- Email: [email protected]
Federal support for dental education: II
REPORTS O F C O U N C IL S A N D BU R EA U S . . . V O L U M E 64, M A R C H 1962 • 151/443
A. J. The stainless steel endodontic file—its use in obturation of difficult root canals. (M. S. thesis—University of Michi gan.) Ann Arbor, 1961. 50 p. On microfilm only.
S am peck,
S o u th e rn C a lifo rn ia S ta te D e n ta l A sso c ia tio n . C o u n c il o n D e n ta l H e a lth .
Conference on dental health, September 9, 1961, Biltmore Hotel, Los Angeles; proceed ings. [Los Angeles, 1961] 60 p. V e r a V i e r c i , V . R. Generalidades odontopediátricas. Asunción, Paraguay, 1961. 90 p. Mimeo. W a l k e r , D. G. Malformations of the face. Edinburgh, Livingstone, 1961. 202 p. $8.50. W i t z k y , H. P. A lo n g itu d in a l c e p h a lo m e tric
evaluation of the mandibular dental arch between 8 and 16 years. (M. S. thesis— University of Michigan.) Ann Arbor, 1961. 56 p. On. microfilm only. Z a r b , G. A. A study of the effect of annealing temperature of gold foil on the surface hard ness and handling characteristics. (M. S. thesis— University of Michigan.) Ann Arbor, 1961. 35 p. On microfilm only. PERIODICALS T h e A r t i c u l a t o r , (Rochester) J o u r n a l o f t h e S a n ta B a rb a ra -V e n tu ra C o u n t y D e n t a l S o c i e ty , (Santa Barbara)
Federal su p p o rt for dental education: II
COU NCIL ON DENTAL EDUCATION COU NCIL ON LEGISLATION
Part I of the joint report of the Council on Dental Education and the Council on Legislation, which appeared in the Feb ruary issue of t h e j o u r n a l , described the specific needs for federal support of dental education. Part II explores the relationships of the needs of dental edu cation within the larger complex of the present and future needs of higher educa tion generally, of which dental education is an integral part.
further detail, the myth makes further claim that home rule and states’ rights principles relating to education of the nation’s youth are the very bedrock of our democratic way of life. The myth is told and retold so frequently in our pres ent-day communications media, that only the bold and the curious have bothered to validate its theme. Philip H. Coombs, secretary of the Fund for the Advance ment of Education and educational pro gram director of the Ford Foundation, is M Y TH OF NONFEDERAL INV OLV EM EN T an economist interested in the financing of higher education. Commenting on the IN H IG H E R EDUCATION future role of government in higher edu That “no man is an island unto himself” cation, he makes the following state has become one of the platitudes of mod ment :3 ern life. Similarly, no agency is an island Over the years we have developed a public unto itself. It is a classic modern myth which pretends that the Federal gov among the politicians of both major po rhetoric ernment has never really entered the field of litical parties that education is now and education, and annually we conduct the same always has been the particular responsi fruitless debate over whether it should or not. bility of local government. Pressed for The debate is highly unrealistic, however,
152/444 • THE J O U R N A L O F THE A M E R IC A N D EN T A L A S S O C IA T IO N
despite the passion that accompanies it, be cause over the last hundred years the Federal government has in fact initiated a wide variety of programs which directly affect higher edu cation—ranging from the landgrant college legislation signed by President Lincoln to the current programs of the National Science Foundation, the Office of Education, and bet ter than a dozen agencies. There is little doubt that the pressures of national need and duty will bring the Federal government increasingly into the field of edu cation in the next ten years. FACTS AND EXTEN T OF FEDERAL SU PPO R T FOR EDUCATION
Totally apart from dental education, it is apparent that the federal government is already involved and contributing sub stantially to the support of our institu tions of higher learning. Witness the fol lowing areas of involvement : the National Defense Education Act of 1958; the re search programs of the National Institutes of Health; construction and loan pro grams to colleges and universities for dormitory facilities; ROTC programs; Veterans Administration programs; In ternational Cooperation Administration; expansion of educational television serv ices ; improvement of teaching in science, mathematics and foreign languages; con struction of health research facilities un der the Hill-Burton Act. The future pattern of higher education in this coun try is already to a degree determined by a variety of federal support programs. GOVERNMENTAL SU PPO RT DURING 1959-60
per cent of support, 38.8 per cent ($748,501,291) was provided by the federal government. States provided 14.9 per cent ($205,830,169) of operating income and local governments only 0.4 per cent ($6,072,765). Of more than passing in terest to members of the dental profes sion is the fact that three professional and specialized schools in the sample sur vey derived 69.9 per cent of their oper ating income from federal, sources, whereas both state and local governments each provided less than 0.1 per cent. (The Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc., is a private agency composed of nationally prominent educators, leaders of industry and business and private citi zens. A booklet, The Functions of the Council for Financial Aid to Education, Incorporated— Objectives, Policies, Pro gram, can be obtained free on request to the Council, 6 E. 45 St., New York 17.) In view of the foregoing findings from the Council bn Financial Aid to Educa tion Survey, it is difficult to visualize the continued operations of many of the na tion’s institutions of higher learning with out federal aid. It is even more difficult, however, to speculate on the reactions of university officials of these same institu tions when confronted by dental schools within the university family committed by their professional organization to oppose the use of federal funds. Universities and colleges throughout the nation are harried and worn from making every conceivable effort to finance each successive year of operations. Financial aid for education must be elicited from every segment of the economy and both private and public support in increasing amounts must be obtained in the future to maintain even a minimum standard of excellence in the pursuit of higher learning.
In a 1959-60 report on a 72-institution sample survey to determine the extent of voluntary financial support of America’s colleges and universities, the Council for Financial Aid to Education found that PUBLIC VIEW OF ROLE OF federal, state and local governments con FEDERAL GOVERNM ENT tributed 54.1 per cent of the operating funds of the sample institutions during The American Assembly was established the 1959-60 academic year.4 Of this total in 1950 by Columbia University during
REPORTS O F C O U N C IL S A N D BU REAUS
the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower. Its purpose was to bring together “leaders in various segments of American life to throw impartial light on the major prob lems which confront America.” The Assembly has provided a nonpartisan forum for discussion of key problems. In 1960, the Assembly viewed the problem of “The Federal Government and Higher Education,” which generated sufficient interest and deep concern to inspire three regional conferences which addressed themselves to the same theme. It is re ported that all four assemblies arrived at similar findings and conclusions, which in part are described as follows:5 1. Institutions of higher learning which now provide places for three mil lion students, by 1970 will be expected to provide educational opportunities for more than six million. 2. The most pressing problem result ing from these increased demands on educational facilities will be operating finances. 3. Existing sources of income—gov ernment at all levels, foundations, cor porate and individual giving—must con tinue and, above all, expand. 4. While traditional sources of income should continue to bear the major share of financing higher education, these sources may increasingly prove inade quate or unwilling to share the burden of financing our colleges and universities. 5. In view of the foregoing observa tion, financial support of higher edu cation by the federal government is appropriate and necessary. 6. Federal aid to education is an es tablished fact, clearly serving the national interest, and does not involve infringe ment on the dignity and independence of those institutions receiving federal monies. It is to be noted that each Assembly expressed concern that there are dangers inherent in federal support of higher edu cation but, in the words of one regional group:
V O L U M E 64, M A R C H 1962 • 153/445
There are some who fear the consequences of an increase in the support of higher educa tion by the federal government. Yet, the hazards of greater federal participation are not comparable to the dangers we will face if the national government, in company with all other agencies, were not to extend its efforts. On balance, it is therefore believed that the extent of participation by the government in higher education will have to be increased.5 STATEM ENTS OF H IG H E R EDUCATION ORGANIZATIONS
Federal support for higher education is no myth within the educational commu nity itself, and leaders of the majority of institutions of higher learning and na tional educational organizations have actively supported federal legislative pro posals in recent years and, in some in stances, have designed and initiated legis lation for which justifiable need existed. Within recent months, 11 higher educa tion organizations went on record for fed eral support of higher education in the following subject classifications: construc tion of educational facilities, National Defense Education Act, National Science Foundation, fellowship programs, re search, international education, educa tional radio and television, federal tax benefits, college and university extension programs and others. These organizations included some of the following: Ameri can Council on Education, American Council on Learned Societies, American Association of Junior Colleges, the Com mission on Legislation, American Associa tion of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities, American Association of University Professors, American Society for Engineering Education, Association of American Colleges, State Universities Association, and so on. Similarly, in recent months, national organizations representing the health pro fessions have presented testimony in favor of federal support for the construction of educational facilities, research, scholar ship and loan programs and for opera tional support of the National Institutes
154/446 • THE J O U R N A L O F T H E A M E R IC A N D EN T A L A S S O C IA T IO N
of Health and the United States Public Health Service. Among the organizations which have presented such testimony are the Association of American Medical Col leges, the American Association of Dental Schools, the American Dental Asso ciation, the American Public Health Association, the American Osteopathic Association, the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Pharmaceutical Association. Health pro fession assistance legislation has also been supported by the American Council on Education, the national organization rep resenting more than 1,400 colleges and universities. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that within the community of national organizations representing institutions of higher learning, whether inside or out side the health professions, requests for federal support for higher education have been made with full realization on the part of agencies and institutions involved of the need to obtain continued and in creasing voluntary support from tradi tional private and nonfederal govern mental sources. Actually, the increasingly
loud and unified voice of the higher edu cation community which continues to seek federal aid for education demonstrates a growing concern on the part of these or ganizations that voluntary sources of support eventually may be either unable or unwilling to assume the burden of financing our free educational system. Further, if even slight evidence now ex isted that the integrity of our academic institutions were threatened by interfer ence from federal agencies or personnel, neither the institutions themselves, nor the various national organizations which represent them, would be ready to go on record favoring the various legislative proposals that recently have been so much under discussion in the Congress.
3. C o o m b s , P h ilip H . A n e c o n o m is t's o v e rv ie w of h ig h e r e d u c a tio n . In F in a n c in g h ig h e r e d u c a t io n 1960-70. N e w Y o rk, M c G r a w - H i l l B oo k C o ., 1959, p. 31. 4. 1959-1960 v o lu n ta ry s u p p o r t o f A m e r ic a 's c o H e g e s a n d u n iversitie s. N e w Y o rk, C o u n c il fo r F in a n c ia l A i d to E d u c a tio n , Inc., 1961, p. 46-47. 5. U .S . D e p a r tm e n t o f H e a lth , E d u c a tio n , a n d W e l fare, O ffic e o f E d u c a tio n . The fe d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t and h ig h e r e d u c a tio n : fin d in g s o f r e g io n a l co nferences g r o w in g o u t o f the Se ve n te e n th A m e r ic a n A sse m b ly . H ig h e r E d u c a tio n , v o l. 17, J a n . 1961, p . 4*6.
A. J. The stainless steel endodontic file—its use in obturation of difficult root canals. (M. S. thesis—University of Michi gan.) Ann Arbor, 1961. 50 p. On microfilm only.
S am peck,
S o u th e rn C a lifo rn ia S ta te D e n ta l A sso c ia tio n . C o u n c il o n D e n ta l H e a lth .
Conference on dental health, September 9, 1961, Biltmore Hotel, Los Angeles; proceed ings. [Los Angeles, 1961] 60 p. V e r a V i e r c i , V . R. Generalidades odontopediátricas. Asunción, Paraguay, 1961. 90 p. Mimeo. W a l k e r , D. G. Malformations of the face. Edinburgh, Livingstone, 1961. 202 p. $8.50. W i t z k y , H. P. A lo n g itu d in a l c e p h a lo m e tric
evaluation of the mandibular dental arch between 8 and 16 years. (M. S. thesis— University of Michigan.) Ann Arbor, 1961. 56 p. On. microfilm only. Z a r b , G. A. A study of the effect of annealing temperature of gold foil on the surface hard ness and handling characteristics. (M. S. thesis— University of Michigan.) Ann Arbor, 1961. 35 p. On microfilm only. PERIODICALS T h e A r t i c u l a t o r , (Rochester) J o u r n a l o f t h e S a n ta B a rb a ra -V e n tu ra C o u n t y D e n t a l S o c i e ty , (Santa Barbara)
Federal su p p o rt for dental education: II
COU NCIL ON DENTAL EDUCATION COU NCIL ON LEGISLATION
Part I of the joint report of the Council on Dental Education and the Council on Legislation, which appeared in the Feb ruary issue of t h e j o u r n a l , described the specific needs for federal support of dental education. Part II explores the relationships of the needs of dental edu cation within the larger complex of the present and future needs of higher educa tion generally, of which dental education is an integral part.
further detail, the myth makes further claim that home rule and states’ rights principles relating to education of the nation’s youth are the very bedrock of our democratic way of life. The myth is told and retold so frequently in our pres ent-day communications media, that only the bold and the curious have bothered to validate its theme. Philip H. Coombs, secretary of the Fund for the Advance ment of Education and educational pro gram director of the Ford Foundation, is M Y TH OF NONFEDERAL INV OLV EM EN T an economist interested in the financing of higher education. Commenting on the IN H IG H E R EDUCATION future role of government in higher edu That “no man is an island unto himself” cation, he makes the following state has become one of the platitudes of mod ment :3 ern life. Similarly, no agency is an island Over the years we have developed a public unto itself. It is a classic modern myth which pretends that the Federal gov among the politicians of both major po rhetoric ernment has never really entered the field of litical parties that education is now and education, and annually we conduct the same always has been the particular responsi fruitless debate over whether it should or not. bility of local government. Pressed for The debate is highly unrealistic, however,
152/444 • THE J O U R N A L O F THE A M E R IC A N D EN T A L A S S O C IA T IO N
despite the passion that accompanies it, be cause over the last hundred years the Federal government has in fact initiated a wide variety of programs which directly affect higher edu cation—ranging from the landgrant college legislation signed by President Lincoln to the current programs of the National Science Foundation, the Office of Education, and bet ter than a dozen agencies. There is little doubt that the pressures of national need and duty will bring the Federal government increasingly into the field of edu cation in the next ten years. FACTS AND EXTEN T OF FEDERAL SU PPO R T FOR EDUCATION
Totally apart from dental education, it is apparent that the federal government is already involved and contributing sub stantially to the support of our institu tions of higher learning. Witness the fol lowing areas of involvement : the National Defense Education Act of 1958; the re search programs of the National Institutes of Health; construction and loan pro grams to colleges and universities for dormitory facilities; ROTC programs; Veterans Administration programs; In ternational Cooperation Administration; expansion of educational television serv ices ; improvement of teaching in science, mathematics and foreign languages; con struction of health research facilities un der the Hill-Burton Act. The future pattern of higher education in this coun try is already to a degree determined by a variety of federal support programs. GOVERNMENTAL SU PPO RT DURING 1959-60
per cent of support, 38.8 per cent ($748,501,291) was provided by the federal government. States provided 14.9 per cent ($205,830,169) of operating income and local governments only 0.4 per cent ($6,072,765). Of more than passing in terest to members of the dental profes sion is the fact that three professional and specialized schools in the sample sur vey derived 69.9 per cent of their oper ating income from federal, sources, whereas both state and local governments each provided less than 0.1 per cent. (The Council for Financial Aid to Education, Inc., is a private agency composed of nationally prominent educators, leaders of industry and business and private citi zens. A booklet, The Functions of the Council for Financial Aid to Education, Incorporated— Objectives, Policies, Pro gram, can be obtained free on request to the Council, 6 E. 45 St., New York 17.) In view of the foregoing findings from the Council bn Financial Aid to Educa tion Survey, it is difficult to visualize the continued operations of many of the na tion’s institutions of higher learning with out federal aid. It is even more difficult, however, to speculate on the reactions of university officials of these same institu tions when confronted by dental schools within the university family committed by their professional organization to oppose the use of federal funds. Universities and colleges throughout the nation are harried and worn from making every conceivable effort to finance each successive year of operations. Financial aid for education must be elicited from every segment of the economy and both private and public support in increasing amounts must be obtained in the future to maintain even a minimum standard of excellence in the pursuit of higher learning.
In a 1959-60 report on a 72-institution sample survey to determine the extent of voluntary financial support of America’s colleges and universities, the Council for Financial Aid to Education found that PUBLIC VIEW OF ROLE OF federal, state and local governments con FEDERAL GOVERNM ENT tributed 54.1 per cent of the operating funds of the sample institutions during The American Assembly was established the 1959-60 academic year.4 Of this total in 1950 by Columbia University during
REPORTS O F C O U N C IL S A N D BU REAUS
the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower. Its purpose was to bring together “leaders in various segments of American life to throw impartial light on the major prob lems which confront America.” The Assembly has provided a nonpartisan forum for discussion of key problems. In 1960, the Assembly viewed the problem of “The Federal Government and Higher Education,” which generated sufficient interest and deep concern to inspire three regional conferences which addressed themselves to the same theme. It is re ported that all four assemblies arrived at similar findings and conclusions, which in part are described as follows:5 1. Institutions of higher learning which now provide places for three mil lion students, by 1970 will be expected to provide educational opportunities for more than six million. 2. The most pressing problem result ing from these increased demands on educational facilities will be operating finances. 3. Existing sources of income—gov ernment at all levels, foundations, cor porate and individual giving—must con tinue and, above all, expand. 4. While traditional sources of income should continue to bear the major share of financing higher education, these sources may increasingly prove inade quate or unwilling to share the burden of financing our colleges and universities. 5. In view of the foregoing observa tion, financial support of higher edu cation by the federal government is appropriate and necessary. 6. Federal aid to education is an es tablished fact, clearly serving the national interest, and does not involve infringe ment on the dignity and independence of those institutions receiving federal monies. It is to be noted that each Assembly expressed concern that there are dangers inherent in federal support of higher edu cation but, in the words of one regional group:
V O L U M E 64, M A R C H 1962 • 153/445
There are some who fear the consequences of an increase in the support of higher educa tion by the federal government. Yet, the hazards of greater federal participation are not comparable to the dangers we will face if the national government, in company with all other agencies, were not to extend its efforts. On balance, it is therefore believed that the extent of participation by the government in higher education will have to be increased.5 STATEM ENTS OF H IG H E R EDUCATION ORGANIZATIONS
Federal support for higher education is no myth within the educational commu nity itself, and leaders of the majority of institutions of higher learning and na tional educational organizations have actively supported federal legislative pro posals in recent years and, in some in stances, have designed and initiated legis lation for which justifiable need existed. Within recent months, 11 higher educa tion organizations went on record for fed eral support of higher education in the following subject classifications: construc tion of educational facilities, National Defense Education Act, National Science Foundation, fellowship programs, re search, international education, educa tional radio and television, federal tax benefits, college and university extension programs and others. These organizations included some of the following: Ameri can Council on Education, American Council on Learned Societies, American Association of Junior Colleges, the Com mission on Legislation, American Associa tion of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities, American Association of University Professors, American Society for Engineering Education, Association of American Colleges, State Universities Association, and so on. Similarly, in recent months, national organizations representing the health pro fessions have presented testimony in favor of federal support for the construction of educational facilities, research, scholar ship and loan programs and for opera tional support of the National Institutes
154/446 • THE J O U R N A L O F T H E A M E R IC A N D EN T A L A S S O C IA T IO N
of Health and the United States Public Health Service. Among the organizations which have presented such testimony are the Association of American Medical Col leges, the American Association of Dental Schools, the American Dental Asso ciation, the American Public Health Association, the American Osteopathic Association, the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Pharmaceutical Association. Health pro fession assistance legislation has also been supported by the American Council on Education, the national organization rep resenting more than 1,400 colleges and universities. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that within the community of national organizations representing institutions of higher learning, whether inside or out side the health professions, requests for federal support for higher education have been made with full realization on the part of agencies and institutions involved of the need to obtain continued and in creasing voluntary support from tradi tional private and nonfederal govern mental sources. Actually, the increasingly
loud and unified voice of the higher edu cation community which continues to seek federal aid for education demonstrates a growing concern on the part of these or ganizations that voluntary sources of support eventually may be either unable or unwilling to assume the burden of financing our free educational system. Further, if even slight evidence now ex isted that the integrity of our academic institutions were threatened by interfer ence from federal agencies or personnel, neither the institutions themselves, nor the various national organizations which represent them, would be ready to go on record favoring the various legislative proposals that recently have been so much under discussion in the Congress.
3. C o o m b s , P h ilip H . A n e c o n o m is t's o v e rv ie w of h ig h e r e d u c a tio n . In F in a n c in g h ig h e r e d u c a t io n 1960-70. N e w Y o rk, M c G r a w - H i l l B oo k C o ., 1959, p. 31. 4. 1959-1960 v o lu n ta ry s u p p o r t o f A m e r ic a 's c o H e g e s a n d u n iversitie s. N e w Y o rk, C o u n c il fo r F in a n c ia l A i d to E d u c a tio n , Inc., 1961, p. 46-47. 5. U .S . D e p a r tm e n t o f H e a lth , E d u c a tio n , a n d W e l fare, O ffic e o f E d u c a tio n . The fe d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t and h ig h e r e d u c a tio n : fin d in g s o f r e g io n a l co nferences g r o w in g o u t o f the Se ve n te e n th A m e r ic a n A sse m b ly . H ig h e r E d u c a tio n , v o l. 17, J a n . 1961, p . 4*6.