Copyright 1999 Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service
JULY 13, 1999, TUESDAY
SECTION: IN THE NEWS
LENGTH:
532 words
HEADLINE: PREPARED TESTIMONY OF
THE
HONORABLE WILLIAM F. GOODLING
(R-PA)
CHAIRMAN
BEFORE THE
HOUSE EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE COMMITTEE
SUBJECT -
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL REFORM
BODY:
Good afternoon.
Our hearing today is another step forward in the authorization process for the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). This is our
fourth Title I hearing.
Back in April we had a hearing on the National
Assessment of Tifie I; in May -- Even Start and family literacy; in June, we
focused on some of the key issues in Title I, Part A and today we will be
looking at the comprehensive school reform grant program.
"While this
program has only been in existence for about a year and a half, the concepts
underlying it have been around much longer. The comprehensive school reform
grants were written into the Fiscal Year 1998 Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations
bill and the first grants were made in July 1998. However, the major concepts of
comprehensive school reform -utilizing reliable research, effective practices,
basic academics and parental involvement -- have been with us for several years.
It was only in 1998 that a separate program was set up.
"In fact, schoolwide
projects under Title I have already been incorporating these concepts. With
schoolwides, individual schools with 50% or more poverty are able to combine
their regular Title I money with other ESEA funds and use those
funds to serve all students in the school. The emphasis is on improving the
whole school. Under schoolwides, the principals and administrators must develop
a comprehensive plan for reforming the total instructional program of the
school, much like the comprehensive school reform grant program. So there are
several parallels. As we think ahead on what should go into a Title I bill, we
will be considering how schoolwides and the comprehensive school reform program
are alike and different, whether there is any unnecessary overlap and
duplication, and what changes, if any should be made.
"When the
comprehensive school reform legislation was first passed, the appropriations
conference report stressed that schools are not restricted to using only those
approaches identified by the Department, but are free to develop their own
reform programs based on rigorous research and meeting certain criteria,
including using proven methods for teaching and learning and providing
high-quality teacher and staff training. I agree with that view. Schools should
not be required to adopt "one-size-fits-all" models of reform. They should be
free to adopt the curriculum portions of one model, the governance portions of
another, or something developed entirely at the local level, as long as it fits
with the criteria.
"We have a wonderful panel of witnesses with us today.
We'll hear from the American Institutes for Research about a recent study they
did on several comprehensive school reform models. We'll also hear from the New
American Schools, an umbrella organization under which several reform models
have been developed. And then we'll hear from a representative of the Direct
Instruction model, the Core Knowledge model, and then a representative from the
Wisconsin Department of Education. In just a few minutes I will have a detailed
introduction of each of our witnesses. At this time, I would yield to the
ranking member for any statement he may have."
END
LOAD-DATE: July 15, 1999 
