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
118565206
label
Republican National Committee Education Briefing Book (2)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118565206
contentType
document
title
Republican National Committee Education Briefing Book (2)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
137
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff (Reagan Administration)
Michael Deaver's Political Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118565206
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1985-12-31
year
1985
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4407d5ebe631bd1b
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Deaver, Michael: Files
Folder Title: Republican National Education
Committee Briefing Book (2)
Box: 66
To see more digitized collections
visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
Republican
National
Committee
Philip Kawior
Director of
Research
June 3, 1983
TO:
CHAIRMAN FAHRENKOPF
ATTENTION:
BILL PHILLIPS
Executive Assistant to the Chairman
THROUGH:
WILLIAM I. GREENER, III A
Director of Communications
THROUGH:
Director of Research P/C
PHILIP KAWIOR
FROM:
RICHARD HANSEN
Issues Analyst
R.H.
SUBJECT:
EDUCATION BRIEFING: THE NATIONAL EDUCATION
ASSOCIATION
Contents of this briefing:
I.
President Reagan fires off letter to NEA president.
II.
Fact Sheet: The National Education Association
III. Analysis
Appendices:
-- Executive Summary of "Tuition Tax Credits: An NEA
Policy Paper."
-- "Education or Political Indoctrination?" by Gary L. Bauer,
Deputy Under-Secretary of Education for Planning, Budget
and Evaluation.
-- Summary and Detailed Information of NEA-PAC contributions
for 1977-78 and 1979-80 election cycles.
-- "On School Excellence" by Edithe A. Fulton, president
New Jersey Education Association.
-- "Reagan Emphasizes Education Issues," David Hoffman,
Washington Post, 5/31/83.
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-7666.
I.
President Reagan fires off letter to NEA president.
On May 26, President Reagan fired off a letter to Willard H.
McGuire, president of the National Education Association, in
response to the NEA's accusation that the President made a
"disgraceful assault" on the teaching profession at his
May 21 commencement speech at Seton Hall University.
In that commencement speech, the President called for a
merit pay system for teachers and said, "Hard-earned tax
dollars should encourage the best. They have no business
rewarding incompetence and mediocrity."
In his letter to McGuire, the President said, "My intent
was
to raise my voice on behalf of the thousands of out-
standing teachers whose compensation is held down by pay
scales that fail to recognize and reward many distinguished
teachers by paying them commensurate with their worth (U) ntil
the NEA supports badly needed reforms in salary, promotion
and tenure policies, the improvements we so desperately
need will only be delayed."
President Reagan, in his letter, also endorsed the "master
teacher" concept espoused by Gov. Lamar Alexander (R.-Tenn).
The plan would offer incentive payments of up to $7,000 a
year to teachers who qualify. The proposal was blocked in
the Tennessee legislature this year because of opposition
from NEA's state affiliate, the Tennessee Education Association.
(Source: Washington Post, 5/27/83).
II. Fact Sheet: The National Education Association
The 1.7 million-member NEA, composed mainly of teachers
from kindergarten through the 12th grade, is the largest
trade union in the United States and has an average of
4,000 members in every Congressional district in the
country.
About 43 percent of NEA members are Democrats, 28 percent
Republicans and 29 percent independents, according to
Ken Melley, the NEA's director of political affairs.
The NEA leadership is opposed to most of President Reagan's
education policies, including his proposals for tuition
tax credits, education vouchers and a merit-pay system
for teachers. (See Appendix: Executive Summary of
"Tuition Tax Credits: An NEA Policy Paper").
The NEA leadership has entered the nuclear arms debate
by developing a biased pilot curriculum on the subject
-2-
of nuclear war which is being tested in 34 states.
(See Appendix: "Education or Political Indoctrination?"
by Gary L. Bauer, Deputy Under-Secretary of Education
for Planning, Budget and Evaluation).
The NEA had 478 delegates at the 1980 Democratic Conven-
tion, about 10 percent of the total and more than any
other single group. The percentage may be less in 1984
because of a change in rules increasing the number of
officeholders mandated as delegates.
NEA-PAC contributed $1.5 million to candidates during the
1982 election cycle and expects to increase its contri-
butions to $2 million in 1984.
In the 1980 election cycle, NEA-PAC contributed to the
campaigns of 206 Democrat and 26 Republican candidates
for the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.
-- 89 percent of 1980 recipients of NEA-PAC contributions
were Democrats and only 11 percent were Republicans,
in contrast to the NEA membership ratio of 43 percent
Democrats to 28 percent Republicans and 29 percent
independents.
-- Of the 232 1980 NEA-PAC recipients, 145 went on to win
the general election, for a winning percentage of 61
percent. NEA claims its winning percentage from
1972-82 to be 77 percent. Apparently, they do not in-
clude those candidates who lost in primaries, and other
recipients who opted to retire or may have passed away,
in their calculations. In addition, NEA-PAC made contri-
butions in 1980 to 8 senators who were not up for re-
election. If these 8 are not counted, the winning
percentage rises to 65 percent. (See Appendix: Summary
and Detailed Information of NEA-PAC contributions for
1977-78 and 1979-80 election cycles).
The NEA will endorse a candidate for the 1984 presidential
election in October of this year. It is expected to be
long-time NEA ally Walter Mondale.
III. Analysis
The National Education Association is obviously a powerful
political and financial force for the Democrats.
It appears, however, that a case could be made to the effect
that the NEA leadership is not entirely in step with its
membership, given the fact that, by NEA's own estimates,
-3-
only 43 percent of NEA members are Democrats, yet 89 percent
of 1980 NEA-PAC recipients were Democrats. Fully 28 percent
of NEA members are estimated to be Republicans, yet only
11 percent of 1980 NEA-PAC recipients were Republicans.
It certainly is not reasonable to assume that all 29 percent
of NEA's politically independent members would favor Democratic
candidates, yet even if that 29 percent were added to the
43 percent of NEA's Democrats, it still totals only 72 per-
cent, in contrast to the 89 percent figure for Democratic
recipients of NEA-PAC contributions in 1980.
New Jersey is a state that leans to the liberal-moderate
side of the political spectrum. The state features two
Democratic U.S. Senators and Democratic majorities in
both Houses of the Assembly and in its Congressional delega-
tion. President Reagan has been the only true conservative
to be successful state-wide in New Jersey in living memory.
Once could reasonably expect the state's NEA affiliate the
New Jersey Education Association, to be strong in its
criticism of President Reagan's education policies, perhaps
pointing an accusing finger at him in the light of the
findings of the National Commission on Excellence in Educa-
tion -- as the NEA's national leadership has done.
However, NJEA president Edithe A. Fulton spreads the blame
rather widely for the decline of educational excellence in
her public statement on the subject. She focuses most
strongly on local school boards. She does accuse the President
of shrugging federal responsibility for the public schools,
but critizes the Governor and the State Assembly as well.
She concludes that, "In the long run, it all depends on what
the general public wants and demands." (See Appendix: "On
School Excellence" by Edithe A. Fulton, president, New Jersey
Educational Association).
Mrs. Fulton's comparatively balanced view contrasts rather
sharply with the statements of NEA president Willard H. McGuire.
Granted, the NJEA is only one of 51 NEA affiliates. But it
does seem possible, if not likely, that many NEA affiliates
and members would be open to reason to a far greater extent
than the national leadership. The question arises, however,
as to the extent the state affiliates and members are compelled
to bow to pressure from the national leadership.
-4-
vomm
clax
redits
An
NEA
Policy Paper
June 1982
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Several proposals before the 97th Congress, including one offered by the Reagan Administration,
would divert federal tax dollars in order to provide a tax credit to parents for tuition paid to private
and/or parochial educational institutions. Parents would be able to deduct up to 50 percent of
their private school tuition-up to $500-directly from their federal income taxes.
NEA is unalterably opposed to any legislation designed to provide tax credits for tuition paid
to any private elementary, secondary, or postsecondary institution. We see such schemes as fiscally
unsound as a matter of public policy. We also believe it to be unconstitutional.
Proponents of tuition tax credits claim it is unfair for parents to have to pay for their
children's private education in addition to taxes for local public education. They call this "double
taxation." This alleged double burden exists, however, only because these parents chose not to
send their children to the public educational system provided for through tax dollars. If a home-
owner decides to hire a private guard to protect that home, he or she doesn't get a tax credit for
paying taxes for the public city police. Neither is a tax credit given for those who elect to join
private swim clubs rather than use a public pool funded by tax dollars. Just like the private swim
club or the private guards, private education expenses are a voluntary expenditure of funds, not
double taxation. A more accurate example of "double taxation" would be citizens who pay taxes
to support local public schools being forced, through tuition tax credits, to underwrite a dual
school system. This double burden would fall most heavily on the elderly, single persons, and those
with no children in school.
NEA does not argue that private and parochial schools should cease to exist. Diversity and
choice in education are well established principles which NEA fully supports. It is clearly the
right of parents to send their children to private schools. However, philosophical and constitu-
tional objections aside, NEA maintains that the federal government should not lavish billions of
dollars on the education of only 10 percent of our nation's total school population, when the
education of 90% is in jeopardy due to cutbacks.
3
STATEMENT
OF
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR PLANNING. BUDGET AND EVALUATION
UNITED STATES a
EDUCATION OR POLITICAL INDOCTRINATION?
If America's parents are wondering in the aftermath of the
Report by the Commission on Excellence in Education how and why
America's education system is failing, they might not have to
look much further than the national headquarters of the National
Education Association (NEA).
The NEA is a teachers' union with over 1.7 million members.
Unfortunately for those teachers, and for the country's youngsters,
the national headquarters of the NEA appears to be in the hands
of "freezeniks" who, instead of concentrating on basics in
education, have initiated an incredibly obvious drive to bring
political indoctrination into the classroom.
The NEA officials must have had tongue firmly planted in cheek
when they recently developed a new curriculum unit on nuclear
war with the title "Choices". Even a cursory examination of the
material reveals that no choices exist in the curriculum.
Instead, the curriculum seems carefully contrived to develop a
mindset in our unsuspecting young people, by instilling them
with fear, and to enlist them in a campaign to bring about
unilateral American disarmament. (The NEA would disagree about
the unilateral part, but does anybody believe similar courses
are being offered in the Soviet Union?)
One of the stated purposes of the NEA course, which has been
pilot tested in 34 States, is to help students deal with fear of
nuclear war. Yet the course begins with huge doses of information
on radiation sickness, fallout, global annihilation and graphic
descriptions of the victims at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Clearly
the material panders to and encourages fear.
War is hell, and "Choices" paints it that way in living color.
What is conspicuous by its absence in "Choices" is balance. The
threat of communism and the fact that the Soviet Union has
engaged in the largest arms buildup in the history of mankind
are not mentioned in the main text. The need for national
security is buried under a mushrooming cloud of implications
that war is unthinkable; ergo, we must disarm.
In recent years, the stirring quotes of such American heroes as
Patrick Henry with his ringing declaration, "Give me liberty or
give me death!" and Nathan Hale, the 21 year-old patriot who
faced the enemy's gallows with the courageous statement, "I
regret that I have but one life to give to my country!" have
disappeared from many American textbooks and classrooms. We now
see what is intended by some to take their place--leftist
indoctrination aimed at turning today's elementary students into
tomorrow's campus radicals.
4
400 MARYLAND AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20202
Albert Shanker, President of the American Federation of
Teachers, pointed out a major and perhaps intentional flaw in
the course material. Shanker observed, "Nothing is said about
the 1930's, when the democracies compromised and neglected their
own defense while Hitler armed. In that era the failure to arm
led to war, not to peace. Likewise, there is almost no
discussion of the near-universally accepted concept of
deterrence of Winston Churchill's idea that the best way to
prevent war is to 'gather such an aggregation of force on the
side of peace that the aggressor, whoever he may be, wil-1 dare
not to challenge.''
Frequently, I have the opportunity to pass by the National
Archives on Constitution Avenue where the most venerated documents
that record America's past are carefully preserved. Some, like
the original Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of
Independence, are displayed under temperature-controlled cases.
Engraved on one of the pillars in front of the National Archives
are these words: "The heritage of the past is the seed that
brings forth the harvest of the future."
Every time I read the words on that pillar I wonder: what will
the future bring forth from the seeds that are being sown in
education today? Our forefathers struggled, at risk of life and
property, to forge a system of government that guarantees
individual freedom. But freedom is not self-perpetuating. Each
generation must nurture the values by which our forefathers
shaped our government.
Next to parental and church influences, education plays the
greatest role in shaping our values as well as developing our
mental skills. Teachers have the awesome responsibility of
helping each child reach his potential.
Good teachers have always taught civility, manners, and--dare I
say it?--love of country. In government classes, they teach
students that all who meet basic requirements of age and
citizenship can vote, but they do not tell students, nor should
they, for whom to vote. Students learn how to participate in
their government, how to write their representatives to express
their views, and how people are elected to office but they
aren't, and shouldn't be, told what views to express.
Education officials in Washington are inescapably bogged down
with budget and legislative priorities, but that is not where
the real action is in education; it is in the classroom.
Teachers, if they are faithful to their calling, are among the
architects of Western culture. As trowels are to masons,
textbooks are the tools of the trade. Of course, they don't ply
them; they interpret them, expand upon them, and lead their
students through them, precept upon precept, line upon line, to
greater heights of knowledge and reasoning ability. To achieve
that end, teachers need substantive textbook materials whose
contents edify and elevate the mind--not material developed by a
5
union intended to produce Pavlovian resistance to the notion of
peace through strength.
Repugnantly un-American by definition, political indoctrination
does not belong in our classrooms. The NEA should get back on
course, or they risk further undermining public confidence in
public education. America's children and tens of thousands of
dedicated public school teachers are being used as pawns. The
NEA can stop further damage to the public school system by
immediately halting the distribution of this heavily slanted
material. Our children and teachers deserve better.
Gary L. Bauer
Gary L. Bauer
Deputy Under Secretary for
Planning, Budget and Evaluation
6
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION PAC
Washington
DC
C00003251
SUMMARY INFORMATION:
1977-78
1979-80
1977-78
1979-80
77-78
79-80
Gross Receipts:
$768,545
$628,618
Gross Disbursements:
$407,635
$963,147
% of Total Contributions & Independent
Total Contributions:
$338,987
$283,585
Total Independent Expenditures:
0
$15,578
Expenditures to Gross Disbursements:
83.1%
31.0%
OF CONTRIBUTIONS
Number of Candidates
Amount
Number of Candidates
Amount
Number of Candidates
Amount
TO ALL CANDIDATES:
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
Democrats
171
206
$324,687
$258,385
Republicans
15
26
$13,300
$25,200
Other
I
-
$1,000
President
2
-
$7,600
Senate
27
38
$72,300
$69,437
House
160
192
$266,687
$206.548
Incumbents
110
169
$153,085
$205,958
Challengers
35
39
$90,702
$41,800
Open Scat
42
24
$95,200
$35,827
Winners Gen. Elec.
118
145
$172,985
$157,239
All Losers/Others
69
87
$166,002
$126,346
RANGE OF
$1-499
14
43
$2,185
$7,950
$1000-4999
114
107
$216,452
$191,378
$500-999
43
76
$22,350
$44,157
$5000 & UP
16
6
$98,000
$40,100
DETAILED
Office
Party
State
District
Contributions
Office
Party
State
District
Contributions
Office
Party
State
District
Contributions
INFORMATION:
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
Carter, Jimmy*
P
DEM
$6,600
Hathaway, William D.
S
DEM
ME
$4,100
Roy, William R.
S
DEM
KS
$6,000
Baker, Howard H, Jr.
S
REP
TN
$2,400
Hodges, Luther
S
DEM
NC
$2,000
Smith, John McNeill
S
DEM
NC
$2,000
Barnett, Don
S
DEM
SD
$4,000
Javits, Jacob K
S
REP
NY
$3,000
Specter, Arlen
S
REP
PA
$2,750
Baucus, Max S.
S
DEM
MT
$3,000
Leahy, Patrick J.
S
DEM
VT
$3,000
Stewart. Donald
S
DEM
AL
$2,000
$1,000
Bayh, Birch E., Jr.
S
DEM
IN
$6,500
Levin, Carl
S
DEM
MI
$10,000
$200
Tucker, James Guy, Jr.
S
DEM
AR
$4,500
Brooke, Edward W.
S
REP
MA
$2,050
Lewis, H. Craig
S
DEM
PA
$2,300
Albosta, Donald
H
DEM
MI
10
$1,500
Church, Frank
S
DEM
ID
$2,100
Magnuson, Warren G
S
DEM
WA
$7,000
Allegrucci, Don
H
DEM
KS
5
$3,500
Clark, Dick
S
DEM
IA
$5,000
Maxwell, Robert
S
REP
OR
$2,000
Aucoin, Les
H
DEM
OR
I
$2,000
$600
Culver. John C.
S
DEM
IA
$4,500
McGovern, George
S
DEM
SD
$3,112
Baumann, James L.
H
DEM
OH
12
$3,000
Dodd, Christopher J.
S
DEM
CT
$2,200
Miller, Andrew P.
S
DEM
VA
$1,500
Blouin, Michael T.
H
DEM
IA
2
$4,000
Durkin, John Anthony
S
DEM
NH
$3,200
Miller, Zell
S
DEM
GA
$2,500
Bonior, David E.
H
DEM
MI
12
$7,000
$700
Eagleton, Thomas F.
S
DEM
MO
$2,000
Nelson, Gaylord A.
S
DEM
WI
$4,625
Brademas, John
II
DEM
IN
3
$2,600
Gunter, Bill
S
DEM
FL
$1,500
Percy, Charles
S
REP
II.
$100
$2,000
Brandon, Benton
II
DEM
AR
2
$4,000
I-404
Hart, Gary W
S
DEM
CO
$2,500
Randolph, Jennings
S
DEM
WV
$4,100
Brooks, Jack
II
DEM
TX
9
$3,500
Haskell, Floyd K.
S
DEM
CO
$6,000
Ravenel, Charles D.
S
DEM
SC
$6,000
Bruce, Terry L.
=
DEM
IL
22
$6,000
DETAILED
Office
Party
State
District
Contributions
Office
Party
State
District
Contributions
Office
Party
State
District
Contributions
INFORMATION:
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
77-78
79-80
Bryant, Winston
H
DEM
AR
4
$2,000
Gammage, Robert A
H
DEM
TX
22
$4,000
Peyser, Peter A.
H
DEM
NY
23
$1,500
Buchanan, John H.
H
REP
AL
6
$2,000
$1,000
Gardner, Steven M
H
DEM
MO
8
$2,000
Quinn, John
H
DEM
ME
I
$2,000
Burton, John
H
DEM
CA
5
$1,700
Godbey, Ronald Lee
H
DEM
TX
6
$4,000
Reibman, Jeanette F.
H
DEM
PA
15
$7,000
Burton, Phillip
H
DEM
CA
6
$3,000
$3,750
Goyke, Gary R
H
DEM
WI
6
$2,000
Rhodes, A.L. Dusty
H
DEM
TX
17
$2,000
Carr, M. Robert
H
DEM
MI
6
$7,000
$1,150
Gudger, Lamar
H
DEM
NC
11
$2,600
$200
Robinson, Ronald E.
H
DEM
WA
7
$5,000
Cavanaugh, John J.
H
DEM
NE
2
$2,250
Hall, Tony P.
H
DEM
OH
3
$3,000
$1,500
Schroeder, Pat
H
DEM
CO
I
$1,500
Corman, James C.
II
DEM
CA
21
$4,500
Hamilton, Pat R
H
DEM
WV
2
$3,000
Shannon, James
H
DEM
MA
5
$1,700
$3,600
D'Amours, Norman E.
II
DEM
NH
I
$500
$2,000
Hannaford, Mark W.
H
DEM
CA
34
$4,600
Sikorski, Gerald
H
DEM
MN
I
$1,500
Daschle, Thomas
H
DEM
SD
I
$3,000
$1,500
Harris, Herbert E II
H
DEM
VA
8
$2,600
$500
Snowden, Phillip H.
H
DEM
MO
6
$2,500
Denton, Lane
II
DEM
TX
11
$4,000
Hertel, Dennis M
II
DEM
MI
14
$5,000
Swift, Allan Byron
H
DEM
WA
2
$5,000
$2,375
Derrick, Butler
H
DEM
SC
3
$700
$1,750
Jenrette, John W., Jr.
H
DEM
SC
6
$1,000
$2,000
Synar, Michael Lynn
H
DEM
OK
2
$2,000
Dixon, Julian C.
H
DEM
CA
28
$4,000
$500
Keys, Martha
H
DEM
KS
2
$2,000
Thompson, Frank, Jr.
H
DEM
NJ
4
$2,000
$2,350
Dougherty, Charles
H
REP
PA
4
$4,000
Kogovsek, Ray
H
DEM
CO
3
$1,000
$2,500
Tilles, Roger Bruce
H
DEM
MI
10
$5,000
Drinan, Robert F.
II
DEM
MA
4
$2,000
$350
Kress, Stanley R.
II
DEM
ID
2
$3,000
Truby, Roy
II
DEM
ID
I
$2,500
Durning, Marvin B.
II
DEM
WA
7
$5,000
Lowry, Michael E:
II
DEM
WA
7
$5,000
$1,900
Tucker, James Guy, Jr.
H
DEM
AR
2
$4,000
Dyas, lless
II
DEM
NE
I
$4,750
Mattox, James
II
DEM
TX
5
$2,000
$3,000
Udall, Morris K.
H
DEM
AZ
2
$1,000
$1,950
Dyson, Royden P.
H
DEM
MD
I
$1,500
Mazzoli, Romano L.
H
DEM
KY
3
$2,000
Vanderveen, Richard
H
DEM
MI
5
$5,000
Easterly, Charles
H
DEM
KY
6
$3,000
McCormack, Mike
H
DEM
WA
4
$1,000
$1,850
Walgren, Doug
H
DEM
PA
18
$1,700
Eckhardt, Robert
H
DEM
TX
8
$1,000
$2,074
McKay, Gunn K.
H
DEM
UT
I
$2,000
$850
Watanen, John, Jr.
H
DEM
MI
II
$5,000
Edgar, Robert W.
H
DEM
PA
7
$3,000
$4,500
Mikva, Abner J.
H
DEM
IL
10
$2,400
Weaver, James
H
DEM
OR
4
$2,000
$1,600
Engeleiter, Susan
H
REP
WI
9
$2,000
Moffett, Toby
H
DEM
CT
6
$-2,000
$2,200
Williams, Lyle
H
REP
OH
19
$2,000
Evans, David Walter
H
DEM
IN
6
$2,000
$1,200
Murphy, Austin J.
H
DEM
PA
22
$2,100
$1,000
Wirth, Timothy E
H
DEM
CO
2
$3,000
$-300
Fellman, Richard M
II
DEM
NE
2
$2,500
Murtha, John P.
H
DEM
PA
12
$1,500
Wolpe, Howard
H
DEM
MI
3
$10,000
$8,000
THE PAC DIRECTORY
Fisher, Joseph L
H
DEM
VA
10
$750
$1,700
Musto, Raphael
H
DEM
PA
11
$1,500
Wootton, Bob G
H
DEM
KS
2
$2,000
Foley, Thomas S.
H
DEM
WA
5
$500
$1,650
Neal, Stephen L.
H
DEM
NC
5
$2,000
Wright, Jim
H
DEM
TX
12
$500
$2,000
Ford, William David
II
DEM
MI
15
$1,700
$1,400
O'Neill, Thomas
H
DEM
MA
8
$2,500
Wyden, Ronald Lee
H
DEM
OR
3
$1,500
Freeman, Michael O.
II
DEM
MN
3
$1,702
Patman, William N
H
DEM
TX
14
$2,567
Young, Robert A.
H
DEM
MO
2
$2,000
Frost, Martin
H
DEM
TX
24
$4,500
$2,100
Pattison, Edward W.
H
DEM
NY
29
$2,000
Zietlow, Charlotte T.
H
DEM
IN
7
$3,000
Galperin, Simon, Jr.
H
DEM
WV
3
$2,000
Pentony, Joseph F
H
DEM
TX
22
$2,000
STAR
Report on Education
NEWARKI29/83
On School Excellence
by Edithe A. Fulton, president
New Jersey Education Assn.
National reports on excellence in educa-
board members arrogantly grind teachers
tion are raising fundamental questions
under their heels. Right at this moment,
about how America runs its public schools.
for example, 61% of the teachers in the
How can we build quality while still leaving
Hunterdon community of Frenchtown are
control of the public schools in the hands
pondering their futures. Of the 18-teacher
of local boards of education whose resist-
faculty, 11 have received dismissal notices.
ance is responsible for the status quo?
The Frenchtown board is playing games
American tradition insists on local con-
with its teachers and - worse - with the
trol. That means decisions made in each
integrity of its public schools.
local district by its own board of education.
In Passaic County, Manchester Regional
But building educational quality will be
recently notified 38 of its 71 teachers that
costly. Local school boards are as likely to
they might not be needed next year. When
reject tax increases as to vote the programs
the time came for the board to vote, they
and facilities needed for the 1990s and the
were all rehired. The layoff threat served
21st Century.
only to let teachers know that board mem-
If the funds are not raised locally, they
bers consider them pawns.
will have to come from the State or, more
likely, the federal government. Ways must
DISDAINFUL ACTIONS
be found to keep control from shifting to
the State and/or national level.
In New Jersey, these disdainful actions
are widespread. They destroy morale and
HOLDING THINGS DOWN
trust in mangement's motivation.
One major recommendation of the
Obviously, local school boards will have
National Commission for Excellence in
to change their ways. In my memory, the
Education is for universal computer educa-
main opposition to school improvement
tion in the public schools. We do not see
has come from local school boards and
many school boards trying to comply. It's
their state organization. Of course, there
not uncommon for school boards to tell
are progressive school boards, but many
the PTA that, if parents want instructional
seem to view their role as holding things
computers in their schools, they should
down rather than building excellence.
hold cake sales to raise the purchase price.
We will not have educational excellence
Of course, the spate of educational re-
without breadth and depth in the curricu-
ports already on the record or still in the
lum. Yet we have seen local school boards
pipeline may not change anything. The
cut art and music throughout the elemen-
President has shrugged off any federal re-
tary grades. Some school boards have even
sponsibility for the public schools. He
eliminated such programs in their high
wants local school districts to pay the costs
schools as foreign language and advanced-
of keeping education abreast of the times
placement classes in math and science.
so that he can keep putting the national
treasure into Defense.
EXCUSE: COSTS
We will not have educational excellence
UP TO PUBLIC
without small class size. Yet we have seen
At the State level, the Governor and
local school boards let class size grow and
Legislature still have not fully funded New
grow, reducing the opportunity of the in-
Jersey's school aid formulas since they
dividual students for interaction and en-
were enacted in 1976. This year's shortfall
richment. In many districts, local school
could total $77 million.
boards have even closed down neighbor-
So maybe local school boards can keep
hood schools with the excuse that small
holding the lid down. Maybe they won't
class size is cost inefficient.
have to face the challenge of building ex-
We will not have education excellence if
cellence for the future. In the long run, it
teachers are not granted the respect that
all depends on what the general public
their calling merits. Yet we have seen local
wants and demands.
Mrs. Fulton is a fourth-grade teacher in the Lakehurst Elementary School. She is the elected head
of 117,000 teaching staff, supportive staff, and retired members of the New Jersey Education Assn.
Major New Political Push
Washington Post, May 31, 1983
Reagan Emphasizes Education Issues
By David Hoffman
sleeping giant of an issue," a Reagan
Washington Post Staff Writer
cation for your children is as strong
adviser said.
President Reagan has launched a
a value as there is in this country."
The long-range strategy is to ex-
The president's new emphasis on
major new political push on educa-
pand the agenda for a Reagan reelec-
education came about, in part, be-
tion issues that foreshadows a larger
"base-broadening" effort for a 1984
tion effort beyond the preeminent
cause of polls done for the White
campaign designed to draw on tra-
issues of the economy and foreign
House by Teeter and Richard
policy. "We want to hit on other sub-
Wirthlin. They show that, as eco-
ditional American family values and
jects close to home," another admin-
nomic worries have begun to ease,
concerns, according to administra-
istration official said.
schools and education have surfaced
tion officials.
Although it is not certain that
"When we get to November,
as strong public concerns.
Reagan will seek another term, they
1984," he said, "we want the Amer-
Because of the impact of foreign
ican people to know [Reagan] stands
competition and the high-technology
said, he has decided to meet the
revolution, Americans are more con-
Democrats head-on this summer and
for quality education, for law and
cerned about the quality of educa-
autumn.
order. Nobody is going to win or lose
tion than at any time since the early
The immediate goal is to carve
the presidency on an education plat-
1960s, according to some polls.
out new territory for Reagan on ed-
form, but we want to get back to
That mood was reinforced by the
ucation issues, such as merit pay for
basic values."
recent report of the National Com-
teachers, that are expected to figure
Republican pollster Robert Tee-
mission on Excellence in Education,
prominently in next year's presiden-
ter, assisting the White House effort,
which found a "rising tide of medi-
tial campaign. "This is a dormant,
added, "The notion of a good edu-
See EDUCATION, A7, Col. 1
EDUCATION, From A1
This "base broadening," as one official called it,
ocrity" in public schools and called for many
is the goal of Reagan's new emphasis on education
changes, including longer school days, more home-
issues. "Politically, what makes it very attractive is
work and higher teacher salaries.
that it can be an umbrella to get to the issues of
Reagan was further drawn toward education as
crime, drugs, foreign competition and retraining
a political issue by the early effort of Democratic
for jobs," Teeter said.
presidential candidates, especially former vice
In his Seton Hall speech, his most recent for-
president Walter F. Mondale, to make it a prima-
mal news conference, remarks to a group of high
ry point on which challenge to Reagan.
school valedictorians and other appearances, Rea-
Three weeks ago, Mondale, an ally of the pow-
gan has repeated his familiar calls for tuition tax
erful National Education Association, called for an
credits and school prayer. But there have been
$11 billion expansion of federal aid to education.
significant new wrinkles in his comments on ed-
Shortly thereafter, Reagan, in a commencement
ucation that reveal the broader approach.
address at Seton Hall University in South Orange,
One was Reagan's declaration at Seton Hall
N.J., fired back with an endorsement of merit pay
that "teachers should be paid and promoted on
for teachers. The NEA and other teacher organ-
the basis of their merit and competence." Polls
izations have long opposed that idea.
done for the White House show that this idea en-
According to several administration officials,
joys strong public support.
White House deputy chief of staff Michael K.
He also endorsed the master teacher plan
Deaver has been instrumental in urging 'the pres-
pushed by Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander, who
ident to emphasize education more.
wants to offer $7,000 incentive payments to cer-
That would be a contrast to the first two years
tain teachers.
of his presidency, in which Reagan's approach to
Teachers' unions oppose the merit pay and
education was characterized by budget cuts in
master teacher concepts on the grounds that they
many federally supported education programs. It
have not worked to improve the quality of edu-
was also defined by narrow issues, such as tuition
cation. The NEA claims Reagan is making a "dis-
tax credits, school prayer and the abolition of the
graceful assault" on the teaching profession. And
Department of Education, that were directed at
lobbying by Tennessee teachers has bottled up
Alexander's plan.
Reagan's conservative base of support.
Reagan has staked out his ground against the
But Reagan is now beginning to test ap-
NEA and any Democratic candidate seeking the
proaches designed to reach a far broader audience
unions' support. Mondale and Sen. Gary Hart (D-
of voters, according to administration officials and
Colo.) are strongly identified with the NEA, but
GOP strategists. In particular, he hopes to appeal
Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio), Mondale's chief rival
to the blue-collar workers and Hispanics who were
so far, is not.
part of his 1980 coalition but who have since
strayed.
Merit pay for teachers is not an issue likely to
dominate the 1984 campaign, one administration
official said, but is important because it is "the
one on which we're diametrically opposed" to the
Democrats.
"If the Democrats want the NEA endorsement,
they will have to pledge loyalty to the teachers at
the expense of parents. There are many, many
more parents out there than teachers," the official
said.
At the same time, Reagan seemed to have been
thrown on the defensive about budget cuts in ed-
ucation, an issue seized by Democrats. Polls show
that Americans generally are willing to pay more
for education, and schools rank high on the list of
activities they believe should be better funded.
The administration, however, has tried repeat-
edly to cut federal aid to education, which com-
prises about 10 percent of all school spending in
the United States. Reagan has continued to insist,
as he did at Seton Hall, that the huge expansion
in federal aid over about the last decade "failed"
to buy results in the classroom.
But Reagan has also recently dodged the ques-
tion of his budget cuts. Asked about "cutbacks in
federal funding for education," Reagan told the
valedictorians, "there haven't been cutbacks in
funding for public education." Ignoring federal
cuts he had sought, he said that total federal,
state and local school spending amounted to
$116.9 billion this year, "and that's 7 percent more
than last year."
White House officials emphasize, however, that
Reagan hopes to capitalize on education not as a
dollars-and-cents issue but as a reaffirmation of
his commitment to traditional American values.
Democrats, in contrast, hope to keep the limelight
focused squarely on federal aid and the federal
government's role in education.
A related issue not fully unfolded is Reagan's
1980 campaign pledge to abolish the Department
of Education, established largely because of lob-
bying by the NEA. Congress has shown no will-
ingness to dismantle it.
Some administration officials are considering a
new approach. One said that Reagan's 1980
pledge to abolish the department is "long gone as
an idea" but that the president could benefit by
"giving it a different mission."
That mission, several officials said, could be
linked to the education commission's report. They
said they think that Reagan should establish a
two-year "agenda of excellence" and order the de-
partment to carry it out. Reagan hinted at this
approach at Seton Hall, saying that the govern-
ment can "help set a national agenda for excel-
lence in education
Republican
National
Committee
Philip Kawior
Director of
Research
May 25, 1983
TO:
CHAIRMAN FAHRENKOPF
ATTENTION: BILL PHILLIPS
by
Executive Assistant to the Chairman
THROUGH:
WILLIAM I. GREENER, III WIGIIGH
Director of Communications
THROUGH:
PHILIP KAWIOR
Director of Research
FROM:
RICHARD HANSEN R.H.
Issues Analyst
SUBJECT:
EDUCATION BRIEFING UPDATE
Contents of this briefing:
I.
President Reagan calls for a merit pay system for
teachers, reaffirms belief that more federal spending
is not the answer for better education.
II. John Glenn on Education.
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-7666.
I. President Reagan calls for a merit pay system for teachers,
reaffirms belief that more federal spending is not the
answer for better education.
In a commencement speech at Seton Hall University in South
Orange, New Jersey on May 21, President Reagan said, in
part:
"We spend more money for education than any other country
in the world - we just aren't getting our money's worth. "
"One of the best ways to do this, and unfortunately it is
opposed by some of the heaviest hitters in the national
education lobby - is by rewarding excellence. Teachers
should be paid and promoted on the basis of their merit."
"Hard-earned tax dollars should encourage the best. They
have no business rewarding incompetence and mediocrity."
"The road to better education cannot be paved with
more and more recycled tax dollars collected,
redistributed and overregulated by Washington bureaucrats. "
"Perhaps the biggest irony about the problems facing
American education today is the fact that we already know
what makes for good schools leadership from
superintendents and principals, dedication from
well-trained teachers, discipline, homework
"
"All these things can be improved without increased
federal funding and interference, and with only modest
increases in local and state support."
"There is much that the federal government can do to help
set a national agenda for excellence in education
in
the weeks ahead I will have more to say on this subject." "
II. John Glenn on Education
Response to Walter Mondale's $11 billion education
program:
"Just to put more money out, to go the traditional route
and just say we'll float more money if we have a problem,
I'd want to see things targeted more to what they're
supposed to accomplish."
(Donald M. Rothberg, "Democratic Candidates Begin
Criticizing Each Other, " Associated Press, 5/20/83)
Response to the report of the National Commission on
Excellence in Education (addressing the Ohio N.E.A.):
"The problem did not start with Reagan, but the
administration's emasculation of federally funded programs
made it worse. (Tom Diemer, "Glenn Gives Reagan Zero On
Education, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 5/7/83)
"Reagan has called for cutting $1 billion from the
educational budget appropriated by Congress, slashing
grant programs, educational incentives and vocational
education efforts.' " (Gene Jordan, "Glenn decries
mediocrity", Columbus Dispatch, 5/6/83)
" (Glenn proposed) 'a federal commitment to educational
excellence' and 'giving students the skills they need to
survive in a rapidly changing world.' That commitment
should include 'training and retraining for the nation's
workers, faced with changing jobs in a technological
age.'" (Gene Jordan, "Glenn decries mediocrity,"
Columbus Dispatch, 5/6/83)
From Announcement speech, 4/21/83:
"In our schools, children from poorer families are
getting neither the help they need nor the skills they
deserve. In our colleges, the Administration's
shortsighted cutbacks in government loan programs -- our
finest investments in the future -- our keeping many
students from enrolling and forcing others to drop out."
"Together, we can prepare the children of today for the
challenges of tomorrow by restoring funding for basic
education, incentives for science education, and loans
for higher education." (Press Release, Senator John
Glenn, 4/21/83)
In July of 1982, Glenn co-sponsored (with Rep. Dave
McCurdy (D.-OK.) companion bills to address the shortage
of qualified science and mathematics teachers. The bills
would have:
-- Forgiven undergraduate student loans to prospective
science and mathematics teachers if the recipients
taught these subjects in elementary or secondary
schools for at least four years.
-- Provided tax credits to businesses for providing
summer positions to science and math teachers, and
for sending employees who have teaching credentials
into the schools as part-time teachers.
Comment:
Glenn appears headed for a "middle ground" position on
education. On the one hand he decries Reagan "cuts" and
calls for restoration of higher federal funding levels. On
the other hand, he criticizes the Mondale big-spending
approach and espouses a rather Reagan-like approach to the
shortage of math and science teachers. Should Glenn,
indeed, stick to the middle ground, he could well present
the toughest opposition for President Reagan on this issue.
Republican
National
Committee
Philip Kawior
Director of
Research
May 18, 1983
TO:
CHAIRMAN FAHRENKOPF
ATTENTION:
BILL PHILLIPS bp
Executive Assistant to the Chairman
THROUGH:
WILLIAM I. GREENER, III WIGILLY
Director of Communications
THROUGH:
PHILIP KAWIOR
Director of Research
FROM:
Richard Hansen
R.H.
Issues Analyst
SUBJECT:
FOLLOW-UP TO YOUR BRIEFING OF MAY 9 ON THE REPORT OF
THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION
Contents of this briefing:
I.
Walter Mondale's $11 billion education program
II.
Excerpts of President Reagan's response to a question on
education at his May 18 news conference
III.
Legislative Update - education
IV.
"Education: The Sleeper Issue," David Broder,
Washington Post, 5/15/83
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-7666.
I. The Mondale Proposal
On Monday, May 9th, Walter Mondale delivered an address at
Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government in
which he attacked President Reagan's education policies. In
sharply-worded rhetoric, he proposed his own five-point,
$11 billion-a-year program in response to the report of the
National Commission on Excellence in Education.
The Rhetoric:
"Mr. Reagan slapped (the Commission) in the face."
"
(I) n answer to (the Commission's) impassioned plea
for educational excellence, Mr. Reagan proposes to
dismantle the federal effort. That is an outrage."
"Two weeks ago, the nation turned to Mr. Reagan. Two
weeks ago, he turned his back on the country, its
children, and its future. Those are tough words, but
I believe them."
"All across the spectrum, and all through the years
(Mr. Reagan) has been no friend to the intellectual
life of our nation. I believe Mr. Reagan is the enemy
of excellence. And I intend to be a President for
excellence."
The Proposal:
A $4.5 billion-a-year "fund for excellence" that would
provide block education grants for local spending to
improve teacher salaries, improve science and math
teaching, develop computer technology courses, lengthen
the school day and set up new programs for motivated
students.
A $3 billion increase for expansion of Title I assistance
for disadvantaged children in public schools, including
bilingual education programs and programs for the
handicapped.
An additional $1.5 billion for student aid programs de-
signed to help students from low-and moderate-income
families go to college.
$1 billion for an "Education Corps" and other programs
to encourage more talented students to become teachers.
Student loans would be forgiven for graduates who spend
four years teaching critical subjects such as math,
science, or languages.
A $1 billion allocation to modernize and strengthen
science and research facilities and programs.
Comment:
Mondale's plan could increase federal spending for education by over
70 percent, from the $15.1 billion Congress appropriated for fiscal
year 1983 to $26.1 billion.
Mondale has played his cards on this issue rather early in the game.
Although his "throw more federal money at the problem" approach
comes as no surprise, he is now on record with a plan, complete
with numbers. We no longer have to speculate as to exactly where
he will be coming from. The Administration and the Party now have
more than enough time to weigh all the variables and formulate a
strategy on the issue of education, especially if the Washington Post's
contention (5/10) that "All six Democratic candidates for president
take a similar line on the question of how to improve education" -
proves to be the case.
Media Coverage:
The Mondale speech and accompanying proposal received minimal media
coverage. No mention was made of Mondale on the three network news
telecasts of May 9, according to the White House News Summary of
May 10. The Washington Post covered the Mondale plan on page A2
on May tenth, while the New York Times relegated the story to page
A18. Papers such as the Los Angeles Times, the Baltimore Sun and
USA Today did not feature reports on Mondale on May 10.
II. Excerpts from President Reagan's response to a question on
education at his May 18 news conference
"
(E) ducation is not the prime responsibility of
the Federal Government and the total budget for education
in the United States is far greater than the defense budget."
"
(T) he Federal Government actually provides less than
10 percent of the cost of education one of the things
that's wrong is that for the 10 percent or less of
funding, the Federal Government has wanted about 50
percent of a voice in dictating to the schools."
"What (the National Commission on Excellence in Education
is) talking about can be corrected without money. It takes
some leadership, it takes some return to basics, it takes
having students that now have to learn what they're supposed
to learn in a class before they're moved on to the next
class.
"
"
(W) e've proven that throwing money at it isn't the
answer, and the Federal Government can never match the
funding of schools at the local and state level.' "
"
I want to implement as completely as possible that
plan (of the National Commission on Excellence in Education)
and it won't cost $11 billion, which a nameless gentleman
(Walter Mondale) has suggested he would advocate that we
spend.
"
Page 5
EDUCATION DAILY
May 18, 1983
22,
Legislative Update
Congressional committees have crowded their schedules in the last few weeks to finish up authorizing legislation
by the May 15 deadline in budget law. The schedule for floor action in both chambers is up in the air on most educa-
tion measures, as committee aides scramble to finish writing the reports that explain the provisions and intent of
the bills.
May 15 also marked the deadline for action on the first concurrent budget resolution for fiscal 1984. The House had no
problem meeting the deadline, having passed its resolution March 24. But the Senate, after about two weeks of floor
debate, sent its measure back to the Budget Committee with à strict deadline of reporting a new measure to the full
Senate by May 18.
RECENT OR UPCOMING ACTION
Fiscal 1984
After about two weeks of deliberation on a first concurrent budget resolution, the
First Concurrent
Senate May 12 defeated all the budget plans before It and told the Senate Budget
Budget Resolution,
Committee to come up with new measure by May 18. Even though the Senate
S. Con. Res. 27,
May 6 approved an amendment to allow $15.9 billion for education, compared with
H. Con. Res. 91
the Budget Committee's $14.9 billion and the House's $16.3 billion, the education
budget is open to question again with this latest move.
Fiscal 1984
The Senate Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations Sub-
Education
committee May 10 heard from witnesses on several education programs, including
Appropriations
student aid and special education (ED, May 11). The House Labor-HHS-ED Ap-
propriations Subcommittee May 23 and 24 plans to hear from education witnesses.
Neither panel has set a date to draft a fiscal 1984 spending measure.
Fiscal 1983
The House Appropriations Committee May 18 is to take up the supplemental ap-
Supplemental
propriations bill drafted May 3 by its Labor, Health and Human Services and
Appropriations
Education Appropriations Subcommittee. The bill is being kept confidential until
full committee action, so it is unknown whether the measure would cut education
programs or give them extra money.
National Science
The House May 12 approved a $1.3 billion NSF authorization bill for fiscal 1984,
Foundation
allowing $50 million more than the administration's $180 million request for im-
Reauthorization,
proving academic research equipment. The Senate Labor and Human Resources
H.R. 2066, S. 1087, S. 1024
Committee May 9 announced approval of Its $1.3 billion bill, which leaves science
education to the science and math bill pending before the Senate, S. 530 (ED, May
10). The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee March 22 ap-
proved the administration's $1.3 billion request verbatim. No date has been set for
floor action on either Senate bill.
Mathematics, Science and
The Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee May 11 approved a $425 mil-
Foreign Language
lion bill to authorize fiscal 1984 math and science education programs ad-
Education Improvement,
ministered by the Education Department and the National Science Foundation.
S. 530, H.R. 1310
The House bill, passed March 2, would authorize the same amount for fiscal 1984
(ED, April 21).
Fair Insurance
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee May 19 is to hold a
Practices,
hearing on the measure to bar sex-based insurance policies, such as those offered
H.R. 100, S. 372
by schools and colleges. The House Energy and Commerce Committee May 17
may take up the House measure, after having dropped it from its daily markup
schedule for nearly two weeks.
Foreign Language
The House Education and Labor Committee May 10 approved the measure to
Proficiency,
authorize $50 million for grants to schools and colleges to improve foreign
H.R. 2708
language instruction (ED, May 11). The measure was approved earlier in the day by
the Elementary, Secondary and Vocational Education Subcommittee, after a hear-
ing May 9. The Postsecondary Education Subcommittee May 5 passed the bill. No
date has been set for floor action.
School Desegregation Aid,
The House Education and Labor Committee May 11 approved the measure to re-
H.R. 2207, S. 402, S. 1256
establish the Emergency School Aid Act, which provided categorical aid to school
districts before creation of the Chapter 2 block grant (ED, May 12). No date has
been set for floor action. The Senate Education, Arts and Humanities Subcommit-
tee this week may hold hearings on the idea. The latest bill, S. 1256, was introduc-
ed May 11 by Sen. Daniel Moynihan, D-N.Y. It is like the House bill, but would
allow $125 million in its first year, compared with the House bill's $100 million.
David S. Broder
THE WASHINGTON POST. SUNDAY, MAY 15, 1983
Education: The Sleeper Issue
7
T. H. Bell is a mild-mannered man
ple's concerns for their children's eco-
to stiffen the intellectual standards for
who understandably has kept a low
nomic futures and the country's com-
both teachers and pupils.
profile as secretary of education under
petitive position." In its new and more
He has thrown his support behind a
a president who promised to abolish
potent form, he said, there is heavy
basic change in the method of paying
the department Bell heads. But I have
emphasis on "academic quality,
teachers. He favors paying incentive
a hunch that Ted Bell is riding one of
competency and accountability."
salaries for "master teachers." This
the big issues of 1984 politics-an issue
Those were the keynotes of, the re-
would help attract the best college sur
that can make things tough for both
cent commission report, one of a spate
dents into teaching and slow the drain
Bell's boss, Ronald Reagan, and the
of studies helping focus this issue for
of talented teachers into business and
leading Democratic presidential hope-
public debate. Reagan responded by
industry, he says.
ful, Walter F. Mondale.
talking about prayer in public schools
Bell invited Tennessee Gov. Lamar
The issue, of course, is education—
and tuition tax credits-issues that
Alexander, a Republican, who is pushing
but more pointedly what the United
Teeter said are tangential to the rising
the "master teacher" plan in his state, to
States is going to do to about the "ris-
public concern. Reagan also disparaged
be a featured witness at the East Lans-
ing tide of mediocrity" that the Na-
the federal role in education in such
ing hearing. Bitter opposition from the
tional Commission on Excellence in
sweeping terms that Mondale was able
Tennessee Education Association side-
Education, appointed by Bell, said last
to charge in a speech last week that
tracked Alexander's proposal on a 5-4
month is threatening to engulf our
the president had "turned his back on
vote in the state senate education com-
schools and nation.
the country, its children and its fu-
mittee last month. But it will be back on
Bell is launching a series of regional
ture." Instead of cutting back federal
the agenda there in 1984-and, Bell
meetings (the first was held May 13 in
aid to education, as Reagan has tried
hopes, in many other states as well.
East Lansing, Mich.) aimed at "light-
repeatedly to do, Mondale said there
The "master teacher" program is no
ing a fire under the legislatures" in
should be a huge increase: $11 billion a
panaces for all our education ills. But a
1984 to improve teachers' training.
year.
poll taken by Peter D. Hart for the
standards and pay, and to toughen the
Bell strikes a middle ground. He de-
Tennessee citizens' group backing
curricula of the country's schools. The
fends existing federal aid, saying the
Alexander's proposal bears out Bell's
flames of that fire already are lighting
programs targeted on poor and handi-
basic contention that the teachers'
up the country.
capped children have been a "demon-
unions may have to accept pay reforms
That's not just my gut feeling, but
strated success." But he contends that
and accountability if the schools are to
the judgment of Robert Teeter, the
the American taxpayers will not sup-
gain new funds. Hart found, for exam-
Detroit-based Republican pollster. He
port the needed additional investment
ple, that only 13 percent of those
told me that "You can see in the data
in education-by any level of govern-
polled would support a tax increase to
that education is becoming a more and
ment-"until we get the kind of
pay for across-the-board improvement
more important issue, involving peo-
changes the commission talked about"
in teachers' salaries. But 57 percent
said they would support a tax increase
to finance salaries "based on merit and
geared to rewarding teachers who meet
higher standards of competence."
About 61 percent endorsed Alexander's
specific proposal for adding a penny to
the sales tax to finance his version of
the "master teacher" plan.
Hart, as it happens, is Mondale's
pollster, too. And Mondale is very close
to the National Education Association,
which, since 1969, has adamantly op-
posed any form of merit pay based on
"instructional performance."
NEA's contention is that there is no
objective measure of teacher compe-
tence and that the imposition of differ-
ential pay would just cause dissension
and wreck morale among teachers. But
when Hart put those exact arguments
to the voters in his Tennessee survey,
they were rejected by a 56-24 margin.
Mondale, as everyone knows, seeks
and expects the NEA endorsement in
October. He proposed dozens of pro-
grams in his lengthy statement on
education last week, but said nothing
about merit pay. A spokeswoman said
that Mondale thinks that kind of deci-
sion should be made by the local com-
munity.
For Mondale, as for Reagan. Ted
Bell's issue may prove a litmus test of
presidentia) stature.
Republican
National
Committee
Philip Kawior
Director of
Research
TO:
CHAIRMAN FAHRENKOPF
ATTN:
BILL PHILLIPS
DATE:
MAY 9, 1983
THRU:
WILLIAM I. GREENER, III WIGIIG
PHILIP KAWIOR PK
FROM:
RICHARD HANSEN R.H.
SUBJ:
BRIEFING ON THE REPORT OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION
ON EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION & REACTION TO IT
Contents of this briefing:
Executive Summary
I.
Summary of A Nation at Risk: The Imperative For
Educational Reform
page 2
II. Political Reaction
4
III. Editorial Reaction
5
IV. Interest Group Reaction
7
Appendices:
A.
Text of President Reagan's April 30th radio address
B.
Capsule brief on Federal Funding of Education
C.
Outline of the Fiscal Year 1984 Education budget request
D.
Members of the National Commission on Excellence in
Education
E.
Washington Post article on the Commission deliberations
RH:sng
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast. Washington. D.C. 20003. (202) 484-7666
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The National Commission on Excellence in Education was
established by Secretary of Education Terrel Bell in August, 1981,
to study the problems of U.S. schools and to make recommendations
for improvements. The 18-member commission was chaired by
David Pierpoint Gardner, president of the University of Utah
and president-designate of the University of California system.
On April 26, the Commission issued a strongly worded 36-page report
entitled A Nation At Risk: The Imperative For Educational Reform.
The commission concluded that "the educational foundations of our
society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity
that threatens our very future as a nation and a people."
Among the Commission's recommendations were: more rigorous and
measurable standards for our schools and universities, strengthened
high school graduation requirements, longer school days and a
longer school year, and improved preparation and higher salaries
for teachers.
The Commission concluded that state and local officials have the
primary responsibility for financing and governing the schools,
while the federal government has the primary responsibility to
identify the national interest in education.
There has been across-the-board support for the findings and
recommendations of the Commission, from President Reagan to Willard
McGuire, president of the National Education Association.
However, despite the Commission's conclusion that it is the
primary responsibility of state and local officials to finance and
govern the schools, reaction to the report in editorials, from
politicians, and from education interest groups has generally
followed the pattern of support for the report, coupled with
attacks on President Reagan's education policies and a call for
greater federal support for education.
There has been an unusual scarcity of comment from political
figures to date, most likely due to the preoccupation of Congress
with issues such as the nuclear freeze and Central American
policies over the past couple of weeks. However, concurrent
resolutions were introduced in both Houses of Congress on April
28th, which resolve that it is national policy that the federal
government contribute to the support of education in the United
States by, among a number of provisions, "the implementation of an
effective federal role in education through a Department of
Education " What public comment there has been from politicians
has been from Democrats taking the opportunity to attack
Administration policies. Republicans have been virtually silent.
In his April 30th weekly radio address, President Reagan praised
the Commission report and reaffirmed his commitment to restoration
of parental choice and increased competition between schools
through initiatives such as tuition tax credits, vouchers, and
education savings accounts; and pointed out that big budgets are not
the answer, that federal spending on education has increased 17-
fold in the last 20 years.
Editorial comment in the nation's newspapers was overwhelmingly
critical of the President's response to the Commission report,
generally calling for greater national leadership and a larger
federal role.
Within days of the Commission report's release, two other reports
were released which drew similar conclusions. The first was a
preliminary report by the National Task Force on Education for
Economic Growth, made up of eight governors and 31 national
business and education leaders. The final report is expected early
this summer. The second report was released by the Twentieth
Century Fund, a private research foundation chaired by Robert C.
Wood, former H.U.D. Secretary.
It is important to note that the Commission report cites "the most
recent" Gallup Poll of the public's attitudes toward the public
schools (1982), which found that "public education should be the
top priority for additional Federal funds. Education occupied
first place among 12 funding categories considered in the survey -
above health care, welfare, and military defense, with 55 percent
selecting public education as one of their first three choices." "
In conclusion, we should not be surprised to hear increased
activity among Democrats and some Republicans in calling for
greater federal support for education, and among Democrats
attacking the President's education policies.
I. Summary of A Nation At Risk: The Imperative For Educational Reform
Conclusion
"Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in
commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is
being overtaken by competitors throughout the world."
"If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on
America the mediocre educátional performance that exists today,
we might well have viewed it as an act of war. "
"We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking,
unilateral educational disarmament."
"The educational foundations of our society are presently being
eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very
future as a Nation and a people."
-2-
Indicators of the Risk
O U.S. students were last seven times on 19 academic tests and
never first or second, compared with students in other
industrialized nations.
Some 23 million American adults are functionally illiterate.
About illiterate. 13 percent of all 17-year-olds are functionally
As illiterate. many as 40 percent of minority youth may be functionally
Average verbal scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Tests (S.A.T.s)
fell over 50 points from 1963-1980 and math scores dropped
nearly 40 points during the same period.
0
Only one-fifth of 17-year-olds can write a persuasive essay and
only steps. one-third can solve a mathematics problem requiring several
Reasons for the Risk
Secondary school curricula have been homogenized, diluted, and
diffused to the point that they no longer have a central
purpose.
The amount of homework for high school seniors has decreased to
the point where two-thirds report less than 1 hour a night.
The time spent on courses in science and mathematics by students
in other industrialized nations is three times what even the
most science and mathematics-oriented students in the U.S. spend.
In England and other industrialized countries, it is not unusual
for academic high school students to spend 8 hours a day at
school, 220 days per year. In the U.S., the typical school day
lasts 6 hours and the school year is 180 days.
Too many teachers are being drawn from the bottom quarter of
graduating high school and college students.
The average salary after 12 years of teaching is only $17,000
per year.
One-fifth of all public 4-year colleges must accept every high
school graduate within the state regardless of program followed
or grades received.
-3-
Recommendations of the Commission
Strengthened high school graduation requirements, to include 4
years of English, 3 years of mathematics, 3 years of science, 3
years of social studies and one-half year of computer science.
For the college-bound, 2 years of a foreign language.
More rigorous and measurable standards and higher expectations
for academic performance and student conduct in schools,
colleges and universities. Raised admission standards for
4-year colleges and universities.
More effective use of the existing school day, 7-hour school
days and a 200- to 220-day school year.
Improved preparation of teachers and steps to make teaching a
more rewarding and respected profession.
-- Aspiring teachers should be required to meet higher
standards and to demonstrate an aptitude for teaching and
competence in an academic discipline.
-- Salaries for teachers should be increased and should be
professionally competitive.
-- An 11-month contract for teachers.
-- Incentives, such as grants and loans to attract outstanding
students to teaching.
Responsibilities
State and local officials have the primary responsibility for
financing and governing the schools.
The Federal Government has the primary responsibility to
identify the national interest in education.
II. POLITICAL REACTION
On April 28th, identical concurrent resolutions were introduced
in the Senate and the House which state: "Resolved that it is
the national policy that the Federal Government contribute to
the support of education in the United States." Included in the
resolution is the statement: "The implementation of an
effective Federal role in education through a Department of
Education, acting as a center for the interpretation of laws,
for meeting national needs, for setting priorities, and for
distributing Federal support for education."
-- Senate Con. Res. 29 was introduced by Senators Hollings
(D.-S.C.) and Hatfield (R.-Oregon).
-4-
-- House Con. Res. 118 was introduced by Reps. AuCoin
(D.-Oregon), Simon (D.-Illinois), Coelho (D.-Calif.) and
Miller (D.-Calif.)
-- The resolutions were referred to the appropriate committees.
O In the Democratic response to President Reagan's weekly radio
address of April 30, Rep. Norman Mineta (D.-Calif.) charged that
the President's education policies were marked by "chronic
neglect." "The President does not seem to understand that it is
his policies and his propositions that threaten public education
in our nation as it has never been threatened before."
Rep. Carl Perkins (D.-Kentucky), chairman of the House
Education and Labor Committee, said, "As the president commends
the commission for its work, I would like to see him back up
these words by asking for more money for education, not less
Reports are helpful, but actions, not words, are what really
count."
Sen. Claiborne Pell (D.-R.I.) said, "On balance, the Commission
has done a valuable and highly credible job Yet
it
makes
no
specific reference to the Federal programs now in effect, and
which are so seriously threatened by the proposals advocated by
the Reagan Administration over the past two years.
O In a letter to Senator Stafford (R.-Vermont), eight Democratic
Senators called for Congressional hearings to "consider" the
conclusions of the report. The letter was signed by Senators
Kennedy (D.-Mass.), Pell (D.-R.I.), Randolf (D.-W.Va.), Eagleton
(D.-MO.), Riegle (D.-Mich.), Metzenbaum (D.-Ohio), Matsunaga
(D.-Hawaii), and Dodd (D.-Conn.).
o North Carolina Governor James Hunt (D.) called on President
Reagan to convene a meeting of the nation's governors to discuss
the implications of the report.
III. EDITORIAL REACTION
O
New York Times (5/2)
"Overcoming these impediments requires strong national
leadership. Instead of exerting it, President Reagan blames the
Federal Government for harming education."
Los Angeles Times (4/29)
"In terms of advancing the national debate, President Reagan was
no help Prayer will not, we think, find the answers to the
problems the commission outlined; leadership will."
-5-
Wall Street Journal (4/28)
"The liberal educational reformers had a running field as open
as it ever gets in the public-policy game, and they blew it.
They failed."
Washington Post (4/28)
"Though the Reagan Administration differs, the commission said
there is a federal as well as a local obligation. And it will
be expensive. "
Chicago Sun-Times (4/28)
"It's a national challenge. President Reagan flunks it
He
mounted his old hobbyhorse tuition tax credits, vouchers,
educational savings accounts, voluntary school prayer and
abolishing the Department of Education. The report mentioned
none of that nonsense.
USA Today (4/29)
"It won't be easy. It will take more tax money - local, state
and federal. "
The Daily Oklahoman (4/28)
"Money is not the pressing need to revitalize American
education, but rather a rededication to the primary mission of
the public schools - thorough grounding in the basics."
Kansas City Times (4/28)
"How can Mr. Reagan interpret the report as a nod for further
federal retreat from supporting the schools? This is a classic
example of listening but not understanding. "
Dallas Times - Herald (4/28)
"In actuality the federal government is the only possible
vehicle for providing leadership on a problem as broad as
education and with such obvious national implications."
Seattle Post-Intelligencer (4/28)
"President Reagan's response was singularly unhelpful
Congress must take a more positive view of the federal
government's responsibility.' "
-6-
IV. INTEREST GROUP REACTION
National Education Association president Willard McGuire:
"It ignores or contradicts many of the priorities promoted by
President Reagan
We agree that there needs to be more money
but disagree about where the money should come from
The
major reforms will require a big boost from the federal
government
"
(Philadelphia Inquirer, 4/27)
American Federation of Teachers president Albert Shanker:
"We could not agree more with the proposals
Nowhere in the
commission's report is there mention of the Reagan
Administration's major ideas with respect to education: tuition
tax credits, vouchers, school prayer, etc. The report
rebuffs
the Administration by ignoring them
"
(New York Times, 5/1)
National Association of State Boards of Education executive
director Phyllis Blaunstein:
"We commend the Commission on Excellence
The 12 percent
decline in federal spending for elementary and secondary
education over the past two years clearly has had a major role
in the educational disarmament which the Commission deplores.
State and local support systems are unable to fill this void
at a time of
record unemployment and financial crisis.
(Press Release, NASBE)
American Association of School Administrators executive
director Paul Salmon:
"The more I read it, the more ecstatic I am
It flies in the
face of many of the things the Reagan Administration has stood
for " (Boston Globe, 4/27)
National PTA spokeswoman Lorie Nies:
"PTA leaders are curious about where the money will come from. "
(Rocky Mountain News, 4/27)
American Association of State Colleges and Universities
president Allan Ostar:
"We are very concerned
about the need for higher standards for
teacher education. But (we) think the federal government must
step in with enough money to allow schools to raise salaries. "
(Higher Education Daily, 4/28)
-7-
National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities
president John Phillips:
"The commission
amassed a group of national statistics that
suggest a set of national problems that beg for a national
solution. Yet here is an ideological thing within which this
Administration is operating that tried to minimize the federal
role and maximize the state and local role."
(Higher Education Daily, 4/28)
-8-
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Houston, Texas)
For Release at 12:06 pm EDT
(11:06 am CDT) SATURDAY, APRIL 30, 1983
RADIO ADDRESS
BY THE PRESIDENT
TO THE NATION
Roosevelt Room
My fellow Americans, I'd like to talk with you today about a subject
of paramount concern to every American family -- the education of
our children. You may have heard the disturbing report this week by
the National Commission on Excellence in Education that I created
shortly after taking office. Their study reveals that our education
system, once the finest in the world, is in a sorry state of disre-
pair. We're a people who believe that each generation will stand upo
the shoulders of the one before it, the accomplishments of each ever
greater than the last. Our families immigrated here to make a better
life, not just for themselves, but for their children and their
children's children.
Education was not simply another part of American society. It was
the key that opened the golden door. Parents who never finished high
school scrimp and save so that their children can go to college.
Yet today, we're told in a tough report card on our commitment,
that the educational skills of today's students will not match those
of their parents. About thirteen percent of our seventeen-year olds
are functional illiterates and, among minority youth, the rate is
closer to forty percent. More than two-thirds of our high schoolers
can't write a docent essay. Our grade is a stark and uncompromising
"U" for unsatisfactory. We must act now and with energy if we're
to avoid failing an entire generation.
Let me hasten to point out that America's children are just as smart
today as they ever were: But most of them do less than an hour of
homework a night. Many have abandoned vocational and college prep
courses for general ones. When they graduate from high school
they're prepared for neither work, nor higher education.
The study indicates the quality of learning in our classrooms has
been declining for the last two decades -- a fact which won't L.
surprise many parents or the students educated during that period.
Those were years when the federal presence in education grew and
grew. Parental control over local schools shrank. Bureaucracy
ballooned until accountability seemed lost. Parents were frustrated
and didn't know where to turn.
Well, government seemed to forget that education begins in the home
where it's a parental right and responsibility. Both our private
and our public schools exist to aid your families in the instruction
of your children. For too many years, people here in Washington
acted like your families' wishes were only getting in the way.
We've seen what that "Washington knows best" attitude has wrought.
Our high standards of literacy and educational diversity have been
slipping. Weel-intentioned but misguided policy makers have stamped
a uniform mediocrity on the rich variety and excellence that had
been our heritage.
I think most parents agree it's time to change course.
we must move education forward again with common sense as our
guide. We must put the basics back in the schools and the
parents back in charge.
The National Commission for Excellence in Education recommends
requiring four years of English in high school and three solid
years each of math and science. It suggests more and longer
school days, higher goals, and tougher standards for matriculation.
Our teachers should be better trained and better paid. And, we
must DO longer make excuses for those who are not qualified to
teach.
Parents, please demand these and other reforms in your local
schools, and hold your local officials accountable. Let our
parents once again be the rudder that puts American education
back on course to its success through excellence.
There are things the federal government can and must do to ensure
educational excellence, but bigger budgets are not the answer.
Federal spending increased seventeen-fold during the same 20 years
that marked such a dramatic decline in quality.
We will continue our firm commitment to support the education
efforts of state and local governments. But the focus of our
agenda is, as it must be, to restore parental choice and influence
and to increase competition between schools.
We've sent to the Congress a tuition tax credit plan, and
proposed a voucher system to help low and middle income families
afford the schools of their choice. We've proposed education
savings accounts to help families save for college education.
We've sent legislation to the Congress that would create block
grants for the training of math and science teachers, and another
proposal would encourage those teachers to keep abreast of new
developments in their fields.
We've also begun an effort to honor some of our finest math and
science teachers. For the sake of all our children, our country,
and our future, we must join together in a national campaign to
restore excellence in American education. At home, in school,
in state government and at the federal level, we must make sure
we have put our children first and that their education is a top
priority.
"Train UD a child in the way he should go," Solomon wrote, "and
when he is old he will not depart from it." Well, that's the God-
given responsibility of each parent and the trust of every child.
It is a compact between generations we must be sure to keep.
I would like to close with a special challenge to America's students
who may think I just wantto pile on more homework. Your generation
is coming of age in one of the most challenging and exciting times
in our history. High technology is revolutionizing our industries,
renewing our economy, and promising new hope and opportunity in the
years ahead. But you must earn the rewards of the future with plain
hard work. The harder you work today, the greater your rewards
will be tomorrow. Make sure you get the training and the skills
you need to take advantage of the new opportunities ahead. Get a
good education. That's the key to success. It will open your mind
and give wings to your spirit. There's a dazzling new world waiting
for you. My generation only discovered it. But you, by summoning
all the faith, effort and discipline you can muster can claim it
for America.
Until next week, thanks for listening. And God bless you.
# # 1
FEDERAL FUNDING OF EDUCATION
President Reagan's Fiscal Year 1984 budget request for Department
of Education programs is $13.2 billion. The House Budget
Committee has voted for $16.3 billion, while the Senate Budget
Committee would allow $14.9 billion. However, an amendment
offered by Senators Stafford (R-VT) and Hollings (D-SC)
subsequent to the release of the Commission report would add an
additional $1.5 billion, which would bring the Senate total for
education spending to $16.4 billion.
For Fiscal Year 1983, the 97th Congress approved a $15.1 billion
budget for education in the lame duck session, in contrast to the
$8.8 billion President Reagan had requested for FY 1983.
However, the President's $8.8 billion request was for a
"Foundation for Education Assisstance," in lieu of the Department
of Education, which he wanted dismantled. Some education
programs for FY 1983 were to have been included in the
President's initial Federalism program, hence the Administration
foresaw federal expenditures for education to be $13.1 billion
for FY 1983. Congress, of course, did not approve dismantling
the Department of Education.
Jimmy Carter foresaw $15.8 billion in federal spending for
education in the FY 1982 budget, his last budget submission.
Actual spending for FY 1982 totaled $14.1 billion, following
President Reagan's FY 1982 budget revisions. The level of
federal spending for education had been $9.1 billion in FY 1977
prior to Carter.
As the President has stated, federal spending for education has
increased seventeen-fold, from the $900 million level of the
early 1960s to $15 billion. A pivotal year was 1965 when "Great
Society" legislation doubled federal spending for education from
1965 to 1966. By 1969, it had nearly doubled again. The
Department of Education, a campaign promise of Jimmy Carter, was
created in 1979.
FISCAL YEAR 1984 EDUCATION DEPARTMENT BUDGET REQUEST
Secretary T.H. Bell announced on January 31, 1983, President
Reagan's Education Department budget request of $13.2
billion for educational programs for fiscal year (FY)
1984. Secretary Bell stressed the Department will again
strive to assist the disabled, the disadvantaged, and
college students who demonstrate need.
Secretary Bell unveiled five new aspects of the FY 1984
budget:
1. Optional voucher program. This program would broaden
opportunities for parents of educationally deprived students
to send their children to schools that best meet their
needs. At the option of local school boards or states, Title
I funds would be distributed to the parents as vouchers, and
parents would have the option of which school their children
would attend. Details are still being formulated for this
program.
2. Science and Math Initiative. The Initiative proposes a
State Block Grant program to help states and local education
agencies improve their science and math programs. This
initiative is to increase the number of qualified math and
science teachers, by retraining and improving their skills,
in a period of one year.
3. Self-help efforts of needy college students. This is a
new approach to student financial aid, which emphasizes a
return to traditional roles of students and families in
meeting college costs and which provides Federal aid to help
overcome remaining financial barriers.
4. Tax Incentive program. This proposal encourages families
to save money towards college costs. This is intended to
eventually reduce Federal outlays and subsidies over the
long run. The proposed legislation for Education Savings
Accounts (ESA) would exempt interest and dividends earned on
deposits to an ESA account if the funds were used for higher
education expenses incurred by the student. This
legislation is targeted to provide tax benefits for lower
and middle-income families.
5. Tuition Tax Credits. President Reagan proposed tuition
tax credit legislation in 1982. The legislation was
reported out by the Senate Finance Committee, but was not
acted on before the close of the 97th Congress. It would
give parents who choose to send their elementary and
secondary students to a non-public school a partial tax
credit and would promote competition for excellence in the
American education system. No credits would be permitted to
those who send their children to racially discriminatory
schools.
Secretary Bell stressed that the FY 1984 budget reflects the
current economic situation and that the Federal deficit
needs to be reduced.
The FY 1984 student financial aid budget places more
emphasis on student self-help through loans and work.
With this new philosophy comes an increase in the FY 1984
College Work-Study (CWS) program by 57%. The Guaranteed
Student Loan (GSL) loan volume shall also increase by 22%
over 1982 figures. National Direct Student Loans will have
a half billion dollars available for new loans without
Federal appropriations. The Pell Grant program is projected
to increase from $2.4 to $2.7 billion and grants will be
adjusted to reflect current educational costs. During the
1982-1983 academic year, the maximum Pell Grant was $1800,
and for academic year 1983-1984, the maximum Pell Grant will
increase to $3000. Eighty percent of the Pell Grant program
will be targeted towards students with family incomes below
$12,000.
The emphasis of the FY 1984 Education Department Budget in
terms of student aid legislation will be towards families
and students taking a more active role in financing a
college education.
The Education Department plans to resubmit legislation to
consolidate the vocational and adult education programs.
The intent of this legislation is to enhance the role of
vocational and adult education as an essential element in
economic development. This legislation will increase
flexibility for state and local education administrators.
MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION
David P. Gardner (Chair)
Robert V. Haderlein
President, University of Utah
Immediate Past-President
and President-Elect, University
National School Boards
of California
Association
Salt Lake City, Utah
Girard, Kansas
Yvonne W. Larsen (Vice-Chair)
Gerald Holton
Immediate Past-President
Mallinckrodt Professor of
San Diego City School Board
Physics & Professor of the
San Diego, California
History of Science
Harvard University
William O. Baker
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Chairman of the Board (Retired)
Bell Telephone Laboratories
Annette Y. Kirk
Murray Hill, New Jersey
Kirk Associates
Mecosta, Michigan
Anne Campbell
Former Commissioner of Education
Margaret S. Marston
State of Nebraska
Member, Virginia State
Lincoln, Nebraska
Board of Education
Arlington, Virginia
Emeral A. Crosby
Principal
Albert H. Quie
Northern High School
Former Governor
Detroit, Michigan
State of Minnesota
St. Paul, Minnesota
Charles A. Foster, Jr.
Immediate Past-President
Francisco D. Sanchez, Jr.
Foundation for Teaching Economics
Superintendent of Schools
San Francisco, California
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Norman C. Francis
Glenn T. Seaborg
President
Professor of Chemistry &
Xavier University of Louisiana
Nobel Laureate
New Orleans, Louisiana
University of California
Berkeley, California
A. Bartlett Giamatti
President
Jay Sommer
Yale University
National Teacher of the
New Haven, Connecticut
Year, 1981-82, Foreign
Language Department
Shirley Gordon
New Rochelle High School
President
New Rochelle, New York
Highline Community College
Midway, Washington
Richard Wallace, Principal
Lutheran High School East
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
W.r.
5/5
Thursday
THE ASHINGTON POST
INSIDE: THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
When Nobel laureate Glenn T.
sity of California system, knew
duced the next draft and many of
Seaborg was asked to serve on
Bell when the secretary was com-
the final report's most memorable
the National Commission on Ex-
missioner of education-ii Utah.
lines, such as "History is not kind
cellence in Education. he at first
Gardner, according to several
to idlers."
refused. Gerald Holton, a distin-
commission members, stayed in
Seaborg, a chemist at the Uni-
guished physics professor at Har-
the background for months as the
versity of California at Berkeley,
vard University, agreed to partic-
commission held hearings around
also left his imprint on the final
ipate only after he was promised
the country, accumulating evi-
document. He came up with the
he could write a minority report.
dence. There apparently was
phrase: "We have, in effect, been
Even Education Secretary Terrel
never any serious disagreement
committing an act of unthinking,
H. Bell had some misgivings when
about the dismal state of the
unilateral educational disarma-
he put the commission together in
American education system.
ment."
August. 1981.
Several commissioners, howev-
Baker of Bell Labs lobbied suc-
"I hoped it would have an im-
er, have strong political views, and
cessfully for strong language about
pact." Bell said in a recent inter-
there were sharp disputes over
foreign competition and reforms
view. "But it was a bit of a chance,
how to deal with the problems.
in the education of gifted chil-
a roll of the dice."
Yale President A. Bartlett Gia.
dren. Quie had a strong influence
It was an insider commission,
matti, for example. is an outspo-
on a section that gave advice to
made up almost entirely of people
ken critic of the Reagan admin-
parents and students.
with direct connections to educa-
istration and a strong advocate of
The report was supposed to be
tion. Among its 18 members there
increased federal funding for ed-
released April 7, but Gardner told
was only one politician. former
ucation. Annette Y. Kirk, a for-
Bell that the commission still
Minnesota governor Albert H.
mer teacher, is an outspoken con-
didn't have a consensus after a
Quie. and one businessman, Wil-
servative and the wife of Russell
working meeting in Chicago.
liam O. Baker, the retired chair-
Kirk, a well-known conservative
Rather than call another meeting,
writer and lecturer. She is an ad-
Gardner resolved the remaining
man of Bell Laboratories.
vocate of tuition tax credits and
issues by long distance telephone
Nobody knew what, if anything.
educational vouchers.
calls.
the politically diverse group would
Giamatti, however, attended
A scathing critique of schools of
be able to agree on-or whether
only one commission meeting, and
education was reduced to a few
anyone would listen.
was never a real force. Kirk and
lines. Paragraphs on the federal
So almost everyone involved
other conservatives like Yvonne
role in education were moved. In
has been surprised with the over-
W. Larsen, past president of the
the end, all 18 commissioners and
whelmingly favorable response the
San Diego School Board, never
Bell endorsed all its findings.
commission's report. "A Nation at
felt it necessary to caucus inde-
At the long-embattled Educa-
Risk," has received since it was
pendently. "It was Gardner's lead-
tion Department, the report is
released last week. It has been
ership," Kirk said. "He really tried
regarded as a major victory for
embraced by everyone from Pres-
to accommodate our views. He's a
Bell. "He knows the administra-
ident Reagan to Albert Shanker,
gentieman and a real diplomat."
tion has given the department to
president of the American Feder-
Commissioners were given
the New Right." said one longtime
ation of Teachers.
three staff-written drafts of the
department official. "But he really
This was due in large part to
report in January. The drafts were
wanted to do something besides
commission Chairman David P.
flat and loaded with jargon, ac-
carrying Reagan's water to the
Gardner's skill in guiding the
cording to several commissioners.
Hill, which he thinks is his duty. I
commission through some perilous
"What we wanted to say wasn't
think he feels better about this
political waters. Gardner. presi-
coming off. There was no drama.
than anything he's done since he
dent of the University of Utah
no clarion call," recalled Kirk.
came to town."
and president-elect of the Univer-
Holton, a skilled writer, pro-
-Bill Peterson