only the corpsmen had any intergroup education. The corpsman takes a 51-hour program leading toward his master's degree is some 20 hours more than the ordinary typical master's program.

Seventy percent of this programing is brand new. Seventy percent of the programing is the kind of thing that we have been wanting to do at Temple University and other teacher universities have been wanting to do for a long time but never have really had a chance to do. Part of this new programing is intergroup education and I might say that also has given us an opportunity to recruit people on the staff knowledgeable in these areas whereas before that time presumably we had no need for them, which of course is simply a gross error in our judgment. You have to recognize that teacher education lags more badly than public school education does in keeping up with the times. This is a part of the function of teacher education financial support for teacher education as you well know is very light indeed.

The Teacher Corps has had a very pronounced impact on our college of education and we hope on others not fortunate enough to have a Teacher Corps installation. For one thing we are beginning to get the kinds of programing changes we introduced in the Teacher Corps spread to our other program.

How rapidly we can do this will depend on money and ability to find able staff. We are moving quickly and we have already put into our catalog four courses that we started for the Teacher Corps. I hope this is only the beginning. There were a number of questions raised early and I had hoped we would have an opportunity to answer those questions because frankly I was not happy the way they were responded to.

There was a question about whether this ought to be a State department project and I would have to say absolutely not. From our point of view this should be a Federal project. We have had no interference from NTC headquarters. We selected these people ourselves and we consider this to be a basic principle for the operation of Teacher Corps.

We would like to have as much glamour associated with recruiting people and there is more glamour out of Washington than Philadelphia. We would like to get as much glamour in recruiting these people but we would not have the program if we did not have the right to make the final selection and indeed for the Teacher Corps group we have now we did much of the recruiting and we would continue to do so.

We feel strongly as long as we make the final selection the program is guaranteed that much integrity. Not everyone can become a teacher. We will still give them the GRE test, paper and pencil interview that we applied to any other person who wants to become a teacher and wants to go through the Temple University to prepare for doing so.

So we intend to maintain that but we certainly don't mind having Washington give us the money to operate the program, to give us the kind of people from whom we can make the selection.

I might say that Harrisburg is not prepared to do either very well, even if they were using your money.

We also believe that the impact on teacher education annoyable in many other ways that ought to be understood not only by Congress,

of course, but by the citizens generally and certainly by all of the colleges of education. We have about 16 different special programs operating out at the college of education and because I happen to be assistant dean for research and development in a sense these are all my responsibility.

I would say we are developing a very easily recognized attitude now among students which I think is great, and that is that we are beginning finally to understand that teachers have to be specialists in more than just their subject matter area. What we are producing through these special programs, not only NTC but the experienced teacher fellowship program as well, but we are producing specialists in urban education and that is a new dimension for the college at Temple University.

We have a great deal of research, probably the best known of which is bankers research in Chicago where he demonstrated how people leave the inner city schools of Chicago after having been recruited to serve in these schools after something he calls culture shock, reality shock. We do not think these teachers will be lost to inner city because they are specialists in coping with the education of the disadvantaged child.

They get their best success in dealing with these children because they are especially prepared to do that. I think it is-I know it is fair to say Temple University has never produced a specialist in urban education and I think it is probably fair to say that no university has until very, very recently.

When we graduate these NTC corpsmen we will have produced the first describable commodities in this area. That is to say we will have produced specialists in urban education. This seems to me to be entirely the most significant of NTC from our point of view as a college of education.

I too could regale you about stories of what happens in the classroom and what fine work these men do. I know you have heard a lot of that. All I can say is, it is true. It has the ring of truth to me because we see it all the time.

I would like to concentrate only by telling you what NTC has done far beyond the small trickle of money that has supported it is to give us an opportunity to add new dimensions to teacher education in producing a specialist in urban education and to a question asked earlier of the group of Atlanta, what would happen if the trickle stopped for NTC? Well, I think what would happen is that one way or another Philadelphia and Temple University and some other kinds of resources would keep something like this going.

It would not be as big and probably not as good but we would keep something like this going because having had a measure of success we probably would not give it up. I should really stop because I am eager to hear your questions and see what responses I can make rather than hearing myself say the same thing about NTC to people who started out as unbelievers and who have come around to now believing how effective this program is.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you for a most valuable statement. I want to make a general statement and invite any comment you may wish to make upon it. I have sat in these hearings now almost every day and

heard questions and answers raised of witnesses about the Teacher Corps and I have come up with about four or five general conclusions from all of this testimony.

The first is that there has been expressed, at least to our committee, no significant opposition to the Teacher Corps by schoolteachers in the communities in which the corpsmen teach, by school principals, or by school superintendents, or by the chief State school officers of the States in which Teacher Corps interns are teaching.

The second general conclusion I have reached from listening to this testimony is that there has been no significant evidence presented to our committee of Federal control over the operation of the Teacher Corps at the local level. The local school systems are controlling the

program.

The third conclusion I have reached is that the school systems in which the Teacher Corps men and women are teaching and learning a great deal from the Teacher Corps operation.

The fourth conclusion I have reached is that the operation of the Teacher Corps to date while it has been relatively modest with only 1,200 or so has had the effect of dramatically focusing attention on the very grave problem of providing and retaining teachers for the disadvantaged in the areas of poverty.

The last conclusion that I have reached is that the two principal criticisms of the Teacher Corps (at least as adduced by the testimony before us) is that the funding of the Teacher Corps has been delayed too much and that the pool of Teacher Corps interns, the authorized pool of Teacher Corps interns, has been too small, that you need more. Now, in light of your experience, would you shoot down, or modify, or change, any of those conclusions? I am trying to give you the major conclusions I have arrived at after listening to the evidence. I am not talking about speculations. I am talking about the evidence that has been brought before this committee during these hearings.

Mr. WILSON. I would like to respond by agreeing with you on your observations. I think these are all true. I think the six observations, generalizations that you have might be the same one Dr. Osview and I have been trying to make, and that is there has been a change in the education of teachers and we are developing a new breed, we are developing specialists who have this commitment and I think we need to underline the commitment to work in the disadvantaged areas.

Mr. OSVIEW. I would like to say we are now in the position of being able to capitalize on some experience. I note with grave disappointment that some of the suggestions for amending seem to me to run directly counter to what seems in our experience to be the great strength or at least the great emerging strengths of NTC.

For one thing, I cannot believe that you can tack on a single year of education and make this program just as good as it otherwise would be.

I might say that the program we developed at Temple University is our program and we worked it out with the school district of Philadelphia. It is not a national program and we think that is one of its strengths. It is a 51-hour program. It demands a fantastic amount of work out of these students and I think it is to our shame and dismay we are just now understanding how hard our students can

work.

We never made our students work this hard before and we are getting much better results.

We have to recognize you cannot do more than 2 years work in I am also unhappy about the fact that this artificial limitation. of $75 plus $15 per dependent is going to be tacked on. I cannot for the life of me understand why. It is an eternal mystery to me why anyone would oppose the willingness, the eagerness of the city school systems to be paying these people at the rate of a beginning teacher's salary.

It just so happens I rode on the airplane to Dallas on Tuesday morning with the superintendent of schools from Philadelphia. He had not been aware of the fact that this was a potential amendment. When I told him of the limitation of $75 he asked me for perhaps 100 miles as the airplane flies to be sure he had gotten the information from me and I took out this document that I had and showed it to him finally because it was apparent he thought I was making some kind of mistake in communicating to him.

His point of view would be exactly mine, that these people earn a beginning teacher's salary and should be paid a beginning teacher's salary.

I think another point that needs to be emphasized is that we have an opportunity now due to the very large number of people who are willing to apply for NTC out of which we make this very small selection, I might say NTC was not really well organized to do this job initially and would be much better organized now, we are losing the opportunity to really bring in the cream of the people with missionary zeal for this job by putting an artificial limitation.

It is still a fact that the No. 1 problem in American education today is a teacher shortage. None of the devices ever mentioned in either the Sunday supplement kinds of things one reads about education or in any of the books has ever discovered a way to do without the teacher. We will continue to need more teachers and as we get more machines, we will need more teachers even as we begin to get more computers in education.

No matter what the device is it comes down to the fact that the No. 1 problem in the United States today is teacher shortage. How we can stint on the genuine attack on the general teacher shortage problem is more than I can understand.

I have never heard it adequately explained to me why there should be stinting on that and I simply cannot figure out for the life of me why NTC has to be embattled for its very life and why these hearings should not be concerned with how to put many millions of dollars in addition to what has been considered a reasonable level of support. Mr. FORD. Both of you gentlemen are concerned with the training of teachers and are able to observe this program from a little different point of view than the school superintendent out here facing the dayto-day pressures that almost always overwhelm them to the point of where they have very little opportunity to move in new directions. One of the things that disturbs me a little bit as we watch the progress of these programs is that as they start to expand the competition for the really good people sets in. The question comes to mind as to how we keep this talent as we develop it in the place in the school system where it is likely to continue to do the most good.

What usually happens in the school system? They are all growing, they are all expanding. Every time a man comes along who shows any interest beyond the subject matter-this is true in my area at least that he is teaching on a daily basis, who shows any community awareness, the first thing you know they have him involved in something. About the time he starts to show leadership they make him a subprincipal or something of the kind and he gets bogged down with all of the problems of how to get somebody a seat on Monday morning and things of that nature and he can no longer work in this area. What do you have in mind as a followup in the school system to provide a continued recognition after this person is no longer a corpsman of his being something special and functioning in a special part of the school so that the special schools and special commitment are not lost. A State says, I believe my State says if a child is in school 265 days a year he is educated 1 year. That becomes the controlling consideration of everyone running the school on a day-to-day basis. How do we stop that happening with these people?

Mr. OSVIEW. I would not denegate education of principals. We need educated principals and superintendents, too. I happen to come out of a school of discipline of administration and I know how important it is and how bad it has usually been.

So if some of these people in the National Teacher Corps become principals and I will freely predict to you many of them will, because they are good people, I don't find that bad. I find that good.

Your other questions lead us into a very consideration that I would like to take a few minutes to point out if I may. Not just National Teacher Corps alone but the galaxy of Federal programs is accomplishing some things which I don't guess was ever really in the mind of Congress or certainly was never said in so many words and it surprised a lot of us who were longtime observers of the educational theme.

School systems have not spent any time on money and planning recently. If they were up to date as of today or maybe had some reasonable idea as to what was going to happen tomorrow, that was usually enough. One of the things that Federal money is now beginning to do is make planning a part of school system operation in ways that 2 years ago I would have argued probably would never happen. One of the kinds of evidence I see of this planning is the sort of thing that is happening in Philadelphia where there is a planning committee made up of people within and without the school system.

One of the things we have discussed in Philadelphia is to create new categories of teachers rewarded with special pay and other kinds of recognition. There is some little question as to whether we are going to call them the old fashion terms master teachers or call them specialists.

Right now I think we are pretty much agreed on the specialist category. We are going to try to find a way in the Philadelphia school system to reward these people who are especially good because long ago we rejected the idea of combat pay. I might say the combat pay rejection was led by the teacher union. It was proposed by the administration which it turned out was some decade or so behind the hinging of the teachers on this issue.