Federal funds would make it possible for many communities to operate their schools for a longer term. IV. The demands upon the schools have increased greatly, and will continue to increase, as the age at which children may enter full-time employment is raised At present 133 States forbid the employment of children under 16 years during school hours (except, in most cases, in agriculture and domestic service). Strong efforts will be made to have this standard adopted in all States after the war-not only because it is desirable educationally, but because it will be important to keep these young workers out of an overcrowded labor market. In addition, some States now require, and others will consider requiring, school attendance up to 18 years for young people who are not usefully employed. Roughly, 14 years usually marks the completion of the elementary course in an eight-grade system. Raising the school-leaving age to 16, or 18 for those not employed, will mean greatly increased enrollment in the secondary schools. Not only will a much large number of children require schooling facilities, but a different type of education will be required for many of them. At present, despite the rapid extension of trade and vocational education, the vast majority of highschool students in this country are taking an academic curriculum-one that has been devised primarily to meet college entrance requirements-despite the fact that the large majority of students enrolled in high school never go to college. With the age for employment raised, and an even larger number of young people in high school whose interest is in practical rather than abstract subject matter, the need for broadening the curriculum and relating the school program to the future responsibilities of students as workers and as citizens will be imperative if these children are not merely to idle their time away in the classrooms instead of idling it away on the streets. Such curriculum reorganization requires skilled leadership, skilled and specially trained teachers and vocational counselors, as well as the facilities that will be necessary to put it into effect. Federal aid for education may spell the difference between making those extra years of schooling a profitable experience for boys and girls or a mere marking of time until they are free to leave school and look for jobs in an already crowded labor market. Senator JOHNSTON. Next is John Rackliffe. STATEMENT OF JOHN RACKLIFFE, REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL TEACHERS DIVISION OF THE STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO Mr. RACKLIFFE. My name is John Rackliffe. I represent the national teachers division of the State, County, and Municipal Workers of America, CIO. I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, that I had looked yesterday at the list of witnesses for today and had assumed that I would be coming up in the afternoon, and I prepared a statement and it is now being typed. I would, therefore, ask permission either to appear this afternoon if the hearing is being held or have my statement inserted later in the record. Senator JOHNSTON. The committee will be back at 2:30. If there is no objection, you may return at that hour. Mr. RACKLIFFE. Thank you very much. Senator JOHNSTON. Is there anyone here that is ready to proceed and go forward at this time? Senator TAFT. Anyone who is in opposition to the bill. * Connecticut, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin. STATEMENT OF MRS. ROY C. F. WEAGLY, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATED WOMEN OF THE AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION Mrs. WEAGLY. I am Mrs. Roy C. F. Weagly, president of the Associated Women of the American Farm Bureau Federation. The Associated Women of the American Farm Bureau Federation is a national farm woman's organization, and an affiliate of the American Farm Bureau Federation. It represents approximately 880,000 families. One of its chief objectives is to preserve and perpetuate the American way of life, one of the principles of which has been equality of opportunity for all. We realize that the fulfillment of our American ideals will depend to a great degree upon a high standard of public schools. Many inequalities in educational opportunities now exist in our public elementary and public secondary schools, and yet the educational resources to which rural people have access are of singular importance, both because of the influence of education in the rural communities themselves and because youth from the farm help to maintain the urban population. Although more than one-half the children in the United States attend rural schools, many of these schools are not capable of providing the kind of training young people need for lives of maximum richness and usefulness under modern conditions. Thirty-four percent of the farm population, but only 23 percent of the urban population are under the age of 16 years. Many rural children are penalized by the following disadvantages: Inadequate school facilities, in many instances shortened or interrupted school terms, insufficient school transportation, and frequently lack of coordination in the provision of same by governing bodies, and inadequate and inequitable financial support. Because of the mobility of our population the local taxing unit is no longer solely responsible for the education of the children living within that unit. We favor Federal grants-in-aid to supplement State funds determined by income in relation to number of children to be educated, the funds to be dispensed by State boards with adequate agriculture representation and entirely independent of Federal jurisdiction. We favor the maximum amount of local guidance and initiative consistent with operating efficiency and a sound program of education. In the statement which has already been presented to your committee on behalf of the American Farm Bureau Federation by W. R. Ogg, a number of principles were set forth with respect to Federal grants-in-aid to the States for education and several recommendations for changes in the proposed bill were suggested. I will not take the time to repeat the recommendations at this time, but I wish to state that they have the approval of our organization. They were developed through collaboration of the two organizations based upon their resolutions. I thank you. Senator JOHNSTON. Is there anyone present who would just like to file papers at this time? STATEMENT OF ARTHUR COREY, REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION Mr. COREY. I merely would like to file a statement representing the long-time policy of the California Teachers Association in defense not only of the general principle of Federal aid but of this particular bill. Senator JOHNSTON. Thank you. (The statement referred to is as follows:) CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, Hon JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Senate Committee on Education and Labor, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: The State council of education, the governing and policy-making body of California Teachers Association, which has a membership of over 37,000 teachers of this State, has repeatedly taken formal action at its reglar semiannual meetings in favor of Federal aid to education. Because of the great need in many parts of the Nation the State council has been unanimous in its support of Federal legislation to increase Federal aid to elementary and secondary schools throughout the Nation. Such action has been recorded repeatedly in the minutes of the meetings of this body. It is our hope that something may be done at this session of Congress to relieve the serious and distressing conditions in portions of the United States both in the elementary schools and the secondary schools. We cannot continue to endanger the opportunity for adequate education to children of this country, merely because the accident of birth has placed them in communities hopelessly unable to provide adequate education for them. Yours very truly. Senator JOHNSTON. Anyone else? ROY W. CLOUD, State Executive Secretary. STATEMENT OF J. L. BUFORD, REPRESENTING THE ILLINOIS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION Mr. BUFORD. I would like to file this paper in behalf of the general principle of Federal aid to education as recommended by the Illinois Education Association. Senator JOHNSTON. Thank you. (The statement referred to is as follows:) ILLINOIS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, Springfield, Ill., January 25, 1945. Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Senate Committee on Education and Labor, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: At its ninety-first annual meeting held at Springfield, Ill., December 27-20, 1944, the Illinois Education Association by resolution advocated Federal àssistance to the States and Territories in the support of education, with the understanding that the expenditure of such funds and the shaping of educational policies shall be matters of State and local control. It furthermore resolved as follows: "The Illinois Education Association favors Federal aid to the public schools free from Federal control as provided in S. 637 and H. R. 2849 and requests its executive secretary to continue to solicit Members of Congress to support these bills. The Illinois Education Association recommends that members request their Senators and Congressmen to support Federal aid to the public schools. These resolutions are predicated upon the association's belief (1) that educational opportunity should be equalized throughout the Nation up to a satisfac tory minimum level, and (2) that national welfare being closely related to and dependent upon educational welfare, the National Government should contribute in part to the support of our public schools. The association believes that although Illinois will be obliged to contribute more than twice as much as it would receive in direct benefits from the proposed Federal aid to public education bills, the indirect advantages to Illinois through the raising of educational and hence living standards in various States and communities throughout the Nation would return benefits to Illinois far greater than the direct financial returns the State would experience under the operation of these bills. The association is concerned with the ability of the Nation as a whole to produce sufficiently, efficiently, and economically not only for the purpose of winning the war but for the purpose of preserving our standards of living in economic competition during the postwar period with nations whose circumstances will allow great production at minimum costs. It is our belief that this national efficiency may best be secured and maintained through Nation-wide educational efficiency. It is furthermore our fear that if the educational needs of the Nation cannot be met through State or local finances and without Federal aid, the Government of necessity would be inclined to make Federal appropriations to specially created educational agencies not under State and local control. We are joined in our support of these contentions by the Illinois Congress of Parents and Teachers, the Illinois Association of School Boards, the American Association of University Women, and similar State-wide groups. Sincerely yours, Senator JOHNSTON. Anyone else? IRVING F. PEARSON, STATEMENT OF MRS. EDITH B. JOYNES, FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE CHAIRMAN OF THE VIRGINIA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION Mrs. JOYNES. I would like to file this paper setting forth the needs of Federal aid for the State of Virginia. (The statement referred to is as follows:) VIRGINIA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Senate Committee on Education and Labor, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: The need for Federal aid in Virginia is clearly revealed by the recent Inventory of Public School Expenditures in the United States,' which shows that it would require an additional expenditure of approximately $15,700,000, exclusive of transportation, capital outlay, and debt service, to give Virginia classrooms a support equal to the national average. This study shows that the median level of classroom support in Virginia was between $800 and $900 in 1939-40 as compared with a median between $1,600 and $1,700 for the United States as a whole. Thirty-five percent of the classrooms in the State were supported at less than $700 per year. A few additional facts bearing on the need for Federal aid to enable Virginia to provide reasonable educational opportunity are cited below: LOW EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Only 77 percent of Virginians have completed the fifth grade, giving Virginia a rank of 42 among the States in this respect. About one-fifth of the people of Virginia have completed high school, giving it a rank of 36. However, only 1 out of each 16 Virginia nonwhites has completed the high school. Median school year for Virginia is 7.5 years, placing it in forty-third rank among the States of the Nation. Nearly three-fourths of Virginia rural adults, age 25 or over, are without high school and college training.2 1 American Council on Education, 1944. 2 The Virginia Public School System, report of the Virginia Education Commission, 1944, pt. II, Reports of Research Committees. INADEQUATE BUILDINGS Of the county high and elementary schools of three or more teachers, 28 percent are deficient in site requirements; 50 percent in classrooms; 73 percent in gymnasiums; and 38 percent in auditoriums. 78 percent of the high schools are without adequate library rooms; 51 percent are lacking in sanitary toilet rooms; and heating is inadequate in 40 percent. County high schools have a deficiency of 34 percent in home economics rooms and 37 percent in shop rooms. It is safe to say that fully one-half of the 2,312 small one- and two-room schools cannot be thought of as meeting any respectable plant standard.2 LACK OF EQUIPMENT Only 10 percent of the county elementary schools are adequately equipped. Only 37 percent of the elementary schools of six or more teachers approach a satisfactory standard in equipment, while 54 percent have meager equipment and 9 percent are inadequately equipped. Only 14 percent of the county high schools have adequate equipment for teaching physical education; only 46 percent have sufficient auditorium facilities; only 41 percent, adequate safety and sanitary equipment; 40 percent, homemaking; 23 percent, science; 36 percent, adequate equipment for classrooms; and only 20 percent, adequate lunchroom facilities." LOW ATTENDANCE In the high-school-age groups our record of attendance is disturbingly low, notwithstanding the fact that increases have taken place. It is rather high through 14 years of age, but after the compulsory age limit of 15 the drop in percent of attendance is rapid. In 1940, 89 percent of Virginia's 14-year-olds were in school, while for 16- and 17-year-olds the figure was only 55.5 percent.3 DWINDLING TEACHER SUPPLY Of 18,699 teachers during the school session 1942-43, 779 could not meet the minimum requirements for teacher certificates and were permitted to teach by the issuance of local permits. During the school year of 1943-44 the number of teachers teaching on local permits had risen to 1,766 and the superintendent of public instruction predicts that this number will be increased to more than 2,000 during the school session 1944-45.2 The proportion of male teachers has been declining over a long period of years. The need of more men who are competent teachers, particularly in high schools, is too obvious to need argument." An alarming shortage of candidates for teaching in the elementary schools has developed in recent years.2 In the following fields in Virginia high schools, even in normal times, the supply of trained teachers has been definitely inadequate; trades and industrial arts, physical and health education, school librarians, and business or commercial education. In a slightly lesser degree the same thing can be said of agriculture, home economics, and distributive education." In the five teacher training institutions surveyed there is a marked decrease in. the number of individuals preparing for teaching elementary work since 1940-41 (from 260, or 36 percent, in 1940-41 to 80, or 13 percent, in 1944-45).* The seniors who are prepared to teach in the elementary department are about one-half the number that entered the teaching field in that department last session, and the 1943-44 number is slightly more than one-half the number that entered the teaching field in the elementary department in 1940-41.* Whereas it is estimated that approximately 900 to 1,000 elementary teachers are needed each year as replacements in Virginia schools, from the enrollment figures at five of the six regular teacher training institutions (Mary Washington not included), it appears that less than 90 graduates will be available each year 2 The Virginia Public School System, report of the Virginia Education Commission, 1944, pt. II. Reports of Research Committees. Summarized Report of Commission on Education of Virginia, State Chamber of Commerce. |