Now it seems to me that increasing taxes at any level with me is the same. I get hurt, or helped, by the increase or the decrease, whether it is one place or another. It is the total that affects me, and I think we are not thinking about that here enough, and I see this resistance. I read in the Kansas City Star, yesterday morning, the listing of communities, cities and States, the percent that the people have gone up with their own taxes at local and State levels in the last few years. It has been tremendous, much more so than the Federal level. Mr. BELL. Well, of course I know some areas, at least I think I do in California, where there actually is the ability to pay, but actually, when they vote on these issues, the public does not respond. They vote them down, in many cases, and where there is really a need. This is what happens in fairly wealthy areas, I know. Dr. ENGLEMAN. Of course, one of the things you people have done in California is, I think that that you are one of the best States in the Union to illustrate the principle that if you feed money into education, you do something to your total income. I think that you people have been pretty bold about that, and it might be that you are becoming more conservative now, I don't know, in the money that you are spending, but I think that you will find that if you do, your income will tend to drop, rather than go up. Mr. BELL. That is all. Mr. PERKINS. Any further questions, gentlemen? Thank you very much, Dr. Engleman, for your appearance here today. Dr. ENGLEMAN. May I express my gratitude to you committee members. Mr. PERKINS. Dr. Fuller, did you wish to put anything in the record? We asked you to step aside, and Mr. Bell tells me that he has no further question, unless you wish to. Do you have any concluding statement? Dr. FULLER. I would be willing to do it, but Mrs. Green is not here, and if you want me to, I would ask her what her preference is, address her personally, or submit it for the record. There is a very good explanation of the instance that she pointed to. Mr. PERKINS. Thank you very much, Dr. Fuller. Did you have anything you desire to insert in the record? Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I have a letter to the chairman with respect to the assignment of the minority members to the subcommittees. Would it be appropriate to give it to you, or do you happen to know the chairman's address, so that I could send it to him? Mr. PERKINS. I would say this: that it is now 22 minutes of 5 o'clock. I know the gentleman, perhaps, has been diligent, but he has just come to the committee room, and if he had presented this to me at 2 o'clock or 2:30, when we reconvened, we would have tried to get a full committee here. I do not have any authority to accept the letter and make the assignments myself, but we could have, at that time. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman Mr. PERKINS. Just a moment. Let me make my observation. Now it is impossible to get the members here who would be a quorum this afternoon, this late in the evening, and tomorrowmany members left today. I do not know whether we can get them. The only way that I would have authority would be for someone with a quorum of the full committee present to make the motion, and the assignments be made, but I feel that you should leave this with the chief clerk of this committee, leave your assignments, and the chairman of the full committee can be reached-I have not been in contact with him, but I am sure the clerk, here, can get in contact. Dr. WOLFE. The chief clerk, not me. I am the education chief. Mr. PERKINS. The chief clerk can get in contact with the chairman, and the chairman can make the assignments overnight. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the backhanded compliment on how I should have handled myself. I also appreciate advice as to what I should have done at 2 o'clock. I might remind the chairman that I saw him at quarter of 2, and he never made any such suggestions to me. I also informed the chairman that I was not going to be able to present until now, because I was substituting for the absent chairman of the full committee in a discussion that he was supposed to be having on Federal aid to education. I might assure the gentleman that I have been diligent in performing not only my own busines but also the business of the permanent chairman of this committee. If I had any inkling that there was going to be a full committee hearing this afternoon, if I had any inkling that there was going to be a quorum of the full committee, if I had any advice from the chairman that he would have appreciated the recommendations that I have to make so that formal action could be taken, it might have been possible for me to respond. I cannot read the chairman's mind, if he does not share it with me. Mr. PERKINS. The committee will recess until a quarter of 10 in the morning, at which time we will reconvene. (Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9:45 a.m., Friday, February 8, 1963.) NATIONAL EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT ACT FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1963 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 429, Cannon Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Roosevelt, Thompson, Holland, Daniels, Brademas, Sickles, Gibbons, Gill, Frelinghuysen, Ayres, Griffin, Quie, Goodell, and Taft. Present also: Representative Giaimo. Staff members present: Dr. Deborah P. Wolfe, education chief; and Richard Burgess, minority clerk. Mr. PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. Our first witness this morning is Dr. Arthur Hitchcock, executive secretary of the American Personnel & Guidance Association. Come forward, Dr. Hitchcock. STATEMENT OF DR. ARTHUR A. HITCHCOCK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN PERSONNEL & GUIDANCE ASSOCIATION, ACCOMPANIED BY CARL MCDANIELS Dr. HITCHCOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like, Mr. Chairman, to bring my associate, Mr. Carl McDaniels, if I may. Mr. PERKINS. Just be seated, please. Now, Dr. Hitchcock, do you prefer to read your statement or insert it in the record and summarize it, and let us commence to question? Dr. HITCHCOCK. Well, I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, first, that we do very much appreciate this opportunity to testify here and we hope that we may be of help to the committee in the ways in which we may be. I would prefer not to read all of the statement here, because members of the committee are excellent readers but I would, however, like to ask if we might insert at a later time some additional material that we have relative to guidance in the rural areas of this country, some rather significant material that, because of the pressure of time in preparing our testimony, we could not bring into this document right now. Mr. PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The additional material referred to follows:) STATEMENT BY MRS. AMBER ARTHUN WARBURTON, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, ALLIANCE FOR GUIDANCE OF RURAL YOUTH RELATING TO A NATIONWIDE STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT ON GUIDANCE FOR RURAL YOUTH This study will be an early spring publication of the National Education Association, Department of Rural Education (the Alliance for Guidance of Rural Youth was one of the first member organizations of the Council of Guidance & Personnel Association, predecessor of the American Personnel & Guidance Association) The Alliance for Guidance of Rural Youth had been working with rural schols for more than three decades to promote and demonstrate improved guidance services. Limited school funds and lack of facilities for teacher and teachercounselor inservice education and lack of local leadership in rural areas has been a constant handicap. The National Defense Education Act's title V-A affording National and State leadership and funds opened new opportunities to advance guidance services in the rural school. These were powerfully reinforced by title V-B of the act providing Institutes for counselor training. Thus skilled assistance and financial aid were at hand for basic aspects of the guidance program. These the alliance had been forced to help improvise over the years, contriving to find the needed resources for rural guidance services among local, State, and National youth-serving agencies. Other titles of the act aided in curriculum expansion-important for an effective guidance program—and by offering loans and scholarships for able students to continue their education. Especially was it recognized by the alliance that in identifying and competently educating the talented a stated purpose of the act-a better understanding of and opportunity for all boys and girls would result. The alliance was extremely curious to know what was happening. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The study was undertaken (1) to survey the extent to which guidance services had been initiated or developed in rural secondary schools on impetus of the National Defense Education Act; (2) to discover their best features and gage the progress toward achievement of comprehensive guidance programs; and (3) to obtain concrete evidence of how rural boys and girls had actually been helped toward developing their potentials. PROCEDURES The study was initiated in August 1960, after 2 years of the NDEA. A questionnaire was sent to the person responsible for guidance services in each State. Among other questions, the State director was asked to name five rural secondary schools that had received NDEA assistance during the 1959-60 school year. The rural school was defined. Special questionnaires were then sent to these local schools. From the local questionnaires returned, 21 schools in 14 States were selected to visit. These were chosen to represent different types of economies, different ethnic groups, and guidance programs in different stages of development with different types of organization. The following States were visited with the economy of community indicated: Arizona: Copper mining and cotton growing. Arkansas: Logging and millwork. California: Railroad center in High Sierras. Iowa: Corn and hogs. Minnesota: "Dinner-pail farming" (combining agriculture with industry) and small grain production. Mississippi: Cotton, corn, beef cattle, and dairying. North Carolina : Peanuts, cotton, poultry, livestock, and dairying. New York: Dairying, vegetable, fruitgrowing, with some members of families commuting to industry. Ohio: Diversified agriculture, corn, wheat, soybeans, sugarbeets, tomatoes, rye, oats, with often one member of family working in a factory or oil pumping station. Oregon: Logging, construction, and agriculture. South Carolina: Tobacco, logging, paper pulp, corn, and cotton. South Dakota: Ranching and grain production. Vermont: Dairying, furniture manufacture, and some working in nearby industries. Colorado: Molybdenum, lead, silver mining, and potato growing. In most of the States only one school was visited but in others two or three were included in order to cover different types of situations. During the visit, the chief school officer, the counselor, and some teachers were interviewed; also, members of the senior class, unforewarned, were assembled equipped with paper and pencil and seated to preserve privacy while writing. The study was explained to them as a research project to find out about major problems bothering young people and who or what helped them solve these problems. The confidential nature and importance of their contribution to the study was emphasized as they were asked to write candidly about (1) a major problem faced during the past 2 years, the solution, who or what helped in the solution; (2) unsolved problems; (3) future plans; and (4) significant changes in the school in the past 2 years that had a marked effect on them, either helping or hindering them in getting along. RESPONSE FROM STATES Some information was received from all States except one. The State questionnaires showed much individuality in the use of NDEA funds. Federal regulations designed to guide States in organizing for use of NDEA took into account the uneven development of guidance services in the States and permitted wide latitude in formulation of State plans that would conform with provisions of the law and meet the State's recognized professional standards. All States made considerable progress-some made enormous strides in helping young people toward their maximum potential. Unquestionably, the Nation is far stronger because of NDEA. While the States went about their business of distribution of NDEA in different ways, their methods fall in the following categories: (1) Reimbursing a local school on the basis of an approved local plan; (2) Reimbursing a county unit on the basis of an approved county plan with a qualified director in charge; (3) Reimbursing a shared services regional plan that might include all schools in several counties or several schools in different counties but in a convenient geographical area; and (4) Providing for administration of tests in all schools and possible distribution of specified guidance materials; might also reimburse certain approved schools for organizing a guidance program including counselor, materials, and so forth. NEW EXAMPLES OF HOW NDEA WORKS AND RESULTS In this brief testimony it is impossible to go into necessary detail to describe adequately what happened in the Nation as a result of congressional passage of NDEA. A few examples will illustrate how the money was spent and results. North Carolina.-The State director of guidance of North Carolina described the background of the guidance program in the State, how the NDEA was used, and results in terms of increase in number of full-time qualified counselors, and number of rural schools served in years from 1958 through 1963. "While many schools in North Carolina have had 'some' guidance services since 1939 (the year the department of guidance services was established in the State department of public instruction), they have been limited and sporadic, performed largely by interested classroom teachers with little or no scheduled time for guidnace duties. However, many of these teachers who served as teacher-counselors had some guidance preparation and continued their study in the fiel dof guidance although their major function was teaching. Hence, the greatest need in North Carolina schools during the years has been adequate sup port for full-time counselors. For that reason, NDEA funds in North Carolina were used primarily to provide full-time qualified counselors. "Under the State plan for NDEA, an administrative unit may be reimbursed provided the program is conducted by a counselor who has a minimum of 18 semester hours of guidance preparation and is engaged full time in guidance activities defined under the plan. Such a counselor may be assigned to one or more schools within an administrative unit or to a combination of adminis |