Eisenhower on Education

President Eisenhower's emergency message to Congress on federal aid to school construction is not only more generous than his program of eleven months ago, but far more realistic. The financial recommendations are no longer completely inadequate, and the conditions which make a locality eligible for aid no longer approach federal control. The only string which the President ties to the federal grants of $250,000,000 a year for five years is need. Although the bill, which also promises federal purchase of $750,000,000 of school construction bonds, failed to meet either educators' hopes or Democratic proposals, it was definitely a step in the right direction.

The plan, however, has several weak aspects. The most obvious drawback is the size of the allocation, hardly enough to fulfill Eisenhower's wishful thought that the bill will meet "current and future needs." Whether the Administration's program or Democratic Congressman Kelly's proposal for $400,000,000 a year in direct grants is the more realistic is obscured by politics and lack of statistics. Few, however, will deny that schools could use the extra money of the Democrat's proposal. Another criticism is leveled at the President's message by several liberal legislators who would attach a rider to the bill banning aid to segregated schools. Such a rider would not only be misplaced, but would mean death by filibuster for the program.

More important and more basic than the questions of amount and segregation, is the dire shortage of teachers. Though intimately connected with school construction, it is badly neglected in the President's proposals. His only offering is "my earnest hope that ... the states and communities will give increasing attention to this taproot of all education ..." It is good to be earnest, but far more important to enact legislation and allocate funds when the nation's schools are short 180,000 teachers. The shortage of teachers and trained personnel can be met only by the federal government. "States and communities" are either unable or unwilling.

Eisenhower's glossing over the need for Federal action in the teaching field is accompanied by a paucity of concrete recommendations in the closely-related field of teacher-producing higher education. Although he notes, "Within ten years we may expect three students in our colleges and universities for every two who are there now, he goes no further in his suggestions than the setting up of an investigating committee. As any college admissions officer would tell the President, the time for investigations and conferences is over. The time for aid to higher education is now, not ten years from now.

The President's message, though it has obvious shortcomings, is encouraging to both parents and educators. It would be even more encouraging if Congress would not only follow Eisenhower's proposals, but also extend and enlarge them.