Session: 1234567891011121314         Page 491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567 of 763

being honest. That reception, in its way, was not unlike the warm reaction that he had to Jerry Wiesener's group. I had great deal of respect for him. I just think it's a tragedy that he had to be mired in Vietnam.

Could you go into some more detail about your evaluation of the education legislation?

I don't know what else I can say about it. I'm glad that we did it--Title One; Title Seven, and all of that. I didn't expect it to revolutionize the quality of education in America. One of the reasons that I still have for being somewhat skeptical about educational quality is that we are still mired in the local control approach to education. If I'm correct, we are the only developed nation that does not have a national educational policy and set of standards, etc. In terms of our history it's a state-controlled phenomenon. While the state, the various agencies [?] and the board of regents set standards for the state, the implementation of those standards is still left to local schoolboards. This one of America's major cliches: the value of local control of education. Now, even Mr. [Albert] Shanker is coming around to talking about the need for national testing of teachers.

You're talking about Albert Shanker?

Yes, Albert Shanker. But America, to me, is caught in the past assumptions that the federal government is not primarily