That was brought out in the hearings in 1945 and 1946 also. Thus the present bill under consideration offers the teachers a 27 percent increase in their maximum against 62 percent to 13 percent increase for the officers. The lower percent increase goes to the higher-paid officers and on the basis of their salary under the 1945 act.

This bill incorporates within its provisions the present $450 flat increase over the 1945 scale, temporarily paid the teachers for the present fiscal year, which benefit dies on June 30, 1947.

In case this amount should fail to be continued, the teacher's pay for the entering group would revert to a figure below that offered to untrained manual labor, and for those who have reached their maximum it would offer a rather hopeless outlook as an income ceiling in the present economic era.

In view of the present world crisis in which democracy is on trial against certain foreign and destructive ideologies, it seems obligatory that those most vital agencies and agents of democracy-her school systems and her teachers-must be supported to the extent that sufficiently attractive salaries will attract the most capable minds and retain within the system the most highly trained and equipped personnel.

The continued existence of our democracy rests on this contingency. It is a dangerous situation we face when we note that more than 350,000 teachers have left our American public schools since 1939, and that such replacements as are being made are from inadequately trained personnel, who are not educationally equipped to meet the teaching qualifications for permanent placement in our school systems.

Therefore, on behalf of the Teachers' Advisory Council of the District of Columbia Public Schools, I approve the Superintendent's bill recommending salary revision, and beg your favorable consideration of

this measure.

Mr. BATES. Thank you very much, Mrs. Gosling.

Mr. Superintendent, apropos to what Mrs. Gosling said as to the growth of these foreign and destructive ideologies, you read in this morning's paper a statement apparently made or quoted as having been made by a member of the United States Senate about teaching of foreign ideologies in the schools of Washington.

At this time, would you care to make a comment in respect to that? Dr. CORNING. I did not see the article, sir, but I will make the comment that there are no foreign ideologies advocated in the schools of Washington, D. C. Of this, I am certain.

Mrs. GOSLING. I think it is a very timely issue.

Mr. BATES. I think it is a very important statement made by a very important member of the Senate. I was rather amazed at the statement he made, whether there is any justification for it or not.

Dr. CORNING. We are very certain of our ground on that, Mr. Congressman, and may I say for your information in that connection that within the past month the Daughters of the American Revolution in district congress assembled passed a resolution highly praising the. schools of Washington for their teaching of history and American government. That commendation, coming from an organization that guards all our American traditions as jealously as does the Daughters of the American Revolution, is very significant.

- Mr. BATES. I thought this might be a proper moment. We are discussing school matters in the Congress of the United States, through one of its appointed committees, and in the presence of so many of the teaching staff, your views, representing as you do the school system in the District.

Mrs. GOSLING. Mr. Chairman, I happen to be a history teacher in the high schools, and of course a member of all the history organizations. I think I can speak without any qualifications whatsoever in endorsing Mr. Corning's statement to that effect.

There is absolutely no question of that in our history department. Mr. BATES. You read about it in today's newspaper, did you?

Mrs. GOSLING. It is very necessary. I think we should support our schools to the extent that we must pay for qualified teachers to uphold our democratic principles.

Mr. BATES. Thank you, Mrs. Gosling.

The next will be Miss Myrtle E. Moore, member of the Junior High School Teachers Association.

STATEMENT OF MISS MYRTLE E. MOORE, PRESIDENT, JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, DIVISIONS 1 TO 9

MISS MOORE. First, as the president of the Junior High School Teachers Association, Divisions 1 to 9, I shall read my statement.

The Junior High School Teachers Association wishes to express its endorsement of the proposed teachers' salary legislation embodied in S. 1088. We feel that the improvements recommended are most desirable.

The single salary scale, paying all teachers on the basis of qualifications and experience, is an equitable way of assigning teachers' salaries. It is our strong conviction that the increase of $700 on the minimum over the 1945 provisions is a forward step in raising teachers' salaries to a true professional level.

With this increase teachers' salaries will more nearly approach those of other professional workers, such as those in Government service, scientific personnel, and lawyers.

The proposed increase is in keeping with the recommendations of the National Education Association and the National Congress of Parents and Teachers.

Now, Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the joint legislative council, which you have heard quite a bit about, naturally I would not make recommendations; I merely wish to give you a history of what we have done, if that meets with your approval.

At the first meeting of the joint legislative council in October of 1946, Dr. Corning sent the following communication [reading]:

Much interest has been expressed in the study to be made of our present salary legislation, a report on which is to be submitted to Congress by February 1, 1947. Such a study had been agreed upon by the Board of Education at the time the hearings on the subject before the Board were held.

In order that all teachers may have an opportunity to have their views presented on this subject, the Superintendent has asked the joint legislative council to conduct the study for the educational employees of the school system and report to him by November 29, 1946.

Inasmuch as the joint legislative council is a representative body of educational organizations on every school level and from both divisions of the school system it seems appropriate for this organization to undertake this project.

Since it is very important that this study be all-inclusive and that as a result of the study we present a united front in our presentations to the Commissioners and to Congress, it is desirable that all organizations of educational employees not now affiliated apply for membership in the joint legislative council and participate in this city-wide study.

The Superintendent desires to direct the attention of the joint legislative council to what, in his judgment, is the specific job that Congress has directed the Board of Education to perform, and with respect to which the Superintendent desires advice from the joint legislative council.

The job to be performed by the Board of Education is described in section 3 of Public Law 568, Seventy-ninth Congress, approved July 31, 1946, which reads: "The Board of Education is hereby directed to make a study of the pay scales and classifications of the employees of the said Board whose salaries are fixed and determined by the District of Columbia Teachers' Salary Act of 1945, as amended, for the purpose of determining what salary and classification adjustments, if any, may be necessary or desirable, and to make a report, including its findings and recommendations, to the respective chairmen of the Senate and House District Committees not later than February 1, 1947."

As the Superintendent sees it, the Board of Education has been directed to limit its study to the pay scales and classifications of the Salary Act of 1945, and to report its findings and recommendations thereon.

Under the terms of the order of Congress the Board of Education does not contemplate submitting a new Teachers' Salary Act. The Board will concern itself with a study and report upon adjustments in the pay scales and classifications of the Teachers' Salary Act of 1945, which the Board considers necessary or desirable.

As a point of departure in its work, the Superintendent suggests that the joint legislative council study very carefully:

1. Section 3 of Public Law 568, Seventy-ninth Congress, in which the Board of Education is directed to make the study.

2. Issues which were before the Board of Education which were not settled at the time of the hearings on the salary bill before the Board of Education.

3. All other issues which are claimed to be inequities by various groups and organizations at this time.

4. Present or proposed salary schedules for all educational employees in other cities comparable in size to Washington, D. C.

Distinction should be made between those issues which very properly should be submitted to Congress, those issues which are purely administrative, and those issues which are within the authority of the Board of Education to solve.

The Superintendent presents herewith seven principles which in his opinion should guide us in our deliberations:

1. It is impossible to develop a perfect salary schedule to which all affected persons and groups will agree.

2. It is the purpose of the present study to determine what salary and classification adjustments, if any, may be necessary or desirable in order to make the present schedules as perfect as possible.

3. It is not conceivable that the desires and needs of all individuals and groups can be completely met.

4. A satisfactory outcome involves a process of careful objective evaluation of each proposal, and to a degree a merging of interests into a formula most acceptable to all.

5. Since costs cannot be ignored, careful consideration should be given to the money involved in recent gains: annual cost of $450 salary increase, $1,600,000; annual increase in cost of the new retirement features, $1,100,000; and a projecting of the costs involved in each new proposal.

6. Any proposal finally adopted should make permanent those gains already accomplished and no proposal should be made which will tend to jeopardize the present situation.

7. Interrelationships and salary levels should be recommended only after careful comparison of salaries and trends for all classifications in cities of comparable size.

Specifically, then, the Superintendent desires advice and recommendations from the joint legislative council on the adjustments in the Teachers' Salary Act of 1945 which the joint legislative council considers necessary and desirable, and would be happy if the joint legislative council would submit for the consideration of the Superintendent and the Board of Education specific amend

ments together with justification which, in the opinion of the joint legislative council, will accomplish these objectives.

The Superintendent desires to assure the joint legislative council of the full cooperation of the school administration in the prosecution of this very important project.

Miss MOORE. The joint legislative council, which is composed of 163 delegates from 46 educational organizations with an estimated membership of 3,200 representing every school level from both divisions of the school system, began work immediately.

A steering committee was chosen to make a detailed study of salary schedules for all educational employees in other cities, comparable in size to Washington, in order to make recommendations to the council.

This committee also studied the inequities which were sent the council by various groups and organizations. Many meetings were held after school and in the evenings and hours were spent in research in order to formulate recommendations to the council. All matters were thoroughly discussed by the entire council before being voted upon.

The National Education Association made it possible for the latest trends and actual salary legislation throughout the country to be carefully studied. The research department of the NEA rendered most valuable service in furnishing current data on teachers' salaries.

After numerous meetings in which opinions were fully exchanged the joint legislative council adopted 18 guiding principles which were used by the steering committee in making a report to Dr. Corning. A complete report was made December 10, 1946.

As is the case in all large groups, there were differences of opinion. Members or alternates were present at all meetings, and discussions were very thorough and each item received careful attention.

As president of the council I would like to point out a few of the recommendations which involve finances.

First, it was recommended that a single salary schedule be adopted for all teachers regardless of where they may be placed in the schools. There are many reasons for the adoption of this plan.

Full recognition should be given to elementary education as being as socially valuable and educationally important as secondary education. This principle assumes that as much professional skill in diagnosis and service to individual learners is needed at one level of the learner's growth as at another level. Another purpose is that of encouraging teachers to continue their professional growth.

It was recommended that a teacher holding a bachelor of arts degree begin at $2,600 and be able to progress to $4,000. The teacher with master of arts degree should go from $2,800 to $4,600. The master's degree plus 30 semester hours of graduate credit should be given $3,000 to $5,200.

It was further recommended that the salaries of officers should be adjusted in relation to those of teachers and should be consistent with the salaries for similar positions, duties, and responsibilities in cities of comparable size.

There were various other recommendations which were made in an attempt to clear up certain inequities in various groups.

It was felt by the group that the Superintendent and Board of Education was most fair in giving the teachers and officers an opportunity to discuss and advise in their salary legislation.

The school personnel of Washington is most anxious to do a good job. We believe that the report of the joint legislative council represents the best thinking of the teachers and officers of the system.

Although it was regretted that the recommendations of the joint legislative council were not accepted in full, the majority of the teachers and officers have endorsed Dr. Corning's proposal. Mr. BATES. Is that, all, Miss Moore?

Miss MOORE. Yes; that is the viewpoint of the council.
Mr. BATES. Thank you very much.

The next witness will be James W. Taylor, president of the Elementary Classroom Teachers Association, divisions 1 to 9.

STATEMENT OF JAMES W. TAYLOR, PRESIDENT, ELEMENTARY CLASSROOM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, DIVISIONS 1 TO 9

Mr. TAYLOR. I am going to cut this as short as possible, Mr. Bates, and slide over a few things. I think you know we are very interested in the children in our schools, and the fact that we are not giving many of them a full share of education and many of them are facing a succession of temporary teachers and we fully recognize that the temporary teachers are making a definite contribution to our schools now, but when you do get a child with nine temporary teachers in a year he does not make much progress, because it takes at least a month to get settled on what a child needs, his interests and the kind of program you are going to build for him.

We also know that there are other factors in the problem besides the salary schedule, but we feel this is a vital one in attracting teachers and in retaining teachers, so for the 683 members of our Elementary Classroom Teachers Association, Divisions 1 to 9, I would like to say with respect to the Board of Education's proposals that most important to us is the fact that you do provide in those proposals a new salary qualification on the elementary level, requiring the master's degree for eligibility.

You know that 15 years ago they introduced the requirement of the bachelor of arts degree but left our salary schedule $200 below the level of the junior high school which required a bachelor of arts degree.

I think on the basis of that you have figured our increase as 78 percent, from $1.425 to $2,500. We like to think of the fact that it should have been $1,600 even then, which would work us down to an increase of 56 percent, and in spite of the fact that we are pretty low to be brought up from in the first place.

The second thing that does is give us an opportunity in the elementary school to go ahead and become better prepared to teach and receive some recognition of the fact that we have done that.

Up to this time, the elementary teacher has obtained a master's degree, and there has been provision on the junior high on the vocational level for her to receive the salary of the high-school teacher.

In our present law that is not provided for and the Board of Education proposals do create that qualification, which we feel is a definite inequity and we are very encouraged to see that it has a chance of being improved.

The Board of Education proposals also provide higher minimum salaries.