Temple University - Templar Yearbook (Philadelphia, PA)

Page 20 text:

MN - A Student Council representation reads a statement at the January, 1965 hearings. In February, 1964, ai the cornerstone laying for the Mitten Hall Annex, Dr. Gladfcltcr warned that tuition would l e increased again unless the state raised the amount of its assistance. The first real public word on the University's hopes and aspirations came shortly thereafter. Addressing the University's 80th Anniversary Dinner on March 8, Dr. Gladfeltei said. We ho| e that evolving circumstances will hurry the day bringing to full fruition the partnership between the University and the Commonwealth. But in May. the President had to repeat his sad tale of a year before: tuition would lx1 going up again in September, this time by $80. Behind the scene, officials were preparing a new and radical plan to present to the state. State Sen. Albert R. Pcchan beat them to the punch. In August lie announced that he was going to introduce a bill to convert both the University and Indiana State College into state schools. Sen. Pec ban's pro|x sal came as a pleasant surprise to University officials. Dr. Glad fetter said it was encouraging that a member of the legislature showed such interest in higher education. The University, however, was not relying on the Pcchan plan. On Sept. 25. 1964. it submitted its Pro-| osal lot Cooperation with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to the advisory State Council on Higher Education. The main feature ol the pto] osal was quite simple: the University would agree to lower tuition and enroll more students if the state would take on a greater share of the University’s financial burden. Specifically the plan provided that: Tuition be reduced from $920 for Pennsylvania under-graduates by $100 intervals so it would reach Penn State's $525 by 1970. The state increase its aid from $6.5 million to $8.4 million for 1965-66. By 1970. the state and the University would share costs on a 50-50 basis. The state would finance much of the University’s construction. The University would increase enrollment to 50.000 by 1970. The name of the University would be changed. . The Governor would ap| »ini some members of the Board of Trustees. In October, the State Council announced that it would hold hearings across the state on the general area of higher education and the University’s pro| osal s| ecif-ically. At the same time, the State Board of Higher Education hired a consulting firm to draw up elements for a much needed Master Plan for higher education in the state. It was the Master Plan that threatened for a lime to dash the University’s hopes. In December, Gov. Scran Two members of the State Council on Higher Education confer. 16

Page 19 text:

The new University constantly sought to fulfill Conwell’s credo of high |uality education at the lowest possible price. As early .is 1021 Dr. Gmtwcll offered to sell Temple to the Hoard of Education of Philadelphia. I he offer was never accepted. After being hit by the Depression anti World War II. the University administration seemed somewhat unsure of what path to follow. Some wanted to move to a suburban setting but the majority prevailed and in 1955 the University embarked on its multi-million dollar physical expansion program. Hut since the big decision had been made to follow in the Conwcllian tradition, it took herculean effotts just to remain abreast of the times. The post-war baby boom would soon be producing an unprecedented mint-bet of college-bound students. Construction costs were skyrocketing and the expansion program had to he curtailed. Tuition costs were also on the tisc, thus depriving many capable students o! a chance to get an education. It was in this atmosphere that a new idea began to take root among members nl the Hoard of Trustees. Why not have the University work closer with the state in a relationship which would be beneficial to both? fter much debate and consideration, action was initiated. In February. I IN I. the trustees sent to Gov. David Lawrence a Rationale for Aid to the University. This proposal once again cited the University's tradition of providing the highest quality education at the lowest cost. The proposal was a rcs] onse on the state level aimed at problems ol higher education in the Philadelphia area. The Governor’s office had asked each institution that was already receiving some funds from the state to indicate possible inter related policies which would be in the public interest. President Gladfelter and others are pensive while waiting to testify at the higher education hearings. The first jrositivc results came in 1962. President Gladfcltct asked the state to increase University appro-pi iatiems by at least 50 | cr cent. Gov. Lawrence rescinded by raising allocations SI.8 million. This enabled the University to reduce tuition for Pennsylvania undergraduates by SI00 while raising tuition for ottt-of-staters by si00. In return foi the aid increase, the Univeisity agreed to scat on its Board of Trustees six gubernatorial ap|x immenis and raise enrollment by 000. Gov. Lawrence also made it possible for such institutions .is the University to get full financing of its “The first positive results came in 1962.” buildings by the General State Authority. The construction pace quickened. Under Gov. William Scranton state aid continued to rise but not at a level sufficient to meet the University's needs. Also, the Governor was forced to put an end to free construction of Univeisity buildings and expansion was at a standstill. Because ol the pom financial situation students received the word in September, 1965, that tuition was being raised SI00.

Page 21 text:

President Gladfelter and Judge Charles Klein, Board of Trustees chairman, look on as the Governor finishes sinning the bill. ton told a group ol college editots that he was determined to wait lor the completed Master Plan before acting on the University's projwsal. The plan was not expected to he finished until the spring of I960. The litst of the State Council’s hearings was held in Pittsburgh in December. Pennsylvania State University President brie Waldci did not directly oppose the University’s proposal but said the real solution to the problems of higher education in a state which ranked 19th in |ki capita expenditures was to expand Penn State. On (an. 2X and 29. 19 f , the heatings moved to Philadelphia. An overwhelming majority of the (53 poisons Irom business, labor, educational and civic organizations who testified were in favor of the University’s plan and urged its quick adoption. City Council passed a resolution to that eflect. Following the hearings, Charles Simpson. State Council chairman, noted the unusual unanimity of feeling. Polls undertaken by the Temple Mews showed the faculty and students also [averred the plan. “The hearings moved to Philadelphia.” Charles Simpson, former chairman of the State Council, was in favor of the Temple plan. 17