Segment 1 Of 2 Next Hearing Segment(2)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS Tables
Page 1 TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1999
Wednesday, March 25, 1998.
SECRETARY OF EDUCATION
WITNESSES
RICHARD W. RILEY, SECRETARY
THOMAS P. SKELLY, DIRECTOR, BUDGET SERVICE
Introduction of Witnesses
Mr. PORTER. The subcommittee will come to order.
We begin our hearings today on the budget of the Department of Education. We are most pleased to welcome Secretary Richard Riley, the Secretary of the Department of Education.
Secretary Riley, it is very good to see you, and we would ask that you proceed with your opening statement. Then we will dialogue a bit.
Secretary Riley's Opening Remarks
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee.
I have with me Tom Skelly, my budget director, who, of course, has been with our Department or its predecessor for well over 20 years, and I am so proud of the work he has done.
I am submitting my testimony for the record, if I might, and will make a brief statement.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—JONESBORO, ARKANSAS SHOOTING
Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by expressing the shock that all of us feel. I know I speak for all of us, all of you on the committee and all of us here, about the tragic death of the four young people and their heroic teacher at Westside Middle School In Jonesboro, Arkansas, yesterday. My heart certainly goes out to the families, as I know all of you share that concern, and to the friends of the victims. Our prayers are with them.
I know Congressman Dickey, you and I have discussed it, and it is especially close to you, being from Arkansas, though not from your district.
This is unfortunately the fifth act of violence to occur in our Nation's schools in the last year and a half that has resulted in multiple victims. The violence in Pearl, Mississippi, and Paducah, Kentucky, is all too fresh in our memory.
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—NATIONAL STATISTICS
This type of violence is something new and very disturbing. Between 1992 and 1994, there were 105 murders and suicides in our Nation's schools. 81 were murders, 19 were suicides, and 5 were unintentional firearms deaths, with a total of 105. Only 2 of these 81 acts of murder involved multiple victims. We now have had 5 incidents with multiple victims in a year and a half.
I think we should be very cautious in jumping to any conclusions about our Nation's schools based on these isolated incidents. I do not think that we should speculate from these random acts of violence. We should do all we can to learn from them. That is why I have asked my experts on school violence to follow up with the President's request to work with the Attorney General, to look at all five of these recent incidents of violence involving multiple victims to discern whether there are any positive steps that we could take to prevent this kind of tragedy.
For example, did any of the young people who committed these multiple acts of violence give any early warning signs that were ignored or dismissed? Are there any patterns in terms of these young people feeling isolated from their peers or families that led them to kill fellow students, and a teacher in this case? Are we taking away the lessons of this incredible tragedy? As we look at it, it is important to remember that 90 percent of our public schools recently reported no incidents of violent crime.
SURVEY OF SCHOOL PRINCIPALS
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Last week, President Clinton and the Attorney General released a survey of school principals that told us that 10 percent of our Nation's public schools reported some form of violent crime to the police last year. Of course, any act of violent crime is cause of concern and is too much, and this is why we have been working hard during the last 5 years to support schools in their efforts to curtail violence.
GUN-FREE SCHOOLS ACT
The Gun-Free Schools Act that Congress passed at the request of the President in 1994 is one example of this ongoing effort. Several thousand young people have been expelled for bringing guns to school as a result of this legislation, and we will have new data in late May on the progress that has been achieved.
PREVENTING SCHOOL VIOLENCE
I also think we need to step back and take a fresh look at what we are doing in terms of preventing school violence. We need to reflect on both the practical steps that we take immediately and look at the larger picture. Almost all schools have zero-tolerance policies for drugs and guns, but it may well be that some schools allow themselves to be lulled into a false sense of security. Violence, they assume, only happens in other schools or in big cities where gangs exist. Well, that is a very false assumption since guns are everywhere. The one thing we have to understand about that is that guns and young children simply do not mix.
DISCONNECTED YOUTH
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I am also troubled by the disconnection that seems to haunt some of our young people. That is something that I have said before, but it needs saying again. We seem to be drifting toward a new concept of childhood which says that a child can be brought into the world and allowed to fend for himself or herself. There is a disconnection that I think demands our attention.
As a Nation, we really do need to slow down and tune into our children. Too many of them, even from good families that have all the trappings of middle-class America, are growing up disconnected, and they are not anchored to an adult or a family or a parent who can get them through the rocky times of life.
When we see children killing children, can we say that we have listened to them with all due care? Violence is a language of sound that always captures our attention, but it is always too late. Whether we like it or not, America needs to look into the mirror and recognize that our culture seems to glorify violence. From television to movies to comic books to video games, violence is too often part of the daily life of the American child.
As we think through this terrible tragedy, as we do, I urge all Americans to support our Nation's schools. This is not a time to walk away from our schools and throw up our hands and say that nothing can be done. When communities come together, parents, the faith community, business, just plain people, when they all come together, we rally around our schools and good things begin to happen.
Children need connections. They need teachers and principals, but the teachers and principals cannot do it alone. The families, the entire community, has to be part of all of this connection, this connecting up for children.
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I heard on a radio program this morning a young student who was there in Paducah, Kentucky. They asked him, as we are all perplexed, what to do and where are we on these random acts, and his simple response, I thought, was rather profound. This young student, who was there at that incident, with all the sadness there, he said simply that the community needs to come together, and I think that is a pretty good description of what we are all trying to say, this connection, this community spirit.
FISCAL YEAR 1999 BUDGET REQUEST
Let me now make three observations or a couple, really, primarily about the budget, very quickly, and then we will get on into questions, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you letting me make that statement. I thought it needed to be said.
My first observation is that the budget request before you continues our commitment to safety in our Nation's schools. We included funding to expand our After-School programs, to reach 4,000 schools. We are requesting $50,000,000 to get many more well-trained drug counselors into middle schools. We are also seeking your support for the High Hopes Program that will connect 2,500 middle schools to colleges and universities. Young people who make good choices early on discover a purpose in life and then move forward. Young people in the middle-school years are making first choices about their future, everything from going to college, to experimenting with sex, with drugs, with tobacco. This is a very important time for our children to tune in and for us to tune into them, to listen to them, to give them the connections that I spoke of at their early time in their middle years.
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
FY 1999 BUDGET THEMES
A second observation is that the President's overall budget request both on the discretionary and mandatory side is timely, I think, and needed. It would reduce class size, help build or modernize 5,000 school buildings, improve teacher quality, bring technology to many more classrooms, and give all Americans the financial support and information that they need to go to college.
I cannot emphasize enough the fact that many of our schools are either overcrowded or are wearing out. They are crowded. They are outdated, in need of repair, and we need to build a lot more of them.
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL REFORM PROGRAM
Finally, I want to thank the chairman and Congressman Obey for your continued leadership in helping us to create new models to turn around failing schools. This budget, as you will note, includes a $30,000,000 increase in the Title I Comprehensive School Reform program that was launched last year, thanks to your initiative. Your leadership, and this increase will allow us to support 3,500 schools in their effort to accelerate change. I believe this program has great potential. I assure you that it has the strong support of the President.
EDUCATION OPPORTUNITY ZONES
We also urge the Congress to approve $200,000,000 for our Education Opportunity Zones proposal, which would complement the Comprehensive School Reform program by joining forces with 50 of the most at-risk school districts around the Nation. We want to help them put in place tough and district-wide reforms that adopt a no-nonsense approach to getting these school systems back on track.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I think I will conclude there, Mr. Chairman, and go ahead and get into questions. I appreciate you letting me make that statement.
[The prepared statement and biological sketch of Secretary Richard Riley follow:]
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
YOUTH VIOLENCE
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Let me say that the school violence that occurred in Arkansas yesterday and the previous terrible and tragic incidents that we have seen are of obviously great concern to Congress and to the members of this subcommittee.
You said that you think we are becoming disconnected. I submit that I think we have been disconnected in our country since the 1960's, and, finally, we are beginning to recognize the value of family and trying to bring our families back together again and keeping them connected. I agree with you that the disconnection that you were talking about is certainly a cause for these kinds of tragedies occurring.
Let me also say that you are exactly right that violence pervades much of our culture, whether it is on our TV sets or in our movies or on our news. It seems that the people that do marketing in our country have determined that we have an inordinate fixation on violence and feed us all that we seem to want, and more, in our society. Somehow we have to get in a free society some balance between the freedom of speech and the responsibility for some of the incidents that I think are based in much of our culture.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Finally, let me say that these, I think, in each instance were gun crimes, and the ready availability of guns in America is clearly a part of this problem, even the ready availability in some of our States of guns to minors.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—TARGETING FUNDS TO PROBLEM SCHOOLS
You said in your opening statements that many of our schools have no violence at all. I think you said 90 percent, did you not?
Secretary RILEY. Serious violence.
Mr. PORTER. That 90 percent of our schools have no serious violence; that 43 percent of our schools have no crime whatsoever. Yet, our programs, to address violence in our schools, go to all of our schools. It seems to me that one of the things we might consider doing, because we spend a great deal of money in this area, is to target the money where it is most needed.
I think we are past the era where we need to pass out funds to every single school district in America for this program or that or every constituency in America in order to get the votes to pass them. What we have got to do is put resources where the problems are and aim to solve those problems, or at least to alleviate the worst aspect of them.
I would like to ask that your Department work with the subcommittee to try to do some targeting that will make the expenditure of funds much more meaningful and get to the problems and attempt to solve them. I think that has been a problem within the policy we have of addressing issues like this. It remains unresolved and ought to be addressed very, very forcefully, and I would like to work with you in order to do that.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. Well, Mr. Chairman, we certainly would welcome that opportunity, and I think that is called for, but I would point out that these last three incidents, these multiple killings which have been so tragic, have been in schools where probably none of us would have anticipated any difficulties whatsoever.
In the heavy urban areas, on a percentage basis, you have more violence occuring than you do in the rural areas generally, but these random acts that are so hard to deal with in terms of public policy, really happen in different kinds of places. These three that have been so tragic over the past period of time really have been in schools that have been relatively violence-free and safe and would not be anticipated to be troublesome.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—NATIONAL STATISTICS
Mr. PORTER. Perhaps you could provide for the record some of the statistics that deal with that issue where violence has occurred in our schools, whether it is in inner cities, suburban areas, or rural areas. That would provide us, I think, some guidance.
I am certain you cannot anticipate every act of violence, but, certainly, the acts of violence occur more frequently in some areas than in others. It seems to me, once again, that some degree of looking at where the problems are and trying to address them in a targeted way makes a lot more sense.
Secretary RILEY. We will do that, and we have some very new, very good information that I will supply to you, and then we can all work on it together. I think that makes good sense.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
[The information follows:]
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
REGULATORY BURDEN—IMPACT ON COLLEGE COSTS
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Secretary, let me talk about higher education for a moment. Terry Hartle, the vice president of the American Council on Education, hardly part of the vast right-wing conspiracy, recently wrote a strong criticism of the regulatory burden imposed by State and Federal governments on higher education.
In the Chronicle of Higher Education, he cites the president of Stanford University who indicates that 12.5 cents of every tuition dollar goes to support compliance with Federal and State regulations, and the amount increases each year.
To quote from Dr. Hartle, ''The panoply of Federal regulations applicable to colleges includes those dealings with Medicare, Medicaid, occupational safety, control of hazardous substances, clean air and water, intercollegiate athletics, wages and salaries, equal opportunity, affirmative action and gender equity, graduate rates, campus crimes, student financial aid, access for the disabled, confidentiality of student and patient records, care of humans and animals in research, indirect research costs, historic preservation, and conflicts of interest,'' and that is just a sample. The preliminary list of regulations affecting higher education filled three single-spaced pages.
Two questions, Mr. Secretary. Isn't it true that most of the increases we have provided for Pell grants, work-study, and other student aid has gone to tuition increases caused in part by regulations cited by Dr. Hardle?
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Dr. Hardle also indicates that the Department does not take seriously its mandate to negotiate rules in order to understand their impact. Sadly, he states, the agency regards the requirements to negotiate as a legal hoop to jump through, rather than as an opportunity to minimize the regulatory burden while still reaching its public policy goals.
What is your comment on this indictment from an organization that historically has been one of your strongest supporters?
REGULATIONS REDUCTION
Secretary RILEY. Well, I think that is an observation that calls for an analysis, and I would say that most of the regulations in the higher education field are related to statutory laws.
We have worked hard to try to simplify and reduce regulations since we have been here. Over 2,000 pages of regulations have been reinvented, simplified or eliminated. Our paperwork burden has been trimmed by 10 percent, translating into 5,400,000 fewer hours for students, schools and others. So we are sensitive to the issue that you mention.
We are trying to make some changes. Of course, one thing is we did not put SPREs in, as you recall. That was a very important debate that we had. SPREs would have meant a lot more regulations. However, there was some good justification for that.
Some of the regulations, for example, regulations concerning defaults in student loans are necessary. If we had no regulations for default reduction, if the Congress was not serious, if we were not serious about that, the default rate would not be anywhere as positive as it is. As you know, the default rate has come from 22 percent down to below 11 percent. That is regulations. That reduction in loan defaults is a result of tightening up on those matters.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
We are looking at other ways to relax the stringent regulations. Of course, when you have money involved, you do have to have certain regulations. We are looking at a performance-based approach in terms of oversight in our student financial aid. So I think some of our approaches will help.
ELECTRONIC FAFSA
Another thing, Mr. Chairman, that we have done is we put the big higher education application for student loans, the FAFSA, on line, to create the electronic FAFSAs. The FAFSA is the big form we send out, and we have made it available via the Internet. A large portion of those are coming in electronically, saving an enormous amount of paperwork. So we would like to move further in those directions, and we are trying to do that.
STUDENT AID INCREASES—IMPACT ON ACCESS AND TUITION
Mr. PORTER. There is a tangential question about tuition absorbing all of the increases in aid that we make in higher education. In other words, could you tell the subcommittee, based on recent increases, for example, in Pell grants, whether we are getting greater access to higher education through that process or whether it is simply being absorbed in tuition increases and really not increasing the number of students who can access higher education?
Secretary RILEY. Well, I think I can certainly safely say that the significant increases in Pell that have occurred over the last several years—and this subcommittee has been very actively involved in that—have made an enormous difference. I do think that most colleges and universities now are really being very cautious and careful about tuition increases. However, there was a period of years where they were enormous, and I am very hopeful that our increases in student aid are really increases for the student and nothing else.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I think everybody is watching that now, too. I think when we do things like create the HOPE scholarship, and provide increases in Pell, all of us are concerned—and we had those same questions last year; namely, is that going to mean inflation of tuition? I think as far as our observation at this point, it has not. I do not think that it will. There are always some legitimate increases for the effect of inflation and other reasons, but I do believe that the students are getting a significant benefit from those things that we have all done together, and I am very, very pleased for that.
Mr. PORTER. Well, historically, the rate of increase in tuition has been far greater than inflation, and a lot of the increases in programs have been absorbed with tuition increases. Obviously, I am happy to hear that you think that that has leveled off and that it really is getting more access for students, which is what we obviously intended for the money to do.
Mr. Obey for an opening statement, and then your questions.
Mr. OBEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I apologize for being late. I have been busy screwing up a few other things before I got here.
Secretary RILEY. I know the feeling. Go ahead.
OPENING REMARKS OF RANKING MINORITY MEMBER
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. OBEY. I am happy to welcome you here, even though it is belatedly. As you know, I regard you as one of the very best members of the President's Cabinet. I must say I have been increasingly distressed by what I see as the increased politization of education in this country and the increased tendency to approach education from a political theology standpoint rather than from the standpoint of simply what works. I admire the fact that you have been able to resist that in the way you have conducted your business.
I also appreciate that the President's budget makes quite clear that his priority is to put education first above all other issues.
I wish I could say the same thing was happening in the Congress. If we take a look at what is happening with the highway bill, that pork-laden monstrosity which is working its way through this place, it is an incredible budget-buster to the tune of over $25,000,000,000 in the Senate and $30,000,000,000 here. When you couple that with the Senate action and the budget resolution, it is quite clear that the intention of the Congress apparently is to put concrete ahead of kids, and I hope that the President will continue to resist that.
We see some other priorities as well that seem to be placed ahead of kids these days, but I hope you will pursue your initiatives because I think they can make a big difference for the kids we are supposed to care about.
Let me also say that last year, in spite of everything, we had a good bipartisan year in dealing with the appropriations process, and I hope that we can continue that this year. That is the only way that we get good things done, and that is the only way that anybody looks good. I know that is your desire as well.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
IMPACT OF BUDGET RESOLUTION ON EDUCATION PROGRAMS
I would like to ask you a few questions about the budget that appears to be developing. The budget resolution reported out by the Senate majority last week provided for programs funded by this committee at less than a freeze level, about $1,000,000,000 in budget authority less than current services, and $1,600,000,000 less than the President's budget.
I would simply like to get your comments on the impact of those budget reductions. If the Budget Committee in the House were to follow suit and follow the similar strategy, what education priorities do you think would be put in jeopardy?
Secretary RILEY. Of course, the basic items that we propose to be funded, the pressing national needs that the President has attempted to propose in a sound sensible way, would be affected. The Class-Size Reduction Initiative, which, of course, would go with the tobacco settlement, and I know there is some controversy on that, but that was his proposal as a way to fund it, the School Construction Initiative, of course, the Education Opportunity Zones. The other measures, After-School Learning Centers and so forth, we think are very critical national priorities that might be affected. As you know, we have tried to reduce programs where we could. We have recommended termination of some 64 programs since we have been here to try to make those budget decisions make some sense, to really key in on those national priorities.
That is my initial reaction. Do you have any specific——
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. OBEY. Well, I am simply concerned about what the Senate budget resolution, if adopted by this side, could mean not only for the President's Class-Size Reduction and his School Construction Initiatives, but also the squeeze that it might place on Title I, Eisenhower teacher training, Pell grants, and the like.
Secretary RILEY. I have not reviewed that, but let me ask Tom Skelly to respond. If you would, Tom?
Mr. SKELLY. Mr. Obey, if we assume that there was a freeze on education funding coming before this subcommittee, you would not have the $392,000,000 increase in Title I that the President proposed. You would not have the increase of $100 in the Pell grant maximum grant, which is going to cost us approximately $300,000,000. You would not have an increase of $160,000,000 in the After-School Learning Center program.
As the Secretary said, you also would not have any of the new initiatives proposed, like the Education Opportunity Zones, which will serve urban and rural areas. So there will be a number of critical national needs that you would not be funding if you were not allowed to increase spending on education discretionary programs.
ESTIMATED EFFECT OF FY 1999 SENATE BUDGET RESOLUTION
Mr. OBEY. I would appreciate it if you would take a closer look at the Senate budget resolution and either submit for the record or give me a memo on what you see being squeezed out potentially in the educational area, if that proposal is pursued.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. We will do that.
[The information follows:]
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION INITIATIVE
Mr. OBEY. With respect to your initiative on Small Class Size, I know that it is not technically before this committee, but I just have one comment and one question. In my own State, our State legislature has pursued on a bipartisan basis, with the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, a program called Project SAGE, which is Student Achievement Guarantee in Education. It is, as is the President's initiative, an effort to get additional teachers into the classroom in the first 3 grades.
While the evaluation of that program has only been preliminary, it appears that students who are the beneficiaries of a smaller class size, indeed, are performing better than their counterparts who are not.
I would hope that you would press that vigorously. I think it is really important. I would simply ask you because this concern has been raised, how would your Class Size Initiative avoid some of the problems that are being encountered in California's Smaller Class Initiative? Because their experience apparently in some instances has been negative. Whereas, in Wisconsin, it appears to have been quite positive.
Secretary RILEY. I think it is very important if you attempt to reduce class size. Now, understand our proposal is just grades one, two, and three, and it is for teachers to have special expertise in reading, but it is not a 1-year deal. That is where you really get into a problem. It takes time to recruit teachers, to develop teachers, to prepare them. Our proposal is a 7-year proposal, and it does involve at least 10 percent of the funds which would be spent for those purposes.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Then it impacts construction, and, of course, we have a proposal on construction because we think that is important. If you have smaller classrooms, you need more space. You have this enlarged enrollment, all of these impact on the construction side of things.
So we have, we think, a balanced approach of smaller classrooms over a 7-year period and the enhanced incentive for new construction and for modernizing construction, all of which we think complement the general idea.
Now, some States are working to decrease class size, like California and like your proposal there. I would point out that our proposal, Congressman, is very flexible, and while we talk about grades one, two, and three, of course, if your State or California has a classroom size down to 18 for grades one, two, and three, they can either reduce class size further in those grades, and, usually, 15 to 18 is very valuable, very helpful, where you can have independent help for students, or they could go up to grade four or down to kindergarten. They have lots of flexibility to work the program within those parameters.
So, by being flexible and by having a time frame of 7 years and encouraging recruitment and so forth and by construction, we think that we have in a complementary way headed off some of the problems.
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL REFORM DEMONSTRATIONS
Mr. OBEY. The last question is on comprehensive school reform, which this committee initiated last year, on a bipartisan basis. I am curious to know what response you have gotten to date from States and what kind of response you think the States, in turn, are getting from local school districts.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
We just had a very successful 2-day outreach effort run by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction in Wisconsin and had a massive response. At one site, we had well over 200 people show up from different school districts, at another site almost 300, to try to determine for themselves which models they were interested in pursing or modifying. I am curious as to how that initiative has been responded to so far.
Secretary RILEY. Well, I think the response is very significant. In the first year, of course, people have to become aware of these opportunities. We have tried to do all we could to make them aware, and the response, then, is very exciting to me.
It is amazing, when you have a failing school or a school that is not performing like you would like for it to perform, what a great option this is for the school. As you know, the approach is a school-based approach, with the opportunity to have design teams come in and help the local people to decide how they want to reform and improve and get more involved in their own school. It is just the right thing to do. When people get into that, it makes the school the center of the community's activity, and it brings the best people in America to advise local people on how they themselves can best reform and improve their schools, working with the principal, the teachers, and all involved.
So my reaction to that is that our response has been very, very strong, and it is getting stronger by the day. It is exciting to me to see schools that are involved in self-improvement. What a difference that makes.
I said in my statement earlier that I appreciated that very much.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. OBEY. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mr. Obey.
Mr. Dickey.
Mr. DICKEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—JONESBORO, ARKANSAS
Before my time starts, may I say something about the Arkansas situation?
Mr. PORTER. You may.
Mr. DICKEY. Secretary Riley, I appreciate very much your comments about Arkansas. I happen to know one of the teachers there. She is an advisor to my Education Council, and I know we are all in a state of shock. I appreciate what you said about the community. I do not think we can take the responsibility nor the guilt of what is happening or what happened in Arkansas or the other States and other schools, but we need to direct it toward the families. I am convinced that what is in the hearts of our kids is what the problem is. We must do something about it. So I appreciate your comments.
EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT—MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
What progress, Secretary Riley, has the Department made toward implementing the Early Childhood Development Project for children with disabilities in the Mississippi Delta region?
Secretary RILEY. Well, Senator Bumpers, of course, brought that question up when I testified in the Senate and has written me, too. I know it is something that you are concerned with.
It is my understanding that the subcommittee put in some $600,000 yesterday as a direct appropriation. As you know, the program is set up as a competitive program, and we had to handle it as a competitive program. Certainly, if you all carry through with that, it would take care of that part of it.
They are really requesting—in Senator Bumper's letter and I am sure it's your opinion, too, more funds than that, and I have a very good feeling about the project. I think it is a fine proposal, but it is under our Special Education and Rehabilitation Services Office. It is a competition, and I do not know whether the $600,000 is sufficient for them to function, but we would certainly welcome a further competition and would offer any kind of technical assistance we could to the applicant, but the request was larger than the normal applications of that kind. That is why we were having trouble with it.
So, frankly, if you all wanted it funded and made it very clear, then that makes it clear to us. So I do not disagree with that action.
Mr. DICKEY. Secretary Riley, I want to ask you further about that. What you have done is you have required us to earmark it or specify it. If that is what makes it through this bill, then you will do it.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
The Mississippi Delta region, of course, includes Arkansas, and it is one of the most impoverished areas in the Nation. I am worried, as I think Senator Bumpers—although I have not talked to him directly—is worried, that you might not have a priority, that this might not be a priority in your system, and that is why we have—you have asked us to earmark it.
What I am saying is that I do not think we should be directing the education policies, anyway, but this committee should not be telling you what to do. Now you have almost prompted us into doing it. Why is that? Do you have some doubts about the effectiveness of this project?
Secretary RILEY. Well, it is my understanding that in the competition that we have announced, average grants will be about $150,000 a year. That is just the nature of this particular competition. Of course, $150,000 a year from what you and Senator Bumpers and others have told me is not near enough to fund this project. But we also expect to have another competition in personnel preparation to which they could apply, I guess in addition to this $600,000.
So I think if you provide the $600,000 this year, then we would certainly have another competition that they could apply to that would provide more money, and we could help you with technical assistance. I think we could work together to try to get up to the $1,800,000 if we enable them to get the other funds under the other program. I would welcome trying to work with you all to do that. We think it is a good program, and I do not want to say anything but that.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. DICKEY. Maybe I am not understanding something here.
In fiscal year 1998, the House and the Senate reports, and the statement of managers of the conference committee, all said that $1,800,000 was to be spent. Now, was it spent or not?
[The information follows:]
FUNDING FOR EASTER SEAL PROJECT IN THE MISSISSIPPI DELTA
At the time of the hearing, the Department had plans for using all Special Education National Activities funds available for fiscal year 1998, including $1,800,000 mentioned in the Appropriation Report Language. However, a subsequently enacted supplemental specified that $600,000 of these funds must be used for support of the Early Childhood Development Project of the National Easter Seal Society for the Mississippi Delta Region. The Department's plans were revised to reflect funding for this specific project and funding for planned awards will be reduced accordingly.
Mr. SKELLY. The competition we have, Mr. Dickey, under that section will be, as the Secretary said, for average grants, of about $150,000 each.
We will have another competition in the personnel preparation area which will provide for larger grants, as large as $600,000, and we are doing that.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. DICKEY. When will this be done?
Mr. SKELLY. After meeting with staff and members on both sides, we are thinking about——
Mr. DICKEY. Mr. Skelly, did you spend the $1,800,000? Are you in the process of doing it?
Mr. SKELLY. We are still in the process of——
Mr. DICKEY. You are not holding any back?
Mr. SKELLY. No, sir.
Mr. DICKEY. Well, I just want you to know that we think in Arkansas this is important.
Secretary RILEY. Yes. We do, too.
Mr. DICKEY. And we would like to have more than $600,000, and I will be trying to get as much as I can earmarked if that is what we have to do.
NATIONAL VOLUNTARY TESTING
I am interested in finding out the status of the national testing debate that took up so much of our subcommittee's time at the end of the last session. What sort of steps has the Department taken to develop these proposed national tests?
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. Well, the national test, has been moved under NAGB [National Assessment Governing Board], and NAGB then, as I understand it, is proceeding to develop the test in accordance with everybody's understanding. The 1999 request from FIE, which is under our research wing, is about $15,000,000 for the continued development of the voluntary national test, fourth grade reading and eighth grade math, and the evaluation that is following with that.
So that is still in process. The NAGB reauthorization is coming up right now, this year, and, of course, that is when you would be involved in deciding the future of what NAGB should do and not do. So that will be before you this year.
Mr. DICKEY. There has been no national testing that has taken place in the last year?
Secretary RILEY. There has been national testing, but it is sample testing that we have always done, the NAEP [National Assessment of Educational Progress] test, but individual tests, no.
Mr. DICKEY. How much sampling?
Secretary RILEY. Sampling, we have always done lots of that, as you know. We do that in different grades, in different courses, and I can give you a complete breakdown of all that, but that has been done for years. Of course, that was one of our arguments about having the individual tests. It is that we were taking the NAEP sample test and making it where an individual could take it, so the parents and the teacher could know if a child could handle the very basics of reading and math in those critical ages.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. DICKEY. I am going to submit the rest of my questions for the record, but I had one last one.
FEDERAL TRIO PROGRAMS
Secretary RILEY. Okay.
Mr. DICKEY. I have historically been very supportive of the Federal TRIO programs. I have been informed that recent evaluations commissioned by your Department have indicated that the intensity of TRIO programs has eroded, and this erosion affects the quality and impact of services. Can you tell me what you plan to do to reverse this erosion?
Secretary RILEY. Well, we are constantly evaluating all of the programs, and in those evaluations, we have good things and other observations to make.
The TRIO programs generally work very, very well, and you do have to constantly be attentive to ensure they continue to work well, and we are constantly watching that as we work with TRIO. We have recommended an increase in TRIO for the 1999 budget. We strongly support what they are doing, and we think they are doing a very, very good job, but we do constantly have to be careful to make sure the TRIO programs do what we want them to do in terms of making progress.
Mr. DICKEY. Thank you, Secretary Riley. It is good to see you.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. Good to see you.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mr. Dickey.
The Chair would advise the members of the subcommittee that we are currently operating under the 8-minute rule, and I have asked the Secretary if considering the delay in our starting if he could stay later. He has assured me that he can. So we will plan for a second round.
Ms. Pelosi.
Ms. PELOSI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to join you and my colleagues in welcoming Secretary Riley here this afternoon and thank him for his great leadership on behalf of the children of America.
It is clear, you are one leader who is sending a very consistent message to the children. We tell them that education is important, and, yet, we neglect their needs in terms of education. We send them to school in buildings that are environmental hazards and have them in overcrowded classrooms in many instances, but your message is clear. Education is important, and we are going to reduce the size of your class with school construction and supplying more qualified teachers, so that we can have schools where teachers can teach, children can learn, and parents can participate. Parents participating, I think, has been the theme of our chairman's questions earlier about what happened in Arkansas yesterday.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—JONESBORO, ARKANSAS
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I earlier today extended my condolences to my colleague, Mr. Dickey, and my colleague, Mr. Barry, who represents Jonesboro. Let us hope that of the shots that rang out in Arkansas, one of them will be a shot heard around the country that we absolutely have to change the atmosphere in which young children could be killing other children with guns.
So many times here, people tell us guns do not kill people, people do. Well, who is responsible when the person who kills a person is 11 years old or 13 years old? Certainly, right now our hearts and our prayers are with the parents of the children and the teacher who very courageously, as you mentioned, tried to save the lives of even more children; but after the first few days of this, we have to look to some parental responsibility. How did these children have access to this arsenal of weapons that they used on other children?
I am so pleased that President Clinton last week focused on this issue, following up on some other unfortunate incidents in our country, but as I said before, hopefully this shot will be the one heard around the country that puts an end to it forever more.
It is a tragedy beyond comprehension when our children are killing each other. Children should not have to be afraid to go to school, and I commend you and the Clinton administration for the initiatives that you have already taken and now are even more important.
BILINGUAL EDUCATION RESCISSION
Mr. Secretary, as far as the budget is concerned, I was very disappointed yesterday that the full Appropriations Committee voted to rescind $75,000,000 from FY 1998 appropriations for bilingual education to fund the supplemental appropriations. Although the issue of bilingual education is currently being hotly debated, especially in my State of California, cutting funding for bilingual education does a great disservice to students who need it to learn English quickly and well in order to achieve high standards.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
What will be the impact of this $75,000,000 rescission?
Secretary RILEY. Well, it would be very serious, and I was really somewhat perplexed by the decision yesterday to rescind the $75,000,000 from bilingual education funding.
Bilingual education was one of those issues in last year's bipartisan budget agreement that was supposed to be agreed to, and it was in that protected zone in that agreement. That, we felt was part of the agreement, and I think it was.
The decision comes here, though, in the middle of the year when we are just finishing a review of hundreds of grant applications, and if this cut stands, then we would be forced to cancel 73 of the 671 projects that are scheduled to receive awards next month. Those people are planning on that funding, and that is part of an ongoing program. It would affect some 142,000 students. I urge the Congress to step back from that decision. I do not think that bilingual education should become a political football right in the middle of the year like that. I think that if there are issues to be decided, they should be decided in the right course of time.
This rescission would cut teacher training, for example. Bilingual teacher training is vastly needed out there. That is a very important part of serving LEP children, limited English proficient children, to ensure they have the kind of education under the law they are entitled to have, are supposed to have, and should have.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
It would lower $25,000,000 in teacher development, teacher training, down to $5,000,000, $25,000,000 to $5,000,000, and that would be a real mistake.
These are competitive grants programs, and we never have near enough money to cover the demands that are out there, just a small piece of the demands.
LOCAL FLEXIBILITY OF CHOICE
This year, it is the same. I think school districts really ought to have the option to choose a bilingual program that suits their specific needs. Kids are different. In some areas, one thing works well. In some other areas, other things work well, but we think that the local school district ought to have the option to choose those things in bilingual education, and when they do, to have funds cut off in this fashion would be very troublesome for them and for education in those areas.
Ms. PELOSI. I appreciate your putting that impact on the record.
UNZ INITIATIVE
Unfortunately, in California, we have an initiative on the ballot called the UNZ Initiative, which will eliminate the right to native language instruction and mandate a one-size-fits-all approach to teaching English and to limited English proficient students.
If that initiative passes or if the school board decides to exercise its State-authorized flexibility to deny the provision of native language instruction, will the Department of Education still authorize local education agencies to use Title I or Title VII funds to provide native language instruction or support services?
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. We are now looking at the UNZ Initiative. The administration is not ready yet to make its judgment on it, but will be relatively soon. You are asking about the impact.
I will say this. Probably, a fourth of the applications in the competition we get from California would qualify under the UNZ provision at this time, and a lot of people do not realize that, but the programs vary. We are very careful about evaluating the applications and making sure they are doing what they say they are going to do in this competition.
So we certainly would comply with the law whatever that is, but certain numbers would qualify under the present competition that comes in.
Ms. PELOSI. Do we know what percentage that is?
Secretary RILEY. It is about 25 percent.
Ms. PELOSI. Oh, about 25 applied to that. Okay, thank you.
The President's—was that a beachhead, or is that too late?
Mr. PORTER. Well, you are getting awfully good at starting on the sentence, with one second left. No, go ahead.
Ms. PELOSI. Well, I will make this a quick one. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
INTERAGENCY RESEARCH INITIATIVE
The President's budget includes new funding for an Interagency Research Initiative. Can you describe the types of research activities that will be included? Can you tell us why such funding was not proposed within the existing programs, such as that of the research centers and regional education laboratories?
Mr. SKELLY. Ms. Pelosi, the $50,000,000 initiative would be an interagency effort between the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation and National Institute of Child Development, and would focus on things like development of the brain and the way young people get ready to go to school.
The program would be authorized under existing legislation, but we felt it was important to give focus to it, and that is why it is requested as a separate initiative.
Ms. PELOSI. I appreciate that. Thank you very much, and thank you again for your leadership, Mr. Secretary.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Ms. Pelosi.
Mrs. Northup.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mrs. NORTHUP. Thank you.
DIVERGENT APPROACHES TO EDUCATIONAL CHANGE
Welcome, Secretary Riley. First of all, I want to thank you for the strong interest that you all have in education. I do believe that the Department of Education is very dedicated to our children and to education. I also believe there are a lot of ideas out there, and I am always so sorry—and I do not direct this at you—that we seem to get into wars—maybe it is because of the passion we have for our children—about anybody that thinks differently about what works and what does not work is anti-education.
I really feel that over the course of raising six children, some that have learning disabilities, and being on the House Education Committee in Frankfurt, Kentucky, for 9 years, that my ideas evolved. They changed. Some of the things we did, did not work. Some of the things, I think, people thought were crazy when they suggested it. It turned out to be more right than I originally thought they were. It just seems a shame to me that we are so quick to decide that there is only one way to be right.
Certainly, within this Congress, there are some differences about what is the best way to improve education. It is important that we do not say about those people that disagree with us that they are anti-education and are wrong. We do not know what is right, as a matter of fact. We have not figured it out yet.
I am convinced in this country, we would spend any amount of dollars possible and come up with any program possible if we really knew that it would solve the challenges that we have in education.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
With that said, I have to put in my point that I really believe, and several times here today you have said, school districts should be free to choose, and how important it is that parents and communities be involved. It worries me that we are moving pretty dramatically in this budget to a federalized sort of view of what education would look like; that we will further constrain local communities, parents, teachers, those people in that community, in that school, from exercising their best judgment, and being able to support what is their view of how to improve their child's school.
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION AND TEACHER TRAINING INITIATIVE
In particular, let me raise the question of teachers and the fact of the 100,000 new teachers in the schools. You pointed out that some States have already moved to pretty substantially appropriate more money for more teachers in those classrooms. So are we saying that they can take their block grant and maybe invest where they have not invested, like in technology? No. We are saying that they can go to fourth grade, they can move it down even lower, but they still only can spend it the way the Federal Government says they can spend it, and that is on teachers.
This does not pay the full price of the teachers. It pays, as I figure it, maybe half, maybe less for each new teacher you put in the classroom. So you are not only failing to recognize that, say, Indiana that has already invested in new teachers that they would have to only take their money to further hire more new teachers, but that they would have to match it with more of their individual money in order to get that money. So they are either going to be Indiana taxpayers that pay their taxes and derive no benefit from this enormous increase, or they are going to spend it in a way that less meets their needs. That is not the only area, but that is sort of the most glaring new example.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. Well, generally, your remarks, as you have observed, I agree with, and I do strongly feel, and as you have heard me say before, that local school districts and States ought to control how we teach and what we teach and all of that.
I do think there is a very important Federal role to support the education in this country and to try to then, yes, have some purpose for the funds we send down, but then to leave the general ideas about how they teach and the control of teaching on the State and local level.
So what my general idea is about the Federal role is that it is a role in support, as a partner, but not in control. As you indicate, when you have a general purpose, some might call that control. Construction, for example, we would propose then to have the bonds for construction, modernization, for repair, for new buildings. Those decisions are local, but it would have to be in the general area of construction.
On classroom size, the average size in America today is about 22 pupils per teacher for K through grades one, two, and three and what our proposal would do, then, is to bring that average down to about 18.
Now, you are right in that all States are different, and you can make that argument, certainly. In California, where they pushed it down to like 20, that is their big California initiative, and, I mean, it is a major undertaking and it has been difficult, but I think it has worked a whole lot better than it has the problems. That is a State decision.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
This would help them get it on down to 18 or 17 or to move into another grade or whatever. The design would have to generally address the purpose of getting fewer pupils per teacher, but be very flexible in how they do it.
CLASS SIZE INITIATIVE MATCHING REQUIREMENT
Mrs. NORTHUP. What percentage of the cost of each teacher would you expect that this would cover?
Secretary RILEY. It is a match.
Mrs. NORTHUP. It is a match.
Secretary RILEY. He said 50 to 100 percent.
Mrs. NORTHUP. I thought it was 90 to 50—50 to 90. I do not think it is 100.
And is that salary, or does that include their benefits?
Mr. SKELLY. That is a rough estimate, with benefits, also. It varies by district.
Mrs. NORTHUP. I mean, are we going to set those salary rates? In other words, are we going to pay more for a teacher in California because their pay scale is different than maybe a teacher in Indiana because of their pay scale?
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Secretary RILEY. The Title I formula is how it goes down to the State, and then the State handles the division within the State. There are certain protections for those large poor areas.
Mrs. NORTHUP. Am I right? Does it start at 90 percent and then go down to 50 percent? So the teacher that Kentucky hires today is going to start at 90 percent. It will not be too much, but in 5 years, they are going to pay 50 percent. No? I thought it was on a decreasing basis over the 5 years.
Mr. SKELLY. The money actually builds up over 7 years. We do not get to the 100,000 teachers until——
Mrs. NORTHUP. Right.
Mr. SKELLY [continuing]. 2005, and it would step up. I think it would still vary by State how they use the money they are getting, their share of the money on the Title I formula. So a poor State, maybe it can afford to get more teachers for the amount of money.
Mrs. NORTHUP. Again, I just want to point out that there seems to be the effect, and I get the complaint all the time from the superintendents, that what they get is a little bit of money, but then it forces them to spend more money. It takes less choice away from them, gives them less ability to focus on what are the unique needs this particular school has.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Maybe some of them need tutoring services. Maybe other ones need extended day programs. Maybe other ones need to extend the school year by 3 weeks. In many schools, that would be a big help, and what we are doing is taking those choices away from us.
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL REFORM DEMONSTRATIONS
I want to point out another particular example before I run out of time. Is the comprehensive school reform that we passed last year—I heard, Mr. Chairman, you and our ranking committee members, stand on the floor and say over and over that this is going to come from each school; that they are going to look at the model that means the most for them, but it has been—the guidelines have been written so that the States would have the ability to decide how to weigh the applications that come in. Clearly, from what Mr. Obey said, there is not nearly enough money for everybody that applies. They can provide weight based on certain models. So you almost ensure that whoever is applying for this has to apply for the model the State chooses, rather than what that group of parents, that group of teachers, and that community believes is essentially needed for that community. So you take away the very thing we talked about as being the major example.
Secretary RILEY. Well, our guidance that goes out to them makes it clear that they can have locally developed models; that they are eligible for support.
Mrs. NORTHUP. But it also says——
Secretary RILEY. It does, and let me finish because you are right about that. They do say they must integrate the nine components of the comprehensive reform program in a coherent way with well-researched and well-documented designs, but it does permit them to have locally developed models.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mrs. NORTHUP. Mr. Secretary, I am actually talking about page 11 on those guidelines, where it says that the State is allowed to weigh the applications on a certain model that the State identifies as a choice. If I have to compete, I am going to be 1 to 10 schools that is going to get it. You know what that almost says is I will not have enough points if I do not go——
Mr. PORTER. Will the gentlelady yield on that?
Mrs. NORTHUP. Sure.
Mr. PORTER. It was our intention, Mr. Secretary, that although the money goes to the States, that the community, the school district—not the school district—the schools——
Mrs. NORTHUP. Right.
Mr. PORTER [continuing]. Get to choose what model they felt was best for their institution, and if the regulations are written otherwise, we would say those are not in accordance with my understanding, at least, of what the comprehensive school reform was intended to do for the individual school.
Secretary RILEY. I will take a look at that, Mr. Chairman. I am informed that it is in the report language, generally referenced as the nine components, but I will look at that and see. It is our thinking that our guidance is consistent with the statutory provision and the report language.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. PORTER. Could I suggest, perhaps, that you and I and Mrs. Northup and Mr. Obey get together on this and see——
Secretary RILEY. Absolutely.
Mr. PORTER [continuing]. That we are tracking in the same direction?
Secretary RILEY. Sure. We will do that.
Mrs. NORTHUP. Thank you.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you.
Secretary RILEY. We will do that.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mrs. Northup.
Mrs. Lowey.
Mrs. LOWEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I join my colleagues, Mr. Secretary, in welcoming you and thanking you for your extraordinary leadership for our Nation's children.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—FINDING LESSONS AND REMEDIES
I do want to say that I share the views of my colleagues in expressing our shock and the fact that we are all deeply saddened with the tragedy in Arkansas, but I am very concerned that if we look at this as a freak incident that just happened there, we will not look for appropriate remedies.
In fact, if I recall, when a similar tragedy occurred in Scotland, after a period of soul-searching, there was a ban on handguns. Given the proliferation of violence in our society, I feel very strongly that we similarly have to take decisive action. Unless we take this action, children will continue to die, whether it is in Arkansas, in New York, or another city.
When we look at what is happening in our schools, unless we recognize this and take this action, I am concerned that we are just fooling ourselves, frankly.
I saw a recent study, a survey actually, comparing life and school for a youngster to what it was like in the 1950's. I remember going to school, and this study listed the 10 most serious infractions, pushing another child, getting out of line, chewing bubble gum, spitting at another child. It is a little different today, and I think we have to recognize it and take that action that is necessary.
With regard to stopping the violence and working with law enforcement officials, it is not the job of the Education Department to enforce safety in our Nation's streets, but out of necessity, the Department has found itself in the position of enforcing safety in our Nation's schools. Could you explain to us how you are working with the Department of Justice cooperatively, jointly, and with local law enforcement officials to address the increased gun violence in our schools, and are the schools really equipped to deal with gun violence?
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS
Secretary RILEY. Well, of course, we are working hard to enforce the zero-tolerance policy for drugs and weapons, and I do think that has had an effect in a large way.
The Gun-Free Schools Act has had a positive impact, I think, in expelling young people who have brought guns to school, and we will have new data available very soon on that.
The President announced last week a $17,000,000 program from the COPS program that is now available to help schools improve their safety policies. We want a four-fold expansion of our After-School program to keep young people connected and safe and out of harm's way. I do think that the After-School program is so effective. As we all know, that is when so many of the youth crimes occur and youth victimization. So that is another thing that we are pushing for, the expansion of the After-School programs.
Two of our programs, Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities, and Character Education, both support peer mediation and conflict resolution. Those kinds of efforts probably, perhaps, do more good than all of the other things put together, if you can really have young people think about conflict and methods of resolution.
ANTI-VIOLENCE TELEVISION MESSAGES
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I am glad to see that during this basketball season that they have had these ''squash it'' ads on TV; that if you are in a violent situation and someone is challenging you and having some well-known sports figure say squash it and walk away and that is what takes strength—if we could have young people really seeing their role models that are great sports figures saying that is what you should do, I think those kind of things can make a big difference.
I think our society, though, has somehow got to stop glorifying violence. You see it every time you turn on the television, or in what you read and in everything you see about you—you see violence in the theater or wherever. I do not know exactly how to cope with that, but, certainly, parents and grandparents and neighbors need to make sure they do their part, and not think that teachers and principals out here in the school can really be the only parties to make violence not occur. That is, generally, some of the main things that we are doing, and I feel hopeful that some of it is making a real difference.
Ms. LOWEY. I appreciate your response because I feel so strongly that all the problems of our society converge on our schools, and then the school is supposed to solve them all. I agree with my colleague, we have to think long and hard about what we can do to enforce policies, to provide programs that help families, that strengthen families, that support families, and you have provided an excellent segue.
AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
As you know, I have been a strong advocate of community schools and, After-School programs. This committee last year provided $40,000,000, and I am optimistic that we will provide the $200,000,000 that the President requested in this year's budget. It certainly is a positive response to the crime and violence that you see on the TVs, in the movie theaters, glorifying teenage sex, and if we can provide constructive programs after school, this certainly makes a lot of sense to me.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I also believe that the extended learning time will improve the children's academic skills. So this is also very important.
I understand that the deadline has now passed to apply for these grants. Could you share with the committee the level of interest expressed in the $40,000,000?
Secretary RILEY. Well, we had enough money to fund around 400 programs, and we had around 16,000 people inquiring about it. Of course, people realized, right quick-like, that it was just a small number that were going to be able to receive funds. We had around 2,000-plus applications. I mean, there is an enormous interest in real constructive, meaningful After-School programs.
What parents want, as you know, and I appreciate that, they want their children to have the opportunity to have academic work and supervised athletics and computer activity and arts and music in the afternoons, things that they would enjoy doing, but certainly strong activities with academics. Where those things are out there and where they are working actively, it certainly makes a big difference. I strongly agree with you that After-School programs, we should really move in that direction.
Ms. LOWEY. I just want to emphasize—because my colleague, Steny Hoyer, could not be here today, but he has been a strong advocate, as I have, of comprehensive or full-service schools. These are buildings that can serve the entire community, and we should be using them. After-School programs are a very important part, as far as I am concerned, of the youngsters learning.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
In fact, that is a good segue to another area. I was delighted to see, Mr. Secretary, that Senator Lauch Faircloth introduced a school construction amendment—I see my time is up—and I am hoping that we can get strong bipartisan support for this. I think, as we work to rebuild our schools, making sure they are safe, making sure they are adequate, we can then expand the many uses that really will help strengthen a youngster's education.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mrs. Lowey.
Ms. DeLauro.
Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
It is wonderful to see you again today, Secretary Riley, and thank you so much for the work that you do. Bless you for the work that you do.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—URBAN AND RURAL PROBLEM
We have all in our own way expressed our feelings and are troubled by the violence in Arkansas. Our prayers are certainly with the families. This is hard to understand. How do you account for an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old deliberately bringing children out and then shooting them? It is hard to understand.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I got a article today from my district, from New Haven. A gun-toting city boy, 13, nabbed on a bus, found with a semiautomatic rifle. He did not get to the school, but there was a tip that this youngster had a gun and they got him in time before something happened.
Not too long ago, in a rural part of my district, a high school in a suburban area, a youngster with a knife stabbed two or three kids. So it is a city, it is a New Haven issue, it is a rural issue. So the violence is there. It may be a small part, but it is there.
What troubles me is that violence begets violence. If you have an atmosphere in which kids are in school and they feel threatened, then they are going to respond to those threats.
SCHOOL VIOLENCE—FINDING SOLUTIONS
I spoke with my colleague, Marian Barry, who represents the Jonesboro area. The Yale child study, as you know, has a portion of what they do that works with children who are victims of violence and who witness violence. Dr. Steve Marins is right now on his way to Arkansas. He has been called in by the Justice Department to go down and join the team down there to try to work with the kids and with their families.
You talked about peer mediation, conflict resolution. I think we have to have a portion of what we are doing in education today, and we need to take a look at resources for conflict resolution, before we deal with the environments and the circumstances.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
We tried to address these issues through an anti-crime youth council in my district. We had about 125 kids brought together, specifically talking about school violence, how they deal with each other. It was interesting to listen to the kids, especially when they spoke about what to do if you know that somebody has a gun or a knife. What is your obligation? What is your responsibility as another student to say something? And each of them came from diverse areas.
One young woman said, a young white woman—she says, ''Everybody in my school looks like me. There is not anything diverse about my school. We knew this kid had a knife, and nobody said anything. The result was that he wound up stabbing someone. We were at fault,'' but they are scared. They are scared in terms of ratting out someone and being stigmatized with that. This is a problem which we have to grapple with in our schools or the environment because that is where it plays out.
Mrs. Lowey is right. There is violence in every part of the society that gets played out for our youngsters in schools, and we need to take the time. We need to deal with the resources to figure out how to get kids to interact with one another, learn to respect one another, learn to respect the diversity and find out what is going on in their lives that is causing some of these problems. I think that has got to be a part of what we deal with here.
I did not mean to make a speech, but it really is—it is so troubling to watch some of this, and to see the pressure that our youngsters, our kids are under in some of these circumstances, and we need to help them work it through.
WHOLE SCHOOL REFORM DEMONSTRATIONS
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I want to just ask—because there have been questions asked about the whole school reform, and Jim Comer, as you know, has been dealing with this issue for a long time. When looking at this whole school reform and who is allowed to do what, when you are putting that material together, as quickly as you can, who is taking advantage of this opportunity and what the particulars are, I, too, would like to get information of how whole school reform is working.
AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
In terms of After-School programs, do we have any idea of how this is going to work yet or how it is going to proceed, who is eligible, who makes the determination for the programming or anything like that?
Secretary RILEY. Well, it is primarily, of course, a school-based program, and they have options, of course, of contracting with others. A percentage of it, 10 percent, is proposed to be set aside for community-based organizations. It is basically a school program, and we think that is really important. The school facilities are there, as you pointed out. That is a place that we are really trying to move, towards a center of the community where families go and people are involved in their school.
The idea is emphasizing those things that I mentioned—and we have talked to parents. We visit schools all around the country, and those are the things they want. They want the computers. They want music and the arts. They want supervised athletics or sports or dancing or whatever, along with academics. As long as you keep those kinds of things as the focal point, they seem to work very, very well.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
The important thing is really getting these young people engaged and thinking well of themselves rather than, as I said in my statement, being disconnected. After-School programs can go a long way to do that. After you get out of the regular school routine, you have those kind of school-driven After-School experiences we are trying to emphasize with this program; you all approved the $40,000,000 last year and we have requested $200,000,000 this year. We have emphasized, as you know, middle school, which we think is so important. You have After-School programs going on in a lot of elementary schools now. In some cases, it is done very well. In some cases, it is not.
MOTT FOUNDATION SUPPORT FOR AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS
One thing that is interesting, in response to your question: the Mott Foundation came in from Flint, Michigan, and they have committed $55,000,000 to make sure that applications were well thought out, and then that the implementation is done properly. They have had meetings around the country, and there are overflow crowds. People want to learn how to do it right. They are going to have an After-School program. It is not just spending time there. It is not that. I am so pleased. Here is a private foundation giving $10,000,000 a year for 5 years-plus, and the purpose of the money is to make sure the programs do, as you point out, what they are supposed to do, and that is to engage young people, to help them academically and to help them grow.
So we feel very good about that. When Mott had these announcements, I mean, the interest was just overwhelming. There are so many people who want to come in and find out about these programs. So I think it is on a very good track.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Ms. DeLauro.
Ms. DELAURO. Well, in the urban setting, if you will, for dealing with conflict resolution and peer mediation, as I said, you can include that as a way in which to deal with some of this, rather than the emphasis being on the metal detectors. And I am not saying that we do not have to have those. We do, obviously, but the hardware of it, rather than those kinds of things which get at the whole issue, the self-esteem and self-confidence and how you make people understand diversity among the students and respect for each other, that is——
Secretary RILEY. I think that is a big part of it, and, of course, our Safe and Drug-Free Schools program that you all funded and that we have requested for funds for again this year as an increase. These programs really deal directly with that issue during school, and certainly after school, too.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Ms. DeLauro.
Mr. Bonilla.
Mr. BONILLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Riley, it is good to see you.
Secretary RILEY. Thank you, sir.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Skelly, as well, is always front and center with a smile on his face, I see. It is always good to see you, too, Mr. Skelly.
Mr. SKELLY. Thank you.
PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AND INVOLVEMENT
Mr. BONILLA. I want to start out, Mr. Secretary. I know there has been a lot of comment today about the Arkansas tragedy, and oftentimes people in public office stand up and say, well, we need to do more at our level. Quite frankly, I think there is a void that exists at the local level. There is a school district, for example, not in my district, but near my district, near the Mexican border in South Texas, where they had a drug counselor come in recently. I met this counselor because he came to my daughter's school and we talked to him at that point. He said he went to do a seminar for parents one night, for example, and this is just a microcosmic example of what I think the problem is. Some people—cynics had said do not bother to come here, we are not going to have any parents show up, they are not concerned about the drug situation, and there is a drug problem in this school district.
At 7 o'clock that night, the counselor shows up with the principal, the assistant principal. By 8:30 that night, there is still just the counselor, the principal, and the assistant principal. No one showed up.
I do not know what it is in this day and age where parents somehow think that someone else has taken responsibility for their kids and whether it is in terms of their health care, their education, their car seats, their after-school care, and somehow they do not have to worry about it. I do not know what has caused this culture to exist in so many homes.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Quite frankly, Mr. Secretary, I am not here to tell you I know the answer, but I do not know if you have a suggestion on how we can get a better connect with teachers and parents and kids to all work together to keep an eye on their kids. I think that is the void that exists out there that is leading us down this road to tragedy.
Secretary RILEY. Well, you put your finger on a very serious part of these kinds of tragedies.
One thing about the drug counselors, we have recommended that for middle schools, that they really get some active programs going, in terms of getting middle school parents and students active and interested in the drug situation. General McCaffrey thinks that is a very important thing for the middle schools. So I hope that comes to pass, and I do believe that is going to be an active program there.
As you know, I spend as much time on parent involvement issues as anything, and our special partnership for parents which has grown to be several thousand members—it started out with 45. We now have practically all of the denominations, for example, and corporations and community-based organizations, and so forth, involved in this partnership. They have come out with some very, very interesting things. We have a network, then, that feeds back out into these groups.
EMPLOYER SUPPORT FOR PARENT INVOLVEMENT
For example, one of the areas is dealing with employers and how employers can have policies to enable parents to spend more time with their children in school or to go to teachers meetings and those kinds of things.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. BONILLA. Could I stop you for one second, Mr. Secretary? Because that time factor, in my view, is something that the parent has to decide whether their employer—well, the employer can be a hindrance, but in 99 percent of the cases in this country, I am seeing mothers flooding the malls, spending hours on end looking for Beanie Babies, and I see the people concerned that are at the box office worrying about ''Titanic'' tickets. Then they go home and watch Jerry Springer. Then they are saying they do not have time to go to the drug counselor. So I am not convinced—that is why I stopped you on that point—that there is some need somewhere else to bring more time in the day for a parent to do it. As you know, a parent who cares is going to get it done.
Secretary RILEY. Well, I think that is a good point that you make, and everybody is different. Times are different. An awful lot of parents, both of them, work, some early in the morning until 7:00 or 8:00 in the evenings, and I think that is right common throughout the country although, that is not everybody.
The problem is, though, having lunch with your child, for example, which a lot of people think is very important, to start getting these connections, for the parent to meet the teacher, know the principal, know the other parents of the children, and some of those things that happen in the middle of the day. You do need some cooperation and some sensitivity on the part of the employer to help with it.
Most employers are very willing to do that. I think they realize that an employee that wants to spend time with their children in school is generally a good employee.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. BONILLA. I think that, generally, you do see the employers that are cooperative. It is a rare thing and a bad thing when an employer says, ''No, we cannot let you do that.'' Most of them are interested in doing that.
I need to move on because the clock is ticking. I want to make a comment here, just a concern, because I want to move onto bilingual education.
FUNDING NEW INITIATIVES VERSUS PROVEN PROGRAMS
I am just concerned about one of the priorities in administration spending on new initiatives in education. They may be good ideas in some cases, but my concern is to not forget—and I know you alluded to TRIO, for example—some of the programs you are proposing increases in are good, but my concern is some of these programs need additional help. I just want to emphasize, let us not forget the ones that are working, like TRIO, that are having a great impact on communities out there, just so we can fund some new programs that are unproven yet.
So I just want to make that comment, and because we are running out of time, unless you feel compelled to say anything about that——
Secretary RILEY. No, I understand that, and I generally agree with you that those things that are working—and, of course, we do recommend an increase in TRIO, as you know.
Mr. BONILLA. I know you do. I just would like to see a little more emphasis in some of these programs like TRIO, and I appreciate your comment.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
BILINGUAL EDUCATION FUNDING INCREASE
I want to talk about bilingual education because that has come up lately, not only with the appropriations package we dealt with yesterday, but in some communities, Spanish-speaking communities in particular. A lot of parents are rejecting the program in this day and age. It has attracted quite a bit of controversy.
The administration is proposing to increase a bilingual education program, once again, and I have supported transitional programs historically on this committee. I do not have a problem with that, but as you noted on page 4 of your testimony, the biggest increase lies in the doubling of the bilingual educational professional development account.
EFFECTIVENESS OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION
My question is: Do you believe that the current bilingual program is working, and what real results do you have to show the subcommittee on how the current bilingual education program is working?
Secretary RILEY. Well, I dealt with that a few minutes ago, and I think it was before you were here, Congressman, but in answer to your question, I think when you have good bilingual teachers—and that is why we are so interested in helping with professional development and to really prepare teachers—and Spanish, of course, is a predominant one, but there are others, as you well know, in Asian languages and so forth.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
When you have good bilingual teachers that really are educated in how to handle bilingualism and diverse student bodies and so forth, in my judgment bilingual education clearly works and works well.
LOCAL CHOICE IN BILINGUAL PROGRAMS
Now, you can have bilingual teachers and programs that do not work well, just like you can have everything else that does not work well. Children are different. Teachers are different. Communities are different. The big thing, we think, is to have local people in the local community have the choice of whether or not they want to make bilingual education available or not, and available for some students and not for others.
I have all kinds of interesting ideas that come to me. One young bilingual teacher told me in California recently that he thought that for students who were born in America that not much bilingual time is necessary and should not be, and for those who emigrated into this country, they should have lots of time to move into it. So you have all kinds of different ideas, people who really want to help LEP children learn English. The whole purpose is to learn English, as you well know.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY
Now, the recent study on reading that just came out, the National Academy of Sciences, really made it very clear that a young person who thinks in Spanish really can learn in Spanish and read in Spanish, and that helps them, then, be able to transfer over into English, that there is some real advantage from a research standpoint to mastering their first language, in a sense, as they move into the other language.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
You have different research. You have different ideas. I think local teachers, local people should have those kinds of options, and that we should help them make their choices as successful as possible.
Mr. BONILLA. I know my time is up, and in the spirit of what you just said, I just want to ask you that in the closing time to please look seriously at an effort that Congressman Tom DeLay is undertaking right now to turn bilingual education decisions entirely over to local districts, perhaps in the form of block grants that we could help them fund, but in light of the fact that we have Eastern Europeans, we have Asians, and Hispanics, and people from all over the world that have different dialects and languages all over the country, I think your comments about giving that control back locally to the districts is one that is the spirit of the Tom DeLay initiative, and it is something that is not finalized yet, the bill, but I think it is something to please take a good look at.
Thank you, Secretary.
Secretary RILEY. Good. Thank you.
Mr. BONILLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mr. Bonilla.
Mr. Stokes.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. STOKES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, let me take just a moment to concur with all of the accolades that have been accorded you by my colleagues relevant to your outstanding leadership in the field of education. I think all of us are proud of the job you do, and it is always a pleasure to welcome you to our subcommittee.
Secretary RILEY. Well, Congressman, I thank you. I would say in all sincerity we are going to miss you around here, too, and you have done a wonderful job. We are all grateful for that.
Mr. STOKES. Thank you very much.
THIRD INTERNATIONAL MATH AND SCIENCE STUDY
Mr. Secretary, let me start out by asking a little bit of what you see as we peer into the year 2000 and beyond, the new century, the new millennium.
In your formal statement before us, you talk a little bit about the Third International Math and Science Study, of which U.S. twelfth-graders out-perform their counterparts in only 2 of the 21 participating countries in math and science. We know already that the next century will be the most highly technicological society known to mankind. However, when you look at the results, of this international test in the context of the situation that exists within our inner-city schools, particularly those schools with high concentrations of minority youth, there is further cause for concern. If the more affluent students in this country, those who are taking the Third International Math and Science tests are doing poorly, then you know that the high concentration of minority youth in our inner-city schools are experiencing even greater difficulties when it comes to passing State proficiency tests and other similar exams.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Many schools are still under court-ordered desegregation. These same schools are plagued with the full range of problems related to the lack of money provided for elementary and secondary education over the years.
Talk to us a little bit about how this country is going to compete in this highly technical society in the year 2000 and beyond.
Secretary RILEY. Well, Congressman, let me speak to the TIMSS study, the Third International Math and Science Study.
Mr. STOKES. Sure.
AMERICAN STUDENT PERFORMANCE ON TIMSS
Secretary RILEY. As you well know, in the fourth grade, we did very, very well. We were second only to Korea in science in all of the countries tested, and this does not just include top students. This is all students. This is students in the inner city and in the rural areas and rich and poor students alike.
So it is a real scientific coverage. It is a sample test, but it is a scientific coverage of American children and all of the other countries. In the fourth grade in math, we were way above average. So, in fourth grade, we are way up there, and I think that is very interesting.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
The standards that we have talked about and worked for, I think, are really having a strong effect in those early years, and that is when you can really get in there early and work with young people, but all of our fourth-graders are very high in the world in math and science. That is important.
In the eighth grade, then, we begin to fall off, and as you well know, we are then average in eighth grade, just barely above average in science and barely below average in math.
In the twelfth grade, we drop on down. While we were better than only two countries in the study, we were part of a group of countries that are close in that range, but there is no question that twelfth grade was down.
ROLE OF EXPECTATIONS IN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Why is that? Well, the TIMSS study indicates that along about the middle school years, we do not really have the expectation of our children that other countries do. What our children are taking in math and science in about the eighth grade, children in a lot of these countries are taking in the seventh grade, even though over the last 10 or 12 years, we have pulled up almost a grade level in math and science. We do a whole lot better now than we would have done 11, 12, 13 years ago. However, everybody else is pulling up. Everybody sees the point that you make in the question, that for jobs of the future—of the new millennium, all of that math and science is going to be very critical.
So the TIMSS study says along about the eighth grade and seventh grade, where 100 percent of the kids in Japan take algebra in the eighth grade, only 20 percent of our kids take algebra, that is beginning to increase, and should increase to 100 percent. Then, going into high school, a lot of our teachers are teaching out of field in math and science, and 55 percent of our physics teachers are teaching out of field.
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
TEACHERS TEACHING OUT OF FIELD
You ask somebody—I did the other day—somebody from Europe about how many teachers they had teaching out of field in science. They said, ''I do not know what you are talking about. We do not have any teachers teaching out of field.'' So we have got to prepare teachers better. We have got to track more young people to teaching in math and science and get those teachers in there teaching in their field, for example, people who finished in math should be teaching math and so forth.
NEED TOUGHER COURSES EARLIER IN SCHOOL
Then, our students just are not taking those tough courses like they are in other countries, and that really shows up in the twelfth grade. If they have not had calculus, if they have not had trigonometry, and, of course, algebra and geometry they are not prepared. They should have these courses in school early. By the twelfth grade they should have taken physics and chemistry and trig and calculus. Our kids are just as smart. We show that in the fourth grade, and we need to then make sure the systems that are out there will expect more from children, have teachers who are better prepared. It is not the teacher's fault because they just put a body in there to have a class.
So I think we know kind of what we need to do, and we need to proceed to get about doing it, and we will have a wonderful entry into the new millennium.
CHARTER SCHOOLS AND VOUCHER SYSTEMS
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Mr. STOKES. As a follow-up, let me ask you this. As you know, I represent Cleveland, Ohio, one of our major American cities and one of the cities which has a high concentration of public school students. There is a new movement, across the country, in support of education vouchers. Along with it, of course, is also the entity known as charter schools.
Has the Department of Education conducted any studies of charter schools and the voucher systems to ascertain what impact, if any, they are having on the inner-city schools and the public school systems?
Secretary RILEY. Well, a number of studies have taken place and are taking place. Really, both of those two concepts are probably too new to get any real significant longitudinal information out of them, and it is usually mixed.
The fact is, as I was talking about taking tough courses a minute ago, I do not care if you are in a voucher system or the private school or in a parochial school or in a public school, if you have taken calculus, you do right well in calculus, and if you have not taken it, then you do not do as well as somebody who has taken it. So it is a lot more important what kind of counseling and advice is given to the student and what opportunities there are within the school than probably these other matters.
As you know, I have never felt that vouchers were a good idea. I really think when you have a failing school, you should get in there and use the Porter and Obey concept to try to reform the school, to do what you can to make it better. If you cannot, and you try and do all of those constructive things, then close it down and start over again.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Charter schools are within the public school system. We think that is a very good option for public schools to have; but they are no panacea. They might be wonderful or they might be poor. So it is very important for the school board to be very careful about the charter and who has the charter and so forth. They are performance-based, based on results rather than regulations, and it frees them up a lot to try different and new things, and it encourages a lot of innovative and creative thought and competition within the public school system.
So we think those are local decisions. They are not our decisions, but we think the charter school is a good option for school boards to have. We think vouchers, by carving off a few students to go off to some school that is a private school, does nothing to improve the failing schools, and it is a non-solution to that problem. I do not think it is a good idea, and that is my position.
Mr. STOKES. I appreciate your candid assessment of that.
My time has expired, and I appreciate your responses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PORTER. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION
Mr. Secretary, when I became a member of this subcommittee, Terrel Bell was the Secretary of Education, and shortly after that, Secretary Bell issued a Nation-at-Risk and warned about a rising tide of mediocrity in our education system.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
It has been almost 10 years since George Bush declared himself to be the education President and convened a summit at Charlottesville that produced goals for improving education by the year 2000, including that 90 percent of students would graduate from high school. Students would leaves grades 4, 8, and 12, with a demonstrated competence in basic subjects, and the United States would be first in the world in math and science.
You described a minute ago, in response to Mr. Stokes' question, that we certainly have not achieved that last goal, although there is some hope that improvement might be coming, and I wondered if you can tell us where we are after overall spending for education has gone up significantly in this country. It has gone up in per-pupil expenditures. It has gone up in real terms. It has gone up in every measurable way, and, yet, we seem to be a long way from where we had hoped to be at this point in time, and a lot of people wonder whether we are getting any value for the money that we spend in terms of results for our students.
Secretary RILEY. I think, Mr. Chairman, that those with public responsibilities need to be able to respond to those questions. They are very legitimate questions and should be asked.
HIGHER EXPECTATIONS AND STANDARDS NEEDED
By the same token, we have to look at education as something that is very large and very difficult to measure in terms of a particular child compared to the whole mass of students out there.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
Some children just do wonderfully well, as you well know, and soar through the system. I think we need to have higher expectations of all children. I think that is one of the critical needs out there, and I am talking about early expectations. We can't wait until the child is in the eighth and ninth grade and then all of a sudden tell them, ''Well, you are going to fail. You cannot move forward,'' whatever. I am talking about young children who need to realize that they have got to get serious about their education.
I do not favor social promotion. I think they ought to be informed. If they have not learned the material, they need to learn it before they move forward. We need to have higher standards. We need to be more serious about higher standards.
I think when you look at our money that we spend and we analyze those things an awful lot, that the preparation of teachers is so important. I think we really do need in the reauthorization of higher education that we are involved in right now, Title V dealing with teachers—I think that is one area that we need to provide as much help for as we can.
When you look at where our money goes, the great portion of our money, of course, goes to special needs like disadvantaged children, disabled children, and so forth, and young children. If you look at Title I, for example, I think around 70 percent of Title I money goes to elementary school children. If you look at other programs, the Federal investment, when you think about it, is primarily for young children, and some, of course, for students in high school, but mostly young children.
Then you look at what is happening in the TIMSS test, for example, that I just discussed with the Congressman. We are doing very well, fourth grade. So I think we can make an argument. You can take those arguments and work them any way you want to, but I think you can make a very legitimate argument that while the Federal dollars are going down to the States and the local school districts and they have the control of education, that these are support systems that our dollars certainly are going into an area where we are doing better.
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
We need to improve a lot, and we need to continually evaluate that. As you know, I am very strong on assessment and to really know how we are doing and to let people know if they are doing poorly and to do something about it. That is the reform effort, why I like it so much, that you all have come forward with.
So I think you can make a pretty good argument, though, that where we are putting our dollars, we can show some real improvement is taking place, but not enough. We need enormous improvement in middle school and high school and certainly across the board. We are not improving fast enough anywhere.
TOP-DOWN VERSUS BOTTOM-UP EDUCATION FUNDING APPROACH
Mr. PORTER. Mr. Secretary, there are a lot of people, and I am not one of them, that believe that through one measure or another, whether it is special savings accounts for education or education vouchers or the like, that we should really kind of pull out of public education and put our resources in another place.
In my area, public education is wonderful, as you know.
Secretary RILEY. Yes.
Mr. PORTER. Our students, for the most part, do outstanding work, but there are many people that think just the opposite and that we should move in the opposite direction. I do not think we are going to do that.
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
You mentioned a minute ago that we have been spending our money—the traditional Federal programs had been for the disadvantaged, that is, economically disadvantaged, for the disabled, for minorities, for federally impacted schools, and in some cases for national priorities like math and science, but this administration has changed direction a bit on those kinds of things, staying with those, but adding some that have broad application such as school construction, national testing, smaller class sizes, after-school hours, education technology, and others that are much broader in application.
There is this raging national debate that goes on as to whether it should be top-down or bottom-up. Can you tell us in your opinion what is wrong with bottom-up? What is wrong with simply giving more flexibility to local schools to use the money in the best ways that they see fit, or should we emphasize these top-down approaches that we think galvanize support nationally for education, but may not really be very effective?
Secretary RILEY. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that, generally speaking, you have to have both.
I think to look at the block grant issue, which is purely giving money down with no instructions basically and letting all that feed up from the bottom, there are a lot of reasons I think that is not a good idea, and I will be glad to discuss those, among them being the fact that over half of the States now have challenges to their tax structure—in terms of equity financing—in the State courts. So you are having numerous issues worked out in the States about the unfairness, the inequitable financing of education, which is a very real issue in many, many States, if not most States.
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
I think it is a very complicated problem, then, to dump more Federal money onto those questionable, inequitable systems, with undefined funds. It would make it more of a complication than it is now. It makes it more inequitable instead of less.
FEDERAL TARGETING OF EDUCATION FUNDS
The Federal dollars—and you know the GAO study that just came out and indicated that the Federal dollars are targeted dollars for basically poor, disadvantaged young people. That has an enormous impact on helping with all of this inequity that the courts are looking at, and I think it has a very good impact on that. GAO said it was something like 5 to 1 in terms of the differences between Federal targeting for poor kids and State targeting. That was GAO's observation.
Then, if you put block grant dollars down on that system, I think you, again, are shifting away from that targeting, which is not advisable.
I think you should target in a national way, for the good of the country, but leave the decision-making of how kids learn and all of that to the local level. I think, also, you should target the purpose of that money, the Federal resources that are sent down, in a broad sense.
So, if you have funds going down for professional development, as in the Eisenhower program, which is very important, something that you and I both support—in terms of the corporate world, they say the most important money they spend is professional development. That is the first thing often cut out of school budgets. The Federal Government's help in targeting education funds in this country, I think, is very helpful, and it really is what TIMSS says we need more than anything else.
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
To lump all that together and to send it down, some States would put it to professional development. Some would put it to standards or whatever. The problem with that is accountability, how do you measure whether the funds are effectively being used. Is anything good coming from it? Are teachers being helped by professional development? If you have block grant funds, people taxed on one level, and then very little to no accountability which is the nature of block grants, then you have unidentified gains in terms of specific purposes that the Congress and the President want to see the country develop.
So there are a number of reasons that I do not like that just pure, old general revenue-sharing kind of thing. I do not think that worked, and I do not think it is good for education to have the Federal role be simply to send dollars down.
FLEXIBILITY IN FEDERAL FUNDING
By the same token, I think it is a real mistake for the Federal Government to send prescripted dollars down in such a way that the local people have no decision-making, no flexibility. As you know, we cut out, for example, in K-through-12 two-thirds of our regulations. We have gone there and enormously lifted regulations out and modified others, and we have a waiver procedure that we try very hard to promote—any local district that wants a waiver from Title I or some Federal program, we try to make it fit their region. We try very hard to make that work, and we very rarely turn down a legitimate waiver. We do not turn down any.
In EdFlex, we have 12 States now that can provide the waivers themselves. We want to expand that to all 50 States. So the States can have waivers, but we think that they should be for a specific purpose, they should be targeted. We provide all of the flexibility that we can within those broad parameters.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 1 Of 2
SPECIAL EDUCATION
Mr. PORTER. One of the problems is that we tell the States they have to spend money in certain areas and that we are going to provide it and then we do not, like special education, where you have got a lot of money that the States could put toward school construction, reduced class sizes, more teachers, and the like, it is by Federal mandate having to be spent for special education, and the Federal Government is not providing anywhere near the share that it had promised.
So we have kind of caught the schools in the middle. They have lost their flexibility by reason of Federal mandates that are unfunded, and they have to spend the funds that they would otherwise spend on the things the Federal Government is now suggesting they spend on for special ed.
Secretary RILEY. Well, I think that is a very legitimate issue, and you had been involved, and others, in increasing funding for IDEA, and increased it some 64 percent over the last 2 years, which is a very dramatic increase. I think that is fine.
We, this year, had some increases that are very targeted in IDEA dealing with young children and also reform programs, but then we have tried to identify other programs in the regular