V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 5 -

One may argue endlessly over precise quantitative appraisal of a
shortage in a given field at a given time (or whether a shortage exists
at all). But such appraisals of the moment are much less significant
than the long-term -- and still continuing -- upward trend in the demand
for trained manpower. And in any case it is important for purposes of
the present discussion to recognize that gross quantitative data on
supply of manpower conceal a much deeper and profoundly more diffi-
cult problem: a problem of quality. This is a problem that will pre-
occupy us throughout the Report.

It is important to emphasize that we are not basing our discussion
on arguable shortages of the moment. The demand for educated talent
is not an overnight development in our society. It has been coming for
a very long time. Certain critical manpower shortages of the past few
years have forced it on our attention rather abruptly, but it is anything
but a recent trend. Indeed, if we look back at 1910 and compare the
distribution of selected skills and occupations with those of today, the
trend becomes vividly clear:

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 6 -

Occupational Distribution of Labor Force*

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th colspan="2">per cent</th></tr><tr><th></th><th>1910</th><th>1955</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Professional and technical workers</td><td>4.4</td><td>9.8</td></tr><tr><td>Proprietors, managers and officials, excluding farm</td><td>6.5</td><td>11.1</td></tr><tr><td>Clerical workers</td><td>10.2</td><td>14.2</td></tr><tr><td>Skilled workers and foremen</td><td>11.7</td><td>14.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>32.8</td><td>49.2</td></tr></tbody></table>

The table illustrates the increase in the degree of preparation and training demanded of our labor force. If we take the occupational categories listed in this table as having in common considerable pre-requisites of skill or education, it is evident that whereas in 1910 these requirements were demanded of less than a third of our work force, by 1955 they were necessary for almost half the work force. And within the table, it may be noted that the increase in demand has been greatest for precisely these categories which require the highest competence and most extended training.

*Statistics for 1910 from America's Needs and Resources, Twentieth Century Fund, N.Y. 1947, p. 549. 1955 from Statistical Abstract of the U.S. 1956, p. 209. Note: 1955 figure for white labor force only. The

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 7 -

These long-term and deeply rooted trends are very different from
the rise and fall of demand in a given professional field from one year
to the next. This latter demand is at the mercy of a great variety of
circumstances in the manpower market. It is possible that in the near
future we shall actually experience an oversupply in certain categories
which now seem to be suffering shortages. This is not incompatible
with the long-term upward trend in demand for talent.

In this day of technologies which become antiquated overnight, it
is of course very hazardous to predict a favorable future for any given
occupational category. The broader the category the more possible it
is to predict a reasonably favorable future. One consequence of this
is that there will be economic advantage to the individual in acquiring
the kind of fundamental training which will enable him to range over
several occupational categories. Individuals so trained will find a
favorable market for their talents under most circumstances. The
individual more narrowly trained will be at the mercy of circumstance.

Some observers have feared that we will produce too many educated
men. But the dramatic examples we have of such overproduction have
been in societies where educated men have highly structured notions
of the job situations in which they may properly exercise their gifts.

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 8 -

Any society which produces large numbers of college graduates is obviously in considerable danger if these graduates are convinced that possession of a degree entitles them to a specific kind of job, at a specific level of prestige, and surrounded by a specific atmosphere of professional dignity. But this is certainly not true of the present day college graduate in the United States.

The trend toward the increase of skill and training needed by our labor force can be expected to continue in the years ahead. One of the most widely publicized aspects of this trend is the impact on the labor force of the so-called automation "revolution" whose first substantial effects will probably be felt in the next decade.

The exact degree to which self-regulating machinery will replace human labor, and the ultimate economic consequences of this replacement, are still matters for debate. But there is no debate over the immediate impact of automation on the level of occupational skills. The consensus of engineers and economists who have considered the problem is that automation will reduce the number of *routine* jobs and will replace them by more demanding tasks of supervision, maintenance and regulation. Thus automation tends new impetus to the trend away from unskilled labor and toward skilled and semi-skilled employments -- a trend that had

V - Report

February 26, 1958

-9-

already gathered considerable momentum with our spectacular gains in command of energy sources. We seem to be nearing the final elimination of the condition in which great armies of unskilled labor constitute the major human resource.

Automation, however, is not the only factor which will exercise an upward pressure on the level of ability demanded of our human resources. An equally powerful factor is the increasing high-level specialization of our environment. It is generally recognized that specialization has now reached the point at which no scientist can hope to encompass more than a small sector of scientific knowledge. An identical refinement and fragmentation of function and skill has taken place in other fields as well. Military strategy is no longer a matter of generalized knowledge but rests importantly on the advice of scholars and technical experts in matters far removed from military operations as such. The conduct of government depends heavily on the talents of the economist, the agronomist, the public health expert and similar highly specialized experts. Industrial psychologists, market research specialists, tax lawyers, accountants, personnel officers are indispensable to the successful operation of a large corporate enterprise.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 10 -

Whether this trend toward specialization is conducive to the develop-
ment of intellectual versatility and to the emotional range of a rich life is
another and by no means reassuring question. Specialization *need not*
handicap the individual in any way. Some of our wisest and most versa-
tile citizens have been specialists at one time in their lives; and there
are signs that this will be increasingly true in the future. But unfortunately
it is a fact that for many individuals specialization is a dead end rather
than an avenue to deeper and broader understanding. One could write a
substantial treatise on the extent to which specialization fosters in many
individuals a sense of impotence vis-a-vis general questions; or the extent
to which it may become a device for avoiding responsibility.

The trend toward intense specialization creates an extraordinary
demand for gifted generalists -- men with enough intellectual and tech-
nical competence to deal with the specialists and enough breadth to play
broader roles -- whether as managers, governors, teachers, interpreters
or critics. Considering the complex role played by such individuals, it
should not be surprising to find that such individuals will be drawn
increasingly from the ranks of those whose education and experience
have included both depth and breadth -- who have specialized but have
not allowed them to become buried in their specialty.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 11 -

But such large questions must not divert us from our present discussion. Suffice it to say there can be no doubt of the increased pressure on our level of skills and capacities which the rapid rise of specialization is bringing about.

To this must now be added the effect of yet another contemporary trend: the recognized value of planned discovery. Discovery is no longer considered a matter of mere good fortune; it has become a necessity in field after field -- business, pure and applied science, medicine, and military affairs. The search for knowledge is now pursued by organized and systematic research on a large scale.

Two distinct pressures have led to the high estimation of research. First is the awareness that we stand at the threshold of "breakthrough" progress in a dozen fields and the consciousness of the immense gains to be won by each new step beyond the frontiers of knowledge. It is to research -- which is to say, to the efforts of the men and women who are probing the boundaries of thought and technical experience -- that we look for new technologies and for new glimpses of the universe.

But a second reason is equally compelling. This is the necessity of meeting the Soviet threat of military superiority. It is unfortunately a fact that the chances for national survival may hinge on the vigor of our research effort; and this creates a national reliance on intellectual effort that is without parallel in history.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 12 -

And it is not only in research fields that there is a premium on men who can move beyond the limits of present practice. In a time of breathtaking technological and social changes there is a pervasive need - particularly at every level of leadership -- for men who understand change and can cope with change. One of our great strengths as a people has been our flexibility and adaptability under the successive waves of change that have marked our history. Never have we needed the trait more than today, and particularly among our ablest men. It is for this reason that in cultivating talent we should prepare our best young people " to meet an unknown need" rather than measure them for "slots" already identified.

The advances of science and technology have been paralleled by the increasing complexity of social organization. It is in the nature of a complex society that it depends simultaneously on the imaginative fulfillment of a hundred tasks. If a relative handful of scientists seem to bear a disproportionate share of the burden today, a handful of diplomats may be called upon to do so tomorrow, and the next day an equally small number of doctors, teachers, political leaders. A nation cannot set its value standards by the demands of crisis alone. It must also cultivate its arts and its intellectual pursuits, its civic virtue and its physical well-being and not least its capacity to meet the daily flux of events.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 13 -

Thus a society depends on a full quota of achievement at many levels. We cannot content ourselves with frantic efforts to meet specific shortages. Not only must we have wise and capable leadership in all areas of our national life, cultural as well as political, ethical as well as technological; not only must we have competent and highly motivated people in a wide range of key professions: we must also have an alert and informed citizenry. Among the tasks which have increased most frighteningly in complexity is the task of the ordinary citizen who wishes to discharge his civic responsibilities intelligently.

There are certain kinds of talent and imaginative thinking on which we are particularly dependent today. It is now generally recognized that we must look to our scientists for major contributions not only to our survival but to the continued vitality of our society. But our dependence on scientists is only a dramatic example of a more general dependence upon innovative talent which is in fact characteristic of many areas of national life today. Whether it is the general capabilities needed to man our industrial apparatus, or the more highly trained abilities required to staff the specialized functions of our society, or the supremely important achievements of creative thought, the need is for an unprecedented degree of individual effort and accomplishment.

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 14 -

In this context it becomes clear that the achievement of our objectives with respect to the cultivation of human resources is almost synonymous with our capacity to maintain the strength and vitality and growth potential of our society. At this level there is no conflict between our survival needs of the moment and our enduring needs as a society.

Before leaving this discussion, which has touched so heavily on the value of research, it is worth noting that a great many of the questions covered in this report—questions of human capacities, human motivations, human learning—are themselves seriously in need of systematic study. RESEARCH ON human behavior should have a high place in our list of priorities.

V - Report
February 26, 1958

III - EXCELLENCE IN A DEMOCRACY

It is now widely recognized that our society has given too little attention to the individual of unusual talent or potentialities. To make such an assertion is not to deplore the unprecedented time and money we have devoted to raising the general level of achievement. Our kind of society demands the maximum development of individual potentialities at every level of ability; and it will serve no purpose to replace our neglect of the gifted by a neglect of the generality. We are all too prone to such wild swings of the pendulum in our national life. We must learn to view these matters in some sort of embracing perspective which will permit us to repair one omission without creating others.

One reason we have difficulty in attending to our ablest young people is that as a people we do not like to be explicit about the fact that individuals differ in general capacity. This is understandable. The reason we are reluctant to label individual differences in native capacity is that native capacity holds a uniquely important place in our scheme of things.

It must never be forgotten that ours is one of relatively few societies in the history of the world in which performance is a primary determinant of status. In a stratified society, performance is not an important factor in establishing the individual's status; as a result, he can afford to be less deeply concerned about his native capacity. For every step that a society takes away from a system of traditionally determined status and towards a

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 16 -

system in which performance is the chief determinant of status, the
individual will be increasingly concerned about his native capacity.
In our society the individual's future depends on an unprecedented
degree upon his own performance.

Of course, we are oversimplifying matters greatly in using such
a term as "native capacity." There are all kinds of native capacity.
That is a point to which we shall return later. But for complex reasons,
Americans see appraisals of "intelligence," however defined, as total
judgments on the individual and as central to his self-esteem. Some
critics note that we discriminate nicely between excellence and mediocrity
in athletics, but refuse to be similarly precise about difference in
intelligence; and they attribute this to the fact that we are more seriously
concerned with athletic ability than with intelligence. Nothing could be
further from the truth. We can afford, emotionally speaking, to be candid
and coldly objective in judgments of athletic ability precisely because we
do not take these as total judgments on the individual and not necessarily
central to his self-esteem.

We would be guilty of even graver oversimplification if we seemed
to be suggesting that native capacity were the sole ingredient in superior
performance. Excellence, as we shall later have occasion to note, is a
product of ability and motivation and character. And the more one studies
high performance in the dust and heat of daily life, the more one is likely
to be impressed with the contribution made by the latter two ingredients.

- 17 -

V - Report

February 26, 1958

great
Any educational system is, among other things, a *strong* sorting
out process. There is overwhelming evidence of a determination on the
part of the American people that this sorting out process be carried out
mercifully and generously rather than ruthlessly, rigidly, or mechanically.

So far so good. But anyone familiar with American education today
can cite instances in which generosity and the quality of mercy have
produced confusion in educational objectives and just about nullified the
sorting out process. Such examples are a legitimate cause for concern.

These considerations lead into the very core of our political
philosophy and have the most profound implications for our future.

At the heart of the matter is a seeming paradox in democracy as we
know it. On the one hand it is the form of society which says most
convincingly, "Let the best man win," and rewards winners regardless
of origin. On the other hand it is the form of society which gives losers
the widest latitude in rewriting the rules of the contest. No one who has
not thought long and hard about these paradoxical facts is in a position
to understand the tug of war between equality and excellence in a democracy.
When the rewriting of the rules is prompted by the standards of fair play, by
elementary consideration of justice, by basic value judgments as to what
sort of a "best man" the society wants, democracy can have no quarrel with
it. Indeed, it is the core process of a democracy. But when the rewriting
of the rules is designed to banish excellence, to rule out distinguished
attainment, to inhibit spirited individuals, then all who pray for the continued
vitality of democracy must protest.

- 18 -

V - Report

February 26, 1958

Every democracy _must_ encourage high individual performance.

If it does not then it closes itself off from the mainsprings of its dynamism and talent and imagination; and the traditional democratic invitation to the individual to realize his full potentialities becomes meaningless. More, perhaps, than any other form of government, a democracy must maintain what Ralph Barton Perry has called "an express insistence upon quality and distinction."

The eighteenth century philosophers who made equality a central term in our political lexicon never meant to imply that men are equal in all respects. Nor do Americans today take such a view. It is possible to state in fairly simple terms the views concerning equality which would receive most widespread endorsement in our country today. The most fundamental of these views is simply that in the final matters of human existence all men are equally worthy of our care and concern. Further, we believe that men should be equal in enjoyment of certain legal, civil and political rights. They should be, as the phrase goes, equal before the law.

But men are unequal in their native capacities and their motivations, and therefore in their attainments. In elaborating our national views of equality, the most widely accepted means of dealing with this problem has been to emphasize _equality of opportunity_. The great advantage of the conception of equality _and_ of opportunity is that it candidly recognizes in differences in endowment and motivation and accepts the certainty of differences in achievement. By allowing free play to these differences

V --Report
February 26, 1958

- 19 -

it preserves the freedom to excel which counts for so much in terms
of individual aspiration, and has produced so much of mankind's greatness.

At the same time one must admit that the conception of equality
of opportunity has its limitations and ambiguities. In practice it means
an equal chance to compete within the framework of goals and the structure
of rules established by the society in question; and this framework tends
to favor certain kinds of people with certain kinds of gifts. This is
unavoidable, but it is only proper that it be recognized. We must also
recognize that in a society in which there are substantial differences from
one family to another in wealth, learning, and concern for education, the
formal "equality of opportunity" represented by free schooling may never
erase the tremendous variations in opportunity represented by home
background. In other words, we cannot assume that we have put our
perplexities behind us when we assert our devotion to equality of
opportunity.

But the important thing to recognize is that our conception of
equality is not in conflict with the pursuit of excellence.

In the perspective of history it is not too difficult to see why
the notion of excellence has not enjoyed unqualified popularity among
the people at large. In the days when it was a genuinely live issue
whether our society was to be governed by a tightly knit elite or by
"the people," proponents of "government by the few" laid heavy
emphasis on the need for excellence, and greeted every gain by the people

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 20 -

with the fearful cry that "quality" was endangered -- whether it be
quality of government, of education, of culture or of social life. It is
understandable, then, that proponents of government by the many should
have grown morbidly sensitive to pleas in behalf of excellence.

But today the very terms of the old argument are irrelevant. The
notion of a real struggle for power between the "elite" and the "masses"
has an archaic, storybook sound to it. The identifiable elite of an earlier
day has given place to dozens of leadership groups -- in industry, labor,
politics, agriculture, science, communications, art, education, religion,
and the military. Each of these leadership groups is fluid in membership,
each is accountable to one or another segment of "the people"; and no one
of these groups recognizes any of the others as of superior status. And
just as the old "elite" has disappeared, so the old "masses" have been
replaced by a literate electorate which is organized in a thousand ways for
a thousand purposes, and which exercises unprecedented political power,
not as a "mass" but through its varied instrumentalities -- labor unions,
farm groups, political blocs, veterans' organizations, churches, and so
forth.

In this radically altered context, it is a grave mistake to assume
that every argument for excellence is a concealed argument for an elite
class in the old sense. We can -- and must -- put that anachronistic
debate behind us. A democracy, no less than every other form of
society, must foster excellence if it is to survive. And it should not

V - Report
February 26, 1958

allow the emotional scars of old battles to confuse it on this point.
Democracy will have passed an important milestone of maturity when
those who are most enthusiastic proponents of a democratic way of life
are also the most vigorous proponents of excellence.

But it will have to be a conception of excellence consonant with
our belief that the moral worth of the individual is independent of
achievement. Human dignity and worth should only be assessed in terms
of those qualities of mind and spirit that are within the reach of every
human being. And it will have to be a conception of excellence which
embraces many kinds of achievement at many levels. There is no single scale
or simple set of categories in terms of which to measure excellence. There is
excellence in abstract intellectual activity, in art, in music, in managerial
activities, in craftsmanship, in human relations, in technical matters.
And as we have said, motivation and qualities of character contribute
as importantly to any and all of these as does high native capacity.

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 22 -

IV - THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

The formal educational system, of course, offers only a small part of the purposeful education that goes on in a society. Family, church and school are the social institutions which share the broadest responsibility for education. But in a sense every organization, every institution within a society is constantly teaching its members, constantly remolding their behavior, contributing to their development: in childhood it may be the scout leader, the playground director, the cop on the corner; in later years the employer, the union, the mass media.

It is hardly necessary to stress here the extreme importance of family life in providing the emotional nurture and moral guidance the youngster needs if he is to develop fully as a person. And it goes without saying that social circumstances which disrupt or degrade the quality of family life put in hazard this all-important emotional and moral nurture.

The social agencies, religious or secular, that concern themselves with the integrity of family life are in the long run insuring the soundness of the human material which will flow into our schools. In the same category belong the good efforts of individuals and organizations who concern themselves with the physical and mental health of

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 23 -

children. And here too one must list the contributions of those farsighted individuals who have fought so hard to provide for the adequate education of our young women. It is the young woman who largely creates the atmosphere of the home.

The church, the settlement house, the day nursery, the supervised playground, the boys' club, the Boy or Girl Scouts, and many other agencies contribute importantly to the process by which a healthy society delivers at the door of the school a reasonably healthy, reasonably law-abiding, reasonably tractable child. As some of the schools in our great cities have learned to their sorrow, if society delivers youngsters too warped, too criminal, too intractable, there is little the school can do to save itself from havoc.

Seen in this light, even the city planners working on slum clearance and the governmental agencies engaged in public assistance programs are contributing to the conservation of those human resources which are the school's raw materials.

But the important contributions of these out-of-school influences to the emotional and moral life of the child are reasonably well known and understood. Less widely recognized is the fact that these out-of-school influences have rather considerable effect upon the strictly

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 24 -

intellectual motivations and academic fitness of the young person. We
refer elsewhere in the report to the fact that each year some 200,000
young people with sufficient aptitude to do well in college fail to go to
college. There are a great many different reasons why such youngsters
do not go on, but for a substantial number the primary reason is that
their family and neighborhood environment have not provided them with
the sort of motivations, the sort of values, which conduce to educational
enthusiasm.

This represents a talent loss at the level of college entrance.
Unquestionably comparable losses occur at earlier stages in the educa-
tional system. We shall return to this point later when we consider the
talent lost to society through economic disadvantage.

In a brief report such as this we cannot possibly do justice to
these varied influences which play upon the individual. That we do not
deal with them at greater length does not imply a low estimate of their
significance. One can only say a few things in a report such as this
and we have chosen to center our attention on the formal educational
system.

Our educational apparatus is not only the primary mechanism for
identifying talent, but the primary instrumentality for the nurture of

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 25 -

talent. Not only what our young people are taught, but how they are
taught, what attitudes towards self-education are implanted in them, what
conscious and unconscious estimations of learning and of excellence they
acquire are all matters for which our school system must assume a basic
social responsibility.

In this country we have always told one another, sometimes with
an all-too-shallow piety, that education is a vital element in the strength
of our society. The times have grimly underscored the truth of that view.
We can no longer merely repeat it to one another: we must explore its full
implications, with all of the vigor and devotion we can muster. If we are
truly concerned to nurture talent we must recognize that the most power-
ful instrument for that task is a vital educational system; and we must
admit that one major source of talent loss today is the existence in many
areas of poor educational facilities and slovenly educational efforts.

Our schools are overcrowded, understaffed, ill-equipped. In
order to correct these conditions, the schools need more money. They
need greatly increased public support and attention. They also need
something more difficult to achieve, something that cannot be bought
with money: a bold and vigorous re-examination of objectives, of
current practices, of patterns of organization, of educational technology.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 26 -

We need many, many more teachers, but we also must learn how to make
more imaginative and more effective use of the teachers we have. We
need greatly expanded facilities but we also must achieve a more en-
lightened approach to the design and use of facilities.

In the past 75 years we have heaped heroic assignments upon our
educators. Consider the fact that in the years between 1870 and 1950,
while our population was increasing somewhat more than three times our
school population was increasing approximately a hundredfold! We have
taken into the school system a greater proportion of our youngsters than
has any other nation and we keep more of them in the system longer than
any other nation. At the same time that we have forced this astonishing
expansion upon the system, we have pressed our educators to include
an incredible variety of fare in the curriculum, to take over more and
more of the functions of the home, and to accept a sense of responsibility
for every psychic or civic crisis involving individuals below the age of
consent.

That our educators did not founder completely under these chaotic
pressures is impressive. That they may be credited with Gargantuan
achievements in creating a system of universal education is a simple
fact. And that their failures are in some measure failures of the American
people is undeniable.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 27 -

In urging our educators on to new challenges, we must give due
credit to the great achievements already recorded. In that spirit, we can
without self-castigation or recrimination, demand much of ourselves and
much of our educators in the days ahead. For we do not wish to absolve
our educators of the mistakes they have made, nor do we wish to absolve
ourselves. And the fateful question is not whether we have done well,
or whether we are doing better than we have done in the past, but whether
we are meeting the stern demands of the times. For much remains to be
done. We need mention only a few of the most spectacular needs.

In the fall of 1957, the shortage of public school classrooms
stood at 140,000. There were 1,937,000 pupils in excess of "normal
classroom capacity." Some elementary and high schools and colleges
have found it impossible to hire well-qualified teachers in such basic
subjects as English, languages, and social sciences; some have even
had to drop chemistry, physics and mathematics from their curriculum
since there were no teachers to teach them.

This problem of undereducation threatens to become more severe
in the years ahead. For by then the population bulge of the future will
press even more urgently on our already scarce facilities. Elementary
school enrollments, which rose from 20,000,000 in the 1940's to some

V - Report

February 26, 1958

-23-

30,000,000 today, will reach about 34,000,000 by 1960. By 1969 high
schools will be deluged with 50-70 per cent more students than they
now can barely accommodate; by 1975, our colleges and universities
will face at least a doubling and in some cases a tripling of present
enrollment.

A. Teachers

At the same time that this unprecedented demand will materialize,
our supply of teachers is apt to fall even further behind. One figure
widely quoted is that the number of new school teachers needed in the
coming decade is equal to about 50 per cent of all the four year college
graduates of every kind in that same period. These figures are slightly
misleading, because recent college graduates are not the only source
of teachers; but nevertheless, the comparison suggests the general
magnitude of the problem. Since only about 20 per cent of college
graduates enter school teaching, the severity of the shortage is apparent.
At college levels, the teacher shortage is even more critical. The number
of new college teachers needed to 1970 is roughly three times the total
number of Ph.D. graduates likely to be turned out in the same period.

The danger of a decline in the quality of our corps of teachers
is obvious. Even today it is in need of upgrading: as of 1956, some

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 29 -

33 per cent of elementary teachers did not hold an A.B. degree. More
than 21 per cent of all public school teachers had less than 4 years of
college preparation. At the level of college teaching, far from upgrading
our corps of teachers, we are slipping backward. The National Education
Association reports that "since 1953-54, holders of the doctor's degree
among newly employed full-time teachers have decreased 25.2 per cent
and those with less than the master's degree have increased 26.9 per
cent."

With the impending shortage, this may become worse. If not
enough highly qualified teachers are available, less qualified ones will
be hired. If even the poorly qualified ones run out, incompetents will
be drawn into the system. This decline of quality will not always reveal
itself clearly in the statistical charts. But our children will get the full
impact of it.

Obviously the need to recruit more and better teachers comes
close to holding the highest priority in current efforts to strengthen
education. We must begin by admitting the present low status of
teaching as a profession, and agree that until we make it a more
attractive calling, both in terms of working conditions and financial
rewards, few will seek it out.

V - Report

February 26, 1958

- 30 -

Teacher recruitment would become infinitely more effective if everyone concerned approached it in a more positive and indomitable spirit. College teachers at every level can do much to interest promising youngsters in teaching as a career. Those actually engaged in teacher training can recruit aggressively and with a determined eye to quality. School boards and college trustees can raise salaries, improve working conditions and in a thousand ways make teaching a more attractive profession.

The recruitment of teachers at elementary and secondary levels is difficult enough; recruitment of college teachers is even more difficult. A much longer period of training is called for; and the graduate schools, which are the primary suppliers of college teachers, have been more interested in their research and research training functions than in teacher preparation. Also, men and women sufficiently gifted and well-trained to be college teachers often have a high market value, so that they cannot be kept in the academic world.

The college teacher occupies a peculiarly strategic role in the production of high talent manpower. Elementary and secondary school teachers are taught by college teachers. Indeed, our entire supply of trained talent -- scientists, engineers, teachers, physicians, writers,

V = Report
February 26, 1958

executives, lawyers -- all pass through the hands of the college teachers
Any failure either in supply or quality of college teachers will reflect itself
in the total output of trained talent. The irony of the teacher shortage is
that precisely those parts of the non-academic world, which are most in
need of educated talent - i.e. most in need of the product of the
universities -- compete vigorously with the universities for the manpower
necessary to produce educated talent.

One important step in the recruitment of superior teachers would
be a great expansion in the number of graduate fellowships for able indi-
viduals preparing for teaching at any level. Such programs, should be
supported from all available sources of funds -- the colleges and
universities themselves, local school districts, philanthropically-
inclined individuals, foundations, state governments, and the federal
government.

Problems of recruitment are inseparable from problems of prepara-
tion. If the programs for the preparation of teachers are rigid, formalistic
and shallow, they will drive away the ablest minds as fast as they are
recruited. Unfortunately, preparation for pre-college teaching has
come perilously close to that condition. Indeed in some states the
requirements for certification as a teacher are such as to make it

V - Report
February 26, 1958

- 32 -

exceedingly unlikely that individuals with a first-class education would
even apply --or be eligible if they did apply!

Fortunately, there appears to be a lively movement to correct
these difficulties. The Educational Policies Commission has recently
re-emphasized that "every teacher should have both a liberal education
and a knowledge in depth of the field in which he teaches." Colleges
of teacher education are re-examining their curricula with a new
awareness of the problem. Groups concerned with teacher certification
are reviewing their regulations in a similar spirit. The liberal arts
colleges are once again accepting some responsibility for teacher
preparation. Hopefully, all of these groups may collaborate to strengthen
and enrich the process of teacher preparation; to clear away the deadwood
of formalistic requirements; and to provide a variety of stimulating and
challenging paths to pre-college teaching.

As for the preparation of college teachers, the problem is one of
reshaping graduate education to meet the urgent need. We need not
dwell on the details of necessary reform. The most farsighted leaders
in the graduate schools have pointed out with great force the conditions
which make graduate education an interminable process for many students,
which degrade the Master's degree, and which belittle the importance