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
472802393
label
Briefing Book: President's Education Summit with Governors - 9/27-28/89
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
472802393
contentType
document
title
Briefing Book: President's Education Summit with Governors - 9/27-28/89
citationUrl
identifierLocal
CF00555-010
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Andrew Card Briefing Books Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
472802393
coverageEndDate
day
28
logicalDate
1989-09-28
month
9
year
1989
coverageStartDate
day
27
logicalDate
1989-09-27
month
9
year
1989
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e5d1f108ddcee0da
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2007-0107-F; 2025-0373-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:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Card, Andrew, Files
Subseries:
Briefing Books
OA/ID Number:
CF00555/2
Folder ID Number:
CF00555-010
Folder Title:
Briefing Book: President's Education Summit with Governors - 9/27-28/89
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
22
3
1
w
Fining
Charlottesville, Virginia
September 27-28, 1989
Charlottesville, Virginia
September 27-28, 1989
"EDUCATION IS OUR MOST ENDURING
LEGACY, VITAL TO EVERYTHING
WE ARE AND CAN BECOME."
Gg Bush
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
THE PRESIDENT'S EDUCATION SUMMIT WITH GOVERNORS
SEPTEMBER 27 - 28, 1989
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
GENERAL SUMMIT INFORMATION
REGISTRATION/INFORMATION DESKS
The credentialing system for the Summit will be strictly
enforced. Credentials will be provided for only 2 persons
accompanying each Governor - one for the Education Advisor and
one for the Governor's designated Staff Aide. A specific type of
credential has been developed for each of these categories.
These credentials can be picked-up at the registration/
information desks listed below.
A media credential will be issued to one Governor's press
secretary which will permit access to the Summit Press
Headquarters. These credentials will be located in the Summit
Press Center.
Registration/Information desks locations and operation times are
as follows:
Tuesday, September 26
3:00 pm - 7:00 pm - Registration/Information Desk
Lobby of Sheraton Hotel
Wednesday, September 27
8:30 am - 1:00 pm - - Registration/Information Desk
Lobby of Sheraton Hotel
2:00 pm - 5:30 pm - University of Virginia Grounds
Lawn area adjacent to Randall Hall
Thursday, September 28
7:30 am - 3:00 pm - University of Virginia Grounds
Rear area between Pavilions III & V
The registration/information desk sites on the University of
Virginia grounds have been located in close proximity to the
transportation arrival/departure points for that day's events.
Credentials must be worn to all Summit events and absolutely no
one will be admitted without proper credentials. The only
exception to this general rule is for the Convocation on
Thursday. Each Governor will receive tickets for additional
staff who are not credentialed Summit participants.
Each Governor and spouse will be issued a security pin by the
United States Secret Service which must be worn during all
official Summit events. In addition, a special identification
badge will be provided to each Governor and spouse.
Transportation
Shuttle service for Governors' parties is planned - by event -
from the Boar's Head Inn and the Sheraton Hotel to the University
of Virginia grounds. A shuttle schedule will be available at
your hotel.
Please note that the schedule will be strictly followed, so plan
to arrive at the designated locations early.
Office Services
A small Office Services operation is available in the Conference
Center lobby at the Boar's Head Inn at the following times:
Tuesday, September 26 - 1:00 pm - 7:00 pm
Wednesday, September 27 - 9:00 am - 6:30 pm
Thursday, September 28 - 7:00 am - 4:00 pm
A second Office Services site, located in Pavilion VI on the
Grounds of the University of Virginia (close to the Rotunda),
will be operational on Wednesday: 12:30 pm - 6:30 pm and
Thursday: 7:00 am - 4:00 pm.
Copier and fax equipment, along with computer equipment, are
provided in these operations. Both locations have 2 staff
members assigned to provide assistance with your office services
needs. The telephone number for Office Services at the Boar's
Head Inn is (804) 972-7431 and in Pavilion VI is (804) 980-8835.
The telephone number for the fax machine in Pavilion VI is (804)
972-7402.
Message Center
A Summit Message Center (804) 980-8846, located in Pavilion VI,
will be operational from 8:00 am - 6:00 pm on Wednesday,
September 27 and 6:30am - 4:00 pm on Thursday, September 28.
Messages received at the Message Center will be posted on a
message board which will be located on the ground level entrance
of Pavilion VI. We will attempt to hand deliver urgent messages;
however, Summit participants are encouraged to check the message
board frequently for messages, and callers with non-urgent
messages are encouraged to leave them with the appropriate hotel
operator.
Additional summit-related information, transportation shuttles,
including telephone numbers, and a map of the University of
Virginia Grounds will be distributed at the Registration/
Information Desk.
WORKING GROUP ROOM ASSIGNMENTS
Room locations for the working group sessions are as follows:
Wednesday, September 27
4:00pm - 5:30pm - Governance: Who Is In Charge?
Lower West Oval
4:00pm - 5:30pm - Teaching: Revitalizing a Profession
Upper West Oval
4:00pm - 5:30pm - The Learning Environment
Upper East. Oval
Thursday, September 28
8:00am - 9:15am - Choice and Restructuring
Lower West Oval
8:00am - 9:15am - A Competitive Workforce and Life-Long Learning
Upper West Oval
8:00am - 9:15am - Post-secondary Education: Strengthening Access
and Excellence
Upper East Oval
SPECIAL SESSIONS FOR EDUCATION PROFESSIONALS
On Wednesday at 4:00pm in Pavilion VII a special session for
Education Professionals has been planned to run concurrently with
the Summit's first working group sessions. On Thursday morning
there will be a light breakfast available in Pavilion VII for
Education Professionals and other credentialed staff members.
There will be a staff luncheon in Pavilion VII on Thursday for
those credentialed staff not attending the working luncheon.
Additional information will be available on site.
DRESS
The weather in Charlottesville has become more fall-like in the
past few days. Daytime temperatures range in the 60-70's and
evening temperatures may fall into the 40's. Also, please note
that there will be numerous occasions in which participants will
walk from site to site, so flat-heeled walking shoes are
recommended.
TRANSPORTATION
All hotels are equipped with limited motor pool and dispatch
located in the main lobby. See your individual schedule for
specific bus movements for major events. The Education Summit
will provide transportation either by bus or individual vehicle
for all official events. In your hotel please contact your
dispatch in the lobby for information or you may call 972-7400,
if you require assistance in transportation.
All buses will be plainly marked for your identification and to
expedite proper boarding. Please check your group's individual
movements for times and places of departure.
TRANSPORTATION
First Lady Session with Spouses
of Governors and Cabinet
The First Lady and Spouses will follow the identical movement of
the President and the Governors except for the Thursday First
Lady Summit Session. Thursday movements will be by foot or by
mini-bus as follows:
Wednesday, September 27, 1989
9:15 a.m.
Depart from President/Governors/Cabinet Schedule.
First Lady and Spouses leave Second Planning
at Rotunda by foot enroute Newcomb Hall for First
Lady's Summit Session.
10:55 a.m.
First Lady and Spouses depart Newcomb Hall enroute
University Hall on three mini-buses via police
escort
12:25 p.m.
First Lady and Spouses depart University Hall
enroute Bayly for luncheon on three mini-buses
via police escort
2:20 p.m.
First Lady and Spouses depart Bayly Museum for
Rotunda. Join President and Governors/Cabinet and
continue with their movement.
President's Education Summit
Governors and Spouses Movements
September 27-28, 1989
General Information
All major movements between the Boars Head Inn and official
summit sites will be made by bus. Your buses will be plainly
marked.
Specific Instructions
The following is a time line of the departure and arrival times
to each event during the course of the Summit. PLEASE BE PROMPT
FOR DEPARTURES
September 27, 1989
2:15 p.m.
Governors/Spouses depart Boar's Head enroute
Old Cabell Hall for Opening Ceremony via buses
5:40 p.m.
Governors/Spouses depart Rotunda for the
Boar's Head Inn via buses
7:00 p.m.
Governors/Spouses depart Boar's Head for
Monticello via buses
9:30 p.m.
Governors/Spouses depart Monticello enroute
Boar's Head via buses
September 28, 1989
7:15 a.m.
Governors/Spouses depart Boar's Head enroute
Rotunda via buses
9:15 a.m.
Spouses walk from Rotunda to Newcomb Hall
10:55 a.m.
Spouses move from Newcomb Hall to University Hall
via spouses motorcade in buses
11:15 a.m.
Governors motorcade from Rotunda to University Hall
via buses
12:30 p.m.
Governors motorcade from University Hall to Newcomb
Hall via buses
12:25 p.m.
Spouses depart University Hall to Bayly Art Museum
for First Lady Luncheon via buses
2:20 p.m.
Spouses depart Bayly Art Museum for Rotunda via
buses
2:30 p.m.
Governors walk from Newcomb Hall to Rotunda
3:40 p.m.
Governors/Spouses depart Rotunda for Boar's
Head via buses
TRANSPORTATION
Governors' Education Advisors
and Staff
The Boars Head Inn and the Sheraton are equipped with a limited
Motor Pool. Major movements will be accomplished by buses.
Dispatch area is located in the hotel lobby.
Schedule of Transportation movements for Governors' Staff.
PLEASE BE PROMPT.
Wednesday, September 27, 1989
1:15 p.m.
Staff Bus departs Boars Head to Memorial Gym
for Press Briefing
1:45 p.m.
Staff Bus departs Sheraton enroute Old Cabell Hall
2:30 p.m.
Education Advisors depart Boars Head enroute
Old Cabell Hall
3:45 p.m.
Staff buses depart Hospital Drive drop-off/pick-
up point enroute Sheraton
5:40 p.m.
Staff buses depart McCormick Avenue departure
point enroute Boars Head and Sheraton
6:40 p.m.
Governors' Credentialed Staff depart Boars Head
and Sheraton via buses to Birdwood for dinner.
9:30 p.m.
Governors Credentialed Staff return via buses to
Boars Head and Sheraton
Thursday, September 28, 1989
7:30 a.m.
Governors' Education Advisora and staff depart
Boars Head and Sheraton enroute Rotunda
10:15 a.m.
Governors' Staff departs Hospital Drive enroute
University Hall
11:00 a.m.
Education Advisors depart Rotunda to University
Hall via Presidential Motorcade (Please be prompt)
12:20 p.m.
Education Advisors depart University Hall enroute
Newcomb Hall via Presidential Motorcade in buses
(Please be prompt)
12:35 p.m.
Governors' Staff departs main entrance of
University Hall enroute Rotunda area via buses
3:40 p.m.
Buses depart Rotunda enroute Hotels following
final statement
THE PRESIDENT'S EDUCATION SUMMIT WITH GOVERNORS
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
SEPTEMBER 27 - 28, 1989
WEDNESDAY, September 27, 1989
2:15 PM
Governors and Spouses depart Boar's Head Inn
en route Old Cabell Hall
3:15 PM
Welcoming Ceremony at Old Cabell Hall - The
President and Mrs. Bush, Governors, The
Cabinet, Spouses and Distinguished Guests
3:45 PM
Procession to the Rotunda - The President and
Mrs. Bush, Governors, The Cabinet, and
Spouses
4:00 PM
Opening Work Sessions in Rotunda - The
President and Mrs. Bush, Governors, The
Cabinet, Spouses
5:30 PM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses conclude
participation in Work Sessions and depart
Rotunda en route Boar's Head Inn
7:00 PM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses depart for
dinner at Monticello
7:30 PM
Reception at Monticello - The President and
Mrs. Bush, Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses
8:00 PM
Dinner at Monticello - The President and Mrs.
Bush, Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses
9:40 PM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses conclude
dinner and depart Monticello en route Boar's
Head Inn
2
THURSDAY, September 28, 1989
7:15 AM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses depart Boar's
Head Inn for Continential Breakfast on
Rotunda Veranda
7:30 AM
Continental Breakfast on Rotunda Veranda -
The President and Mrs. Bush, Governors, The
Cabinet, Spouses
8:00-9:15 AM
Second Work Session in Rotunda -
The President and Mrs. Bush, Governors,
The Cabinet, Spouses
9:15 AM
Spouses depart for Plenary Session in Newcomb
Hall hosted by Mrs. Bush
9:30-11:00 AM
First Plenary Session in Dome Room of Rotunda
- The President, Governors, The Cabinet and
Education Advisors
9:30-10:45 AM
Spouses' Plenary Session in Newcomb Hall -
Mrs. Bush and Spouses
10:55 AM
Spouses depart for Convocation at University
Hall
11:15 AM
Governors and The Cabinet depart for
Convocation at University Hall
11:30 AM
Convocation at University Hall -
The President and Mrs. Bush and all Summit
participants
12:20 PM
The President, Governors, The Cabinet and
Education Advisors depart University Hall for
Working Luncheon at Newcomb Hall
Spouses depart University Hall en route
Bayly Museum
12:30 PM
Mrs. Bush and Spouses' Luncheon at Bayly
Museum
1:00-2:30 PM
Second Plenary Session, Working Luncheon at
Newcomb Hall - The President, Governors, The
Cabinet and Education Advisors
2:15 PM
Mrs. Bush and Spouses depart Bayly Museum en
route Rotunda
3
Thursday, September 28, 1989 (cont.)
2:30 PM
The President, Governors, The Cabinet and
Education Advisors depart Newcomb Hall en
route Rotunda
3:00 PM
The President's and Governors' Closing
Statements at the Rotunda attended by all
participants
3:30 PM
Governors, The Cabinet and Spouses conclude
participation in Education Summit
The President's Education Summit
With Governors
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1989
7:30 am - BREAKFAST
Charlottesville, Virginia
* Rotunda
Schedule of Major Events
8:00 am - SECOND WORKING SESSION
* Rotunda
9:30 am - THIRD WORKING SESSION (Plenary)
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1989
* Rotunda - The Dome Room
3:30 pm - PRESIDENTIAL WELCOME
11:30 am - CONVOCATION
* Old Cabell Hall
* University Hall
3:45 pm - PROCESSION TO THE ROTUNDA
1:00 pm - WORKING LUNCHEON (Second
4:00 pm - FIRST WORKING SESSION
Plenary Session)
* Rotunda - Three Meeting Rooms
* Ball Room, Newcomb Hall
7:30 pm - RECEPTION AT MONTICELLO
3:00 pm - CONCLUDING STATEMENT
8:00 pm
DINNER AT MONTICELLO
* Rotunda Steps
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
THE PRESIDENT'S
EDUCATION SUMMIT
WITH GOVERNORS
Charlottesville, Virginia
September 27-28, 1989
"EDUCATION IS OUR
MOST ENDURING
LEGACY, VITAL TO
EVERYTHING WE ARE
AND CAN BECOME"
Gy Bush
АТЭНЕГ
THE PRESIDENT'S
EDUCATION SUMMIT
WITH GOVERNORS
The Under Secretary of Education
Ted Sanders
and
Debra Anderson
Deputy Assistant to the President
and Director, Intergovernmental Affairs
request the pleasure of your company at a
Barbeque
Wednesday, September 27, 1989
7:00 p.m.
Birdwood Pavilion
Casual
University of Virginia
Summit Credentials Required
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
History
housed student and writer Edgar Allan Poe and basket-
Tourist Inforn
Virginia University
ball star Ralph Sampson. still house selected fourth-year
Although Thomas Jefferson could claim a lifetime of
students and graduate students; the Pavilions are
The University is located
achievements, the University of Virginia was one of the
occupied today by senior faculty members and their
D.C., and 70 miles from
few for which he wanted to be remembered. Founded in
families.
than 30 flights per day to
1819. the University was the beneficiary of Jefferson's
Behind the Pavilions, public gardens framed by brick
Washington, Baltimore, I
immense energy and talents upon his retirement from
serpentine walls provide a sense of classic and serene
wide bus and railway sei
public office. He designed its buildings, outlined its
beauty conducive to reading, strolling, or socializing.
freight are provided by C
purpose, planned its curriculum and recruited its first
Modeled in the Classic style after the Roman Pan-
Railway Company, and tl
faculty. He presided over the Board of Visitors - the
theon, the Rotunda was originally meant for library and
lottesville Transit System
school's governing body - whose members included
classroom use. Its oval rooms and dignified Dome Room
System provide local bus
such prominent public figures of the day as James
are used today for lectures, ceremonial events and
around the community.
Madison and James Monroe.
important meetings.
In 1825, sixty-eight young men came to Charlot-
Tours: Guided tours of t
tesville to be taught by a faculty of eight. Unlike most
provided year-round, free
college students of the time, they were not being trained
offered daily at 10 a.m., ]
for the clergy or for academia. Jefferson wanted students
Charlottesville/Albemarile
at the Rotunda entrance.
of his University to be educated in practical affairs and
public service. The innovative curriculum allowed
Located about twenty miles east of the Blue Ridge Moun-
Newcomb Hall: Newco
students a broader range of study than could be found at
tains, Charlottesville is a thriving city that maintains a small-
center and contains the P
other universities around the country, while giving
town flavor. The city and county have a combined popula-
snack bar and coffee cafe
Jefferson a forum for his own ideas concerning self-
tion of more than 115,000 with light manufacturing, tourism,
information desk is locate
government and religious freedom.
agriculture, and retail trade constituting the area's economic
Hall Bookstore is open W
base. The area is known for its scenic location, historical at-
8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., and (
tractions, with the University forming a large part of its
and Sundays from 10 a.m
Jefferson's Rotunda,
identity.
its hours are 8:30 a.m. to
an outstanding
Though not a large city, Charlottesville offers a substan-
a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturda
achievement in
tial range of cultural resources. The Charlottesville/
American architec-
University and Community Symphony Orchestra, the
Admissions: The Admis
ture.
Symphonic Band, the Charlottesville-Albemarle Oratorio
from 8 a.m. until 5 p.m., I
Society, the Light Opera Company, and the Virginia Singers
sions catalogs and the un
perform regularly. The city supports several art galleries and
are available at the Newc
a dozen movie theaters.
Bayly Art Museum: The
Rugby Road, adjacent to t
Museum is open fróm 1 P
Sunday. A small donation
Directional Map
Airport 8 Miles
Washington 120 Miles
Monticello: Thomas Jeffe
The Grounds
Route
29
By-Pass
from the University Grour
Recognized by the twenty-one nation World Heritage
Route
minutes, from 8 a.m. to 5
from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., No
Committee as one of the world's most significant cultural
Road
Road
days a week. Admission is
properties, the Rotunda, the focal point of Jefferson's
Lawn, joined the Taj Mahal and the Statue of Liberty on
Ash Lawn-Highland Asl
the prestigious World Heritage List in 1988.
Road
James Monroe, who settle
Although the University of Virginia has grown to
Waynesboro
colleague. Summer hours
encompass more than 1,000 acres, it has retained the
25 Miles
Park
Annual
10 a.m. to 5 p.m.; open ev
intimacy that characterized Jefferson's "academical
Year's, and Thanksgiving.
village." The original buildings remain the cornerstone of
the modern-day University. Lining the Rotunda to the
South
Montpelier: James Madis
east and west are four colonnaded rows of student rooms
I-95 & Richmond
Lynchburg
70 Miles
forty-five minute drive fro:
and ten Pavilions for classrooms and faculty living
62 Miles
interstate 64
County, Virginia. It is ope
quarters. The Lawn and Range rooms, which once
to 4 p.m. Admission is cha
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
riter Edgar Allan Poe and basket-
Tourist Information
Charlottesville enjoys
Phone Numbers (Area Code 804)
many diverse
n, still house selected fourth-year
students; the Pavilions are
The University is located 110 miles from Washington,
restaurants,
including numerous
Admissions, Undergraduate (Miller Hall)
924-7751
ior faculty members and their
D.C., and 70 miles from Richmond. Airlines offer more
outdoor cafes.
than 30 flights per day to such destinations as New York,
Admissions, Graduate (New Cabell Hall)
924-7184
Washington, Baltimore, Atlanta, and Pittsburgh. Nation-
Afro-American Affairs
924-7923
is, public gardens framed by brick
de a sense of classic and serene
wide bus and railway service for both passengers and
Alumni Association
971-9721
eading, strolling, or socializing.
freight are provided by Greyhound, AMTRAK Southern
Athletics Tickets (University Hall)
924-UVA1
ssic style after the Roman Pan-
Railway Company, and the CSX Corporation. The Char-
Bayly Museum
924-3592
.S originally meant for library and
lottesville Transit System and the University Transit
Bus System Information
924-7711
rooms and dignified Dome Room
System provide local bus service on the Grounds and
Cabell Hall Box Office
924-3984
ures, ceremonial events and
around the community.
Conferences and Institutes
924-7141
Continuing Education
924-7114
Tours: Guided tours of the Rotunda and Lawn are
Daily Calendar Recording
924-3777
provided year-round, free of charge to the public. Tours are
offered daily at 10 a.m., 11 a.m., 2 p.m., 3 p.m., and 4 p.m.
Dean of Students Office
924-7133
le/Albemarle
at the Rotunda entrance.
Skyline Drive, Blue Ridge Parkway: Both offer scenic
Development Office
924-7306
drives and hiking through the Blue Ridge/Shenandoah
Emergency 911 (in university)
9-911
miles east of the Blue Ridge Moun-
Newcomb Hall: Newcomb Hall serves as the student
range. Located at exit 19 off Interstate 64 West, or at the
Equal Opportunity/
center and contains the post office, barbershop, Pavilion XI
junction of Rts. 250 and I-64, less than an hour outside
a thriving city that maintains a small-
Affirmative Action Office
924-3200
and county have a combined popula-
snack bar and coffee cafe, cafeteria, and movie theatre. An
Charlottesville.
Handicapped Access Info.
924-7984
000 with light manufacturing, tourism,
information desk is located on the third floor. Newcomb
The Corner: Conveniently located adjacent to the Univer-
Heritage Repertory Theatre
924-3376
rade constituting the area's economic
Hall Bookstore is open weekdays during the summer from
sity's Central Grounds, the group of shops and restaurants
Hospital Main Desk
293-1100
vn for its scenic location, historical at-
8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., and on Saturdays from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
known as "the Corner" serves the needs of students and
Information, general
924-0311
versity forming a large part of its
and Sundays from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. During the school year
visitors alike. Vendors offer the UVA logo on T-shirts,
its hours are 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, 10
Library (main)
924-3021
sweatshirts, mugs, and hats, alongside bookstores and
a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday, and noon to 5 p.m. on Sunday.
Newcomb Hall Bookstore
924-3721
city, Charlottesville offers a substan-
clothing and gift boutiques. Eateries run the gamut, ranging
sources. The Charlottesville/
from outdoor cafes and ethnic fare to a New York- style deli
Parking and Bus Information
924-7231
Patient Information
inity Symphony Orchestra, the
Admissions: The Admissions Office in Miller Hall is open
and an all-American diner. Some establishments present
293-1100
Charlottesville-Albemarle Oratorio
from 8 a.m. until 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Admis-
nightly entertainment by local artists. Parking is available in
Personnel
924-4444
a Company, and the Virginia Singers
sions catalogs and the undergraduate and graduate Records
two garages (on Elliewood Ave. and 14th St.) and in an
President's Office
924-3337
city supports several art galleries and
are available at the Newcomb Hall Bookstore.
outdoor lot located behind the Corner buildings.
Press Inquiries
924-7116
S.
The Downtown Mall: In addition to the Corner, Charlot-
Sports Information
924-3011
Bayly Art Museum: The University's museum is located on
Rugby Road, adjacent to the architecture school. The Bayly
tesville boasts a historic downtown area which includes a
Restaurants on Grounds
924-7968
Museum is open fróm 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., Tuesday through
pedestrian shopping mall. Several restaurants are located
Student Information
924-3363
Sunday. A small donation is requested.
along its charming brick and lamplit walkways as well as
Tourist Information and Tours
distinctive shops and nightspots. The flavor of the city has
The Rotunda
924-1019
Airport 8 Miles
Washington 120 Miles
Monticello: Thomas Jefferson's home is just a short drive
been preserved here, in a restoration project recently
University Guide Service
924-3239
from the University Grounds. Tours begin every five
completed.
TDD
By-Pass
29
Route
minutes, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., March through October, and
In the Court Square area, lawyers and business people
(Telecommunications
Arlington
occupy offices in historic buildings dating back to the 1700s.
Blvd
from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., November through February, seven
Devices for the Deaf)
982-HEAR
Road
days a week. Admission is charged.
Modern-day Charlottesville is home to many new office
University Operator
924-0311
Road
buildings, a convention center downtown, and new
University Police
924-7166
Road
Ash Lawn-Higbland: Ash Lawn-Highland is the home of
shopping areas.
McCormick
University Relations
924-3297
Road
James Monroe, who settled close to Jefferson, his friend and
Film Festival: The University is home to the Virginia
Virginia Film Festival
924-FEST
colleague. Summer hours are 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., winter from
Festival of American Film, which attracts nationally renown
Women's Center
982-2251
Park
10 a.m. to 5 p.m.; open every day, except Christmas, New
filmmakers, critics, and scholars to the city each fall to
Year's, and Thanksgiving. Admission is charged.
celebrate and encourage the state's contribution to American
Area Phone Numbers
filmmaking.
Montpelier: James Madison's home is approximately a
Charlottesville/Albemarle
I-95 & Richmond
forty-five minute drive from Charlottesville in Orange
Wineries: The rich hills of Albemarle County support
Chamber of Commerce
295-3141
70 Miles
Interstate 64
County, Virginia. It is open seven days a week from 10 a.m.
several wineries producing fine Virginia wines. Contact their
Charlottesville/Albemarle
to 4 p.m. Admission is charged.
offices directly for tour hours and directions.
Visitors Bureau
293-6789
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
Enrollment
Research
The Arts
The University of Virginia student loves a challenge.
Students Enrolled
As a leader among public institutions, the University
The University is an exciting
From the University's forty-two Rhode Scholars — more
supports research and scholarship in many fields.
welcoming the opening of a
than any other state institution in the country - to its
Undergraduate
11,200
Research in the humanities has been a long-recognized
Theatre to rubbing elbows \
Olympic gold medalist, a U.Va. student is recognized as a
Graduate
4,300
strength at the University, and programs in the biomedi-
1st Professional
Spacek, Nick Nolte, Gregory
bright, motivated, and thoughtful individual. Twenty-five
1,700
cal, physical, and engineering sciences have developed
the Virginia Festival of Ame
percent of all undergraduates in the College of Arts and
TOTAL
17,200
as areas of excellence. Research in the sciences is sup-
community's cultural calend
Sciences are on the dean's list.
ported by a University-wide computer network, state-of-
Throughout the year, pe
Approximately 96 percent of the University's grant-in-
the-art facilities for the study of DNA, two astronomical
faculty artists, along with ac
aid athletes earn degrees. The percentage is nearly twice
telescopes, a nuclear reactor, and an impressive variety
and speakers brought to the
the graduation rate of athletes across the nation.
of equipment for the analysis and imaging of substances.
groups, ensure a constant fle
The football team recently played the country's top
New research instrumentation is being acquired con-
cultural programming to the
football team, Notre Dame, in the Kick-Off Classic Game,
tinuously at a rate in excess of $10 million each year. In
are the Tuesday Evening Co
the nationally-televised college season opener. The
the past year, external support of research programs ex-
Union - which has sponso
Cavaliers won the All-American Bowl in 1987 and the
ceeded $63 million. The University is among the top
as a Bob Dylan concert and
Peach Bowl three years earlier. Perhaps more impor-
twenty-five public universities in competitively-awarded
lecture - a Collegium Music
tantly, however, the team has received recognition every
federal grants.
sored by the music departm
year since 1984 from the College Football Association for
Tuition and Fees
singing groups.
graduating among the highest number of scholarship
football players in the country.
The highly acclaimed He
Undergraduate and graduate, full-time.
the Virginia Players perform
The men's soccer team won the ACC regular-season
In-State
$2,500 per year
The Honor System
Shakespeare to Shephard the
championship for the fifth consecutive year in 1988,
Out-of-State 6,310 per year
University's well-equipped di
earning its seventh straight bid to the NCAA tournament.
The Honor System is one of the University's oldest and
The basketball team made it to the NCAA's Final Eight in
*Excludes law, medicine, and graduate business school
The University's Bayly Muse
most venerated traditions. Based on the fundamental
'89 after reaching the Final Four in '84; the women's
tuitions. Room and board not included.
collection of art, including O
assumption that anyone who enrolls at the University
century American art and Eu
basketball team has been nationally ranked consistently
subscribes to a code of ethics forbidding lying, cheating,
time. The Bayly's growing C(
and has received invitations to the NCAA championship
and stealing, the Honor System allows students the kind
frequent visiting shows, exh:
tournament every year since 1984.
of personal freedom possible only in an environment
Gallery - which displays sti
where respect and trust are presumed. The system is
Academic Programs
other works - and by sever
entirely run by students.
of Charlottesville.
The University offers the bachelor's degree in 52 fields
and programs, the master's degree in 97, the educational
Admissions
specialist in 6, the first professional degree in 2 and the
Students and faculty enjoy beautiful surroundings as they
doctorate in 55.
proceed to class.
The Health Scier
The University employs more than 10,000 persons in
Admissions standards are highly competitive on all levels.
faculty and staff positions.
Chosen among the nation's to
A recent class was drawn from nearly 15,000 completed
The full-time instructional faculty at the University is
centers in The Best Hospitals
applications for the 3,000 undergraduate first-year and
over 1,600 and the faculty-student ratio is 1:12. There are
in 1987, the University Health
transfer spaces.
292 endowed professorships at the University.
received another boost when
More than 92 percent of the entering first-year
new $240 million hospital, th
students rank in the top fifth of their secondary school
The ten degree-granting schools are:
ever in the state of Virginia. \
class. The mean combined SAT score of this year's
School of Architecture
bassinets, the center's "high-t
entering class is 1218.
Coilege of Arts and Sciences
offers the latest in technology
Approximately 5,400 students received nearly $28
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
fashioned bedside caring.
million in financial aid last year in the form of scholar-
Colgate Darden Graduate School of Business
The Health Sciences Cent
ships, grants, loans, and work study.
Administration
referral center for central and
Students at the University come from all fifty states
McIntire School of Commerce
two teaching hospitals, a chil-
and many foreign countries.
Curry School of Education
and the Blue Ridge Hospital.
Sixty percent of all students at the University are
School of Engineering and Applied Science
federally designated cancer a:
Virginia residents and 8 percent are black. The student
School of Law
clinical research center, both
population is made up of equal numbers of men and
School of Medicine
intensive care units, fully com
women.
School of Nursing
care units, a burn center and
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
The Arts
Off-Grounds Education and
lic institutions, the University
The University is an exciting place for the arts. From
Public Service
cholarship in many fields.
welcoming the opening of a Broadway play at Culbreth
ties has been a long-recognized
Theatre to rubbing elbows with such film stars as Sissy
The Division of Continuing Education annually provides
Spacek, Nick Nolte, Gregory Peck and James Stewart in
professional development opportunities to adults through
y, and programs in the biomedi-
conferences and courses in Charlottesville and at seven
eering sciences have developed
the Virginia Festival of American Film, the University
Research in the sciences is sup-
community's cultural calendar is always kept filled.
regional centers around the state. Last year. it enrolled
wide computer network, state-of-
Throughout the year, performances by student and
15,000 students in credit courses and 20,000 in non-credit
faculty artists, along with actors, musicians, artists, writers
courses and professional development programs.
study of DNA. two astronomical
and speakers brought to the University by student
Clinch Valley College, the University's four-year branch
actor, and an impressive variety
groups, ensure a constant flow of artistic events and
institution, enrolls approximately 970 (or 1169 FTE) full-time
halysis and imaging of substances.
mentation is being acquired con-
cultural programming to the community. Among these
students at its campus in Wise, Va.
cess of $10 million each year. In
are the Tuesday Evening Concert Series, the University
Public service programs include the White Burkett Miller
Center of Public Affairs, the Center for Public Service, and
support of research programs ex-
Union - which has sponsored such disparate activities
ie University is among the top
as a Bob Dylan concert and a William F. Buckley Jr.
the Center for the Liberal Arts. They study problems of
lecture - a Collegium Musicum baroque group spon-
Classwork may even lead students to study outside.
national, state, and local government, and the economy and
ersities in competitively-awarded
sored by the music department, and several student
public education.
singing groups.
Pegasus, the hospital's air emergency service, is one
of the country's best rescue helicopter services, transport-
The highly acclaimed Heritage Repertory Theatre and
ing patients from up to 500 miles away.
the Virginia Players perform plays ranging from
The University hospitals provide outpatient and emer-
stem
Shakespeare to Shephard throughout the year in the
Board of Visitors
gency care to almost 150,000 patients yearly.
University's well-equipped drama and fine arts center.
Joshua P. Darden Jr. Rector (Norfolk)
ne of the University's oldest and
The University's Bayly Museum owns a broad-ranging
John S. Battle Jr. (Richmond)
ns. Based on the fundamental
collection of art, including outstanding examples of 20th
e who enrolls at the University
century American art and European art from Jefferson's
The Libraries
Charles L. Brown (New York, New York)
W.L. Lyons Brown Jr. (Louisville, Kentucky)
ethics forbidding lying, cheating,
time. The Bayly's growing collection is supplemented by
The University's library system consists of the Alderman
Robert G. Butcher Jr. (Richmond)
System allows students the kind
frequent visiting shows, exhibits at the Fayerweather
Library, housing the principal general collections; the
William McCutcheon Camp Jr. (Franklin)
ossible only in an environment
Gallery - which displays student and faculty art and
Clemons Library, a reading library; several departmental
Mrs. George M. Cochran (Staunton)
[ are presumed. The system is
other works - and by several private galleries in the city
N. Thomas Connally (Washington, D.C.)
libraries; and the substantial specialized collections in the
Edward E. Elson (Atlanta)
S.
of Charlottesville.
business administration, fine arts, law, medicine, and
Waller H. Horsley (Richmond)
science and engineering libraries.
Lemuel E. Lewis (Las Vegas, Nevada)
The sixteen libraries contain more than 2.9 million
Elizabeth D. Morie (Lexington)
books, 10 million manuscripts, maps and photographs;
S. Buford Scott (Richmond)
y beautiful surroundings as they
The Health Sciences Center
thousands of prints; and the tenth largest microfilm collec-
James L. Trinkle (Roanoke)
tion in the nation. The University's rare books and manu-
Jesse B. Wilson III (Fairfax)
Chosen among the nation's top sixty-four health care
scripts are valued at more than $200 million.
Thomas E. Worrell Jr. (Charlottesville)
centers in The Best Hospitals in America, a book written
Wendelin White, student member
in 1987, the University Health Sciences Center recently
received another boost when it opened the doors of a
Alumni
new $240 million hospital, the largest building project
ever in the state of Virginia. With 552 beds and 61
There are some 100,000
bassinets, the center's "high-tech, high-touch" facility
alumni of the University
offers the latest in technology with the most old-
Office of University Publications
Additional Copies:
of Virginia. Among well-
fashioned bedside caring.
© 1989 by the Rector and Visitors
University Publications
The Health Sciences Center, which serves as the
known alumni are Edgar
of the University of Virginia
Booker House
University of Virginia
referral center for central and western Virginia, includes
Allan Poe, Woodrow
Charlottesville, VA 22906
two teaching hospitals, a children's rehabilitation center
Wilson, Walter Reed,
804/924-4524
and the Blue Ridge Hospital. Its special units include
Erskine Caldwell and
federally designated cancer and heart research centers, a
Alben Barkley.
Non-Discrimination Policy
clinical research center, both medical and pediatric
The University of Virginia does not discriminate in education
intensive care units, fully computerized surgical intensive
or employment on the basis of race, color, religion, national
care units, a burn center and a Level I Trauma Center.
origin, political affiliation, handicap, sex, age, or veteran's status.
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
A
B
C
@
D
e
E
F
@
G
e
H
@
85
1
76
112
Massie Road
Old Old Ivy Road Ivy Road
35
2
28
21
6
80
22
3
Virginia University
1984 OSL sin
115
122
119
113
€
29
95
43
Alderman Road
PEOP AAI
79
4
Edgemont Road
91
65
78
64
83
Emmet Street
109
6
74
121
55
59
12
5
/
vatory Road
H
117
47
H
K
92
Newcomb Rd
40
B1
114
67
@
75
72
University
62
440
Alderman Road
Whitehead Road
87
E
27
60
6
39
17
23
110
54
120
56
$
X
53
41
86
70
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
68
85
26
45
48
1
118
Massie Road
B
100
Old Ivy Road
35
21
Arlington Boulevard
Millmont Street
2
Emmet Street/U.S. 29 North
13
22
S
115
Copeley Road
3
122
119
113
111
Mr. Jefferson's Academical Village
29
44
Alderman Road
West Range and Gardens Hall
Holel A
PEOB AAI
Rotunda
The
Hall
4
91
104
64
Emmet Street
West Lawn
109
East Partlion Lawn
HoHe
East Range and Gardens
74
108
Asan "academical village" to house teachers and students.
S a setting for instruction Thomas Jefferson designed
Rugby Road
The village is situated around the picturesque Lawn,
59
scene of many important events in the University's
12
37
16
history, including annual Final Exercises.
Jefferson's design for the Grounds included four colon-
5
117
51
47
naded rows of one-room student living quarters between
73
larger buildings, the Pavilions, which provided
105
Newcomb Rd
14
classrooms and dwelling space for faculty. The original
92
B
114
116
Jeffersonian buildings remain the center of the modern-
40
24
A
day University.
3
67
50
82
e
75
72
Rd
106
cormick
University Ave
52
62
Whitehead Road
61
19
87
27
49
6
23
54
120
Visitor Parking
25
53
41
128
70
33
14th Street
137
Bush Library Photocopy
Preservation
Preservation
Bush Library Photocopy
111
Mr. Jefferson's Academical Village
Alderman Road
PEOP
West Range Jefferson and Gardens Hall
Hotel
M
Rotunda
44
The
4
104
VIII
91
Hotel
Emmet Street
West Lawn
109
East Pavilion Lawn
Hall
East Range and Gardens
6
A
S a setting for instruction Thomas Jefferson designed
an "academical village" to house teachers and students.
Rugby Road
The village is situated around the picturesque Lawn,
scene of many important events in the University's
history, including annual Final Exercises.
Jefferson's design for the Grounds included four colon-
5
51
H
naded rows of one-room student living quarters between
73
larger buildings, the Pavilions, which provided
Newcomb Rd
14
classrooms and dwelling space for faculty. The original
BY
114
Jeffersonian buildings remain the center of the modern-
day University.
Rd
75
72
HOMELY
University
8
62
Ave
Whitehead Road
61
19
27
49
6
23
54
Visitor Parking
41
70
14th Street
31
77
Stadium Road
Jefferson Park Ave
Werrand, Street
127
102
Jefferson Park Avenue
142
PL BUT
103
7
131
139
Street
136
143
11th
West Main Street
Copyright © 1987 University of Virginia
e
73
5I
Peyton House
Residential Buildings
105
5F
McCormick Road Residence Area
108
5J
Rugby Road Apartments
Medical Center
74
5D
Physical Plant
105
5F
A. Page House/Housing Division Office
109
4H
Sprigg Lane Residence Area
75
6F
Physics Building
96
5D Alderman/Observatory Residence Area
105
5F
B. Emmet House
109
4G
A. Hoxton House
126
6H
Barringer Wing
76
ID
Printing Services
96
5D
A. Tuttle House
105
5F
C. Kent House
109
5G
B. Lewis House
127
7H Claude Moore Health Science Library
e
77
6H
Randall Hall
96
5D
B. Dunnington House
105
5F
D. Dabney House/Office of
109
4H
C. Gwathmey House
128
61
Clinical Office Building
e Building
78
4C
Reactor Facility
96
5D
C. Fitzhugh House
Residence Life
109
4H
D. Mary Munford House
129
6H
Cobb Hall
stronomy Building
79
4B
Research Laboratories for the
96
6D
D. Dunglison House
105
5F
E. Bonnycastle House
110
6C
Stadium Road Residence Area House
130
61
Corner Building
Engineering Sciences
96
6C
E. Courtenay House
105
5F
F. Hancock House
110
6C
A. Gooch House
131
71
New Hospital (under construction)
oservatory
80
6H
The Rotunda
96
5D
F. Lile House
105
5F
G. Metcalf House
110
6B
B. Dillard House
132
61
Hospital
hitheatre
81 6H Rouss Hall
96
5D
G. Maupin House
105
5E
H. Lefevre House
111
3J
University Gardens Family Housing
133
71
Jordan Hall
gineering Building
82
5F
Ruffner Hall
96
5D
H. Webb House
105
5E
I. Humphreys House
134
7H
McKim Hall
dmissions Office
83
4C
Special Materials Handling Facility
96
5D
I. Watson House
105
5E
J. Echols House
135
7H
McLeod Hall
ices Building
84
4H
Speech Language Hearing Center
96
5D
J. Dobie House
106
6G
Monroe Hill Residential College
136
71
Medical Research Lab No. 4
85
11
Sponsors Hall
96
5D
K. Balz House
106
6G
A. Davis House
Athletic Facilities
137
61
Medical School
86
6C
Student Activities Building
97
7G
Brandon Avenue Apartments
106
6G
B. Smith House
138
71
Parking Garage No. 1
ouse
87
6F
Thornton Hall
98
21
Copeley Hill Family Housing
106
6G
C. Long House
112
1A Birdwood Clubhouse and Golfcourse
139
7J
Parking Garage No. 2
88
5D
Tree House
99
11
Copeley III Residence Area
106
6G
D. Mallet House
113 3H The Cage
140
71
Primary Care Center
89
2D University Police/Information Center
100
21
Copeley IV Residence Area
106
6G
E. Venable House
114
5G
Lady Astor Squash Courts
141
7J
Stacey Hall
, Astronomy Observatory
90
6H
Varsity Hall
101
2G
Faulkner Residence Area
106
6G
F. Gildersleeve House
115
3G
Lannigan Field
142
71
di
Towers Hospital
91
4H Virginia Foundation for the Humanities
101
2H
A. Younger House
106
6G
G. McGuffey House
116
51
Madison Bowl
143
7G Virginia Ambulatory Surgery Center
I
92
5G
Visitor Parking
101
2H
B. Hench House
106
6G
H. Harrison House
117
5H
Memorial Gym
S Heating Plant
61
Washington Hall
101
2G
C. Mitchell House
106
6G
I. Tucker House
118
1H
North Grounds Recreation Center
ill Dining
(see academical village inset)
102
7H
French House
106
6G
J. Holmes House
119
3H
Onesty Hall/Natatorium
1
93
6H
West Range
103
7G
German House
106
6G
K. Rogers House
120
6D
Scott Stadium
ansportation/Materiel
94
6H Wilson Hall
104
41
Lambeth Field Residence Area
106
6G
L. Peters House
121
5C
Slaughter Recreation Center
torehouse
95
4D Zehmer Hall Conference Center-
107
6A Piedmont Faculty Housing Area
122
3H
University Hall
Division of Continuing Education
UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS
Preservation
Bush Library Photocopy
AM
Alderman Road
PEOP
43
4
Edgemont Road
91
64
Emmet Street
109
@
6
74
55
5
Road
H
117
47
H
1
Newcomb Rd
14
B
114
A
75
72
Road
Imick
University
Alderman
Whitehead Road
61
19
27
6
120
54
41
31
77
Stadium Road
Jefferson Park Ave
134
127
7
AAVIDU Many
102
Fontaine Avenue
Jefferson Park Avenue
Lane
140
103
PL
143
Academic & Administrative Buildings
24 5H Clemons Library
47
5G Lambeth House
73 5I Peyton House
25
Residential Buildings
105
5F
McCormick Roa
6G
Cocke Hall
48
11
Law School
74
5D
Physical Plant
105
5F
A. Page House/H
1 6E
A & M Building (Aeromath)
26
11
Colgate Darden Graduate School
49
6H
The Lawn
75
6F
Physics Building
96 5D Alderman/Observatory Residence Area
105
5F
B. Emmet House
2 5C
Acc. HEP Laboratories
of Business Administration
50
51
Madison Hall
76
ID
Printing Services
96
5D
A. Tuttle House
105
5F
C. Kent House
3 5H
Alderman Library
27
6H
Colonnade Hotel
51
51
Madison House
77
6H
Randall Hall
96
5D
B. Dunnington House
105
5F
D. Dabney House
4
5G
Alumni Hall
28
2C
Commonwealth Court
52
6E
Material Science Building
78
4C
Reactor Facility
96
5D
C. Fitzhugh House
Residence Life
5 5I
Bayly Museum
29
4D
Continuing Education
53
6F
Mathematics Astronomy Building
79
4B
Research Laboratories for the
96
6D
D. Dunglison House
105
5F
E. Bonnycastle H
6 5G
Bemiss House
Central Virginia Center
54
6G
Maury Hall
Engineering Sciences
96
6C
E. Courtenay House
105
5F
F. Hancock Hous
7
1B
Birdwood Pavilion
30
5I
Culbreth & Helms Theatres
55
5B
McCormick Observatory
80
6H
The Rotunda
96
5D
F. Lile House
105
5F
G. Metcalf House
8 61
Booker House
31
6G
Dawson's Row
56
6G
McIntire Amphitheatre
81 6H Rouss Hall
96
5D
G. Maupin House
105
5E
H. Lefevre House
9 61
Brooks Hall
32
4G
Dynamics Building
57
6E
Mechanical Engineering Building
82
5F
Ruffner Hall
96
5D
H. Webb House
105
5E
I. Humphreys H
10 6D Bryant Hall
33
6H
East Range
58
5H
Miller Hall Admissions Office
83
4C
Special Materials Handling Facility
96
5D
I. Watson House
105
5E
J. Echols House
11
11
Cafe North
34
7H
Elson Student Health Center
59
5D
Mineral Resources Building
84
4H Language Hearing Center
96
5D
J. Dobie House
106
6G
Monroe Hill Re:
12
51
Campbell Hall
35
2G
Faulkner House
60
6G
Minor Hall
85
11
Sponsors Hall
96
5D
K. Balz House
106
6G
A. Davis House
13 2L Carruthers Hall
36
51
Fayerweather Hall
61
6G
Monroe Hall
86
6C
Student Activities Building
97
7G
Brandon Avenue Apartments
106
6G
B. Smith House
14
51
Carr's Hill
37
51
Fiske Kimball Library
62
6G
Monroe Hill House
87
6F
Thornton Hall
98
21
Copeley Hill Family Housing
106
6G
C. Long House
15 7G Carter G. Woodson Institute
38
ID
Fontana Food Center
63
6F
Montebello
88
5D
Tree House
99
11
Copeley III Residence Area
106
6G
D. Mallet House
16
5E
Cemetery
39
6G
Garrett Hall
64
4G
Morea
89
2D University Police/Information Center
100
21
Copeley IV Residence Area
106
6G
E. Venable House
17
6E Center for Computer Aided Engineering -
40
5E
Gilmer Hall
65
4D
National Radio Astronomy Observatory
90
6H
Varsity Hall
101
2G
Faulkner Residence Area
106
6G
F. Gildersleeve H
Albert H. Small Building
41
6G
Halsey Hall
66
6G
New Cabell Hall
91
4H Virginia Foundation for the Humanities
101
2H
A. Younger House
106
6G
G. McGuffey Hot
18 6H Chapel
42
71
Heating Plant
67
5G
Newcomb Hall
92
5G
Visitor Parking
101
2H
B. Hench House
106
6G
H. Harrison Hous
19
6F Chemical Engineering Research Building
43
4C
Highway Research Council
68
1J
North Grounds Heating Plant
61
Washington Hall
101
2G
C. Mitchell House
106
6G
I. Tucker House
20
6E Chemistry Building
44
4J
International Center
69
5D
Observatory Hill Dining
(see academical village inset)
102
7H
French House
106
6G
J. Holmes House
21
2D Children's Rehabilitation Center
6H Jefferson Hall
70
6G
Old Cabell Hall
93
6H
West Range
103
7G
German House
106
6G
22
K. Rogers House
2D Cochran House
(see academical village inset)
71
2K
Parking and Transportation/Materiel
94
6H
Wilson Hall
104
41
Lambeth Field Residence Area
106
6G
L. Peters House
23
6F Clark Hall
45
11 Judge Advocate General School
Management Storehouse
95
4D
Zehmer Hall Conference Center -
107
6A
46
41 Lambeth Conference Center
Piedmont Faculty
72 6H Peabody Hall
Division of Continuing Education
LOCATION OF SUMMIT EVENTS
Keyed to University of Virginia Map
BUILDING
BLDG. #
EVENT
Bayly Museum
5
Spouse's Lunch
Jefferson Hall
49
NGSA Holding Room
Memorial Gym
117
Summit Press Headquarters
Newcomb Hall
67
Working Lunch and Spouse's Plenary
Old Cabell Hall
70
Welcoming remarks
Pavilion II
49
Summit Staff Headquarters
NGA Summit Coordinators Office
Pavilion VI
49
White House Intergovernmental Staff
Office Services
Message Center
Governors' Staff Holding Rooms
Governors' Private Conference Rooms
NGA Staff Offices
Pavilion VII
49
Educational Advisors' Session, Breakfast and Lunch
Pavilion VIII
49
Cabinet Offices
Governors' Staff Holding Rooms
Peabody Hall
72
White House Press Headquarters
Rotunda
80
All working group and Thursday
Morning breakfast and plenary
University Hall
122
Convocation
All areas have restricted access during the Summit activities even for credentialed
staff.
Table of Contents
I.
Schedule
II.
General Information
-
Working Group Agenda
-
Summit Working Groups and Participants
-
Department of Education 1989 Back-To-School
Forecast
Background Papers
III.
Teaching: Revitalizing a Profession
IV.
The Learning Environment
V.
Governance: Who Is In Charge?
VI.
Choice and Restructuring
VII.
A Competitive Workforce and Life-Long Learning
VIII.
Postsecondary Education: Strengthening Access and
Excellence
THE PRESIDENT'S EDUCATION SUMMIT WITH GOVERNORS
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
SEPTEMBER 27 - 28, 1989
WEDNESDAY, September 27, 1989
2:15 PM
Governors and Spouses depart Boar's Head Inn
en route Old Cabell Hall
3:15 PM
Welcoming Ceremony at Old Cabell Hall - The
President and Mrs. Bush, Governors, The
Cabinet, Spouses and Distinguished Guests
3:45 PM
Procession to the Rotunda - The President and
Mrs. Bush, Governors, The Cabinet, and
Spouses
4:00 PM
Opening Work Sessions in Rotunda - The
President and Mrs. Bush, Governors, The
Cabinet, Spouses
5:30 PM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses conclude
participation in Work Sessions and depart
Rotunda en route Boar's Head Inn
7:00 PM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses depart for
dinner at Monticello
7:30 PM
Reception at Monticello - The President and
Mrs. Bush, Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses
8:00 PM
Dinner at Monticello - The President and Mrs.
Bush, Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses
9:40 PM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses conclude
dinner and depart Monticello en route Boar's
Head Inn
2
THURSDAY, September 28, 1989
7:15 AM
Governors, The Cabinet, Spouses depart Boar's
Head Inn for Continential Breakfast on
Rotunda Veranda
7:30 AM
Continental Breakfast on Rotunda Veranda -
The President and Mrs. Bush, Governors, The
Cabinet, Spouses
8:00-9:15 AM
Second Work Session in Rotunda -
The President and Mrs. Bush, Governors,
The Cabinet, Spouses
9:15 AM
Spouses depart for Plenary Session in Newcomb
Hall hosted by Mrs. Bush
9:30-11:00 AM
First Plenary Session in Dome Room of Rotunda
- The President, Governors, The Cabinet and
Education Advisors
9:30-10:45 AM
Spouses' Plenary Session in Newcomb Hall -
Mrs. Bush and Spouses
10:55 AM
Spouses depart for Convocation at University
Hall
11:15 AM
Governors and The Cabinet depart for
Convocation at University Hall
11:30 AM
Convocation at University Hall -
The President and Mrs. Bush and all Summit
participants
12:20 PM
The President, Governors, The Cabinet and
Education Advisors depart University Hall for
Working Luncheon at Newcomb Hall
Spouses depart University Hall en route
Bayly Museum
12:30 PM
Mrs. Bush and Spouses' Luncheon at Bayly
Museum
1:00-2:30 PM
Second Plenary Session, Working Luncheon at
Newcomb Hall - The President, Governors, The
Cabinet and Education Advisors
2:15 PM
Mrs. Bush and Spouses depart Bayly Museum en
route Rotunda
3
Thursday, September 28, 1989 (cont.)
2:30 PM
The President, Governors, The Cabinet and
Education Advisors depart Newcomb Hall en
route Rotunda
3:00 PM
The President's and Governors' Closing
Statements at the Rotunda attended by all
participants
3:30 PM
Governors, The Cabinet and Spouses conclude
participation in Education Summit
THE SUMMIT CONFERENCE ON EDUCATION
WORKING GROUPS
1. Teaching: Revitalizing a Profession
Identifying, recognizing and rewarding excellence in
teaching.
Enriching the teaching profession by providing more
flexible routes to certification.
Attracting enough qualified teachers for
elementary and secondary schools.
Meeting our national needs with respect to science
and mathematics instruction in elementary and
secondary schools.
Increasing the number of minorities entering
teaching.
Evaluating proposals for national certification
examinations.
2.
The Learning Environment
Providing appropriate pre-school and early childhood
experiences to prepare children for primary school.
Identifying at-risk youth and reducing the number of
student drop-outs.
Creating safe, violence-free schools.
Establishing and maintaining drug-free schools.
Assessing student performance and establishing
appropriate goals.
Engaging teachers, students, parents, and the
community in a partnership and a life-long
commitment to education.
-2-
3. Governance: Who Is In Charge?
Defining the appropriate role of the Federal
Government in education.
Defining the appropriate role of State governments
in education.
Defining the appropriate role of local school boards
in education.
Reforming federal and state education regulations.
Ensuring that schools are publicly accountable for
their performance, that there is adequate scope for
innovation, and that exceptional performance is
recognized and rewarded.
Ensuring parent and citizen involvement in local
school governance.
4.
Choice and Restructuring
Evaluating the experience with choice across the
nation.
Assessing transportation and equity issues involved
in choice.
Considering ways of expanding choice and
strengthening accountability.
Evaluating the experience with magnet schools across
the Nation.
Instituting performance-based restructuring
initiatives.
Evaluating the experience with site-based management
and program restructuring.
5.
A Competitive Workforce and Life-Long Learning
Ensuring that adult Americans are sufficiently
literate to perform effectively as parents,
workers, and citizens.
-3-
Determining what institutions, public and private,
bear responsibility for various aspects of worker
training.
Enhancing public-private partnerships in education.
Communicating the needs of the consumers of the
products of our education system.
Creating incentive programs to produce more high
school graduates.
Enhancing the quality of training and vocational
education.
6.
Postsecondary Education: Strengthening Access and
Excellence
Enhancing opportunities for disadvantaged youth
and their access to higher education.
Strengthening science, mathematics and engineering
teaching in American universities.
Strengthening university entrance requirements and
reducing the need for remedial courses.
Recruiting and retaining more minority students and
faculty in higher education institutions.
EDUCATION SUMMIT
WORKING GROUP SESSION ASSIGNMENTS
Wednesday, September 27, 1989-4:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
GOVERNANCE: WHO IS IN CHARGE?
Co-chairmen: Governor Garrey E. Carruthers, NM
Governor Bill Clinton, AR
Moderator:
Secretary Lauro Cavazos (Education)
Governors
Governor Steve Cowper, AK
Governor George A. Sinner, ND
Governor Joe Frank Harris, GA
Governor Robert P. Casey, PA
Governor Mike Hayden, KS
Governor Rafael Hernandez-Colon, PR
Governor Buddy Roemer, LA
Governor Edward D. DiPrete, RI
Governor William Donald Schaefer, MD
Governor Carroll Campbell, Jr., SC
Governor Stan Stephens, MT
Governor George S. Mickelson, SD
Governor Kay A. Orr, NE
Governor Gerald L. Baliles, VA
Governor Norman H. Bangerter, UT
Governor Michael Sullivan, WY
Cabinet
Secretary Nicholas Brady (Treasury)
Secretary Manuel Lujan (Interior)
Secretary Samuel Skinner (Transportation)
Director Richard Darman (OMB)
Ambassador Carla Hills (U.S. Trade Representative)
TEACHING: REVITALIZING A PROFESSION
Co-chairmen: Governor Terry Branstad, IA
Governor Booth Gardner, WA
Moderator:
Attorney General Richard Thornburgh (Justice)
Governors
Governor William A. O'Neill, CT
Governor Rudy Perpich, MN
Governor Bob Martinez, FL
Governor John Ashcroft, MO
Governor John Waihee, HI
Governor Bob Miller, NV
Governor Cecil D. Andrus, ID
Governor James G. Martin, NC
Governor Henry Bellmon, OK
Governor John R. McKernan, Jr., ME
Governor Michael S. Dukakis, MA
Governor Tommy G. Thompson, WI
Governor Thomas H. Kean, NJ
Governor Alexander A. Farrelly, VI
Cabinet
Secretary Clayton Yeutter (Agriculture)
r. D. Allan Bromley (Office of Science and Technology Policy)
Chairman Michael Boskin (Council of Economic Advisors)
Admiral Richard Truly (NASA)
PAGE TWO
WEDNESDAY
THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
Co-chairmen:
Governor Guy Hunt, AL
Governor Ray Mabus, MS
Moderator:
Director William Bennett (Drug Control Policy)
Governors
Governor James J. Blanchard, MI
Governor Peter T. Coleman, AS
Governor Rose Mofford, AZ
Governor Judd Gregg, NH
Governor George Deukmejian, CA
Governor Mario Cuomo, NY
Governor Roy Romer, CO
Governor Richard Celeste, OH
Governor Michael N. Castle, DE
Governor Neil Goldschmidt, OR
Governor James R. Thompson, IL
Governor William Clements, Jr., TX
Governor Evan Bayh, IN
Governor Madeleine M. Kunin, VT
Governor Wallace Wilkinson, KY
Governor Gaston Caperton, WV
Cabinet
Secretary Elizabeth Dole (Labor)
Secretary Robert Mosbacher (Commerce)
Secretary Jack Kemp (HUD)
Secretary Louis Sullivan (HHS)
Secretary Edward Derwinski (Veterans Affairs)
Thursday, September 28, 1989-8:00 a.m. to 9:15 a.m.
CHOICE AND RESTRUCTURING
Co-chairmen: Governor John R. McKernan, ME
Governor Rudy Perpich, MN
Moderator:
Secretary Lauro Cavazos (Education)
Governors
Governor Guy Hunt, AL
Governor Bob Miller, NV
Governor Bill Clinton, AR
Governor Garrey E. Carruthers, NM
Governor James R. Thompson, IL
Governor James G. Martin, NC
Governor Evan Bayh, IN
Governor George A. Sinner, ND
Governor Terry E. Branstad, IA
Governor Henry Bellmon, OK
Governor Mike Hayden, KS
Governor George Mickelson, SD
Governor Norman H. Bangerter, UT
Governor Booth Gardner, WA
Governor Stan Stephens, MT
Governor Tommy G. Thompson, WI
Cabinet
Attorney General Richard Thornburgh (Justice)
Secretary Samuel Skinner (Transportation)
Secretary Jack Kemp (HUD)
Ambassador Carla Hills (U.S. Trade Representative)
A COMPETITIVE WORKFORCE AND LIFE-LONG LEARNING
Co-chairmen: Governor Carroll Campbell, SC
Governor Willam Donald Schaefer, MD
Moderator:
Director Richard Darman (OMB)
Governors
Governor Steve Cowper, AK
Governor Michael S. Dukakis, MA
Governor Rose Mofford, AZ
Governor Judd Gregg, NH
Governor Roy Romer, CO
Governor William A. O'Neill, CT
Governor Ned Ray McWherter, TN
Governor Michael N. Castle, DE
Governor William P. Clements, TX
Governor Joe Frank Harris, GA
Governor Madeleine M. Kunin, VT
Governor Wallace Wilkinson, KY
Governor Gerald L. Baliles, VA
Governor Buddy Roemer, LA
Governor Gaston Caperton, WV
Governor Michael Sullivan, WY
Cabinet
Secretary Robert Mosbacher (Commerce)
Secretary Elizabeth Dole (Labor)
Secretary James Watkins (Energy)
Secretary Nicholas Brady (Treasury)
Secretary Dick Cheney (Defense)
Secretary Louis Sullivan (Health and Human Services)
PAGE TWO
THURSDAY
POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION: STRENGTHENING ACCESS AND EXCELLENCE
Co-chairmen:
Governor Cecil Andrus, ID
Governor John Ashcroft, MO
Moderator:
Secretary Clayton Yeutter (Agriculture)
Governors
Governor Peter Coleman, AS
Governor Thomas H. Kean, NJ
Governor George Deukmejian, CA
Governor Mario M. Cuomo, NY
Governor John Waihee, HI
Governor Neil Goldschmidt, OR
Governor Robert P. Casey, PA
Governor James J. Blanchard, MI
Governor Rafael Hernandez-Colon, PR
Governor Ray Mabus, MS
Governor Edward D. DiPrete, RI
Governor Alexander A. Farrelly, VI
Governor Kay A. Orr, NE
Governor Bob Martinez, FL
Governor Richard Celeste, OH
Cabinet
Secretary Manuel Lujan (Interior)
Dr. Michael Boskin (Council of Economic Advisors)
Dr. D. Allan Bromley (Office of Science and Technology Policy)
Admiral Richard Truly (NASA)
Secretary Edward Derwinski (Veterans Affairs)
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
NEWS
FOR RELEASE: a.m. papers Contact: Jane Glickman (202) 732-4307
August 24, 1989
Tom Snyder
(202) 357-6689
1989 BACK-TO-SCHOOL FORECAST
-- The American people will spend a record $353 billion on
schools and colleges in the 1989-90 school year, Secretary of
Education Lauro F. Cavazos projected today.
-- - "Our nation continues to make a tremendous financial
investment in education," Cavazos said, "but the education
deficit continues to grow. Too many Americans remain
ill-prepared for a changing world.
"As this school year begins, President Bush is taking the
historic step of calling together the nation's governors to
address this national crisis. Such leadership is critical; but
parents, teachers -- indeed, all Americans -- must become
involved if we are to ensure that each student has an
opportunity to be educated to his or her fullest potential.
That is what Americans expect from their generous investment in
education."
Cavazos' comments accompanied release of the Education
Department's annual statistical forecast for the 1989-90 school
year. The $353 billion spending projection for public and
private education at all levels represents a 6.8 percent
increase over last year, when overall spending was $330 billion.
-MORE-
-2-
The largest increase will be in higher education, with
spending estimated at $141 billion, a 7.2 percent increase over
last year. Adjusted for inflation, this constitutes a 36
percent increase since the 1980-81 school year.
Elementary and secondary expenditures -- both public and
private -- are expected to rise to $212 billion, a 6.6 percent
increase over last year's spending and, after adjusting for
inflation, a 29 percent increase since 1980-81.
Per-pupil expenditures in public elementary and secondary
schools are also expected to reach a record high of $5,246,
$308 per student more than last year.
At the higher education level, expenditures for each
full-time equivalent student will rise to $14,923, nearly
$750 more per student than a year ago.
The average salary of public elementary and secondary
school teachers is expected to rise to $31,200 in the coming
school year, up 5.5 percent over last year's average of
$29,567. After adjusting for inflation, this will amount to a
20 percent increase since 1980-81.
This year, expenditures of educational institutions at all
levels -- elementary, secondary, and postsecondary -- will again
amount to about 6.8 percent of the gross national product.
-
Total Enrollment Rises Slightly
Total enrollment in the nation's schools and colleges is
expected to reach 58.7 million this fall, up by 400,000. About
45.6 million young people will attend elementary and secondary
-MORE-
-3-
schools, 150,000 more students than last year, and 13.1 million
students will attend higher education institutions, about
250,000 more than a year ago.
As in the past several years, enrollment increases in
grades K-12 will be concentrated in the elementary grades (K-8),
reflecting the increase in births that began in 1977 and has
continued in most subsequent years. In 1988, births exceeded
3.9 million, more than any other year since 1964.
Enrollment continues to decline this year for grades 9-12,
reflecting a downward trend that has occurred for this age group
since the peak year of 1976. Lower enrollments for grades 9-12
will continue for another year or two, until the youngsters born
after 1976 begin reaching the upper grades. Annual increases in
secondary school enrollments will then continue throughout the
1990s and the early years of the 21st century.
In the fall of 1989:
-- total elementary (K-8) enrollment will climb
1.5 percent over last year, from 32.4 million to
32.9 million;
-- total secondary enrollment will drop 2.6 percent,
from 13 million to 12.7 million.
School enrollments vary by state and region. In the 1980s,
the greatest increase in the public school population has been
in the West, while a smaller increase has been experienced in
the South, and enrollments have declined in the Northeast and
Midwest. Between 1980 and 1989, the largest enrollment
increases -- in descending order -- were in California, Texas,
Florida, Arizona, Utah, Georgia, Nevada and Washington.
-MORE-
-4-
Despite a shrinking traditional college population of
18- to 24-year-olds, total college enrollment has reached new
peaks in recent years. In the fall of 1989, nearly
13.1 million students are expected to enroll in public and
private colleges and universities, about 250,000 students more
than last year.
The rise in college enrollments in the 1980s can be
attributed to higher attendance rates among the traditional
college-age group as well as higher enrollment rates for older
and part-time students, especially women. Since more students
are attending college part-time, full-time equivalent enrollment
is rising at a slower rate than total student enrollment.
Education and Employment
In the fall of 1989, about seven million people will be
employed in our nation's schools and colleges -- 2.7 million as
elementary and secondary teachers in public and private schools,
755,000 as instructional faculty in colleges and universities,
and 3.6 million in other professional, administrative and
support positions in educational institutions at all levels.
Together with the total projected enrollment of
58.7 million students, nearly 66 million Americans -- more than
one out of every four persons in a population of 249 million --
will be involved in formal education in the next school year.
-MORE-
-5-
School Completion
A decrease of 178,000 high school graduates is projected
for the spring of 1990, bringing the total to 2.6 million. The
trend has been generally downward since the peak year of 1977,
when nearly 3.2 million students received diplomas.
High school graduation projections recognize that currently
about three-fourths of young people earn a high school diploma
around age 17 or 18. Some of those who drop out of school
before graduation eventually receive a high school equivalency
certificate.
The number of earned degrees to be conferred during the
1989-90 year is expected to be somewhat higher than last year at
the associate, bachelor's, and master's level, while doctoral
and first-professional degrees are expected to hold steady.
Estimates are: associate degrees, 448,000; bachelor's degrees,
1,006,000; master's degrees, 301,000; doctoral degrees, 34,000,
and first professional degrees, in fields such as medicine, law
and theology, 72,000.
Bachelor's degrees expected this year represent an all-time
high, while master's and doctoral degrees will be down slightly
from the peak years of 1977 for master's degrees (317,000) and
1973 for doctor's degrees (34,800). The number of first
professional degrees has stabilized after reaching a peak of
75,000 in 1984-85.
###
-6-
NOTE TO EDITORS:
Tables and charts for the back-to-school
forecast are attached.
More detailed education statistics may be obtained from
several publications prepared by the National Center for
Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education,
available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Use
the stock numbers and prices listed.
The Condition of Education, 1989 provides charts,
indicators and text on trends in American education.
Volume I focuses on elementary and secondary education,
costs $5.50, stock number is 065-000-00377-5. Volume II
reports on postsecondary education, costs $6.50, stock
number is 065-000-00378-3.
The Digest of Education Statistics, 1988, is a detailed
compendium of education data, costs $19.00, stock number is
065-000-00351-1; Projections of Education Statistics to
1997-98, costs $15.00, stock number is 065-000-00356-2;
State Projections to 1993, costs $3.25, number is
065-000-00380-5.
Table 1.--Estimated number of participants in elementary and secondary education
and in higher education: Fall 1989
[In millions)
All levels
Elementary and secondary schools
(elementary,
Institutions
Participants
secondary,
of
and higher
Total
Public
Private
higher
education)
education
Total
65.7
50.6
44.8
5.8
15.1
Enrollment1/
58.7
45.6
40.3
5.3
13.1
Teachers and faculty
3.4
2.7
2.3
0.4
2/
0.8
...
Other professional,
administrative, and
support staff
3.6
2.3
2.1
0.2
1.3
1/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. Higher education comprises full-time and part-time students enrolled in
degree-credit and nondegree-credit programs in universities, other four-year colleges,
and two-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
professional, administrative, and support personnel. Because of rounding, details may
not add to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
unpublished projections and estimates. (This table was prepared July 1989.)
Table 2.--Enrollment in educational institutions, by level of instruction
and by type of control: Fall 1980 to fall 1989
[In thousands]
Level of instruction and
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
type of control
1980
1985
1987
1988 1/
1989 1/
All levels
58,414
57,313
58,140
58,286
58,682
Public
50,444
48,988
49,999
50,241
50,511
Private
7,971
8,325
8,140
8,045
8,171
Elementary and secondary
schools2/
46,318
45,066
45,371
45,437
45,595
Public
40,987
39,509
40,024
40,196
40,323
Private
5,331
5,557
1/ 5,347
5,241
5,272
Kindergarten through
grade 8 3/
31,666
31,244
32,004
32,426
32,915
Public
27,674
27,049
27,886
28,390
28,818
Private
3,992
4,195
1/ 4,118
4,036
4,097
Grades 9 through 12
14,652
13,822
13,367
13,012
12,680
Public
13,313
12,460
12,138
11,806
11,505
Private
1,339
1,362
1/ 1,229
1,206
1,175
Higher education4/
12,097
12,247
12,768
12,849
13,087
Public
9,457
9,479
9,975
10,045
10,188
Private
2,640
2,768
2,793
2,804
2,899
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 grew from 5.2 million in 1980 to 6.3 million in 1985.
4/Includes full-time and part-time students enrolled in degree-credit and
nondegree-credit programs in universities, other four-year colleges, and two-year
colleges.
NOTE.--Data for fall 1987 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, 1989 (forthcoming); Projections of Education
Statistics to 2000 (forthcoming). (This table was prepared August 1989.)
Table .--Enrollment in public elementary and secondary schools,
by region and State: Fall 1980 to fall 1989
[In thousands]
Region and State
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
1980
1985
1987
1988 1/
1989 2/
United States
40,987
39,509
40,024
40,196
40,323
Northeast
8,214
7,318
7,251
7,202
7,176
Connecticut
531
462
465
463
465
Maine
222
206
212
211
210
Massachusetts
1,022
844
825
817
814
New Hampshire
167
161
166
166
171
New Jersey
1,246
1,116
1,093
1,081
1,085
New York
2,871
2,621
2,594
2,580
2,558
Pennsylvania
1,909
1,683
1,669
1,655
1,646
Rhode Island
148
133
134
134
135
Vermont
96
90
93
96
93
Midwest
10,766
9,949
9,887
9,848
9,804
Illinois
1,983
1,826
1,811
1,788
1,805
Indiana
1,056
966
964
964
950
Iowa
534
485
481
477
464
Kansas
415
410
421
426
425
Michigan
1,866
1,690
1,606
1,590
1,573
Minnesota
754
705
721
724
725
Missouri
845
795
802
807
811
Nebraska
280
266
268
269
266
North Dakota
117
119
119
118
118
Ohio
1,957
1,794
1,793
1,782
1,769
South Dakota
129
124
127
127
128
Wisconsin
830
768
772
775
769
South
14,134
14,117
14,419
14,528
14,552
Alabama
759
730
729
730
723
Arkansas
448
433
437
456
433
Delaware
99
93
96
97
98
District of
Columbia
100
87
86
89
86
Florida
1,510
1,562
1,665
1,729
1,744
Georgia
1,069
1,080
1,111
1,111
1,132
Kentucky
670
644
643
638
626
Louisiana
778
788
793
791
797
Maryland
751
672
684
689
701
Mississippi
477
471
506
503
504
North Carolina
1,129
1,086
1,086
1,081
1,077
Oklahoma
578
592
584
585
582
South Carolina
619
607
615
616
617
Tennessee
854
814
824
820
815
Texas
2,900
3,132
3,237
3,269
3,302
Virginia
1,010
968
979
988
988
West Virginia
384
358
344
336
325
West
7,873
8,124
8,468
8,619
8,791
Alaska
87
107
106
104
104
Arizona
514
548
572
577
608
California
4,118
4,256
4,489
4,611
4,731
Colorado
546
551
560
560
570
Hawaii
165
164
166
167
170
Idaho
203
209
212
215
211
Montana
155
154
152
152
150
Nevada
149
155
168
176
179
New Mexico
271
278
287
281
299
Oregon
465
448
456
462
450
Utah
344
403
423
426
435
Washington
758
750
776
790
788
Wyoming
98
103
98
98
96
1/Estimated by reporting States.
2/Projected by the National Center for Education Statistics.
NOTE Includes most kindergarten and some nursery school enrollment. Because of
rounding, details may not add to totals.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Common Core of Data survey; "Early Estimates: Key Statistics for Public
Elementary and Secondary Education: School Year 1988-89"; and State Projections
to 1993 for Public Elementary and Secondary Enrollment, Graduates, and Teachers.
(This table was prepared August 1989.)
Table 4.--Number of teachers in educational institutions, by level of instruction
and by type of control: Fall 1980 to fall 1989
[In thousands)
Level of instruction and
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
type of control
1980
1985
1987
1988 1/
1989 1/
All levels
3,171
3,265
3,363
3,390
3,447
Public
2,679
2,710
2,802
2,828
2,874
Private
492
555
561
562
573
Elementary and secondary
teachers2/
2,485
2,550
2,627
2,649
2,691
Public
2,184
2,207
2,279
2,304
2,340
Private
301
343
1/
348
345
352
Elementary teachers
1,401
1,483
1,551
1,567
1,592
Public
1,189
1,237
1297
1,316
1,336
Private
212
246
1/
254
251
256
Secondary teachers
1,084
1,067
1,076
1,081
1,099
Public
995
970
982
987
1,003
Private
89
97
1/
94
94
96
Higher education
instructional staff3/
686
715
736
741
755
Public
495
503
523
524
534
Private
191
212
213
217
221
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 four-year colleges, and two-year colleges.
NOTE Data for fall 1987 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, 1989 (forthcoming); and Projections of Education
Statistics to 2000 (forthcoming). (This table was prepared August 1989.)
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: 1980-81 to 1989-90
[In current and constant dollars]
School year
Level of instruction and
type of control
1980-81
1985-86
1987-88 1/
1988-89 1/
1989-90 1/
Current dollars:
Expenditure per pupil in public
elementary and secondary
schools2/
$2,762
1/ $4,069
$4,709
$4,938
$5,246
Higher education expenditures
per full-time equivalent
student3/
7,997
12,041
13,403
14,176
14,923
Public
7,009
10,509
11,618
12,315
12,986
Private
11,010
16,530
18,812
19,740
20,724
Constant 1980-81 dollars:
Expenditure per pupil in public
elementary and secondary
schools4/
2,762
1/ 3,239
3,522
3,530
3,575
Higher education expenditures
per full-time equivalent
student4/
7,997
9,585
10,022
10,132
10,168
Public
7,009
8,365
8,687
8,803
8,849
Private
11,010
13,159
14,067
14,110
14,121
Average salary for public
school teachers:5/
Current dollars
17,644
25,198
28,008
29,567
31,200
Constant 1980-81 dollars4/
.....
17,644
20,059
20,944
21,134
21,259
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 1989-90 CPI
estimate is derived from 1989 and 1990 data in The Economic and Budget Outlook, Fiscal
Years 1990-1994, Congressional Budget Office.
5/Data for 1980-81, 1985-86, 1987-88, and 1988-89 are from the National Education
Association. The 1988-89 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, 1988-89. (This table was prepared August 1989).
Table 6.--Total expenditures of educational institutions, by level of
instruction and by type of control: 1980-81 to 1989-90
[In billions]
School year
Level of instruction and
type of control
1980-81
1985-86
1987-88 1/
1988-89 2/
1989-90 2/
Current dollars
All levels
$182.8
$269.5
$310.7
$330.5
$353.1
Public
150.7
218.7
252.6
268.9
287.3
Private
32.2
50.8
58.1
61.6
65.7
Elementary and secondary
expenditures
112.3
161.8
187.1
199.1
212.2
Public
104.1
148.6
172.0
183.4
195.5
Private2/
8.2
13.2
15.1
15.7
16.7
Higher education expenditures3/
70.5
107.7
123.7
131.4
140.9
Public
46.6
70.1
80.6
85.5
91.9
Private
24.0
37.6
43.1
45.8
49.0
Constant 1980-81 dollars 41
All levels
$182.8
$214.6
$232.4
$236.2
$240.6
Public
150.7
174.1
188.9
192.2
195.8
Private
32.2
40.5
43.5
44.0
44.8
Elementary and secondary
expenditures
112.3
128.8
139.9
142.3
144.6
Public
104.1
118.3
128.6
131.1
133.2
Private2/
8.2
10.5
11.3
11.2
11.4
Higher education expenditures3/
70.5
85.7
92.5
93.9
96.0
Public
46.6
55.8
60.3
61.1
62.6
Private
24.0
29.9
32.2
32.8
33.4
1/Preliminary.
2/Estimated.
3/Includes current-fund expenditures and additions to plant value.
4/Data adjusted by the Consumer Price Index, U.S. Department of Labor. The 1989-90 CPI
estimate is derived from 1989 and 1990 data in The Economic and Budget Outlook,
Fiscal Years 1990-1994, Congressional Budget Office.
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, 1989 (forthcoming); Projections of Education
Statistics to 2000 (forthcoming); and unpublished projections and estimates. (This
table was prepared August 1989.)
Table 7.--Number of graduates of educational institutions, by level of
education completed: 1980-81 to 1989-90
[In thousands]
School year
Level of education
completed
1980-81
1985-86
1987-88 1/
1988-89 1/
1989-90 1/
High school graduates, total
3,020
2,642
2,793
2,781
2,603
Public
2,725
2,382
2,493
2,491
2,337
Private1/
295
260
300
291
266
College and university
graduates:
Associate degrees
416
446
430
439
448
Bachelor's degrees
935
988
989
994
1,006
Master's degrees
296
289
292
293
301
First-professional degrees2/
72
74
72
72
72
Doctor's degrees
33
34
34
34
34
2/Includes 1/Estimated. 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, 1989 (forthcoming); and Projections of Education
Statistics to 2000 (forthcoming). (This table was prepared August 1989.)
Chart 1.--Enrollment in educational institutions, by level:
Fall 1970 to fall 1989
Millions
40
35
Elementary
30
25
20
Secondary
15
10
Higher education
5
0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1989
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 1959
(forthcoming).
Chart 2.--Number of teachers in educational institutions,
by level: Fall 1970 to fall 1989
In thousands
1800
1600
Elementary
1400
1200
1000
Secondary
800
600
Higher Education
400
200
0
1989
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 1989
(forthcoming).
Chart 3.--Expenditures of educational institutions in
constant 1980-81 dollars, by level: 1970-71 to 1989-90
Billions
$160
140
Elementary/secondary schools
120
100
80
Higher education
60
40
20
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
1989
School year beginning -
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 1989.
(forthcoming).
Teaching: Revitalizing a Profession
A key to providing quality education in America's schools is
quality teachers. Today, some question the future ability of the
American educational system to attract quality teachers to the
classroom in the numbers needed in the 1990s and beyond.
Quantity and Quality
1. At present, there is little likelihood of a general
teacher shortage in the foreseeable future. Not only
is an adequate supply of teachers expected, but
current student-teacher ratios are near all-time lows.
According to the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS), an overall teacher shortage is not expected in the 1990s.
Its Occupational Outlook Quarterly projected that demand for
teachers will vary in the 1990s with more teachers needed in the
elementary grades but fewer needed at the high school level. A
similar conclusion was reached in a survey by the Association for
School College and University Staffing, Inc.
In addition, the teaching profession has increased in popular-
ity among college students. In 1987, 8.1 percent of college
freshman expressed interest in a teaching career. That
represented a dramatic increase from the 4.7 percent level of
1982, a 20-year low.
This year there are more than 2.3 million elementary and
secondary school teachers in America's public schools. An
additional 350,000 teach in America's private schools. There are
now about 19 students for each teacher in America's public
schools, a post-War low. In 1960, as the baby boom swelled the
school age population, there were nearly 26 students for each
teacher.
2. While the overall supply of teachers seems adequate,
there will be greater needs for teachers with certain
skills. Further, given the role model function played
by teachers, it may be important to increase the cultural
and ethnic variety of America's educators.
The Association survey projected shortages of bilingual and
special education teachers. In addition, an increased commitment
to developing math and science skills in America's schools is
likely to sharply increase the demand for teachers in these
fields, and may lead to a shortage.
As the racial and ethnic composition of America's schools changes
in the coming years, it may be important to increase the share of
America's teachers who serve as role models to minority groups.
-2-
Between 1976 and 1986, the fraction of America's teachers who
were black declined from 8.1 percent to 6.9 percent. On the
other hand, the share from other minority groups, chiefly
Hispanics, increased dramatically, from 0.7 percent in 1981 to
3.4 percent in 1986.
3. While the quantity of teaching professionals is unlikely
to be a problem in the coming decade, the quality of the
training of those entering the classroom is less certain.
The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores of high school seniors
intending to major in education are 55 points below average.
Only 58% of intended education majors pursued an academic program
in high school, compared with 68% of all college-bound seniors.
On standardized vocational aptitude tests, future teachers scored
in the 37th percentile compared to a norm at the 50th percentile.
The Southern Regional Education Board found that education
graduates had fewer hours of course work and a weaker curriculum
than did liberal arts or science majors.
On the other hand, the educational level of teachers is
increasing. In 1986, over half of public elementary and
secondary school teachers held master's or doctorate degrees. In
1976, 62 percent had no more than a bachelor of arts degree.
Teacher Salaries
1. Salaries for elementary and secondary teachers have risen
sharply during the 1980s. The increases have outpaced
both inflation and the rise in the wages paid to workers
generally.
This year, the average teacher salary for public school teachers
will reach $31,200. That is a real increase of 23 percent from
the 1981 school year. By comparison, real median family income
has risen about 14 percent over the same period.
On the other hand, teachers' salaries failed to keep up with
inflation during the 1970s. Real pay for teachers fell by nearly
8 percent while median family income rose slightly after
adjusting for inflation.
In sum, both the real and the relative standing of teachers' pay
has improved during the 1980s after falling during the 1970s.
2. Wide discrepancies exist among the states in teacher
compensation. Further, there is no evidence that
these discrepancies are narrowing.
-3-
In the 1986 school year, teacher salaries ranged from less than
$20,000 in Arkansas, Mississippi and South Dakota, to more than
$30,000 in Alaska, California, New York, and Rhode Island.
During the first five years of the decade, the greatest increase
in salaries occurred in relatively high-pay New England, while
the lowest rate of increase occurred in the relatively low-pay
Plains States.
Link Between Salaries and Quality
1. A recent report by economist Eric Hanushek at the
University of Rochester concludes "there is no
strong or systematic relationship between school
expenditures and student performance."
The report summarized some 187 previous studies that attempted to
show a correlation between school expenditures and academic
performance. It concluded that higher per-pupil spending, higher
teacher salaries, and greater administrative expenditures had no
measurable impact on student performance.
Hanushek's report supports the view that improving educational
achievement requires a commitment to accountability and
excellence, not more money. Hanushek concluded, "if you're
interested in improving educational performance, you have to
develop management techniques and polices that are geared
directly to performance."
2. The historic evidence makes clear that the rapid rise
in teacher salaries during the 1980s has not produced
a commensurate rise in performance.
While teacher salaries have increased faster than both inflation
and overall salary levels, SAT scores have risen only 9 points --
about 2 percent.
Adequate compensation is one prerequisite for attracting both the
quality and quantity of staff needed. However, it should not be
viewed as the answer. The next section considers some other
approaches to finding qualified and highly motivated teachers.
Programs to Attract and Promote Quality Teachers
1. One of the central problems of education is attracting
competent people to teaching. This is particularly true
for members of minority groups. States have implemented
a wide variety of programs.
Recruitment programs include those of North Carolina which has
adopted an aggressive teacher recruitment program that includes
-4-
high school recruitment, scholarships, and targeted projects to
expand the pool of minority teachers. Arkansas and other states
began special loan programs to attract minority teacher education
students.
Retention programs include Pennsylvania's loan forgiveness
program for teachers in rural and inner city schools. California
sought to retain outstanding urban teachers by offering financial
incentives and sabbaticals.
Indiana has added a computerized teacher referral system and
implemented beginning teacher internships.
2. The pathway to certification in most states requires
prospective teachers to complete a formal two-year
teacher education course as part of a degree program.
Forty-six states require passing an exam prior to
certification.
Many college graduates with subject matter expertise and indi-
viduals seeking second careers face barriers to the classroom
involving certification criteria that prevent teaching from
becoming an option. Consequently, many school districts forego
the talent and motivation of highly competent professionals who
have an interest in teaching.
3. The idea of alternative certification systems for hiring
teachers is gaining popularity in the States.
In New Jersey, any person who has earned a bachelor of arts
degree in a field other than teaching and passes a
standardized national teacher exam can be hired as a provisional
teacher. After two years, the teacher is eligible to receive
official certification. On the whole, the caliber of the new
recruits surpasses that of the traditionally certified teachers,
and the number of qualified applicants per teaching position
rises annually.
Last year, 30 percent of the state's 750 new teachers were hired
under the program. For the 1989-90 school year, 275 more
teachers have been hired through the alternative system,
representing 35 percent of the new teaching force. Since 1985,
over 7000 applicants have sought to enter the program.
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode
Island, and Vermont are working with the Northeast Education
Laboratory to develop policies to reduce obstacles to interstate
teacher mobility.
4.
Support for alternative certification is one of the
President's education initiatives.
-5-
If Congress adopts the President's proposal, states would receive
one-time grants to apply toward the development, expansion,
improvement, or evaluation of flexible teacher certification
systems. The President requested $25 million to fund this
program for FY 1990.
Rewarding Excellence in Teaching
1. Two prominent federal programs that identify and reward
excellent teachers are Presidential Awards for Teaching
Excellence in Mathematics, Science, and Foreign Lanquages
and the Fund for the Improvement and Reform of Schools
and Teaching (FIRST).
The Presidential Awards program in the National Sciences
Foundation authorizes the President to make awards that recognize
outstanding elementary and secondary teaching in the fields of
mathematics, science, and foreign languages in every state.
The Hawkins-Stafford Elementary and Secondary School Improvements
of 1988 established FIRST in part to encourage schools to
implement incentive programs that identify and reward excellent
teachers. The Fund authorizes the Secretary of Education to make
grants to teachers or administrators implementing such programs
in the school. In 1989, $1.5 million was appropriated for
school-level projects that provide teacher incentives.
2. One of the President's 1989 education initiatives is to
establish Presidential Awards for Excellence in
Education: cash awards to excellent teachers.
All elementary and secondary school teachers, in public and
private schools, teaching any academic subject, would be eligible
to compete for recognition and awards.
To date, Congress has not supported the initiative. Senate bill
695, which includes in some form, other Presidential education
proposals, does not include Presidential Awards for teachers.
3. Many states seek to identify, and reward well-qualified
teachers through incentive pay and promotion systems.
To date, 12 states have established teacher incentive
or career ladder programs; 8 states are funding pilot
projects; and 6 others are developing state programs.
One outcome of the "first wave" of educational reform has been a
nationwide movement toward changing the incentive structure of
the teaching profession. Career ladder and other pay-for-
-6-
performance programs are the largest educational experiment in
the U.S. today and are gaining widespread support.
South Carolina's successful Teacher Incentive Program initiated
in 1984 has now become a statewide $21.5 million project. The
program rewards teachers for superior performance and
productivity.
Louisiana's new "Children First" program offers a career option
plan for teachers that increases professional responsibility and
authority and boosts salaries 10 to 20 percent above the state
minimum. After a two year pilot, statewide implementation of the
plan is scheduled for 1991-92.
4. Teacher incentive programs can be used to improve
accountability in our education system. Five states
-- Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, and
Utah -- are implementing teacher incentive programs
based on student performance. Arizona and Delaware
are piloting similar programs.
Merit pay for teachers is one type of student performance-based
incentive program that has gained support in recent years.
Evaluations of several of the student-based incentive plans in
these states have found positive outcomes.
A study of the Utah Career Ladder Program reports that the
program, "is powerfully and positively changing both the teaching
profession and the ways schools are organized to teach.
The Learning Environment
Achieving better results in the educational system will
require that children attend school in an environment that is
conducive to learning. This means, among other things, schools
which are drug-free and violence-free; it is helped by home
environments which are safe and supportive. In addition,
children from early ages throughout their lives as students must
be challenged by parents, teachers, other role models, and the
education system to commit themselves to learning as a positive
and life-long enterprise.
Pre-School and Early Childhood
1. Parents play a critical role in providing children with
values and skills essential to success in school and
later life.
Two recent reports, "Gaining Ground: Values and High School
Success" and "Improving the Productivity of America's Schools"
documented the vital role which parental attitudes play in
children's educational success. The reports found that parental
encouragement, interest, and concern were twice as important as
socioeconomic background in determining student performance.
2. Quality pre-school programs can increase the chances
of success, particularly for at-risk youth.
Research shows that high-quality early intervention programs can
increase the long-term chances of success for at-risk youth.
Studies also show that disadvantaged children who attend good
preschool programs are less likely to be delinquents or be
dependent on welfare than other disadvantaged children.
During the 1980s, interest in early childhood education has
grown, although a majority of participants have come from
affluent families:
In 1980, eight States had legislated or funded preschool
programs. By 1989, 31 States had such programs.
In 1986, according to Census data, 39 percent of 3- and
4-year olds attended preschool.
It is important to recognize that quality preschool is not a
panacea and that quality education, follow-up, and the message
from all sectors of society should be that learning is an
essential and valuable element to a successful life.
-2-
At-Risk Youth
1. At-risk children comprise a significant proportion of
students in school.
Students with difficulties adjusting to school come from all
racial and ethnic groups and all socioeconomic classes. However,
the likelihood of encountering problems is higher for children
from low-income families, families where English is not used at
home, and families who are members of minority groups. Due to
this heightened likelihood, children from these backgrounds are
categorized as being "at risk."
In 1982, children from these groups comprised about 30 percent of
America's school-age population. The share of children from
these groups will grow over the next decade. Offsetting this
trend, however, is the rising socioeconomic level of families in
these "at risk" categories.
2. Rescuing young people who have trouble in school means, in
part, reducing the dropout rate: a major educational
challenge for the system. This is particularly true for
members of at-risk groups.
Overall dropout rates were one-sixth higher a decade ago than
they are today. The decrease in the dropout rate was especially
pronounced among blacks. In 1988, 14.9 percent of black adults
aged 18-24 were dropouts compared to 27.4 percent in 1968.
The Hispanic dropout rate is very high, 35.8 percent of 16- to
24-year olds, and shows no sign of decreasing. One-third of
those dropping out had completed six years of schooling or less.
In many cases, individuals who drop out return to school at a
later date. For example, in 1986 roughly 1 million students did
not graduate with their class, but 428,00C Americans received
high school equivalency degrees. Nearly half of all dropouts
return and get their degrees at some point in their lives. The
number of equivalency degrees granted during the 1980s was 25
percent higher than in the 1970s.
Those students who drop out do so for many reasons. Poor
academic performance is not always tied to dropping out. More
than half of the students dropping out in 1982 had a C average or
better. Low expectations and lack of motivation can be major
factors. More than one-third of a class of high school dropouts
simply reported that school was "not for me."
3. The Federal government has provided funds for special
programs for at-risk youth for more than two decades.
-3-
Federal programs for at-risk youth began in the mid-1960s. Head
Start, begun in 1964, is currently funded at $1.2 billion, and
serves over 450,000 preschool age children in over 1,200
locations. The President has requested additional funds which
would increase the number of low-income 4-year-olds served by
Head Start by one-third. Remedial education programs, begun in
1965, are currently funded at $4.6 billion, and reach 4.7 million
children each year in over 90 percent of our schools.
Other federal programs provide education programs for handicapped
children, Indian children, potential dropouts, neglected
children, migrant children, youth in correctional facilities, and
teenage parents.
4. States and localities have expanded efforts to improve
educational opportunities for at-risk children.
States have initiated a broad range of innovative programs
including those focused toward alternative education programs for
drop-outs, enticing drop-outs back into the educational system,
school-to-work transition programs, and programs to coordinate
multi-agency efforts for at-risk youth.
South Carolina's "Target 2000" program expands state programs
targeted for at-risk youth by combining services with increased
accountability and regulatory flexibility. Indiana has an
Educational Opportunity Program for At-Risk Youth that provides
$22 million to assist school districts to implement programs for
pre-school and remediation programs and encourages parental
involvement.
Violence and Drugs
1. Students and adults rank student drug use as the
major problem facing young people and schools.
The percentage of students using drugs by the sixth grade has
tripled since 1975 -- 26 percent of fourth graders and 42 percent
of sixth graders have used alcohol.
The Gallup Youth Surveys show that 54 percent of 13- to 18-year
olds cite drug use as the major problem facing them today -- up
from 27 percent ten years ago. For the third year in a row,
adults cite student drug use as the major problem facing the
schools.
Research shows that drug use is 10 times more prevalent than
parents believe. Additionally, school administrators and
teachers are often unaware of drug use and related-theft
occurring on school grounds.
-4-
2. Violence, crime, and disorder among school-age youth is
increasing, impeding learning, and hurting teacher morale.
Drugs have only recently replaced "discipline" as the major
problem facing schools and there is little doubt that the two are
often interrelated. Gang violence persists as competition for
drug markets increases and more destructive weapons are used with
increasing frequency. According to the most recently available
FBI statistics, crime among youth under 18 years old has
increased since 1983. Violent crime has increased 31 percent,
vandalism 38 percent and drug offenses have shown a 45 percent
increase.
Almost one-third of students in a 1988 survey reported that
someone had threatened to hurt them while 14 percent reported
they had been robbed. Twenty percent of teachers reported being
threatened and 8 percent had been attacked.
Nearly one-third of teachers surveyed said they considered
leaving the profession because of discipline problems. A 1985
survey of principals rated discipline as the number one problem.
Another survey showed that 14 percent of students said that
"improving discipline" is the single most important action a
school could take to improve education.
3. The President's 1989 education initiatives include a
proposal to provide special add-on funding for a small
number of urban schools with the worst drug problems.
Under the Drug Free Schools Urban Emergency Grants program, $25
million would be provided to school districts with the most
severe drug problems to implement comprehensive solutions.
Assessing Student Performance
1. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
placed the U.S. last in mathematics and in the bottom
group in science in a comparison of U.S. 13-year old
students with their peers in 11 nations and 4 Canadian
provinces.
For example, only 40 percent of U.S. students could perform a two
step math problem versus 78 percent of Korean students and about
60 percent of students in most countries. In the science tests,
only 42 percent of U.S. 13-year olds were able to analyze
experiments, compared with 73 percent in Korea and about 58
percent in most countries.
2. Particularly disturbing is evidence that the gap between
U.S. students and those in other countries increased as
students progressed through the educational system.
-5-
In the fifth grade, the U.S. ranked eighth out of 15 countries in
science. By the ninth grade, the U.S. had dropped to third from
the bottom. By the time students reached grade 12, U.S. students
scored an average ranking of 11th out of 13. By the 12th grade,
even average Japanese students were outscoring the top 5 percent
of U.S. students in college preparatory math. We were lowest
overall in algebra skills and among the lowest in calculus.
3. U.S. students also performed poorly in the social sciences
such as geography.
Our students ranked 7th out of 9 nations in their ability to
identify places on a world map. Surprisingly, our young adults
who were fresh out of school were less able to identify places
than were people aged 55 and over.
4. The quantity of time devoted to learning is much lower in
America than in other countries.
Taiwanese students spend 40.4 hours per week and Japanese
students spend 32.6 hours per week in the classroom. In the U.S.
students average only 19.6 hours per week in the classroom.
Sixty-two percent of U.S. students reported having less than one
hour of math homework per week. This contrasts with only 32
percent of Korean students who have so little homework.
5. Students in competing countries are exposed to more
rigorous academic curricula than in the U.S. Students
cannot learn what they haven't been taught.
In the eighth grade, U.S. students are still learning arithmetic
while Japan provides an intensive treatment in calculus. By the
latter secondary grades, U.S. students are learning algebra while
Japanese students are learning calculus. Only one-fifth of
advanced U.S. math students take calculus in high school. Nearly
all advanced students in other countries take calculus.
Governance: Who Is In Charge?
As the decision makers at this Summit contemplate
establishing national goals for educational attainment, it is
useful to consider the constitutional, jurisdictional, and
historical issues which shape the decision making process in
education. Establishing accountability for educational results
involves clearly delineating responsibility for decision making
and financing. Federal and state laws and regulations may limit
flexibility in ways that impede the efforts of local school
authorities to improve educational quality.
Dividing Responsibilities
1. Both the States and the Federal government have been
involved in providing education since the country was
founded. Historically, States have had ultimate
responsibility for education with the Federal government
providing a much less active role.
This division of responsibilities began with the Northwest
Ordinance in 1787. The Federal government allocated one square
mile in each township in the new territories to support the
creation of local public schools for that township. However, the
Ordinance did not establish any federal controls over how the
districts were to be run or over the curricula. These matters
were left to the States.
This pattern was followed in the Morrill Act of 1862 which
authorized public land grants to the States for the establishment
and maintenance of agricultural and mechanical colleges. Direct
federal cash support began with the Morrill Act of 1890, which
extended cash payments to support the land grant colleges.
Nonetheless, states were left as the governmental entities
responsible for public education at the elementary and
secondary level. Some states have directly elected chief state
school officers and state Boards of Education, while others are
appointed by the Governor.
Under our federal system, school districts and all local
jurisdictions are the responsibilities of the state governments
which have created them. Localities are thus delegated
responsibilities for education by the States. Generally, a
substantial degree of delegation has occurred and a tradition of
local control over the shape and content of education is quite
strong.
2. Local control has been maintained through a highly
decentralized network of locally operated school
districts.
-2-
Today, there are approximately 15,000 local school districts.
However, this number has been declining as a result of the
consolidation and elimination of non-viable school districts to
fully exploit scale economies in education and the gradual
decline in transportation costs. In 1931, there were over
127,000 school districts; by 1960, the total had dropped to
40,500. This consolidation process is now slowing.
Local boards of education may be elected directly or appointed by
the mayor or the county board of supervisors. Some districts
have independent taxing authority; others receive all local funds
through appropriations from the unit of general government.
School districts vary in size and complexity: only 173 school
districts enroll more than 25,000 students; over 8,000 districts
enroll fewer than 1,000 students. New York City, the nation's
largest school district has an enrollment that exceeds the
enrollment of over 35 States.
3. Today, the role of the Federal government in education is
important, but limited.
The Federal government provides additional funds to support
programs for students with special needs (such as the
educationally disadvantaged, the handicapped, language minority
students).
It also provides limited resources to address educational issues
of high national interest at a given moment (e.g., support for
science and foreign languages after Sputnik and aid for school
desegregation).
The Federal government supports research on national education
issues and the collection and dissemination of statistics about
education at all levels.
Finally, federal officials and the President provide leadership
to influence the direction of public education. The most visible
recent major example was the 1983 report of the National
Commission on Excellence in Education.
Sources of Funding
1. Predominant State and local control of education has been
maintained for two centuries in part because states and
localities continue to be the principal sources of
revenues for public education.
This year, 6.8 percent of the GNP will be allocated to support
education. Total expenditures for American education at all
levels is expected to reach $353 billion this year, $212
-3-
billion of which will be spent at the elementary and secondary
level.
Education represents the largest single item of expenditures for
state and local governments. Expenditures for all levels of
education account for 29 percent of state and local spending;
expenditures for elementary and secondary education, for 20
percent.
Historically, localities, through the property tax, provided the
largest share of revenues for public education. However, in
1978-79, states became the largest source of revenues for public
elementary and secondary education. The Federal government
continues to be the most junior financial partner in the
enterprise, never providing more than 10 percent of total
revenues in any year.
Percent of Elementary and Secondary Education Spending
Year
Local
State
Federal
1920
83.2
16.5
0.3
1940
68.0
30.3
1.8
1960
56.5
39.1
4.4
1980
43.4
46.8
9.8
1987
43.8
49.8
6.4
The range in the share of revenues from the states is wide: from
88 percent in Hawaii (which has no local districts) and 75
percent in New Mexico to 6 percent in New Hampshire.
2.
Expenditures for public education continue to rise every
year, although there is considerable state-to-state
variation.
Differences in expenditures among states remain wide: from a
high of $8,010 in Alaska and $6,497 in New York to a low of
$2,350 in Mississippi.
Recent Trends in Governance
1. The trend in this decade has been to move toward more
centralization and regulation of education at the state
level from what has been a locally controlled system.
The areas of education regulated at the state level vary from one
state to another. All states regulate the length of the school
year and the ages of compulsory school attendance; some set
qualification/certification requirements for teachers; some
determine permissible textbooks, some set curriculum requirements
or standards.
-4-
In recent years, the movement has been to tighten state imposed
requirements (e.g., graduation requirements, teacher
qualifications) in order to improve standards and reduce
variations in educational resources and outcomes within states.
2. At the same time, there has been some movement toward
greater decentralization within school districts.
Often referred to as school-based management, this greater
decentralization gives more latitude to principals and teachers
to make decisions about the uses of resources or the shaping of
curriculum and instruction within their own schools.
Lifting Constraints on State and Local Flexibility
1. The proliferation of categorical education laws at the
federal and state levels has probably tended to reduce the
incentive and the flexibility needed to achieve better
educational results.
Increased flexibility for educators to design strategies that
they feel will work best will allow the educational system to
adapt to the local environment and will provide a greater number
of educational experiments from which the nation as a whole can
learn and benefit.
2. The President has endorsed the principle of waiving
restrictions on the use of federal funds if that will
result in greater achievement gains.
Nearly all federal programs for education and training are grants
to states and local entities which place limits on what grantees
can do with the funds. Current regulations are usually
restatements of law, not executive branch rule making. Thus,
removing such regulations will require statutory changes.
It is important to note that increased flexibility entails
increased responsibility for achieving non-educational social
objectives. Much federal education law reflects the context of
the 1960s and 1970s, a time when many school systems did not
serve minorities, poor populations, and the handicapped as well
as they served others. Federal dollars were meant to assure
enhanced and appropriate services to these populations.
Consequently, federal laws and rules focus on the process of how
federal aid is spent to make sure that money targets special
needs and supplements, not supplants, state and local funds.
These are important goals. Concerns that waivers might direct
funds away from target populations must be addressed while we
consider how to provide more flexibility and local control.
-5-
3. To achieve the dual objectives of freeing up resources and
achieving greater educational results, goals that are
shared by both the President and the Governors, one
approach would be to consider granting waivers in exchange
for performance accountability.
Demonstrating substantial improvement in student outcomes,
especially the gains made by traditionally targeted populations,
would be at the heart of a waiver system. Three states -- Ohio,
South Carolina, and Texas -- are demonstrating this concept by
granting regulatory waivers to local districts with high
performing schools.
Choice and Restructuring
Providing educational choices for parents is a key means of
promoting accountability in our nation's schools as well as
increasing the quality of the nation's educational system.
Providing consumers with the power to choose what they feel best
suits their needs not only increases customer satisfaction, but
also causes producers to compete to provide a quality product.
It also is critical that we structure our schools to deliver
the desired result: higher levels of education achievement.
Innovative restructuring can give parents, teachers, and
administrators more freedom and control of resources in exchange
for holding them accountable for student performance.
The Case for Providing Choice
1. Providing choice increases parents' involvement in their
children's education.
The critical importance of parental involvement in a child's
education cannot be underestimated. The more parents accept
responsibility for the educational progress of their children,
the more likely it is the children will succeed.
In "Gaining Ground: Values and High School Success" educational
researchers Sandra Hanson and Alan Ginsburg documented that
factors under parents' control such as setting expectations and
expressing interest, have far more effect on student outcomes
than does socioeconomic status. These findings confirmed the
earlier report by Herbert Walberg in "Improving the Productivity
of America's Schools" that parent concern and encouragement were
twice as important in student achievement as family background.
Choosing the best schools for their children is one of the most
fundamental ways parents could get involved, if the system let
them.
2. Parental choice also stimulates efforts to improve our
schools by inspiring constructive competition among
schools and encouraging parents to get involved in school
improvement efforts.
As New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean advocates, "When parents
choose schools, they are more likely to care about the school's
progress and become involved in its operation
Choice can make
our schools prosper.
-2-
3. The public overwhelmingly supports the concept of choice.
According to the 21st Annual Gallup Poll on Education, conducted
earlier this year, the American public believes that parents and
students should have the right to choose which schools in the
community students should attend. Overall, the margin of support
was two-to-one (60-31 percent). Particular support for choice
was expressed by non-whites and by young adults.
Difficulties in Providing Choice
1. Presently no public school choice plan gives parents the
ultimate right to choose which public school their child
will attend.
While parental choice is a concept being endorsed by States and
local districts across the nation, the "right to choose" the
schools their children attend is generally limited or controlled.
Space availability constraints and cross-district jurisdictional
problems are two of the limiting factors.
The most open form of "controlled-choice" plan allows parents to
select the district in which their child will attend school.
Some of these interdistrict programs are available only to
special "at-risk" populations, not all students. State magnet
schools offer a more limited form of interdistrict choice.
Typically, these schools offer a particular curricular specialty,
like science and mathematics. Other choice plans allow parents
to choose from among public schools within the district only.
2. A key issue in implementing parental choice is how to
integrate it with factors such as desegregation plans and
schemes to increase opportunity for those most in need.
Choice is one among several important social programs that have
to be taken into account when organizing school systems. Others
include maintaining racial balance and providing intensive
remedial services for those most in need. A successful choice
plan incorporates other goals as well to create an overall system
that leads to higher performance for all students and leaves none
behind.
State Efforts to Promote Choice and Restructure Schools
1. The most far reaching extension of parental choice
involves the ability to send one's children to schools
in other school districts.
The broadest choice for parents exists in Minnesota which
expanded its choice program this year to require all districts to
participate in the interdistrict open enrollment program.
-3-
Districts lose their power to prevent students from leaving the
district unless the transfer will interfere with desegregation
plans. Some 3,700 students requested transfers for the 1989-90
school year, each taking with them $3,300 in state aid.
Washington State gives dropouts, at-risk students, and teen
parents an opportunity to choose schools in other districts, and
New Jersey is piloting a similar program for dropouts in 1991.
None of the cross-district choice programs being implemented by
States allow parents to select specific schools for their
children. However, North Carolina presently is considering a
choice plan that would allow student application to specific
schools.
2. Less broad are choice programs that allow parents to
choose from among public schools within their home
district.
West Virginia's choice program only applies to children who are
otherwise displaced if their neighborhood school fails to meet
accreditation standards.
Massachusetts has allocated more than $40 million to promote
public school choice plans over the last five years. In
Cambridge, a controlled choice plan allows parents to choose
schools so long as racial-balance guidelines are maintained.
New Jersey passed legislation to pilot intradistrict choice, and
Governor Richard Celeste is directing Ohio's project to implement
statewide interdistrict choice by 1993. School districts
presently are required to develop plans for open enrollment.
3. By far the most common form of State "choice" programs are
those that offer magnet schools and alternative programs.
More than 15 States have special schools in science and
mathematics. In Michigan, $1 million has been allocated to help
start approximately six regional magnet secondary science-math
schools.
Postsecondary enrollment options for high school students also
are gaining popularity. Eight States have enacted postsecondary
options and seven others are considering programs.
4. The National Governors' Association (NGA) has stressed
that the focus of school restructuring should be on
placing decision-making authority and responsibility for
results with parents, teachers, and administrators.
-4-
In "Time For Results" and subsequent progress reports, the
Governors have indicated four major essential areas for school
restructuring:
Modifying curriculum and instruction to promote the
acquisition of higher order skills;
Decentralizing authority and decision making. Parents,
teachers and administrators should work together to set
the directions and strategies for the school;
Developing new staff roles to allow teachers to work
together to improve instruction and to encourage
principals to take risks and reward performance; and
Establishing accountability systems linking rewards and
incentives to student performance.
5. Activities to promote restructuring are now taking place
in the vast majority of the states.
The NGA reports that 27 states are implementing measures to
promote restructuring at the school or district level. Alaska
targets activities at the elementary school level, while
California and Virginia focus efforts on middle schools.
Twenty-one states are willing to grant regulatory waivers for
local sites if the local district encounters barriers in
implementing improvement plans. At least three states, Ohio,
South Carolina, and Texas tie these waivers to performance.
Administration Proposals and Activities to Promote Choice
1. To promote choice in schools, the President's 1989
education initiatives include a proposal for fostering
Magnet Schools of Excellence.
Magnet schools have been successful in increasing parental choice
and improving educational quality. The Federal government
presently provides Magnet Schools Assistance grants to further
desegregation efforts under the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act. The President's proposal supports in addition the
establishment, expansion, or enhancement of magnet schools
without regard to desegregation plans.
2. The President has urged states to maximize parental choice
and involvement and to experiment with innovative
techniques in order to make real choice available.
In particular, states might consider ways to provide information
and counselling to help parents select the school which best
-5-
suits their children's needs, assure that dollars follow students
to the schools they choose to attend, and provide transportation
within reasonable limits, especially for families unable to pay
for it.
3. Under the leadership of Secretary Lauro Cavazos, the
Department of Education is taking a series of actions to
promote greater freedom for parents and students to choose
the right schools.
The Secretary's activities include:
Convening a series of regional strategy meetings on choice
in October and November this year. The meetings will take
place in New York, Minnesota, North Carolina, Colorado,
and California;
Creation of an Education Department task force to
"promote, encourage, and evaluate choice programs and
report on their activity." The Department plans to
conduct an extensive evaluation of Minnesota's pioneering
choice program;
The appointment of a Special Advisor on Choice Programs;
Directing the Department to make choice a major priority
in selecting programs to receive grants under the
Secretary's Fund for Innovation in Education;
Publishing a guide for parents on how to select a school
entitled, "Choosing a School for Your Child."
A Competitive Workforce and Life-Long Learning
In order to maintain our competitive position in the world,
we must maintain a highly skilled workforce which has the
flexibility to adapt to emerging technologies. In addition, we
should provide all of our citizens the tools to be able to lead
fully productive lives. To do this, we must address the problem
of literacy.
Demographic trends indicate that our workforce will grow
more slowly in the 1990s than in recent decades and that the
composition of the workforce will shift toward older workers. As
a nation we face the twin challenges of educating our youngsters
in the latest technologies while encouraging our older workers to
acquire new skills. We cannot afford a poorly trained workforce
if we are to maintain our position of world leadership.
Demographic Trends and the Job Market of the 1990s
1. In the 1990s, the workforce will grow more slowly than
at any time since the 1930s.
During the 1970s, the size of the labor force increased at an
average annual rate of 2.9 percent, as the men and women of the
baby boom generation entered the workforce along with many older
women who either had never been in the workforce or who had
previously left the workforce to raise families. In the 1990s,
the rate of growth in the workforce is projected to be only 1
percent per year as the number of new labor force entrants drops.
2. The U.S. workforce will become older, the pool of young
labor force entrants will decline, and the labor force as
a whole will be less flexible.
The average age of the U.S. worker is now 36 years. By the year
2000, however, the average age is expected to be 39 years. The
number of workers age 16 to 24 will drop by almost 2 million, or
8 percent. Although tomorrow's workforce will be more
experienced, it may be less adaptable. Older workers, as a
group, are less willing than younger workers to move their homes,
to change their occupations, or to undertake training.
3. Jobs of the future will demand more education and more
sophisticated skills.
On average the length of education required for jobs in today's
market is 12.8 years. Fewer than one-fourth of all occupations
require a college degree. During the 1990s, the relative
quantity of low skill jobs in our economy will decline. More
than half of all new jobs created between 1984 and 2000 will
-2-
require some training beyond the high school level, and almost
one-third will be filled by college graduates. On average, jobs
created during the 1990s will require 13.5 years of education.
The Problem of Illiteracy
1. Currently, an estimated 13 percent of the adult population
of the United States is functionally illiterate, and the
reading skills of many more adults are marginal.
There are an estimated 20 million adults in this country who
cannot read and write.
Illiterate adults fall into three major categories: those who
failed to complete high school, those who completed high school
but nonetheless failed to acquire basic literacy skills and those
who emigrated to the United States and have failed to learn
English at a basic literacy level. Many of the adults in the
third category are literate in the language of their native land.
Of the adults who are technically literate, a substantial number
cannot read at the eighth grade level. Approximately 17 percent
of young high school graduates and 30 percent of all young adults
cannot read at that level.
2. Illiteracy is often passed on between generations.
Research has documented the problem of intergenerational
illiteracy. Parents who lack adequate literacy skills often fail
to encourage their children to acquire those skills, thereby
perpetuating illiteracy into future generations.
3. Adult illiteracy programs do not reach enough people.
Studies of state and city adult literacy programs reveal that
attrition rates are frequently as high a 50 percent after only 75
to 100 hours of instruction. Volunteer programs report that the
median length of tutoring is well below 50 hours.
4. Many functionally illiterate Americans are reluctant to
acknowledge their lack of skills.
Many adults lack a strong incentive to seek and to sustain
literacy training. The relationship between literacy and
employment is often not clear as workers find ways to "cope" with
their problem. Having developed ways of coping with their lack
of adequate reading and writing skills, many workers are
uncomfortable and embarrassed about others knowing of their
deficiencies.
-3-
Toward a Fully Literate Society
1. The private and nonprofit sectors have instituted programs
to combat illiteracy.
In hundreds of companies around the country, employers are
providing workplace literacy programs to improve the basic skills
of their workers. Motorola estimates that it will have spent $35
million by 1993 to teach basic reading skills to employees. The
Business Council for Effective Literacy, established in 1983 by
Harold McGraw, encourages private businesses to promote adult
literacy and provides guidance and technical assistance on how to
do so. In addition, foundations such as the MacArthur
Foundation, the New York Life Foundation, the William R. Kenan
Charitable Trust, the Mott Foundation, and the Gannet Foundation
support literacy programs.
Thousands of volunteers work to improve literacy skills through
tutoring programs and literacy classes that meet in schools,
churches, libraries, and other community facilities throughout
the country. ABC and PBS are operating a television campaign
called Project PLUS, which promotes increased awareness of
illiteracy and links volunteer tutors with adults in need of
literacy training.
2. Federal government efforts to promote literacy involve
several Federal agencies, including the Departments of
Education, Labor, and Health and Human Services.
Mrs. Bush has focused attention on efforts to foster literacy in
programs across the country.
The Department of Education provides grants to every State for
the support of adult basic education programs involving over 3
million adults in communities throughout the country. In
addition, the Department of Education supports both research on
issues related to literacy and the collection of data concerning
the extent of the illiteracy problem.
The Department of Labor recently led the effort to amend the Job
Training Partnership Act (JTPA). The proposed JTPA amendments
would refocus efforts on the acquisition or improvement of basic
skills, including literacy skills, among both adults and youth
who participate in the program, with an emphasis on increasing
services to youth most in need of help.
The Head Start program of the Department of Health and Human
Services addresses the problem of intergenerational literacy.
The Administration's 1989 Budget authorized a one-third increase
in the number of poor 4-year olds who participate in the Head
Start program. In addition, the Department of Health and Human
-4-
Services' Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program
focuses on the improvement of literacy skills among welfare
recipients.
Under the Management By Objective (MBO) system instituted this
year, the Secretaries of Education, Labor and HHS have been
charged with joint responsibility for developing integrated
literacy initiatives. The milestones and timetables for the MBO
items are now being developed.
Other Federal agencies, such as ACTION, the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the
Department of Defense, and the Bureau of Prisons, also devote
resources to improving literacy skills.
Providing Skills for the Future
1. The private sector is key to developing the skills of the
nation's workforce. U.S. industry spends $30 billion
annually on formal worker education and training programs.
On average, the private sector spends about 1.4 percent of
aggregate payroll expenses on training programs. Expenditures of
2 to 4 percent of payroll expenses in individual firms are not
uncommon. Currently, one in ten American employees receives some
formal training from his or her employer. In addition to
expenditures for formal training programs, employers spend from
$90 billion to $180 billion for unstructured training, which is
the principal means by which small business integrates technical,
economic, strategic, and regulatory change into the workplace.
2. Labor market trends suggest that current training
efforts will be insufficient in the 1990s.
Two-thirds of all workers who will make up the U.S. labor force
in the year 2000 are already working. To upgrade the skills of
current workers and new labor force entrants alike, additional
private sector training efforts will be needed. In addition,
training programs for the 1990s will be called upon to include
more minority workers. Minority employees represent about 15
percent of the workforce but receive only 8 percent of formal
worker training.
3. In the 1990s, employers should expand the public-
private partnerships established in the 1980s.
U.S. firms already participate in many education partnership
programs. These programs often guarantee jobs to qualified
students upon graduation, donate money and equipment, and offer
on-site teacher training. To ensure a fully productive
workforce, America's employers should become full partners in
-5-
American education. Improved communications between industry and
educators will help schools provide the skills required of entry-
level workers. Increased participation by industry also will
help make schools more accountable for the skills of their
graduates.
Business has demonstrated a significant willingness to
participate more actively in educational reform. In a 1989
survey of the Fortune 500 companies, two-thirds of corporate
executive respondents indicated that their companies would be
willing to take additional steps to help improve public schools.
Sixty-eight percent responded that, if asked, they would
personally contribute their time to help the public education
system.
4. The Federal government also has an important role. The
Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) provides
employment and job training services in partnership
with the private sector. Additional support comes from
the Vocational Education Act.
Under the JTPA, nearly $4 billion per year is spent on programs
to train individuals facing employment barriers. These programs
include economically disadvantaged adults and youth, dislocated
workers, veterans, Native Americans, and migrant and seasonal
farm workers. The JTPA's $1.8 billion block grant program serves
1.3 million people each year through grants to states and
localities. Industry participates in JTPA programs through
Private Industry Councils, which help set local policy for,
design, and administer training programs.
The Department of Education provides nearly $1 billion per year
to the states to augment vocational education programs. An
Administration proposal would improve this program by requiring
states to identify populations in need of aid and requiring
localities to agree to achievement goals for the people served.
5. States not only use Federal funds but often spend far more
of their own funds on adult literacy and on skill training
linked to economic development.
States are the primary grantees under most Federal education and
training laws. They operate extensive postsecondary education
systems, some of which at the two-year college level, are heavily
involved in vocational training. In addition, states regulate
private, for-profit training schools. States also work closely
with businesses to meet their workforce needs. A strong state
coordinating and guiding role can make all these parts of the
system work more effectively.
Postsecondary Education: Strengthening Access and Excellence
As the U.S. confronts the demands of long-term economic
and technological growth in a competitive world marketplace,
postsecondary education is one of the most important keys to
preparing our nation to meet the challenge. Our higher education
system is widely envied throughout the world. It is vital that
we maintain this worldwide leadership. Furthermore, improving
access for minorities and disadvantaged groups and requiring
results are essential to strengthening our system of
postsecondary education and preparing our nation to meet the
workforce challenges of the next century. Three-quarters of all
students in higher education are in public (State-supported)
schools.
Strengths of Our Higher Education System
1. American higher education is without equal in providing
opportunity and access.
The U.S. has twice the percent of young adults in postsecondary
education as do other countries. Currently one college student
in six is over age 35. By 1997, that fraction is expected to
rise to almost one in four.
State and federal support for postsecondary education has
increased access substantially through the post-war period.
Total enrollment in higher education increased from 3.3 million
students in 1957 to an estimated 13.1 million this year.
The Japanese National Council on Education Reform recently
stressed "the importance of increasing individuality, choice, and
flexibility throughout the educational system" in Japan. Our
system's tolerance of students who change course during their
educational career is crucial to allowing creativity and
individual development.
2. At the top of the educational ladder, our research
universities are a magnet to others in the world.
Each year 360,000 foreign students attend school in America.
More than 20 percent of our science Ph.D.s, nearly half of our
mathematics Ph.D.s and nearly 60 percent of our engineering
Ph.D.s are granted to citizens of other nations.
While this is an indication of the world-leading quality of our
schools, it can also be a matter of concern. Eighty percent of
these recipients had non-resident visas and would be expected to
leave the U.S. after receiving their degrees.
-2-
Maintaining Excellence in Postsecondary Education
1. The underlying problem with our postsecondary system today
is that too many students are unprepared to perform
college-level work.
In 1983, "A Nation at Risk" reported that between 1975 and 1980,
remedial math courses in public 4-year colleges increased by 72
percent. In 1984, 4 out of 5 colleges taught remedial courses in
basic skills that should have been mastered in high school.
2. To ensure colleges are accountable for what students are
learning, states and institutions can assess students'
performance and knowledge. Several state initiatives aim
to promote college quality by assessing student outcomes.
During the past year, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Nevada, and
Vermont have adopted state policies on assessing student
outcomes. Six other states are implementing previously adopted
policies. To date, all but thirteen states have state-level
policies addressing the assessment of undergraduate performance.
3. In order to meet growing technological demands, more
emphasis must be placed on strengthening the teaching of
math, science, engineering and increasing the number of
graduates in these fields.
Over the past twelve to fifteen years, there has been a
persistent shortage of natural science and mathematics teachers.
Further, ever increasing numbers of prospective teachers with
math and science degrees are being lost to other professions that
offer higher salaries. Between 1971 and 1985, the starting
salaries for graduates with bachelors degrees in math, chemistry,
and physics who entered non-teaching professions were 40 to 60
percent higher than starting salaries for teachers.
The number of American students in graduate schools for math,
science, and engineering degrees are outnumbered by students who
are citizens of other nations. Since 1970, the percentage of
American graduate students studying mathematics has declined
steadily. In both math and engineering, less than half of the
doctorates awarded by U.S. universities go to U.S. citizens.
4. The President has proposed the National Science Scholars
program to supplement existing federal programs which
encourage science and math education.
This program is designed to encourage high school graduates who
have excelled in science, mathematics, or engineering to continue
their education in these academic areas at the postsecondary
-3-
level. If enacted, the proposed program would provide
scholarships of up to $10,000 to 570 outstanding high school
graduates each year.
Other federal programs aim to recruit students into these fields
as well:
The National Science Foundation's Young Scholars program
provides enrichment activities for talented secondary
students, particularly minorities, who may be candidates
for careers in mathematics, engineering and the sciences.
Fellowship programs through the Department of Education
and the National Science Foundation provide assistance to
graduate and professional students in fields of
mathematics and science.
NSF makes the Presidential Awards in Science and
Mathematics Teaching each year to recognize and reward
excellence and emphasize the importance of good teaching.
The Barry Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in
Education Foundation provides scholarships and fellowships
for undergraduates and graduates pursuing degrees in
science and mathematics.
The Department of Education's Dwight D. Eisenhower Math
and Science Education programs provide grants to colleges
and universities for programs to improve the skills of
teachers and the quality of instruction in math and
science.
5. Promising practices to enhance student preparedness for
postsecondary education and to promote college quality are
being implemented in several states across the country.
One of Texas Governor William Clements' educational excellence
initiatives adopted this year will provide cash awards to
campuses that demonstrate significant gains in student
achievement.
Postsecondary options programs allow high school students to take
advanced courses at an earlier age to better equip them for
college. In Colorado, high school juniors and seniors may enroll
in courses at postsecondary institutions tuition-free.
Most states have significantly increased high school graduation
requirements to enhance college preparedness and reduce the need
for remedial courses at the college level.
-4-
Strengthening Participation of Minority and Disadvantaged Groups
1. Enrollment rates for blacks and other disadvantaged groups
still lag significantly behind whites and advantaged
groups.
The absolute numbers of members of minority groups in higher
education have risen since the mid-1970s, but the share of blacks
seeking higher education has declined. At the same time, the
share of Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans has been
growing. The share of blacks attending schools of higher
education is only 79 percent of the share of whites while the
rate for Hispanics is only 64 percent that of whites.
High school students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds
who graduate are more than 50 percent less likely to enroll in
college.
2. After enrolling in college, minorities and the dis-
advantaged are less likely to remain in higher education
to complete a degree.
In 1986, only one-third of black and Hispanic 1980 high school
graduates who enrolled in a four-year college had earned a
degree, compared to 56 percent of white students.
Since 1977, the number of degrees of all types earned by minority
groups has increased in part reflecting the relative growth in
non-black minority college enrollment. However, rates of
completion by the minority population still trail significantly
behind whites.
The completion rate of disadvantaged students is also low. Only
37 percent of the 1980 high school graduates from low-income
families completed a degree by 1986 compared to 61 percent of
students from high socioeconomic status backgrounds.
3. Low expectations and inadequate academic preparation in
the early years are a main cause of lower participation
and retention in higher education among minorities and the
disadvantaged.
The proportion of black and Hispanic 1982 high school graduates
with grade point averages in the bottom quartile was twice that
of whites.
Minority students are less likely to take college preparatory
coursework than are whites. In 1987, 21 percent of high school
graduates took physics compared with 11 percent for blacks and
Hispanics. Moreover, many schools serving minority and
disadvantaged students do not offer advanced courses.
-5-
What the Federal Government and States Are Doing
1. Twenty-one states and the Federal government are taking
actions to improve the recruitment and retention rates of
minorities and the disadvantaged in postsecondary
education.
One of Education Secretary Lauro Cavazos' principal objectives is
"to increase minority participation and retention in two-and
four-year college degree granting programs." The Department of
Education's work on this management objective will produce better
guidance on how to strengthen access and retention in higher
education.
In 1989, the Department of Education made $219 million available
for programs that support counseling, tutoring, and other
services for disadvantaged students to encourage them to enroll
in and complete postsecondary education.
Rhode Island recently adopted a plan to improve minority
enrollment in higher education. The plan includes forming an
inter-institutional advisory committee and expanding minority
scholarships and student services.
Georgia, Missouri, and Wisconsin also have developed statewide
plans to improve minority recruitment and retention.
Tennessee is using incentive funding to promote the enrollment,
retention, and graduation of minority students at state colleges
and universities.