If you want me to discuss the other measure for a moment, I think the bill to create a department of education and welfare, that being H. R. 5795, comes much nearer to meeting the requirements with respect to consolidation, and, perhaps, it will come nearer to furnishing the basis for the type of information and scientific study that I have referred to than does the Sterling-Reed bill.

The CHAIRMAN. You understand, of course, that that bill is simply the reorganization plan?

Doctor CAPEN. I understand so.

The CHAIRMAN. As you understand, there was a Special Committee on the Reorganization of the Executive Departments, and they are going to make a report to Congress. The proposed legislation is covered by a number of bills, and this bill is simply the educational part of it. This bill creates a department of education and welfare.

Doctor CAPEN. I did understand that, but I did not understand whether it would be reported by your committee as a separate item.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, it could be. It is before us, or it has been referred to this committee.

Doctor CAPEN. I think that the objection of the educational people to it, as it stands, would lie with respect to one feature only, and that is the inclusion in the department of the veterans' service, for the reason that that is such an enormous undertaking, and, as everybody knows, so much subject to political pressure, that it is the feeling of many of us

Mr. TUCKER (interposing). Do you mean vocational education for veterans ?

Doctor CAPEN. No, sir; I mean the whole veterans' service. I think it might be possible to amend the bill so that vocational education as related to the veterans might be properly included.

Mr. Robson. Pardon my interruption, but the educational features, as related to the veterans, will soon expire as a matter of necessity.

Doctor CAPEN. I think they will within a very few years; but, if I understand the bill, the veterans' service is transferred to the department of education and welfare.

Mr. TUCKER. I do not see why that should be done.

Doctor CAPEN. Many of us who have studied the other functions of the department believe that would be a very hard team to drive, and that probably education, public health, and social welfare activities would suffer a great deal from the inevitable emphasis in the department upon the claims and activities of the Veterans Bureau.

Mr. BLACK. How do you think the private educational interests would feel about the provision in the first bill you discussed, H. R. 6582, which gives the commissioner of education inquisitorial powers over the subjects enumerated, "and such other educational matters and subjects as in the judgment of the commissioner of education may require attention and study?”

Doctor CAPEN. I think that nobody will object to that.

That leads me to another comment on the bill which you have before you providing for a department of education. Many of us are convinced that a bill carrying those large subsidy provisions, in spite of the clause denying to the department power to control State systems, will inevitably bring about a certain control from Washington that would be irksome to the people in the States and localities; but nobody is opposed to the investigation and publication of facts.

Mr. BLACK. I wonder if you have read Upton Sinclair's book entitled “The Goose Step"?

Doctor CAPEN. I have read it.

Mr. BLACK. I think that some of the colleges he refers to would quite strongly object to anybody coming in there and looking over the field.

Doctor CAPEN. I do not think that there is any college that he refers to that would not be very glad to have some impartial person to come in and study the whole undertaking, because Mr. Sinclair deals mostly with scandal.

Mr. BLACK. He starts out with the thesis that all of them are wrong.

Doctor Capex. Yes, sir. There is very little, if any, danger that anybody would object to the publication of demonstrable facts. That is what all of them want.

Perhaps a brief reference to my own experience with that type of work would be of interest to the committee. Doctor Mann stated that I had charge of a number of surveys for the Bureau of Education, and that is true. Altogether, I made surveys of some 48 institutions and a number of State school systems. In all cases those surveys were made at the request of the State systems. Generally the invitations came from the governors of the States or the authorities of the institutions involved. The strictures offered in the surveys: were very drastic in some cases. The effort was made to tell the truth about the institutions investigated and to make such recommendations as seemed to the investigators to be just. These .surveys have had a perfectly extraordinary influence on nearly every one of the institutions and States where they have taken place. In some few of the States the recommendations made by the Bureau of Eductaion have been adopted in toto by law; because it was felt that they were made by an impartial group of persons representing the Government, and responsible to the institutions themselves, at least indirectly. It was assumed that the investigators had drawn a clear and honest picture of the conditions and made recommendations that represented their best judgment.

Mr. TUCKER. Are not those surveys made by the Carnegie Foundation ?

Doctor CAPEN. Those of which I am speaking were made by the Bureau of Education. The Carnegie Foundation, however, has made some surveys. Surveys have also been made by other agencies. Besides the Carnegie Foundation the General Education Board has made a number.

Mr. BLACK. Of course, there is a great deal of discussion going on at this time about certain facts in the history of this country, and as to whether certain facts stated in our history are approved by the foreign authorities. Has there ever been any survey made of that subject other than by the Educational Council of New York?

Doctor CAPEN. I think there has been none. I do not know of any. Mr. BLACK. Do you think that this department might do that?

Doctor CAPEN. The main thing that is under consideration in the inquiry you mention, is a matter of detail for experts in history. If it seemed to be an important issue, the Government office might assemble a group of historical experts and get a report from them. I should judge that it would probably not launch upon that type of investigation unless it were seriously urged to do so.

Mr. BLACK. It is not strictly a pedagogical matter.

Doctor CAPEN. If I may say one word more that is suggested by the experience with surveys.

The influence of authoritative pronouncements based on facts emanating from a Government office is really all that is needed to effect noteworthy improvements. If the Government is in a position to perform that sort of service for the country on a large scale, it needs no other powers to bring about the results that we would all like to see. In other words, the States out of their own resources are able to put their own houses in order if they know what to do. If they are given an adequate plan or if they have presented to them a picture which shows them their shortcomings, perhaps, by comparison with somebody else, the vitality and energies that reside in the communities themselves

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). In other words, you do not believe that any State is financially unable to educate its children?

Doctor CAPEN. I am sure that no State is financially unable to do it. I happen to disbelieve in subsidies, and I am, perhaps, prejudiced on that account against that part of the bill providing for a department of education. I disbelieve in subsidies for education and for a lot of other things, and I am very much opposed to the 50–50 type of subsidy, which Ì think tends to break down the independence of the State governments. I am opposed to that type of subsidy, and I do not think it is necessary in order to accomplish results.

Mr. REED. If it were not for the Federal subsidy proposed there, would you find many features of that bill that would be objectionable

Doctor CAPEN. Not many that are objectionable, but some that are quite inadequate. I think it should be strengthened.

Mr. REED. Have you already covered all of those points? I came in late.

Doctor CAPEN. I have tried to.

Doctor Mann. The next witness will be President Woods, of the University of Maryland. He has been connected with one of the land-grant colleges for a great many years, and is now administering one of the land-grant colleges. He is a member of the land-grant colleges' executive committee and of the Land Grant Colleges' Association. Therefore he has had a lot of experience in the actual handling of funds that come from the Federal Government under the Morrill, Nelson, and Hatch Acts.



Doctor Woods. In speaking of the land-grant colleges it is necessary for me to be extremely careful, because there is one in each State and Territory and they are by no means uniform in their belief as to certain measures or in their understanding as to the desirability of certain policies. There are some points, however, on which they are quite agreed. The executive committee of the Land Grant College Association, keeping in close touch with the various colleges through the association meetings and conferences with various meetings of the association, have been considering these various educational meas

ures from time to time, and have been in considerable doubt in regard to certain features of each one of them. The latest measure, however, that has come to our attention is this bill, H. R. 6582. This bill has recently been in the hands of each member of the committee, and, in order to say exactly what I want to say and no more and no less, I have prepared a very brief statement, which, with your permission, I will read and turn over to the reporter:

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee I have been requested by Mr. R. A. Pearson, chairman of the executive committee of the Association of Land Grant Colleges, to represent that committee at this hearing in reference to H. R. 6582. Copies of the bill have been submitted to each member of the committee, as follows:

Dr. R. A Pearson, president Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa; Dr. A. R. Mann, dean college of agriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y.; Dr. F. B. Mumford, college of agriculture, University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo.; Dr. W. B. Bizzell, Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College, College Station, Tex.

The committee has not had a formal consideration of this measure, but the following statement as prepared by Dean Mann, I think, represents the consensus of opinion of the committee:

The Dallinger bill is one which should receive our support. It provides for the enlargement of the existing Bureau of Education, making it possible for it to function in altogether worthwhile ways. Since the main purpose of the Federal bureau will be to aid education by means of survey and studies, the provision for more of this work by the bureau in this bill seems to be altogether worth while and largely to meet the situation. Furthermore, since there is such a wide diversity of opinion with regard to the place and need for a Federal department of education, we favor this more conservative movement before we plunge headlong into a full-sized department. If an enlarged and strengthened Bureau of Education succeeds by reason of its work, in demonstrating the need for a department, it will be time then to create the department.

I may say, as representing the land-grant colleges, that they do not believe in a highly centralized control of education. Probably the most successful educational measure ever passed was the so-called land-grant act of 1862, establishing the land-grant colleges, followed by subsequent acts providing for the agricultural experiment stations, and later the agricultural extension services. In all of these measures the control is left very largely to the States. The cooperation of the United States Bureau of Education and the United States Department of Agriculture has been helpful and has succeeded because it has left the States free to adjust the work to local needs. It has, therefore, accomplished the greatest good.

The land-grant colleges believe firmly in Federal cooperation in education, but they feel that the type of cooperation for the present, at least, should be that provided in this bill, H. R. 6582, now under consideration.

Mr. REED. Are the land-grant colleges opposed to Federal aid in principle?

Doctor Woods. They are not.
Mr. BLACK. They are creatures of Federal aid ?
Doctor Woods. Yes, sir.

Mr. REED. I thought you were opposed to Federal aid here, under the Sterling bill?

Doctor Woods. I am not sure whether the Federal aid proposed in that bill is a practicable measure.

I think that some of the

representatives of the colleges favor that aid, and others do not. Therefore, I am not speaking for them as a group on that.

Mr. BLACK. The administration of the land grants has been somewhat unfortunate in this country, has it not?

Doctor Woods. I think not. I think it has been very successful.

Mr. BLACK. I do not means so far as the administration of the colleges with the money received from the land grants is concerned, but in the disposition of the lands under the grants, or the returns from the grants have sometimes gone astray.

Doctor Woods. The grant was made very early. It was in 1862, I think, that this bill was passed, and the lands were disposed of under that act by the States that had script, for example. My own State of Maryland, for instance, received script, and they got 60 cents per acre for the land. It was in Michigan and the Middle West, and at that time, I suppose, they thought it was not worth anything

Mr. REED. Cornell University did well, did it not?

Doctor Woods. Yes, sir. Some of the States conserved these properties very well, and others did not.

The handling of the land grants or the lands by the various institutions was in some cases very decidedly open to criticism, and the lands did not return to the States anything like what should have been realized. That was true as to Maryland. Maryland sold those lands for almost nothing; I think that all of the land-grant colleges feel that any action in the nature of a subsidy should be very carefully considered, and made only when it has been determined that the expenditure of the money will bring about the real purposes sought for the promotion of education and not for the control of education.

Mr. BLACK. This bill would provide that any other lands for that purpose would be under the jurisdiction of this bureau rather than under the Interior Department, but I suppose there are no other lands.

Doctor Wood. We feel that the bill H. R. 6582 comes as near representing the interests of the State as could be done and as near to a consolidation of the educational interests and agencies of the Government in their cooperation with the States as anything we can see or that we have seen up to date. Whether that represents the last word, we are not prepared to say, but it is certainly a step forward in the right direction, and we feel that everything proposed in this bill is sound.

Doctor Mann. The next witness will be Dr. C. H. Judd, the professor of education in the Chicago University, and the director of school education. I might say that the work in education of the University of Chicago exercises a very large influence over the entire Middle West, because of the large number of graduate students, the summer school, and the publications that they issue. They publish one journal that is devoted to high-school problems and another devoted to elementary school problems. Professor Judd is also the president of the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, and has, perhaps, had a wider personal contact with the school systems and teachers throughout the Middle West than anyone I can think of.

« ForrigeFortsett »