school year and for whom the school district provided free public education. This percentage requirement applied equally for all school districts in realistic and would, if enacted, correct for those two provisions an inequity in Public Law 874 that I tried to have corrected for a number of years. It is my feeling the 3-percent clause should be applied equally to all school districts regardless of size. The right of the Commissioner to waive the percentage requirement in instances where exceptional circumstances exist is a desirable provision. The application of the two proposed provisions to the school district of the city of Detroit will demonstrate their effect on a typical large city school district. The Wayne County Social Welfare Commission reports that we have in the city of Detroit approximately 16,500 families on ADC. We estimate there are approximately 32,000 children in public schools from these family groups. The Michigan Employment Security Commission reports that we have in the city of Detroit 32,130 cases receiving unemployment compensation. The estimated number of public school children of school age in this group is approximately 24,000. This would make the total number of pupils eligible under the two new provisions 56,000. Applying an estimated rate of $70 per pupil would produce revenues to the school district in the amount of $3,920,000. I call to your attention that the 56,000 eligible pupils are only approximately 20 percent of the total enrollment of the school district, 296,000. The actual assistance provided by the Federal Government would amount to less than 3 percent of our total budget of $142 million. I hasten to point out, however, that such a sum of money could and would make a substantial difference in the type of educational program that we could offer in Detroit. In the development of the figures for the Detroit public schools, I noted with a great deal of interest that 17 other counties in Michigan would qualify for aid under the section providing for ADC children. While some of the grants would be small in comparison with the total grants, it would be a substantial allocation to the smaller school districts involved. In some instances a grant in the $5,000 to $6,000 class would mean an additional teacher to provide services for these rural pupils who also are in dire need of greater doses of the best possible education. It is my understanding that the ADC section of the proposed legislation would provide assistance to 18,321,981 pupils throughout the Nation. The estimated cost of the program has been reported at $65,476,460. While this amount appears as a substantial sum, I am sure I don't need to remind the committee that the annual cost would be far less than the sum of money necessary to house these pupils in detention homes or corrective institutions for a number of years during their lifetime. I am not aware that the cost of the second provision relating to children of the unemployed has been computed on a nationwide basis. I am assuming that the cost of this program, nationwide, would have the same experience that we report for the city of Detroit. Such money spent for education is, in my opinion, one of the best investments of Federal tax dollars that can possibly be made. In conclusion, I would like to suggest to the committee a number of observations relative to the extension and improvement of Public Law 874. I assure the committee that not all of the items require an annual budgetary appropriation, but, in my opinion, would strengthen what has proven to be a most effective public assistance program. 1. Public Law 874 and Public Law 815 should be made continuing legislation to deal with continuing Federal impact. School districts should be able to plan ahead on a sound basis. 2. Pupil eligibility categories should be extended into areas such as those proposed in this bill and into any other related areas that are associated with Federal impact. 3. Where Federal impact declines, the Federal payments should be continued long enough on a descending scale to permit orderly readjustment of school programs. 4. The absorption percentage requirements in all categories of Federal pupils should be continuously studied to arrive at an equitable Federal and local responsibility. 5. Eligibility requirements should be studied to determine whether or not federally connected pupil increases should be based on federally connected membership rather than on increases in both Federal membership and total membership. 36-177 0-64 -9 6. Rate of payments under Public Law 874 should be continuously studied in reference to changing school costs to assure an adequate support program in eligible local school agencies. 7. The qualifying percentage now listed at 3 percent and 6 percent in the law should be made uniform for all local school districts. Perhaps the question should be raised as to whether or not a qualifying percentage should be necessary in clearcut cases of Federal responsibility. It has been a real pleasure for me to appear again before this committee. You know. I hope, my high regard for the excellent work you have done in the area of education over a period of years. Senator MORSE. I will insert in this record at this point a statement by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Hochwalt, who was unable to be present. (The prepared statement follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL CATHOLIC WELFARE CONFERENCE, WASHINGTON, D.C. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Education, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We appreciate the opportunity to set forth the department's views on S. 2528 and S. 2725 extending and amending the Federal impacted aid program (Public Laws 815 and 874). Hearings before your subcommittee have prompted speculation that the operation of the impacted aid program in some respects no longer conforms to the basic purposes for which the legislation was initially enacted by the Congress. It has been intimated that some school districts are receiving Federal assistance where there is little or no showing of economic loss resulting from the presence of the Federal installation. A thorough review of the entire impacted aid program would appear to be in order with particular emphasis directed to a study of the economic impact on local areas because of the presence there of Federal properties. In this connection, we strongly support a recently approved provision in S. 3060, section 203 which requires the Commissioner of Education to transmit to the Congress on or before June 30, 1965, a full report of the operation of Public Laws 815 and 874, together with his recommendations as to what amendments to such laws should be made if they are further extended. Pending the result of such a study we would suggest that the present temporary provisions of Public Laws 815 and 874 be extended temporarily and without amendments. We are growing increasingly apprehensive that this form of Federal assistance may be assuming proportions approaching general programs of assistance without adequate appreciation of implications. Again may I express our gratitude for the privilege of presenting to your subcommittee our views on this important legislation. Very sincerely yours, Rt. Rev. Msgr. F. G. HOCHWALT, Director, Department of Education, NCWC. Senator MORSE. I thank you very much, and we stand in adjourn ment. Dr. BROWNELL. Thank you. (Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.) APPENDIX PROGRAMS FOR POTENTIAL DROPOUTS Study Report No. 3, 1964 Series-Benjamin C. Willis, General Superintendent of Schools, Chicago Public Schools, May 1964 FOREWORD Study reports of the various educational programs have been made from time to time during the past 10 years. These studies are in addition to the review and revision of curriculum materials. Reports have included such areas as elementary education, secondary education, junior college, teachers college, recreation, and the summer school program. Some areas have been formally reviewed and "next steps" recommended once during the past decade while others have been reviewed two or three times. This report, "Programs for Potential Dropouts," is the result of a study conducted by a citywide committee, as were those named above. The membership on this committee reflects the various geographic sections of the city; the pertinent areas of the educational program, instructional materials, and/or facilities; and the various organizational levels of teaching, administration, and supervisory responsibility. Grateful appreciation is expressed to the committee for an excellent description of the existing program for potential dropouts and for the committee's recommendations for expansion and improvement. This report is a contribution to the study of schools approved by the board of education on January 9, 1963, and will be reviewed by the Chicago Public Schools Survey Committee. For more complete understanding of the Chicago public schools, this report is being made available to the staff in the schools and for patrons of local libraries. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Department of Instruction: James H. Smith, Deputy Superintendent. Department of Instruction: Thaddeus J. Lubera, Associate Superintendent. Department of Curriculum Development: Evelyn F. Carlson, Associate Superintendent. Department of Operation Services: Edwin A. Lederer, Associate Superintendent. Department of Administration: Milton J. Cohler, Associate Superintendent. Department of Higher Education: Eileen C. Stack, Associate Superintendent. COMMITTEE TO STUDY PROGRAMS FOR POTENTIAL DROPOUTS John F. Erzinger, Superintendent, District 13, Chairman. Lloyd J. Mendelson, Principal, Farren School, vice Chairman. Frances Albritton, Teacher, Doolittle School. K. Celeste Campbell, Librarian, Farren School. Mary A. Coppinger, Supervisor, Bureau of Pupil Personnel Services. Jerome H. Gilbert, Principal, Tesla School. William J. Kelleher, Principal, Hirsch High School. Claudine Lee, Counselor, Bond Upper Grade Center. Herbert W. Lehmann, Director, Urban Youth Program. Edward L. Praxmarer, Consultant, Department of Curriculum Development. Mildred Rosenberg, Principal, Cather School. Alfred Rudd, Assistant Director, District 11 Special Project. Esther Sams, Teacher, Farragut High School. Lester A. Spielman, Principal, Andersen Education and Vocational Guidance Center. Shirley E. Stack, Principal, Byrd School. CONSULTANTS Evelyn F. Carlson, Associate Superintendent, Department of Curriculum Development. Blanche B. Paulson, Director, Bureau of Pupil Personnel Services. INTRODUCTION The dropouts-boys and girls who withdraw from school prior to high school graduation-have been a phenomenon on the American scene since the advent of free public secondary education. Actually, the 20th century has evidenced a steady increase in both the numbers and proportion of youth who successfully complete the secondary school program. What is of major concern today, as a current study indicates, is the problem, not the fact of dropout.' In previous times, the teenage dropout could be absorbed readily into the job market. Today's highly geared space age has made it more difficult for nongraduated youth to obtain and retain employment, especially in the great urban centers. The problem has become more acute since the end of World War II for a variety of reasons: the impact of automation; the extensive rural-urban migration; the high mobility within the city; the tensions of mid-20th century civilization. Even though the incidence of dropout tends to vary according to the socioeconomic level of the community, it is clear that dropout-prone youth are found in all kind of school-community settings. There is also general agreement that the seeds of dropping out are implanted long before the actual decision to leave school is made. Certain observable characteristics can be identified which in various combinations are symptomatic of dropout proneness. These characteristics are: 1. Lack of experimental readiness for school. 2. Retardation in academic progress. 3. Low level of achievement in the basic tool subjects. 4. Low intellectual ability. 5. Persistent health problems. 6. Irregular attendance patterns. 7. Nonsatisfaction of status needs in school program. 8. Personality and emotional disorders. 9. Instability in the home. 10. Parental attitude toward education (indifferent or overambitious). 11. Economic problems in the home (need to work). 12. Social aspects in the community (identification with peer dropouts). The Illinois dropout study, illustrative of research in this field, has categorized the predisposing characteristics for identifying potential school dropouts into three major dimensions: (1) Low academic aptitude: (2) parental disinterest in education; and (3) retarded emotional maturity and social adjustment.* The Chicago public schools have long been aware of these factors as negative influences on normal leaving and development of young people. Many provi sions made in the regular school program as well as in the special projects have been directed toward meeting the recurring challenge of aiding young people to make the most of their school opportunities. Inservice teacher training programs have also been conducted in Chicago to help teachers provide for the educational needs of potential dropouts. The following report delineates the efforts made to cope with this problem throughout the school system. ANALYSIS OF DROPOUT INCIDENCE IN CHICAGO Statistics regarding the number of dropouts from Chicago public high schools have been maintained through a uniform reporting system for a number of years. These reports indicate the number of voluntary dropouts each year beginning with the 1954-55 school year, and the percentage of dropouts has been ascertained by comparing the number with the membership adjusted to provide for transfers in and out. Voluntary dropouts do not include pupils who transfer to other schools. 1 Daniel Schreiber, "Introduction," Education Association. 1964, p. 2. the School Dropout, Washington, D.C., National 2 "Procedures for the Identification of Potential High School Dropouts," the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (Springfield, Ill., 1962), pp. 2-9. Eileen C. Stack, "The Dropout Problem," Illinois Education, 51: 117-20, November 1962. Morris Haimowits, "Some Implications for Teacher Training," the School Dropout, Washington, D.C., National Education Association, 1964, pp. 170–191. The average high school dropout rate has varied as follows, according to a report compiled by the bureau of research, development, and special projects dated December 1963: Comment. This indicates that the percentage of high school students dropping out of school during the school year has been decreased by 1.5 percent between the 1954-55 school year and the 1962-63 school year. Thus, the dropout rate has been reduced by almost one-fifth. Fürther analysis discloses that there was a range in the percentage of dropouts in each of the 21 school districts of the city; the lowest was 2.6 percent while the highest was 14.4 percent. A comparison of the dropout rates of the 21 districts and the socioeconomic factors disclosed by census data reveals the relationship between such factors and the dropouts. While there is a positive relationship, the highest dropout rate is not always found in the districts at the lowest socioeconomic levels despite the tendency for dropout rates to vary inversely with socioecenomic factors. The table on the next page, which lists the 21 districts of the city in the order of percentage of dropouts together with socioeconomic data revealed by the 1960 census, indicates that provision must be made for the potential dropout regardless of the socioeconomic level of the community. Col. 1: High school voluntary dropout percentage, 1962-63. Col. 2: Rank in terms of 21 districts with respect to percentage of dropouts. Col. 4: Median years of school completed by persons 25 years and older. Col. 5: Rank in terms of 21 districts with respect to median years of education. Col. 6: Median income of families. Col. 7: Rank in terms of 21 districts with respect to median incomes. Col. 8: Percent of total male employed-professional, technical, and kindred workers; also, managers, officers, and proprietors. Col. 9: Rank in terms of 21 districts with respect to type of employment. NOTE.-The socioeconomic data based upon the 1960 census was taken from the general superintendent's report to the board of education, dated July 10, 1963. |