The Morrill-Nelson Act (1862 and 1890), appropriating funds for land-grant colleges and universities; the Hatch Act (1887), appropriating money for the establishment of agricultural experiment stations in connection with land-grant colleges; the Smith-Lever Act (1914) and the Capper-Ketcham Act (1928), providing for agricultural extension work through land-grant colleges; and the Smith-Hughes Act (1917) and subsequent similar acts for vocational education in agriculture, trades, and industries, home economics and distributive occupations all illustrate a fundamental interest of the Federal Government in the fostering of public education.

Thus the precedents were established and none of the dire predictions of those who have traditionally opposed Federal aid for education on the ground that it would result in Federal control of education have materialized. These arguments are as outworn as those directed against the public schools themselves. The experience of the 69 landgrant colleges sharply distinguishes Federal-State cooperation in educational matters from Federal domination of State educational policies. The last Congress extended the field of cooperation. Necessary defense training programs are being at present Federally financed, and given through State schools. Opportunities for this vocational training, however, are closed to thousands of American youth who live in some communities where there are no high schools, and to many other American youths because they have had insufficient elementary school. training to enable them to participate in these programs. Today's defense training efforts have been successful largely because of State vocational schools, and in our elementary schools we must lay the foundation for the youth and adults who will be needed in the Nation's economic life of tomorrow. When, because of lack of educational opportunity, an individual's native capacity is undeveloped, not only is the individual grossly wronged by society, but the whole Nation is the loser.

There is no doubt that a reasonable amount of Federal financial assistance to equalize educational opportunities among the States would rapidly result in a vast improvement in the quality and quantity of education now offered to several million American children and youth.

Having mentioned precedents for the proposed legislation, I should like to point to some of the needs it would meet. Emphasis in the pending bill, S. 1313, is placed on equalizing educational opportunities for youth in rural areas. In many rural areas free public high-school advantages are wholly lacking. In several States, largely rural, a relatively large proportion of the youth of high-school age have no high school advantages. In 7 States less than 15 percent of the total publicschool enrollment is in high school as contrasted with 24 percent or more in 7 other States.

In the solution of the problem of unemployed youth, the secondary schools have a major contribution to make. The schools should be in a position to provide for the profitable investment of the time of youth until they can be absorbed into the labor market. Certainly up to the age of 21 years secondary schools, as increasingly as they have been called upon to do in the last decade or two, must provide for the education or, to put it another way, the developmental employment of the time of our youth. The problem is especially acute in rural areas. Three-fifths or more of the enrollees in C. C. C. camps and

N. Y. A. resident-work projects have come from rural areas or from towns with populations of fewer than 10,000. Even during the depths of the depression thousands of rural youth, without economic opportunity on their home farms or in their home communities, migrated to cities in search of employment. The surplus of unemployed rural youth between the ages of 16 and 21, in the 10 States in the Southern Appalachian and Ozark areas, has been estimated at more than 400,000. Finding their way to cities these rural youth are added to the ranks of unemployed city youth. And both groups, without tangible employment assets in the form of definite trade or occuaptional skills, are, therefore, at a disadvantage in competing for jobs with other young people and adults who have had opportunities for training in vocational schools.

In order to meet the pressing problem of occupational adjustment for rural youth it is not sufficient to provide facilities for training in vocational agriculture and home economics in some of the rural high schools. Valuable as such training may be in providing for the realistic vocational education of young men and women who will remain on the farm, it is not enough. For many rural youth facilities ought also to be provided that will enable these youth to secure vocational training of less-than-college grade for the occupations of industry and commerce to be found in urban areas. A constructive proposal as to how this need may be met has been advanced. It is the development of regional or State vocational schools, post-highschool technical institutes, and junior colleges in which the youth from rural areas and small towns may secure training in a variety of occupations.

A few States have established regional trade schools and junior colleges to serve youth from surrounding areas. The State of North Dakota may be cited as a specific example. North Dakota is primarily a sparsely settled agricultural State and hence finds it impossible to provide for trade and industrial education in small communities. Consequently, provision was made for centralizing trade teaching in one State school of science located at Wahpeton, N. Dak. This school, maintained at public expense, is free to residents of North Dakota. During a special winter term of 18 weeks many farm youth are in residence at the school securing training which will prepare them for various mechanical trades, the building trades, the electrical trades, and for business or domestic occupations.

I see no immediate prospect that the kind of educational opportunities I have described will or can be made available to the rural youth of many States without funds from the Federal Government to the States to finance such facilities. General equalization of publicschool facilities is necessary before vocational education can become available to many of the rural youth.

I note that the pending bill proposes funds to provide public-school facilities in areas affected by the influx of population due to defense activities. The facts concerning these needs have been made available through an investigation of the Office of Education upon the request of the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy pursuant to Senate Resolution 324, dated October 9, 1940. I shall not go into the details of the report of that investigation. Commissioner Studebaker and Mr. Taft will appear before the committee and present these facts.

I would like, however, to point out that there will be somewhere around 265,000 children in defense areas from families connected with defense activities for whom there will be no public-school facilities September 1941 unless some immediate provision is made for financing such facilities. About $115,000,000 will be required for new school sites, buildings, and equipment, transportation and other current operating expenses, including teachers' salaries.

As Coordinator of Health and Welfare in the national-defense program, I am concerned that proper educational facilities be made available to the children of defense workers. If defense workers cannot have schools for their children the effect on their morale will be anything but wholesome.

Your attention probably will be called to a bill, H. R. 3570, now pending before the House Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, entitled "A bill authorizing an appropriation for providing additional community facilities made necessary by national-defense activities, and for other purposes." This bill has the support of the Federal Security Agency. Since the appropriation is $150,000,000 and includes recreational facilities, sewers, waterworks, and other community facilities, as well as schools, the amount will not be sufficient to meet school needs. There is no conflict between H. R. 3570 and S. 1313. Any funds that would become available from H. R. 3570 would not be duplicated under S. 1313, because of the express provisions of the latter bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Governor, may I ask you a question there?
Mr. McNUTT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Say both of these bills become law, would the administration of them be in the same agency?

Mr. McNUTT. Under 3570 the President would designate the agency which would administer aid to schools.

The CHAIRMAN. So there would be no conflict?

Mr. McNUTT. There would be no conflict. That is by express provision of S. 1313.

Senator ELLENDER. These school facilities are provided for by the bill that is being considered in the House of Representatives?

Mr. McNUTT. It would be a matter of apportioning that money. It covers not only school facilities but recreational facilities, sewers and waterworks, and other community facilities.

Senator ELLENDER. You indicated a moment ago it would require $150,000,000.

Mr. McNUTT. That is right, and there will not be $115,000,000 out of $150,000,000 available, that is perfectly obvious.

Senator ELLENDER. How much of it would be available?

Mr. McNUTT. There has been no determination as to how that fund will be divided. As a matter of fact, there is some disagreement as to how the fund should be divided. H. R. 3570 authorizes an appropriation to be used by the President in providing the various community facilities needed in defense activities through Federal agencies designated by him, in accordance with such directions and conditions as he may prescribe. This would seem to leave the matter up to the President.

Senator HILL. It is a surprise that there should be some disagreement as to the division.

Mr. McNUTT. What is that?

Senator HILL. It is a surprise that there should be some disagreement as to the division of the funds.

Mr. McNUTT. The need is so immediate that any disagreement should be resolved in the immediate future. That bill deserves attention now.

Senator ELLENDER. Governor, do you think it is a correct course to pursue, to include in the pending bill this emergency feature of providing for pupils? Do you not think it might be best to consider the problem in a separate bill?

Mr. McNUTT. I would have no objection. The point is to have the money available to meet these emergency needs. Whichever bill will pass first, that is the place where the money should be put, because we need it right now. As far as school facilities in defense areas are concerned, that money must be available and facilities erected by September of this year if we are going to meet the need. Recreational facilities are needed, all of them are needed right now.

Senator ELLENDER. In making your estimates for the purposes of the bill, you say you are backing this other bill?

Mr. McNUTT. Yes.

Senator ELLENDER. You are fostering it?

Mr. McNUTT. Yes.

Senator ELLENDER. Did your office support that part of the appropriation to be used for education?

Mr. McNUTT. No; while we, of course, supplied such data as we had, at the time that was under consideration an adequate survey had not been made of all these needs. We would simply have to make a distribution of what funds are made available. I felt that the sum was too low at the outset.

Senator ELLENDER. You simply suggested a lump sum?

Mr. McNUTT. The total of the estimates for various purposes greatly exceed $1,500,000, the lump sum. These estimates are in some instances based on assumptions which I feel undershoot the mark, for example, those made as to the effect of concentrations of men. We have concentrations of troops moving in adjacent to communities that have a population of 1,000 or so, that cannot possibly take care of the influx of those who would normally follow such a concentration. In the World War we had 1.4 persons outside of every camp to every person inside, and certainly at this time there will be at least one person out of the camp for everyone inside. have industrial concentrations of 15,000 workmen going into a community which, by the 1940 census, was 864.

We

Now you cannot see a community of 864 persons absorbing an additional influx of 15,000 men with their families. Now there is one spot where there might be educational facilities, and happily, in the particular one to which I refer, they had made their survey, they know precisely what they need, and they have their plans already on file and as soon as the other money is available they are ready to start. Does that answer your question, Mr. Chairman and Senator Ellender? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Thank you, Governor.

Mr. McNUTT. I have given some attention to the problem of equitable apportionment incident to grants for education, and have conferred with some of the leading educational authorities on the possible methods and plans. There are several satisfactory methods of doing this, and I understand these will be discussed by Mr. Reeves,

Mr. Dawson, and others. The chief problem is to set up a plan that will be reasonably certain to allocate the funds to the States in proportion to their needs for funds. It would be possible insofar as funds for general equalization of educational opportunities are concerned to write a formula into the bill. The present situation, however, is complicated by the need for educational facilities in defense areas, the need for educational facilities for children residing on Federal reservations, and for the children of migratory workers.

Establishment of a Board of Apportionment as proposed in S. 1313 would, in my opinion, result in the allocation of funds in proportion to need and, at the same time, save any Federal official who deals directly with the States from the charge of having influence over State educational policies through the power to determine the amount of funds going to the State. I subscribe heartily to the policy stated in section 2 of S. 1313, forbidding Federal interference with

the organization and administration of schools, the control of processes of education, the control and determination of curricula of the schools, the methods of instruction to be employed in them, and the selection of personnel employed.

As a final word, I would like to say that in the decisions this Nation makes respecting its support of public education, it is dealing with one of the deathless values of civilization, a value more vital to this modern day than to any civilization of simpler centuries. If a nation is shortsighted in the decisions it makes, it cannot confine the wages of its sins to the generation that blunders.

We can defer building a road, a bridge, or a building, and catch up on its construction later. We cannot put educational opportunity for our children in cold storage for the duration of the war, or even of a period of financial stress, and restore it later to an unschooled generation grown old. These must go through life a lost generation poisoning the processes of popular thought, political action, economic prosperity, and the national defense with their ignorance, lack of skill, and undisciplined judgments.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Governor.
Mr. McNUTT. Thank you, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Reeves, please.

STATEMENT OF DR. FLOYD W. REEVES, CHAIRMAN OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION, FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY

The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, give your name and title, as you wish it to appear in the record, please.

Dr. REEVES. My name is Floyd W. Reeves. I am professor of administration at the University of Chicago, but for some time I have been on a leave of absence from the university. Since June of 1939 I have served as director of the American Youth Commission of the American Council on Education and at present I am also serving as Director of Labor Supply and Training in the Office of Production Management.

For a period of 20 years I have been studying these problems of educational finance. The first extensive study in this field on educational finance inquiry was just 20 years ago. I served on that staff and prepared one of the volumes in that report.