A Report of a Survey of the University System of Georgia Submitted to the REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA s. 20 IVY STREET, E. ATLANTA, GEORGIA DECEMBER 15, 1949 BOARD OF REGENTS UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA (March 1, 1950) 20 Ivy Street, S. E., Atlanta State at Large State at Large State at Large State at Large State at Large First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Ninth Tenth MRS. WILLIAM T. HEALEY 2774 Andrews Dr., N.W., January 18, 1950-January 1, 1953 Atlanta JOHN J. McDONOUGH Georgia Power Company, January 1, 1950-January 1, 1957 Rome FRANK M. SPRATLIN 78 Mar:etta St., N.W., January 1, 1946-January 1, 1953 Atlanta HUGHES SPALDING 434 Trust Co. of Ga. Bldg., January 10, 1949-January 1, 1956 Atlanta CAREY WILLIAMS January 10, 1949-January 1, 1955 JAMES PETERSON January 10, 1949-January 1, 1955 Greensboro Soperton H. L. WINGATE January 1, 1947-January 1, 1954 Pelham CASON J. CALLAWAY January 1, 1944-January 1, 1951 Hamilton ROBERT O. ARNOLD January 10, 1949-January 1, 1956 Covington RUTHERFORD L. ELLIS P. O. Box 1111, January 1, 1947-January 1, 1954 Atlanta CHARLES J. BLOCH 614-18 Persons Building, January 7, 1950-January 1, 1957 Macon Roy N. EMMET January 1, 1945-January 1, 1952 Cedartown FRANCIS STUBBS, SR. January 12, 195Q-January 1, 1957 Douglas SANDY BEAVER January 1, 1945-January 1, 1952 Gainesville WILLIAM S. MORRIS January 1, 1944-January 1, 1951 Augusta OFFICERS OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS Chairman HUGHES SPALDING Vice-Chairman . ROBERT O. ARNOLD Chancellor HARMON W. CALDWELL Assistant to the Chancellor JoHN E. SIMS Executive Secretary L. R. SIEBERT Treasurer W. WILSON NOYES Auditor JAMES A. BLISSIT A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA ~- The persons whose names appear below are listed in the order in which their contributions appear in the text. Major responsibility was assumed in each case by one or more persons with special competence in each of the areas of inquiry. However, frequent conferences of the several members of the staff were held and the Report is, in its entirety, a staff report. GEORGE D. STRAYER-Professor Emeritus of Education, and formerly Director, Division of Field Studies, Institute of Educational Research, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, New York-Director of the Survey. ARTHUR J. KLEIN-Dean Emeritus, College of Education, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio-The Program of Higher Education. F. W. HART-Professor Emeritus of Education-University of California, Berkeley, California-The Physical Plant of the University System. MARY DE GARMO BRYAN-Professor of Institution Management and Supervisor of Food Services, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, New York-Student Living. R. W. KETTLER-Controller, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana-The Financial Administration of the University System. H. C. SHERER-Auditing Division, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois-Assistant to R. W. Kettler on The Financial Administration of the University System. FREDERICK M. HUNTER-Honorary Chancellor of the Oregon State System of Higher Education, Eugene, Oregon-The Administration of the University System. THAD L. HUNGATE-Controller, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, New York-Financing the Future of the University System. FOREWORD On the twentieth day of July, 1949, the Regents of the University System of Georgia entered into a contract-with George D. Strayer, formerly Director of the Division of Field Studies of the Institute of Educational Research, Teachers College, Columbia University, for the conduct of a survey of the University System of Georgia. The agreement provided that the survey should include inquiries and should report concerning: "(a) The elimination of unnecessary units in the System. (b) The elimination of unnecessary functions in the remaining units. (c) The elimination of unnecessary duplication of essential functions in the various units. (d) The functions of junior colleges and whether these units should be continued as a part of the University System or should be turned over to local boards of instruction. (e) Comparative costs of each type of service in each unit of the System and the scope of graduate work and adult education programs. (f) A clarification of administrative responsibilities, policies and authority, and a coordination of administrative functions between the different units. (g) Approved, uniform accounting procedures and efficient purchasing systems. (h) The most efficient teaching loads and recommendations with respect to base salaries, policy for salary advancement, and the Regents' plan for retirement of aging faculty members. (i) Student housing and dining hall operations with suggested changes. (j) The allocations which should be made by the Legislature to the support of the University System. (k) Such other procedures as both parties may deem appropriate." The Director of the Survey was fortunate in securing the cooperation of a staff of men and women of highest competence. The work of the survey was begun in the field on the first of September and continued to the fifteenth of December. The Report of the Survey and a digest of the Report were submitted to the Board of Regents on December 15, 1949. In the conduct of the inquiry the members of the Survey Staff enjoyed the most generous cooperation of the Board of Regents, of the Chancellor of the University System and members of his I staff, of the presidents, deans, controllers, and other adminis- trative officers, and of members of the faculties of the several institutions of the University System. Without the help so generously furnished in the gathering and assembling of data, this Report could not have been completed in time for the consideration of the Regents at their December meeting nor for action by the Legislature in January. The problems arising in connection with the inquiry were discussed with responsible representatives of the several institutions of the University System. The findings and recommendations of the survey have been reviewed with the Chancellor. It is the hope of the Survey Staff that this Report may receive the thoughtful consideration of the Board of Regents, the Chancellor and his staff, the administrative officers and faculties of the constituent members of the University System, the officers of the State government, the members of the Legislature of Georgia, and other citizens of the State. GEORGE D. STRAYER, D~rect()r. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I The Program of Higher Education________________ 1 Responsibilities of the Regents____________________________________________________ 1 Preparation of College and Public School Teachers___________________________ 3 Allocation of Teacher Preparation to Institutions 10 Raising the Standards of Preparation in the Special Fields 26 Facilities Needed by Higher Institutions to Perform Teacher Education Functions 29 Upgrading of Teachers in Service ----- 32 Research, Professional Education, and Graduate Work. 34 Organization of Research__________________________________________________________________________ 57 Selected Relationships of the Graduate SchooL 61 An Extension System_______________________________________________________________________________ 64 Functions of the Several Institutions of the University SystenL 71 Chapter II The Program and Administration of the Junior Colleges 81 An Expanded Program of Secondary Education 81 Place and Program of the Junior College 81 Program Adapted to Varying Needs and Abilities 82 Junior College Should Provide Adult Education 84 Junior Colleges Should Be Independent of the University System 85 Major Adjustments Necessary to Independent Status 87 Junior Colleges Administered by Local Boards 87 General Supervision by State Board of Education___________________________ 91 Junior College Support, State and LocaL 91 Four-Year Type-Grades 11 through 14-Desirable 93 Chapter III The Physical Plant of the University System of Georgia 95 Physical Plant Shapes Educational Program 95 Overcrowding in Dormitories a Serious Health Hazard 96 Fire Hazard in Student Housing 97 Overall Condition of Buildings 99 Deferred Maintenance 103 Current Use of Instructional Space 104 Physical Plant Needs 113 Estimated Cost of Recommended Plant Program 125 Plant Development Responsibility of Regents and Central Administration 126 Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development Recommended 126 Chapter IV Student Living 129 Magnitude of Residence Housing Problem 129 College-Operated Residence Halls 129 Space and Facilities in Student Rooms 132 Equipment and Supplies in Student Rooms 133 Bathroom and Sanitary Facilities 136 Charges for Board and Lodging 137 Social Rooms, Equipment, and Facilities 139 Service Rooms -------------------- ------------------------- 140 Residence Hall Staffs --------------- 142 College-Operated Food Services 143 Functions of Food Service ------ 143 Food Must Be Nutritionally Adequate ~ 145 Cost of Food Services ----- 148 Provisions for Sanitation -------------- 155 Personnel --------------------- 157 Chapter V The Financial Administration of the University System ------ 160 The Board of Regents and the State 161 Administration of Funds a Board Function 163 Authority for all Procurement Should Be Vested in the Regents 167 The Board of Regents and its Central Office 169 Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement Recommended 178 Continuous Program of Internal Audit 188 Institutional Financial Administration 189 Delegation of Procurement to Institutions Where Advantageous 203 Further Revision of Financial Reporting Needed 204 Need for Perpetual Inventories 206 Summary of Suggestions and Recommendations 215 Chapter VI The Administration of the University System. 219 Needs in Central Administration 219 Recommended Administrative Organization Chart 225 A Proposed Administrative Code 226 The Goals of Higher Education in Georgia 226 Institutions of the University System 229 The Board of Regents-Officers and Committees 231 The Chancellor-Qualifications, Duties, and Staff 232 The Presidents-Selection, Qualifications, and Duties 235 The University Advisory CounciL 236 Coordination Policy-Special Inter-institutional Councils 238 Upgrading of Professional Personnel by Appropriate Board Policies__241 By-Laws of the Board 242 Chapter VII Financing the Future of the University System 254 Factors Posing Problems of Finance 254 Quantitative Characteristics-Background Data on Enrollment, Staff, and Finance 257 Demand for Higher Education in Georgia 263 Institutional Costs-Teaching Loads, Salaries, Retirement.. 278 Institutional Support-Ability and Effort 310 Total Cost of Higher Education and Family Ability to Pay 327 Recommendations for Financing the University System of Georgia._331 Summary 343 CHAPTER I THE PROGRAM OF HIGHER EDUCATION The competitive ambitions of individual institutions must be subordinated to the responsibilities of the state-wide system of higher education. The Regents of the University System of Georgia are the trustees of the people of the State for the development and operation of statewide opportunities for all public higher education in the State. The fact that the Regents are responsible for a system of higher education places them in a quite different position from that held by the trustees or governing board of a single institution. The success of the governing board of a single institution is measured by the degree to which it promotes the welfare and reputation of that institution in competition with other institutions as well as with respect to the excellence of its educational program. The accomplishments of the Board of Regents of a state system of higher education are measured by its success in using the funds available for the State's higher educational effort in ways that will produce the greatest possible educational results and will prevent undesirable competition and duplication among the institutions in the system. The fundamental responsibility of the Regents of a state system of higher education is the State as a whole and it is compelled, therefore, if it does its job well, to subordinate the development of each of the institutions under its control to this larger basic obligation. The task of the Regents is made difficult by the fact that it is hard for the administrative officers, faculty, student bodies, and alumni of each of the separate institutions to subordinate their personal loyalties to their own institutions to the accomplishment of the state-wide obligations that should be the dominant concern of the Regents of the state system. The task cannot be accomplished if individual members of the Board of Regents share these institutional loyalties to an extent that leads them to function upon the governing board as special advocates and promoters of their favorite institutions. The dangers of institutional pressures upon individual members of the Board, and of board members themselves serving as special advocates for the institutions with which they have the closest associations of residence and educational experience, have led some states to place legal limitations upon board membership which are designed to minimize the distortions of fundamental objectives that arise from these sourceS. The Survey Staff does not 1 2 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF recommend any change in the structure or method of appointment of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia; attention is called to these matters merely to emphasize the di!ficult character of the task of the Board of Regents and the necessity that it hew to the line of its basic obligation with determination and at the risk of considerable criticism. The Board of Regents of a system should delegate responsibility for carrying on specific activities and functions to individual institutions and should maintain its own authority through supervisory officers. If the Board of Regents of a state-wide system of higher education had sufficient wisdom, knowledge, time, and a miraculous mobility which would enable it always to be on the right spot at the right time, it might undertake to administer the institutions under its control directly and in detail. Obviously, these conditions do not exist anywhere, although boards in some instances have undertaken in greater or less degree to act as though they did. Fortunately, perhaps, when this has been the case, even in states with only three or four higher institutions, the results have been so disastrous that delegation of large powers and duties to institutional administrative officers and faculties has been accepted as sound procedure for the functioning of central boards. Yet such institutional delegation serves to accomplish the basic, coordinating responsibilities of a central board only when it operates within clearly defined limits with respect to finances, orderly administration, and educational programs. This section of the survey report is concerned solely with the control by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia over the educational programs of the institutions of the System. It is in the area of educational program that the most delicate balance has to be maintained between the exercise of board authority and the actual operation of educational processes by the institutions themselves. No half-way intelligent board will assume that it has the knowledge which will enable it, first hand, to determine content of courses and curricula in the great variety of fields that are included in a higher educational program; to select the research problems that should be attacked and the detailed supplies and equipment necessary for their prosecution; or to prescribe the methods appropriate to specific features of instruction or of research. The initiative of local institutional administrative officers and faculties must be preserved and their energies and abilities must be released rather than cramped and held in check. The accomplishment of these things simultaneously with the exercise of the coordinating controls that are the Board's responsibility is not a simple or easy matter in actual practice, but the THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 3 principle by which such accomplishment should be sought is easy to state. The Board should assign specific functions and activities to each institution and thereafter exercise only so much supervision of the performance of these allocations as to insure that they are actually performed in accordance with acceptable standards and that the institution does not undertake functions and activities that have not been allocated to it. Such supervision as is here suggested cannot be conducted in any first-hand sense by the Board itself. Hence, the necessity that it employ a trained and competent executive officer for these purposes. Commonly, as in the Georgia System, this officer is known as the Chancellor of the University System. In a system as large and varied as that of Georgia, it is necessary that the Chancellor be assisted by, and direct the activities of, a number of persons with specialized competence with respect to the various groups of activities involved. Recommendations are made by another portion of this report with respect to the number and duties of these assistants to the Chancellor in the University System of Georgia; this section of the report deals with some of the matters with which the proposed Assistant to the Chancellor in Charge of Instruction will deal. The discussion that follows is, therefore, concerned primarily with the allocation of educational functions to the various institutions; only incidentally are other problems discussed for the purposes that are related to clarification of the allocations proposed. Because of the importance of certain areas of education in the total state picture, the discussion has been organized about three major topics. They are as follows: 1. Education for professional service in institutions of higher education and in the public schools. 2. Graduate and professional education and research. 3. Distinctive functions and allocations to each of the institutions. EDUCATION FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS The most important contribution that the institutions of higher education of Georgia can make to the social and economic development of the State is that of preparing professional personnel for service in junior and senior colleges and in elementary and high schools. 4 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The system of higher education should prepare college and university teachers and administrators. College and university teachers prepare the leaders- in the applications of scientific, social, economic, and humanistic knowledge to the practical business of living, and furnish the scholars and research workers who develop new knowledge and new uses for knowledge already attained. One important aspect of their functions is the constant replenishment of the supply of college and university teachers who can continue these tasks with increased effectiveness. Another is the preparation of teachers for the elementary and secondary schools who prepare and select students for college attendance, and provide education for participation in the social and economic life of the world by the very large percentage of youth who will never attend a college or university. In Georgia, in 1940, approximately 87 per cent of the white population and 98 per cent of the Negro population of 25 years of age and over had never even entered college. Undoubtedly this situation has improved since 1940, but an enormous task remains if teachers are to be furnished to the great numbers who will never attend college, but who should find useful and happy places in our common life. This means that preparation of college teachers specifically qualified to guide and direct the learning of prospective public school teachers is an urgent need in Georgia. It means, probably, that a larger percentage of the manpower of college and university teaching should be devoted to the preparation of public school teachers and to the preparation of college teachers of teachers than to any other single purpose. Although studies show clearly that a very large percentage of persons who receive Doctor's and Master's degrees enter college teaching, the objectives sought in their preparation almost never face the fact that one of their major functions will be that of preparing elementary and secondary teachers for the public schools. The task of preparing college and university teachers who will in turn prepare public school teachers, is not solelyor even mainly-a task of colleges of education, although they should have important contributions to make. The task of the public school teachers is to include, along with college preparatory work, the best possible service to the 80 per cent of school youth who never reach college. Therefore, their college teachers in the subject matter fields and areas should be prepared to assist them to command and evaluate the content of the subjects taught in relationship to their use for the kinds of lives that these students will actually lead. College teachers cannot do this effectively unless their training or experience, or both, has made them aware of and sympathetic to this purpose of the public schools. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 5 The problem of preparing college teachers falls within the scope of the level and functions of only two institutions in the University System of Georgia-the Georgia Institute of Technology and The University of Georgia. The major portion of this obligation rests, and should continue to rest, upon the University. If it is to perform this task and also prepare other types of professional practitioners, as well as develop scholars and research workers, two developments will be necessary: (1) a much more extensive program leading to Master's and Doctor's degrees; and (2) the organization of its program of graduate work in accordance with patterns differentiated on the basis of whether they are designed to serve the purposes of professional practitioners, or those of high level subject matter scholarship and research. Failure to recognize and make provision for this differentiation in requirements and content of graduate work threatens the influence and support of graduate work, especially at the Master's level. Considerable doubt has been expressed in a number of states concerning the value of graduate work for teachers. Serious attempts are being made by public school people to find other requirements which will more validly qualify for salary increments, promotions and renewal of teaching certificates. These doubts do not arise from any belief that the educational profession does not have the problems and the materials which demand training at the graduate level. They arise, primarily, because of the limited nature of the graduate programs that are approved by graduate schools. These programs are, on the whole, characterized by intensive subject matter specialization and by the imposition of requirements and hurdles that are almost meaningless in the advanced professional preparation of either public school or college teachers. The statement is frequently made that these requirements are such as to tend positively to disqualify public school teachers for the performance of their function in the school. Obviously, in terms of the numbers who should be trained as college teachers it is a very small percentage of the number that should be prepared as public school teachers and administrators. But, at least so far as preparation of public school teachers is concerned, the preparation of college teachers is the key to raising the general level of educational, social, and economic competence in the State as a whole. The task is one of providing the other colleges and universities of the State with a considerable number of well-qualified college teachers annually. This responsibility is supplemented by the further obligation to provide, to the fullest extent possible, opportunities to Georgia youth to qualify for college and university service within and outside the State. 6 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF At the present such opportunities exist at the Doctor's level in only three fields at the University of Georgia, and actually in one and potentially in three at Georgia Tech. Georgia's young men and women scholars must, in most fields, go outside the State for advanced training designed to qualify them as college teachers. Many of them do not return. Many fail to continue, since it is an established fact that, even at the graduate and professional levels, local opportunities for training increase significantly the number of persons who go on to such training. In either case Georgia loses valuable contributors to its development. PERSONNEL FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL SERVICE A fairly correct estimate can be made concerning the relationship between demand and supply of professionally trained persons for the public schools. The Survey of Public Education of Less Than College Grade in Georgia, published in 1947, estimated an annual turnover of 2,715 white and 1,341 Negro teachers. On the basis of raising the standards of teacher qualification to four years of college education, the report estimated that each year, for a ten-year period, 4,300 white and 2,000 Negro teachers will be needed to provide repJacements for normal withdrawals, for anticipated increases in enrollments and services, and for replacement of emergency teachers. The Survey Staff has not been able to make the studies necessary to check the accuracy of these estimates. Provision should be made in the State for continuous study of this matter, and this may well be committed to the Bureau of Educational Studies and Field Services, in the College of Education at the University of Georgia. For the purposes of this survey, the general estimate of a gross need for an annual supply of from 4,000 to 4,500 new white and from 1,800 to 2,000 new Negro teachers is all that is necessary as a guide for its recommendations concerning the development of college facilities for teacher education. This estimate seems justified by normal turnover rates, by trends of enrollment in public schools, and by well-known facts concerning the number of sub-standard teachers now in public school service. T~aining opportunities should be provided beyond those needed to meet current standards. The task that lies ahead in providing training for teachers who will meet the minimum standard of four years of college training is, of THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 7 course, only part of the problem. If Georgia schools are to catch up with and keep abreast of public education in the United States, the present standards of bachelor degree training in a planned professional curriculum will be a minimum standard; incentives -and opportunities will need to be provided for preparation of master teachers, supervisors, and ad'ministrators at the Master's degree level. Pending the time when. preparation at this level becomes standard, limited development of opportunities to secure such preparation should be extended beyond present facilities. How rapidly this development will be made cannot be estimated with accuracy, but the splendid progress already attained in reaching a minimum standard of training for the Bachelor's degree for high school teachers indicates that the need is not remote nor merely speculative. It is, however, impossible to secure basic and normal figures upon which to measure the size of this task in the same way as for demand on the basis of standards actually existing. Facilities for training are inadequate in certain fields. The size of the future task of meeting the need for training numbers sufficient to meet the existing standard is, of course, measured in part by the number that may be prepared at present with the facilities that already exist. The survey of the public schools of Georgia made in 1947, states that in the normal years before 1940 all colleges for white, both public and private, graduated fewer than 1,000 teachers annually; and that the institutions for Negroes graduated fewer than 300. These numbers declined during the war years to a low in 1944-45 of a combined total of less than 300 white and Negro elementary and high school teachers. In 1945-46, the number enrolled in teacher education programs increased to about 50 per cent of the number preparing to teach just preceding the war. This tendency to increase has continued so that in 1949-50 it is probable that enrollments registered in degree programs leading to qualification for teachers' certificates on the Bachelor's level, are considerably more than half the number preparing to teach before the war. There is considerable reason to believe that the facilities of the State, public and private, for the education of teachers at the Bachelor's degree level have not been materially expanded beyond those available prior to the war. If it is assumed that enrollment in teacher education at that time used only two-thirds of the facilities of plant and college personnel available for this purpose, it seems likely that the facilities now available are adequate probably for less than one-half the needs of the State. This dearth of facilities is, however, not a problem of multiplying the number of institutions at which such facilities should be provided. It is a problem of improving and increasing the facilities 8 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF of the institutions that are best able to prepare teachers at the levels and in the fields that the needs of the State justify. Thus far, this discussion has been confined to the problem of teacher needs and supply in only gross terms which lump together all types of needs and levels of public school teaching. The problem of preparation of teachers cannot be dealt with in actual practice in these terms. Teachers do not constitute a single body of persons with interchangeable functions; they must be prepared for a great variety of distinct services and the training furnished must be designed to produce teachers for each level and field of school activity. Further, the practical problem in Georgia, as in other states, must be attacked both from the standpoint of pre-service training and from the standpoint of upgrading teachers already in service who have sub-standard preparation. Subsequent sections of this portion of the survey report dealing with the preparation of public school teachers will, therefore, discuss: (1) the preparation of elementary teachers; (2) the preparation of secondary school teachers; and (3) the allocation of these functions to the various institutions. The preparation of professional personnel for service in the elementary schools is a more difficult and important task than that for any other phase of public school service. The preparation of elementary teachers is not only the biggest task from the standpoint of sheer numbers needed, but it is also the most difficult from the standpoint of higher education. The processes and content of a program that results in a teacher competent to do the job that should be done with small children depart more widely than any other level or field of teacher education from the conventional procedures and subject matters of college training. This period is more significant in determining the child's entire future development than any other period of school life, and its importance is still further emphasized by the fact that all children are subjected to its influence. If the teacher in the elementary school is to deal competently with all of the aspects of child growth and development, this involves a broad and varied knowledge on the part of the teacher, a command of a large number of specific skills, professional expertness in the psychology of child growth and development, and professional techniques of a very special character. The development and carrying on of the educational processes that will prepare a high school graduate to become competent enough in a four-year period to undertake these responsibilities with respect to children is a very difficult problem indeed. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 9 The college and university teachers who have this problem to solve need a higher level and a broader training themselves than is the case of college teachers who can devote all of their time to the pursuit of one small aspect of knowledge without much concern as to how the college student will use it. The college teacher engaged in the preparation of teachers for elementary schools must, at every stage of the process and in every subject matter field, be aware of and concerned about the contribution that his efforts may make to the production of a competent elementary teacher. It is necessary that certain aspects of elementary teacher preparation involve wide departure from standard organizations and classifications of college subject matter and that certain methods of instruction used in conventional college classes be drastically modified. Experience has shown that one part of the process of preparing an elementary teacher that cannot be safely omitted is actual practice under close supervision of the total job of teaching elementary school children. Such student teaching is, to a degree, the test of the effectiveness of the contribution of each college teacher to the total process; but it is even more important as a means for teaching the student to bring together and unify the separate aspects of his learning in actual application on the job. The demands of effective elementary teacher preparation are such, therefore, that, even more than is the case in the preparation of secondary school teachers, the unit or institution that is most familiar with and concerned about the matter,-the college or department of education,-should have a very large degree of authority and autonomy in determining the content and procedures to be used in the process. The task of preparing professional personnel for service in public secondary schools is as varied as the instruction and services provided by the schools. The task of preparing secondary school teachers at the Bachelor's level is not so great in terms of numbers as is the preparation of elementary teachers, nor does this preparation involve as great departure from conventional organization and content of undergraduate college courses. Secondary school teaching is, however, segmented into many distinct areas of specialized functions, each of which requires preparation that differs significantly from preparation in other areas. The history teacher requires different preparation from the chemistry teacher; the teacher of agriculture from the teacher of business subjects. This subdivision is much more apparent and much more real than is the case 10 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF in the preparation of elementary teachers. Nevertheless, traditional subjects such as history, civics, and economics tend more and more to be fused, in the modern high school, into the one field of social studies, and biology tends to take the place of separate c-ourses in botany, zoology, and physiology. It is believed that the purposes of secondary education may, in certain instances, be better served by courses that consciously relate traditionally separate subjects to general principles and problems that have reality for the student. But there still remain many of the traditional subject divisions with separate and independent status corresponding to the specialized departments of the usual college of arts and sciences. In these instances the secondary school teacher has the difficult problem of vitalizing the normally weak academic interest of the average high school pupil in these subjects, by teaching methods that relate them to interests that are deeper than those of school success. The prospective high school teacher needs assistance from his college teachers in determining what these methods are and how they may best be used. THE ALLOCATION OF TEACHER PREPARATION TO INSTITUTIONS This portion of the survey report is concerned with the allocation of teacher education functions to the various public institutions of the University System of Georgia. It is fully recognized that several of the excellent private institutions of the State which have a real, and not a perfunctory, interest in the preparation of teachers, will and should continue to make their contributions to the total task. The extent and nature of this contribution should be determined upon the basis of careful study and detailed inter-institutional agreements which can be made only through continuing cooperative consideration by the agencies involved. It is believed by the Survey Staff that an appropriate meeting ground in this connection is the Georgia Council on Teacher Education which has been functioning for some time and which includes representatives of public and private higher institutions, of the public schools, the Georgia Education Association, the State Department of Education, the State Board of Education, and of the Regents of the University System of Georgia. It should be an excellent instrument for the identification of the studies needed, and for the cooperative exploration of desirable agreements concerning the part that the private institutions are prepared to play in the preparation of professional personnel in the public schools. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 11 The Survey Staff is convinced, however, that any contribution by the private higher institutions that proves practical will constitute a relatively small percentage of the total. In any case, the basic responsibility for the preparation of persons to serve in the public schools rests with public agencies. The public higher institutions of the State must, therefore, be equipped and staffed to prepare every type of professional personnel required by the public schools, even though such training is not and should not be in all its aspects a monopoly of these institutions. In considering the allocation of the preparation of professional personnel for public school service to the various public higher institutions of the State, it is desirable to treat the preparation of elementary and secondary school personnel separately. This is desirable because of the great numbers demanded by the elementary schools, because of the greater unity of training appropriate for elementary school teachers, and because effective elementary school preparation demands more extensive departure from the usual subject matter courses of conventional college programs. A broad general education is a necessary portion of any program for the preparation of personnel for service in the public schools. It should be emphasized at this point that professional personnel for service in elementary and secondary schools cannot be satisfactorily prepared for their special functions unless their college training includes careful provision for their general education. This can be accomplished in neither case by the requirement that a specified block of the student's time be devoted to the sampling of unrelated courses designed to lay the groundwork for specialization in the subjects that they treat. The student cannot secure perspective and related understanding of the world in which he lives through such studies. In many instances the professors who give the work have not and cannot make the syntheses that they presumably expect the student to make unaided. This is not general education in any cultural or sociological sense. It will not serve to provide the over-all understandings that both elementary and secondary school teachers need if they are to make the world come alive for their pupils. Both need general education in a realistic sense which fuses the world of work with the humanities and the sciences and treats the social studies in terms of the major problems of society. For both, therefore, as well as for other college students, serious modification of existing programs is required if the purposes of general education are to be accomplished. 12 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Elementary school preparation cannot be provided on an adequate scale by one institution. Attention has been called to the great numbers of elementary school teachers that must be given training if annual replacements and the needs of an expanding elementary school are to be met. This real and potential demand is so great that it is impossible to assume that the task can be performed at anyone institution. Another important limiting factor on the practical expansion of elementary teacher education in any institution is the supply of children available for attendance at the laboratory school which must be maintained if a satisfactory program of elementary teacher education is performed. Another somewhat similar limitation is the number of rural and urban elementary schools which may be used for student teaching in normal and typical school situations. Further, experience shows that if students are to be recruited for elementary teacher preparation in sufficient numbers, it is necessary that training facilities for this purpose be available within reasonable distance of their homes. On the other hand, in view of the limited resources available in Georgia, it is the judgment of the Survey Staff that adequate facilities for the kind of elementary teacher preparation that the children of the State deserve cannot be provided at all the institutions now under the jurisdiction of the Regents of the University System. ALLOCATIONS OF PREPARATION OF PERSONNEL FOR SERVICE IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS In view of these considerations the Survey Staff recommends: 1. That no teacher education, as such, be conducted by the junior colleges. This recommendation is intended to apply whether the recommendations of the Survey Staff with respect to the control and development of a junior college system in the State are or are not adopted. It is not intended, however, to restrict the junior colleges in offering two-year programs of general education appropriate for use in transferring to the teacher education programs of the senior colleges which do not require highly specialized lower division preparation. 2. That the Georgia Institute of Technology should not enter this field. 3. That the Valdosta State College confine its teacher education program to the preparation of elementary teachers at the Bachelor's level. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 13 4. That the North Georgia College at Dahlonega limit its teacher education program to the preparation of elementary teachers at the Bachelor's level. 5. That the Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville include in its teacher education program the preparation of elementary teachers at the Bachelor's level only until such time as it is clearly demonstrated that there is need for another institution to prepare elementary teachers at the Master's level. 6. That the Georgia Teachers College at Statesboro, which has the sole function of teacher preparation, include in its program the preparation of elementary teachers at both the Bachelor's and Master's levels and of elementary principals and supervisors at the Master's level. 7. That the University of Georgia at Athens undertake complete coverage in the preparation of professional personnel for elementary school service; at the Bachelor's level to meet minimum desirable qualifications; at the Master's level for master elementary teachers, for elementary principals, and for supervisors; and at the Doctor's level, for the preparation of college teachers and research workers in the elementary field. 8. That the Atlanta Division of the University of Georgia-or, if the recommendations of this survey with respect to this enterprise are adopted, the Atlanta College of the University System-abstain entirely from entering the field of preparing elementary school personnel, except as two years of general education, as previously defined by this report, may be regarded as qualifying for transfer to one of the teacher education units preparing elementary teachers. Nor should the unit at Atlanta enter the field of preparing elementary principals or supervisors at the Master's level; these functions should be the responsibility of the University and of the Georgia Teachers College only. 9. That the Albany State College develop its program and facilities for the preparation of elementary teachers to the highest possible degree. It is the intent of this recommendation to suggest that the major specialized field of the college at Albany be that of elementary education comparable to the major specialization at Savannah in the industrial field, and at Fort Valley in the field of agriculture. This means that Albany should be the one institution for the preparation of nursery school and kindergarten teachers and that it should take the leadership in developing an elementary training program for Negro teachers on the Bachelor's level that will provide a sound basis for a 14 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Master's degree program in the elementary area for teachers, principals, and supervisors when demand for such preparation justifies this development. 10. Savannah State College and Fort Valley State College should confine their elementary programs to the preparation of teachers at the Bachelor's level for service in grades one to eight. They should not look forward to the development in the foreseeable future of the Master's degree in the elementary field. THE ALLOCATION OF THE PREPARATION OF PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL FOR SERVICE IN THE SECONDARY SCHOOLS As has already been noted, preparation of professional personnel for service in the secondary schools is, of necessity, much more highly segmented than is the case of preparation for service in elementary schools. It is necessary, therefore, to consider the allocation of each of these segmentations to the various institutions in terms of the probable demands in each case and with reference to other elements of the programs of the institutions which better qualify some of them for specific areas of preparation than is the case elsewhere. Included in the list of distinct functions that follows are certain areas of specialized training that are not confined in application to secondary school service alone. They are included since they require a degree of specialization more nearly comparable with that of secondary school preparation than the training required for elementary school service. 1. Teachers of the so-called academic subjects: English History Economics Civics Each of the foreign languages-ancient and modern Mathematics Chemistry Physics Botany Zoology 2. Teachers of the so-called special fields: Agriculture Home Economics Health and Physical Education Fine Arts-both graphic and plastic THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 15 Industrial Arts Secretarial and Distributive Education Music Education for the handicapped, exceptional children, lJ,nd the retarded 3. Personnel for special and administrative services: Secondary school principals School superintendents Counselors School psychologists Supervisors Research and statistical specialists School nurses Visiting teachers Teacher-librarians Specialists in auditory and visual aids Attention has been called to the fact that certain of the subjects listed among those called "academic" are sometimes in high school programs fused into one field or subject, for example, in social studies or in biology. When this is done the problem of teacher preparation for the combined field is quite different from the problem for each of the conventional subdivisions of knowledge that contribute to the more general subject. Attention should also be called to the fact that agriculture, home economics, health and physical education and practically all of the areas of teacher education listed under the "special" fields, represent similar selection and relating of distinct subjects for the purpose of accomplishing what these subjects treated separately cannot accomplish. The same observation holds also to a large degree for the special and administrative school services. With this large number of distinct and specialized types of secondary and general service functions to be provided for, the task of allocation to the several institutions of the University System of Georgia would be extremely difficult were it not for two considerations: first, the small number required to fill the positions that are likely to be open in Georgia in a considerable number of these areas; and, second, the fact that the existing facilities and programs, upon which a number of these school service training programs must depend, are not widely scattered among the several institutions. It will simplify consideration of the whole matter, therefore, if school service positions are first considered for which demand is so restricted and facilities now so highly concentrated that one, or at most two or three of the existing institutions, can be expected to handle the total demand with the least expense to the State. Each of these will be 16 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF discussed in a brief paragraph and the allocations recommended by the Survey Staff indicated. Teachers of Vocational Agriculture should be prepared exclusively by the University and, when facilities are available, by the Fort Valley State College. The Survey Staff is informed by competent authority that the exist- ing supply of teachers of vocational agriculture is adequate to meet current demands and that the University of Georgia is prepared to furnish annually the eighteen or twenty new teachers that will be re- quired for replacements and for expansions that may reasonably be expected in the secondary schools for white students. Since the num- ber involved is small and since the only institution that has basic and advanced work in the general field of agriculture is the University, it is recommended that the preparation of teachers of agriculture for service in the high schools and in junior colleges and senior colleges be assigned to the University alone. . Of the three higher institutions for Negro students, the one at Fort Valley is the only one that by reason of its location, land resources, and already assigned major function is in a position to develop a sound program in the field of general agriculture as a basis for the preparation of teachers of agriculture. As is noted elsewhere in this report, it is believed that the field of basic and applied agriculture should be much more highly developed at Fort Valley than it is at present. Such development will serve many useful purposes, of which one may well be the provision of a sound subject matter program for the preparation of vocational agriculture teachers. The college does not at present conduct a program in agricultural vocational education. It is the judgment of the Survey Staff that this program should not be undertaken until the general agricultural program of the college is more highly developed and the fact established that there will be an effective demand for Negro teachers of vocational agriculture in sufficient numbers to justify the program. The office of the Chancellor of the University System should determine when these conditions have been met by consultation with the College of Agriculture at the University and with the Division of Vocational Education in the State Department of Education. Teachers of Vocational Home Economics for white schools should be prepared exclusively by the University and the College for Women at Milledgeville, and for Negro schools at Fort Valley. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 17 Teachers of home economics are now prepared at the University and at the College for Women at Milledgeville. The Survey Staff is convinced by the statements of competent authorities acnd by its own review of the facts available, that these two institutions are entirely adequate to meet the demand for vocational teachers of home economics in the white schools of the State. Each meets the fundamental conditions required for the prosecution of this work: strong basic work in home economics and practice facilities in accredited high schools with approved programs of vocational home economics. It is believed, therefore, that this function should be confined, for white students, to these two institutions in the University System of Georgia. It should be noted very definitely that this limitation has reference solely to the preparation of vocational teachers of home economics; it does not apply to programs designed to serve general education functions or to prepare for certain occupations, other than teaching, that are definite functions of home economics instruction at the college level. All of the three institutions for Negro students list programs in the preparation of high school teachers of home economics. This is justified neither by the demand for such teachers nor by the facilities of the institutions. The program at Albany has not been approved by the Regents of the University System and it is recommended that approval be withheld and that the resources that can be made available to this institution be directed to other purposes, including preparation for home economics occupations, other than teacher education, that are appropriate to the city location of the institution. It is highly desirable that the program for the preparation of vocational home economics teachers be limited to the institution at Fort Valley or to the one at Savannah. Strong arguments can be advanced for retaining the function at either of these institutions since both should have strong, basic departments in the general field of home economics and in its occupational applications other than the education of secondary school teachers. The effective demand for such teachers does not, however, justify the allocation of this teacher education function to the two institutions for Negro youth. In view of the fact that preparation of Negro home demonstration agents, who are in fact teachers, should be conducted at the institution to which the general field of agriculture is assigned, it is recommended that the preparation of vocational home economics teachers also be assigned to the institution that is primarily concerned with the production and uses 18 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF of food and with the development of rural life. This recommendation is very definitely intended to include the transfer of the function of preparing home demonstration workers from the institution at Savannah to the Fort Valley State College. This recommendation does not mean, however, that the State College at Savannah should be restricted in preparing for the other home economics occupations appropriate to its industrial service purposes; on the contrary, it should give increased emphasis to these objectives. Nor does the recommendation mean that the Fort Valley State College should not engage vigorously in the preparation for the home economics occupations that are most appropriate to its basic agricultural and rural life purposes. It is recognized that this allocation of non-teaching home economics functions to the three institutions for Negroes will result in considerable duplication. However, the Survey Staff does not regard this as undesirable duplication; it is believed that relatively local, as well as state-wide opportunities for employment in these home economics occupations are in process of development to a degree that will absorb a substantial number of properly trained persons. The major problem of the institutions will be that of identifying and making provision for practical understandings and skills in the non-teaching home economics occupations. Preparation of teachers of music for white schools should be restricted to the University and to the College for Women at Milledgeville and, for Negro schools, to the Albany State College. Teachers of music in Georgia, as is the case elsewhere, frequently function both on the elementary and secondary school levels; that is, they are responsible for the music training at both levels of the public school system. Only in the larger cities are there likely to be music teachers who are specifically and solely assigned to the secondary schools. For this reason, it is highly important that the teachers of music in the public schools have a very broad and thorough understanding of the nature of the learning process and of children at both elementary and secondary school levels. The total number required in Georgia is not extremely large. It is believed, therefore, that for the white institutions, two may serve the needs of the entire State so far as these needs are served by public higher institutions-the College for Women at Milledgeville and the University. It is recommended, therefore, that the preparation of music teachers be confined to these institutions. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 19 Aside from its central and most important area of specializationthat of preparing elementary school teachers-the Albany State College should undoubtedly be the institution for Negroe~ that emphasizes the liberal arts and sciences program. It seems entirely appropriate, therefore, that the preparation of musicians and of teachers of music should be allocated to Albany. The Survey Staff wishes to emphasize the fact that this definite limitation upon the preparation of teachers of music is in no way intended to minimize the importance of music in the programs and in the life of all of the other institutions. It is believed that each of the institutions should offer, to the fullest extent possible, a rich program of music training, especially training that leads to the development of orchestral groups, bands, and choral or other singing groups. Such training not only enriches the life of the students while they are in college but provides them with a cultural appreciation and understanding that will be of value to them throughout their lives. Therefore, competent staff members should be provided in each of the institutions for the conduct of this work and for providing leadership in making music a vital part of the life of the institution. "Majors" for teachers of health and physical education in schools for white youth should be confined to the University and the College for Women at Milledgeville. Public school demand for teachers who have specialized exclusively, or in a major sense, in the field of health and physical education and in the related area of recreation is, in fact, not large. Although health and physical education services are needed and used in all public schools, it is usually a secondary function which is combined with some other major teaching specialization. It does not seem desirable, therefore, that the full development of the facilities and personnel for major emphasis upon the field of health and physical education should be made in all, or even in a great number, of the institutions in the University System of Georgia. It is recommended that, in a major sense, the work in health and physical education leading to the Bachelor's degree should be confined to the University and to the Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville. It should be noted, however, that this limitation applies only to the major emphasis in the Bachelor's program for teachers of health and physical education. "Minors" for teachers of health and physical education should be permitted in any institution authorized to prepare secondary school teachers when it has developed a satisfactory health and physical education program for its general student body. 20 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF All students, in all institutions, no matter what their field of specialization or their educational plans, should receive thorough instruction in good health habits and should be taught to relax by physical exercise and play. All teachers and prospective teachers have a special responsibility in this matter since they, more than young people who enter other occupations, will in turn be responsible for developing health understandng and good health habits and play skills among their pupils both at the elementary and secondary school levels. To accomplish these objectives for all students, and especially for teachers, requires competent personnel and varied facilities in all of the higher institutions of the Georgia System. If these resources are provided in sufficient abundance and of the quality necessary for the performance of this function with the general student body and with prospective teachers, it is entirely probable that any of the institutions whose programs include the preparation of secondary school teachers, may well offer health and physical education in a minor sense in combination with another area of specialization for secondary public school service. Teachers of health and physical education should be prepared at the minor level only at Fort Valley State College and Savannah State College. What has been said with reference to the institutions for the white college students of Georgia is equally true of the institutions for the education of Negro youth. It is not believed, however, that any of the three institutions has reached the point in the development of physical facilities and personnel that will justify a major specialization in the field of health and physical education. It is recommended, therefore, that the Fort Valley State College and the Savannah State College, both of which are authorized to prepare secondary school teachers in other areas, improve their facilities for meeting the needs of their total student bodies as a basis for offering a program for teachers of health and physical education as a minor and as supplementary to the major preparation of teachers in other fields. While the Albany State College, along with the other institutions, should have a strong program for training its entire student body in health and recreational exercise, and special attention should be given to this field in its program for elementary teachers, it should not undertake to prepare teachers for the public secondary schools. It may be pointed out in this connection, that the recommendation has been made that the three Negro institutions all develop strong programs in the field of home economics. This area is very much concerned with nutrition and other health matters; the staffs of the home economics department should be utilized to build up and strengthen the health programs of these institutions. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 21 Leadership in the preparation of teachers of the fine arts should remain at the University, but the College for Women at Milledgeville should be permitted to offer a major for teachers in this field and the Georgia Teachers College at Sfatesboro should be permitted to offer a minor. Teachers of the fine arts in the public schools are frequently responsible for such instruction both at the elementary and secondary school levels insofar as specialized instruction is offered at the elementary level by teachers other than the room teacher. The specialized teacher in the field of fine arts, however, most normally functions in a major fashion in the secondary school. The demand for such specialized teachers in the State of Georgia is not large. Allocation of this function among the higher institutions of the University System may, therefore, easily involve an excessive provision for the preparation of specialized teachers of the fine arts. Undoubtedly, the University of Georgia at Athens has more complete provision and a higher quality of basic facilities and personnel for instruction in the fine arts than any other institution in the University System. Its program prepares artists as such, and furnishes instruction for the use of artistic design and artistic skills in many areas of activity. It is, therefore, unthinkable that the University should not be the leading institution of the State for the preparation of teachers in the field of the fine arts. In the opinion of the Survey Staff, however, it is highly desirable that the field of preparation for fine arts service in the public schools should be open both to the institution at Milledgeville and to the institution at Statesboro. In both of these institutions a high degree of art skill and understanding is needed on the part of specialized staff members if elementary teachers are to be given the skills and competence that they will need in their work as elementary teachers. It is believed that the performance of this task at Statesboro will require personnel and facilities that are also thoroughly adequate to prepare teachers of the fine arts for the secondary schools in combination with other subjects. At Milledgeville, both elementary teacher preparation and the preparation of Smith-Hughes vocational home economics teachers require the services of faculty members highly trained in the field of the fine arts. Further, it is believed that at Milledgeville it will be desirable to permit the arts college students to major in this field. For these reasons, it is recommended that the College for Women at Milledgeville be permitted to develop the preparation of fine arts teach- 22 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF ers for service in the secondary schools as a major teaching area. It is recommended also that the Georgia Teachers College be permitted to develop fine arts as a specialization in secondary education in the minor sense. Preparation of fine arts teachers for service in schools for Negro youth on a major basis should be limited to the Savannah State College, but the Fort Valley State College should be permitted to offer fine arts as a minor teaching field in combination with other secondary school teaching specializations. The field of fine arts is closely related to industrial design, to work in the industrial arts, to home economics, and to many of the employments in business. It is therefore recommended that the Savannah State College be authorized to develop a major teaching field in the fine arts, since the service of the areas named constitutes a central function of this institution. It is believed that both service to the general student body and the development of the field of home economics at the Fort Valley State College require provision for substantial fine arts instruction at this institution. It is therefore recommended that Fort Valley be authorized to offer a minor teaching field in the fine arts as a part of its secondary school program. Since it is the recommendation of the Survey Staff that the institution at Albany, aside from its specialization in the field of elementary teacher education, shall be distinguished as a college of arts and sciences for Negroes in Georgia, it seems entirely appropriate that fine arts be developed in this institution so that a major may be secured in a program of arts and sciences. It is recommended, however, that the Albany State College should not be permitted to develop a staff for offering professional training in the secondary school field in this or in any other area of secondary school service except music. These limitations upon preparation of fine arts teachers in major and minor senses by the public higher institutions of the State does not imply that the Survey Staff minimizes or undervalues the usefulness and desirability of fine arts opportunities in the other institutions of the State. Fine arts should be an elective, and even a requirement, in the general education of all students, whether teachers or otherwise. In many respects, fine arts gives a better outlet for individual creative impulses than is the case even of music, and for those who are not interested in musical skills or musical attainments, fine arts experience may provide a cultural factor that would otherwise be lacking in their education. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 23 The preparation of teachers of industrial arts should, for white students, be confined to the University and to the Georgia Teachers College, and, for Negro students, to the Savannah State College. - Attention should be called to the fact that the area of industrial arts is not designed to prepare craftsmen on the occupational level. Industrial arts is concerned with learning how to use various tools in the manipulation of a great variety of materials, and with the ability to handle the machines and gadgets that are found in almost every household and every kind of environment in our industrial civilization. It provides an outlet for creative impulses and for the development of the skills necessary to satisfy these impulses through the manipulation of materials that do not ordinarily come under the classification of fine arts subject matter. Nevertheless, industrial arts are closely related to the fine arts, and fine arts instruction and understanding are an essential element in the development of an industrial arts program, if the processes and results are to be satisfying in any sense other than the strictly and narrowly utilitarian. The two fields are frequently combined in a single department of fine and industrial arts, but more commonly they are separated as two distinct areas. Industrial arts can contribute materially to the general education of a great many people and, at the same time, provide a means by which the higher institutions may equip the teachers who, in the public schools, will carry on to their pupils the satisfactions of creative and material activities of the kinds included in the field of industrial arts. A good industrial arts program demands provision of varied and extensive shop opportunities, since, in the industrial arts as well as in the fine arts, the measure of learning is not simply that of understanding but of being able to do. The demand for specialized industrial arts teachers in the secondary field will never be very great and is, in Georgia, not as highly developed as is the case in some other states where industrial processes have for a longer period created an interest in this form of expression and skill. It is believed, therefore, that specialization in the preparation of the teachers of the industrial arts should be confined to the University and to the Teachers College at Statesboro so far as the institutions for white students are concerned. Since its major function is the industrial field and since the trade work which it has developed has given the Savannah State College the necessary shops and physical facilities for work in the field of industrial arts, and since, also, the trained staff is already there available, it is the recommendation of the Survey Staff that the preparation of 24 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF industrial arts teachers for secondary school service be confined to the institution at Savannah. All of the institutions in the University System which provide for the preparation of elementary teachers, should provide facilities whereby elementary teachers may learn, in simple fashion, the use of certain common tools that will be helpful in the preparation of materials and teaching devices for use in the elementary schools. This work may well be confined to a general course that might be called "Fine and Industrial Arts for Elementary Teachers," which should have for its purpose the development in the student of understanding of the principles of design and the manipulation of the materials that are commonly used in elementary school instruction. Preparation of vocational teachers of the commercial and distributive subjects should be limited to the University and, for Negro students, to the Savannah State College. The preparation of vocational teachers of the commercial and distributive subjects should be confined to the one institution that has a well-developed college of business administration in an environment which is able to contribute to this training the other elements that it demands. The University is the only institution for white students that satisfies these conditions. It is recognized that the preparation of teachers in this field is somewhat difficult to carryon in an institution as remote from the centers of business and trade as is the University at Athens. This difficulty is not insuperable, but will require a rearrangement of program and time for these students that will permit them to engage in the off-campus activities that are involved in this kind of training at the college level. Since the Savannah State College should be characterized by its primary concern with the industrial and business phases of educational preparation, it should be the institution where the basic subject matters in this area and business contacts are most highly developed. It is therefore recommended that it be the only institution for Negroes authorized to develop a program for the preparation of secondary school teachers of commercial and distributive subjects. V ocational trades and industrial education should be carried on exclusively by the Georgia Institute of Technology for white students, and, for Negro students, should be assigned to the Savannah State College. Trades and industrial education has for its objectives the training of tr ade and the related industrial teacher!> for evening classes in pub- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 25 lic schools and industrial plants, for all-day public trade schools, for public and plant part-time schools, and for foremanship training. A considerable part of this work is done off the campus of the institution to which it is attached. At present the only institution in the State that carries on this type of teacher education in cooperation with the State Department of Education is the Georgia Institute of Technology. This is the only element of teacher preparation that is carried on by this institution. Its appropriateness for this specific institution lies in the fact that trade and industrial education is obviously related to the central interests of the Georgia Institute of Technology. It is recommended that this function remain exclusively that of this institution. The interests of the Savannah State College are centered upon the same general family of activities as those with which the Georgia Institute of Technology is concerned, although at a quite different level. It is similarly appropriate, therefore, that vocational trades and industrial education for Negroes should be assigned exclusively to Savannah State College. Teacher-librarians should be prepared on a major basis solely at the University and on a minor basis at the College for Women at Milledgeville and the Georgia Teachers College. A teacher-librarian is a teacher who also has preparation and training to take the leadership and responsibility for the organization and use of the library resources of the school. In larger high schools there is, of course, a full-time librarian. The training here referred to does not qualify for such positions; these should require full professional library training in a library school. The demand that is now an effective demand in Georgia for teacher-librarians is not large. This fact arises in part from the very undeveloped condition of libraries in the public schools of the State. It is assumed that one of the efforts of the public schools in the immediate future will be the development of their library resources. One of the greatest and most useful instruments for the accomplishment of this purpose is the presence upon the school staff of a teacher who has had the degree of library training that is necessary to get the work under way and to carry on during the period when the library does not demand a full-time trained librarian. It is believed that the preparation of teacher-librarians should not be confined to one institution of the University System. At the same time, the Survey Staff is fully convinced that the major emphasis upon this work should be at the University of Georgia. Hence, it recommends that the University of Georgia continue its program for the preparation of teacher-librarians both on a major and a minor basis. This means that a teacher-librarian may major at the University in 26 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF the field of librarianship or, on the other hand, take a major in some field and a minor in the library function. The Survey Staff also recommends that preparation of teacher-librarians be conducted at the College for Women at Milledgeville and at the Teachers College at Statesboro, but in these institutions solely as a minor in a degree program with majors in other fields of teacher education. RAISING THE STANDARDS OF PREPARATION IN THE SPECIAL FIELDS Discussion of preparation of teachers in the special fields and of the allocation of these functions to the various institutions, has assumed that preparation of such teachers may be fairly well accomplished upon the basis of the minimum standard of a planned program designed specifically, in each case, for the field of service indicated and leading to the Bachelor's degree. The Survey Staff wishes to emphasize that this is a minimum standard. Georgia should look forward to setting up the Master's degree as a minimum in all of these special areas and should, as a step in this direction, provide incentives in the form of certification and compensation to teachers in these fields to obtain the Master's degree. It will be noted, however, that in no case does the Survey Staff recommend that any institution other than the University offer the Master's degree for teachers in these fields. It is believed that this should be, for a considerable period, the responsibility of the University alone. The College of Education of the University should provide opportunity at the Master's level in all these fields as rapidly as is consistent with the development of its programs in fields of professional school service which should require preparation on the Master's level as a minimum standard. In this connection it is desirable to call attention to the following excerpt from a statement in regard to the professional training of school personnel which was approved by the State Board of Education on February 20, 1948. This statement is extremely significant in that it indicates that the bases upon which certification has in the past been granted, will be materially changed and that each unit of the higher educational system of Georgia which plans to undertake teacher education in any of its phases will be required to undertake a planning program and submit it to the State Department for consideration and approval: "Effective for individuals who complete their training after September 1, 19.50, the professional certificate will be based upon a planned professional curriculum, four years in length, which has been approved in advance by the State Board of Education. Each training program must have been designed THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 27 to prepare for a specific teaching field or a school service and the student must have received the Bachelor's degree. Responsibility for admitting the individual to training, guiding him through the program, and for recommending him for the professional certificate will lie with the Dean of the College of Education or the Director of the Division of Teacher Education in the institution offering the training. Upon receipt of a transcript of the student's record and an application which has been signed by administrative authorities of the college, the State Department of Education will issue the professional teacher's certificate." In this connection attention should also be called to a further statement made by the State Board of Education on the same date: "Colleges preparing teachers in the State, through the State Council on Teacher Education and the Division of Teacher Education and Certification of the State Department of Education, will agree upon the principles and minimum standards to be observed in developing and implementing a professional training program. These principles and standards, when approved by the State Board of Education, will become criteria for determining when a proposed program may be approved." THE FIELDS OF SCHOOL SERVICE WHICH SHOULD REQUIRE THE MASTER'S DEGREE AS A MINIMUM STANDARD The fields of professional school service which the Survey Staff recommends for exclusive allocation to the College of Education of the University include the following: the secondary school principalship, the superintendency, school counselors and school psychologists, special teachers of the retarded and handicapped, school nurses, visiting teachers, specialists in auditory and visual aids, and research and statistical specialists. The minimum standards in all of these fields should be a Master's degree program specially planned for the accomplishment of the objective indicated and designed to produce professional personnel of a high degree of competence. The University has very properly recognized that some of these areas of professional school service should require training at the Doctor's level. It therefore offers programs leading to the Doctor's degree in certain of these areas. As rapidly as conditions and resources warrant, the University should look forward to extending its graduate programs in these areas, not solely for the purpose of providing personnel for direct public school service in Georgia, but also in order that the capable young men and women of the State may have opportunities available in the State for preparation leading to employment in colleges and universities, both within and outside of Georgia. 28 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHING OF THE ACADEMIC SUBJECTS Supply and demand studies with respect to professional personnel for service in the public schools should be carried on continuously by the Bureau of Educational Studies and Field Service of the College of Education of the University. Thus far no mention has been made of the allocation of teacher education for secondary school service in the academic subjects. The Survey Staff is completely convinced that restricted allocations of the academic subjects is impossible. In the first place, all the higher institutions need strong staff members in all the academic subjects; and, secondly, effective demand for teachers in the academic fields shifts so seriously from year to year that any attempt to make institutional assignments of responsibility for teacher preparation in these fields would be extremely unrealistic and impractical. These facts do not mean that the preparation of teachers in the academic fields should be left entirely to hit and miss chance or to unrestrained competition among the institutions. Demand and supply should be a matter of continuous study and reporting to the several teacher education units of the State-both public and private. On the basis of such studies, the institutions should be able to guide students to other fields, within and outside school service, when it is evident that there will be little demand in the fields of their first choice. Such information and guidance will, of course, not function perfectly to keep supply and demand in balance, but would go far toward conserving the resources of the institutions and in preventing misdirected effort and frustration on the part of students. The Survey Staff heartily endorses the recommendation of the joint committee on teacher education of the Board of Regents and the State Board of Education which is reported in the survey of Georgia schools published in 1947. This joint committee recommended that responsibility for the continuous study of various elements of public school service, and especially continuous study of supply and demand, be committed to the Bureau of Educational Studies and Field Services of the College of Education at the University of Georgia. The Survey Staff recommends strongly that adequate funds be provided from the State Department of Education and the Regents for the staffing and the conduct of this work. It is suggested, further, that the demand and supply project of the Bureau function with the assistance of an advisory committee representing the Regents and the State Board of Education and such other THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 29 agencies as may seem desirable to the director of the study and to the Dean of the College of Education. If the recommendation made by another section of this report should be adopted, the appropriate representative of the Board of Regents would be the Assistant to the Chancellor in Charge of Instruction and, undoubtedly, the official of the State Department of Education in charge of teacher certification would be especially competent to represent the State Board of Education on such an advisory committee. In order that there may be no misunderstanding, special attention is called to the fact that the foregoing statement in regard to the study of supply and demand is intended to apply to the schools and colleges both for white and Negro students. It may also be desirable to call attention to the fact that the recommendation with respect to supply and demand studies in the academic fields is also intended to carry with it the recommendation that the Bureau of Educational Studies and Field Services at the University of Georgia also be made responsible for the continuing state-wide study of supply and demand in the other fields of professional school service, including the elementary school, the special fields, and personnel in the special and administrative services. FACILITIES NEEDED BY HIGHER INSTITUTIONS TO PERFORM TEACHER EDUCATION FUNCTIONS The Survey Staff has not found it possible to determine and recommend, institution by institution, the specific additions to plant, equipment, and personnel that will be needed if each of the institutions is to do an excellent job in the areas of preparing professional public school personnel that have been assigned to it. This matter requires careful and cooperative planning on the part of all the institutions, since teacher preparation is not an isolated enterprise, but is intimately interwoven with the development of plant, equipment, and staff that are used also for other purposes. It is also realized that funds available for the total higher educational enterprise are severly limited; institutional planning with respect to plant and personnel for preparation of professional school service will, therefore, be conditioned and participated in by the planning for institution-wide development by administrative officers and the professional staff of the Chancellor's office. Laboratory schools under the control of the teacher education unit must be provided at all the institutions that prepare teachers. 30 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The Survey Staff wishes to emphasize, nevertheless, one of the areas of great need that involves both the nature of the program and the physical plant. Reference is made to provisions for laboratory schools under the control of the educational unit in each institution that prepares teachers, and to arrangements-which usually involve provision of appropriate transportation-with typical public schools for observation and practice purposes. No effective program of teacher preparation can be carried on solely by presentation of theory and information through readings and lectures. Any good teacher education program involves laboratory experience with children and with the materials of child learning under carefully controlled conditions. This means that a laboratory school must be one of the teaching and learning resources of the teacher education program. The physical and biological sciences and the applied fields, such as agriculture, must have laboratories in which the department concerned can set up and control the materials and processes of student laboratory experience. N one of the sciences believes that it can conduct a satisfactory program of education in its field without such facilities. This is equally true of the preparation of teachers. The difference lies solely in the fact that, in the one case, the laboratory is equipped with material facilities and enclosed usually within four walls, and, in the other case, the laboratory is also equipped with children and teachers of children. The laboratory school is immeasurably more complex and even more costly than the undergraduate laboratories of the physical and biological sciences. Typical schools in urban and rural situations must be available for practice teaching. Effective teacher education also involves actual experience, under close supervision and guidance by competent members of the education staff, in rural and urban school situations approximating those in which prospective teachers will find employment. Many necessary elements of knowledge and various skills cannot be learned under the somewhat artificial conditions of the laboratory schools and must be acquired through guided practice in typical schools appropriate to the level and field in which the student expects to find employment. Field experience in typical schools cannot, however, be substituted for experience in a controlled laboratory school; the assumption that it can be would be comparable to the contention that college instruction in chemistry and biology might as well be carried on in a chemical plant or drug manufacturing concern as in the laboratories of the college. Such field laboratory experience usually involves some financial remuneration to the schools thus used and provision of transportation THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 31 facilities for student teachers and their college supervisors. It always involves the employment of members of the college faculty competent to direct such laboratory work and the use of their time for this purpose. Preparation of teachers who are able to guide- the learning and development of children and youth is not a cheap job, even from the one standpoint of providing the laboratory and field experiences that should constitute a major feature in the professional aspects of their preparation. Laboratory and public school facilities for observation and practice teaching are markedly inadequate in the institutions for teacher preparation. In most of the institutions of the University System of Georgia that undertake to prepare teachers, the facilities for these purposes are sadly inadequate. The professional educational leaders of all the institutions are acutely conscious of this fact; but the chief institutional administrative officers, and others that determine how funds shall be used, are frequently unaware of or indifferent to the problem. Although it cannot undertake to make specific and detailed recommendations with respect to what should be done in this connection in each of the institutions, the Survey Staff wishes to express its judgment in regard to the general status of laboratory and field experience facilities for prospective teachers in each of the institutions to which it has recommended allocation of teacher education functions. 1. The Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville has excellent facilities in terms of its current program. 2. The Albany State College has splendid facilities for these purposes in its elementary school emphasis. 3. The Georgia Teachers College at Statesboro has facilities of which approximately half are excellent, the other half are so sub-standard that the existing plans for construction should be carried through as rapidly as possible. 4. The Savannah State College has facilities that could, with proper attention arid rehabilitation, be made fairly adequate. 5. The Valdosta State College provides a course in practice teaching but its facilities are entirely inadequate. 6. The North Georgia College at Dahlonega offers a program in teacher preparation, but it does not include practice teaching and has no facilities for this work. Until such facilities are made available, the Survey Staff recommends that the allocation of teacher education suggested by the Staff be held in suspense and that the present program leading to a degree be discontinued. 7. The Fort Valley State College has, it is understood, discontinued its socalled laboratory school which was in the main a school for faculty children, and has made no satisfactory provision for laboratory and field experience in 32 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF its teacher training program. It is recommended that until such time as provision for these facilities is made upon a reasonably satisfactory basis, the degree program of this institution for the training of teachers be discontinued and the recommendations of this report with respect to the-allocation of teacher education functions to this institution be held in suspense. 8. The College of Education at the University of Georgia, which should provide an example of the best practice with respect to laboratory and field experience in the preparation of teachers, is well prepared to exercise such leadership from the standpoint of its administration and the quality of its faculty. The efforts of both are disastrously handicapped by the physical facilities available for laboratory purposes and practice teaching. The dangerous and shameful quarters now occupied on the Coordinate Campus should be abandoned at the earliest possible moment. A new laboratory school, especially designed for use of teacher education, should be constructed on the main campus in close proximity to the new building for the College of Education that should also be provided. The sites for these buildings should be selected at once and definitely reserved for these purposes. The plans and procedures for field experience in typical schools that have been developed by the College of Education at Athens are excellent, but their effective execution is seriously handicapped by lack of tran'lportation and by highly undesirable limitations of personnel for their operation. Both should be provided. UPGRADING OF TEACHERS IN SERVICE A special study should be made of the problem of in-service training of teachers. Thus far, this discussion of teacher education has not called special attention to the problem of teachers who have already been employed in public school service, although they lack the minimum qualifications that have been prescribed-completion, with a Bachelor's degree, of a program specially planned to prepare for the school service to be rendered. Many teachers are employed in Georgia, as is true in other states, with qualifications that are sub-standard, not only from the standpoint of their formal training, but also from the standpoint of their professional interest and general education. The problem of raising the level of these teachers is only in part one of providing the opportunities which will enable them to obtain Bachelor's degrees. Indeed, in a great many instances, it is probable that merely satisfying the formal requirements to complete a degree program will be little more than a mechanical process that has little effect upon the teacher's understanding and ability to promote the growth and development of children and young people. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 33 The Survey Staff is informed that a number of school administrators are reluctant to emphasize the in-service training of considerable portions of their teaching staffs on the score that their basic attitude of deep-seated indifference to the professional obligations of teaching is such as to make their withdrawal or elimination much more beneficial to the schools than the effects of any additional training that would enable them to retain their positions. While the Survey Staff is not inclined to deny that the war emergency has brought a considerable number of such persons into school service, it believes that by far the greater number of emergency teachers can, through appropriate processes of educational assistance and personal counseling, be developed to give far better service to the boys and girls of their schools and, in many instances, aided to become excellent teachers that will be a credit to the profession. In any case, it is perfectly evident that teachers brought into the public school systems under emergency conditions, will continue in service for many years. In view of the effects of their teaching upon children, it seems that school administrators and the teacher education units of the State's higher educational system cannot, in good conscience, do less than make every effort to improve the professional competence of these teachers while they remain in service. The Survey Staff is not convinced, however, that this may be best accomplished through adherence to the formal patterns and standards of degree programs. It seems probable to the Survey Staff that the methods and content of training appropriate to this task are quite different from those that prove effective for students who enter upon a four-year program of teacher preparation fresh from high school. The age and experience of emergency teachers are quite different and the program for their upgrading should take these facts and the specific positions they now occupy into consideration in developing instructional materials and procedures. This should be a challenge to the teacher education units of the University System to re-think and 'reconstruct summer school and workshop programs. It is recommended that the Bureau of Educational Studies and Field Services of the University undertake a study of the whole matter of inservice training of teachers in the schools of Georgia in cooperation with the State Department of Education, public school administrators, and the several units of higher education that prepare teachers. Planning for this purpose should be as specific and as realistic as its planning for the quite different task of preparing high school graduates to become teachers during four years of continuous college education. 34 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF RESEARCH, PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, AND GRADUATE WORK It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the educational status and the economic and social standing of the State and the excellence of its lower levels of education are dependent to a considerable degree on the facilities provided for graduate work, for professional education, and for research. Yet it must be recognized that the meanings of these terms are variously understood and that this confusion frequently results in unrealistic and restrictive organization and control of these activities aJld of the facilities provided for their prosecution in our higher institutions. This survey cannot undertake to settle all of these matters in any universal sense, but it is obligated to propose concepts and relationships which, in its judgment, are appropriate to the development of an economical and effective system for their prosecution by the public higher institutions of Georgia. The discussion that follows will, therefore: 1. Examine briefly some of the meanings frequently attached to each of these areas of educational activity and attempt to define each in terms that should, in the judgment of the Survey Staff, be adopted in organizing, developing and controlling these activities in the institutions of the University System of Georgia. 2. Recommend allocations to specific institutions of responsibility for the various phases of the total development of graduate and professional education and of research. THE MEANINGS OF RESEARCH, PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, AND GRADUATE WORK Research involves systematic investigation by approved methods in any academic, professional, or applied field. There is little disagreement that the idea of research involves the prosecution of investigation by means of sound and logical methods and by techniques appropriate to the matter being investigated. In general, it is also commonly accepted that the results of research should make a contribution to knowledge positively, or by establishing that what has been previously regarded as true is, in fact, false. Thus, mere use of the methods of research to establish what has already been established through research methods is not research, although it may be a means used to learn research methods. On the other hand, use of research methods to establish the truth of well-known facts or principles which have been arrived at by some other method may be called research. The concept becomes even more attenuated when it is ap- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 35 plied to the invention of a new technique or instrument of investigation applicable to the prosecution of a research problem. Major differences of viewpoint which affect the organization and control of research in our higher institutions do not usually arise, however, with respect to these concepts; the serious differences lie in the area of attempts to delimit research to "worthwhile" research. Some persons, in effect, deny that any investigation properly belongs in the field of worthwhile research, in the higher institutional sense, if it is carried on under the motivating purpose of adding to knowledge something that will be immediately and practically useful in the everyday world. Research is not "pure research" under these conditions. These persons are inclined to define academically worthwhile research as that which adds to or reconstructs some portion of the organized structure of a specific body of learning, such as chemistry, history, or some other body of knowledge to which it is the objective of its disciples to give greater coherence and completeness as a structure. No one denies the scholarly character and need for such research. The quarrels arise in the implicit and frequently emphatic direct denial that investigations intended to serve immediately practical ends, or which do not contribute to perfecting the structure of a distinctly organized body of knowledge, have any claim to academic recognition as research. The practical usefulness of such investigations may be fully or even warmly acknowledged, but there is strong disinclination to admit that such investigations are research projects which deserve academic recognition through appropriate graduate degrees. It is recognized that the materials and techniques of research in chemistry, history, mathematics, and biological fields, for example, differ markedly from each other. Yet it is sometimes asserted that certain fields such as business, home economics, education, and agriculture are, as such, not and cannot be fields for research because the materials, the techniques appropriate to these areas, and the objectives of their investigations are different from the materials and techniques of the so-called academic subjects. The leaders of the applied fields and professions reply that whether any investigation deserves the name of research is not determined by its subject matter, by the nature of the usefulness of its objectives, or by its use of the techniques of other areas; but that its character as research is determined by use of sound logical processes and of techniques appropriate to the specific area and problem and by the production of new knowledge or new application of old knowledge. For the purposes of its treatment of research in the public higher institutions of Georgia, the Survey Staff takes what it believes is a 36 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF sound view, that systematic investigation in any academic, professional, or applied field for purposes which, to competent persons in that field, seem worthy, and which uses data, methods and techniques appropriate to the field and the problem involved, should be classified as research if the results add to or reconstruct knowledge or practice. Equal, although not necessarily the same, academic recognition should be accorded investigation in any fields which are comprehended within the terms of this definition. "Professional education" as used by this report means the programs of education involving four or more years of posthigh school education that are definitely planned to prepare practitioners in a field of activity. For the purposes of higher educational planning and development the popular notions of what occupations are professional serve little useful purpose. This is largely due to the fact that many professions are in process of attaining this status. Undoubtedly, status is an element in the concept of professional, but no satisfactory authority as yet exists which confers the standing needed to secure this recognition. Hence, the classification of occupations as professional shades off from the older universally recognized professions of medicine, law, and engineering, through the occupations that are frequently called professional, such as college and university teaching, accounting, and music, and frays out to a multiplicity of practitioners whose recognition as professional people is frequently accorded almost entirely by persons who are themselves engaged in the occupations, such as librarians, public welfare workers, statisticians, and psychologists. For the purposes of this survey of higher education in Georgia, it is necessary to pin down more definitely and in educational terms the sense in which the expression "professional education" is used. It should be perfectly clear that the definition adopted is solely for the purposes of this report, and that it is not proposed as a definition of the term which is intended to comprehend the great variety of limited and general concepts currently in use. This report uses the term "professional education" to designate the programs of education involving four or more years of post-high school education that are definitely planned to prepare practitioners to engage in a definite field. Such programs may provide for subsidiary and corollary objectives, such as those of general education, but their central motivating purpose is that of preparing practitioners in a definite occupational field. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 37 It follows that when competent authority has authorized specific programs of professional education in a higher institution, only those who know the field and the requirements for practice in it are competent to construct and to exercise major control over each of the educational programs thus authorized. The ultimate power to give such authorization rests, and should rest, in the governing board which is responsible for the institution or institutions under its control. Wise exercise of this power will require that prior to authorization of any new program or curriculum, whether professional or otherwise, the board will (1) determine from persons competent in the field the nature of the content and processes that should be involved in the prosecution of the new program; (2) secure the opinions and advice of the administrative officers and faculty of the institution in which it is proposed to place the new program. It should be noted that it has become standard practice among the better higher institutions for governing boards to agree that programs will not be initiated or abolished until after the judgment of the institutional faculty has been officially expressed. A uthority to change the structure of an institution by the addition or abolition of educational units or curricula must rest finally with the Board of Regents. Change in the fundamental educational structure of a university or college by the addition or abolition of educational units or curricula is of such major importance that authority to accomplish this purpose must be left in the hands of the governing board. The suggestion that such changes be made will ordinarily originate with the administration of the institution or with the faculty group, or both. However, there are certain conditions which make it highly desirable that the board retain its full freedom to initiate itself such changes as in its judgment seem desirable. Faculty groups everywhere are inclined to be extremely conservative in regard to the addition of new units since they feel that such additions may, in fact, work to their own disadvantage. Further, they have vested interests in the units that already exist, and the suggestion that a unit be abolished or merged with another unit always excites resentment on the part of the faculty people concerned. Further, faculties are not usually as keenly aware of the needs and general situations which demand the additions of various areas of work which have not previously been offered by the institution as is the case of the institutional administration, or, when the board is alert to the functions of an institution, as is the governing board itself. 38 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Even though institutional administrative officers at the top rank are likely to be more keenly aware of the needs for expansion and of the needs for fusion or abolition of units or curricula than are faculty members, the alertness of administration with regard-to these matters varies from time to time and in varying circumstances. It is, therefore, necessary that the governing board realize its responsibility in this matter and retain its full freedom to initiate proposals for the addition or abolition of units and curricula, when, in the judgment of the Board, this may seem desirable. Good procedure on the part of the Board in connection with this matter will always require that the Board request and receive the judgment of the faculty and of the administrative officers of the institution before taking final action. It is necessary, or at any rate highly desirable, that the Board secure the thinking and the judgment of the persons who are much more intimately connected with the actual operation of the educational program than is the Board itself. However, the Board should not be bound by such judgments when, after giving full consideration to the facts and arguments that may be adduced by the internal operating organization, it still seems to the Board desirable that the change should be made. Graduate education is study pursued, subsequent to receipt of the Bachelor's degree, in accordance with the requirements of an institution authorized to grant graduate degrees. The simplest concept of graduate education is that which defines it as education beyond the Bachelor's degree. It is usual, however, to extend this definition to mean work beyond the Bachelor's degree in a subject or field which has been pursued in a major sense in the undergraduate program. Yet many well-recognized graduate programs, especially in some of the professional fields, such as graduate schools of social work, not only fail to make this requirement, but actually discourage undergraduate work in the field as such. Even in these instances, however, it is usual to limit admission to the graduate program to those who have had what is considered appropriate preparatory undergraduate experiences. Many attempts have been made to distinguish the nature of graduate work from that of undergraduate work in senses different from that of mere continuance in the field of study for a longer period of time. The most common attempt of this kind is that which insists that graduate work must involve research which makes a contribution to knowledge. This position is taken most strongly, and in a very limited sense, by the fields of learning that are least concerned about the ap- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 39 plication and use of knowledge in practical ways. Almost everywhere this restricted concept has broken down in theory, as well as in practice, so far as the Master's degree is concerned, except in the institutions with underdeveloped graduate programs which lean over backward in striving for academic respectability and recognition. This breakdown results, in the main, from recognition of the fact that a research worker cannot be developed in one year of post-Bachelor training which was forced upon the institutions by the trivial and strained results actually obtained. The significance and the meaning of the Master's degree has changed greatly. The tendency is to claim no more for the first graduate degree, the Master's, than that it represents a period of study during which a considerable familiarity with the methods and procedures of research may be obtained. Over a considerable period the Master's thesis was quite generally supposed to provide training in and demonstration of some degree of mastery of research standards and methods, but, on the whole, the Master's thesis has come to mean little more than a demonstration of ability to do and write up an independent piece of work of somewhat extended character. With the development of knowledge in many fields the tendency is increasingly to make the period of Master's work merely a continuance, at a more advanced level, of specializations begun in the undergraduate program. The methods are chiefly those of course work and credit accumulation that differ little from the methods of upper division college work. Indeed, in many outstanding institutions there is a strong trend toward substituting course work for the thesis requirement, or at least permitting the student to make a choice between a program that requires a thesis and one that permits him to substitute additional courses in place of the thesis. Field and supervised experience in enterprises not carried on for educational purposes is receiving more attention in graduate work. The major development, at both the Master's and Doctor's levels, that seeks to depart from conventional course methods of undergraduate instruction is found in the professional and applied fields in which a larger block of the student's time is given to individual problems and to what may be called field laboratory experiences, that is, to guided and critical participation in enterprises and practical projects in the student's field of interest. This tendency is most pronounced in the 40 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF professional and applied fields since they provide the greatest opportunity to supplement verbal methods of presentation and the artificial conditions of campus laboratories by realistic and responsible experiences under institutional direction and supervisIon. It is sometimes asserted that the applied and professional fields are solely concerned with techniques and that their advanced work is, therefore, not graduate work. Such assertions overlook the fact that these fields are centrally concerned about the functioning of their areas and regard techniques as mere means to this end in the same way that the sciences and other areas of knowledge, which deal largely in techniques, are concerned about the use of techniques in the accomplishment of their objectives. Both are concerned with central functions; the difference lies solely in the fact that, on the one hand, the functions are directed to immediate practical use and, on the other hand, to those of developing a coherent body of scholarship without immediate reference to practical application. General requirements for graduate work may be formulated to include opportunities in academic, professional, and applied fields. Institutions of repute everywhere are taking the practical position that, while techniques and objectives differ among all the areas and fields of advanced training, each has a right to a position in the sun and to recognition through the granting of appropriate graduate degrees whenever certain general conditions can be met. Among these general conditions are: 1. Establishment of the fact that advanced preparation is needed for the purposes of schollU"ship or for the purposes of a substantillJ body of practitioners and leaders in an applied field. 2. The presence on the staff of the institution of persons who, by training and experience, are qualified to plan, carry on, and direct such advanced training. 3. Access to physical and other facilities appropriate to an advanced program in this area. 4. A definite planned program with respect to the content and methods to be used which clearly meets certain minimum standards with respect to the time that must be devoted to preparation for the advanced degree sought. 5. Designation of the degree to be granted by a name appropriate to the objectives of the program and to the time required to obtain it. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 41 ALLOCATIONS OF GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION TO THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA The definitions and discussions of research, professional education, and graduate work which immediately precede this section have been intended to make clear the concepts of the Survey Staff concerning these matters and, in large part, to determine its recommendations with respect to the allocations of these functions to the various institutions in the University System of Georgia. Obviously, allocations are also made with reference to what the Survey Staff considers to be practical factors in the situation in Georgia, such as progress already made, services that are needed, and the limitations of resources that may be devoted to work of this kind. Special attention is called, however, to the fact that among the practical factors involved, the Survey Staff has not attempted to evaluate any officer or other person now engaged in these activities from the standpoint of his suitability or competence to perform these functions. The recommendations made are entirely impersonal; it is believed that it is the responsibility of the institutional president and the Chancellor of the University System to select and assign, with the approval of the Regents, competent individuals to these responsibilities. The University of Georgia should be the one great center for graduate and professional education and for research. The Survey Staff has reached the obvious and inevitable conclusion that the University System should develop but one great graduate and professional center, that at the University of Georgia. There is no other institution in the System that has the groundwork laid for such development or that comprehends within its scope a sufficient diversity of areas of scholarship and applied knowledge, to provide the reinforcing interchange and combinations of learning that are necessary to the development of such a center. This recommendation is not intended to place in the University all of the professional education of the University System, nor does it imply that the development of one great university center for graduate work means that all of the graduate work of the System should be a monopoly of the University-either directly or by remote control. As will become evident from allocations subsequently recommended, the Survey Staff is acutely conscious of the fact that Georgia is engaged in the development of a state-wide system of higher education. In certain instances the investments and commitments already made cannot, from any practical standpoint, be revoked, and the purpose of 42 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF providing the best possible service to the state requires limited participation by other institutions in the graduate and professional fields of education and in certain areas of research. The grounds for assigning graduate and professional work to institutions other than the University are specific. In this connection it is perhaps desirable to point out that the Survey Staff makes a distinction between the development and operation of a well-rounded graduate program, such as is proposed for the University, and the offering of the Master's or Doctor's degree in a specific area appropriate to the major function of an institution of limited scope. The Survey Staff has confined its allocations of graduate work to institutions, other than the University, to programs that are directly related to special limited functions at the undergraduate and professional levels. Further, these allocations are believed by the Survey Staff to be, to a substantial degree, essential to the performance of high-grade undergraduate and professional work in the special fields assigned to these institutions. Important in this connection is the fact that it is becoming increasingly difficult to secure for service on college faculties any but the inexperienced or the rejects of other institutions, who are willing to take service in an institution in which the sole opportunity is that of teaching undergraduate students. In addition, in the cases in which graduate work is assigned to other institutions than the University by the recommendations of the Survey Staff, it is becoming increasingly true that, the country over, the training in which these institutions have special functions cannot be carried to completion at the undergraduate level and may profitably be completed in the institution of undergraduate training. It will perhaps make for simplicity and clarity of presentation if the allocations of limited graduate work and professional preparation to institutions other than the University, are treated prior to the neces sarily more extensive discussion of graduate and professional education and research at the University. The exclusive assignment of professional and graduate work and of research in the field of industrial technology to the Georgia Institute of Technology should be continued. The Board of Regents has definitely assigned to the Georgia Institute of Technology exclusive responsibility among the public higher institutions of the State for the development and operation of the whole range of education dealing with engineering technology, except for agricultural engineering, which, because of its close relationships to agri- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 43 culture, has been assigned to the University. The entire field of industrial and public engineering is, therefore, the responsibility of the Georgia Institute of Technology, at all levels and through all the educational instrumentalities available for this purpose-extension, undergraduate and graduate instruction, and research. It has made extraordinary progress in the accomplishment of its functions through all these means and has attained national distinction that may, perhaps, be roughly measured by the fact that a very large percentage of its students come from outside the State. The Survey Staff has no recommendation to make which involves fundamental change in the decisions already made by the Regents that Georgia Tech should grant the Master's and Doctor's degrees in the field of industrial technology and should continue to emphasize and develop its Engineering Experiment Station. This endorsement of existing decisions by the Regents is definitely intended to include the program in industrial management and the authorization that the institution may grant the Doctor's degree in the fields of chemistry and physics. A uthorization to grant the Doctor's degree in chemistry and physics should be extended to include mathematics. Perhaps some comment is in order with respect to advanced work in chemistry, physics and mathematics as such, rather than as contributing factors to the technological fields of application. Chemistry, physics, and mathematics are obviously fields in which the University should have strong programs leading to the Doctor's degree. This duplication at Georgia Tech is necessary, however, in the opinion of the Survey Staff as it apparently was in the judgment of the Regents when permission was given to the institution to develop programs leading to the Doctor's degree in these fields. Chemistry, physics, and mathematics are basic to work in engineering. Research and graduate work in the strictly technological fields require men on the faculty of these departments who are capable of research in these subjects at the very highest level. Such men cannot be obtained and held unless they can approach research problems and instruction as chemists, physicists, and mathematicians, rather than as mere service personnel to applied engineering. In the judgment of the Survey Staff, the highest level school of technology cannot be developed and carried on unless opportunities are provided to the faculties of chemistry, physics, and mathematics, to direct the work at the Doctor's level in these fields. The medical school at Augusta should be an independent unit of the University System and should report to the Regents through 44 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF the Chancellor and should be authorized to grant the professional medical degree and the Master's degree in the clinical and technological fields of medicine. The medical school at Augusta is associated with the University at Athens in only a tenuous and theoretical sense that, so far as the Survey Staff can discover, serves no practical purpose to either institution. Attempts to bring the graduate and research program of the medical school under the control and supervision of the University at Athens would, in view of the distance between the two institutions and the highly specialized character of medical research, result merely in confusion and the distraction of both from more important activities. The conventional assumption that medical education profits greatly from its association with the remainder of the university when both are on the same campus, is to a considerable degree an unjustified assumption. When the medical school is conducted away from the main university campus, as is the case of the medical schools of Cornell University, the University of Illinois, Indiana University, Louisiana State University, North Carolina, and many others, direct administrative connection between the university and the medical school provides few benefits and tends to multiply problems and to waste effort in maintaining the machinery of connection. It is therefore recommended that the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta be made, by direction of the Regents of the University System, an independent unit of the University System. The benefits of association are, in any case, primarily those of voluntary cooperation in research between the medical school and units of the University. It is believed that the common control of the institutions by the Regents of the University System provides all the basis that is necessary for association in the joint prosecution of research projects which require joint financing. As an independent unit of the University System and as the only institution that is capable of carrying on such work, it is recommended that the medical school be authorized to grant the professional medical degree and the Master's degree in the clinical and technological fields of human medicine. The Georgia Teachers College at Statesboro should confine itself to teacher education with emphasis, through the Master's degree, upon preparation of professional personnel for service in the elementary schools. The section of this report that deals with teacher education in Georgia makes the recommendation that the Georgia Teachers College at THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 45 Statesboro be authorized to grant the Master's degree in elementary education on the basis of planned programs for master elementary teachers and for elementary school principals and supervisors. It is the judgment of the Survey Staff that this is necessary in order that the program of the Georgia Teachers College may be maintained at a high level as an institution devoted exclusively to the preparation of teachers. It is necessary that it include on its staff persons who have the training and ability to experiment with the methods and content of elementary teacher preparation, and these cannot be secured and retained unless they have opportunity to carryon the process of preparation at both the undergraduate and the graduate levels. Further, it is believed that a teacher education institution which centers its attention exclusively on this one task has certain distinct advantages over a college of education that is subject to the distractions and restrictions of a large university. This recommendation is confined to the elementary area of school service for a number of reasons. First, a good program of elementary teacher education requires wider departure from conventional college courses in the subject matter fields and in methods of instruction than is the case of any other field of preparation for service in the public schools; the exclusively teacher education institution is freer than others to make these modifications and adjustments. Second, it is the intent that the major emphasis of the institution at Statesboro shall be upon elementary education. This is not only the more difficult professional task, but the need is greater. Further, it has been the general tendency of teacher education institutions the country over, whenever they have been free to do so, to place major emphasis on secondary teacher preparation to the neglect of the elementary field. The recommendation is intended to discourage the Georgia Teachers College from following this pattern. Third, since the purposes of professional elementary school service and the processes of preparation, are much more unified than is the case of secondary school service, the resources that are required for secondary school training are so much more varied and costly that leadership in secondary teacher education should be confined to the University where the necessary, varied, subject matter departments are already provided. The Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville should be authorized to grant the Master's degree in the humanities and social studies. The Georgia State College for Women has a splendid reputation as a college of arts and sciences. It is believed that the continuation of this reputation is, to a degree, dependent upon authorization for the 46 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF institution to take the next step in development and to offer the Master of Arts degree in the humanities and social studies. It is recommended that the graduate program of the institution be confined to this degree, since it will be desirable for those who wish to pursue their work in the sciences beyond the Bachelor's level to do so in an institution where the science fields are highly developed. The cost of expanding the personnel and material facilities at Milledgeville to provide Master's level work in the sciences for the few who would seek such training would be excessive and, in any case, undesirable, since these facilities are abundantly available at the University. The University of Georgia at Athens. It should be noted that the foregoing recommendations in regard to the offering of limited graduate work by the institutions of the Georgia System, other than the University, are in only two instances restrictive upon the development of graduate work and research at the University. These two limitations are the exclusive assignment to the Georgia Institute of Technology of graduate and research functions in the field of industrial technology, other than agricultural engineering, and the exclusive assignment to the medical school at Augusta of graduate work and research in the field of human medicine. The other assignments are not restrictive upon the University and it is the expectation that the University will continue to offer and to develop its graduate work in the same fields. The apparent duplication is not extensive and, in any case, the Survey Staff believes that it is necessary if the Regents are to exercise their responsibility for the general welfare and usefulness of each of the institutions involved. If some slight degree of competition among the institutions results, it is believed that this will be a healthful situation as compared with monopolistic control of the entire field by one institution. It now becomes necessary to examine the graduate and professional work and the organized research of the University with respect to the general status of their development and with reference to certain specific areas. The character of the University of Georgia as a university is apparent in its professional schools. The University includes in its structure nine professional schools: law, pharmacy, agriculture, forestry, education, business administration, journalism, home economics, and veterinary medicine. In addition, the Department of Nursing Education in the College of Arts and Sciences offers a program leading to the Bachelor's degree in this field. The University has, therefore, in the variety of its opportunities for professional education, one of the essential elements of a university as THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 47 the term is generally understood in the United States. The fact that it does not include a college of engineering and a school of medicine is, of course, due to the fact that it is a part of a state-wide system which performs these functions through two other institutions. Additional professional schools should not at present be developed by the University System of Georgia. The University System of Georgia does not, at the University or elsewhere, make provision for a number of other professional schools that are important enough to maintain recognized standardizing bodies of sufficient strength to give status to the professions involved. Among these may be named dentistry, library science, and social work. The question naturally arises as to whether the University System of Georgia should contemplate the development of these areas at the University or elsewhere. In the opinion of the Survey Staff, the immediately practical approach to provision of opportunities for Georgia youth to enter these professional fields is through cooperation with the Board of Control of Southern Regional Education in the development of regional institutions to meet these needs This involves contributions by the State to such institutions, with consequent allotments of places for fixed numbers of Georgia students who otherwise would not find opportunities in the South or who would be compelled to attend institutions in other southern states or in the North and pay heavy out-of-state fees. Such participation is, of course, a contribution to the development of the South as a region, but it is also a means of providing excellent educational opportunities for Georgia youth at a cost far below that of creating and operating a professional unit within the State itself. The Board of Control of Southern Regional Education has already selected the School of Dentistry of Emory University as a regional school in this field and Georgia is cooperating in this enterprise during the current academic year. It is understood that the Board of Control of Southern Regional Education is now considering the development or designation of regional schools for library science and for social work. Atlanta would be an unusually appropriate center for the development of either of these areas, but there is no institution within the University System located in Atlanta, to which either of these functions may appropriately be assigned. In the judgment of the Survey Staff the University at Athens is not favorably situated for the development of a southern regional school in either field. In any case, the cost of development would be so great that, unless met 48 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF by gifts for construction and endowment for operation, funds might better be expended for improvement of enterprises that have already been undertaken at the University. Graduate work at the University is established on a firm foundation, but needs further development at the Doctor's level. At the University, all of the professional schools offer programs leading to Master's degrees except law, pharmacy, and veterinary medicine; none, except education, offers work at the Doctor's level. All the departments of the College of Arts and Sciences, except nursing education, provide programs leading to the Master's degree; only two, however, mathematics and zoology, provide programs leading to the Doctor's degree. The mere recital of these facts indicates clearly that the University at Athens has laid the groundwork for developing as a University with respect to the variety of fields in which graduate work is done, but that it is seriously underdeveloped with respect to provision of opportunities at the Doctor's level, both in the academic and professional fields. Proposals for strengthening the University advanced by the faculty and administrative officers are sound. In making this statement, the Survey Staff is not calling attention to anything about which the administrative officers and faculties of the University are not already keenly conscious. Indeed, interviews with a considerable number of the members of the University staff gave the Survey Staff the impression that perhaps this awareness is somewhat too self-derogatory. Examination of the training and experience of the faculties raised the question as to whether, from this standpoint at least, the potential capacity of the University to extend its Doctor's work in certain additional fields has not been unduly, though honestly, minimized to an excessive degree. The Survey Staff is in entire accord with the desire and hope of administrative officers and faculty members that salaries may be raised to a level which will make it possible for the University to secure and hold distinguished scholars in both the academic and professional fields, in order that graduate work and research at the University may be strengthened. It heartily endorses the desire of University personnel that generous research funds may be provided as a base for the development of research enterprises that will attract advanced graduate students and provide them with high level resources for the prosecution of research work in connection with their graduate studies. It shares with the alert and ambitious members of the faculty the conviction THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 49 that the energies of capable research men and directors of advanced graduate studies are being wasted and dissipated through overloads of undergraduate instruction and administrative or _committee duty, which might be corrected by additions to the faculty. The Survey Staff earnestly recommends that all of these matters be attacked vigorously and corrected as rapidly as resources permit. The administrative organization of research needs to be carefully reconsidered. Vigorous leadership with broad understanding and knowledge of higher education and with personal qualities which will command the highest respect and confidence, are necessary if the University staff is to be developed into a team of cooperating departments and activities. Yet, without any assumption that organization and administrative mechanisms can serve as adequate substitutes for skilled and intelligent personal leadership at all levels and in all areas of University responsibility, the Survey Staff is convinced that organization and administration inappropriate to the task to be performed can seriously handicap even the most able leader. Fundamental in any good organization and of special importance in higher educational institutions, are organization and administrative procedures that assign definite responsibilities to appropriate units and clothe them with the authorities and powers necessary to the exercise of these responsibilities. This is especially true at the levels of graduate work and research in a university where creative activity is obtained only through the initiative of individuals and groups of individuals who share a common purpose and interest in a specific scholarly or professional field. An earlier portion of this discussion of graduate and professional education and research has defined concepts and relationships among these phases of university activity that, in the opinion of the Survey Staff, are sound. The application of these concepts to the functioning of the University may be-illustrated in some detail by discussion of the College of Agriculture as a distinct administrative and educational unit for a professional field. This discussion will deal with the relations to the general university administration, to the graduate school, to other major institutional units, including the Schools of Home Economics, Forestry, and Veterinary Medicine, and with the internal relationships of some of the major units and activities of the College of Agriculture itself. All agricultural activities are joined in a single major unit in the University. 50 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF On March 9, 1949, the Regents of the University System of Georgia by resolution reorganized the agricultural activities of the System by abolishing the position of Vice Chancellor of the Uniyersity System in charge of agriculture and centered the administration of all the agricultural activities of the System in the College of Agriculture of the University of Georgia at Athens. The Dean of the College of Agriculture was placed in over-all charge of resident instruction, the agricultural experiment stations, and of the Agricultural Extension Service. The Dean of the College of Agriculture was also directed to submit a plan for reorganization to the Regents through the President of the University and the Chancellor of the University System. This action of the Regents very properly defined and unified, under one immediate administrative head, all the activities that constitute the professional field of agriculture and placed this unit completely in the University organization as one among a number of other distinct schools and colleges. Its relations to the central over-all administration of the University thus became exactly the same as those of the other separate schools and colleges of the University; direct official access to the Chancellor and Regents of the University System with respect to any phase of agricultural education was abolished and, instead, the Dean of Agriculture was required to follow the normal pattern of communication through the President of the University to the Chancellor and thence to the Regents. Subject to general rules of the Regents with respect to the internal organization of agricultural activities, the authorities and responsibilities of the President of the University in relationship to the College of Agriculture were thus made the same as those governing his responsibilities for the administration and operation of any other school or college of the University. These decisions of the Regents embody sound principles of organization and administration. Final responsibility for the internal organization of the College of Agriculture rests with the Regents. The directive of the Regents requiring the Dean of the College of Agriculture to submit to them a plan for reorganization of the College of Agriculture through the President of the University and the Chancellor of the University System is also in accord with well-recognized principles of sound procedure. This channeling of communication was intended to include, as the Survey Staff has every reason to believe was the intent of the Regents, exercise by the President of the University of his right and duty to make his own judgments and recommendations with respect to the plan of reorganization proposed by the Dean of the College of Agriculture, and the exercise by the Chancello r THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 51 of his responsibility to give to the Regents his own judgment with respect to the Dean's proposals and the President's recommendations with respect thereto. It should be emphasized that the ultimate responsibility for a matter of university organization as important as this rests, and must rest, with the Regents. They are under no compulsion to accept the recommendations of the Dean of the College of Agriculture, the President of the University, or of the Chancellor of the University System. If any of these officers should feel that the final decision of the Regents makes it impossible for him to exercise the responsibilities that he has in the University System, or that the decision of the Regents constitutes official notice of lack of confidence in his judgment, he should resign his office and thus give the Regents an opportunity, if they wish, to select another officer who will, in their judgment, be able to function in accordance with their decisions. The statements of principle embodied in this paragraph were occasioned by the discussion of the College of Agriculture and the University of Georgia, but they are generally applicable to any subordinate unit in any of the higher institutions of the University System and to each of the institutions. Basic principles of general application are presented in connection with the reorganization of the College of Agriculture. At the time of this survey of the University System of Georgia no decisions had been made by the Regents with respect to the reorganization of the College of Agriculture and the Survey Staff was requested to consider and to make recommendations with respect to the whole matter. This gives occasion not only to deal with this specific problem, but also provides convenient opportunity to present, in application to a concrete situation, the general principles and procedures that should, in the judgment of the Survey Staff, prevail in the organization and administration of all of the institutions and their subordinate units throughout the University System of Georgia. One major unit of university organization should not be given authority over any coordinate major unit. In defining the scope of the responsibilities of the College of Agriculture and in bringing all of the activities pertaining to this field into one administrative unit in the organization of the University of Georgia, the action of the Regents was sound. However, other elements in the action of the Regents taken on March 9, 1949, in connection with this unification of agricultural education, must be interpreted either as a violation of the principles embodied in the unification of agricultural activity, or, whatever the intent of the Regents, as being so loose- 52 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF ly worded as to justify this interpretation. Reference is made to the following paragraph of the Regents' resolution: "RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Board of Regents shall and it does hereby authorize and direct that the Dean of the School of Home Economics, the Dean of the School of Veterinary Medicine, and the Dean of the School of Forestry, be subject to and cooperate with the Dean of the College of Agriculture in formulating and executing agricultural research and extension programs in the fields of home economics, veterinary medicine and forestry." (Minutes of the Board of Regents, March 9, 1949, page 186.) The Schools of Home Economics, Forestry, and Veterinary Medicine, by virtue of their status as separate independent schools with distinctive functions and responsibilities, are administratively, in the organization of the University of Georgia, on a par with and the equals of the College of Agriculture. In each case their central interests and responsibilities are distinct from those of agriculture. It is their function to develop and carryon the educational processes and activities distinctive to their several fields. They should not be "subject" to the dean of any other unit of the University which has coordinate status in the organization with respect to any of their activities of teaching, research or extension. Such subjection could easily lead to the destruction and serious weakening of their non-agricultural functions. This is a general principle applicable to all the coordinate, separate units of an institution, whether they be schools or colleges or departments within a school or college. If this principle is ignored, a tangle of cross-purposes and authorities will develop in the organization that will create confusion and conflicts which will make it impossible for the President to exercise any function other than that of ruling on jurisdictional disputes. The intent of the Board of Regents in passing this resolution was undoubtedly the perfectly legitimate and desirable one of bringing all agricultural research and extension under the jurisdiction of the Dean of the College of Agriculture. The Survey Staff has no quarrel with this purpose; it recommends, however, that it be accomplished in accordance with quite different and sounder administrative and organizational procedures. A method is recommended for securing the objectives sought without violating good administrative procedure. Attention is called to the fact that agricultural research and extension are carried on through definite organizations designed and operated as distinct units of administration within the structure of the College of Agriculture-the experiment stations and the Agricultural Extension Service. They are financed by funds definitely ear-marked THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 53 and budgeted for these units of organization. The persons who are engaged in these capacities, either on a full-time or part-time basis, are officially members of their staffs and appear on- their payrolls as such. This pattern should be maintained in the interests of good organization, and doubtless must be maintained upon the legal grounds that condition use of federal funds for these purposes. It is assumed that the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine and Forestry have on their staffs, or may have, persons who are capable of contributing to the research of the experiment stations and to the work of the Agricultural Extension Service. It would be unnecessary and wasteful duplication of effort if these persons undertook to carryon research and extension activities that were already being carried on by the experiment stations or the Agricultural Extension Service. The control over and the planning for the conduct of agricultural research and extension by the Dean of the College of Agriculture would be restricted and interfered with, if these persons carried on research and extension in the field of agriculture quite independently, even though the College of Agriculture was not able itself to provide these specific activities. It should be a definite rule that these schools should not, and indeed no school or college should, carryon research and extension activities in the field of agriculture and rural life except by definite arrangements with the College of Agriculture and under its sponsorship. Any difference of opinion between the College of Agriculture, on the one hand, and the Schools of Veterinary Medicine, Forestry or Home Economics, on the other, as to what constitutes agricultural activity in the field of research or extension should be determined by the President of the University, subject to appeal to the Chancellor of the University System and finally to the Board of Regents Under these conditions, the problem becomes one of setting up a regular procedure whereby appropriate available personnel of the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine and Forestry may be utilized in the research and extension programs of agriculture without invasion of the desirable autonomy of these schools. Obviously this cannot be done unless these schools are staffed so that this use of their personnel will not interfere with or hamper the performance of functions necessary to the attainment of their own objectives. This can be determined only by the Deans of these respective schools. Fortunately, the methods of experiment station and extension service operation are such that the nature and conditions proposed for such service may be defined normally in rather specific terms. Joint appointments by agreement between the College of Agriculture and the school concerned will insure proper relations in the work of the experiment stations. 54 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Experiment station research is set up in terms of specific projects. Funds are budgeted by projects. Personnel is assigned to projects. In the case of any research project undertaken or-proposed by the College of Agriculture, or that is proposed by the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine or Forestry, as appropriate for the participation of the personnel of one or more of these schools, the proposal should become the subject of conference between the Dean of the College of Agriculture and the dean of the school concerned, together with such members of the staffs of both units as may be considered desirable. It should be the purpose of this conference procedure to determine whether personnel is or can be made available and under what conditions as to use of time, equipment and supplies. If agreement can be reached between the two deans with respect to these matters and other pertinent ones, the person or persons directly involved should be appointed to the staff of the experiment station on a part-time basis and a corresponding portion of the individual's salary assumed by the College of Agriculture, either directly, with corresponding reduction in salary payments by the school involved, or by transfer of funds to the salary budget of the school in which the individual holds regular appointment, whichever is more convenient to the accounting system in use. If the two deans cannot reach agreement the proposal should be regarded as closed. These procedures have been presented in connection with the discussion of the relations of the College of Agriculture and its experiment stations to specific schools, but they are equally applicable to relationships that may be desirable between the College of Agriculture and any other major unit in the University organization, or to arrangements between any organized research unit in any college or school and the personnel of any other school or college. Status as agricultural extension specialists may be given to staff members of other units under conditions agreed to by both units. In the case of the Agricultural Extension Service, the organization of work involves two quite different sets of personnel: (1) the county and district agents, and (2) the extension specialists normally resident on the campus, but working in the counties and districts in response to the requests of these areas and under the immediate direction of the Director of the Agricultural Extension Service. Staff members of the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine and Forestry are not in any position to serve as county or district agents. The only practical way in which they may serve agriculture is as extension specialists in their respective fields. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 55 In many cases extension specialists serve on a part-time basis in extension and devote the remainder of their time to teaching or other service in the College of Agriculture or elsewhere. It is entirely prac- tical, therefore, in the cases in which the Agricultural Extension Service requires only the part-time services of an extension specialist in home economics, veterinary medicine, or forestry, for the Dean of the College of Agriculture and the dean of the school concerned to reach agreements whereby an individual is appointed for part-time service in the two units, each assuming its proportionate share of the salary involved. A similar joint appointment is also possible, and it may be in some cases desirable, when the Agricultural Extension Service has need for a full-time specialist in home economics, veterinary medicine or forestry. In these cases the College of Agriculture should assume full responsibility for the salary. Membership of the full-time extension specialist in the school of his specialization and his association with the other members of the school have decided advantages from the standpoints of his professional standing and the information and viewpoints that his field contacts may bring to resident teaching members of the school faculty. If the deans of the College of Agriculture and of the school concerned cannot reach agreement concerning the use of personnel of the school in agricultural extension service, the matter should be regarded as closed. Enforcement of the prohibition against using personnel of a school or college, outside the College of Agriculture, for agricultural extension service, except by arrangement with the College of Agriculture, should fall within the original jurisdiction of the President of the University, subject to appeal to the Chancellor, and ultimately to the Regents. Attention should perhaps be called at this point to the fact that such joint appointments as are here recommended should be subject to approval, upon the recommendations of the deans concerned, through the regular channels by which all other appointments of personnel are made. This is true, whether division of the salary of such a joint appointment is or is not involved; academic status should be as much a concern of central university administration as are salary payments. While conditions of operation of the general extension service of the University and of other units of the University System of Georgia differ considerably from those of the Agricultural Extension Service, the same principles apply to credit work given through general extension; the department and school or college in whose field work is offered, should be responsible for the character of the work and for the personnel by whom it is offered. The general extension service should be permitted to use regular members of the department or school faculty only by 56 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF agreement with and under the authority of the school or college concerned. An experiment station should be established at Athens and the work of the three stations coordinated by the Dean of the College of Agriculture. Consideration by the Survey Staff of desirable reorganization of the College of Agriculture requires that specific attention be paid to the relationships of the College of Agriculture at Athens to the two experiment stations at Griffin and Tifton. This consideration is, with respect to the principles of organization and procedure involved, pertinent to the organization of the institutionally-sponsored research of any major unit of the University which has responsibility for a single well-defined professional area. It is reported to the Survey Staff by thoroughly informed authority, that the programs of the two experiment stations have not been coordinated and that there is not only considerable overlapping of activity, but also that certain projects are pursued at the station whose environment is least suited to such projects. Further, there is upon the campus at Athens, where the major portion of the personnel resources of the College of Agriculture are located, no experiment station through which local staff members may work in coordination with the two offcampus stations. The existing stations are far removed in space and, to a large degree, in interest from the parent organization. As a result, two usual and normal purposes of the federal cooperative experiment stations are seriously handicapped: the stations have only remote and indirect impact on resident teaching; and, the interpretation of the results and applications of the research of the stations through the Agricultural Extension Service is less prompt and effective than it should be. This does not mean that the directors and staffs of the stations are working entirely in a closed-off world; on the contrary, both their investigations and their interests are largely directed to change of agricultural practice. These interests are such that the Survey Staff received the impression that perhaps too large a percentage of their time and effort might be given to direct extension activities that might better be carried on through the Extension Service. This impression may be a mistaken one, but there is no doubt that closer association with resident teaching and with the central Agricultural Extension Service is desirable, and that more careful planning and allocation of research projects is imperative. After careful study of the whole situation, the Survey Staff wishes to recommend that an experiment station be established at the Uni- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 57 versity in close proximity to the campus and that a plan be adopted for developing and coordinating experiment station projects substantially in accord with the pattern that is described by the paragraphs that immediately follow. The Dean of the College of Agriculture should set up an Agricultural Research Council. It is recommended that the Dean of the College of Agriculture constitute an Agricultural Research Council composed of himself as chairman, of the directors of the three experiment stations, and of the directors of resident teaching and of the Agricultural Extension Service. Upon occasion, or even regularly, the deans, or appropriate persons designated by the several deans, of the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine, and Forestry should be invited to sit with this Council, as should the chairman of the University Research Council, recommended by another section of this report. It should be the function of the Council to examine and make recommendations to the Dean of the College of Agriculture with respect to: (1) the selection of projects that should be undertaken; (2) the allocation of projects to the several stations; (3) the allocation of the funds available to the various projects; and (4) the publication of results of research. It may be noted in connection with the last point that the publication of the results of research should be a matter of the College of Agriculture as a whole or of the experiment stations as a group, and not solely one of the several stations independently. Consideration of these matters necessarily involves planning for securing and allocating personnel to the various projects, and, in fact, selection of projects to be undertaken will be determined to a considerable degree by the availability of appropriate personnel. Selection of projects of greatest urgency and importance from the standpoint of service to the State will, therefore, be less limited if the pool of projects and of the personnel for their prosecution is extended beyond the full-time permanent members of the experiment station staff. Every practical means should be adopted to utilize personnel of the resident teaching staff and of the Extension Service, and consideration should be given to the exchange of personnel between station and station and between stations and the resident teaching and extension staffs. Further, it is desirable that regular and normal channels be provided for submission of project proposals to the Council from the resident teaching staffs and the Extension Service of the College of Agriculture and from the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine, and Forestry. It is not the intent of this suggestion that these channels be closed to other units of the University, but it assumes 58 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF that relationships of the Schools of Home Economics, Veterinary Medicine, and Forestry to agricultural experimentation will, by reason of their subject matters, be closer and more continuous than other units of the institution. The Agricultural Research Council should meet eight or ten times a year on regularly scheduled dates. At least one of these meetings should be an annual planning session extending over a period of several days, at which the major outlines of the work of the year following should be formulated and agreements as to staffing reached. This planning session should come early enough so that the plans made may be embodied in financial terms in the asking budgets of the several units concerned, and submitted in the proposals for the College of Agriculture as a whole, to the President of the University for inclusion in his recommendations to the Chancellor and Regents with respect to the budget request of the entire University. The section of the report of the Survey Staff that deals with finance and business processes makes recommendations concerning budget construction and procedures which involve early planning and formulation of the agricultural research program as a part of the budget of the College of Agriculture as is here indicated. The other regular meetings of the Agricultural Research Council should be devoted to reports of progress, to necessary adjustments of plans, to arrangements for the use of research results in resident teaching and by the Agricultural Extension Service, to the participation of graduate students in station projects, to exploration of any new proposal that may be made, and to matters of policy and procedure that require development or clarification. The organization and procedures of agricultural research may serve as a pattern for the organized research units of other colleges and schools of the University. It is obvious that the specific elements and conditions that exist in agricultural research do not parallel the factors that govern the development of the organized research units in other schools and colleges of the University. Nevertheless, the same principles of control, organization, and procedure should apply to any organized research unit devoted exclusively to investigations related to the functions that have been assigned to any specific school or college-home economics, veterinary medicine, forestry, pharmacy, law, business administration, or education. The College of Arts and Sciences is not included in this list because it has been assigned no single function that serves as a unifying interest THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 59 about which research may be organized; on the contrary, it includes a great variety of areas, each with its own distinct research problems and techniques-chemistry, physics, mathematics, botany, zoology, geology, history, political science, sociology, music, fule arts, English, and the foreign languages, ancient and modem. Each of these areas may properly constitute a separate center for the organization of research in its field. If, and when, research investigations in any of these develop to the point that requires or permits the creation of an organized research unit in that field, the same principles that this discussion regards as sound for the organized units of research in the several schools and colleges, other than the College of Arts and Sciences, will apply to the unit created. It is desirable to formulate these principles in definite statements: 1. The organized, official research of a school or college should be under the control of the school or college to which it pertains and the school or college itself should determine the research projects that should be undertaken and the standards to be observed in their prosecution. 2. The research projects of any such research unit should be financed by the budget of the school or college or by funds and services of another unit of the University placed at the disposal of the research unit in accordance with definite written agreement between the schools or colleges concerned. If and when an institution-wide research council exists it may have funds for subsidizing the work of the research unit of a school or college and, when this is the case. such gra.nts should be made only after approval by the institution-wide research council under conditions that make the research unit of the school or college responsible to the University Research Council in accordance with the conditions agreed to when the grant is made. 3. Persons assigned on a full- or part-time basis to the research unit of a school or college by another unit of the University should be given official status on the school or college faculty in which the research unit is located. 4. Projects to be supported should be selected and approved by a council or committee of the school or college of which the organized unit of research is a part. The council or committee should be advisory to the dean and its recommendations should require his approval. 5. Regular reports of progress on each authorized research project should be made to the council or committee at least quarterly. A University Research Council should be created. In addition to the organized research units of the several schools and colleges it is highly desirable that an institution-wide research council be created at the University of Georgia. The powers and functions of this council should be as follows: 1. It should have the power to recommend to the President of the University allocation of funds budgeted to the council, and not budgeted in the individual schools and colleges or to the research units or departments thereof, 60 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF which may be allocated to research conducted by individuals and to supplement the funds of the organized research units of the several schools and colleges. 2. It should also be the agency of the University to which reports should be made annually concerning all research projects approved, under way, and completed by sponsored individuals and by the several organized research units of the schools and colleges. Over the latter the council should exercise no control or supervision, except in those cases in which it has allocated funds with provisions which prescribe that specified conditions be met. 3. It should be the clearing center for discussion and voluntary coordination of those research projects that are under consideration by the organized research units of the schools and colleges and by individuals who seek sponsorship by the individual departments, schools and colleges, or by the council itself. 4. It should report annually to the President concerning the accomplishments of the research enterprises of the University as a whole and concerning the research needs of the University not covered by the reports of the several schools and colleges. The University Research Council should be made up of representatives of each of the organized research units of the several schools and colleges, of representatives of each of the professional schools and colleges which do not have organized research units, and of representatives of each of the divisions of the College of Arts and Sciences-fine arts, language and literature, social sciences, physical sciences, biological sciences. The Dean of the Graduate school should be ex officio chairman of the Council. The representatives of each of the groups named should be selected by their colleagues and should serve for terms of not less than three years, so distributed as to insure substantial continuity of membership. It should be noted that the term "research" as used in this discussion of the research units of the University has the meaning of the definition given by a preceding paragraph of this report. Further, research, whether thus defined or used in some other sense, may and frequently does exist by and of itself without any relationship to the graduate work of an institution. Hence, the election of the representatives to the University Research Council should be by the regular faculty membership of the several units and divisions to be represented, and not by the graduate faculty members thereof or by the graduate faculty as a whole. A distinction should be made between institutionally sponsored research by individuals and individual research that is not thus sponsored. It must be recognized that by no means all of the research carried on within a university is done under the auspices of organized research units. Much of it is individual and personal. It is desirable, how- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 61 ever, to make a clear distinction between individual research that is institutionally sponsored and that for which the institution takes no responsibility whatsoever. In the case of individual research that is not institutionally sponsored, the worker does the work on his own time and without special institutional provision of facilities or assistance; he is under no obligation to secure the approval of his administrative superiors or report to them. He meets his full institutional obligations if he performs acceptably the duties for which he is employed and for which he is responsible to the administrative officers of his department and college. This report is not concerned with this type of individual research; its interest is confined to the individual research that is institutionally sponsored. Institutionally sponsored research projects, whether individual or otherwise, are those which are approved by an institutional authority and usually involve allocations of time, equipment, and clerical or other assistance. Institutionally sponsored research projects which are carried on by a single individual should not, from the administrative standpoint, be regarded as individual research. Projects assigned to single persons by the organized research units of a school or college or conducted under the sponsorship and supervision of the University Research Council should be considered as elements in the organized research of the institution and not as institutionally sponsored individual projects. The latter term should be limited to those research projects conducted by individuals, which are authorized and supported by the budget of the specific department in which the individual has membership or by the budget of a school or college which has no organized research unit or council which considers and makes recommendations concerning the acceptance of all the research projects that are to be sponsored by the school or college. Sponsored, individual research, in this sense, should require the approval of the reguar administrative superiors of the persons concerned and should require also that periodic reports of progress be made to such superiors. THE RELATIONSHIP OF INSTITUTIONALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH TO THE GRADUATE WORK OF THE UNIVERSITY Graduate work is dependent upon association with research. As has been suggested by the preceding paragraph, research, as such, is not dependent upon association with graduate work. It may be 62 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF carried on in a university without reference to the graduate work of the institution and in an institution where no graduate work exists. On the other hand, graduate work, especially at the :poctor's level, cannot maintain desirable standards unless the men who direct it are interested and active participants in research activities. It is true also that research receives aid from the contributions of graduate students which could not be so cheaply obtained through other means. What has been said is less true of graduate work at the Master's level in many fields, since work for the Master's degree is likely to consist in large part of learning the methods and techniques of investigation rather than of making very important contributions to knowledge. Nevertheless, even at the Master's level, study projects may, and frequently do, secure results that are of appreciable value to larger research enterprises. The Graduate School should have the right to designate faculty members who are to carryon graduate instruction. Fundamentally, of course, graduate work is a process of instruction; this is its purpose even though methods may differ from those of undergraduate instruction and the outcomes involved may be valuable in other relations than those of developing learning ability. Hence, it is proper and desirable that graduate schools center their interest and control upon the instructing function. However, since participation in research processes and purposes is an essential element in graduate instruction, the Graduate School is compelled to be actively concerned that research activities on the part of those who direct graduate instruction be developed to the point where they provide opportunities for association of graduate students with faculty members who are competent and experienced in research. The Graduate School must be certain that such men are available on the faculties of the several schools and colleges; it cannot be assured of this fact and take responsibility for the quality of students to whom graduate degrees are granted, unless it has a determining voice in the selection of the persons who are to conduct and direct graduate work. Thus, while the research units of the several schools and colleges may function independently of the Graduate School so far as research, as such, is concerned, this confers no right or expectation that they will carryon or direct graduate instruction in similar independence. Only such members of school or college research units as are designated for the purpose by the Graduate School should be permitted to take on responsibilities for graduate instruction. Such designation should be made only upon the basis of standards of training, experience, and productivity that provide reasonable insurance of interest and THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 63 competence. It will facilitate both the development of research and graduate work if the Graduate School, through its Dean, be consulted and approval secured before a school or college requests the appointment of a faculty member whom it plans to assign to graduate instruction or direction. The Graduate School should approve courses to be offered for graduate credit, but is less competent to approve specific research projects to be used in graduate instruction. It is desirable and necessary that the Graduate School approve the offering of any course that is to be taken for graduate credit. The Graduate School is less competent to determine in each of the multitudinous areas of professional and academic scholarship, the precise problems that are appropriate and useful as elements in the research experience of graduate students. This must be left to the judgment of the persons in the field of the student's work who have been selected for their competence in the field. Hence, it is extremely important that the designation of persons to direct graduate work be made with such care that these decisions may be entrusted to them with confidence. It follows also, that these persons are the ones most competent to pass judgment on the acceptability of the student's research work with the same finality that any college instructor determines the grade of a student in his classes. Funds not budgeted to the several schools and colleges should be available to encourage research as a foundation for graduate work. The interest of the Graduate School in research is of fundamental importance if graduate work of acceptable character is to be carried on. Such interest is imperative in an institution, such as the University of Georgia, where the development of research and graduate work is in the midway stage between creditable accomplishment and superior performance. In the judgment of the Survey Staff this interest can find effective expression only if considerable sums, not budgeted to the several schools and colleges, may be made available for allocation to research projects in response to requests of individuals or units of the University. For this purpose, among others, the Survey Staff has recommended the creation of the University Research Council to serve in an advisory capacity to the Dean of the Graduate School who acts as its chairman ex officio. This recommendation is intended to bring the Dean of the Graduate School, acting as Dean of graduate instruction, into close and continuous relationship with the research activities of the University: First, through the aid and 64 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF stimulus that may be given to research through the allocation of funds; and, second, through his chairmanship of the agency to which reports of research proposed, under way, or completed shall oe made, both by the research projects directly sponsored through grants-in-aid and by the research projects conducted under other independent budgets. THE GENERAL EXTENSION SERVICES OF THE STATE INSTITUTIONS What is and what is not "extension" has not been clearly defined. The public higher institutions of Georgia seem to regard their educational obligations to those who are not regularly enrolled resident students with varying degrees of seriousness. In general, the term "extension" is applied to the activities intended to meet these obligations, but there is considerable confusion here, as elsewhere, as to what is and what is not "extension." The word was probably originally applied with the meaning that work done on the campus of an institution would be carried off the campus. It was soon recognized, however, that the people for whom the service was intended needed educational help of quite different character and conducted by quite different methods from those used in resident instruction. Hence, these activities are sometimes classified as credit and non-credit. While it is true that classes and correspondence courses may be conducted with or without credit, non-credit work is usually carried on by means of conferences and short courses, on or off the campus; lectures, radio programs, demonstrations, publications and forums; through the loan of books, and of visual and auditory aids to learning; and a multiplicity of other means. The confusion in Georgia cannot be resolved, however, by any such simple formula. This may be made clear by several, by no means exhaustive, illustrations. The Extension Division of the Georgia Institute of Technology conducts a resident two-year technical institute. The Extension Division of the University of Georgia conducts, at least technically, the third year of a liberal arts program at the Atlanta Division to continue the two years offered by the Atlanta Divis on itself. The College of Education of the University conducts undergraduate and graduate work in Atlanta as part of the University Center in Georgia, an independent cooperative organization in no sense an instrument of the Regents of the University System. This work is not carried on under the auspices of the extension services of the University of Georgia. The time of day, or the day of the week, when work is done on THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 65 the campus seems to be an important factor in classifying work as "extension" or "resident," but there is no uniformity of practice. The Survey Staff does not regard it as one of its responsibilities to deal specifically with all the confusions and conflicts ihat are involved in the organization and administration of the services of the institutions of the University System of Georgia that are extended to persons not regularly enrolled as resident students. The Survey Staff is concerned, however, with the problem of coordinating the services as among the several institutions. This is a matter that should be dealt with by the Regents of the University System, if waste and conflicts are to be avoided. In many states with a number of public higher institutions, both in the states in which a number of institutions are controlled by a single governing board and those where each is controlled by a separate governing board, each institution tends to regard the whole state as its real campus and the entire body of the people of the state as a potential student body for off-campus instruction and service. These facts indicate that in this field of higher educational service, Georgia also has, in the making, a serious problem of institutional competition and duplication. The competition may become very severe indeed, as it has elsewhere, since the motivating purpose in providing off-campus instruction and service is not solely educational. It is regarded by all as an element in the public relations of the institutions and as an effective means for securing widespread local support and hence legislative assistance. As institutional ambitions are made effective in practice, competition may cease to be something remote from the great body of the people and may manifest itself in local communities; duplication of effort and competition for clientele carried on at the community level, is quite a different matter from competition to secure resident students on the campus. Institutional division of off-campus services is impractical. Many proposals have been made in other states as to methods of securing coordination of institutional extension services. One most commonly advanced is that the State be divided among the institutionS on geographical lines. Since in Georgia, the University, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and the Woman's College at Milledgeville, are, to a considerable degree, state-wide institutions, rather than local ones, this solution seems impractical. Further, none of the institutions possesses all the kinds or types of facilities and staff needed to serve all of the needs of the population of any region. Each possesses resources not possessed by any other. Nor does the proposal that coordination be secured through division of responsibility by fields seem 66 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF practical. While it is true that each of the institutions named has distinctive lines of work, it is also true that each of these fields requires corollary and preparatory work that is very much the same in all the institutions. Such duplication is not undesirable when the work is conducted on their separate campuses; it becomes wasteful when, by extension, several institutions bring the same program to a local community. A considerable body of very similar offerings is provided on their campuses by all of the institutions which is entirely suitable to meet many needs of the non-resident student group. No sharp line can be drawn between this body of material and more advanced work which shades over into the distinctive specializations of each institution. A further difficulty in assigning work to institutions on the basis of the special fields of the institutions arises from the fact that practically every definition of special field that can be devised, requires educational service that is appropriate also to other areas. For example, to choose an extreme case, it is perfectly proper and correct to say that agricultural extension is a specialized field, yet dealing with the problems that rural people wish solved goes far beyond the growing of crops and animals. It involves economic, social and civic areas as well. Therefore, agricultural extension must deal with such matters as farm leases, bookkeeping, income tax returns, community organization and rural health. In other words, many areas that are not thought of as agricultural must be included in agricultural extension if the needs of agricultural people are to be met. It is true that agricultural extension work is not carried on for college credit. It is also true, however, that the same principle applies to the specializations of a number of the institutions which are most useful when college credit can be obtained. V oluntary or compulsory coordination of the extension activities to form one state-wide extension service is recommended. Since it is practically impossible to make a sharp institutional allocation of extension functions on the basis of either geography or the specialized nature of institutional offerings, it becomes essential that the problem be approached upon a state-wide basis. Organization of these efforts should result in a pooling of the total body of resources of the institutions, so that the institution which can best provide the service at a specific locality will be called upon to render it. Further, decisions should be reached in regard to the specialized types of service which each institution should provide on the basis of its peculiar competence in that field or at the level at which the service is needed. It is clear to the Survey Staff that effective use of all of the resources of THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 67 all of the institutions in the University System of Georgia for purposes of off-campus service, requires some form of central coordination of the System. The Survey Staff is also convinced, however, that any such system of central control or administration that may be developed should guard very carefully the exercise of initiative by the local institutions and on the part of specific units within each of the institutions. Further, the administration of the system should be such as to guard carefully the intimate connections and relationships of each institution to its local community and environment; in the opinion of the Survey Staff, no more devastating charge can be made than that a higher institution exists for years in a community and in no way affects the life and economy of the community. Some elements in the general extension service of the University of Georgia provide patterns that should be preserved in the State System. The General Extension Division of the University of Georgia has had considerable, although not complete success in coordinating the general extension work of the University and has developed a plan of cooperation with several of the higher institutions that has elements which should be perpetuated in any state-wide system of off-campus service that may be developed. Under this plan, a staff member in the cooperating institution is designated by the University Extension Service of the University of Georgia as an associate director; enrollments in the correspondence program at the University are handled by him and upon occasion he arranges for use of University resources for other phases of the local institution's off-campus service. Such cooperation is entirely voluntary as between the institutions involved. Cooperation of this sort has not, however, been sufficiently developed to constitute a state-wide system, although the University of Georgia has the most complete service developed by any of the institutions of the Georgia system in terms of the variety of its extension offerings and of the geographical scope of its coverage. It is not believed that a state-wide system of extension service may be successfully developed as the enterprise of the University of Georgia or of any other single institution. Other institutions would tend to believe that the service would be directed too largely to the promotion of the interests of the institution in which administration was centralized and that they would lose the local and specialized contacts that are so important to them. One example of this tendency is the conviction, several times expressed to the Survey Staff, that the University Extension Centers operated by the University and offering credit courses, are instruments for recruiting upper division students 68 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF for the University and are in direct competition with other undergraduate institutions for students at the lower division level. The coordination of institutional extension resources into a state-wide system should be the responsibility of an officer in the office of the Chancellor. The problem of state-wide coverage by extension services and of coordinated utilization of the resources of the entire group of institutions for this purpose, is a problem of system-wide scope and should, therefore, be subject to the oversight of the chief executive officer of the Regents, the Chancellor of the University System of Georgia. It is therefore recommended that the position of extension assistant be restored, and that, subject to the direction of the Assistant Chancellor in charge of Instruction, he serve as the coordinator of extension services. This officer should not be regarded as, or have the authority of an administrative officer in charge of an operating organization. His functions should be solely those of securing operation of the extension activities of the several institutions through cooperative arrangements among the administrative officers and staffs of the institutions. The personnel used in extension work will be regularly appointed members of the faculties and staffs of the several institutions and of their constituent units. They should be solely responsible administratively to the officers of their own institutions. It would be highly improper administration if the use of their time and the assignment of their duties were divided between such institutional administrative officers and an outside administrator in the office of the Chancellor. It may be objected that this limitation upon the authority of the extension coordinator in the Chancellor's office will make his services ineffective and foredoom him to failure to secure coordination of institutional extension services. It is believed that the danger that this will be the case is much less than the dangers that would result from interference with the complete responsibility of institutional administrative officers for the conduct of the work of their institutions. This belief is firmly grounded upon the fact that the Chancellor and the Regents of the University System have ample authority to determine the types of educational service that are to be rendered by each of the institutions of the System. This authority may be exercised properly only through the chief administrative officer of each institution by means of policy requirements and institutional budgetary controls; it should not be exercised by the issuance of directives to the subordinate officers and staffs of the institutional organization. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 69 An Extension Council should assist the Chancellor's office in securing coordinated activity. Since the Survey Staff conceives of the functions Of the extension assistant in the Chancellor's office as those of a staff and planning officer, rather than as those of an administrator in charge of extension operations, the state-wide organization recommended must be appropriate to this method of securing state-wide coordination of institutional extension activities. The major features of an organization structure that will, it is believed, be appropriate to the purpose are indicated by the paragraphs that follow. The assistant in charge of extension activities should be assisted by an Extension Council composed of a representative of the extension activities of each of the institutions in the University System of Georgia, including each of the institutions for Negroes. In the case of the University it is recommended that there be two representatives on the council: one of General Extension and one of the Federal Cooperative Agricultural Extension Service. It is not considered practical to bring the general extension and agricultural extension organizations of the University together into one University extension service that includes both. The size and complexity of the Agricultural Extension Service, together with the fact that it must be of necessity conformed to the general patterns of the National Federal Cooperative Extension Service makes it desirable that its position as an organized unit in the College of Agriculture of the University be maintained. Attention has already been called to the fact that the needs of agriculture in rural life have resulted in the Federal Cooperative Agricultural Extension Service providing noncredit extension service to many interests and activities that are not limited solely to rural communities-home economics, recreation, health, taxation are examples. Further, its organization includes workers permanently resident in the counties and regions where the institutions of the University System are located, and opportunities for local cooperation in these and other fields may well exist or be developed. Since the plan for a state-wide extension service is based upon the coordination of institutional organizations, rather than upon their absorption, it is desirable that the Agricultural Extension Service as well as the General Extension Service of the University be represented on the State Council. The Council's functions should be purely those of planning and policy formulation, with the concomitant responsibility of recommendation to the Chancellor, through the assistant in charge of extension, 70 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF and to the administrative heads of the several institutions that its members represent. It should be the responsibility of the assistant in charge of extension to follow up such recommendations to insure that positive or negative action is taken promptly by the institutions and Chancellor and, when required, by the Regents. The Council should meet regularly, not less frequently than once each quarter, and special meetings should be held at the call of the assistant in charge of extension or at the request of three members. Certain definite problems should receive the attention of the Extension Council. It is not the purpose of the Survey Staff to suggest the details of planning and policy making that should be dealt with by the Council but it wishes to call attention to three specific points that are considered to be of special importance. 1. The Council should formulate a definition of the activities that are to be considered "extension" activities in the operation of the University System, in order to determine the activities with which the Council should deal and those which are to be considered resident field work by the several departments and units of the institutions. The proposals of the Council with respect to this definition of extension should be submitted to the several institutions for consideration in order that exception may be taken to the Council's proposals or that additions may be suggested. These comments should then be considered by the Council and such modifications made as to it seem desirable. The assistant in charge of extension should then present the recommendations to the Chancellor for such action by the Regents as to him seems desirable. This matter has been discussed in some detail to illustrate the methods by which the work of the Council should, in the opinion of the Survey Staff, be carried on, and because a definition of "extension" by the Regents is desirable as a directive to the several institutions of the System, as well as for the work of the Council and the assistant in charge of extension. Practical answers, even though they may involve somewhat arbitrary decisions, should be given to such questions as: Under what conditions will evening and Saturday classes held on the camp us or in the local community be regarded as resident work? When will they be considered extension? Will directed field experience in connection with resident courses, or as separate courses in a professional field, be considered resident or extension instruction? Under what conditions are courses given in cooperation with the University Center in Georgia to be considered extension or residl'nt work? Should resident technical institutions of less than four years duration be operated under extension administration? Under what conditions should an extension center cease to be the responsibility of extension administration and become a local junior college under the administration of the local school authorities or under the general administration as a branch of the parent institution? THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 71 2. The Council should consider and make recommendations concerning the assignment to a single institution of exclusive administrative and operative responsibility for certain phases and types of extension activity. The most important aspect of the wQrk which should receive this kind of consideration is, in the opinion of the Survey Staff, the conduct of correspondence study. Competition among the institutions of the University System of Georgia for correspondence course students is obviously undesirable. A single bulletin should contain the announcement of all correspondence courses offered. The validity of correspondence courses as a means of earning credit is dependent upon sound standards in the preparation of course materials and the observance of carefully tested techniques in their conduct and administration. It is believed that these objectives cannot be obtained if a variety of institutional administrations are responsible, or if administration and operation are separated from immediate contact with institutional facilities. While it is assumed that registration for correspondence work may well be initiated at the several institutions and that appropriate staff members in the separate institutions may be designated, with the approval of local institutional authorities, for the conduct of specific courses or a specified number of enrollments therein, the Survey Staff recommends that operation of all the work done by correspondence be centered in the University of Georgia as it is at present. This should not, of course, free the University correspondence study organization of the University from the examination, suggestion, and recommendations of the State Council on Extension. 3. The Council should consider and should formulate objectives that should be sought through extension activities in terms of the most pressing and critical needs of the State that may be thus served, and should plan a program that, both with respect to methods and subject matter, will, in its judgment, most quickly and effectively accomplish these objectives. Emphasis is given to this matter because in Georgia, as is true elsewhere, extension has been too largely developed in a hit and miss fashion in response to specific isolated demands, rather than in the light of any over-all analysis of the total economic and social needs of the State. It is realized that this is a difficult task that will need to be constantly reconsidered and that will always be performed imperfectly, but it is believed that expenditures of efforts and funds may be much more effective if the attempt is made seriously to put first things first. INSTITUTIONAL FUNCTIONS This portion of the survey of the University System of Georgia has discussed six major areas: (1) the Regents; (2) teacher education; (3) professional education; (4) research; (5) graduate work; and (6) work by extension. In connection with these discussions recommendations have been made with respect to, first, the exercise of certain re- 72 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF sponsibilities by the Chancellor's office and the organization of these responsibilities; second, the relationships among certain types or phases of higher education in the institutions; and third, the allocation of certain functions to the several institutions. It is now desirable to consider each institution, one at a time, and bring together in this connection the institutional recommendations already made and those that it has not been convenient to present in connection with the three major topics that have been discussed. This will be done by a series of recommendations in the case of each institution, without discussion when the recommendation is abstracted from the text that precedes; with brief discussion in each instance of an additional recommendation. It should be noted that changes of the titles of certain institutions are not covered by specific recommendations, but it is the intent to recommend that the names used be adopted. FUNCTIONS OF VALDOSTA STATE COLLEGE It is recommended that the Valdosta State College be developed as a coeducational college of arts and sciences at the Bachelor's level only, with a curriculum for the preparation of elementary teachers and with modifications of the arts and sciences program designed to provide practical occupational competence for students who do not wish to complete a degree program or who are unable to do so. It should not undertake secondary teacher preparation, and the program of elementary teacher education should be suspended until satisfactory laboratory school and practice facilities are available. It is not desirable to maintain within the University System of Georgia a four-year degree-granting institution with an enrollment as small as that at Valdosta. It is not believed that the enrollment can, within a reasonable period, be developed to an efficient size by the admission of women only. With certain relatively minor exceptions, the physical plant is adequate to care for an enrollment of desirable size. There is no other public degree-granting institution for white students south of a line drawn east and west through the approximate mid-point of the State. The nearest public higher institution, Georgia Teachers College at Statesboro, is an institution with a specialized function whose character should be preserved and it is not suited to meet the great variety of needs that should be served. The Survey Staff believes, therefore, that the institution at Valdosta should be continued. Declining enrollments at the Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville and changing attitudes toward coeducation in Georgia, convince the Survey Staff that one college exclusively for women will be sufficient to meet the wishes of the considerable group in the State that still desires that its daughters attend a college for women only. The members of this group in the southern part of the State who now send their daughters to Valdosta because it is a college for women, would suffer no serious handicap if they sent them to Mil- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 73 ledgeville instead. This re-direction of such students would tend to provide that institution with a student body for which its plant and facilities are designed. Further, it is not believed that the admission of men to the institution at Valdosta will adversely affect attendance at the State institutions in the northern half of the State. The presence of local opportunities invariably results in college attendance on the part of eligible high school graduates who would otherwise not go to college. FUNCTIONS OF NORTH GEORGIA COLLEGE AT DAHLONEGA It is recommended that the North Georgia College at Dahlonega be continued as a college of arts and sciences at the Bachelor's level, and as the one institution in the University System distinguished by its essentially military organization for men. Its emphasis for its women, in addition to that of the usual program of arts and sciences, should be upon an elementary teacher education curriculum leading to the Bachelor's degree. It should not undertake to provide the professional phases of a secondary teacher education program, and the elementary teacher program should be suspended until satisfactory laboratory school and practice facilities are made available. FUNCTIONS OF THE GEORGIA STATE COLLEGE FOR WOMEN AT MILLEDGEVILLE 1. It is recommended that the central function of the Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville be that of a college of arts and sciences offering majors in the usual academic subjects and in home economics at the Bachelor's level, and providing programs leading to the Master's degree in the humanities and the social studies only. 2. Important secondary functions should be those of preparing, at the Bachelor's level, elementary and secondary teachers, including vocational home economics teachers, teachers of music, fine arts, and of health and physical education on a major basis, and of teacher-librarians on a minor basis. FUNCTIONS OF THE GEORGIA TEACHERS COLLEGE AT STATESBORO 1. It is recommended that the Georgia Teachers College at Statesboro confine itself exclusively to the preparation of professional personnel for service in the public schools. Such personnel should be prepared for teaching in the secondary schools at the Bachelor's level in the academic fields and industrial arts as majors, and as minors in the 74 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF fields of health and physical education, fine arts, and teacher-librarianship. 2. The emphasis in the teacher education program _of this institution should be upon preparation for elementary school service. It is therefore recommended that the Georgia Teachers College be authorized to offer the programs for the preparation of professional elementary school personnel at the Bachelor's level and, at the Master's degree level, for master elementary teachers and for elementary school principals and supervisors. 3. The improvement of laboratory school and practice facilities should have early priority. FUNCTIONS OF THE GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 1. It is recommended that the Georgia Institute of Technology be continued as the one institution in the Georgia System devoted to the whole field of industrial technology (except that of agricultural engineering), at the Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctor's levels, and that engineering research and extension be limited to this institution. 2. It is further recommended that the institution's current authorization to grant the Ph. D. degree in the fields of chemistry and physics be extended to include mathematics. 3. The teacher education program of the institution should be limited to the vocational trades and industrial field under the Federal Acts and no other institution for white students in the University System of Georgia should be permitted to enter this field. 4. It is recommended that the Southern Technical Institute be continued under the administration of the Georgia Institute of Technology, but that it be conducted as a unit of the Institute of Technology reporting directly to the President, rather than, as at present, as an enterprise of the Engineering Extension Division. Under the Engineering Extension Division of the Georgia Institute of Technology, this resident technological program extends over a period of two years. The program of the Southern Technical Institute is, in fact, a modification and adaptation of the certificate courses offered by extension under the name of "technical institute programs." The fact that the program is a terminal one of two years duration gives the impression that it is a junior college program. This is not true, however, in terms of normal junior college operation under the control of a public school system. It provides college grade engineering or technological education planned to prepare engineers of a type different from THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 75 the engineers prepared on the four- or five-year basis. The latter are highly trained in the theoretical aspects of engineering that are needed to deal with the original research and design problems associated with professional engineering practice; the work of the Southern Technical Institute is designed to provide the basic scientific training, the specialized technical "know-how," and the supervisory and management training of what may be called "operating" engineers. The engineering profession is becoming increasingly responsive to the need for a specialized type of engineering training of this kind. This interest arises largely through the studies that the profession has carried on, and because of the fact that the profession's training of "design" engineers has resulted in graduates taking operating positions which marked them as failures as professional engineers in the design sense. As is stated in the catalog of Georgia Tech, it is estimated that ten operating engineers are needed for each design enginet>r. The Associated Industries of Georgia estimates that there are in Georgia about 20,000 well-paying positions of this type at salaries ranging from $2,400 per year upward. Georgia industry is going to need an increasing number of persons of the type prepared by the Southern Technical Institute. Similar institutions are now being conducted under the auspices of reputable engineering colleges. The Survey Staff is convinced that this enterprise should be continued with increased support. It does not believe that the level and type of preparation given by the Southern Technical Institute and needed by Georgia industry, can be maintained under any other direct control than that of the Georgia Institute of Technology. FUNCTIONS OF THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA AT AUGUSTA 1. It is recommended that the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta be conducted as an independent unit of the University System responsible directly to the Chancellor and the Board of Regents, as are other institutions of the System. 2. It is recommended that the Medical College be authorized to grant the professional medical degree and the Master's degree in the clinical and technical fields of medicine. 3. Further, it is recommended that as soon as arrangements can be made, the Medical College assume responsibility for the Schools of Nursing for white and Negro students now conducted by the University Hospital under the auspices of the City of Augusta. FUNCTIONS OF ATLANTA COLLEGE 1. It is recommended that the Atlanta Division of the University be divorced entirely from administrative connection with the University of Georgia and given the status of an independent unit in the University System of Georgia. 76 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The Survey Staff is convinced that a branch institution primarily devoted to local educational service in relatively limited fields, and separated in distance by seventy miles and in the nature of its environment by striking dissimilarities, cannot be satisfactorily supervised administratively by a mother institution. It is believed that the limitations proposed for the program for the Atlanta College and the fact that its student body will continue to be made up entirely of day students, a large percentage of whom are employed locally, make it improbable that the Atlanta College will provide undesirable competition for students with other state institutions. This recommendation is made by the Survey Staff with full knowledge that the Atlanta unit has been accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools upon the basis of the accreditation of the University of Georgia, rather than upon the basis of its own standards of staff, support, and facilities. The Survey Staff is convinced that these matters should receive the attention of the Regents, whether the recommendation that the Atlanta unit should be an independent unit of the System is or is not accepted. 2. It is recommended that the program of the Atlanta College be confined, at the Bachelor's level, to business administration and to a two-year program of arts and sciences. The major school of business administration of the University System of Georgia is located at the University at Athens, and this should continue to be the case. The institution at Athens is authorized to grant Bachelor's and Master's degrees in the field and should ultimately look forward to the granting of the Doctor's degree in business administration. It is not believed that the authorization to the Atlanta College to grant the Bachelor's degree, as is done at present, in the field of business administration, will seriously hamper the program at the University. It certainly will not limit the University's work in this field at the Master's level nor at the levels beyond the Master's degree, as long as the Board of Regents maintains these exclusive allocations to the University. At the same time, it must be recognized that Athens is not a center for business activity comparable to Atlanta. If the School of Business Administration of the University is to develop its programs at the undergraduate and Master's levels as they should be developed, it will be necessary for it to make arrangements in Atlanta, and in other centers, for cooperative experience and for field laboratory work as a part of these degree programs. The Atlanta College should be a feeder for the Master's work at the University in this field. 3. Pending the establishment of a junior college by the City of Atlanta, which should take over these functions, the Atlanta College should continue to offer its two-year diploma courses in the fields of business. FUNCTIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA 1. It is recommended that the development of the University of Georgia be continued as the major institution in the University System THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 77 with respect to the variety and scope of its undergraduate, graduate and professional offerings and its research work. It is also natural, therefore, that it continue to be the most important institution of the University System in the field of its extension activities. 2. The foregoing recommendation implies that all the fields and levels of higher education fall within the scope of the University's functions, except those areas reserved exclusively by the Board of Regents for other institutions in the System, namely, in accordance with the recommendations of the Survey Staff: medicine, including dentistry, if such a program should in the future be undertaken; and industrial technology, with the exception of agricultural engineering. 3. The Survey Staff also recommends that no other institution for white students in the System be permitted to develop programs in the fields of law, veterinary medicine, pharmacy, agriculture, forestry, or journalism. Further, if and when professional schools of library science and of social work are added to the program of University System, these should be assigned exclusively to the University. In the judgment of the Survey Staff, however, no new professional schools should be added to the program of the Georgia System until such time as those already established and the graduate work of the University and the Georgia Institute of Technology at the Doctor's level, have been developed much more extensively than is the case at present. It is the judgment of the Survey Staff that a number of fields may be developed most economically in cooperation with the Board of Control for Southern Regional Education. 4. The University should be the only institution in the Georgia System that should be permitted to offer programs at the Doctor's level, except as previously recommended by this report in the case of the Georgia Institute of Technology, and suggested as a future development in the field of medicine at the Medical College of Georgia. Authorizations to institutions, other than the University and Georgia Tech, to provide graduate work at the Master's level should be limited to the instances recommended by this report until such time as the Doctor's programs of the University and of the Georgia Institute of Technology have been developed into a well-rounded group of opportunities at this level. 5. In the field of preparation for professional service in the field of education, the University only should offer work in vocational agriculture and in commercial and distributive education, for secondary school principals, school superintendents, school counselors, school psychologists, teachers of special classes for the handicapped, specialists in auditory and visual aids, and research and statistical specialists. 78 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF FUNCTIONS OF THE FORT VALLEY STATE COLLEGE 1. It is recommended that the Fort Valley State Dollege be developed distinctively as the State college for Negroes in the field of agriculture and home economics, and it should be the only institution for Negroes that looks forward to granting the Master's degree in these fields. 2. This recommendation is intended to imply that the Fort Valley State College should give much greater emphasis than at present to the fields of agriculture and home economics, including terminal and short courses of less than four years duration related directly to employment in the various agricultural and home economics occupations, and that preparation of agricultural extension and home demonstration agents should be limited to this institution. 3. One secondary but exclusive objective should include the provision of vocational agricultural and home economics teacher education at the Bachelor's level as soon as facilities satisfactory to the State Department of Education can be provided. 4. Until such time as acceptable observation and practice facilities are provided in secondary school academic fields, the institution should not offer professional teacher education work, as such, leading to the Bachelor's degree in these areas. The development of these facilities should parallel development of similar facilities for the purposes of preparing vocational teachers of agriculture and home economics. 5. Subject to provision of acceptable laboratory and practice facilities, the College should be permitted to offer minor teaching fields in fine arts and in health and physical education. 6. It is higWy desirable, also, that facilities be developed for satisfactory observation and practice in the preparation of elementary teachers for grades one through eight at the Bachelor's level. Provision of such facilities should, however, have a priority rating lower than those for the preparation of agricultural, home economics and academic teachers in the secondary schools. 7. The Fort Valley State College should offer a sound program in the arts and sciences leading to the Bachelor's degree only, with special emphasis on majors in the biological sciences, since these are basic to the institution's distinctive functions in agriculture and home economics. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 79 FUNCTIONS OF THE SAVANNAH STATE COLLEGE 1. It is recommended that the Savannah State College be developed distinctively as the State college for Negroes for the industrial and business fields. 2. This recommendation is intended to imply continued emphasis upon programs in the trades, and greater emphasis than at present upon education for employment in and operation of various businesses, including home economics employment other than that of public school teaching. 3. The Savannah institution should, as a secondary emphasis, develop elementary teacher education for grades one through eight at the Bachelor's level only and, as soon as adequate facilities for observation and practice teaching are made available, it should develop professional teacher education in the secondary school academic fields and also special subjects as majors in industrial arts, fine arts, the commercial and distributive fields, and, when occasion arises, in trades and industrial education, and as a minor in health and physical education. 4. The institution should provide a sound program in the arts and sciences leading to the Bachelor's degree with special emphasis upon majors in mathematics, the physical sciences, economics, and in the graphic and plastic arts. FUNCTIONS OF THE ALBANY STATE COLLEGE 1. It is recommended that the Albany State College be developed distinctively in the University System of Georgia as the college of arts and sciences for Negro students. 2. Priority in development of the college of arts and sciences at Albany should be given to the arts, the humanities, and the social studies. When and if adequate facilities are provided, the undergraduate program in arts and sciences of the Albany State College should furnish the best base available among the three Negro institutions in the University System for authorization of the Master of Arts degree. 3. Of major importance also in the program of the institution at Albany should be the development of its program of elementary teacher education at the Bachelor's level. It should look forward to development of leadership and facilities in the field of elementary teacher edu- 80 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF cation which will justify the Board of Regents in giving it the first authorization to provide programs leading to the Master's degree for elementary teachers and for elementary school principals. It is the recommendation of the Survey Staff that the Albap.y State College give larger emphasis to the preparation of professional elementary school personnel than is the case in either of the other institutions for Negro students. No secondary teacher education should be offered, except in music, and this field as a major should be limited to Albany State College. 4. Incidental to its program of arts and sciences the Albany State College should develop programs pointed directly to employment in the fields appropriate to its city environment on less than a degree basis for those who are not able or do not wish to obtain the Bachelor's degree. CHAPTER II THE PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGES The five junior colleges included in the University System represent the first step in the development of an expanded program of secondary education. In the years which lie ahead opportunities for two years of education beyond the high school should be made available to all boys and girls graduating from high school. The ideal which should be kept in mind is an opportunity for junior college education available for all youths within commuting distance of their homes or in residential colleges in the region in which they live. The expansion of the program of secondary education to include the thirteenth and fourteenth years has gained wide acceptance throughout the United States. There is everywhere the recognition of the fact that twelve years of education is not enough to equip boys and girls for the responsible positions which they should occupy in commerce, in agriculture, or in industry. Positions which can be adequately filled by students who have had two years of specialized education beyond high school are many times as numerous as are the opportunities for employment which require graduation from colleges offering four-year courses in engineering, agriculture, or business. The place of the junior college as the upper division of the common school system can be best understood by consideration of the educational program which it should offer. As developed throughout the United States, the junior college has served three main purposes: (1) It has provided a two-year curriculum for those who complete their formal education at the end of the junior college period. The emphasis for this group of students is on vocational education, and the courses offered are often referred to as "terminal courses." (2) A two-year program which prepares students to transfer to the junior year of four-year institutions in which the students will specialize in preparation for later professional or scholarly work in the university, or continue his general education. (3) A program of adult education. 81 82 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF A large percentage of those who graduate from high school can be best served by the two-year vocational program offered in the junior college. It has been estimated on the basis of the achievement of students enrolled in junior colleges and in four-year institutions, that 80 per cent of those graduating from high school should enroll in one- or twoyear terminal vocational courses which will prepare them for work in the occupations which they will enter. The other 20 per cent may be expected to continue through a four-year program and will in many instances continue beyond the four-year program in professional schools or graduate work. Altogether too many young people enter four-year colleges and fail during their freshman and sophomore years. Frequently the program in which they have been enrolled offers little in .preparation for work or in their development as citizens. The fact of failure in the typical arts and science program represents a liability rather than an asset to those who have this experience. The two-year terminal vocational curricula should include a program of general education. The program of general education shoUld contribute to personal development, to competence in human relationships, and to the acceptance of civic responsibility. On the side of personal development students should come to understand how to protect their own health and how to provide conditions which make for healthful living in the community. They should acquire intellectual and aesthetic interests which will give lasting satisfactions. They should acquire competence in worthwhile fields of recreation. They should develop that type of character which is measured by ability to give direction to their own lives. On the side of human relationships and civic responsibility, they should enjoy experiences which will help develop in them high competence in living and working with others. They should develop broad sympathy and understanding. They should become tolerant of honest differences in opinion and judgment. They should learn to accept responsibility for the improvement and development of human society. The vocational courses offered in the junior college should be closely related to opportunities for employment in the locality or region in which the students reside. Among the occupational areas that have been well served by junior colleges are business (clerical and secretarial, bookkeeping), agricul- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 83 ture, home economics, retail merchandising, technical work in automobile and airplane mechanics, in electrical and electronic technology, in heating, air conditioning and refrigeration, labora~ory technics, and the like. The technical courses proposed should not be confused with the program offered in engineering schools. The technician is one who takes the plans of the engineer and uses them in the productive process. He is not primarily concerned with design or invention but rather with the operation of machines and the management of personnel. Smaller schools will have to limit their offerings to two or three specialized curricula while larger schools may provide a more generous offering. The vocational courses offered in the junior college should in many cases prepare students for positions in which they will supervise the work of others. It is entirely possible in a two-year program beyond high school for the student to acquire a high degree of specialized knowledge and to learn how this knowledge can be applied in industry, in business, or in agriculture. In many cases the graduate of the junior college vocational courses will move rapidly from the less important position requiring the application of his specialized knowledge and command of techniques to the one in which he uses his judgment in the supervision of others. The graduates of junior colleges in many parts of the United States are today serving as foremen in factories and power plants, as office managers, as heads of departments in retail stores, as assistant managers or managers on large farms, as technicians in laboratories, and in the management and control of their own ventures in business, agriculture, and small industry. The junior college should prepare students to transfer to the upper division of four-year colleges and universities. For those students who are enrolled in curricula which lead to transfer to institutions of higher education, the curricula offered should be related to the program of education which they will undertake in the institutions to which they are to transfer. Here again the variety of opportunities that can be provided will depend upon the size of the junior college. Work in the liberal arts and sciences, including mathematics, physical science, biological science, social science, and languages and literature may not in a small college be sufficiently differentiated to meet all of the requirements for the junior standing in the many specializations developed in four-year colleges and universities. General education for these students is, however, of greater importance than is preparation for specialization in the upper division of the college to which they plan to transfer. 84 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF For students who transfer, the emphasis in the junior college should be on general education. Students in the two-year program leading to a transfer to the upper division work of the four-year college or university should enjoy a program of general education comparable to that provided in the twoyear vocational curricula. They, too, should be ready to accept their responsibility as members of the family, the community, the state and the nation. They should have developed personally to the point where they can live wholesome happy lives. They should have acquired lasting interests and enthusiasms in intellectual and aesthetic activities. Their general education should be continued in the upper division of the four-year college. The junior college should provide a program of adult education. The junior college has an obligation to provide educational opportunity for adults as well as for youths. The specialized facilities available in the junior college plant and the staff available should be utilized for the education of adults. In some cases the faculty of the junior college should be expanded in order to meet the needs of the adult population. In many cases the assignment of teachers may be divided between the day school for junior college students and afternoon and evening classes for adults. In other cases it will be essential to provide faculty who are especially equipped for the teaching of the more mature students. The junior college plant should serve as the center for the work of the extension division of the university or other institutions of higher education. The local junior college should cooperate with these other institutions in providing the program for adults. The courses for adults should include education which will lead to their upgrading in the occupations in which they are engaged or in their preparation for transfer to other occupations. The adult program should provide as well for general education, particularly as it has to do with the development of intellectual and aesthetic interests and with a program of wholesome recreation. The junior college is a loca l institution. It will be observed from this discussion of the functions of the junior college that it is in its highest and best development a local institution. It should serve the youths and the adults living in the locality in which it is placed. If the system of junior colleges is adequately developed in the State of Georgia, one may confidently predict that the number enrolled in these institutions will be multiplied during the next ten or fifteen years. As this type of education is made more certainly avail- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 85 able throughout the State, many young people who do not now enjoy any formal education beyond the high school will be enrolled. This will be particularly true if the amount of state and local support is such as to make junior colleges the free upper division onhe common school system. The development of the system of junior colleges will add greatly to the number enrolled in the other institutions of higher education. Wherever junior college opportunities have been provided for all youth, the number of students enrolled in the four-year institutions and in the universities has increased. The fact that more boys and girls continue their education two years beyond high school means that more of them discover the need for the work offered in the upper division of the four-year institutions. There will, of course, be many high school graduates who will go directly to the four-year colleges. If they are well-advised, their enrollment in these institutions will be based upon an expectation of completing a program leading to the Bachelor's degree. There will be an even larger number of students enrolled in the courses in junior colleges that lead to transfer to the four-year colleges. This number will greatly exceed the number who would have gone to four-year colleges or universities had there been no opportunity for junior college work near home. Students who go to junior colleges because they are easily available and who show real promise will be well selected for upper division work. Many of these students without the junior college opportunity do not now receive any education beyond high school. From data collected from high school principals in Georgia for the graduating class in 1949, it appears that many of the most promising high school graduates did not go to college. Of those who were classified among the upper 25 per cent in scholastic ability approximately 48 per cent did not continue their education. As the junior college system becomes fully developed, all of these able young people should be enrolled in junior colleges and most of them should continue to the completion of the work for the Bachelor's degree. The junior colleges should be disassociated from the University System. The Survey Staff believes that the recommendations of the earlier survey reports should be carried through to a conclusion at this time. "In the past twenty-five years, a new educational unit-the junior collegehas been developed. Its growth during the past ten years has been very rapid, 86 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF and it is now evident that this new institution is to become in some form or other a permanent part of our program of education. Naturally, the administrative and financial relations of the State and of the local community to the junior college have not become so clearly defined as they have in the case of the high school. In recent years, however, the trend has become fairly evident. The tendency is to regard the period covered by the junior college as a part of American secondary education and to place the responsibility for administration on the local unit as is the case with the high school at present. "The State of Georgia has been tardy in accepting the view that the junior college is a local institution. All of the publicly supported institutions of this type in the State, save one, are supported and administered by the State through the Board of Regents of the University System. This is so contrary to the trend in America with reference to secondary education that the Survey Committee does not hesitate to urge a change of policy in this matter..... "In fact, the junior college should be a part of the upward expansion of the common school and not a part of the program of education concerned primarily with the training of specialists. (This is a part of the program of higher education.) Furthermore, in its clientele, the junior college is distinctly a local institution. The data collected by the Survey Committee in connection with its study of the geographical distribution of students show this to be true in Georgia, as has been found elsewhere, in spite of the efforts of some of the junior colleges to draw their student body from the entire State. The local character of the junior college and the functions which it has in the program of education point to the desirability of the transfer of the junior college to local communities. . . . "When that time arrives, provision should be made by the State of Georgia for financial assistance to be given to local communities for the development of junior colleges under standards to be prescribed by the State. Logically, as the junior colleges become an integral part of the program of secondary education, they should be placed under the State Board of Education." * That these recommendations are in accord with the thinking of those responsible for the development of the junior college program throughout the United States is indicated by the following quotation: "Because the public junior colleges or community colleges are a part of the public school system, they should logically be supervised by the State Board of Education and/or State Department of Education, which agency or agencies would be concerned with such general administration as pertains to standards and trends of development. The powers and responsibilities of these agencies should be clearly set forth in the state legislation. "Junior colleges would be responsible under this system to the State Board and/or State Department of Education for accreditation, but not to state universities or state colleges because of the necessity for greater adaptation of the junior college program to community needs. The junior colleges should also plan to qualify for accreditation by the regional accrediting agency. "The legislation should include definite provisions for administrative control of the junior colleges. It has been found that a junior college best meets *Report to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, 1943, pp 117-119. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 87 the needs of the local community when the control is under a local board. In situations where this principle can be followed, it should be carried out. In others, a special board may be established. In those junior colleges serving a broader area, a board representative of the entire area should be chosen." * The change in the status of the junior colleges will involve certain major adjustments. Among the matters which must be considered when the junior colleges are disassociated from the University System are the following: (1) the relationship of the junior colleges to the common school system; (2) the administration of the junior colleges; (3) their support, including a consideration of the contribution which should be made by local communities. As has been proposed above, the junior college should be considered as an extension of the secondary school program. As such it is, or should be, recognized as a part of the common school system. This upward extension of the common school system is acknowledged in the Constitution of the State of Georgia, Section 2-7001, paragraph 1: "Maintenance of existing systems; new systems prohibited.-Authority is hereby granted to municipal corporations to maintain existing independent school systems, and support the same as authorized by special or general law, and such existing systems may add thereto colleges. No independent school system shall hereafter be established." It will be observed that authorization is given for independent school systems to add college education to the program currently offered. In the Acts of 1937, Section 32-611, provision is made for additions to the local school unit as now organized: "Local units may provide additional advantages.-Nothing in this Chapter shall operate to prevent any local school unit from providing from local funds educational advantages in addition to those herein prescribed or that may be prescribed by the State Board of Education or from making rules for the government of such local systems not in conflict with those prescribed by the State Board." The junior colleges should be administered by the Board of Educationin the district in which they are located or by a Board of Education recruited from a larger area which should constitute a junior college district. *"Suggested Procedures and Techniques for Initiating and Developing Legislation for a State Plan for Community Colleges," a tentative statement drafted by The Committee on Legislation, American Association of Junior Colleges, 1201 19th Street, N. W., Washington 6, D. C. 88 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Each of the junior colleges currently supported by the State is located in an independent school district. It would appear to be possible to transfer the administration of these schools, and to develop other junior colleges in independent school districts without a Constitutional amendment. It is interesting to note in passing that junior colleges in Augusta and in Savannah have been organized and are supported by these independent districts. A larger area than is included in the local independent school district will often be involved in providing support for the local junior college. In the larger cities, for example, Atlanta, Augusta, Columbus, Savannah, it should be possible to provide local support which when supplemented by state contributions would make possible the development of a first class junior college. In other cases it will be necessary to provide for an expanded unit of administration including the local independent district, the county in which this district is located, and several surrounding counties as the area from which support can be secured, and from which the members of the local board responsible for the junior college should be recruited. This method of recruiting the board responsible for the junior college and for providing support for it has been used throughout the United States. The State of Mississippi provides by law for the establishment of junior college districts as follows: "The trustees of a separate school district containing a municipality with a population of not less than ten thousand according to the most recent federal census or of an agricultural high school that is not less than twenty miles distant from any of the state colleges, with the exception of Alcorn Agricultural and Mechanical College, may extend the curriculum in the school or schools under their charge so as to include the studies of the freshman or sophomore year or both, of college work when they deem such additional work necessary to properly provide for the educational needs of such school district, county or counties. Provided further, that separate school districts and county agricultural high schools may unite with other separate school districts or with other counties in the establishment of a junior college. . . . Counties desiring to unite in the establishment and support of a junior college either with municipal separate districts or with other counties, shall make such a desire a matter of record by majority vote of the county school board and upon a petition of ten per cent of the qualified electors an election shall be called. If the majority of those voting shall favor the establishment of such school the board of supervisors shall make a levy for the support of said junior college. . . . The county school board and the board of supervisors of a county desiring to co-operate in the maintenance and support of a junior college located in another county, may authorize the county superintendent of education to issue a certificate against the county school fund, the county agricultural high school fund, or the special junior college fund, for an amount sufficient to cover the THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 89 cost of instruction in the said junior college of all students in attendance from the county desiring to co-operate with said junior college, same to be based on actual attendance for the previous scholastic year. All moneys going to the support of junior colleges authorized by this article shall be paid out on the - certificate of the county superintendent of education in the county from which such support is derived. All funds collected for the support of a junior college from whatever separate districts or counties they may be derived, shall be paid to the county superintendent of education of the county in which the junior college is located and shall be turned over by him to the board of trustees of the junior college, who shall usc such fund for the purpose of maintaining the junior college and for such purposes only. "CoJnties co-operating in the maintenance of a junior college by levying tax shall have as herein provided, representation on the board of trustees and the trustees shall be elected as provided for by the laws governing such election. Counties co-operating by direct appropriation based on attendance shall be represented on the board of trustees by the county superintendent of education who shall be an ex-officio member of said board." * The formation of junior college districts in California is provided for by statute, as follows: "The State Board of Education shall establish minimum standards for the formation of junior college districts. The standards shall include, in addition to such others as the board may establish, a requirement that the assessed valuation of the area proposed to be included in a junior college district shall be an amount which, through the levy of a district tax not in excess of twenty cents ($0.20) on each one hundred dollars ($100) of the estimated true wealth of taxable property as computed from the last preceding report of the State Board of Equalization will yield an amount which, when added to the available State financial aid for junior college education, will be deemed adequate for a junior college in the proposed area. "Whenever the governing board of any high school district or the governing boards of two or more contiguous high school districts present to the State Board of Education a petition in the form prescribed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, asking permission to call an election for the formation of a junior college district to include all the territory in the high school district or districts, as the case may be, the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall make or cause to be made a survey of the proposed junior college district and of high school districts contiguous to the proposed junior college district, which may appropriately be included in the proposed district. "The cost of the survey shall be borne by the high school district, the governing board of which signed the petition, or, if there are two or more high school districts petitioning the cost shall be borne by the high school districts in proportion to their assessed valuation. The cost of the survey to a high school district is a proper charge against the maintenance fund of the district. *Laws of Mississippi, Article 19, Section 6475. 90 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF "Upon the completion of the survey the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall report the findings to the State Board of Education together with his recommendations as to the action to be taken on the petition. "If the State Board of Education approves the petition, it shall within 30 days after approval notify the superintendent of schools of the county in which the greatest area of the proposed junior college district lies. "Within 30 days after receiving the notice the superintendent of schools of the county within which the greatest area of the proposed junior college district lies, shall call an election to be held in every elementary district in the proposed junior college district. He shall appoint three qualified electors in each elementary district to conduct the election. "In city school districts the county superintendent of schools shall divide the city school district into precincts and appoint three qualified electors in each precinct to conduct the election. "The election shall be called by posting notices in three public places in each district, one of which shall be a public schoolhouse of the district, at least two weeks before the election, and by publishing the notice at least once a week for two successive weeks in a newspaper having a general circulation in the proposed junior college district. The first publication shall be not less than two weeks before the election. The notice shall specify the polling places, and in cities, the precinct lines. "The expenses of printing notices and ballots and other necessary expenses incurred in the calIing,.holding, and conducting of the election shall be paid by the board of supervisors out of the county general fund. "The election shall be held separately and simultaneously at a public schoolhouse in each elementary school district or in each precinct, and shall be conducted in the manner provided for conducting elections of governing boards of elementary school districts. "The ballots used at the election in each district shall contain the words "Junior college district-Yes" and "Junior college district-No." Each elector voting at the election shall make a cross with a pencil, ink, or rubber stamp after the answer he desires to give. "The election officers in each district or precinct shall canvass the vote of the election as soon as the polls are closed. They shall report the result to the superintendent of schools who called the election within five days after the election. "Within 10 days after receiving the returns of the election, the superintendent of schools shall combine the votes "for" and the votes "against" the formation of the junior college district and declare and record the result, with the details of the vote in each district, in a book kept by him for that purpose. "If a majority of the votes cast at the election is in favor of the formation of the junior college district, he shall file with the county clerk of the county or of each of the counties in which the proposed junior college district lies, a certificate showing the total number of votes cast in each district in favor of the junior college district, the total number of votes in each district against the junior college district, the aggregate result of the election, and the boundaries of the proposed district. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 91 "If it appears from the certificates filed by the superintendent of schools that a majority of the votes cast at the election is in favor of the formation of the junior college district, the junior college district is formed from and after the first day of July next succeeding the election. The county clerk shall record the certificate in full in his record of school districts." * The junior college should be placed under the general supervision of the State Board of Education. When the junior colleges are placed under local administration and are thought of as a unit in the common school system, they should be placed under the general supervision of the State Board of Education, as are the elementary schools and high schools of the State. The State Board of Education should accept the responsibility for presenting the needs of these institutions for support to the legislature, and for the distribution of the moneys so secured to the local junior colleges. The State Board of Education should provide by regulation for the qualifications of members of the staffs of the junior colleges and for their organization and administration by local boards of education. The State should continue to provide support for junior colleges. The junior colleges now existing should be continued and should be adequately supported. When these institutions are transferred to the jurisdiction of local boards of education, it will be necessary for the Legislature to provide support of at least as much as is now made available to the Board of Regents. As these institutions grow in size and function larger appropriations will be necessary. The total amount involved immediately would not be large. Approximately $400,000 per annum of state funds would be needed by the junior colleges now administered by the Board of Regents. An additional appropriation of from $75,000 to $100,000 annually should be made for each of the junior colleges now operated in Augusta and Savannah. As other junior colleges are developed, as they should be, in other large centers of population, and in newly created junior college districts, additional state support will be required. The support of junior colleges will require local taxation tn support of this unit of the common school system. The cost of providing this extension of the common school system should be divided between the State and the localities in which the *Laws of California, Chapter 13, Article I, Sections 4238-4247, inclusive. 92 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF junior colleges now exist or are later developed. A tax in support of this unit of the common school system should be levied in each of the local jurisdictions responsible for the administration of a junior college. These local jurisdictions may consist of an independent school district, or of a county, or of a number of counties. When school districts or counties outside of the local administrative unit in which the junior college is located send students to the junior college, they should be required to reimburse the local junior college administrative district by an amount which would provide for an equitable division of the costs among the several school districts from which students are recruited These local contributions should be used primarily to reduce the fees now paid by junior college students. Over the period of the next ten years, these fees should be reduced to a minimum or abolished altogether. The junior college, as a unit in the common school system, should offer free tuition to students throughout the State. Support for buildings and equipment will be required. As new junior colleges are developed, and as those presently existing grow larger, considerable sums will be necessary for capital outlay. The State should share with the localities in providing the necessary money for buildings, grounds, and equipment. It will be necessary to develop a plan whereby support for capital investment shall be derived not only from the administrative units in which the junior colleges are placed, but also from the other areas from which students are recruited. This can be done by requiring a certain contribution for this purpose per student per year from each administrative area from which students are enrolled. The State Board of Education should determine conditions requisite for the establishment of a new junior college. Among the matters to be considered in the establishment of new junior colleges will be the prospect of enrollment and the certainty of local support. An efficient junior college requires an enrollment of at least 300 students. The possibility of enrolling 300 or more students will be related to the high school population of the area in which it is proposed to establish a junior college. It may be desirable to poll high school students with regard to their probable response to the opportunities which might be provided in a local junior college. The other factor that should be considered is the assessed valuation of the property upon which a tax in support of the junior college might be levied. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 93 The Board of Education of the locality in which it is proposed to establish a junior college should initiate the proposal which should be confirmed by a vote of the citizens. The initiative in the establishment of junior colleges should in every case be taken by the local Board of Education responsible for the administration of schools in the area in which it is proposed to extend the program of secondary education. In the large centers of population the initiative should certainly be taken by the local Board of Education. In those situations which may involve many districts or several counties, the initiative might well be taken by one Board of Education inviting the cooperation of the other boards included in the area. The final determination to establish a junior college should be by a vote of the people of the total area to be served. The junior college including the eleventh to fourteenth years of the common school system has certain advantages. In the development of junior colleges throughout the United States a new type of organization has been effected. Instead of a separate two-year junior college beyond the high school, the last two years of high school education, the eleventh and twelfth years, have been organized with the thirteenth and fourteenth years to form a four-year junior college. This form of organization has much to commend it. In many areas in Georgia such a consolidation of the eleventh and twelfth years with the thirteenth and fourteenth would provide a junior college population of sufficient magnitude to make possible a good working unit. The larger group organized as a four-year junior college would reduce the per capita cost. Even more significantly, the work offered in the four-year junior college would provide a more desirable program of education and make possible the specialization of faculty beyond anything that can be hoped for in the small high school. When one examines the record of high school graduates in the freshman year in Georgia junior and senior colleges he cannot fail to be impressed with the large number of failures. It seems altogether possible that these failures are in many cases due to the lack of opportunity in the smaller high schools. The four-year junior college might be expected to ameliorate this situation. The establishment of a system of junior colleges will contribute to the wealth of the State. The economic well-being of the people of Georgia can be improved through the development of a program of free public education. Lit- 94 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF eracy is essential for all citizens. General education through the elementary school is commonly recognized as necessary for successful participation in the work to be done at the lowest levels of employment. A high school education is required of those who aspire to employment above that ordinarily classified as manual Tabor. The junior college offers the opportunity for those who will continue their education beyond high school to prepare for work involving a wider range of knowledge and a greater appreciation of its application in business, in agriculture, and in industry. Those who are prepared for this higher type of employment will add greatly to the wealth of this State. The investment required to provide junior college education for all youths in Georgia will bring large returns in economic well-being to the people of the State. CHAPTER III THE PHYSICAL PLANT OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA The physical plant of a college or university shapes the educational program. Winston Churchill, addressing the House of Commons with regard to the rebuilding of the House after its destruction by enemy bombs, expressed an idea that might well be taken seriously by all who are responsible for the development, planning, and construction of the physical plant of schools, colleges, and universities. Churchill said, "We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us." With the ever-increasing scope and complexity of organized education to meet and to seek to solve the problems of society in a scientific age, the magnitude of Churchill's words should be recognized and interpreted in every project undertaken. Reduced to income on investment, the foregoing may be interpreted to mean that the efficacy of instruction per dollar expended is conditioned by the physical plant-the buildings and the equipment. Failure to recognize this obvious fact is not only poor economy from an investment point of view, but an invitation to failure in our race for leadership among the nations of the world. Along with efficiency of instruction and economy of expenditures, the role of the physical plant includes two other factors of major consequence; namely, the safety and health of the students and staff. Any administration responsible for the control and direction of a system of schools that neglects to provide effective safeguards against injury, loss of life, or detriment to health is guilty of failure to perform a major moral and legal duty. The methods employed in the survey of the physical plant were adapted to the time available and scope of the problem. The data upon which the critical analysis of the physical plant is based were derived from the following sources: (1) personal observation and field notes by members of the Survey Staff in every building from basement to attic on every campus; (2) detailed plant inventory forms 95 96 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF filled out by responsible administrative officers in each institution, reporting factual information on quality, condition, function, and utilization of each building; (3) statements of plant needs by each institution submitted by the several presidents to the Board of Regents in June, 1948, and as revised in 1949; (4) conferences with the administrative officers and department heads. From these sources, with the splendid cooperation of everyone from custodians to presidents, it has been possible to make this study in a period of two and one-half months that might otherwise have taken a year or more. Student housing being recognized as the most critical problem in the System, the condition existing in the dormitories is accorded first place in the plant analysis. The overcrowding currently existing in the dormitories ~s a serious health hazard. The typical dormitory room now in use in the University System is designed and equipped to accommodate, in an austerity fashion, two students. It has but one small window, thus restricting ventilation; two very small closets for the clothing and accessories of the students; two single beds, a chest of drawers or chiffonier; and one or two small study tables. This comprises the equipment. A single drop cord light is standard installation. If the use of the rooms were restricted to two occupants, students in the more modern buildings could enjoy a fair degree of comfort, convenience, and healthful surroundings. But such is not the case. Almost three thousand of Georgia's boys and girls are packed in three and four to a room. Study is impossible and health is in jeopardy. The following table summarizes the housing situation by institutions and by totals. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 97 TABLE 1 Distribution of the Number of Students per Room in Dormitories (1) Institution (2) (3) * (4) (5) (6) (7) Number Numbtr One Two Three Four of Students per per per per Rooms Housed Room Room Room Room ---- Senior Colleges Ga. Inst. of Technology _____ 859 1900 27 1432 51 396 University of Georgia________ 1032 2339 23 1550 579 236 North Georgia Oollege________ 179 548 0 125 18 405 Ga. State 001. for Women ___ 471 721 48 670 3 0 Ga. Teachers Oollege ________ 262 524 0 524 0 0 Valdosta State College _______ 129 222 12 210 0 0 Junior Colleges Ga. Southwestern College ___ 128 West Georgia Oollege _________ 225 Middle Georgia Oollege_______ 116 South Georgia Oollege________ 120 Abraham Baldwin Agri. 001. _ 135 Sub-Totals _________________ 3656 247 9 176 42 20 460 0 440 0 20 234 6 200 24 0 282 6 132 144 0 343 1 28 198 116 --------- 7820 132 -- 5487 -- 1059 -- 1193 -- Negro Colleges Albany State Oollege _________ 97 (?) 1 130 51 0 Fort Valley State College_____ 161 411 16 38 361 4 Savannah State College ______ 115 381 1 68 147 ---- 32 SUb-Totals _______________ 373 792(?) 18 236 559 36 -------------- GRAND TOTALS ________ 4029 8612 150 5723 1618 ]229 ---- *The numbers reported in this column do not check with added columns (4), (5), (6), and (7) due to difference8 in reporting. Overcrowding, it will be noted, is not localized in a few places. Only Georgia Teachers College and Valdosta State College have not been forced into three- and four-pupil use of rooms. Just for the elimination of triple and quadruple housing, 578 additional rooms would be required. Student housing throughout the University System is a grave menace to the lives of thousands of students. Three-fourths of the dormitories now in use are of non-fire-resistive construction. Of these, 48 are two or more stories in height and such "fire escapes" as have been provided are useless in case of fire or panic. This situation is one of immediate urgency and should receive the attention of the Regents and the Administration at the earliest possible date. If the people of the State accept the challenge, what can be done to correct the situation? The answer is (1) vacate certain of the most 98 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF hazardous buildings that would not justify the cost of rehabilitation; (2) make every building that is two or more stories high, "life-safe" by the installation of smoke-proof, fire-resistive stair wells at appropriate places; (3) where furnaces and fuel rooms exist, enclose them in fireresistive material and have no doorway or opening to the inside of the building; (4) check the electric current load in all wiring systems, and where overload is found, rewire according to load and need; (5) build no more non-fire-resistive dormitories two or more stories high. Where land areas are available, one story student housing might well be used. In support of the above program for life-safe housing, a brief summary of current conditions may serve to carry conviction. Of 96 dormitories critically analyzed, only 25 per cent might reasonably be classified as fire-resistive. The remaining 75 per cent are internally flash-burning structures. Housed within the walls of these unsafe buildings are a total of 5,065 students, or 60 per cent of all students currently housed by the University System. None of these buildings can be made fireresistive at a reasonable cost, but most of them can be made life-safe by servicing them as suggested in Items (2) to (4) above. What is a fire escape? Perhaps this question can be answered more effectively by considering what is not a fire escape. A vertical iron ladder, running from the top floor of a building to within six to ten feet of the ground, access to which is over a radiator at the end of a hall, through a double hung window, and by a leap that would challenge the agility of an acrobat, is not a fire escape. Neither is a maze of wooden platforms and open zig-zag stairs plastered on the wall of a building directly over plain glass windows that might well be belching flames and gas from below, a fire-escape. The military, when it took over the University System dormitories, tore down or by-passed many of the iron ladders and substituted the wooden stairs. The wooden stairs probably are safer than the ladders, but under war conditions life is cheap. Not one of the so-called fire escapes on the exterior of the dormitories of the University System of Georgia would be credited one point on a scale of 100 by the National Fire Protection Association. The most serious menace to safety is the false sense of security that such futile contraptions provide, and the confidence inspired by the fact that under fire drill conditions the building can be emptied in two or three minutes. When flames, smoke, and poisonous gases are racing up stairways and along corridors, fire drill conditions do not prevail. Instead, panic prevails and disaster ensues. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 99 The beautiful bifurcating central wooden stairways that sweep gracefully down from floor to floor, fanning out into an elegant foyer, as in many of the Georgia dormitories, would not be means of egress in case of a raging fire. On the contrary, they would serve only as vents, flues and chimneys, speeding the spread of flame and smoke. From the foregoing the answer to the question, "What is a fire escape?" may well be deduced; namely, smoke-proof, fire-resistive stair wells at appropriate places that are used regularly as a means of ingress and egress by the occupants of the building. It is the recommendation of the Survey Staff, without reservation, that life-safety in all student housing units be given a number one priority in the physical plant program. An over-all view of the condition of the buildings on the several campuses will serve to point up needs and probable costs. The officers in charge of physical plant in each institution were asked to classify all of their problem buildings into three categories: (1) buildings that should be abandoned at the earliest possible date, giving reasons; (2) similarly, all buildings requiring major modernization, with estimates of cost; and (3) buildings requiring minor modernization, with estimates of cost. Obviously, this request imposed a difficult task on the officials responsible, but the returns in almost every case evidenced much labor and conscientious effort to report as accurately as circumstances would permit. The returns, in general, were in agreement with the observations made by the Survey Staff as each building was critically studied on the spot. Space will not permit inclusion in this report of the breakdown of the reports from each campus, but for the purpose of pointing up the critical analysis made of the buildings, a portion of the return from one institution is reproduced here: 100 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF INSTRUCTIONS: List, in order, buildings that should be abandoned at earliest possible date: Reasons for Abandonment Name Present Use '" ..o..:.l<1> :1-:~1 +>o:l e+0en><1~> ..<.1.>. o:l >'"1 P <1I> +> ~(],) >1 OJ o .+.>o..1>. +~"0>, 0.0 ~<1> ",0 ",>1 <1>o:l ~>1 I'.s 0<1>..'.t.j. I-< o:l.~ SIo-<:l 0 >1::S <1>P=l ~t <1>,Q <1> I-<+> E-l i;;:;0 ------------ Military Building____________ Class Rooms ______ x x xx Chern. Eng. Building_________ Class Rooms ______ x xx Old Shop ____ - - ____ - - _____ .. _ C1. Rms. & Shop __ x x x x Adnllnistration_ . __ .. _________ Administration ___ x x x x x Chern. AnneL ____ . _____ . ___ Chern. Lab________ x xx Rifle Range __ . ____ - - __ - - - - __ Rifle Range ______ x x x xx Mod. Languages ____ - ________ Class Rooms. _____ x x Old Residence (21 of these) __ C1. Rms. & Office. x x x x x x Shop AnneL ___ . ____________ Class Rooms ______ x x x x x INSTRUCTIONS: List, in order, buildings that would justify major modernization: Check Modernization Required Name Present Use I<-1<> +::>s e+:I:-n>1bl1 :a~ S~ .:..:..so<:1l> P- ,Q blI ~ '" I-< <1>+> ",~ ..... o:l tl>1 0<1> ..o..:.l'o~:l o...:l P-1.>. eon:l ..<.1.>. ~ Pro abl Cm ------------ --x x x x x x $ 10, 000 x x x x x x 75, 00 x x x x x x 3D, 000 xxxx x *30, 000 x x x x x 3D, 000 xxxx x 25, 000 xxxx x 75, 00 --$275, . o *Estimate based on diversion to other use after new Library is built. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 101 INSTRUCTIONS: List, in order, buildings in need of minor modernization or repair: - Modernization or Repair Required ----------- Name Present Ac- Life In- Use Floors Light- Paint- ousti- Safe- terior Prob- ing ing cal ty Fin- able Treat- Stairs ish- Oost ment ing ----------- Burge Apt. ____ Residence ___ x x $ 10,000 Techwood_____ Dormitory___ x x x x 25,000 Field House____ Miscell. ______ x 5,000 Smith__________ Dormitory___ x x 15,000 Brown _________ Dormitory ___ x x x x 100,000 Howell_________ Dormitory___ x x 15,000 Harris _________ Dormitory ___ x x x x 120,000 Dining HalL __ Dng. HalL ___ Cloudman _____ Dormitory___ Harrison_______ Dormitory___ Tower _________ Dormitory___ Glenn _________ Dormitory ___ Gym ___________ Gym _________ x 5,000 x x x 15,000 x x x 20,000 x x 20,000 x x 20,000 x Vent. Ath1. Office ___ Ath1. Off. ___ x G. 20,000 x 5,000 Ohern. Annex __ 01. Rm.&Lab. Physics ________ 01.Rm.&Lab. Infirmary_____ Infirmary___ Ohern. Engi. __ O.Rm.&Lab. A. French_____ 01. Rms. _____ x x 7,000 x x 15,000 x x x 20,000 x x 10,000 x x 7,000 Stock. & P. 0. __ Stock&P. 0._ AeronauticaL _ 01. Rms. _____ Eng. Drawing__ 01. Rms. _____ Mech. Eng. ____ 01. Rms. _____ x 8,000 x 20,000 x x x 50,000 x x x 50,000 Research Bldg. Research_____ OE Bldg. ______ 01. Rms. _____ Oeramic _______ ----------~--- Oallaway Apts. Apartments__ x x x 20,000 x x x 40,000 x x x 25,000 x x 25,000 TOTAL ___ $702,000 From the corresponding returns of fourteen institutions, a composite summary table was compiled, indicating the over-all magnitude of the problem by the classification listed above. This is shown in the following table. 102 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 2 Summary oj the number and condition oj buildings in the University System that: (1) should be abandoned at the earliest possible date; (2) are in need oj major modernization; (3) are in need oj minor modernization, as reported by administrative officers in charge oj plant. (1) Should be abandoned: Total Number StrucBuildings tural Weaknesses 47 28 Reasons for Abandonment Func- Excessive Fire Unsafe tionally Mainte- Tempo- Menace Obsolete nance rary to other Buildings 20 37 17 22 24 (2) Are in need of major modernization: Total Num- ber Build- ings Structure Modernization Required Heat- Floors ing; Light- Plaster; Plumb- ing Paint ing Roof Probable Cost Life Safety 82 40 57 55 55 54 27 53 $2,649,600 (3) Are in need of minor modernization: Total Number Buildings Floors Modernization or Repairs Needed AcousLight- Paint- tical Life-Safe Interior ing ing Treat- Stairs Finish ment Probable Cost 123 53 47 118 18 35 103 $2,119,750 Of the 47 buildings recommended for abandonment, 28 are reported as structurally weak; 20 unsafe; 37 functionally obsolete; 17 excessive maintenance cost; 22 temporary; and 24 as constituting fire menaces to other buildings. Items 2 and 3 of Table 2 are read similarly. The cost estimates are reported on Sections 2 and 3 of the table only. The cost of replacing equivalent space in the buildings recommended for abandonment is not reported in this table but is included in the list of building needs submitted to the Board of Regents in 1948 and 1949. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 103 It will be observed that the total of the estimates for major modernization and minor modernization is as follows: (2) Major modernization, 82 buildings $2,649,600 (3) Minor modernization, 123 buildings_ __________________ 2,119,750 TotaL $4,769,350 The above figure does not include estimates of money needed to solve "deferred maintenance" problems. This information was requested separately and is discussed under the following topic. Deferred maintenance, like delinquent taxes, is costly. The old fable "For want of a nail the shoe was lost, etc." has meaning for plant maintenance. For want of a nail and a can of paint, many a building in the University System has depreciated far in excess of normal expectancy for its age. Despite this obvious fact, expenditure for maintaining the physical plant is the first item to be slashed under stringent budget conditions. The reason is easily understood. Buildings, having no voice, can't protest audibly. They take the cut silently, and silently decay. In the University System this painless budget operation has been going on over a long period of time-the depression, the war, and the postwar years-with the result that maintenance needs have pyramided to shockingly high figures. Itemized estimates were prepared by the administrative officials in charge of physical plant in all institutions. A critical study of these estimates was made by the Survey Staff, often in consultation with the officials preparing them. Obviously, the estimates cannot be exact, but it is the judgment of the Survey Staff that they are below rather than above what the cost will actually be. The total of the estimates submitted as necessary to cover the cost of deferred maintenance is $1,375,100. The breakdown by institutions is reported in Table 3. In the light of the long-delayed up-keep and repair so evident on all campuses and the consequent cumulative deterioration of the plant, it is the recommendation of the Survey Staff that a vigorous, systematic program of plant maintenance and repair work be initiated at the earliest possible date and the program be carried to completion by 1953-the time when the need for plant capacity expansion will begin to demand pressing consideration. 104 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 3 Estimate of Money Needed to Solve Deferred Maintenance Problems Institutions Estimates Notes 1. University of Georgia_________________ $ 300,000 2. Georgia Inst. of Tech. ________________ 605,000 3. Medical College of Georgia___________ 5,500 4. North Georgia College________________ 18,000 5. Ga. State Col. for Women _____________ 35,000 6. Georgia Teachers College_____________ 17,000 7. Valdosta State College _______________ ---------- Lists new buildings only. 8. Ga. Southwestern College ____________ 41,300 9. West Georgia College_ - - ______________ 6,000 10. Middle Georgia College _______________ 17,000 11. South Georgia College________________ 30,000 12. Abraham Baldwin Agric. College _____ 37,000 13. Albany State College _________________ 14. Fort Valley State College _____________ 15. Savannah State College ______________ 100,000 138,000 Includes $100,000 fc r new central heating plant. 25,300 TOTAL _________________________ $1,375,100 The extent to which the instructional space of a physical plant is used is one very significant measure of need. The extent to which the instructional space in any given college or university plant is used is conditioned by a considerable number of factors, some of which are subject to control and some of which are not. Among the most critical factors are the following: 1. Administrative policies: (a) Space assignment. (b) Length of school day and week. (c) Programing non-instructional activities. (d) Size of classes. 2. The planning of the buildings, room size and room adaptability. 3. Variation in total day enrollment. The above factors are discussed below in order. l(a). When the effective use of a multimillion dollar plant is involved, administrative policies become critical issues demanding centralization of space assignment within each institution in one high-level executive, with authority to control the time when and the place where instruction is given-the day, the hour, the building, and the room. Such centralization of assignment authority is absolutely necessary if the altogether too common concept of exclusive departmental ownership of a given building is to be broken down, thus allowing otherwise unused space to be assigned to classes from other departments as need dictates. The little "principality principle" must give way to optimum use of the plant, just and equitable consideration being given to all concerned. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 105 Centralization of space assignment authority is further necessary in the case of "prima donna" professors, who, all too often assume the prerogative of dictating the days, hours, and rooms in which they choose to teach. Such prerogatives are one major factor in low utilization of plant jn the early morning hours and in the afternoons. The central authority in charge has a difficult assignment, if effectively executed, but one paying large dividends in plant utilization. l(b). Plant utilization is also influenced by administrative policy establishing the length of the school day and school week. This factor will vary with the location and conditions within institutions, but in institutions where a very large percentage of the students are housed on or near the campus as in the University System of Georgia, the long day, long week, should be entirely feasible where plant capacity is under pressure. Considering the investment in the plant and the fact that buildings are material things, a fiftyhour week should not be unreasonable. The application of this principle will be applied in measuring the utilization reported subsequently. l(c). The programing of non-instructional activities such as assemblies, lunch periods, and non-instructive recreational programs and sports are significant factors in plant utilization. Of these, the lunch period poses a real problem. Students must have their period for lunch, but rather than have all of the instructional rooms of the entire plant stand idle for an entire period, considerable advantage can be had by staggered or continuous lunch service over two or three periods, with a large number of classes running at the same time. There would be some loss of plant use, but not 100 per cent loss. Such staggered lunch service would also reduce the load on lunchroom space and facilities. l(d). The minimum, normal, and maximum size of classes is a matter of administrative policy-a matter that should be worked out cooperatively between each institution and the central office. The conclusions reached should become a matter of policy of the Board of Regents with general supervision of the policy established vested in the central administration of the System. The impact of many excessively small classes on building utilization is obvious. The larger the number of classes in relation to enrollment, the more classrooms and more buildings will be required. The analysis of class size in relation to room utilization is reported in Table 4. In this table the number of class sessions by size grouping (under 20, 21-40, 41-60, etc.) is shown in relationship to the normal capacity of the rooms they occupy. This table is to be interpreted as follows: Inside the brackets within each of the two parts of the table, the number of class sessions in which the size of the class is appropriate to the capacity of the room in which the class is held, is shown. FOl example, in the non-specialized rooms, 125 class sessions in which the enrollment is 20 or less, are held in rooms in which the capacity is 20 or less. Similarly, 757 class sessions with enrollments of 21-40 are held in rooms with a capacity of 21-40. Thus all of the bracketed numbers indicate agreement between size of classes and the capacity of rooms in which. they meet. The disparity between size of class and size of room is indicated by the numbers falling outside the bracketed zig-zig line. For example, 335 class sessions 106 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 4 Distributions of Class Sessions by Size in Relationsh~p to Instructional Room Capacity (Total for the University System) Room Capacity Under 20______ 21-40 __________ 41-60 __________ 61-100 _________ Over 100______ Classes Under 20 125 335 126 34 6 Non-Specialized Rooms Number of Class Sessions by Size I I I Classes of Classes of Classes of Classes of 21-40 41-60 61-100 over 100 24 2 757 26 8 251 105 8 105 53 15 1 25 18 20 15 Room Capacity Under 20_____ 21-40 __________ 41-60 __________ 61-100 _________ Over 100______ Classes Under 20 422 314 25 17 Specialized Rooms Number of Class Sessions by Size I I Classes of Classes of Classes of Classes of 21-40 41-60 61-100 over 100 64 3 435 32 2 81 46 12 3 2 4 5 4 1 of classes under 20 in enrollment are meeting in rooms with a capacity of 21-40, 126 such classes are meeting in rooms with a capacity of 41-60, 34 classes in rooms with a capacity of 61-100, and 6 in rooms with a capacity of over 100. Thus a total of 501 class sessions are held in rooms with a capacity larger than required. Likewise, 381 class sessions of 21-40 are meeting in classrooms with a capacity much larger than required. This is a clear indication of the lack of proper relationship between class size and room capacity. The above facts taken alone are sufficient evidence to support the recommendation of the Survey Staff made in the final section of this phase of the surveYi namely, that provision be made in the central office for an Assistant Chancellor THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 107 responsible for physical plant development, and further that this officer should be an educator. 2. The plan of the buildings-room size and room adaptability-conditions to a very large degree the potential utilization of floor space. If the number of classrooms provided is closely related to the number of classes of approved size by subject and by type of activity, a high degree of utilization is readily attainable without restricting or impairing instruction. This factor is not subject to administrative control in the case of buildings already constructed, but it imposes a major economic responsibility upon the Regents and the central administration when the planning of new buildings is undertaken. Provision is made for meeting this responsibility in the final section of this phase of the survey. Evidence of the almost complete absence of consideration of this factor can be deduced from Table 4 immediately preceding. 3. The final factor listed as conditioning utilization under this topic was variation of school enrollment. This factor is not subject to administrative control. The rise and decline of enrollment caused by (1) the economic status of the population; (2) the impact of war and related postwar programs; (3) the changing concept of the need for more and better education; and (4) the upsurge and decline of the birth rate, are not subject to administrative control. The facts are, however, that the alert administration will seek to anticipate plant needs and thus be ready to meet the problems more effectively as they arise. For example, the rapidly declining G. I. enrollment, coupled with the "depression dip" in college age youth between now and 1953 should provide a breathing spell in plant expansion during which hazardous housing should be replaced or made safe, and long-deferred maintenance should be corrected. The objective measurement of plant utilization yields significant data on control policies and administrative practices. Complete measurement and analysis of the use of instructional space in a plant requires the use of an objective measure as applied by the Survey Staff and reported below: Room utilization as a measure counts a room as "used" for one class period if it is occupied by a class, regardless of the size of the class or the size of the room. For example, if a room with a seating capacity of 40 is occupied for one class pe~iod by a class of ten students, the room is counted utilized for that period. Obviously, plant utilization based on room use will show a much higher utilization than would be the case if the capacity of the room in relation to the size of the class is taken into account. 108 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF To measure the room utilization of a plant it is necessary to establish first the length of the school week. As indicated earlier in this section, the physical plant should be available for class use 50 hours per week-five class hours in the morning, and five in the afternoon, Monday through Friday. This is the basis against which room use has been calculated. It will be apparent at once that it would be an administrative impossibility in a college or university to so organize a program of instruction that every classroom would be occupied every period in the established school day and week. This fact gives rise to the problem of setting up an acceptable basis or criterion against which to measure attainable use. For the purpose of this survey, a five-point scale of use has been employed and a percentage definition of each step on the scale is given. The five steps, together with percentage definition, are shown in Table 5. Two types of rooms are recognized; namely, non-specialized and specialized. Different percentages of use are set up as definition of steps on the scale. It will be at once apparent that laboratories and many specialized instructional rooms would not be suited to general classroom use and, therefore, should be measured by a more liberal scale than non-specialized rooms suited for a wide variety of instructional uses. Rooms so highly specialized as to preclude their use for class instruction were eliminated for this discussion; for example, libraries, gymnasiums. and research laboratories. TABLE 5 Classification of Standards of Instructional Room Use and Percentage Definition of the Five Classifications Non-Specialized Rooms Level of Use and Definitions Maximum High Normal Low Very Low 90% use and up 70% to 89% 60% to 69% 45% to 59% Below 45% Specialized Rooms Level of Use and Definitions Maximum High Normal Low Very Low 80% use and up 60% to 79% 40% to 59% 30% to 39% Below 30% The data employed in calculating room utilization in the several units of the University System were supplied to the Survey Staff by the administration of each institution. The forms used supplied the following information: the name of each building used for instructional purposes; the type of room; the normal capacity and approximate area; and the number of students assigned to each room each period of the day from 8 :00 A. M. to 5 :00 P. M. From these data and the classification scheme described in Table 5, the utilization of instructional rooms in twelve of the fifteen institutions is reported in Table 6. Reports were not available for the Medical College, and in the reports of two smaller schools the data were not broken down in form to tabulate. TABLE 6 ~ l".l Institutions Distribution of Room Utilization by Institutions and by Totals Number of Institutional Rooms by Type Maximum Morning-8:oo to 12:00 High Normal Low C - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 6 ~ t'1 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 1 20 3 4 0 0 0 10 0 0 1 0 ~ , o 0 0 0 1 1 10 8 0 2 5 ":.t ;.. 0 0 4 2 6 24 0 6 2 6 00 2 63 16 40 34 87 48 61 322 76 I ~ THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 111 The facts reported in Table 6 challenge critical study by the Board of Regents and all responsible administrative officers. Remembering that room utilization, regardless of room capacity, is the high percentage of use, there is much to be pondered by way of policies and procedures. For example, it will be noted that non-specialized classrooms, generally, have the greatest use in the mornings and fall to almost negligible use in the afternoons, whereas the reverse is true for the laboratory type of specialized rooms. They are unoccupied a large part of the time in the mornings and are used most heavily in the afternoons. This situation seems to be almost a tradition in colleges and universities, but there is every reason to believe that good administration could serve to spread the use more uniformly over the day in both types of rooms. In the summary of totals at the foot of Table 6 it will be noted that only 89 of the 422 non-specialized rooms are rated at maximum use in the morning and that 66 of the 89 are in Georgia Tech. It will also be noted that only 14 out of 327 specialized rooms attain maximum use in the morning hours. In the afternoon, only 2 of the 422 non-specialized rooms reach maximum use and 322 are rated as very low. Very low is defined as below 45 per cent. Critical study of this table will reveal the disparity between the several institutions in the extent to which they are making acceptable use of their classroom space. For the purposes of simplification and easier visualization, the detailed data in Table 6 are consolidated in Table 7, showing number of rooms used at normal or above and the number used below normal expectancy. 112 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 7 Consolidation of Utilization Data in Table 6 Number A. M. P. M. of In- ----- Institutions struction- Normal Below Normal Below al Rooms and Normal and Normal by Type Above Above -------------------- N.S. S. -- N.S. -- S. -- N.S. -- S. -- N.S. -- S. -- N.S. -- S. -- Ga. Institute of Tech. 135 90 130 48 6 42 10 82 125 8 Univ. of Georgia______ 128 105 76 55 52 50 5 46 123 59 North Georgia College 29 13 13 0 16 13 0 11 29 2 Georgia State Col. for VVomen _____________ 31 24 12 10 19 14 0 0 31 24 Geleogrgei_a__T__e_a_c_h__e_r_s__C_o_l_- 13 11 9 6 4 5 0 2 13 9 VCaolldleoges_t__a___S__t__a__t_e_ 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 7 7 VVest Georgia College_ 10 7 3 0 7 7 2 3 8 4 Mliedgdele___G__e_o__rg__i_a__C__o_l_- 12 6 0 4 11 2 0 0 12 6 A bra ham Baldwin Agr. College ________ 10 5 2 5 10 0 0 4 10 1 Albany State College_ 24 5 24 5 0 0 24 5 0 0 Ft. Valley State College _________________ 11 16 9 11 2 5 1 11 10 5 Salvegaen_n_a_h___S_t_a__te___C__o_l_- 12 38 9 22 3 16 10 26 2 12 - - -- - - --- ---- - -- --- -- Totals ____________ 422 327 292 173 130 154 52 190 370 137 From the above table, the extent to which each institution has made use of its non-specialized and specialized classrooms on the basis of normal and above, and below normal, is very revealing as to need. For example, 130 of the 135 non-specialized classrooms at Georgia Tech are used at normal or above, and in the University of Georgia, 76 of the 128 non-specialized rooms are used at normal or above, whereas Middle Georgia College, with 12 non-specialized rooms, is not using any of the rooms at normal or above. The totals at the foot of the table summarize the situation for the colleges as a group. Two hundred ninety-two non-specialized classrooms out of 422 are used at normal or above, and 130 at below normal in the mornings. In the afternoons, only 52 non-specialized classrooms out of 422 are used at normal or above, and 370 are used at below normal expectancy. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 113 PHYSICAL PLANT NEEDS The physical plant needs, order of urgency, and probable cost are reported in the following pages. In the preceding pages the available data bearing upon physical plant needs of the University System have been analyzed and critically evaluated. In the following pages, the Survey Staff seeks to translate the needs thus analyzed into an orderly program' of plant development, broken down by (1) institution groups; (2) individual institutions within groups; (3) specific projects within institutions; and (4) estimated costs. The magnitude of the over-all program is such that it could not be carried to completion advantageously within a five-year program if all of the money to cover the estimated cost were made available at once. N or are the needs equally pressing. Therefore, the Survey Staff has considered the following factors in recommending the order in which the program should be undertaken and carried to completion: (1) To make such dormitories as are to be continued in use, life-safe; (2) to solve deferred maintenance problems; (3) to modernize buildings scheduled for continued use; and (4) new building projects. The first factor, namely, life-safety in student housing, is the most critical immediate issue confronting the University System. In support of this statement, the following facts are presented. Of the 84 dormitories from which data were complete, 68 were classified as "permanent" and 16 as -"temporary." Of these, 23 were reported as of fire-resistive construction and 48 were reported as of non-fire-resistive construction. These 48 dormitories are of from two to four stories in height. Housed in the 48 dormitories of non-fire-resistive construction are 3,870* students. The Survey Staff recommends that these 48 dormitories be made life-safe at the earliest possible date by the installation in each dormitory of two smoke-proof, fire-resistive stair wells, to be used regularly as means of ingress and egress. Such installation it is estimated, if properly done, will cost approximately $10,000 per dormitory, or a total of $480,000 for the 48 dormitories. In addition to the 48 units provided for above, there are a relatively small number of extreme emergency situations where immediate safety measures should be taken either by temporary exit devices or by evacuation of the students thus housed. These situations have been made *This number does not include students housed in temporary structures. 114 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF known to the administration and thus need not be specifically enumerated here. The second factor noted above, namely, the solution of the deferred maintenance problem, is critical on practically all campuses. The economic aspect of this situation has been discussed at length in an earlier section of this report. The total amount of money estimated to solve this probelm is $1,375,100. (See Table 9.) This phase of the building program should be completed by 1953, the time when plant expansion will become pressing. The third factor listed above, namely, modernization of existing buildings that are to be continued in use, should be begun as soon as funds are available and carried to completion, if possible, by 1953. The total estimated cost for major modernization projects is $2,593,900, and for minor modernization projects is $1,484,100. (See Table 9.) The specifics of this program are listed in detail on worksheet tables on file in the central office. The fourth and most expensive factor in the program is new buildings and additions. This phase of the program is reported in detail in Table 8. The specific projects in each institution are classified on the basis of priority of need into four or five categories. In establishing the priority listing, consideration was given to (1) safety, and (2) instructional service. Priority as used here connotes sequence of development, not time. The program outlined will probably require ten years of continuous, vigorous projection. The details of the above program are set forth in the following table. TABLE 8 Plant DefJelopment Program Recommended by Survey Staff Covering (1) New Buildings; (2) Order of Priority; and (3) Estimated Cost Institution and Buildings Priority #1 #2 *3 #4 #5 UNDIoVrmERitSoIrTyYfoOr FMeGnE.O__R__G__IA________________ Dormitory for Women ___________________ Library, North Campus__________________ TotaL___________________________________ Demonstration SchooL __________________ Chemistry Building______________________ StTuodteanLt_U__n__io__n__o_f__M__e_m__o_r_i_a_l_H__a_l_L________________ Classroom Building________________ ._____ Physics Annex____________________________ Assembly & Ath. Building_______________ Total____________________________________ 900,000 1,100,000 1,600,000 3,600,000 400,000 900,000 200,000 1,500,000 450,000 250,000 1,000,000 1,700,000 e Totals r ~ 00 $3,600,000 I o "'il 1,500,000 o~ ~ 1,700,000 Administration Building_________________ Plant Science Building___________________ Landscape Architect. Annex_____________ Library, South Campus_____________ .. ____ TotaL___________________________________ 350,000 600,000 150,000 400,000 1,500,000 ~,500,000 Agricultural Engineering Building_______ Animal Science Building_________________ Fine Arts Annex__________________________ Cannery Plant________________ .. _________ Dairy Building Annex ____________________ TotaL______ .. _________ _______ _____ ______ Grand TotaL ______ - _______________________ 600,000 500,000 300,000 45,000 40,000 1,485,000 1,485,000 ........ $9,785,000 01 TABLE 8 (Cont'd) Institutions and BUildings GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY New Library Building____________________ Architecture Building____________________ Heating Plant ____________________________ TotaL ___________________________________ Classroom Building_____________ . ________ AUditorium & Physical Training Building TotaL __________________________________ Infirmary Building_______________________ Administration Building_________________ Student Activities Building ______________ Total ___________________________________ #1 1,500,000 900,000 600,000 3,000,000 Chemical Engineering Building __________ Aeronautical Building Annex ____________ T o t a l ___________________________________ #2 2,000,000 1,750,000 3,750,000 Priority #3 600,000 700,000 1,250,000 2,550,000 Grand TotaL ______________________________ ATLANTA DIVISION, U. of GEORGIA Note: Suggest allotment over 3-year period to initiate and carry expansion program to completion. Grand TotaL _______________ . ________.______ 2,500,000 #4 700,000 350,000 1,050,000 ,,...... <:> Totals #5 $ 3,000,000 3,750,000 2,550,000 > ~ t:"J o"I:l 1,050,000 ~ I $ 10,350,000 o ":l : Uq1 $ 2,500,000 ~ $ 2,500,000 ~ o ":l MEDIOAL OOLLEGE OF GEORGIA General State Hospital I 2,500,000 New Administration Building _ Oonversion of Present Adm. to Dormi- tory and Student Union _ Grand~otal _ NOR~H GEORGIA OOLLEGE Men's Dormitory Girls' Dormitory ~otal _ 400,000 _ 400,000 1-1 800,000 Elementary Demonstration SchooL _ Drill Hall-Rifle Range & Gym. Building_ ~otal _ Annex to Library _ Auditorium-Oapacity 1000 _ Music Bldg. -Student Union _ ~otal _ Dining Hall and Kitchen Annex to Infirmary ~otal _ --------- _ Grand ~otaL__ - - __ - -- - - - _- - -_ - - -- - - - -- 400,000 I I I 150,000 I I 200,000 450,000 650,000 90,000 250,000 150,000 I 490,000 I 200,000 40,000 I 240,000 103 $ 2,500,000 II: l?:l I 400,000 c::: oj 0 l?:l 0 ~ 650,000 .0>..-. I 490,000 I 240,000 $ 2,180,000 ........ '-l Institutions and Buildings GESOciRenGcIeABSuTilAdTinEgC__O__L_L__E_G__E__F_O__R__W__O__M__E_N_ Rural Home Mgmt. House _______________ T o t a l ___________________________________ Complete Peabody Lab. Wing____________ Addition to Library Wing_________________ President's Home ________________________ T o t a l ___________________________________ NR eumr soedr ye lSActhkoi nosLo_n_H__a__l l_f_o__r_S_t_u_d__e_n__t _C_e__n_t_e_r T o t a l ___________________________________ Admin. and Business Administration____ Dining Hall_______________________________ T o t a l ___________________________________ Grand Total________________________________ TABLE 8 (Cont'd) Priority ""1 ""2 ""3 400,000 35,000 435,000 200,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 200,000 35,000 235,000 GEORGIA TEACHERS COLLEGE Laboratory School Building______________ Central Heating Plant ___________________ Student Union ___________________________ T o t a l ___________________________________ 350,000 50,000 100,000 500,000 ""4 300,000 300,000 600,000 I-' I-' 00 Totals ""5 $ 435,000 350,000 235,000 >- ~ trl 1600,000 ~ $ 1,620,000 ~ >- o00 ~ ~ $ 500,000 o "Jl Men's Dormitories________ ______________ DirUllgHall_______________________________ Cottage for colored help _________________ ~otal___________________________________ Arts Building_____________________________ Faculty Apartments _____________________ President's Home. _______________________ ~otal ___________________________________ Physical Education Building_____________ Grand ~otaL________ . ________ . ____________ VALDOS~A S~A~E COLLEGE Addition to Converse Hall________________ Addition to Ashley Hall__________________ Recreation Hall and Gym. _____________ 0_ ~otal_______________________ . ___________ Elementary Demonstration SchooL _____ Infirmary ____________________________ 0 ____ Auditorium-Replace second floor ___ . ___ ~otal ___________________________________ Dormitory________________________________ Classroom Building______________________ ~otal ___________________________________ Dining Hall________________________ 0_ ____ Music Building ___________________________ ~otal___________________________________ Grand ~otaL______________________________ . 35,000 35,000 250,000 320,000 450,000 250,000 10,000 710,000 200,000 100,000 200,000 500,000 300,000 50,000 30,000 380,000 275,000 250,000 525,000 300,000 150,000 100,000 250,000 710,000 380,000 300,000 $ 1,890,000 $ 320,000 500,000 525,000 250,000 $ 1,595,000 GRAND~O~AL ALL SENIOR UNI~S____ . $11,155,000 $10,360,000 $6,030,000 $3,940,000 $1,485,000 $32,970,000 ~ r 00 >< i ~ o l.:J I ........ '" TABLE 8 (Cont'd) Institutions and BUildings GEORGIA SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE Boys' Dormitory__ . _-- __ -- ___ - -- ______ -__ Girls' Dormitory ________ - ______ - _________ TotaL______________ --. __________________ Central Heating Plant. __________________ Replace Terrell HaIL ____________ . _______ CotonvIenrftirsmeacroyn_d__ s--to__r_y___o_f__W___b_e_a_t_l_y__H__a_l_l T o t a l ___________________________________ Classroom BUilding________ -------- -----Grand TotaL _______ - -___ -- -- --_ - -------- - -__ #1 200,000 150,000 350,000 Priority #2 #3 75,000 100,000 25,000 200,000 150,000 WMESeTn'sGDEOorRmGiItoAryC_O__L_L__E_G__E________________ - - -26-0-,00-0Science BUilding_____________ -- --- ______ Auditorium ______________________ -_______ Grand TotaL __ - ____ -- -- --- ------_--- ______ 150,000 200,000 MMIDeDnL'sEDGorEmOiRtoGrIyA___C_O__L__L__E_G__E__ ---_. -_____ 180,000 #4 #5 -- ,... ~ Totals $ 350,000 200,000 150,000 $ 700,000 > ~ t'J $ 260,000 "d 150,000 ~ ~ 200,000 ~ $ 610,000 q00 ~ ~ o '-';l Women's Dormitory____ .. ---. -----------~otal______ ---------------------------- Dormitory for Faculty Women___________ Gymnasium _______ -- _-- -- - -- -- - - -- -- -- --- ~otal ___________________________________ Girls' Dormitory_________ - --- - -- - - -- - - - -. Dining Hall _________ - - - _--- - -- - - -- - - -- - - . ~otal ___________________________________ Grand ~otal________ - _- - -- _- - - - - --- - - - - - --- SOU~H GEORGIA COLLEGE Girls' Dormitory______ -- -- - - --- - -- - - - . - -Boys' Dormitory_______ - _- - --- - - -- - -- - - ... ~otaL _________ -- - - -- - - -- - - --- - -- - - - .. --Home Economics Building___ -- -- -- - -- - -Infirmary________ - -___ --- - ---- -- - - -- -- - --Fine Arts Building. - ___ -- - - ---- ---- - -- - -Warehouse and Repair Shop __________ .. _ ~otal ___________________________________ Grand ~otaL______ - - - - -- -- -- - -- - --- - -- - - - -- ABRAHAM BALDWIN AGRIC. COLLEGE Girls' Dormitory- -- --- ---------- --- ------ 100,000 280,000 200,000 200,000 - 400,000 205,000 50,000 150,000 200,000 70,000 150,000 100,000 250,000 50,000 150,000 30,000 180,000 1-3 II: i:'i $ 280,000 <~ ~ $ 200,000 UJ ~ U..q2 250,000 ~ is:: $ 730,000 o ":l o oi:'i ;0 $ 400,000 >I:i:l 70,000 50,000 '180,000 $ 700,000 $ 205,000 .... ....I:..:l TABLE 8 (Cont'd) Institutions and Buildings *1 ABRAHAM BALDWIN AGRIC. COLLEGEStCudonentitnCueednter__________________________ Faculty Housing (5) _____________________ T o t a l ___________________________________ Engineering and Forestry Building______ Grand Total________________________________ Priority *2 *3 *4 50,000 50,000 100,000 150,000 .... ~ Totals *5 $ 100,000 150,000 $ 455,000 GRAND TOTAL JUNIOR UNITS__________ $1,495,000 ALMBeAnN'sYDSoTrmAiTtEoryC_O__L_L__E_G__E______________ -Women's Dormitory______________________ Health and Phys. Ed. Building__________ T o t a l ___________________________________ Infirmary and Equipment _______________ Laundry and Equipment_________________ Home Economics House __________________ Faculty Housing _____________________ - _-Science Building_________________ - ---- --- T o t a l ___________________________________ 300,000 300,000 300,000 900,000 Central Heating Plant___________________ Classroom Building_____________ -___ ----- $ 720,000 100,000 25,000 18,000 100,000 275,000 518,000 $ 800,000 100,000 250,000 $ 180,000 $3,195,000 :> ~ $ 900,000 l;j "d I ~ o "'l >- 00 518,000 cl ~ o "'l ~otal 1 Student Union Building _ Industrial Arts Shop _ ~otal _ Auditorium. _ Grand ~otaL _ FOMRe~n'sVDAoLrLmEiYtoSry~A~E COLLEGE _ Faculty Housing _ Enlarge Infirm. & Dining HaIL _ Demonstration SchooL _ ~otaL .. _ Library _ ScLieanbcoer,atAogr.y & Home Ec. .Classrooms &_ Central Heating Plant _ ~otal -- - \ Health & Phys. Ed. Building. _ Education Building --- --------- _ Ag. Barns, Sheds, Silo, etc. _ ~otaL__ .--- -------- ------- -- --- 1 Student Union Building _ Grand ~otaL -- ------ _ 250,000 75,000 100,000 250,000 675,000 350,000 I 100,000 50,000 150,000 850,000 ~ l".! c:j 150,000 485,000 ~ Mechanic Arts Building__________ . _________ Grand TotaL ______ . _____________________ - 150,000 l".l 150,000 $1,820,000 "d ~ o GRAND TOTAL NEGRO COLLEGES______ $2,225,000 $1,603,000 $1,360,000 $ 500,000 $ 300,000 $5,988,000 "!l > 00 ~ -< o "!l THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 125 For the purpose of consolidating the details of the foregoing table into totals by institutional groups and by projects the following summary table is presented: TABLE 9 Summary of Estimated Total Cost Required to Carry the Recommended Physical Plant Program into Effect Projects Recommended Senior Junior Negro Colleges Colleges Colleges Totals To Provide Life-Safe Dormitories _________________ $ 290,000 $ 130,000 $ 60,000 $ 480,000 To Solve Deferred Maintenance ___________________ 980,500 131,300 263,300 1,375,100 Maj or Modernization _____ 1,262,000 514,800 817,100 2,593,900 Minor Modernization _____ 1,341,000 21,600 121,500 1,484,100 NetwionBsu_i_l_d_i_n_g__s__a_n_d___A__d_d_i_- 32,970,000 3,195,000 5,988,000 42,243,000 Totals _________________ $36,843,500 $ 3,992,700 $ 7,249,900 $48,086,100 The additional land needs oj the several institutions are relatively small. The fourteen institutions were asked to report the following information: (1) area of campus; (2) additional land owned; (3) additional land needed. The reports received are shown in the following table. TABLE 10 Land Owned and Land Needed Distributed by Institutions Institutions Georgia Institute of Technology______ University of Georgia_________________ North Georgia College ________________ Georgia State College for Women _____ Georgia Teachers College _____________ Valdosta State College _________ -- _____ Georgia Southwestern College ________ West Georgia College __________________ Middle Georgia College ________________ South Georgia College ________________ Abraham Baldwin Agricultural Col. __ Albany State College __________________ Fort Valley State College ______________ Savannah State College ________________ Area of Campus 120 A. 270 61 60 145 60 81 40 53 40 25 90 97 120 Additional Land NewLand Owned Needed OA. 3417 427 86 255 llot 25A. 0 60 30 0 0 185 A. 0 235 0 130 0 302 0 75 200 64 0 270 1000 13 0 126 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The Survey Staff recommends that favorable consideration be given to the following requests: 1. That at the Georgia Institute of Technology, 25 acres of additional land be acquired. The granting of this request will serve two purposes; namely, provide area for expansion, and provide much-needed slum clearance. 2. The Survey Staff recommends that additional land be acquired for the Fort Valley State College. 3. The Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College request is for 200 acres. This should be favorably considered. The above recommendations are based on the types of programs to be served. The Board of Regents and the central administration of the University System should be more appropriately housed. The significance and value of the service of a public agency is often judged and conditioned by the adequacy and dignity of the physical facilities provided for it. The University System, being one of the most significant aspects of the State government, should be housed in a manner to command recognition and respect and at the same time to afford convenient and efficient working conditions. The Survey Staff, recognizing the temporary nature of the present housing, recommends that appropriate steps be taken at an early date to provide new quarters in keeping with the functions to be served. The control and direction of physical plant development and administration should be coordinated and supervised through the central office. The magnitude and significance of the plant program recommended in the foregoing sections places upon the Board of Regents a tremendous responsibility-a responsibility to the State of Georgia as a whole, its present and its future. In the light of the magnitude of these responsibilities, the Survey Staff recommends, in anticipation of the problems and issues arising out of the recommended physical plant program, that the following policies and procedures be adopted by the Board of Regents, and that they be embodied in the Regents' administrative code. 1. That the Board of Regents create a position in the central office carrying the title, Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development, the duties of such office to be defined in part as follows: THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 127 (a) To aid and assist in the preparation of developmental campus plans for each of the several institutions, the same to include contour surveys, location of existing buildings, reserved space for future buildings, recreational areas, and a comprehensive landscaping pattern. No new buildings or major additions should be authorized on any campus until such a comprehensive developmental campus plan has been prepared and adopted by the Board of Regents. This provision should not preclude immediate attention to the problems of modernization and safety in existing buildings. The campus developmental projects should be cooperative enterprises, including the contributions of the local staff concerned, and should afford splendid instructional opportunities for specialized departments within the University System, such as engineering, architecture, landscaping, and drafting. Through the cooperative use of appropriate departments within the System, two ends would be served: one, economy in the development of the plant; and, two, incentives for real field projects for class instruction. (b) To cooperate with the administration and staff of each institution in the determination of building needs and to aBBist in the preparation of the statement of the problem for each new building or addition, the same to be basic information from which the architect, when commissioned, shall prepare his preliminary drawings. (c) To consult with the administrative staff of the institution involved on preliminary drawings, checking conformity with the statement of the problem as of (a) above, and to recommend such changes as may be necessary for authorizing further detailed development. Such checking and rechecking should continue until working drawings and specifications are acceptable to the president of the institution involved and to the Assistant Chancellor who, through the Chancellor, would recommend approval for award of contract by the Board of Regents. (d) It should be the further duty of the Assistant Chancellor in cooperation with the Chancellor and the Building Committee of the Board of Regents to prepare a standing list of architects qualified by training, experience, and record of success to undertake the design and planning of college and university buildings. From such a list the Regents, upon the recommendation of the Chancellor, on consultation with the local president, would select the architect for each project. The approved list should be revised from time to time. (e) It should be the further duty of the Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development to prepare standards and criteria to be observed by architects to the end that a maximum of usable floor space shall be provided, consistent with quality and safety in buildings. There is abundant evidence on the several campuses that usable floor space, economy, and efficiency have been sacrificed to monumental architectural effects. Georgia cannot afford such sacrifices, especially in the face of the well-recognized principle that sheer ornamentation that does not contribute to utility is not good architecture. Proper standards and guiding criteria should serve to unify utility and beauty. (f) This Assistant Chancellor should be responsible for recommending to the Chancellor a plan whereby the Regents will be aBBured of full compliance of contractors awarded building projects. Supervision by the architect or 128 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF his representative is not enough. The Board should have a check and doublecheck on quality of performance. There is abundant evidence in some recently constructed buildings in the System of questionable quality of work. (g) It should be the further responsibility of the Assistant Chancellor to cooperate with the administration of the several institutions in seeking to bring into closer physical association related areas of knowledge. For example, as new buildings are planned, the physical sciences might, to their great advantage, be housed in a single building; similarly, the life sciences in one building. Such association of related departments would serve to facilitate work toward common ends, reduce overhead, and effect substantial economy in plant construction, maintenance, and operation. This unifying of physical plant is a current tendency in university construction policy. Almost everywhere on every campus in Georgia there are too many, too small buildings. This is especially true on the University of Georgia campus. This is a problem that cannot be solvl'ld quickly, but it can be solved step by step as new buildings are constructed. What should be the qualifications of the Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development? The essential ability, training, and experience of the Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development, in the order listed, should be: 1. Ability to command the respect of and to cooperate with the administration and staff of the several institutions of the System. 2. Knowledge of problems of planning buildings to serve the needs of the many varied and complex problems of instruction, research, and experimentation. 3. Training and experience in the functional planning of school buildings, including economy and safety. In the light of the foregoing qualifications, it is clear that the position is not one to be filled by a technically trained engineer or architect, but rather by a broadly trained educator, preferably with a Doctor's degree. For purposes of emphasis, it is not the function of this officer to personally design and plan buildings or to superintend construction, but rather to see to it, on behalf of the Regents, that they are planned and constructed in accordance with best available knowledge extant at the time. A budget should be provided to support the activities of this office (1) to cover a variable office staff, adjusted to the volume of work on hand; (2) to cover necessary travel expenses within the System and to pay the expenses of visitation and study of progress in new college buildings in other states when authorized; (3) to assemble a collection of specialized books, publications, and plans related to college and university plant planning. It is the judgment of the Survey Staff that every dollar invested in the service outlined above will return many-fold to the University System in the form of more appropriate, more efficient, more economical and safer physical plants. CHAPTER IV STUDENT LIVING One of the most striking developments in the field of college education in the last thirty years has been the increase in housing and food services provided for students. This development has been due to several factors: the lack of facilities in most communities to provide for the growing college enrollment; the economic advantage to the student; and the growing concern of parents that their children live in desirable surroundings under college supervision. The most important factor, however, has been the changing point of view of college educators. Whereas student residences were at one time thought of merely as places of shelter or for the chaperonage and protection of young girls, they are now recognized as important educational agencies-an integral part of the educational program. They provide essential services but they also furnish opportunities for education in community living and in recognized standards for health, and they serve as a focal point for individual and group guidance. To quote Nicholas Murray Butler: "The University has provided convenient, attractive, and well-administered halls of residence....precisely as libraries, laboratories and teachers themselves are provided, in order to exert educational influence and to offer educationalopportunity. These halls were built, not as an educational convenience, but as an educational necessity." This study and the recommendations therein are based on visits to the ninety-three residence halls and twenty-one food services in the University System and on data furnished by the Controllers and residence and dining hall staffs of these institutions. Housing for married students has not been included; information was not available on the food and house services of the athletic dormitory at the Georgia Institute of Technology; college stores selling many other items besides food are not considered individually; and two institutions having food service concessionaires-The Atlanta Division, Atlanta, and the Medical College, Augusta-were omitted. COLLEGE-OPERATED RESIDENCE HALLS Fifty-two per cent of the students enrolled in the colleges are housed in college-operated buildings; of these, forty-two per cent are in permanent buildings. 129 TABLEIll ... c:r" Q Student Housing-Summary of Accommodations Provided by Institutions and Their Utilization Institution University of Georgia, Athens 1 Women Men .'."., ~ '.:.0.;,j UJ. z0:.<='10:) O..J.,'"~' oJ"oil Accommo- dations Provided I...S<~~~,bI;)~.a"O, p, ~'~p"b'..~O O"fi.l ~ '<~"I)~ .~'!-:\ .<.1.)...- E~-i~0 E-i ~ ~ I 1608 736(1) 92 4637 1026 490 Students in Resi- dence . Georgia State College for Women, Milledgeville_ ____ _______ _____ ___ _ Women 828 I 937 717 Georgia Teachers College, States- Women boro_ ______ ____ __ __ ____ __________ Men I 331 302 434 272(2) 302 272 Married 28 28 28 220 28 717 100 I 100 302 328 'I 7961 6991 ~ ~ o I:I;l G~J~~t~~s_t_i:~~~_~~_~~_C_~~_~I~_~~~1::~ried 5097 1900 145 -I 1---1 __ AJg~~a~ Jft~:!~ ~_~~i_c_~~~=~1 :~:en 93 80 324 208 Married 1900 193 145 193 73 81 202 68 24 23 2238 44 I 40 > 00 c:j 7 6 I 73 78 78 13 293 90 62 ~ ~ 1 ~ NloornthegaG__e_o__rg__i_a___O__o_l_le_g__e_, ___D__a__h_- Women Men 155 129 534 196 129 255 187 232 9 129 83 23 437 82 83 35 ~ l'j Married 18 18 Women 89 73 Middle Georgia Oollege, Oochran_ Men 218 167 I Married Women 152 1-1--0 I South Georgia College, Douglas_ _ Men Married 339 141 67 167 - 25 1..10 20 97 141 97 1- -6 16 6 67 75 187 86 - -- , 5(3) 1..10 72 254 75 75 77 -7-2 41 i rn ~ 00 Georgia Southwestern College, Women 148 101 99 2 99 67 67 ~ Americus ________________________ Men 231 177 Married 130 18 3 47 133 58 15 56 ~ is: West Georgia College, Carrollton_ Women 209 199 168 31 168 83 83 o Men 301 238 167 71 167 55 0 '";j o TOTALS White Institutions ____ 16032 7149 1953 6768 1702 381 251 8470 53 42 otoJ Sanvaahn_n_a_h___S__t_a_t_e___C_o__ll_e_g_e_,__S__a_v_a__n_- Women Men 534 183(4) 737 198(5) 183 198 183 34 34 ~ 198 27 27 F oVrat l lVe ya_l_l e_y___S_t_a__t e___C__o_l l_e_g_e_,___F__o_r_t Women Men 342 254 297 266 213 184 41 213 62 62 82 184 62 62 Women 296 171 Albany State College, Albany_____ Men 149 21 Married 128 43 22 21 22 51 51 128 43 43 94 63 14 I TOTALS Negro Institutions ____ 2355 1093 73 927 73 166 0 1000 42 39 GRAND TOTAL______________ 18387 8242 2026 7695 1775 547 251 9470 52 42 (1) Also 10 in Baptist Union and 636 in Sorority Houses. (2) Normal capacity 166. (3) Occupied by Non-College families. (4) Normal capacity 159. (5) Normal capacity 149. I-' ~ I-' 132 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Of the 93 residence halls in the System, few are comparatively recent buildings, 14 are temporary, and the remainder include buildings which may have met the need at the time they were built, but which now fall considerably below acceptable dormitory standards. In the discussion which follmvs, references are made to standards as set by recognized authorities in student housing. Residence halls should provide proper conditions for living and for study. Not more than TWO students should have to share quarters. Many institutions have had to lower their standards in this regard during the postwar period resulting in overcrowded conditions that provide no opportunity for relaxation, comfort, or study and that are actually dangerous to health. The minimum standard size for a single student room is 120 square feet; for a double room, 200 square feet. As indicated in the following summary, only a few of the residence halls meet these standards; in some instances three and four students are occupying rooms which do not meet the standard size for single occupancy. In 6 residences-2 students are occupying rooms which do not meet the standard size for 1 student. In 10 residences-2 students are occupying rooms which just meet the standard size for 1 student. In 1 residence-3 students are occupying rooms which do not meet the standard size for 1 student. In 14 residences-3 students are occupying rooms which do not meet the standard size for 2 students. In 1 residence-4 students are occupying rooms which just meet the standard size for 1 student. In 3 residences-4 students are occupying rooms which do not meet the standard size for 2 students. In 1 residence-6 students are occupying rooms which do not meet the minimum standard for 3 students. More than 2,900 rooms are housing more students than standard space allowances would deem satisfactory. Each resident should have a minimum of nine square feet of closet space. Twenty-one dormitories meet this standard but most of the halls show a general lack of adequate closet and storage space; 14 provide no closet space whatever---only hooks on the walls and sometimes lockers. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 133 Window area in a student room should average 20 per cent of floor area with at least one window in a single room and two windows in a double room. Fifteen residences reported only one window in a double room. Floors in student rooms and corridors should be of fire-resistive composition-covered with asphalt tile, linoleum, or other resilient material, and should be easy to clean and noise-resistant. Wooden floors should be sealed to close dust-collecting cracks. A beginning has been made in some residences in replacing old wood or cement floors with asphalt tile or linoleum. This program should be continued as rapidly as funds permit in the interest of comfort and cleanliness. (Coved bases of the same material are particularly desirable from a housekeeping standpoint.) Adequate lighting is a matter of major importance in a room where students are expected to study. Provision of adequate lighting should represent the first step in an improvement program. Minimum provisions for a student room include: a ceiling light, a good reading lamp for each resident, and light over the chiffonier; 600 watts are specified for a single room and 1200 watts for a double room. Measuring in foot candles, 5 foot candles are needed for general lighting; 10-12 foot candles for dressers and mirrors, 20-30 foot candles for study tables or desks. In respect to lighting, provisions in most of the residences are inexcusably poor, having only one central ceiling light in a room accommodating one to four or more students, and limiting the wattage per room to 100-500 watts. Several institutions, however, have rewired one or more residences to provide wall outlets. Two institutionsStatesboro in two dormitories, and Douglas in one-have provided excellent student lamps, meeting I. E. S. standards. The furnishing of student rooms is important. Above all things, a student room should provide a good place to sleep. A good bed, therefore, is important-with springs and mattress that support the body for rest. This represents the second item, after good lighting, to be provided in an improvement program. Single beds should be at least thirty-nine inches wide and seventy-six inches long; double deckers have been necessary evils but should be discarded as soon as possible; double beds have no place in a dormitory. Minimum furnishings for each student should include: one single bed and mattress; one desk (24 x 38 inches), one desk chair, one desk 134 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF lamp of approved standard design, one easy chair, one chest, one mirror and six feet of bookshelf. These items should be furnished by the college to provide uniformity and to insure that each room is properly furnished to meet student needs. Waste baskets are also generally furnished by the institution. Beds and mattresses furnished in most of the dormitories for men are unsatisfactory, although the' Georgia Institute of Technology is refurnishing one of its dormitories each year, with good, modern furniture including good beds. A number of the dormitories for women provide excellent beds and good furniture, and most colleges have a current replacement program. Desks are inadequate in most of the dormitories for men and in many of those for women, and book space is generally lacking. Replacement of furniture may be a gradual process, but should be speeded in recognition of the fact that a college generation is only four years. Other departments of the colleges can be helpful in the dormitory improvement program. At Milledgeville, for example, the home economics and art departments are consulted in the selection of new furnishings. College shops are used in several institutions to build attractive closets, and this service could well be expanded. At Savannah, on the other hand, students (veterans) taking training in technical courses are not permitted by the Veteran's Administration to obtain their practical experience in the college residences, where opportunities could be readily provided for experience in plastering, painting, plumbing and carpentry, identical with the experience offered in class work in shops on the campus. Since funds are not available to employ skilled labor, it is regrettable that the student body-including students who live in buildings in great need of these servicesshould not be able to gain experience in an actual situation. Maid or porter service is important in student rooms. The amount of maid or porter service provided in student rooms varies greatly over the country. Whereas before the war, there was a growing tendency to provide daily, or even weekly, maid service, rising labor costs have compelled institutions to call more and more upon the students to care for their own rooms, especially in women's residence halls. Student organizations usually take over the responsibility for delegating and supervising the work done by students in THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 135 residence and dining halls. It has long been the practice quite generally in state institutions for students to care for their own rooms. Sixty-seven of the 93 residences included in this _study report that students are expected to care for their own rooms. The Georgia Institute of Technology gives daily maid service ; West Georgia College gives weekly maid service in the men's residence halls; and at the University of Georgia, janitors are expected to do some daily cleaning in student rooms. The limited staff in this latter institution would suggest that the cleaning might be inadequate, especially as there are no house mothers in these halls. Duties of "firing" crews and cleaning personnel should be separate. As noted below, housekeeping in student rooms is done well in some halls and indifferently in many. With proper instruction, proper equipment, and proper supervision, there is no reason why students cannot do an excellent job of housekeeping. One great need noted in the institutions visited is for cleaning closets equipped with slop sinks and essential tools for housekeeping. These closets should be easily accessible to students and employees and both should be instructed in the proper use and care of the tools provided. Regularly employed personnel, not students, should be responsible for the care of public areas. This is discussed below under "Employed Personnel. " Telephones in booths should be provided on each floor. The cost of installing a two-way buzzer system in an old residence hall of any size is exorbitant. Many institutions, therefore, have had to do with less satisfactory methods. The number of telephones required varies with the locality and the habits of the residents. In general, at least one telephone for incoming calls should be provided on each floor or residence corridor. Residents can work out their own plan for sharing the responsibility of answering the telephone and calling their neighbors. The loud-speaker system reported in some of the colleges is not recommended because it unnecessarily disturbs a whole corridor whenever a person is called. At least one pay telephone for outgoing calls should be provided in each residence, preferably on the main floor. Receipts from the coin boxes will determine how many telephones the Telephone Company will install. No expense will accrue to the dormitory unless receipts fall below the guaranteed minimum; a percentage of receipts over and 136 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF above the guarantee will serve as a source of income to the dormitory. Booths, as sound proof as possible, for all telephones will save the nerves of those who live in adjacent rooms. As noted in the detailed summary, fourteen of the residences reported no telephone in the building. This is a hazard to safety and health as well as an inconvenience. Thirty-nine residences report only one telephone in the building-in the office, lobby or "phone" room. Residence halls should provide for the personal safety and physical welfare of the occupants. The matter of safety is handled in another section of this report. It should be emphasized here, however, that many of the residences are overcrowded and present fire hazards. In the light of recent fires in college dormitories, this is a matter for serious consideration. Housekeeping in the residences varies from excellent to unbelievably poor. The conditions of student rooms, in many cases, are unacceptable from the standpoint of cleanliness and order. This is due to several factors: the crowded conditions, the inadequate closet and desk space, the lack of storage space for trunks, lockers and suitcases, and to poor or inadequate supervision. For economic reasons, it is important that the number of employed personnel be kept at a minimum, but training and supervision of all employees can improve the services rendered. As seen in some outstanding instances, in both new and very old and crowded dormitories, it is entirely possible to maintain a high standard of housekeeping by training the students in proper methods and procedures and by proper supervision. House directors and student proctors should be furnished with check lists for cleaning which would help in the training of employees and students and in the follow-up. The relief of crowded conditions in student rooms and the provision of adequate storage space are matters of first importance. Bathroom facilities are below standard. Standards for bathroom facilities specify: one toilet bowl to 7 residents (half toilet bowls and half urinals in men's residences); one lavatory to 4 residents; one shower to 7 residents. This Survey shows that more than half of the residences provide an adequate number of toilet and bath fixtures per resident. In some THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 137 residences provisions are entirely inadequate; e. g., 13 residences have one tub or shower for 10 to 20 students; seven have one lavatory for 10 to 20 students; and seven have one toilet or urinal for 10 to 16 students. There should be ample facilities on each floor to care for residents of that floor. Toilet facilities should never be concentrated in the basement as is true in several of the residences in this study. Each toilet should be in a separate stall provided with swinging door. Walls and floors of all toilet rooms and lavatories should be of non-porous material, preferably tile, and those having cement floors should be tiled as soon as possible. All toilet rooms should be well-ventilated, with a maximum of daylight-direct sunlight whenever possible. In many shower rooms, ventilation is inadequate and paint is peeling and plaster falling. Ventilating fans placed in the windows may be of some temporary help. Health facilities are provided. In general, infirmary and health services are provided for the college as a whole and not restricted to students in residence. Thirteen of the 14 institutions report some infirmary service; the fourteenth has a nurse on call. Three institutions report a doctor in residence; nine report one or more nurses in residence. Infirmary records have not been kept in several institutions. Valuable information for health programs can be gained from careful analysis of infirmary and health records. There should be opportunity for special studies of groups or individuals. There should be close cooperation between health services and housing and feeding of students. In these colleges, the number of residents per infirmary bed ranges from 25 to 491. Each dormitory or group of adjacent small residences should have a registered nurse in residence. She may combine dormitory duties with general campus health functions. Facilities and services offered in the residence halls are directly related to the charges made to students. A survey made in 1948 of 288 institutions of higher education, in which are enrolled nearly half of all college students in the United States, shows: "The average donnitory rate being charged students for single occupancy is $28.33 per month ($6.67 per week). When two students occupy a room, the average monthly charge is $15.68 each ($3.70 per week). If three or more occupy the same room, the average is $15.15 per month ($3.56 per week)." 138 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF In the University System of Georgia, room rents range from $0.70 to $4.13 per week per student, with rents in 86 of the 93 halls falling below the average of $3.56 for three in a room. In the light of these figures it is understandable why standards are, in some instances, very low. It is recognized as important that charges to students be kept as reasonable as possible. On the other hand, if residence halls are to serve their educational purpose, certain minimum standards must be met. Rates in several southern state universities are within the Georgia range: University of North Carolina, $1.90 per week; University of Mississippi, $2.12 (men), $2.76 (women); University of South Carolina, $3.38. Table 12 shows that current rates provide for operating surpluses though the quality of the services offered and the efficiency of the management vary widely. It would be desirable in many institutions if profit were reduced somewhat and better services given. TABLE 12 Income and Profit of Residence Halls 1948-49 Institution Resident Income Students ApproxiProfit mate Weekly PerOent Rate SENIOR Athens,University 2546 $236,622.28 $ 57,912.89 24.0 AtTlaenchta. ,__G__a_._I_n_s__t._ Dahlonega________ 2238 566 332,732.00 72,751. 37 22.0 40,518.00 9,929.90 25.0 Milledgeville ______ Statesboro________ Valdosta _________ 717 630 222 115,207.74 44,592.75 34,629.55 15,122.62 13.0 12,544.62 28.0 7,993.37* 23.0 $3.83 3.75 1. 96 2.06 1. 53 2.50 JUANmIOerRicus _________ Oarrollton ________ Oochran__________ Douglas __________ Tifton ____________ 232 335 254 364 366 16,075.20 28,457.74 13,594. 25 16,676.35 20,641. 96 1,168.47 7.0 4,426.62 15.0 173.77 1.0 3,528.59 21. 0 2,243.83 11. 0 2.13 2.00 1. 75 2.00 1. 75 NESGavRaOnnah ________ Fort Valley_______ Albany___________ 391 397 222 21,111. 56 18,423.07 11,055.40 21. 76 0.1 1. 25 521. 87 3.0 1. 25 267.17 2.0 1. 50 $950,337.85 $180,613.38 7,993.37 $172,620.01 (18%) * Includes expenditures for furnishings charged to current operations. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 139 Residence halls should provide for social life-formal or informal-for group as a whole and for small groups within the large group. According to Harriet Hayes: In women's residence halls, twenty square feet per student should be allotted to social rooms. "This provides for lounges, guest parlors, infonnal play-rooms and small social rooms on upper floors for residents only. Men's halls require less social space, since men do not entertain to the extent and in the many ways that women do." This study shows that: 15 residence halls for women and two for men meet the standard of 20 square feet of social space per resident. 2 halls for women and 19 for men report no social rooms whatsoever. 17 halls for women and 25 for men report one social room. 23 halls for women and one for men report two or more social rooms. 16 halls for women and three for men have recreation rooms. 11 halls for women have parlors or studies on the residence floors. Only one hall for women and one for men report a library. Recreation rooms, with ping-pong table, piano, radio or victrola, and a space for dancing are popular with students and provide healthy entertainment within the college grounds. Large lobbies in many of the dormitories-now used as passages only-could be utilized for such social space. Social rooms, now unfurnished, should be suitably equipped. At the University of Georgia, in dormitories having no social rooms, considerable space is devoted to the collection and distribution of student laundry. If some centrally located but less desirable areas were designated for this service, pleasant lounges could be provided in these dormitories. Vending machines are frequently placed on walls adjoining student rooms. These should be moved to areas where they will not disturb residents. Every residence should have a library with current newspapers, some academic reference materials, and books and magazines for relaxation and light reading. Individuals or organizations in the community or state will gladly furnish suitable reading matter with little or no cost to the institution. The library can double as a study room or lounge. A kitchenette, adjoining one of the social rooms if possible, is desirable in halls, both for men and for women. Nineteen of the residences for women and two for men do have such kitchenettes. 140 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Residence halls should provide service areas for the convenience of residents. It has become common practice for laundry and pressing rooms to be provided not only in women's residence halls, but also in men's halls. Equipment in these rooms includes tubs, wringer, dryers, and ironing boards. More and more institutions are installing electric washing machines with meters, charging from 10 to 25 cents per halfhour. Most institutions also have electric irons available which students may check out or rent from a central office. It is noted that four of the colleges have a central laundry service in which they take care of bedding and some personal laundry for residents at a nominal charge. Others have no such service. In either case, many students do some part of their laundry. It is recommended therefore that electric washing machines be purchased and made available to all students in their own residence or in a place easily accessible to several residences. Meters can be obtained and set at whatever charge seems fair. Income can be used to pay for the machines over a period of time, and to maintain and replace laundry equipment as necessary and the surplus, if any, can be devoted to other dormitory needs. All students, women and men, should have easy access to a place (not the bathroom or the mop sink) where they can wash out and press small articles of clothing. In a woman's hall, a sewing room, equipped with sewing machine, cutting table, and long mirror, is highly desirable. At least, a sewing machine should be accessible. A deposit is usually required for a bobbin and refunded when the bobbin is returned. Sewing machines are provided in 17 dormitories in the University System. Some women's residences provide a shampoo room; others provide special shampoo basins in the bathrooms; many provide electric hair dryers in the bathrooms or elsewhere. Seven of the women's residences reported that they have electric hair dryers. It is recommended that these be made available to all women residents. Portable models with coin meters are available and are especially suitable for use in upstairs studies or parlors where students may visit or read, or play while drying their hair. Under present crowded conditions, few residences have been able to reserve space for guest rooms. Six of the residences in this study re- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 141 ported that they do have one to two guest rooms. In lieu of guest rooms, guests are permitted to sleep in beds of residents who are temporarily absent. This is undesirable from the standpoint of health and control. When conditions permit, it is recommended that each college reserve one to two guest rooms, preferably rooms with private or connecting bath, for the use of college guests, parents, or other approved guests of residents. It is also recommended that these rooms be fully furnished and equipped with linens and bedding, and that a charge be made which will cover costs and provide some additional income. Residence halls should maintain high standards of housekeeping, operation and maintenance. Regularly employed personnel should be responsible for the care of public areas: all bath and toilet rooms should be thoroughly cleaned at least once each day; entrances and lobbies should be cleaned dailyoftener on a rainy day; corridors, stairs, entrances, social rooms and other public areas require daily dusting and a thorough cleaning at least once each week; grounds and basements must be kept in good condition; floors should be waxed and windows cleaned periodically. Good maintenance of buildings and equipment is also essential. This means prompt attention to plumbing, electrical, and other building repairs. A faucet leaking continuously for lack of a washer, a toilet stopped up for more than one hour, a doorknob off, or a dangerously frayed electric wire left unrepaired indicates inadequate personnel, poorly trained personnel, or a poor attitude toward the important matter of maintenance. There is no training program for employees at present in any of the colleges, and no standards set up for procedures or performance. An in-service training program should be instituted as soon as possible. Material is available for use in such a program. Closely related to the quality of service rendered by employees are the personnel policies of the institution. Job classifications, fair wages, fair hours, paid vacations, sick leaves and holidays, good working conditions, carefully worked out schedules, standardized instructionsall are essential if the employees are to do a good job for which they are being paid, and to take an interest in their work and turn in a good performance. In 35 residences, full-time employees are paid lesEl than 40 cents per hour; and in 26, part-time employees are paid wages ranging from 17 142 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF to 35 cents per hour. On the other hand, wages exceeding 40 cents per hour are paid in 26 of the residences. In three institutions, employees work 50 hours per week; and in three others, they work 48 hours. Only four institutions provide paid vacations; three have provisions for paid sick leave; and three pay for some holidays. It is evident that there is wide variation of policy within the University System. It is recommended, therefore, that study be given to these policies and that definite minimum standards be set up for all colleges in the System. Residence halls staffs should be adequate and professionally trained. A full-time house director should be provided for a residence or group of residences housing 100 students; the director will need a full-time assistant for each additional 100 residents. Since residence halls must be covered twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week, part-time assistants, who may be faculty members or advanced students, will be needed for relief; and student proctors (one for 25 to 50 students) are needed to assist in the guidance and social program. The customary remuneration for student proctors is free room rent, or in some cases, free room and board. In the University System, eight colleges employ student proctors or monitors in the dormitories. They receive payment in amounts varying from $2.00 per week to $58.50 per quarter. Faculty members serving as part-time assistants in some halls receive free room rent. In two residences, a faculty member and his wife are assigned an apartment, rent free, for services rendered in the dormitory. In the opinion of the administrators and deans of the colleges, most of the residences are sadly understaffed; 11 report no specific residence hall staff; 28 report a full-time director responsible for from 36 to 372 residents. Where there is only one house director, he or she should be a person trained in the techniques of guidance so as to be able to supervise and direct the development of the individuals and of the group, and also trained in the management of employed personnel and in the methods of good housekeeping. Where a director has one or more assistants, they THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 14:3 should be selected to supplement his or her abilities-being specialists either in the field of guidance or of institution management. In nine of the colleges, the house director is responsible to the dean's office; in four, to the president's office; and in one, he or she is responsible jointly to the dean's office and the office of building management. It is common practice for residence halls to be operated jointly under the dean's office and the business office. In the larger institutions, where the educational function of residence halls is recognized and encouraged, there are generally two staffs working together cooperatively in the halls; one working under the dean's office and responsible for student life and activities, welfare and counseling; the other staff members working under the business office and responsible for administration, equipment and furnishings, operation and maintenance, and the training and supervision of employees in the house department-these officers are frequently also responsible for food service in the residence halls. House directors could be of great assistance to one another if they would meet together for periodic conferences-sometimes with members of the dean's staff or of the office of buildings and grounds or of the business office. Here they could discuss mutual problems and responsibilities. Those who are especially successful in one field could help others who are having difficulties and, in tum, learn something that would be helpful to them. Such conferences are now held regularly at the University of Georgia and at Milledgeville and possibly at other institutions. It is recommended that JOINT CONFERENCES of a similar nature be arranged for colleges having comparable programs and problems. COLLEGE-OPERATED FOOD SERVICES The most important of many functions of food service is that of serving nutritionally adequate meals for the maintenance of health and maximum physical well-being. Recent advances in the science of nutrition have tended to increase nutritional standards, but it has long been recognized that good nutrition is essential to good health and these nutritive requirements for young men and women of college age are well established. Students who are properly fed are more likely to resist certain infectious diseases, to fatigue less easily and to avoid the listlessness characteristic of poor 144 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF nutritional status. It is on this basis that the food for athletes is usually liberal and is carefully supervised. Improved scholastic progress should be expected among students having optimum nutrition. Improvement has been noted in young children accompanying improved feeding programs in public schools. It has been assumed to be the result of decreased absences due to illness and to general improvement in health. Recent research suggests that certain nutrients may play specific roles in increasing certain types of learning ability. In any case it is reasonable to assume that similar advantage might be expected by young people of all ages as a result of eating highly nutritious meals. A third function of food service is to educate students in habits of eating which will be likely to insure good nutrition as a part of good health at present and in the future. The best way to learn to eat a wide variety of foods and to develop good habits of food selection is to eat good meals regularly. In most of the colleges, students living in the dormitories eat in the dining halls and daily service of adequate meals serves as the best means of nutrition education and a safeguard for health. Day students in a number of the institutions do not eat in the dining halls and in two institutions only 25 to 30 per cent of those living in dormitories eat in college dining halls. Observation of meals eaten by students in college snack bars and offcampus eating places, in place of regular meals in the dining halls, showed poorer choice of food-selection of meals which were less adequate nutritionally and occasionally more expensive. Frequently, however, the cost of these snacks was less than that of dining hall meals but the foods included were not comparable. It is desirable, therefore, both for health and education in good food habits, that all students living in dormitories be expected to eat in college dining halls. Fundamental knowledge of foods and nutrition should be given all students in connection with health education or other suitable courses. Students deserve to receive information which will aid them in the wise expenditure of money for food. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 145 If foods are to be eaten, and if unfamiliar foods are to become part of the students' food experiences, they must be appetizing in appearance, "good to eat," and attractively -served. Menus must include a reasonable variety of foods, prepared in many ways. The familiar complaint of "monotony" is easy to avoid. Fortunately the essential foods-if they are well-prepared-are those which people like best, and there are innumerable sources of reliable information as to methods of preparation and menu planning. Meals were eaten in many of the college dining halls during this survey. On the whole they were well-planned and palatable. Menus seemed to show good selection and fair variety, confirming the more reliable yardstick of the distribution of purchases as discussed later. College food services also provide educational opportunities in social experience. Dining halls should be more than feeding stations. Much of the social life of our times is centered around food service. People come together to eat formally or informally as a background for social, business, or professional activities. College dining halls offer the opportunity for education and experience in gracious social behavior, good conversation, and personal poise. Several colleges take advantage of this opportunity. In one, hosts and hostesses are appointed for each table; in another, one dinner a week is a formal affair with coffee served in the lounge. One expects to replace the "bag" suppers served on Sunday night by occasional buffet suppers managed entirely by students. The music department in another plans to play good music on a record player during the dinner hour; in one cafeteria the president of the college gave dignity to the occasion of the meal by saying grace. A number have extended meal hours so as to avoid rushing, noisy crowding, and bolting of food. If food is to promote good health it must be nutritionally adequate. There exists a simple procedure for judging the probable adequacy of food served in college dining halls. This is the comparison of the distribution of expenditures for foods in certain nutritional classes with average expenditures in institutions in which meals have been found to be adequate by calculation of nutritive contributions of each food and shown to meet standards set by the National Research Council. Ranges 146 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF are shown for October averages in 40 college food services. Prices for food are comparable to those paid by Georgia colleges. The following table shows that most colleges in the System spend more than the average for protein foods, due to service of meat three times a day. High expenditures for these protein foods are desirable so long as they do not result in lowered expenditures for the essential fruits, vegetables, and milk. TABLE 13 Nutritive Distribution of Food Dollar Institution Meats, Fish, Poultry, Fruits & Oheese,Eggs Vegetables Milk Oereals Per Oent Per Oent Per Oent Per Oent Balance SENIOR Georgia Institute of Technology___ Southern Technical Inst. _________ University, Athens Ag Oafeteria____ Denmark________ Ooordinate ______ Lucy Oobb______ Milledge Annex__ DaRwosoomn_T__e_a______ Milledgeville Atkinson ________ O a f e t e r i a ________ Dahlonega_________ S t a t e s b o r o ________ Valdosta___________ 44.0 32.0 50.0 51. 0 45.0 45.0 57.0 42.0 43.9 38.7 46.5 51. 6 41. 0 26.4 19.3 22.0 26.0 33.0 34.0 16.0 27.0 26.2 28.9 13.3 24.2 22.0 15.9 13.6 13.0 9.0 8.5 10.0 15.0 10.0 12.9 14.2 14. 6 9.1 16.0 2.4 16.0 7.0 12.0 9.0 7.0 9.0 4.0 4.2 13.7 8.0 6.9 10.0 11.3 18.7 8.0 2.0 4.5 4.0 3.0 17.0 12.7 4.6 17.6 8.2 11.0 JUNIOR Americus __________ Carrollton_________ O o c h r a n ___________ D o u g l a s ___________ Tifton _____________ 65.0 41.3 44.17 54.6 54.2 18.3 20.4 20.8 15.3 23.3 6.6 5.0 5.0 21. 0 9.9 7.1 10.0 11.0 13.89 11.8 10.5 7.8 8.1 8.0 6.3 NEGRO Albany ____________ 48.2 Savannah_________ 36.0 Fort Valley________ 51. 5 23.4 9.6 14.3 4.0 28.0 25.0 10.0 1.0 24.4 9.0 7.8 7.2 RANGE FOR 40 Colleges ___________ 35-40 23-26 18-20 7-12 9-13 Expenditures for fruits and vegetables are within the range suggested in most instances. It is possible that low prices for fresh vegetables and some fruits during the month for which these figures were obtained, and good buying procedures, as shown in some of the colleges, THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 147 account for expenditures for these foods which are somewhat below annual levels. A check on consumption of milk shows a different picture. It is extremely difficult to meet the standard for daily calcium intake, as set by the National Research Council, if the meals contain less than one pint of milk per day-more is to be desired. Low consumption is a cause for concern in view of the importance of milk for all young persons. With the exception of the Milledge Annex training table which serves more than a quart of milk to each student daily, only Technical Institute, Coordinate, Lucy Cobb, Carrollton, and Atkinson at Milledgeville report consumption of approximately one pint per day, per student. One college serves one-half pint and permits students to purchase additional amounts. Several average less than one-half pint. The high price of milk in most communities in which the colleges are located, limited supply from farms connected with some of the colleges, and failure to serve milk at each meal probably accounts for the low consumption. There is also the possibility that some students have not been made aware of the importance of this food and have not learned to like it. There is wide variation in prices paid by the colleges for milk and for ice cream. Prices range as follows: 4~ to 6~ cents per half-pint of milk; 50 to 82 cents per gallon of milk; 80 cents to $1.50 per gallon for ice cream. Considerable effort is expended by the State to purchase staple foods of uniformly high standard at minimum, uniform prices. It is even more important to see that milk of high quality, as specified, can be purchased at minimum and uniform price, with full advantage of volume buying. The importance of a present and future market for milk through development of customers during school and college years should not be underestimated by dealers in the establishment of their prices. The price of milk should be sufficiently low to compete with the sale of soft drinks. It should be available to all students at low cost; loss, if any, on such sales should be absorbed in the operations. In one college, for example, the president and the manager of the College Shop have agreed to sell milk below cost, at five cents, in order to increase its consumption. Dining halls should be used for suitable social affairs which cannot be accommodated in other areas of the college. Dining space is large, usually pleasant and sometimes the only area adequate for certain types of social entertainment. This space is too 148 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF valuable to be restricted to use for only three hours a day unless adequate social space is provided elsewhere. - Dining halls should be attractively decorated and furnished so as to present an atmosphere of pleasant relaxation if they are to make their best contribution to social education and student enjoyment. Many of the dining halls are freshly painted, nicely furnished, and well-lighted and ventilated. Others are in process of redecoration and replacement of furniture, of installing resilient flooring and acoustical treatment. The attractiveness of the rooms will be increased and at the same time maintenance costs will be lowered. In the majority of dining rooms in the System efforts have been made to keep them clean and freshly painted. Some are especially pleasing and in several, flower arrangements made the rooms appear cheerful. Some, however, were decidedly drab. At the University, for example-which has one of the great art departments of the country-no request has been made of the art department to assist in decoration of dining rooms. Such a department is sure to have excellent ideas for treatment of walls and for types of furnishings and decorations. Some of these projects might be used as problems for art students as well as for improving the attractiveness of the dining halls. Food services should be operated as efficient business enterprises providing good food at reasonable cost to students and assuring certain operating margins. Most colleges aim to operate dining halls primarily as services to students rather than as large sources of income. It seems fair that students should pay current operating costs, such as those listed in the quarterly reports submitted by each dining hall together with charges for reasonable maintenance, and depreciation of equipment which represent the use cost of these items for the current year. Charges should not be expected to cover amortization and interest charges on dining hall buildings. Charges made to students vary widely in the different institutions. One factor in setting charges seems to be the probable ability of students to pay them. A survey in 1948 of 288 institutions of higher education, which include nearly half of all college students in the United States, showed that the average rate charged for board (3 meals a day) is $9.27 per THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 149 week or $1.32 per day. Survey of Table 14 shows that two institutions in the System have board rates above this average and that rates in the remainder range from 80 cents to $1.17 per day_ Amounts spent for food in October 1949 range from 16 to 51 cents and for the year 1948-49, from 19 to 46 cents. In general, food cost percentage rises as rates and food expenditures decrease. TABLE 14 Institution October, 1949 1948-1949 Board Food Food Food Food Charge Cost Cost Cost Cost Per Day Per Meal Per Cent Per Meal Per Cent Dining halls Average of 288 colleges _ $1. 32 SENIOR Athens _ Millege Annex _ Training Table _ Lucy Cobb __ . _ Denmark _ coordinate _ Tech Institute, Atlanta__ Dahlonega _ Milledgeville _ Atkinson "_ Statesboro _ Valdosta _ 1.48 1. 50 .875 1.17 .902 1.17 $0.45 .51 .37 .26 .40 .22 .30 .27 .20 90.0* 60.0* 75.0* 48.0 39.0 77.0 74.0 90.0 51. 0 $0.46 .34 .46 .41 .23 .23 .21 .21 65.0 54.0 75.0 61. 0 59.0 71.0 61. 0 84.0 58.0 .JUNIOR Americus cochran carrollton Douglas Tifton _ .90 .18 60.0 _ .90 _ _ _ 1.00 1.00 .903 .17 .32 .19 .27 61. 0 70.0 57.0 76.0 .27 .19 65.0 .30 73.0 .28 82.0 .21 65.0 NEGRO Albany Savannah Fort Valley _ .802 _ .80 _ .904 .24 72.0 .16** 61. 0 .27 90.0 .23 71. 0 .20 .23 76.0 CAFETERIAS & TEA ROOMS Dawson Tea Room_ _____ Ag Cafeteria____________ Georgia Tech Cafeteria & Restaurant_________ Milledgeville Cafeteria_ _ . 40 49. 0 58. 0 .32 69.0* .32 62.0 .35 57.0 .29 42.0 .39 63.0 .28 46.0 * Operating at a slight loss. ** Food consumption too low for this month due to efforts to repay 1948-1949 loss at too rapid a rate, thus penalizing present student body. Expenditures have been increased for November. There was not sufficient variation in quality of food served to account for this spread; it is likely to be due primarily to more elaborate and varied menus in services spending the larger amounts. It is also 150 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF possible that lack of food cost control, poor purchasing procedures, and inadequate refrigeration may account for some of the differences in certain food services. In the case of Milledge Annex:, the cost represents above-average quality and larger amounts. It seems desirable for similar institutions to review charges together at the end of each year so as to arrive at fair rates which will be uniform within each group insofar as individual situations permit. Food services, like housing, represent huge business operations. Income from dining halls in 1948-49 was $2,762,393; operating profit was $238,532. This figure represents an approximate profit on total operation of 8.6 per cent; some operations showing considerably higher profit than others. October operations in colleges from which statements were available showed all to be operating at a profit with the exception of two showing negligible loss. The volume of business is an important factor in determining cost. A number of factors may be concerned in operating efficiency. One of the most important is volume of patronage. Note Milledgeville dining hall, Dahlonega, and Statesboro, for example-all have high food cost percentages, but they are assured a regular patronage of over 1000 meals a day. Labor costs run between 5 and 6.5 cents per meal and the efficiency of personnel is suggested by the labor time per meal of six to ten minutes. Similarly low costs and relatively efficient operation are obvious in the junior colleges with regular patronage. Cafeteria operations such as those found at Ag Cafeteria and Georgia Institute of Technology show a slightly higher cost because of more elaborate menus but costs are relatively low because of the large number of persons served. Note, on the other hand, the relatively high labor costs of serving small numbers as at Tech Institute, Milledgeville Cafeteria, Dawson Tea Room and Lucy Cobb at the University. From the standpoint of financial operation, it is very desirable that students living in college residences eat at the college dining halls in order to assure regular patronage and definite income. This is illustrated by the dining hall income of the University 1948-49: approximately $201,000 was received from 415 students living in dormitories and required to eat in the dining halls, while only $290,000 represented income from all remaining students of whom 1477 lived in college dormitories but were not required to eat at the college. Similarly at Georgia Institute of Technology, the Southern Technical Institute at TABLE 15 ~ 1948-1949 Income and Expenditures Board Rate Meals Served Labor Time Labor Cost Per Quarter Per Day Per Meal Per Meal Income Profit ~ SENIOR Georgia Institute of Technology { *Southern Technical Institute __ University, Athens _ **Ag Cafeteria _ ***Denmark _ coordinate _ Lucy Cobb _ Milledge Annex . Dawson Tea Room _ Milledgeville _ Atkinson _ cafeteria _ $135.00 112.50 105.00 2077 422 905 664 740 251 288 9,5 1890 180 Dahlonega statesboro valdosta _ _ _ 78.75 83.00 105.00 1800 1379 723 19 22 12.29 22.16 14.5 22.95 16.3 28.5 9.9 32.3 6 10 12 $0.148 .174 .118 .14 .16 .1792 .104 .27 .06 .167 .05 .06 .075 $ 566, 953. 06 727,306.55 322,774.02 186,084.47 191,617.05 89,738.03 $ 6,909.86 78,201. 65 53,977.57 7,942.68 31,174.11 18,526.99 ~ ~ 00 ~ l:!: ~ o ot"J ~ JUANmIOerRicus _ carrollton _ Cochran -__ - -- - - - _ Douglas - _ Tifton - -- _- -- _______ ___ __ 81.00 90.00 81.00 90.00 84.00 619 725 690 1077 1023 11.6 10.2 7.7 6.2 .097 58,179.53 7.02 .097 97,320.62 14,227.69 .058 56,511.00 1,754.88 .035 77,802.50 4,893.48 .05 88,875.81 7,356.24 NEAGlbRaOny Savannah Fort Valley _ _ _ 85.00 85.00 87.00 114 425 496 7.6 7.3 11.4 .049 77,705.00 .04 101,722.95 .066 119,802.70 6,233.87 I 5, 260. III Loss 7,325.69 $2,762,393.29 $238, 531. 73 5, 260. 11 Loss 1 Includes expenditures for replacement of kitchen equipment charged to current operations. * Southern Technical Institute, operating loss $3,432.58 ** Ag Cafeteria " " 98.34 ... Denmark " "4,476.08 $233,271.62 (8.6%) --0. 152 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF which dormitory residents were not required to live in, showed a loss of over $3,000 in 1948-49; with a change in that policy this year the same unit has shown a profit of over $5,000 through October. Study of costs in colleges operating more than one unit under individual management indicates the need for centralization of operations to establish uniform buying procedures and organization of personnel and to take advantage of the special contributions each manager can make to the operation as a whole. Food cost control is essential in a college food service operation. Accounting is considered elsewhere in this survey. It should be mentioned here as it relates to policy of management and to cost control. If we accept as a fair charge to the student his use of equipment during his time in college, accounting procedure should provide for this item as a recurring charge to the budget. Depreciation at appropriate rate should be charged and when charged should be funded. Charges to the budget can then be made in evenly distributed amounts and the operating picture is not distorted by undue burden on one operating period or one group of students. Some of the colleges in the System lack the control procedures which would be of special value to their operations. In some, for example, inventories are taken at quarterly intervals only, and information as to operating costs are known at such long intervals as to be of little use as operating guides. Stores, cash, and personnel records are inadequate in some instances. Certain record forms and procedures would seem to be minimum requirements. Many of these are already in use in a number of the institutions with excellent results. At least six of the colleges use daily food cost reports as an operating control and their costs reflect good control at all points. A committee representing each type of college should work with auditors and controllers to develop suitable records for control for each institution. Reports based on these records using uniform accounting procedures would serve as the basis for useful comparisons of operations. Business students in each college can gain excellent practical experience in keeping such records. Foods should be purchased on the basis of specifications, as determined by amounts needed, deliveries, and storage facilities. They should be checked on arrival as to weight, quantity, and quality. Few scales were observed in the kitchens visited. Canned goods were cut and tested for grade on delivery in only three units. Many THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 153 complained of the quality of staples obtained through state purchasing but few had specific standards against which to check items delivered. The necessity for state purchasing would seem to be open to question in a system so large as to offer in itself the capacity for volume buying which sometimes secures good prices. Purchasing locally is frequently of real advantage and "spot" purchases of canned goods are frequently to be preferred under the present market conditions. It seems desirable to establish a university procurement procedure in which those in charge can have advice from experts in the System as required. Storage facilities are inadequate in most of the colleges for handling large amounts of staples; nor is this practice desirable because of deterioration and destruction likely to occur in foods held at temperatures found in many institutions through a considerable part of the year. Several steps should, therefore, be advised in connection with purchasing. These include: 1. Setting of specifications for all items or selection of grade (with established specification) most suitable for use. This should be done at conferences of persons representing each institution. Specifications are available from government, state, and other sources and there are a number of able and experienced buyers in the System. 2. Regular meetings of dietitians and others purchasing food at some central point to examine staples and decide on grades to be purchased. 3. Examination and check on delivery. 4. Study of purchasing procedures to provide flexibility which may be to the advantage of the institutions. Kitchens are important work areas. Their layout and equipment affect the quality of the food served, operating costs, and sanitation. Layout which provides straight-line handling of food from delivery to preparation and service with adequate, but not unnecessary, work space provides the most efficient kitchen. Few kitchens in the System are ideal as to layout but many are above average in convenience of operation. Some changes in layout which might improve efficiency were suggested at the time of the visits to the kitchens. All kitchens should be well lighted. A good standard is that of ten foot candles for general illumination and from 30 to 40 foot candles at points of preparation such as cleaning vegetables, preparing salads, cooking and dishwashing. Most kitchens visited had good daylight 154 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF but some seemed to be inadequately provided with artificial light. Fluorescent lighting is a recent asset to kitchen illumination. Good ventilation is essential to prevent cooking- odors from permeating the building and to aid the comfort of the workers. Most, but not all, of the kitchens had the advantage of cross-ventilation. One had no hood over cooking equipment; another building was of metal with no insulation. Some are overly large, requiring extra labor and cleaning; several are very limited for the numbers to be served. The usual standard for dormitory dining space, exclusive of main storage, is 4~ square feet per person served. Equipment is equally, if not more, important. Equipment in kitchens serving large numbers has heavy use. It depreciates rapidly, especially if poorly cleaned and cared for, and many items or models become obsolete. For example, specialized equipment such as steamers, fryers, and steam-jacketed kettles, has replaced range cooking with economy of operation and improvement in quality and variety of the products. Profits from food service should be used to purchase new equipment and improved models of old equipment. This will result in more satisfactory food service. Many of the kitchens in the colleges are in good condition with regard to equipment and there has evidently been great effort since the war to replace old equipment and to improve the kitchens generally. Food services in this group are Institute of Technology, Milledgeville, University, Douglas, Carrollton, Valdosta, Tifton and Americus. Fort Valley has a number of items of equipment purchased within four years; Savannah is well equipped except for a hood and walk-in refrigerators. Albany has a number of new items but is in immediate need of a new dish washing set-up, a reach-in refrigerator and additional storage space. Continuation of current replacement policies should keep this group in satisfactory condition. Another group of kitchens, among which are three units at the University, need complete new equipment including refrigeration, except for several items recently purchased. These include: Dahlonega: Kitchen very small. If new student union building is planned, suggest including new dining service in that building. Denmark (University): Obsolete building and equipment. Suggest transfer of this major dining service to student union building. The present Memorial Hall is an available building which can be made THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 155 into an acceptable student union, including a cafeteria and a variety of other food services as well as the usual student union facilities. The advice of architects and the art department should be sought on this suggestion. In general, a good building can be "remade" at approximately 80 per cent of the cost of a new structure. If a move is not feasible in the near future and if an increased patronage is developed by change in dormitory policy it would be desirable to re-equip the present kitchen. All items should be selected with the possibility of their transfer to another location as soon as possible. Students now living in Memorial Hall should be distributed throughout other dormitories for the benefit of both foreign and American students. Coordinate (University): Should not be re-equipped until decision is reached as to the future use of Coordinate dormitories. However, the large copper coffee urn (possibly usable as metal in crafts classes) should be replaced in the interest of better coffee. Lucy Cobb (University): Should not be re-equipped until decision is reached as to the future use of the building. Cochran: The dining room here has been re-equipped recently with good effect. The kitchen is unsatisfactory from every point of view. It is below ground, poorly lighted, much too small, and without future as an efficient and sanitary kitchen. A dining room wing should be planned for the future as a part of the student center. In the meantime, it is suggested that only such items as can be moved be purchased. For sanitary reasons, the galvanized sinks now in use should be replaced by stainless steel sinks as soon as possible. Stainless steel tables should replace the wood tables. A new small dish washing setup, of stainless steel, with full automatic control machine would conserve space, lower labor cost, improve sanitation, and be movable. Statesboro: Kitchen undesirable as to size, location and equipment. Food service should be transferred to student union building, if such is planned. In the meantime, only such equipment as is required for operation and sanitation should be replaced. Provisions for sanitation are essential to cleanliness and to health of students and employees. Provisions for good sanitation include: 1. Clean, light, and adequate locker rooms for employees. Lavatories should always be equ,ipped with soap and paper towels. Sh{)wers should be 156 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF provided, if possible, together with soap and towels. One institution has showers. 2. Medical examination of all employees, including students, concerned in any way with food service. This is common practice in the colleges. 3. Instruction of managers by college physician as to daily inspection of food handlers which should be done by them. 4. One or more lavatories to be installed in the kitchen convenient to work area. These should be equipped with soap and towels. 5. Uniforms for all employees, furnished and laundered by the college. This should include student workers. Smocks for student girls may be made by home economics students. White coats should be furnished for boys. 6. Caps for male employees and hairnets for all women required. Girls (students) at counters or waiting on tables should wear hairnets or uniform kerchief-as they may select. Boys should wear caps. 7. Careful instructions for all persons connected with food service should include methods of handling and serving food and in personal hygiene which will safeguard the health of those eating in the dining halls. 8. Training for employees responsible for cleaning of kitchens and dining rooms in proper methods of cleaning, careful use of detergents, and care of mops and other cleaning tools. 9. Racks provided for mops and brooms. Mop sinks located in preparation and storage areas and easily accessible to dining rooms. 10. Good lighting in all storage and work areas is essential to cleanliness. 11. Garbage stored in refrigerator or screened area, and collected promptly. Cans scrubbed, and, if possible, steam used before they are returned to the kitchen. Some institutions require persons collecting garbage to leave clean cans. Trash, other than food waste should be burned in an incinerator or otherwise. Handling of garbage and trash was found to be unsatisfactory in some colleges. 12. Gradual replacement of galvanized sinks, dish washing units, and work tables with stainless steel units. These units have indefinite life and can be moved to new installations if required. 13. Tiling of floors of kitchens and refrigerators which are not now tiled. Cement is porous and therefore difficult to keep clean. Insulation in floors of walk-in boxes should be below floor level to permit reduced handling of food by means of portable shelves. 14. New models in kitchen equipment are easier to clean-reducing labor cost and improving sanitation. Standards for food service in college shops should be as high as those for dining halls. Some college shops serve only snacks which are purchased by students in addition to regular meals. In others, however, many students THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 157 eat one or more of their meals each day. The units are usually equipped for service of a limited number of items and-with the possible excep- tion of one unit-could not be considered a substitute for the dining hall. - These shops are frequently the center of much of the social life on the campus. Many are dismal or cheap-looking spots, decorated with advertisements, and none too clean. Sanitary provisions for handling and preparation of food are low in several. The service of food at a lunch counter may be necessary in some large institutions. If so, these units should be operated as a part of the college food service. They should be adequately equipped for service of a more liberal menu than hot dogs and hamburgers; they should be kept immaculately clean; and they should be attractive social rooms. Personnel policies vary widely throughout the System. All concerned with the operations having service personnel should determine in conference personnel policies which are acceptable to all similar institutions in the System. Such policies should include job classification, wage rates and ranges for each classification, hours of work, vacation and sick leave arrangements. In-service training of personnel should be a continuous process in every operation. Training of employees should include that suggested above under sanitation as well as in the performance of the specific duties of each job. Capital outlay and rehabilitation are essential tn both housing and food services. It is evident that considerable capital outlay will be involved in the building program if the educational advantages of student living are to be extended to a greater number of students. With the possible exception of the two largest institutions, it seems unlikely that charges for amortization and interest on these buildings can be passed on to students without seriously affecting the college enrollments. Charges to students should include current operating expenses. Reserves for maintenance are appropriate in managing current operations and such reserves should be funded so that recurring charges, representing use cost, can be made to the budget. Tables 12 and 15 show operating profit for the year 1948--49 to be approximately 18 per cent in the case of residence halls (some part of this assigned to building amortization and interest) and 8.6 per cent on dining services. 158 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The rehabilitation program should be handled gradually, taking the most important needs first. Some of these are: safety, adequate lighting, closet space, good beds, desks, resilient flooring for improved housekeeping, bathroom improvements. Similar programs exist in connection with food services as suggested above. Such rehabilitation can be begun by the careful use of surplus and reserves now in the dormitory and foods accounts, totaling approximately $1,300,000. Institutions should use such portions of their reserves as they can justify for needed repairs and operation, it being understood that capital outlay will be advised from the standpoint of the System as a whole. One of the most difficult problems facing college administrators is that of securing properly qualified professional personnel. Professional training for dietitians or food service managers is relatively new but college food services are now being staffed with trained managers as these become available. Six food services in the System are now under direction of such managers. Others are directed by persons who have acquired their training through many years of valuable experience and who are, on the whole, doing a good job. Such persons are not easy to replace and as they retire the trend is toward the employment of professionally trained managers. In the meantime, advantage should be taken of their knowledge and standards in training of new managers. Trained managers can be used for some teaching. In institutions offering training in institution management, managers are members of the home economics teaching staff. This is the case in the Ag Cafeteria at the University and in all food operations in Milledgeville. Their knowledge and training can also be used in health education departments, in connection with courses in business administration and food cost control, in courses in social sciences dealing with the problems of local, national, and world food production and distribution; and in courses in physics and chemistry in which they can illustrate scientific principles as applied to food service equipment. It is, therefore, possible to carry some part of the salary necessary to secure wellqualified personnel on the teaching payroll and thus avoid increase in student charges. Because of the wide demand for trained managers in many fields there is a shortage of available personnel. The University System, THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 159 however, is equipped to train its own managers of food and house services. Excellent work at an undergraduate level is being done at the University and at Milledgeville which can be developed into a graduate program headed up at the University as the center for graduate training. Such a program should provide, in addition to college courses, field practice under supervision in the two institutions mentioned, in several other colleges in the System. Experience should be given in food services and in residence halls with the assistance of the deans and in dietary work in connection with college infirmaries. (In all but one infirmary in the System, food is satisfactorily served from the dining halls.) The period required for the advanced degree may be one or two years, depending upon the previous training and experience of the applicant. Since it is the aim of the System to serve many state educational needs, field experience may include that in school lunch and in hospital food service. The latter should probably be limited to the community hospitals developing so rapidly in Georgia and the state institutions which are in immediate need of guidance in connection with food services. There are many resources within each of the institutions which may be called upon for assistance in improving facilities for student living. Closer integration is advisable between maintenance and housing, food, and health services; between housing, food, and teaching departments such as home economics, art, and business; between deans of men and of women, and all of these services and departments. I t is also evident that within each institution are persons and resources which can be utilized for the advantage of student living in the System as a whole. An essential point of view in the maximum utilization of facilities is that of the membership of each college in a great University System over and above its function as an individual unit. Through visits to institutions within the System and through close cooperation of all members of the staffs of all institutions concerned with similar problems, great things can be accomplished. Each institution is outstanding in some way; each institution can contribute to improvement in living for all students in all units of the System. CHAPTER V FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATIO~ OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA INTRODUCTION This section of the survey report involves primarily a study and review of financial administration of the University System of Georgia. It includes general organization for business operation; budgetary procedure; collection, control, and disbursement of funds; accounting; purchasing; and the preparation of financial reports. However, in visiting the eighteen units or institutions presently comprising the Univer~ity System some consideration was given to all phases of business management. In general the study is based upon the principle of line officer responsibility with delegation of authority commensurate with responsibility. At the institutional level it is based upon the principle that all business administration should be centralized under a chief business officer directly responsible to the chief executive of the institution. Two major aspects of financial administration have been considered in the preparation of this report. These two major aspects will not be discussed as separate sections but will be integrated in the review of general policies and procedures. The first involves financial administration in the broadest sense of the word. This refers to financial administration at the policy level, the relating of finances to the entire instructional, research and extension program of the University System. It concerns the development of plans to adequately support the longrange educational programs of the several units. This is and should be the direct responsibility of the Board of Regents and the chief executive of the University System. The second major phase involves financial administration at the operating level. This concerns the application of fiscal policy at the several units and a consideration of the business methods and procedures as developed by the chief executive and chief business officer of each of the institutions. To the greatest degree possible responsibility for business administration at the operating level should be delegated by the Chancellor and the Board of Regents to the chief executives of the institutions. They in turn should centralize responsibility for financial administration in a single chief business officer for the institution. 160 THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 161 In the further consideration of financial administration attention will be directed to the relationship of the Board of Regents of the University System to the several state agencies or elect!ld and appointed state officers; the general organization and operation of business affairs of the central office of the Board of Regents; the internal financial administration of the senior and the junior institutions; and a final summary of suggestions and recommendations. It is recognized that many of the suggestions contained herein have already been considered by officers of the Regents as well as business officers of the institutions. It is also recognized that some of the suggestions will involve major changes in policy. It is not believed that such changes will involve additional legislation or constitutional amendments. If, however, this should be the case, it is suggested that consideration be given to effecting such necessary changes which will insure accomplishment of the major objective-the providing of adequate higher educational opportunities for the people of the State of Georgia. THE BOARD OF REGENTS AND THE STATE All publicly controlled institutions supported in whole or in part by public funds must properly be related to the financial organization of the supporting governmental unit. The University System of Georgia is dependent in part upon appropriations from general tax revenue provided by the General Assembly of the State. Accordingly, accountability at the post-audit level of the Board of Regents of the Univeri"ity System to the State of Georgia is recognized and reaffirmed in principle. However, specific attention is directed to the principle of accountability on a post-audit basis since it will be apparent that in a number of instances fiscal control by the State over the University System exceeds this concept of accountability. The following paragraphs will contain a brief review of the state offices and agencies involved in various financial activities with respect to the Board of Regents of the University System. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY The General Assembly should provide biennial appropriations for the support of the University System. This legislative body is charged with the responsibility of appropriating funds to the several state agencies based in general upon the recommendations of the Budget Bureau of the Governor's office, but subject to such amendments as the General Assembly may deem desirable which do not create a deficit. 162 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF In actual practice no general appropriation bill was enacted by the General Assembly from the period of January 1943 to January 1949. This procedure was possible since the general app!opriation acts of 1943 and 1949 provided that the funds therein appropriated should be available for the coming fiscal year and "for each and every fiscal year thereafter until repealed by law." This provision is specifically in accordance with the Constitution which also provides that the General Assembly may pass supplementary appropriations not contained in the general appropriation bill submitted by the Governor. However, such supplementary appropriations are available only if there is an unappropriated surplus in the State Treasury or if the revenue necessary to pay such appropriation shall have been provided by a tax laid for such purpose and collected into the general fund of the State Treasury. It is apparent from the foregoing that the Constitution limits the authority of the General Assembly in its power to provide appropriations-other than on a conditional basis-not included in the general appropriation bill submitted with the budget message. It is also apparent that the constitutional provision of continuing appropriations until repealed by law eliminates, at the discretion of the General Assembly, the necessity of passing a general appropriation bill at each regular biennial session. However, it is urgently recommended that the proper committees of each house and the General Assembly as a whole be informed of the financial needs of the University System at each regular session. It is further suggested that the General Assembly pass a new appropriation bill for the University System at each regular session. Only in this manner can the University System be assured of proper legislation which will provide necessary financial support on a realistic and current basis. Elsewhere in this report further consideration will be given to the means of developing a legislative budget to be presented by the chief executive of the University System at each session of the General Assembly. THE GOVERNOR The Governor serves both as chief executive of the State and as Director of the Budget. Brief mention has already been made of the fiscal responsibility of the Governor with respect to appropriations for the University System. The total state budget is, in effect, the Governor's budget and he in turn serves also as Director of the Budget. As already noted, THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 163 any supplementary appropriations not contained in the budget bill are available only if there is an unappropriated surplus or if revenue has been provided by a tax laid for such purpose. It is _therefore imperative that the Governor's budget message and appropriation bill contain adequate provision for the financial support of higher education. Since it is mandatory that the Governor submit a budget message it is essential that the Governor as well as the General Assembly be fully informed in advance of the financial needs of the University System. To this end it is again important that the chief executive of the University System prepare a biennial legislative budget based upon specific requests of the chief executives of the units comprising the System. The Finance Commission established in connection with the Budget Bureau was specifically created in order that all state agencies might have opportunity for a hearing, an unbiased determination of appropriation needs, and an appeal from the action of budget officials in the disapproval or modification of a budget. The proper operation of such a commission would be of genuine value. It would serve to assure the chief executive of the University System of proper consideration of financial needs. It would also point again to the necessity of a well-developed, carefully planned legislative request. THE STATE AUDITOR The State Auditor is responsible for audits and for assistance in budgetary functions. The State Auditor as Head of the Department of Audits and Accounts is specifically charged with the responsibility of conducting special and annual examinations of all financial transactions of every department, institution, agency, commission, bureau, and officer. He is further charged with the responsibility of keeping such accounting records as are necessary to provide and maintain a current check upon all fiscal affairs. Furthermore, he is directed to call attention to any illegal, improper or unnecessary expenditures. As has been previously indicated, the principle of accountability to the State on a post-audit basis is reaffirmed as sound business practice in administering public funds. However, such accountability should primarily involve a consideration of the legality of an expenditure and the availability of funds to cover the expenditure. The Board of Regents is by Constitution charged with responsibility for control and management of the University System. It must therefore follow that the Board of Regents must likewise be responsible for the propriety and the necessity of any expenditure. This principle is generally ac- 164 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF cepted in such instances in which a constitutional board or agency is specifically charged with managerial responsibility. It should also be noted that under that section of the Code dealing with the Budget Bureau the State Auditor is named as Assistant Director of the Budget. As Assistant Director of the Budget the State Auditor is specifically charged with the responsibility of actively assisting the Director in "the compilation and analysis of estimates, in the preparation of the budget and the accompanying message and appropriation bill, and the inspection of public offices." Since the latter contains a statement to the effect that the Director of the Budget "may prescribe and direct the use of such forms of accounts, records, and reports as may be necessary to further efficiency" it is apparent that the State Auditor as Assistant Budget Director may prescribe the accounting procedure to be used by state agencies. In actual practice the State Auditor has cooperated most effectively with officers of the Board of Regents in the development of a system of financial accounting and in the preparation of financial reports. With the cooperation of the State Auditor considerable progress has been made during the past several years in developing accounting and reporting procedures based in part upon recommendations of the National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education.* These recommendations have been widely accepted throughout the country by colleges and universities, state and federal agencies, and various accrediting associations. They represent an effective attempt to relate finance to education based upon generally accepted principles of accounting. Further reference will be made to the recommendations of the N ational Committee in reviewing internal fiscal operations of the several units. Some reference to these recommendations has been made in these paragraphs since certain accounting responsibility has in the past apparently been vested in the Budget Bureau. Commendable progress has already been made in the application of National Committee recommendations to the system of accounting and financial reporting. It is recommended that further consideration be given to the adoption of principles of accounting and reporting as recommended by the National Committee. In further consideration of the position of the State Auditor it should be noted that this officer at present approves in summary form the *These recommendations were published in 1935 by the University Press of Chicago in a volume entitled "Financial Reports for Colleges and Universities." The volume is now out of print, but will be reproduced and expanded by a new committee. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 165 educational and general cost and income budget on an annual summary basis for each of the units of the University System. This budget, which indicates both internal income'as well as income from state funds and includes furthermore both general operations- as well as capital outlay, is the actual proposed allocation of funds by the Board of Regents, The approval of the Assistant Budget Director on this document is apparently in lieu of the Code requirement of approval of allotments on a quarterly basis. Quarterly estimates have not recently been required of the Board of Regents. This is most commendable and indicates progress in acceptance of the principle of providing authority commensurate with responsibility. In addition to the annual approval, the Assistant Budget Director thereafter approves all budget amendments of each of the units of the System which affect the totals. This procedure is in accordance with that paragraph of the Code related to the execution of the budget. It is again apparent that in actual practice the State Auditor as Assistant Budget Director exercises considerable responsibility with respect to budgetary control of the several units of the University System, This is true in spite of the fact that the general appropriation bill provides for a lump sum appropriation and the Constitution charges the Board of Regents with responsibility for government, control, and management of the University System and all of the institutions in the System. However, attention should again be directed to the fact that no general appropriation bill was passed from 1943 to 1949. During that time additional allotments to the basic appropriation were provided by the Director and Assistant Director of the Budget. These allotments were in excess of the basic appropriation and therefore the Board of Regents of the University System was largely dependent upon a sympathetic governor and state auditor. It should be noted that the Board of Regents fared relatively well during this period of time and that the general appropriation bill of 1949 provided substantially the same amount of funds as had been provided by special allotments and basic appropriations during the previous year. However, such a practice may in the future jeopardize the financial support of the University System as changes in administration occur. It is therefore again recommended that the general appropriation bill, as prepared by the Governor with the assistance of the State Auditor, include each biennium a recommendation for adequate support of the University System as presented by the chief executive of the System. It is furthermore suggested that appropriations specifically indicate that which is to be used for general operation and that portion to be available for major capital additions, i. e., plant development, including land and land improvement, new buildings, renovation of existing 166 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF buildings, and equipment for new buildings. It is also recommended that after appropriations have been made for the University System that the Board of Regents exercfse sole responsibility_ with respect to the allocation of funds and the internal budgetary operations of the the several units of the System. In passing it may be noted that the State Auditor is elected by the General Assembly and holds office until a successor is elected as provided by the Code. In actual practice the State Auditor and Assistant Budget Director has held office many years and during this period of time has been sympathetic with respect to the needs of the University System. However, it should be noted that the dual responsibility for both budgeting and auditing, together with election by the General Assembly, places this state officer in an unusually powerful position. THE SUPERVISOR OF PURCHASES The Supervisor of Purchases has unusually broad powers with respect to procurement. The office of the Supervisor of Purchases was established by legislative enactment as a separate and distinct agency of the State of Georgia. The Supervisor is appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate for a term of four years. He is charged with broad responsibilities with respect to procurement of all supplies, materials and equipment for the use of the State Government for any of its departments, institutions, or agencies. He is empowered to enforce and establish standard specifications, to contract for utilities, to rent or least space, to supervise stores and storerooms, to transfer, sell, or exchange surplus materials, to maintain inventories, to secure competitive bids, to award purchase contracts to the lowest responsible bidder and, furthermore, to make all rules and regulations necessary to carry out the terms and provisions of this chapter of the Code. The foregoing is not intended to represent a complete statement of duties and responsibilities but rather to indicate in general the broad scope of authority. In carrying out the duties of his office the Supervisor is authorized but not compelled to permit independent purchases with respect to: 1. "Technical instruments and supplies and technical books and other printed matter on technical subjects; also manuscripts, maps, books, pamphlets and periodicals for the use of the State Library or any other library in the State supported in whole or in part by State funds." THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 167 2. "Livestock for slaughter, and perishable articles such as fresh vegetables, fresh meat, fish and oysters, butter, eggs, poultry and milk, provided no other article shall be considered perishable within the meaning of this clause, unless so classified by the Supervisor of Purchases." 3. "Emergency supplies of drugs, chemicals and sundries, dental supplies and equipment. In the purchasing of emergency supplies under this paragraph it shall be the duty of the department making said purchases to report same to the Supervisor of Purchases, giving the circumstances necessitating such purchases." In actual practice the institutions of the University System have been given authority to make emergency purchases up to the amount of five dollars. They have likewise received authorization to arrange for the purchase of perishable items and the purchase of technical materials and books. However, in these instances the institutions submit a request for confirmation and may subsequently receive a confirming purchase order. In other cases of extreme emergency they have been orally authorized to purchase materials in excess of the five-dollar limit and then likewise secure a confirming purchase order. In still other instances they have been advised of authority to purchase locally but such authority is based entirely upon the discretion of the Supervisor of Purchases. The procurement of materials, supplies, and equipment is undoubtedly one of the major problems presently confronting the several institutions of the University System. It should be noted that the following discussion again is based upon acceptance of the principle of delegating authority commensurate with responsibility. Since the Board of Regents as a constitutional body is charged with responsibility to control and manage the University System, and since the procurement without delay of necessary supplies, materials and equipment is so absolutely essential in carrying out the entire instructional program, research, extension and other activities of the institutions, it is urgently recommended that complete responsibility for all procurement be vested in the Board of Regents. It appears likely that the constitutional Board in discharging its obligations to control and manage already has authority to procure necessary materials, supplies and equipment in operating the University System. Numerous instances of delay, substitution and needless expense involved in procurement might here by presented. Direct citation of such instances would now serve little purpose. However, it should further be noted that the needs of educational institutions differ materially in many instances, and properly so, from the needs of other 168 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF state departments and agencies. Likewise, the distance of the several units from the State Capitol and the lack of adequate means of testing of materials create additional difficulties. It is not intended to imply that the theory of centralization of purchasing is entirely unsound. Advantages do accrue in the purchasing of large quantities of standard materials and supplies. It is intended, however, to vest authority for procurement in the Board of Regents in order that procurement might properly be related to educational programs, and to avoid situations in which substitutions actually become a conditioning factor for the entire educational program. It is then furthermore intended that the Board of Regents shall at its discretion delegate such responsibility for purchasing to the administrative officers of the several institutions in all instances in which materials may be secured locally under advantageous conditions of price and quality. Experience has indicated that reputable vendors in many instances will provide more favorable price considerations for educational boards or institutions than for central state procurement agencies. In considering the recommendations with respect to procurement contained in these paragraphs, it is suggested that the Board of Regents at its own discretion be authorized to utilize the services of the Supervisor of Purchases wherever price advantages may be secured without impairing promptness of delivery or quality of merchandise. In this manner all effective resources of the State may be utilized in purchasing most advantageously. OTHER STATE OFFICES AND AGENCIES Other state offices and agencies may be involved from time to time in the operation of the University System. It is not intended to overlook the services of the Attorney General, various boards and commissions, legislative committees, and others who may be actively engaged in rendering service to the University System. However, since such services are usually required in only periodic and specific instances, and since they do not in all instances involve financial administration, no further discussion of such offices, agencies, committees, and commissions will be contained in this section of the report. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 169 THE BOARD OF REGENTS AND ITS CENTRAL OFFICE The Board of Regents was originally constituted as a statutory board by an Act of the General Assembly passed in 1931. The Board was reorganized in 1943 and became a constitutional board by an amendment passed in 1945. From the time of reorganization in 1943 until the present, substantial progress has been made with respect to improvement in financial administration. During this period of time a procedure for the preparation and development of uniform internal annual operating budgets was established. Educational and general income and expenditures were separated from the income and expenditures of auxiliary enterprises and activities. Increasing uniformity in the preparation of educationally significant financial reports was encouraged, and at the close of the 1947-48 fiscal year, a consolidated financial report for the University System was prepared by staff members of the central office. This report was in turn based upon individual financial reports prepared by administrative officers of the several units. During this same period of time the Board of Regents also employed a Director of Budgets who was authorized to install uniform procedures of accounting, budgetary control and business practices throughout the University System. The Board of Regents, its officers, and staff members, as well as the administrative officers of the several units are to be commended for this progressive development and improvement in financial administration during the past several years. It is hoped that a review of present practices and procedures together with suggestions for consideration of further refinements in procedure will result in an even greater degree of effectiveness and efficiency in financial administration during the years to come. General organization for financial administration is determined in part by statutory provisions and in part by constitutional provisions. In the initial Act of 1931 establishing the Board of Regents, specific paragraphs of the Act provided for the election by the Board of a chairman and a vice chairman from its own membership, and for the election of a secretary who was not a member of the Board. The Act provided that the duties of the secretary were to be defined by the Board but also provided that the secretary give bond payable to the Governor. The Act further specified that all sums of money payable to the Board of Regents be paid to an official elected or appointed by the Board and thereby implied the election or appointment of a treasurer of the Board. The Act also provided that such an official give bond payable to the Governor. 170 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Subsequent legislative amendments, the reorganization Act of 1943, and the Constitutional Amendment of 1945 did not change statutory or constitutional provisions with respect to officers of the Board. However, in accordance with the authority of the Boara to govern, manage, and control the University System, this body subsequently adopted by-laws for the government of the University System. The by-laws provide for four officers, namely, a chairman, vice chairman, secretary and a treasurer. The by-laws also provide for a chancellor who shall be chief executive of the University System, and for a number of standing committees, including a Committee on Finance. The duties and responsibilities of the officers and committees are set forth in the bylaws. The following discussion will include only such officers, committees and staff members actively responsible for financial management as set forth in the by-laws or as subsequently approved by action of the Board of Regents. At the time of the survey the actual major organization with respect to financial administration may be shown by the following chart. An additional chart of organization is presented later in this section of the report to indicate suggested changes. The following paragraphs provide a brief review of the responsibilities of present committees, officers and staff members with suggestions for possible changes. CHART I -f EXECUTIVE SECRETARY BOARD OF REGENTS COMMITTEE ON FINANCE f ~ CHANCELLOR Fiscal Affairs Committee TREASURER ~ CHIEF ACCOUNTANT THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE The Committee on Finance is charged with the responsibility of recommending to the Board the fiscal policies to be followed in the conduct of the University System. The Committee also recommends to the Board the allocations of state funds to be made to the member institutions after a study of the Chancellor's recommendations. The Committee furthermore recommends budgets of various units to the Board after a consideration of the recommendations of the Chancellor and the Committee on Educa- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 171 tion. Finally, the committee receives, through the Chancellor, reports of the Treasurer relating to investments of all trust funds and advises the Board regarding such funds. In actual practice the Committee on Finance works closely with the Chancellor on matters related to fiscal administration. However, the vacancy of the chancellorship during a period of time in 1945 and 1946 apparently necessitated greater direct responsibility for financial administration on the part on the Committee. It should be noted in this connection that the position of Director of Budgets originally recommended by the Chancellor was actually filled at a time in which the position of Chancellor was vacant. Thus, while it may have been the intent of the Chancellor and the Board that the Director of Budgets be responsible to the Chancellor, in actual practice the Director became responsible to the Board through the Committee on Finance. This line of responsibility continued even after the appointment of a new Chancellor in 1947. The position of Director of Budgets became vacant shortly after the appointment of the present Chancellor. The position was then abolished upon recommendation of the Chancellor but was re-established in July 1949 upon motion of the Chairman of the Committee on Finance. Further suggestions with respect to the personnel of the office of the Board of Regents will be contained in another section of the survey report. However, it is here urgently recommended that all staff members of the central office be directly responsible to the Chancellor of the University System. The exception to this suggestion involves only the Board members who are elected as Chairman and Vice Chairman and members of committees none of whom has administrative authority. Such administrative officers of the Board as have statutory status should be assigned by the Board as members of the Chancellor's staff and should report to the Board or its committees only through him. THE CHANCELLOR The Chancellor has specific fiscal responsibilities in administering the University System. References to officers and staff members in this section of the survey report are limited in general to a review and consideration of duties and responsibilities related to financial administration. To this end attention is directed to only such duties of the Chancellor as are related to immediate fiscal responsibility. The by-laws provide spe- 172 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF cifically that the Chancellor be responsible for the preparation for the Board of a suggested allocation of state appropriations to member institutions with an accompanying statement of the bases on which it is determined. The by-laws also provide that the Chancellor prepare budgets of member institutions in conference with heads of the units of the University System. Since the by-laws provide that both proposed allocations and proposed budgets be recommended to the Board by the Committee on Finance, the Chancellor, in effect, secures prior approval of his proposals from the Committee on Finance. At the meeting of the Board in January 1949 the Chancellor recommended that the position of Director of Budgets be discontinued. At the same time the Chancellor recommended, and the Board approved, continuation of a Fiscal Affairs Committee composed of the Treasurer, the Chief Accountant, the Controller of the University, the Controller of Georgia Institute of Technology, and the Controller of the State College for Women. This committee was in effect a continuation of the committee organized informally in 1945 to review fiscal administration in the light of the recommendations of the previous survey committee. The reconstituted Fiscal Affairs Committee was charged with direct responsibility to the Chancellor. In practice, however, this committee meets with the Committee on Finance of the Board of Regents and also with the Board as a whole. Since the institutional representation of the Fiscal Affairs Committee is limited to three units, and since there is a need for greater continuity of study of finance of the entire University System, it is recommended that the Committee be discontinued. This recommendation is also in keeping with the principle that the chief business officer of each institution be directly and solely responsible to the chief executive of the institution. It is further in keeping with the principle that all personnel of the University System and all staff members of the central office be subordinate to the Chancellor. Legislative budgets should be prepared in addition to annual internal budgets. As has already been indicated, other sections of this report deal with the adequacy of financial support for the University System of Georgia. However, attention is here directed to the procedure involved in periodic presentation of financial needs as related to the total higher educational program. The chief executives of all of the THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 173 member institutions present annual reports which include both immediate and long-range needs. However, at the moment there is little indication that these reports form the basis of biennial requests to the legislature for support of the University System. In publicly controlled colleges and universities there must be, in effect, two budgets. The first of these is the so-called legislative budget prepared on an annual or biennial basis depending upon whether the legislature meets in regular session each year or every other year. The second budget usually designated as the annual internal operating budget should always be subject only to the approval of the governing board. In the University System of Georgia there appears to be need for further development of a systematic procedure in accumulating financial data to be used as a basis for the preparation of a biennial budget. Financial needs should be segregated in order to indicate funds required for general operation and funds required for capital outlay, i. e., plant development and expansion. The request for operating funds may be based upon a system of priorities. The first consideration will be that which is essential for the basic operation of the institution in carrying out present educational services as approved by the Board. The second will be that which is highly desirable or desirable for the expansion of existing educational services. The third will be that which is highly desirable or desirable for the development of new educational services. The fourth will involve those items which should be considered on a long-range basis but which may be postponed for two, four or six years without jeopardizing the fundamental program. In the development of the legislative budget for operation every attempt should be made to relate finances to the educational program. A basic functional and departmental classification will in all instances be more educationally significant than an object classification The institutional legislative budgets should be initially prepared by the chief executives of member institutions with the assistance of chief business officers and other administrative and academic officers. These budgets should contain information with respect to actual income and expenditures for two years preceding, revised estimates for the current year, and estimates and requests for each year of the coming biennium. A summary statement might be used to indicate total expenditures for operation. Operation of auxiliary enterprises should then be deducted to indicate totals for educational and general purposes. From these totals should be deducted the estimated and actual amounts expended from institutional income. The balance will then indicate amounts received and to be requested from general state revenue. 174 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Additional statements should support such a summary sheet indicating detail of income by source and proposed expenditures by function and department. The classification of the budget should conform to the books of accounts and to the financial report. If it is deemed desirable summary statements of expenditures by major object classification can be provided for each major division and department. It is not intended that the legislative budgets necessarily contain details of personal services or other expenses. Lump sums for salary adjustments or new positions, and lump sums for other expenses based upon expanded or new programs might well be indicated. However, institutional chief executives will wish to consider salaries of individual staff members as well as details of expenses and equipment for each division and department. The suggested forms contained on the following pages are only intended to indicate possibilities with respect to development of legislative budgets. It is not suggested that they be adopted without careful consideration of the needs peculiar to each institution and to the University System as a whole. They involve only the legislative requests for funds for operation. Additional summary and detail statements may be provided as needed. Institutional chief executives should present their respective budgets to the chief executive of the System. The Chancellor with his staff will review and appraise each budget in the light of the approved educational program for each institution. These budgets should then be consolidated to provide a master budget for the University System. This budget should in turn be presented by the Chancellor to the Board of Regents for approval. The Board should then authorize the Chancellor to present the final legislative budget to the Budget Bureau, appropriate legislative committees and the General Assembly as a whole. The final form of this budget should contain information relating the request to the educational program but it is not intended that details be included. The details as submitted by the institution will, however, be available to the Chancellor for further use at his own discretion. Substantially the same procedure is suggested for legislative requests for capital outlay. Such requests should include needs for land and land improvements, new buildings, major remodeling or rehabilitation of existing buildings, and necessary equipment for new buildings. Requests for normally recurring departmental equipment should be included under general operating expenditures. Priorities will again be needed with respect to requests for capital outlay. In each instance, however, such requests should be considered in the light of educational SCHEDULE 1 ~ GRAND SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS FOR OPERATION I1;j ____________________ B I E N N I U M ~ ITEM (UNIT OR UNIVERSITY SYSTEM) r~e Second First Current First year Second year ~ Year Year Year of Coming of Coming Preceding Preceding Estimate Biennium Biennium Comments UJ. ~ a:: (1) TOotpear1atEioxnp_e_n__d_i_tu__r_e_s___f_o__r___A__l_l o I:I;l o oI1;j (2) Less: Auxiliary Enterprises and Other Non-EducationaL ______ ~ (3) Total Expenditures Educational and General Purposes_________ (4) Less: Actual and Anticipated Institutional Income-Educational and GeneraL ___________ (5) Total Request-State Fundsfaonrd OGepneerraatli_o__n_-_E__d__u_c_a__t_i_o_n__a_l (All forms may include additional columns to indicate amounts approved by the Chancellor and by the Board. ) .... "'-l CTt SUMMARY OF INCOME Educational and General ____________________ BIENNIUM (UNIT OR UNIVERSITY SYSTEM) SCHEDULE 2 ~ "'l 0:> ITEM Second Year Preceding Student Fees _________________________ Endowment __________________________ First Year Preceding Current Year Estimate First year of Coming Biennium Second year of Coming Biennium - Comments F e d e r a l _______________________________ Sales and Services____________________ >- ~ Gifts and Grants ____________________ "C ~ Others (as needed) __________________ o ":l >- 00 Total (See Schedule 1, Item 4) ______ ~ (Additional statements may be provided to indicate details under ~ each maj or source of income. Similar statements may also be prepared for auxiliary enterprises and activities.) o ":l ITEM Administration and GeneraL Instruction-Related Services Organized Research Extension Libraries SCHEDULE 3 ~ SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES t;I Educational and General ____________________ BIENNIUM ~.... < ~ _ t;I is:: _ (May include data indicating o ";l _ changes resulting from expansion of existing o ot;I _ _ serVices or development of new serVices) .~... ;.. Operation and Maintenance of Physical Plant_ _______________________ __ i-- Total (See Schedule 1, Item 3) _ Maj or Object Classification (if de- sired) : Personal Services _ Other Operating Expense _ Equipment (Departmental) _ Total as above J-(-A-d-d-it-i-o-n-a-I-siatements may be used to indicate further details, e. g.} under institution, first, major diVisions, and, second, each department. ) ...... """" 178 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF programs at each of the units as they have been developed at the institution with the approval of the Chancellor and the Board. These in tum should be reviewed by the Chancellor and recommended by him for approval by the Board of Regents. Further suggestions with respect to plant development are contained in another section of this report. The principle of lump sum appropriations to the Board of Regents for the University System is sound. It is suggested that the request to the General Assembly indicate separately funds needed for general operation and funds needed for plant expansion and development. After appropriations have been provided by the General Assembly the allotment to the member institutions should be based in general upon the original institutional request as revised by the Chancellor and approved by the Board with due consideration being given to any change in grand total resulting from actual legislation. This procedure is appropriate since the legislative request will already involve the combined recommendation and approval of the Chancellor and the Board of Regents. Such a procedure will set a pattern for equitable distribution of the allotment, but will also permit the Board of Regents and the Chancellor to make such adjustments as may be necessary to carry out the educational program during the biennium. After the appropriations have been made no approval of allotments or subsequent changes should be required by any state agency other than the Chancellor and the Board of Regents proper. An Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement should be added to the Chancellor's staff. In view of the need for continuous study in providing financial data for the legislative budget, and in view of the suggestion that the responsibility for procurement be vested in the Board of Regents, it is recommended that the Chancellor recommend to the Board the employment of a staff member to serve under the Chancellor as Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement. This officer should take the place of the Director of Budgets authorized by the Regents on July 13, 1949. Such a staff member in tum may need to secure the services of a competent procurement officer to work with the member institutions in developing standards of merchandise, testing of materials, and accumulating information with respect to sources, prices and quality. It is then also recommended that responsibility for procurement be delegated to the several units to the greatest extent possible. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 179 The Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement should work at all times with and through the Chancellor in developing a program designed to continuously determine immediate and long-range financial needs in terms of the approved educational program. He should work with the Chancellor in the development of forms and procedures in securing biennial requests from the institutions. The Assistant Chancellor should be a competent educational business administrator with thorough knowledge of proper fiscal administration of higher education. He should also have some understanding of the academic functions of an educational institution and should bear in mind that the business function is one of service to the educational program. He should possess requisite qualifications with respect to both academic training and actual experience in educational business administration. Such qualifications should involve training and experience beyond that customarily required in commercial and industrial organizations. It should involve experience in college and university business administration. In discharging his obligations, the Assistant Chancellor should at all times recognize that the business officers of the several units are and should be directly responsible to their own chief executives, and that responsibility for immediate fiscal operation of the institutions should be vested in the local business officers. An Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development should also be added to the Chancellor's staff. In view of the proposed segregation of general operating appropriations from appropriations for plant expansion and development, it is also suggested that the Chancellor recommend to the Board of Regents the employment of an Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development. While this staff member must of necessity cooperate closely with the Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement, the scope of such a position and its relative importance in the entire development of the University System makes it desirable that this staff member report directly to the Chancellor. Specific recommendations with respect to plant development will be contained in another section of this report. It is here intended only to direct attention to the procedure and staff which may be needed to secure proper consideration of plant needs. The Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development, by virtue of personal qualities, training, and experience, should be able to enlist the respect and cooperation of the administration and staff of the University System. He should possess the professional knowledge essential to the functional planning of college and university building. He should be, first of all, an educator, preferably with a Doctor's degree. It is not the function of this office to design and plan buildings from an 180 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF engineering or architectural point of view but rather on behalf of the Regents to see to it that they are planned in accordance with the best available knowledge extant at the time. The following chart of organization is presented in order to clarify the recommendations which have here been made. Attention is directed to the fact that the chart involves only personnel concerned with the financial administration of the University System. CHART II I I I I I I I I , ~f EXECUT SECRET~ARY BOARD OF REGENTS Committee on Finance . CHANCELLOR --------. i I I I I I I >t TREASURER I 't' + ASSISTAmT CHANCELLOR FOR~ FINANCE AND PRWCUREMENT I AUDITOR >t ASSISTANT CHANCELLOR I FOR PLANT DEVELOPMENT CHIEF EXECUTIVES OF UNITS .~.. CHIEF BUSINESS OFFICERS OF UNITS It will be noted that these recommendations are intended to imply that the Chancellor serve effectively as chief executive of the System in all matters pertaining to financial administration. Only the two nonmember officers of the Board of Regents will have direct responsibility to that body. However, in even these two instances these officers will have some responsibility to the chief executive of the System. The present duties and responsibilities of these officers will be indicated in the following paragraphs. Reference will also be made to proposed responsibilities but these are outlined in greater detail in another section of this survey report. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 181 THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY The Executive Secretary has limited fiscal responsibility. The position of Secretary was established by statute but the responsibility for prescribing the duties of this officer was vested in the Board of Regents. Some fiscal responsibility may be implied in the Statutes since the legislative Act requires that the Secretary give bond and further implies that some funds may come into his hands. By action of the Board of Regents the title of this officer was changed from Secretary to Executive Secretary. The by-laws of the Board of Regents do not prescribe any fiscal responsibility but rather those duties which are generally customary for such officers. These involve recording of minutes, attesting of legal documents, affixing of the seal, and custody of fidelity bonds, deeds, and other documents. In actual practice the Secretary performs a number of duties related to financial administration. Some of these may have become his responsibility as a result of vacancies in the position of Chancellor. At the present time the Secretary assists in preparing and presenting financial data to the General Assembly for legislative requests. The Secretary also assists in preparing the budget for the central office of the Board of Regents. He is further responsible for processing documents with respect to the state aid program, and he cooperates with the Treasurer in performance of other functions related to budgetary procedure and fiscal operations. All checks issued by the central office of the Board of Regents are countersigned by the Secretary. The present by-laws already prescribe functions for the Secretary that are consistent with accepted practice. However, it should be noted that the by-laws also provide that the Secretary "shall perform such other duties and have such other powers as the Board may authorize or as may be assigned to him by the Chancellor." It should be understood that the Secretary is responsible to the Chancellor for all duties assigned to him by the Board. Direct responsibility to the Board of Regents should be involved only in the performance of his duties as recording secretary. THE TREASURER The Treasurer now serves, in effect, as chief fiscal officer of the University System. 182 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The position of Treasurer was not specifically named as such in the Statutes creating the Board of Regents. However, the position is implied in the reference to an official who shall receive funds from the State. The Treasurer as an officer of the Board of Regents is directly responsible to that body for duties prescribed in the by-laws. These include (1) responsibility for insurance matters, (2) placing required persons under fidelity bonds, (3) requisitioning for State and other funds, (4) escrow agreements, (5) financial reports of the various units and of the System itself including preparation of a system of uniform financial reports, (6) financial supervision of various trust funds under the direction of the Committee on Finance, (7) other duties and powers as authorized by the Board or assigned by the Chancellor. The actual responsibility of the Treasurer with respect to matters of insurance is somewhat limited by State practice. The Board of Regents has determined that triple A buildings will be insured at 50 per cent; other buildings will be insured at 90 per cent; and contents will be insured at 100 per cent. The Treasurer is responsible for securing schedules of items for coverage from the several units. Thereafter, his responsibility is limited to the details involved in the payment of premiums, the preparation of reports relating to the payment of such premiums and the recovery of losses. The actual insurance coverage is secured by state officers presumably under the state regulation which provides that the Governor protect buildings up to 50 per cent. All coverage is now secured by the State. In keeping with the principle of vesting complete authority for management and control of the System in the Board of Regents it is recommended that the Board, through its proper officers, be wholly responsible for the securing of insurance for all property of the University System. Coverage with respect to fidelity bonds is determined by the Treasurer in consultation with the chief business officers of the member institutions. At the present time fidelity bonds are based upon specific amounts for named individuals. The amounts range from $1,000 to $50,000. In reviewing present procedure it appears that changes in personnel and changes in duties and responsibilities create some difficulty in determining certainty of proper coverage. It also appears that some individuals who periodically handle cash are not under bond and that in some instances the coverage is inadequate. It is therefore recommended that the possibility of a blanket fidelity bond covering all em- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 183 ployees of the System be further considered. Such coverages may be limited to five or ten thousand dollars but additional specific coverages will be necessary for a few staff members who customarily handle large sums of money. Custody of funds and depository procedure is routinized through the Treasurer's office. Items three and four involving requisitioning for state and other funds and escrow agreements are discussed under the single heading as here indicated. Funds held in the name of the Board of Regents or in the name of the several units (designated by type of funds) are deposited in twenty-five or more banks throughout the State of Georgia. Such funds are protected by deposits of securities by depository banks under the terms of an escrow agreement. Each of the member institutions must first deposit educational and general revenue in a local account designated as a revenue collection account. These funds are then in turn deposited in an account in the name of the Board of Regents at the end of each month. Deposit tickets are transmitted by the institutions to the Treasurer who in turn prepares a voucher and check to transmit such funds to the institutions. They are then deposited in the educational and general account of the unit. In actual practice all such funds, which are considered as a part of gross allotments are now by resolution of the Board returned in full to the units and left in local banks for the benefit of the institutions. It is recommended that the policy of permitting institutions to benefit by their own collections be continued. At the time the funds are returned to the institutions such moneys are commingled with other educational and general funds received from State revenue. When institutional receipts exceed estimates and therefore exceed total gross allotments, such excess collections may be added to the total allotment by means of a budget amendment. This document is initiated at the request of the institution, presented to the Committee on Finance and the Board with the Treasurer's approval and is also subsequently approved by the Assistant Director of the Budget of the State. Allotments may be reduced in similar fashion through failure to collect the estimated income. Internal changes between functions of the approved allotments are processed in a similar manner but such changes are not referred to the State Budget Bureau for approval. State appropriations for educational and general purposes are distributed by the Treasurer in accordance with allotments approved by the Board of Regents. 184 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Requests for state fundR are generally submitted to the State Budget Bureau once a month on forms prescribed by the Budget Bureau. The requisition form provides for detailed information with respect to receipts, disbursements, and balances to date, together with an item indicating the amount of the requisition. In practice the Treasurer submits a requisition which indicates only the total amount requested. This requisition is then supported by a list of member institutions which indicates the proposed allotment for the month less revenue collections and the net allotment from the State. There is no set policy by which distribution of state funds is made each month to member institutions. It is reported that the distribution is generally made on a pro rata basis. However, the amounts vary from time to time and are based upon the judgment of the Treasurer as to institutional needs, specific requests from the several units, the judgment of the State Auditor and the availability of funds. Attention is again directed to the practice of securing approval of the Budget Bureau for initial annual allotments as well as subsequent budget amendments. It is again recommended that sole responsibility for allotment of all funds be vested in the Board of Regents. These allotments should be based upon recommendations of the Chancellor. In allocating state funds it appears that further consideration might be given to specific policy based upon institutional requests and Board approval. A plan of allocation might well be indicated in the approved annual budget, but attention should again be directed to the fact that such allocations should in final form be subject only to the Board of Regents and not to any other state agency. While it is true that that paragraph of the Budget Bureau Act requiring quarterly budgets has not recently been applied to the University System, the present procedure still provides for control by the Budget Bureau. This control may be exercised through approval or disapproval of allotments and budget amendments. There may also be some question with respect to the necessity of depositing institutional income first in a revenue collection account, then transferring to the account of the Board and finally transferring again from the Board to the institutions for deposit in institutional educational and general accounts. This procedure is not subject to serious criticism but it necessitates additional bank accounts, and these appear already to be too numerous. Furthermore, since it is the policy of the Board that each unit be permitted full use of institutional collections, no purpose is accomplished by present practice that might not also be served by carefully prepared monthly reports from each institution. Excess collections could be added to the budget by Board approval as heretofore. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 185 Institutional income from auxiliary enterprises is retained by local units. The financial status of auxiliary enterprises is set forth in periodic reports submitted by the institutions to the Treasurer. With the approval of the Board of Regents, institutions are permitted to budget and expend up to 95 per cent of their income from auxiliary enterprises after all costs of operation have been considered. Officers of the Board and of the member institutions are to be commended for the vigorous attempt to segregate educational and general operations from those of auxiliary enterprises. Direct charges for operation are applied to auxiliary enterprises and in those instances in which the costs cannot be computed on a direct basis, e. g., some utilities, allocation of cost is made on a percentage basis. The five per cent reserve, if funded, is commendable as a means of providing for emergency repairs and rehabilitation. Under present day costs of construction this percentage is not adequate for replacement. Monthly, quarterly, and annual financial reports are prepared in the office of the Treasurer. A comprehensive monthly report entitled "Allotment Account" is prepared by the Treasurer. This report includes a statement of anticipated educational and general funds from all sources and allocations made for the current year; a statement of budget amendments in transit; a financial statement of allotment account in balance sheet form of current assets and current liabilities; a statement of receipts and disbursements; statements of the unallocated account and of approved allotments; statements of revenue collections for the current year and the preceding fiscal year with appropriate percentages for comparative purposes; statements of detail of gross allotments and payments and balance of state funds due institutions; beginning cash balances by units budgeted to date; and statements of changes in educational and general allotments and details of cash available for allotment. This report includes only educational and general funds since it involves only allotment accounts. It is based upon the books of accounts kept by the Treasurer and serves to indicate the status of allotments at the close of each month. The institutions themselves submit to the Treasurer a monthly budget progress report including both educational and general and auxiliary enterprise funds. These are checked with the reports and records of the Treasurer's office. Quarterly reports of cash position are prepared by the Treasurer based upon reports submitted by each member institution. These 186 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF reports are in turn submitted to the Budget Bureau. As presently constituted these reports appear to be of only limited value. They do not accurately reflect the financial status of the member institutions since cash in transit with respect to state funds may not be recorded and since all commitments may not be indicated. It is therefore recommended that these reports be revised to indicate the exact financial status on an accrual basis. It is further recommended that these reports be subject only to the review of the Board of Regents since the Board alone has responsibility for control and management. These reports may, if desired, be submitted to the Budget Bureau for informational purposes but should not be submitted for specific approval nor for the purpose of direct administration by the Budget Bureau. The annual financial report prepared by the Treasurer is based upon individual reports submitted by each institution. This report was published in consolidated form for the first time in 1948 but it is reported that plans have been made for the annual publication of such a consolidated report. The Treasurer and the Chief Accountant are to be commended for evidence of progress in developing this report. It contains a summary statement of financial operations, a consolidated fund balance sheet, a consolidated statement of income by source and units and expenditures by functions and units for educational and general purposes. It also includes a consolidated statement of income and expenditures for auxiliary enterprises by units of the System and by activity, as well as a general statement of receipts and disbursements indicating operations of the Regents during the year. Similar statements in greater detail are then provided for each of the units of the System. Expenditures in these statements are classified by function, department, and major object classification, i. e., salaries and wages, travel, operating supplies and expense, and equipment. With one or two exceptions the consolidated annual report for the University System of Georgia conforms in general with the recommendations of the National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education. One of the major exceptions here indicated is the inclusion of expenditures for plant development and construction in the statement of current restricted expenditures under educational and general purposes. This is due in part to consolidation of appropriations for all purposes under a single amount. However, either direct state funds or institutional funds used for major capital additions should be shown THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 187 first as unexpended plant funds and should not be commingled with current funds. Transfers from current funds to plant funds should be shown as such in order that total current expenditures might actually reflect the amount expended for operation. Staff members of the central office are aware of this exception. Plans are now under way to report such major expenditures for capital additions under a plant fund section, and to indicate in the balance sheet and subsidiary statements the actual unexpended portion of plant funds. Actual responsibility of the Treasurer with respect to financial administration of trust funds is somewhat limited by state regulations. State regulations provide that trust funds may be invested only in securities of governmental agencies or in industrial securities upon court order. The Treasurer is directly responsible to the Committee on Finance with respect to administration of trust funds. In general they have been well maintained and instances of inter- or intra-institutional investments of such funds have been limited to revenue producing property. In considering these trust funds it again appears that the Board of Regents proper should in general have sole authority for investment. Such a procedure might be particularly advantageous with respect to holding securities received by gift or bequest. Other duties and powers involving financial administration have been delegated to the Treasurer. Since the position of Director of Budgets became vacant in January 1949, the Treasurer has in effect served as chief fiscal officer of the University System. He has, therefore, a direct responsibility to the Board of Regents for stated duties prescribed in the by-laws but he has a direct responsibility to the Chancellor for those other duties which he performs as a fiscal officer of the University System. As already indicated this dual responsibility appears to have been the intent of the Board of Regents since the by-laws authorize the Chancellor to assign duties to the Treasurer. There is no indication in the by-laws that the Treasurer is expected to exercise direct supervision of business management of the several units at the operating level. Likewise, it is not intended to imply in this report that either the Treasurer or any other staff member of the Board of Regents' office assume such responsibility at the operating level. Internal business management of the several units should be vested in the chief business officer of the institution who in turn should be directly responsible to the institutional chief executive. 188 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Since the duties formerly assigned to the Director of Budgets now appear in part to be assigned to the Treasurer, this officer in actual practice assists the Chancellor in preparing recommendations with respect to the allocation of funds and in the review of the budgets of the several units. In this connection the Treasurer works also with the Fiscal Affairs Committee. Consideration of these duties of the Treasurer and the Fiscal Affairs Committee was included in discussing financial responsibility of the Chancellor. Several other duties and responsibilities are at present included in the fiscal operation of the Treasurer's office. In addition to the Treasurer, the personnel presently includes a chief accountant and two clerical assistants. The clerical assistants provide general clerical and stenographic services and in addition are active in keeping the ledgers for the allotment account for the University System and also the fiscal operations of the central office proper. The duties of the Chief Accountant, according to present practice, do not involve direct supervision of the accounting functions of the several units. Some supervision of accounting procedure is implied and must actually be exercised as a result of by-law requirements of establishing a system of uniform financial reports. Furthermore, in actual practice, the Chief Accountant and the Treasurer have assisted the several units in development of books of accounts and have actually installed accounting systems in a number of institutions. Again the principle of individual responsibility at the institutional level should not be overlooked and further reference to accounting and financial reports is contained in the paragraphs which include a discussion of institutional financial administration. However, assistance from the central office in system installation and a continuous review should be most advantageous to the units of the University System. It is therefore recommended that the title of Chief Accountant be changed to that of Auditor. The Auditor should be responsible through the Treasurer to the Board of Regents. He should establish a program of internal audit. He should conduct a continuous system review and assist the several units in the installation of adequate accounting systems in conformity with recommendations of the National Committee. He should assist the Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement in the preparation of an annual consolidated report and cooperate with the Assistant Chancellor in the interpretation of financial data. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 189 INSTITUTIONAL FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION No attempt has been made in this general report to report individually on the financial operations of each of the member institutions. However, the business offices of each of the units comprising the System were visited during the course of the survey and details of internal business management were noted in each institution. The report differentiates between senior and junior units but is limited in general to describing the range of practices in fiscal administration with suggestions and recommendations based upon generally accepted principles of college and university business administration. It is based upon acceptance of the principle of complete centralization of the business functions under a single chief business officer directly responsible to the chief executive of the institution. It is also based upon acceptance of the principle that the business office is a service organization to promote the instructional, research and extension programs of the several units. Financial administration is therefore not an end in itself but to a large extent a means to an end-an aid in providing effective educational service. Specifically this sub-section involves consideration of (1) general organization and centralization of business functions, (2) budgetary procedure, (3) control and custody of cash, (4) internal check and audit, (5) accounting, (6) auditing, (7) purchasing, (8) financial reports, (9) business management of auxiliary and service enterprises, (10) inventory procedure, (11) endowment, loan and agency funds, (12) organization and supervision of non-academic personnel. SENIOR INSTITUTIONS The classification of senior institutions in this report includes all units which offer at least a four-year program leading to the granting of a Bachelor's degree. It also includes such units affiliated with other institutions such as general and agricultural extension, and the agricultural experiment stations. It likewise includes the Medical College of Georgia and the Atlanta Division of the University. General organization and centralization of business functions varies from single to multiple responsibility. Business administration of each of the senior units is supervised in whole or in part by a business officer serving under the title of controller. This office is in each instance directly responsible to the chief executive of the unit or division. At least three of these institutions have published institutional statutes which contain specific state- ]90 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF ments relative to business procedure, duties, and responsibilities of the controllers. Several other institutions have prepared statutes in mimeographed form which are presently in the process of further review and revision. At least three of the institutions have prepared organization charts indicating lines of authority and responsibility. A number of the smaller units have at the moment prepared no institutional statutes and no statement of the duties, responsibilities, and scope of authority of the business officers. Some of these units have indicated that they are following instructions from the central office of the Board of Regents or that the size of the institution does not warrant the development of such statutes. At the present time no institution has provided a complete manual of business procedure, although several institutions are contemplating preparation of such a manual. At least three institutions have actually prepared material to be incorporated in a business procedure manual. All institutional representatives indicated that the controllers served as major administrative officers with tenure, rights, and privileges corresponding to those of other comparable officers of administration. However, this may in part be conditioned by the size of the institution, and the degree to which business functions are assumed by chief executives or delegated to other institutional administrative officers. In actual practice the general business organization and centralization of business functions varies from complete centralization in one institution and nearly complete in another, to an institution having two coordinate business officers both responsible to the chief executive, and others in which specific business functions have been delegated to several administrative officers responsible to the president rather than the chief business officer. In several of the smaller senior institutions or divisions the chief executive serves in effect as the chief business officer and actually retains the title of treasurer. In still others the chief executive assumes greater responsibility at the operating level of business administration than should ordinarily be necessary. Inmost of the institutions there appears to be a tendency toward providing an organization in which a large number of business staff members report directly to the chief business officer. It is again recognized that organization will be conditioned by the size of the institution. Nevertheless, in even the two institutions having a high degree of centralization of business functions under a THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 191 chief business officer, there is some need of further consideration of actual business office organization. Areas of activity might well be consolidated under a supervisor serving as a line officer directly responsible to the chief business officer. For example, a director of auxiliary and service enterprises might well coordinate business management of such activities as dining halls, bookstores, laundries, central stores and similar enterprises. Such a director should then be responsible to the chief business officer. This procedure will in turn release the chief business officer from personal attention to many details and permit him to serve his chief executive more effectively at the policy level of financial administration. All business functions should be centralized. Specifically, chief business officers should generally be charged with responsibility for the following: (1) assistance in the preparation of biennial and annual budgets, (2) control of budget operation, (3) accounting and preparation of financial reports, (4) collection of institutional income, (5) pre-audit of expenditures, (6) disbursement of funds, (7) internal check and audit, (8) purchasing, (9) operation of general stores, receiving and mailing departments, (10) inventory of property, (11) financial management of student loan funds, (12) supervision of finances of student organizations, (13) financial management of investments, (14) management of the physical plant, (15) assistance in management of new construction and physical expansion, (16) business management of residence halls and dining halls, (17) management of bookstores, print shops, laundries and similar enterprises, (18) cooperation in business management of infirmaries, dairies, and other educational business enterprises, (19) general supervision of non-academic personnel, (20) review of leases, contracts, and other legal business documents. Further reference will be made to these business functions in subsequent paragraphs of this section of the report. However, to summarize briefly the degree of centralization it is noted that all business officers reported some responsibility for the first six of these business functions. The seventh is largely dependent upon the size of the organization, but internal check is the responsibility of the chief business officer to the extent that such a procedure is possible. The eighth, that of purchasing, is likewise the responsibility of the business officer, but present state prodecures reduce in many instances the possibility of exercising responsibility at an administrative level. Responsibility for the tenth function involving general stores is limited to those institutions which operate general stores. Responsibility here is also conditioned by the degree of centralization of other functions, e. g., 192 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF management of the physical plant. Financial management of student loans is also limited to institutions in which loan funds exist, but even in some of these the responsibility of the business officer is primarily at the bookkeeping level. Supervision of fllances of student organization ranges from complete supervision to almost the absence of any supervision other than custodial. Management of the physical plant ranges from complete responsibility to complete absence of responsibility. Between these two extremes are various degrees of responsibility involving cooperative responsibility with the chief executive or other administrative officers. The actual degree of assistance in management and supervision of new construction and plant expansion is difficult to determine. However, the majority of institutional representatives reported some responsibility for the business officers but in at least four or five instances such responsibility is either negligible or non-existent. Responsibility for the remaining functions here outlined is largely dependent upon whether such facilities and functions actually exist in the institution. At the present time there is only limited supervision with respect to non-academic personnel but further reference to this problem will be made later in this report. It is recommended that further consideration be given to the development of institutional statutes in each institution which contain a clear statement of the duties, responsibilities and scope of authority of the chief business officer. It is also recommended that each institution regardless of size give consideration to the development of a manual or guide for business procedure. Such manuals can be relatively brief and simple in the smaller institutions, but must be substantially more comprehensive and extensive in the larger institutions. These manuals might well include a statement with respect to the relationship of the business office to other departments and divisions of the institution. They should also contain a chart of business organization and a complete statement of the duties and responsibilities of all members of the business staff. They should contain explanations with respect to all business procedures, and illustrations of various business forms with proper explanation as to the use of such forms. Excerpts from the detailed manual should be distributed to various divisions, departments, and offices of the institution in order that the personnel of such divisions might be familiar with details of business practice affecting their own operation. Further consideration should also be given to such reorganization in the business offices proper as will permit the chief business officer to devote some time to assisting the chief executive in matters of fiscal policy. Any reorganization should involve complete centrali- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 193 zation of business functions here indicated under a single chief business officer responsible to the chief executive. Attention is again directed to the questionable practice of distributing xesponsibility for business functions among several administrative officers responsible to the chief executive. Particular attention is also directed to the business organization of the institution which has no chief business officer but rather two coordinate officers directly responsible to the president. Business administration in that institution is at present admittedly effective. However, it is based to a large extent upon personalities rather than sound principles of business administration. Changes in personnel might readily destroy the effectiveness of such a business organization. Internal budgets are well-developed in form and in content. In accordance with requirements of the Board of Regents each institution prepares an internal budget covering financial operations for a fiscal year. These budgets are well-developed as to form. They contain a detailed list of the faculty and other regular employees showing title, terms of employment, and salaries. They also contain definite allocations to departments for other expenses classified as to object. They include details of proposed salary adjustments by name and position and, in general, contain sufficient detail to serve effectively as financial plans for the implementation of the educational program. Budgets are also provided for auxiliary enterprises but these are generally kept separately since funds for the support of these activities are not deposited with the governing board. These budgets contain summaries of estimated income by source and funds and proposed expenditures by function, object, and department. They also indicate actual figures for two precp.ding years as well as requests and recommendations for the coming year. Allotments to the several departments, divisions, and offices are generally made under four major object classifications, i. e., operating supplies and expenses, travel, capital outlay, and personal services. There is considerable variation in the technique of actual budget preparation and development. In some instances forms are sent by the business officer to the several departments with a covering letter of instructions for preparation. In other instances there is a much greater degree of informality. This is generally true of the smaller units. In a number of institutions the department heads confer primarily with the president in presenting their needs and in other cases the staff confers primarily 194 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF with the business officer. However, in most instances there is at least some opportunity for budgetary conferences involving the chief executives, chief business officers and the head of the department or division involved. In a number of instances academic salaries are established almost entirely by the president with nominal assistance from other officers. However, in some cases the heads of departments make recommendations with respect to their own staffs but these must fall within the approved salary schedule. Most chief executives and business officers advise department heads of any changes and also provide departments with a copy of the approved departmental budget. However, there is still some evidence to the effect that department heads may not promptly be notified of changes and modifications. In a few instances it is reported that departments may not be notified of the actual initial allotment. The degree of budgetary control as exercised in the several institutions varies substantially. It is general practice to encumber salaries for a year based upon actual contracts and approved budget. The control beyond this is quite negligible in a number of instances. Mechanization of accounting procedure in at least five institutions provides potentially a very effective means of budgetary control but even in some of these units the control is not entirely effective. That is to say that commitments are not promptly entered as encumbrances against departmental allotments at the time that obligations are actually incurred. The purchase order received from the State is used in a number of cases rather than the initial requisition. In still other instances the voucher or invoice itself is used to record for the first time the reduction of unexpended departmental allotments. Thus at any particular time there may be outstanding commitments not reflected in the appropriation or allotment ledger used for budget control purposes. Institutions having no mechanical accounting machines are for the most part using a manual allotment ledger which is standard in form throughout the System. In at least one institution an additional detail record is maintained and this record is used as a basis of monthly posting to the standard appropriation or allotment ledger. Lack of mechanization also introduces some duplication in the accounting procedure as a whole since the actual books of accounts are maintained on an object basis for the benefit of state officers involved in audit. In fairness to a number of the smaller units it should be recognized that the size of the institution makes possible the exercise of certain THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 195 personal budgetary control by the business officer. For example the business officer may "run" the file of outstanding purchase orders and requisitions and thereby reasonably well estimate the actual budget position of any department or division. In fairness to all institutions it should be noted that the present procurement policies of the State have a tendency to limit effective budgetary control since information with respect to the amount of commitments is frequently not available for several weeks or longer after the requisition has been processed. There is also substantial variation among the several units with respect to information regarding budgetary status which may be made available to department heads. In a few cases regular monthly reports are submitted to the department heads. Such a procedure is relatively simple in mechanized systems in which such reports may be obtained as a by-product of actual posting to the budget control. In other institutions the business officer may send monthly or periodic summaries and in still others the departments may be requested to maintain a running account and indicate their own budget status on requisitions submitted to the business office. In a few cases no attempt is made to advise departments of budget status although in actual practice the department heads may call at the business office for such information. It is quite apparent from the foregoing discussion that the actual form of the internal budget has been well-developed. It is also apparent that certain procedures with respect to budget development might be improved by means of more extensive conferences which involve the president, the business officer, the academic dean or .dean of faculties, and the deans and department heads immediately concerned. It is likewise apparent that budgetary control should be generally improved and that departments should be in some instances informed more regularly regarding the status of their budgets. Improvement in budgetary control, which is recommended most urgently, involves recording as an encumbrance all requisitions and commitments at the time that they are approved and processed by the business office. This in turn is partly dependent upon greater institutional autonomy with respect to purchasing. It may also depend to some extent upon further mechanization which will be discussed again in later paragraphs of this section of the report. Brief mention should again be here made of the proposed legislative budgets. Institutional business officers will be required to work most carefully with the chief executives of their respective institutions in 196 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF the development of such budgets. Since such budgets involve long range financial plans for the development of educational services, it is in this particular area that the business officer can render effective assistance to the chief executive. Because the neea. for further development is of major importance, suggestions have been made for internal reorganization of business offices in order that the chief business officer have sufficient time to devote to the long range financial plans. Control and custody of cash is generally effective but use of pre-numbered forms and mechanical receipting machines should be expanded. Control and custody of cash as considered in this review includes also the collection of institutional income and the disbursement of funds. In all of the senior units cash collected by or deposited with the central business office of the institution is controlled by means of pre-numbered receipts prepared at least in duplicate or triplicate or by means of mechanical receipting devices. In all of the units all cash collections are also eventually deposited in local banks through the central business office of the institution. However, from this particular point on the procedure with respect to handling of cash varies substantially among the several institutions. In a number of instances all receipts are deposited daily intact in the proper depository. In others these deposits are made periodically depending upon the amount of cash collections on hand. Some institutions report regularly weekly deposits whereas others indicate that the time might range from three to ten days. Some institutions report that cash is balanced daily even though deposits may not be made, but others indicate that cash is balanced at less frequent intervals. Some institutions also report that cash may not be deposited in full at any particular time in order that funds may be available for petty cash and change funds. While it is recognized that the size of the institution tends to condition practice with respect to making daily deposits intact, it is nonetheless suggested that this procedure be reviewed most carefully in all institutions not presently following this generally accepted principle of financial administration. It is at this point of business management that difficulties most frequently occur and it is therefore recommended that daily deposits be made intact if any collection has actually occurred. It is recognized that several daily deposits may be necessary during the period of heavy collections such as at registration. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 197 Further consideration should be given to control of cash collections which are first made in offices other than the central institutional business office. This involves collections which may be made regularly or periodically in dining halls, cafeterias, student unions, bookstores, laundries, shops, dairies, and infirmaries. Several of the institutions have already devised very effective control by means of cash registers, prenumbered sales slips, Uarco machines, etc., but in other instances there is complete dependence upon the initial collecting office to bring cash receipts to the central office for deposit. In some instances in which cash registers are in use there is no cash register tape and readings of the cash register are made by no individual other than the one responsible for initial collections. The fact that most individuals responsible for cash collections have been placed under bond is no valid reason to eliminate proper controls. It is recognized again that no system of cash control can serve as absolute assurance of proper practice. However, it is essential that the system be designed to minimize both fraud and error. Such a procedure provides vital protection for staff members involved in cash collections as well as further assurance to chief administrative officers who are finally responsible for all business transactions. It is therefore recommended that all cash collections wherever made be recorded by means of pre-numbered receipts or sales tickets controlled through the central institutional business office, or if cash registers are available, that readings and/or tapes be controlled by a representative of the chief business officer not responsible for actual cash collection. Procedure varies with respect to petty cash and change funds. In a number of institutions no such funds actually exist except on the basis of retaining or utilizing current receipts. Still others have devised effective procedures which are carefully controlled and petty cash funds are operated on an imprest basis. In other cases all disbursements are made by check regardless of the amount. The need for change funds and for petty cash funds must be recognized in most of these institutions and particularly in the larger units. It is also recognized that the possibility of improper use of such funds constitutes a genuine difficulty. It is believed that the establishment of a petty cash fund properly recognized and properly operated on an imprest basis is preferable to utilization of current receipts, and it is therefore recommended that a further detailed review of practices be 198 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF made in order to provide uniformity on a system-wide basis. Petty cash funds should be reimbursed at least once a week. With the exception of petty cash payments all funds should be disbursed by pre-numbered checks. Some institutions have eliminated cash payrolls but these are still in use in a majority of institutions. While it is recognized that the complete elimination of cash payrolls will add to the total volume of work, widespread continuation of the use of cash payrolls is a practice open to serious question. The periodic need for relatively large sums of money and the possibility of error in preparing payroll envelopes constitute potential sources of difficulty. It is therefore suggested that consideration be given to the gradual elimination of all cash payrolls. It is also suggested that as many of the weekly payrolls as possible be changed to a semi-monthly basis. The use of a check signing machine in the larger units is entirely commendable. However, in the interest of greatest possible protection for all staff members concerned it is recommended that the keys to such machines be controlled by at least two different individuals. This will mean that the operator must secure an additional key from another person in order to use the machine. It is also recommended that all checks be pre-numbered and that all numbers be properly accounted for in the process of preparing bank reconcilations. Consideration should also be given to the possibility of consolidating a number of bank accounts. The present procedure of multiplicity of accounts may in part be due to requirements originating outside of the institution proper. However, it appears that it is also due at least in part to a tendency to spread funds in a number of banks. It is also a device which requires that banks do bookkeeping which should properly be the responsibility of the institutional business office. Funds might still be spread among the several banks but one account might be maintained as the active account and all others would be involved only in transfers between banks as may be required. There is no further security in providing separate bank accounts as long as funds are disbursed by the same fiscal officer. There is merit, therefore, in the simplicity of consolidated bank accounts provided adequate fund control is properly established through the books of accounts of the institution. Internal check and audit may be increased by reassignment of duties. Internal check involves a procedure whereby the work of one individual is complementary to the work of another. It means in effect THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 199 an organization in which the same individual does not collect cash, disburse funds, and maintain the books of accounts. The degree of internal check is always contingent upon the size and nature of any organization. However, even the smallest of these institutions generally maintain business staffs of at least three employees including the chief business officer. In such instances it is entirely possible to maintain a reasonable degree of internal check by providing that one individual serve as cashier and a second individual review details of daily deposits and record transactions in books of accounts. The second staff member must also prepare checks for disbursements of funds and record such transactions, but the invoices proper should be approved by the individual receiving the material and the invoices should further be reviewed and approved by the chief business officer or his representative. The signing of checks also should be done by the chief business officer, or if signed by a machine that function should be performed by an individual other than the one preparing the check. It is hoped that cash payrolls may be abandoned in the not too distant future. However, as long as they are continued they should be processed and pay envelopes prepared by an individual other than the one who actually distributes the cash to employees. Utilization of the services of the chief executive in countersigning checks is a useful device in providing some degree of internal check in the smaller institutions. However, as these institutions develop it is possible that more effective internal check can be secured within the business office proper. It is not always possible for the president or chief executive to be as completely informed of the details of financial transactions as may be necessary to enable him to sign checks on other than an emergency basis. Furthermore, the chief executive should be relieved of routine tasks which might well be delegated to other administrative officers. On the other hand the president should be kept well informed on matters of finance by periodic reports from the business office. Internal audit programs as such have not generally been developed throughout the senior units of the University System. A number of chief business officers reported that they or their representatives conducted periodic test checks and audits in certain areas. This appears to be particularly true in such instances in which the registrar or other non-business officers exercise responsibility in the collection of cash. In at least one institution a staff member serving under the title of auditor distributes his time between functions normally assigned to a chief accountant and those carried on by an internal auditor. 200 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Since limitations of staff preclude in most instances the possibility of the development of effective internal audit programs, recommendations have already been made to the effect that a_ continuous procedure of internal audit and systems review be conducted through the central office of the Board of Regents. Such a procedure will be particularly helpful in the smaller units and might also serve to supplement such audit programs as may properly be carried on in the larger units. Accounting procedure should be further mechanized and books of accounts should be expanded to include a complete general ledger. Accounting functions of each of the senior units are supervised or actually carried on by the controller of the institutions. There is a great deal of similarity in forms, procedure, and books of accounts among the smaller units which maintain all accounts on a manual basis. There is also some similarity in forms, procedure, and books of accounts in institutions utilizing typewriter bookkeeping machines. Only one institution at present uses the punched card method in the daily accounting function. Accounting systems of the smaller units consist largely of a cash receipts and disbursement book set up in sections consistent with the several funds and separate bank accounts which are maintained. In general these include revenue collections, educational and general, auxiliary enterprises, loan funds, agency funds, and such others as may be necessary in any particular institution. Subsidiary student ledgers, loan funds, agency funds and trust funds ledger are also maintained as determined by the needs of the institutions. The cash receipts and disbursement book contains an additional section of summary of payments by object classification. The appropriation or allotment ledger has already been mentioned in connection with budgetary control. This ledger maintained on standard forms in general use in small institutions throughout the System is used to record budget allotments to date and also indicates the free balance or unexpended budget allotment to date. As has already been indicated the ledger is maintained in a variety of ways but in general does not always reflect the actual free balance as at any given moment. Entries to the cash receipts and disbursement book are generally made from summaries prepared from analyses of the pre-numbered receipt forms in use. The voucher check, or an analysis thereof, gen- THE UNIVEHSITY SYSTEM OF GEOHGIA 201 erally serves as the posting medium to record disbursements. The books of accounts in the larger units and in those utilizing mechanical accounting machines are fairly complete with one or two exceptions. At the time of the survey no institution regardless of size had on hand a general ledger kept on a current basis which included controlling accounts for all assets and all liabilities of the institution. At least one institution was maintaining such a ledger on a manual basis but the ledger was not current at the time of the visit. A number of institutions maintain no general ledger whatsoever. This omission is serious since the general ledger is actually the heart of any accounting system. Such a ledger should contain a section for current funds further classified as to general or restricted. It should also contain separate sections for endowment funds, loan funds, plant funds, and agency funds. Each section should constitute a complete accounting entity and should contain all assets, liabilities and balances pertaining to the fund. Income and expense accounts will be required only in the current fund section. Transactions in other funds will affect only assets, liabilities and fund balances. Appropriate subsidiary ledgers should support controlling accounts in the general ledgers. These will vary in accordance with the size and nature of the institution. A number of institutions might effectively further mechanize accounting procedure with equipment already available. Others have developed to a sufficient size and volume to justify serious consideration of installation of mechanical accounting procedures. Such mechanization will eliminate some duplication in effort now necessary to maintain effective budgetary control, a functional and departmental classification of accounts, and still provide the type of information required by the State Auditor. Attention is again here directed to recommendations of the National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education. These recommendations are specifically designed to relate finance to education by providing for functional and departmental classifications of expenditures. They are also designed to provide procedures based upon accepted principles of college and university accounting. These in turn provide for meticulous accounting for dollars and cents which is important in the operation of any accounting system, but does not constitute the sole purpose of the accounting program. The National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education has recommended a series of monthly, annual, and other periodic reports based upon a system of fund accounting. 202 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Recommendations of the Committee also include a classification of income by source; and a functional, departmental and object classification of expenditures. Five major funds have been suggested. These are as follows: 1. Current funds which are further classified as to general or restricted. These funds include all current operations of the institution. 2. Loan funds which are used to assist students in need of financial aid. 3. Endowment and other non-expendable funds which are permanent in nature, and of which only the income is to be used for current purposes. 4. Plant funds which may be further classified between unexpended funds and those invested in the physical plant. 5. Agency fUIids, which are those held by the institution as custodian and usually involve funds of student organizations. Further recommendations of the National Committee involve suggestions for a fund balance sheet with supporting exhibits and schedules in summary and detail. Income and expense are first classified under three major categories, i. e., educational and general purposes, auxiliary enterprises and activities, and other non-educational income or expense. Income is further classified by source. Educational and general expenditures are classified under administration, instruction, organized research, extension, libraries, and operation and maintenance of the physical plant. Futher departmental classification is provided under these three major divisions, and the recommendations of the National Committee also contain a suggested classification of expenditures by object. Recommendations for reports for auxiliary enterprises and activities are also included. It is most commendable that recent installations and modifications in accounting procedures within the University System have been based in general upon recommendations of the National Committee. It is suggested that the recommendations of the National Committee be adopted for all institutions of the University System and that such changes be made which will provide general conformity with these recommendations. It is then recommended that the accounting system of each of the institutions contain a complete general ledger maintained on a fund basis with proper controlling accounts for all assets, liabilities and balances, and income and expense. It is further recommended that necessary subsidiary ledgers or registers be maintained which include the necessary detail supporting the controlling accounts of the general ledger. The number of subsidiary ledgers will depend primarily on the size and complexity of the institution. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 203 Futher consideration might also be given by the large institutions to the problem of cost accounting, particularly as related to a physical plant job system. In this connection it is again noted that in some institutions the director or superintendent of the physical plant is not responsible to the chief business officer. In general such an organization may lead to financial or administrative difficulties. It is again suggested that the chief business officer exercise responsibility in connection with business management of plant operation and maintenance. Likewise the cost accounting for physical plant job system should be under the general supervision of the business officer. Such a system should involve accumulation of costs for labor, material and overhead for various jobs undertaken by the physical plant. It should involve a procedure for the charging of such costs to the appropriate department or division. It should serve to relate estimates to actual costs and should provide a valuable guide in determining the breaking point on cost between utilizing the physical plant staff or contracting for necessary repairs and rehabilitation. Independent audits are conducted annually by representatives of the State Auditor. With the exception of one or two activities the financial transactions of all funds and activities are audited annually by representatives of the State Auditor's office. This principle has already been reaffirmed as sound practice in the administration of public funds. It is commendable that such audits are conducted on an annual basis and that they have been conducted on a reasonably current basis. However, it is recognized that limitations of staff and a tendency to reproduce certain detail may tend to reduce the direct value of these audit reports to the administrative officers of the University System. It has therefore been recommended that the annual independent audits be supplemented by a continuous internal audit program. Purchasing procedure at the institutions should be further formalized when greater authority has been delegated. Considerable reference has already been made to the problem of procurement. At the institutional level responsibility for procurement is generally centralized under a chief business officer. In the larger units this responsibility is delegated to a particular member of the business staff. Some variations are noted in connection with the authority granted to members of the staff in making minor purchases and in the authority of librarians or dietitians to purchase THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 203 Futher consideration might also be given by the large institutions to the problem of cost accounting, particularly as related to a physical plant job system. In this connection it is again noted that in some institutions the director or superintendent of the physical plant is not responsible to the chief business officer. In general such an organization may lead to financial or administrative difficulties. It is again suggested that the chief business officer exercise responsibility in connection with business management of plant operation and maintenance. Likewise the cost accounting for physical plant job system should be under the general supervision of the business officer. Such a system should involve accumulation of costs for labor, material and overhead for various jobs undertaken by the physical plant. It should involve a procedure for the charging of such costs to the appropriate department or division. It should serve to relate estimates to actual costs and should provide a valuable guide in determining the breaking point on cost between utilizing the physical plant staff or contracting for necessary repairs and rehabilitation. Independent audits are conducted annually by representatives of the State Auditor. With the exception of one or two activities the financial transactions of all funds and activities are audited annually by representatives of the State Auditor's office. This principle has already been reaffirmed as sound practice in the administration of public funds. It is commendable that such audits are conducted on an annual basis and that they have been conducted on a reasonably current basis. However, it is recognized that limitations of staff and a tendency to reproduce certain detail may tend to reduce the direct value of these audit reports to the administrative officers of the University System. It has therefore been recommended that the annual independent audits be supplemented by a continuous internal audit program. Purchasing procedure at the institutions should be further formalized when greater authority has been delegated. Considerable reference has already been made to the problem of procurement. At the institutional level responsibility for procurement is generally centralized under a chief business officer. In the larger units this responsibility is delegated to a particular member of the business staff. Some variations are noted in connection with the authority granted to members of the staff in making minor purchases and in the authority of librarians or dietitians to purchase 204 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF books or perishable foods. There are also many variations in connection with procedure involved in initiating purchases. A number of units provide institutional requisitions which are submitted by the several departments to the institutional purchasing representative. This individual may in turn secure bids and then prepare the standard state requisition form for transmittal to the State Supervisor of Purchases. In still other instances the departments may themselves prepare the state requisition form which will then be processed by the institutional business office. Another procedure simply involves oral requests to the institutional business office and these requests are then transcribed on the regular state requisition form. Variations exist with respect to procedure in encumbering departmental budgets. This procedure which involves reducing free balances of budget allotments on the basis of estimated cost of materials which have been requested, has already been mentioned. Attention is again directed to the necessity of encumbering budgets for all commitments at the earliest moment possible. The delegation of further authority for procurement at the institutional level will increase the opportunity for such a procedure but will likewise increase the need of further formalizing purchasing procedure. This should be done by developing institutional requisitions within each of the several units. As such requisitions are approved in the business office they should also be priced and the estimated cost should immediately be recorded as an encumbrance against the proper departmental budget allocationthat is, a reduction of the free or unencumbered balance. This balance should then be adjusted as invoices are actually paid. If further authority for purchases is to be provided at the institutional level consideration should also be given to further uniformity of procedure on a system-wide basis. The practice of permitting staff members to make purchases with little reference to approval from the institutional business office should be discouraged. It is recognized that purchases of books and perishable food stuffs constitute a special problem, but even in these instances it is necessary to exercise some business office supervision at the institution in order to provide proper budgetary control. All institutional business office procedure should be based upon the principle of securing materials and supplies in strict accordance with departmental requests after proper consideration of availability of funds. Financial reports may be revised to provide further conformity with the recommendations of the National Committee. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 205 All of the units of the System now submit uniform reports as required by the Board of Regents. These involve monthly reports indicating the status of the budget, quarterly reports of dining halls and dormitories, a quarterly statement of cash position and a complete annual financial report. Reference to these reports has already been made in the discussion involving the central office. In addition to the reports herein indicated, a number of the institutional business officers prepare periodic reports for internal use within the unit proper. These usually include, among others, reports related specifically to business or quasi-business activities such as dining halls, residence halls, bookstores, extension and correspondence services, and athletic associations. As previously noted, a number of institutions also provide monthly reports for department heads indicating the status of the particular departmental budget. These may be in summary form or may be in detail obtained as a by-product of actually posting to the books of accounts. There is again commendable evidence that consideration has already been given to recommendations of the National Committee in the preparation of financial reports. Consideration of Committee recommendations is particularly evident with respect to the annual financial report. These reports recognize the major funds as recommended by the National Committee and provide fund balance sheets with appropriate supporting exhibits and schedules. However, attention is again directed to the fact that funds for major capital additions should not be commingled with current restricted funds but should be set separately under plant funds and should be reported as expenditures from plant funds. The expending of funds for capital additions involves the exchange of one asset for another, e. g., the exchange of cash for land, buildings, or equipment. It does not therefore constitute an "expense" as do disbursements which are made for the general operation of the institution. The classification of accounts in the financial reports is fairly consistent with that of the books of accounts proper. However, there is still need for some analysis, and also need to secure some information for report purposes from sources other than the books of accounts. Further refinement in accounting procedure involving complete books of accounts with proper controlling and detail accounts will facilitate the preparation of financial reports. Business management of auxiliary and service enterprises is not completely centralized under a chief business officer. 206 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The responsibility of the chief business officer with respect to business management of dining halls and bookstores is quite clear in most instances. It is less well defined in a number of institutions in connection with dormitories, central stores, shops, farms, dairies, infirmaries, and other activities involving the need of some business management. It is recognized that a number of these activities must be managed on a cooperative basis since they involve problems directly related to student welfare. However, in all instances in which such activities are expected to be generally self-supporting there is need of proper financial control and supervision through the business office of the institution. It is not intended that the business officer dictate policy with respect to living conditions or programs involving general student welfare. It is intended that the chief business officer supervise the business management of all activities and in so doing work closely with the chief executive, deans and department heads. Proper inventory procedure is a necessary part of sound fi- nancial administration. Inventory is frequently neglected under the pressure of daily business tasks which must be accomplished on a deadline basis. Effective inventory procedure should not be overlooked since accounting is still necessary after dollars have been converted into materials, supplies and equipment. At the present time it is general practice throughout institutions to take a physical inventory of movable equipment and other property on an annual basis. However, at least one institutional business officer indicated that a perpetual inventory procedure had previously been in operation and that consideration would be given to the possibility of returning to such a procedure. Inventory procedures with respect to consumable supplies, i. e., office supplies, educational supplies, maintenance supplies, foods, etc., vary to a considerable extent. A number of institutions are maintaining very effective perpetual inventories with respect to these supplies. Still others maintain perpetual inventories for at least some of these items, particularly with respect to foods. Other institutions depend largely upon periodic physical inventories. Institutional business officers should give further consideration to the establishment of perpetual inventories for all consumable supplies, movable equipment, and other property. It is recognized that limitations of storage space pose some difficulty in connection with proper inventory of consumable supplies THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 207 particularly with respect to maintenance and janitorial supplies. However, the need for adequate stock records and inventory controlR still exists. It is hoped that space limitations will ultimately be solved through the construction of adequate shops and central storage facilities. In establishing perpetual inventories for movable equipment consideration should be given to classification by department and by type of equipment. The punched card installation at one of the institutions can be used very effectively for such a purpose. In other institutions it is suggested that triplicate cards be provided for each item of equipment. These should be prepared at the time that the invoice is processed for payment. The first card should be filed in the business office by department. The second should be filed by type of equipment, and the third should be sent to the department for filing. Cards should be removed if equipment is discarded, sold or transferred. It is not intended that such perpetual inventories should completely eliminate periodic physical counts. Such perpetual inventories will readily serve to locate equipment and to effect transfers among the departments in order that equipment may be used to the fullest extent possible. It also provides ready reference for the several departments and indicates to the head of the department the equipment for which he is responsible. Financial management of endowment and trust funds is controlled through the Committee on Finance of the Board of Regents and through state regulations restricting the type of securities which may be held by agencies of the State. Little can be added to previous references which have been made to financial management of endowment funds. A number of institutions have no endowment funds but in others the chief business officer exercises such responsibility as may be delegated to him by the Committee on Finance. Endowment funds have been well protected in general and the first consideration has been security of the principal. Securities are generally deposited in safety deposit boxes in the banks. In several instances it was noted that securities were kept in the business office proper. In one case this was due to the fact that no safety deposit box was at the moment available. However, application had been made for the rental of a safety deposit box. For the protection of business officers involved it is recommended that the presence of an institutional officer in addition to the controller be required in obtaining access to the safety deposit box. 208 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Financial management of student loan funds is well organized throughout the University System. A number of institutions reported that no loan funds are available. In a number of other institutions the amount of such funds is very nominal. In some instances in which the amounts are substantial, loan funds have been invested in short term securities and in at least one instance in long term securities or in revenue producing property of the institution or other institutions within the University System. Procedures for granting and collecting loans are generally satisfactory. Formal applications and regular promissory notes are used in most instances. The notes indicate the terms and conditions of the loan and, unless otherwise specified by the original donor, usually bear interest at a specified rate. The interest may apply immediately or it may be deferred until after the student has graduated. In most instances the business officer serves as a member of the student loan committee or is at least given an opportunity to express his opinion with respect to the advisability of making a loan. It is recommended that this procedure be followed in all institutions since the business officer frequently has occasion to be familiar with the financial responsibility of the applicant for the loan. The degree of supervision over agency funds varies among the several institutions. Agency funds are those held by the institution to be expended at the direction of others. These generally include student activities fees used to promote student organizations and publications, income from dues and activities of student organizations officially recognized by the institution, and deposits of students or staff members to be held for safekeeping. In general the institutional business officer exercises some responsibility with respect to agency funds collected as a result of the student activity fee. However, the degree of responsibility varies from active supervision to little or no supervision other than that which may be involved in providing banking facilities. Supervision over funds derived from dues of members of student organizations or of social activities of such organizations varies to even a greater degree. In many instances such funds are not deposited in the business office or are deposited only on a voluntary basis. With the possible exception of social fraternities and sororities, it is recommended that funds of all student organizations be deposited THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 209 with the chief business officer and that he in turn cooperate with faculty sponsors and student officers in the financial supervision of student organizations. Institutions which formally recognize student organizations cannot overlook the moral obligation to supervise finances in a manner consistent with sound financial practices. Merchants or vendors who deal with student organizations look to the institution for assistance in collecting accounts even though there is no legal responsibility on the part of the institution. Furthermore, the business office provides continuity in fiscal management which is valuable because of continuous changes in officers of student organizations. Finally the training in financial matters is a worthwhile byproduct of financial supervision which adds to the total educational experience of the students. Many of the institutions now operate a so-called student bank as a service to the students. While such service is undoubtedly valuable from the standpoint of the student, the practice is questionable from the standpoint of administrative detail required. If such practices are to be continued it is suggested that a service charge be assessed to partially compensate the institution for services provided. Chief business officers should exercise some responsibility with respect to recruitment and determination of terms and conditions of employment of non-academic personnel. At the present time there is little uniformity in policy with respect to salaries and wages, job classification, promotions, transfers, sick leave, vacation, retirement or insurance. These problems will become increasingly important as personnel again becomes stabilized and as institutions develop to a degree requiring an increasing number of clerical and service staff employees. Therefore, it is recommended that a detailed study be made with a view to establishing job classification with appropriate salaries and wages. Such a study should include a statement of policy with respect to sick leave and vacations. Ultimately some consideration must also be given to a retirement program. It is possible that an expansion of the national social security program may provide some solution. At the present it is not yet entirely certain that publicly controlled institutions will be included in such legislation. It would appear entirely logical to defer specific recommendations until such time as the national legislation has been further amended. JUNIOR INSTITUTIONS Five institutions are included under this classification. These institutions vary in size, level of support and educational objectives. 210 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF They also vary with respect to general effectiveness of financial administration and in detail of fiscal procedure. However, they have been set apart in this discussion since they do, in many respects, constitute a more homogeneous group than do the senior institutions. Many of the comments and suggestions contained in the paragraphs relating to senior institutions are also applicable to the junior units. It is not intended, therefore, to repeat all of the same detail, but rather to indicate variations in financial administration. The size of the business staff proper is a limiting factor with respect to general organization and centralization of business functions. In at least one of the institutions the chief executive assumes substantial responsibility for financial administration at the operating level. In the past there has also been some tendency to distribute business functions among several administrative officers or at least some degree of uncertainty with respect to scope of authority and responsibility of the chief business officer. This condition is changing and there is now evidence of effective progress as business functions are centralized under a chief business officer. One of these institutions has prepared tentative statutes containing an effective statement of the duties and responsibilities of the chief business officer. This institution has also developed a chart of organization indicating a high degree of centralization of business functions. At the present time no manuals of business procedures have been developed. In view of the size of these institutions such manuals are not of major significance but it is recommended that all institutions prepare statutes indicating the duties, responsibilities and scope of authority of the chief business officer. Budgetary procedure as related to form and content of the budget is similar to that of senior units since uniformity is required by the Board of Regents. Business officers again indicated responsibility for assistance in preparation of the budget and responsibility for exercising budgetary control. There is less formality in preparation of budgets than in some of the larger institutions but the general pattern of conferences is quite similar. There is some need to increase budgetary control by encumbering allotments for all commitments, but the size of the institutions permits greater control by analysis of unpaid purchase orders and outstanding requisitions. Procedure for control and custody of cash is well organized within the business office proper. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 211 In all but one of these institutions incoming cash is recorded on prenumbered receipts in the business office. It has been reported that plans are under way to provide pre-numbered rec~ipts in this institution. There is again need to review mechanics for control of cash as it is collected by offices other than the business offices. There is also need to consider greater regularity in the daily deposit of funds from the central business office of the institution. Further consideration should also be given to the possibility of eliminating cash payrolls. In general funds are disbursed by institutional checks prepared in the business office, signed by the controller and countersigned by the president. Standard voucher checks are used as found elsewhere in institutions of the University System. The same multiplicity of bank accounts is also found in these institutions as reported by the senior units. Receipts indicating inclusive numbers are summarized periodically for preparation of bank deposits. The degree of internal check is somewhat limited due to the size of the business staff. At least one institution has developed an unusually high degree of internal check by proper distribution of duties among the three members of the business staff. As previously noted a staff of three individuals is large enough to obtain a fair degree of internal check. This can be provided by assigning to one individual responsibility for collection of cash, to another staff member responsibility for keeping of the books of accounts, and to the third member or business officer proper responsibility for approving requisitions and invoices, and signing of checks. The books of accounts now kept on standard forms used in other manual installations throughout the system should be expanded. Utilization of the standard cash receipt and disbursement book and allotment ledger creates some uniformity with respect to accounting procedure. There is some question as to the advisability of mechanization of accounting systems in these institutions although several may now be large enough to justify consideration of such changes. There is, however, some need of expansion of the accounting system in all of these units. This is particularly true with respect to a general ledger. At the present time the accounting system of one of the units includes a general ledger. It is not complete in that it does not contain controlling accounts for all assets and all liabilities. However, it 212 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF is most commendable to the extent that it indicates definite progress in accounting procedure. It is recommended that the accounting systems of all of these units be expanded to include a general ledger. This ledger should contain accounts classified in accordance with recommendations of the National Committee. It should therefore include a section for current funds further classified as to general and restricted funds. It should also include a section for endowment and other non-expendable funds, if needed; a section for student loan funds, if needed; a section for plant funds and a section for agency funds. Each section should be a complete accounting entity in itself and should contain all the assets, liabilities and fund balances pertaining to the particular fund. Income and expense accounts as such will be required only in the current funds section. Transactions in the other funds will affect only assets, liabilities and fund balances. Subsidiary ledgers and registers should support the controlling accounts in the general ledger. The classification of accounts should therefore be consistent with that of the general ledger. Such subsidiary ledgers should at least include an income ledger, expenditure ledger, student accounts ledger and detail ledger~ for endowment, loan and agency funds. The income ledger should be classified as to major purpose, i. e., educational and general or auxiliary enterprises, and further classified as to source. The expenditure ledger should likewise be classified as to educational and general or auxiliary enterprises, and then should further be classified by function and department. Expenditures may further be classified by object through use of proper code symbols. The absence of mechanization creates some difficulty with respect to accounting procedure, but it appears quite possible to combine the allotment ledger with the expenditure ledger proper. This may involve development of a voucher register for chronological listing of vouchers for all disbursements. For this reason it has been suggested that consideration be given to mechanization wherever the size of the unit may justify such procedure. Mechanization will provide a cash receipts journal, cash disbursements journal and a chec.k register as a by-product of actual posting to the ledger accounts. Independent audits are conducted by representatives of the State Auditor. The principle of accountability to the State through properly conducted post-audits has already been well-established. Attention has also been directed to the desirability of supplementing such audits by means of a continuous internal audit procedure conducted through THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 213 the office of the Board of Regents. The large senior units may further provide some internal audit within the institution proper, but such a procedure is not recommended for the junior units. This does not, however, preclude the possibility of proper staff organization to provide some degree of internal check. Financial reports are consistent in form in that they are largely prescribed by the office of the Board of Regents. In general these institutions prepare only the monthly, quarterly, and annual financial reports submitted to the Board of Regents. The nature of these reports has already been briefly described. The size of these institutions and possibility of personal contact may in part reduce the need for additional reports for internal use. However, it is possible that some consideration should be given to development of additional reports for auxiliary enterprises. Attention is also again directed to the fact that financial reports should indicate as nearly as possible the exact financial status. Therefore, they should include all unrealized estimated income as well as all outstanding commitments. It is also suggested that these financial reports be reviewed from a point of view of providing greater conformity with the recommendations of the National Committee. Business managers cooperate in the management of auxiliary and service enterprises. In most instances there is evidence of responsibility of the business officer for business management of auxiliary enterprises beyond the bookkeeping level. However, there is some indication of further need for direct supervision. Auxiliary enterprises are generally intended to operate on a self-supporting basis. Accordingly, it is essential that expenditures be well contained within available funds and that all costs of operation-both direct and indirect-be applied as a charge against the specific activity or enterprise involved. It is therefore of utmost importance that the chief business officer develop fiscal procedure in accordance with sound business practice. Inventory procedure generally involves periodic and annual physical counts. Inventory of consumable supplies is generally determined by physical count on a monthly, quarterly, or annual basis. However, at least one institution reported perpetual inventory procedure for the dining hall. All institutions reported annual physical inventories of movable equipment and other property. 214 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF It is recommended that further consideration be given to inventory procedure for consumable supplies. Perpetual inventories for such items are most advantageous. Adequate stock records may be provided by means of simple card records indicating receipt of material, issuance of supplies, and the balance on hand. Perpetual inventory procedure may also be maintained for equipment as already described in the discussion of senior units. It is further recommended that controlling accounts for inventories be maintained in the general ledger which has been suggested. Endowment and loan funds are at present not significant, but all institutions are involved in financial supervision of agency funds. The 1948 financial reports of these institutions did not include any endowment or loan funds. It appears, however, that a number of these institutions have now acquired some loan funds. These institutions are in the process of developing business procedure with respect to such funds. Such procedure should involve financial supervision through the business office. It should also provide the business officer with an opportunity to pass judgment upon proposed loans. It should provide for a formal loan application and the signing of a note indicating amount, interest rate, and date of maturity. It is suggested that such notes provide for a co-signature in keeping with generally accepted business practice. Such a procedure adds to the educational experience of the student which may be valuable for him in future business relationships. All of these institutional business officers report some responsibility with respect to agency funds. The degree of responsibility is fairly well defined as related to student activity funds resulting from fees. There is substantially less responsibility for supervision of funds of student organizations derived from members of such groups. It is again suggested that the business office establish financial supervision for all student organizations officially recognized. Reasons for such a suggestion are contained in the discussion of senior units. It is also suggested that the practice of operating student banks be discontinued unless service charges can be established to offset in part the cost involved. Organization and supervision of non-academic personnel is not of major importance in the junior units. The number of non-academic employees involved is relatively nominal. However, as these institutions increase in size it will be necessary THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 215 to consider salaries, wages, job classification, transfers, promotions, sick leave, vacations, insurance, and retirement. SUMMARY OF SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Attention is directed to evidences of genuine progress in financial administration during the past few years. Officers of the Board and institutional administrative officers are to be commended for their effective efforts in developing internal operating budgets, segregating educational and general operations from auxiliary enterprises, installing and mechanizing accounting systems, and preparing an annual consolidated financial report based in general upon recommendations of the National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education. The recommendations contained in this report are intended to suggest further refinement of fiscal procedure and to direct attention to certain conditions and practices which now tend to limit the effectiveness of financial administration in the University System as a whole. THE BOARD OF REGENTS AND THE STATE 1. It is urgently recommended that the General Assembly of the State of Georgia provide biennial appropriations for the support of the University System. These should include (a) a lump sum appropriation for general operations and (b) a lump sum appropriation for major capital additions involving land and land improvement, new buildings, major renovation of existing buildings, and equipment for new buildings. 2. In order that the General Assembly may have ample opportunity to study legislative requests it is recommended that the budget message of the Governor include each biennium provisions for the adequate support of the University System for both general operation and capital additions. 3. Since the Board of Regents has been established by constitution with power to govern, control and manage the University System, it is recommended that all authority for allocation of funds, approval of institutional operating budgets, and subsequent changes in such budgets by means of budget .amendments be vested in the Board of Regents. No additional approval of such documents should be required after final approval by the Board of Regents. 4. Since the Constitution provides managerial responsibility for the Board of Regents it is recommended that all responsibility and authority with respect to procurement be vested in the Board. The procurement of materials, supplies and equipment is an integral part of any managerial function. Furthermore, the needs of educational institutions differ in many instances from the needs of other State agencies. Supplies and equipment always become conditioning factors of the entire educational program. It is also recommended that the Board of Regents exercise complete responsibility for procurement of adequate insurance coverage. 216 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS AND ITs CENTRAL OFFICE 1. In order that the Board of Regents may properly exercise the authority vested in it by the Constitution, in order to provide a means of assembling financial data for biennial budgets, and in order to exercise responsibility for procurement it is recommended that the Board of Regents authorize the employment of an Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement. Such a staff member should be recommended by the Chancellor to the Board for appointment. He should be directly responsible to the Chancellor. He should possess requisite qualifications with respect to both academic training and actual experience in educational business administration. 2. It is also recommended that the Board authorize employment of an Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development. This staff member should likewise be recommended by the Chancellor to the Board for appointment. He should be able to enlist the cooperation of the administration and staff of the University System. He should possess the professional knowledge essential to the functional planning of college and university buildings. He should be, first of all, an educator. 3. Consideration should also be given to further development and expansion of a continuous program for accounting system review and a continuous program of internal audit. To this end it is recommended that the title of Chief Accountant be changed to that of Auditor. It is proper that this staff member be responsible to the Board through the Treasurer and through the Chancellor as indicated in the suggested chart of organization. The internal audit program is not intended to replace the present independent audit conducted by State officers but rather to supplement such audits and also any internal audits which may be conducted by institutional business officers. INSTITUTIONAL FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 1. It is recommended that all business functions as herein outlined be centralized under a single chief business officer who in turn shall be solely responsible to the chief executive of the institution. It is further recommended that all units develop institutional statutes which contain a comprehensive statement with respect to the duties, responsibilities, and scope of authority of the chief business officer. Senior units should also further consider the development of a manual of business procedure as is herein briefly described. 2. The form and content of present internal annual budgets is entirely commendable. However, it appears desirable that further consideration be given to the method of development in order that all deans and department heads concerned be given opportunity for conference with their chief executive and that they likewise be fully informed of any proposed changes in original requests. It will also be necessary that chief executives, business officers, deans and department heads cooperate fully with the Chancellor and the Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement in the development of adequate legislative budgets. 3. The use of mechanical receipting machines or pre-numbered receipts in the control of cash as it is deposited in the institutional business office is ade- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 217 quate. It is recommended that further consideration be given to controls as cash is collected in areas other than the central business office. It is further recommended that spot checks be made by representatives of the central institutional business office and that cash payrolls be abandoned at the earliest time possible. It is also suggested that all checks, receipts and similar forms be pre-numbered for control purposes. Duties should be assigned to business staff members in such a manner as to provide the highest degree of internal check possible. 4. It is recommended that further consideration be given to mechanization of accounting procedure in the senior units. It is suggested that accounting systems be further revised to conform more closely with the recommendations of the National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education. Books of accounts should in all instances include a general ledger classified under the five major funds recommended by the National Committee. The general ledger should contain controlling accounts for all assets, liabilities, income and expense. Subsidiary ledgers should include at least an income ledger for current income, an expenditures ledger combined with the appropriation ledger for current expenditures, a student accounts ledger and such subsidiary ledgers as may be needed for the details of endowment, loan, plant and agency funds. If the accounting procedure is mechanized cash receipt and disbursement journals may be obtained as a by-product of posting to the ledger accounts. 5. A recommendation has already been made to the effect that all responsibility for procurement be vested in the Board of Regents. When this is done it is further recommended that responsibility for procurement be delegated to institutional administrative officers in all instances in which purchases can advantageously be made locally with proper consideration as to price, quality, and time of delivery. Local responsibility will then involve establishing procedure with respect to institutional requisitions, the pricing of such requisitions and encumbering budget allotments, i. e., charging departmental budgets with the estimated cost of the materials and supplies which have been requisitioned. Institutional business officers and the staff member employed in the office of the Board should cooperate in a continuous study of prices, sources of supply, and a testing program of all materials and supplies. 6. With one or two exceptions, annual financial reports already conform in general to the recommendations of the National Committee. In cooperation with the central office of the Board it is recommended that institutional business officers further review monthly, quarterly and annual reports in order that they may conform more completely to National Committee recommendations. It is further recommended that reports indicate the correct financial status by indicating unrealized estimated income and all outstanding commitments. 7. It is recommended that institutional business officers actively supervise the business management of all auxiliary and service enterprises. To this end they must cooperate with chief executives, deans and other administrative officers. All direct and indirect operating costs should be charged against auxiliary enterprises which are intended to be self-supporting. 8. It is recommended that senior units maintain inventories of consumable supplies, movable equipment, and other property on a perpetual basis. It is also suggested that periodic physical counts be made in order to check perpetual inventOIY records. It is further recommended that controlling accounts be maintained in the general ledger for all inventories. 218 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF 9. Investment of endowment and trust funds is at present controlled by state regulations and supervised in general by the Committee on Finance of the Board of Regents. It is recommended that all responsibility for investments be vested in the Board of Regents and its Commi~tee on Finance. It is also recommended that all securities be placed in safety deposit boxes in banks with which institutions normally conduct business. For the protection of institutional business officers it is recommended that the presence of two institutional administrative officers be required in order to gain access to securities. It is recommended that the chief business officer be given an opportunity to pass judgment upon any proposed student loan. It is further recommended that loan applications be processed through the business office and that notes state specifically the amount, interest rate and date of maturity. It is also desirable that notes be endorsed by a second party. It is recommended that institutional business officers exercise supervision over finances of all student organizations officially recognized by the institution. This does not necessarily include social fraternities and sororities. It is also recommended that the student bank services be discontinued unless suitable service charges can be established to offset a portion of the administrative cost. 10. It is recommended that consideration be given to problems related to organization and supervision of non-academic personnel. Consideration should be given to job classification, salary and wage rates, promotions, transfers, vacations, sick leave, insurance and retirement. Uniform policies should be established throughout the senior units of the University System. Grateful acknowledgement is made of the splendid cooperation of all officers and staff members of the University System. Recognition is also given to the fact that many of the suggestions contained in this report have already received some consideration by officers and staff members of the Board of Regents as well as institutional business officers. It is hoped, however, that the suggestions contained in this report will serve as a means of indicating further possibilities with respect to effective progress in financial administration of the University System of Georgia. This in turn should provide greater educational service in exchange for moneys expended in the support of higher education. CHAPTER VI THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA The current survey of the University System of Georgia takes the form of an appraisal of the progress of administrative development over approximately a ten-year period. It has been preceded by two previous surveys of the higher educational establishment of the State-those of 1932 and 1943 (begun in 1940), respectively. The Survey Staff has visited all institutions; conferred with all institutional presidents and principal officers of administration; attended many meetings of the Board of Regents and its committees; conferred constantly with the chief administrative officers of the Board; read the recent reports of all central and institutional administrators; and reviewed the minutes of the Board of Regents for recent years. The recommendations of this report are based primarily upon information from these sources. Everywhere the finest cooperation and courtesy have been accorded members of the Survey Staff. The Survey Staff commends the Board for the first steps taken to lay a firm foundation for the development of a University System competent to undertake the all-important task of providing enough college and university opportunity for all the youth of Georgia capable of using such education for their own and the public good. The aims of unified administration should be clearly understood. The Survey Staff is convinced that acute rivalries and excessive competition between institutions of the System are not so evident in Georgia as in many other states. Everywhere the system of unified administration is accepted as an accomplished fact. But an understanding of the full meaning of a unified plan and a realization of its great possibilities have not yet become a habit of thought to all the responsible personnel of the System. A clearly defined conception of the purposes and goals of the University System and a full understanding of and allegiance to them by the central authority and all system units ranks first among the immediate administrative needs of the System. 219 220 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF An agency for maintaining the institutional patterns is indispensable. It is apparent from the minutes of the Board and conferences with presidents and administrative officers that the need of a recognized plan for reviewing and revising curricula and adopting courses has not as yet been fully realized. * It is, however, a most essential mechanism for maintaining a unified system through which a large number of institutions operate as a single administrative organization. With the present plan of modifying curricular offerings it is possible for an institution of the System to deviate very widely from its assigned pattern by gradual incidental additions or the modification of courses. These at present are approved with the annual adoption of the budget or by brief emergency reports. A central control procedure for appraising the curriculum patterns of the several units bringing periodic (preferably annual) schedules of recommended changes, including additions, modifications, and eliminations, for all institutions to the Chancellor's office and thence to the appropriate board committee for consideration and action is a first necessity. The board action on curriculum should regularly occur early enough in the fiscal year to provide for the effect of course changes in the System's budget for the ensuing year. The recognition of this need, of course, implies no inhibition or restriction on initiative and experiment in proposing new courses and curricula. The type of standardized control here suggested is the only sure method the Board of Regents and the central administration can have of maintaining the specialized pattern for each institution. The building program must have expert educational and technical supervision. The overwhelming needs of the physical plant of the several institutions stand in high priority for administrative attention. The minimum requirement in both maintenance and new construction make the creation of a central management authority indispensable. Moreover, marked economies in administration of upkeep and construction are possible if an expert assistant to the Chancellor is provided as a regular staff member. He should be a high-ranking member of the central office force with notable educational and technical qualifications and should act as an expert supervisor of physical plant operations, including maintenance, upkeep, alterations, and all programs for new construction. (Plot plans should be developed for the campuses *See: Minutes of the Board of Regents, 1948-49, page 97; Minutes of the Board of Regents, 1945-46, pages 8, 25, and 218. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 221 of all the institutions and included in the regular annual announcements thereof.)* The budget and the financial structure can be best shaped toward the educational purposes of the System by an educational and fiscal expert in the Chancellor's office. The fiscal policy of the University System of Georgia has as its principal purpose the achievement of the educational goals of the System and its institutions. The budgetary structure is rapidly growing in size and complexity. The need of much greater financial support is imperative. The auxiliary agencies of the several institutions have large intricate financial operations, all of which contribute to the educational work of the teaching institutions. All of these factors press insistently for a strong policy of fiscal control by the Board of Regents centering in the Chancellor's office. A continuous budget-making process throughout the institutions and a coordinated management of the complex fee and fund structure and the multitude of financial oparations under the specific direction of the Board through the Chancellor's office offer the best safeguard for the effectiveness and integrity of the Board's enormous financial responsibility. At present, the fee structure of each of the institutions is largely determined by the amount of funds necessary after the annual allocation of funds by the Board of Regents is known.** The fees are approved by the Board of Regents to meet the fiscal situations of the several institutions. The result is that the students of the collegiate institutions are paying a much larger proportion of the cost of their education than those of other states of this area and those of the nation as a whole. Once each year the Board should review the fees paid at the institutions and, with the advice of the Chancellor and the principal fiscal officer, establish a scale to be observed throughout the System. The Board of Regents should also adopt on the recommendation of the Chancellor and the principal fiscal officer a standard policy for the entire System for the acceptance of gifts and endowments and a method of handling them. The Chancellor and the Presidents have the responsibility of cementing the institutions into a unified organization by means of their common interests and activities. The institutions of the University System of Georgia have been created over a long period of years with varying objectives. Together *See page 4, General Catalogue, University of Georgia, 1949-50. **See Minutes of the Board of Regents, 1948-49, pages 5, 157, 315. 222 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF they now constitute a single agency of the State Government charged with the duty of maintaining a full program of education representing a composite of all these institutional objectives and traditions. To direct such a widespread and complex mechanism in a single great edu- cational program demands both strong central authority and guaranteed institutional autonomy for the best type of institutional administration and development. Accordingly, the mutual interests and interrelated activities of the institutions provide the cement which builds the separate institutional entities into a single organization. An active University System Advisory Council is an indispensable agent of the Chancellor and the presidents for this purpose. The general extension services of the University System should be unified. In all of the institutions of the System general extension activities are undertaken in greater or less degree. In the past history of the System and its institutions, the services have been unified under a single headship. At present, the several institutions manage their activities in this field independently. In the opinion of the Survey Staff unification of these services under a single supervisory agency is not only highly desirable in making the services more effective, but an interinstitutional common interest of great importance in promoting unity among the institutions. Accordingly, the Survey Staff recommends the unification of the general extension services of the System, including adult education, evening classes, correspondence work, and similar activities under a special coordinating Council appointed by and reporting to the Chancellor. Inter-institutional and high school contacts of the units should be centralized. No more important inter-school relationship exists than that between the institutions of higher education and the secondary schools of the State. At present, the policy of contacting the high schools varies with the attitude of the administrative officers of the several institutions. Guidance programs of great value could be initiated if a central policy of administration prevailed. Accordingly, all contacts of the System and its institutional units with the high schools of the State should be managed by a General Extension Special Council established by the Chancellor's office. Teacher Education as a function of all institutions requtres central management. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 223 Teacher education is undertaken by all of the institutions of the University System in some form or another. So highly important a function of the institutions of higher education, if achieved in an effective and adequate manner, certainly must be directed through a central authority. A central supervisory administration of all teacher education through a council appointed by and reporting to the Chancellor is vital to the success of this program. Library development needs a special advocate. A champion of the library cause among the pressing and varied demands of the System would bring much greater progress in the development of libraries than at present. Neither the library collections of the institutions nor the housing facilities are at all commensurate with the great educational programs undertaken. Not only are new fireproof libraries required at the University and the Georgia Institute of Technology, but also much more effective book collections for research and graduate work. A central supervisory agency to coordinate the library development of the System in the form of a Special Council is a most essential step. Central control of puhlications is necessary. The publications of the System such as the Board's reports and the announcements of the several teaching units vary greatly in style and impressiveness. * There is also some lack of consistency and uni- formity in the briefs the publications carry showing their relationship to the University System of Georgia. A central control and standardization of the regular publications of the System and all its units is vital to the unified System. In each institutional catalogue a campus plot plan and a brief statement of the objectives and organizational structure of the University System of Georgia should appear. A central printing establishment might be used as a facility to assist materially in such central control. No restriction is here implied upon the issuance of research bulletins and reports and literary periodicals and publications. These, of course, should be stimulated and encouraged. *Compare General Catalogue, University of Georgia, Register 1948---49, Announcements 1949-50; Bulletin, Georgia Institute of Technology, Announcements 1949-50; Georgia Teachers College Catalogue, 1948-49, Announcements 1949-50; and West Georgia College Bulletin, Volume 14, Number One, 1948-49. 224 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The heavy and complex responsibilities of the central government of the System require the formulation of an administrative code. The evidence before the Survey Staff leads to the inescapable conclusion that the central administration of the System should have a clear idea of its strong points and its current needs. The progress made in the ten-year period is commendable, but mainly preliminary and foundational. For so vast an enterprise as the administration of the University System of Georgia to succeed in its commitments to achieve a great educational program for Georgia requires vigorous and far-sighted measures in accordance with a standard charter of policies clearly understood and thoroughly supported by all the administrators and the institutional personnel of the System. A proposed Administrative Code is offered as the basis of such a policy. The suggested provisions of the Code are set forth in the pages that follow. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 225 CHART III The Recommended Administrative Organization of the University System of Georgia *** THE STATE OF GEORGIA THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF ----., THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA I I I THE CHANCELLOR I I ~ ASSISTANT CHANCELLOR FOR INSTRUCTION ASSISTANT CHANCELLOR FOR PLANT DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANT CHANCELLOR FOR FINANCE AND PROCUREMENT ASSISTANT TO CHANCELLOR OFFICE STAFF UNIVERSITY ADVISORY COUNCIL SECRETARY OF BOARD TREASURER OF BOARD SPECIAL INTERINSTITUTIONAL COUNCILS PRESIDENTS AND INSTITUTIONAL ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ELEVEN* TEACHING INSTITUTIONS OF THE SYSTEM UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, GEORGIA TEACHERS COLLEGE, Athens, including College of Ag- Statesboro riculture and Experiment Sta- MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEOR- tions, General and Agricultural GIA, Augusta Extension NORTH GEORGIA COLLEGE, GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECH- Dahlonega NOLOGY, Atlanta, inclUding ATLANTA COLLEGE, Atlanta Experiment Station, General (Atlanta Division) Extension in Engineering Fields, SAVANNAH STATE COLLEGE, & Southern Technical Institute Savannah GEORGIA STATE COLLEGE FOR FORT VALLEY STATE COLLEGE, WOMEN, Milledgeville Fort Valley THE VALDOSTA STATE COL- ALBANY STATE COLLEGE, Al- LEGE, Valdosta bany STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ---- Solid line shows flow of Administrative Authority - - - - - Dotted line shows source of appointment. *See Survey Staff's recommendations regarding the five junior colleges, Chapter II of this report. 226 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA Proposed Text PREAMBLE For the purpose of providing capable leadership for effective and responsible self-government for the commonwealth, and insuring a spread of knowledge and scientific preparation sufficient to cope with the momentous problems of this and coming generations, the State of Georgia maintains a system of higher education. Through the institutions of this System (and other chartered colleges under private control) the State seeks to offer college and university education to every youth of Georgia capable of using such education for his own and the public good. Note: The State of Georgia discharges its responsibility for providing higher education to the youth of Georgia through the University System of Georgia. In common with all other states of the United States, Georgia maintains institutions of university and college rank in order to prepare leaders capable of maintaining a free society through effective and responsible self-government. The number of such leaders necessary for satisfactory progress in the operation of the democratic processes and continually improving the general welfare cannot be stated in accurate percentages or even reliable approximations. The fully recognized principle that all youth capable of profiting by college education and contlibuting significantly to the improvement of general wellbeing should have the opportunity has not been nor can it easily be refuted. In Georgia, 48 per cent of the highest (in scholarship) 25 per cent of high school graduates do not get further than high school. The data just now assembled in this survey furnishes conclusive evidence of this deplorable waste of the most valuable resource of the State through the failure to develop to full capacity almost one-half of the State's ablest youth. A free society such as ours requires incomparably more leadership than any other social or political type. European democracies are much more centrally governed than the United States and consequently require fewer leaders, while dictatorships need NO leadership. Currently in the United States we have 175,000 governmental units. * Our tradition of local self-government is mainly responsible for this great number. In all phases of our colossal business and productive system hundreds of thousands of able leaders are required. To these can be added the large numbers in the highly specialized professions. *Anderson: Units of Government in the United States-Public Administration Service of Chicago. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 227 Even at the present rate of collegiate education we are preparing leaders per unit of population at about seven times the rate of the democratic nations most closely associated with us. In 1948-49 our collegiate enrollment totaled 2,400,000. The national graduating class for the year numbered above 430,000. Thus, in the United States the college and university graduating class was more than double the total collegiate enrollment for the year for Great Britain, 78,440, and France, 123,313. The United States has one college student for each 60 persons; Britain and France together have one college student for each 425 persons. In Georgia, the ratio is about 40 per cent below the national average or one college student for each 85 persons. In number of college graduates annually the Georgia proportion to total population is about one-half that of the nation-one to each 688 persons in Georgia as compared with one to each 348 persons in the nation. The University System of Georgia, in the class of 1948, graduated 3,523 students from its several institutions.* The private accredited colleges added to this number another 1,090. Distributed as to fields of preparation and specialization, they included: Degrees in: General Liberal Arts 714 Teaching 710 Business Administration 577 Engineering 547 Scientific Farming 259 Home Economics 195 Law 125 Journalism 124 Chemistry 93 Medicine 66 Scientific Forestry 59 Pharmacy 23 Architecture 20 Nursing 11 In some of the fields here listed it is easy to determine that the recruitment needs will be well supplied, e. g., law, journalism. In others, there is still a regrettable shortage, e. g., teaching, nursing, medicine. One conclusion is certain-that at least one-half of the ablest youth of the State from whose prepared intelligence the State would have profited greatly are getting no college education whatever. The administrative control and management of this System and its institutions are exercised through a single highly centralized authoritythe Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, with a single chief executive officer, the Chancellor. Full governmental authority over all state supported institutions of higher education is conferred upon the Board by the State Constitution and by action of the Legislature. Appropriations for the support of the University System and its institutions are made in lump sums to the Board which has complete discretionary power in allocating such funds. *Reports of the institutional heads to the Chancellor. 228 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The Board of Regents has succeeded to the governing powers over all the institutions held by previous Boards. The legislative action creating the University System calls for the establishment and opertion of a unified and coordinated agency with a pattern for each institution especially adapted to specific needs so that the main goals of higher education for the State may be fully attained. The University System of Georgia consists of (a) The Board of Regents and its executive office. (b) The sixteen* teaching institutions controlled and subsidized by the State, together with their several subdivisions and units. The University System of Georgia was established by a law enacted by the Legislature and signed by Governor Russell on August 28, 1931. On March 9, 1945, the Board of Regents was made a constitutional body as a result of a vote by the people of Georgia adopting an amendment to the Constitution of the State. By this amendment to the Constitution the organization was firmly established in the following language: "There shall be a Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and the government, control, and management of the University System of Georgia and all of its institutions in said system shall be vested in said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall consist of one member from each Congressional District in the State, and five additional members from the Stateat-Large, appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The Governor shall not be a member of the said Board. The first Board of Regents under this Constitution shall consist of those in office at the time this Constitution is adopted, with the terms provided by law. Thereafter all succeeding appointments shall be for seven year terms from the expiration of the previous term. Vacancies upon said Boald caused by expiration of term of office shall be similarly filled by appointment and confirmation. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation of a member, or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the Board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, or if the General Assembly be then in session to the end of that session. During such session of the General Assembly the Governor shall appoint the successor member of the Board for the unexpired term and shall submit his name to the Senate for confirmation. All members of the Board of Regents shall hold office until their successors are appointed. The said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall have the powers and duties as provided by law existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, together with such further powers and duties as may be hereafter provided by law." *The Survey Staff strongly recommends that five of these institutions, the junior colleges, be disassociated from the University System of Georgia. See Chapter II. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 229 The following named institutions are the teaching and research units of the University System. The pattern of each is indicated by the principal functions as stated: The University of Georgia at Athens-The major program of undergraduate and professional study and research for the entire System; courses leading to Bachelor's and Master's degrees in arts and sciences; to Doctor's degrees in presently specified fields; and to professional degrees in established professional schools; agricultural service to the entire State based on agricultural research; general extension services of wide scope. (The entire area of higher education is legitimately assigned to the University of Georgia except medicine and industrial technology; and degree courses in the various fields as determined from time to time by the Board of Regents. The Board allocates certain specially defined functions to the other institutions.) Georgia Institute of Technology at Atlanta-The special distinctive institution of the System devoted to the whole field of industrial technology (except agricultural engineering), on the Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctor's levels; and exclusively for the System all research and extension services in engineering; currently with Doctor's degrees in chemistry, physics, and mathematics. Georgia State College for Women at Milledgeville-The University System's distinctive college for women; four-year collegiate program of liberal arts with emphasis upon elementary and secondary teacher education, home economics, and music; graduate study limited to first graduate degree in humanities and social sciences; general extension services. The Valdosta State College at Valdosta-Four-year collegiate liberal arts program with emphasis upon practical arts; program for elementary teach~r education; general extension services. Georgia Teachers College at Statesboro-The Univel'sity System's special school for the education of elementary teachers for white students; four-year professional study program fGr teachers for the public schools with emphasis upon education for elementary teachers; graduate study for professional Master's degree for elementary teachers, supervisors, and school principals only; general extension services. Medical College of Georgia at Augusta-Four-year professional study program for physicians; four-year collegiate courses for nurses and medical technicians; graduate study in clinical and technical fields of medicine. North Georgia College at Dahlonega-Four-year collegiate liberal arts program with emphasis upon military training; program for elementary teacher education; general extension services. Atlanta College at Atlanta-Four-year specialized courses in business administration and secretarial science at the bachelor's level; two-year courses in lower division, and two-year terminal courses in business fields. COLLEGES FOR NEGROES Savannah State College at Savannah-Special and distinctive college for Negroes in industrial and business fields for the University System; four years of 230 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF collegiate study in arts and sciences; program in home economics for business and industrial positions; also elementary and secondary education emphasizing industrial and home economics fields; terminal and short course program in industry, trades, and practical arts; general extension services. Fort Valley State College at Fort Valley-The special college for agriculture and home economics for Negroes for the University System; four-year college program in liberal arts with emphasis on sciences basic to agriculture and home economics; program in teacher education in both elementary and secondary fields, expecially for teachers of agriculture and home economics; special fouryear technical study in agriculture and home economics, with Federal Cooperative Extension based on agricultural research; terminal and short courses in agriculture; general extension services. Albany State College at Albany-The distinctive college of arts and sciences for Negroes for the University System; special four-year study program in arts and sciences for Bachelor's (and ultimately, as the Board of Regents may determine, for Master's) degree; elementaIy teacher education at Bachelor's level (ultimately Master's degree for elementary teachers and principals); terminal short courses; general extension services. JUNIOR COLLEGES Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College at Tifton-A terminal study program in practical agriculture with emphasis upon short courses in scientific farming and rural community development (cooperating with Coastal Plain Experiment Station). Georgia Southwestern College at Americus Middle Georgia College at Cochran West Georgia College at Carrollton-A community terminal program, emphasizing rural life improvement. South Georgia College at Douglas Note: Since the establishment of the unified System real progress has been made toward achieving the purposes for which a single board and single central executive office were created. In at least four notable particulars great strides have been made: The unified Board reduced the number of institutional units from twentysix to fifteen. The patterns of the remaining institutions have been readjusted and redirected toward the same goals with much less institutional administrative overhead, and more fruitful results. Clearly established patterns for specific functions have been approved for all institutions. While there is some tendency on the part of institutions to overstep the boundaries of these specific patterns they are, in the main, adhered to, thus forming a truly unified System. *See Chapter II of this report. The disassociation of these junior colleges from the University System of Georgia is recommended by the Survey Staff. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 231 The Board has eliminated to a great degree sharp and destructive competition as well as much unnecessary duplication of curricula. The interference of political partisanship by other departments of State government has been greatly minimized by the Constitutional Amendment of March 9, 1945. A general appraisal of the process of establishing a System over nearly two decades must accord marked progress. I. BOARD OF REGENTS The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall consist of fifteen members, ten of them from the ten Congressional Districts, and five from the State-at-Large. They shall be appointed by the Governor who may not be a member of the Board. The members shall serve for a term of seven years, two members being appointed each year, except that every seventh year three shall be appointed. All members shall hold office until their successors are appointed. The officers of the Board of Regents shall be the Chairman, the Vice- Chairman, the Chancellor, the Secretary, and the Treasurer. * The term of office of each shall be one year, except the Chancellor who shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. They shall be elected each year by the Board at the March monthly meeting. They may be removed at any time by the Board by the affirmative vote of a majority. No one person shall hold more than one of these offices. All officers shall continue in office until their successors are chosen and installed. The standing committees of the Board shall be:** 1. Committee on Education (Committee on Instruction would be preferable, as all committees and the Board itself are "Committees on Education") 2. Committee on Finance 3. Committee on Buildings 4. Committee on Organization and Law 5. Committee on Visitation 6. Committee on Agriculture 7. Committee on Complaints Members of all standing committees of the Board shall serve for one year. They shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Board for the year for which he is elected. *The legal adviser of the Board is the Attorney General of the State as provided by statute. **Additional committees of the Board with long time assignments are: Inauguration, Georgia Tech Development, and WGST Radio. 232 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The Board of Regents is the official department of State Government with complete authority for the control and management of the University System of Georgia and its several institutions. It exercises the powers and assumes responsibilities established by law for all of the Boards to which the unified Board has succeeded. The Board of Regents is the policy-making body for the educl.\tional program of the State. In this respect it is an educational legislature. It exercises its administrative authority through its chief executive officer, the Chancellor. Its committees make recommendations to the Board upon information and data furnished by the Chancellor's office and supplemented by his expert advice and recommendations. Neither board committees nor individual members of the Board as- sume administrative authority as committees or individuals.* They act only through their regularly constituted administrative head, the Chancellor. Collectively, the Board is the supreme authority of the System and directs the Chancellor and the institutions within the area contemplated by the Constitution and the laws of the State establishing the educational program. The detailed procedures of the Board are set forth in the by-laws as contained in Section VII of this Code. II. THE CHANCELLOR The Chancellor is the chief administrative and executive officer of the Board. Through him all policies adopted by the Board are put into operation and all administrative direction channeled to the System and its administrative units. He is the adviser of the Board in all of its policy making functions and advises all committees in preparing and presenting recommendations to the Board for action. The Chancellor shall have personal and professional qualifications of the highest order. He shall have attained educational distinction comparable to the best in the field of higher education, and likewise a record of proved administrative success. He shall have insight into the vital relationship between a program of education and the progress of a free society. He shall understand the technical structure and activities of the American educational system. He shall be the kind of man who naturally can be a leader of leaders. *Two dangers lurk insidiously in the committee system of board organization: (a) the assumption of administrative authority and functions by committees; (b) the approval of proposals by the Board on recommendations of committees without full understanding of the import and meaning of such proposals by all members. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 233 The Chancellor is selected by the Board after a canvass (preferably nationwide) by a committee especially appointed and particularly adapted to that purpose. Such a committee shall consist of representatives of the Board of Regents and representatives of the leading administrators of the System (the presidents). It will consult with representatives of the principal faculties of the University System before making a recommendation. It may well ask the advice of the principal foundations, leading professional organizations and distinguished leaders who know the administrative personnel of the educational field. It will sift the nominees made by such consultants and select a small group from which to make final choice of a recommendation to the Board, after carefully assembling and studying the credentials and record of each. The Chancellor, when elected, will serve on indefinite tenure (or at the pleasure of the Board). He has the power and responsibility to: (a) Execute policies approved by the Board and act as expert adviser to the Board in the Board's primary responsibility-the determination of policies. (b) Initiate and recommend to the Board an adequate and creative educational program for the entire System and propose and recommend adjustments and improvements from time to time. (c) Formulate and recommend to the Board the annual budget of the System and its institutions and all subsequent modifications and changes therein. (d) Unify, coordinate, and supervise the development of the educational program in all units and institutions of the System, and establish and appoint such System councils and committees as will best serve this end. (e) Search out and recommend to the Board the ablest available presidents and administrators for the units of the System. (f) Exercise full authority over all administrative, faculty, and staff appointments, promotions, and transfers within the System and its institutions, including dismissals, resignations, leaves, and changes in rank, upon both the professional and non-academic levels. It is assumed that recommendations for faculty and staff appointments affecting the several institutions of the System will be made upon the recommendation of the presidents of the respective institutions. (g) Formulate and recommend to the Board a building program necessary to achieve the educational goals of the System. (h) Attend all regular and special meetings of the Board and its committees. (i) Make regular reports to the Board, including annual report, special reports listed above, and such other reports as are required for the welfare of the System, including all communications concerning the functions and busi- 234 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF ness of the State System coming to the members of the Board or its central office. (j) Perform such other duties as the policy of the Board may require. (k) Act as a member of each of the faculties of the institutional units of the System with authority to call faculty meetings upon special occasions if the interest of the System requires such action, and authority to attend councils and committee meetings of any and all institutions. The Chancellor's staff will be appointed by the Chancellor with approval of the Board. They will consist of: (a) The Assistant Chancellor for Instruction. This staff member will be an experienced and highly qualified educational expert. He will have charge of curriculum development and modification and student guidance throughout the System (see Survey of 1943, page 27). (b) The Assistant Chancellor for Finance and Procurement to be in charge of all fiscal affairs. This staff member will be a highly qualified business expert. He will act as a general controller of funds and chief budget officer of the System and its institutions, and will have charge of all purchases for the System and its institutions. His contacts with the institutions will be through the presidents who will be many times represented in their relationship with him by the institutional fiscal officers. He will thus be a coordinator of the business offices of the institutions in behalf of the Chancellor. He should also act as an internal auditor-in-chief for the auxiliary funds of the Board and the several institutions. (c) The Assistant Chancellor for Plant Development, by virtue of personal qualities, training, and experience, should be able to enlist the respect and cooperation of the administration and staff of the University System. He should possess the professional knowledge essential to the functional planning of college and university building. He should be, first of all, an educator, preferably with a Doctor's degree. It is not the function of this office to design and plan buildings from an engineering or architectural point of view but rather on behalf of the Regents to see to it that they are planned in accordance with the best available knowledge extant at the time. He shall act as the general supervisor of the physical plant and make contact with the several institutions through their respective presidents. The presidents in turn will many times be represented by the officer in charge of physical plant of the local institutions. (d) The Secretary of the Board. The Secretary will be the keeper of archives of the Board. He will keep an accurate record of the proceedings of all the meetings of the Board and its committees. He will be custodian of the seal of the corporation and will represent the Board in handling the fidelity bonds and deeds and evidence of title to the tangible property of the University System. He will perform such other duties as may be assigned by the Chancellor. (e) The Treasurer. The Treasurer will be the representative of the Chancellor in the management of the central funds of the System. He will be the custodian of the State appropriation and all the funds in charge of the Board. He will perform such other duties as may be assigned by the Chancellor. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 235 Note: The Treasurer and the Secretary of the Board should be considered as staff officers of the Chancellor and work as a part of a unified central office under the Chancellor's direction. Although these offices are created by statute, the incumbents should be chosen and hold tenure on the recommendation of the Chancellor and should be an integral part of his office organization. (f) Office Staff: Executive assistant to the Chancellor. Secretarial and stenographic assistants. Note: The administration of the University System of Georgia is one of the heaviest and most exacting educational responsibilities in the nation. The welter of problems arising from merely the routine procedures of sixteen colleges cooperating within a single program of related activities constitutes a tremendous burden for the chief executive. Adding to the complexity is the geographical spread of the institutions over the entire State; and more important the necessity of a continuing campaign to shape public opinion in behalf of greatly increased support required for current and future needs such as recruiting and retaining the ablest faculty and assuring an adequate physical plant. The Chancellor himself is thus the principal public relations officer of the System. No less capable leader is equal to the task. The Chancellor must unify the operating mechanism so that the institutions all support and contribute to the main goals of the program and yet maintain autonomy and independence sufficient to stimulate the highest creative thinking in teaching, research, and institutional services. It is not within the range of human ability for the Chancellor to carry such a program with the staff at present provided by the University System. If the unified System is to work successfully a vigorous and competent central administration is vital. The central staff must be strongly manned in the fields of the several specializations where lie the major problems upon the solution of which the program and smooth operation of the System depend. An administrative staff as above listed is the minimum for a successful program of unified and coordinated administration. III. THE PRESIDENTS The successful administration and the achievement of the goals of each of the institutions of the System are mainly dependent upon the president and his capacity for leadership. He, the President, must possess in general the same qualities as detailed above for the Chancellor. He must have successful administrative experience, personal qualities of leadership, and adequate professional preparation. Each president shall be elected by the Board upon the recommendation of the Chancellor to serve on indefinite tenure or at the pleasure of the Board. The method of appointment will follow the outline of 236 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF procedure for the selection of a chancellor with the exception that the Chancellor, himself, rather than a committee, shall make the canvass. In each instance he should make a broad survey, consulting the highest educational authorities and selecting a group of nominees of from twenty- to twenty-five from which a smaller group of some six or eight should be finally carefully weighed and considered. The Chancellor shall exercise his own discretion as to whether a single recommendation or a small group of carefully chosen nominees should be presented to the Board through the appropriate committee. The powers and responsibilities of each president shall be to: (a) Assume responsibility for the initiative as leader of the educational program of his institution within the pattern as established by the Board, and accept the further responsibility of maintaining the Board's policy. (b) Recommend all curricular changes to the Chancellor which may have been developed by the several faculties at such times as the policy of the System requires. (c) Recommend faculty and non-academic staff appointments to the Chancellor, including those with rank of instructor and higher, and non-academic appointments to the principal positions; also recommend new positions, promotions, changes in rank, resignations, dismissals, and leaves of absence. (d) Formulate the budget with the cooperation of the chief fiscal officer of the institution in consultation with deans and department heads, as provided by the Board's policy, and recommend same to the Chancellor; carry out the budget policy adopted for his institution by the Board of Regents. (e) Accept full responsibility for the administration of his institution, looking toward its well-being and progress. (f) Attend meetings of the Board of Regents upon invitation of the Chancellor (this applies to the presidents or heads of the senior or four-year institutions) . (g) Make minor budget adjustments within limits prescribed by the Board. IV. THE UNIVERSITY ADVISORY COUNCIL For the purpose of promoting an ever increasing understanding of the aims of the University System as the agency of the State for higher education of its youth and augmenting the effectiveness of operating the System as a single state-wide organization, a University Advisory Council has been created. The University Advisory Council shall have power to make recommendations to the Chancellor and through him to the Board of Regents regarding all educational and administrative matters of concern to the THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 237 University System as a whole (excluding problems of internal concern only to and wholly within the authority of the several institutions). The University Advisory Council also shall have authority to make recommendations in such specific fields as the following: establishment or discontinuance of divisions or departments in the units of the University System; distribution of funds among the several institutions; the fee structure of the several institutions; scholarship and student loan policies; the annual calendar of the institutions; inter-institutional relations and those of the System to other institutions of learning; admission of students and conditions for conferring degrees; transfers of students and acceptance of credits in transferring from one institution to another; conditions for granting of scholarships and fellowships; problems of faculty employment, tenure, promotion, and dismissal. The active voting membership of the Council shall consist of the Chancellor, who is Chairman ex officio, and the heads of all teaching institutions. Associate non-voting membership shall consist of (a) the principal staff officers of the Chancellor on invitation of the Chancellor; (b) principal fiscal officers of each institution on invitation of their respective Presidents and approval of the Chancellor; and (c) one member from each institutional faculty staff if recommended and invited by the President with the approval of the Chancellor. The University Advisory Council shall serve as the principal advisory body to the Chancellor on all inter-institutional problems. It is an agency for the coordination of the mutual and interrelated interests of the units of the System. The University Advisory Council shall meet once each term of the regular academic year-fall, winter, and spring. Special meetings are called by the Chancellor. The secretary shall be appointed by the Chancellor and shall be responsible for the records and minutes of the Council. Such committees as are necessary for effective operation of the Council shall be appointed by the Chancellor. Note: As explained in the note following the section on the Chancellor's staff, it is highly important to use such agencies and mechanisms as will knit together in the most effective manner the interests of the respective institutions of the System in the common cause-which is the support and development of higher education in the State in the optimum degree. In other states systemwide councils have proved an effective channel for the spread of information necessary to good administration throughout the units of the system. As an aid in the policy making function of the Chancellor's office such a consulting advisory body seems indispensable. 238 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF V. COORDINATION POLICY-SPECIAL INTERINSTITUTIONAL COUNCILS I ntroductory Note: The aims of the University System are set forth above in this Code. The unique dual purpose, as briefly stated and further implied, seeks a central management sufficiently strong to direct the teaching units as a united agency toward the recognized objectives, and yet give to each of them encouraging autonomy toward fullest realization of their resourcefulness and creative impulses. Unnecessary and wasteful duplication, as well as excessive competition are to be guarded against and (if present) eliminated. As explicitly detailed above in the assignment of their respective duties, the Chancellor and the institutional Presidents (or chief administrative officers) are the principal exponents of these two primary responsibilities-the Chancellor of the strong central control factor, and the PreEidents of the independence of the institutions. Both ideas must be equally supported and nourished by the Chancellor and the Presidents working together. The cause of higher education as upheld by the University System of Georgia requires that both the Chancellor and the Presidents champion both conceptions with unfailing zeal, while retaining full consciousness in each case of their primary assignments. To do this in the most effective way, the principal inter-institutional functions must be administered by both the Chancellor and the Presidents. This means that certain agencies selected from the several teaching institutions are to be assigned for a defined area of their activities to report directly to the Chancellor. The fields having greatest inter-institutional interchanges of activities and cross-assignments of functions are general extension, libraries, and teacher education. In order to provide the Chancellor and the Presidents with the best organizational means of administering their respective dual functions of adequate central control and sufficient institutional independence to stimulate creative teaching and research on the highest levels, the principal interrelated activities of the units of the System shall have special administrative and supervisory leadership. Presently, these areas are general extension, * libraries, and teacher education. All institutions have mutual interests in these fields. The realization of the full value of the work of each of these divisions depends upon the success of their respective programs throughout the System. For the purpose of directing the activities and interests common to all units to the best advantage of the University System and achieving the optimum outcomes for those who use the services of these divisions, and also for the purpose of contributing substantially to edu- *An Assistant in the Chancellor's office, preferably under the direction of the Assistant Chancellor in Charge of Instruction, shall have supervisory responsibility for general extension throughout the System. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 239 cational results of the teaching institutions, there shall be constituted a Special Council. The members shall be appointed by the Chancellor. This Council shall report directly to the Chancellor's office; it shall continually consult and cooperate with all institutional presidents and chief administrative officers. It shall have advisory authority only within the organizational structure of any of the regular teaching units, and it shall have such authority over specially organized groups of classes and activities as may be assigned by action of the Board of Regents on recommendation of the Chancellor. Specifically, the further duties of the Council shall be: (a) The Council shall have advisory charge of all adult education, evening classes, and correspondence study of the several institutions of the System. (b) The chairman of the Council shall be chairman of the High SchoolCollege Relations Committee consisting of one representative from each of the institutions; also certain educational officers, e. g., the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, the President of the High School Principals Association, and the representative of any other group working with high school-college relations. For similar purposes and services there shall be constituted by the Chancellor a Special Council on Teacher Education. This Council shall elect its own chairman; it shall report directly to the Chancellor and shall be the chief adviser to the Chancellor who is the responsible administrator of all teacher education. Thus, the Council on Teacher Education shall have only such authority as may be delegated by the Chancellor in consultation with the Presidents of the institutions concerned. The Special Council on Teacher Education shall have as its first responsibility the advocacy of a teacher education program in the University System of Georgia that shall aim to meet the present crisis in supplying well-prepared teachers to the elementary and high schools of the State; and also in supplying the ever present demand for the upgrading of the teaching profession in Georgia. In this area the Council shall take the initiative and recommend the program to the Chancellor. In order to promote a developmental program of libraries and library service within the University System, a Special Council on Library Development and Service shall be established by the Chancellor. The membership shall be appointed by the Chancellor and shall include representative librarians of the System and such other faculty and administrative staff as the Chancellor may determine. The Council shall have only such administrative authority in any of the institutions as may be delegated by the Chancellor. 240 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF It shall be the duty of the Special Council on Library Development and Service to recommend a program for the entire System, consulting with institutional heads and librarians and advising the Chancellor of the best practices and services in the nation. The Chancellor, in consultation with the institutional heads, will consider such program of library development as this Council may present and make such recommendations to the Board of Regents as the total program of the System may justify. Such services as central purchasing, a central library catalog, and inter-library exchanges may be considered as important interests of this Council. Note: The libraries in the University System are greatly in need of better housing, larger collections, and a permanent system-wide program. * Here an enthusiastic expert is needed to sponsor and promote a campaign on behalf of libraries. The collections for the senior colleges are meager for so large an enrollment of students-25,000 in 1947-48 for the entire System. They were as follows: University of Georgia Atlanta Division, University of Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia State College for Women, Milledgeville Georgia State Woman's College, Valdosta Georgia Teachers College University of Georgia Medical SchooL Georgia State College, Savannah North Georgia College Fort Valley State College Albany State College. _ 238,000 _ 25,000 _ 102,000 _ 50,000 _ 25,000 _ 38,000 _ 18,000 _ 14,000 _ 17,000 _ 16,000 _ 14,000 557,000 Library centers with regional programs and system library services have been inaugurated with effective results in Denver, Seattle, Atlanta, and the Oregon State System of Higher Education. A similar Special Council for the University System of Georgia should be constituted by the Chancellor to supervise student living units and health departments and provide expert advisory assistance to the central office for these vital and indispensable services. A faculty representative of the President of the Medical College of Georgia and a member of the Home Economics Department of the University of Georgia should be included in the membership of this Council. *See Chapter III of this report on the Physical Plant. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 241 VI. UPGRADING OF PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL BY APPROPRIATE BOARD POLICIES It shall be the policy of the Board of Regents to secure and retain a corps of administrators and a faculty staff of the highest quality for the University System and its several units. In this respect the Board accepts the principle that the quality of teaching and research in the institutions under its charge determines in high degree the success of the Board in performing its mandated duties. (a) To this end the Board of Regents shaH seek to provide salaries as high as the economic resources of the State will permit and sufficient to enable the University System of Georgia to compete for the services of able men and women with other top-rank universities of the southeastern region of the United States. (b) A comprehensive faculty retirement plan shall be provided under the present broadly permissive statute of the State which will service to augment adequately the salary schedule and tenure provisions in attracting the highest caliber teaching and research talent to the System. Note: A joint contributive plan of the T. 1. & A. A. type is highly desirable. The present arrangement is designated as only temporary. * (c) Permanency in faculty and administrative ranks of the University System of Georgia shall be recognized as a major factor in recruiting and retaining the ablest men and women for its several institutions. Service in the highest administrative ranks, which are filled upon a highly competitive basis as described above in the section treating of the selection of Chancellor and Presidents, shall be on indefinite tenure (or at the pleasure of the Board). Administrators of faculty rank and professors, associate professors, and assistant professors shall serve on indefinite tenure. In these above listed classifications, discharge may be for specific cause only as prescribed in the by-laws of the Board of Regents, Section VII of this Code. (d) For the purposes above stated in this section, the Board of Regents will support a policy of leaves of absence for professional improvement-especially by means of advanced graduate study and research. Such leaves may be granted to regular faculty and professional and administrative staff as a full year's leave on half-pay after six continuous years of service; a six months' leave after three years of continuous service; for those serving on three quarter academic basis, a quarter's leave of absence with full pay after eight quarters of service during a given three-year period; for such administrative and faculty staff members as serve on a four-quarter assignment, a quarter's leave on full pay after eleven quarters of service in a three-year period. Institutions of the System shall make these provisions operative by proposing to the Chancellor and the Board of Regents for approval an institutional statute embodying them. Other leaves of absence without pay may be granted on the recommendation of the Chancellor and the respective institutional heads for one year or a fraction thereof, but no full year's leave of absence shall be renewed for longer than one year without specific action by the Board on recommendation of the Chancellor and the institutional head based upon valid reasons for such extension. *See Minutes of the Board of Regents, 1948-49, page 180; also Code of Georgia Annotated, Title 32; also Georgia Laws, 1948-49, page 1198. VII. BY-LAWS OF THE BOARD Name, Charter and Seal 1. The name of the corporation under its charter is "REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA." 2. The charter of the corporation consists of the original charter of the Trustees of the University of Georgia as written by its author, Abraham Baldwin, embodied in the Act of the General Assembly of the State of Georgia approved January 27, 1785; Article 6, Sections 45 through 77 of the Reorganization Act of the State of Georgia, Georgia Laws of 1931; and all other laws of the State of Georgia applicable to the Board of Regents. 3. The corporate seal shall have inscribed thereon the name of the corporation, the year 1785, and the words: "CORPORATE SEAL." Central Office 4. The central office of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall be at 20 Ivy Street, S. E., Atlanta, Georgia. Meetings 5. The Board of Regents shall meet monthly on the second Wednesday in the central office, unless otherwise determined by the Board. 6. Special meetings of the Board of Regents may be called by the Chairman or Secretary for any purpose at the request in writing of four members of the Board. Such requests shall state the purpose of the proposed meeting. 7. The Secretary shall give each member of the Board at least five days' written notice of regular and of special meetings of the Board. The notice shall be mailed to the address appearing on the Secretary's records. 8. Business transacted at all special meetings shall be confined to the objects stated in the call. 242 THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 243 9. At all meetings of the Board of Regents eight members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The action of a majority of the members of the Board present at any meeting shall be the action of the Board, except as may be otherwise provided by these by-laws. Officers 10. The officers of the Board of Regents shall be the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, the Chancellor, the Secretary, and the Treasurer. The term of office of each officer shall be one year, except that of the Chancellor who shall serve on indefinite tenure (or at the pleasure of the Board). They shall be elected each year by the Board at the March monthly meeting. They may be removed at any time by the Board by the affirmative vote of a majority of the Board. No one person shall hold more than one of these offices. They shall hold office until their successors are chosen and installed. Vacancies shall be filled by the Board as soon as practicable. 11. Chairman: The Chairman shall preside at the meetings of the Board and he shall appoint the members of all committees. He shall be an ex officio member of all committees. The Chairman of the Board, upon its authority and in its name, shall execute all notes, bonds, deeds, contracts, and other documents requiring the seal. The Chairman shall submit the annual report of the Board of Regents to the Governor. 12. Vice-Chairman: The Vice-Chairman shall perform the duties and have the powers of the Chairman during the absence or disability of the Chairman. 13. Secretary: The Secretary shall be elected by the Board. He shall be placed under bond in an amount to be determined by the Board. The cost of the bond shall be paid by the Board. He shall be sworn to discharge faithfully his duties as Secretary. He shall be present at all meetings of the Board and of the committees. He shall keep an accurate record of the proceedings of the meetings of the Board and of the committees. In the absence of the Secretary from a meeting, a secretary shall be chosen for the meeting and he shall record the proceedings. The Secretary shall keep in safe custody the seal of the corporation. He shall affix the seal to those documents requiring it. When it is affixed to a document, it shall be attested by his signature. He shall be the custodian of all fidelity bonds and of deeds and evidence of title to the tangi- 244 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF ble property of the University System. He shall perform such other duties and have such other powers as the Board may authorize or as may be assigned to him by the Chancellor. 14. Treasurer: The Treasurer shall be elected by the Board. He shall be placed under bond in an amount to be determined by the Board. The cost of the bond shall be paid by the Board. He shall be sworn to discharge faithfully his duties as Treasurer. He shall be responsible for insurance matters; placing the required persons under fidelity bonds; requisition for state and other funds; escrow agreements; the financial reports of the various units of the University System and of the System itself; and the preparation of a system of uniform financial reports for the use of the member institutions. Under the direction of the Committee on Finance he shall have under his control all of the various trust funds of the University System. He shall keep a strict and separate account of each fund, showing the securities in each fund, cash on hand, and a detail of all income and disbursements. He shall make itemized reports to the Committee on Finance with his recommendations as to sales and investments or reinvestments of all trust funds whenever such reports are requested by the Committee on Finance. He shall perform such other duties and have such other powers as the Board may authorize or as may be assigned to him by the Chancellor. Delegation of Duties of Officers 15. In case of the absence of any officer of the Board of Regents, or for any other reason that the Board may deem sufficient, the Board of Regents may delegate the powers or duties of such officer to any member of the Board, provided a majority of the Board concurs therein. Duties of the Board and Its Committees 16. The Board of Regents shall be responsible for the operation of the University System of Georgia. The Chancellor shall be the chief executive officer of the Board and he shall be responsible to the Board for the administration of the System (except those duties that may be assigned by the Board to the Secretary and the Treasurer). The execution of the policies of the Board is hereby delegated to the Chancellor. The committees of the Board shall make studies of the problems in the fields assigned to them and advise the Board THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 245 as to what, if any, changes of policy should be made. Each of the standing committees shall keep informed with respect to the manner in which the policies of the Board are being administered in its field and each committee shall make a report thereon to the Board annually or oftener if desirable. Standing and Special Committees 17. The Board of Regents hereby creates the following standing committees* : 1. Committee on Education (preferably, Committee on Instruction. All committees and the Board itself are Committees on Education) 2. Committee on Finance 3. Committee on Buildings 4. Committee on Organization and Law 5. Committee on Visitation 6. Committee on Agriculture 7. Committee on Complaints Each standing committee shall consist of not less than three nor more than five members. A majority of the members of a committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The Board of Regents may authorize special committees with whatever membership is desired by the Board. Each standing or special committee shall keep minutes of its proceedings and shall report the same at the next regular monthly meeting of the Board. The Chancellor shall be an ex officio member of each committee without the authority to vote. Committee on Education (Preferably Committee on Instruction. All Board Committees and the Board itself are Committees on Education.) 18. The Committee on Education shall make recommendations to the Board regarding the scope of the educational, research, and extension functions of the University System, except *Additional committees of the Board with long-time assignments are Inau- guration, Georgia Tech Development, and WGST Radio. 246 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF those phases that have been delegated to the Committee on Agriculture. The Chancellor* shall submit to this committee on or before the first day of January of each year a statement of the nature and scope of the work of each unit in the System; a full report of all contemplated changes in courses of study and curricula; a summary report on the teacher load based upon the fall enrollment; together with his recommendations regarding the operation of each unit. The committee shall submit its report to the Board at the January monthly meeting of the Board. This committee shall recommend to the Board at the March monthly meeting the election of the faculty members and the other employees in the University System and the salaries to be paid each. This committee shall act only upon such names as are recommended by the Chancellor and in case of faculty members and other employees only such names as are recommended by the Chancellor and the head of the institution at which the faculty members and other employees are to serve. This committee shall have such other duties as may be authorized by the Board. Committee on Finance 19. The Committee on Finance shall make recommendations to the Board regarding the fiscal policies to be followed in the conduct of the University System. It shall receive and study the Chancellor's recommended allocation of the state appropriation to the member institutions. It shall make its recommendations on allocations to the Board at the February monthly meeting. At the March monthly meeting this committee shall make its recommendations to the Board for the approval of the budgets of the various units of the University System and the central office after considering the recommendations of the Chancellor and the Committee on Education. It shall receive the reports of the Treasurer affecting investments or reinvestments of all trust funds and shall advise the Board regarding such funds. *The Chancellor's relation to the System is defined elsewhere in the Code. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 247 This committee shall have such other duties as may be authorized by the Board. Committee on Organization and Law 20. The Committee on Organization and Law shall familiarize itself with the appropriate statutes and advise the Board, its committees, and the Chancellor upon all matters of law, bylaws, and regulations involving the duties and powers of the Board and any of its officers and agents in the conduct of the University System. This committee shall have such other duties as may be authorized by the Board. Committee on Visitation 21. The Committee on Visitation shall make at least one annual visit to each of the institutions of the University System and shall make a report to the Board at the monthly meeting following such visits. This committee may request the Chairman of the Board to designate other members of the Board to assist with these visits. Each visit shall be made by at least two members of the Board. It shall be the further duty of this committee to advise with the Chancellor and to make to the Board recommendations regarding programs, policies, and the condition of the buildings and grounds of each institution of the University System. This committee shall have such other duties as may be authorized by the Board. Committee on Agriculture 22. The Committee on Agriculture shall make recommendations to the Board concerning the coordination, development and supervision of agricultural education, research, and extension work in the University System with a view to producing the best possible results. The Chancellor shall submit for the committee's consideration at least annually, or as often as may be requested, the recommendations of the heads of the agricultural colleges, departments, and stations for an integrated program of agricultural education, research and extension designed to develop the State's agricultural possibilities. Such recommendations shall be channeled through the 248 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF President of the University of Georgia of which the agricultural units are an integral part. When these recommendations are received by the committee, they shall be submitted to the Board with whatever recommendations the committee may make. In the formulation of its recommendations this committee shall be free to ask, through the Chancellor, for the assistance of members of the research staffs and the faculties of the University System. This committee shall have such other duties as may be authorized by the Board. Order of Business 23. The parliamentary rules adopted by the Senate of the State of Georgia, as modified by the by-laws of the Board of Regents, shall be followed in conducting the business of the board. The following shall be the order of business at each meeting of the Board of Regents but the rules of order may be suspended by the Board: 1. Roll call. 2. Consideration of minutes of last regular meeting and of special meetings held subsequently and their approval or amendment. 3. Election of officers. 4. Report of the Chancellor. 5. Reports of standing committees. 6. Reports of special committees. 7. Reports of officers. 8. Unfinished business. 9. New business. 10. Petitions and communications. The Chancellor 24. (a) The relation of the Chancellor to the Board of Regents: The Chancellor of the University System of Georgia shall be the chief executive officer of the University System, and, as such, shall perform all of those duties that are prescribed by the Board of Regents. He shall be responsible to THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 249 the Board of Regents for the prompt and effective execution of all resolutions, policies, and rules and regulations adopted by the Board for the ordering and the operation of the entire University System and for the government of any and all of its branches, and his discretionary powers shall be broad enough to enable him to meet his extensive responsibilities. (b) Veto power of the Chancellor: The Chancellor shall have the power to veto any act of any council, faculty, or committee within the University System, but in so doing he shall transmit to the proper officer a written statement of the reason for such veto. A copy of each veto statement shall be transmitted to the Board of Regents. Any council, faculty, or committee shall have the right to appeal from a veto of the Chancellor to the Board and to be represented before the Board by any member or members chosen for that purpose from said council, faculty, or committee. (c) Reports: The Chancellor shall prepare and submit to the Board of Regents such annual and special reports concerning the University System as the Board may require. (d) Allocation of funds: The Chancellor shall be responsible for the preparation for the Board of Regents of a suggested allocation of state appropriations to the member institutions. This suggested allocation shall be accompanied by a statement of the bases on which it is determined. (e) Budgets: The budgets of the member institutions shall be prepared by the Chancellor in conference with the heads of the units of the University System and transmitted to the Board by the Committee on Finance, with such modifications as it may approve. The Institutions of the University System 25. The Board shall make the allocation of funds to the units at the February monthly meeting. It shall approve the budgets of the institutions and the central office, and it shall elect the faculty members and other employees at the March monthly meeting. 26. A member of the Board of Regents shall not recommend any person for employment at any of the units of the University System. 27. The employment of persons related to each other shall be discouraged. Immediate members of a family shall not be employed in the same unit of the University System. 250 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF 28. The faculty of each institution of the University System shall consist of the head, deans and directors, professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and instructors, members of the extension and research staffs, treasurer or similar official, registrar, and librarian. 29. Each faculty shall meet monthly and at other times when necessary. Each faculty shall appoint a secretary who shall keep a record of the proceedings. A copy of the minutes of each meeting shall be sent within three days after the meeting to the Chancellor who shall keep the minutes on file in his office. 30. The faculty shall make, subject to the approval of the Chancellor and the Board, rules and regulations for its government and procedure and for that of the students; provide such committees as may be required; prescribe requirements for admission, classes, courses of study, and requirements for graduation; and make the other usual or necessary rules for the maintenance of high educational standards. A copy of the rules and regulations made by the faculty shall be filed with the Chancellor. 31. The faculty shall prescribe rules for the regulation of student publications, athletics, inter-collegiate games, musical, dramatic and literary clubs, fraternities and sororities, and all other student activities and affairs, subject to the approval of the Chancellor and the Board. 32. The discipline of the students is the responsibility for each faculty. A student has the right of appeal to the Chancellor from any sentence of punishment decreed by a faculty. 33. The faculty shall recommend to the head of the institution the candidates for degrees. A record of all degrees awarded shall be transmitted by the head to the Chancellor during the month in which they are awarded. 34. The members of the faculty shall not engage in any occupation or pursuit which will interfere with the regular and punctual discharge of their official duties. 35. The head of each department shall submit to the president and the faculty on or about the first day of May in each year a written report of his department. Any head of a department may request that his report be presented to the Chancellor or the Board. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 251 36. All officers of administration and faculty members with rank of assistant professor and above shall serve on indefinite tenure, except as prescribed below in this section. All faculty members and officers of administration shall give three months' written notice to the head of the institution of their intention to resign; and faculty members and officers of administration shall be given three months' notice by the head of the institution of his intention not to renew the contract of employment. The head of the institution shall give the Board, through the Chancellor, three months' notice of his intention to resign; and the Board, through the Chancellor, shall give the head three months' notice of its intention not to re-elect him. The Board of Regents may at any time discharge any person in the employ of the University System for prescribed causes, namely, immorality, neglect of duty, or incompetence, without giving notice; but upon request made within ten days thereafter, any person so discharged shall be furnished a statement of the charges against him, and should he demand it within ten days after the receipt of such charges, he shall be given a hearing before the Board, or a committee of the Board, as the Board may determine. The Board, or the committee, as the case may be, shall then hold a hearing on the charges and take final action thereon. 37. Any person in the University System shall have the right to appeal to the Board of Regents without prejudice to his position. The appeal shall be in writing and it shall state in detail the wrong complained of and the redress desired. It shall be filed with the Secretary at least ten days before the meeting of the Board of Regents at which it is to be considered. The President or Director of the Institutions 38. The President or Director of each institution in the University System shall be the executive head of the institution and of all its departments, and shall exercise such supervision and direction as will promote the efficient operation of the institution. He shall be the ex officio chairman of the faculty and shall be the official medium of communication between the faculty and the Chancellor, and also between the students and the Chancellor. He shall recommend annually to the Board of Regents, through the Chancellor, the election or re-election of the faculty and the other employees of the 252 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF institution, the salary of each, and all promotions and removals. He shall have the right and authority with the approval of the Chancellor to fill vacancies in the faculty between meetings of the Board, with the understanding that these appointments shall be approved by the Board as hereinbefore provided. He shall have the right and authority with the approval of the Chancellor and the Board to grant leaves of absence to members of the faculty for study at other institutions. He shall make an annual report to the Board, through the Chancellor, of the work and condition of the institution under his control. 39. Members of the University System shall be free to offer suggestions for the welfare and improvement of the System. The Chancellor shall be the regular channel by which such suggestions and recommendations are transmitted to the Board of Regents and he shall present to the Board for its consideration such measures as he shall deem necessary or expedient for the welfare of the institution. Honorary Degrees 40. The Board of Regents, upon the conditions hereinafter stated, may confer honorary degrees by the affirmative vote of not less than nine members. Not more than an aggregate of five honorary degrees shall be conferred in anyone year, of which not more than two shall be the same degree. Honorary degrees shall be conferred through the Chancellor of the University System on Commencement Day at the University of Georgia or at the Georgia Institute of Technology, as the Board may direct. Nominations for honorary degrees shall be made by the faculty of the University of Georgia or by the faculty of the Georgia Institute of Technology, through the Chancellor, to the Board of Regents. Nominations shall not be voted on at the first meeting of the Board at which they are submitted. The voting upon the conferring of honorary degrees shall be by secret ballot. This Code to be the By-Laws 41. This code of by-laws is officially designated as the BY-LAWS OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA. These by-laws may be amended or repealed at any regular meeting by an affirmative vote of not THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 253 less than eight members of the Board, provided any change in these by-laws shall be submitted to the Secretary in writing at any regular or special meeting and shall be voted on at the next regular meeting of the Board. Any by-law may be suspended at any regular or special meeting for that meeting only by the unanimous consent of all present, provided not less than eight members are present. 42. A code of statutes for each institutional member of the University System of Georgia shall be proposed by the President and faculty of each institution to the Chancellor for consideration and recommendation to the Board of Regents for final consideration and approval. Codes of statutes for the several institutions shall be similar in form and purpose to this administrative code for the System as a whole. CHAPTER VII FINANCING THE FUTURE OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA INTRODUCTION Following the close of the war the nation's economy has been swiftly adapted to serve the needs of civilian life. The supply of goods and services has been brought (roughly) to the measure of demand. Although conditioned by the threats of the Communists from abroad, life for most Americans has become normal. It is possible once more to plan for the future within an institutional and economic framework of reasonable stability. This is to say that the necessary postwar readjustments are, in general, far advanced. Labor is now redeployed in its peace time occupations; families are building homes and rearing children; industry and agriculture, business and finance have pioneered and served the redesign of the economy. But the services and demands for higher education remain highly abnormal. The adjustments to "normal" have still to be made. The enrollments in institutions of higher education of the nation, which had aggregated 1,494,203 in 1940, had by 1943-44 been reduced to 877,517.* Teaching and administrative staffs were also depleted, and well-rounded programs were maintained in many institutions with great difficulty. The upper ranks of high school were also affected, as boys and girls left school to join the armed services or to enter the ranks of industry. These dislocations were accompanied by difficulties in financing operating budgets. Meanwhile, as income from fees declined, those young men and women of college age who were engaged in war services were learning, among other things, the value of a college education. A surprisingly large number continued some study while in service. Following the cessation of hostilities, and aided by entitlements under the G.!. bill, they flocked back to college; more high school youth continued through graduation and entered college, with the result that the enrollment rose from the all-time prewar peak in 1940 of 1,494,203 to an estimated 2,694,000 in 1948-49. *Does not include 277,755 full-time regular session military students. 254 THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 255 The strain imposed upon the institutions of higher education can be readily understood. The depleted staffs were augmented in part by those returning from service and in part by new recruits, many of whom were necessarily new to college teaching and of limited training. Classes were enlarged. Teaching loads were increased. Faculty salaries generally were low and increases usually lagged behind the increases in salaries and wages of industrial personnel as the value of the dollar declined. Temporary structures were often added to existing inadequate physical facilities to house the institutional program, and living quarters for faculty and married students were often found in converted barracks and trailer camps. While these difficulties were being experienced in providing the desired quantity and quality of educational opportunities, the financial picture had suddenly become bright. Fees were increased in a fashion commensurate with the increase in the cost of living. High income per student was thus associated with a low cost per student, and the enlarged budgets were (generally) supported more from fees, and with relatively small increases in support from philanthropy or public funds. Although the great increases in enrollments following the war were cared for on an emergency basis, it is today apparent that as the veteran enrollments decline, civilian enrollments will rise, so that in fact high enrollments are expected to continue. True it is that some decline is anticipated but it will be modest, and it is estimated that the steady rise in enrollments will be resumed after 1954. Now the institutions of higher education face these problems: 1. Substandard housing, both institutional and individual, must be replaced by physical facilities suitable to needs. 2. Substandard program factors and methods must be replaced by approved factors and methods. This means that the salaries of teachers must (often) be increased, and that teaching loads and class sizes must be made to conform to standards of quality rather than expediency. 3. That portion of the cost of program that in public institutions has been borne by veterans' fees, in excess of what civilians would pay, must be financed by new sources as the veterans complete their training. The return to standards means in the near term that at the very time income from fees is declining, unit costs are rising. If standards of quality are to be maintained, and if the burden on the student and his family is not to be increased, the privately controlled institutions must seek more gifts, more income from 256 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF endowments; publicly controlled institutions must plan for increased subventions, both for operations and for capital outlay, and beyond this, lay plans for support of a steady increase in the demand for higher education in the long term to meet the requirements of a democratic industrialized society. This description of the situation in the nation is equally true of the State of Georgia. But, as will be shown, there are other and equally-if not more-critical problems unique to the State System. The purpose of this examination of the financing of the University System is to suggest to the Board of Regents appropriate fiscal policies for financing the future of the University System. This chapter of the report is organized as follows: Section I. Quantitative Characteristics. This section will pro- vide the background information on enrollments, staffs, and finance. - Section II. Demand for Higher Education. This section will seek to provide a realistic appraisal of the responsibility for the higher education of youth which the State may wish to assume. Section III. Institutional Cost and Cost Factors. This section will analyze and appraise institutional costs; it will deal with such cost factors as faculty salaries and retirement allowances. Section IV. Institutional Support. This section will examine practices in institutional support, both within and without the State. The ability of the State to support higher education will be studied, and its current effort will be measured. Section V. Student Living Cost and Family Ability to Pay. This section will deal with the cost of higher education borne by the student and his family, and will note the effect of cost on the flow of able students to college. State responsibility for housing and feeding students will be considered. Section VI. Recommendations for Financing the University System of Georgia. This section will consider objectives and principles for finance and will estimate the cost of higher education to be carried on within the University System in the future. The shares to be borne by the student and the State will be proposed, and recommendations with respect to support will be presented. The section will conclude with suggestions for fiscal policies deemed appropriate for the System. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 257 SECTION I QUANTITATIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN GEORGIA In 1947-48, fifty-two institutions of higher education in Georgia reported 46,559 students in residence during the academic year. Of this number, 31,380 were men; 15,179 were women. In addition, 19,906 students attended summer sessions of six to twelve weeks in length. A census of enrollment, taken in the third week of the fall term reveals a somewhat lesser number in residence at that particular time-a total of 39,634 students. By the fall of 1948 this number had increased to 41,383, of whom 15,702 were veterans. The staff (reduced to a full-time basis) numbered 3,316, of whom 2,209 were men and 1,117 were women. A comparison of enrollments (fall sessions) of 1948 with those of 1939 is shown in Table 16. TABLE 16 Enrollments in Higher Educational Institutions of Georgia, 1939 and 1948 Fall Fall % Senior institutions for whites University System 1939 1948 Increase 10,574 22,532 113.1 Privately controlled institutions 5,334 8,793 64.8 TOTAL 15,908 31,325 96.9 Junior institutions for whites University System 1,971 Privately controlled institutions____ 1,469 Public junior colleges under local controL _ TOTAL 3,440 2,180 10.6 1,496 1.8 792 4,468 29.9 Totals for institutions for whites 19,348 35,793 85.0 Institutions for Negroes University System 1,118 Privately controlled institutions 2,347 2,092 87.1 3,498 49.0 TOTAL 3,465 5,590 61.3 GRAND TOTAL 22,813 41,383 81.4 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. 258 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The total increase in students enrolled in institutions of higher education in the State in the nine-year period was 81.4 per cent. The increase was 85 per cent in institutions for white students and 61.3 per cent in institutions for Negro students. Senior institutions for white students almost doubled their enrollments, while the increase in enrollments in junior institutions was less than 30 per cent. Enrollments in all institutions publicly controlled increased from 13,663 to 27,596, an increase of 13,933 or 102.4 per cent. On the other hand the enrollments in institutions privately controlled increased from 9,150 to 13,787, an increase of 4,637 or 50.7 per cent. The data are represented graphically in Chart IV. It will thus be seen that the rate of increase in enrollment in public institutions has been about double that of the privately controlled institutions, and that in the fall of 1948, the institutions under public control enrolled two thirds (66.68 per cent) of all students in the State. CHART IV. ENROLLMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS OF GEORGIA: 1939arull94S1 PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS (50% INCREASE) 27,596 PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS 002% INCQEASE) 9.150 13.787 1939 1 1~1\~I I~\~I \l.ij 1948 _ WHITE l@ft\ NEGRO 13.663 ~~~\\j\lr~i:i:timt~lM 1939 1948 THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 259 The distribution of students enrolled in the fall of 1948 according to the legal control of the institution in which enrolled is shown in Table 17. TABLE 17 Distribution of 1948 Fall Enrollment of Institutions of Higher Education of Georgia According to Type of Control of Institution in Which Enrolled Type of Control State control City or county controL Private independent Methodist Church Baptist Church Presbyterian Church A. M. E. Methodist and C. M. E. Other Fall Enrollment 1948 White Negro Total _ 24,712 _ 792 _ 2,989 _ 5,014 _ 1,914 _ _ 107 _ _ 265 2,092 365 895 1,159 824 255 26,804 792 3,354 5,909 3,073 107 824 255 265 TOTAL___________________________________ 35,793 5,590 41,383 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. Table 17 reveals the nature of the forces which together arrange for opportunities for higher education for the youth of the State. Of the enrollment of 35,793 white students, 25,504 or 71.2 per cent are in institutions under public control, 2,989 or 8.4 per cent are in institutions under private independent control, and 7,300 or 20.4 per cent are in institutions under church control. Of the enrollment of 5,590 Negro students, 2,092 or 37.4 per cent are in publicly controlled institutions, 365 or 6.5 per cent are in institutions under private independent control, while 3,133 or 56.1 per cent are in institutions under church control. The size of these institutions may be ascertained from Table 18. It will be noted from Table 18 that only seven institutions in the State enroll more than 1,000 students; the other 46 are small institutions. Of the larger institutions, five of the seven are under public control. These seven institutions together enroll 24,960 students, or 60.3 per cent of the students of the State. All of the institutions that enroll less than 250 students are under private control. It will be of interest at this point to present an over-all picture of higher education financing and costs in Georgia. Table 19 reveals the amount and nature of income for institutional operation and for capital outlay in 1947-48. 260 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 18 Institutions of Higher Education in Gorgia, Classified According to Size of Enrollment Number of Students Enrolled in Regular Session 0-249 250-499 500-999 1000-1499 1500-2499 2500-4999 5000 and over Public _ _ _ _ 9 6 2 _ _ _ 3 Private 17 8 6 1 1 Total 17 17 12 3 1 3 TOTAL______________________________ 20 33 53 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. TABLE 19 Educational and General Income and Receipts for Capital Outlay of Institutions of Higher Education of Georgia, 1947-1948 (In Thousands of Dollars) Public Private Institu- Institu- tions tions Total ' A. Educational and General Income Student fees, including fees paid by Veterans Administration Federal Government State Government-allotmenL State Government-other County and City Government Endowment, Gifts and Grants Sales and Services of Educational Departments Other Income 7,230 1,459 4,007 223 145 388 1,235 172 3,913 257 6 4 3,086 3,169 195 11,143 1,716 4,007 229 149 3,474 4,404 367 TotaL B. Receipts for Capital Outlay 14,859 10,630 25,489 -- 3,8691 1,189 5,058 Total Income and Receipts for Capital Outlay 18,728 11,819 30,547 = ---- 1From State. Source: For Private Institutions: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. For Public Institutions: Report of Treasurer, Board of Regents. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 261 The information provided in Table 19 approximates the totals for the State, but the data on incomes of institutions that together enroll 506 students are not at this time available. Nonetheless, it will be seen that the total income for operationS in 1947-48 exceeded 25 millions of dollars, and receipts for capital outlay exceeded 4 millions, 3 hundred thousand dollars. The institutions under state control, with 64.8 per cent of the student body, received 58.2 per cent of the total current income. The amount and nature of institutional expenditures for current and capital purposes are shown in Table 20. TABLE 20 Educational and General Expenditures and Expenditures for Capital Outlay of Institutions of Higher Education of Georgia, 1947-1948 (In Thousands of Dollars) Public Institutions A. Educational and General Expenditures General Administration 1,651 Instruction 6,069 Research 1,415 Extension 2,144 Libraries 450 Plant Operation and Maintenance__ 1,619 Organized Activities Related to Instruction 736 Other 120 Private Institu- tions 1,463 3,925 371 1 359 1,076 3,281 Total 3,114 9,994 1,786 2,145 809 2,695 4,017 120 TotaL_________________________________________________ 14,?04 10,476 24,680 B. Expended for Plant Improvements and Additions 3,147 GRAND T'OTAL 17,351 1,767 12,243 4,914 29,594 Source: Public Institutions: Treasurer, Board of Regents. Private Institutions: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. The expenditures for current and capital purposes approximate 30 millions of dollars, of which 24.7 millions is for current purposes, and 4.9 millions is for capital. In state controlled institutions that enroll 64.8 per cent of the student body, the direct 262 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF expenditures for instruction were 6.1 millions or 60.7 per cent of the total. It is not the purpose at this point to discuss these data in detail, but rather to show the amount and nature of institutional income and expenditures. It may be estimated that in addition to a total institutional expenditure of about $29.6 millions, the cost of living of the students attending the colleges of the State aggregates about $31.6 millions. Of this amount, $21.3 millions is estimated as the cost of living of students in publicly controlled institutions, and $10.3 millions the cost in privately controlled institutions. The total outlay for higher education in the State of Georgia in 1947-48 may thus be estimated at more than $61 millions. This is what the citizens of the State have financed, whether through taxes, fees, gifts, earnings, or family savings. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 263 SECTION II THE DEMAND FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN GEORGIA In planning for the future, it will be necessary to estimate what the demand for higher education in the State will be; what part the private institutions may be expected to play; and finally what responsibilities must be assumed by the State. HIGHER EDUCATION POSSESSED BY ADULTS The 1940 census of the United States for the first time ascertained the amount of higher education possessed by the adult populations (25 years of age and over) of the States. In the following table-Table 21-the rank of Georgia appears with respect to the general average of the nation, to the more favored States of the far West, and to the Southeastern States. TABLE 21 Percent of the Population Age 25 Years and Over Completing College Work for the United States and Selected States-1940 1. Georgia Per Cent Per Cent Com- Completing 1-3 pleting 4 or Years of College More Years of Work College Work 4.8 3.3 2. Other Southeastern States: Alabama _ 4.2 2.9 Kentucky _ 4.2 3.0 Arkansas _ 4.1 2.3 Louisiana _ 4.3 3.5 ppi M.iss!s~i _ 4.4 3.1 Vlrglma _ 6.0 4.5 Tennessee _ 4.8 3.1 North Carolina _ 5.5 4.1 South Carolina _ 4.8 4.7 Florida _ 6.2 5.0 3. ThCeaFliaforrWniaest: Nevada _ _ 8.5 8.9 6.8 6.7 Oregon Washington _ _ 8.6 8.1 5.5 5.6 4. The United States _ 5.5 4.6 Source: Bureau of the Census. 264 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The relationships become more apparent when shown graphically. Hence in Chart V the comparison is made. 'I~'! ~ It will be seen from Table 21 and Chart V that while the adult population of Georgia possesses more of higher education than do some of her neighbors, others of the Southeastern States out- rank her. The proportion for Georgia falls markedly below: that possessed by the population of the nation, and even more marked- ly below that possessed by the populations of the more favored Western States. If the State is to improve its position, it must improve its opportunities to its youth for higher education. CHART V HIGHER EDUCATION POSSESSED BY ADULTS - A COMPARISON (1940 CENSUS DATA) GEORGIA II 1m NORTH CAROLINA II UNITED STATES PERCE~T WITH I - 3 YEARS OF COLLEGE Ml PERCENT WITH 4 OR MOR[ Y[ARS OF COlL[G[ I CALIFORNIA THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 265 HIGHER EDUCATION PROVIDED FOR YOUTH The availability of higher education for the youth of Georgia may be appraised by relating the enrollment in regular session to the population of college age, assumed to be ages 18-21, inclusive. In 1940, 15.42 per cent of youth age 18-21 were enrolled in the colleges and universities of the nation. In Georgia in that same year the enrollment of 23,229 compared with a population age 18-21 of 261,740. The percentage enrolled was thus 8.87, or 57.5 per cent as great as in the nation as a whole. Of the number enrolled in Georgia in 1940, 19,525 were white students. This number compares with a white population age 1821 of 165,605, a ratio of 11.79 or 76.46 per cent as great as in the nation as a whole. The Negro enrollment of 3,704 compared with a Negro population age 18-21, inclusive, of 96,135, or 3.85 per cent or 24.97 per cent as great as in the nation as a whole. By the year 1947-48, the enrollment in the nation had increased to 2,615,562. This figure is estimated to be 28.39 per cent of th~ population age 18-21. The enrollment in Georgia for that year is reported to be 46,559. This compares with a population aged 18-21 in that year of 253,258, or 18.38 per cent. The rate of attendance in Georgia was thus 64.74 per cent as great as that in . the nation, compared with 57.5 per cent in 1939-40. The enrollment of whites of an estimated 41,069 compares with an estimated population of 157,790 or 26.03 per cent. This is 91.7 per cent as great as for the nation as a whole. The enrollment in Negro institutions is estimated at 5,590, and is 5.86 per cent of the estimated Negro population of 95,468, or 20.6 per cent as great as in the nation as a whole. While the diffusion of higher education among the white population is still below the national average, it would appear that important gains have been made. Although in 1948 the veteran enrollment was large, it was slightly higher (relatively) in the nation than in Georgia. Moreover, students enrolled in 1948 for the first time in Georgia formed a slightly larger proportion of the total enrollment (26.1 per cent) than in the nation (23.6 per cent), indicating that the demand for higher education in Georgia is expanding relatively to the national average. 266 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TRENDS IN HIGH SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS The output of the high schools, particularly of the accredited high schools, is of course the main source of college enrollments. The trends in high school enrollments and in numbers of graduates will determine to a considerable extent the trends in enrollments in college. The growth of senior accredited Georgia high schools is revealed in the Official Bulletin of the Georgia Accrediting Association, from which the figures in the following table have been abstracted. TABLE 22 Growth of Senior Accredited Georgia High Schools Year Number of Schools Enrollment Number of Graduates 1905 1915 1925 1935 1945 1949 12 420 94 111 12,778 1,627 309 43,512 9,380 462 79,350 16,008 573 106,735 18,897 112,839 23,874* *Represents fourth year enrollment. The data of Table 22 are shown graphically in Chart VI. lt will be observed that the growth in numbers of schools, in enrollment, and in graduates has been rapid. The figures given are for both white and Negro schools. The data show that white accredited Georgia high schools had an enrollment in the senior class in 1940 of 18,718. This had increased to 20,207 in 1949, an increase of 8.0 per cent. The Negro accredited high schools had an enrollment in the senior class in 1940 of 2,247. In 1949 the figure was 3,577, an increase of 59.2 per cent. The figures suggest that enrollments in white schools are nearing a position of stability, but that in the Negro schools the trend is strongly upward. While the twelve grades are common in most school systems of the United States, including those of the Southeastern States, the twelfth grade is just in process of being added to the public school system of Georgia. The introduction of the twelfth grade will have some effect on college enrollments during the period of its addition. Thereafter the flow of students to college should be increased. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 267 CHART VI ENROLLMENT IN SENIOR ACCREDITED HIGH SCHOOLS OF GEORGIA I 1905 450 1915 12,778 1925 1935 1945 1949 Not all of the high schools of Georgia are accredited. Information with respect to trends in the proportion of total enrollments found in the high schools will throw light on the probable course of college enrollments in the future. In Table 23 the proportion of total school enrollment found in high school is shown for Georgia and the Southeastern States. The proportion for all schools is shown for the United States. TABLE 23 Proportion of Total School Enrollment Found in High School 1919-20 1929-30 1939-40 1945-46 1948-49 White Schools Georgia____________________ 9.9 15.9 22.7 23.0 24.7 Southeastern States 8.8 14.6 21.4 Negro Schools Georgia 1.0 2.7 7.1 lOA 14.3 Southeastern States 1.0 4.0 9.3 11.0 All Schools United States lOA 17.1 25.9 24.1 24.1 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. 268 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF The data are not strictly comparable due to the lack of a twelfth grade in most Georgia high schools. The figures do show, however, that the great disparity which existed in the twenties and thirties has been reduced to a considerable extent for white schools, and that rapid progress is being made in such reduction in Negro schools. THE BASIS OF ESTIMATE OF FUTURE ENROLLMENTS It must not be assumed that these figures on quantitative aspects of education in the lower schools afford a solid basis for estimate for the future. At the present time, as is evidenced by the report of the Georgia Accrediting Commission each year, a relatively large proportion of the graduates of high schools make unsatisfactory records in college, indicating that many high schools operat~ at standards which require to be improved in the future. It is assumed in this estimate that the lower schools will be strengthened, the twelfth grade added, and the quality of output improved. Indeed, these steps are foundational to any consideration of a sound program for higher education for the State. It is proposed that normal enrollments in institutions for whites in Georgia in 1950 be estimated at 85 per cent of the proportion of the population of college age in college in the nation. Thus, if for the nation we estimate 20 per cent of youth age 18-21, inclusive, will be in college in a given year, we may estimate that 85 per cent of this proportion, or 17 per cent of white youth age 18-21, inclusive, will be in the colleges and universities of Georgia for whites. It would seem reasonable to assign such a percentage (85 per cent) as the norm for the year 1949-50, and to increase it .5 of one per cent a year to 90 per cent in 1960. In light of the rapid quantitative growth of enrollments in Negro high schools, it might be presumed that the increase in Negro college enrollments in Georgia would at least parallel that for the nation at large, if not exceed it. Thus, it would seem reasonable to expect the normal rate of 3.85 per hundred in 1940 mentioned above to increase to 5.39 per hundred in 1950, and with the substantial veteran enrollment actually to exceed this rate. However, the rate was but 5.85 per hundred in 1948 and it must be concluded that either unsatisfactory quality of work in high schools, or the economic condition of the Negro, or both, operate to reduce the rate below normal expectation. Accordingly, for the purpose of this estimate, it will be assumed that 5 per cent THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 269 is a normal rate for Negro schools in 1950, and that this will rise rapidly to 10 per cent in 1960 by increments of .5 of one per cent each year. This would mean that enrollments in Negro colleges might be expected to double within the next ten years. TRENDS IN COLLEGE ENROLLMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES It is generally expected that the trend is toward an enlarged enrollment in higher educational institutions in the nation. It will be recalled that the enrollment in 1940 was just under 1.5 millions. By 1960, Hungate* estimates the enrollment will be 2,260,000; the President's Commission on Higher Education**, 2,704,000; and a group at the Third National Conference on Higher Education in 1948***, 2,500,000. It is proposed to base estimates of enrollments on estimates of population age 18-21, inclusive. Hungate's estimate for 1950 will be used for the near-term estimate of normal. The N. E. A. Group estimate of 2.5 millions will be assumed for 1960. The normal rate per 100 youth in the nation age 18-21 will become 21.537 in 1950 and will increase by (assumed) increments of 4.188 per cent to 1960 when the rate of 25.725 will be reached. It may be assumed, for the purpose of this study, that the rate will not increase in the period 1960-65, a period in which the population of college age will be greatly expanded. In formulating estimates in the near term-1950-54, it must be borne in mind that the present enrollments in the colleges and universities are highly abnormal due to two factors: (1) the pres.ence of the veterans; and (2) the return of the flow from the high schools to normal after the reductions in enrollments during the war. It is expected that by the close of 1951 the flow from the high schools will be normal, and by 1954 the veterans will have completed their training. The details of estimates both of populations and enrollments are shown in Table 24. *Hungate, Thad L., "Financing the Future of Higher Education," Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, New York, p. 224. **President's Commission on Higher Education in "Education for American Democracy," Appendix, p. 20. ***"Current Trends in Higher Education," Published by the N. E. A., Washington, D. C. 270 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 24 Estimated Enrollments in Institutions of Higher Education of the United States: 1948-1965 Population Estimated 18-21 Per Cent of Veteran Civilian (In thou- Population Normal Enroll- EnroIl- Year sands) in College ~ ment ment Total 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 9,074 8,861 8,640 8,447 8,363 8,401 8,513 8,603 8,870 9,044 9,284 9,718 10,449 10,991 11,328 11,415 12,189 ---------- 21.537 21.956 22.375 22.793 23.212 23.631 24.050 24.469 24.887 25.306 25.725 25.725 25.725 25.725 25.725 25.725 -------- 1,908 1,987 1,890 1,906 1,950 2,012 2,069 2,170 2,251 2,349 2,500 2,688 2,827 2,914 2,937 3,136 1,142 950 725 500 250 150 50 -------- ---_._--- -------- -------- -------... -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 1,552 1,798 1,850 1,890 1,906 1,900 2,012 2,069 2,170 2,251 2,349 2,500 2,688 2,827 2,914 2,937 3,136 2,694 2,748 2,575 2,390 2,156 2,050 2,062 2,069 2,170 2,251 2,349 2,500 2,688 2,827 2,914 2,937 3,136 These estimates for the future may be compared with an actual enrollment of 238,000 in 1900, of 598,000 in 1920, and of 1,494,000 in 1940. It may be assumed that the average practice in the United States will in general represent the central tendency for provision for higher education in Georgia. TRENDS IN COLLEGE ENROLLMENTS IN GEORGIA An estimate of the population of college age has been made by the Central Statistical Unit, Division of Vital Statistics, Georgia Department of Public Health. Because the factor of migration is difficult to assess, it has been omitted in the estimate. It is possible, therefore, that the estimates with respect to white populations are too low, and with respect to Negro populations too high, since the net in-migration is white and the net out-migration is Negro. It is believed that the rate figures are such as to warrant use of the population estimates without alteration. It is to be expected that the trends will be under constant review, and correction of estimates made as new evidence becomes available. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 271 The estimate of college enrollments in Georgia for white students is shown in Table 25. The estimates of population are given in five-year intervals. Estimates for intervening years are made by simple interpolation. In order to use cumulative figures of regular enrollments, the veteran census enrollment reported for the fall of 1947 is adjusted to an estimated cumulative enrollment figure. TABLE 25 Estimate of College Enrollments of White Students in Georgia, 1948-1965 Year 1947-48 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 Population EnrollAge 18-21 ment Rate Normal Inclusive per 100* - Tren-d ------------ ------------ 155,936 18.31 28,552 156,201 18.77 29,319 156,467 19.24 30,104 156,732 19.72 30,908 156,998 20.19 31,698 157,263 20.68 32,522 159,706 21.16 33,794 162,148 21.66 35,121 164,591 22.15 36,457 167,033 22.65 37,833 169,476 23.15 39,234 179,280 23.15 41,503 189,085 23.15 43,773 198,889 23.15 46,043 208,694 23.15 48,313 218,498 23.15 50,582 Veteran 18,855 17,122 14,516 10,500 6,500 3,000 1,500 500 C-iv-ilia-n Total 21,415 40,270 23,618 40,740 25,208 39,724 27,000 37,500 29,000 35,500 30,908 33,908 31,698 33,198 32,522 33,022 33,794 35,121 36,457 37,833 39,234 41,503 43,773 46,043 48,313 50,582 *This rate is 85 per cent of the national rate in 1950, and 90 per cent in 1960 and thereafter. From 1950 to 1960 there is a steady increase of lh of 1 per cent of the national rate. The estimate in Table 25 indicates that the veteran enrollment will soon disappear, and that the enrollment from the high schools will gradually increase. Nonetheless, the total enrollment is expected to decline from 40,740 in 1948-49 to between 33,000 and 34,000 in 1952 through 1955, after which enrollment is expected to rise markedly, reaching its present level in about 1960 and moving to a new peak in 1965 as the children born in the war period come of college age. It should be borne in mind that the estimate in Table 25 and the one shortly to be presented in Table 26, are for total college enrollments in the State. In order to 272 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF estimate the responsibility of the University System, the share of the burden which will be assumed by the private and local public institutions will require to be estimated. This will receive attention later in this section. An estimate of enrollments in the Negro colleges of the State is shown in Table 26. TABLE 26 Estimate of College Enrollments of Negro Students in Georgia, 1948-1965 - Yea-r 1947-48 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 Population EnrollAge 18-21 ment Rate Inclusive per 100'" ------------ ------------ 95,179 96,052 96,926 97,800 98,673 99,546 100,364 101,182 102,000 102,818 103,636 105,825 108,013 110,202 112,390 114,579 -------- -------- 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Normal Trend ---------- ---------- 4,759 5,283 5,816 6,357 6,913 7,466 8,029 8,600 9,180 9,767 10,364 10,583 10,801 11,020 11,239 11,458 Estimated Enrollments'" Veteran Civilian 1,870 1,698 1,440 1,000 600 200 4,419 4,665 4,759 5,283 5,816 6,357 -------- -------- -------- ----------------------------- ------' ----- -------------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- -------- ---------------------------- -------- Total -- 6,289 6,363 6,199 6,283 6,416 6,557 6,913 7,466 8,029 8,600 9,180 9,767 10,364 10,583 10,801 11,020 11,239 11,458 "'In the colleges for Negroes it is assumed that the veteran enrollment is added to the regular civilian enrollment. It is not thought that high school output bound for college was reduced during the war years as in the white schools. It is assumed that the rate raises steadily % of 1 per cent from 1950-1960, and during the great increase in population, 1960-65, remains constant. Unlike the white enrollments, scarcely a dip in enrollment is estimated for the Negro colleges. If the estimate is borne out enrollments in the Negro colleges may be expected to climb, par- ticularly if the lower schools are strengthened. The estimates of total enrollments in higher education in Georgia may be secured by combining Tables 25 and 26. This is done in Table 27. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 273 TABLE 27 Estimate of College Enrollments in Georgia, 1948-1965 Year 1947-48 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 19'62-63 1963-64 1964-65 White 40,270 40,740 39,724 37,500 35,500 33,908 33,198 33,022 33,794 35,121 36,457 37,833 39,234 41,503 43,773 46,043 48,313 50,582 Negro 6,289 6,363 6,199 6,283 6,416 6,557 6,913 7,466 8,029 8,600 9,180 9,767 10,364 10,583 10,801 11,020 11,239 11,458 Total -46,559 47,103 45,923 43,783 41,916 40,465 40,111 40,488 41,823 43,721 45,637 47,600 49,598 52,086 54,574 57,063 59,552 62,040 It will be seen from the estimate of all enrollments in Georgia colleges and universities that a drop is estimated from 45,923 in the current year 1949-50, to a low point in 1953-54 of 40,111. This represents a drop of 5,812, or 12 per cent. Thereafter enrollments are expected to climb to a peak of 62,040 in 1965. These estimates, as will be seen, have implications for fiscal policy for higher education in the State. PROBABLE DISTRIBUTION OF ENROLLMENT ACCORDING TO TYPE OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL It is necessary to estimate what the private and local public institutions will do, in order to put into relief the demand for higher education to be served by the University System. But in making such an estimate, it should be borne in mind that a depression may increase rather than reduce the burden on the State as students seek to avoid the higher fees of private institutions. If Emory University should increase its graduate work, this probably will not materially change the picture. The decline in veteran enrollment may be accompanied by some shift to public institutions as the means to bear the cost of fees is no longer available from the Veterans' Administration. Aside from this, the percentage distribution may be expected to hold under "normal" conditions until the private institutions enroll the present 274 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF number of students, after adjustment for veterans' withdrawals. From there on, it is expected that expansion must be achieved almost wholly through the publicly controlled institutions. There are estimated to be in 1948-49, 4,648 veterans in private and local public white colleges and universities in the State. It will be assumed that enrollments will continue to be distributed between the University System and private and local public institutions as in 1948-49, except that as the veteran enrollment declines, it will be accompanied by a shift of one-third of the replacement-1,708-to public institutions, due to increased difficulty in paying fees in private institutions. Thus, the proportion of white enrollments in the University System may be estimated to be 69.04 per cent in 1948-49, 69.37 per cent in 1949-50, 69.75 per cent in 1950-51, 70.23 per cent in 1951-52, 70.73 per cent in 195253,70.96 per cent in 1953-54, and in 1954-55 and thereafter until 1962, 71.18 per cent. It is estimated that after 1962 the enrollment of private colleges will remain fairly constant at about 12,500 students, and the substantial increase in enrollments in the late fifties and the early sixties must be taken care of in publicly controlled institutions. The estimated enrollments in white schools is shown by type of control in Table 28. TABLE 28 Estimated Enrollment According to Type of Institutional Control of White Students in Institutions of Higher Education in Georgia, 1949-1965 Year -1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 Public Control Veteran 12,474 10,575 7,649 4,735 2,186 1,093 364 ---------- ---------- ---------- --------- -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- --------- Civilian 15,654 16,981 18,506 20,195 21,798 22,463 23,142 ----------------- ---------- ---------- -------- ------------------------- ---------- Total -28,128 27,556 26,155 24,930 23,984 23,556 23,506 24,055 24,999 25,950 26,930 27,927 29,542 31,273 33,543 35,813 38,082 Private Control Veteran 4,648 3,941 2,851 1,765 814 407 136 ------- -------- -------- ----<---- ------- -------- -------- ------- ----------.---- Civilian 7,964 8,227 8,494 8,805 9,110 9,235 9,380 --------------- -------- ------- -------- ------- ------- --------, ------- ------- Total --, 12,612 12,168 11,345 10,570 9,924 9,642 9,516 9,739 10,122 10,507 10,903 11,307 11,961 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 Grand Total -- 40,740 39,724 37,500 35,500 33,908 33,198 33,022 33,794 35,121 36,457 37,833 39,234 41,503 43,773 46,043 48,313 50,582 Similarly, estimate may be made of enrollments of Negro institutions of higher education in Georgia according to type of control. There are estimated to be in 1948-49, 1,136 veterans in THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 275 private schools, of a total of 1,698. It will be assumed that enrollments will continue to be distributed between public and private institutions as in 1948-49, except that as the veteran enrollment declines and is replaced, one-third of 1,123-or 374-students will shift to publicly controlled institutions where fees are lower. Thus, the proportion of enrollments in public institutions may be estimated to be 37.42 per cent in 1948-49, 37.79 per cent in 194950, 39.63 per cent in 1950-51, 41.41 per cent in 1951-52, and 43.13 per cent in 1952-53. This ratio is estimated to continue until the private institutions enroll 5,000 students; thereafter, expansion will doubtless be the full responsibility of the public. The estimate appears in Table 29. TABLE 29 Estimate of Enrollment According to Type of Institutional Control of Negro Students in Institutions of Higher Education in Georgia, 1949-1965 Year Public Control Private Control Grand Veteran Civilian Total Veteran Civilian Total Total 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 562 1,819 2,381 1,136 2,846 3,982 6,363 476 1,867 2,343 964 2,892 3,856 6,199 331 2,159 2,490 669 3,124 3,793 6,283 199 2,458 2,657 401 3,358 3,759 6,416 66 2,762 2,828 134 3,595 3,729 6,557 2,982 3,931 6,913 3,220 4,246 7,466 3,463 4,566 8,029 3,709 4,891 8,600 4,180 5,000 9,180 4,767 5,000 9,767 5,364 5,000 10,364 5,583 5,000 10,583 5,801 5,000 10,801 6,020 5,000 11,020 6,239 5,000 11,239 6,458 5,000 11,458 It appears from Table 29 that the State faces a substantial responsibility in providing for a rapidly enlarging Negro college population. ESTIMATED EFFECTIVE DEMAND FOR HIGHER EDUCATION AT INSTITUTIONS PUBLICLY CONTROLLED The estimated enrollments in publicly controlled institutions which appear in Tables 28 and 29 can now be brought together to form the basis for projecting the needs for financing higher 276 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF education in the future at publicly controlled institutions. The results appear in Table 30. TABLE 30 Estimated Demand for Higher Education from the University System of Georgia, 1949-1965 Year - 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 White Veterans Total 12,474 10,575 7,649 4,735 2,186 1,093 364 ------------------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- ------,---- ---------- 28,128 27,556 26,155 24,930 23,984 23,556 23,506 23,683 24,613 25,549 26,513 27,495 29,085 31,273 33,543 35,813 38,082 Negro Veterans Total 562. 2,381 476 2,343 331 2,490 199 2,657 66 2,828 ------ 2,982 ------ 3,220 ----- 3,463 ------ 3,709 ------ 4,180 ------ 4,767 ------ 5,364 ----- 5,583 ------ 5,801 ------ 6,020 ------ 6,239 ------ 6,458 Total Veterans Total 13,036 11,051 7,980 4,934 2,252 1,093 364 -------- -------- -------- -------- --------------- -------- --------------------- 30,509 29,899 28,645 27,587 26,812 26,538 26,726 27,146 28,322 29,729 31,280 32,859 34,668 37,074 39,563 42,052 44,540 The foregoing estimate is in terms of cumulative enrollment, regular session. An estimate of the fall term census enrollment may be secured by dividing the figures by 1.1382. The data are shown in graphic form in Chart VII. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 277 CHART VII ESTIMATED ENROLLMENT IN UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA: 1949-65 44 ~ (IN TI-IOUSANDS) 44 40 j-~ ---V-E-TE+RA-N-S-+----+--+----t---+---~__1 40 3l. TO AL 32 24 24 16 16 8 0 1949 1951 8 NEG ----- ---- ----- ----- ---- 0 1953 1955 1957 1959 1961 1963 1965 From the foregoing table and chart, it is apparent that the decline in enrollments due to the completion of veterans training is both modest and temporary. The estimated decline is from 29,899 students in 1949-50 to 26,538 in 1953-54, a drop of but 11.2 per cent. After 1954, the rise is expected to be steady, and by 1958 the enrollment will approximate that of 1949-50. The rise is rapid in the late fifties and in the sixties as the children born during the war years come of college age. By 1965 the System is expected to enroll almost 50 per cent more students than in 1949-50. It is apparent that both educational and fiscal policies must be adapted to the task ahead. 278 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF SECTION III INSTITUTIONAL COSTS AND COST FACTORS Institutions of higher education devote their resources (generally) to three forms of public service: resident instruction, research, and extension activities. Here an examination will be made of the amount and nature of expenditures for these items. (Capital outlay is considered in Section IV. At this point the analysis deals only with current operations.) COMPARISON OF CURRENT EXPENDITURES In Table 31 the current expenditures of the University System of Georgia are compared with those of all publicly controlled institutions of the Southeastern States. The comparison, for the year 1947-48, permits a view of the manner in which the resources in Georgia have been applied in relation to the practice of her neighbors. It is to be assumed that everywhere those who are charged with the responsibility of administration are seeking the marginal utility of the budget dollar. It should not be surprising, therefore, to find a similarity in the expense pattern. TABLE 31 Current Educational and General Expenditures of the University System of Georgia and Publicly Controlled Institutions of the Southeastern States (Georgia excluded), 1947-48 Ten Southeast- Georgia ern States Expenditure Classification Amount in Thou- Amount in Thou- sands of Dollars 0/0 sands of Dollars 0/0 General Administration and General Expense ________ Instruction ______________________________ Research __________________________________ Extension ________________________________ Libraries ___________________~______________ Plant Operation and Maintenance _______________________________ Organized Activities Related to Instruction (Net) __________ Other ________________________________________ 1,651 6,069 1,415 2,144 450 1,619 137 120 TotaL________________________________________ 13,605 12.1 44.6 10.4 15.7 3.3 11.9 1.0 1.0 -- 100.0 9,955 8.9 51,020 45.7 11,653 10.4 17,646 15.8 3,750 3.4 16,692 14.9 1,004 .9 -- 111,720'" 100.0 *The figures do not include those of a few institutions, but are considered reliable for this use. Sources: For Southeastern States: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. For Georgia: Report of the Treasurer, Board of Regents. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 279 The proportion of funds devoted to organized research (research separately budgeted)-10.4 per cent-is identical with a similar proportion for the Southeastern States. The proportion devoted to extension services in Georgia is 15.7 per cent compared with 15.8 per cent in neighboring states. It will be seen, therefore, that Georgia has followed a pattern of allocation of funds to types of functions that is comparable to that of the other Southeastern States. How can it be estimated whether Georgia is spending too much or too little per student? Some information can be obtained from examining expenditures of the land-grant colleges, and particularly those of the Southeastern States. The evidence shown in Chart VIII reveals that in 1947-48 the estimated expenditures for the equivalent of a full-time student for an academic year was as follows: in the entire country $498, in the Southeast (Georgia excluded) $446, and in the University of Georgia $331. It thus appears that unit expenditures in Georgia are low. CHART VIII CURRENT EXPENDITURES PER RESIDENT STUDENT: 1947-48 (IN LAND GRANT COLLEGES) UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA OTHER SOUTHEAST STATtS UNITED STATES 280 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF COSTS OF RESIDENT INSTRUCTION The largest institutional costs are for resident instruction. These are the expenditures involved in providing educational facilities for students: administration, teaching, libraries, plant operation and maintenance, and related items. Here the analysis will move from total current expenditures to those for resident instruction; a later discussion will deal with a further subdivision of costs-the funds required for professional personnel. Institutional Instructional Load Before beginning the evaluation of resident instruction costs, it will be useful to see the manner in which the University System has distributed the teaching function to the several institutions of the System. Table 32 contains information concerning the student body and the number of credit hours taught in each institution in 1948-49. TABLE 32 Institutions of the University System (Excluding Medical School and Experiment Stations) : Full-time Student Equivalents and Student Credit Hours (Including Summer Quarter), 1948-49 and 1940-41 Institution 1948-49 1948-49 Full-time Student Credit Student Hours (Four Equivalents* Quarters) 1940-41 Student Credit Hours University of Georgia________________ Atlanta Division ________________________ Georgia Inst. of Technology______ Evening School ______________________ Technical Institute ________________ North Georgia College ______________ Georgia Teachers College ________ Valdosta State College _____________ Ga. State College for Women____ Middle Georgia College ____________ South Georgia College ______________ West Georgia College ________________ Abraham Baldwin Agric. CoIl. Georgia Southwestern College__ 7,010 3,123 6,382 680 442 784 808 326 1,104 361 451 596 439 305 350,528 156,172 319,129 34,019 22,085 39,190 40,413 16,289 55,203 18,059 22,568 29,828 21,953 15,274 175,559 44,657 124,683 ------------ ------------ 28,130** 33,190 18,398 76,195 18,020 14,420 16,807 17,956 17,655 Savannah State College Trade School __________________________ College ____________________________________ Fort Valley State College __________ Albany State College ________________ 263 1,353 974 686 ------------ 67,640 48,716 34,289 ------------ 34,933 23,057 20,192 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. *Defined as 50 credit hours for an academic year. **North Georgia College was a junior institution in 1940-41. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 281 The rapid increase of enrollments following the war was unevenly distributed among the institutions. The University and Georgia Institute of Techonology doubled their outputs; the Atlanta Division now cares for more than three times the credit hours of 1940-41. On the other hand, both the women's colleges lost enrollment; the junior colleges together show an increase of 26.9 per cent. The colleges for Negroes together (exclusive of the Trade School at Savannah) show an increase of 92.7 per cent. The outstanding fact is that 77.3 per cent of the student credit hours provided for white students are found in the University, the Atlanta Division, and Georgia Institute of Technology. The remaining 22.7 per cent are found in nine small institutions. The provision for Negro students is centered in three institutions. Resident Instruction Costs by Institutions The current costs* of resident instruction in the institutions of the University System are summarized in Table 33. Here expenditures for equipment and for research and extension services have been excluded, and the cost of organized activities relating to instruction is included net; that is, after income applicable to such activities has been deducted. *The nature of expenditures included in current cost of resident instruction are summarized below: 1. Administrative and General. This grouD includes the current expenditures for the general administrative offices and all other general activities which affect the institution as a whole, except the expense of operating and maintaining the physical plant. 2. Plant Operation and Maintenance. This group includes the current expenditures for operating and maintaining the physical plant of the entire institution except the auxiliary enterprises. 3. Library. This group includes the current expenditures for library salaries, books and periodicals, supplies and materials. 4. Instruction. This group includes the current expenditures for the departments of instruction, including salaries, supplies, equipment, office expense, and other expenses of carrying on the teaching program. 282 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 33 Costs of Resident Instruction in the University System, 1948-49 Institution Plant Adminis- Operation trative and and Mainte- General nance Library Instruction Total University of Georgia $287,903 Atlanta Division 92,901 Georgia Institute of Technology 310,599 North Georgia College____ 68,067 Georgia Teachers College 51,486 Valdosta State College_____ 45,643 Georgia State College for Women 114,522 Middle Georgia College____ South Georgia College West Georgia College AbCroalhleagme Baldwin Ag. Georgia Southwestern College 26,664 32,210 32,504 26,789 38,700 $339,480 98,754 359,561 57,419 32,225 22,627 88,628 19,667 21,508 31,606 25,903 23,045 $105,019 $1,860,522 $2,592,924 19,280 399,691 610,626 50,098 1,567,488 2,287,746 18,243 155,905 299,634 11,413 154,765 249,889 9,700 94,470 172,440 31,198 4,756 3,804 8,306 347,518 56,636 78,223 73,975 581,866 107,723 135,745 146,391 5,133 3,081 61,231 51,184 119,056 116,010 Savannah State College___ 79,983 Fort Valley State College 66,570 Albany State College 34,584 77,061 76,907 33,714 9,364 8,315 8,863 254,294 169,099 114,422 420,702 320,891 191,583 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. When these expenditures are related to the number of credit hours taught, and to the number of full-time students, unit costs are obtained. These unit costs permit comparisons among institutions and call for interpretation of differences. The analysis of unit costs (unit expenditures) is presented in Table 34, and a comparison of expenditures per full-time student equivalent is shown graphically in Chart IX. Cost Variables The figures on current cost of resident instruction shown in Table 34 reveal important differences among the institutions. An effort to analyze these costs without intimate and detailed knowledge of each institution is difficult, for objective evidence may sometimes be satisfactorily explained by human factors and relationships. But some analysis is essential, if only to can attention to situations requiring further study. Before this evaluation is undertaken, consideration should be given to the nature of the variables that influence current cost. Note that for the time being capital outlay is not considered. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 283 TABLE 34 Costs per Student Credit Hour in Institutions in the University System, 1948-49 Institution Total Cost Admin- Total per Full. istrative Opera- Cost time and tion and per Student General Mainte- Instruc- Quarter Equiva- Plant nance Library tion Hour lent University of Georgia Athens $ .82 Atlanta Division .59 Georgia Institute of Technology .97 North Georgia College____ 1.74 Georgia Teachers College 1.27 Valdosta State College 2.80 Georgia State College for Women 2.07 Middle Georgia College__ 1.48 South Georgia College____ 1.43 West Georgia College 1.09 Abraham Baldwin Agri- cultural College 1.22 Georgia Southwestern College 2.53 $ .97 .63 1.13 1.47 .80 1.39 1.61 1.09 .95 1.06 1.18 1.51 $ .30 .12 .16 .47 .28 .60 .57 .26 .17 .28 .23 .20 $5.31 2.56 4.91 3.97 3.83 5.80 6.30 3.14 3.46 2.48 2.79 3.36 $7.40 3.90 7.17 7.65 6.18 10.59 10.55 5.97 6.01 4.91 5.42 7.6Q $370 195 359 383 309 530 528 299 301 246 271 380 Savannah State College__ .93 .90 Fort Valley State College 1.37 1.58 Albany State College 1.01 .98 .14 2.70 4.67 234 .17 3.47 6.59 330 .26 3.34 5.59 280 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. The laws of economy so well known in industry operate in higher education. The first law is that of variable proportionshow many students per teacher? What size classes? What specializations of staff? What teaching loads? How big a library? How much and what kind of physical facility need be operated and maintained? These are variables, and the skillful administrator with his objective of quality before him will combine the factors to provide the quality of opportunity at a cost as low as is consistent with his objective. The second law has to do with the relationship between the cost of a unit of output and the size of plant, assuming the variability of all the productive services. The advantage that comes of the specialization of labor and management is to be fully realized, recognition being given to the fact that the intensive utilization of a man's learning ability is subject to diminishing returns, and that the final authority to make decisions of management cannot be subdivided or delegated. It cannot be expected 284 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF CHART IX CURRENT EXPENDITURES r-OR RESIDENT INSTRUCTION PER STUDENT: 1948-49 ATLANTA DIVISION ~Ir:]., GEORGIA TEACHERS GEORGIA TECH. UNI\/. OF GEORGIA NORTH GEORGIA G. 5. C. W. G.S.WC. WEST GEORGIA ABRAHAM BALDWIN MIDDLE GEORGIA SOUTH GEORGIA GEORG'" S. W. GEORGIA 5TATE ALBANY STATE FORT VALLEY (l.}1:] (011] B1i)j ~'.(.~ ~"1t] ~~~r~ If#~1 ~~~l:J 0.1']1 (~!~It] ~".l-1! ttl.It) t},).!t] THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 285 that the small college can operate economically unless its assigned functions are clos.ely restricted. Even so, a number of classes may be undesirably small. The cost of overhead may tend to be high, and often the utilization of plant may tend to be low. It is evident from the above discussion that the quality of output begins with the quality of the factors utilized. The educational program itself must be related to the needs of modern life. The quality of teaching personnel, the appropriateness of teaching methods utilized, the quality of facilities that support the work-all must be consistent with the objects sought. All the factors must be employed in just such amounts or degrees as will provide quality of output with economy. Perhaps most basic to quality of output is quality of professional personnel. Suitable conditions of employment, including salary, tenure, freedom to teach, teaching load, leaves of absence, recreation, housing, insurance, and provisions for retirement are necessary to retain good teachers of training and experience. But standards apply as well to the institutional environment, the quality of equipment, library service, non-academic services and facilities necessary to student life. There is one other matter that should be mentioned-it is less tangible than those so far mentioned-but of great importance. This is the degree to which the entire personnel of the institution are brought into participation in the formation of policies in which they are concerned-whether faculty, non-academic personnel, or students. Democracy in administration is essential to true economy. Lack of it will in time show up in either the cost or the quality of the output. What, then, causes these variations in resident instruction cost in the University System? Conceivably it may be the salaries paid to teachers or to the number of credit hours per teacher, on the average, that are taught, or it may be due to the size of classes. In Table 35 the facts on these matters are shown. 286 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 35 Average Teachers' Salaries, Average Student Credit Hours per Teacher, and Average Class Size for the Units of the University System Institution Average Average Student Salary of Credit Full-time Hours Teachers Per (9 months) Teacher Average Class Size Estimated Average Teaching Load (Hours per week) University of Georgia, Athens $3,677 Atlanta Division 3,5301 Georgia Institute of Technology__ 3,7023 North Georgia College 3,560 Georgia Teachers College 3,197 Valdosta State College_________________ 3,460 Georgia State College for Women 3,440 Middle Georgia College South Georgia College West Georgia College Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College Georgia Southwestern College 2,970 2,909 2,950 3,103 3,000 Savannah State College________________ 2,831 Fort Valley State College 2,514 Albany State College_____________________ 2,750 331 2 308 312 350 208 198 312 273 465 600 292 3385 2 242 29.1 39.2 23.7 23.3 25.6 18.14 18.0 25.0 24.1 33.6 33.9 24.2 25.15 24.4 19.9 11.4 13.0 13.4 13.7 11.5 11.0 12.5 11.3 13.8 17.7 12.1 13.4 2 12.2 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. 1 Part-time teaching procured for full-time equivalent salary of $2,475. 2Not computed. 3 Does not include Southern Technical Institute or Evening School. 4 Individual music lessons to 1 or 2 students of 45 teaching hours per week not included. 5Trade School not included. It is evident at once that the variations in resident instruction costs can be explained only to a limited extent by the level of salaries paid. More explanation is available in figures on average student credit hours taught per teacher. In a survey made by the Office of Education, Federal Security Agency,* a representative sam- pling of faculty members of all types of institutions were studied-a total of 1,351. The findings. indicate that the median teacher taught 341 student credit hours, and had a teaching load of 13.5 hours per week. From these figures it can be estimated that the median class size in American institutions of all types was 25.3 students. In these figures, as in Georgia, are reflected Circular No. 254, March 15, 1949, "Survey of Salaries and Occupational Attitudes of Faculty Personnel of Higher Education." THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 287 the results of emergency measures taken to care for unprecedented enrollments. It must not be assumed, therefore, that these figures are representative of desirable practices. They are merely representative of current practices and may expect to be altered as standards of quality replace practices of expediency. With respect to the senior institutions, the University of Georgia has an average of credit hours taught that just about equals median practice in the country. It appears that the average class size is somewhat high, and that the average teaching load is somewhat low, not only with respect to the median referred to, but also in comparison with other senior institutions of the University System. Georgia Institute of Technology, North Georgia College, and Georgia Teachers College are close enough to the norms as to require no comment. The Atlanta Division operates a class size that is believed to be too great. Out of a large faculty (the full-time equivalent of 101.2 persons) only 52 are in fact full-time, the remainder being drawn from the professional personnel of the City of Atlanta. The rate of compensation for part-time teachers is equal to $2,475 for teaching a full academic year. It is probable that at the Atlanta Division, students may not receive the amount of personal guidance and help that they need. The data on the two women's colleges claim attention. The class sizes are small; the teaching loads are low; and the total student credit hours taught by the average teacher in each institution is low. Instructional costs are therefore high. As for the junior colleges, Middle Georgia is near the norm. The instructional costs of South Georgia are slightly above because of a rather low teaching load. The low instructional costs of Abraham Baldwin and West Georgia Colleges can be explained by large class sizes and above-average teaching loads, especially at Abraham Baldwin where the teaching load is perhaps too high. The instructional cost at Georgia Southwestern is not far from normal; it is slightly higher than Middle Georgia because of a lower teaching load. No comment is required for the Negro institutions, except to note that class size at Albany State College is low. The data for Savannah State College are about normal for class size and teaching load. 288 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Costs Within the Uni'versity of Georgia In large institutions general averages are not very revealing. Particularly is this true of an institution as complex as the University of Georgia. Information concerning costs of resident instruction by schools of the University is presented in Table 36. TABLE 36 Instructional Costs of the University of Georgia, 1948-49 By Schools Agriculture Arts and Sciences Business Administration Education Forestry Home Economics Journalism Law Pharmacy Veterinary Medicine Credit Hours _ 30,485 _ 143,388 _ 51,757 _ 28,007 _ 7,710 _ 5,844 _ _ 10,709 11,560 _ 7,077 _ 8,222 304,759 Full-time Students* Equivalent 609 2,867 1,035 560 154 117 214 231 141 164 6,095 Full-time Students Teaching Per Personnel Teacher 41.2 148.0 27.2 33.7 6.0 18.1 6.4 9.3 5.0 12.0 -- 306.9 14.8 19.4 38.0 16.6 25.7 6.5 33.4 24.8 28.2 -13-.7 19.8 Agriculture Arts and Sciences Business Administration Education Forestry Home Economics Journalism Law Pharmacy Veterinary Medicine Credit Hours Per Cost Per Teacher Teacher* _ 247 _ 323 _ 634 _ 277 _ 428 _ 108 _ _ 558 414 _ 472 _ 228 - 331 $7,425.00 6,728.00 8,950.00 7,415.00 7,854.00 4,900.00 8,005.00 8,728.00 10,230.00 10,077.00 $7,309.00 Instruc- Average tional Cost Salary of Per Teacher Credit Hour $3,705.00 3,576.00 3,753.00 3,508.00 4,229.00 3,330.00 3,580.00 4,892.00 4,330.00 4,260.00 $3,677.00 $ 7.76 4.66 2.42 6.64 3.83 12.90 2.50 4.74 4.95 12.43 -- $ 5.27 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. *Based on 16-2/3 quarter hours as a full-time load. It will be noted that there are twice as many students in business administration per teacher as in arts and sciences. The number is high in journalism and pharmacy. It is low in home economics, agriculture, education, and veterinary medicine. In general, the instructional cost per credit hour is explained by the material in the table. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 289 Costs Within the Georgia Institute oj Technology In the academic year 1948-49, the average cost of each of 103,949 credit hours in the Engineering College was $8.70. This is $435 per full-time student for an academic year. The cost per credit hour (171,307 were taught in 1948-49) in the General College was $6.45, equal to $323 per full-time student for an academic year. The estimated cost per full-time student in the Technical Institute in 1948-49 is $480; in the Evening School, $252. Attention is called to the practice at the Georgia Institute of Technology for teachers of the day school to teach in the evening school to augment their salaries. It is believed that some of these teachers have undertaken a teaching load that is too heavy for continuous effective work, and that some limitation should be placed on the total load a teacher may carry within the System. For example, in the spring quarter of 1948-49, 14 teachers of English, 8 teachers of industrial arts, 9 teachers of physics, and 16 teachers of mathematics taught in the Evening School. Of these 49 teachers, 23 taught more than 6 hours per week in the Evening School, with a resulting total teaching load as follows: one, 16 hours; five, 19 hours; two, 20 hours; one, 21 hours; six, 22 hours; one, 23 hours; and seven, 24 hours. The Atlanta Division may also employ some teachers who have full-time teaching responsibilities to the University System. It would be preferable-if salary scales permitted-to assign a portion of a regular teacher's time to work in the Evening School, in the interest of maintaining the teacher at top efficiency. The Problem oj Small Classes It is considered desirable (generally) in undergraduate work to maintain class size at not less than ten students. When classes become smaller, the costs begin to approach the cost of individual instruction. To shed further light upon the problem of resident instruction costs, the numbers of classes of 1 to 9 students for one quarter in the academic year 1948-49 are shown in Table 37. 290 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 37 Small Size Classes (9 or less) in the University System in One Quarter of Academic Year, 1948--49 Institution Number of Small Size Classes (9 or less) University of Georgia, Athens _ Atlanta Division _ Georgia Institute of Technology General College "_ Engineering College _ North Georgia College _ Georgia Teachers College _ Valdosta State College _ Georgia State College for Women _ Middle Georgia College _ South Georgia College _ West Georgia College _ Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College _ Georgia Southwestern College _ Savannah State College _ Fort Valley State College _ Albany State College _ 129 a 8 30 75 16 22 20b 46c 10 10 2 4 5 26 41d 34e TotaL____________________________________________ 478 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. a. Includes 35 classes provided solely for graduate students. h. Does not include individual music lessons-1 or 2 students. This amounts to 45 teaching hours per week. c. Laboratory School services not included, nor instruction in piano and voice. Lessons were given to 121 students of piano and 47 students of voice. The services of 5 teachers are required for this work. d. Does not include individual piano, voice, and instrumental music lessons. Such lessons require 51 hours of teaching per week. Does not include laboratory school services. e. Observation and practice teaching in the laboratory school not included. Altogether, these small classes aggregate 478. It is suggested that larger classes might be arranged through alternating courses or through appropriate modification of program. Other Resident Instruction Costs These data, together with the discussion, explain much of the variation in resident instruction costs. But the explanation must continue, for there are other factors to be considered in addition to credit hours, class size, and teaching load. Plant operation and maintenance, together with administration, must also be analyzed. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 291 An examination of expenditures for 1947-48 of publicly controlled colleges and universities, teachers colleges, and junior colleges for whites for the southeastern area discloses a distribution for resident instruction as follows: Kind of Expenditure Colleges and Teachers Junior Universities Colleges Colleges General Administration and Expense 12.0 11.6 12.9 Instruction Library 64.5 57.3 59.9 4.8 4.2 2.1 Plant Operation and Maintenance______ 18.7 26.9 25.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. The distribution of resident instruction expenditures for the institutions of the University System of Georgia appears in Table 38. TABLE 38 Percentage Distribution of Current Expenditures for Resident Instruction by Teaching Units of the University System of Georgia, 1948-1949 Administration Instrucand General tion Library Plant Total University of Georgia Athens 11.1 71.8 Atlanta Division 15.2 65.4 Georgia Institute of Technology 13.6 68.5 North Georgia College __ 22.7 52.0 Georgia Teachers College 20.6 61.9 Valdosta State College__ 27.0 53.9 Georgia State College for Women 19.6 59.8 4.0 13.1 100.0 3.2 16.2 100.0 2.2 15.7 100.0 6.1 19.2 100.0 4.6 12.9 100.0 5.7 13.4 100.0 5.4 15.2 100.0 Middle Georgia College__ 24.7 52.6 South Georgia College____ 23.7 57.6 West Georgia CoIlege____ 22.2 50.5 Abraham Baldwin Ag. College 22.5 51.4 Georgia Southwestern College 33.4* 44.0 4.4 18.3 100.0 2.8 15.9 100.0 5.7 21.6 100.0 4.3 21.8 100.0 2.7 19.9* 100.0 Savannah State College 20.0 57.8 Fort Valley State College 20.7 52.7 Albany State College 18.1 59.7 3.0 19.2 100.0 2.6 24.0 100.0 4.6 17.6 100.0 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. *Expenditures abnormally high in 1948-49. 292 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Compare the proportion spent on plant by Georgia's senior institutions with the average for the region. Against the regional average of 18.7 per cent we find 13.1, 16.2, 15.2, 19.2, 13.4, and 15.2 per cent. These low allotments to plant operation and maintenance naturally lead to inquiry as to whether the physical plants have in fact been satisfactorily operated and maintained. It is probable that the proportion of the educational dollar expenditure devoted to plant operation and maintenance should be increased. It is interesting to note that the University of Georgia spent $1.13 per credit hour on operation and maintenance in 1940-41; in 1948-49 it spent $.97. The publicly controlled teachers colleges and junior colleges ordinarily are small in size. For these it must be expected that plant costs will be higher due to (generally) lower utilization. This is an example of the effect of size on cost. It would seem probable that the Teachers College, with 12.9 per cent of expenditures assigned to operation and maintenance of plant, and South Georgia College with 15.9 per cent will need to increase their allocation to this purpose. On these, as on the remaining institutions, inspection and information will determine how adequately the plants have been maintained. In Table 31, the expenditure for operation and maintenance of plant in the University System of Georgia is shown to be 11.9 per cent of the total current expenditure budget in 1947-48. This compares with 14.9 per cent for the publicly controlled institutions of the Southeast. It is believed that appropriations for the operation and maintenance of plant should be increased to approximate the average proportion being expended in the region. Now general administration and general expense may be examined. It is apparent at once that all of the institutions except the larger ones have a high administrative overhead-higher than is found in the surrounding states. Possibly this may be due to difference in accounting, but it is believed that the very small schools have administrative patterns that tend to parallel those of the larger institutions. The problem might well be reviewed with the presidents of the institutions to see if the proportion of the budget devoted to overhead cannot be reduced and the proportion spent for teaching be increased. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 293 PROFESSIONAL SALARIES AND RETIREMENT ALLOWANCES In higher education, as elsewhere, the quality of the factors used are related (generally) to cost. Given poor teachers and poor facilities, the output may be expected to be poor, for the best administration will be unable to transform the results to those of high standards. But, contrariwise, good teachers and good facilities cannot guarantee good results, for the quality of program, the morale of the staff, and skillful administration are still necessary. It is not possible within the scope of this study to examine the quality of the factors. But certain observations will be made concerning professional personnel-their rank, training, salary, and period of employment-and the existing provisions for retirement allowances together with such supplementary provisions as may be required. Measures for Professional Personnel More than one-half of all the money spent for resident instruction is for salaries of the professional staff. It is not contemplated that this study can evaluate the staffs. All that is possible is an examination of certain objective measures which, in general, are considered important in institutional staffing. These measures may be examined in relation to similar measures in like situations, and certain conclusions can be drawn and their implications on the cost of higher education of the future can be formulated. Three measures have been selected as the basis for this study: (1) The maturity of the staff, as evidenced by its distribution among professorial ranks; (2) academic preparation, as evidenced by the highest degree held; and (3) the competitive position of the institutions of Georgia for competent personnel, as evidenced by salaries paid. As these measures are developed an appraisal of the practices among and within the institutions of the University System will be possible. Rank Accorded Professional Personnel Information concerning the distribution of faculty personnel, according to rank, is presented in Table 39. Here it is possible to compare average practice in the United States, in 15 selected institutions for whites of the Southeastern States, and in the University System of Georgia. 294 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 39 Percentage Distribution of Teaching and Research Personnel According to Rank for the United States, Selected Institutions of the Southeast and the University System of Georgia Rank Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor Other Sample for 147 15 Select- Selected ed Insti- University System of Georgia, 1948-49 Institu- tutions of tions the - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - of the South- United eastern All Senior Junior Negro States States Institu- Institu- Institu- Institu- _ -194-7-4-8 29.1 % -194-8--49 22.5% tions 21.9% tions 22.7% tions 39.3% tions 6.7% 18.5% 17.9% 24.2% 26.4% 4.1% 23.9% 23.3% _ _ 25.2% 3.9% 23.1 % 27.7% 8.8% 28.4% 18.1% 7.4% 26.5% 19.3% 5.1 % 43.5% 4.7% 8.4% 30.4% 19.5% 19.50/0 Source: For sample for U. S.: Circular No. 254, U. S. Office of Education, F. S. A., March 15, 1949. For institutions of the Southeast and for University System of Georgia: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. From Table 39, it appears that the proportion of the staff that holds professorial rank is substantially lower in the University System of Georgia than in the country as a whole, but only slightly lower than found in the selected institutions of the Southeast; the proportions holding ranks of associate professor and assistant professor are higher, while the proportion holding rank of instructor is lower. It is possible that in Georgia and the Southeast the men and women in the lower ranks do not possess the training, experience and maturity that warrant promotion to the rank of full professor; or non-promotion may be brought about by lack of funds to pay the higher salaries. On the other hand, it is quite possible that Georgia has fewer in the rank of instructor and more in the rank of assistant professor precisely because qualified personnel were not available as instructors within the salary scale provided. In any event, it would seem that Georgia must re-examine the distribution of personnel according to rank. What is needed is not a paper adjustment, but rather that relationship in the faculties that mingles youth and maturity under appropriate incentives. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 295 It is apparent from Table 39 that the distribution for the junior institutions follows a different pattern than that of the senior institutions. It is possible that consideration should be given to abolishing rank in junior institutions. Clearly the distribution in the Negro institutions calls for a readjustment as fast as it can be brought about. These institutions need more professors-fewer assistant professors. It is, of course, possible that the availability of competent peronnel is such that the present picture does not disclose the advances that are being made. As an example of the variations in practice within the System, the distribution for the senior institutions (Atlanta Division and Medical School excepted) is shown in Table 40. TABLE 40 Percentage Distribution of Teaching and Research Personnel According to Rank in Senior Institutions of the University System of Georgia Rank University of Georgia at Athens Professor Associate Professor ---- Assistant Professor Instructor _______ Other _______________ 28.4% 23.8% 24.2% 16.6% 7.0% Georgia Inst.of Tech., Atlanta --19.4% 20.5% 28.1% 26.4% 5.6% North Georgia -Co-ll-eg.e 20.8% 47.2% 28.1% 3.9% Georgia Valdosta Teachers State College -Co-lle-ge 9.5% 22.6% 43.3% 55.5% 33.1% 11.8% 2.3% 7.7% 6.5% 7.7% Georgia State College for Women 25.9% 29.1% 24.5% 18.5% 2.0% Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. It is clear from Table 40 that there is little similarity in rank distribution in the senior institutions of the University System. The two women's colleges afford an example. At Valdosta, 78.1 per cent of the staff are in the senior ranks, while at Milledgeville only 55 per cent are so assigned. The question readily occurs: Why do fewer than 10 per cent of the staff in the Teachers College hold rank of full professor? Within the University the distribution within the several schools is dissimilar. It is therefore urged that as new conditions, such as new salary scales, a greater supply of college teachers, etc., develop in 296 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF the several institutions, continuous attention be given to appropriate assignment of rank. Academic Preparation of Professional Personnel The academic preparation of professional personnel may be shown by degrees held. It is to be emphasized that the degree held does not denote the value of the staff member. It is but one objective measure. Ordinarily the more successful of the professional personnel possess advanced degrees. In Table 41 is shown the per cent of the staffs by rank which hold the Doctor's Degree. TABLE 41 Per Cent of Teaching and Research Staff That Possess Doctor's Degrees Senior Institutions University System of Georgia - - Rank 1948-1949 Professor _______________ 63.0% Associate Professor ______ 29.0% Assistant Professor _____ 8.2% Instructor ----------------- .4% Other -------------------------- .0 15 Selected Institutions in Southeast 1948-1949 65.4% 46.7% 21.3% 6.8% 30.9% Sample of 147 Selected Institutions of the United States 1947-1948 66.9% 54.3% 39.0% 22.3% 5.7% TotaL______________ 24.2% 32.6% 37.7% Source: For sample for U. S.: Circular No. 254, U. S. Office of Education, F. S. A., March 15, 1949. For institutions of Southeast and for University System of Georgia: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. It is evident that the faculties of the senior institutions of the University System of Georgia possess about three-fourths as many Doctor's degrees as do selected institutions in the Southeast, and about two-thirds as many as do institutions in the United States generally. There is little variation in the degrees held by professors, but the variations in the junior ranks are very great. This fact may prove of great significance. For it appears that the University System is adding few well-prepared scholars in the junior ranks. It is from the junior ranks that promotions come. If present practice continues, the quality of Rcholarship at the upper level is apt to decline. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 297 In Table 42 is compared the Doctor's degrees possessed by the staffs of senior institutions with those possessed by staffs of the junior colleges and institutions for Negroes. TABLE 42 Doctor's Degrees Possessed by Staffs of Classes of Institutions of the University System-1948-1949 Rank Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor Other Senior Institutions _ 63.0 _ 29.0 _ 8.2 _ _ .4 .0 Junior Institutions 2.1 Institutions for Negroes 50.5 2.6 24.2 0.8 4.0 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. Few Doctor's degrees are found outside the senior institutions. Steps must be taken to improve the academic preparation of the faculties in the University System, particularly in the Negro Colleges. Within these institutions the extent of the distribution of the advanced degree differs markedly, as shown in Table 43. It is recognized that the requirements of a technical school, such as Georgia Tech, may differ from those of other institutions. TABLE 43 Doctor's Degrees Possessed by Staffs of Senior Institutions of the University System-1948-1949 Rank Univer- Georgia sity of Inst. of Georgia Tech., at Athens Atlanta North Georgia Georgia Teachers College College Valdosta State College Georgia State College for Women Professor -------- 64.9 44.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 79.9 Associate Professor 53.0 15.3 17.8 10.9 2.1 10.7 Assistant Professor 11.6 10.7 Instructor 1.1 Other ---- ------------- 34.0 14.9 29.2 14.2 23.8 23.9 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. It would seem desirable to strengthen the faculties through an effective program of upgrading. Advanced degrees in a vigorous faculty should appear in the lower as well as the upper ranks. 298 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Salaries of Professiorw..l Personnel In higher education, no single set of policies can be more important than those which define the conditions of employment of professional personnel. Many elements enter into such policies, but the administrative policies governing salaries are basic. Such policies cannot be confined to salary levels, but must relate salaries to academic preparation, length of tenure, academic rank, research and teaching contributions, the optimum work load, and opportunities for self-development. Such policies well determined can contribute much to morale, can stimulate initiative and self-realization. It is not the purpose of this study in finance to examine in full the set of policies that govern the well-being of the faculties of the several institutions, but rather to examine practices with respect to faculty salaries within units of the University System as they relate to practices elsewhere. Such an examination will afford bases for judgment with respect to adequacy and will assist in estimating the financial needs of the future. As a first step, the average salaries for an academic year in Georgia are compared with averages of 352 colleges and universities in the United States. This comparison is thus a comparison of broad averages. The data for the year 1948-49 are presented in Table 44. TABLE 44 Average Salaries in the University System of Georgia Compared with Average Salaries in 352 Colleges and Universities for the Academic Year 1948-1949 Rank Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor University System of Georgia _ $4,455 _ 3,621 _ _ 3,064 2,536 Median Average of 352 Colleges and Universities $4,500 3,900 3,437 2,839 Sources: Salaries in Georgia: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. In 352 Colleges and Universities: "Trends in Enrollment, Fees and Salaries in 352 Colleges and Universities." Prepared for Central Association of College and University Business Officers, June, 1949, by Wm. J. English. In the foregoing comparison, the 352 institutions comprise state universities, teachers colleges, municipal institutions and privately controlled institutions. In these institutions, the median THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 299 average in relation to the Georgia average is 12.0 per cent higher for instructors, 11.2 per cent higher for assistant professors and 7.7 per cent higher for associate professors. Further comparisons are made possible by data obtained by questionnaire from 15 selected institutions in the Southeastern States, by data provided in the study for the Central Association of College and University Business Officers referred to in Table 44 and by data from a study conducted by the U. S. Office of Education which sampled 147 selected institutions of the United States for 1947-48. The averages for the senior institutions for whites of the University System of Georgia are used as the basis of comparison. The data are shown in Table 45. TABLE 45 Average Salaries of Teachers and Research Workers in Senior Institutions of the University System of Georgia for 1948-1949, in Comparison with Practices Outside Georgia Rank Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor (3) (4) (1) (2) 1948-1949 1947-1948 1948-1949 1948-1949 Medians of Average Average Medians of Average Salaries in Salaries in Average Salaries in 69 Public Senior Salaries in State Universi- Institu- 15 Select- Universi- ties as tions of ed Institu- ties Enroll- shown in University tions of the ing U.S., F.S.A. System of Southeast- 587,561 Sampling Georgia ern States Students Study $4,685 3,708 3,196 2,610 $5,082 4,130 3,555 2,900 $5,000 4,241 3,598 2,935 $5,758 4,594 3,892 2,950 Sources: Columns (1) and (2): Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. Column (3): English Study, ibid., Table 44. Column (4): F.S.A., U. S. Office of Education, Circular No. 254, March 15, 1949. It will be seen from Table 45 that the median averages of salaries found by English (Column 3) is very close to median practice in the 15 selected institutions of the Southeastern States (Column 2). The findings of the sampling study of the Office of Education are markedly higher. The evidence shows that median average salaries in selected institutions in the Southeast match those of the rest of the country. This comparison of salaries, similar to the comparison in Table 44, shows that salaries in 300 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Georgia are low. In relation to the average salaries paid in the senior institutions of the University System of Georgia, the medians of average salaries in 15 selected institutions of the Southeast reveal the salaries of professors to be 8.4 per cent higher, of associate professors 11.4 per cent higher, of assistant professors 11.2 per cent higher, and of instructors 11.1 per cent higher. Thus it may be concluded from this evidence that salaries in Georgia are low and that the competitive position of the University System as it relates to staffing for the future from the supply of trained men and women in the United States is poor. Unless there is a substantial adjustment, the University System cannot hope to maintain institutions of the first rank, but mustin future-expect a decline in standards as present ability is replaced by mediocrity or less. In Table 45, the average salaries of all senior institutions were compared. It will be of value to compare averages of the individual senior units with the median averages of 15 selected institutions of the Southeastern States. This is done in Table 46. It can be seen from Table 46 that the practices in assigning salaries are diverse. It is not supposed that the salaries should be uniform. It would be expected that average salaries of professors in the University and at Georgia Institute of Technology would be higher than in the other senior institutions due to the diverse functions performed and to the need for maintaining creative scholars on the staffs at high salaries. But the differences are greater than can be accounted for on this ground, and the differences in the lower ranks are difficult to explain. Why, for example, should a professor at Valdosta receive $500 a year more than a professor in the Teachers College? Table 46 reveals a need for further equalization of salaries in senior institutions through upgrading salaries in all institutions with particular attention to institutions possessing the lower averages. Within the institutions attention* must be given to salary levels for different professional personnel. The final salary comparison to be made will be the median salaries paid in 15 representative institutions in the Southeast- *Attention is directed to a study recently released by the Committee on Faculty Salaries of the American Society of Engineering Education which was published in "Higher Education" on September 15, 1949, Vol. VI, 1202. (Federal Security Agency, Office of Education, Higher Education Division.) This study reports on 1948-1949 salaries in 339 professional schools. Data are presented for salaries in architecture, business, dentistry, engineering and law. ~ l;l ~ TABLE 46 Average Salaries in Senior Units of the University System of Georgia and Median Average Salaries in 15 Selected Institutions of the Southeastern States-1948-1949 ;3 ~ (1) 1948-1949 ~ Median of m Average Salaries in (3) (6) (8) g~ Rank 15 Selected Georgia Institu- (2) Institute tions of the University of Tech- (4) North (5) Georgia Georgia University State (7) of College Valdosta Georgia is: o ':r;I Southeast- of Georgia nology Georgia Teachers for State Atlanta ern States at Athens Atlanta College College Women College Division o l;l Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor _ $5,082 $4,612 $5,184 $4,188 _ 4,130 3,744 4,046 3,637 $4,275 $4,181 $4,675 $4,417 3,260 3,251 3,397 3,893 ~ ~ _ _ 3,555 2,900 3,241 2,524 3,317 2,721 3,108 2,500 2,653 2,805 2,904 3,398 2,240 2,496 2,210 2,718 Sources: Column 1: Table 45, above. Columns 2-8 inclusive: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. I;.l.:) o.... 302 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF ern States and average salaries paid within classes of institutions in the University System of Georgia. Thus it will be possible to see what the practices are in the Negro institutions, the junior colleges and the senior institutions for whites. The data are presented in Table 47. TABLE 47 Average Salaries in Classes of Institutions of University System of Georgia, Compared with Medians of Average Salaries in 15 Selected Institutions of the Southeastern States--1948-1949 Rank (1) 1948-1949 Medians of (3) (4) Average (2) 1948-1949 1948-1949 Salaries in 1948-1949 Negro In- Junior 15 Selected Senior In- stitutions Institu- Institu- stitutions of Uni- tions of tions of the University versity University Southeast- System of System of System of ern States Georgia Georgoia Georgia Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor $5,082 4,130 3,555 2,900 $4,685 3,708 3,196 2,610 $4,004 3,122 2,680 2,141 $3,295 3,026 2,734 2,339 Sources: Column 1: Table 45, above. Columns 2, 3 and 4: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. It is evident that salaries in the Negro institutions and junior colleges also need attention. Contrast, for example, the practices in Virginia State College for Negroes. There the average salaries are: professor $4,370, associate professor $3,888, assistant professor $3,182, and instructor $2,426. It will be useful to consider salary ranges also. In Table 48 are shown the minimum and maximum for the University System of Georgia in 1948-49, compared with those of the University of North Carolina and with the medians of similar measures for 15 selected institutions of the Southeastern States. The University of North Carolina appears to have the highest salary scale among the public institutions of the Southeast. For this reason the ranges at that institution are shown. Median practice among 15 representative institutions is shown in Column 3. As an aid in further study of the salary scale, attention is called to a study by Henry G. Badger of the U. S. Office of THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 303 TABLE 48 Salary Range for Academic Year at University of Georgia, University of North Carolina, and Median of Ranges at 15 Selected Institutions of the Southeastern States--1948-1949 (1) University of Georgia at Athens (2) University of North Carolina Chapel Hill (3) Medians of 15 Selected Institutions of the Southeastern States Rank Low High Low High Low High Professor ____ $4,000 Associate Professor ____ 3,200 Assistant Professor ____ 2,500 Instructor _______ 1,950 $6,500 4,500 4,000 3,200 $5,600 $18,000 4,600 8,640 3,500 6,000 2,700 5,500 $4,275 3,650 3,000 2,450 $5,750 4,670 4,000 3,350 Sources: Column 1: Statement Prepared in Office of Treasurer, Board of Regents, August 9, 1949. Columns 2 and 3: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. Education entitled "Construction of College Teachers' Salary Schedules."* It is probable that the median of ranges in selected institutions as shown above is too restrictive as applied to professors. It is believed that the upper limit at both the University and Georgia Institute of Technology might well reach $10,000 to $12,000 for a limited number of outstanding creative scholars. So far in this discussion of salaries, the tenure period considered has been for an academic year. But in the entire University System, 168 out of 1,176 persons--or 14.3 per cent--are employed on a 12-month basis and receive 33-1/3 per cent more salary than if employed on an academic year basis. Due to the operation of summer sessions, many of the teachers are employed to teach in summer for which additional compensation is provided. For those employed on an academic year basis, some are paid in 9 monthly installments, some in 10 installments and some in 12 installments. Among the 15 selected institutions of the Southeast, 4 employ their entire faculties on a 12-month basis. Thus the majority employ personnel for the academic year, although administrative heads often are employed on a 12-month basis. Practices differ in paying summer session salaries. At Alabama Polytechnic, the *American Association of University Professors, Bulletin, Vol. 34, No.2, 1948, pp. 406 ff. 304 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF salary for a 10-week summer session is 25 per cent of the salary for an academic year. At the University of Arkansas, the salary for 12 months is 20 per cent more than the academic year salary. At the University of Tennessee, summer session salaries are paid according to a schedule. Practice can best be appraised by comparing the median of average salaries for the academic year and for 12 months in the 15 institutions of the Southeast. This is done in Table 49. TABLE 49 Medians of Average Salaries of Teaching and Research Personnel for the Academic Year and 12-Month Year-1948-49 at 15 Selected Institutions of the Southeastern States Rank (1) Median Average Salary Academic Year (2) Median Average Salary 12-Mo. Year (3) Per Cent (2) is Greater Than (1) Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor _ $5,082 _ 4,130 _ 3,555 _ 2,900 $5,993 4,637 4,242 3,593 17.9% 12.3% 19.3% 23.9% Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. It would seem from Table 49 that it is not general practice to add one-third salary for the summer session. Rather, the payment seems more generally to be one-sixth or one-fifth of the academic year salary. It is understood that in Georgia all 12month persons receive a full month vacation with pay, but no such privilege is available with pay for academic year people. It is suggested that all academic appointments be paid on the basis of 10 months' service with an addition of 20 per cent for summer session teaching-teaching on this basis being a part of the academic year contract. Recapitulation Concerning Professional Personnel While the distribution of professional personnel according to rank is perhaps not optimum in Georgia institutions, primary concern centers on qualifications of new recruits and the evidence of lack of academic preparation. Presuming that this is due primarily to the low salaries that are paid, it is believed that on the average professional salaries must be raised 12.5 per cent. This would permit paying academic year people for 10 months' service, and would provide funds to establish some top ranking THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 305 positions at the University and at Georgia Institute of Technology. Provision for Retirement of Teachers The Georgia Teacher Retirement Law was enacted in 1943 and amended in 1949. Teachers of the University System became eligible to participate in this plan at its inception, and those employed subsequent to January, 1944, have been required as a condition of employment to participate. In the discussion of provisions, a knowledge of the Georgia Teacher Retirement Law, as amended, together with Related Statutes, June, 1949, will be assumed. No effort will be made to cover all details, but rather, in general to assess the adequacy of the provision made and to make such recommendations as seem appropriate. The Regents possess the report of 1948 by James Holliday in which he describes the provisions of the law and recommends that supplementary provision be made by the Board of Regents. The power of the Regents to supplement the provisions of the law are expressly stated in the law as amended, June, 1949. In recent years there has been a pronounced trend in the nation to recognize age 65 as the normal date for retirement. The recent survey of retirement plans put out by the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association, 522 Fifth Avenue, New York, will confirm this. It is, of course, the normal age of retirement under Federal Social Security provisions. Experience has shown that while some teachers retain their abilities long past 65 years of age, for many this age finds them with declining powers. A man who now begins employment and who serves continuously in the University System for thirty years as an able professor, for example, and receives throughout the period more than $3,000 per year and at the time of retirement receives $6,000 per year would receive an allowance on his life alone of $110.10 per month at age 65. This is not enough for him, and certainly not enough for him and his family. Had the professor been employed at 30, his expectation would be increased to $143.55 per month-still not enough. For those professors who have served the university or college in the past the benefits described will be lowered due to the lower salary scale prevailing before the war. Many examples could be cited, but this one is enough. The 306 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF University System cannot secure and hold able professors unless it provides in a suitable fashion for their retirement. Under the provisions of the Teacher Retirement Law, the employees (teachers) contribute 5 per cent of the first $3,000 of salary, and the State adds its payment of 2.73 per cent of the compensation for the employees' normal benefit, and 4.10 per cent for the accrued liability. All the State's contribution is paid directly, and the cost of such provision as is made does not therefore appear upon the books of account of the System. Dr. Holliday has noted some essentials of a satisfactory supplementary plan. (1) Participation should be compulsory. (2) The contract should be an individual rather than a group one, with power reserved to the annuitant to control the date on which the annuity begins, as well as to select at that time the type of annuity that will best serve him. (3) There should be nothing in the arrangement to impede professional mobility. (4) The contract should be non-cashable. (5) The contract should permit additional premium payments by the holder as he may desire. This is the type of contract offered by the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, founded and sponsored by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, a sound, rapidly growing company that was founded to meet the retirement needs of teachers, and that has specialized in meeting them for 30 years. A great part of the college teachers of the nation hold individual annuity contracts with this company. Its contracts, therefore, permit professional mobility. To summarize the view to this point: (1) Provision should be made by the Regents to assure to its teachers an adequate retirement allowance. The provision made under the present Teacher Retirement Law is inadequate. (2) The normal age of retirement should be fixed at 65 for the University System rather than 70, and financial provision should be made on this basis. (3) The Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, 522 Fifth Avenue, New York, and the form of contract it uses, are recommended as means through which provision for supplements may be made. Each year the full cost of retirement as related to the service for that year should be borne. It is thus necessary to fix the THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 307 standards for retirement allowances, and to translate these into matched premium payments. William C. Greenough, Assistant to the President of the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, states: "Early in 1920, when interest rates were considerably higher and when expected longevity of annuitants was less than at present, colleges established retirement plans calling for premium payments equal to 10 per cent of each participant's salary. That early pattern persisted strongly until about 1943. Colleges thought of each change in annuity rates as necessarily a reduction in retirement benefits, rather than as a signal for a revision upward in the premiums to be paid. During recent years many colleges have revised their plans to provide for larger premiums and larger benefits and by the end of 1946 forty-four college plans provided for contributions in excess of the old 10 per cent basis, usually about 15 per cent of salary."* Mr. Greenough presents a table** showing the benefit (single life annuity, male) expressed as a percentage of fixed salary to be expected under the assumption that the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association's 1948 deferred annuity rates are in effect at the time of retirement. These benefits are based on retirement at age 65, premiums of 15 per cent of salary, as follows: Age When First Premium Is Paid Benefits Expressed as a Per Cent of Salary with Retirement at Age 65, Based on Contributions of 15% of Salary 25 69.0% 30 56.7% 35 45.7% 40 35.8% 45 27.0% 50 19.0% 55 12.0% It is recommended that the provision in the University System of Georgia be not less than that which could be secured from a matched 7.5 per cent of salary contribution (15 per cent of salary in all). It is considered doubtful whether any maximum value on annuity should be set. If set, it should be high. *"College Retirement and Insurance Plans," p. 54 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948). **Ibid., p. 53. 308 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Under existing conditions the recommendations of the Survey Staff are as follows: (1) Make provision for supplementary allowances through the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America. (2) Use the standard provided by total contribution of 15 per cent of salary as the basis for formulating the premium rate as it applies to the future. (3) Provide for past service benefits by making single premium payments at the time of retirement, covering both the employer's and employee's share as related to a salary representative of past service. In light of the low salary situation in the System this might appropriately be the salary for, say, 1948-49. The single premium should cover all the years of service to the initiation of the supplementary plan; and include, of course, accumulations of interest at the going contractual rate. It is further recommended that the advice of the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America be sought and that a plan for supplements be based on study of retirement expectation of all employees. Supplementary benefits may thus be evaluated in light of the cost of providing them. It is possible, however, that the conditions which now prevail may in the near future be profoundly altered. If the Federal Social Security coverage should be broadened to permit inclusion of State employees, the State would need to elect its course for the future. It is probable that if social security became available it would, because of its favorable economic aspects and because its benefits are vested in the teacher, become the basic provision, at least for new employees of the University System, with sup.plementary provisions made through the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America. It is proposed that the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America be requested to make actuarial studies and recommendations. RECAPITULATION In this section, institutional costs and cost factors have been analyzed. The following observations have been made: 1. The proportion of current educational and general expenditures devoted to organized research and to extension parallels THEluNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 309 the average practice of the Southeastern States. 2. Current expenditure per full-time student in Georgia is low, when compared with expenditures in land-grant institutions in the United States and in the Southeastern States. 3. While almost three-quarters of the resident instruction in Georgia is found in large units of operation, the balance is in small units. 4. There is great variation in resident instruction costs among the member institutions of the University System. 5. Factors causing variations, such as credit hours. taught, class size, and teaching load, should be studied by the administration of the institutions. 6. Expenditures for plant operation and maintenance have been low. 7. The smaller institutions of the System have a high administrative overhead. 8. With respect to professional personnel, Georgia needs to re-examine the distribution of staff according to rank. 9. From a study of the number of faculty members who hold the Doctor's Degree, it would appear that the University System is not adding enough well-prepared scholars in the junior ranks. 10. Professional salaries are low, and should be raised an average of 12.5 per cent. 11. Provision should be made for supplementing the present retirement allowances. 310 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF SECTION IV INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT The State of Georgia has been increasing its appropriation for the support of its institutions of higher education. A summary of appropriations made to the University System, together with payments made by the State on appropriations specifically for buildings and equipment is shown in Table 50. TABLE 50 State Support of Institutions of Higher Education in Georgia, 1940-1949 Year Payments on AppropriaState Appropriations tions for Specific Build- to University System ings and Equipment 1939-40 1940-41 1941-42 1942-43 1943-44 1944-45 1945-46 1946-47 1947-48 1948-49 _______________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- $1,772,500.00 1,593,483.11 1,907,993.52 2,202,267.79 2,158,707.30 2,565,000.00 3,400,000.00 3,400,000.00 3,411,000.00 5,572,000.00 $ 400,000.00 150,000.00 ---------------- ----------------- ---------------------------------- 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 4,058,742.20 214,256.25 Sources: Appropriations to University System: Statement by Auditor or State of Georgia. Payments on appropriations for buildings and equipment: Statement prepared in office of Treasurer June 23, 1949. The increase has been substantial, but it remains to measure the adequacy of this support to the services to be performed. INTERSTATE COMPARISONS OF SUPPORT OF ALL PUBLICLY CONTROLLED INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION In 1940, Georgia ranked forty-fifth among the states with respect to support of higher education, and forty-fourth with respect to support of elementary and secondary education.* "'Support per capita of youth 18-21 years of age, and children 5-17 years of age: see T. L. Hungate, "Financing the Future of Higher Education," Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, New York, 1946, pp. 260, 262. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 311 In 1940 the State of Georgia provided 29.6 per cent of current educational and general income of publicly controlled institutions of higher education of the State, while state support in the Southeast was 46.8 per cent and in the entire United States 48.6 per cent. The sources of support are shown in Table 51. TABLE 51 Percentage Distribution of Educational and General Income in 1940 of Publicly Controlled Institutions of Higher Education in Georgia, the Southeast, and the United States United States Southeast Georgia Student Fees __________________________ 18.6 Endowment Earnings ---------- 2.3 Federal Government ______________ 12.3 State Government __________________ 48.6 County and City Government 8.2 Private Gifts and Grants______ 1.7 Sales and Services of Organ- ized Activities Related to Instruction _________________________ 6.9 Miscellaneous _______________________ 1.4 21.8 34.2 2.6 2.2 16.5 20.6 46.8 29.6 3.6 6.1 1.2 4.3 5.5 2.7 2.0 .3 100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. At the same time, the fees of students provided 34.2 per cent of the support in Georgia, 21.8 in the Southeast, and 18.6 per cent in the nation as a whole. Thus, in 1940, the pattern of support in Georgia differed from that found in neighboring states and in the nation. More support was provided by student fees, less by the State. By 1947-48 the enrollments in publicly controlled institutions of Georgia had risen to 26,804. This was almost double the 13,663 enrollments of 1939-40. The sources from which the University System derived its support of $18.7 millions in 1947-48 are shown in Chart X. 312 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF CHART X SOURCES or SUPPORT FOR THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM: 1947-48 (IN MILLIONS) A. EDUCATIONAL AND GENERAL INCOME STUDENT FEES STATE ALLOTMENT ED OTHER PUBLIC FUNDS I$.4 ENDOWMENT, GIFTS. GRANTS I!I!I OlHER SOURCES B. STATE APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL OUTLAY Figures are not available for the entire United States, but the existing pattern of support in Georgia and in the ten Southeastern States can be ascertained from Table 52. As in 1940 the pattern of support in the University System in 1948 reveals more reliance on fees and less on funds from the State. These figures are for current support alone. It must be kept in mind that these figures on income are for all three functions-teaching, research, and extension services, and that the figures become more meaningful when related to the function they serve. Receipts for capital outlay for 1947-48 for the University System and for the ten Southeastern States (Georgia excluded) are summarized in Table 53. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 313 TABLE 52 Current Educational and General Income of Publicly Controlled Institutions of Higher Education for the Southeastern States (Georgia excluded) and for Georgia, 1947-1948 Ten South- eastern States Amount Amount Georgia (In Thou- (In Thou- sands of sands of Dollars) Per Cent Dollars) Per Cent Student Fees, including fees paid by Veterans Adminis- tration $43,420 Federal Government State Government 13,465 57,959 County and City Government 2,017 Endowment Gifts and Grants 2,898 Sales and Services of Educa- tional Departments 1,649 Other 3,133 34.9 $7,230 50.7 10.8 1,459 10.2 46.6 4,2301 29.7 1.6 145 1.0 2.3 388 2.7 1.3 6362 4.5 2.5 172 1.2 Total $124,541 100.0 $14,260 100.0 Sources: U. S. Office of Education, Unpublished Reports for States Other than Georgia; the Financial Report of the Treasurer of the Board of Regents for Georgia. 1 Regents' allotment was $4,007 thousands; the remaining $223 thousands was provided by other state agencies, notably the State Department of Education, for vocational education. 2Total income was $1,235,000 of which $599,000 is treated as an expense credit. TABLE 53 Receipts for Capital Outlay, 1947-48, for the University System of Georgia and for the Ten Southeastern States (Georgia Excluded) Amount in Thousands of Dollars Georgia Alabama Arkansas Florida Ken~~cky LOUISIana Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Virginia State $ 3,869 1,859 1,218 6,175 2,871 3,280 2,411 10,297 1,025 4,061 7,816 Gifts and Grants 9 111 25 17 80 Other $ 331 2,995 1,737 65 1,457 196 28 2,906 1,719 380 Total $4,200* 4,854 2,964 6,351 4,353 3,476 2,439 13,220 1,025 5,780 8,276 TotaL -'-$4_1-:-,0_1_3 24_2 1_1~,4_8_3_ _5_2:-,7_38 Amount actually expended. 314 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF REGENTS' ALLOTMENT OF STATE FUNDS WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM The Regents each year allot to each institution a sum for current support. For the year 1948-49, the amount so allotted was $5,506,643.96. If it is assumed that fees paid by students TABLE 54 Regents' Allotment of State Funds to Institutions and Estimate of How It Was Used Held in Applied to Applied to Reserve or Cost of Cost of Applied to Resident Research and Capital Senior Institutions Allotment Instruction Extension Outlay University of Georgia Athens Atlanta General Extension Savannah $1,077,000.00 75,500.00 $_5_2__1__,_8__5__9__._0__1_ $216,313.31 $33785,,850207..0608 40,000.00 __________________ 40,000.00 25,000.00* Georgia Institute of Technology _ Medical College _ North Georgia College _ Georgia State College for Women _ Georgia Teachers College Valdosta State College 735,000.00 470,000.00* 235,000.00 482,000.00 113,000.00 168,250.00 332,770.06 189,119.84 427,668.01 95,533.82 124,483.26 369,048.36 3,596.56 33,181.58 ~---------------- 45,880.16 50,735.43 17,466.18 43,516.74 Junior Institutions Georgia Southwestern College _ West Georgia College _ Middle Georgia College__ South Georgia College _ Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College _ 80,000.00 80,000.00 65,100.00 104,300.00 109,000.00 80,000.00 79,613.27 63,535.31 66,619.60 63,957.92 386.73 1,564.69 37,680.40 45,042.08 Experiment and Exten- sion Units Agricultural Extension __ Experiment _ Tifton (CPES) _ 481,000.00* 137,550.00* 194,250.00* Negro Institutions Albany State College 138,075.00 Fort Valley State CoIL 184,275.00 Savannah State College _ 200,143.96 108,893.09 162,176.39 169,228.99 2,487.14 4,511.48 26,620.52 17,587.13 30,914.97 Other: General Central Office Construction Dept. Graduate Education Regional Council for Education UnSiuvrevresiyty System 114,800.00 26,500.00 66,900.00 49,000.00 55,000.00 TotaL $5,506,643.96 *Ncrt computed. Source: Allotments; Report of Treasurer, Board of Regents, June 30, 1949. Estimate of use made by Survey Analyst. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 315 should be applied to finance their education, and endowment income and gifts and Federal grants are applied according to such restrictions that exist, then State appropriations are the final moneys to be applied to finance current operations. At each institution some small income, termed miscellaneous income, is received; this income might be the first to be assigned to surplus. On the basis of these assumptions, the amount of allotment and its use in 1948-49 are shown in Table 54. PATTERNS OF FINANCE OF TEACHING UNITS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM In Table 55 the institutional patterns of finance of resident instruction are shown. In arriving at these estimates, it was assumed that fees, endowments, and gifts were first used to finance the teaching program, and that state funds and a small item titled "Miscellaneous" were the last funds to be applied. TABLE 55 Institutional Patterns of Finance, University System, 1948-49 Percentage Distribution of Support as Applied to Current Cost of Resident Instruction Institution Matriculation and Other Fees Tuition NonResident and Federal Veterans Funds State Funds Endow- ments and Gifts Total Senior Institutions UnAivtheernsisty of Georgia 45.9 Atlanta 54.5 30.7 45.5 Georgia Institute of Technology 44.0 40.0 North Georgia College 29.7 6.9 Georgia Teachers College 40.1 21.7 Valdosta State College 27.0 .7 Georgia State College for Women 25.5 .8 2.7 20.1 14.6 63.1 38.2 72.3 73.5 .6 100.0 100.0 1.4 100.0 .3 100.0 100.0 100.0 .2 100.0 Junior Institutions Middle Georgia College 27.3 13.7 South Georgia College 36.9 14.0 West Georgia College______ 34.5 12.8 Abraham Baldwin Ag. Co1.30.4 14.0 GeCoorgllieageSouthwestern 23.7 6.0 59.0 100.0 49.1 100.0 52.7 100.0 53.5 2.1 100.0 69.0 1.3* 100.0 Negro Institutions Savannah State College__ 36.5 23.3 40.2 Fort Valley State College 32.1 6.3 11.0 50.5 Albany State College 35.9 7.3 56.8 100.0 0.1 100.0 100.0 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. *Miscellaneous Income. 316 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FROM STUDENT FEES It has been shown that student fees in Georgia provide an unusually large proportion of the cost of higher education in comparison with other states of the Southeast, or with the United States generally. Further, the expenditure per student (as measured in land-grant colleges) is lower in Georgia than the averages for neighboring states and the United States. It remains to examine the size of fees charged to students. In general, the fees for resident students that are applicable to the cost of institutional operation are: (1) $75 per year at institutions for Negroes; (2) $90 per year at the junior colleges; (3) $105 per year at the Atlanta Division of the University; and (4) $135 per year at all senior institutions, except the University-$150, and Georgia Tech-$169.50. The fees charged appear reasonable in all but the senior institutions. The fees in these institutions-where the larger proportion of students are enrolled-are high. A survey made by Benjamin Fine (see New York Times, October 2, 1949) reveals that the average undergraduate tuition fee for 1949-50 in 130 public institutions is $103. The fee in six large public universities of the Central States-Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota and Ohio-averages an estimated $100. The fee in public universities in the ten Southeastern States is an estimated average of $114. These fees compare with $135 at the smaller senior institutions of Georgia, $150 at the University of Georgia, and $169.50 at Georgia Tech. In the 10 public universities in the 10 Southeastern States, only the universities of Virginia and North Carolina have fees higher than do the two top institutions in Georgia. The fees applicable to institutional operation are less than $100 in the universities of South Carolina, Louisiana, Florida, Arkansas and Kentucky. Thus, it can be concluded that fees at the senior institutions are high in relation to student fees charged in similar institutions elsewhere. This fact will be of use in considering plans for support of higher education in Georgia in the future. INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FROM STATE FUNDS From Table 55, it is evident that institutional patterns of finance for resident instruction bear little resemblance one to THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 317 another. State support is low at the large student centersAthens and Atlanta-20.1 per cent at Athens, none at the Atlanta Division where fees more than meet the cost, and 14.6 per cent at Georgia Institute of Technology. State support is high in the small institutions-almost threequarters of the current cost at the women's colleges; only 38.2 per cent at the Georgia Teachers College. It is possible that the difference in support accorded units of the University System is brought about to some extent by differences in fees from veterans and from out-of-state students. As the veteran enrollment declines, these patterns of support must be materially altered. It will be helpful in suggesting support policies for the future to have this knowledge of practice in the present. ABILITY OF THE STATE TO SUPPORT HIGHER EDUCATION No judgment can be made of the practice of the State in financing higher education, unless some measures are used to estimate its ability to pay for higher education. Two factors in the financial future of Georgia are impressive: (1) the economy of Georgia is well diversified, with progress stimulated by a confident leadership; (2) per capita income in the State, which in 1940 was equal to 54.8 per cent of the national per capita income, had increased to $971 in 1948, equal to 68.9 per cent of the national per capita income. The diversity of the economy is shown in Table 56. TABLE 56 Major Sources of Income Payments: Selected Components as a Per Cent of Total Income, 1948 Components United Southeastern States Region Georgia Agricultural Income _ 10.2 16.9 14.4 Government Income Payments _ 13.9 16.9 16.0 Manufacturing Payrolls _ 22.4 17.0 18.9 Trade and Service Income _ 27.0 25.5 27.8 All Other Income _ 26.5 23.7 22.9 TotaL__________________________ 100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Survey of Current Business, August, 1949, p. 10, U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce. 318 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF That Georgia has well-diversified economic activities is apparent from Table 56. Its agricultural income is above the national average, but not as high a proportion as for the region as a whole. Manufacturing payrolls are relatively higher than in the region as a whole, and the gap between the figure for Georgia and for the nation is becoming narrower. Trade and service income are close to the national average. But Table 56 is only a picture at a particular moment. It does not reflect the forces of change. In agriculture the farm income dollar in 1925 was 53 cents from cotton and 7 cents from tobacco. In 1948, it was 28 cents from cotton and 11 cents from tobacco. Livestock and livestock products accounted for 22 cents in 1925; 38 cents in 1948. The balances were accounted for in crops of fruits, nuts, grain, hay, vegetables, and miscellaneous crops18 cents in 1925; 23 cents in 1948. The last ten years have witnessed a revolution in agricultural production and efficiency. While the cotton acreage is down, the yield per acre is up so that about one-half the acreage produces about the same crop. Tractors on the southern farms were 162 per cent more in 1948 than in 1940, indicating the degree to which mechanization of agriculture has advanced. Farming in the South, as elsewhere, is rapidly becoming a commercial undertaking. "Strides in industrialization have contributed significantly to the Southeast's relatively large income growth since 1929. In line with this long-term tendency, in both 1947 and 1948 factory payrolls increased faster in the region than nationally."* The census of manufactures of 1947 reveals that in Georgia in the 8 years from 1939 to 1947, the value of manufactured goods shipped increased 274 per cent, the number of employees 46 per cent, and salaries paid them 317 per cent. Total income payments to individuals, 1929-48, are shown in Table 57. It is apparent that such payments had reached more than three billions of dollars in 1948, an increase over 1940 of 212 per cent. This compares with increases of 215 per cent in the southeastern *Quoted from "Survey of Current Business," August, 1949, p. 14. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 319 TABLE 57 Total Income Payments to Individuals, 1929-48 (Millions of Dollars) Year United Southeastern States Region Georgia 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 $ 82,617 73,325 61,971 47,432 46,273 53,038 58,558 68,000 72,211 66,045 70,601 75,852 92,269 117,196 141,831 153,306 157,190 171,548 189,212 206,011 $ 8,681 7,127 6,064 4,979 5,136 6,354 6,976 8,132. 8,457 7,904 8,414 9,043 11,580 15,594 19,722 21,907 22,662 23,930 26,205 28,498 $ 956 798 667 560 596 735 800 907 920 863 901 986 1,241 1,648 2,176 2,426 2,484 2,621 2,904 3,076 Source: SUl'V'ey of Current Business, Augus,t, 1949, U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce. region and 171 per cent for the nation as a whole. These figures show that the flow of increase to the Southeastern States has improved relatively in the past eight years. An even better view may be had if total income payments are divided by total population to achieve per capita income payments. The figures are shown in Table 58. In 1940 the per capita income of the Southeast was equal to 56.0 per cent of the per capita income of the nation. In Georgia, it was equal to 54.8 per cent of the national figure. In 1948, the per capita income of the Southeast was $957, equal to 67.9 per cent of the per capita income of the nation of $1410. In Georgia the per capita income was $971, slightly higher than for the region, and equal to 68.9 per cent of the national figure. The ability of Georgia to support education, as measured by per capita income, is compared with the ability of the Southeastern States and the United States in Chart XI. 320 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 58 Per Capita Income Payments by States and Regions, 1929-1948 (Dollars) United States Southeast Georgia 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 $ 680 596 500 ~------________ 380 368 420 460 531 561 509 539 575 693 876 1059 1161 1192 1215 1319 1410 $344 279 235 191 195 239 260 301 310 287 303 322 403 538 676 771 815 822 899 957 $329 274 227 189 200 245 264 298 301 280 290 315 389 515 684 781 826 826 925 971 Source: Survey of Current Business, August, 1949, U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce. The fact that Georgia has improved her economic status and stands in ability equal or superior to her neighbors is of significance in evaluating her practices in the support of higher education. It is believed that the best single measure of the ability of the State to support education, including higher education, is the per capita income of her people. AN EVALUATION OF STATE SUPPORT OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION Two periods are selected in which to examine the practice of the State in support of higher education-the first is 1940, the last normal year before the war; the second is 1948, the latest year for which comparable data on institutional support are available. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 321 CHART XI ABILITY TO SUPPORT EDUCATION (1948 PER CAPITA INCOMES) GEORGIA SOUTHEAST UNIlED SlATES In Table 59 the appropriations made in 1939-40 by the several Southeastern States for current educational and general support of institutions of higher education are compared with the Georgia appropriation. The figures are made more meaningful by showing the amount per capita of the youth of the State of college age18-21, inclusive, and by measuring the support as a fraction of 1 per cent of total income payments to individuals. This last measure may be described as the effort made by the State in supporting institutions of higher education. It would appear from the evidence in Table 59 that in 1940 Georgia was typical in the amount of public support accorded higher education. Five Southeastern States provided a per capita support in excess of $10; three at the $7-$9 level; two, along with Georgia, the $6 level. 322 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 59 State Appropriations for Current Educational and General Expenditures for Higher Education in 1940 State Amount Expressed as a Fraction of One Per Cent of Total Amount in Amount Per Individual Thousands Capita of Youth Incomes of Dollars Age 18-21 of State Georgia Alabama Arkansas Florida Ken~~cky LOUIsIana Mississippi North Carolina $ 1,773 _ _ 2,371 1,516 _ 2,517 _ 2,434 _ 5,966 _ 1,152 _ 2,465 $ 6.77 10.39 9.77 18.34 11.06 31.90 6.56 7.90 .180 .311 .307 .264 .277 .704 .259 .218 South Carolina _ 1,562 8.96 .287 Tennessee Virginia _ 1,502 _ 2,345 6.56 10.56 .162 .208 All States in the United States 151,223 15.50 .199 Source: U. S. Office of Education, "Biennial Survey of Education, 1940." Viewed from the point of view of effort, the State ranked low -all states achieving a level of state current support of more than .20 of one per cent except Tennessee and Georgia. Attention may now be turned to levels of support accorded in 1948. The current educational and general income for the publicly controlled institutions of the Southeastern States (Georgia excluded) was compared with Georgia in Table 52. Figures for the United States are not at this time available. The total receipts for capital outlay in publicly controlled institutions in the ten Southeastern States was in 1947-48 equal to 42.3 per cent of the current income; state appropriations to 32.9 per cent. In Georgia the state appropriation was equal to 27.1 per cent of educational and general income. If the appropriation of the State of Georgia for higher education, both for current and capital purposes, is expressed as a per cent of total income payments to individuals of the State, a measure of effort to support higher education is provided. This comparison is made in Table 60. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 323 TABLE 60 State Appropriations for Higher Education, 1947-48, for Current and Capital Purposes in Georgia and in Ten Southeastern States States Expressed as a Fraction of One Per Cent of Total Amount Income Payments to (in thousands) Individuals Georgia Current Capital Total _ _ $4,230 3,869 .137 .126 _ 8,099 .263 SoCutuhreraesnttern States Capital _ _ 57,959 41,013 .228 .161 Total _ $98,972 .389 Source: Georgia: Report of Treasurer, Board of Regents. Southeastern States: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. Whereas, Georgia's effort to provide current support of higher education was measured in 1940 as .180 of one per cent of the income of individuals of the State, the figure in 1948 had declined to .137 per cent. It was in 1948 only 60.0 per cent as great as the effort made in the other Southeastern States, and when appropriations to capital outlay are included, the total becomes .263 for Georgia, and .389 for the other Southeastern States. Thus, in terms of total effort, that of Georgia was equal to but 67.6 per cent of the effort being put forth by her neighbors. It will be of interest to relate the effort of Georgia in 1948 to support higher education with the efforts exerted in that year by other Southeastern States. The data are presented in Table 61. 324 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF TABLE 61 Efforts of Southeastern States to Support Higher Education-1948 (Arranged in order of rank in total state support) State Amount of State Support (In Millions) Current Capital Paid to Indi- viduals (In Millions) Effort Expressed as a Fraction of One Per Cent of Total Income Payments to Individuals Current Capital Total Florida Louisiana North Carolina Virginia Arkansas South Carolina Alabama Mississippi Tennessee Kentucky Georgia 9.4 6.2 $2,762 .339 .223 .562 10.4 3.3 2,597 .401 .126 .527 5.9 10.3 5.3 7.8 3,531 .168 .292 .460 3,326 .160 .235 .395 4.3 1.2 1,672 .256 .073 .329 4.5 1.0 1,714 .265 .060 .325 6.4 1.9 2,585 .248 .072 .320 2.6 2.4 1,603 .162 .150 .312 4.9 4.1 4.4 2.9 3,036 .163 .134 .297 2,596 .168 .111 .279 4.21 3.9 3,076 .137 .126 .263 Source: Georgia: Report of Treasurer, Board of Regents. Southeastern States: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. 1Regents' allotment was 4.0; other state agencies provided .2. The foregoing table reveals that Georgia ranks lowest among the Southeastern States in relative effort to support higher education. When total support (for current and capital purposes) is considered, the five states-Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Virginia, and Arkansas-are at the top of the list. The effort of these five states combined is .254 for current purposes, .207 for capital purposes-a total of .461-just 75.2 per cent above that of Georgia. For comparative purposes, however, those states should be selected that lead in effort to provide current support, because 8upport for current operations can be assumed to be recurring. On this basis the five leading states are Louisiana, Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas, and Alabama. Together their effort to support higher education measured .309 for current support and .119 for capital outlay-a total of .428. Had Georgia in 1948 supported higher education at the average level of all the Southeastern States, she would have appropriated $7 millions for current operations and $5 millions for capitala total of $12 millions. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 325 But if the State of Georgia had supported higher education at the level of the five states exerting the greatest effort toward current support, she would have appropriated $9.5 millions for current operations and $3.7 millions for capital-a total of $13.2 millions. It would appear altogether reasonable for the State of Georgia to equal the efforts put forth by these five states. The per capita income of the five states together is estimated at $957 in 1948 compared with $971 in Georgia. A comparison of the actual support of higher education by the State of Georgia with its potential support measured by efforts exerted in 1948 by neighboring states is shown in Chart XII. CHART XII GEORGIA'S SUPPORT FOR HIGHER EDUCATION :ACTUAL e POTENTIAL _ CAPITAL OUTLAY (IN MILLIONS) ~1:~M CURRENT OPERATIONS $12.0 $13.2 $7.9 SUPPOIH IN 1947-48 I SUPPORT IF EQUAL TO AVEQAGE EFfOQT OF S. E.. STATES SUPPORT IF EQUAL TO AVEQAGE EFFOQT OF TOP 5 S.E. STATES THE PROBLEM OF SUPPORT AND THE PLANS It has been pointed out that as the veteran enrollment declines and is replaced by non-veterans, the institutions will face major problems in financing their programs. To the degree that the problem is understood and plans are made, the difficulties will be minimized. 326 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF Important additions must be made both for current and capital purposes. The analysis of practice in support provided in this section will afford a basis for formulating appropriate principles of finance for higher education in Georgia. Guided by standards of quality and cost, it will be possible to set forth both an educational and financial program for higher education in Georgia that will serve the future needs of the State at a cost commensurate with the ability of the State to pay. It is not within the province of the Survey Staff to appraise the tax structure, but it is apparent that unless and until more effective means are utilized to secure from the people the means to assure to them the services they want, there is little hope for the improvement of higher education in Georgia. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 327 SECTION V TOTAL COST OF HIGHER E,DUCATION AND FAMILY ABILITY TO PAY The cost of higher education to a student and his family is more than tuition. The cost of living must be taken into account. An examination of fee and living costs at publicly controlled institutions enrolling 19,708 students, and at privately controlled institutions enrolling 9,368 students permits the following estimate of averages for 1949-50. TABLE 62 Average Cost to Student for Full-time Study for Academic Year Per Cent Enrollment of Institutions Studied Living Cost Total Cost (Fees and Living Cost) In-State Students of Publicly Controlled Institutions Senior Institutions Junior Institutions Negro Institutions _ 78.2 _ 11.2 _ 10.6 $950 620 570 $1,140 727 670 100.0 Privately Controlled Institutions Senior Institutions _ 75.8 936 1,250 Junior Institutions _ 5.2 570 720 Negro Institutions _ 19.0 670 920 100.0 Source: Unpublished data on file in the Office of the Board of Regents. It will be seen that the average total cost of attending a senior institution in Georgia is $1,140 in a publicly controlled institution and $1,250 in a privately controlled institution. The latter is but 9.6 per cent greater than the former. The average cost of attending junior college is much lower-$727 in institutions publicly controlled, $720 in institutions privately controlled. In the Negro institutions a substantial differential exists between average total cost in publicly controlled and privately controlled institutions. 328 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF When parents decide to send their boy or girl to a publicly controlled college, they face a cost over a four-year period of $4,560 (average). Or, if it is a junior college, $1,454 in two years. The cost of a college education to a student and his family repre- sents a financial barrier the size of which often determines who may and who may not go. It is not a selection on the basis of personal qualifications alone, but also on the basis of ability to pay the cost. . With the cooperation of the superintendent of public instruction a questionnaire was sent to the principals of all accredited high schools of the State of Georgia, inquiring how many of the top 25 per cent of the 1949 graduating class did not go to college this fall, and why, in the opinion of the principal, they had not gone. Replies were received from principals of schools that in June 1949 graduated 10,441 seniors. Of the top 25 per cent of this group, or 2,610, 1,239 did not go to college. 1,239 is 47.5 per cent of 2,610-almost half. Almost half of the ablest group of youth of the State did not go to college. Of this number, in the opinion of the principals reporting, 941 or 75.9 per cent did not go because the family lacked the means. Thus, it can be estimated that 36.0 of the top 25 per cent of the graduates do not go on to collegenot because they lack interest or ability, but because they lack the necessary money. In 1948 the per capita income in Georgia was $971. Assuming the average family to consist of 3.5 persons, the average family income in Georgia in 1948 may be estimated at $3,398. This means that many families fall in lower income brackets. For the children of these families it is often true that the cost closes the door to college educational opportunity. This is a matter of concern. For the building of institutions, the maintaining of expensive faculties and physical facilities all presuppose that scholars will attend. So it is a serious matter when more than a third of the ablest scholars in prosperous times do not attend for lack of money. The State of New York maintains the "Scholarship Fund of the University of the State of New York." This fund consists of money appropriated by the legislature, and all gifts and bequests received for scholarship purposes. Scholars are selected under rules of the Regents who provide the examinations. The scholar- THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 329 ship is for $1,400 covering four years of study at any college of the State the student may choose, and the money may be used for college fees or for other expenses. There are no rules preventing the holder of a university scholarship from holding any other scholarship. The law provides that five scholarships "shall be awarded each county annually for each assembly district therein and shall be awarded to the county at large without regard to assembly district boundaries, except that no county shall have its total number of scholarships reduced below the total number it was entitled to as of September first, nineteen hundred forty-three ..."* This experience of New York is reported because it is a procedure which seeks to give opportunity to the able youth of the State. It is understood that Georgia has had a program for the selection of scholars but that it has now been abandoned in the interest of economy. Marshall** has observed: "There is no extravagance more prejudicial to the growth of the national wealth than that wasteful negligence which allows genius that happens to be born of lowly parentage to expend itself in lowly work." The curtailment of student aid by the State would seem contrary to the desired trend. Moreover, the program of selection should be of interest to philanthropists. Any aid that can make educational opportunity available to worthy youth should be encouraged. Separate attention is given in this survey to the standards for student life. It is estimated that about one-third of all property owned by the University System comprises facilities for the housing and feeding of students and staff. Some of these facilities have been provided by outright grants of state funds; others by investment of endowment; still others through the issuance of bonds; and finally from reserves of internal income, usually that of auxiliary activities. But for the most part, the dormitories and dining halls are paid for, and the making and funding of charges for interest on capital or for depreciation are not general practice. If it is in- *University of the State of New York, Handbook No. 34, May 1949, "University Scholarships." **Marshall, Alfred, "Principles of Economics," McMillan and Company, Ltd., London, 1936, p. 212. 330 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF tended to include such charges, corresponding amounts of cash should be transferred from operations to funded reserves. If, in fact, the student and his family are not expected to pay for interest on capital and for depreciation on plant, then charges to students should be kept closely related to cost. The philosophy should be not to charge students at the "market," but to assess to them such costs as the Regents determine they should bear. It is believed that the inclusion of charges for interest and amortization on auxiliary activities plant will raise the cost of higher education to the student and his family to the further restriction of the flow of young men and women from high school to college. It is therefore suggested that in general the financing of dormitories and dining halls as "self-liquidating projects" is inappropriate to the objectives of higher education in Georgia. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 331 SECTION VI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FINANCING THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA It will not be amiss, in attempting to gain the long view of finance for the University System, to pause to consider appropriate objectives and principles. By so doing, the proposals for improvement can be better understood, and the recommended policies for support and fund control can be more easily evaluated. OBJECTIVES FOR FINANCE The objectives of finance for higher education in Georgia are, of course, to implement the social policy of the State for higher education. But nowhere does such policy appear to be defined. Prior to World War I, and reaching far back through time, higher education in the United States and abroad was generally regarded as personal capital. It belonged essentially to the individual and-when the individual and his family possessed the necessary qualifications and the necessary funds-the investment of such funds was made if, generally, the outlook for money return justified it. The public interest was satisfied if the earnings prospects regulated the supply of a sufficient number of the practitioners needed. Thus it is that the support of higher education has come so largely from fees. Philanthropy has been directed to the support of study for the ministry and to the advancement of scholars that could not expect large money income as a result of their efforts. This pattern of support is consistent with the social philosophy of individualism. Prior to World War I, individualism was the dominant note, whether in economy or society or in government and, because the individual was regarded as the beneficiary, anticipated earnings and productiveness were associated with the personal capital required to prepare a young man as a doctor, a lawyer, or a leader in commerce. At the present time, while profound changes have taken place in our society, the pattern of finance adapted to the older conditions remains in force. The philosophy advanced here is not that of education as personal capital alone, but of education as personal wealth and capi- 332 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF tal for society as well. Under such a philosophy the problem of financing higher education is not the determination of the marginal efficiency of personal capital in terms of money income for those physically able, but the determination of the marginal efficiency of social capital in terms of the state and national income and the state and national wealth. This philosophy has yet to find full expression in public policies of the individual states and the federal government. Practices of finance of higher education in the State of Georgia make it evident that the State has rejected the "personal capital" theory, and has accepted-at least in part-the notion that higher education is capital for society. On no other ground could the State annually spend $5 to $8 millions of public money for this purpose. Yet, as will be shown, many practices prevail in the System which are not in harmony with the objectives of higher education most appropriate to present day democracy. Here principles of finance will be presented, and certain practices in the University System evaluated in light of them. ApPROPRIATE PRINCIPLES OF FINANCE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN GEORGIA Perhaps the best way to introduce these principles is in the form of questions: Who is to be educated? Who is to pay the cost? How determine and assure quality of educational opportunity? How make higher education available both geographically and through time? How attain economy and regulate the flow of money and its administration? How assure coordination of objectives, functions, and activities? It is the answers to these and similar questions that have occupied the attention of the Survey Staff. Not all of these questions are primarily financial, but all have implications for finance. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 333 Who Should Be Educated? If higher education were regarded as personal capital and personal wealth, then those should be educated who have the desire, the personal qualifications, and the means. But because of the changed conditions in soCiety, the soCial interest in having trained leaders-in government, business, agriculture, industry, and the social services-and informed Citizens, has become perhaps greater than the individual interest. A high school education no longer suffices to equip young people to meet the complex problems of modern life. The State of Georgia may appropriately finance opportunities for higher education for the numbers and to the extent that the benefits to the people of the State are adjudged equal to the cost. The President's Commission has expressed the opinion that almost half of the youth of college age could profit by such training. Present practice is far below this. As has been shown, more than a third of the ablest youth of the State do not go to college because they lack the money. It may thus be assumed that in the near term (15 years) Georgia will make no mistake in planning to assist in the financing of higher education of all those who seek it and who possess the necessary qualifications. But the plans, in so far as possible, should provide for equality of educational opportunity. The means possessed by parents should be less decisive in determining who may and who may not go to college. Who Should Pay the Cost? The cost of higher education should be distributed according to the interests of the parties involved. The parties of primary interest are the student on the one hand and the people of the state (and nation) on the other. It is believed that the people's interest in the training of youth now transcends the individual interest, and that the greater share of the cost should be borne by public funds. It is suggested that student fees should cover no more than one-third, and preferably no more than one-fourth, of the current cost of resident instruction. The balance of current cost, plus the cost of capital outlay, might appropriately be borne by the public. And while states generally have been slow in recognizing that their concern for student life is equal to their concern for institutions, it is submitted that the people of the State of Georgia cannot finance institutions and be indifferent to the standards for student life-for health, safety, nutrition and living quarters. 334 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF It is believed that the State must assume responsibility for providing the capital to finance residence halls, dining halls and bookstores-those things necessary or convenient to institutional operation. And this capital must be supplied (generally) without charging the student interest or depreciation of buildings. To do so would increase the cost barrier and tend to defeat the primary purposes of the State in supporting higher education. Evidence is presented elsewhere in this report to show that Georgia is delinquent in providing essential physical facilities not only for educational activities, but for student life as well. How Secure Quality of Educational Opportunity? Quality of education is achieved when (1) the program is adapted to need; (2) the optimum relationship of the factors involved is secured, i. e., the optimum class size, the right kind and size of classroom, students qualified for the studies they pursue, and appropriate teaching techniques employed; and (3) the factors are of a quality to contribute most to program-the quality of professional employee, supplies, physical facilities and service, and, finally, the quality of administration. Some attention has been given to analyzing these matters in Georgia. In many instances the findings afford bases for administrative action. It is believed, however, that the professional staffs-particularly in the junior ranks-need to be upgraded through additional training, and salaries (generally) need to be increased. Provision for supplementary retirement allowances is needed. It was estimated that salaries should be increased an average of 12.5 per cent, and an additional 2.25 per cent of professional salaries should be added for supplements for retirement allowances. An increase of $250,000 is estimated as needed for various improvements throughout the System, including the strengthening of graduate work. It is believed that the budget of the Atlanta Division should be increased an estimated $250,000 to allow for improvements in standards. The maintenance of plant budgets are believed to be too low, particularly at the large institutions. An addition of 2.7 per cent of the gross budget is proposed to cover this need. THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 335 Availability oj Educational Opportunity Elsewhere in this report attention has been given to the availability of higher education through geographic location of institutions. But there is another matter related to availability that affords deep concern-and that is the requirement of the constant availability of educational opportunity through time. The quantity and quality of educational opportunities must be made available to youth as they mature. The standards must not deteriorate in the depression. Attention must be given now to see that this flow of capital that provides the leadership for the future is not cut along with appropriations for material undertakingsfor inanimate things can wait-youth cannot. How Secure Economy and Good Fiscal Management? The need to strengthen the administrative staff of the Office of the Regents and to better relate this office with other appropriate offices of government has been treated elsewhere. Given appropriate allocation of function, economy within the System will become a matter of standards, staff direction, staff assistance, and leadership in administration. This is a responsibility of administration. EXPANDED SUPPORT REQUIRED BY THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM There are three major requirements of the University System that together will require increased expenditures, a change in the current pattern of support, and a marked increase in support from the State. These requirements will be briefly considered in the following paragraphs. They comprise: (1) new funds to replace the fees of veterans who will soon complete their training, and new funds to replace a proposed reduction in fees at the University of Georgia and Georgia Institute of Technology; (2) new funds to finance an urgently needed program of capital outlay; and (3) new funds to finance improvements in the educational program of the System. It is estimated that the veterans' fees (in excess of matriculation fees) in 1948-49 aggregated $2,228,765; that they will approximate $1,890,000 in 1949-50, $1,364,000 in 1950-51, $842,500 in 1951-52, $383,300 in 1952-53; and that they will completely disappear by the end of the year 1954-55. As the veterans withdraw, their places will be taken by civilians and, while the income of the System will decline, its responsibilities will remain. Unless, 336 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF therefore, the estimated $2,228,765 received in 1948-49 is replaced, the System faces a major crisis. In addition to the decline in fees from veterans, the recommended reduction in fees at the University and Georgia Tecll from $150 and $169.50 respectively, to $135, will bring about a reduction in income of $259,264. This reduction in income mus~ likewise be replaced. Elsewhere in the survey report the grave need of the System for a broadly conceived and systematic program for plant improvement has been presented. The long period in which too little attention has been given to maintenance and replacement of plant makes this program imperative. The reasons are diverse: In many instances it is safety and health; in some it is economy; in some it is the improved functioning of the instruction, or betterment of student life. The program for capital outlay, including delayed maintenance, is estimated at 50 millions of dollars. Urgent as this need is, it is not supposed that the State should provide this large sum at one time. Instead, as will be seen, the needs are comprehended in a new level of annual State support. Of equal importance in considering the support required by the University System is the need for new funds to finance improvements in the educational program of the System. It is recognized that there can be no sudden transition from current practice to what is proposed, nor is it supposed that the wisest courses can always be identified by persons with limited knowledge of the System. Thus the suggestions made afford wide latitude for administrative judgments in formulating improvement plans. The immediate needs of the University System for improving its educational program are listed below. The estimates are based on 1948-49 data. 1. Increase in salaries of professional personnel, including teachers, research workers, librarians, and administra- tors. It is estimated that, on the average, an increase of 12.5 per cent is needed to put the University System in a competitive position. Professional personnel are estimated to receive 62 per cent of current expendi- tures. Thus the increase is estimated at .12% times .62 times $15,208,562-0r $1,178,700 2. Provision for supplementing pensions of the profes- sional personnel is estimated to cost 234 per cent of salaries; 234 per cent of 62 per cent or 1.395 per cent of $15,208,562 - or ._______ 212,200 3. Other provision for improvement of program. There will be some need to change allocation of function and THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 337 increase provision for graduate instruction. The changes to be made are expected to bring some economy. A net addition for this purpose is estimated at___________________________ 4. Provision for maintenance of plant is 2.7 per cent below practice in neighboring states. 2.7 per cent of $15,208,562 is equal to .________ 5. Strengthening the program of the University division at Atlanta to bring it to the point of accreditation is estimated to cost 6. Strengthening the office of the Regents by addition of specialists is estimated to cost 7. A scholarship program to reach able students is sug- gested, to cost .___________________________________________ 250,000 410,600 250,000 80,000 500,000 These recommended increases together aggregate $2,881,500 Of the above increases of $2,881,500, the items for increases in salaries and retirement allowances totalling $1,390,900 will serve the needs of organized research and extension services as well as those of resident instruction. Based on 1948-49 percentages an allocation of $250,000 to research and extension appears appropriate. It is estimated that the cost of resident instruction will decline to the extent that student fees decline. Mter the enrollment reaches the 1948-49 level (about 1958) the cost will mount as a basic expansion in facilities is provided. On the basis of these assumptions, the estimate of expenditures for the University System is as follows: TABLE 63 Estimated Expenditure of the University System for Current Operations-1948-1965 Year Resident Research and Instruction* Extension Total 1946-1947 1947-1948 1948-1949 1949-1950 1950-1951 1951-1952 1952-1953 1953-1954 1954-1955 1955-1956 1956-1957 1957-1958 1958-1959 1959-1960 1960-1961 1961-1962 1962-1963 1963-1964 1964-1965 $ 8,283,201 10,745,699 10,835,572 13,403,562 13,275,422 13,166,032 13,089,872 13,061,772 13,080,522 13,124,272 13,243,072 13,386,772 13,802,700 14,503,000 15,297,500 16,361,200 17,465,500 18,556,200 19,647,000 $ 2,998,537 3,558,241 4,372,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 4,622,990 $11,281,738 14,203,940 15,208,562 18,026,552 17,898,412 17,789,022 17,712,862 17,684,762 17,703,512 17,747,262 17,866,062 18,009,762 18,425,690 19,125,990 19,920,490 20,984,190 22,088,490 23,179,190 24,269,990 *Includes Office of the Board of Regents and Other Expenses. 338 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED SOURCES OF SUPPORT FOR THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM In light of the needs of the University System, a plan of support for the future, consistent with the principles and objectives above presented, is required. As a first step it will be helpful if the outlook for fees is examined. The estimate is presented in Table 64. In formulating the estimates, it was assumed that the reduction of fees at the University and Georgia Institute of Technology would be made, thus reducing matriculation fees by $257,771; that non-resident fees would level at $700,000; and that fees of veterans in excess of matriculation-estimated at $2,228,765 in 1948-49-would rapidly decline, and would disappear after 1955. TABLE 64 Estimated Income of University System from Fees-1948-1965 Matricu- Year - -lati-on 1948-1949 _________________ $3,124,400 1949-1950 __________________ 1950-1951 ________________ 1951-1952 _______________ 1952-1953 ________________ 1953-1954 ________________ 1954-1955 _________________ 1955-1956 __________________ 1956-1957 _____________ 1957-1958 _________________ 1958-1959 ________________ 1959-1960 _________________ 1960-1961 __________________ 1961-1962 __________________ 1962-1963 ______________ 1963-1964 ________________ 1964-1965 __________________ 3,060,890 2,932,750 2,823,360 2,747,200 2,719,100 2,737,850 2,781,600 2,900,400 3,044,100 3,203,500 3,366,000 3,550,500 3,797,400 4,053,600 4,306,800 4,560,000 NonResident $700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 -Oth-er $292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 292,000 Veterans $2,228,765 1,890,000 1,364,000 842,500 383,300 185,000 66,900 ---------------- --------------- ------------- -------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------- ------------------------------------------- - - Total $6,345,165 5,942,890 5,288,750 4,657,860 4,122,500 3,896,100 3,796,750 3,773,600 3,892,400 4,036,100 4,19'5,500 4,358,000 4,542,500 4,789,400 5,045,600 5,298,800 5,55,2,000 In formulating a picture of required support for the University System, it was assumed that income from gifts, grants and endowment, income from governments other than the state allotment, and sales and services and other sources would remain at the same levels as in 1948-49, namely $3,811,215. The proposed support for the University System is shown in Table 65. It is important that every dollar not expended on program be made available for capital outlay. The subvention from the State for current and capital purposes aggregates $13,162,447, and it is suggested that annual state support continue at this amount, or-if change occurs-that the change be a gradual one. Expansion of enrollments (after 1958) will again require increase in support. TABLE 65 Year Income of the University System of Georgia-1946-1965 (Actual Income 1946-1949-Estimated Income 1949-1965) State Capital Outlay State Current Operations Total State Student Fees Other Income 1946-1947 ________________ 1947-1948 ________________ 1948-1949 _______________ 1949-1950 ________________ 1950-1951 ________________ 1951-1952 ________________ 1952-1953 ________________ 1953-1954 ________________ 1954-1955 ________________ 1955-1956 ________________ 1956-1957 ________________ 1957-1958 ________________ 1958-1959 ________________ 1959-1960 ________________ 1960-1961 ________________ 1961-1962 ________________ 1962-1963 ________________ 1963-1964 ________________ 1964-1965 ________________ $ 772,228 3,869,294 713,726* 4,890,000 4,364,000 3,842,500 3,383,300 3,185,000 3,066,900 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 $ 3,382,348 4,007,154 4,792,918 8,272,447 8,798,447 9,319,947 9,779,147 9,977,447 10,095,547 10,162,447 10,162,447 10,162,447 10,418,975 10,956,775 11,566,775 12,383,575 13,231,675 14,069,175 14,906,775 $ 4,154,576 7,876,448 5,506,644 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,418,975 13,956,775 14,566,775 15,383,575 16,231,675 17,069,175 17,906,775 $ 6,151,008 7,230,342 6,604,429 5,942,890 5,288,750 4,657,860 4,122,500 3,896,100 3,796,750 3,773,600 3,892,400 4,036,100 4,195,500 4,358,000 4,542,500 4,789,400 5,045,600 5,298,800 5,552,000 $ 3,408,658 3,621,482 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 3,811,215 *Includes $579,476 appropriated for current purposes. t-3 fJ:I l':l zc.-l.'<::..l1 r~e -t-<3 Total m -< U1 t-3 $13,714,242 l':l i!:: 18,728,272 0 15,922,288 ";l 22,916,552 0 22,262,412 l':l 0 21,631,522 21,096,162 ~ ;.0...-. 20,869,762 20,770,412 20,747,262 20,866,062 21,009,762 21,425,690 22,125,990 22,920,490 23,984,190 25,088,490 26,179,190 27,269,990 ~ ~ CCl 340 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF It will be noted that while the State's subvention is fixed at $13,162,447, it would be possible during the next few years to spend substantial sums for capital outlay in the near term, the amount declining to a level figure of $3,000,000 by 1955. Thus, if the State should increase its support in 1949-50, the amount for capital outlay would aggregate $22,731,700 by the close of 1955. This would be a substantial advance toward meeting the more urgent needs and, thereafter, annual appropriations of $3,000,000-plus such additions from revenues as are possiblewould seem to afford a reasonable program. The amount and sources of support for the University System as proposed from the present time through the year 1964-65 are shown in Chart XIII. CHART XIII. fiNANCING THE EXPENDITURES OFTHE UNIVERSITY SY.STEM: 1947-65 $30 (IN MILLIONS) $30 25 20 / -- / , ~ r-- :--- OTHER INCOME 15 vII.""'"- // stUD~NT I F~ES ---- ,.....- ~ .......... l5 ....... ~ V ---- --L.---...... ........... ------ :-- 20 15 10 V / 10 / STATE SUPPORT: CURRENT OPERATIONS / -- 5 "",V --- ,/, / / o , / / -- -- -- --- - - - --- STAn SUPPORT: CAPITAL OUTLAY 5 --- -- o 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 ACTUAL I ESTIMATED FUTURE A RESTATEMENT OF SUPPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM IMMEDIATELY NEEDED FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA It has been recommended that the State of Georgia increase its annual appropriations to the University System from the THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 341 $5,506,644 sum in 1948-49 to $13,162,447, or roughly 13.2 millions of dollars. The need for this increased subvention in a normal year-say 1955-56-can be stated as follows: Amount in Millions 1. Actual 1948-1949 2. Replacement of Veterans Fees and Fee Reductions 3. Capital Outlay Increase 4. Improvement in Educational Program $ 5.5 2.5 2.3 2.9 TotaL ---------------------------- $13.2 Prior to 1955, more will be applied to capital and less to replacement of fees; and, should surpluses from current operations develop, these will be needed to speed the program of capital outlay. The distribution of the recommended new level of support between the educational program and capital outlay in the near term is as follows: Year Support of Provisions for Educational Program Capital Outlay Total 1949-1950 1950-1951 1951-1952 1952-1953 1953-1954 1954-1955 1955-1956 1956-1957 1957-1958 $ 8,272,447 8,798,447 9,319,947 9,779,147 9,977,447 10,095,547 10,162,447 10,162,447 10,162,447 $ 4,890,000 4,364,000 3,842,500 3,383,300 3,185,000 3,066,900 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 $13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 13,162,447 After 1958, it is expected that state support will rise. It is estimated that at least $17,906,775 will be required by 1965. It may be felt that $13.2 millions is too great a sum for Georgia to provide. But, as has been pointed out in an earlier section, it will require the same measure of effort actually put forth in 1947-48 by the neighboring states of Alabama, South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana and Arkansas, and it may be expected that the efforts of these states will increase when they too face the loss of fees as the veterans complete their training. The needs of the University System have been conservatively estimated. If the State is to provide higher education of acceptable quality 342 A REPORT OF A SURVEY OF to its youth, a program of finance similar to this is deemed imperative. FISCAL POLICY FOR THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM It is probable that no person or group of persons could be found who possess the wisdom and foresight to formulate policies that would govern uniformly all institutions in the System. Nor is it desirable that this be done. For the freedom of individuals and institutions to be dissimilar is an important force for good. Yet in matters of finance it will be found helpful, not only to the Regents but to the entire personnel of the institutions, to formulate points of view-and what might be regarded as principles-with respect to the allocation and control of funds, so that all may understand and realize that similar circumstances receive similar treatment. The following suggestions are believed to be appropriate. 1. The University System will seek support from the State and its citizens on the basis of comprehensive plans looking to the future. 2. The officials of government and the citizens will be constantly informed concerning the plans and the progress under the plans. 3. The plans will include consideration of personnel, physical facilities, educational programs and services, and finance. 4. The concern for student life will parallel the concern for educational opportunities in the classroom, and appropriate financial provisions will be made. 5. Aid from philanthropy will be sought. Care will be taken not to nullify such aid through reductions in state support. Conditions and restrictions attached to funds will be strictly observed. 6. The University System will seek to provide the services of auxiliary activities to students at cost, exclusive of charges for interest on capital unless specifically authorized. Interest on buildings and depreciation on buildings generally will not be charged. Charges for depreciation of equipment are deemed appropriate and such depreciation will be funded. 7. The University System will seek to render services relating to health and student activities at cost. 8. The University System in the near term will endeavor to fix charges (tuition) to Georgia students at about 25 per cent of the cost of resident instruction, but not exceeding 33-1/3 per cent of such cost. 9. The University System will maintain a program of scholarships to enable well-qualified youth of limited means to secure the advantages of higher education. 10. The University System will seek to achieve among its member institutions standards for personnel, work load, class size, and other factors relating to educational program and cost. 11. The allotment of state funds for resident instruction in the near THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA 343 term ordinarily will approximate 75 per cent of the cost for students of the State of Georgia. 12. All capital outlay will be expended on the hasis of a system-wide development plan, and system-wide priorities will be observed. 13. All proposed modifications of program will be reviewed in connection with the review of the annual budget, in order that program and finance may be coordinated. SUMMARY In this section the objectives and principles of finance appropriate to democracy were presented as a basis for considering the needs of the University System and fiscal policy for the future. The needs for new funds for support of the University System were found to include the replacement of veterans' fees, the finance of capital outlay, and the improvement of the educational program. The sources of support for the improved program were examined. It was recommended that state support for current and capital purposes be increased at once to an annual $13.2 millions. This represents an increase of $7.7 millions over the $5.5 millions provided in 1948-49. This annual appropriation at the level of $13.2 millions would suffice (it is estimated) to meet System needs until about 1958, after which increasing enrollments would require added funds. It was pointed out that the State of Georgia, if it appropriated $13.2 millions for higher education, would be making an effort in relation to her means just equal to the average efforts in 1948 of Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Florida and South Carolina. The outline of the recommended program of support was accompanied by suggestions for fiscal policy for the University System. Thus it is that the recommendations contained in this section have reflected the analyses of the earlier sections of this report: the demand for higher education; the institutional cost and cost factors; the nature of institutional support; student living cost and family ability to pay. The cost of higher education to be carried on within the University System of the future has now been estimated. The shares to be borne by the student and by the citizens of Georgia have been recommended. Careful consideration must be given to these matters. And then the State must act, for a financial crisis faces the University System of Georgia. j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j