Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

tion. Educational planning falls under Manpower.

Thus far the Board has limited its work to planning; and as operating programs have come into existence, they have been delegated to already existing Government agencies. Upon the passage of the Defense Production Act of 1950, for example, the President, by Executive Order, established the National Production Authority in the Department of Commerce, and in the same Order directed that this activity be coordinated with other Government functions by the Chairman of the National Security Resources Board. An additional example of this policy is found in the delegation to the Department of Labor of the function of establishing labor requirements in defense industries. In the operation of defense activities the Board will assume only the function of coordination. This plan of organization is quite different from the pattern which evolved between 1940 and 1945, when entirely new agencies were created, such as the War Production Board and the War Manpower Commission. The current policy is intended to make fullest use of the skills and experience of existing Government departments and agencies.

The Place of the Office of Education

The National Security Resources Board has designated the Office of Education as the agency for all educational planning. I quote from a statement authorized by the Board:

In the field of education, the National Security Resources Board and the President are looking to the Federal Security Agency and the Office of Education as the focal point

within the Federal Government where information regarding the educational and training needs will be gathered and distributed to the schools and institutions of higher education so that they may make their maximum contribution to the defense effort. The statement continues:

In helping the Office of Education carry out its role, the National Security Resources Board is seeking to establish relationships between other government agencies and departments and the U. S. Office of Education. Thus the Office will have constantly available current information which it will send promptly to colleges, universities, and schools. The Office will also secure information from the schools and colleges which can be used by the agencies of government in their own educational planning. This joint effort of government and educational institutions will provide the most efficient means of putting all the Nation's educational forces to effective use in the defense effort.

[ocr errors]

In accordance with this policy of estab lishing departmental relationships with the Office of Education, there is now being formed an interdepartmental liaison committee representing defense and civilian departments and agencies concerned with the national defense. It is expected that the membership of this committee will be announced in the near future.

Action by the Office of Education

The Office of Education has taken steps to carry out the two general types of responsibilities delegated to it: First, that of serving as the focal point for educational planning in the Federal Government, and second, of operating programs for which funds and administrative authority are placed in the Office of Education as, for example, defense training of war production workers of less than college grade; and programs similar to Engineering, Science, and Management War Training.

Within the Office of Education we have organized a defense council which meets regularly, considers emergency problems, and develops plans for their effective solution. We have further appointed staff members to deal with designated defense activities. (See listing on page 20.)

In order that educational leaders in the schools and colleges may be informed of Federal activities concerned with education, the Office is issuing at irregular but frequent intervals a Defense Information Bulletin. This publication is sent to the Chief State School Officers and institutions of higher education. The Bulletin will provide promptly official information concerning defense training plans, manpower policies of the defense establishments and of civilian agencies, and legislative and executive actions. The regular publications of the Office, SCHOOL LIFE, a monthly maga zine which reaches virtually all of you, and HIGHER EDUCATION, which reaches college. executives, will continue to provide general articles on education and fuller discussions of defense-related activities.

In recent weeks the Executive Office of the President has issued policy statements, and the Congress has passed laws, relating to the defense effort, of particular interest to schoolmen. Two of the Executive Orders relate to the training of workers for defense occupations.

Defense Training Programs

In accordance with the policy of the National Security Resources Board which

places responsibility for education and training in the Office of Education, the President issued recently two documents that are of considerable importance to school administrators. On September 9, the President issued Executive Order 10161 under the Defense Production Act of 1950. This order delegates authority for specific phases of defense production to certain Federal Government agencies. Part VI of the Executive Order dealing with labor supply states: "The Secretary of Labor shall utilize the functions vested in him so as to meet most effectively the labor needs of defense industry and essential civilian employ. ment, and to this end he shall: "(a) Assemble and analyze information on labor requirements for defense and other activities and on the supply of workers

*

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

This Executive Order was accompanied by a memorandum from the Director of the Bureau of the Budget approved by the President which clarified responsibilities of the Department of Labor and of the Federal Security Agency with relation to the training of defense workers. This statement placed responsibility for identifying training needs for defense activities in the Department of Labor. It also stated that the Office of Education, Federal Security Agency, would "develop plans and programs for the education and training, in groups or classes under organized educational auspices, of personnel needed for work in occupations essential to the national defense."

The Department of Labor thus has the responsibility for making plans to meet defense and essential civilian labor requirements, and the Federal Security Agency through the Office of Education has the responsibility for developing plans and programs for the education and training needed by personnel who are to be employed in occupations essential to the national defense.

19

The Department of Labor and the Federal Security Agency will coordinate their planning under the leadership of the National Security Resources Board. Appropriate steps have already been taken to reach an understanding concerning the division of labor in connection with these activities. Agencies having comparable responsibili ties in the States and local communities will face many of the problems of coordination which exist in the Federal Government, and they will doubtless want to develop working relationships in their own communities to guarantee a minimum of duplication of effort and friction and a maximum of efficient planning and operation. The appropriate State and local agencies will be informed of policies and procedures as rapidly as they are developed by the Department of Labor and the Office of Education in order that local authorities may have the benefit of national experience in their planning.

Coordination of all educational activities within the States is very much needed if the various educational systems and institutions are to make their full contribution to the defense effort. State Boards for Vocational Education, local boards of education, and official bodies governing the operations of institutions of higher learning will be called upon to assume specific responsibilities with respect to planning defense training programs.

The Office of Education will continue its policy of dealing administratively with duly constituted educational authorities within the States. It is imperative, however, that all agencies concerned with planning, developing, and operating programs of education and training for defense purposes should work out means of securing the highest possible coordination of these programs within States or even regions. State groups representing the various branches and levels of education might well consider devices for achieving such coordination and cooperative planning. Such a cooperative arrangement will assist the Nation in securing an adequate supply of well-trained and skilled workers for the various production activities essential to an efficient defense program. Allocations and Priorities

Another problem with which the schools will be concerned in the months ahead is the use of materials for equipment and construction. The Office of Education has made plans in this connection and when

Defense Mobilization Assignments in the Office of Education

These staff members are the Office of Education channels of communication between (1) Government departments and agencies and (2) educational institutions and individuals concerned with defense problems. The present assignments and the persons involved are as follows:

Accelerated Programs in Higher Education--- JOHN DALE RUSSELL.
Area and Language Studies---

Audio-Visual Aids to Defense Training---
Civil Defense (Protection of Life and Property).
Curriculum Adjustments in Secondary Schools.
Defense Facilities of Higher Education Institu-
tions

Defense-Related Government-Sponsored Cam-
paigns in Schools____

Defense-Related Occupational Information and
Guidance__.

Defense-Related Research__--
Education for the Health Professions.
Engineering, Science, and Management Defense
Training in Colleges and Universities______
Extended School Services for Children of Work-
ing Mothers____

Health and Physical Fitness Programs-----
Illiteracy in Relation to Manpower Utilization--
Information Concerning Legislation on Student
Loans and Scholarships-----

In-Service Teacher Training as Related to Non-
vocational Defense Activities__

Liaison for Research Contracts in Educational
Institutions___

Liaison for Selective Service; Liaison for Military
Training Programs in Civilian Institutions___.
Libraries and Defense Information__
National Scientific Register
Practical Nurse Training-.

Publications and Defense Information____

KENDRIC N. MARSHALL.
FLOYDE E. BROOKER.
WILLIAM A. Ross.
J. DAN HULL.

ERNEST V. HOLLIS.

CARL A. JESSEN.

HARRY A. JAGER. RALPH C. M. FLYNT. LLOYD E. BLAUCH.

HENRY H. ARMSBY.

HAZEL F. GABBARD. FRANK S. STAFFORD. AMBROSE CALIVER.

BUELL G. GALLAGHER.

DON S. PATTERSON.

BERNARD B. WATSON.

CLAUDE E. HAWLEY. RALPH M. DUNBAR.

JAMES C. O'BRIEN.

WARD P. BEARD

GEORGE KERRY SMITH

[blocks in formation]

the time arrives for the control of the use of critical materials through allocations and priorities, the Office of Education is prepared to take the following steps: 1. Call a national conference of educational representatives to obtain their recommendations concerning policies for conservation of materials, policies governing any rationing programs that might be necessary, and procedures to be followed in making allocations and granting priorities. 2. Act in an advisory capacity to officials in other Government agencies which have responsibility for the administration of such programs. 3. Assist other Government agencies in the

preparation of written guides and procedures relating to allocations and priorities.

4. Keep State and local educational officials informed concerning the development and and operation of such

programs.

5. Render consultative service to State and local officials in securing the materials they need.

6. Keep officials of Federal agencies informed concerning the problems

which arise in connection with the administration of the program. Although the Office of Education may have no official responsibility in the administration of these programs, these projected activities of the Office will insure proper consideration of the problems of schools and colleges with regard to the need for materials.

The conservation of materials likely to be in short supply will involve the schools to a considerable extent. There are likely to be shortages in such items as transportation equipment, rubber, gasoline, fuels and oils, lumber and other building materials, metals, and textiles. The first step toward restrictions has already been taken by the issuance of Regulation No. 1 of the National Production Authority recently established by Executive Order in the Department of Commerce. This regulation, to which schools and colleges are subject, sets up controls to prevent the accumulation of excessive stocks of material.

The regulation defines what it calls a "practicable minimum working inventory" and provides that all agencies covered by the regulation shall hold inventories within specified limits. With certain exceptions, it specifically prohibits the receipt of such

materials which would place the inventory above the defined limit or ordering those which would place the inventory beyond this limit. It also requires an agency, for example, a local school system, to keep all records concerning inventories, receipts, deliveries, and the use of materials and provides that records must be made available to the National Production Authority on request. Most schools and colleges have not been in the habit of building up inventories which would exceed what the regula tion defines as the "practicable minimum working inventory;" consequently these regulations will not, at least at this time, work a hardship upon many institutions. It is possible, however, that other regulations may follow which will more seriously involve schools and colleges. As these developments occur your Chief State School Officer will be informed of them through our Defense Information Bulletin.

New Legislation on
Federally Affected Areas

Two laws recently passed by the Congress have direct bearing on defense activities in areas where Government installations have

caused major school problems. These measures not only are related to our steppedup defense program; they also have important implications for the long-term development of American education. At present they concern only a small proportion of the Nation's school districts; but if the defense effort is stepped up, more units of the school system will be involved. House bill 7940, now Public Law 874, provides Federal assistance for current expense to school systems overburdened by the activi ties of the Federal Government; and Senate bill 2317, now Public Law 815, provides financial assistance for school construction to similar school districts. Public Law 815 also provides for a Nation-wide survey of the need for school construction.

These measures are the result of long study by a subcommittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor with the

help of the staff of the Office of Education. The study showed that in 410 school districts school attendance had increased, since 1939, an average of 70 percent. In that school year these districts were educating more than 130,000 children who lived on nontaxable Federal property and about 140,000 whose parents lived on private property, but who were employed on nontaxable Federal property. A double burden has been placed on these communities by

two factors: (1) The sudden increases in school enrollments caused by Federal activ. ities, and (2) the loss of local school revenue resulting from the withdrawal from local tax rolls of substantial amounts of property. The study also revealed that the same districts included 250,000,000 acres of federally owned land with a valuation estimated at more than 132 billion dollars. It is estimated that taxation of this Federal property at prevailing rates would yield more than $193 million a year for current operating expenses.

Congress decided to approach this problem by determining the amount of Federal payments on the basis of the number of chil dren involved. First, the number of children to whose schooling the Federal Government ought to make a financial contribution is to be established. Second, the amount per child to be paid by the Federal Government for current expenses is to be determined by the amount per child which is normally derived from local tax sources in comparable communities in the State. The Federal Government is thus paying the local tax share of the cost of educating these children in accordance with prevailing standards of local tax support in the surrounding areas.

The appropriation currently available for allotment under Public Law 815 is not sufficient to meet the total need for funds under the statutory formulas. It will therefore be necessary to approve projects on the basis of the relative urgency of need. We shall cooperate fully with local and State school authorities in determining the urgency of such projects.

The Congress regarded both measures as somewhat experimental, and therefore set a terminal date on their operation. Public Law 874, providing Federal assistance for current expenses, will be in effect for 4 years, and the construction measure, 3. During this time the Office of Education will administer these measures under the terms of the laws and continuously study their operation with a view to correcting any inequi ties which may develop or suggesting revision of the laws to guarantee that the Government meets its full obligations to local districts burdened with financial obligation because of Federal activities.

In the effort to get this program of finan cial assistance promptly under way, all available resources of the Office have been placed at the service of the Director of this project. Forms, instructions, and procedures to follow in connection with the

application for help are in preparation. The Office staff will work closely with State and local school authorities, both in the administration of this program and in studying and evaluating its effectiveness and its long-term implications for American education. The policies and practices established under these laws will, I hope, serve as an example of the kind of cooperative effort educators throughout the Nation are capable of in solving significant educational problems, and, in this particular instance, in insuring American children the educational opportunity to which they are entitled.

Survey of School Construction Needs

One of these bills, Senate bill 2317 (Public Law 815), provides for a Nation-wide State-by-State survey of school construction needs for which the Congress appro priated $3,000,000 for grants-in-aid to State educational agencies to finance onehalf of the cost of conducting these surveys within the States.

Since it will be necessary to collect and evaluate certain data on a pattern sufficiently uniform to permit a Nation-wide report to the Congress, the Office of Education will provide consultative services and assist States in every possible way in the coordination of their planning and work.

The school facilities surveys will include an inventory of existing facilities, the need for additional facilities in relation to school population and district organization, the development of over-all State plans for school construction programs, and a study of the adequacy of State and local funds available for school construction.

But enactment of House bill 7940 and Senate bill 2317 in no way alters the fact that, as a Nation, we are facing a severe shortage of classroom space which will grow worse each year unless drastic steps are taken soon to overcome this serious deficiency in our school system. Makeshift classrooms, overcrowded plants, inadequate facilities-these existing condi tions greatly impair the quality of education, and it is the quality of the education our children receive today which will largely determine the quality of our citizens tomorrow. America cannot afford to handicap the education of her children by failing to provide adequate schools. The depression kept us from doing this in the thirties. World War II stopped school building in the forties. We cannot afford not to build schools now and in the years immediately

ahead unless the Nation is in imminent peril. Under a partial mobilization, such as we will doubtless face for the next several years, our educational system will be unable to make its essential contribution to national defense unless schools obtain additional classroom space and facilities.

Civil Defense

In the matter of civil defense the schools will be called upon for special services. On September 18, President Truman laid before Congress a "blueprint" for a vast civil defense program. As many of you know, this program drafted by the National Security Resources Board to alert the Nation to the possibilities of atomic attack provides an extensive mutual aid system involving thousands of workers, both paid and volunteer, at the national, State, and local levels.

Though a temporary Civil Defense Administration will probably serve until Congress acts on the Federal civil defense bill, it is intended that States and local communities will move ahead with their civil de fense planning now instead of waiting for national legislation and the dissemination of detailed information. Education clearly has a responsibility in both the initial planning and the execution of civil defense operations. Close working relationships are being maintained with other governmental agencies and with appropriate outside organizations on numerous phases of civil defense, and information will be sent to you as rapidly as it becomes aavilable.

In this connection, the Chairman of the National Security Resources Board has indicated that he contemplates, ultimately, the training of some 20,000,000 persons in firstaid procedures. To supplement this, many individuals will be needed in home care of the sick and injured. The American Red Cross has been delegated the responsibility for this great undertaking. It is one in which the schools can play a significant role. The Office of Education is cooperating closely with the Red Cross in the development of this training program insofar as the schools may be involved.

Impact on Teaching Staffs

The question which most troubles school administrators these days is, "What will be the effects of manpower mobilization on education?" Communications from all sections of the country indicate that teaching staffs at all levels of education and student bodies in the later high school and college

years are showing the effect of military mobilization. One State Commissioner of Education reports that approximately 2,000 teachers in his State are subject to call to the armed forces either as reservists or as draftees. Many staff members are in key positions in the defense program, such as vocational and industrial arts teachers, and no replacements are available.

At the moment we lack complete statistical data on the number of teachers throughout the country who are liable for military duty in the months ahead. But of this we are already sure: The elementary schools throughout the Nation can ill afford to lose a single teacher. Of the 300,000 teachers who left the profession during World War II, few have returned, and in the early postwar years only a trickle of teachers came from the colleges and universities. Hence in comparative terms, the teacher situation is far worse now than it was 10 years ago.

No improvement in this situation is in sight even if men are not removed from teaching for military service. Since the enrollments in elementary schools in 1957 will be 40 percent higher than in 1947, teacher recruitment should increase proportionately. That this will happen seems doubtful. There is a shortage of educational administrators and supervisors as well. It is difficult to see how elementary teaching staffs can be maintained if they are significantly reduced by military mobilization.

The heaviest impact on teacher staffs and, to some extent, on student bodies has come from the recall of reservists and national guardsmen. Considerations for delay in calling a reservist to active duty are based upon his current employment in a critical occupation necessary to a highly essential activity. Delays in call to active duty are made on an individual basis only, and the Defense Department has made it clear that under no circumstances will blanket delays for any given profession such as teaching be granted.

The Defense Department is guided in its actions on requests for deferment by the list of essential activities of the Department of Commerce and by the list of critical occupations of the Department of Labor. It must be emphasized that these lists are used as guides only and that each deferment is granted or withheld on an individual basis only.

The Commerce Department's list of essential activities embraces educational services

which include: “Establishments furnishing formal academic or technical courses, correspondence schools, commercial and trade schools, and libraries." The Department of Commerce lists as a critical occupation teachers of critical occupations only. These occupations tentatively include agronomists, architects, bacteriologists, biologists, botanists, chemists, dentists, engineers, geologists, mathematicians, metallurgists, physicists, and veterinarians, among others.

The total impact of Selective Service on teaching staffs is probably relatively small because those who are affected are nonveterans age 19 through 25, inclusive, only. Since many males of ages 24 and 25 are veterans of World War II persons selected to date have been primarily from ages 19 through 23, inclusive, which age groups

probably include relatively few male nities, the States, and the Federal Govern

teachers.

However, if you as a school administrator wish to take further steps to clarify the status of your teachers under the present Selective Service regulations, the place to go is to the local draft board. Let the members of the draft board know all the facts about your most pressing staff requirements and your most critical long-range needs. A number of the inquiries about teacher deferment which have been received in the Office of Education and in Selective Service headquarters deal with questions which can be answered only at the local level.

I have attempted to detail a few of the matters related to the defense effort to which educators will want to give attention during the critical period ahead. Mobilization for national defense involves the local commu

ment. As far as education is concerned it is imperative that the administration of educational programs for the national defense involve the cooperation of local, State, and national officials. In Washington we shall do everything possible to keep you informed about developments as quickly as they occur. You can be of critical assistance by organizing your local resources in the national interest, by making your resources and facilities available in the national effort, and in keeping the Office of Education informed concerning your planning and your need for help. Jointly the educators of the country will provide the intelligence, the training, and the skills needed in time of national need and indispensable to the continuation of our free society.

Citizens and Schools in the National Crisis

by The National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools

URING the 2 months which have fol

Dow

lowed the beginning of the conflict in Korea, the National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools has been asked many times what the role of citizens working for better schools should be in time of war or near war. In hundreds of communities in every State of the Union citizens are wondering whether they should press their efforts for better schools now.

To us it is encouraging that throughout the confused years which followed World War II Americans worked harder than ever to improve a public school system which already stands as one of the greatest social triumphs in history. Here and now in this country we have come closer than mankind ever has before to the goal of equal educational opportunity for all. But all thought ful citizens recognize that we still are a long way from perfection and that much remains to be done. The task has been intensified by the rapid and continued growth of our school population with the conse

quent development of serious inadequacies in school facilities and teachers. We still face the reality of an increase of 10 million school children during the next decade.

There are thus two compelling reasons for pressing the work for better education. One is that this work is yet far from finished. The second is that this work tests and measures the integrity of our own democratic purpose.

In reappraising the importance of this work in the light of current history, we believe it has gained rather than lost importance. The conflict in Korea is obviously a part of a much wider one which has been smoldering for many years and which cannot be expected to die down in the immedi ate future. While the early settlers in America could throw down their peacetime tools when threatened by attack, and take them up again when the danger had passed, we are faced with the more complex necessity of simultaneously continuing our constructive peacetime work and defending

ourselves during many long years of tension. If, by threatening us, our enemies were able to make us abandon the efforts necessary to maintain and improve our free society, they would by threats alone have won a major victory.

Of course, it will be necessary to adapt our plans for our schools to the immediate requirements of our expanding program for defense. But those who are in the fight for better schools should be alert to secure for our schools top priority in the new line-up of civilian activities that lie ahead.

Recently General Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, said: "An educated people is easy to lead but hard to drive; easy to govern but impossible to enslave." It is our public schools which must bear the main responsibility for maintaining an educated people here. It would be ironic indeed if we neglected them when we need them most.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »