morning. As you may already know, yesterday in the Senate I introduced Senate bill 706, the science and mathematics bill developed by the administration. I want to insure that it will receive proper consideration in the deliberations of this subcommittee as we set about blending the best of all of the proposals to come before the Congress into the type of a science and mathematics educational package that will help our State and local school systems improve the quality, as well as the quantity of their offerings in these important fields.

Yesterday, before the subcommittee, Senators Domenici, Hart, and Chiles described the crisis our country faces because of the declining quality and quantity of the course offerings in science and mathematics available to the youngsters in our schools. Other witnesses supplied frightening data to verify not only the decline in the number of teachers who are qualified to teach science and mathematics, but the concomitant inability of school systems to offer sophisticated course content because of the shortage of competent teachers in these advanced areas of instruction.

In introducing S. 706 yesterday, I said that it was an initial step in the direction of helping resolve the situation on a short-term basis. As a former high school chemistry teacher yourself, I am sure you are abundantly aware that well-designed science and mathematics programs can introduce students to challenging experiences in these fields long before the ninth grade in high school where S. 706 begins to take effect. The early exposure of students in the middle school or elementary school years is essential to a well-integrated program that will engender an interest in students in pursuing more difficult courses in their later secondary school experiences. They also need qualified teachers.

Students in other nations with which we must compete for parity in the world technical marketplace often have several years of experience in science and mathematics before reaching the high school level. Well-qualified imaginative teachers in these early years of instruction are essential if youngsters are to develop the fundamental skills required for the work of the secondary school. For this reason, I would hope that out subcommittee will carefully examine each piece of legislation before us and that we will take the best of each and come up with creative legislation which will help State and local school officials develop an instructional program and staff adequate to the task our schools face.

Somewhere along the line we seem to have lost track of the fact that only about 1 percent of the population of the United States is trained as engineers and scientists. Yet, most of the science and mathematics education effort in our country has been under the misguided influence of the academic research community, which as someone has suggested, does not really have a philosophical rationale for or against science education for the nonscientist. Most, it seems, simple do not think about it or care.

It is my hope, Mr. Secretary, that we can fashion legislation that will take a practical, pragmatic approach in helping State and local school officials in their efforts to correct the science and mathematics shortfalls in their schools. Moreover, we all need to assist the nonscientist public in becoming more science and mathematics conscious, so that the youngsters of those who pay for, benefit from, or

suffer the ill effects of what we do will be encouraged to develop excellence in the fields of science and mathematics equal to or better than their counterparts in other countries.

I will have some questions for you, Mr. Secretary, which I will submit in writing. I look forward to your testimony.

And as soon as you are through with your opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, could I ask for just a 2-minute recess so I can chat with the Secretary back here just for a second. I know that is unusual, but I would appreciate it if you would let me do it.

Senator STAFFORD. Under the circumstances, the Chair thinks it is justified, and the committee will stand in recess, briefly, to give you an opportunity to confer with the Secretary before he testifies. Senator HATCH. Thank you so much.

Senator STAFFORD. We will include in the record at this point an opening statement by Senator Kennedy, who will be joining the hearing shortly.

[The opening statement of Senator Kennedy follows:]

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR KENNEDY

Senator KENNEDY. Let me first commend my two colleagues, Senator Stafford and Senator Pell, for their wisdom in calling this series of hearings. I would also like to welcome our distinguished witnesses.

I don't think that you or many other people in this room today are unaware of the magnitude of the problem that our public education system faces, particularly in the area of mathematics and science. Our public school system must deal with a new era of technological sophistication with undertrained teachers, inadequate staff, out-of-date courses, and poor equipment. They cannot teach our next generation with these inadequate tools.

Today we continue a process which I am confident will culminate in a program to provide our school system with the tools that it needs. I have spoken many times over the last few months about the need for a program to restore excellence to our public schools. Within the next week, I intend to introduce the first piece of that program-The National Education for Economic Development Act.

I will not dwell on the details of my bill or on the problems it addresses. My colleagues and other witnesses have painted a picture of inadequacy that I cannot add to. I would, however, like to make two brief points.

First, our efforts must not be narrowly focused on a small population of elite students. Rather, it must encompass the wider population, while encouraging all students to receive training in math and science. Second, we must not focus exclusively on the secondary schools or the colleges. In the long run, the greatest benefits could arise from new efforts at the elementary school level. Our program should look to helping students at all levels. Both points are embodied in my bill.

My bill will authorize $1.5 billion to improve instruction in mathematics, science, and technology at the elementary, secondary, and postsecondary level. While providing support for school districts all across the country, my bill also targets the funds to those areas which need the aid the most.

The bill requires local planning and authorizes programs to train and retrain teachers, improve curricula, to develop improved instructional methods and materials, to acquire instruction equipment and to expand access to quality instruction in math, science, and technology. It will support similar activities in colleges and universities, as well as programs of research and development.

Finally, it will support the establishment of new math and science centers which will provide valuable resources to students and teachers at the elementary and secondary levels and will form the conduit between the researchers in the universities and the practitioners in the schools. This bill will provide a comprehensive, cooperative program to improve math and science education in our schools.

I am not unmindful that this program requires a major commitment of resources and effort, and no single institution or level of government can bear the burden alone. The Federal Government must provide the leadership. It must provide funds. It must provide guidance. But it must work with State and local governments, both financially and programmatically, in this effort. Nor can universities, libraries, museums, or businesses be forgotten. Together in a truly national effort, this Nation can make its public math and science education the best in the world.

I look forward to working with my colleagues on the committee and particularly my two good friends, Senators Pell and Stafford, to develop a bill on this subject agreeable to a majority of this committee and the Senate.

[Brief recess].

Senator STAFFORD. The committee will come to order. We see the Secretary has returned, which means that at least one member of the conference has survived for the rest of the meeting. [Laughter.] Mr. Secretary, I want to say that I join with Claiborne Pell in saying to you that I think under very trying circumstances, under many of which probably you have been misunderstood by those who wish to misunderstand you, that I think you have really been a friend of education these last 2 years, and I join with Senator Pell in welcoming you here this morning as a friend of education who has done the best he can under the most trying of circumstances for the last 2 years.

And we would be very happy to hear your statement.

STATEMENT OF HON. TERREL H. BELL, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, ACCOMPANIED BY CAROL CICHOWSKI, ACTING DIRECTOR, SPECIAL EDUCATION, REHABILITATION AND RESEARCH ANALYSIS DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Secretary BELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

If it is agreeable to the chairman, I will submit my written statement for the record, make a few comments and then be ready to respond to questions.

Senator STAFFORD. That would be most agreeable. We will place the written statement in the record in full.

Secretary BELL. Thank you. I know that the committee has heard in testimony the rationale for an initiative to solve the problem in the area of math, science, and technology. With the budget pres

sures under which the administration is laboring at the present time, the enormous concern about a deficit that could reach as high as $200 billion, and with a great amount of concern on the part of many in the administration about the initiation of a new Federal aid to education program in the face of all of these factors, the President has been very responsive to the data that we have presented indicating that this is a critical problem and that it is related to many priorities that we have in this administration.

Mr. Chairman, the administration's bill that Senator Hatch indicated was introduced yesterday, compared to the other bills, is a very limited and carefully targeted piece of legislation. The moneys available for this bill within the Department's budget had to be worked out within some tight constraints, constantly looking at this huge deficit that we are pondering. We felt that we needed to target the very limited resources that we could provide on the most urgent problem, and the most critical problem is the shortage of teachers. So, we have concentrated the full $50 million in our proposal on scholarships to provide and encourage the preparation of additional teachers in math and science.

We wanted a bill that would provide enough flexibility so that each of the 50 States could utilize these funds where the need is the greatest. We hope that our funds will be supplemented and enhanced both from State and local resources, limited as I know they are, and also from the private sector. We have analyzed the availability of secondary schoolteachers. We have studied some successful programs that have been piloted in some school systems at the present time, and we have concluded that if we can concentrate our resources on prospective teachers, those with college degrees, and those that have been teaching but do not have a teaching major in math or science, if we can concentrate our efforts on these potential teachers, we will be able to have a quick response to the need. And that is why we have focused our efforts in this regard. As our bill is considered, we would urge that the committee keep in mind that the National Science Foundation budget and deliberations on their budget within the administration were taken into account.

NSF is going to be working in the precollege science field in both science and mathematics, in materials development, and in areas that will complement the focus of our bill-increasing the supply of teachers.

We have emphasized in our proposal the fact that the need is immediate. A survey that we conducted of the States and the school systems indicates that boards of education and State boards of education are dramatically raising the high school graduation requirements in these subject matter areas.

Because of this, the demand for teachers in mathematics and science on the high school level is increasing, and there is a decrease-I would not say a commensurate decrease-but there is quite a decrease and going to be quite a decrease in demand in other subject areas.

For one thing, high school enrollments are declining, and as students are required to take more mathematics and science courses, it just follows that they are going to enroll in fewer courses in other fields.

There is going to be an opportunity to redeploy teachers. In addition to that, with the high level of unemployment right now, there are others with college degrees who would be willing and capable of preparing for teaching. And so we have wanted to concentrate our resources in this area.

I would like to add just a few comments about some of the other math/science bills. If our legislation is not the legislation that moves forward, I think it is important that we concentrate on the number one problem. And the number one problem is to increase the supply of mathematics and science teachers. Admittedly, there are other things that we ought to be doing in addition to that, but my concern about the other bills is that the dollar amounts are in excess of what we can afford right now with the budget problems that we have. But if that is disagreed with and if we cannot persuade the committee on that item, we would emphasize, Mr. Chairman, that the provisions in the other bills do not concentrate a large enough portion of the total dollars and target them on bringing into the teaching ranks immediately more math and science teachers.

I would acknowledge that there are applicable provisions in the bills, those sponsored by you, Mr. Chairman, and Senator Pell, the bill sponsored by Senator Domenici, and the bill sponsored by Congressman Perkins and others in the House. But we do not think that they carry sufficient resources and they give sufficient priority to getting new teachers and retrained teachers into the classroom in a very short period of time.

There is both a long range and a short range solution. We would emphasize that our bill concentrates on the short range problem. And as limited as our bill is in dollar amounts, we emphasized this

area.

We would urge the committee to take another look at that and see if whatever bill you markup and move forward, that our approach would get favorable consideration. But whatever bill does move forward, we would hope that we would get more emphasis upon meeting the needs for next fall and a year from next fall when we think the increase is going to be dramatic.

Just to put that in perspective, I would emphasize that our National Center for Education Statistics estimates for every increase in a course required to graduate from high school, you generate a need for 34,000 additional teachers.

Now, that is not allowing for the attrition and the loss that we are getting in the supply of teachers at the present time. And so we cannot emphasize too much the necessity for increasing the supply.

I am sure the chairman is very familiar with our bill and its orientation. With those comments and with that emphasis, I would be pleased to respond to questions.

[The prepared statement of Secretary Bell follows:]