ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1967 MONDAY, MARCH 6, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9:50 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Daniels, Brademas, Hawkins, Gibbons, Ford, Scheuer, Meeds, Burton, Goodell, Bell, Gurney, Erlenborn, and Dellenback. Staff members present: Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; William D. Gaul, associate general counsel; Benjamin F. Reeves, editor; Louise M. Dargans, research assistant; and Charles W. Radcliffe, special education counsel for minority. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. The record. will note a quorum is present. We are delighted to welcome before the committee again Dr. Edgar Fuller, executive director of the National Association of Chief State School Officers. Dr. Fuller has made numerous appearances before the Committee on Education and Labor, and several of the subcommittees on education and labor. It is a great pleasure this morning, Dr. Fuller, to welcome you. I understand you have by your side several distinguished educators. I will call upon you at this time to make the introductions. STATEMENTS OF EDGAR FULLER, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, COUNCIL OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS; HARRY SPARKS, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, KENTUCKY; FLOYD T. CHRISTIAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, FLORIDA; RAY PAGE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, ILLINOIS; AND PAUL F. JOHNSTON, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, IOWA Mr. FULLER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Edgar Fuller. These statements will be given later as executive secretary-treasurer of the Council of State School Officers. The council is composed of the State superintendents or commissioners of each of the 50 States and the chief school officers of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Canal Zone, Guam, American Samoa, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. 75-492-67-27 411 The chief State school officers are present from Kentucky, Illinois. Iowa, and Florida. At this time I would like to introduce them, going from where I sit to my right. The first is Dr. Harry Sparks, superintendent of public instruction of Kentucky. Chairman PERKINS. I am delighted that he is here. Dr. Sparks has brought forward, in my judgment, one of the outstanding title I programs of the whole country. It is doing so much to provide educational opportunities throughout Kentucky. I am delighted that Dr. Sparks is here this morning and I certainly appreciate his program in Kentucky. Mr. FULLER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman next to Dr. Sparks is Dr. Ray Page, the superintendent of public instruction of Illinois. Next to Dr. Page is Dr. Floyd T. Christian, superintendent of public instruction of Florida. Playing right end this morning is Dr. Paul F. Johnston, superintendent of public instruction of the great State of Iowa. We would like to have the talks in about the order of this introduction, if it is agreeable. Chairman PERKINS. If there is no objection from the committee this morning, I think we will proceed a little differently this morning. Let the distinguished educators make their statements in accordance with the way you have introduced them and we will refrain from questioning the witnesses until they have completed their statements, unless there is some urgent and important point that should be brought up during the statement. Commencing today, we will operate under the 5-minute rule in order to give all members a reasonable opportunity to interrogate the witnesses within a reasonable period of time. After we get around under the 5-minute rule, then there will be no limit on the time, and the members who want to stay can interrogate the witnesses as long as they care to interrogate them. On some days we may run into the evening. I do not feel that a limitation of time should be put upon members where they want to probe deeply in certain areas of the administration of the act. for the first time around, I think I should make the point, since some of our junior members did not have the opportunity last week, that we will operate under the 5-minute rule and strictly adhere to the 5minute rule the first time around. That includes, of course, yielding your time to others. You may proceed. Mr. SPARKS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Harry M. Sparks, superintendent of public instruction, Commonwealth of Kentucky. I am grateful for this opportunity to appear before the Committee on Education and Labor because of your honored chairman, of whom we in Kentucky are extremely proud. I want to report on the progress made in the first full year of operation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Further, it is a pleasure to appear in behalf of the Council of Chief State School Officers as well as the Kentucky Department of Education. It is my belief, Mr. Chairman, that the combined experience of the 50 States provides the most valid source of evidence at the present time for evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of the new Federal programs in elementary and secondary education. Today, State school systems, working cooperatively through the Council and interstate programs, are increasingly better informed, better staffed, and better organized to provide insightful leadership in education. In addition, title V funds have contributed materially to the expansion and improvement of the planning and evaluating functions of most State departments of education. Particularly, I feel this is true in the States with limited resources and many high priority needs at the local level. My first general observation of most new legislation is that the timing of authorizations, appropriations, and finally allocations are "out of joint." In addition to the need for advanced notice of funding of projects, the State and local school districts are concerned with the necessary personnel and facilities to operate the programs-with both in short supply. My second observation is that even intermediate-range planning is discouraged; and the ultimate success or failure of new programs rests heavily on State and local school systems. To insure reasonable stability, it is recommended that legislation carry a minimum extension of 4 years and that general safeguards be established to insure funding of projects prior to the beginning of each academic year. Even with what must be labeled "emergency planning," the several titles of Public Law 89-10 have progressed extremely well in Kentucky. In my testimony before the subcommittee on March 10, 1966, I dealt at some length with the planning and organizing phases of programs and the early problems encountered. Today, in this second report to the committee, I shall review briefly (1) the 1966 amendments incorporated in Public Law 89-750; (2) react to the proposed amendments in H.R. 6230; and (3) provide for the record, if I may, a progress report on the basic titles of the original legislation. By the way, I shall not go into this detailed analysis of the achievements, but they are attached to my statement for the record. THE 1966 AMENDMENTS TO PUBLIC LAW 89-10-TITLE VI-PUBLIC LAW 89-750 The Congress is to be commended highly for correcting a "blind spot" in the original legislation with the addition of title VI and its incorporation in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1966. This title provides a vehicle for States to improve the quality and quantity of educational programs for handicapped children. It is a highly desirable expansion of the basic law. It is estimated that Kentucky is only meeting the educational needs of approximately 20 percent of its handicapped children and youth. From the authorization of $50 million, Kentucky was reported to be eligible for an estimated $905,442. From the final appropriation of $2.5 million, Kentucky may receive an estimated allocation of $45,270, or approximately 1 percent of the State's current budget for special education. Title VI is directed toward critical unmet needs and has great potential for meeting these needs. It is hoped that the Appropriations Committee and administrative agencies can come to see more nearly eye to eye with the Committee on Education and Labor on realistic support levels for fiscal year 1968 and future years. Adult EducationAct of 1966-Public Law 89-750: Highly important to the Kentucky Department of Education is the new amendment-title III of Public Law 89-750-which helps the States to broaden and improve general adult education which is so imperatively needed in breaking the cycle of poverty. Placing the administration of adult education in the U.S. Office of Education helps to provide unity and direction to a program now reporting to two separate agencies. In Kentucky, exemplary cooperative working relationships have been established with other State and Federal agencies in the administration of adult education programs. Inasmuch as the programs have been operational for several years, it is strongly recommended that the program be financed at or near the authorization level. I am particularly concerned with the advancement of adult education in Kentucky in that the 1960 census showed us to be tied with South Carolina for the low end of average educational achievement throughout the State for our adults 25 years of age and older. I hope that at some time the concepts of basic education can be extended to include high school training so that our adults may be trained for the passage of the general education development test or the equivalency program which will enable these men to secure jobs in modern industry. A program which is restricted to merely basic education takes a fellow about half away across the creek, Mr. Chairman, and lets him drown when he tries to apply for a position in modern industry. Amendments to title I-Public Law 89-750: Two amendments are especially helpful to Kentucky in the administration of title I. They are (1) clarifying the definition of average per pupil expenditure"; and (2) raising the low income factor after June 30, 1967, to $3,000. The revised 50-percent clause: This amendment penalizes no State in terms of the existing formula and at the same time assists lowincome States with higher concentrations of economically disadvantaged youth to provide a higher level of education. Percentage formulas, in general, tend to produce inequities. While the new formula is a significant step forward, it is recommended that further study be given to various methods for determining an even more equitable basic grant formula for distributing title I funds. The new low-income factor of $3,000: The adoption of a more realistic family subsistence level will make it possible for many States to improve administrative and instructional practices for the disadvantaged child. Further, it will include many borderline children that are now excluded by the $2,000 cutoff formula. In areas of heavy concentration of poverty, such as some counties in Kentucky, it will be possible to gear the total school program to the needy child. Judicial review: It is recommended that Federal acts providing aid to education should provide for judicial review by local citizens through their courts. THE 1967 AMENDMENTS-H.R. 6230 1. NATIONAL TEACHER CORPS The reactions I have received in the way of evaluation of the National Teacher Corps have been most commendable of the overall program. It is an important addition to title I and has the added potential for helping to alleviate the problems of social isolation in remote areas. Kentucky has had seven programs in full or partial operation for fiscal year 1967. Four teacher training institutions in the State have worked closely with the program. An essential ingredient for success is that the program must identify with regular programs and be under the same general administrative direction. I submit two reports from local school systems that give strong indication that the Teacher Corps can make a significant contribution to education in Kentucky. (The reports follow :) Dr. HARRY M. SPARKS, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, State Department of Education, Frankfort, Ky. HOPKINSVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Hopkinsville, Ky., February 24, 1967. DEAR MR. SPARKS: I would like to recommend to you the National Teacher Corps program, which we have had in our system since November 1, 1966. At first, when the program was explained to me, I was very much concerned that the teachers assigned would be mis-fits and cast-offs from other school systems. I have found this not to be the case. We have thirteen Teacher Corps members who are working in our school system and they are all conscientious, hard-working, dependable people. They take their work seriously and actually have been an immense help to our educational program. The men and women we have assigned to us seem to be deeply interested in the culturally disadvantaged children. They spend time, even beyond the required hours, trying to help these children raise their educational and social levels. I wish we could double the number of teachers that have been assigned to us. As you are very well aware, we have a high percentage of culturally disadvantaged pupils in our school system. Of course, it is too soon to evaluate the work of these people efficiently by test, but I believe this is the best Federal program in operation to help the culturally disadvantaged. I would place the National Teacher Corps program on the same level with Head Start. This is one program that I hope you will urge Congress to expand and continue. Sincerely, GENE C. FARLEY, Superintendent of Schools. BRECKINRIDGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Re National Teachers' Corps. Dr. HARRY M. SPARKS, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Frankfort, Ky. DEAR DR. SPARKS: The National Teachers' Corps has been a tremendous asset to our school system this year. We are very grateful to have it and deem ourselves fortunate to be one of the recipients of this service. By utilizing the corpsmen to the fullest, we have expanded our program to the extent of four teaching units plus several other services not school connected. These courses have been greatly expanded by the Corps: 1. Remedial reading is taught full time at Irvington Elementary. The underprivileged are given most of the time. |