Puerto Ricans, for example, are coming across the Delaware River, from New York and New Jersey, into eastern Pennsylvania. Special problems exist in more places than the cities of over 300,000, although the largest cities could use every bit of the money specified in that section.

We have another problem in what we call the distressed school districts. We are trying very hard in Pennsylvania to do something about putting such school districts in the hard and soft coal regions on a firm financial basis. I am sure, Senator Randolph, there is such a problem down in your State. For 15 months there has been a law which, it is hoped, will enable the State to solve some of the complex issues in the distressed districts.

Recently I spent time trying to find some money for teachers who haven't been paid for 4 months. Occasionally teachers haven't been paid for 8 and 9 months. We are very sure that our department of public instruction will take advantage of this part of section 109.

Pennsylvania was one of the first States to use NDEA funds. So many teachers attended the classes held under NDEA auspices that the New York Times even ran a story about the large number.

IMPACTED AREAS

The change in aid for impacted areas has been discussed to some extent. Our department of public instruction gave me a memorandum, about 6 pages, that had been sent to them. I shall not speak on the theory of that memorandum, but I would like to raise a question about the practical aspects of these changes.

In Pennsylvania, by the 1959 report, 98 school districts were involved, which were entitled to almost $4 million. That was approximately 210 percentage of current expenditures, but 24/10 percent of a budget can make a great difference in the quality of education. I am afraid that, if this problem of impacted areas is not studied and revised, we may find some new distressed districts which lost more under the changes in aid for impacted school districts than they gained under this bill, and which will not be able to make the kind of change in the local tax structure that is necessary.

In conclusion, I would like to say that we think the total appropriation in this bill is not high. The task force report was more ambitious. We know that some people consider the amount too large. It will not solve Pennsylvania's problems. It will be no temptation to Pennsylvania to reduce expenditures, even if that were allowed in the law, but we do believe that it will speed up certain programs that Pennsylvania school districts already have in mind.

in

It will be a decided step forward, not only in principle, but actually program.

Senator MORSE. Miss Root, I want to thank you very much for this excellent statement and I will say you have been of great assistance, especially in your testimony on one point that Senator Clark has been bringing out time and time again here and in the Senate itself. That point is that every State, including Pennsylvania, has areas where Federal aid is sorely needed, and when you talk about what you called the distressed school districts you support your Senator completely.

I was quite surprised to hear you say that you have some districts in Pennsylvania or have had districts in Pennsylvania where teachers have not been paid for 8 and 9 months.

Miss RooT. Oh, that is not new this year.

Senator MORSE. Well, it is new to me. I judge from your statement in Pennsylvania there is no central State emergency fund?

Miss Rooт. Oh, yes. We have had an emergency fund. It used to be bigger. It is only about $300,000 for this biennium and $300,000 in the 1961-62 appropriation bill.

Senator CLARK. Mr. Chairman, if I can interject briefly, under our system we pay a State instruction subsidy to all school districts on an equalization basis. So the poorer districts get quite a deal more than the richer districts, but the ceiling on that subsidy is 5,800 per teaching units and some of these places like Fayette County, for example, where such a very high percentage of the population is not only out of work but on relief, the local school districts just cannot raise the money to keep their teachers.

Senator MORSE. I see the point.

Miss Root. Most of the districts are in the hard and soft coal areas with a very few outside. These districts have been in a bad position ever since tax revenue from coal companies fell off and the income of miners dropped.

Senator MORSE. I want to thank you for the whole statement but especially for this emphasis because we have had some discussion already in the hearing about so-called richer States of which Pennsylvania is always cited as an example. As the Senator from Pennsylvania has pointed out, these richer States, so-called, have their individual school problems with regard to which the Federal aid program would be of great assistance.

Miss ROOT. Pennsylvania pays a very high percentage of school support from State aid. It is up to about 50 percent.

Senator CLARK. The highest in the country.

Miss Root. Yes. On which, I am sure, the Governor's committee is going to say much.

Senator CLARK. I know that Senator Javits is anxious to get away, so I have no questions. I would like to commend the witness on a fine statement and say that I agree with everything she says except the nice things she said about me.

Miss Roor. Thank you very much.

Senator MORSE. It is typical of his modesty, but I will join you in those statements.

(The prepared statement of Miss Margaret Root follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARGARET ROOT, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE PENNSYLVANIA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS

My name is Margaret Root. I am executive secretary of the Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers, which is affiliated with the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO. Some people look askance at teachers who concern themselves, as we are doing, with legislation affecting education. We believe that as teachers we have a responsibility to our pupils that extends beyond what we can do for them in the classroom. Also we have a responsibility as citizens and parents to speak out on the problems of which we have direct knowledge.

We endorse the declaration of purpose of S. 1021, Federal subsidies to the States for "urgently needed public elementary and secondary school facilities, to employ needed additional public school teachers and pay them adequate salaries, and to undertake special projects directed to special or unique educational problems or opportunities."

There are several advantages in making the appropriation available for buildings and for teachers' salaries. Those who emphasize States rights should approve because the bill would give them a choice. Some States may have a greater need for construction and others for improving instruction. Pennsylvania, for example, has done more than any other State toward subsidizing local building programs, contributing about $55 million in this fiscal biennium. There are still building problems connected with reducing the number of small schools, with replacing obsolete structures, with increased enrollment, and with shifting enrollment within school districts.

But Pennsylvania is directing more of its attention to improving instruction. For example, the liberal arts and subject matter requirements for provisional certification are being stepped up; college entrance board examinations will be required for admission to all State teachers' colleges in 1961. A larger per

centage of able young people must be attracted into teaching, or those two concrete steps will make little difference. Salary is still an important attraction in teaching as in other occupations; that improvement of salary is tied in with improvement of instruction, no one denies.

PENNSYLVANIA'S FINANCIAL COMPLICATIONS

Pennsylvania faces difficulties in raising salaries to those of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. With the highest rate of unemployment, State revenues have declined while needs rise. Many school districts are handicapped by the same conditions in raising local taxes. We appreciate the leadership of the President and of the Congress in combating unemployment in general, and in distressed areas in particular. Eventually, such programs should be of great value, but meanwhile educational opportunities must be improved today or a school generation will lose out.

Pennsylvania has another problem in raising taxes. The cost of our public school system had more than doubled in the last decade, of which cost the Commonwealth pays half. It wants to improve schools, but does not want to drive industry or residents across State lines to lower taxes. That is one reason for supporting Federal aid to schools.

Some citizens of our Commonwealth may oppose this bill because Pennsylvania, in spite of its unemployment, will receive only the minimum the first year and little more in the 2 succeeding years. Some resentment will probably be expressed because more money will go to States that have drawn our industry away by lower wages and taxes. But we of the Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers are more aware than business of the educational problems in our classrooms due to inmigration.

SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL PROJECTS

Under section 109 five of the special educational projects, for which a State shall set aside 10 percent of its allotment, would be of great value to Pennsylvania for

(1) remedial or special instructional programs or services for pupils having special language or adjustment problems;

(2) programs or services for adapting curriculums to the needs of deprived or disadvantaged pupils;

(3) programs or services for pupils from inmigrant or unusually mobile families;

(4) programs for coordinating the school system planning and programs in the area served by the local education agency, with the planning and programs of other public or private nonprofit agencies dealing with problems related to the alleviation of the same deteriorated or depressed areas and of the families and children residing therein;

(5) programs to encourage and stimulate educational excellence, including programs for exceptionally gifted children.

Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have small Ford Foundation grants for projects of the first four types now, but could use many times those amounts. Harrisburg and Chester have similar problems. Puerto Rican pupils are found in various communities along the eastern border of the Commonwealth.

Pennsylvania, under legislation enacted about 15 months ago, is making a determined effort to put distressed school districts, chiefly in the hard and soft coal areas, on a firmer financial basis. Much remains to be done to increase educational opportunity in those areas.

We have no hesitation in predicting that our department of public instruction would take advantage of this provision with the same record speed it made use of NDEA funds. Likewise, we can predict that teachers would accept with enthusiasm good courses to help them carry on such special projects. The attendance of Pennsylvania teachers at NDEA courses in mathematics, science. and foreign languages was so good as to get a story in the New York Times. In general, States and local districts and teachers do not deliberately fail in these special areas; they have not had the funds.

AID FOR IMPACTED AREAS

We are concerned about the proposed amendments to Public Law 874 in aid for federally impacted areas. According to the 1959 report, 98 Pennsylvania school districts were entitled to $3,805,576 or 2.4 percent of their total current expenditures. Compared with California's 4 percent of current expenditures in 495 eligible districts, Pennsylvania would feel less impact from these amendments. But 2.4 percent of an operating budget can make a big difference to quality of instruction. It is conceivable that some school districts would receive less Federal aid under S. 1021 than under Public Law 874. We can foresee a new kind of distressed school district that, falling short of 4 or 5 or 6 percent as the requirement rises, cannot make local tax adjustments in time to offset the loss.

Pennsylvania's superintendent of public instruction has spoken publicly in favor of Federal aid for teachers' salaries and we take him at his word. But teacher can include anyone from the recent graduate to the highest paid superintendent. We urge you to make sure that this money actually reaches down to the classroom teacher.

Many of us were disappointed in the total appropriation of this bill in comparison with the Horde report; others think it too high. It may be the best compromise attainable. The amount will not solve Pennsylvania's problems and it offers no temptation to reduce expenditures statewide (prohibited in the bill). But it will enable Pennsylvania to move faster on improving the quality of education.

Senator MORSE. Miss Pincus, president of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, is the next witness.

I am glad to have you with us, Miss Pincus. You may proceed in you own way.

STATEMENT OF CELIA PINCUS, PRESIDENT OF THE PHILADELPHIA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS

Miss PINCUS. Thank you, Senator Morse, and members of the committee, and especially our own Senator Clark, if you will allow me that privilege, since he is a Philadelphian like me and has been a fearless fighter for the right in many directions and most especially in the area of education.

I am Celia Pincus, the president of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers, AFLCIO.

I teach in Jay Cooke Junior High School, and the reason I mention it is because it is an unusual school where the pupils represent a wide range of home backgrounds and abilities. Whether you are educators or not, it might interest you to know we have children whose IQ's range from 70 to 140, and in case you think that it costs half as much to educate a child with an IQ of 70, it doesn't.

It often costs three times as much as it does to educate a normal child.

Senator CLARK. Mr. Chairman, could I interject at this point, because the witness is an old friend and I am sure she won't mind.

I know that Senator Javits is very anxious to get away to another meeting. I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if Miss Pincus' address, if she would be willing, might be printed in full in the record and then if she would just, for a couple of minutes, give us the benefit of her emphasis on that part of her statement which has not already been covered. It would be very helpful. It has to do largely with the problem of enrollment from migrant groups, the dropout problem, and the need for an increase in teachers' salaries in the area from which she comes which is Philadelphia.

Senator MORSE. If that meets with the pleasure of the witness, that is the procedure we will follow.

Mr. Reporter, will you please see to it that Miss Root's statement is printed at the close of her testimony, and then will you see that Miss Pincus' statement is also printed at the close of her comments?

You may proceed in your own way.

Miss PINCUS. Thank you, Senator. I want to emphasize for Philadelphia that at the White House Conference in 1960 the State's report on children and youth indicated that the pressing problems in education and recreation and unemployment have been created by increasing urbanization of minority groups with their migration from south to north, from Puerto Rico to the mainland, and from country to city. In Philadelphia 1,500 children a year enter our schools whose parents came to the city in the forties for war work.

Senator CLARK. Are not most of these Negroes?

Miss PINCUS. Most of these are Negroes, Senators.

A picture where school enrollment is largely from migrant groups, shows children of poor socioeconomic background, culturally deprived, from overcrowded and neglected housing with morale so low that the frustration level is always dangerously close. And, believe me, it is as dangerously close for the teacher as it is for the pupil. And the teacher who handles groups like that must be especially well trained and given the consideration necessary to keep him in the classroom. Senator CLARK. Now, let me ask you there: Is it not true that teaching these more or less problem children is an unusual and hard challenge which many perfectly good teachers are not willing to rise to? Miss PINCUS. That is right. Senator Clark is right about that. I know that we think of teaching in terms of service but even your desire to give service has its limitations in physical strength, in your emotional endurance of certain problems. Breaking up a fight, though it will take only 5 minutes, will leave you

Senator CLARK. It will upset you for the rest of the day?

Miss PINCUS. It will leave you trembling for the rest of the day and any work that you have to do beyond that is done on nervous energy rather than on any plan that you had at the beginning of the day.

Senator CLARK. Now, isn't it true, Miss Pincus, that there are a large number of teachers in the Philadelphia public schools who are not certified?

Miss PINCUS. That is right.

Senator CLARK. And, therefore, temporary?

Miss PINCUS. They are temporary. They are semicertified; that is, they are teaching on provisional certificates which last for 3 years. About 10 percent of our teaching force consists of substitutes who either don't have the certification or are unable to pass the examina