• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 The Florida legislative council...
 Legislative reference bureau
 Letter of transmittal
 Acknowledgement
 Table of Contents
 Summary of the report
 Higher education
 Florida's students in colleges...
 Exchange of students with other...
 Students in Florida's colleges...
 Facilities for higher education...
 The university system
 Students in the university...
 Financial aspects of the university...
 Cost of current operations
 Students share in the cost
 Programs of the university...
 Buildings under construction
 Auxiliary enterprises
 Funds
 Duplication of instructional...
 Index to part I






Group Title: Florida's university system: a survey of state-supported higher education in Florida
Title: Florida's university system
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AM00000209/00001
 Material Information
Title: Florida's university system a survey of state-supported higher education in Florida
Physical Description: 2 v. (ix, 483 p.) : ill. (some col.), maps ; 27 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- Legislature. -- Legislative Reference Bureau
Florida -- Legislature. -- Legislative Council
Publisher: Florida Legislative Council
Place of Publication: Tallahassee
Publication Date: 1953
 Subjects
Subject: Universities and colleges -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: as reported to the Legislative Council by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
General Note: "February 1953."
General Note: Includes indexes.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: AM00000209
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Florida A&M University (FAMU)
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 01896683
lccn - a 53009543

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Title Page
    The Florida legislative council and select committee on education
        Page a
    Legislative reference bureau
        Page b
    Letter of transmittal
        Page c
    Acknowledgement
        Page i
        Page ii
        Page iii
    Table of Contents
        Page iv
    Summary of the report
        Page v
        Page vi
        Page vii
        Page viii
        Page ix
    Higher education
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Florida's students in colleges and universities
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Exchange of students with other states
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Students in Florida's colleges and universities
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
    Facilities for higher education in Florida
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Junior colleges
            Page 22
            Page 23
            Page 24
            Page 25
            Page 26
            Page 27
        Private institutions
            Page 28
            Page 29
            Page 30
            Page 31
        State participation outside university system
            Page 32
            Page 33
            Page 34
            Page 35
            Page 36
            Page 37
            Page 38
            Page 39
            Page 40
            Page 41
    The university system
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Management and control
            Page 44
            Page 45
            Page 46
            Page 47
        Experience of other states
            Page 48
            Page 49
            Page 50
            Page 51
        The board of control
            Page 52
            Page 53
            Page 54
            Page 55
            Page 56
            Page 57
            Page 58
            Page 59
            Page 60
        The executive secretary
            Page 61
            Page 62
        Staff of the board of control
            Page 63
            Page 64
            Page 65
            Page 66
            Page 67
            Page 68
            Page 69
            Page 70
        Coordination and control
            Page 71
            Page 72
            Page 73
            Page 74
            Page 75
            Page 76
            Page 77
            Page 78
            Page 79
    Students in the university system
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
    Financial aspects of the university system
        General revenue appropriations
            Page 86
            Page 87
            Page 88
    Cost of current operations
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
    Students share in the cost
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
    Programs of the university system
        Research programs
            Page 98
        Extension programs
            Page 99
        Instruction
            Page 100
            Page 101
            Page 102
            Page 103
            Page 104
            Page 105
            Page 106
            Page 107
            Page 108
            Page 109
            Page 110
            Page 111
            Page 112
            Page 113
    Buildings under construction
        Page 114
        Page 115
    Auxiliary enterprises
        Page 116
        Page 117
    Funds
        Page 118
        Page 119
    Duplication of instructional offerings
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
    Index to part I
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
Full Text
0. j


F LORI DAY'S


UNIVERSITY SYSTEM






L#


PART I


FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL


1953


4Ir
j -'


378
F4,34Zf


















FLORIDA'S UNIVERSITY SYSTEM



PART I
















A SURVEY OF

STATE-SUPPORTED HIGHER EDUCATION

IN FLORIDA


'Vi


AS REPORTED TO

THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

BY THE
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU


FEBRUARY 1953


v
~
,:,



I:

~















THE FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL



WALLACE E. STURGIS
PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE
OCALA
CHAIRMAN

A. ROY SURLES
REPRESENTATIVE, POLK COUNTY
LAKELAND
VICE-CHAIRMAN


SENATE MEMBERS

GEORGE C. DAYTON
DADE CITY

R. B. GAUTIER
MIAMI

HARRY E. KING
WINTER HAVEN

GEORGE W. LEAIRD
FT. LAUDERDALE

B. C. PEARCE
PALATKA

WAYNE E. RIPLEY
JACKSONVILLE

J. B. RODGERS, JR.
WINTER GARDEN

GEORGE G. TAPPER
PORT ST. JOE


HOUSE MEMBERS

JOHN E. BOLLINGER
WEST PALM BEACH

C. FARRIS BRYANT
OCALA

DOYLE E. CONNER
STARKE

B. ELLIOTT
PAHOKEE

JAMES S. MOODY
PLANT CITY

FLETCHER MORGAN
JACKSONVILLE

GEORGE S. OKELL
MIAMI

JOHN S. PITTMAN
JAY


SELECT COMI TTEE ON EDUCATION

A. ROY SURLES
CHA RMAN

SENATOR GEORGE G. TAPPER SENATOR GEORGE W. LEAIRD
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN S. PITTMAN




















LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU

STAFF


MYRON R. BLEE
Associate Director


S. SHERMAN WEISS
Director


ARTHUR L. CUNKLE
Associate Director


WILLIAM C. HARRIS
Assistant Director


MARION F. BUFORD
Research Assistant


ELIZABETH J. KLEMMING
Secretary


SADIE L. YATES
Stenographer-Bookkeeper


LOIS D. EPPERSON
ELIZABETH H. RASMUSSEN
Stenographers






RESEARCH AIDES

CHARLOTTE L. BLEE
ERMA B. DANENBERG
WOODLEY A. GRIZZARD
BLEEKA 0. JORDAN












February 23, 1953


Honorable A. Roy Surles, Jr.
Chairman, Council Committee on Education
Lakeland, Florida

Dear Mr. Surles:

Submitted herewith is the report of theReference Bureau
on Higher Education in Florida. Because of the volume of
material available, we have separated information of a gen-
eral nature and of interest to the Council and the Legis-
lature from more specific data which supports the conclusions
summarized in Part I. The Report is being presented in two
parts for the convenience of the Legislature. Part I has
been completed, and Part II will shortly be available for
the use of those members who might be interested in more de-
tailed information.

This project has been an assignment of Myron R. Blee,
Associate Director, who developed the plan of the research
and determined the methodology to be used. We wish to ack-
nowledge the full cooperation of the Board of Control and
its staff, and the personnel of the institutions involved,
as well as the cooperation of administrators of all the pri-
vate institutions and public Junior Colleges in the State,
in making information available to the Bureau. Acknowledg-
ment of the contribution of each individual is made in the
forward to this report by Mr. Blee.

Respectfully submitted,



S. Sherman Weiss
Director








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


This study of the Florida University System was facilitated
by the cooperation of the Board of Control. In addition to
the willingness of members of the Board to answer our many
inquiries, the cooperative attitude of the board was reflect-
ed throughout the entire system.

The Board's staff, headed by the Executive Secretary, William
F. Powers, provided us with all of the information we re-
quested through them. Mr. Powers and William G. Hendricks
and Paul Skelton of his staff contributed many hours to the
preparation of materials required for the study. These
gentlemen evidenced a willingness to help with the study,
and, moreover, they showed every inclination to use the
materials assembled.

Considerable effort was made in the institutions to provide
us with information. Dean Harley W. Chandler of the Univer-'
sity of Florida, Vice President A. B. Martin of Florida
State University, and President'George W. Gore of Florida
A. & M. headed up the effort in their respective institu-
tions. President Doak S. Campbell of Florida State Univer-
sity and President J. Hillis Miller and Vice President John
S. Allen of the University of Florida gave the project their
support.

Particular effort was required to be made in the offices of
the registrars of the institutions. The development of the
student equivalent measure for the instructional load from
1941 to the present was a particular contribution.

The business offices of the institutions contributed many
hours of effort to assemble financial information.


Every member of the faculty in each of the institutions con-
tributed to tihestudy by completing three questionnaires dur-
ing the year 1951-52. Since the allocation of faculty time
to the various functions performed was based on the faculty
members' reports, this point is particularly significant in
the present study or in any studies which may subsequently
be made.









To all these people who have made contribution to the study,
appreciation is expressed.

Because it would be difficult to understand the role of the
Florida University System apart from the contribution of the
other colleges and universities of the State, inquiries were
made at each of the institutions. Almost without exception
these institutions were willing to cooperate far beyond the
requirements of this study. They evidenced a desire to par-
ticipate in educational planning for the State of Florida on
a continuing basis.

Many people in these institutions contributed to the informa-
tion we required. Of particular importance was the contribu-
tion of the late Dr. Bowman F. Ashe, President of the Univer-
sity if Miami. In addition to his graciousness in taking
time to understand what it was we were trying to do and his
willingness to open any university records for our purposes,
his long-range vision, his practicality, and his inspiration
were most helpful.

The contribution of Dr. Ashe and of the other individuals
listed below is acknowledged with appreciation:

Barry College for Women
Sister Mary Dorothy, 0. P., Dean

Bethune-Cookman College
Mary McLeod Bethune, President Emeritus
Richard V. Moore, President

Chipola Junior College
Kenneth G. Skaggs, Administrative Dean

Edward Waters (Junior) College
W. B. Stewart, President
J. A. Espy, Dean

Florida Christian College
Clinton Hamilton, Dean








Florida Normal & Industrial Memorial
College
R. W. Puryear, President
Frank T. Wilson, Registrar
Florida Southern College
J. C. Peel, Dean
Jacksonville Junior College
Paul L. Johnson, President
Allen C. Hutchinson, Dean-Registrar

Orlando Junior College
Morris S. Hale, Jr., Dean
Palm Beach Junior College
John S. Leonard, President
Pensacola Junior College
James L. McCord, Dean
Rollins College
Hugh F. McKean, President
St. Petersburg Junior College
M. M. Bennett, President
Charles 0. Smout, Registrar
Stetson University
Ray Sowers, Chairman Education Division
C. Howard Hopkins, Dean
University of Miami
Jay F. W. Pearson, President
University of Tampa
M. C. Rhodes, Dean
Washington Junior College
G. T. Wiggins, Dean
Webber College
Palmer T. Hogenson, President

The U. S. Office of Education has been very helpful with
suggestions and materials. Of particular importance was the
opportunity to participate in a conference which was con-
cerned with the development of a system of determining unit
costs in higher education. To Ernest V. Hollis, W. Earl
Armstrong, and Granville K. Thompson of the U. S. Office of
Education, we express our appreciation.
For the many hours of labor which have been required in the
institutions, and in the office of the Board of Control, we
are appreciative, and it is hoped that the reward will be in
whatever use is made of the material to further the interests
of the State of Florida. .) / -? /

Mydon R. Blee,
Associate Director














TABLE OF CONTENTS
of
PART I


SUMMARY OF THE REPORT.......................... .............V
HIGHER EDUCATION.................................... ...........
FLORIDA'S STUDENTS IN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.............4
EXCHANGE OF STUDENTS WITH OTHER STATES.....................10
STUDENTS IN FLORIDA'S COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.............12
FACILITIES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN FLORIDA..................20
JUNIOR COLLEGES...................................... 22
PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ..................................28
STATE PARTICIPATION OUTSIDE UNIVERSITY SYSTEN.........32
THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM.......................................42
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL.............- ..................44
EXPERIENCE OF OTHER STATES.......................... .48
THE BOARD OF CONTROL ..................................... 52
THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY............................... 61
STAFF OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL......................... 63
COORDINATION AND CONTROL..............................71
STUDENTS IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM .........................80
FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM..................86
GENERAL REVENUE APPROPRIATIONS.......... ..............86
COST OF CURRENT OPERATIONS............................. 89
STUDENTS SHARE IN THE COST........................... 92
PROGRAMS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ..........................98
RESEARCH PROGRAMS..................................... .98
EXTENSION PROGRAMS................................... 99
INSTRUCTION.......................................... 100
BUILDINGS UNDER CONSTRUCTION .............................. 114
AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES..................................... 116
FUNDS....................................*..................* 18
DUPLICATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL OFFERINGS.....................120







SUMMARY


GENERAL
1. A significant contribution to higher education is made by the
private universities and colleges of the State.

2. State-supported higher education includes:
a. Public Junior Colleges under the Minimum
Foundation Program,
b. The Regional Education Program,
c. Out-of-State aid for negroes,
d. The inoperative University of South Florida,
e. The inoperative Medical School at Gainesville,
f. The state aid to the University of Miami's
Marine Laboratory, under contract with the
State Conservation Board,
g. The state aid to the first approved medical
school,
h. The Florida University System
(1) The University of Florida, including
(a) Agricultural Extension Service
(b) Agricultural Experiment Stations
(c) Industrial and Engineering Experiment
Stations
(2) The Florida State University
(3) The General Extension Division of Florida
(4) The Florida Agricultural and Mechanical
College for Negroes.

COORDINATION AND CONTROL
1. The control of the University System rests with the Board of Con-
trol, subject to the supervision and control of the State Board of
Education. The Board also administers the funds for regional edu-
cation, out-of-state aid for negroes, and state aid for the first
accredited medical school. The control of the junior colleges is
divorced from the control of theTEniversity System, except t the
leve--of the State Board of Education.
2. The Board of Control does not make an effort to coordinate the
offerings of the public institutions with the offerings of private
institutions.
3. The provisions for the Board of Control do not make ita strongly-
independent body:
a. Its members are appointed by the Governor for
short terms, without legislative confirmation,
and
b. The Board operates subject to the control and
supervision of the State Board of Education.









4. The Board of Control is burdened by a heavy work load:
a. Absence of clearly defined general and operat-
ing policies has required that the Board give
considerable attention to administrative detail,
b. The membership of the Board of Control also
constitutes membership of the State Plant Board
and the State Soil Conservation-Board,
c. Two noncollegiate institutions are operated by
the Board of Control:
(1) The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art,
(2) The Florida School for the Deaf and Blind.
d. There is a aeuirement that_all_vouchers be
approved by the Board of Control.

7 5. The supervisory function of the Board of Control appears to be
limited to financial matters.

6. The staff of the Board of Control is composed of finance officers
who are in the process of strengthening financial controls and
reports.

7. Since the Board of Control!sstaff is without educational leader-
ship, decisions concerning the programs to be supported, and
decisions concerning where such programs will be conducted, have
been made by the institutions, subject to Board approval.

8. The appropriations act controls the amount of general revenue
which is available for the operation of higher education, but the
system is not required to operate on a line budget.

9. The general provision of the appropriations act gives the Univer-
sity System a blanket appropriation for all other income (including
Federal funds), subject to the control of the Board of Control,
the Budget Commission, and the terms under which the money is
received.

io. Income classed by the universities as "money belonging to the
State" is deposited in the State Treasury in incidental or trust
funds. These funds are subject to the controls of the Budget
Commission.

11. Income which the University System does not classify as "State
money" is retained by the institutions for use inwhatever projects
the Board approves, without control by the Budget Commission.

12. The Board of Control determines the amount of money available for
the institutions by fixing student fees and other charges which
produce revenue for the incidental fund.









13. Auxiliaries are not on a complete accrual system of accounting,
and it is difficult to determine the extent to which they are
self-supporting.

14. Auxiliaries provide a great variety of services for the institu-
tions.

15. Educational and general funds of the universities are used to pro-
vide educational services (such as counselors in residence halls)
in connection with the auxiliaries.

16. It is generally understood that auxiliaries are to be self-
supporting although there does not appear to be an established
policy governing this, or one governing the use to which any
"profits" might be put.

17. Accounts for the auxiliary activities are carried in the State
Treasury, and the statutory requirement that the Board of Control
approve all vouchers requires such action by the Board without
sufficient time or sufficient information. In addition to consti-
tuting an additional burden for the Board, it tends to divide the
responsibility for the proper disbursement of funds.

18. New buildings and building renovations in the institutions in the
University System are provided by:
a. General Revenue with specific approval of the
Legislature,
b. Revenue from "self-liquidating bonds" which are
retired from income earned by the property,
c. Student fees,
d. Other incidental income.

19. It appears to be necessary to use the income from buildings which
are already paid for to supplement the income from self-liquidating
dormitories to meet the obligations which the revenue certificates
represent.

o2. Self-liquidating projects have required the Board of Control to
pledge certain income, including student fees and charges, over a
period required to retire the bonds.


PROGRAMS OF EDUCATION, RESEARCH, AND SERVICE

i. There is an ever-increasing demand for services from Florida's
institutions. This is not unlike the experience of the rest of
the Nation. With a limit to the total resources available, this
poses problem concerning which of the programs will be supported.









2. Short of total mobilization, there, is little probability that
there will:be any significant decline in enrollment. Otherwise,
enrollments are expected to increase.

3. In terms of constant dollars, the general revenue required for the
operation of the University System is increasing more rapidly than
enrollment.

4. In terms of constant dollars, the cost of the operation of instruc-
tional departments for each full-time student is increasing.

5. There appears to be an inverse relationship between the number of
students instructed in a school or college and the amount of money
spent per full-time student. This is based on the strong tendency
for the cost of instruction per full-time student to decrease as
the average size of classes increases.

6. The provision of the law that there shallbe as little unreasonable
duplication as possible between the two white universities has
been implemented by an interuniversity agreement which was drawn
up by representatives of the institutions and approved by the
Board of Control.

7. The control of the interuniversity agreement over the offerings of
the institutions has been adhered to in the sense that no "schools"
or "colleges" have been established in violation of it.

8. There is occasion to question the establishment of programs within
schools and colleges in the universities which appear to violate
the terms of the agreement.

9. At least one small program (under 50 full-time students), journal-
ism, is provided for in separate schools in the two universities
for white students.

Io. While the law charges that unreasonable duplication should be
avoided in the white universities, the law and circumstances
require that Florida A. & M. duplicate the programs of the white
universities for which there is a demand for negro students.

11. This has resulted in difficulties associated with procuring a
qualified staff for specialized programs and in the operation of
programs for very small enrollments.

12. Graduate programs have increased in size and in proportion to the
total program, but as yet they constitute a small part of the
total operation.


vii










13. Graduate costs of instruction appear to be higher than under-
graduate costs of instruction in the same area for the most part,
but the cost of undergraduate teaching in some fields exceeds the
cost of graduate teaching in several others.

iq. The interuniversity agreement recognized the need for coordination
of the organized research programs, but ho machinery has been
established to achieve this.

15. Service programs appear to be conducted by both universities with-
out interinstitutional coordination.
















THE GROWTH OF COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES


The experience in this country during the last century has
shown that institutions of higher learning have a tendency
to broaden their programs by the addition of courses in more
and more areas of learning, and that they tend to provide
more and more advanced programs in many of those areas.

The outward expansion of institutions has changed special
purpose schools, such as teacher-training institutions, to
colleges with general programs. It has changed institutions
with special functions in state systems to general purpose
institutions competing for appropriations and students. A
few courses become departments, departments become schools,
schools become colleges, and colleges become universities.

The upward extension of institutions has changed junior
colleges into degree-granting institutions, and four-year
colleges have added programs for the master's and doctor's
degrees.

The tendency toward upward and outward growth is less a
criticism of the people who guide institutions of higher
learning than it is a reflection of the fact that higher
education knows no natural limits. The number of areas of
human knowledge is virtually without limit, and each area
offers unbounded opportunity for specialization. The possi-
bilities for higher education approach the infinite.











WHAT IS HIGHER EDUCATION?


The evaluation of higher education is too often influenced
by the thinking of Chambers of Commerce in areas benefited
by expenditures forthat purpose; by the emotions of loyal
alumni and their attitude toward success in athletic endeav-
ors; and by consideration of total costs rather than a
weighing of the importance of those things which these costs
make possible.

Today vast resources are poured into higher education.
Young people invest several years of their lives as students;
teachers devote their productive lifetimes in universities
and colleges; private and public interests spend tremendous
sums of money to provide facilities and programs'of higher
education. For what purposes are these things done?

It is in colleges and universities that young people seek to
prepare themselves.for participation in economic, social,
and political life. Vast numbers of instructional programs
are set up for this end.

It is in colleges and universities that new discoveries and
new understandings concerning man, his world, and the tools
for building a better world are discovered...Research facili-
ties and programs are provided for this purpose.

It is in colleges and universities that. an.effort is made to
eliminate the lag between the development of new tools,
methods, and understandings and the application of them to
the concerns of everyday living. For this purpose, exten-
sion programs, adult education, and service programs are
established.











A REPORT ON THE FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


The primary concern of this research report is with the
three institutions of higher learning which are operated by
the State of Florida through the Board of Control. By defi-
nition of the State Statutes, these institutions constitute
the Florida University System.

The research is concerned with the way in which the State of
Florida provides for higher education, with the administra-
tive machinery which it has established, and with the way in
which the State controls and coordinates higher education.
The research has been concerned with the instructional pro-
grams which the institutions provide, and it has taken note
of the research and service programs which the State pro-
vides in the University System.

Research attention could not be confined exclusively to the
three institutions of the University System. Other State-
supported higher education, higher education in Florida's
privately-supported institutions, the use of out-of-state
institutions by Florida students, regional education, and
practices and programs in other states have been examined.
They have been studied in their relation to the Florida
University System.

The research has not exhausted the ramifications of the
University System. It does not identify solutions to the
problems which Florida faces in the field of higher educa-
tion. It does attempt to assemble the factors which produce
those problems, and in which may be found some of the under-
standings necessary for charting the course from this point
forward.
















PROPORTION OF FLORIDA'S POPULATION


ATTENDING COLLEGE 1949-50




Among the states and the District of Columbia, Florida
ranked 34th on the proportion of its population attending
college in 1949-50. In that year 142.6 persons in every
1o,ooo of Florida's population were enrolled in college.
For the nation as a whole, 165 persons in lo,ooo were attend-
ing college.

In the years since 1938, when a similar study was made,
Florida has been one of the three states to move out of the
lower ten. Of the five states making the greatest progress
since the earlier study, four of them were Southern States,
Arkansas, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida.

In 1949-50, Florida had 39,523 residents enrolled in insti-
tutions of higher learning.


SOURCE. U. S. Office of Education









PROPORTION OF POPULATION ATTENDING COLLEGE
1949-1950
(COLLEGE STUDENTS IN EACH 10.000 OF POPULATION)



1922 -2
.L 1109.
..;- 7 ,.:, \\,,,,:



17 3 9 1A......,. v.\ .


1 5 2 A7
Wo. 1. .. .3..






,v\|o ,.. i. \ .. N.
% .. S ,K. 0.C;* coNN. 190.












\3 234.5 120.5 D 265
N.2 77.4NN%





. Highest F Low R.I. 127.7







190.1 302.9 132.5 -158.19'. -754 \N32.0 Vr 132.5
A;, 15 3" ,- ', "o -:.

1i21 .82.6 1 137..
"' ,,! -- V.A.-. .


I",\ 17 J Lt 198 4 1"'. 0 L ^.^._' .



*Med OR ,, S ,,. ff. o d i
,. '17J .-... 1160 195..7' / M
..V .1 6 .. 190. 1
134. 1.1 20. "5 D. C. 25VA
NL MD.. 168.4 ,-,,?... .,
,':-,IN. N:, J.. : ,,.. 177.4




| "-; -'7. N.. "- '
90.1' 302. iU.,.-N. VT. 132. E. R e
182,;j -. ;4 26" .




.... SOURCE.' U S l.. ,fc o f... E c i R i n d
. .', ,-a',, .. ":'.;,9 ,,2















WHERE DO FLORIDA'S STUDENTS GO TO COLLEGE?





In 1949-50, of the 39,523 Florida residents who were enrolled
in colleges and universities, 28,276 were attending institu-
tions located in Florida. That is, 71.6% of Florida's
students stayed in the State for higher education.

In that year, 80% of all of the students in the United States
attended institutions located in their own states.

Pf those who stayed in Florida, 17,536 (62%) entered institu-
tions which were publicly controlled. Those who enrolled in
public institutions of Florida constituted 44.37% of all of
the Florida students in and out of the state for that year.

Of the 11,247 students who left the State for higher educa-
tion, 7,390 (66%) enrolled in privately controlled institu-
tions, six of them went outside the continental limits to
public institutions, and 3,857 (34%) enrolled in institutions
supported by public funds in other states.

















N. .

N.


39.523 STUDENTS 1949-1950


WHERE DID FLORIDA'S STUDENTS GO TO COLLEGE IN 19497


SOURCE: U.S. Office of Educ.
Residence d Migration
of College Students.












FLORIDA STUDENTS
IN
OUT-OF-STATE INSTITUTIONS
1949-50
% OF
TYPE INSTITUTIONS UNDERGRADUATE GRADUATE TOTAL TOTAL

Public Universities 1,438 300 1,738 15.5
Public Liberal Arts 575 12 587 5.2
Public Junior Colleges 107 107 1.0
Public Technical Schools 1,084 58 1,142 10.2
Public Teachers Colleges 2 253 255 2.3

TOTAL IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS 3,206 623 3,829 34.1




Private Universities 2,408 535 2,943 26.2
Private Liberal Arts 2,741 83 2,824 25.1
Private Junior Colleges 494 494 4.4
Private Technical Schools 23 399 422 3.8
Private Teachers Colleges 89 89 .8
Private Theological Schools 334 334 3.0
Private Other Professional 306 306 2.7
TOTAL IN PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS 6,395 1,017 7,412 65.9

TOTAL IN ALL OUT-OF-STATE
INSTITUTIONS 9,601 1.640 11,241




SOURCE.' U. S. Office of Education














FLORIDA STUDENTS
IN
FLORIDA INSTITUTIONS
1949-50


TYPE INSTITUTION*


UNDERGRADUATE


GRADUATE


% OF
TOTAL TOTAL


Public Universitiesi
Public Liberal Arts2
Public Junior Colleges3

TOTAL IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS




Private Universities4
Private Liberal Arts5
Private Junior Colleges6
Professional Schools7

TOTAL IN PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS


7,817
7,333
892

16.042


1,155
339


1,494


4,581
4,772
1,o68
65

10,421


132
122


8,972
7,672
892


31.7
27.1
3.2


17.536 62.0


4,713
4,894
i,o68
65


16.7
17.3
3.8
.2


10.675 38.0


TOTAL IN ALL FLORIDA
INSTITUTIONS 26,528


*Classified by U. S. Office of Education


1. University of Florida
2. Florida State University
Florida A. & M, College
3. Chipola Jr. College
Palm Beach Jr. College
St. Petersburg Jr. College
4. University of Miami
5. Barry College
Bethune Cookman College
Florida Normal & Industrial Memorial College
Florida Southern
Stetson University
Rollins College
University of Tampa


6. Edward Waters Jr. College
Jacksonville Jr. College
Orlando Jr. College

7. Jacksonville College of Music





SOURCE:
U. S. Office of Education


1.748


28,276
















"THE BALANCE OF TRADE" IN COLLEGE STUDENTS






In 1949-50, 11,247 residents of the State of Florida went
out of the State to enroll in institutions of higher learn-
ing. In that year, 7,888 students came into the State to
enroll in Florida's colleges and universities.

The Exchange with Other States


TO OTHER STATES FROM FLA.
2,574
64
323
459
2,020
310
486
496
498
522
851
.902
1,020
712
6

11,247


New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Georgia
Massachusetts
Louisiana
Virginia
Dist. of Columbia
South Carolina
Tennessee
North Carolina
Alabama
36 Other States
Outside U. S.


I OTHER STATES TO FLA.
1,707
916
720
480
445
376
41
169
64
84
126
197
191
1,946
426

7,888


In the exchange of
the world, Florida


students between Florida and the rest of
lost 3,359 more students than she received.































THESE STUDENTS LEAVE
FLORIDA
TO GO TO COLLEGE


7,888


THESE STUDENTS COME
FROM OTHER PLACES
TO GO TO COLLEGE
IN FLORIDA


STUDENTS LEAVING FLORIDA .1949-1950 STUDENTS COMING TO FLORIDA
FOR INSTITUTIONS IN INSTITUTIONS FROM STATES
STATES LISTED LISTED
01 8888 o
o 0 880 0 0 0 0 0 0


N.Y. I

GEORGIA I

ALABAMA

N. CAROLINA

TENNESSEE

S. CAROLINA

DIST. OF COLUMBIA

VIRGINIA

LOUISIANA

MASSACHUSETTS

ILLINOIS

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW JERSEY

OUTSIDE U. S.

36 OTHER STATES


N.Y.

GEORGIA

ALABAMA

N. CAROLINA

TENNESSEE

S. CAROLINA
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
VIRGINIA

LOUISIANA

MASSACHUSETT:

ILLINOIS

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW JERSEY

OUTSIDE U. S

36 OTHER STAT


SOURCE: Residence S Migration of College Studenft
U. S. Office of Education


______
_~___
____













FROM WHAT SOURCES DO FLORIDA INSTITUTIONS

DRAW S STUDENTS?



In 1949-50, therewere 36,164 students enrolled in the public
and private institutions of higher learning in Florida.
These students came from every state of the Union and from
the District of Columbia. 426 'students came to Florida from
outside the continental limits of the United States.

Of the 36,164 students enrolled in the institutions of
higher learning in Florida, 28,276 (78.2%) of them were
residents of Florida.

Six states, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois,
Georgia, and Massachusetts, supplied 4,644 (12.7%) of the
students in Flor.ida's colleges and universities. The other
41 states sent 2,818 students to make the total out-of-state
enrollment 7,888.









SOURCE: U. S. Office of Education








SOURCE OF STUDENTS IN FLORIDA'S COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
1949-1950




WyoA. MIH. DA
"I -- -o. ,--,. ..--.-





/ L L 0THER S T A T E SOW 4,w' --.
S----~- A SHA ED
u \ :" STATES
SCOLO. 12.71
I "\ i \.7
" __ .-.. 'KANSAS V... """
-. k I .... .'". KY"'


N EX. C.
.-.-:. 4 /... Out of /
"---L.J- ---'"- L .. U.S.
ST \ .... c-- 1.2


SOURCE: U. S. Office of Education
















AREAS 'SERVED BY FLORIDA'S COLLEGESAND UNIVERSITIES

The instructional programs of Florida's colleges and univer-
sities draw students from every county of the State, from
virtually every state in the Union, and from many foreign
countries. The information assembled from the institutions
for the Fall semester 1951 is shown on the next three pages.

OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL LIMITS OF THE UNITED STATES: Africa,
Alaska, Argentina, Austria, Belguim, Bolivia, Brazil, British
Malaya, British West Indies, Canada, Canal Zone, Chile, China,
Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, England, Germany, Greece, Guam, Guatamala,
Haiti, Hawaii, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq,
Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Mexico, the Netherlands,
Norway, Panama, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Puerto
Rico, Spain, Thailand, Turkey, Venezuela, and Yugoslavia
on the records of Florida colleges and universities as the
homes of students. For the fall of 1951, there were 470
students from beyond the continental limits of the United
States.

OTHER STATES: The map on the opposite page shows the number
of students from other states and the District of Columbia,
reported by the institutions to be enrolled in Florida
colleges and universities in the fall of 1951.











OUT-OF-STATE STUDENTS IN FLORIDA INSTITUTIONS

FALL 1951.FULL-TIME STUDENTS


AtOgTy
3


WYo.

2


N. DAK.
6



S. DAK.
17


NEDR.


COLO.


KANSAS
19


N. MEX

11


TEXAS


OKLA.
21


CONN.
D.C.
DEL.
MD.
MASS.
N.J.
N.H.
R. I
VT.


3A
3


Total, Other States
Outside Continental U.S.


6,032'i
470'


Grand Total 6,502












FLORIDA STUDENTS BY COUNTY OF RESIDENCE: The map on the op-,
posite page shows the position 6f the counties when they are.
compared on the basis of proportion 6f their total population
enrolled in institutions in Florida for the fall 1951. The
information does not include (1) part-time students who take
courses at colleges or.universities, or (2)' students who en-
rolled in institution's outside Florida.


The map is based'on the following information:


COUiNTY


ALACHUA
BAKER
BAY
BRADFORD
BREVARD
BROWARD
CALHOUN
CHARLOTTE
CITRUS
CLAY
COLLIER
COLUMBIA
DADE
DESOTO
DIXIE
DUVAL
ESCAMBIA
FLAGLER
FRANKLIN
GADSDEN
GILCHRIST
GLADES
GULF
HAMILTON
HARDEE
HENDRY
HERNANDO
HIGHLANDS
HILLSBOROUGH
HOLMES
INDIAN RIVER
JACKSON
JEFFERSON
LAFAYETTE


NO. % uF
STUDENTS POP.


862
27
174
81
142
750
42
31
40
43
23
129
5260
59
26
2052
578
20
41
192
24
7
30
45
51
34
74
148
2071
49
82
280
73
32


54
.43
.41
.71
.60
.89
.53
.72
.65
.30
.35
.71
1 .06
.64
.66
.67
.51
.59
.71
.53
.69
.32
.40
.50
.51
.56
1.11
1.09
.83
.35
.69
.81
.70
.93


NO. % OF
COUNTY STUDENTS POP.


LAKE
LEE
LEON
LEVY
LIBERTY
MADISON
MANATEE
MARION
MARTIN
MONROE
NASSAU
OKALOOSA
OKEECHOBEE
ORANGE
OSCEOLA
PALM BEACH
PASCO
PINELLAS
POLK
PUTNAM
ST. JOHNS
ST. LUCIE
SANTA ROSA
SARASOTA
SEMINOLE
SUMTER
SUWANNEE
TAYLOR
UNION
VOLUSIA
WAKULLA
WALTON
WASHINGTON


273
132
1078
54
23
73
214
313
56
103
78
71
16
858
75
838
141
1418
1219
135
186
115
109
202
161
78
82
60
23
903
27
58
71


.81
.56
2.09
.51
.72
S51
.62
.82
.72
'34
.61
.26
.46
.75
.66
.73
.69
.89
.98
.57
.74
57
.59
.70
.60
.69
.48
.58
.26
1.22
.51
.39
.60








FLORIDA STUDENTS IN FLORIDA'S COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES

FALL 1951 FULL-TIME STUDENTS



...... ..
cmW w --: ;
.X.






% OF POPULATION
!N FLORIDA'S COLLEGES { ,m

Lowest .26 .


a.26 .52 .



*53 *62


.64

SA '' >



D .73 1.51


D 2.09 Highest


C] COLEGErs

JUNIOR COLLEGES


Q) UNIVERSITIES













DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS IN FLOOR

BY TYPE OF INSTITUTE
1949-1950


IDA INSTITUTIONS

ION*


TYPE INSTITUTIONS


UNDERGRADUATE


GRADUATE


% OF
TOTAL TOTAL


Public Universities
Public Liberal Arts
Public Junior Colleges

TOTAL PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS



Private Universities
Private Liberal Arts
Private Junior Colleges
Private Professional Schools

TOTAL PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS


TOTAL ALL INSTITUTIONS


Of the 7,888 students who came to Florida from other
states, 1,698 (21.8%) enrolled in public institutions.


* See page 9 for institutions classified by
the U. S. Office of Education.
** This distribution does not include the 426
students who came to Florida from the area
outside the continental limits of the U.S.


SOURCE: U.S. Office of
Educa t ion


8,372
7,856
1,049

17.277



8,485
6,549
1,079


16.113


33.390


9,720
8,317
1,049

19,086



8,721
6,773
1,079
79

16.652


1,348
461


1,809



236
224


79

539


2.348


27.2
23.3
2.9

53.4 '



24.4
19.0
3.0
.2

46.6


35,738**








DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS* IN FLORIDA INSTITUTIONS
OF HIGHER LEARNING BY TYPE OF INSTITUTION
1949 1950









C\ \

/ 2 /
27.2% 23.3% 2.9% 24.4% 19.0% 3.0

UNIVERSITIES LIBERAL ARTS C\ UNIVERSITIES LIBERAL ARTS I .C I


WHE RE T H E .S T U D E N TS G 0 T 0 C 0 L L E G E

PUBLIC PR I VATE

53.4% 46.6%
* Excluding students from other countries.










WHAT FACILITIES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION


ARE FOUND IN FLORIDA?


Facilities for higher education in Florida are the product
of the efforts of private groups and of State and local
governments.

The University System is composed of three institutions
which are operated by the State through the Board of Control.
The University of Florida at Gainesville and the Florida
State University at Tallahassee are institutions for white
students. The Florida Agricultural and Mechanical College,
for negroes, is at Tallahassee.

Local yernments, through district and county funds, and
theaSt.e,_hrough .the Minimum FoundationIProgramT,- Tiviepro-_
vided junior college facilities in certain counties of the
State. Public junior colleges are found in Lake Park,
Marianna, Pensacola, and St. Petersburg. The junior colleges
are an upward extension of the public school system.

In addition to the publicly supported institutions, Florida
has 15 colleges or universities which are provided and
operated by private groups.

The University of Miami, the University of Tampa, and Stetson
University at Deland are privately controlled universities.
Barry College for Women at Miami, Florida Christian College
at Tampa, Florida Southern College at Lakeland, Rollins
College at Winter Park, and Webber College at Babson Park
are degree-granting institutions for white students. Bethune-
Cookman College at Daytona Beach and the Florida Normal and
Memorial College at St. Augustine are degree-granting insti-
tutions for negroes.

Jacksonville Junior College, Orlando Junior College, and
St. Joseph's Academy at St. Augustine are private junior
colleges for white students. The Edward Waters College in
Jacksonville is a negro junior college.





FLORIDA'S UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES


6 8





PUBLICLY-SUPPORTED INSTITUTIONS


1. THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA. GAINESVILLE
2. THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY, TALLAHASSEE
3. THE FLORIDA A. & M. COLLEGE, TALLAHASSEE*
4. CHIPOLA JUNIOR COLLEGE, MARIANNA
5. PALM BEACH JUNIOR COLLEGE, LAKE PARK
6. PENSACOLA JUNIOR COLLEGE. PENSACOLA
7. ST. PETERSBURG JUNIOR COLLEGE. ST.PETERSBURG
8. WASHINGTON JUNIOR COLLEGE. PENSACOLA*


PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS


BARRY COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, MIAMI
BETHUNE.COOKMAN COLLEGE, DAYTONA BEACH*
FLORIDA CHRISTIAN COLLEGE, TAMPA
FLORIDA NORMAL & INDUSTRIAL MEMORIAL COLLEGE.ST. AUGUSTINE*
FLORIDA SOUTHERN COLLEGE. LAKELAND
JOHN B. STETSON UNIVERSITY. DELAND
ROLLINS CO LEGE. WINTER PARK
RINGLING SCHOOL OF ART, SARASOTA
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI, CORAL GABLES
UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA. TAMPA
WEBBER COLLEGE, BABSON PARK
EDWARD WATERS (JUNIOR) COLLEGE, JACKSONVILLE*
JACKSONVILLE JUNIOR COLLEGE, JACKSONVILLE
ORLANDO JUNIOR COLLEGE. ORLANDO
ST. JOSEPH'S ACADEMY, ST. AUGUSTINE


* FOR NEGROES


Universities :)

Colleges [

Junior Colleges


10
.14

-15
L- 22













THE ROLE OF JUNIOR COLLEGES IN HIGHER EDUCATION

IN FLORIDA





Florida has made relatively little use of junior colleges in
meeting her obligation for higher education. In 1949-50,
5.4% of the students in Florida's institutions of higher
learning were in junior colleges. Only 4.9% of the students
in Florida's public institutions were in public junior col-
leges. Neither the State nor private organizations have
provided junior college facilities on an extensive basis in
Florida.

Florida's public junior colleges are an upward extension of
the county school system under theMinimum Foundation Program.
They come under the general supervision of the State Super-
intendent of Public Instruction, and they are completely
independent of the Board of Control. Only at the level of
the State Board of Education do the public junior colleges
and the university system come under the same supervision
and control.

At the request of the State Advisory Council on Education, a
survey of the State of Florida with regard to the development
of community colleges was reported to the State Superin-
tendent in February 1951. The State Superintendent's Office
and the Advisory Council are now in the process of consider-
ing the report in the development of a proposed junior col-
lege program.












ENROLLMENT IN FLORIDA'S PUBLIC JUNIOR COLLEGES

(BY COUNTY OF RESIDENCE)


FALL 1951


FULL-TIME STUDENTS


35




* IN ADDITION TO THE 132 FROM ESCAMBIA
THERE ARE 151 STUDENTS FROM ESCAMBIA
AND SANTA ROSA COUNTIES COMBINED. NO
BREAKDOWN IS AVAILABLE FOR THIS FIG-
URE.




FLORIDA NON-FLORIDA
STUDENTS STUDENTS
1. CHIPOLA JUNIOR COLLEGE 136 8
2. PALM BEACH JUNIOR COLLEGE 166 14
3. PENSACOLA JUNIOR COLLEGE 151

4. ST. PETERSBURG JR. COLLEGE 403 86

5. WASHINGTON JUNIOR COLLEGE 132


988 108






S COUNTIES OPERATING JUNIOR COLLEGES


COUNTIES CONTRIBUTING TO OPERATION
OF JUNIOR COLLEGES IN ADJOINING
--- COUNTIES


SOURCE:
Questionnaires to Colleges











ENROLLMENT IN FLORIDA'S PRIVATE JUNIOR COLLEGES

(BY COUNTY OF RESIDENCE)
FALL 1951 FULL-TIME STUDENTS


FLORIDA
STUDENTS

1. EDWARD WATERS JUNIOR COLLEGE 237

2. JACKSONVILLE JUNIOR COLLEGE 138

3. ORLANDO JUNIOR COLLEGE 120

495


NON.FLORIDA
STUDENTS

13

2



15


SOURCE:
Ouestionnaires to Colleges












RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FLORIDA JUNIOR COLLEGE SURVEY


Under the guidance of a steering committee of the State
Advisory Council on Education, a Florida junior college sur-
vey was made in 1950-51. The report of the survey1 was sent
to the State Advisory Council on Education in February 1951
by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The
recommendations of the survey called for legislation which
would:

(I) LEAVE THE DECISION TO CREATE AND SUPPORT COM.
MUNITY OR JUNIOR COLLEGES TO THE VOTERS AND
FREEHOLDERS OF THE COUNTY OR MULTICOUNTY DIS-
TRICTS,
(2) HAVE THE COMMUNITY COLLEGES OPERATE UNDER THE
CONTROL OF THE COUNTY BOARD OF 'EDUCATION, OR
UNDER AN ELECTED COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOARD,
(3) PERMIT THE CREATION OF COMMUNITY JUNIOR COLLEGES'
IN DISTRICTS OF ONE OR MORE COUNTIES WHICH COULD
MEET CERTAIN MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR POPULATION
AND ASSESSED VALUATION,
(4) GIVE THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUC.
TION SUPERVISION OVER THE COMMUNITY JUNIOR COL-
LEGES.
(5) INCORPORATE EXISTING VOCATIONAL AND ADULT PRO.
GRAMS INTO THE COMMUNITY JUNIOR COLLEGES,
(6) GIVE THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICTS POWER TO
TAX FOR COMMUNITY JUNIOR COLLEGE PURPOSES,
(7) HAVE THE STATE PARTICIPATE IN THE FINANCIAL SUP-
PORT OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES UNDER A FORMULA AKIN
TO THAT USED IN THE MINIMUM FOUNDATION PROGRAM,
WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF SIXTEEN FULL-TIME STUDENTS
TO CONSTITUTE AN INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT.
(8) TERMINATE STATE FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO A COMMUNITY
COLLEGE WHICH BECOMES A FOUR.YEAR INSTITUTION.
AND .
(9) PERMIT THE PRESENT JUNIOR COLLEGES TO REMAIN
UNDER THE MINIMUM FOUNDATION PROGRAM, UNLESS THE
VOTERS DECIDED TO CHANGE TO THE PROPOSED COM-
MUNITY COLLEGE LAW.

It is noted that these recommendations do not provide for
any coordination of the junior colleges with the University
System, except at the level of the State Board of Education.
This could be very significant in the light of the exten-
sive use of junior colleges in other states.




1. Report of the Florida Junior College
Study, State Department of Education,
February 195L










JUNIOR COLLEGES IN THE UNITED STATES


While the function of junior colleges is becoming increasing-
ly clear, we, as a nation, have not yet decided upon the
extent to which junior colleges will be used as institutions
for higher education.

Junior colleges, or community colleges, as they are coming.
to be called, have been assigned a threefold function: (1)
general education or preprofessional education for.students
who desire to transfer to more advanced institutions of
higher learning, (2) terminal education of a vocational and
citizenship nature for youths who may or may not have finished
grade 12 ,and (3) adult education to meet the needs 6 indi-
viduals and of the community in the vocational, recreational,
and citizenship fields.

It is widely accepted that community colleges should be de-
signed to serve the community in which they exist, but it is
also true that community colleges bear avery close relation-
ship to the common schools and to the advanced programs of
higher education as well.

There is a very great variation among the States in the ex-
tent to which higher education is provided in junior col-
leges. In two states, Louisiana and Nevada, there are no
junior colleges. In 14 states there areno publicly supported
junior colleges. In only 14 states were there as many as 10
out of every ioo college students attending junior colleges.

On the other hand, California in 1949-50 had 37 students in
every ioo who were enrolled in her institutions in junior
colleges. 51 out of every 1oo students in California's pub-
lic institutions of higher learning were in junior colleges.
Out of the 34 states with public junior colleges, 5 of them
had 20% or more of their enrollment in junior colleges, and
20 of them had o1% or 'more in junior college's.

Another characteristic of the junior college movement in
this country has been the development of junior colleges into
degree granting institutions with four and five yearprograms.
It would appear that this is apart of the tendency of educa-
tional institutions to expand upward and outward. Institu-
tions which are created as two-year colleges have had a
tendency to become four-year colleges with little apparent
regard for the over-all need for additional four year col-
leges.








ENROLLMENT IN PUBLIC JUNIOR COLLEGES
1949-1950
(SHOWN IN PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL ENROLLMENT IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS)




2*


1 -' MO.
S s. .---
jV O'. '" 1: .4
1.S -- '.'^ .**- 5




"12 .. 0o. L" 0- a^ 7* 6 8.1%.

""- -. ."2 "




rfd r / 1 o.11.7%


L N .I L 4. /
1 V






I Ovartie 4.9% 0.4%



bl/C Jnior CollegesZ
,J 4thOuatil 4.9 0.4% .X .o.

LIM Public Junior Colleges


SOURCE: U. 3. Office of Education
Residence and Migration of College Students

















PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS PLAY A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN
HIGHER EDUCATION IN FLORIDA



While this study is concerned primarily with higher educa-
tion under the Florida University System, it is very clear
that the publicly controlled institutions have a strong
partner in the private institutions in the State.

In 1949-50, 47% of the students enrolled in colleges and
universities in the State were enrolled in privately-support-
ed institutions. 78% of the students who came into insti-
tutions of the State during that school year entered private
institutions.

In the fall of 1951, 8,254 Florida'students from 61 counties
enrolled in private institutions in the State. The distri-
bution of these students by counties is'shown on the map on
the opposite page. The proportion of total enrollment from
each county .isshown on the chart accompanying the map.

The location of theprivate institutions is shown on the map.









ENROLLMENT IN FLORIDA'S PRIVATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
FULL-TIME STUDENTS. FALL. 1951


33( 3 26











PROPORTION OF STUDENTS IN PRIVATE COLLEGES AND 7



BAKER 7.4 LEE 25.8 .I 604







BREVARD 28.9 LIBERTY 0
BROWARD 49.2 MADISON 6.8 2 5
CALHOUN 14.3 MANATEE 24.3 5, 2 16 51
CHARLOTTE 9.7 MARION 14.4 I FR TO. T
CITRUS 27.5 MARTIN 26.8 soT I
CLAY 11.6 MONROE 26.2






COLUMBIA 17.8 OKALOOSA 5.6 3
DAE 69.8 OKEECHOBEE




DESOTO 22.0 ORANGE 28.1 ..
DIXIE 0 OSCEOLA 24.0 34
DUVAL 20.5 PALM BEACH 25.4 O .lU
ESCAMBIA 5.7 PASOS 35.5





FLAGLER 0 PINELLAS 17.0
FRANKLIN 19.5 POLK 49.5
GADSDEN 7.8 PUTNAM 16.31
GILCHRIST 25.0 ST. JOHNS 25.3
GLADES 0 ST. LUCIE 31.3
GULF 6.7 SANTA ROSA 6.4
HAMILTON 13.3 SARASOTA 23.8
HARDEE 31.4 SEMINOLE 27.3
HENRY 8.8 SUMMER 17.9
HERNANDO 12.2 SUWANNEE 14.6
H% OF TOTGHLAND 34.5 TAYLOR TOTAL ENROLLMENT 6.7
HILLSBOROUGH 47.9 UNION 13.0L CO S







HOLMES 6.1 VOLUSIA 59.4
INDIAN RIVER 15.9 WAKULLA 0
JACKSON 9.3 WALTON 12.1
JEFFERSON 6.8 WASHINGTON 12.7 '
LAFAYETTE 3.1




LA- COLLEGES LA 1

RAF JUNIOR COLLEGES
CALHOUN 14.3 MANATEE 24.3 5 1
CHARLOTTE 9.7 MARION 14.4 -
CITRUS 27.5 MARTIN 26.8
CLAY 11.6 MONROE 26.2 3OA&% 1 3

COLUM8,A 17.8 OKALOOSA 5.6
DADE 29.8 OKEECHOBEE 14.6

DIXIE 0 OSCEOLA 34.7
DUVAL 20.5 PALM BEACH 25.4
ESCAMBIA 5.7 PASCO 35.5
FLAGLER 0 PINELLAS 17.0
FRANKLIN 19.5 POLK 49.5
GADSDEN 7.8 PUTNAM 16.3

GLADES 0 ST. LUCIE 31.3





HILLSBOROUGH 47.9 UNION 13.0
HOLMES 6.1 VOLCSIA 59.4













JUNIOR COLLEGES








DEGREES GRANTED BY FLORIDA'"S PRI VATE IKSTI'TUTIOS



Even though it fails to take into account the outcome of re-
-search and certain kinds of extension services, the number
of degrees granted is frequently used as a measure of the
output of institutions of higher learning.

The table on the opposite page shows the number of degrees
which were granted by the private institutions during the
years from 1947-1948 through 1950-51. The table summarizes
data reported by the institutions listed in the footnote on
that page.


The
the
the


chart below compares the number of degrees granted
private institutions of the State with those granted
institutions of the Florida University System.


COMPARISON OF NUMBER OF DEGREES AWARDED
FLORIDA'S PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS WITH THE
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


1i71


COMBINED PRIVATE
INSTITUTIONS*


THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM*


39
.-, .. ,


2181
1935 *




1947 .......




194 .'48 :.*.f :.:




1947.48


2871


3429
:::,:i :,;.:


**- *t y/
; *"/^v~ /'-


1948. 49


4503



9 '





























1949.50


3794


1950.51


*Shded areas represent graduate degrees.

30


5000


4000


3000 L.


2000


1000 L













DEGREES GRANTED BY FLORIDA'S PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS1



AREA OF STUDY 1947.48 1948.49 1949.50 1950.51


BACHELOR'S OR FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREE


ARTS AND SCIENCES 859 1059 1416 1201

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 336 692 1008 807
EDUCATION 426 586 639 631

ENGINEERING 24 93 194 170

HOME ECONOMICS 21 18 12 19

JOURNALISM 7 3 11 7

LAW 94 209 340 376

MUSIC 42 40 96 64

PHYSICAL EDUCATION 16 23 54 45
RELIGION 19 30 81 61

SECRETARIAL SCIENCE 22 17 18 16
TOTAL 18662 27702 3869 3397


MASTER'S DEGREE


ARTS AND SCIENCES 20 52 59 81

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION .. 5 6 10
EDUCATION 49 44 57 58
TOTAL 69 101 122 149


ASSOCIATE IN ARTS

(TWO YEARS IN JUNIOR COLLEGES)

GENERAL AND
TERMINAL 44 49 395 299




L Included in this report: Barry College for Women, Bethune-Cookman College,
Edward Waters College, Florida Christian College, Florida Normal & Industrial
Memorial College, Florida Southern College, Rollins College, Stetson University,
University of Miami, University of Tampa, Webber College, Edward Waters (Junior)
College, Jacksonville Junior College, and Orlando Junior College.

2. Rollins did not report for these years.













STATE FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION IN MARINE RESEARCH


AT THE UNIVERSITY OF HIAMI



Funds of the State of Florida are used to finance marine
research conducted for the State Board of Conservation by
the Marine Laboratory of the University of Miami. The
expenditures are made under terms of a contract between the
State Board of Conservation and the University of Miami, as
authorized by the statutes. (373.06(3))

The State Board of Conservation is authorized by law to make
such surveys in marine biology as it deems proper. Under
the contract, the facilities and staff of the Marine Labora-
tory of the University of Miami are made available to the
State Board of Conservation to carry out research approved
by the Board's supervisor. The results of the research are
disseminated with the identification of the Florida State
Board of Conservation.

Under the terms of the current contract, the University of
Miami is paid from State funds for (i) salaries according to
the actual proportion of time spent on investigations
authorized by the Board, (2) expendable supplies, including
fuel for operating vessels and vehicles, (3) travel incurred
directly in investigations authorized by the Board, and
(4) administrative and overhead costs, computed on the basis
of 1/3 of the salary costs. Reimbursement for capital
equipmentprovided by the University of Miami is not made.













STATE BOARD OF CONSERVATION

MARINE BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI


GENERAL REVENUE
APPROPRIATIONS


1947-48

1948-49

1949-50

1950-51

^ 1951-52


1952-53


$45,000.00
$45,ooo.oo
$45,000.00

$25,000.00

$25,000.00
$25,000.00
$10,000.00

$25,000.00
$10,000.o00


INCIDENTAL FUNDS
APPROPRIATIONS


General
Shrimp

General
Shrimp


$20,371.62**


GENERAL REVENUE
EXPENDITURES


$2,979.52*

$45,000.00*

$16,449.04*

$24,729.03*

$19,229.34 General
$8,004.98 Shrimp


INCIDENTAL FUNDS
EXPENDITURES


$15,303.03***


"Report of State Auditor.
Income from sale of oyster she//. Reported by
Office of State Board of Conservation.
Office of State Board of Conservation.

















THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA



The 1943 Session of the Legislature established and created
an institution of higher learning to be known as the Uni-
versity of South Florida. The statutes .(2_41_.4__provide
that the institution shall have as its primary purpose a
school of medicine, a school _o h armacy7 aniidaschool of
dentistry.


The responsibility for the location and establishment, as
well as for the operation, of the University of South
Florida was given to the Board of Control.


The statutes authorize the Board of Control to accept endow-
ments on behalf of the University of South Florida. There
appears to have been no occasion for the Board to exercise
this authority.


The Board of Control was directed by law to establish the
school immediately upon the enactment of the bill, but no
financial provisions were made to enable them to do so.











THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND NURSING


The 1949 Session of the Florida Legislature created a school
of medicine and nursing as a component part of the University
of Florida at Gainesville.

The law, (241.471(2)), provides that the school shall be
operated according to the standards required for recognition
and approval. It is further provided that no money shall be
spent for the construction of facilities or for the opera-
tion of this school unless it is specifically appropriated
for such purpose by the Legislature. No such money to
activate this school has been appropriated.





FUND'S FOR PLANNING 'STATE MEDICAL SCHOOL


The 1951 Session of the Legislature appropriated $1oo,ooo to
the Board of Control for the purpose of drafting plans for
building, erecting, and establishing a State medical school
in Florida,

An additional $96,500 from the Commonwealth Fund, a private
fund established to promote physical and mental health
education, has been received by the University of Florida
for the same purpose.

$1,682.95 was spent during the first year of the biennium
for this study.











FINANCIAL AID TO THE FIRST ACCREDITED MEDICAL SCHOOL


The 1951 Session of the Florida Legislature appropriated the
sum of $225,000.00 to the Board of Control for the purpose
of providing financial aid during the period from July 1,
1951, through June 30, 1953, to the first accredited and
approved medical school to be established in the State.

The statutes (242.62) provide that $3,000 per year shall be
paid, for each Florida student enrolled, to the first
accredited and approved medical school to be established in
the State. Other provisions of the law require that the
enrollment of the school be distributed throughout the State,
and that at least 90% of it be composed of Florida resi-
dents. Residence for seven years immediately preceding
enrollment is required of students for whose enrollment the
$3,000 would be payable.

It is further provided that the money so paid to such insti-
tution shall be spent for no purpose other than the opera-
tion and maintenance of a medical school and for medical
research. The money cannot be used for building construc-
tion or for the maintenance and operation of any hospital.

No school appears to have qualified for the first year of
the current biennium. In the fall semester of 1952-53, the
University of Miami opened a medical school, enrolled its
first class of 28 students, and has instruction underway.
According to a recent decision of the Florida Supreme Court,
the medical school appears to be meeting the requirements of
the act within the intent of the Legislature. In lieu of
final acceptance for membership in the Association of
American Medical Colleges based on a four-year operation of an
approved medical college, the Court declared that meeting
the requirements of the American Medical Association to date
would comply with the intent of the Legislature.

The University of Miami has filed its list of students with
the Board of Control in accordance with provision of the
act, but it has not yet made formal claim for payment of the
$3,000 per student.

The budget requests of the Board of Control do not include a
request for funds for aid to this medical school for the
1953-55 biennium.









;'SOUTHERN REGIONAL EDUCATION


The 1949 Session of the Legislature ratified the compact
drawn up by fourteen Southern States to provide for joint
effort to use and develop facilities for professional,
technological, scientific, literary, and other fields of
higher education.

The Board of Control for Southern Regional Education is
composed of the Governors of the States and three citizens
from each of the States. The three citizens are appointed
by the Governors for staggered four-year terms, and one of
the citizens must be selected from the field of education.

The Board of Control for Southern Regional Education has the
duty to submit plans and recommendations to the States for
the establishment and operation of joint educational facili-
ties. To date, no such joint facilities have been estab-
lished.

The Board may enter into agreements with any of the States
or with any educational institutions or agencies to provide
educational services. This authority has been used to
arrange for the exchange of students among the States. Under
it, States contract with the Board of Control for Regional
Education to assign it a quota in participating colleges.
The institutions in which Florida has been assigned quotas
are shown on the map on the next page.

Once the quotas have been established, prospective students
apply through an agency in their own state (in Florida, the
Board of Control) to be certified as a part of the state's
quota. These certified applicants, who meet the require-
ments and are accepted by the contracting schools, count on
the state's quota.

Once the students are enrolled, the States are billed by the
Board of Control for Southern Regional Education for the
contract price. The payments are forwarded to the institu-
tions where they are used for educational operations in the
programs concerned. Funds are not used for permanent
improvements.

Florida's share in the cost of general operation of the
Southern Regional Education program is $13,ooo per year.
This includes the administration of the contract student
program, the research projects, study conferences, and other
Southern Regional Education activities.










FLORIDA IN SOUTHERN REGIONAL EDUCATION


The State of Florida, through..the Board of Control, has a
contract with the Board of Codtrol for Southern Regional
Education to provide quotas for students in medicine,
dentistry, and veterinary medicine. For each student
accepted under the quotas established, the Board of Control
has agreed to pay $1,500 for medical and dental students
and $i,ooo for students in veterinary medicine.

Florida has a quota which permits the maximum enrollment in
the following institutions of 175 medical students, 85 dental
students, and 52 veterinary students. Total enrollment
under the plan in the three programs is 312 students.;

INSTITUTIONS UNDER CONTINUING
CONTRACTS FOR FLORIDA STUDENTS

1. ALABAMA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE. AUBURN
(Private)
2. DUKE UNIVERSITY, DURHAM. NORTH CAROLINA
(Pr iva te
3. EMORY UNIVERSITY. ATLANTA. GEORGIA
(Methodis t)
4. LOYOLA UNIVERSITY, NEW ORLEANS. LA.
(Catholic)
5. UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. BALTIMORE
(State) 5
6. MEHARRY MEDICAL COLLEGE. NASHVILLE. TENN.
(Private.Negro
7. TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA, NEW ORLEANS VA
(Private)
8. TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE, TUSKEGEE. ALABAMA
(Private) -
9. VANDERBILT N..C----.-- 2 '

TENNESSEE OKLA. S. C
(Private) A
ALA.^ -A.L'
GA.
MiSS. 1

*\ TEXAS \LA. .. \

/ 4 & 7
FLA.




The Florida State UniveF ity is under contract to receive
students in the School of Social Welfare under the Regional
Education Program.:










EXPENDITURES FOR FLORIDA STUDENTS UNDER REGIONAL EDUCATION


Florida students who are enrolled in out-of-state institutions under the
Regional Education Program are in four-year professional programs. When
the program was started in 1949-50, there was a first-year class only,
and so the costs were approximately 1/4 of the cost of a full program.
In the second year a new first-year class enrolled in the program, and
the other group constituted a second-year class; this brought the cost
of the 1950-51 program to approximately 1/2 the cost of a full program.
The third class enrolled in 1951-52, and the current year, 1952-53,
brought the program up to full strength under present quotas with the
enrollment of four classes. The cost of the program for the current
year is approximately that of a full program.

In 1949-50 there were 22 dental students, 50 medical students, and
11 students in veterinary medicine. With 83 students enrolled, the cost
of the program, including the Florida share of the central office, was
$126,250.00.

In 1950-51, with two classes enrolled, there were 42 dental students,
87 medical students, and 21 students in veterinary medicine. With
150 students, the total cost for that year was $225,750.00.

In 1951-52 there were three classes enrolled with 56 dental students,
134 medical students, and 26 veterinary students with a total cost of
the program of $320,250.00. The appropriation for that year exceeded
the cost by $1,250.00.

For the current year, 1952-53, the Legislature failed to increase.the
appropriation to provide for the addition of the 4th class. The $321,500
appropriation plus.the $1,250.00 carried over from the first year of the
biennium made $322,750.00 available for the obligations for 1952-53. It
was estimated by the Board of Control that the addition of the 4th class
would increase the obligation $100,000 over the funds available. In
November of 1951 the Budget Commission approved $50,000 from the emer-
gency fund for that purpose, and the Board of Control is asking the
Legislature for a $50,ooo deficiency appropriation to meet the expenses
of the program.

In addition to the students accepted under the quota, the out-of-state
institutions have enrolled other Florida students in these professional
programs. In 1949-50 there were 11, in 1950-51 there were 41, and in
1951-52 there were 60 students taken in addition to the quota. The
institutions did not charge Florida for these additional students.












OUT-OF-STATE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR NEGROES


The policies of the Board of Control provide'that scholar-
ships shall be granted to applicants of the Negro race to
attend colleges and universities beyond the boundaries of
SFlorida to pursue courses which are offered at Florida State
SUniversity and the University of Florida but which are not
offered at the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical College.

Such scholarships require the approval of the Board of
Control.

Applicants are required to be legal residents of the State
of Florida for a period of at least twelve months immedi-
ately prior to the filing of the application, and they must
be planning to carry a normal college load in an accredited
college or university.

Scholarship grants are in the amount of $350.00 for the
regular school year of two semesters or three quarters, or
$175.00 for one semester, or $116.67 for one quarter.
$150.oo is allowed for one nine-weeks summer session, or
$125.00 for one six-weeks summer term.

Payments are made to the students at the beginning of each
term, upon receipt of a statement from the institution that
fees have been paid by the student.

Funds for this purpose have been coming from the A. and M.
budget, but the Board of Control is requesting separate
funds in its current budget requests for the biennium begin-
ning July 1, 1953.


















PAYMENTS FOR OUT-OF-STATE SCHOLARSHIP AID
1945-46 THROUGH 1951-52


YEAR


NUMBER OF
PERSONS


AMOUNT


76
26
269
i88
488
516
297

TOTAL 1,860


S$7,854.75
9,914.67
46,433.71
50,455.94
96,170.72
S 85i967.58
72,371.73

$369.169.10


1945-46
1946-47
1947-48
1948-49
1949-50
1950-51
1951-52
















THE FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


The statutes (239.01(1)) define the university system of
Florida as (l) one university to be known as the University
of Florida located at Gainesville, to which shall be admitted
both white male and white female students; (2) one univer-
sity to be known as the Florida State University located at
Tallahassee, to which shall be admitted both white male and
white female students; and (3) one college to be known as
the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical College located at
Tallahassee, to which shall be admitted negro male and negro
female students.


It is further provided in the statutes (239.01(3)) that no
college, school, department or division at either of the
universities at the time (1947) the schools were made co-
educational shall be moved to the other university.


The same article.provides, moreover, that "all unreasonable
duplication shall be avoided."








THE FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM



,\ I L..--,i--,-g;p,_
I' ",w O.l,






FLORIDA
A. & : -
,.. COLLEGE





THE
FLORIDA
/ STA TE



THE
l UNIVERSITY
FLORIDA
FL OR IDA \














HANAGEHENT AND CONTROL OF THE FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


The Florida University System is operated by the State of
Florida to provide college-grade instruction, research, and
service to the State. The University System is supported by
the State, and its management and control are a part of the
government of the State.

The management and control of the Florida University System
is centered in the Board of Control, but many agencies of
the State take part in governing the system.

The Board of Control exercises its broad powers in conjunc-
tion with, but under, and subject to the supervision and
control of the State Board of Education.

The Governor appoints the members of the Board of Control.

The Budget Commission makes recommendations concerning the
legislative budgets from the institutions. It approves the
operating budgets submitted by the Board of Control, and it
releases funds in accordance therewith.













All money, which is collected by the institutions and which
is classified as "belonging to the State," is deposited with
the State Treasurer, who is also custodian of all State and
Federal funds available for the use of the System.

The Comptroller disburses funds for the University System.

The State Auditor postaudits the financial accounts of the
institutions and the Board of Control.

Legislative act created the University System and made pro-
vision for its management and control. The statutes estab-
lished the principle that there shall be no "unreasonable
duplications" between the two white universities. The
Legislature has acted to provide for particular programs in
the institutions. It provides money from general revenue
for the operation of the University System and for capital
outlay. The Legislature appropriates money from all other
sources, including the earnings of the institutions, for the
operation of the System.

This system of higher education is based on provision in the
Constitution of the State of Florida, Article IX, Section 2,
that "the Legislature shall provide for raising sufficient
revenue to defray the expenses of the State, including...the
State institutions of higher learning..."












NEED FOR COORDINATION AND CONTROL


Decisions to spend money for education are decisions against
spending that money for anything else; and, similarly,
decisions to spend money in support of certain educational
programs in certain institutions are decisions against
spending that money for other programs.

As long as the resources available for the functions of the
State Government have an upper limit, it will continue to be
important that expenditures for higher education be co-
ordinated and controlled, both within the system of higher
education and with the other functions of the State.

Under the Florida system, the Legislature exercises the
responsibility for deciding how much of the State's resources
will be used for higher education and how much will be used
for other purposes.

In Florida, the Board of Control is in a position to exer-
cise responsibility for deciding which of the various pro-
grams of higher education will be provided, to what extent,
and in which institutions.

In states with a multiplicity of state-supported institu-
tions which operate under separate boards, the problem of
coordination and control may be more difficult than it is in
Florida. The fact that Florida's machinery facilitates this
coordination and control, however, does not reduce the
importance and need for such coordination and control.












i
















WHAT IS INVOLVED IN STATE-WIDE COORDINATION AND

CONTROL OF HIGHER EDUCATION?




There appear to be five aspects of the job of coordinating
and controlling higher education from a State level.

(I) THE JOB INVOLVES DECISIONS CONCERNING WHAT
INSTRUCTIONAL. RESEARCH. AND SERVICE PROGRAMS
WILL BE SUPPORTED:

(2) IT INVOLVES DECISIONS CONCERNING WHAT INSTITU.
TIONAL FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE
PROGRAMS WHICH HAVE BEEN DECIDED UPON. THIS
INCLUDES DECISIONS CONCERNING WHETHER MORE THAN
ONE INSTITUTION WILL PROVIDE SOME OR ALL OF THE
PROGRAMS;

(3) IT INVOLVES DECISIONS CONCERNING THE AMOUNT OF
FINANCIAL AND OTHER SUPPORT TO BE PROVIDED FOR
THE SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION:

(4) IT INVOLVES DECISIONS CONCERNING THE POLICIES
UNDER WHICH THE SYSTEM AND THE INSTITUTIONS WILL
OPERATE: AND

(5) IT INVOLVES THE SUPERVISION OF THE OPERATION OF
THE SYSTEM AND OF THE INSTITUTIONS TO SEE THAT
THE OPERATION IS PRODUCING THE INSTRUCTION.
RESEARCH, AND SERVICES AGREED UPON UNDER THE
POLICIES ESTABLISHED.














EXPERIENCE OF OTHER STATES IN COORDINATION


OF HIGHER EDUCATION



In states in which there is a.multiplicity of institutions
under separate boards, whatever coordination and control is
exercised must be done by the legislature. Over the years
in these states, legislators have come to feel that competi-
tion among the institutions has reduced the hope for the
development of a comprehensive but economical state program
of higher education.


Growing out of such dissatisfactions, at least three types
of organizations have been established to coordinate the
various aspects of higher education prior to their con-
sideration by the legislature.


A Single Governing Board With No Educational Executive
Officer. In states which follow this plan, the focus of
interest in coordination .appears to be financial rather than
educational. Under this plan, such coordination as there is
comes from (i) pressure created by financial limitations,
and (2) voluntary cooperation which frequently is not unlike
"log rolling" in legislative bodies.


While many institutional heads are satisfied with such an
arrangement, it is found that a lack of comprehensive plan-
ning to meet the state's needs characterizes most of the
systems in which there is no educational executive officer.


Iowa, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, South Dakota, and Florida are
organized under variations of this plan.





I













A Single Governing Board With An Educational Executive
Officer, Usually Called A Chancellor. The essential charac-
teristic of the states with this organization is the effort
to develop a unified system of higher education under one
leadership. The approach to the legislature is through a
single board which has the benefit of both educational and
financial leadership on its own staff. The function of the
executive officer is to provide the board with information,
oriented in educational as well as financial factors, which
will enable them to make the judgments and decisions required
to perform the five essential aspects of coordination and
control of higher education.1


Such systems, in operation, have produced certain benefits,
and there is wide agreement that they (i) tend to bring
about a unity of purpose and plan among the institutions
comprising the system, (2) reduce unjustifiable duplication
of offerings in instruction, research, and service, (3) tend
to turn the attention of members of the legislature to the
needs of the system as a whole and away from the needs of
particular institutions as such, and (4) make possible the
operation of some functions on a state-wide basis.


Few would argue that there are no disadvantages to such a
system. In the first place, the line of authority between
the educational executive officers and the heads of institu-
tions has been poorly defined. There appears to have been a
tendency to build up a central administration, thus robbing
the system of the initiative and prestige of top-notch
educational leadership in the institutions. It is further
argued that it is difficult to build up a loyalty in a



1. See Page 43.













system of higher education that is akin to the enthusiastic
support of alumni and friends.


It would appear that in those cases in which the board.and
the educational executive officer have emphasized their
responsibility for state-wide planning and policy determina-
tion, and in which the administrative responsibility has
been left with the institutions, these disadvantages have not
been serious.


Georgia, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Mississippi, and
North Carolina are states which fall under this plan in one
way or another.


A Central Board With Strictly Limited Functions, And Separate
Doards For The Several Types Of Institutions. Oklahoma is
the example of a state in which several boards for the
various types of institutions have been retained and in
which an over-all board has been created to coordinate the
boards and institutions under them. The central board, the
State Board of Regents for Higher Education, has as its
principal function the coordination of the budgets from the
various boards and institutions.


The central board's educational executive officer and his
very small staff limit their function to the preparation of
pertinent data required by that board as it makes decisions
(1) concerning the budget proposals to submit to the legisla-
ture, and (2) concerning its responsibility for the alloca-
tion of appropriations to the various institutions. Thus
the board is able to make its decisions based on a careful
study of the programs and the conditions under which they
are offered.

















WHICH PLAN FOR COORDINATION AND CONTROL IS BEST?




Experience among the states produces no conclusive evidence
as to which plan is best. It is quite probable that there
is no plan which is best for all states. But it is becoming
increasingly clear that a satisfactory plan for coordination
will be one in which


(1) THE CENTRAL COORDINATING AGENCY SHOULD STUDY
CONSTANTLY THE STATE'S NEEDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION
AND DEVELOP INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS TO MEET THOSE
NEEDS ADEQUATELY AND ECONOMICALLY. AND


(2) THE CENTRAL COORDINATING AGENCY SHOULD LEAVE
MUCH RESPONSIBILITY FOR BOTH PLANNING AND ADMIN-
ISTRATION IN THE HANDS OF THE OFFICERS OF EACH
INSTITUTION,








1. Material excerpted from address by Fred J. Kelly,
Specialist In Higher Education, Office of Education,
Federal Security Agency.













THE BOARD OF CONTROL


Chapter 240 of Florida Statutes provides for a Board of
Control of sevenimembers appointed- byt e G o ernr ~-n e-from
each of the six 'Congressional Districts--as-of-January -1,
1951), and one from t-he State at lrge. The members of tie
Board are required to be residents and citizens of the State
for ten years prior to their appointment and may not be
selected from among the residents of any of the counties in
which any institution under the Board of Control is located.
These appointments do not require confirmation by the
Senate. The Governor may remove members of the Board of
Control for cause.


In addition to the institutions of the University System,
the Florida School for the Deaf and the Blind, and the John
and Mable Ringling Museum of Art come under the jurisdiction
of the Board of Control.


The members of the Board of Control, by virture of their
appointment to that board, also constitute the membership of
the State Plant Boardi and the membership of the State Soil
Conservation Board.2


The statutes provide for the election of a chairman for the
Board as often as that office becomes vacant, for: the elec-
tion of the secretary to the Board, and for the employment
of all necessary clerks and servants.



1. The State Plant Board has responsibility for the detection, control, and
eradication of pests and plant disease.
2. The State Soil Conservation Board is responsible for the coordination and
promotion of the Soil Conservation Districts throughout the State.










INSTITUTIONS UNDER THE BOARD OF CONTROL*


THE STATE BOARD
OF EDUCATION


THE BOARD OF CONTROL



STAFF OF BOARD
OF CONTROL


UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA


FLORIDA STATE
UNIVERSITY


FLORIDA A. & M.
COLLEGE


I
i

FLORIDA SCHOOL FOR

THE BLIND AND DEAF

------------------------


*The membership of the Board of Control also
constitutes State Plant Board d the State
Soil Conservation Board.

**Not a part of the University System.
Operated under jurisdiction of the Board of
Control

53


"" *
JOHN d MABLE RINGING

MUSEUM OF ART


~---------~-------"*--------T








PRESENT MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL 1


Frank M. Harris, Chairman
St. Petersburg, First District
Ex-officio member of all committees
Term expires in 1953


Hollis Rinehart, Vice Chairman
Miami, Fourth District
Education*, Building and Grounds
Term expires in 1956

Eli H. Fink
Jacksonville, Second District
Finance*, Education Committees
Term expires in 1953


Committees


George J. White, Sr.
Mt. Dora, Fifth District
Personnel, Building and Grounds Committees
Term expires in 1953

W.-Glenn Miller
Monticello, Third District
Building and Grounds*, Finance Committees
Term expires in 1955

George W. English, Jr.
Ft. Lauderdale, Sixth District
Personnel*, Finance Committees
Term expires in 1954

Mrs. Jessie Ball duPont
Jacksonville, State-at-Large
Education, Personnel Committees
Term expires in 1955



W. H. Powers, Executive Secretary
Tallahassee
Nonvoting member of all committees

Guy C. Fulton
Gainesville
Architect to the Board of Control


* Indicates Committee Chairman


1. January 1953.













POLICY MANUAL OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL


In 1952, the Board of Control issued a "Statement of Policies
and Objectives," which contains provisions relative to a
number of aspects of its own organization and operation as
well as to the University System as a whole.


The statement provides that, in addition to the chairman, a
vice-chairman and an executive secretary shall be officers
of the Board and that persons to fill these positions shall
be elected by the Board as often as they become vacant. It
provides that the chairman and vice-chairman be elected from
among the members of the Board and that the executive secre-
tary be elected from outside the membership of the Board.
It further provides that the Board may remove any of its
officers by a majority vote.


The policy statement calls for monthly meetings of the Board
and for at least one regular meeting each fiscal year at
each of the institutions under its management.


The statement creates four standing committees, Buildings
and Grounds, Education, Finance, and Personnel, of at least
three and not more than five members, appointed by the
chairman. Both the chairman and the executive secretary are
members of the standing committees, ex officio, and the
chairman has power to vote with the other members of the
committees.











THE BOARD OF CONTROL

Length of 'Service of Members

The statutes provide that the term of office for members of
the Board of Control is for four years and until their
successors are appointed and qualified.


Excluding the seven members of the present Board, forty-one
individuals have served the State of Florida on the Board
of Control since it was organized in 1905.


In general, the pattern has been for members to serve one
four-year term and then leave the Board.1


Ten people have served for periods in excess of one four-
year term; and, of this number, three have served for a
period longer than twelve years. One man served for twenty-
four years. At the other extreme, eight individuals served
for periods of less than one full term. Four served for
less than one year.


One of the present members has completed five years of
service, three have completed three years, and three have
completed one year. Among the three most.recent appoint-
ments, the first woman to serve on the Board of Control is
included.




1. Median 4 Years.
Mean (Arithmetic Average) 6.4 Years.





LENGTH OF SERVICE OF PRESENT BOARD MEMBERS
(IN YEARS COMPLETED)




t o
EC i







Lo
LENGTH OF SERVICE 10
LENGTH OF SERVICE IN YEARS


LENGTH OF


SERVICE OF FORTY-ONE PAST MEMBERS

OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL


4: LENGTH OF SERVICE IN YEARS

_- SOURCE: Office of Secretary of Sttfe















TRANSITION TO A SEVEN-MEMBER BOARD


To implement the enlargement of the Board of Control from
five to seven members, the Legislature in 1951 provided for
a number of transitory terms. The terms involved in this
transition are shown on the opposite page.


It is noted that the terms on the five-member Board were
staggered in such away that three appointments were required
in the first year of each administration, and the other two
were made in the third year of each administration.


Ten transitional terms were defined by the statutes. Of
these, five have been appointed by Governor Warren. Five
will be filled by appointments by Governor McCarty.


In addition to the five transitional terms to be filled by
Governor McCarty, there will be three regular appointments
to fill, bringing his responsibility up to eight appoint-
ments to the Board of Control.


Future Governors will fill two vacancies in each of the
first three years of their administrations, and there will
be one vacancy in the last year of each administration.













THE BOARD OF CONTROL
TRANSITION FROM FIVE TO SEVEN MEMBERS


GOVERNOR
CALDWELL
1948


)(
1Q.49


f 't
lo0-/


M!OR WARREN

S1951 1952
I i
.. *: ,e [


) ( GOVERNOR

1953 1954
1 t


McCARTY )(

1955 1956 1957
1 11


FUTURE

1958
f


1 94


GOVERNOR )

1959 1960 '61
i I


I. I

..,.5



I. I _~.- ---


I,. \~:.:


: i TERM ON VIVE-MEMBER BOARD



S TRANSITION TERM. APPOINTED


INDICATES TIME TO BE SERVED AFTER 1/1/53



INDICATES TIME TO BE SERVED AFTER 1/1/53


I


-- : ~-. r


~, :,.-r :..I


---------_ --'.1
I
-J












THE BOARD OF CONTROL


Standing Committees


The Board of Control is now in the process of activating the
system of standing committees established by the 1952 state-
ment of policies and objectives.


The Finance Committee is the only one which has been active
to date, and it appears to have maintained no record of its
activities. This committee received the legislative budget
submitted by the institutions, and it heard the heads of the
institutions justify the budget requests.1 It returned some
of the proposed budgets to the institutions for changes
which were worked out with the executive secretary, and it
held second hearings to consider the changes. The committee.
recommended the revised legislative budgets to the whole
Board where they were adopted without further interpretation
by the institutions.


The Committee on Building and Grounds was established to
study and to prepare recommendations concerning land and
building requirements of the institutions,, The Committee on
Education was set up to consider and make recommendations
concerning the educational functions of the institutions.
The Committee on Personnel was created to study and make
recommendations concerning various aspects of personnel
management.






1. The Finance Committee invited members of the Council's Select Committee on
Education to sit with It on these hearings. The Council's research Staff
observed these meetings.














THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY


of the Board of Control

The statutes creating the Boardof Control in 1905 authorized
the Board to elect a secretary to serve at the pleasure of
the Board. In 1952, the Board changed the title from secre-
tary to executive secretary.

Four individuals have served the Board as its secretary.
Excluding, the present secretary, who was elected by the Board
in 1947, the terms of service for the previous secretaries
were eleven, four, and twenty-seven years.

The functions of the executive secretary are detailed in the
statement of policies and objectives issued by the Board in
July 1952. In general, the executive secretary serves the
Board as its secretary and as its.executive officer. He is
"responsible to the Board for the prompt and effective execu-
tion of all resolutions, policies, actions, and rules and
regulations adopted by the Board for the operation of its
office and the institutions under its jurisdiction." The
statement gives him broad enough discretionary powers "to
enable him to properly discharge these responsibilities."

The executive secretary attends and participates, without
privilege of voting, in all meetings of the Board. He is a
member, ex officio, of all committees, without vote, and at-
tends all committee meetings, serving as secretary when so
requested.















He is custodian of the corporate seal of the Board, and he
authenticates its use by his signature. He prepares the
agenda for meetings of the Board, and all regular items
coming to the Board for consideration receive his attention
before the Board meeting.

The executive secretary serves as a liaison officer between
the Board of Control and other State officials, boards, com-
missions, and departments. He serves as liaison officer
between the institutions.

He serves as financial advisor to the Board and to the..heads
of institutions, and he is a consultant to the business
managers of the institutions. He recommends the basic
system of accounts in use at the institutions, and he pre-
scribes the forms for the reporting of financial and statis-
tical data to the Board.

The executive secretary audits and approves expenditures of
the institutions, and he is authorized to approve purchase
requests from the institutions in amounts not in excess of
$1,000.

The executive secretary approves appointment of nonacademic
personnel and student assistants for the Board.

The executive secretary is in charge of the Tallahassee
office of the Board of Control, and he has general super-
vision of the activities of the architect to the Board of
Control.











ORGANIZATION OF THE STAFF OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL


G AUDITOR




PROPERTIES
AUDI TOR. ANALYST
SUPERVISOR












STENOGRAPHER TYPIST
F S ________ ____________


*Title changed by Board from Secretary to
Executive Secretary
**Not the same as the Architect to the
University of Florida
"*See pages 68 & 69.














THE BOARD OF CONTROL
AND ITS GENERAL OFFICE EXPENDITURES


The expenditures of the Board of Control and of its general
office in Tallahassee are paid from general revenue funds
appropriated to the Board for its own operation. The Board
submits a legislative budget in addition to the separate
legislative budgets for each of the institutions.

The first table on the opposite page shows the expenditures
of the Board and its general office2 for three years.

For the year ending June 30, 1951, the reports of the State
Auditor show that the net expenditures for the operation of
the three institutions of higher learning, the expenditures
of the office of the architect, expenditures from the admin-
istered funds of the Board and from other operations, totaled
more than thirty-six million dollars. This does not include
expenditures of the other institutions under the Board.

The expenses of the Board and of its general office in 1950-
51 were less than 1/10 of 1% of the current expenses of the
University System.s.


I. F.S.U. FINANCIAL REPORT FOR JUNE, 1952. SHOWS ONE SALARY
($5.830) FOR AN EMPLOYEE IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE BEING PAID
FROM INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS.

2. SEE PAGE 67 FOR EXPENDITURES OF THE BOARD'S ARCHITECT.

3. A & M, $3,029, 137.50; F.S. U. (1949-50), $8,875,211.31; U.
OF F. (INCLUDING EXTENSION AND THE EXPERIMENT STATIONS)
$19,763,109.48; BOARD'S ARCHITECT, $115,577.46; .ADMINIS-
TERED FUNDS, $4, 142,987.40; OTHER $378,808.37; TOTAL-
$36,304,741.52. PERCENT FIGURE IS 0.09319%.














THE BOARD OF CONTROL AND ITS GENERAL OFFICE


EXPENDITURES


1949. 50*


SALARIES
EXPENSES

TOTAL


$16 544.99
$10.635.32

$27, 190. 31


1950.51 '

$16.968.00
$16 .865. 43

$33,833.43


1951.52 *

$29.710.00
$14,20 1.98

$45.9 11.98


1951-52 EXPENSES OF THE BOARD BY OBJECT CODE**


TELEPHONE, TELEGRAPH. &
MESSENGER SERVICE
TRAVEL EMPLOYEES
TRAVEL OTHER THAN EMPLOYEES
OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
STATIONERY AND OFFICE SUPPLIES

TOTAL CURRENT CHARGES

TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES

OFFICE FURNITURE AND EQUIP.


TOTAL BOARD OF CONTROL AND
GENERAL OFFICE EXPENSE


S1,966.57
3. 425.44
4.053. 38


887. 15


966. 13


$13,650.29


551.69


$14,201.98


* Report of State Auditor
** Office of the Board of Control















THE ARCHITECT TO THE BOARD OF CONTROL


The Board of Control employs an architect who is responsible
for drawing plans and specifications for, and supervision
over, the construction of buildings at the several insti-
tutions.

The Board's statement of policies and objectives defines
the position, and the executive secretary is given general
supervision over the activities of the architect and his
staff. The architect submits regular reports to the Board
as do the heads of the various institutions.

The architect's office is maintained on the campus of the
University of Florida, but there is no direct relationship
between the architect and the head of that institution.i

The Board of Control operates the architect's office almost
completely from a fund which is produced by fees charged by
the office for: the planning of buildings and for the super-
vision of their construction. The Board's legislative
budget requests a token sum from general revenue to cover
this function.2




1. THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA HAS ITS OWN CONSULTING ARCHITECT
EMPLOYED rN'THE PLANT AND GROUNDS DIVISION UNDER THE BUSI-
NESS MANAGER.


2. THE JANUARY 1952 PAYROLL OF THE ARCHITECT'SOFFICE TOTALED
$7.499. 10 THE GENERAL REVENUE SALARY ITEM REQUESTED IN THE
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET FOR THE BIENNIUM WAS $8.000. AN APPRO-
PRIATION OF $300.500.00 FROM TRUST FUNDS WAS REQUESTED.














EXPENDITURES OF THE ARCHITECT'S OFFICE


(BY SOURCE OF FUNDS)


1949-50


1950-51


FROM GENERAL REVENUE



FROM INCIDENTAL FUNDS*


$ 2,803.96



$123,133.99


$ 5,123.20



$110,654.26


$ 394.81



$131,251.97


$125,937.95


$115,777.46


$131,646.78


SProduced by fees which are charged by the office of the architect for planning
of buildings and for the supervision of their construction. Charged against
the funds for the construction of the buildings.


1951-52


TOTAL














THE STAFF OF THE BOARD OF CONTROL


MAJOR FUNCTION


POSITION


QUALIFICATIONS
REQUIRED


EXECUTIVE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD


SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE


PROVEN ADMINISTRATIVE AND EXECU.
TIVE ABILITY


POSITIONS IN THE BOARD'S OFFICE IN
TALLAHASSEE


SUPERVISING AUDIOO.


ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT TO THE
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY. AND SUPER-
VISOR OF INSTITUTIONAL FINANCIAL
RECORDS AND REPORTS.


TECHNICALLY TRAINED AND EXPERIENCED
AUDITOR AND ACCOUNTANT.


AUDITOR-ANALYST


STATISTICAL ANALYST, INSTITUTIONAL
BUDGETARY DIRECTOR AND AUDITOR.


TECHNICALLY TRAINED AND EXPERIENCED
AUDITOR AND ACCOUNTANT.


PROPERTIES SUPERVISOR


INSURANCE, INVENTORY AND PROPERTY
CONTROL,


TRAINING IN INSURANCE, INVENTORY
EXPERIENCE, AND EXPERIENCE IN BUILD-
ING CONSTRUCTION.


SECRETARY


SECRETARIAL DUTIES


STENOGRAPHIC TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE.


ACCOUNTANT


OFFICE ACCOUNTANT AND BOOK.
KEEPER,


CUSTODIAN AND TYPING OF BOARD
MINUTES.


STENOGRAPHER


BOOKKEEPING TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE.



STENOGRAPHIC TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE.

















MAJOR FUNCTION


POSITION


QUAL IF ICATIONS
REQUIRED


POSITIONS IN THE OFFICE OF THE ARCHITECT TO THE
BOARD OF CONTROL IN GAINESVILLE


ARCHITECT TO THE BOARD


DESIGNS BUILDINGS. DRAWS. PLANS.
AND SUPERVISES CONSTRUCTION OF
BUILDINGS.


A REGISTERED ARCHITECT WITH INSTI.
TUTIONAL EXPERIENCE.


ADMINISTRATIVE ASST.


HANDLING OF CONTRACT PAYMENTS.
CHANGES. ETC. SUPERVISION OF
INSPECTORS AND CORRELATION
WITH OFFICE.


TECHNICAL TRAINING THROUGH EXPER.
IENCE IN ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION,
HANDLING OF CONTRACTS. BUSINESS
METHODS. ABILITY TO MAKE ADMINIS.
TRATIVE DECISIONS.


EXECUTIVE SECRETARY


HEAD SECRETARY


STENOGRAPHIC AND BOOKKEEPING EXPER-
IENCE.


STENOGRAPHER


GENERAL STENOGRAPHIC WORK


STENOGRAPHIC TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE.


OFFICE MANAGE


HANDLING OF BUILDING CHANGES.
CONFERENCES WITH REFERENCE TO
NEW JOB CHANGES. CONFERENCES
WITH SALESMEN.


TECHNICAL TRAINING WITH THOROUGH EX.
PERIENCE IN CONSTRUCTION AND OFFICE
PRACTICE. ABILITY TO MEET PUBLIC
AND TO MAKE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS.















MAJOR FUNCTION


POSITION


QUALIFICATIONS
REQUIRED


CHIEF STRUCTURAL ENGINEER


STRUCTURAL DESIGNER AND DRAFTS.
MAN IN CHARGE OF ALL STRUCTURAL
ENGINEERING WORK.


COLLEGE GRADUATE IN ENGINEERING OR
ARCHITECTURE WITH NOT LESS THAN 7
YEARS OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DE-
SIGN EXPERIENCE.


STRUCTURAL ENGINEER


STRUCTURAL DESIGNER AND DRAFTS.
MAN.


SQUAD LEADER


SENIOR DRAFTSMAN WITH ABILITY
TO DIRECT OTHER DRAFTSMEN AS
A SQUAD.


SENIOR DRAFTSMAN


ARCHITECTURAL DRAFTSMAN


JUNIOR DRAFTSMAN


ARCHITECTURAL DRAFTSMAN.


COLLEGE GRADUATE IN ENGINEERING OR
ARCHITECTURE WITH 2 YEARS OF STRUC-
TURAL ENGINEERING DESIGN EXPERIENCE.




COLLEGE TRAINING WITH 5 YEARS EXPER.
IENCE, OR, IF NO COLLEGE TRAINING,
8 OR 10 YEARS EXPERIENCE AS A DRAFTS-
MAN.




COLLEGE TRAINING WITH 5 YEARS EXPER-
IENCE, OR IF NO COLLEGE TRAINING, 8
OR 10 YEARS EXPERIENCE AS A DRAFTSMAN.




APPROXIMATELY 6 YEARS EXPERIENCE OR
COLLEGE TRAINING AND 4 YEARS EXPER-
SENCE.


MECHANICAL DRAFTSMAN


DRAFTSMAN AND DESIGNER


INSPECTOR


JOB INSPECTOR OF GENERAL
CONSTRUCTION WORK.


SIMILAR TO SENIOR DRAFTSMAN BUT WITH
TRAINING OR EXPERIENCE IN MECHANICAL
OR ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING.




WELL-ROUNDED KNOWLEDGE OF CONSTRUCTION:
TECHNICAL TRAINING DESIRABLE BUT NOT
ESSENTIAL.


ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR


JOB INSPECTOR OF ELECTRICAL
CONSTRUCTION WORK.


WELL-ROUNDED KNOWLEDGE OF ELECTRICAL
CONSTRUCTION: TECHNICAL TRAINING DESIR-
ABLE, BUT NOT ESSENTIAL.


MECHANICAL INSPECTOR


JOB INSPECTOR OF PLUMBING.
HEATING. AND VENTILATING
WORK.


WELL-ROUNDED KNOWLEDGE OF MECHANICAL
CONSTRUCTION: TECHNICAL TRAINING DESIRE.
ABLE. BUT NOT ESSENTIAL.










INTERUNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON COORDINATION


An interuniversity committee of eight members is provided
for in the University System to make recommendations for the
coordination of the programs of the University of Florida
and the Florida State University.

The Inter-University Committee on Coordination was provided
for on a permanent basis in the initial statement on co-
ordination, which was made jointly by the presidents of the
two universities. The initial statement, the JOINT STATEMENT
ON COORDINATION OF PROGRAMS OF UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA AND
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY, was approved by the Board of
Control in April 1949.

The Inter-University Committee on Coordination is composed
of four appointees of the president of each institution.
The reports of the Committee are submitted to the presidents
for their further consideration. Since the'matters under
consideration usually involve the development of new or of
more advanced programs, the implementation of the recommenda-
tions usually require that they be submitted to the Board of
Control by the president or presidents concerned.

The Board has indicated that unless thereis substantial
agreement between the two universities, action on proposals
for new or for more advanced programs will be delayed. In
such cases, proposals are returned to the presidents or to
the interuniversity committee to work out conditions which
will be satisfactory to both institutions.










POLICIES GOVERNING INTERUNIVERSITY COORDINATION


The proposal of the headsof the two universities, in the
initial joint statement on coordination, established, with
the approval of the Board of Control, the policies which
govern interuniversity coordination.

(1) Coordination shall be in light of the intent and
purpose of the 1947 act to provide coordinate
universities of equal rank in their respective
fields of service.
(2) That neither university will propose a legis-
lative enactment changing one department, school,
or college in existence in 1947 from one univer-
sity to the other without full discussion of the
proposal by the interuniversity committee.

(3) That neither university will recommend anewpro-
gram or a major expansion of an existing program
until a careful study has been made by the
interuniversity committee to determine which
university should offer the work.

(4) That, consistent with consideration of the best
interest of youth of the State and logical group-
ing of curricula, allocation of functions be
recommended in such a way as will tend to create
comparable opportu-nities for service by both
universities.

The current policy manual of the Board of Control carries
a blank page entitled "Interuniversity Coordination". This
indicates that the Board may be in the process of rethinking
this matter.








ALLOCATION OF CURRICULAR PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED BY THE

INTERUNIVERSITY COMMITTEE AND APPROVED BY

THE BOARD OF CONTROL


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA



AGRICULTURE


ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS


ARCHITECTURE

ART (PAINTING, SCULPTURE & CRAFTS)



ARTS AND SCIENCES
(INCLUDING PREPROFESSIONAL COURSES
IN AREAS IN WHICH INSTITUTION HAS
NO PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL)




BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
(WITHOUT NEED TO DUPLICATE ALL
DEPARTMENTS)


FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY


ART (PAINTING, SCULPTURE &
CRAFTS)


ARTS AND SCIENCES
(INCLtDING PREPROFESSIONAL
COURbES IN AREAS IN WHICH
INSTITUTION HAS NO PROFES.
SIONAL SCHOOL)



BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
(WITHOUT NEED TO DUPLICATE ALL
DEPARTMENTS)


ENGINEERING


FORESTRY


GENERAL EXTENSION
(JOINT ENDEAVOR)


GENERAL EXTENSION
(JOINT ENDEAVOR)


GRADUATE SCHOOL
(IN FIELDS WHICH HAVE PARTICULARLY
STRONG UNDERGRADUATE MAJORS. DOC-
TORAL PROGRAMS MUST BE APPROVED BY
THE BOARD OF CONTROL.)



LAW (PRE-LEGAL TRAINING. POST-GRADUATE
LAW SCHOOL. SHOULD NOT BE DUPLICATED
AT PRESENT TIME.)


GRADUATE SCHOOL
(IN FIELDS WHICH HAVE PARTICULARLY
STRONG UNDERGRADUATE MAJORS, DOC-
TORAL PROGRAMS MUST BE APPROVED BY
THE BOARD OF CONTROL.)



(PRE.LEGAL TRAINING ONLY.)


PHARMACY


PHYSICAL EDUCATION


PHYSICAL EDUCATION











UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA



RESEARCH PROGRAMS
(COOPERATION TO BE ENCOURAGED)


INSTRUCTION IN LIBRARY SCIENCE
(NOT TO EXCEED 15 SEM. HRS. IN COL-
LEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES)


INSTRUCTION IN HOME ECONOMICS
(RESTRICT THE USE OF HOME ECONOMICS
TO 18 .SEM. HOURS TOWARD DEGREE)


FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY



RESEARCH PROGRAMS
(COOPERATION TO BE ENCOURAGED)

MARINE BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH
INSTRUCTION AND SERVICE
(WITH FACILITIES MADE AVAILABLE
TO U. OF F.)



SOCIAL WORK


LIBRARY SCHOOL




HOME ECONOMICS


NURSING AND HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT


(MAY BE NECESSARY AT SOME FUTURE
TIME IF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CREATES
DEMAND)


EDUCATION
(SHALL NOT INCLUDE HOME ECONOMICS
EDUCATION)



PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
SERVICE AGENCY AND NON-
PROFESSIONAL CURRICULA
IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND
OTHER SUBJECTS RELATED
TO PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION


MUSIC


EDUCATION
(SHALL NOT INCLUDE
EDUCATION)



PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
SERVICE AGENCY:
TRAINING (NOT TO
AT U. OF F.)


AGRICULTURAL






PROFESSIONAL
BE DUPLICATED


MUSIC


(MAXIMUM CREDIT OF 24 SEM. HOURS
MAY BE OFFERED TOWARD DEGREE)


JOURNALISM










HOW ARE THE FUNCTIONS OF COORDINATION AND CONTROL
PERFORMED IN FLORIDA?


Of the three general types of organization for coordination
and control of higher education on a state-wide basis,
Florida operates on a system which has a single board with-
out an educational executive officer. The Board has the
services of an executive secretary and his staff, who are
finance officers for the Board and financial advisors for
the institutions. The Board has broad authority and respon-
sibility, not only for the coordination of programs of
higher education, but for the operation of the three insti-
tutions of higher learning.

The heads of the institutions do not sit with the Board in
its deliberations, but they appear before it to give reports,
to make requests, and to make recommendations concerning
policy and administrative detail.

The actions of the Board of Control are subject to the
supervision and control of the elected State Board of Educa-
tion. It would appear that the supervision and control of
the State Board has been nominal.

How does this machinery perform the five functionsi of
control and coordination of higher education?

It is difficult to ascertain from the written records of the
Board of Control the manner in which the decisions concern-
ing the coordination and control of higher education are
made.2 However, these records and other evidence indicate
that decisions are arrived at substantially as follows:

I. DECISIONS CONCERNING WHICH INSTRUCTIONAL, RESEARCH, AND
SERVICE PROGRAMS ARE TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE STATE.
While it is not possible to present a complete or detailed
picture of the way in which these decisions are made, it
would appear that the following points are clear from the
record:

(i) The Board of Control does not consider the
offerings of the private institutions in the
State when it makes its decisions concerning
which programs will be supported by State funds.


1. See page 47.
2. It should be noted that this discussion Is limited to the manner in which
the Board of Control functions In making these decisions. No investigation of
the ways in which decisions are made in the institutions was made, and this
presentation does not describe them.












(2) The Board awaits the recommendations of the
heads of the institutions, and it does not have
any long-range educational plans of its own.

(3) Within the total funds made available, the allo-
cation of financial support to the various pro-
grams is determined in the institutions, subject
to Board approval.

(4) The focal point of the Board's concern appears
to be the financial rather than the educational
aspects of the program.

(5) The Board's staff maintains no continuing
studies of the State's educational needs and
resources to guide the Board in making decisions
concerning how far state-supported higher educa-
tion should go.

(6) Programs are established-by legislative enact-
ment from time to time.

II. DECISIONS CONCERNING WHAT INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES ARE
REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE PROGRAMS AGREED UPON.
The records appear to establish the following points:
(1) The Board awaits the requests from the institu-
tions to establish a new program.

(2) The Board does not maintain a continuous study
of the performance of the institutions in terms
of courses and degrees offered, enrollment in
the various programs, kinds of services rendered,
and research areas being pursued.

(3) The Board postpones decisions concerning the
allocation of any given program to an institu-
tion until the representatives of the universi-
ties can agree upon terms which are mutually
satisfactory.

(4) The interuniversity agreement, an instrument
drawn up by the institutions and approved by the
Board, was designed to control decisions in this
area, but there is some indication that recom-
mendations and decisions in contradiction to it
are made without modification of the agreement.













(5) Programs are started with an inauspicious begin-
ning and gradually grow to the point that they
approach a program already in operation in the
other university.

(6) Little evidence is found to indicate that the
implications for the negro college of programs
established in white universities are considered
in any over-all coordination of the expansion of
institutional facilities.


III.: DECISIONS CONCERNING THE AMOUNT OF SUPPORT WHICH THE
SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION REQUIRES..
The salient points in the performance of this function are:
(1) While the Board of Control leaves decisions con-
cerning the allocation of support of various
programs to the institutions, the Board is much
more active in decisions concerning the total
amount of money which each institution requests
from the legislature.

(2) The Legislature itself makes decisions concern-
ing the amount of money which is available from
general revenue for the support of higher educa-
tion, institution by institution.

(3) The Board of Control, acting on the recommenda-
tions of the heads of the institutions, decides
the total amount of money.which will be avail-
able by fixing student fees and other charges
which go into the incidental funds.


IV. DECISIONS CONCERNING THE POLICIES UNDER WHICH THE
SYSTEM OPERATES.

Practices in this area are in a process of change, but the
following points appear:
(i) While it is not true that the Board of Control
has operated without policies, it is true that
the Board has been inclined to let policies
build up and be handed down by word of mouth and
by practice. Within the current biennium the













Board has set about systematizing and publishing
policies in a number of significant areas.

(2) In lieu of over-all policies for the system,
policies have tended to grow up in each institu-
tion, rather than in a well-coordinated body for
use throughout the system.

(3) Acting in a situation in which there has been a
minimum of clearly defined policies, the Board
of control has not been able to delegate respon-
sibility for administrative detail. As a result,
the Board has tended to devote its attention to
administration rather than to policy formulation
and to supervision.

(4) The present policy manual is being drawn up by
the staff of the Board of Control and the sug-
gested policies are considered by the Board in
light of the view of the institutions and
officers concerned.

V. SUPERVISION OF THE SYSTEM TO DETERMINE THAT PROGRAMS OF
INSTRUCTION, RESEARCH, AND SERVICE ARE BEING CONDUCTED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ESTABLISHED POLICIES.
The following points stand out in the operation of the
system in Florida:

(1) In lieu of general over-all policies for the
system, supervision has been neglected in favor
of participation in administration as a function
of the Board of Control.

(2) In lieu of educational orientation of the Board,
supervision has been confined rather largely to
finance.












INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


The University System has provisions for a large number of
instructional programs in many different departments, schools,
colleges, and divisions. The various component parts of the
institutions are organized around fields of learning, or
around'specialties within those fields.

Closely related courses are given in departments, which, for
the most part, have their own faculties and their own de-
partment heads or chairmen. Related departments are organ-
ized into schools or colleges. These'schools or colleges,
or divisions as they are called at Florida A. & M., are
headed by a dean or a director. The deans or directors are
administrative heads of their colleges, and the presidents
of the institutions rely more or less heavily on them for
recommendations concerning employment of personnel, programs
of instruction, and budget preparation as far as their own
colleges are concerned.
The University of Florida is organized into 13 colleges or
schools in which instruction is given. In addition, there
i's a Graduate School which administers graduate programs,
but which utilized the personnel of the other colleges, and
the School of Inter-American studies which stimulates and
coordinates 'study and exchange of culture in the western
hemisphere.

Florida State University has lo schools or colleges in which
instruction is given. In addition, there is a general
education program, which is an inter-departmental endeavor
of the College of Arts and Sciences, and the Graduate School,
which administers and coordinates graduate study given in
the various schools or colleges.

Florida A. & M. College is organized in 10 divisions plus
the Graduate Division which performs the same functions as
the graduate schools do in the universities.

Detailed information about the operation of the departments,
schools, colleges and divisions of each of the institutions
for the year of 1951-52 is shown throughout the second part
of the report.











FLORIDA STUDENTS IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


FULL-TIME STUDENTS FALL 1951
a



j 4' i 68 i 68w J
'17U 7.. .39 "

33 1066 68 5 BRADFORD 73
23 2 7o 106 o .DUVAL 1529
26 52 2 *38 139 UNION 19

26 30 268 i
S32 A 3
8 26 8 817 113











.- 57 e,,\v ,2
147 1 L






789.... t.. t
S16 36 97 16 77

23









2E' 16372

C L .
62 617



^ 1072 608 \ 10 1
789....8
^'y.. ---_-- i-67

^5" 161 36 97 16 77

uWAW'Ai 46 I p1 34

28a 7 474

TOTAL: 13.498 96 _31


22 378


L^ "'Il 1,585
75





-<^ .o
oCO-0-a ~












OUT OF STATE STUDENTS IN FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

FALL 1951 FULL-TIME STUDENTS


ONT.

1


WYO.
2


UTA3
3


N. DAK.


S. DAK.
4


NEDR.
3


COLO.


KANSAS
8


N. MEX.


EXA

26


OKLA.


CONN. 30
D. c. 10
DEL. 7
MD. 10
MASS. 34
N.J. 96
N.H. 2
R.I. 7
VT. 3


1,279
211

1,490


Other States
Beyond Continental U.S.

To fa I













INSTRUCTIONAL LOAD FOR FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM
FALL 1940 THROUGH FALL 1952




The instructional load for the University System' is shown
in the table below and in the chart on the opposite page.
The information is shown in student equivalents which are
figured from the total hours of credit.2 This is done to
show full-time students and part-time students as an equiva-
lent number of full-time students.


FALL


1940-41
1941-42
1942-43
1943-44
1944-45
1945-46
1946-47
1947-48
1948-49
1949-50
1950-51
1951-52
1952-53


UNIVERSITY
OF
FLORIDA

3,894
3,439
3,242
701
783
1,379
6,636
8,583
10,090
10,616
9,765
8,975
9,118


FLORIDA
STATE
UNIVERSITY

2,043
2,092
1,900
2,166
2,344
2,571
3,155
4,334
5,200
5,948
5,338
4,321
4,412


FLORIDA
A. &M.
COLLEGE

902
864
867
709
830
1,170
1,319
1,586
1,568
1,756
1,929
1,965
2,006


TOTAL


6,839
6,395
6,009
3,576
3,957
5,120
11,110
14,503
16,858
18,320
17,032
15,261
15,536


1. Does not include students enrolled in General Extension Divisido.
2. Undergraduate credits each semester divided by 15, and graduate
credits divided by 12.









INSTRUCTIONAL LOAD IN FULL-TIME STUDENTS1



FLORIDA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM2


(IN THOUSANDS)


FALL 1940



FALL 1941



FALL 1942


FALL 1943



FALL 1944


FALL 1945



FALL 1946



FALL 1947



FALL 1948



FALL 1949



FALL 1950


FALL 1951



FALL 1952


I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 16 17 18 19































_ __-_------__
__ ~L------


1. Student equivalent figures are used to weight part-
time students as fractional parts of full-time stu-
dents.
2. Does not include General Extension Division.














WHAT ABOUT FUTURE ENROLLMENT?


No elaborate predictions for enrollment in the institutions
of the University System are included in this report. It
would appear, however, that there are certain rather de-
finite indications that we can expect enrollment to con-
tinue to advance in the long run.


This general expectation is based on:

(i) The advances in the enrollment in the elementary
grades.: This is shown at the third-grade level
on the opposite page.:

(2) The tendency for more and more Florida students
to stay in Florida for their education at the
college level. (See page 1o)

(3) The tendency for a higher proportion of Florida's
population to enroll in colleges. (See page 4)














THIRD GRADE ENROLLMENT IN FLORIDA


1941 1952


(IN THOUSANDS)


WHITE




L. NEGRO


41-42 42-43 43-44 44-45 45-48


46-47 47-48 48-49 49-50


Potential
College '51
Freshmen


'56 '57 '58 '59 '60 '61


~2


20 1-


i




B




~ ~LV/i -11'I
51.-5"


50 51


' '''
'`''
~ '"''

I~r~l
~I
11 I
I 1
,~
I ~
I
II ,I
I
,


-ii-TI
I


)




'''

' i


-Tn?-
I
~I
I~
I(I'
''


I

'

I ~


-~-
~ -
.





) I


'52 '53 '54 '55















STATE APPROPRIATIONS TO THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM


The chart on the opposite page shows the amount of the
appropriations from State funds to the institutions of the
University System for six biennial periods beginning in
1941. The last item at the far right of the chart shows the
amounts being requested by the Board for the institutions.


The chart is based on information taken from the Reports of
the State Auditor. The information is shown in the table
below and on the back of the opposite page.




APPROPRIATIONS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


AG. AND IND.
BIENNIUM EXP. & EXT.


BUILDINGS


CURRENT


TOTAL


$1,481,998.00
$1,494, 39.00
$3, 605, 151.00
$6, 368,440.12
$5,989,672.00
$5,944, 672.00


$97,763.22 $2,107,401.25
$2,042,508.20
$9, 209,352.71 $2, 268,626.00
$12, 513, 678.00 $7, 255, 150.00
$12, 666, 680.00
S $14, 230,000.00


REQU ESTED


$6, 067, 200.00 $15, 865,053.00


$3,687,162.47
$3,536,906.20
$15,083, 129.71
$26, 135,268.12
$18,656,352.00
$20, 174, 672.00



$28, 717,523.00


1941-43
1943-45
1945-47
1947-49
1949-51
1951-53


1953-55 $6, 785, 270.00




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs