agree with you it is maddening always to be dealing with situations. where almost in one lifetime you won't know whether what you did worked or not.

Mr. MEEDS. Do you suppose the National Institute of Education could be a prestigious organization which could give validity to some things that people have been saying for a number of years, for instance, that we ought to be doing more testing of young peoples?

We have some fairly valid methods of testing which we are not employing on a large scale because of social problems and political problems. Can an institute of education help us by focusing national attention on this and saying we ought to be doing more of this?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I think you raise a very important question, sir, and I would hope the answer to that is yes. One of the things that distresses me is the sort of increasing hostility to testing, on the grounds that tests are somehow not valid. Well, this is a perfectly fair question to raise. Are they or aren't they? Are they culturally biased? Are they biased toward one group or another?

I think this is the kind of question you can put to National Institute of Education and know you are going to get a straight answer. It may not be the answer you like, but you are going to get an honest answer from the best men who work in the field, and the Congress and school board and PTA and the superintendent can say, "I am following the best practice known. That is where they came out at NIE, and I will stay with their finding. I don't know any better."

It gives officials, mothers and parents a sense of whatever they do they are doing it as the best impartial available practice.

Mr. MEEDS. Do you have any suggestions as to what the level of funding of the National Institute of Education ought to be? And if we can expect the administration to support your description adequate level of funding?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Yes, sir. Obviously Secretary Richardson will be more to the point on that, but I believe it would begin at about $115 million a year, a good part of which would be brought from existing expenditures. I understand Commissioner Marland is already developing a nucleus of young people in OE who would fit into this kind of organization and beginning to have them think about it. I would say, sir, that you start these things out as it occurs. You can't start out full blast, but I would certainly hope to see Dr. Levien has some statistics on this-I would say we ought to be spending at least a quarter billion dollars a year on educational research if we are going to spend $65 billion a year on education.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MEEDS. Yes.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I believe Dr. Levien of the Rand Corp., who did the study commissioned by the administration on the NIE, suggested that by early 1980 we should be spending $1.1 billion.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. One point one, Mr. Chairman, but that would be over a 10-year rise. You would not start that way.

Mr. MEEDS. I would like to observe in parting here that if you can't be born Greek or Japanese or Chinese or Jewish, the best thing to do perhaps is to surround yourself with them. I married a Chinese girl. My campaign manager is Jewish and he is married to a Japanese, and I am a very good friend to the chairman here.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I thank the gentleman.

The Chair would like to recognize the distinguished ranking minority member of the full committee, who comes to this position for the first time this year and is widely recognized, as the principal Republican spokesman in the House of Representatives, if indeed not in either body, in the field of education, the gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Quie.

Mr. QUIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I welcome you, Dr. Moynihan. I want to commend you for the tremendous assistance you have given to a number of administrations in giving them some leadership in their education efforts. I would like to follow up on Mr. Meeds' questions about the people who are presently doing research and the possibility of expanding this effort in research in education. Because I feel very strongly that we ought to make this dramatic expansion and produce about the same percentage of research in education as we have done in defense, I also recognize the tremendous benefits of research in agriculture and think what the Federal Government has done in research has been more beneficial than for all of the other programs put together for the American farmers.

I would like to talk about two things: the ones who are presently dong the research work, and the others who are building up a force of men and women who can carry this on. You can't expect to get it done in 10 years. That means in this decade we are going to be building up a group of knowledgeable people. Let's look at those who now are doing research. Are there some individuals who would like to do more research in education and have the capability and are there some who are doing research but the funds are so short that they are spending most of their time trying to locate funds?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. I think there are now unemployed resources in the field of educational research; yes, sir. I don't think this is as dramatic as some of those unemployed think, but we have more first rate men wishing to do work in this field than are now doing it. I think this is the case. I think we have got a fair amount of not very productive research going on, too, a fair amount of things that are not research at all. There are, sir, men who should be working in this field who aren't working in it.

There are good men who spend too much time filling out forms and getting to know associate commissioners, and flying back and forth to Washington to find themselves a little money. We have scientists doing the work that businessmen probably should do, but scientists shouldn't have to do that.

About new people coming into the field, I think I would say simply two things: One is that let's be very clear: Educational research has not been very prestigious. It has taken some very brave men to stay in the field. I can think of a dozen men who have stayed on in schools of education at some cost to themselves. There is a lot of fashion in science as in anything else, and there is a kind of Gresham's law: bad work drives out good work, and poor researchers drive out good researchers.

I have known men who, at costs to their reputation, have stayed in this field because they have known it to be so important. What the field needs is the kind of recognition Congress can give it. The kind of thing I was saying to Mr. Meeds, an institution of Washington, an insti

tution of such unquestioned status that anyone interested in that institution is known to be running on a fast track. Once that happens I think you will have no trouble recruiting people, because it will have become an intellectually exciting subject.

Let me say to you, sir, that a couple of colleagues of mine have recently made a list of what they regard as major findings of social science in the last 40 years. Up until about 1930, up to 1940, two-thirds of those findings occurred in Europe. Since that time, two-thirds occurred in this country.

The overwhelming proportion, the big things that were found out, the important ideas, came because money was spent. It took money to find it out, because one man in a study doesn't do much any more. Where really important new things had been found, there had been an investment of adequate resources.

For instance, the Coleman study took many millions of dollars, but when it was over our idea of what the schools were like was turned upside down.

Mr. QUIE. Developing prestige in the Congress for educational research, is what Chairman Brademas is attempting to do, rather than quickly pass this bill. He wants to spend the year holding hearings and develop not only the public attention to it, but public knowledge about what is needed and what is possible. I commend him for this.

I think we can do a great deal, not only educating our own members— which is about as difficult a task as a person can find-but also to provide education for people of the country to understand it. Do you think, then in an effort to produce more researchers that most of this research ought to be conducted in our large institutions of higher education? Mr. MOYNIHAN. Most of it probably should; yes, sir. I think the pattern of the National Institutes of Health, with which you are closely familiar, Congressman, has been a pretty successful one. I think we need some in-house people here in Washington or wherever they locate this center-but by and large, there are about 15 places in the country where the kind of work you are talking about can be done and much should be put there. This is not something to be spread everywhere. Every county should not have its center. The things we are trying to find out, once found don't need to be found again. It is that level of

science.

So, pick some strong places, places that are moving, and build with them. They are not all located by any means on the Eastern Seaboard. They are spread across the country.

Mr. QUIE. So an attempt to get political support is not the best way to get research that we want. We may be able to get some congressional support for a while, but you won't produce the results that would sustain congressional support.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. That is what we have agricultural research stations for, sir.

Mr. QUIE. I noticed they were at least limited to one per State. rather than providing several within the State. How do you then deal with the continued belief of some educators that, if you would reduce the pupil-teacher ratio, suddenly educational benefits would tremendously increase? I thought that would be well known among educators, but I am amazed by elementary and secondary school teachers who will not agree with me that changing the pupil-teacher ratio isn't going to change the educational output.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Sir, every so often, even a Congressman as distinguished as yourself has to be told by a witness that something he proposes be done can't be done. Peter Rossi, at Johns Hopkins, has written a little paper about this. It turns out that just about the oldest continuing research inquiry in some behavior of this kind by psychologists has to do with the effects of pupil-teacher ratio. Since about 1922 the first work was done about that time since that time we have had 40 or so really good papers on this: good stuff, good men. In the Coleman study, "Equality of Educational Opportunity," if you recall that tremendous thick book, he has a table on everything. There is nothing he doesn't have a table on. But he says there is no table on the effects of pupils-teacher ratio because, for all races in all regions, at all leevels and in all circumstances, the effect was zero.

That hasn't changed anybody's mind. The reason it hasn't changed anybody's mind is, that the effect of pupil-teacher ratio is not on the pupil, but on the teacher. They go crazy in a room with 50 people. I don't blame them for thinking that small classes are a good thing, but I would hope they wouldn't say they were doing it for the aid of children. They are doing it for themselves. They have rights. I don't know why a teacher should be driven crazy. But on the other hand, we shouldn't associate being decent with decent people with changing educational outcomes.

Mr. QUIE. Let me ask one other question, then, Mr. Chairman.

That is the problem we face when there is failure. You mentioned that quite a bit in your testimony here and commended those who had fortitude in the face of disappointment.

We will undoubtedly find failure in this research, like we have in many others, and this has worried me because sometimes the program goes down the drain if there is not a conditioning to accept the concept that you will have failures. From your observation over the years of administrations and Congress, do you think of anything we could do differently in order to condition at least our colleagues who have to vote on the money to be able to accept failures as well as the successes?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Sir, yes; do more of what you are doing this morning. You did not walk in here promising the moon, saying: Just you wait, we are going to get this institute and in 4 years time that will be the end of that subject.

I think we have all been chastened. I think you have certainly had a better record than most in saying: Don't expect the apotheosis of all possible expectation to come before the end of the calendar

year.

I think this committee, if I may say so, Mr. Chairman, is going about its work in the terms that it ought to go about it. I think you are creating a legislative record which says: This must be a hard problem or it would not have resisted as many efforts as we have made. We will stay with it. We have faith in the scientific method. We have faith in our scholars, teachers, and administrators, and we don't expect success to happen overnight.

Mr. QUIE. It has been my philosophy that instead of trying to hide. failures from the Congress and then the Congress suddenly discovers the failure, it would be better to be open about it and let the Congress and people know how the situation is progressing and tell

them beforehand. I look at it something like congressional trips overseas. If you don't say anything about it to your constituents and they find out about it in the paper, they think you are going on a junket. But if you announce it ahead of time, they think you are going on a worthwhile trip.

Mr. MOYNIHAN. The President tried to do that, and I would have hoped a little more attention might have been paid to his statements. In that first message to the Congress January 1969, he said:

Let the men and women of the Federal Government understand that this administration does not expect every experiment to succeed; that there is no shame associated with failure, if you will learn from failure

And I think one of the great needs of government and particularly of the Congress, sir, is to make the people in the Federal branch feel they can say something doesn't work without feeling that they will lose their job.

Mr. QUIE. Thank you. You have been a good witness.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I am reminded, in view of the colloquy, Dr. Moynihan, of a late professor at Harvard, Raphael Demos, and having once heard him preach a little sermon in the college chapel about the subject of how to learn to fail, the point being that Americans learn only how to succeed and we are not emotionally or psychologically accustomed to the other.

The gentlelady from Connecticut, Mrs. Grasso.

Mrs. GRASSO. No questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BRADEMAS. The gentlelady from Massachusetts, Mrs. Hicks. Mrs. HICKS. Mr. Moynihan, thank you very much for coming this morning. What I am troubled about with regard to this, is, what sort of priorities are we going to have in the research program? You are going to be allocated, if this is funded, a certain amount of money. This morning we have been talking a great deal about the very young child and, of course, I am interested in him, too. But today I see the great need for some research to be done on the high school level. Because in my city, Boston, at the present time our high schools are closed, not for vacation but because of disturbances in the high school. I would trust that this Institute, if it were so formed, would be able to do some work in this field on the high school level. We are not going to be able to reach these boys and girls on the infant level because they have gone far beyond us. Are you going to set priorities regarding the research or are you going to research on all levels at the same time?

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Well, Mrs. Hicks, you certainly are right in what you say about the high schools in Boston and Cambridge. I would say simply this: that first of all, the National Institute will respond to Congress. What does Congress want done?

The President has suggested some of his priorities: now what are Congress's priorities? There is no question whatever that one of the most difficult social problems in America is in that period of young adolescence. We aren't very good at making that shift in young people. We don't know much about it. We ought to learn a lot more. It has been wisely said by James D. Wilson that there are a lot of problem situations where you can't do anything about the causes until you cure the symptoms.