Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323153561
label
Back to School Address - Alice Deal Jr. High 10/1/91 [OA 8329] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153561
contentType
document
title
Back to School Address - Alice Deal Jr. High 10/1/91 [OA 8329] [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13773-011
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153561
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
addecac41458830e
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13773
Folder ID Number:
13773-011
Folder Title:
Back to School Address - Alice Deal Jr. High 10/1/91 [OA 8329] [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
21
6
5
McGroarty/Buntor
September 26, 1991
12:30 pm
31 SEP 26 P12 22
[SCHOOL.TS]
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ALICE DEAL JR. HIGH, WASHINGTON, D.C.
OCTOBER 1, 1991
12:10 P.M.
Thank you, Mrs. Mosteller, for allowing me to visit your
classroom today. [[TO STUDENTS] And let me thank all of you for
letting millions of kids in classrooms all across the country
tune in to hear what I'm about to say.
You know, long before I became President, I was a parent. I
remember the times my kids came up with a really tough question,
or a difficult decision. I tried my best never to shut them down
with a quick "No." I would simply say those three magic words
that made that problem disappear: "Ask your Mother.' //
No parent's perfect. Especially, now -- when you've reached
your teens, and your parents hit that awkward age. //
Let me tell you why I've made the trip up from the White
House to Alice Deal Junior High. I'm not here to teach a lesson.
I'm not here to tell you what to do, or what to think. When it
comes to education, you're accustomed to adults talking about you
and at you -- well, today, I'm here to talk to you.
Every day, we hear more bad news about our schools. Maybe
you saw today's headline about the release of the new National
Report Card. [[HOLD UP PAPER OR NEWS CLIP. In math, for
instance, the national report shows that of all Eighth Graders
tested in 1990, just a fraction -- 18 percent -- could function
at even the 7th Grade level.
2
In spite of statistics like this one, I don't see this new
report as bad news -- and I'll tell you why. This report card
tells us a lot more about what you know, and what you don't know.
It gives us something to build on. It shows us our strengths --
and the weaknesses we've got to correct. It sets forth a
challenge to work harder, to learn more, to revolutionize
American education.
I know you've heard about stanines and percentiles, surveys
and statistics, but here's what all the fancy talk means:
Education means the difference between a good future and a lousy
one. Scores tell us where we are, and where we need to go. But
they don't give us the right to make excuses.
All over America, schools succeed -- against all odds. Kids
from all over the District of Columbia petition to get into Alice
Deal -- because parents know this school works. It works because
of teachers like Mrs. Mosteller, who decided at the age of 25 she
wanted to teach. She went back to school, worked her way through
college, spent seven years waiting tables to pay tuition. [ [She
made it -- and so can you. ]] //
This school works because of students like you. Some of you
have taken part in the Johns Hopkins Talent Search: You took the
college-entrance exams on an experimental basis as 7th Graders.
And even in junior high, some of you scored well enough to get
into many colleges. [ACKNOWLEDGE STUDENTS BY NAME] //
So let's just put it on the line. You've got the brains.
Now you must put them to work.
3
Fast-forward five years from now. Nationwide, between now
and 1996, as many as one in five of today's 8th Graders will not
graduate with their class. In some cities, the drop out rate
will climb twice that high or higher. Imagine that: Out of a
total of nearly 3 million of your fellow classmates nationwide,
an army of more than half-a-million dropouts. how much does this # change
I ask every student watching today: look around you. Count
five students -- start with yourself. No one dreams of becoming
a dropout, but far too many do. Which one of you won't make it?
// Let's make a pact right here. Let's work to see that five
years from now, you and your friends will be more than sad
statistics. Give yourself a decent shot at your dreams. Stay in
school. //
Let's go back to the future
# 8th
grafers
under half of today's eighth Gra
nationwide
11
enter the working world. More t
ay
in school -- and become the coll
(28min)
The question for each stude
ill
you be five years from now? Wil
ob
grad w/thericluss
and working toward a better one
1
and out of work? Will you be on
running the streets?
Think about that tonight --
ble
doing homework; while your paren
al
to meet your teachers -- like so
year at Back to School Nights ac:
4
I'm asking you to put two and two together: Make the
connection -- between the homework you do tonight -- the test you
take tomorrow -- and where you'll be five, fifteen and fifty
years from now. You see, the real world doesn't begin somewhere
else, and some time in the distance future. The real world
starts right here. What you do here will have consequences your
whole lives.
Let me tell you something many of you may find hard to
believe. You're in control. [[You're thinking: How can the
President say that about kids who don't even have their drivers'
licenses?] But think about it, and you'll see what I mean.
Think about drugs. You see films. You hear police experts
and tough speakers from the outside. You get stern lectures from
everyone -- movie stars, athletes, teachers, parents, friends.
But you know and I know that all the drug prevention
programs -- all the pledges -- all the preaching in the world
won't pull you through that critical moment when someone offers
drugs. At that moment, everything comes down to you. Yes or No:
You've got to choose, and the answer will change your life. Your
parents won't make the decision. Your teachers won't make the
decision. Your friends won't make the decision. It's up to you:
It takes guts to take control. //
Drugs and violence threaten every school, every small town
and suburb in America. As students, you have a right to be
physically safe at school. You should never have to worry that a
quarrel in the hallway will lead to a gunfight in the playground.
5
You shouldn't have to fear for your life if you criticize someone
who wears a beeper in class. Fear should never follow you into
the classroom. //
If you have to take the long way home after school so you
don't cross paths with the gang hanging on the corner, if
outsiders roam the halls of your school hassling students, you
must take control. Go to your teacher, go to your principal, go
to your parents -- as difficult as it may be, go to the school
board of you have to. Demand discipline. If good people chicken
out, bad people take control. So let's drive the drugs and guns
and senseless violence out of our schools. //
When it comes to your own education: take control. Don't
say school is boring, and blame it on bad teachers. Find the
good teachers. Tell them you want an education. Tell them
you're here to learn.
Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart. I
can't understand for the life of me what's so great about being
stupid. If someone goofs off today, they're cool -- they're
Homer Simpson. But what about years from now, when they're stuck
in a dead-end job? Don't let peer pressure stand between you and
your dreams.
Take control -- challenge yourself. Only you know how hard
you work. Maybe you can fake your way into a job -- but you
won't keep it if you don't have the know-how to get the job done.
Maybe you can cram the week before the marking period ends, and
turn that c into a B. But you can't con your way past the SAT
6
and into college. And you certainly can't con your way through
the working world. / If you don't work hard -- who gets hurt?
If you cheat -- who pays the price? If you cut corners, if you
hunt for the easy A -- who comes up short? Easy: You do.
You're in control -- but you're not alone. People want to
help you succeed. Here at Deal, teachers like Mrs. Mosteller --
your principal, Mr. Moss. / Right now in classrooms across this
country -- in the communities every kid calls home -- no matter
how bleak, no matter how empty things sometimes seem -- there's a
teacher, a parent, a friend or family member ready to help you.
They want to see you make it.
[ [TRANSITION: SEGUE TO AUDITORIUM WITH SPECIAL GUEST
]]
If you take school seriously, you won't have to settle for
just a job. You'll have a career. If you make it your business
to learn, one day, you'll be a better parent. You may not think
about it now, but one day your children will want to look up at
you and say, "I've got the smartest Mom and Dad in the world."
Don't you disappoint them.
But most of all, if you educate yourself, you'll enjoy life.
You'll have what it takes to make a difference in the world -- to
be a part of something bigger than yourself. Look around you.
Ask yourself who gets the most enjoyment out of life -- it's the
people who live to learn. //
Let me leave you with a simple message: Every time you walk
in that classroom door, make it your mission to get a good
education. Don't do it because your parents -- or even this
7
President -- tells you. Do it for yourselves. Do it for your
future. //
Thank you -- and good luck to every one of you this school
year. // And now, Mrs. Mosteller, back to your lesson.
# # #
out of SUU
Alice Deal Junior High School
Fort Drive and Nebraska Avenue. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20016
1990 Talent Search Statistics
Johns Hopkins University has forwarded the results of the 1990 Talent
Search. We are very proud of our students' results.
Out of nearly 85 Deal 7th graders who qualified to take the SATs, 62
participated. Deal's program was coordinated by Mrs. M. Powitz.
To be eligible to take the test as a seventh-grade Talent Search participant
is in itself a noteworthy accomplishment. To achieve an average score as
compared to a college-bound high school senior is even more exceptional.
SAT scores are only one measure of intellectual and academic potential.
To attain a high score on either section of teh SAT, a student must reason
exceptionally well mathematically or verbally.
The 1990 Talent Search results are based on the total of 36,864 Talent
Search participants. The scores of Deal students are compared with other
Talent Search participants and college-bound senior high school students.
Mean SAT Scores
SAT-Math
SAT-Verbal
TSWE (Test of Students'
Male Female Male Female Male Female Written English
1990 Talent Search Group
422
394
353
354
37
39
1983 High School Sample
425
400
378
375
NA
NA
1989 College-bound Seniors 500
454
434
421
42
43
The following is a listing of Deal's top scorers including those receiving
special recognition: D - Certificate of Distinction
S - Invitation to CTY and State Awards Ceremonies
R - Invitation to CTY, State & REgional Awards Ceremonies
Bacon, Nathaniel - D(M)
Mulla, Sameena - D (V.M.TSWE)
2
Canterbu
Centebury, Alan - D (TSWE)
Mullen, Meredith - D (M)
3
Chotie, Matthew - D M,TSWE)
Reinhard, Willa - D(TSWE)
4
Correra, Laura - D(TWSW)
3
Rhett, Damali - D(V,M); S(M)
5
Dow Din, Peter - D(M)
14
Sawyer, Kate - D(V.M,TSWE); S(V,M) ;R(M)
Fleischer, Lucas - D(V,M,TSWE); S(M)
15
Smith, Susannah - D(TSWE)
Mara, Ian - D (V,M,TSWE)
16
Wagner, Alexander - D(TSWE)
8
Moore, Lindsay - D(V,M,TSWE)
17
Zurer, Seth - D(V,M,TSWE); S(V); R(V)
Moore, Lorrie - D(TSWE)
THE HIGHLIGHTED NAMES WERE MATH COUNTS TEAM MEMBERS
doems
specificating
The Johns Hopkins University
This
FOR RELEASE: May 13, 1990
CONTACT: John Schmidt
(301) 338-7160
ACADEMICALLY TALENTED YOUTH FROM MARYLAND
AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HONORED AT AWARDS CEREMONY
More than 400 seventh-graders from Maryland and the District of Columbia
were honored for their outstanding verbal and/or mathematical ability
discovered in the 1990 Annual Talent Search conducted by The Johns Hopkins
University Center for the Advancement of Academically Talented Youth (CTY) in
Baltimore.
The students, who scored well above the mean for high school seniors,
received certificates of merit at the state and regional level in a ceremony on
May 13 at The Johns Hopkins University Homewood Camp's
Last fall public and private schools in Maryland and DC identified over
4,400 students who qualified for the Talent Search and took the Scholastic
Aptitude Test (SAT) in January. Ten percent of these students, their families,
and their teachers were invited to the ceremony.
The highest scorers at the state level from the District of Columbia were:
Verbal:
Alistair M. Moore, Washington, D.C.
James A. Temple, Washington, D.C.
Mathematics: Jean W. Galbraith, Washington, D.C.
Kate A. Sawyer, Washington, D.C.
Combined:
Alistair M. Moore, Washington, D.C.
Jean W. Galbraith, Washington, D.C.
The highest scorers from the State of Maryland were:
Verbal:
Karthik Balakrishnan, Phoenix
Lawrence H. Sanders, Silver Spring
News & Information Services
212 Whitehead Hall
Charles and 31th Streets Bottimore Mird and 91918
Mathematics:
Todd W. Geldon, Rockville
Howard Hung, Ellicott City
Combined:
Karthik Balakrishnan, Phoenix
Lawrence H. Sanders, Silver Spring
National awards were presented to Maryland and Washington D.C. students
who scored at or above 700 SAT-M or 630 SAT-V before the age of 13:
Abigail Baker
Karthik Balakrishnan
Benjamin Barden
Megan Barrett
Michael Bramer
Daniel Chen
Andrew Church
Samit Dasgupta
Brian Demain
Todd Geldon
Howard Hung
Andrei Israel
Emily Klinker
John Krat
Manickam Krishnamurthy
Webster McBride
Kathryn Markham
Michael Mitchell.
Alistain Moore
David Raynor
Lawrence Sanders
Rebecca Schulman
Mark Torelli
Jesse Torgerson
Alexandra Vidas
Peiyun Wu
Over 46,000 students from more than 4,000 schools in 19 states and the
District of Columbia- participated in the 1990 Talent Search. Approximately 23
percent of all Talent Search participants scored at or above the mean for 1989
college-bound seniors on the mathematics portion of the test--500 Math--and
about 16 percent scored at or above the verbal mean--430 Verbal.
This year marks the 11th anniversary of the Center for the Advancement of
Academically Talented Youth. During that time, CTY has helped thousands of
mathematically or verbally talented seventh-graders develop their academic
talents through educational planning and counseling, fast-paced courses, and
one-day workshops.
For information about CTY and its programs, contact Angela James or Pat
Owen at (301) 338-8427.
###
Deal Junior High School
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Fort Drive and Nebraska Avenue, N.W.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Washington, D.C. 20016
September 23, 1991
Dear Parents,
We are off to another exciting and, hopefully, very successful
school year. There were a few staffing wrinkles that left some
special programs/sponsorships floundering. However, as always, our
staff has pulled together and our parents have been patient and a
valuable resource in helping to overcome these obstacles.
Attached please find our Calendar of Events and notice that,
although you are welcome to attend all events, those with an
asterisk (*) carry a special invitation to parents.
Secondly, grade level assemblies (7th - Wed.; 8th - Thurs.;
9th - Fri.) are being held this week to provide all students with
an explanation of course objectives and a large brown envelope with
which to collect course outlines/ Letters of Understanding from
each of their teachers. Please see to it that these outlines reach
you and return the Letter of Understanding receipt to your child's
teacher the very next day.
Thirdly, we again solicit your assistance in filling some
vacant positions (have applicants call Mrs. Streeter, business
manager):
1) * Security Aide
3) Composition Aide
2) Clerk Typist
4) Math/Science Aide
*
We were hoping to hire a retired police officer. One
who spent 18 of his 20 years on the force as a school
police officer at Deal and Wilson. The position is not
an attractive one because the school system can only
pay a minimal amount due to the old "double-
dipping" regulation. There is, however, D.C. Act 8-N6
which allows retired police officers to be hired as
police officers "without annuitant liability for
salary earned from the District of Columbia government
"
I have contacted some members of the D.C. Council and
our Board of Education suggesting such an annuity
exemption for school system security aides. Considering
the conditions around some schools, we can not think
of a better applicant. You may want to join us in
seeking such an exemption by contacting a councilman/
woman and a board member.
(OVER)
Fourthly, "Back to School Night" is Tuesday, October 1st. We
will forward a reminder letter to you by your child on Monday,
September 30th. On the back of the letter a blank class schedule
should have the following information entered: Course Name,
Teacher's Name, and Room Number. You will need this schedule when
visiting classes.
Lastly, try to arrive a few minutes before 7:00 p.m. You may
wish to bring the outlines with you to aid in discussions with the
teachers. I think you will agree that "Back to School Night" helps
us all to share in setting an expectancy for the 1991-92 school
year.
Feel free to call me (282-0100) if you have questions/concerns
or just want to chat.
See you on Tuesday, October 1st!
Yours truly,
Regnold R.Main
Reginald R. Moss
Principal
Deal Junior High School
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Fort Drive and Nebraska Avenue, N.W.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Washington, D.C. 20016
CALENDAR OF EVENTS
1991-92
"Working Together to Build Our Capital"
* Parent Participation Requested
SEPTEMBER
2
-
Holiday (Labor Day) D.C. Public Schools Closed
3-4
-
First Days of School for Teachers
5
-
First Day of School for 7th Graders
-
5-6
-
*
PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
-
Gift Wrap Sale Kickoff Assemblies, 2:30 p.m. (Aud.)
6
-
First Day of School for 8th & 9th Graders
13
-
Gift Wrap Collection Day #1 ( Day #2, 9/20; Day #3,
9/25)
9/15-10/15-
Hispanic Heritage Month
23-27
-
Student Council Sponsored "Spirit Week"
23
- *
Student Council Pep Rally, 2:15 p.m. (Auditorium)
-
Mrs. Landberg's Meeting with Ward III PTA
Presidents, 7:30 p.m. (Deal Library)
24
-
* Student Council Officer Inductions, 9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
25
-
* 7th Graders to Receive Course Outlines, Assembly,
9:15-9:45 a.m.
NOTE: Outlines for every course taken home at
3:00 dismissal.
26
-
* 8th Graders to Receive Course Outlines, Assembly,
9:10-9:25 a.m.
27
-
* 9th Graders to Recieve Course Outlines, Assembly,
9:10-9:25 a.m.
OCTOBER
1
-
TAP Form A's Due
- * Deal's "Back to School Night" (Classroom
Visitation), 7-9:30 p.m.
2
-
Pizza Party for Sections with Largest Gift Wrap
Sales, 2:15 p.m. (Cafeteria)
1-4
-
Yearbook Pre-Sale Week
3
-
* PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
-
"Buddy Day, " Bancroft 6th Graders to Spend Day
7
-
Mid-Advisory, Deficiency Notices Mailed 10/8/91
8
-
Group Pictures/Candids for Yearbook
10
-
"Buddy Day, Eaton/Hearst 6th Graders to Spend
Day
14
-
Holiday (Columbus Day), D.C. Public Schools Closed
17
-
"Buddy Day," Janney 6th Graders to Spend Day
18
-
* 7th Grade Family Dinner/Social, 7:00 p.m. (Cafe.
19
-
PSAT to be Administered to 9th Graders
(OVER)
23
-
Individual Pictures, 8:00 a.m.-3:15 p.m. (Aud.)
24
-
"Buddy Day," Lafayette 6th Graders to Spend Day
- *
Parents' Workshop (1st of 3), 7:30 p.m. (Cafe.)
25
-
Staff Development (Students Dismissed at 12:15 p.m.)
-
Student Council Sponsored "Back to School Dance,"
8-11 p.m.
31
-
"Buddy Day," Murch 6th Graders to Spend Day
NOVEMBER
1
-
World Peace Day
5
-
* "Deal/Wilson Night" for ALL Prospective Parents, 7-
9 p.m. (Aud.)
7
-
"Buddy Day," Powell/West/Oyster 6th Graders Spend
Day
- * PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
8
-
Last Day of the First Advisory (46 Days)
-
Large Group Student Activities (Bell III)
11
-
Holiday (Veterans Day), D.C. Public Schools Closed
12
-
First Day of the Second Advisory
13
-
Giftwrap Arrives; Parents Must Pickup, 3-8 p.m.
(Aud.)
14
- * "International Night," 6:30 p.m. (Aud./Cafe.)
15
-
Teachers Convention (Students not in School)
17-23
-
American Education Week "Schools and Communities:
Partners for a Strong America"
19
- * Inductions, Nat'l Jr. Honor Society, 9:15 a.m.
(Aud.)
- * Parent-Teacher Conferences, 6:30-8:30 p.m.
20
- * Guidance Dept. Sponsored Career Day (Homerooms -
Bell II), 9-9:45 a.m.
21-22
- * "Formal" Open House
25
-
Representatives from the National Council of Social
Studies. to Visit
27
-
* Thanksgiving Assembly/Presentation of Food Baskets,
9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
28-29
-
Holiday (Thanksgiving), D.C. Public Schools Closed
DECEMBER
1-7
-
Geography Awareness Week
5
- *
Deal "Geography Bee," 9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
-
* PTA Board Meeting, 7;30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
13
I
Student Council Sponsored Winter Dance, 8-11 p.m.
(Boys Gym)
17
-
Mid-Advisory, Deficiency Notices Mailed 12/18/91
18
- *
Deal Winter Music Festival, 7:30 p.m. (Aud.)
20
- *
Winter Vacation Assembly, 9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
23-31
-
Winter Vacation, D.C. Public Schools Closed
JANUARY
1
-
Holiday (New Year's Day), D.C. Public Schools Closed
9
-
* PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
16
- *
Parent Workshop (2nd of 3), 7:30 p.m. (Cafe.)
17
I
* Martin Luther King, Jr. Assembly, 9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
20
-
Holiday (MLK, Jr.'s Birthday), D.C. Public Schools
Closed
22-31
-
Midyear TAP Conferences Begin
30
-
Last Day of the Second Advisory (46 Days)/First
Semester
-
Large Group Student Activities (Bell III)
31
-
Staff Development/Recordkeeping (Students not in
School)
-
PTA Sponsored Luncheon for Teachers
FEBRUARY
1-29
-
BLACK HISTORY MONTH
2-8
-
School Counseling Week
3
-
First Day of the Third Advisory/Second Semester
4
-
Semester Classes Switch
-
Chinese/Vietnamese New Year
6
*
-
PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
9-15
-
National Vocational Education Week
11
- *
Parent-Teacher Conferences, 3:15-5:15 p.m.
14
-
Student Council Sponsored Valentine's Dance, 8-11
p.m. (Boys Gym)
17
-
Holiday (George Washington's Birthday), D.C. Public
Schools Closed
19-21
*
-
Deal Science Fair (Judging 2/20 a.m.; Viewing 2/20
p.m. and 2/21 a.m.)
25
-
Jose de San Martin Day
28
-
* Social Studies Dept. Black History Assembly, 9:15
a.m. (Aud.)
MARCH
1-31
-
Art/Music in Our Schools Month
-
National Women's History Month
4
-
Mid-Advisory, Deficiency Notices Mailed 3/5/92
5
- * PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
13
- * Faculty Talent Show (Bell III)
19
- * Parent Workshop (3rd of 3), 7:30 p.m. (Cafe.)
20-22
- * Citywide Science Fair (Woodson Senior High School)
27
-
* Student Council Sponsored Talent Show, 7:00 p.m.
(Aud.)
- * Citywide Geography Bee
APRIL
2
I
* PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
6
-
Last Day of the Third Advisory (45 Days)
7
-
First Day of the Fourth Advisory
10
-
Student Council Sponsored Spring Dance, 8-11 p.m.
(Boys Gym)
-
Ninth Grade Parents Notified on Promotion Status
14
-
* Parent-Teacher Conferences, 6:30-8:30 p.m.
17-24
-
Spring Vacation, D.C. Public Schools Closed
22
-
Secretaries Day
27
-
Students/Teachers Return from Spring Vacation
MAY
1
- * Deal Spring Concert, 7:30 p.m. (Aud.)
(OVER)
3-9
-
Teacher Appreciation Week
5
-
Teacher Appreciation Day
4-8
-
CTBS to be Administered
7
- *
PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
8-10
-
Ninth Grade Chorus Trip to Williamsburg, VA
(Festivals of Music '92) or to Virginia Beach, VA
(North American Festival)
10
-
Mothers' Day
12
-
Mid-Advisory, Deficiency Notices Mailed by 5/13/92
-
* Awards Assembly - Academic, 9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
14
-
* Awards Assembly - Extra-curricular, 9:15 a.m. (Aud.)
15-17
-
* Citywide History Fair (MLK, Jr. Library)
17
-
Deal Band/Orchestra "Concert on the Lawn, 2:00 p.m.
18
-
SSPP End of the Year EXAMS to Begin - 9th Graders
25
-
Holiday (Memorial Day)
27
-
SSPP End of the Year EXAMS to Begin - 7th/8th
Graders
JUNE
2
-
* Student Council Campaign Speeches (Assembly - Grades
7,8) 9:15 a.m.
-
Ninth Grade Picnic
4
-
Student Council Elections
-
Ninth Grade Dance, 8:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m. (Temple
Sinai)
-
PTA Board Meeting, 7:30 p.m. (Rooms 222/226)
12
- * Promotional Exercises, 9:30 a.m. (Aud.)
-
Student Council Sponsored 7th/8th Grade Trip
14-18
- * National History Day (University of Maryland)
17
- * "Deal Day/Olumpics," 12:00-3:00 p.m.
Raindate: June 18th)
19
-
Last Day of the Fourth Advisory (47 Days)
-
Last Day of School for Students
21
-
Father's Day
22-25
-
Staff Development/Recordkeeping for Teachers
25
-
Last Day of School for Teachers
TESTING DATES
MAY
4-8
-
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills - Grades 7,8,9
18-27
-
Secondary Student Progress Plan End-of-Year Exams
(Grade 9)
27-6/4 -
Secondary Student Progess Plan End-of-Year Exams
(Grades 7 & 8)
6
Jeannie --
important info for Oct 1 speech
from Alice Deal --
1)
info on their many "Math Counts" awards -- what is this
competition, city-wide, national???
2)
some Deal kids participate as 7th graders in a Johns hopkins
TYalent Search program in which they take the SATs. Many kids -
- 46, if I recall what the principal told me -- score a combined
Sent into
S
800 or higher. Confirm the figures and info on the program.
gave
Also -- will any of these kids be in the class President speaks
They
to?
have
3)
check with Rae Nelson on high and low points of the Report
and
Card
7777
of
colin Powell tape upstaris NHCA Speaks to young People
9/17/91
Sharon in Demarest - 7620- 1 out @ 1:30 pm lft. msg.
Back to school address-
2:25pm
education has 3 schools picked out; need to look @
them- - Atin waiting hear from principals
Steve Denganski- if info will call Dun
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:07 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P01
CARNEGIE COMMISSION
ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND GOVERNMENT
David 212-998-2155
Fax
This transmittal has 77 pages including this cover.
Please phone (212) 998-2150 if there are any reception difficulties.
URGENT: Please deliver immediately
Date: 9/19
Please deliver this transmittal to:
Jeanie Buuton
This transmittal is from:
Lor,
Message:
CARNEGIE COMMISSION ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND GOVERNMENT
10 WAVERLY PLACE, NEW YORK, NY 10003
PHONE: (212) 998-2150, FAX: (212) 995-3181
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:08 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P02
Embargoed Until
September 16, 1991
A.M.
IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST:
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
IN THE KEPOKM OF
K-12 MATH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
September 1991
A Report of the
CARNEGIE COMMISSION
ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND GOVERNMENT
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:09 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P03
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
7
PART I:
THE SOCIAL CONTEXT POR A FEDERAL
15
REFORM EFFORT
PART II:
INADEQUACIES IN PRE-COLLEGE MATH AND
18
SCIENCE EDUCATION: A CHRONIC AND SERIOUS
THREAT TO THE NATION'S FUTURE
PART III:
ASSUMPTIONS TO GUIDE FEDERAL STRATEGY AND
20
ORGANIZATION
NATIONAL Will AND NATIONAL SCOPE
25
ELEMENTS OF A FEDERAL STRATEGY
26
PART IV:
FEDERAL ACTIVITIES IN K-12 MATH AND
28
SCIENCE EDUCATION
CURRENT STRATEGIES
28
THE MAJOR FEDERAL PLAYERS
29
MONEY MATTERS: FEDERAL SPENDING FOR REFORM AND
31
IMPROVEMENT
RESOURCES HOP MATH AND SCIENCE IMPROVEMENT
35
PART V:
PRIORITY ROLES FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
38
IN MATH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
ROLE FOR THE PRESIDENT
38
ROLES FOR THE AGENCIES
39
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FEDERAL AGENCY ACTION:
39
EIGHT KEY INNOVATIONS
WHO SHOULD Do WHAT FOR MATH AND SCIENCE
47
EDUCATION?
2
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:09 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P04
PART VI:
STRENGTHENING THE KEY FEDERAL AGENCIES
48
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND NATIONAL SCIENCE
48
FOUNDATION
OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
49
PART VII:
DECIDING ADMINISTRATION POLICY AND
52
OVERSIGHT
ADMINISTRATION POLICY AND OVERSIGHT
52
ASSIGNMENT OF OPERATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE
56
FEDERAL AGENCIES
A DoED/NSF JOINT OFFICE FOR K-12 MATH AND
56
SCIENCE IMPROVEMENT
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION
58
PART VIII: BUILDING A NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR IMPROVING
60
MATH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
CLOSING STATEMENT
61
APPENDIX:
ALTERNATIVE ASSIGNMENTS OF FEDERAL MANAGEMENT
62
RESPONSIBILITY FOR K-12 MATH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
ENDNOTES
65
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
70
MEMBERS OF THE CARNEGIE COMMISSION ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,
71
AND GOVERNMENT
MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL, CARNEGIE COMMISSION ON
72
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND GOVERNMENT
MEMBERS OF THE TASK FORCE ON K-12 MATHEMATICS AND
73
SCIENCE EDUCATION
MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL, TASK FORCE ON K-12
74
MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
3
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:10 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P05
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report of the Camegie Commission on Science, Technol-
ogy, and Government was prepared by Its Task Force on K-12
Mathematics and Science Education and adopted by the Commission
at its meeting on June 26, 1991. The members of the Task Force were:
Lewis M. Branscomb, Chair
Bill Aldridge
Richard Atkinson
Garrey Carruthers
Eugene H. Cota-Robles
Shirley Hufstedlur
David Kearns*
Leon Lederman
Shirley M. McBay
Lauren B. Resnick
n
Roland W. Schmitt
Maxine F. Singer
Shella E. Widnall
The Task Force established an Advisory Grancil when IIIFINE
bers were generous with their criticism and advice and contributed
many important ideas based on their broad range of expertise;
however, the findings of this report are the responsibility of the
Carnegie Commission and its Task Force. The members of the Task
Force and its Advisory Council and their affiliations are listed at the end
of this report. Also listed are the members of the Carnegie Commission
on Science, Technology, and Government and its Advisory Council.
The Task Force benefited from discussions with a number of
government officials, among them J. Thomas Ratchford, Associate
Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy; Walter Massey,
Director, National Science Foundation; Ted Sanders, then Deputy
Secretary, Department of Education; Christopher Cross, then Assistant
Secretary fun Educational Research 1..1 1...,....... 1111 ",
Education: Luther Williams. Assistant Director, Education and Human
Resources, National Science Foundation, and PERAY Executive
Director, Committee on Education and Thiman RESOURCES, Federal
Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology
The Commission is grateful to Dr. Branscomb for his leader-
David Keams resigned from the Task Force on May 20, 1991, when he was confirmed as Deputy
Secretary of Education.
5
SEP 10 '01 MON 16:10 ID:CARNEGIC COMMISSION TCL NO:212 005 3101
#200 POC
All who have meditated on the art of governing Mankind have
been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the
education of their youth.
-Aristotle
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:11 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P07
ship, to the members of the Task Force and its advisors, to Rollin B.
Johnson, the project director, and to David Z. Robinson, who served
as principal liaison to the Commission and its staff.
Joshua Lederberg, Co-Chair
William T. Golden, Co-Chair
6
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:11 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P08
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A large number-probably a majority-of American public
schools are failing to prepare their students adequately for the jobs of
the future, for life in a diverse culture, or for the civic responsibilities
so essential to democracy. The President and governors are committed
to educational reform aimed at improving overly regimented schools
with dispirited teachers and unmotivated students. These efforts are
meant to produce fully functional institutions with properly trained,
motivated teachers who use modern materials and teaching methods
in creative environments and develop strong incentives for student
progress.
Unfortunately, that may not be enough for disadvantaged
students from poor communities. In the year 2000, when the national
goals agreed upon by the President and governors call for American
students to be "first in the world" in mathematics and science, one
CRITICISM
American child in four will be poor; one child in three will be a minority
group member; and one child in twelve will lack the English language
proficiency required for learning. School reform alone will not suffice
to address these sources of disadvantage. Yet the Task Force on K-
12 Mathematics and Science Education is convinced that education is
the best hope for all children, and that math and science skills are
especially critical for good jobs, for further education, and for effective
participation in an increasingly technological world. We also believe
that rapid progress is possible, despite the aspects of disadvantage that
beset many schools, students, and families.
The charge given the Task Force by the Carnegie Commission
was to examine how the federal government is organized to make
decisions and implement change in the reform of math and science
education, and to identify changes in organizational structure and
decision-making processes that will help the federal government to be
an effective partner in education reform. Why focus on math and
science education when the schools are beset with systemic problems
CRITICISM
not specific to any subject and by teaching problems in every subject
area? There are at least two reasons why the federal government
should pay special attention to math and science education: the
increasing demand for numeracy and problem-solving ability in
tomorrow's world, and the federal government's special responsibility
for assuring the nation's technical capability to address national goals
for the economy, environment, health, and security.
The Task Force shares with most Americans a cence of urgency
for bold initiatives that will provide real help to the nation's schools and
renew public confidence that dramatic progress can be made. There
is no shortage of motivated Americans with good ideas about how to
serve our children better. In short supply, however, is the institutional
7
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:12 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
H280 P09
capacity to aggregate enough resources, to build a national consensus
for action, and-most important-to persist with a specific program of
reform long enough for it to take effect, at least a decade and maybe
two.
The federal government should, therefore, support the most
promising initiatives in the country and build a constituency for
launching them on a scale that will make a substantial difference in
every school in America. The Task Force recommendations are
intended to help the federal government identify the best responses to
OF PURPOSE TASK
the challenges and support them more swiftly, wholeheartedly, and
intelligently.
ELEMENTS OF A FEDERAL STRATEGY
The Task Force devised a strategy for math and science
education reform with four elements:
Commit to change both how schools are organized and run
and what goes on inside the classroom. This requires the action of two
lead agencies, the Department of Education and the National Science
Foundation, working together through new mechanisms for collabo-
ration with each other and with other agencies.
Deploy the resources of the technology-based agencies of the
federal government to improve math and science education and to
expand the supply of professionally trained scientists and mathemati-
cians serving the nation as teachers and technical professionals.
Leverage state and private initiatives and support effective
change through greater emphasis on flexible, competitively evaluated
funding mechanisms and the best available understanding of the
education system and of teaching and learning strategies.
Build an informed, broadly participatory, and productive
collaboration among leaders of states and communities, federal agen-
cies and Congress, private institutions, and the technical community,
using a variety of new institutional mechanisms to ensure that federal
activities are both effective and supportive.
8
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:13 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P10
PRIORITY ROLES FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Foremost among the federal responsibilities is the leadership
role of the President himself. The Task Force urges the President
to use the full prestige and influence of his office w mobilize all
Americans for a sustained, national, bipartisan reform effect.
The Task Force developed specific recommendations for
action by federal agencies in the following areas:
Provide fully qualified math and science teachers for
every school by recruiting teachers from under-repre-
sented groups: creating a single professional path to either
teaching or practice in mathematics and science; and
enhancing the have ludge, skills, and mode adon of current
teachers.
Decide what students need to know and know how to
do by establishing requirements for the jobs of the
future. Engage the business community, scientists, and
citizens in this effort. Develop methods of assessment
appropriate to this goal.
Strengthen educational systems research and estab-
lish broad-based support for basic cognitive and ap-
plied learning research and field testing of innova-
tions. A coordinated reform effort requires SYSTEMS
research and "systems engineering" based on the best
analytical understanding of the K-12 education system.
Ensure diffusion of successful Innovations: provide
access for all schools and all students to tested educational
improvements and support their successful adoption. Do
not be satisfied with successful demonstrations alone.
Empower all federal science agencies to take leader-
ship roles in the reform of K-12 math and science
education. Every science agency of the government
should have an explicit education charter defining its
responsibilities to address pre-college issues that lie within
the agency's special technical expertise and human re-
source requirements.
Encourage private sector development of educational
materials, curricula, textbooks, and software for new
educational technology. Educational innovators in the
private sector not only make significant educational
9
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:13 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P11
Investments but are able to diffuse innovations throughout
the country.
Support science centers and museums, educational
television, and other sources of "informal" educa
tion. Nontraditional education is a powerful way to
motivate students and interest parents in the scrious study
of mathematics and science and to explode negative
stereotypes of science and scientists.
Provide an information and referral service to docu-
ment innovations and help innovators locate federal
support for K-12 math and science activities. Indi"
viduals outside the federal agencies have difflculty In
location the coursel which in vuln ПРУЧИ
to program materials, services, and information.
WHO SHOULD Do WHAT?
The Task Force recommends that federal science agen-
cles play more significant roles in the reform effort:
The National Science Foundation should take the lead in
mohilizing the nation's universitier and colonoe profossion
HIS 111 revrauxe man and science teacher education,
curricula, materials, and technology; support cognitive and
applied learning research; and stimulate science education
in unconventional settings. NSF should broaden its edu-
cation experience beyond education research.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
The should take the lead role for
systemic change, for educational systems analysis to In-
form the reform strategy, for assessment of progress, and
for the diffusion of successful innovations. The Office of
Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) of DoEd
should help the nation develop a "cerebral cortex" for
education reform, and should acquire the capability to
manage the kind of competitive, innovative programs
necessary for rapid progress in math and science reform.
The Department of Labor should become a more active
participant, particularly with regard to defining goals for
10
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:14 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P12
educational content and skills needed for the jobs of the
future.
The Department of Energy should continue its leadership
of the Committee on Education and Human Resources of
the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering,
and Technology (FCCSET), and through that mechanism
ensure that all the R&D-intensive agencies coordinate their
contributions to math and science educational progress.
The Department of Health and Human Services, especially
the National Institutes of Health and the National Institute
of Mental Health, should design and carry outan appropri-
Atr Inne range program. noordinated with NSF and DoEd,
to ensure the nation's supply of quality health professionals
as well as its future health.
The Department Defendeshould create model schools W
demonstrate its capabilities in educational technology,
processes, and programs; transfer them to the private
sector: and facilitate the entry of demobilized personnel
with math and science training into public school teaching.
Because the math and science reform effort requires urgency,
Chin, und all tuchminal againinn should douning n morn
streamlined and responsive infrastructure.
New INSTITUTIONS
Besides strengthening existing offices dealing with math and
science education, the DoEd and NSF should create a mechanism for
collaboration-a Joint Office for Math and Science improvement. It
would report directly and jointly to the Secretary of Education and the
Director of NSF. We recommend that outside advice to DoEd and NSF
be channeled Unough an painel reporting to the Joint Officers
facilitate close collaboration between these agencies.
To support the national reform effort, DoEd should set up, with
NSP parthipallon, a senier for stucational systems analysis
that can serve as "systems engineer" for new efforts to accumulate
research knowledge to guide reform, evaluate the effectiveness of
reform Initiatives, and diffuse heat educational practice; it should
include a clearinghouse for educational Information. A Federally
11
SEP-19-'91 MUN 16:15 ID:CARNEGIE CUMMISSION IEL NU:212 995 3181
#280 P13
Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) might be the
appropriate institutional form.
A nongovernmental national center for educational content
and assessment should be created, perhaps under the National
Education Goals Panel, to build consensus on what American students
should know and know how to do, and to assess their progress.
The National Education Goals Panel should be supplemented
by a council of education reform leaders from outside government
together with senior officials from the Executive Branch, Congress, and
the states, e.g., the directors of the Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) and NSF, chairs or staff directors of key education
committees of Congress, governors, and chief state and city school
officers. This council would support the work of the Goals Panel and
would convene a biennial national conference on educational im-
provement sponsored by either the Goals Panel or by OERI to review
the national strategy on math and science reform, and the progress
toward national math and science goals.
MONEY MATTERS
Given that state and local governments fund 94 percent of
school budgets, the federal government's role in reform should be to
leverage state and private investments and produce change in the
system, not to sustain it as it is. There is an immediate and substantial
need for reorientation of federal education funding toward educational
reform.
The Task Force recommends that, as a long-term goal, a
designated proportion (perhaps 10 percent) of DoEd's program
funding be allocated for discretionary activities aimed at more
effective achievement of program goals. These activities would be
devoted to change-oriented, competitive, professionally reviewed
programs that provide incentives for reform to states and communities.
As this flexibility would allow DoEd programs to be more effective in
serving the intended groups of students, learning in science and
mathematics would be enhanced along with all other parts of the
curriculum.
This flexibility is also needed in the only existing DoEd
program that targets mathematics and science. To this end, the
Administration and Congress should convert all the funding for
the Elsenhower grants program In DoEd to a competitive, peer-
reviewed program. This would almost double the funding directed
toward enhancing the performance of K-12 math and science teaching.
12
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:17 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P14
There is a strong case for greater priority attention and funding
by the federal government specifically for math and science education.
Indeed, science and mathematics are the only areas of schooling in
which American students are explicitly intended by the President and
governors to become "first in the world." But in 1991 the federal
government budgeted only $515 million, or only 4 percent of its total
contribution to public school revenues, directly for math and science
education.
The Task Force concludes that more of the federal pre-
college education Investment should be targeted to mathematics
and science. The Task Force recommends that all federal
agencies concerned with science and technology devote some
percentage of their R&D funds to math and science education.
Since the federal government is the largest single employer of math and
science professionals, it has an interest and an obligation to reinvest
in the education pipeline. These funds, too, could be administered
through a competitive grants process to encourage the best innovators
and the best ideas.
MECHANISMS FOR COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT
For oversight of the math and science reform effort, two
channels of White House oversight (in addition to the Office of
Management and Budget) are important. The Domestic Policy
Council, with the Secretary of Education as chair of its Education
subcommittee, coordinates overall education policy and should give
mathematics and science a high priority in the strategy. The President's
Assistant for Science and Technology uses the Committee on Educa-
tion and Human Resources (CEHR) of FCCSET as an extension of the
OSTP staff to encourage and coordinate activities of the Department
of Education and the fifteen agencies with math and science content
in their missions.
As part of the quest for an Integrated federal strategy,
CEHR should become a standing committee of FCCSET, with a
full-time staff devoted to the coordination of agency activities
and the review of agency strategies for K-12 math and science
improvement. The Director of OSTP should assign to an associate
director full-time responsibility for math and science education issues.
13
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:19 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P15
MECHANISM FOR CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW
The many congressional committees with jurisdiction
over DoEd, NSF, and other engaged agencies should coopera-
tively review the activities such agencies may undertake to
accelerate K-12 math and science education reform, and give
priority to math and science issues in the Intensified program of
federal action. A temporary Select Committee on Math and Science
Education might be a useful instrument for this purpose. Where
statutory limitations hinder promising agency activity, they should be
removed.
Is there reason to be optimistic about lifting the capabilities of
American students to "first in the world" in the next decade? The
current situation holds out great promise of dramatic progress. On the
other hand, few areas of social development have more often seen
hopes crushed and cynicism prevall.
The one best hope for success is impassioned, persistent,
nonpartisan leadership by every American able to make a contribu-
tion-but most importantly by the President. His crusade in the cause
of education, if taken up by governors, congressional and other
leaders, and by presidents who follow, can turn this situation around.
We can once again be proud of our schools and confident that future
generations of young Americans will be equipped to lead the nation
to new levels of greatness.
14
SEP-19-'91 MON 16:21 ID:CARNEGIE COMMISSION TEL NO:212 995 3181
#280 P16
PART I
THE SOCIAL CONTEXT FOR A
FEDERAL REFORM EFFORT
This report is about the serious shortcomings in U.S.
math and science education, and what the federal government
can and should do in order to play a much more effective role in
the national effort to remedy those shortcomings.
Inadequacies in pre-college math and science education are a
chronic and serious threat to our nation's future. The national interest
is strongly bound up in the ability of Americans to compete technologi-
cally. This requires not only an adequate supply of scientific and
technical professionals but a work force able to solve problems and use
the tools of a knowledge-intensive economy. All young people,
including the non-college-bound, the disadvantaged, and young
women, must be given the opportunity to become competent in
mathematics and science.
A large number-probably a majority-of American public
schools are failing to prepare their students adequately for the jobs of
the future, for life in a diverse culture, or for the civic responsibilities
so essential to democracy. This conclusion is supported by both expert
and political assessment,1 even though some public schools provide an
excellent education for college-bound children from middle- and
working-class families. Most families, in fact, think their local schools
are fine-not realizing how inadequate their children's education may
be in light of tomorrow's higher demands for skills and judgment.²
including
which
the
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
DRAFT
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
THE
much
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: September 30th Release of the National Education Goals
Panel Report: Building a Nation of Learners
The first annual report on America's progress toward the National
Education Goals will be issued on September 30, 1991. The report
makes two basic points.
First, the Nation is making progress in some areas. More of our
young people are acquiring minimum academic skills than ever
before. High school completion has reached an all-time high: 83
percent of our 19- and 20-year-olds have finished high school or
its equivalent. Incidents of drug use in American schools is
down.
But in the most important area of educational performance-student
learning there is little to cheer about. That is the second
point, which the report makes by examining student performánce
over time and in absolute terms.
The report tells that, over the last 20 years, American students'
performance in the 3Rs and science has remained flat (Chart 1).
While the learning gap between minority and majority students has
narrowed, that has happened mainly because of gains by Black
students, mostly in lower level knowledge and skills. White
students' performance has remained essentially unchanged.
The report also locks at student learning in light of an historic
development: our first attempt, as a Nation, to establish what
all students ought to know and be able to do in an academic
subject area--in this case, in mathematics. Created through a
national consensus process overseen by the National Assessment
Governing Board, this new standard was chosen by the Goals Panel
as the measure of "competency" in mathematics for National
Education Goal 3. When applied to the 1990 National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP), as is done in the report, the new
standard shows how far we are from National Education Goal 3. It
shows that only 1 in 6 American students is leaving grades 4, 8,
and 12 "having demonstrated competency in challenging subject
matter" in mathematics (Chart 2).
The rest of our students are not doing good enough. And minority
students gains over the last 20 years pale in light of this new
standard. Only four percent of Black eighth graders and six
percent of Hispanic eighth graders have achieved competence in
mathematics, for instance, compared to 39 percent of
JHN-08-1900 08 07:30 FROM
TO
94562878
P.08
Competency in Mathematics
Percent of 4th, 8th, and 12th graders by Achievement Levels, 1990
BELOW
BASIC
BASIC
PROFICIENT
ADVANCED
1%
1%
3%
15%
Stx,
18%
16%
COMPETENT
NOT GOOD
85%
82%
84%
49%
44%
40%
ENOUGH
37%
38%
36%
Grade 4
Grade 8
Grade 12
Note: Percentages may total more than 100% due to rounding.
Percent of 4th graders who are competent in
mathematics, 1990
29%
TO%
COMPETENT
on
2%
5%
94%
E
sex
I
BYN
NOT GOOD
ENOUGH
American Indian
Amiun/
Alashan Native
Pacific lelander
Black
Hispanic
While
Competency in Mathematics
Percent of 8th graders who are competent in
mathematics, 1990
SON
22%
COMPETENT
5%
-
#
DE%
61%
90%
94%
YES
NOT GOOD
ENOUGH
American Indian
Asian/
Aleakan Native
Perchase Islunder
Blask
Hispanic
While
Competency in Mathematics
Percent of 12th graders who are competent in
mathematics, 1990
84%
19%
2%
I
COMPETENT
E
96%
94%
81%
NOT GOOD
ENOUGH
American -
Aleaken Native
Pasific
Black
Hispanie
White
CRAMPLE was - increfficient - parmit reliship
IU
a
P.10
Asian/Pacific Islander eighth graders (Chart 3).
This report provides the clearest indication to date of how far
we must go to reach the National Education Goals. It also
underscores the need for AMERICA 2000 Communities, World Class
Standards, American Achievement Tests, New American Schools,
parent choice, Governors Academies, and other parts of AMERICA
2000.
AMERICA 2000 is designed to incite a revolution community by
community, school by school, and family by family. I hope we can
use this report to help do that.
Lamar Alexander
Attachment
alni Due
Bhck to School 9/27/91 12:15 wilk thing
gym ptadrin
classroom puting (?)
pussimier of to Jo
Dm Maines WH had
[CNN, pgs broadcart-]
[Mos - Toller (like Dollar)
MOS To WARTING dollar)
the Deal JHS: school of destimer
an students can learn; all teachers canteach; all
schools can he meanful!
11:30 students ass. and
1:50ame
hist class nm 1:12
Band play Hair to Chief)
address e 12:10 in Classions - after gruch back to holding Set malery off
class
ptuduts to present
Principal to great - antingut Mr. Smith (7)
outside class@ 12:07
que Moststollar- greet into - Porks barely out door (one 4
Park Sit M stool in fort of desk (10mins talk/remanks)
in and
off.stge annomint (WHCA)
special guests nix and hungle intedund together
la. falu turns (3/mins la may) stay from in dugs school stay any
10 mins speak
hold
dept. 12:35 approx
principal zast. co press I PTA, 2ax-large
school bd. mbrs, (?)
mayor See of ed,
Superintent
PA 2 ast, puncifits
pripal
greet approvial
n in and.
108 staff is guts
-
think as band/singing from chorus 110 (fold
paus Kim
11:30- Noon
bame/bachdrop
Mostoller
30 kids in band
Su. derander to commit to aud une
Poins
wats
Heintage
2 athletes
Hospanic weth Month
presutation of grits
dgrober 9/15-10/15
Ms. Cynthia Mostollar American Hist. 5th Jack class hds.
decoved
(3) telephoness in the classroom
comple senters & teacher
Lucas shirt
to present
word may remain 10 yrs. in the water and new
5/com a crocolite
part. 3 others
woun 11. / black (Glah) blackboard
yourd walls
anu
poths in front of Machbourd
signing
weather vich
Amunte as
- Oer gane Leonard
- 9/27/91 -
Ms. MOSTOLLER (pron Mos Dollar)
cont'd
waitness until this past summer to pay
Andert loans
3.4 - 6 and line in right 1 starts. non w/ " ]
bad idea 4 8th graders / teach
Homer singar not contempong enough
bag Q
p.le suggstion
Mr. Francisco (sp.) (whin comm of pchool)
are 5 you friend and custodian
Dan TP for Porus in Quditorien ?
7.
STATES
OF
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
NEWS
UNITED STATES OF of AMERICA
FOR RELEASE
Contact: Melinda Kitchell
August 28, 1991
(202) 401-1008
1991 BACK-TO-SCHOOL FORECAST
Four months after President Bush announced his AMERICA 2000
education strategy, the U.S. Education Department today released
its 1991 back-to-school forecast reporting increased enrollment
in preschool programs, more non-traditional students attending
college, and record spending on education at all levels.
"Fortunately, we're returning to school this year with a
national strategy for improving education and for helping the
nation reach its education goals. We have begun the countdown to
a new era of achievement under the President's AMERICA 2000
education strategy," Alexander said.
According to the department:
More parents are sending their children to preschool;
between 1980-81 and 1990-91, school enrollment for 3-
and 4-year-olds grew 44 percent; from 2.3 million to
3.3 million;
Even though the proportion of 18- to 24-year-olds in
the population has decreased in recent years, college
enrollments are up as more older and part-time students
seek higher education; students over age 24 rose from
4.5 million in 1980 to 6.0 million in 1990, while part-
time enrollment rose from 5.0 million to 6.0 million;
O
Total education spending in the U.S. is expected to
reach $414 billion this year, up 5.5 percent over
1990;
o
An estimated 68.4 million Americans, or one in four,
will be directly involved in education this year as a
student, teacher, administrator, or as support staff.
-MORE-
8.
-(2)-
ENROLLMENT CLIMBING
Elementary and secondary school enrollment in 1991 will
total 46.8 million, and is expected to grow through the end of
the decade because the number of U.S. births has edged upward
continuously since 1977. In 1990, nearly 4.2 million children
were born, the most births in a single year since 1961.
The 1991 enrollment in public and private elementary and
secondary schools (see table 2 and chart 1) will continue an
upward trend that began in 1985. Elementary school enrollment
(grades K-8) should climb 500,000 to 34.3 million. Secondary
school (grades 9-12) matriculation is predicted to increase only
slightly this year, from 12.4 million last year to 12.5 million
this year.
Increases in the number of children now attending pre-school
programs indicate that more parents want to provide early
educational experiences for their children. The first national
education goal, adopted by President Bush and the nation's
governors, is that every child begin school ready to learn.
Thirteen states now offer some form of state-legislated
parental choice, and legislation will be pending this fall in 36
states now considering choice programs.
As part of the AMERICA 2000 strategy, President Bush has
urged states to make schools more accountable by allowing parents
and their children a voice in selecting the school the child will
attend. The Administration has proposed $200 million in
incentives for school districts offering choice programs. An
-MORE-
9.
-(3)-
additional $30 million has been requested to plan, operate, and
evaluate promising approaches to choice.
BIGGEST GAINS IN THE WEST
Regionally, the largest enrollment increases are found in
the West, with only slight increases in the Northeast and
Midwest. At the state level, enrollment in Nevada, Florida,
Arizona, California, Washington, and New Hampshire (in descending
order) have climbed the most between 1985 and 1991. (Table 3
provides enrollment trend data and projections for each state.)
NUMBER OF HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES DECLINES SLIGHTLY
About 2.4 million students are expected to graduate from
public and private high schools this school year, down slightly
from 2.5 million in 1991 (see table 7). The 17- and 18-year-old
population has been declining since 1977, when 3.2 million
students graduated. More than three-quarters of U.S. students
earn a regular high school diploma by age 19.
The high school completion rate (including those who
complete an equivalency degree) for 19- and 20-year-old whites
was 87 percent in 1990, up one percentage point since 1973.
During the same time period, the gap between white and black
students narrowed, as blacks reached a completion rate of almost
78 percent in 1990, an increase of about ten percentage points.
Hispanic students trail at 60 percent.
Overall, nearly 83 percent of 19- and 20-year-olds report
that they have completed high school or its equivalent. The
-MORE-
10.
-(4)-
national education goals aim to increase the high school
graduation rate to 90 percent by the year 2000.
COLLEGE ENROLLMENT DIVERSIFIES
Because of increasing numbers of older students (see
page 1), the number of students enrolled in college this fall is
expected to edge up slightly, with more than 14 million expected
to attend colleges and universities.
Only moderate increases in college enrollment are
anticipated by the mid-1990s, since the traditional college-age
population will continue to decline for several more years.
In AMERICA 2000, President Bush has urged all Americans to
consider learning as a lifelong process and has encouraged all
Americans to return to school. AMERICA 2000 calls for a National
Conference on Education for Adult Americans, aimed at improving
both the quality and accessibility of education and training
programs that serve adults.
EARNED DEGREES AT ALL-TIME HIGH
The number of degrees earned at colleges and universities
during 1991-92 will reach all-time highs in all categories except
first professional degrees. Estimates are: associate degrees,
477,000; bachelor's degrees, 1,081,000; master's degrees,
338,000; doctorates, 39,000. First-professional degrees
(medicine, theology, and law) will match the 1975 high of 75,000.
TOTAL EXPENDITURES UP
Spending for public elementary, secondary and higher
education is estimated at $336 billion, with another $78 billion
-MORE-
11.
-(5)-
spent by private schools and colleges. The $414 billion total is
a 5.5 percent increase over 1990.
K-12 SPENDING SEES LARGEST INCREASE
PER PUPIL SPENDING UP 34 PERCENT IN TEN YEARS
Elementary and secondary schools are expected to spend about
$249 billion in 1991-92, up five percent from $237 billion in
1990-91 (see table 6 and chart 3). After adjusting for
inflation, this translates into a 39 percent rise in elementary
and secondary school spending since 1981-82.
Per pupil spending in public elementary and secondary
schools (including current expenditures, capital outlays, and
interest payments on school debt) is expected to increase to a
high of $5,961 in 1991-92, up $213 from $5,748 in 1990-91
(table 5). Per pupil spending has grown 34 percent, adjusted for
inflation, over the past ten years.
In the last school year, the average public school teacher's
salary rose by more than five percent (see table 5), with a
similar increase expected this year. If estimates hold, average
salaries will be about $34,814 in 1991-92, versus last year's
average of $33,015. Teachers' purchasing power this year is
expected to be greater than ever before.
The AMERICA 2000 strategy asks states and districts to adopt
policies that boost pay for the best teachers, those who teach
core subjects, and those who teach in dangerous locations or
serve as mentor teachers.
-MORE-
12.
-(6)-
HIGHER EDUCATION SPENDING KEEPS PACE
Colleges and universities will spend about $165 billion in
1991-92 (see table 6 and chart 3), up six percent in the past
year. Spending is up 44 percent since 1981-82, adjusted for
inflation. The forecast for the average school expenditure per
full-time (equivalent) college student for 1991-92 is $16,054, up
26 percent in ten years, adjusted for inflation. The figure
covers all campus outlays, including salaries, construction and
maintenance costs, and operation of research facilities. On
average, tuition covers approximately 25 percent of the total
per-pupil expenditure, according to the department's most recent
(1989) estimate.
SCHOOLS EMPLOY MORE WORKERS
This year, about 7.4 million Americans work at all school
levels as teachers and support staff, paralleling last year.
Some 2.8 million individuals will be elementary and secondary
school teachers (chart 2), and 762,000 will serve as
instructional faculty in colleges and universities (table 4).
Approximately 3.8 million will work in administrative,
professional, and support positions. The number of public school
teachers and other staff has increased 15 percent over the past
ten years.
To improve teaching, AMERICA 2000 calls for federal
incentives ($25 million) to states to support creation of
mechanisms for alternative certification of teachers and
administrators, and for establishment of academies to train
-MORE-
13.
-(7)-
teachers in five core subjects (math, science, English, history
and geography). The Department has requested $70 million to pay
for the initial costs of these academies in fiscal year 1992.
Another $22.5 million is sought to assist governors in
establishing academies for principals and other school leaders.
ACHIEVEMENT DATA TO BE ANNOUNCED THIS FALL
Oct.30th
MATH ACHIEVEMENT LAGS
This fall, the Education Department will release trend data
on math, science, reading, and writing achievement under the
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The National
Education Goals Panel will also report on progress toward the
national education goals, and the National Assessment Governing
Board, which oversees NAEP, will release performance standards
for what students should know in math in grades four, eight and
12, as well as the percentage of students performing at each
level.
Last June, the Education Department reported the math skills
of eighth graders in 40 participating states and territories and
of fourth, eighth and 12th graders nationally. Across the board,
scores and surveys revealed poor skills and study habits, little
math study and homework and low expectations for achievement
among the nation's youth. Fewer than half of the 12th graders
could do work (fractions, decimals, percentages and simple
algebra) typically introduced in the seventh grade. Only five
percent of seniors had the skills needed for technology-related
careers or college-level work.
-MORE-
14.
-(8)-
AMERICA 2000 proposes to develop world-class standards in
each of the five core subjects, to help teachers teach and
students learn what young Americans need to know and be able to
do if they are to live and work successfully in today's world.
To promote better teaching and learning and to track student
progress, the strategy also calls for a voluntary nationwide
examination system, utilizing future American Achievement Tests.
NOTE TO EDITORS:
Attached are tables prepared by the National
Center for Education Statistics.
More detailed education statistics may be obtained from the
Digest of Education Statistics, Projections of Education
Statistics, and The Condition of Education, which are prepared by
the National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of
Education. These publications may be ordered from the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO) using the stock number and
prices below.
The Condition of Education provides statistical indicators,
charts, and text which describe important trends in American
education. Part 1 of The Condition of Education 1991 deals with
elementary and secondary education and is available from the GPO
(SN 065-000-00454-2; $12 a copy). Part 2 of The Condition of
Education 1991 reports on postsecondary education and is also
available from GPO (SN 065-000-00455-1; $12 a copy).
Also available from the GPO are the Digest of Education
Statistics 1990, a detailed compendium of education data, (SN
065-000-00442-9; $24.00) i and Projections of Education Statistics
to 2001, a compilation of projections of key education
statistics, (SN 065-000-00440-2; $9.50).
91-068
15.
(9)
Table 1. --Estimated number of participants in elementary and secondary education
and in higher education: Fall 1991
[In millions]
All levels
Elementary and secondary schools
Institutions
(elementary,
of higher
Participants
secondary,
education
and higher
Total
Public
Private
education)
Total
68.4
52.0
46.2
5.8
16.4
Enrollment1/
60.9
46.8
41.6
5.3
14.1
Teachers and faculty
3.6
2.8
2.5
0.4
2/
0.8
Other professional,
administrative, and
support staff
3.8
2.3
2.2
0.2
1.5
/Includes enrollments in local public school systems and in most private schools (religiously affiliated and
nonsectarian). Excludes subcollegiate departments of institutions of higher education, residential schools for
exceptional children, and Federal schools. Elementary and secondary includes most kindergarten and some
nursery school enrollment. Excludes preprimary enrollment in schools that do not offer first grade or above.
Higher education comprises full-time and part-time students enrolled in degree-credit and nondegree-
credit programs in universities, other 4-year colleges, and 2-year colleges.
2/Includes full-time and part-time faculty with the rank of instructor or above.
NOTE.-The enrollment figures include all students in elementary and secondary schools and colleges and
universities. However, the data for teachers and other staff in public and private elementary and secondary
schools are reported in terms of full-time equivalents. The staff data for institutions of higher education include
all full-time and part-time professional, administrative, and support personnel. Because of rounding, details
may notadd to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, unpublished projections and
estimates. (This table was prepared August 1991.)
(10)
16.
Table 2. -Enrollment in educational institutions, by level of instruction
and by type of control: Fall 1981 to fall 1991
[In thousands]
Level of instruction and
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
type of control
1981
1985
1989
1990
1991
All levels
57,894
57,226
59,339
60,172
60,946
Public
49,669
48,901
51,041
51,938
52,557
Private
8,225
8,325
8,298
8,234
8,390
Elementary and secondary
schools2/
45,522
44,979
45,881
46,221
46,841
Public
40,022
39,422
40,526
41,026
41,575
Private
5,500
5,557
1/
5,355
5,195
5,267
Kindergarten through
grade 8 3/
31,370
31,225
33,320
33,808
34,313
Public
27,270
27,030
29,158
29,742
30,186
Private
4,100
4,195
1/
4,162
4,066
4,127
Grades 9 through 12
14,152
13,754
12,562
12,413
12,529
Public
12,752
12,392
11,369
11,284
11,389
Private
1,400
1,362
1/
1,193
1,129
1,140
Higher education4/
12,372
12,247
13,458
13,951
14,105
Public
9,647
9,479
10,515
10,912
10,982
Private
2,725
2,768
2,943
3,039
3,123
1/Estimated.
2/Includes enrollments in local public school systems and in most private schools (religiously affiliated and nonsectarian).
Excludes subcollegiate departments of institutions of higher education, residential schools for exceptional children, and
Federal schools.
3/Includes most kindergarten and some nursery school enrollment. Excludes preprimary enrollment in schools that do
not offer first grade. This undercount of preprimary enrollment is particularly significant for private schools. According
to data collected by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, public and private nursery school and kindergarten enrollment of 3-
to 5-year-olds grew from 4.9 million in October 1981 to 6.7 million in October 1990.
4/Includes full-time and part-time students enrolled in degree-credit and nondegree-credit programs in universities,
other 4-year colleges, and 2-year colleges. Excludes students in noncollegiate postsecondary institutions.
NOTE--Data for fall 1989 are preliminary. Because of rounding, details may not add to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 1991
(forthcoming); Projections of Education Statistics to 2002 (forthcoming). (This table was prepared August 1991.)
(11)
17.
Table 3. -Earollment in public elementary and secondary schools,
by region and State: Fall 1981 to fall 1991
(La thousands]
Region and state
Pall
Pall
Fall
Fall
Pall
1981
1985
1989
1990 1/
19912/
United States
40,022
39,422
40,526
41,026
41,575
Northeast
7,869
7,316
7,200
7,232
7,339
Connecticut
505
462
462
469
477
Maine
216
206
214
216
218
Massachusetts
947
844
826
829
846
New Hampshire
164
161
172
171
181
New Jersey
1,200
1,116
1,076
1,083
1,101
New York
2,761
2,621
2,566
2,563
2,999
Pennsyhezia
1,839
1,683
1,655
1,668
1,680
Rhode Island
143
133
136
138
139
Vermont
93
90
95
%
97
Midwest
10,372
9,261
9,851
9,901
9,973
Illinois
1,924
1,826
1,797
1,803
1,311
Indiana
1,025
966
954
956
962
Iowa
516
485
478
484
477
Kamas
410
410
431
436
442
Michigan
1,725
1,603
1,577
1.577
1,589
Mianesots
734
705
740
752
767
Minouri
819
795
808
810
826
Nebraska
273
266
271
274
274
North Dekots
118
119
118
117
117
Okio
1,899
1,794
1,767
1,770
1,775
South Dekota
126
124
127
129
131
Waconsia
804
768
783
791
802
South
13,990
14,117
14,587
14,761
14,889
Alstems
743
730
723
728
726
Arkansas
437
433
435
435
438
Delaware
95
93
96
100
102
District of
Columbia
95
57
81
81
81
Florida
1,488
1,562
1,772
1,862
1,994
Georgia
1,056
1,060
1.127
1,152
1,179
Kentucky
658
644
631
630
623
Louisians
782
788
783
779
767
Maryland
722
672
699
715
739
Mississippi
472
471
502
500
496
North Carolias
1,109
1,066
1,081
1,083
1,099
Othlaboms
983
992
579
579
574
South Carolina
609
607
616
622
628
Teansuse
838
814
820
822
827
Tems
2,936
3,132
3,329
3,353
3,379
Virginis
990
968
985
996
1,025
West Virginia
378
358
328
323
313
Wast
7,791
8,126
8,287
9,134
9,374
Alub
91
107
109
112
111
Arizona
507
548
608
990
660
California
4,046
4,256
4,772
4,963
5,101
Colorado
544
551
563
569
576
Hawaii
163
164
169
171
176
Maho
205
209
215
221
215
Montana
153
154
151
152
151
Newsda
151
155
187
197
206
New Mexico
268
278
296
300
305
Oragon
457
448
472
485
482
Utah
356
403
437
445
445
Washington
730
750
810
832
852
Wyoming
100
103
97
%
94
/Extrand by reporting Sam
2/Projected by the National Custer for Education Statistics.
NOTE--Indates not bladergarma and - survey school exrollment. Because of reunding domile may not
add so totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Onler for Education Statistics, Common Care of Dan servey,
"Earty Eximane Key State for Public Beneaury and Secondary Education: School Year 1990-91°. and
Projections of Education to XX2 (forthcoming). (This - - prepared August 1991.)
(12.)
18.
Table 4.- - Number of teachers in educational institutions, by level of instruction
and by type of control: Fall 1981 to fall 1991
[In thousands]
Level of instruction and
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
type of control
1981
1985
1989
1990 1/
1991 1/
All levels
3,143
3,265
3,488
3,506
3,587
Public
2,634
2,710
2,890
2,930
3,004
Private
509
555
598
576
583
Elementary and secondary
teachers2/
2,438
2,550
2,734
2,744
2,826
Public
2,125
2,207
2,356
2,391
2,465
Private
313
343
1/
377
353
360
Elementary teachers
1,380
1,483
1,664
1,632
1,682
Public
1,159
1,237
1,389
1,379
1,429
Private
221
246
1/
275
253
253
Secondary teachers
1,057
1,067
1,070
1,112
1,143
Public
965
970
968
1,012
1,036
Private
92
97
1/
102
100
107
Higher education
instructional faculty3/
705
715
1/
755
762
762
Public
509
503
1/
534
539
539
Private
196
212
1/
221
223
223
1/Estimated.
2/Includes teachers in local public school systems and in most private schools (religiously affiliated and nonsectarian).
Excludes subcollegiate departments of institutions of higher education, residential schools for exceptional children, and
Federal schools. Also excludes preprimary teachers in schools without a first grade. Teachers are reported in full-time
equivalents.
3/Includes full-time and part-time faculty with the rank of instructor or above in universities, other 4-year colleges,
and 2-year colleges.
NOTE--Data for fall 1989 are preliminary. Because of rounding, details may not add to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics,
1991 (forthcoming); and Projections of Education Statistics to 2002 (forthcoming). (This table was prepared August 1991.)
13.)
19.
Table 5.-- - Total expenditure per student in educational institutions, by level
of instruction and by type of control, and average salary for
public school teachers: 1981-82 to 1991-92
[In current and constant dollars]
School year
Level of instruction and
type of control
1981-82
1985-86
1989-901/
1990-91
1991-92
Current dollars:
Expenditure per pupil in public
elementary and secondary
schools2/
$2,997
1/ $4,069
$5,421
$5,748
$5,961
Higher education expenditure
per full-time equivalent
student3/
8,577
12,041
14,848
15,393
16,054
Public
7,493
10,509
12,694
13,148
13,709
Private
11,867
16,530
21,440
22,332
23,287
Constant 1990-91 dollars:
Expenditure per pupil in public
elementary and secondary
schools4/
4,265
1/ 5,007
5,717
5,748
5,702
Higher education expenditure
per full-time equivalent
student4/
12,205
14,818
15,660
15,393
15,357
Public
10,663
12,933
13,388
13,148
13,113
Private
16,887
20,343
22,613
22,332
22,275
Average salary for public
school teachers:5/
Current dollars
19,274
25,199
31,331
33,015
34,814
Constant 1990-91 dollars4/
27,427
31,011
33,044
33,015
33,301
1/Estimated.
2/Data represent total expenditures per pupil in average daily attendance.
3/Data represent current-fund expenditures and additions to plant value per full-time-equivalent student.
4/Data adjusted by the Consumer Price Index, U.S. Department of Labor. The 1990-91 CPI estimate is derived
from 1991 and 1992 data in Budget of the United States Government. Fiscal Year 1992, prepared by the Office of
Management and Budget.
S/Data for 1981-82, 1985-86, 1989-90, and 1990-91 are from the National Education Association. The
1990-91 data are preliminary.
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, unpublished projections
and estimates; and National Education Association, Estimates of School Statistics, 1990-91. (This table was
prepared August 1991.)
(14)
20
Table 6. Total expenditures of educational institutions, by level of instruction
and by type of control: 1981-82 to 1991-92
[In billions]
School year
Level of instruction and
type of control
1981-82
1985-86
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92 1'
Current dollars
All levels
$197.8
$269.5
$365.1
$392.2
$413.8
Public
162.0
218.7
296.5
318.6
336.0
Private
35.8
50.8
68.6
73.6
77.9
Elementary and secondary
expenditures
120.5
161.8
220.6
236.7
248.6
Public
111.2
148.6
203.3
218.3
229.4
Privatel/
9.3
13.2
17.3
18.5
19.2
Higher education expenditures2/
77.3
107.7
144.5
155.4
165.1
Public
50.8
70.1
93.1
100.3
106.5
Privatel/
26.5
37.6
51.4
55.1
58.7
Constant 1990-91 dollars
All levels
$281.5
$331.7
$385.1
$392.2
$395.7
Public
230.5
269.1
312.7
318.6
321.2
Private
50.9
62.6
72.4
73.6
74.5
Elementary and secondary
expenditures
171.5
199.2
232.7
236.7
237.7
Public
158.2
182.9
214.5
218.3
219.4
Privatel/
13.2
16.3
18.2
18.5
18.4
Higher education expenditures2/
110.0
132.5
152.4
155.4
157.9
Public
72.3
86.2
98.2
100.3
101.8
Privatel/
37.7
46.3
54.2
55.1
56.1
1/Estimated.
2/Includes current-fund expenditures and additions to plant value.
3/Data adjusted by the Consumer Price Index, U.S. Department of Labor. The 1991-92 CPI estimate is derived from 1991
and 1992 data from Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1992 prepared by the Office of Management and
Budget.
NOTE--Because of rounding, details may not add to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 1991
(forthcoming); Projections of Education Statistics to 2002 (forthcoming); and unpublished projections and estimates. (This
table was prepared August 1991.)
(15.)
21.
Table 7. --Number of graduates of educational institutions, by level of education
completed: 1981-82 to 1991-92
[In thousands]
School year
Level of education
completed
1981-82
1985-86
1989-901/
1990-91 1/
1991-92 1/
High school graduates, total
2,995
2,643
2,592
2,508
2,446
Public
2,705
2,383
2,324
2,253
2,193
Privatel/
290
260
268
255
253
College and university
graduates:
Associate degrees
435
446
445
470
477
Bachelor's degrees
953
988
1,043
1,064
1,081
Master's degrees
296
289
319
327
338
First-professional degrees2/
72
74
71
74
75
Doctor's degrees
33
34
38
39
39
VEstimated.
2/Includes degrees in medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, chiropractic, veterinary
medicine, dentistry, law, and theological professions.
NOTE--Because of rounding. details may not add to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics,
1991 (forthcoming); Projections of Education Statistics to 2002 (forthcoming); and unpublished estimates. (This table
was prepared August 1991.)
22
(16)
Chart 1--Enrollment in educational Institutions, by level:
Fall 1970 to fall 1990
In millions
$40
35
Elementary
30
25
20
Secondary
15
10
Higher Education
5
O
1991
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
Fall
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
Digest of Education Statistics, 1991 (forthcoming).
23.
(17)
Chart 2--Number of teachers In educational Institutions, by level:
Fall 1970 to fall 1990
In thousands
2,000
1,500
Elementary
Secondary
1,000
Higher Education
500
0
1991
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
Fall
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
Digest of Education Statistics, 1991 (forthcoming).
24.
(18.)
Chart 3--Expenditures of educational Institutions in constant
1990-91 dollars, by level: 1970-71 to 1991-92
In billions
$
250
200
Elementary/secondary schools
150
Higher Education
100
50
O
1991
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
School year beginning -
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Digest of Education Statistics, 1991 (forthcoming).
.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
9 Sept. 1991
Hi Dan,
l thought that the
attached info. may be
helpful to you c your
researcher(s) for education
speeches in the future
the Leviston speech
was great ! & look
forward to the Education
address! Thanks,
Jane
xt.2428
PHI KAPPA
NEWS
KAPPA
PHI DELTA KAPPA
PHI DELTA KAPPA INTERNATIONAL
THE PROFESSIONAL FRATERNITY IN EDUCATION
P.O. Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402-0789
PHI DELTA KAPPA
For further information, contact Terry L. Wiedmer
812/339-1156 or
EMBARGOED UNTIL
For release 10:30 a.m. August 22, 1991
STRONG SUPPORT FOR GOALS AND BUSH STRATEGY
Bloomington, IN -- Both the Bush Administration strategy for achieving
the six national goals for education by the year 2000 and the goals themselves
receive strong support from the U.S. public in the 23rd Annual Gallup/Phi Delta
Kappa Poll of the Public's Attitudes Toward the Public Schools, to be published
in the September 1991 issue of the Phi Delta Kappan. However, Americans
remain highly skeptical that the goals, first announced in February 1990, will be
achieved by the target date.
The 1991 Gallup/Phi Delta Kappa poll is the most comprehensive survey
of American attitudes on educational issues since the series began in 1969.
This year, Gallup interviewers asked a scientifically selected sample of 1,500
U.S. adults a total of 80 questions, twice the usual number.
Perhaps the most startling finding to emerge from the 1991 poll is the
precipitous drop in the number of Americans who say that drug use by students
is the biggest problem confronting the local public schools. While student drug
use topped the list of problems for the sixth consecutive year (mentioned by
22% of the public), it was in a virtual tie this year with two other responses: lack
of discipline, mentioned by 20%; and lack of school funding, mentioned by 18%.
This result reflects both a drop in the percentage of the public mentioning drug
use (down from 38% in 1990) and an increase in the percentage mentioning
lack of funding (up from 13% in 1990). The number mentioning lack of
PDK News, Page 2
discipline remained stable (19% in 1990, 20% this year).
Most of the measures outlined by the Bush Adminstration last spring in
America 2000 receive strong support from the U.S. public. The public favors (by
62% to 33%) allowing students and parents to choose which public schools in
their community the students attend, regardless of where they live. However,
few parents whose children attend public school say that their children would
change schools if given the choice.
The public overwhelmingly favors requiring the local public schools to
conform to national goals and national standards of achievement (81% in favor,
12% opposed). Americans also strongly approve of requiring public schools in
their communities to use a standardized national curriculum (68% in favor, 24%
opposed), and they favor the use of standardized national tests to measure
academic achievement (77% in favor, 17% opposed).
In the 1990 Gallup/Phi Delta Kappa education poll, the public strongly
endorsed the six national education goals put forth by the President and the
nation's governors. In this year's poll, the public gives even higher priority to
each goal, but skepticism about reaching the goals by the year 2000 is as high
in 1991 as in 1990.
Public support for the goals is consistent throughout every segment of the
population: men and women; whites, nonwhites, blacks, and Hispanics; all age
groups; Republicans, Democrats, and Independents; all levels of education; all
regions of the U.S.; all occupational groups and income levels; and people with
or without children in public or private schools. However, pessimism about the
chances of reaching the goals is also consistent across demographic groups.
PDK News, Page 3
The first of the national goals -- by the year 2000, all children will start
school ready to learn -- is the goal the public is least skeptical about achieving
(47% say that attainment is likely or very likely). Some 55% of the public say
they favor making tax-supported preschools available for all 3- and 4-year-olds
whose parents want them, while 40% oppose the idea.
The public is strongly interested in knowing how much progress local
public schools are making toward achieving the six national education goals
and favors, by a margin of better than 3-1, the publication of "public school
report cards." Generally, Americans believe that schools showing progress
toward attaining the goals should be financially rewarded with more state and
federal funds (64% in favor, 26% opposed), but they oppose withholding funds
from schools that are less successful (33% in favor, 57% opposed). However,
the public favors not renewing the contracts of teachers and principals in
schools that show no progress (57% in favor, 32% opposed).
In previous Gallup/Phi Delta Kappa polls, Americans have opposed
lengthening the school day by one hour and the school year by 30 days (to
about 210 days). This year, for the first time, a majority of Americans (51%) say
they favor a school year of 210 days. The public is divided on the question of
lengthening the school day: 48% oppose the longer day, while 46% favor it.
Although the level of public support for school choice among pubic
schools is high, public opinion with regard to school vouchers, one means of
enabling parents to choose their children's schools, is mixed. Over the years,
vouchers have never been particularly popular in the Gallup/Phi Delta Kappa
PDK News, Page 4
polls. This year, though, 50% of the public say that they approve of school
vouchers, while 39% oppose them.
However, on a follow-up question, 68% of the respondents say that they
oppose "allowing students and parents to choose a private school to attend at
public expense," while only 26% favor the idea. Gallup interviewers then asked
the 26% in favor of vouchers for private schools whether private schools that
"accept government tuition payments" should be "accountable to public
authorities." Sixty-three percent of those who favor vouchers for private schools
also favor public accountability for those private schools that accept government
tuition payments; only 27% oppose the idea.
The trend question asking the public to grade the local public schools
has yielded relatively stable results since 1984. This year, 42% of the public
give the local public schools grades of A or B. Moreover, the disparity between
the grades given to local schools and those given to the nation's schools
remains striking: while 42% award local schools grades of A or B, only 21%
give the nation's public schools similarly high grades. Once again, parents
express enormous satisfaction with the schools their oldest children attend:
73% award those schools grades of A or B.
The margin of error for the 1991 Gallup/Phi Delta Kappa education poll is
3% for responses involving the total sample and somewhat larger for responses
involving smaller portions of the sample.
The minimum order for reprints of the version of this poll published in the
Phi Delta Kappan is 25 copies for $10, with additional copies available at 25
cents each. Write to Phi Delta Kappa, P. O. Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402, or
phone 812/339-1156. This price includes postage and delivery.
PDK News, Page 5
Those who wish to order the 649-page document that is the basis for the
published report should write to Sarah Van Allen at the Gallup Organization, 47
Hulfish St., Suite 200, Princeton, NJ 08542 or phone 609/924-9600. The price
is $95, postage included. Besides complete demographic breakdowns of
responses to all questions asked this year, the document contains answers to
several questions bearing on race and ethnicity.
--30--