note calling my attention to a part of your statement as to the relative investment of Federal and State funds in your program. He suggests that a dollar per student of Federal money as opposed to the $300-plus put up by the State and local authority doesn't provide much financial leverage for Federal
Do you share counsel's opinion?
Mr. SULLIVAN. I share counsel's opinion.
May I just make a comment, Senator, relating to this: I hope our testimony this morning has indicated to you that as a result of the National Defense Education Act funds that have been made available to us, that we have put the horse and buggy in the barn and locked the door, and are now reaching out, using these funds, finding ways of improving instruction in terms of modern-day needs.
This was our intent, actually, this morning.
Senator MORSE. You have carried it out. I want to thank you very much.
We are privileged to have Dr. Shelden with us again, who is the dean of women at the University of Illinois. I am particularly delighted to welcome Dean Shelden here this morning, because I had the privilege and pleasure of speaking at the University of Illinois a few Sundays ago. I can testify as to her qualifications, based upon both my previous knowledge and what I learned about the great work she is doing at the University of Illinois.
Dean Shelden, we are delighted to have you. You may come to the stand and proceed in your own way.
STATEMENT OF DR. MIRIAM A. SHELDEN, DEAN OF WOMEN, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, CHAMPAIGN, ILL, INTERASSOCIATION JOINT COMMISSION ON PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT; ACCOMPANIED BY BARBARA CATTON, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN DEANS AND COUNSELORS
Dr. SHELDEN. Senator, I would be remiss if I didn't bring you greetings from the students of the men's residence halls. I think you sparked their interest in Government as no speaker they have had in recent years. I was pleased to be a part of their meeting during your appearance there.
Senator MORSE. I found it a very stimulating occasion.
Dr. SHELDEN. Senator Morse, my name is Miriam Shelden. I am dean of women at the University of Illinois. I am privileged to speak before this subcommittee which has shown individually and collectively its concern for education of the young people of the United States.
My purpose is to speak for the Joint Commission on Professional Development of the several professional organizations who work mainly with college students in the guidance and student personnel area. These organizations are the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers; the American College Personnel Association; the Association of College Unions; the Association of College and University Housing Officers; the National Association of Foreign Student Advisers; the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators; the National Association of Women Deans and Counselors; and the Western Personnel Institute, a cooperating research member.
Four of these associations have institutional memberships from 1,169 colleges and universities; the others have individual memberships totaling more than 8,000 guidance and student personnel workers in our institutions of higher education. The Women Deans' Association also includes guidance personnel working at the elementary and high school levels.
The joint commission of these eight organizations which I represent joins the American Council on Education, the National Education Association, and the American Personnel and Guidance Association in support of your efforts to improve education at all levels and asks your special attention to certain needs at the college and university level. All of us work with young people; all of us see at first hand what situations now are; and many of us know how fast the enrollment wave, only 2 years away, is approaching the colleges and universities. Those of us in the State and land-grant institutions which have brought educational opportunities to children from all segments of our people are especially aware of the impending crush of students. My own background gives me experience from which I speak. I was educated in private colleges, Russell Sage College and New York University. I have taught in two-Berea College, a private institution serving the impoverished students of the Appalachian Mountains area, and the Woman's College of the University of North Carolina. After 5 years of service in the U.S. Naval Reserve, I went to the University of Illinois as dean of women.
Its enrollment at Urbana alone reached 24,169 last fall; 9,880 of these were freshmen and sophomores-highly able young people sent to us mainly from the high schools of Illinois. It is for able students like these in our State and all the other 49 and for our national economic growth and security that I seek your help.
The National Education Improvement Act of 1963 is a comprehensive program for education on all levels. We applaud this conception of education as a continuum through all levels and all segments of education. I am addressing myself particularly to title III of the bill which provides for institutes for teachers and other personnel requiring special training.
COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE INSTITUTES NEEDED AT UNIVERSITY LEVEL
The National Defense Education Act of 1958 has provided institutes, both short term and regular session, to improve the qualifications of individuals who are engaged in secondary schools as counseling and guidance personnel or preparing to work as counselors in high schools. These institutes have proved of immeasurable value in improving the skills of the persons already working with high school students and have increased the number of trained counselors. They have served also to awaken the people of this Nation to the need for effective guidance and counseling of young people. The present bill before your committee proposes to continue the training of high school counselors and to extend training programs to those persons working with students at the elementary level based on the sound assumption that attitudes, expectancies, and preparation of the student begin earlier than entry into high school.
It is my opinion also that the need for counseling does not end when the student leaves high school bound for college.
Therefore, my urgent request to this subcommittee and the Congress is that the bill be extended to offer training, by means of short term and regular session institutes, to those engaged in or preparing to engage in the counseling and guidance of students at the college and university level.
My reasons are: The joint commission which I represent was formed from those organizations of student personnel workers whose services touch the lives of students outside the classroom. In our jobs we see daily failing and underachieving students who basically have the ability to do good college work and who could have been salvaged in most cases if trained advisers had been available to them at the appropriate time in their college careers. If we are to prevent costly college dropouts of these able students and the resulting loss to the Nation of skilled manpower, we need to provide counseling and as
We need trained staff in our residence halls. Between 1950 and 1961, the Congress authorized nearly $2.9 billion in loans to assist colleges and universities in building residence halls, cafeterias, student unions, and other essential service facilities for students.1 A physical plant is only as good as the staff who operate it, and in a university we have to provide more than bed and board if students are to live, study, and grow into mature responsible adults within these walls. We need trained staff now and our needs will increase markedly in the days ahead. The Association of College and University Housing Officers has endeavored to upgrade existing staffs in all operating levels by establishing short training institutes. The house-mother training programs of 5 to 10 days preparation offered by colleges and universities including my own can hardly offer adequate training for head residents who work with 200 to 500 students under 1 roof. I ask why we invest millions in buildings but fail to provide trained staff to work with them.
Woolner, Sidney H.. "The College Housing Program,," Higher Education, vol. 19, No. 4, February 1968, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington, DC.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963, p. 4.