equipment to both community colleges and four-year institutions, donations of used equipment not more than three years old, service contracts so that universities lacking maintenance money can cease turning down donations, faculty salary augmentation grants, and graduate student fellowships for U.S. citizens to get doctorates and teach.

The electronics industry is ready to work with this committee and other members of Congress on remedies to the engineering education problems. There are serious long-range implications for the United States if industry, education, and government do not work more vigorously to solve the situation.

As you

I appreciate the opportunity to address you today. develop legislation, AEA will be pleased to participate.

Senator PELL. Dr. Rutherford, there are two questions I could ask you briefly. In your testimony, you suggest two interesting proposals to improve our Nation's capacity to teach math and science, both of which would involve a lot of our Federal resources.

In view of the deficits facing us, what would you view as the most appropriate solution in the short turn that the Federal Government can undertake to improve math and science education?

Dr. RUTHERFORD. Senator, I think in the short term you are on the right track by dealing with the problem of the preparation of the teachers as the major emphasis, as long as there is some money to provide some support for identifying talented students and encouraging them and some funds for research and development.

Those funds that the Federal Government might at this point invest are of the order that is being talked about, of some hundreds of millions, but not billions.

Many of the problems that Professor Willoughby addressed are the kinds that need to be taken care of at the State and local level, and I agree with him that if they are not done there, then the Federal investment may be wasted.

My point is, Senator, that if Congress stops with these bills which I take to be emergency measures, and does not focus on underwriting the reeducation of many of our science and math teachers, that would not get us into the future where we need to be.

Senator PELL. Thank you very much. Also, Dr. Rutherford, what has been your experience with student loan forgiveness as a means of increasing the number of math and science teachers? Do you think that loan forgiveness is a sufficient incentive for students to choose teaching careers?

Dr. RUTHERFORD. I have no data on that, and I believe other people do. I can only say that while I think it is appropriate, I would not believe that by itself it would radically increase the number of science and mathematics teachers.

I think that the fundamental circumstance is the working conditions of the teachers, and no matter what they are paid or what incentives for fellowships there may be, unless and until they are able to be in circumstances in which they can successfully teach their subject-have the resources, have the support system, and have the respect of the community-then the rest is not going to work.

Senator PELL. I thank you, and I thank all of you very much indeed. Senator Quayle may have some questions.

Senator QUAYLE. I just have a statement that I want to put into the record, and also to express my interest to the chairman, in his absence, and the ranking member in trying to work together on a very important and substantive problem that we have.

I know that in my home State, I am shocked when I look at the statistics. When you look at recent graduates in 1982, four major universities in Indiana graduated a total of three people in chemistry, four in Earth sciences, and two in physics, who are qualified to teach their subjects in Indiana high schools. I mean there is just absolutely no way, gentlemen.

Are you getting prepared to adjourn or go to the next panel? Senator PELL. We have another panel of people and we are trying to wrap up by quarter past twelve.

Senator QUAYLE. Well, in that case, I will insert my statement. It is an eloquent statement. I spent a lot of time on it, Senator Pell. [Laughter.]

[The opening statement of Senator Quayle follows:]

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR QUAYLE

Senator QUAYLE. Mr. Chairman, I must first thank you for organizing these hearings on what is of real concern to me. As you know, I have been especially interested in the areas of job training, worker retraining, and vocational training generally in the past 2 years. I think I know something of the problems of the unemployed, the displaced workers, and the poorly trained people looking for work in America today.

We have before us today a problem which is just as big, and just as important for the long-run economic recovery and growth of America Those of us in the industrial Midwest and Northeast know there is a problem with out supply of skilled workers. We know that we need a more scientifically literate labor force. And most importantly, we are concerned that our reserve of well-trained and educated scientists, thinkers and creators of jobs may be falling behind.

I know our guests today will go into some detail about the severity of this problem, but I would just like to highlight my own State's situation:

In 1982 Indiana's four major universities graduated a total of three people in chemistry, four in Earth science, four in general

science, and two in physics who were qualified to teach the subjects in Indiana secondary schools.

Since 1977, there has been a steady decline in math scores for entering Purdue University students. More than one-third of Purdue students are unprepared for college calculus and must take remedial math courses.

In 1982 Indiana's major State universities graduated sufficient mathematics teachers to fill only 58 percent of the vacancies listed in Indiana schools.

Indiana, at a time of critical need for training, retraining, and preparation for industries of the future, requires only 1 year of high school science and 1 year of mathematics for graduation.

The statistics for our Nation as a whole, and particularly our standing internationally, are just as dismal:

In the U.S.S.R., East Germany, the P.R.C. and Japan, the school year averages 240 days, compared with 180 days in the United States.

The secondary school system in these same countries is a balance of science and math together with social science, languages, and humanities. Students must carry seven to nine courses a semester to accommodate the demanding curriculum.

English is the language of science around the world. Today there are more adults learning English in China than there are English speaking people in the United States.

Mr. Chairman, I believe this situation points toward a crisis, not just this year in whether we can fill all our teaching positions, but on into the future, in America's ability to compete in a free world market, and to defend that free market from its adversaries.

I am certainly not one who believes the Federal Government must try to solve every crisis in America's classrooms. But there is a Federal role here, and if properly narrowed and focused, the Federal Government can provide the resources needed for equal opportunity and access to excellence.

I believe we must explore incentives for our best teachers in the sciences to continue in teaching. William Raspberry's column in yesterday's Washington Post entitled "Paying Teachers More" may point the way toward action that must be taken at the State level. If we are seeking excellence, then we must recognize it in our schools, and we must pay for it.

There are many other issues I hope will be explored during these hearings. Among the questions I would like our panelists to address are:

One, should science and math teachers at the secondary level be recognized for their results-with teaching awards, salary bonuses, and incentives for quality work?

Two, what role should the Federal Government play vis-a-vis the States and local education agencies?

Three, how can we provide incentives for American business and industry-the ultimate consumers of a well-educated labor forceto become involved with math and science education earlier in the process?

Four, what should the role of our best colleges, universities, and schools of education be in this effort?

Five, should our best and brightest students receive our best attention, allowing the United States to compete on a world scale in an increasingly competitive world?

Again Mr. Chairman, thank you for your leadership in conducting these hearings, and I look forward to questioning and reviewing the testimony of all our witnesses.

Senator PELL. You are the chairman, if you can see the next panel through. Can you stick around?

Senator QUAYLE. I can stick around for 10 minutes. I guess we are going to conclude this in 15 minutes and we can call the next panel.

Senator PELL. You are chairman.

[Whereupon, Senator Quayle assumed the chair.]

Senator QUAYLE. I did not realize I was going to be chairman today.

Thank you very much for your input. I will read it in the record and look forward to working with you.

Which panel are we on?

Senator PELL. The second panel.

Senator QUAYLE. Dr. Forbes, Dr. Frazier, Dr. Lucas, Mr. Wolfenbarger, Dr. Smith, and Dr. Parent.

Senator PELL. And the record is staying open so that Senators can submit questions at a future date.

[Whereupon, Senator Pell resumed the chair.]

Senator PELL. Gentlemen, we are under considerable time pressures here, so my hope is that you could confine your talk to as short a period as possible. In fact, from the viewpoint of the Senators, the thing that we listen to most is when you make a point, one, two, three, four, and that stands in our memory. But when monotone reading goes on, you eventually get what we call the MEGO factor, the "mine eyes glaze over" factor.

So, I would wonder if the statements could appear in full in the record and if you would abbreviate them to make these very short points. Thank you.

First, working from left to right, we would ask Ms. Adler to start out.

STATEMENT OF SUSAN B. ADLER, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE, EDUCATION COMMISSION OF THE STATES, WASHINGTON, D.C.; CALVIN M. FRAZIER, COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION, STATE OF COLORADO, DENVER, COLO., AND PRESIDENT, COUNCIL OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS; ROBERT WOLFENBARGER, VICE PRESIDENT, NEW JERSEY STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, SUMMIT, N.J., AND DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE BOARDS OF EDUCATION; ROBERT L. SMITH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COUNCIL FOR AMERICAN PRIVATE EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, D.C.; AND M. JOAN PARENT, FIRST VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION,

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Ms. ADLER. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I am Susan Adler, director of the Washington Office for the Education Commission of the States. Roy Forbes, lead staff person to our ECS Task Force on Education for Economic Growth

was scheduled to testify here this morning but was unable to join

you.

The same questions that Senator Stafford raised at the outset of this hearing which focused on: (1) looking at the scope of the problem, (2) looking at what kinds of initiatives are underway by the political and educational leadership within a State to deal with this problem, and (3) looking at appropriate roles for business and industry, are being addressed by our task force. Governor Jim, Hunt of North Carolina, serves as task force chairman. Governor du Pont of Delaware and Frank Cary of IBM serve as cochairmen.

There is a blue sheet attached to my testimony that lists all the members of our task force. Many of the people on today's panel are members. Cal Frazier, to my left, serves as a task force member. The National School Board Association and the National Association of State Boards of Education also have representatives on our task force.

As our first goal, we set out to define with our members the scope of the problem. In answering that question, we built on the data that the National Assessment for Education Progress. The National Assessment has been housed with the Education Commission of the States for the last 13 years.

Senator Chiles mentioned this briefly in his testimony, and I would like to build on what he said. We have found, that students have made the greatest gains in the basic skills-how to multiply, how to read a sentence, how to do arithmetic. And, the most dramatic improvements were largely among students in the lowest 25 percent of those assessed.

The largest declines occurred for students in the highest achievement class, the students in the top 25 percent in each learning area evaluated. The problem-solving, critical thinking, analyzing, reasoning, the complex learning skills that we need in this modern technological society we are fast approaching, are the very skills that the majority of our students do not now have. In certain skill areas, up to 85 percent of our students are unable to demonstrate competence.

We took this information to our task force. The business representatives called those skills "learning to learn" skills; define the educators as "higher order/critical thinking skills." Our task force members also told us that we need to add to that skills definition attitudes, behaviors, and motivations-some of the kinds of comments that Senator Domenici mentioned this morning. Given this definition of the problem, the second goal of our task force is to address what a State and local policy leader-governor, legislator, State board member, chief State school officer-can do in his or her own State to increase the opportunities for our high school graduates to have and use these skills.

We are asking the kinds of questions that you are asking, Senator Pell. How do you create a learning environment in your State that motivates teachers and students? What changes in the educational delivery system do we need? Should we think about extending the length of the school day? What are the costs involved? What happens if business should be approached and asked to teach in the schools? How can that be done? Where is it already being done?