FUNCTIONAL ILLITERACY

Dr. HOLLOWAY. I will be pleased to provide that.

I was going to point out also there are 15 million adults who are considered functionally illiterate in the United States now. We want to refine our data on that.

But let me give you our definition of functionally literate: "That the individual is able to read at a level that helps him perform a task basic to employment and survival in the society." That is our generalized definition of literacy.

And to know there are 15 million adults-well, we don't know how many are high school graduates and how many are dropouts and how many are older adults that didn't go to school. That information we will be soliciting this fall, because we feel it is crucial to know the percentage of youngsters who leave the schools without reading skills. And we will find that out this fall, because we feel that is just essential to know if we are going to tackle the problem of illiteracy.

As you know, the program was announced almost 2 years ago by the former Commissioner James Allen. But, for many reasons, it didn't get off the ground. So, actually, September will be our initiation date for an actual program of this kind.

TEN-YEAR STRATEGY

I thought you might be interested in the fact that we are drawing up a master plan to achieve this 10-year goal. We have it set out for each year.

We feel if this is to be education's moon shot, we have to have a strategy for getting there. So we will be finalizing

Senator MONDALE. If we set aside 40 percent of the money of the space program, then you would be well funded.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. You will be interested to know that James Webb is on the Reading Council, the former Director of NASA.

In terms of a particular strategy, we want to attack the reading problem from four different major directions.

One is the redirection of formula money. They have already decided that we have quite a lot of notice. We will redirect other people's money into programs by a variety of means. But the redirection activity seems to me significant, because there is no pointit seems if we learned anything from Comp. Ed., it is that adding a project on top of a mediocre program or an inadequate programi will not solve the educational problem.

So I am trying to build into right to read some of my experiences and learnings from California. And one certainly is that the project approach or the bad-data approach-or "cosmetic approach" or whatever you want to call it really has not solved the problem.

So, in our redirection activities we will hope to change directions for the programs that now fund reading activities from the office of education from State and local levels.

The second thing that we plan to do beginning in September is what we call transition. The moneys that are now-the discretionary money that will be designated as right to read money will be used

to help districts change their existing programs and only with the commitment to change that will right to read pay for the transition activities.

We will not again fund another project. The project this time will be the total program of reading and language. So the transition activities will be a major portion of what we will do.

Those will be in situations that Dr. Wheeler indicated don't now have Federal funding or certainly not substantial Federal money. And we know that the youngsters are there and they are very needy.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Senator MONDALE. Are you intending to cooperate with the Office of Child Development?

Dr. HOLLOWAY. Yes.

Senator MONDALE. We are hopefully going to adopt a massive comprehensive child-development program as we extend Headstart. If it is fully funded, which it probably won't be, it would be $7 billion a year for these first 5 years of life. It seems it would be a good area for you to be involved in.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. Dick Orton and I have had initial conversations in regard to how we might work together from the Headstart standpoint. But we certainly do plan to work with all agencies that have anything to do with children and, certainly, language and reading.

SCHOOL BOOKS

Senator MONDALE. I wish we could get American business to contribute to development of technology for printing inexpensive books, good books cheaper, so these children could bring books home with them.

Don't you think that is very important-to let them have their own books?

Dr. HOLLOWAY. Yes; and books that they are interested in.

Senator MONDALE. They would have to pick them. But it seems to me that is very important.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. I don't know whether you are aware of the fundamental program

Senator MONDALE. My wife is active in the program, so I get proselytized.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. I think that is a good start. But much more needs to be done.

One of the things very basic to right to read is the involvement of the private sector and, in addition, getting industry to set up so-called literacy models on the job for people who work there. There are a variety of other agencies and associations, like publishers and what have you, whom we have to work with.

Senator MONDALE. Right. I think in order to get the cost down you have to have a wide range of good but inexpensive literature which the children can obtain either free or for a very modest cost, and they should be able to take it home as theirs.

I don't know. Maybe that is not important.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. I think it is essential.

59-411-71-pt. 12- -6

Senator MONDALE. It seems that a lot of these children don't have literature to read in their own homes to train themselves on.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. I can't agree with you more that having books available to go home is great. I think the books in the schools ought to go home. But I just don't think there is anything sacred about leaving the books at school.

I think the publishers could make a great contribution here if they would reproduce different kinds of books and for less money. Senator MONDALE. Yes.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. I don't think the children will ever be able to buy a $5 book. Many of the children's books now are quite expensive. Senator MONDALE. I think they are now able to sell some good books for 30 to 35 cents.

What about "Sesame Street" and their new effort to try to move into the reading efforts through television? Is that helpful?

Dr. HOLLOWAY. That program will get underway this fall. The Commissioner has assigned me to work with them. They have had a first preview. They will be field-testing it this summer, hopefully getting some of the bugs out of it.

From the preview, I thought-I had recommendations. But, basically, I feel we ought to utilize the media of TV much more in the teaching of reading.

The Office of Education has put $5 million into the program based upon whether or not they can develop it in a satisfactory way. I believe they can.

One of the things that I am somewhat concerned about is that the program be used by school people as a complementary way of teaching reading.

I also recommended that we establish an adult "Sesame Street." I think there is a great deal we con do in the home for those who may not go out to learn these skills.

There is a great deal we can do in the home with this program.
Many adults will not admit they cannot read. Even if-

Senator MONDALE. It is increasingly embarrasshing to admit that. Dr. HOLLOWAY. Sure it is. But I think television can really assist us, and many other media as well.

But we are working closely with Mrs. Cooney on the program. It is called "The Electric Company Hour," and it will be aired the latter part of September or early October.

Senator MONDALE. We have set aside in the Senate integration bill $45 million for educational television, to be culturally and ethically utilized.

But I am interested in a recent survey in the Brownsville area that shows that 80 percent of the children watch "Sesame Street."

Mr. ROBINSON. All over the city. So do I-every Saturday.

Dr. HOLLOWAY. One of the things we recommended to the reading program was a utilization program-was that the children who are supposed to watch it actually do. And parents are geared into follow up in some way with what is taking place there.

So we look forward to working with that reading program. I think the whole media world has great implications for education, and we have to utilize them to help us in the teaching process. I feel very strongly about that.

EDUCATIONAL REFORM

I want to make one final comment.

We will be setting up renewal centers which will focus on changes to be made in the country. That will be a first major effort.

But, as you know, right to read doesn't have legislation at this time, so we are going on administrative authority. But I believe that the program really holds a great deal of potential for education reform, because reading is so basic to everything else we do in education. Just as comprehensive education influenced middle-class schools, I think the right to read approach, if we are successful-and I believe we will be can significantly influence the way we teach reading to all children, because many children read in spite of rather than for any other reason what we do in the classroom.

So I am hoping it can reform the way we teach reading to everybody.

Senator MONDALE. I think the whole effort in the schools will founder unless we can have some kind of observable criteria to judge it by. And the changes that we need in the school system are very difficult to come by unless we have some way of measuring it.

Certainly, reading is not only essential but it would be a good place to begin.

As a matter of fact, if you can't teach a kid to read, I don't know how the system justifies itself.

I think Dr. Clark told us there is evidence that many children come up from the Bahamas and the Caribbean and read better than the children in the classes into which they are placed.

I have to go. We are going to have an executive session for marking up the higher education bill, but I will be right back. Dr. HOLLOWAY. Thank you very much.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. RUTH LOVE HOLLOWAY

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Ruth Love Holloway, newly appointed director of the Right to Read Program, USOE. In my former capacity as Chief of the Bureau of Program Development with California's State Department of Education, I and my staff assumed the responsibility for assisting some 900 school districts in planning and implementing federal and state compensatory education programs. I was asked to comment on three areas today (a) compensatory education in California, (b) research on impact of compensatory education on general education, and (c) plans for Right to Read. On the first two areas, I will be speaking as a professional and in relation to my former work. This is not intended to reflect on official policy statement of the Office of Education.

California is proud of its success in ESEA Title I in that each year some 250,000 children average at least one year's academic gain for one year of instruction. A sizeable number of these children gained in excess of the month per month growth. To fully appreciate such gains we must consider the historical progress of children from economically deprived backgrounds. Usually, the children are behind from the day they enter school and their rate of progress is normally .7 years gain for each year of school. This, of course, means that they are getting further behind the longer they remain in school.

Since the so-called normal rate of growth is one year's gain for each year of instruction, it is apparent that poor children at a distinct disadvantaged. Briefly, there are several reasons for the degree of success which California's compensatory effort achieved.

1. The Division of Compensatory Education is a separate division within the Department of Education.

2. The federal formula monies were used as discretionary resources. Guidelines setting forth areas for programs were developed. Enabling state legislation set the parameters and priorities for all programs for disadvantaged children. Guidelines included a requirement of multiple services. Each individual was to record instructions in reading, math, and health and nutrition were provided as needed. It was required that his parents were involved, his teachers were given specialized inservice education.

3. The monies were concentrated on each child at a level of $300 over and above the regular district expenditure.

4. Priority placed emphasis on kindergarten through grade six with a longitudinal focus.

5. Technical Assistance was provided to districts in their project. Performance objectives were used to guide activities based on identified needs of children. 6. The state approval process involve an analysis of the program for legal requirements and recommendation for program improvements.

7. Once the projects were operational, a program review and monitoring process was implemented to facilitate adherence to guidelines.

8. Each year the state summarized and reported evaluation from local data to the State Board of Education.

These items accounted for the degree of success which was experienced. However, a continual re-assessment is essential for updating the state delivery system.

IMPACT OF COMPENSATORY EDUCATION ON GENERAL EDUCATION

Although, the program served only 40% of the eligible children, the practices germinated in compensatory efforts began to spring up in middle class schools. And so my study undertaken during the 1970 school year focussed on the impact of compensatory education or general or regular education.

Responses were sought from a variety of school districts to three major questions:

1. Are the specialized compensatory programs being replicated outside the target area or in non-funded programs?

2. Has the process of involving parents, teachers and administrators influenced methods of program planning?

3. Has the employment of specialized personnel, i.e. teacher aides, instructional specialists, tutors, home-school coordinated affected employment practices non-compensatory programs?

The research investigation sought to discover the degree of impact or influence in non-funded schools as well as the activities continued in instances of fund-reduction or elimination.

These were the types of schools studied:

School-Type A. (Saturated School Project).-A school located in an intensive poverty impacted urban area which is saturated with total program service. Such schools include entire school populations in compensatory education and both regular and added staff are involved in the program.

School Type B. (Single grade level project).-Demonstration projects in reading and mathematics operate in selected school districts (14). All such programs are funded at the junior high level exclusively. It is a longitudinal program beginning with the 7th grade, with students in entire grade levels participating in the project.

School-Type C. (Laboratory Project).-The laboratory projects operate in schools in which multiple grade levels are served. Selected children are taken from regular classrooms for short periods of time in order to receive special instruction in a laboratory or "pull-out" situation. It is a common organizational approach in compensatory education.

School-Type D. (Non-federal resources project).—A school located outside the designated target area which has no federal funds but has altered aspects of the school program.