The CHAIRMAN. Senator Monroney, we would be delighted to hear from you now.

STATEMENT OF HON. A. S. MIKE MONRONEY, UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Senator MONRONEY. I want to thank the distinguished chairman and members of the committee for giving me this opportunity to testify in support of legislation to improve the quality of education and to provide increased opportunities for higher education of talented students.

I would like first to commend the committee on the character of these hearings. No Senate committee within my memory has ever invited such an array of great scientists and educators to focus their attention on a national problem. I am confident that the committee will report an effective bill, as a result of these hearings, and it occurs to me, too, that the collected statements of these scientists and educators will be immensely valuable to the student of political and social thought for many years to come. The views of these experts and the decisions of the Congress this year with regard to the Federal Government's role in education will demonstrate how the leaders of the Nation are facing the challenge of a new scientific revolution which is occurring in the environment of the ideological conflict between world powers.

We are here to discuss whether and to what extent the Federal Government should enter into public educational efforts hitherto regarded as the primary if not the sole responsibilities of State, local, and private agencies.

NEITHER BILL ADEQUATE SUBSTITUTE FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION.

Many of us have been convinced for years that the Federal Government should act to help local communities solve their school-construction problems, and I have been privileged to join with the distinguished chairman of this committee in sponsoring bills for this purpose several times during the past 6 or 7 years. These bills have not been passed for a variety of reasons which need not be discussed here. However, I would like to emphasize at this point that neither the Smith bill nor the Hill bill now under consideration should be considered an adequate substitute for the broad program of assistance for school construction which is needed now more than ever.

I agree with Senator Clark that we will never have enough money to establish a perfect school system, and thus the problem is one of priorities. The Hill and Smith bills suggest the priorities. Indeed, the priorities are forced upon us by the national need for more scientists, engineers, and linguists, and for more well educated Americans. in a civilization growing more and more complex.

BOTH BILLS IN THE AMERICAN TRADITION

Both bills are in the American tradition of offering wider opportunities to the individual. Throughout our history we have believed that the best job can be done if we give the individual the chance to do it, using his own energy and talent. This is the ideal that brought our ancestors to this continent, and it is the one which has helped them to conquer geographical, technological, and social frontiers.

Scholarships awarded on the basis of personal achievement are in that tradition. I thoroughly approve of the provision in the Hill bill offering 40,000 of these scholarships annually. The number must be limited enough to make winning a real honor and, on the other hand, large enough that every truly gifted student will be encouraged to hope that he can win.

While both bills propose $1,000 as the maximum award to each winner, the Smith bill would limit the amount according to financial need. It is true that this may seem to be a reasonable basis for distributing public funds, as some of the witnesses before this committee have suggested, and it would permit a somewhat wider use of available funds.

SCHOLARSHIPS BASED ON MERIT ALONE

At the same time, however, I am convinced that scholarship awards should be based on merit alone, as provided in the Hill bill. Injecting the additional question of financial need simply blurs the honor to the individual student by relating the award not to his own achievement but to the size of his family's income. In our selection of the Nation's future military leaders for education at one of the service academies, we believe that family income is irrelevant, and I suggest that it is equaly irrelvant in helping talented students toward intellectual leadership in other fields.

Dr. Trytten of the National Academy of Sciences referred to scholarships as a mechanism for recognizing high intellectual goals, rather than a subterfuge for granting financial support to students. He suggested that financial support would be justified but should be furnished apart from the scholarship program. I believe that his position is wise, and I hope that this committee will agree on the merit provision of the Hill bill.

COST-OF-EDUCATION GRANTS

Many of the witnesses before the committee have pointed out that scholarships should be accompanied by cost-of-education grants to the colleges chosen by the winners of scholarships, in order to cover the additional expenses of the institution in providing his education which are not included in the student's fees. Surveys indicate that few if any colleges actually charge the full costs of a student's education, and if we are to add to student enrollments through a scholarship program, we cannot expect the colleges to accept the strain on facilities already crowded without some financial help. I would even favor reducing the total number of scholarships, if necessary, in order to pay for these cost-of-education grants, although I hope that it will not be necessary.

LIBERAL STUDENT LOANS IN HILL BILL

The liberal student-loan program provided in the Hill bill seems to me an excellent method of helping to meet the rapidly rising costs of education. It has the advantage over various private and institutional loan funds of offering lower interest rates and a longer repayment period. Most parents, as well as the students themselves, are reluctant to go into debt for 4 years while career opportunities are still uncertain. The terms of this program are encouraging, and especially so for the prospective teachers, who may cancel a generous proportion of the loan for each year of teaching.

In our effort to broaden educational opportunities, especially in scientific and technical fields, I strongly urge that we direct our most careful attention to the teaching of these subjects at the secondary level. The eminent scientists who have testified at these hearings agreed that the shortage of scientists must be overcome by vigorous corrective action at this level.

I have not come here to criticize our public-school system or to enter into arguments over educational theory. I think we all agree with the standards of Dr. Rabi of Columbia University who said:

If you give him the fundamental tools of a cultivated man and he uses his language; if he knows something of its literature; if he knows his mathematics, which is the language of science; if he knows his history; if he knows something about the world in which he lives in that way and its past, I will be very pleased to take him after that. But we would like to have him know it quite well rather than just be entertained by it.

PROPER EMPHASIS ON QUALITY IN EDUCATION

The Hill and Smith bills properly emphasize programs to improve the quality of education, first, by helping teachers to raise their professional qualifications; second, by enriching the content of science, mathematics, and language courses; and third, by helping local communities to acquire the physical facilities needed for adequate instruction in these subjects.

The leading scientists and educators have said, and I'm sure we all agree, that at least one inspiring teacher appeals in the education of nearly every great man. We cannot hope to fully develop the brilliant intellects of the future unless we provide inspiring, devoted, and well-qualified teachers. Such teachers set educational standards that are a delight and a challenge to the good student.

The National Science Foundation, in cooperation with colleges and universities throughout the country, is conducting one of the most promising programs for developing and encouraging good science teachers. I hope that we will provide funds to expand the summer institutes and academic-year programs. We need more of these enthusiastic teacher-students, and secondary science education will benefit from their enriched professional knowledge as well as from the closer relationship between the high school and the university faculties. Mathematics and science should be the major concerns of those who teach them; not the incidental tasks of an English teacher or the athletic coach.

22201-58-77

ADDING SCIENCE AND MATH TO VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

At this point I should like to discuss S. 2956, which would add science and mathematics to the vocational-education programs. Senator Kerr, Senator McNamara, and I introduced this bill 2 years ago and we have reintroduced it this year. I hope that this committee will consider some of the specific problems we intended to overcome through S. 2596, as it seems to me that they are not quite clearly defined in the Hill bill.

(The text of S. 2956 follows:)

[S. 2956, 85th Cong., 2d sess.]

A BILL To amend the Vocational Education Act of 1946 in order to promote scientific education

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That subsection (a) of section 3 of the Vocational Education Act of 1946 is amended by striking out the period at the end of clause (5) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon, and by inserting after paragraph (5) the following paragraph:

"(6) $10,000,000 for education in the various fields of science (including mathematics) essential to vocational education and to encourage and prepare for further scientific training in order to supply the Nation's scientific manpower needs, to be apportioned for expenditure, subject to the requirements of subsection (d) of this section, in the several States and Territories in the proportion that their total population bears to the total population of the States and Territories, according to the last preceding United States census."

SEC. 2. Subsection (b) of section 3 of such Act is amended (1) by striking out "paragraphs (1) to (5)" and inserting in lieu thereof "paragraphs (1) to (6)”. (2) by striking out "programs of vocational education and vocational guidance” and inserting in lieu thereof "programs of vocational education, vocational guidance, and scientific education", and (3) by inserting before the period at the end thereof a comma and "except in the case of expenditures for scientific education which shall be made in accordance with the State science plan required under subsection (d)".

SEC. 3. Subsection (c) of section 3 of such Act is amended by inserting after "in trades and industry;" the following "$40,000 for scientific education;”.

SEC. 4. Section 3 of such Act is further amended by inserting at the end thereof the following subsection:

"(d) No State or Territory shall receive any funds provided under this title until it has made provision, satisfactory to the United States Commissioner of Education, for

"(1) a State science plan for education of less than college grade in the various fields of science (including mathematics) essential to vocational education and to encourage and prepare for further scientific training in order to supply the Nation's scientific manpower needs;

"(2) the administration of such science plan by the State board;

"(3) such education to be given in schools or classes under public supervision or control; and

"(4) minimum standards and requirements for science teachers and supervisors and for such other individuals participating in such plan as may be determined to be appropriate by the United States Commissioner of Education."

SEC. 5. Section 7 of such Act is amended by striking out "The appropriations made under authority of this title shall be in addiiton to, and shall be" and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "The appropriations made under authority of this Act shall be in addition to, and shall, except for those authorized in section 3 (a) (6) for scientific education, be".

SEC. 6. Section 9 of such Act is amended by inserting "(a)" after "Sec. 9", and by inserting at the end of such section the following subsection:

"(b) For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this title relating to scientific education, including making such investigations and studies as may be necessary to carry out such provisions, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, and Wel

fare, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1958, and annually thereafter the sum of $200,000."

SEC. 7. The amendments made by this Act shall be effective for fiscal years beginning after June 30, 1958.

Senator MONRONEY. We were convinced 2 years ago that immediate action was needed to improve secondary-school preparation in science and mathematics. The vocational-education program is already operating successfully. School administrators are familiar with it, and it seems to me that the addition of science and mathematics to the program would permit quick action with a minimum of redtape.

IMPORTANCE OF SAFEGUARDING USE OF FUNDS

Even more important than the problem of administrative organization is the establishment of adequate safeguards over the use of funds. The vocational education program provides such protection without undue Federal interference. Whereas the other bills now before the committee do not contain specific regulations, but leave this. problem largely to the discretion of the State education agencies.

I do not intend to imply that State school officers are either incompetent or dishonest. Many of them are my dear friends and I have the highest regard for their abilities. On the other hand, we must recognize that many of them are politically elected or appointed, and are unavoidably subjected to local pressures.

When $40 million a year is to be spent in the acquisition of science laboratory equipment, we must accept the fact that it will attract the attention of some whose interest will involve more than civic duty. I hope we can insure that Federal money will be spent for equipment that will yield good laboratory experience rather than for "do-it-yourself junior spacemen kits," producing little of value to anyone but the salesman.

CLOSER COOPERATION BETWEEN HIGH SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY

I am pleased with the effort of both the Hill and the Smith bills to improve the content of science, mathematics, and language courses at the secondary level. It seems to me that we must plan now to encourage our high schools to work closely with the professional faculties of the universities. The high school science teacher should become better acquainted with the university scientist, both for his own pleasure and inspiration and for better coordination of the standards expected of the student.

We cannot afford the luxury of petty conflict between State school agencies and the universities. Dr. Clark Dunn of the engineering experiment station at Oklahoma State University has told this committee that 60 percent of the 72,800 freshmen entering engineering colleges in 1955 were required to take noncredit preparatory mathematics courses before they could go on to advanced courses. Dr. Dunn emphasized that time is an important element in engineering education. Surely we can avoid this kind of waste by better planning at each level and better guidance of the individual student.