F Acknowledgments ROM THE FIRST ACTIONS to initiate this project to its completion, the authors have received help and encouragement from many persons actively engaged in the 2-year college movement. Too many to name individually, they should at least be recognized by general designation here. These persons who are serving in State departments of education or in offices of other similar State educational agencies and who have responsibility for statewide coordination and supervision of 2-year colleges were fundamentally helpful in getting the project started and in providing data related to it. The chief executives of a few individual 2-year colleges also helped by providing information about factors which governed the financing of their own institutions and of others in their State. Shares as Required by Law .... States with a Specific Formula States with Legislative Appropriations States with Laws Dealing Specifically with the Local Support or Limitations Regard- ing the Tuition Charged ...... Should Public 2-Year Colleges Be Tuition-Free? ....32 APPENDIX. STATE EXHIBITS OF STATUTORY AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS for Financing Current Percent of current operational funds derived from State and Page CHAPTER I W The Study ITHIN the current rising surge of public interest in college and university education, the special attraction of the 2-year college is notable. Operating under different names in different States and situations, these 2-year colleges have come to be recognized as a basic answer to the demand of more people for more education beyond the high school level. The decentralization of higher education, which the establishment of 2-year institutions represents, is aimed essentially at the reduction of the barriers of geography and financial costs which have traditionally kept many who desire and could profit by further education from attaining this goal. In view of the main objective set for the public 2-year colleges, namely, the making of post-high-school education more accessible to the students, many questions arise as to the proper and the best ways by which they should be financed. Some States, for example, California and Kansas assert that public 2-year colleges should be tuition-free like the high schools. Others maintain that since these colleges provide education and training beyond the age of compulsory school attendance the student should share in the costs. As more and more States proceed to decentralize higher education by establishing one type of 2-year college or another, this question of financing takes on added interest and significance. Yet to date, a comprehensive compilation and discussion of procedures and practices currently in effect in the several States in distributing the costs of 2-year colleges between the several main sources of support has not been provided. PURPOSES AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY This bulletin reports and discusses information on the comparative proportions of support for 2-year colleges received from the State, the district, and the student. On the basis of these compiled data, it is hoped that present practices can be better appraised and ones as yet unformulated better developed. Some data bearing on this question of allocation of burden of support were provided in Patterns of Organization and Support in Public 2-Year Colleges.' This publication reported amounts of income received by public 2-year colleges when grouped according to type of control and by geographic region. It did not present specific illustrations of the practices in each of the States. Another recent publication, Criteria for the Establishment of 2-Year Colleges, also touched upon the question of support burdens. It provided information and attempted to provide guidelines and specifics regarding the major criteria to be considered in founding new colleges. Financial support was one of the more important considerations discussed. 2 In considering the data and discussion of the allocation of financial costs for the several States reported in this bulletin, it must be noted that a satisfactory support pattern in one State seldom will work equally well in another. However, a careful review of what support is provided in a variety of situations over the Nation can be extremely helpful to the State and local agencies considering such matters. The ultimate policy formulated to govern the financing of public 2-year colleges, of course, must rest basically on factors within the State for which the institution will actually operate. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to present a review of the laws, the regulations, and the practices involved in providing support for 2-year colleges in each of the 50 States. PLAN OF THE STUDY Much of the basic information needed to complete this study was already available in the Office of Education. It consisted of documentary materials such as State laws and official regulations issued by State supervisory and regulatory agencies. In the interest of completeness and accuracy, the summaries of State practices compiled from these sources had to be verified. Accordingly, letters were sent for review to State agencies containing a precompiled statement of the laws, regulations, and support practices operating in that State. In States having more than one type of 2-year posthigh-school institution, each operating under different public auspices, a letter was sent to each of the appropriate supervisory or 1 S. V. Martorana and D. G. Morrison. Patterns of Organization and Support in Public 2-Year Colleges. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Washington, D.C., 1959. D. G. Morrison and S. V. Martorana. Criteria for the Establishment of 2-Year Colleges. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960. |