files.eric.ed.gov · document resume ed 331 586 ps 019 273 title hearing on the reauthorization of...
TRANSCRIPT
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 331 586 PS 019 273
TITLE Hearing on the Reauthorization of the Follow ThroughAct. Hearing before the Subcommittee on HumanResources of the Committee on Education and Labor.House of Representatives, One Hundred First Congress,Second Session.
INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, D.C. HouseCommittee on Education and Labor.
PUB DATE 90NOTE 91p.; Serial No. 101-93.AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales
Office, U.S. Government Printing Off:_ce, Washington,DC 20402 (Stock No. 552-070-08538-6, $2.75).
PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materieas (090) --Reports - Descriptive (141)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Compensatory Education; *Coordination; Early
Childhood Education; Economically Disadvantaged;*Educational Cooperation; *Educational Quality;Federal Legislation; *Federal Programs; Hearings;Higher Education; Outcomes of Education
IDENTIFIERS Congress 101st; *Follow Through Services;Reauthorization Legislation
ABSTRACT
A hearing was held to discuss the reautnorization ofthe Follow Through Act, legislation designed to combine the resourcesof local srhools, universities, and parents to consolidate andenhance gAins that low-income children make in preschool program suchas Head Start. l'estimony conci-rnea: characteristics ot highquality Follow Tnrough Program in tle early elementary grades; (2,
ways of insuring that characteristics of high quality early childhoodprograms are continued in kindergarten and elementary school grades;(3) tne need for increased federal support for Follow Through; (4)recommendations for improving the national Follow Throlgh Program;(5) long-term results of the Follow Through Program in the cityschools of Richmond, Virginia; (6) experiences with Follow Through inthe Leflore County School District in Northwest Mississippi; and (7)a rationale for the reauthorization of the Act that is based on theprogram's effectiveness, characteristics, and potential. Materialssubmitted for the record include panelists' statements, testimony onthe program's effectiveness, a statement of Follow Through's purposesand its leadership role _n educating young children, and additionalletters of support from participating teachers, parents, andchildren. (RH)
****** ******************************************** ***** ****************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.******************e***************************************** ******** ***
HEARING ON THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE
FOLLOW THROUGH ACToo
cez HEARING
rix:0 stlicommiTTEE 0S III'MAN REsoilicESHEFOHE THY
U S DEPARTMENt OF EDUCATION.Pt . 4, t ,, A... A kii.S1,1'' .' A.,/ ,"`VO.,110,11ent
t PI I1 ATI( ,hAt kf 01 /Fit ( ', ItSOCIRMATIO%t I r,,11 $4 . 1 RIC.
l' h.s ,1,,, "me.0 ha% twer ,e1"okluc011 Off...wi f ,,,,, Tme pe.sr.0 of °qv:v.1101M
*It An4e.%^ ,4.e. .110
_- -,--th.s pato
7, .4f,C.414 ,4 s . v.
tftE
COMMITTEE ON ORATION AND LABORHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE IWNDRED FIRST CONGRESS
SECOND
IfFNRINti ElE1.1) kikAsifiNtd-f)N. FEtint .tRy ly:011
Serial No. 101-93
jilt 11 11,14' I t14 1144 ,t '..1141014.4 tirt.!1"11 Ltihi
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
t GOVERNMENT l'HINTING OVEHI
WASHINGTON . 1990
, t" f141..1. .1 Ill .*IlLto 11 H'tI. I10.1111, (Mt, .ttiOtft lIt
2
coMslIrTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
ACt;USTUSWILLIAM I) Ft $RD. MtchiganJi VSEPH NI GAY I )S. t% 1.1
ClAr. MIsmq111GEORGE MILLER. Czadornh,AUSTIN J MURPHY. Petuw,Ivaro.t
E WOKE. Mtchtg,inPAT WILLIAMS, MontanamArnim t; MARTINEZ. CaliforniaMAJOR R (WENS. New Yeti,CHARLES A !LVES. 111.tute.CARL C PERKINS. Killtuk-ITHOMAS C SAWYER, OhuIX/NALI) M PAYNE. Neu ,/er-psNITA M LIMEY, NeuGLENN POSHARD,JOLENE UNSOELO Wze-Inttoot)NICK JOE RAHALL II, WetAIME n PUSTER. RwoPETER .1 VISCII/SKY. Indhlrht
R)NT?.. ImitanaRWEISI MECME MAraind
HAWKINS C.411t,rnr.i. ChmrrnivrW IMAM F C /OBLINt;, Pent:.+,1%;m1..P. TM IMAS COLEMAN. Mksour:TIRMAS prriu.MARGE ROUKEMA. Neu Jersi".SIEVE GUNDERSON. Wi,ivt?..1,1sTEVE BA RTI.ETT Tex;isTriomAs TAUKE. lowsHARRIS W PAWELL, !litmusPAVI. 14 HENRY. Mtehig,inFREI) GRANDY, hm:tCASS BALLENGER. North C,1 '1;1
PETER SMITH. Vermont'TOMMY F ROBINSON. Ark.et-ir.
tit toltvrtatrit-1, ws; lit N !4 RrYs
DALE I. kILIWE Mit higan Uhertrtmitt
THOMAS t SAWYER.OLENE UNSOELD, W,e,httItzt.,r1NITA M LOWEY. Nvv. YenkGLENN POSHARD.ArousTrs F H.AWKINS.
Offit
THOMAS .1 'FAUKE. tou.1E THOMAS C( LEMAN.EREI) GR.ANDY. louo,
CONTENTS
Hearing held in Washington. 1X'. February 21, 1190.. .........Statement of
Ramp. Eugene A. Ph.D.. President. National Follow Through Associa-tion; Russell Busch, Ed.D., Director of Grant Programs. Richmond City.Public Schook Richmond. VA: Ann Adams. Ed,D.. Follow ThroughDirector, het-hire County. School District, Greenwood, MS
Wilk.r. Barbara, Ph.D.. Public Affairs nrector. National Association forthe Education of Young Children; and, Thomas Schultz. Ed D. ProjectDirector fOr Early Childhood Education. National Association of. StateBoards of F.:duration.. .. . 13
Prepared statements. letters. supplemental materials. et cetera'Adams, Ann. Ed.D., Follow Through Director, Lef lore County School
District. Greenwood. MS. prepared statement of'. ........ ..... .. goBusch. Rut:smell. Ed.D., Director of Grant Programs, Ric !mond City Pubhc
Schools. Richmond. VA. prepared staement of ........Education. U.S. Departnwnt of preparod statement of.Leffore County' students. letters from .
Millender. Naomi. Director. Cult ural Linguist ic Approach 'FollowThrough Program. letter dated March 199o, to lion Dale E. Kildeeenclosing additional material for the record ...... ...... ........
Owens, lion Major R.. a Representative in Congress from the State otNew York. prepared statement of .
7f)Paul. Dr. Alice, and Dr. Amy SchlessmanTrost, University ot Arizona.
summary. entitled. Follow Through Unique Community Based Educa-t;on Programs bir Children "At Risk.'. 72
Ramp. Fume A Ph D . President. National Follow Through Associa-tion. prepared statement of ... . . 43
Schultz. Thomas. Ed.D.. Project Direoor for Early Childhood Education.National Association of State Boards ot Education. prepared statementof. . . . . . . .
Willer. Barbara. Ph D . Public Affairs Director. National Association forthe Education of Young Children. prepared statement of . 17
Iii
HEARING ON THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THEFOLLOW THROUGH ACT
WEDNESDAY. FEBRUARY 21. 1091)
HOUSE OF REPRE.;ENTATIVES,SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCEN,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,Washington. IX'.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:10 p.m. in Room1213i, Rayburn House Office Building. Hon. Dale F. Kildee [Chair-man] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Kildee. Poshard and Tauke.Staff present: Susan Wilhelm. staff director; S. Jefferson McFar-
land, legislative counsel: Lisa Morin. professional staff member;Lynn Selmser, professional staff member; and Margaret Kajeckas.legislative assistant /clerk.
Chairman KILDEE. The Subcommittee on Human Resourcesmeets this afternoon to discuss the reauthorization of the FollowThrough Act. Follow Through is a unique program combinin_; theresources of local schools, universities and parents to consolidateand enhance, in the early elementary grades, the gains which low-income children have made in preschool programs, such as HeadStart.
While Head Start has, over the years, been widely recognized forthe important services it provides to at-risk children, FollowThrough has not enjoyed the same level of recognition. Yet, the re-search on the program has found that Follow Through children ex-perience impressive gains in reading, math an:-1 language arts.
Additionally, Follow Through research has shown that these chil-dren subsequently are less likely to need special education services.less likely to drop out of school and less likely to be held back.Clearly, this is an investment in disadvantaged children and a wiseuse of public funds.
Yet, for the last ten years, Follow Through has been zeroed outof the president's budget. While it is very commendable that Presi-dent Bush has requested increased funding for Head Start, I amdisappointed that he has continued the Reagan Administrationpolicy of ignoring the need for the kinds of transitional servicesprovided in Follow Through programs.
Head Start and Follow Through were designed to be complernentary programs, and a need for one strongly implies a need for theother. I have often said that the role of government is to promote,protect, defend and enhance human dignity. This role is exempli-
f f
5
fled by, I believe, the strong parental involvement that is found inthe Follow Through program.
I want to welcome all of our witnesses. While the Department ofEducation was invited to send a representative to testify, we areinformed that no one is available today; however, they have provid-ed us with a written statement which, without objection, will bemade a part of the record.
Additionally, our witness representing the Lef lore CountySchools in Mississippi, Dr. Ann Adams, has provided us with lettersfrom some of her Follow Through students which, without objec-tion, will also be made a part of the record.
[The prepared statement of the Department of Education and theletters of the Leflore County students follow: j
f;
3
'tateme,r c" the i2ev.trt,"*vt Eco-atIon
en Peaut..'it:cn tt lL Tr)r.:,gr. Program
tc the bt .(.2mr.Ittet.Nyman Reso.ircesoh E0,,c3t3on ano Later
Febtk.ar '39
The co; low Tt,fc.4,-, k 4, aM w4s nitAtt-o as a teeleral,,
a...cle''meIt4' or Cg' am tc, Okn-Oqn Ar.1 l'st:vmlnatt.1 mocle is ot
elemlehtary qrAors
reb,e,_lertlng t 1
nc.,ne cren In the' earl,'
4; 'rrot,..qr1 vroleCts
t."
7W,Z, na.1 C. t"-e JOlnt
..1t-t. the
t. I. ....cc).:..)rtect
1^ 4. 1.111
L' r " .: .
C ,) Vit."
J".e.": "4- r1,-1!,(.41 m.7.re
Nat,.-'!n. 8,
4 ...,/ ant t n
r 1 .1%. .
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
4
.; C.; ". 4' e- ' It
are ref.
I. 1
5ei.rl:lt r' tt.e "e. t. ", r ". re
'7.44 . e -eft reg.,lat.c-s
Zr r; .1 . 1.-J .
^ C t- i e tr,c,
^ 14,..1(' e
'1
t' ; .3t E i i - ES
71' :' L : . -v :''
T.PE
t
tst r " 4 T
C ..1" art
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
5
Furthermore. the DeOartment reluests CouOIIng the 50:e ot the
Even Start orogram to $4r, m)1;,v +Qr. Fi /991. the Even t:tart
program Integrates eV+, 3n0
Oro9ramS. Parents recet.e t,r t Ingtru: 10r1 4,C1 ,C*,
recelve help tr beccmln4 owtters thelr ,r1;aren's ectucat1::-..
The C.epartmer:t bellevez; tr.tt so.feaeJ 'uric:ling tor Even Start
Couto help make other orogr.tm5 dS Hear! YIart an0 Chapter
become even more efreLt've ne'o'ng 315a.i.artage1 chrlorer
sueta;n the vri9reS maCe In ore.ich-, as trey mde tr'e
trarettln rf,to etemontar. I 1h. E.en 3r Orogram.
^therefcere. actaress the ..,tr tr, r. rotr
Nt ) rp 3 'Iticr- e t.v,t t mr t 'h tr e tOn at
Piet, vouth. actl.'t.ek 3L l'r '.1%"r
for .:.h'Idren 'r- the ear:., te -;,rrleo out
the :haoter
Foll.'.. ,1 L- tt . ..' '.7,...1 J- - -a . 3'.: t'''...'"
achie,,-.7 't, 0..tt:.Se .,1 -0.e-, # -,C,e
auth,,It 3t-_ St ""uli t*. 1' ...., .` t--" t'n'"' -' t, dt T P',. e,:,
curreht 3uttr,, :ill_t,,,.
t;
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
6
21BThurman DriveGreenwood,MS.38930February 13,1990
The Honorable Dale E.KildeeChairmanSubcommittee on Human ResourceHouse of RepresentivesCannon House Office BuildingWashington,D.C.20515
Dear Mr.Chairman:How are you doing?I'm doing fine.
I been in Follow-Through For threeyears.I have learned how to writeletters,how to use Punctuation markscorrectly,Synonyms,how to plantseeds,how to abbreviate words and manyother skills. I've had fun workingwith the Magic Slate Top Reader Club,Number Muncher and with the Jack andthe Bean stalk.Mrs.McCain does a greatjob of teaching me . Sopplease don'tcut out Follow-Through program.
Very truly yours,Tineata Boldien
(13-1.11licat,Ck,
7
Rt. 5 Box 180Greenwood,MS.38930February 13, 1990
The Honorable Dale E. KlideeChairmanSubcommittee on Human ResourcesU.S. House of Representatives320 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I love Follow-Through alot.rvelearned Math, Language,Science and
Reading skills.My teacher has taught me
all of them. Please don't letFollow-Through down. We try hard topass our skills that our teacher hastaught us. I've learned how to work on
the computers. I learned everything inFollow-Through. I like the wholeclassroom.I like to come to school andlearn my skills that my teacher teaches
us.
Very truly yours,John Brown
949-14frylaitoianj
Delta Apt.2-DGreenwood,MS.38930February 13,1990
The Honorable Dale E.KildeeChairmanSubcommittee on Human ResourcesU.S.House of Representatives320 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington,D.C.20515
Dear Mr.Chairman:I like Follow-Through very much. I
like to go to my areas andlearn.Everyday I come to school andlearn a lot.When my teacher starts toteach,I pay attention to her andlisten.My teacher helps me a lot.Pleasedo not cut off Follow-Through becauseit is so Important to me.We have a lotof fun in the Areas.I like Amanda ElzyElementary School.This is my third yearin Follow-Through.Follow-Through meansa lot to me because Follow-Through hashelped me so much.We have six areas inmyclass room.I have lot's of fun in theComputer Area and the Art Area.Myteacher is so nice to me.
Very truly yours,Latasha Carter
otectazilou Ccutimi
1 2
9
1011 Clay Ave.Greenwood,Ms.38930February 13,1990
The Honorable Dale E.kildee
ChairmanSubcommittee on Human ResourcesU.S. House of Representatives320 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington,D.C. 20515
Dear 14t.Chairman:1 love Follow Through.I'velearned
a lot of things in this class.We have
so many things to help us to learn.
Hove to do lots of things InFollow-Through.Mrs.McCain make things
to help us do better in class.Pleasedo not take the Follow Through programaway. If the program is cut,the otherboys and girls will not have theopportunity to do the things we did in
Follow-Through,we love Follow-Throughvery much and please do not take it
away from the other boys and girls.
Very truiy yours,LaShante Golden
54,ttbni
2226 R Luther DriveGreenwood,MS.38930February 13, 1990
The Honorable Dale E. Kildee, ChairmanSubcommittee on Human ResourcesU.S. House of Representatives320 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr.Chairman:I've been in Follow Through for
three years.I have learned a lot aboutILA learned how to write creativestories and how to work on thecomputers.So why stop this program ?This is an educational program.When wego to our areas our teacher helps us a1ot.We have learned many things aboutthis program.I have been in thisprogram and I feel that other childrenshould be in Follow Through.On thecomputers ,I work with Magic Slate ,
Print Shop and Number Munchers.Thosegames are fun.This program is excellentI would hate it IF this program was cutoff.
Very truly yours,LaAndrea E lis
1 4
11
Rt.5, Box 222Greenwood,MS.38930February 13, 1990
The Honorable Dale E. Kildee
ChairmanSubcommittee on Human ResourcesU.S. House of Representatives320 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr.Chairman:This is only my first year in
Follow-Through. I have had a wnderful
time. Mrs.McCain is the is the best
teacher that I know. Mrs.McCain hasencouraged us to do more things. I've
learned to do things in the areas.I've learned how to make things in the
Art Area. I've learned more than I
would in the other classes. And I
would like for other children to have
the same opportunity that I have had in
the Follow-Through program from other
children and that would make me and the
other children in the Follow-Throughprogram very happy.
Very truly yours,Robert Moore
Chairman KILDEE. Students a few years from now will be able tocheck the Congressional Record and see their work in that record.
As a matter of fact, we keep. of course, copies of the Record inthe Library of Congress. but also, in case we do not have thewisdom to keep the peace. which I think we have greater signs wewill do now, extra copies of the Congressional Record, along withall government archives, are kept deep in the mountains of Mary-land in case of our failure to avoid nuclear war.
A thousand years from now, no matter what happens. historianswill read the letters of the students from Greenwood. Mississippi.in the Congressional Record.
I would like to call upon now the ranking Republican Member ofthe subcommittee, Mr. Tauke. Tom, do you have an opening state.ment?
Mr. TAUKE. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, Mr.Chairman. I wish to thank you and commend You for holding thishearing on Follow Through, a program which has provided impor-tant insights into effective strategies for educating the disadvan-taged.
This program became a competitive grant program in 19 SE; andcurrently. thore are Follow Through projects funded in 19SS forthree years, through June 31. 1991. The appropriation for fiscalyear 19S9 was $7.2 million,
As you know. Mr. Chairman, there has been a lot of disagree-ment about whether Follow Through was intended to be a programsimilar in scope and size to Head Start or more of a demonstrationprogram to test innovative educational approaches.
The legislative history just isn't clear as to what the intent wasfbr this program. Department regulations. however, have favoredthe latter interpretation, meaning that it has continued as a dem-onstration program.
The fact is that Follow Through, whether by design or implemen-tation, has been a demonstration program. As we focus our atten-tion on the reauthorization, we are dearly at a crossroads. Thesenior Republican on our committee. Mr. Good ling, has been circu-lating information to the members demonstrating some of the chal-lenges we face with the Head Start Program.
Head Start has demonstrated progress for students in the yearsimmediately following their experiences as part of that program,but we have not been able to maintain those gains over the longhaul.
Consequently. there is considerable feeling among many of themembers I know that we need to look beyond the Head Start Pro-gram to see what we can do in order to maintain the gains thatstudents achieve as a result of their Head Start experience.
The Follow Through Program should give us some insight intosome of the strategies that have worked in the past, but it wouldappear as if we need to make some decinion as to how we are goingto develop a program that is comething more than a demonstrationprogram.
I look forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses, Mr.Chairman. and I think that we are going to have some interestingdiscussions, both in the committee room and outside the committeeroom, as we .attempt to figure out how to make certain that the
I ti
13
benefits of Head Start are carried on throughout the studentcareer of those children who need this kind of assistance.
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much. Mr. Poshard.Mr. POSHARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think one of the more
costly parts of our educational system today is the remediationprocess through which so many of our disadvantaged children, es-pecially, have to undergo even at an early age in some of the earli-er grades; that's why Head Start and some of the programs thatget at children at a very early age are so important.
Follow Through has at least participated in one area that I thinkis so terribly important if we are ever going to get our educationalsystem on its feet, so to speak, and that is parent participation.
I honestly look at many of the problems that we have in educa-tion today and think whether or not we are ever going to solvesome of them if we do not continue to get adequate parent involve-ment in the education system.
My wife is a third grade reacher. There have been times whenshe has sent home 25 slips to parents of children asking them justto come in and talk to her, children who were doi-4, well and chil-dren who were doing poorly. If she gets five of the 25 in, she isvery, very lucky to discuss their children's education.
We cannot have an adequate education system without parentalinvolvement in the education of the children. Follow Through has,in their model prototype programs, done an excellent job in gettingone-on-one parenting education with their children, which is so es-sential, especially in the early childhood phase.
So, to the extent that we get the one-on-one teaching with thechildren, we get parent involvement, we get younger parents in-volved. I think the program has been a model of success.
am just glad to serve on this committee, Mr. Chairman. andlisten to the testimony. I am going to have to run in and out, asI've got some folks waiting in the hallway.
Chairman KILDEE. I appreciate you being here today. You cre-ated a quorum.
I'd like to call on our first panel now. The first panel consists ofDr. Barbara Willer, Public Affairs Director. National Associationfor the Education of Young Children: and, Dr. Thomas Schultz.Project Director for Early Childhood Education, National Associa-tion of State Boards of Education.
Dr. Willer.
STATEMENTS OF BARBARA WILLER. PH.D.. PUBLIC AFFAIRS DI-RECTOR. NATIONAL ASSO('IATH)N FOR THE EDUCATION OFYOUNG CHILDREN: AND. THOMAS SCHULTZ. ED.D.. PROJECT DI-RECTOR FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION. NATIONAL AS-SOCIATION OF STATE BOARDS OF EIWCATION
Dr. WILLER. Thank you. Mr. Kildee It is a real pleasure to behere and to also hear the opening comments. There is quite a bit ofunderstanding among you about the importance of this programand the importance of early children education in general, so thatit is very nice to come up and sit here and share my remarks inthat regard.
27-282 0 - 90 27
14
I am here today on behalf of the National Association for theEducation of Young Children and particularly our president. EllenGalinsky, who once worked with the Follow Through Program atBank Street college in New York City, and to talk about some ofour principles in terms of statements of beliefs that have relevanceto the Follow Through concept.
I will particularly talk about the characteristics that are impor-tant both in preschool services, but then also following throughinto the elementary grades, in terms of providing high quality.comprehensive services, particularly fbr children who are at riskfor later educational failure.
I think that one of the most remarkable things about FollowThrough over the past two decades has been its embodiment of theprinciple that no matter how good an early childhood program, itcannot be and will not be an inoculation or a miracle cure that cansomehow prepare children to withstand poor schooling, later disad-vantage, all social ills.
tiometimer;, too often, we look at high quality preschool servicesas this miracle cure that will help children withstand all of oursocial problems and it simply cannot do that. This by no meansshould be an indictment of early childhood programs: far from it.
Rather, we need to look at the characteristics that make earlychildhood programs good in the preschool years and see if there arethose characteristics that can then be followed through into the el-ementary grades, as well, those characteristics that promote highquality.
We know what those characteristics are and, frankly, when look-ing at the design of the Follow Through project, all of those princi-ples are there. One of the key principles is that programs are de-signed to reflect developmentally appropriate curriculum and de-velopmentally appropriate teaching practices.
Developmentally appropriate is a phrase that has made its wayinto the lexicon in the last few years and really focuses on an indi-vidualized approach to learning, and one that recognizes that thereare unique characteristics, both of different age groups, so thatwhen you teach second graders, you don't use the same strategy aswhen you are working with three or four-year-olds.
Equally importantly. there are unique individual characteristicsthat must be brought into account in terms of' the individual chil-dren. Their interests, abilities, are all unique to themselves andneed to be appreciated just as ethnic, cultural and linguistic herit-age also need to be appreciated.
Another characteristic that is absolutely critical to high qualityprograms is that teachers and administrators have specializedskills and knowledge in terms of early childhood development andearly childhood education.
Teachers need to understand how children learn and how tostructure the environment appropriately. They also need the sup-port of their administrators. It is very difficult to implement a de-velopmentally appropriate program that really encourages childrento initiate their activities and to work in groups Ps opposed to sit-ting at desks if, in fact, the principal expects the class to be quietand sit in class all day long and fill out their worksheets.
15
Another important characteristic of small groups of children areappropriate teacher/child ratios that will allow for the individual-ized instruction. When groups are too large or when there are toomany children assigned for a particular tencher, no matter howgood that teacher is. it is difficult to implement the program.
Another characteristic is the need for comprehensive services. In-tellectual development, social/emotional development are very im-portant, but equally so are needs for sound nutrition and psycho-logical and physical health.. When children are members of familieswho may not have access to those types of service.4, it is very im-portant that programs become responsible for assuring that chil-dren have those services.
Also, it is not a one-shot deal, Children need to Luntinue to re-ceive those services over time. This is not an area that w: have tra-ditionally defined as a part of the school's role or as a part of themajor function of education: vet, in fact, if that is not there, chil-dren are unable to take advantage of the education environmentthat is provided to them.
Finally, one of the most important characteristics is active pa-rental involvement and participation in the programs. This is im-portant both in terms of the long-term consequences, because whenyou create change and you are working within the family system,it is more likely that that change will continue, but it also helps topromote continuity between home and school.
As I mentioned earlier, it is very noteworthy that the FollowThrough project embodied each of these principles and has em-bodied it throughout its twenty-year history. The only thing thatwasn't there in the original Follow Through plan but is implicit isthe notion of developmentally appropriate practice. Again, this is afairly new consensus area.
The two points that have been in Follow Through from day oneare the individualized instruction and also respect for cultural,ethnic and linguistic heritage.
I think that what we see in Follow Through is the types of atten-tion to detail that has the basis for providing high quality services.but the principles themselves need policies that can help programsput those into practice.
There are a couple of policy principles that I think really need tobe highlighted. One is the need for sufficient funds. Certainly, inthe history of Follow Through. the funds have not been providedsufficiently in order to allow the program to meet its goals.
I think what may have happened is something that happens toooften with programs. We decide that a program doesn't work when.in fact, the issue is that the program was under funded and thereare not sufficient funds to allow it to accomplish its goals.
Secondly, there must be collaboration and coordination amongservices for children now and over time. The need for coordination,particularly with the Head Start program, is particularly criticaland needs to be fostered, but we also need to look at other ways ofcoordinating and collaborating with different service provisions.
Early childhood, thank goodness, is a very popular issue both, asyou know, at the state level and also at the Federal level. We needto look for ways to coordinate and collaborate among those servicesso the full quality, comprehensive services can be provided.
16
In some cases, we have the potential of having needless duplica-tion of some services and yet missing others. Just to give you anexample in the extreme form, there is the real potential for havinglots of part-day programs for four-year-olds in the community butthose part-day programs often do not include the comprehensiveservices that are needed.
We need to look for ways to bring the resources together. decidewhat children and families need and make sure that those are pro-vided. That brings me to my last point in terms of flexibility.
We need to look for ways to provide the flexibility to meet indi-vidual and family needs, although not, obviously, at the expense ofprogram quality. There are reasons for the regulations that are de-veloped and we need to make sure that the principles of quality aremet, while still alkwing some flexibility to meet individual needs.
In sum. I think with the Follow Through Program, we can givespecific examples of" how it has served these principles for highquality service provision. We need to take advantage of the historythat is there and to look for ways to continue the process as moreand more children are in situations where they are at points ofbeing at risk for later school failure and as we begin to serve morechildren through Head Start, it is even more important that thesetransitional services are provided.
Thank you.IThe prepared statement of Barbara A. Willer. Ph.D., follows: j
_
17
-4
Testmony More the Suivernmdtve on Human ResourcesEducanon and Labor Committee
United States House of Representatives
February 21. 1Q90
Bar Ora A. Wilier, rh.D.Public Attain Director
National Assocktion for the Education of Young Children
,
18
Testimony of Barbara A WilierBefore the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the
House F.ducation and !Astir CommitteeFebruary 21. 1990
My name is Barhara Willer and 1 am the Public Affairs Director of the National
Association for the Education of Young Children thlAEYO. NAEYC is the largest
organization of early childhood professionals in the nation, with a membershipsurpassing 70,000. Founded in 1926. the Association is dedicated to improving the
quality of early childhood services for children and families from birth through age11
On behalf of NAEYC's President, Ellen Galinsky, who has worked with the
Follow Through Program at Bank Street College in New York City. I am pleased tohe able to prosent some ot NAEYC's principles which are relevant to the FollowThrough concept My testimony will focus on the characteristics of servicos likeFollow Through that are needed to continue the gains that children and their families
receive by participating in high quality. comprehensive early childhood services such
as the Head Start program
For over two decades, Follow Through has embodied a principle thatunfortunately is too often not understoo& that high quality, early childhoodprograms, no matter how good, are not -- and cannot he expected to be -- aninoculation or miracle "cure' that will prepare a child to withstand all social ills, poorschools, and the ravages of poverty. Please do not interpret this statement as anIndictment of high quality preschool services Far horn it. Rather, the critical issue
is how do we assure that the characteristics that make preschool programs effective
are also found in kindergarten and elementary school programs, and so on down theline
Characteristics of Good Programs
The elements that determine program effectiveness are well-established, based
on a number of years of research. theory, and professional experience These
charactenstics include
Programs that reflect a developmentally appropriate curriculum anddevelopmentally appropriate teaching practices.
Such a curriculum and teaching practices stress an individualized appmach
that focuses on child-initiated learning activities Developmentally appropriate means
that the unique characteristics of different ages of children are recognized andsupported, I a, second grade children are not expected to learn the same material orin the same ways as 4-year-olds. Equally important, the unique characterishcs,
interests, and abilities of Individual children within the group are appreciated andsupported as is each child's ethnic, cultural. and linguistic heritage.
Teachers and administrators have specialized knowledge of earl, +Whomdevelopment and early childhood education.
19
Willer TestimonyPage 2
Effective implementation of developmentally appropriate practice requires
teachers who have the specialized knowledge of how children learn and how to
structure an instnictional environment appropriately. Teachers who have this
specialized training recognize that their role nerd not and should not be that of
the primary imparter of knowledge. but rather that they facilitate children's learning
processes through a carefully designed, ongoing process of asse&sment, planning, and
evaluation.In addition to teachers having specialized knowledge, the teaching staff must
be supported by the school administration Developmentally appropriate practice.
differs significantly from traditional approaches to instniction of many elementary
schoob. Teachers find it very difficult to implement a more developmentallyappropriate approach when their principals export all the children to sit at desks all
day and complete workbooks and ditto sheets.
Small groups of children and teacherchild ratios that permit an
individualised approach to curriculum and instructional design and
implementation.While small groups and good ratios are not a panacea, and in the absence of
good teacher training cannot be effective, they are an important component of
developmentally appropriate practice When the group size is ton large tNAEN1.'
advocates a group size of no more than 20 to 24 for primary grade children) and
when ratios exceed 1:10 or 1.12, it becomes much more difficult to Implement adevelopmentally appropriate program. For groups of especially needy children, even
these numbers may be too great. For children of drug-involved families, extreme
disadvantage, or other severely debilitating conditions, an even smaller group size and
ratio of teacher to children may he needed to assure that each individual childreceives adequate attention
Recognition that all of children's needs must be met, intellectual and social-emotional, as well as needs for sound nutrition and both psychological and
physical health.For children of disadvantaged circumstances, programs need to provide the
cvmprehensive health and social services so critical to children's development One
of the most serious shortcomings I 9ee in the recent efforts by many stategovernments to replicate the success of the Head Start program through state-funded
early intervention services is the fact that comprehensive services component, which
is quite expensive, is too often overlooked or ignored. Children must have acress
to the array 'of comprehensive service, that is needed if real gains are to be achieved.
Moreover, the need for comprehensive services is not a one-shot deal. Although
elementary schools have traditionally done little in this regard. we must look for
ways that school-age children are provided access to comprehensive services. While
It may go beyond our traditional definition of educational services, the provision ofcomprehensive services is critical in reaching our goals of educational success for all
ddidren.
20
Willer Testimonypage 3
Active parental involvement and participation, especially in decisionmaking
affecting their child.Parents who feel accepted and apprvciated by their children's teachers and
school administrators convey similar messages to their children Empowered parents
teel that their children can succeed in school and do their hest to make sure ithappens The continuity ot experience between home and sch iii is amplified through
parental involvement, much to children's advantage
It is noteworthy that each of the above characteristics, except for
developmentally appropriate curriculum and teaching practioes (which have gained
professional consensus only recently), were stressed in the original Follow Thniugh
program Two key components of the devekTmentally appropriate Philosophy,
individualized instniction and respect for cultural. ethnic, and linguistic heritage were
stressed, however Follow Through programs had planned variations in theirapproaches to curriculum and instructional design. At that time, there was much less
consensus within the early childhood profession regarding curriculum and teaching
practices Today there is a growing body of research evidence that supportsdevelopmentally appropriate teaching practices as the most beneficial approach to
children's education, and especially for ciLn of low-income families
Policies for fostering high quality service provisionNAEYC has adopted a statement of guiding principles for the development And
analysis of early childhood legislation. I believe that committev members may find
these principles useful in their deliberations regarding Follow Through's future
activities Today I wish tn highlight lust a few of these principles
There must be sufficient funds to ensure the provision of high quality twirlers.
This is a principle which has not iseen adhered to over the history of Follow
Through Erosion of funds have impaired the programs' ability to provide tf..complete. scope of high quality services needed, especially in terms of comprehensive
servwes Too (Men under-funded programs are blamed tor -not working" when the
real problem was not in the design hut in the amount of funding available for.nplementation
There must be collaboration and coordination among services for children, now andover time,
Coordination and collaboration ate absolutely essential if intervention programs
are to achieve their goals- Coordination and collaboration are important from two
perspectives: at any given point in time as well as over time. At any given point.
children and their families may be receiving assistance from a variety of agencies and
funding sources Families in children in the early elementaty grades ate likely to
need child care; how is this being provided? What armngemenb are being made for
continuity? Other social services are also of importance. The critical question is,
what are the needs of the family, and how are they being met? The parental
21
Willer Testimonypage 4
involvement strategies of the Head Start and Follow Through programs provide an
important strategy in this regard. Such partreipation helps to empower parents and
helps them to better access the services they need
Ct4laboration and coordination ate aittit Iftlitttriant over tittle ne9 et especially
important for enhancing children's transition from preschool services into kindergarten
and the elementary grades. While there have been some transition prolechi in the
past, there need to be more systematic efforts toward fristeting the communication
mid coordination of the various service providers that deal with children from one
year to the next The Follow Through program is a good position for furthering the
goals ot coordination and collaboratton Certainly, this has been a malor !..oal of the
program since its beginning.
Coordination and collabor.ition needs to oceur at every level At the federal
level, it is Impel &ant that systematic means for communication ocrur between the
Department of Health and Human Sennees, in which Head Start is based, and the
Department of Education, in which Follow Through and other school-basest services
are housed Noe should other departments he overlooked For examrle, theDepartment of Labor has a number ot programs. such as lob training, that while not
directly affecting children, do have tremendous impact because of their effects on
children's families Again, the groundwork for this process already exists: we need
to be sure that the resources are available to strengthen the collaborative efforts at
every levet
Flexibility to meet individual family and community needs
ft is important that legislative programs provide sufficient flexibihtv for
communities to best meet the needs of individual families served, recognizing the
unique demands and characteristics of local service orovision At the same time. such
flexibility should never compromise the quahty of series. Provided tIne ot thereasons that such flextbilitv is so important is that communities iv markedk, iii the
degree to which services are being provided, which children are being served, and
who needs service When program standards are rigid and inflexible, there ran he
needless duplication of some services, while other needed services go wanting
For over two decades. the Follow Through program has been implemented
following these principles for high quality service provision, although at funding
levels insufficient to fully acromplish its goals Follow Through's history illustrates
that these principles are not eaay to implement. It takes much time and effort, as
well as new approaches to service delivery. nut, the effort is well-placed and will
do much to help to assure that we provide all of our young children with theoppotiunittes for educational and life success that they so richly deserve.
22
Chairman K1LDEE. Thank you.Dr. Schultz.Dr. SeHutrz. Thank you. I am pleased to present testimony on
behalf of the National Association of State Boards of Education. Iam Tom Schultz. I work with early childhood issues for NASBE.Most of my remarks are based on a National Task Force on EarlyChildhood Education that we empaneled a couple of years ago toproduce this report, Right from the Start.
It basically addresses recommendations for improvement ofpublic early childhood services for children, ages four to eight. andtheir parents, so it is a pod match to the challenges representedby Follow Through.
To summarize my testimony. I will begin with my punch linewhich is derived from a historical artifact about Follow Through.This book came out in 1975, written by Alice Rivlin and Mike Tim-pane about Follow Through. It's title was Planned Variation inEducation: Should We Give Up or Try Harder?
I think. Fifteen years later, the verdict is that we have done nei-ther. We haven't abandoned Follow Through, but we haven't givenit the resources to allow it to really try harder. The conclusion ofmy testimony is that it is time for the Federal Government to tryharder, and that we have to figure out the strategy that will be ap-propriate to build on the capacity that Follow Through represents.
I have got essentially three major arguments that lead me tothat conclusion. The first is the conviction that Follow Through isfocused on a key policy problem for public early childhood in the1990s which is early school experiences for low income children.
I think if you look at President Bush's National Education Goals,you will see that he has committed us to essentially a zero defectpolicy in terms of a ninety percent high school graduation rate andhigh levels of achievement tbr all students.
What that means is that we can't be satisfied to have low incomeor minority kids achieve at lower rates than their more advantagedcounterparts. We have got to find ways to support them and allowthem to be successful. Unfortunately, we have more low incomechildren in our schools than we had five to ten years ago. We arefinding increasing complications in their lives in terms of the bur-dens that they bring to the public schools.
The latest horror story that came across my desk from News-week last week was a survey that estimates that 375,000 babies areborn each year who have been exposed to drugs during pregnancy.primary crack cocaine, so that would take up about 12,000 elemen-tary school classrooms or eighty percent of the slots in Head Start.It is not a minor problem for us to contend with. My sense is thatthe public schools are not ready to be able to cope effectively withthose children.
A second point is that there is growing evidence that the earlyschool years are particularly critical if we are looking at outcomesof high performance and ability to complete school. Drop-out ex-perts that we talked with through our task force said that, by theend of third grade, they can tell you, with very high accuracy.which kids are going to drop out.
I think the message there is that we've got to intervene some-time prior to third grade if we are going to make a difference interms of these aspirations that we have as a society.
I think a particular concern that was raised in our work as atask force was very high rates of retention of children in kinder-garten and the early grades.
If you look at records from urban disti:cts like Boston and theDistrkt of Columbia and entire states, such as Delaware. Arizonaand Florida, you find rates of up to 20 to 25 percent of young chil-dren of all income brackets are being retained in those early schoolyears. and higher rates than that for minority, male and low-income students.
Unfortunately. the impact of that practice of holding kids back isnot positive on their achievement and tends to ircrease theirchances of dropping out. I think the picture is one where we havegot a high priority to succeed with poor kids, more poor kids thatare more troubled.
A focus has to be provided on those early school years thatFollow Through seeks to address. We have some problems in termsof current practices in those years in terms of public schools.
It seems to me the second contention that I would bring in myremarks is that Follow Through is an effective and promising pro-gram strategy to build on. I am not going to relate the particularevaluation evidence on Follow Throu;:i. but rather try to bringsome comments from the perspective of early childhood leaders andcomponents of successful programs that we looked at on the part ofour task force.
I think there is a growing consensus among early childhood ex-perts and experts concerned with programs for low income chil-dren. that agrees with the key features of Follow Through in termsof continuous and comprehensive intervention, strong parent in-volvement. and not waiting until kids fall behind and then at-tempting to remediate their problems.
A primary recomnwndation in our report right from the start isto create early childhood units that would operate in elementaryschools to provide services and distinctive forms of instruction foryounger children. There is a similar recommendation coming froma report that is going to he issued soon hy the National Associationfor Elementary School Principals.
I think another example of this agreement on this concern forearly grades and the Follow Through approach are efforts thatha-e been made by Project Head Start over the past years throughthe Head Start Transitions Program and an earlier effort, ProjectDevelopmental Continuity, that has been trying to improve thetransition for young children coming out of Head Start into thepublic schools.
Finally. I think the point made by Mr. Posl, . , that parent in-volvement as an aspect of Follow Through is itical. is one thatt he experts agree on.
My third point. and I think the trickiest issue for us to grapplewith at this stage. is the Federal leadership strategy to take thiskey problem and perhaps the promise of the Head Start Programexperience.
Let me first address the recommendation, as I understand it, ofthe Department of Fducation. which is essentially to say thatFollow Through can be zeroed out: the services can be providedthrough Chapter I: and, dissemination of the National programscan be handled through Chapter 2 and the National Diffusion Net-work.
NASBE supports all of these programs and we feel that theyhave an important role to play. but we don't think that they dupli-cate the mission of Follow Through. Ltt me give you some exam-ples of differences that we think are significant.
For example, Follow Through models are designed to providecontinuous support for young children from kindergarten throughthe primary grades. If you look at the figutes on Chapter I. as of acouple of years ago. three-quarters of their progiams in schools donot include services to kindergarten kids.
The idea is: Let's wait ur'il we're sure we've found the kids thatare needy based on achievement scores and then we'll pick up andtry to help them.
Similarly. Follow Through is designed to provide comprehensiveclassroom programs across all the subject areas while Chapter 1 isstill predominantly a program that takes children out of the regu-lar classroom for about thirty minutes a day to work in a smallgroup on one particular subject area.
It seems to me while Chapter I resources are directed toward lowincome children, the program strategy does not idealiy complementthat of Follow Through.
Similarly, Chapter 2 and the National Diffusion Network a:e ex-cellent strategies for supporting local school improve.nent. but wedon't believe that they are a good and effective mechanism to dis-seminate Follow Through.
I have three ideas to suggest in terms of component for a newFollow Through strategy which I'll cover briefly. One is I thinkthere is an investment that needs to be preserved in terms of dem-onstration models for Follow 'Through. It is important to haveenough sites to illustrate those programs in action in real schoolsand to allow them to continue to refine implementation with newgroups of students.
Secondly, it seems to me we have got to figure out some fairlypointed ways to spread the lessons of Follow Through. to mandateor to provide resources so that Chapter 1 programs particularlythose under the concentration grants or school-wide projects. canlearn about Follow Through and provide support for staff develop-ment. perhaps on a cost-sharing basis.
Third. I suggest in my testimony some possible new problemareas or challenges that could be addressed through new FollowThrough. Some examples there are I think that there are pointedproblems for local schools, the needs of multicultural kids, the pos-sibilhy of Follow Through models that would go back to the idea ofstrong connections with Head Start in a more precise way.
Finally, I think some ideas to revisit the challenge of parent edu .
cation and parent involvement as a critical strategy and find somenew ways of getting at that. Thank you.
(The prepared statement of Thomas Schultz. Ed.D.. follows:
Nalinnut Avolciation tsi State Boat& of Idutahontel1.2 i ameton StrevtAli-,Indria VA 22114
; 11 h./14 4000
, .
;41 T14,
A..)l I AI k.
f",;, 414, ."
26
Mr. Chairman and Subcommittee Members I am Tem Schulte, representing theNational Association of State Boards of Education and I am pleased to presenttestimony on the future of the Follow Through Program. My comments are largelvbased on the work of NAM's National Task Force on Early Childhood EducationOur Task Force was comprised of national experts in early childhood education,state and federal policymakers and public school staff And administrators Basedon extensive public hearings and reviews of exemplary early childhood and earlyelementary school programs, the Task Force's recent report. entitled gightlaegithRILAXI. presents series of recommendations for rhe improvement of publicschool programs and services to children ages 6.E1 sod their parents, a targetgroup which coincide, well with she clients of Follow Through Programs
1 will address three questions in my testimony
(1) Is_follow Through focussed Oflfthiah otiority Oreblem_let AmeriCEDeducatiok;
(2) Is follow Th lus,b...1..F.L.MASing.end effetilyeskoittaoljakasNgy % tollo
+.2) St is the_susi_eifectivg_ledttal leadershio LUAU= trluAtTrine . the alecjivek wi Follow ThreUgh2
The Follow Through Program began as a federal initiative to remedy the'fade-out in cognitive gains for graduates of summer Head Start programs asthese children moved into the early elementary grades The hypothesis of FollowThrough is that a comprehensive intervention to improve classroom instruction, toprovide health and other services to children and to strengthen parentinvolvement in kindergarten and the primary grades will enhance the schoolperformance of low income children. Due to budget limitations, the programevolved into an evaluation of alternative curriculum models and the transfer ofthose models into other sehools
The first key policy question for the Subcommittee is "do the earls, schoolexperiences of low income students constitute a pressing national priority forthe 1990s I would Argue that this problem is even =IP ..etious, more complexand more vital to our national interest than was the CA4P when follow Through WA,first created. based on the following evidence.
I. Schools today are serving A higher proportion of students from low tnromehomes. and the consequences ofpoverty on young chi:then are mot. ,,mplex and
severe
The numhet vf childrui. in poverty increased more than Zot from 14', toloS6. from under 10 million to over 1: million children hutieg the s.meperiu.i the number rf househclds In puvettv ifwleat.edrourhut of poor 1-11,parne households was ,p eud wtl t am::te, ,tt.por: increased 2tt
. gv,ry veer nearlv I00.0rW hehies are novo to reetatfe mn!hr!.!.pet uf Amett,el rill. 4 %;14.11. rA1fA., wn- tIrve:married has alm,s, quadrupIed
27
According to a recent story in SIMAnth magarine, a survey by the National
Assoriation for Perinatal AddictionResearch and Education estimates that
375,000 infants have been exposed to drugs, primarily crack cocaine, during
pregnancy. This cohort of children will fill Over '12,000 elementary school
classrooms, or over 801 of the currentslots available in Head Scart
President Ruah's nationaleducation goals include universal school
readiness for young children. a 901 high school graduation rate, and high
expectations for student performance. To meet these goals, the 301 of our
students who are minorities and enequal, overlapping number who are poor
must begin to succeed at high levels of performance and complete school at
the same rates as their more advantaged counterparts
2 There is growing avidenee that early school experiences ate a critical
determinant of children's eventual ability to complete their education with
acceptable levels of performence.
Our Task Force report obsetves that by the end of third grade, most
students have either attained a threshold level of achievement which makes
further school success likely, or they are on a dewnward trajeCtory in terms
of achievement, having been retained in grade for one or more years, or
hsving been tracked inro a set of classes or groups designed for low
achieving students ln spite of our best efforts at compensatory strategies
to help this letter cohort of students to 'catch up', our success rates are
not encouraging.
Of particular conrern to the Task Force are high rotes of retaining
children during thoit early school years, particularly for low income and
minority students For example, Roston PublicSchools retained 6 se of its
kindergarteners and 19 45 of its first grade students in 1987: the District
of Columbia held back 12.7s of its firstgraders aed 8.41 of its second
graders; the schools in Arizona retain 85 of kindergarteners and 205 of
students in first grade Minority, male, and low income students tend to
experience higher rates of retention Studies of the impact of retention
show the practice has no beneficial effects on student achievement and
increases the chances of studentseventually dropping out of school by
3t)s
Experts concerned with promoting higher levels of problem-solving,
thinking, and effective communication skills agree that children's earl?'
sncounters with scienee, mathematics, reading, snd writing tend to determine
their later attitudes and dispositions towards these subjects A wide range
of proposals to improve learning in these areas stress the need to alter
early elementary teaching. curriculum and assessment practices io provtOr
more experiences which actively engage young children with a variety c.f
materials, make explicit use cf dialogue nod cooperative ;earning
strategies. roci challenge students to think
Turning to mv second question I would atgue that e dtvtise poui of
have endored the Follow Through ..onrepts of continuous and romprehensive
Interventior ir school practice sue outreach to rsrent of v'ulnE chtidten
28
A primary recommendation of Rigjit FroM the Starr is for "early childhoodunits" for children ages 4-8, designed arrund the unique needs and learningstyles of 2ounger students, just as the middle scho.ol movemPrA promotes adifterent model or school organization. activities, and instruction forearly ade'escent students
The National Association for the E,Jrcation of Young Children publication,21yelopmentalle Aqprooriate Prectlet_IILEarlY Childhood Programl 5,ennIngaulannyirmajzsbiamonghAge_ji articulates a detailed set of principlesfor instruction and assessment of children in kindergarten and the primarygrades. The National Association of Elementary School Principals will bereleasing a report in the next month which addresses this %AMP Age span.with recommendations which Are consistent with the NASRE and NAEYC reports
- Project Head Start has mounted two demonstration programs to improve theconnections between local Head Start operations and the public schoolsProiect Developmental Continuity in the mid1970s and the Head StartTransitions Program in the mid-19$0s supported pilot projects to enhance theearls Achool experiences of Head Start children and their parents
. Some recent designs for improving student learning across the earleelementary gtades (Success for All Students At. Johns Hopkins liniverstts
.
have emerged in recent veers, as have proposals to alter compensatoryeducation practices to emphasize a more comprehensive, preventative approach(e g the Accelerated Schools Network from Stanford ftiversity and school-wide projects provisions under Chapter 1).
- The benefits of active parent involvement in schools and the provision ofhealth and other support services to rhildren are actively supported by awide range of experts and advocates However, as our Task Force discoveredfrom testimony by parents of former Head Start students. many public schoolsare not adept at suppporting active parent involvement
In summary, we know that poor children are large and growing group ofpublic school students, that our economic future depends on their ability topersist in and succeed at schooling, that the early school years are critical rethese ultimate educational outcomes, that current policies end practices are athest inadequate to produce the gains which are possible and needed and thatprofessional opinion among researchers and practicing educators has"rediscovered" the appeal of the Follow Through strategy of comprehensivecontinuous support for high quality instruction In the early grades
Turning to my third question, let me begin by responding to therecommendations of the Department of Education regarding the future of FollowThrough ln their view. Follow Through services may be supported through theChapter 1 Program and the dissemination of innovative Follow Through models :anbe sustained throush a combination of the Chapter I! block grant fund and rheNational Diffusion Network I beg to differ
while NASRE is extremely supportive of both Chapter I ant: Ch"prer 1:.neither program represents a forceful federal strategv for promoting thepotential of Fo:low Through model programs or services Chapter 1 servicesremain overwhelmingly in the form of a supplement to the regular classroomprogram. most codnonlv in the form of a "pull-our prof-ram" of rougt.iv f0 trn-!es
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
per day in reading or mathematics basic skills instruction In addition, only
27% of schools offering Chapter 1 services in lofib included the pacticipation of
kindergarren students. Fve contrast, Follow Through models are designs fer
comprehensive, continuous support for students from kindergarten thtough thitd
grade and seek to improve regular classroom instruction across all subject ateAs
Similarl', while Chapter 2 and the National Difffusion Netwurk (NDN) ptomoty
invaluable support for local innovative effoers and access to a aide range of
proven model programs. respectively,ueither program duplicates ot serves a% a
substitute for Follow Through. Chapter 2 resources are subject to local needs
and local innovations across evan program dimension and all typos of students
At sn average funding level of $30,000 per school district, Chapter 2 funds are
not sufficient to pay for implementation of the typical Follow Through ptr,gram
even if that were the only priority of a community.
The NDN provides information co local schools ou several hundred exemplary
programs but few resources for the v,alts of training staff and implementing these
models. The most recent directory of NDN programs indicates thfrtvnine Follow
Through programs which hove met the Department's high standerds of effectiveness
for incluatom tn the KnN unfortunart-ly, twenty-eight of these programs are
listed a section entitled, 'Approved Projects With Limited AvallahilftV".
indicating that they Are no longet avaiiable for dissemination through knN 1,t
the remaining projects, none is currently receiving NDN funds lor active
dissemination Thus, the programs cited by the Department do not providecomprehensive, continuous services for tne needs of Younger low income students.
nor an effective support for the implementation of successful Follow Through
programs.
What should be done hy the federal government to realize the contribution of
Follow Through in school improvement7 I would recommend three components fur a
Follow Through strategy for the 19405:
1 /.. demonstrate their approachGiven the comprehensive nature of Follow Through programs, it is importantto maintain sufficient numbers of demonstration sites to illustrate these
strategies in real schools, as well as to continue to refine implementatioo
with new groups of students We are not endorsing an eternal commitment roany specific school or community. and there well might be a policy which limits
the duration of protect funding in a site to allow new communities to
participate
2. Increase snpooPt for dissemination of SUcCkSsful MOdelg-The federal commitment to Follow Through should include additional resourcesand a strategy for assisting implementation efforts in other communitiesSupport should be limited to staff development and training costs on a costsharing bests with local school districts Another prospect to ItIve,StigOite 1s
stronger connection between Follow Through sponsors and schools implementiog tht
school-wide projects provisions under Chapter l
7. Extend demonstration efforts to new challengeS and additional Slia'NeigsFollow Through sponsors or new organizations should bo invited to extend theit
efforts in areas such as the following to develop adaptations of their programs
to respond to the needs of schools serving multicultural communities, children
from homes wirh a problem of drug e,nse, or children from familre% who are
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
27-2b2 0 90
-
30
homelese, Follow Through should also consider expansion to support newstrategies, e.g. 010 models which build more direct connections with Head Startprograms, (b1 models which combine several promisieg instructional approaches indifferent content areas, and (0 a revisiting of the challenge of enhanoingparental involvement. education and support as a route to improving studentmotivation and achievement.
In summary. Follow Through is an example of 'positive trots)," tot federaleducation policy. Its initial mission of creating a major new service program wasundercut by budgetary limitations, and its subsequent evaluation design producedmore lrguments than clear conclusions. However the program's strategy forworking with children, families and schools and the extensive 'teld experiencesof Follow Through sponeors are a precious resource in our current effort torestructure America's public schools At a time when business and politicalreaders ore united in promoting additional resources for Head Start and otherpreochool programs, ve need to revisit the problem of promoting successful earlyschool experiences tor disadvantaged students
In 1'475. Alice eivlin and Michael Timpane edited a book on Follow Throughentitled flanned Varistion In Eduoation _Should We dive VD or Irs' Harder?, In thepast decade we have done neither. We have been unwilling to abandon FollowThrough as a strategy, but wr have been equally unwilling to eommit sufficientresources ro implement existing model programs on a broad scale or to address nesdimensions of the needs of poor children in new ways. It Is time for the federalgovernment ro start trying harder.
The National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) is a nonprofit,private association that represents state and territorial hoards of educationOur principal objectives are to strengthen state leadership In educationpolicvmaking. promote excellence In the eeucation of all students; advocateequality of access to educational opportunity: and assure responsible leygovernance of public education. NASBE's work In early childhood education hAsbeen supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. the Exxon EducationFoundation and the Administration of Children. Youth. and Families of the C SDepartment of Health and Human Servic's
31
Chairman Ku.or,E. Thank you very much for your testimony.I think you mentioned one of the titles was Give Up or Try
Harder or something like that?Dr. SCHULTZ. Yes.Chairman KILDEE. You are right. We are doing neither. I'm look-
ing back over the history of the appropriations of the FollowThrough Act. Before I got here, back in 1970, the appropriationswas $70 million. Now we are down to about one-tenth of that. Ad-
justed for inflation, it would be even much less than that.So, we haven't given up. We have struggled hard. As a matter of
fact, last time. Tom, you and I worked out a compromise to keepthe program alive. It wasn't just in the committee here, but we hadsome threats out on the floor, too, so we worked out a compromiseto keep it alive.
We are down to about :it7.2 million. so we haven't given up andwe aren't really trying harder as far as the fiscal commitment isconcerned.
There are some in the Administration who, in various ways. saythis program. Follow Through. shares a certain redundancy withwhat other programs like Chapter 1 or Chapter 2 could do.
Could you respond? You both mentioned that. I think, in yourtestimony. Could you expatiate on that a bit. why Chapter 1 andChapter 2 really will not do what Follow Through does? Doctor, doyou want to start here?
Dr. SCHULTZ. Just to amplify my comments. my sense is that insome respects. Chapter 1 is moving in the Follow Through direc-t'on in terms of some of their funding being freed up and encour-agement to local districts to look at school-wide approaches.
Sometimes. I've heard comments from the Federal administra-tors that local programs may misread the Federal intent in termsof regulations. and because they have done puThout programs orthey have done programs that are not addressed to the whole classteaching strategy, that that must be continued because of' someFederal mandate.
I think that it is a large program that is slow to change. It seemsto me it hasn't been hooked up in any substantial or concerted waywith Follow Through in terms of directing the attention of Chapter1 programs to Follow Through or providing particular resources forthem to learn about Follow Through, to my knowledge.
I .think in Chapter 2, the primary issue is one of resources. Ifyou ve got a general block grant that is open for any priority acrossany subject area and any age of student, it's going to be hard forme to see that as a leadership strategy for low income, youngerlearners.
I think it tends to be something that doesn't provide enough sup-port in local districts to do all of the things that we would like it todo.
Chairman KILDEE, Dr. Willer?Dr. WILLER. I would just reiterate what Tom has said. I think
ideally, Chapter I would embody many of the same principles thatFollow Through has demonstrated are so important. I don't thinkthat that obviates the need for the program and the services.
Chairman KILDEE. I notice that, very often, and I am gettingvery general and philosophical here, but very often, redundancy, if
:32
it exists, in education is a fiscal sin, but redundancy in the DefenseDepartment is prudent planning. You find that, you know.
You have those who say that we need both the MX and theMidgetman and the B-2 bomber. That's redundancy. but to be onthe safe side, we should be redundant. For the Triad system. de-fense of land sea and air, you can build in redundancy.
Very often, when it comes to education, redundancy becomesreally a fiscal sin. I am not sure the word redundancy is correctthere, but programs can complement one another. Very often, theyshould be complementary, shouldn't they? I think Follow Throughcan be complementary to Chapter I. or an innovative approach toChapter L
I have been in this education prnfession now in some capacity for35 years. ten years as a teacher and 25 years either in the StateLegislature or the Congress. I have always had to fight againstpeople saying that this is redundant or that this overlaps.
I always feel that if we were really funding education as itshould be funded in this country. then perhaps we could examine,with close scrutiny, some unneeded redundancy. But, when we areso underfunding it. I think that if there can be some overlapping,that possibly would be a very positive thing, educationally.
I know I have had to fight this for many, many years, about :35years now. That is my philosophy for the day. .rom, I'll defer to younow.
Mr. TAUKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.I think that what you said, Dr. Schultz. about giving up or trying
harder is true. We arc not succeeding very well by just kind offloating along with the Follow Through program. I want to spend alittle time trying to determine what you think the program shouldbe doing.
I guess in very basic terms, what should the goals of the FollowThrough program be in the 1990s? Dr. Willer.
Dr. WILLER. I think that I would mention the goals that are de-signed to promote high quality service provision. I have mentioneda number of those in terms of helping children succeed and using avery broad definition of that, The original goals talked about pa-rental involvement. I think that continues to be an extremely im-portant goal of this project.
Providing children with the tools that they need to be able totake advantage of what the educational system is providing them.Comprehensive services would be number one on my list, in termsof the access to health and psychological services, nutrition, etcetera.
The children who are in families who do not have access to thoseservices need to be provided with those services so they can takeadvantage of what the school can offer.
Promoting opportunities for the developmentally appropriatepractice. One of the things that I think that Follow Through hasdone in terms of the sponsors, working directly with school systemsin terms of enhancing the more individualized approaches and in-volvement of parents is that it puts into the system a planned wayof developing a program, then ongoing implementation and evalua-tion. assuring that not only the students are involved, but the par-ents and administrators with outside help.
2 t;
I think that is a nice model for effecting change over a longterm.
Mr. TA:LIKE. Dr. Schultz?Dr. Se Htwrz. I guess in a strategic sense. I would probably stress
two functions. One would be continual testing of new approaches tothis target group and this age span, which I think doesn t necessar-ily mean continue to test the same set of sponsors and the samesites forever, but recognize that there is a Federal role in support-ing new approaches to these tough problems.
It seems to me the second strategy would he one of spreading thelessons of these tests to other programs, other communities, otherdistricts. I think that often, we have an aspiration for Federalfunding, which is always going to be a drop in the bucket.
Our sense is that we want the drop in the bucket to become ra-dioactive in some magical way, you know. in the good sense of ra-dioactivity. that well just spend this little bit of money and theneverybody will rush to replicate the lessons.
I think what we've been learning from the past couple of decadesof experience in school improvement and installing innovations inschools is that that process is slow and takes a lot of support. Ithink it's not necessarily the case that the Federal Governmenthas to provide all of that support.
I think that systems like the National Diffusion Network andChapter 2 recognize the need for funding and for support and forpatience in terms of the implementation and dissemination of theseideas.
Mr. 'NUKE. I take it you think that we still have a need for whatwe might call demonstration projects. both of oci?
Dr. SCHULTZ. I would say yes.Dr. WILLER. I would agree with the need fef demonstration. I
think we also have to look at ways of direct service provision.Mr. TALIKE. My perception is that there hasn't been much imple-
mentation of those things we've learned through the demonstrationprojects. Am I missing something along the way? We've had twentyyears of demonstration projects and I don't see that the lessonsthat have been learned are being implemented anyplace outside ofthe places that have the funding for the Follow Through program.
Am I wrong in that perception?Dr. &till:M. I think there are sonw other witnesses that can
probably address that more precisely than I can. My sense is thatit depends on your level of expectation; that you can producecharts that will show there have been many inquiries and probablyadoptions of some of these models on a large scale.
It seems to me that the challenge in terms of having. as a rou-tine, regular, feature of elementary schools, things like strongparent involvement, comprehensive services and an innovative,supportive approach to instruction, we still have a long way to go.
Mr. TAUKE. I don't mean to be difficult, but everybody jumps onthe band wagon of strong parental involvement and we are allpleased to talk about it. It s like motherhood and apple pie, but thereality of life is that a lot of our children don't have parents whoare going to be involved.
Where you've got the ability to get strong parental involvement,you have half the problem solved. Our challenge, as I see it, in
3.1
much of our society today is we have families that are not function-ing. I guess I don't mean to take off on you or my colleague fromIllinois. who isn't here to defend himself, but every educator seemsto traipse before us and say. "Well, we have to have strong paren-tal involvement.**
We all say, "Yes, that's right. This is good for the family.- Ifslike finding an apple pie and getting out and endorsing it everyother day.
Isn't our problem in the City of Washington. De that half thekids are born to unwed mothers and a good percentage of thosehave serious problems that don't permit them to be parents'? Isn'tour challenge to come up with programs that, in a sense, help thekids when there isn't any strong parent around?
Shouldn't that be part of the Was?Dr. SCHt LTZ. I hink it's yes, hot h.Mr. TAI.10:. That's good.Dr. SCHULTZ. As part of our task force. we had testimony from a
number of Head Start parents. What they said to us was, "Wewere extremely involved in our Head Start program. We were ex-cited about cont inuing to be actively involved in our children's edu-cation when they entered elementary school. We were discouragedby the public schools in terms of or interest in doing more than ahake sale,-
I think part of the problem is there are schools that are notequipped to take parent involvement seriously. I think anotherpart of' the problem is, as you stated, some parents who need spe-cial help and support. I think we have developed some innovativefamily support and parent education programs, but they tend tostop. as Head Start does, after the kids reach school age.
The idea is birth to three or birth to age four. we have specialefforts. It seems to me that we need to find some ways to continuethose principles up into adolescence. I think it's parents of juniorhigh kids often that have some of the toughest problems.
So, it seems to me Follow Through illustrates some models ofhow to get more serious and substantial parent involvement and. Ithink, also. probably some ways of supporting parents who may notbe as well equipped or as well motivated. I don't think it is one orthe other in terms of where does the problem lie.
Mr. TA CKE. I agree that that probably is true. I'd feel better, Iguess, if you came in and said to me, "We've had a lot of models,It's about time we started doing something to deal with the chal-lenges of these children. We can't be developing models all the
The Federal Government is going to have to make a strong com-mitment to putting together a continuum of services for those whoare four, five, six, seven, eight. until they get to the third grade.This is my philosophical pitch. In a sense, I think we are missingthe boat if we keep fighting over $7.5 million in the FollowThrough program.
Let me ask you the final question. How much money do youthink we should put into this program?
Dr, SCHULTZ. More.Dr. WILLER. The need is tremendous.Chairman KILDEE. Let the record show that.
Mr. TAtait:. After giving them that pitch that they have to domore, what else could they say, right? I appreciate very much yourtestimony. I don't mean to be putting you on the spot here.
It does seem to me that there is a danger all of a sudden that weate putting Head Start on this pedestal that it solvcs all problems.and it doesn't. Then, we are not developing any kind of program tobuild on the benefits of Head Start.
We are excluding a lot of people from the Head Start programbecause they don't have the kind of parental commitment that isneeded fOr them to participate. They are the ones who need to beparticipating or have something done for them, perhaps even morethan those who have parents who will participate.
I don't know that I have the answers to all of these problems.but we have got a generation coming up here that needs help realfast. We can't keep doing hearings and no progress. Mr. Chairman.Thank you.
Chairman KILPEE. I agree with that. Let me ask you this. Tom
and I recognize that we do have parents out there. as he and Icome.. from. I'm sure, who are solid parents, prudent parents. caringparents. parents of good judgment. parents of good habits.
Mr. TAUKE, 1 didn't know you knew my parents that well.Chairman KILDEE. I can judge from their child, you see.Mr. TAUKE, They were also tough as nails.Chairman KILDEE. Mine were tot.gh. too. They were very caring
and very loving. very prudent. with good judgment. My mother justturned 90 years old this week, God love her. She's doing very well.
We do knowTom and I both knowthat there are also parentsout there who don't quite meet that model. Some are defective par-ents. As a matter of fact. in the jurisdiction of this subcommittee isthe Runaway Youth Act. Through the years, I've reached the con-clusion that. very often. a child runs away and it is the smartestthing that kid has done.
l really hate to say that. but in that particular situation, it is anact of defense. it is an act of self preservation to get away fromthat destructive family situation So. Torn and I do know that outthere, there are some families so damaged you can hardly identifythem as really being a family.
Having said that, however, can you discuss with us how moder-
ately good, maybe somewhat deficient. parents are helped with
their parenting skills through parental involvement activities in
Follow Through'?Dr. WILLER. I think that, beginning in Head Start, we have seen
some of the real examples of what can happen when parents areactively involved, Tom is so right. that we need to look for defini-tions and help people who are working in programs to understandthat we are talking about real involvement, real power and partici.pinion in the program process and not to help us out with bakesales. et cetera. et cetera. et cetera.
Head Start has a history of doing that. I think we've seen it in
terms of the level of activism and support that those parents dem-onstrate for the program. I think it also is a part of the FollowThrough model. I'm sure that the next panel will be able to giveyou some more specific examples of parents that have reallybecome actively empowered in their children's lives.
I would agree with Mr. Tauke that the problems many of thosefamilies face are growing daily. It becomes a much more difficulttask and is not a pat. five-step thing to do. It really takes a lot ofunderstanding.
New fields. not necessarily new, but new to educators. we're talk-ing probably social work. psychology, a lot of other disciplines thatnd to be involved that will take more resources, more training. inorder to really focus on the family unit. There is no more effortthat can be better placed in terms of effecting real change.
Dr. Seutg.n. I think we do have examples beyond Head Start, aswell, from programs such as Parents as Teachers in Missouri. theEducation for Parenthood in Minnesota. I'm not sure I have thenames exactly right, These essentially provide good models of howadults can work in homes with parents and bring parents togetherto work in groups on parenting skills.
It seems to me that it is possible to transfer those modes of serv-ice and provide support of that type for parent, of school age kids.It seems tv me it would be a natural, to try through an extensionof' Head Start or through other community based programs.It seems to me the other side of this issue is what kinds ofchanges are needed in terms of how public schools relate to parentsas far as other aspects of' involvement. I know that the two unpopu-lar things to talk about these days are mandates and money. but itstrikes me that if you look at Head Start and you look at specialeducation, you basically see instances where you have high levelsof involvement of parents and it is a mandate.
If you want to be a Head Start grantee. you have to agree to seri-ous involvement of parents. Similarly. Public Law 93-142, parentshave to sign off on that educational plan. Head Start has resourcesthat are designated to support parent involvement. You have tohave a parent coordinator who is paid full time to work with par-ents; that's unusual in public elenumtary schools that you wouldhave a person dedicated to that function.
So. I am sure, as Barbara said. that Follow Through specific ex-amples will he shortly before you, but I think that we do knowsome things about how to make progress in this area and 1 thinkthat we could do more than we are doing.
Chairman KILDEE, When I taught school. on PTA night. I used towait for the parents of the kids who had problems. They nevershowed up. The parents of' the kids who didn't have problemsshowed up, and I began to realize that's probably why they didn'thave problems, because those parents were really concerned abouttheir kids. It didn't take me long to figure that out.Somehow, if we can reach out to those who aren't really aware oftheir role as parents or aren't that sensitized and bring them inand give them some assistance, they will, like parents in HeadStart, become not only better parents, but actually become bettercitizens of the community. Their involvement in community activi-ties begins through programs like Head Start and Follow Through.I've seen it happen many times.I we help parents become more aware of the needs of their chil-dren, realize their responsibilities and how they can carry outthose responsibilities, we have done a good service. We should notbe paralyzed by the fact that there are probably a number of fami-
37
lies out there. too many. where parents and the family situationare just so defective that under our present resources. we aren'table to do much for them.
There are a lot of borderline families where the parents can behelped in their parenting skills.
Dr. St1411.17- I think, also. to swing this back to the assumptionsof Follow Through. it strikes me in my experience in my local PTAthat the highest rate of turn-out is with those parents of kindergar-ten kids because. they are eager to find out what is going on in theschool.
They art, the ernes who are more motivated. They want to hearwhat the principal has to say. Often, by the time your kid gets tosixth grade. you are. kind of an inner circle or you're out.
It seems to me that public schools need to make a maximumeffort to Mvite and involve parents of kids from the minute theystart school It they aren't welcome at that stage. it's hard to bringthem back in later on. !..0 it seems to me that's the assumption ofFollow Through. Start with those early grade's. work with the par-ents in a positive sense from that point on. I think that is an im-portant lesson that we can pick up on.
Chairman KII.DEF You both mentioned coordination with HeadStart. What kinds of linkage's and activities would this involve at1 he. program lever.'
Wit.i.fae. One thmc I would just piggyback on what Tom hasjust said is that in terms of parents who have become empoweredthrough Ilead Start, to look for a way of actively building a bridgeso that those parents and that involvement can be channeled effec-tively through Follow Through. That would just be one example, of
leioking fOr linkages between the program providers them-selves so that there can he. continuity in terms of the children andthe. families themselves. as well as well as what is happening in thepreigrams
Chairman t here a system of formalized linkages or ac-tivities between I load Start and Follow Through that you areaware of"
Dr. Scut.i.uz. I don't know.Chairman Kii.DF.E. We generally feel that Follow Through should
serve those children who have been involved in Head Start. Can wedo more to formahze some linkage's between those two programs atilk' progrim level*.' If you have any ideas on that. just feel free. tosubmit any of those ideas to us later.
if you don't mind, we would like to be able to maintain contactwith people like- yourselves as we go through this reauthorizationto tap your talents on this, so this will be the beginning.
Dr. Wn.LEa. Thank you.Dr. Sext.I.Tz. Thank you.Chairman Kit.m.a.:. Thank you very much.Our next panel will consist of Dr. Eugene A. Ramp, President of
the National Follow Through Ansociation from Lawrence, Kansas:Dr. Russell Busch. Director of Grant Programs, Richmond CityPublic Schools. Richmond. Virginia: and Dr. Ann Adams, FollowThrough Director. Lenore County School District, Greenwood. Mis-sissippi. who brought along the letters from the children.
We appreciate those. You can ttall the children, too, that theChair fbrmally took note of these letters and they will be, as I saidbefore. part of the official record.
Dr. ADANts. Thank you. I'm sorry they couldn't hear your coin-nwnts.
Chairman KILDEE. Please tell Tinoata Bo Mien. John Brown. La-tasha Carter. LaShante (=olden. LaAndria Ellis. and Robert Moore,thank you.
Dr. ADAMS. Thank you.Chairman lin.nEE. Now. we eau begin in any fashion. Dr. Ramp.
STATEMENTS OF EUGENE .A. KAMP. PH.D., PRESIDENT. NATIONALFOLIAM THROUGH ASSOCIATION: RUSSELL BUSCH. DI-RECTOR OF GRANT PROGRAMS. RICHMOND CITY PUBLH'SCH(H)LS. RICHMOND. VIRGINIA: ANN ADAMS. EMIL POIAAMTHROUGH DIKErrott. LEMORE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT.GREENWOOD. MISSISSIMDr. RAmr. Thank you, very much. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Taukta.
I would like to thank Chairman Kildee for this opportunity to pro-vide testimony oh the reauthorization of the Follow Through Act.
Follow Through is an important program. It is the only Federalprogram specifically designed to bridge the gap between Head Startand the early elementary grades. We provide transitional servicesto help prepare the way fbr at risk children upon entering schooi.
Most school districts are unprepared fbr the problems that thesechildren bring with them. Programs like Chapter 1. although excel-lent programs fbr what they are designed to do, do not help a greatdeal, partly because they are remedial in nature and partly be-cause they only serve to supplement the regular program,whereas Follow Through models are preventive in nature and aredesigned to actually become the regular school program.
The period between Head Start and. say, the 0-iird grade is par-ticularly critical for these kids. Just to suppor, point of view, arecent major research study conducted out ot Ii Hopkins Uni-versity stated. and I will just quote in part:
-By the end of third grade, children are lat., . into achieve-ment trajectories that they follow the rest of their school years.-That is an important thing to understand. This is. in my opinionand I think the opinions of most of us that have worked in thisarea lbr over '20 years. the most critical time for kids that are atrisk of failing. You get them here or you probably don't get themever.
Follow Through. like Head Start, is a comprehensive service de-livery. program. It deals with the whole child. Follow Through isalso intensive. It is a full-day program. even at kindergarten. It in-volves the whole classroom and often the whole school, and some-times it is district wide.
There is also an intensive program of parent involvement. Inbrief, Follow Through tries to impact the child's entire life throughour classroom and parent involvement programs.
Follow Through was originally authorized. in my opinion, tofollow up on Head Start upon entering their early elementarygrades. The reasons for authorizing the program 23 years ago are
42
;19
as compelling today a; they were then. In fact, a recent article onthe front page of The New York Times quoted a well known childdevelopment expert on this subject. I'm quoting:
"'The problems of poor people are not going to be solved bygiving their child one year of preschool, said Edward Zig ler, a pro-fessor a psychology at Yale University and one of Head Start'sfirst administrators. Mr. Zig ler says that as poor children growolder, they continue to need the same comprehensive services andspecial attention that Head Start devotes to them in the beginningbut few schools have the money or staff to provide.-
Mr. Zigter's final comment in that artide :s particularly relevantkir the purpose of this hearing. and I am quoting again: "WhileFederal aid to Head Start has increased over the years, money forFollow Through has dried up-
Every day. Follow Through is 4eeing new and more dramaticproblems coming into our schools and classrooms. The challenges ofserving disadvantaged kids today an, actually far greater than theywere 23 years ago. I can say from first hand experience that wealready have. crack babies in our kindergarten classrooms.
The Newsweek article that Tom mentioned earlier indicated thatthey were coining. Well. I've got news for Newsweek. The crackbabies are already in our sclwols. in some of our schools right now.
The other problem that we are facing that is much worse than itever was before is the work we are trying to do with parents. Mostof the parents of the kids we, are serving are barely more than chil-dren themselves. and we are trying to provide them with an under-standing of not only the educational process but what it is to be aparent.
The task grows geometrically as wt. sit around debating variousways to proceed. It is frustrating to those of us out there doing thisto see the problems and feel we can't really deal with them effec-tively. statistic that we've seen first hand is that over 1300 teen-agers give birth to a child every day. This one surprised me. Morethan forty of those teenagers give birth to their third child everydav of the year.
Po flow Through appropriations toda.. as someone noted earlier,are one-tenth of what they were twenty .Years ago. During thissame period of time. the problems that Follow Through was sup-posed to address have heen steadily increasing and our schools arefinding it increasingly difficult to cope.
Instead of providing quality services to 1.2 million or even120,00n children in hundreds of schools throughout the country, wedirectly support only about 12.500 children in a small number ofdemonstration classrooms at the present time.
Though it is important to preserve this demonstration and train-ing capacity, it is essential that Follow Through he allowed toexpand its ability to serve more children in more schools and withan improved level of service.
We would like to make four recommendations that could. if nec-essary, be implemented with little additional funding. We aretrying to be realistic, but at the same time you need to understandthe scope or the problem.
The first recommendation is that we would like the authoriza-tion of aopropriations not to state such sums as necessary. We've
3
agreed to this language in the past, to allow more flexibility in ne-gotiations but it has also been associated with steady and signifi-cant declines in our appropriation levels, so most of my member-ship said to conmwnt on that and see if there isn't sonw way thatwe could recommend to you that a specific amount be stated foreach year based on what you want Follow Through to do and whatyou think it would cost to do it.
Second. we would like to recomnwnd that Follow Through bemore closely aligned with Head Start. This does not necessarilymean major changes in legislation or administration of the pro-gram. nor does it nwan that our appropriation need be significant-ly increased.
What we would like you to consider is requiring some type offormal communication mechanism between the two programs. Thiscould be as simple as a joint coordinating or planning committee oras complex as asking Head Start to begin using developmentallyappropriate Follow Through models in their programs.
The purpose would he to increase Head Start's awareness ofFollow Through programs and to help them better prepare chil-dren for the transition into the regular school classroom.
I have a sub-recomnwndation under that, that I'd like you to alsothink about. This is more in terms of long-range planning, howev-er. Although it is probably unrealistic to think that our appropria-tion could ever reach that of Ilead Start's, we would like you toconsider eventually bringing Follow Through to within approxi-mately one-tenth of Head Start's funding level, then linking thetwo appropriations together on a percentage basis.
For example, when Head Start gets a two percent increase.Follow Through appropriations automatically increase two percent.We believe that over a ten-year period, we could be serving most, ifnot all. I lead Start graduates as they enter school.
Preliminary calculationsand we've only been working on thisfor a couple of weekslead us to believe. that Follow Throughmodels will cost about one-tentb of what Head Start costs per child.This isn't to suggest that I kad Start is expensive, only to realizethat schools across the country are already providing three to fourthousand dollars per child for Ow average educational program.
The Follow Through add-on to that is probably not going toamount to much. relative to the. average cost per child in school orin Ilead Start, for that matter, so we. believe. that we could prob-ably serve or address the needs of most Head Start kids cominginto schools within a ten-year period.
It will take some gearing up and some strategic planning, withabout ten percent or one-tenth of the Head Start appropriation.whatever it is at the time, if our goal is to ever really try and serveHead Start kids as they are coming out of Head Start and into theschools.
Our third recommendation is that some type of Ibrmal connec-tion between Follow Through. Chapter 1, Chapter 2. Even Start.and other Federal education programs serving at-risk elementarystudents, also be required in this and related authorizations, againtying these programs together, at least with language and prefer-ably with law.
.11
Although these programs approach similar issues in differentways, there is much that can be done through better coordinationof effort and information. At the present time, for example, we arebeing encouraged by the Department of Education to disseminateour model programs through Chapter I, but the Department hasnot even allowed us to participate in their regional meetings.
If language could be developed that would ensure more coopera-tion and communication, all of these programs, including FollowThrough, will benefit. The final recommendation goes back to ourprimary goal or providing increased and improved services to at-risk students without significantly increasing Follow Through's ap-propriation.
After wide-ranging discussions among our membership duringthe past two weeks. there is a growing consensus that some type ofturnkey system needs to be developed so that Follow Through canexpand the number of schools and students servcd.
We suggest that, one. we preserve our current training and dem-onstration capabilities: two, that we begin offering the FollowThrough programs to more new school districts and children on arotating basis. Under this turnkey system. a school or districtwould be invited to implement Follow Through models with theFederal Government providing a specific anwunt of money for alimited amount of tape.
We believe that most Follow Through models could be imple-mented and to some extent. institutionalized, within the school dis-trict to become actually part of that system rather than an add-onto it. within three to five years. The realistic number is probablycloser to five than three and it depends a lot on the type of modelthat we're talking about.
A new school district would know at the start that they have acertain number of years to institute the program and that they willhave to assume full responsibility for it at the end of that time. Bycycling new districts through the program every three to fiveyears, we could begin to serve significantly more children inschools without significantly increasing our appropriation.
At current funding levels. however. it is important that pni un-derstand that we will never begin to approximate serving all oreven most Head Start graduates even with a turnkey type system.
We have not worked out all of the details of this plan. but webelieve that it could be a workable solution to what many of us inthe program have long believed to be a serious problem. Everyonewants to provide more effective services to more at-risk children,but in our current mode, we are finding it difficult to interest newschools in adopting effective educational programs without some fi-nancial support.
The turnkey system would provide an incentive, seed money, ifyou will, that could ultimately lead to real school reform. That'swhat we are about. We are not tweaking at the edges of a systemor fine tuning an already failed system. We're talking about majorsystem change.
By putting a limit on the time and money a school district has toadopt our models, we will be able to serve many more childrenover the long run and implement our models in more schools thanwe can under present conditions. By doing so, we may be much
42
more effective in meeting the goals set out for us in our originalauthorization 23 years ago.
Many other possible recommendations have been discussedamong our members, but we have selected these because we believethey are achievable. affordable and could result in greater serviceto more kids.
If you believe that these or other recommendations have merit.we would be pleased to provide whatever technical assistance youand the professional staff members might desire in further develop-ing and improving upon our plans.
Thank you.[The prepared statenwnt of Eugene A. Ramp. Ph.D.. follows:I
t;
It S kar4. 41,04 1
4.1pmcorst4w.
43
Nationai Follok% Through Assiwiatiou
i'141 t'1,1t! ti Si ill N1 Nt of I 1.4 .1 %1 t(IP Pt, itPi t,/thrril 44111,11.11 I idiot* throtigh ssii ,alon
China/ 21 1000
019 14 itstfi As! the Vsitt.11,.1 L tlftin lti 41, i.tti.iii I sit. .II hi" to thank6.1.1 bd.h i t..i tin ;it, 0.111011 241 p 1 ttatt: 1t511/111//15 till Olt' reattlhol 1,,J1 ;r1 ,.1
it. t 1,floti, I Irmitg/, 4t f 111. 2.11 %Ian t ittfliA11 tit tn1Tt t', tmi1111114, 1 111 1 thu ilpi .11 11111 I 4.1.1/ , I ` 1 1. nl,t. trt .111 L.1114111 is
Mt' at attritm and qui upclici,4 .4.% fin link' a Ph t 1/1 4/v4 4'14 411fIlln1.11 Alt!hilt! 11,1. 11.4.10 21 qt. (11. t Ittst sllt tli Is-til'uts and a tat tilts appt,intnit.tit in thv
t1, hlwvIt i4 !item Ittrutt 14 .11 1 isu %sit 4 It is,uts,is ! .1E11 ,t11.11 tb,. iit
(ark(' ubil, tor st I ti, .101,0.11.11, ;104 tt 1.11. .1 t 1/14111Din: .11
111. 1,I4 1 sift of hs.is NI, lust It. tilt 1/1 lit it I Alt 1t5 lit. nigh 1,4gt.4th splits'I 0/ 1 11 1. 2 ..1/1 111 1 Of !flk. \ MI. 11411 f.t 4,1. t,$ti,it
.1 .1 111,14 I lit +,1111 1`,11il 1 1-,. iiAtiti .11 tun 1110.114 1 lin 1 tit iii,
I itirlftlin ttiiii
s ,1 1:1,$4341t 1.1 :1.10r WV, .{10! 1. ut 1.c1 .1114.11
114 .t11 .1;11 II 1 11 tn1./.'s pi tit it t'dm 41n,t1.11 Moult 14. t-ina.01 ditrtos utth 1 imAdAtItt I 11.10,-1 I 1 t 1 sh44f4 his ist Itt.ir 51.1,11v
..!. !hi ts 1.111411 V' I 10111 si IN Fl 1.""/ 011,rsi. 1 14%01.'4M-I .001( Is wt. 1 1 11, 11.1111tt. 11, d 11i Ittl'4t'l t'Ll 114 11 S. alt 111 thv tvtivl .411,.4.1kh I in Iliv 1., dlitll Itt uttin 1,1/1.11 1 1t 64 1>tsolut '1 11411111 t tt.t' It hIlt tIlI. " la ttgs' it /IA, Itt.itt,i. 1..1 410 Hu Ifs MIlt11.11t 4 till ctill...11.11.11 r; 4, in 4.-1111.14:flout the ,tuttl% .4h,, I tit ,,tsgh thtt..t hit wt., it a. J nt.th,4 fvklvv.41
tot .4 lilt DI 111 l'Itli 4111.11 "WM, 11.114 t. lii, itt 11..,t10 V.111. Alit .11 .11hit tIct tILrt11 th dv4 mks %vit. hot ut iii flit I .464.
h4 .1114 I is, !! tttit. Alit 1,11 pf tl 1 t 1.;prot in I!In tinji .it h4 1114 10s, .1 ill I 1.1.0.1,01111% And t 14 ION Ji 1.11, u.s t tnittlf
1 .1!./1.. tir.L1441 u tstinp.. .111), liii J iiuiiiIII. hit 11141 t if 'pit h tti tit. sIk1514 it 1th 41 .51., Itttlt Iti 1/ A 0114041c fill il,tt
111,, J11.111.12 ii .11.1.; 4/11 I 1,104 VII 41 lit f 111111. L2 Ina 111, i 1.1.41 ',Ili, iii 11.11It, ;..iit is 1 /Hi t it tj1Lit 11 III .1111 I 21'11t I Aim igtattis It it .dsn tsiwt1ns gkt th. trat...sts.sh h sl/1 1 4C.,1 ti t 4.. tin u vgii!.tr si tramn.m,nt.1 11114U itIsf.t. I..; 4 it,g M141 It..tt hvt. iii thr. st is tzttnt ntatit WI I It.1,1
1.1t t ATV 111.11111411h t 1 &Int situ I,.tItim rra at Ili Ilir "14,, .ii),1 p1.5th v stl,,u..Istiutstheld! It Art 1.1 14. 11.1"1, uIi.I1h,iliiititi g thutiitiIi tn. gym;.bI.tJ. /1/ s,111 1.1 .t17. I 1 ill,: fi ,,4 AS S., .1
filtill Alls ..tr.11 0 0".0 f ..tiipit Ii issis 10 lith l'%t hAOL.01,
elt 14 Cs .1110.1s1 ilis,.hsl 1 7 . . i t ! I, Ifs sli, 11,1 ft .10,1 ii 1.11tot 11 .1 t tti. ii. 114
,111it 4. tn. Is It, 1s .1 ii ilidd Is/t Atli qi
i ills "ugh ft.f O..- r. hi, t,s, , tIrtst; t.e ti:+..ti,tivin .11t111..111,,t1 (vitt tils I t shj. in tIu,sIIh, pi t t has U smtntl. Alit its t .1 st ''iiitii, v ham utlh .41.1h tv,tot .11 van, atintt ittt am% I or
t.iiiiiii lIt. oi I swIlom. I hi 15 itt it tahdatt tl t u.ttipla; it andlit illit'1 flit I It'imituth III Ii,1111 1,Issvil1111.111I4It lit WO. Parni. largvh
ham...Ion at hustinunt ft-4 data !t ut. neprvullt".tht. lartet.st int tt holt ofiahdatt ott tit ; anit ft dt tat titawr intlivvitth nt sttith tinthis tell I. tfw 11, pat tmcnt t;quiltt gains in wailing math andlangtiago: arts lit hit-it-mem sii,,ss lit ',Irk; 14 ont.%! I broutth prinechstutlict1 I. iii uw 1hr; l 414f.s.1Tig m pat rut! Int itivelltlent Iii Aulf uthertmIt. II 11.I5 1, Mild 11141 11115 pi am had 111101.1111, iii part.nt'''lit nictit it, O is 1 Fi1.10.1genWpif and upt.ration- than JO311% I. it II 2t..2.1 1 pi. Itti am. %twit, rl
BEST COPY AVAILABLF
,1
44
SUNNIgnPnitiCa. int tturnan Rrisintrt 4'ssft-hi-miry 21, 1,1,00
tir. RampPagr
This program sets es as an tants:arum nation:at f irst tit 1. tr s.-tIcs %%A c.II/C.ITTI Malprograms pi as I14 4's And peeli, ,tile /n.ettegs 1/mt ,.en bs-Ip me rvlect atic , .0
children fact in out *A ft.b I ittlists I hti.nlet ts itosnotivd 14, ottyr natnatial thrmonstra.Um and dissmtnatuan nt the programs developed under Its ansptecs It atsit wrves as a
Atonal tab, olwranng ii, aissroom Ai toss Ow manor, y rot c thisnatnin u an Atonal tar Inst. thy I.ohlou I hr ough pr a Train it ts an vstrainalinart rtanonalresource that ran preq-idc the mttch needed transmit-nal sem-tics I.envern t tract St,3t.t andthe rcgtilar systcm
In spin. cat I tu important %tot k and tinpi.5514. ,44 I the [spa 211 t ars thetlt.m Ihi argh pr...grarn has esper ten 1'41 scrums detel tot-alum in funding and semu c
capahtlin the ,mgin.d nuisli ri ot 1,4 Moss through %sm. to hilt...A.up on I lead Martchtldren st hen iho rntrrcd the carh rIvnit.ntars. gratbes As /trait Start funding has tnereased, I 41!1,1%% Ihrough arrri.riattons have dvureased from a high 01 mon! than $'11mithon in I int to a tittle ncer S millson In loon !hiring this nrtn. thy pn +Mons ot atrisk bast. gra assn /navy mania MS And 4.11111pkt Atityrit alcrtacittarsa haat') It As da signast for a Siss lett th.at ant Iongyr cysts rtmow 11)1 Singh an hclp brings, hoofs ii ihn 2 1 st i it pi -1 a t tunas: 1 ht. u1.ziititt s oh this sok, animate(' nevatto des ada. ash( Ow, ta allou thy pi 1 '0 am to Win nth' lit 44101,4'31r tbS'. Is%
I1u.aogh I,, Ja II aa iota that it s5 si, aintaluch aplahha al an(l 1,1 11.11 el! In
rhc "st.vv1 lotion Through
oll,as tit nati i tha oath 1, di, al pi ow am sp,, 0, sawn at to ha talgy the gap bymacs) I tcad start and the ear Is deal tentai y gt I he transit!, mal %LI4 tics pa n
olloo. Slit oiagb Ii, lp la, pi (TAU' thc %as lot at iisk child/ yn upon ontyairtg id ha sat Mosthal, al &ST! I. ts arc ntiptcpat ash to dcal Ott:, tit, hi utth thcsy stud, tits t haptct I is not
at a Oh% ti ail this ;vaid Iv, .1.1sa- it is a prograni that saipplaatnents thcI cgulal si ha a. al ptogrant. sa het a as l'a aIla au !hi. aagh is pa et, ntnt and lie, s ttn, s thy it gad.,sa hoot in-ogiani knou host ran. at diva tranvia-am pall. tat ts ft a Ti1 more than seat s
cspo wrrs haat many ettli..nton i es. al, hcrs. has,: nothinui st ith the 1 ollml hi , ri,Nnityt, art: also beginning ha lit it 011 the rrsstiktn
rhere isj,...,sehin,,,tikun ft, fht414. tbar , bildrert make tqs tratt.ttr,nflit! pure u b,ut l tnipiu ,rtr, ts ath pre ?1,1 and ban;tastrretz u e thrnk it hkell tbat rile a. ,rdorric thilia lane} .sPrrill'M h)tht,f,f I Milli 0-1/ ci tempters arc pe,,14.'tatii II, adjustment
Ahlu Ill t nd pcifferKt '1 under Owl menf that l',439 Pi III !bell fif swrssi bending tn. tbe cud the gm d grade. ,ittidren ats. !awn bed
rvt,r Pro orient trlith't te,P1/ c tki P.e1 oft the pro, e /blt c, head treirsI Iles ander f inn, isle PrsSi
a Want I ha on gh iikc !kat! Start as a arraprchcrasia c 4,1' sit In s'I-1 541. 'gram It attempts t, deal %loth the whole , hild iii. hid1ng 110.1Fies tional rnyalia alcnial Ittat IN. Mal
,e *al Mid iti,c 45 that ireff 04.11, s' .1 ,Ildt1 S jl telAtI1 ant/ tit t s'I, elI I Often,.I ITT-etigh intrnsavt. In its am,' a :a, ci i :ng at risk Infarct, It is a InIt (Loapi a 11 .of IstiltItTgAllets It tits cation: lass, Otani an] TI1C 441114l' hool utmans en5I4111 VS In St1ITIt CAM'S t ntf r 1. .01 air hi'1ng InIVIOntenTrif diStrtr111tIt.!here is also an int1MSI c pt P., ; ni. '1st' par cnts in tht dut.anon of their t Mat en atvet cl I's,1101% 1111, mgh sac !hi' goat IS T., MAC /Ca, ii, ng a t us i,c, ti ae IT1TI% an the ha ann'and /Is" pst In tar let It,: tr a to mina. t tIlt I halal s nine Mc through (nit 11.455mat ain and pancnt int, an orient programs
41a 1ha a aogh *1 J ai 1/11I/011/,t Se ta ah..aaa Sei, e,11 / la ad *slant pa...school hildrel)upon vim-ring tha varly ykrnernar, gradvs I he f 4 t, If ili, factagrani anth,analatior,
*CO, aga al tompellIng nada. as OW% %S., 1, atiall A it rut II cait pagk arm Ic inOw eu F.,' 4. Time* chruars 14. I "hi, stata-d
trifirreF.ielgtill'S '.114'rir,It 4' b111 ,41'",!4 l'1 htif hi PIA' t prragritin. u-itbhttle futlerre.up run. r the I irrldrinr n.. 1* s, tantnrt rmhat rh. flit r!,
-eslit %link /Mid Strati mr al, man) ti,thippn mitt; 3. attitude tint andschresl, their at-acietutc. gains Snit i off u rthrn serrral ,vn-trs Atudies fintact
Irt sting xuircv IN meal/emu 14.'1407M:114 di compare./ troth poor h/drrnu h.. aid not attend Item/ Ctart (Pre 3fri..11and %twit- forma' that Ileac/start thrirlivn ii on nu.n. irkel thrum oiuutle I bohlreri to he held huck,to in. 1qm-ea' rn cpat rat 1.(Pic,ity 'hi ,prywriiPi4 attii Ph A WI' 1."14 i 'n %tat:clan/tzed tr.r,tx
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
45
PIK nIt !flint..., ft, onti di` 11-.3e1t3*
lehettar1 21. 14041 !taw. 1
3 It. 44.44144. \ et, 3,,k rl,r,, .11 11.4 it' 41 111 of I It 101.14 3 set II .,,4;.! 3..1.t't, 111 t
1141/ 1/1 11/t' 5111,34 4 1
,44., 444 tr 44433 (14 he AI WI et, 141 4)14141A4 !brit
fdarerr t V.'44a peen ,.11.1 t 4114 atil /Vier, prtoe,./1- II! psi bidfit I ith' I 1111.14?? 4171,1 ,t ,.tart 7)414 .4,11),1411,1r,thn,. tt,
54$1. /1441 .4. 1.444,4 4 in/. . I 1,1.1 Owl I I 111111744' 14 the4.1"4. . w. i ,,4411. rat att.-FM...Ft ftwt 1 art
t., 11,1 141:1011://ik. hit feld 4, IN, Ic /4, t. 44 .ta1., rft 1 hic them
tf r'3eItt 3 LI/ 11 .1/131114 117 II,Vt 301 ttl,If t e It 1.1, t 34, On, ft, .41,14.:
bd.' 1. 10'.0/ .1rd F. if. ..441%:ant bets tits t ,1 47 [fa, al 5 4rr,;44.1
1.41xb. a for, 'parr/ 1,3 r irte,,f f/ttri 4I4/I e 4417 34 ea 354.
/". 414 \.'74 34441.' rm., 3 4.h4 4,at t 1.4.41t
44. 1 h. ps ,1,7111Q1.1,31. 31.1111, i 1 tf 11;I 44,4ht "1,1,1ir4s 4' 44 311 54 1 ittli ,01151i
41, /4 31,11 In V.111 4114..444 41 5,4, 14 4444. 4.4t ,44 34104,%:34 u ,33,, ;11 e;1' 444 "3'1,11 0,1 '131rr.,30; 3 ri44 ft? ..r it., Ir. 41,1,1,141' 41' 131 44 14,14.414 447 It r44'444'144
de, 444 4.414 :I sto it 7, 14.441..4 11e11113,. h Au, I 1 4/ 1,1,1 111411t:
Vtil/e 4113 41; it.t 31,414 3,0 tf 1,, I 1 43,4* 414444. %%t. -41 .014 31131/1714; II, 1,
in 14 101 .4as t1..444.t. 444 A 144.1444% I 4,0 14.14 k 3141% 13.44. %.4 .43 51 4"1: II, "' t"") "14"t11,1,11.,11t )11 4.'14 .1, 4 4111111,3. 1111 ,,44- 444 11.4 4144 7kI I 14.11ft (6;,:t 01 S4 It ''14; Ott' itti.tft
241 44 .44 .13., r 411' 141 01111,114.,, 7.1 4334' 34,04101S lt 5*4.41444411 5.144 4t, 14441.04
.01 411.111 koIt 11.-.111.11 1,444 ill), I let' 111.411".1, 01 411144411111
shis. Ate Istt,ilts 114 4 414,-11. III 141 t h41.14 I,, 7t44.444,y3tt. 444.+04 i//e 4. 1014 let th it
,4%t 4 3 ti 4,117 1g1.1 ,..404 Ill, 1li 34.1. 1 4.4 $ 414% Mt) (ILO 11101 441 .441
0.4, 0 010,1.111,14S. S 1,1 t )4,1 5. .11 141111r1,4 il I., I 4.41 44.111174h
344,411 7,5 th, L., 74 41.41 3111.,:41, 11 .5 41.". 1, 1 11011, 1431 ih, i eh ,A,11 It. ,n..let; 4144 4114 .41I1' .4341..44
What 'Qv IL's,. 7 r.tritt-,1 rnot 11.111m Iliroogh
3,3! 1), 7141 4.4.44.4. /..44 /444 It., .4 4,44.4. 4.7 th
34..,41 (r4)44., 141 44tr- 7; e 444I)14171.11 ..1 fin :14. 41 31113/4,1 1,i1/1 tsst:, I 11 6{1, 111 45
1,1 Rill a' .14.1t) 11 OM stattItt ti 311, kin 43.4 414.14 M.4414,41341, ,t1 lb,."Ilk t 14414tt 4444414 t I Iti thc 1,1 4. .01,1 431.14 1h.1,1 11,11 '41 1144,014"1" Se /al
1111,11/11 lit tder 3 ICJ, .40 Of i .43, 3,444444. t4.44 th.444 43 413 iltt'st /44,444 .11, ,i101I,41171 I .3 J14,0110 r/. 111,11111' sils1 4,45 WC 1. its nt 114.41 .431111131.1/1).11, IN 1 11
11;11114,11 llthf.' 71 hal t. flo hi..t11/1, .11,3 the r.4 I IS 11111104ft 31411 IT 51 4-14 .4 414 1114.7
\lot short '4444 th1111 143 4411 4 344/431414 404.)4 4 34(44.7% 1" 131111.; Anti ..rth 44414. 1.J? cut. .1144)
111111,1 n't .1 tuf,h, .1 11%31114 14141111 .1 dAos 4, .21:1,41)44 1711 13144, It, Itt,. Imst20 ;tot mor, 434.471 444 34. 41t 4,3 Ow 1.44. 41 itt 1311.. Art' 1.11110101 Ii/* 4,4101.114A 131.11 An I 311.111 :It a .4 31.11V VWCI In% !Ill 4) ,51131 41t41g. In ,ttli:1.'1111 .4t1.1 0111 ,i'l e'S 14,1 111 .4 4 4,3.11 4%;33 t4,. 4.4 HA, .,.. inn'', 744
At3)ttth4,4tt
Din 141.1 .11 in 1.33.4% 130 4 41.414 'ii 1).0 .13441 I4',11 411 t %V/ 14 44^4 risk fj,
toes that Irk 14..t. tin - 11;101 11 1..1%11,4 .11 1144 111;; 14111t 4411.4 411 Lat I foe 111,.
me ut stilt 1.it 1,44. 13103 ,t tit 3ut.,1n t ime; tachti t 14 It , luta int lode hthIrcit 111.474laimlit's hying 14ttoss the post en. 15 t, nt4tt. Ii 13111.114.11 110114 st. Oft 4.04 pm volt, !Odom stt14,... moilter. hake {464 *1.111141 71,1 high S1114 .-411 .01143 / 3111,114:11 $4111154:
3411117.11$ 17,1 3 11)4h434 3:4 st .14, 11 .41," 014 44. 111.4 Olt' 1144/1,11, t of lh41434 44 444
these resk r At'Ql W* 'Rill 1)4' co, rea.e...; .44,103..47)13% otrr the nest .'s se.tts
/1.1t1fig Me 31 4,1 2.11. hAst 1, .0 II, 41 a 43141 -thou) ith 414.4.411,1 Callt 31;34111.4.1
1iange.44141 11. ,4% 74, mak. ti harptit k 1c.11 twit it. hat te, tit e s. 34"A.. ate Aialb tut 38. 6.4%4' 3..liftt.d $4.31.11 11143, , I, n her. (qt.. at441 ft the th..11.4- 54310.4
leatkis th. lb.'s,. Ars. not lust tvss..ns ft atnt 4! It) 3 ollou fltrough It msideralge Nutsl43 (4 lt11ur1ip.47 Jr% t dot a14) m,41 4e5e.01 14 34j 14.4441V (1441 717t14.1 Of ate th,g 4.% h.11C
!earned in I 011. ' 3 hr.ugh and v41)4314.1 mi,st of the sent '.5544e3 ptattit es that hat,: hemdrveh Ted
We linosv.1.4- cArnple. that elltrctivt- UtitStit haw A 1.,44tltl' And that OUT AI177 tustors And values peoftunntis Affect student outcomes U. have Iejetwti that
inr tfs to ttr most effet-rit-e 01(1 nerd 74. *Teeth. goats 3nd tthlevut es And that dtv.a.Otoold cstAblishi'd xith bri.Att lumi atut CLMIFTIUt1311 ;111ttt3'Cfn71n1 3t3 t3iIfl sn. ILI.ran inCrt'asr rtmintittiwnt tto. the pit.grattt mut to the schoo1 11.4- haw !ranted that sut -1:culut tt Its have a high degree of fix uttmAn. tn henaven att spruAl sshtvol isr.qtrArns
41,w m 4u-der It, at 4114) ,Otifstoit .1thi tnfli% I !hat Can rhsemit the etituatum
BEST COPY WHARF
46
Sift% intuntIte Ott kflutt.111 itt.taitsri et.alwn.aq. 21, t.t90
Dr. RampPage 4
1114 t t tit fit 4. h.., 4. ht, .1 s,1,41tPtt .111! ..f rho crit int 71% 711 111137,1,16 tit,,1t UP W., this 1, Ad to A. nt And Aliihnfl PIp lip tip tot tamirotIt% 4' 134 th.1, /IN ti ittt' 131, itt1t h gins tit tratoseit!, let rtt.. ht. t thiough
thod itielli eft, . s, PTO. Its 411111(4. 3'3311131101J {1, gunk- n ogiitts pram, V.. 1 I t i f Ittt.'% NJ% p ft 4,1/14 ift.19 rohy
'414 p h.14 t alt, kat pn,t ,t lin .thout ViTt`ithe eat liw-rs Illvi it.nd (1st- intr,Ittt,trtaith,,,t At4.11,13,131,41, df.14 art aitiiroptratv tor thy iot!, burnt; taught oh: 1tIr 1-4.1111.11111
4Iefll 111.1, ,11111/ft'st Iltis, tehmhoth in, twk ipidisittital.AA systt Ihs 1 ihtf,1 Of /1141,1cip 3111114: VTOL till 1' ttit iii Inste 31111111.111% 171111 t 4'14fit 1, ii h ps
}Ma p 14.11 4, 1 1/13,01111/V 3,141, Illit ter, f nutg Ttrlti tiq thilt thd.-ott. Ihi pt qt. tittli-hilitrp'n'st't tut ilii:dgeif tts ICArtttnt: ii tii phi- Mort teat tut% take% plat...
ho t-spi ct vier% 11.14k-11114, Cult AtItltnegh 3/ 4' t/i1./14 Art- i .1 thenit..a..atzt. the,. soht ii thvit tittti-iIs I tth M 11111,00 141,14 hers art. iteottli IT 31j)Cti inpt ts .1 11..,h t.t.t.ctlahoos to.ti-titt, rrt.tro atc thi-rtt hi dthivii. thvir htt;,hest1: 0 U... trt h, i PP I, 14 1,id3r Pit dt13, t., sluilons 31131114111t1C 14.,11111' / 4'1n,P. t Ili f..i ilt 40,4 h.., , xt.11,111 W1111060 1111 !Inv ot
..r:1 411..,1 h.rfl tJ, U. .3:1,1. rt tormam 311.1 pi ft, 111 IL I tt141t ii 114, ,h fl4:1141.411,111
! A vik.t tIP e. .41141111 tvaitt.e.liiit s
p. th,o j, .1,f, irsti.titt 0'0? ,111, pp titlhrt c f ft f. I, .1r,t ..lht I *oil. kti..3 0141 !It t' lie
ri.Iff 1..1 5, P.M 1111111i,', slit 111 itck tit, fit ft,31 35311 h., if 1, f Mem,111,11, 1115114h tf s,li ,t1 pi hi ap ttaalthst, at ,,,1t-ftt,t stamisr.15.
11341 It'. tl 1,1 L:t 1113 /t1 ttftit p11,-,p1 t,, P tb Stup,k,ur..,plut J. hi. Phu-% 11:1111t 'ft 4'3, Op -lc fit through 'i,,zpp. It OL V.Atif hwt crtn nt AMA
otit41 lit it., m1 st 4 IL.A1 ohlwt the skill', ot thh.1,h,t, It pc
IS ll-1 i 11..1'01 pist h, kihm ii h3T ft. 1,t's1 Mir p.liip lbs 11143.14.11/1'.4 t1 1V, I 11.41 t 11) r. nt.0 It' 1.1116,14.1,1411t14 pit.. tt hi, All. ,to tlt
!Iat).4, .1 id 1,,t It, him.; It Au liti oq.ci th,,t env, ft Vt. Clint, aiiilaatthsfig,' pc.1,^,,, I, t)Ing tts Pis: ts all 41. th, Nano: thoig, oi alth It nt iat
.,op hi hash It IN.. t, ,,...st ,,, h,,,,that Oh., to t. p dot .111.M.1; t ittitipt 1, piri iS m orich.rshohtlotz that tht: nt-it pa% iork1, I 01.ln 4 411 t3111,..3411.1 '13 Of th.tt t.h.ti t4 111,4 dotty !top ts t.5.5.irdp Prong. hut thAtst., pp pp,..s 1.4 A 14 Ttrr ,pp. I hutigt. AdInsippsn Ati% t Nal ti'AL1,1,tuip atm! &heart, t
11, it di., t Is .011 Phi h.11, htit ati unilostandtnt; id pn,Igs And Annthii,t,),In 1,.i it I phsompmj! !Ling e.1,0p. sIrppt,r1 Nt, n. tit attiblum to the oh
/11 41114, f 1 h JR It -1/1/ft,t; Anti twi tiMs asstLince, moral tipplAttri 1.4 s'sken1131 I, t/t If t vvIth hang.' mdm Ani, t flAt h'41-ned t NM/4C
A hitn, oc litirkt», 1,!Att., And instiloil, m417140.41 ho..)1.1.0 f, toky tr, thy, i ht it utsteni Pc At atldriiog Litt!,1.11 t trt114. ,tt, 4, Ili Mt( ROI% ca ppp hort 0 hint;
11.6! 1111,33 Is 111, 3 ..ospft t rriqCss l rtoi an us tor Out t, p,f,p,.pr Milli Of frt's licat di/l ,el: 011 1 Om 11, Is i't
.1 '9i t . t,s I.. tint el dip Owp t ss rat h.ph,o cps t. And our c.o, lip c ypi stIL D 1.0.1.1Auti Appvt 1.1141t1
Pr: .101101141 /t1 kilt P hat it hat th-cd hi. it, trip. ph, istt.oiha, also h-4t-nekt u.tt it, at lhota effectise strategics for producing
Chang(' t't kip, 0-1.111 511) t 1141, 40114d t 44t Mtt1111/10131/1",311t.11/1 .Itt.lfsfit 11 it; Olt /44144 .141110.1, it it et. 1AL thAtgtil dot tinkilli'd A
inet th.it et P5 ohl,,,rtat.t It. 3.11f.' .1 tt11,131 rt.,11 Of Jtit detctilt, win Iv tit in, di,.tre, t Jrld tht 1 I lit itugh tp, up., a I tit hirmat plan tit 4444 cr. slit .old ht. sot/pi gird
tithir mat .1.,Thisit's that ps-, mum' inses Ap sum And thalogot. among the 1,,trp,tp,intskr, py that it ts Itiltur 1,1 alti.mpt t haogt oil imat. ts ,,mrdt firh.Pomp: A Lulng )tvin it tu It Nowt: to pc odut t att. ripe it shangt. help thctiitttrcn st-IThctitt I otttitt. throtit,th "tatter ti-rrt change% arc uSteally in order, and
th.". it i TM likt 1,t4. or ff it it (LIM' ippp p Loge scAle Wr also knots, however, thathatige shnittd he t Fled out In mm.ett tnArtigcahtc mvps, so that the participants can cat.
ps'nic nit sus tvss and see results that hcip to mottvatt. dicm as the process continuesAnil fin.ttly, m hive learned that ti ts tintionant ft. attnic patrictpants to totontvcr to Pulpsoh pt I igt unprost ment rathcr that, chetah uhn shah tic irtsvfned
Response To TN. Departnient's Budget Justification
i.uht Asti like to resplind brttily t.* the poems made thc I krartnicot of fducattonin thew hottget titttft am en for Follow rhrough f -7,19! Rudjvr Prfinntat -on page C.132,orwhi t heir it hnftr.r einem. Ifinv),IPPI. I I tL101)
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
47
Suben maguey On I Il1111.111 RC...HM(1X%Februarv 2 1, 1490
Dr. RampPage 5
1 triat. the% stale that Voftrrai WA' 04`,11.0ested fr.r dt"ri Thriittsb in VP)/ Ahhoughappointing. tht ['ATM° :Pt 810 mirprme to Armin,. ;81 rollow rhriulgh Nem th4 departnulit%Lite% 1114 The Puw, i,hyt rit ef reth pi...gram bat 41.411 Mel n, mu opinion OAthr haul: ohleetnes Of the holftwe flu alukth mignon hove, for the mitst part neVer Preenaddressed. Ad the pi o.ent r,11,,, through fund% tftretity mirrort only 12.63438hildrcn according to Ow department's butfgki %liniment 1.01lina lbrough minro.ca
141 he athlres.ung the twetk% of at ro.k hthfren tn tht. suntry, nonthering on the tam ad1h %. tlep.irttnent then %tau 01 that Outstanding 'width fit,. ear& 4. htlarbr 84,1
edrit arum hal 40 Nen ifeieh pied, relinc./. .48.1.111,V4?3ish UV./ fa ,2Y1 L'ar5 this tone. antif tt, e Apprea....th' !heti 0, know.). dkung our atuhatandtng model%
Hu- itott ..4.8tentent, tit .14tleyr VaintInott tflciirn 11.4.8.
iliiptiirr Than, lin ruxh pr.14% 1.. anr/r tin a Ott OWLS' d cifter the h777flna3i, sr; sr/
Fs rill rre Tbn 'ugh 414 %Wel.% ith pn.3:4a141,"41. trhtt 31/1. NA/In-MI I latistant !sauf
N1.1 k hic tta'ft't tie the t14°11 ttt t1U1 I. n IA 43 %,INIe I. 01,04. heanagh
inin.h81 In faa f II )111'11 4.111 01414. I It It. 111.41 ih '.'.I 17. thu I 111,114414 414411.st I OIL ITT
I hr.,ugh lat , t% In, Ate.% tha .4, 14 MII1f It./turk. And el, mit in,hith apan k
fe% tor par ha 113,41 pi ehletti to T.13 it f 3,8.071 41 4' 1, 316 1.3 11131* / 4118.8/I Olt% TI,IT t188
I 11141 /2 1 r 'ft.,. I !trough urt e 4,8134148,4. 1811111/1, 43. Illf Pt 114 1.0 3 1,1,;,,, .1
Illa la .4 Oadal 14' 14,01341183 la II 1...30,u, . it 41,.. t.I. 11 188 do 544
ILT 17..tit ,,3 the 11154 :Is 3'tt,1)4t )titifIc .114411 I Ii 111 I, 48811.81 e
Edift ,f1f..11,8i 10,14188.1 f8 .4 ba,if tt :81 s'.11 ,'Ettlefillart X?/./4.1 44488 It 0.11181441' f ON
I .814 ICJ 111/1 10114'0' ( ,ther.ter I Kniiit 18 1..14 If ell 1101 4441414.4 I 11,pfet State h Oa'
I 31..344 r 1 411411 h.1341% 8 ..' rt48,4t 3111, 1,811111 411 tnport.iilt and Al iii, iS lll1'.iog 44 %Isl. %NW; Ill FlIa'e 14 Ile t3!88,1,11f progt.inPa. et, t'la I'. ft 1814 rollou Uhl .144.:11
883.1 el Idasetehl Ina; In I ,r,,),,j ..11,01/1/T: tido 3.833. .44 rtuattnih rips, 3111 810 ,..f11 /Tad
.11 It .411 ''I'll.1l 131. 88 ,114411. 48. I I .18 ef dern,4 to ft TIT 1.41 f 0:48341)0;i .414 ftt %IL f
11,' 811,811. III..11 te Ott f t , Iti 08111 .04 34432488.'. 3 ht. ssizts
tuic,448.131.11)....131, thr. 14,83a1 .811..01 Now .3111 t 11.11,ter I 4 II/ I
aa ,1% tl31 .14 1),,,mgh pt, 3,,-41 )111,1" 1,4 i 1,011331. 118438i /I 41 I. 4i3488111) al It. 11 opt. e I
411,1 .% riohlein h.r5 wilt Identitleat 114 I .11) 441.4.413% 111,4i ,1 e./ an 4:Iat II 5.188,8 't
T 3.1%10011r1 18, 1'. t 811/3414111,8111,81 T 3...3.1, 3 f 118 Ittl hit t1 180 .11%
f 8.811, 1 4114 Ille tI 1.4,481,1n 11,..o. In 8) 5, 8%,I It 88 .8 8. 4; 180 ti 11.43811 I Iffht Itt tT/ RICO tIT aid tf Itil ,!, Oh t .884 13tt ft ,6 .1.1t1,11, t.eptcl I lint%
I1t 4' 8. T / lh.lf I+ .Itt 5. , stub,. ir r ts. 14 lir A4mr.111 itr rss
11 354 r /II:Orr-Ts %lib 11101 t Pa. lir 1.45 t I.., ath tits t I ,s11,.n tst i.tri.h t4.1, It 81 .0844
41 a' 8838 icd Ito n.411 tin , 0.1 .0 th.tat .18I8
t 514r41, 51Is 1f1 th.it i 11.111111 2 `1,114' % 0.0 IWO, 1 8.8110 34 415, .1 t t81154Olt ttfllt 4 h.srtr. I f and.. 113% 11 thr I.., .r1 sr 1s. .itmt sr Owl t.atsS, tts.sr, sst,r;lt I 011,15 orrOs s4os41.1 48.51414 %.1,1s1s,sts...1k t t, 81 .8. 1 2 418-1.
.41 t. If VI, 413% 48183til al 1,0- ,iitiottia 10 .0. i a i.e 11..0 43,, 8.0 1, yilit ng,.ing 114"18 Is, t.port all the 4 11111 ittlik At 1' 4fIS4 /Ho., 3 III 8,480 .88,8, ITT ,81
1.111188 I., III, "Mt /.1140,811. 341,1 Nil of ft,. st hool ts t It t5 t's,st
tt 1.15 ts, 111 t ls.opt, 11111tl8. It tf Ilit., It 384. 01 .81 111 It, 5
311 tt' 411,41,18S, It .3 I eL,oat fIl...4431 345, f141.4l, a e II .e.I.1t a,c i I
.done stlyt hart' sr 1/114' ..11451.111.8l4,3: tss...t. Is No ;at 1% tsrldtr.rs .111.11I
31.84331 41 N. 4 1. k 11.15 a 1/, 1181811 in 14155;11118..11.81$ thr sst Its it hrIts 11.3,,I ill Ow tsstsist. If !halt 51 48 t' Its h81% ,148.4 mItt,ifs' 4 11.1111. I Jtuf 4 h.q.!, 2
384. .1,115 1141 All 0111, I. III .111ple 14 8.,.1 king toth .0 8 od, i31t1,11,.tt
Kr( ilititriciiilition 1 or 1444141 1iorit44448
I ts.4 I I I t 4.1801 .1111(4141..11W71, I. 081.i. 1431 .1 TTIt tt 831, T TT, t, ;If T ...I ft,. MT; II,. 1,/lIt flit VI 881134 tll 111.88 3 . I III .1,411 ,08.18 t' 1.4, 3%, %
/S/a 4flal TAU St 4111.14113: II tit, t'AsItI8311 13,3388 4138 II, I .38.' '98.4, Ail
of in tiling 88,184184 4.8% ft, 1 2 million ol 8% 1 211 IWO frsliir 411 In hundred. of %111...I.throughout the t ountrt tee keeitrelf "1114 12 .081 a htldren in .8 %miff nun 'ter otdent,01%tt.tttaitt a altutt% 1 hough It 8% 11/13nert.1111 to pack, 844 Ifu free ells4r4Ile Ill
443844113 If t isati1433 1))41 I a,ril,n4 Ihr tta J318811141 III (',1314811J 41ae34 4., I I 8., flr 81 t
4311411411 in Mori..., hi if 'tom It tic u, N3.3413) Liter. it %, pwille to di, till, se HIP Mt.1 844111114.110 ItIa I 4 454 ate
IX I. 41.111.,L" atell the% 3.411, deaf% 141111 14311,415 rt.>, ,i/ifir rsfsst.Hts rst5 Nit fat t8.sss51
118.14141 ri rt use .1 rr tr, 111,111,1 rstt 131. 54.418 4 .its.slnithr 5 .41 lltr ,13, i 1114. srerzt. 314.1431.1118
1.114 Ura' Us luta Ur to 14.4,, %limn-nil 13148 11.i. d1131. IF ir.rti, Id %Nat .8181 1.411.81*. 1184 Ii.1414'
"48ir17 Mont at firt yowl. !Ito In.. 11 u%val Its the p.ot I>, Ain% 818888e tit minlit% 81) tn.gi 01.11041% AM. lig I Vivir)11,1% II 11.1 'St t t./ As, hein .0.,8.41 Luca %fsh ttal Iv
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
r
48
St Obi Onluthiri. Itc..otartc*rchntary 21, 1994) Dr. Ramp
Page b
NignIfh Ant AN% tint tA III .11 1 1 girt 1.111011 It s ei 1131 744 /444 IC, tIttl In rid thil4411 4.11 h %VA(' h,esi Mthie %,1,1 *ant 041,44 Ilettogh to do, and lAti
approprtate funihng lewd talth milk II I'm:y.191,h tutr gabal tug . rofmtlhon, 5 IS mtl.bon. $241 nulloon, etc
'my ck. !.,,,tilmeDd then 1 /MIN VIM tuh ba Irk 1: t4ith13 ead MATI Ott+ tt.ft net t'NNItill 41W.I14 171.1411i 4 thing, 4. ill 1114. dnunturotve tetpurement. 0 th pt,our atta Nor doe., nu'an that c ij r rprspri.thon he.4n.rte anth int teased kt hat we would hke you to ion.nier ettittlemg (41,14.f3t1ng)some nri. it tio nut I ttnntottic abort met hattimn between the t. program, 1111s cc tuldh...i...omptc .1, A Went datum): Of A{011,144 %,,Ittttlith.A. purpilw Y444uht N. toflu ea,t 54,115n $11' I All llit.tugh MOthis kmi to help them h,ettecprep,ac the/thug: Lir ils. c dtesithitt WU, .4111 /id IbinNh tt is prithJbl %Inn-Asti, to dunk
iitle whin A.% ur at..k.h that of If cad "tan, wiftelt.1 ftla you to cimssticrL' i WIllIS 1'71'74411N F. ,1 hh41) tt 541141411 A41114,um4tt tutah of f feud Siotre!..1,,fith.; h.+ .inI theft ttnk it it th, tut. appt opi cations tow. the, 4,,n i rt't vnt.v. b.mts
I% It. 11 4 Ii .itt tt4II iwt etIt !Mfg:ASV I 1417 t1A I hr,,tio Arpt,iptlatut, el11.1,/, 1111 1 t'ast. 154. rt't g
4 441' 14.0 g 1111, 110.1(1..11 t (431 S. .Int 1.454.1 1.4 111.4 15-1.1-01t to: t 4 1. '1It 2 1 art.1 'II it:t mns stl.,:,1 ;1,k
, .4,, n9 .,2 . ,-.S t1 1 g11 71;), 1 r.loget1.11 1/3113111 StehIstigt1 174-1.1.1.1 .4: Ate: h sint1..t /11. III 11!lt / .114 ;331 !in I is nen, It 14131 'tad In' IL Int'4,, 9, S. 11,- 4, 444 lulic 44, (.41
I1/1.1),4 .4 1.4 1I14' Ii, 4...11111, 11114 .111. 4101/ 411%,'.../...AC progra.te% %Ain Iwyter1.,,i ik, /it, in Ki t/..1 tt, It 3 .tt itt 115 I 41.31 lh 1 4. gh 711.11 viingstit 1.10451,4 411.4 st rib 1 oh, Ate, ttt Ana itt1n)tir4.,
f if h tk-.4 .4!
; .t: It. 'iiIt) I,!t, 1,1 lot) . it'.i 1 t I1.I. I. 11 .Iti 11 11411 4.11 11115504g g iiOtt t...st .1 st f tg 1/7 .tt isk st.i.ic rit ,11,, if 11,1,:,,,hTro 'I" etc, 'i \fl.'t Sit& r41 11;til4. tricintirt shtr during thv remIli .1 t% 1st. II./ ./ tzt ing Sk.it t't '1'41.1,411 Si qv III
1., I. , ! 1414 )11 tiO1 3:7 i30,1 inni1t7g mut5. I .1 \.% lit. u, 41...,4 ) toe+, 414' I .4,4.4. .1. .4.511 ,...i3'al.001. alid 1., oft. t HI. Ah4t1 311,4g1 444151.. I.
dris 1.1. is h., 4, .0111 !lasts ttAt. Alt% i s,l,,..4 I, 1., ,qt.,,s I ht ,14t1 It, .1 It 014 t4:Att rat N. t%A.11111,11I
itig .17/1...111 'St 111.'11. !Mick .gt hmt V6..4. .1,4 ts, 1.4 att. I hi ....ill,' %it 11,11ttal",1/ ilot el 41411 flu c't 141 fit":
.10,ft 1.1 44, ktp 31 /In 11.111 Itt3t Ott thtt 11,1111N 4 it 14.41, tt,,ti,tit,tt. the pi pit am arid that th. i t f., .os,etlft 41* 1 I Iitlltl,Ite, 4..,
111.,4 1.m, Is, .1 ..:4,14.. tti thy t tg 3 1, At %,ttld t,I.,1t t,. \ k INA' twt,t,....tttllt. .0 . 1 Mut si ah ,nt 1 weft), Ans. iitaSt. in sin'It.11710::
1.% .. .01 .11 ItIt I/ Is I ill. ati,i1111111 ,t, tho 3 1.11 k3tIt s t . ttt,.;: ,ttt, q is III IL. in .1,3 .1 ell Li% t 1. It.;
i s 1 . 1 s t I I ! , 1 ) , 3 5 III 1 ; g lig 71 31/17. 1. 1 1'1 t.1 lat 1110n 111L tit itt est, IttIdt it ht.! tIl .441 I 011119 lust, 11, _If l 1111/1111s: Fi tittli. gilt {, 4414
5. (1.1.,15 I fk-, dil ggJ Jn1s otto finatt, Cal Min*. 't11.1.IltelL: l..11.1 01%. 4014 s, tfa t,. adopt Ohtit st 1.1 I tr 11,31/g t 111141 11 I 'it 1 OW i,isIbc 7'1111 .1110 Intrit-Plit 17!
..111 ti, .It Is 01 11... .15 01,111 Itt J11 lit. {VI Cit r1t Cflt ....Utah s.. 14101.1, 1, 1.1111 11.. et Ifl W.< .01 t4 LQII'1.11 1t .414 .11It1 1It st't inpf 111 !titI 1/..;I .1 1 `4. 1 17'. at,:f not u 24
Sittt, .111111It 1031., .tts wl .1 3111,1'1.; 111 14.11as,55,, 11,./ 1,.) th, , .0it itii 31 C.A. !It 1 3111. 3thf.f 1411i And 701 I 7,11! I/1 1111171 it 11 WI Itt's It` ttot.3.1,31413,.. l! 11 141 t p. II the. 11, othrt 1$(.11,Ae that thf ottItttI L'1 tilt ttltcndalIt 1ns Ii jsu Sk.etIttt tit t1 lit' 17 111C SA h..11eNt'i lit In teg
tht 311'0115sitot1.11 '0.91 II, ilirt 1 i4,1011 tit si: t It, 4,41145,1 it. 14 4.11-1 and 11114+10+1,1,:1) t, tlit tIiI 7/ t' t t 11101i.J1ii 4"! O., .4";
BEST COPY AVAILABL(
t- ,))
.19
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much.Dr. Busch.Dr. Buscn. Thank you, Chairman Kildee, Mr. Tauke. Ladies and
gentlemen, it is an honor and a pleasure fOr me to be here thisevening and to share with you specifics with reference to theFollow Through Program and perhaps to share some informationfrom a practitioner's standpoint.
I am Russ Busch. Director of' Grant Programs for the RichmondCity Schools, with the responsibility for administering over 12 dif-ferent federally funded programs in the Richmond City Schools.
Let me first of all start off by giving you a perspective of the his-torical ideas of' the Follow Through Program in the RichmondPublic Schools. As you have done in your introductory remarks. of'course. the Follow Through Program. since the 1967-6s school yearwas one of the first. of course. that we implenwnted in the Rich-mond Public Schools.
In so doing, we have data and research that. certainly. we wouldbe happy to share that will reveal long-term effects of the FollowThrough Program in a positive sense as far as child development,as well as the other areas of attendance in school. improvedparent/child relationship. career development, families and parentinvolvement, parent education. staff development and communityinvolvement.
I listened intently to some of the previous testimony ai . some ofthe questions raised. As a practitioner in the school system. cer-tainly, of course. I would he in a position to supply some of theseanswers from the standpoint of the Richmond City Schook.
can assure you, first of all, that there is a very unique place forthe. Follow Through Program in terms of education ir Americaand, most specifically. in my district in the Richmond City Schools.
In 1977. our p:ogram received national validation as a resourcecenter by the Joint Dissemination Review Panel. Upon doing this.we were able to disseminate the basic model of the Follow ThroughProgram which was the home school model. throughout the coun-try, as such. In so doing. we have record and documentation of 22adoptions in terms of' this particular model.
In response to oiw of the questions, regarding implementation ofthe model. I can assure you. that there. has been true implementa-tion and success in many of these districts ihat have adopted ourmodel.
We. of course, find that there is a positive aspect. too, in terms ofFollow Through being linked to a model sponsor. specifically uni-versities and colleges. One of the basic thing's that it has done. indoing this, is to give linkage not only in terins of' home and schoolbut also in terms of higher ed.
We have been able to keep at least a degree of sensitivity onhigher ed levels in terms of some of the problems that we, as prac-titioners in public school systems. are experiencing and certainly,of course, we feel that the higher education areas would be in aposition to better prepare for students that would be forthcomingto the colleges and universities.
We are very pleased, also. to report that in terms of the linksthat we have presently with the high school curriculum model, theprimary goal of this model includes numerous ways that teachers.
50
parents and coimnunities. of course, can work as volunteers inworking with children and improving them in certain areas.
Three of them we recite. such as pursuing interests and ideas,living and working successfully with each other. and, using a widerange of intellectual and physical abilities,
Program outcomes of this model evidenced development in chil-dren of a broad range of skills that are essential fiir successfulliving in a rapidly changing society. The curriculum enhanced ini-tiative of students by providing them with materiak, equipmentand time to pursue activities of their choosing.
There are a variety of characteristics of families that we serve inour Follow Through program. One of the bottom lines that We findin terms of this is the fact that. in many instances, in our core Cityof Richmond, these are single parents that we are working with.
In instances, the statement that we've heard so often inour society, babies having babies, of course, would be realistic.Many of these mothers. for the most part. have not had an oppor-tunity to he exposed to some of' the positive things that would beessential in terms of training children or even rearing children.
This. we feel, is. a plus factor as far as our Follow Through pro-gram is concerned. We have been able, through our various meansof' communicating, through our various group meetings and, morespecifically. through PA' meetings. to bring parents in to settingswhere we have been able to work with them and to even assist inthe training of' these parent to be sensitized and to improve theirabilit ies and t heir skills to work with their youngsters.
There are some positive results of the Follow Through Programin the Richmond Public Schools that I would like to cite. Basically,there are six that I have listed here that I would just briefly sharewith you.
First. from the standpoint of parent participation. we havefoi.md. through the Follow Through Program, that it has been agreat source, as well as resource, to encourage and to have parentscome in and participate. I think one of the previous questionsasked was what kind of nnpact this program may have had on par-ents and parental involvement.
I would certainly testify that it has had a very positive impactfrom the mere fact that not only in my system, but in some of theadopted systems, we've gotten letters back commenting that theyhave recognized an increased involvement of parents as a result ofthe program.
In many instance's, these persons have had a need for some typeof vehicle to bring them together, not just for the sake of meeting.but to bring them together for constructive kinds of discussions.even to the extent of some how-tos and how-to-dos. as far as work-ing with children.
Additionally. we hold monthly demonstration disseminationworkshops to work with parents and other school divisions or dis-tricts that have come to share our particular model.
Third would be community support. We have a variety of testi-mony that we could share. One that most readily comes to mind isthat we've had the business community rally around our FollowThrough Program. recognizing as has been said by Mr. Poshard,the idea that, to get to the problem. in many instances, of young-
51
sters that we are experiencing today, certainly, it would rest withthe home and the idea of getting to parents.
Through that. we've had some support not only from the busi-ness community but even from a practicing dentist, who recognizedthat we had limited funds and that these youngsters had some veryacute needs for dental work and the like. He volunteered time andeffort to say. "If' these youngsters can get to my office or if you canget them to my office. I will surely work with them.- It's a matterof getting not only to the parents. hut certainly. raore importantly.to the children.
We have garnered positive community support through ourFollow Through Program,
Additionally. as I mentioned, the idev of parent advisory commit-tee activities. This, as I said. is not just a meeting for the sake of' anweting. but training activities and specifIcs that help parents towork with their children.
We have. had positive relationships with our model sponsors. asI've indicated. and through university contacts and the like. We'vebeen able to collectively come forth with ideas to share as to how
can effectively meet the needs of the boys and girls in ourFollow Through Program.
There are some examples that I can give in a variety of wayswith reference. to the success of the Richmond Follow Through Pro-gram from the standpoint of parents. Before doing that. there isone other item that I would like to mention that we feel we've hadquite a bit of success with as far as Follow Through is concerned.
We annually sponsor a Parenting is Basic Conference. We havedone this tor the last 1:.! years. In sponsoring this conference, whichis put on by the Follow Through Program, we have been able toattract parents. the business community and community personnelto this particular conference and exchange ideas, not just from thestandpoint of improving the educational opportunities for boys andgirls. but to improve- our community.
As you will perhaps be aware of. Richmond. unfortunately. likemany, many of the other locations throughout the country. hasbecome sort of a mecca fin- crime.
We till. through our vehicle of parental involvement, throughthe communications that we have been able to get out, that wehave been able to at least make some indentation in terms of com-municating to parents and perhaps preventing some of the poten-tial problems that could precipitate from some of the core city situ-ations that exist in our city.
We have some parents that have been involved in a variety ofways, but there are two testimonies I'd like to share briefly. One iswith reference to, and we conferenced with these individuals beforedeparture. a Mr. and Mrs. Griffin. a husband/wife team.
Prior to their involvement in Follow Through, I think that one ofthem had not even completed the eighth grade and the other didIlnish high school. As a result of the kind of training, the incentiveand the positive effects that they have garnered through theFollow Through Program, we are very pleased and very proud.
Mr. GriffIn is hut just a testimony, as well as his wife, to thekind of success stories that we've realized in terms of parent in-volvement in Follow Through. As a result of that, Mrs. Griffin has
gone on to complete a college degree. She is a very productive citi-zen and, not only that. but in the area of social services.
As she has commented to me time and time again, she definitelyknows, of course, many of the kinds of concerns that our parentshave because she has been there. Mr. Criftin is now a journalistand a photographer with one of the local newspapers. very activelyinvolved, with the Follow Through Program.
The additional story would be with reference to a Ms. EssieMiller who was a school drop-out. At one point. Ms. Miller hadmade it quite dear that she saw no d.rection in life for herself orfor her children.
Through her involvement in the Follow Through Program, Mrs.Miller was the redpient of a scholarship just this past October as aresult of a scholarship foundation that was established in the nameof one of our former supervi s of the program.
She is now attending one of the local community colleges anddoing quite well academically.
As the result of these kinds of testimonies and the like, the spin-off effect certhinly rests with the children. We see positive selfesteem that these youngsters now have been able to garner, notonly through the success of their parents but through the involve-nwnt of their parents in the Follow Through Program.
I would want to say in closing that we would very, very stronglyrecommend the authorization of Folkw Through and certainlystand available to give testimony and specifics as far as the success,as well as the nmny. many benefits and the uniqueness of theFollow Thnnigh Program as it has impacted the Richmond PublicSchools.
Thank you.1The prepared statement of Russell M. Busch. Ed.D.,
7
53
Alms far Fallow ThroughTESTTMCNN before
SUhrommattee an Hume Frittulles
rhe itonot it ,t, I r t.ttubcortrnit tee ,.g1 1-6,,,..ut,.1.
tfoink 6,1 tr!,or!r.1*.Rixrn QC, :inn, a, i..!
` or VI , r :
if, 1:.: I' :i 1, .1 h. !ii 'Flynn;F.. d sty .pi rt F T!. f. . g.41 1'1 1..ct71,` t 41- "f !Iftk,fki .t,y ;,rio,
mxt ii.t .h.iti -..vit t "At e. I t ',gain con! dux-,t . y . .i
FF1Strrir.i f --pect j,. i) t/: ,t rlitsuo,rri :11 the Hichisqui,
'he F.+ i. 41f. !he, tuty F. F.,w
Pr, ,dx,trt, f. -. 'elnd 1.i1 IILETE'r
11;I.,11(11 ;1 tEs!..0 F..iF ; 410- tOtr1 tt toc, , t F dn. ..Vt1!, 't ht. j.rt.; it ilift SF .. 44',Pn f tWI .n .....nent , elk.I VII. lvvr14,prictrt Ind ..,Trrun,ty 11, 101.1rp
by int diterw mid . 11.'":60.11-Cht`r, thdt dt ivr's 'I
kisAjt..1 )1: -F k. id,t, Nk .1 1 r c.nt i,i .110 t11411.. t . tut if-a-him, ind P 1,tru
;n ; oi,r N.rt ..41.1: 1.i.lf 1.41 .1.. .1 Rosouri:. ,'vritorfly tht. ..;orht 1,4, i 1+1 .si tlie.\.('t.t!, in mitt Lanc.it tiand Invf.dvirnent in the, I.:hi rid- .e.drIming ill- t
3, I.1.ST 1.t11 F. fmc I, .1 tt,thlt,,j erlte`I
At tri .t ", i t -1141 irtnt .ti IPichrv wirt .ru d 4 t hr e.firr "I.rr Mcfie:.
Pi .011.1ry F.fsis thit. rude; ;:s .luverlxis wily% 1..111Tit s ond i ire:m.11dt y 5I.inr, t t t ir. ticsi. strici,
, Pt,/ u ,vo; .r ;: I tit :y sifh i,ther
widt : t .rttrilectudl rnddti:lt
Pmgram c'tfr' t this naktel evidenced developrent in children a broadrang. of ski I Is .tnat are essent fal tor successful living in a rapidly rhangingsociety. The curriculum untlanord init tat we of students by previding themwith (Thiteriells, equipment and t up to pursue activities they choose.
Characteristi.,, and Needs ot I-mulles Served bv Follcer Throult
Included in our enrt)lbtent ot over 200 students, grades K-3. 8 t rasethin ure-parent families that reside in public housing where drugs. 1P1P
poverty. unenploysent or underestsloynent and other social ills are part andparcel of daily living. Self-esteem of children and fcerulies is very low.
BEST COPY AVAILARE
Mere than nalf of the mothers were teenagers ellen these ,elildren %ere born.
Many have younger siblings. in over-crowded hoeseholds. !nen, :s tee
beacon for bringlng hope tu !hese tarelies where sucie.ss nas evuied
generations.
Needs of these children vat parents are meing ret threugh t!e nnn.:.n.mehtof paraprofessionals who wrek in a dual role of ...lassneen ied paten! "tuca-
tor that results in one-To-nne teaceing and leerning in both school 4n.the hane. Through the use t tikIll*-;.4.4.011114 sieVe;OFL`ti 1,171 a!
and unexpensive Materlals, partv,ts Are trained to reieforre met ent tfl .esttilc-
tion initiated In c1ass:1'1..2m.
Unlike other Program, A'', IS 1,111;?Of .11161 ii. F,,110W rftrOull :s toeused
on meeting unique needs nf ni.dtve in schnoi and in structured !raining tor
parents and coMeenity volnnteere in erre settinge as well. Yet, the change
Ln pppulation wife a greater egnber of enunger parents with limited experiencesmekes the need for nontionat.'n t Follow Thenugh mere crucial than ever.
Threugh the "Plan.netanaveresent-evaluate Sequence" ot the High,Scope
Mhdel, children and perents ire learning to structure activities, not only
in the currieulum, eut 12.'0 Ir exera-eurrirular artiviries.
Positive Retiults 4 ehieuie an the Richmond.Publie Snhorls
narent dext n.qatIon Ls Treeter in Follow Threugh than in any_ _
other pregnes in tne Rh:frond Public Schools. For the Last
11 years, parents have sponsored J 'ParentLnq Is Basic Conference'that prrvided training tor parents. ad-.alistrators. teachers
and connwnity representatives tryn severit states. Over 500
people attend tnese .vnInt,a1 events.
2. Demunstratron. .Inseemination werksheps ,ee held euntnly t-e
interested grnups troM Richmond and other loralit:es.
Cannanit,y_upport tran various organnoatins ra,ch as Red cross.
12nited Way, nnieersities, n'operative Extenson nervi,e ndother oitiren greune ranging teem toenagere t retInNi persons
continue to penevide volunteer support servieee ds needed ntchildren and parents, These serviees nave I've!) ontn prevent.ve
and corrective in eealtn, nett:tine, quidarke, ,,niasellhg, .nurerdevelopment and cultural enricnment.
4. Policy Advisory nemittee Activities have Oven nunniy etfectiveLn providing YrA1111O9 for parents Ln gisel-setting, decisLon-
making, child development, health, safety, interpersonal rpla-
tions, parenting sk.11s and in other areas. Many porents nave
been getting inspired to oontinue tneer ethx:.ation by getting6ED'e and coltege train:pg. During more Than :0 years nt opera-
ting the Follow Tnreuge Program in Riennend, mnny parents havebeen employed in various oereers as teachers, clerical wurkers.sucial services and di .ther careers.
Positive Spa_nsr Cnerict Relationsnips enhance the quality of
eglii"ar:,Wfor the system tnreuge the previsiun of training
for Follow Threugh prntessionals, parapredessionals, parents
and school admunistraters. Interpersonal nelatianshipe have
been enhanced by Model Leonsors through the years.
6. Dissemenatien and Demnnstration of successful components in Follow--Through have attracted visitors to deserve Richmond's programfnin sucn countries aa England, Auatralla, Israel and from manystates in the united States.
Examples of Success StorLes in Richmond's Follow Through Program
1. P. 6 Mrs. WarTen Griffin and their semen Children tonefitted from FollowThrough n numerous ways: the students were hagh achievers, both parents
went back to school. Mt. Griffin us a journalist and photographer whilemrs. Grifftn works as a professional in the Department of Aging for theCity of Richmond.
+,; , 1.11 4.1,1
.1...1 10" ksia.itt'184
\ Isn4 oy
;41, 01.110 1-x1,1A Jru
`: K}: .1 .:tt . t,I; La'
r 4; ; , ; ; ; pt..1.11.1 '531": TUC Puy thur ; . , 14 . ot.1 ; wal put. A ;.
'21 ,. ; 1; ; J. ' .r": I "I.: " V1/4MI
ie. I. 111%Tal-iii.171:IN
- A ursita...) btr; put.
.. 1.v; t i A,: .4 0.% I'..relt St.'M v1/44t, .4.144d1g.)
; . I..: , ,; . I :! rat I K00)014.1_ TOA
; '1/44 : -0-1111 'I! Sort ut it 4,1.3,011.y41, 10.41 dmicaroLps
At..t , ;- PO, tWit0 St"; 1 I tIrlatsy Out ;;TI.41 .111.4:,{ OT4
1.1; suot.1,..41 ;Nut, .1%1 ,to zvi oTss..1 'SW
gs
5ti
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much. Dr. Busch. I particular-ly appreciate your addressing the question I raised earlier aboutparenting. I think that is a very important element in this pro-gram and you certainly are emphasizing that in your program inRichmond,
Dr. Adams.Dr. ADAMS. iThairman Kildee, thank you for the opportunity to
express r-iy views on the reauthorizztion of Follow Through. I havecome to know directors of other Follow Through Programs andhave been very impressed by their models. but I know my ownmodel best and most of my comments will have to do with themodel used in my district.
My district is the Lenore County School District in NorthwestMississippi. It is a flat farmland area in the Mississippi RiverDelta. After reviewing several Follow Through models, we chosethe model of High S.ope Educational Research Foundation in Ypsi-lanti. Michigan. It is the cognitive oriented curriculum model.
We have been very pleased with the model and, as a result ofusing it. can say that because of Follow Through. young childrenfrom low income homes have been more successful in school.Ninety-five percent of the Follow Through children in our districtare low income.
As you may see in our written testimony, research shows thatthe achievement test results of our Follow Through children is re-markably higher than that of non-Follow Through children in thesame school.
I was interested in Mr. Tauke's comments concerning whetherFollow Through should serve primarily as a demonstration func-tion or serve as a larger scale program fbr educating children. Myanswer would be that there is a great need for both.
As an administrator in a district in which ninety percent of thechildren are low income. I dream of being able to serve all of ourprimary children through Follow Through. As I see what FollowThrough means to our children. I feel a missionary zeal to tellothers so that they can also institute Follow Through to serve theirchildren.
In his September 2s, 199 address at the Educathn Summit,President Bush referred to the estimate of the National Assess-ment of Educational Progress. that fewer than one out of four highschool juniors can write an acceptable letter of persuasion.
In your folders are those letters that you mentioned that werewritten by some of our third grade Follow Through children. Theirchildren. Mrs. McCain. told them that you were trying to decidewhether to continue Follow Through, and some of them wanted towrite you. She gave them your address, but she didn't tell themwhat to say and she didn't check their letters or correct them. Shejust sent them to me.
I would like to read one of these letters now:"Dear Mr. Chairman, I love Follow Through. I've learned a lot of
things in this class. We have so many things to help us learn. Ilove to do lots of things in Follow Through, Mrs. McCain makesthings to help us do better in class. Please do not take the FollowThrough Program away. If the program is cut, the other boys andgirls will not have the opportunity to do the things we did in
i)t
Follow Through. We love Follow Through very much and, please.do not take it away from the other boys and girls. Very trulyyours, LaShante Golden.-
Chairman KILDEE. We should CC copies of that to my goodfriend; Richard Darman and the President. Go ahead.
Dr. ADAMS. These letters may not be written perfectly, but webelieve that eight-year-olds who write letters like this will be highschool juniors who can write adequate letters of persuasion.
Chairman Ka.DEE. On that, again. I read the letters and thattype of testimony is too often overlooked, not only in FollowThrough but in all the education programs. We are so consumeroriented in other areas, but very often, not sufficiently so when itcomes to education.
if those who are receiving the services have a good feeling aboutit. we should probably show some wisdom by listening to them.That's why I decided to place the letters in the official record.
Dr. ADAMS. Thank you for that. The educational services toFollow Through children would not be assumed by Chapter 1 orChapter 2 if Follow Through were discontinued. Chapter 1 is a re-medial program. Its focus is on correcting children's academic defi-ciencies after they develop. Follow Through is preventive.
Chapter 1 pulls children out of' their classes for extra help inreading or mathematics or language; in our district and, I believe,in most, children are served only in the one area in which they aremost behind.
Follow Through serves children in their own classrooms in read-ing and mathematics and language arts and science and socialstudies and art and physical education and all other parts of thecurriculum.
Although our process or how we teach could be adopted by Chap-ter 1, it is not the present intent of the law that Chapter 1 he usedto teach the entire child the entire curriculum. None of the chil-dren who wrote .ou the letters would presently be served if therewere no Follow Through.
One transferred into our district at the beginning of this year.The others were in Follow Through last year and their achieve-ment test scores are too high to qualify them for Chapter 1 serv-ices.
We feel very strongly that a powerful primary program for theentire kindergarten through third grade period is important tofirmly consolidate the gains made in overcoming the educationaldisadvantage of a low income backgrote.d.
Chapter 2 funds in my district are used to assist with programsfor student drop-out prevention, curriculum development, teachereffectiveness training, staff development training and gifted andtalented projects. Chapter 2 funds are not adequate to take theplace of Follow Through. nor do the two programs serve the sameneeds.
The dissemination function of Follow Through would best beserved by maintaining the Follow Through Program. The 1987 re-authorization of the Follow Through Program placed greater em-phasis on dissemination and demonstration.
Beginning with this changed emphasis. our model. High Scope.has increased its dissemination efforts and has helped us to im-
fil
prove ourselves as demonstration sites. We are finding an almostoverwhelming interest among other educators and corporate spon-sors to implement the effective approach that we are using.
Because of our personal commitment to the program. we know itworks. We can be much more effective in encouraging others toadopt the program than could a disinterested entity that is spread-ing information about hundreds of programs. More importantly. ifFollow Through were ended and the demonstration cla.sses wereclosed, there would be no Follow Through. There would be nothingto disseminate.
In his same address at the Education Summit, President Bushenumerated five areas in which he envisioned reform. I will brieflyrelate these five areas to Follow Through.
First, the day when every student is literate. Follow Through issuccessful. There is proof that children are learning. Our students:ire literate.
Two, a day when our educational system will be unafraid of di-versity. The National Follow Through concept was designed as anexperimental planned variation program whereby a number of dif-ferent approaches to early childhood education were implemented.Diversity is an integral part of Follow Through. Each model is dif-ferent. Adopters are free, as we were, to examine several modelsand choose the one or ones that best suit their needs.
Three, a day when choice among schools will be the norm, whenparents will be free partners in the education of their children. Theparent component, as others have already said, is an essential partof F9llow Through.
We have parent committees and encourage extensive parental in-volvement. Last year. our Follow Through parents were so excitedabout Follow Through and what it was doing for their childrenthat they insisted on paying for a banquet for other parents, schoolpersonnel. community members and Follow Through children.
These were low income parents who paid out of their own pock-ets because they were so excited about Follow Through, theywanted other people to know about it. These are partners in theeducation of their children.
Fourth, a day when we use accurate assessments, carefullylinked to our educational goals. From the beginning, FollowThrough has been held to high accountability. Each of our objec-tives is carefully evaluated. You have seen the results of my dis-trict's assessments in reading, mathematics and language. AllFollow Through sites conduct assessments of their goals.
Fifth, an educational system that never settles fbr the minimumin academics or in behavior. We Follow Through sites have ex-tremely high expectations for our children. We are determined tohelp every child develop his full potential. Since we don't knowwhat that potential is, we must aim very high indeed, so that wewill not underestimate what an individual child can do.
Our test results indicate that we do not settle for the minimum.When children are working successfully on activities they findmeaningful. as they do in Follow Through, their behavior is exem-plary.
5,9
May I conclude by responding to the President's statement thataccountability also means we must act on what we discover. Wehave discovered that Follow Through is successful in accomplishingwhat it was designed to do. Let us act on this discovery by reau-thorizing Follow Through. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ann Adams. Ed.D., follows:l
60
Lenore County School District, 1901 Highway 82 West,Greenwood, MS 38930 (601) 453-8566
Statement Prepared for Submis u .to the Subcomittooon Numan Resourcesi_ House Co .ttee on Education andLaborebyuary_219901 by_Ur.. Ann A. Arbims, FoltrwThrou_qh. Director _befjor.e County_School_pi.stOct .
Chairman Itildoe, Members of th Conaluttee, thank you torthe opport un. it -y to express my views on reauthorizing theFollow Through Program.
I have come dS on advocate tor tho continuodreauthorization of Follow Through:
(1) Because of Follow Through, young childron flom low-income homes have been more successful in school.
(2) Because of the comprehensive notoxe of the FollowThrough Program, children's lives have been changed.
(3) The educational Services to Follow Through childrenwould not be assumed by Chapter I or Chapter II.
(4) Sponsors are an important part of the Follow ThroughProgram.
(5) The dissemination function of Follow Through wouldbest be served by maintaining the Follow ThroughProgram.
The rationale fur thuso statements is os follows.
(1) BeCduse of Follow Through, young children from low-income homes have been more successful in school.
Ninety-five percent of the children in the LefloreCounty School District's Follow Through Program areclassified cis low-inrome. When compared with similarchildren within the District, the Follow Through children aromore successful. A comparison was made using the most recentadministration of the California Achievement Tests, April1989. These results revealed that the first, second, andthird grade Follow Through students (FT) scored significantlyhigher in mathematics, reading, and language at each gradelevel than did the non-Follow Through students (Non-FT) inthe same school.
14
61
Results of t-tests Comparing NCE Scoresof Independent Groups, April 1989
California Achievement Test
Subject Grade Direction of t_ratioSigni0.cant_piftprence
Language 1 FT > Non-FT 5.09*
Math I FT > Non-FT 4.18*
Reading 1 FT > Non-FT 7.69*
Language 2 FT > Non-FTMath 2 FT > Non-FT 9.28*Reading 2 FT , Non-FT 6.85*
Language 3 FT , Nor-FT 5.30*
Math 3 FT > Non-FT 5.39*Reading 3 FT > Non-FT 3.94*
* Significant at greater than .001 level ol cOndf (degrees of freedom) 38
In addition to having higher test scores, the FollowThrough children are developing thinking skills. In Januol
1990 a visitor in a Follow Through classroom observed twokindergarten children. The children wanted to read somewritten material they had located. Atter a brief discissionbetween themselves, the children went to the computer area ;
their classroom. One child read out the material, letter Lyletter. The other child typed in the letters. They then ha.1the computer's speech synthesizer read the material to them.
This behavior is typical of the independent problem solving
skills developed by our Follow Through children.
d Wt.
(2) Because of the comprehensive nature of the FollowThrough Program, children's lives have boon changed
The Follow Through Program provides health, nutritional,psychological, social, and spvech and language services toFollow Through children. In our program there Was a firstgrade child with a physical problem. The nature of theproblem was such that the other children were repulsed by the
child's appearance. Rejected by his peers and many adult:,the child began to exhibit emotional problems. His motherworked at a part-time minimum wage job, and his father did
seasonal farm work. His family had no insurance or otherresources to have his physical -roblem corrected. Throughthe Follow Through Program, med 41 services were provided tsurgically cure his condition. This child's life was chang,dby Follow Through's comprehensive services.
62
(3) The educational Services to Follow Through childrenwould not he assumed by Chapter I or Chapter II.
Chapter I is a remedial program which is provided tocorrect students' educational deficiencies after theseacademic defects develop. The Follow Through Program isdesigned to prevent educational deficiencies. The FollowThrough Program attempts to assist low-income children indeveloping to their full potential. Our mission is not thesame as that ot Chapter I. Both programs are needed. Nosingle peOgram will be successtul with every child.
Because of the successful achievement of Follow Throughchildren, if our Chapter 1 guidelines were applied to FollowThrough, no first and only two second grade children wouldhave been able to return to the program this year. Theywould have scored too high to quality to remain in theprogram. Wily seven of the first, second, and thitd gradechildren in the program did not score above the fiftiethpercentile in reading, mathematics, and/or language. Ofthese seven, four were being served by special education andwould not have been served by Chapter I, anyway. We believethat serving children for the entire four years is importantfor long lasting impact. Even with our excellent results, wedo not believe that one year in a program is sufficient toovercome the educational disadvantage of a low-incomebackground.
In my District, Chapter II funds are used tor programsfor student dropout prevention, curriculum development,teacher effectiveness training, staff development training,and gifted and talented projects. These are all importantneeds and share the allocation of less than sixty-threethousand dollars. Chapter 11 funds could not be stretched toalso meet the needs of our Follow Through children if FollowThrough were discontinued. OL77 District is not the only onewhich is already using its Chapter 11 funds and its FollowThrough funds to the full extent possible.
(4) Sponsors aro an important part of the Follow ThroughProgram.
Because they developed the approaches demonstrated bylocal Follow Through projects, the sponsors have a dedicatedcommitment to ensuring that the approaches are successfullyimplemented. They assist the local projects in maintaining ahigh degree of excellence and accountability. Using currentresearch and research generated by implementation of themodels, the sponsors have been able to make revisions toimprove the delivery of instruction. In our District's case,in 1988 our sponsor recommended the addition of a computerarea in each classroom. This addition has had a great impacton our program. This alteration in the program was not
Pi;
63
available in 1968 when our program began. Follow Throughprograms are not static. All things change. The sponsorshelp ensure that the changes are positive and that revisionsand improvements are made as appropriate.
Having local projects implement the sponsors' models hasbeen an excellent plan. The local projects servo childrenand their families, deliver instruction, and evaluate themodels from a very practical, realistic point of view. Localprojects provide a school setting for implementation of themodels and for demonstrating the models to others. Throughthe implementation of a model in a real school witl: realchildren, parents, and teachers, it is possible to proclaim,-This program works!- It is also possible for othereducators to see that the model is successful, rather thanmerely hear developers describe a program they claim souldwork.
(5) The dissemination function of Follow Through wouldbest he served by maintaining the Follow ThroughProgram.
Critics may say, -Follow Through has met its objectivesand should, therefore, be terminated.- Is this the approachwp want to use in education? Becasse Follow Through hasdemonstrated that it is successful, tt should be abandoned7Do schools no longer have entering kindergarten and firstgrade children from low-income homes, children who attendedHead Start, children who need help in developing to theirfull potential? Is there no longer a role for parents intheir ehildren's education? Are there no longer educatorsfor whom -Seeing is believing- and who, therefore, need tovisit demonstration sites before effecting change in theirown districts?
High Scope Educational Research Foundation, ourDistrict's sponsor, is making extensive contacts ant. findirs3enormous educator and corporate interest in observing andimplementing our model. Without the demonstration sites,those interested in adoption would have no place to examincthe program in action to determine whether or not the modelwould fit their needs.
Educational professional literature gives us innumerablewritten suggestions for ways to educate children. However,opportunities to see successful programs in action are rare.Even more limited are the mechanisms to allow educators tolearn about a successful program, observe it in operation,and be taught how to implement it in their awn districts.Sponsors are particularly competent in managing theinformation and imulementation components of this apparatus.0eMonstration zite.i provide the "proof of the pudding", thepersuasive evidence that a model works. The demonstrationsites also are effective in assisting adopters in learning
7
how to implement the model in their own districts. There isnothing so convincing SS watching children at work andtalking with a teacher who uses and totally believes in thatprogram.
Wit:lout Follow Through, there would Fo nothing todisseminate.
Should Follow Through then remain as it is now designed?Low-income children and parents are being served through acomprehensive educational program. Parents are learning totake part in action COAMittOOS and increasing theirinvolvement in their children's education. Dissemination ofthese successful programs is increasing and becoming moreproductive. The continuation of Follow Through is important.
Perhaps, however, some changes could be Ltoneficial. Aswe have informed other educators ehout our program, ourDistrict has found many who were interested but lacked tendsto implement the model. A suggestion has been made thatperhaps Follow Through should have two parts. One part wouldbe the sponsors and local demonstration sites and the self-sponsored programs, as they currently are fundea and operate,serving children and families and disseminating anddemonstrating successful programs. The other part would bethe adopters. Districts could apply for a small three tofive year grant to install the program they adopted. Thegrant would pay their start-up costs, including consultantfees. The adopters would know from the beginning that theywould be expected to assume all costs at the end of theinitial grant. This would enable the adopters to get theprograms off to a strong start so that they could becomeDistrict-sustained. This would encourage Districts toimplement these successful Follow rhrough programs. More andmore children would be served by proven programs.
In conclusion, there are many compelling reasons torcontinuing Follow Through.
Through its sponsor-public schools partnership,Follow Through has an excellent combination ofexpertise and living laboratory for managingschool Improvement programs.
The Follow Through Program has high accountabilityfor producing results.
Follow Through is a model for encouraging andestablishing parental involvement in schools.
Follow Through provides a model of - Jarietyof successful, proven programs for other localschools to see in operation and then implementin their own districts.
65
Follow Through enhances the U. S. Department of
Education's opportunities to develop more effective
ways of using available resources to assist public
schools.
As financial resources become increasingly limited, it
is important tor the federal government to locate, advocate,
and continue those programs which are successful, which can
be economically implemented, and which will result in
improved educational opportunities for the children of our
country. Follow Through is such a program.
66
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much for your teHmony, allthree of you. It's been very, very good.
Several years ago, one of' the Assistant Secretaries of Agriculturetestified that the WIC program was too successful, that they hadn'tronlized how many numbers of women, infants and children outthere were hungry and needed this program and, because it wastoo successful, it was suggested we cut back on the program.
I could never quite fathom that logic. Of course, a lot of illogicalthings took place in that winter of discontent beginning in 1981,when we had what was called reconciliation. Do you remember theterm? I 'dways thought reconciliation was something marriedthople do when they have quarrels. That was certainly not an actof love that year when we cut back on programs in a drastic way.
I am one of the few who dug my heels in and would not evenvote yes at all on any of the reconcThation programs that year, be-tuse it was a lousy year tbr people. This program, apparently, isso...cessful. I don't know anyone who would testify that it's not suc-ce-zful.
I want to find some way to save a measly, by Pentagon stand-ti, :!`i7.*.! million program. I believe in the program. Believing in it
nrd having the infbrmation and the ammunition that you people ofThis panel and the panel before you provided is two differenttiThis year, the pressure is really on. I am on the Budget Commit-
tee in addition to being on this committee and we have to get thedeficit down to :914 billion, which means we have to find $36 billion
skiaeeze out of the budget, 36 billion.Bctiire today. I was determined, but now I am even more deter-
mined. to make sure that that $36 billion does not include anyPoi Through money. They can squeeze it out of somewhere else.They can squeeze it out of some of those redundancies across ther,vor in that five-sided building. I think that's where I'll try tosq ti-oze. anyway.
!! is going to be a tough year, but those who sometimes wondert,:,ctlier you can make a difkrence in government would have togt CI' that the two panels today have certainly done so by arming
u-- %k it h the information on Follow Through programs, whetherthe; bt in Mississippi or Kansas or Virginia or wherever.
kids are being served with a minimum of dollars, really. I don'tknow how. You stretch those dollars pretty well. I don't think that
,yone would find any $3,009 or $30,000 coffee pots in your pro-. :.,rns or any $600 toilet seats that Cap Weinberger was trying tono% when he was Secretary of Defense.
What I find is that people like yourselves who testify or peopleho are in your profession will never be rich. I hope you live afairly comfortable life, but you'll never be rich. You are in therebecause you really are dedicated to education and to kids. Thatdedication enables those dollars to go a long way.
I think we can better compensate our educators and still be care-611 with our dollars. I appreciate your dedication to the program:nld the fact you make this program so cost efficient. I don't thinkanyone is questioning that part of it. I certainly don't question it.
:%70 job is going to be to try to make sure we reauthorize Followchrough and then go over to the Appropriations Committee. First
79
67
of all, we'll make sure the Budget Committee leaves room for thiswith some assumptions in the budget resolution and then it will goto the Apvropriations Committee.
While I ni in kind of a philosophical, preaching mood today. I dohave some questions, also. All of you touched pretty well on thewhole idea of parenting. I find this very important in programs,that to the degree we can have parents involved, we can help kidsby teaming together the professional educator and the parent.
Dr. Busch, you mentioned that parental involvement in Rich-mond in the Follow Through Program is greater than in other pro-grams. Why is this so? Do you do anything specific or is it just thatyou reach out for those parents in some fashion?
Dr. BUSCH. Yes, I feel that that is the big impetus, the fact thatwe do reach out for those parents and Follow Through is an excel-lent vehicle to do it.
The other thing that I think has made for that kind of differenceis the fact that, as you may recall originally. when Follow Throughfirst was developed, we were in a position to have funds that wouldtrain parents, to enable them to become mole productive in termsof either their job, employment or even to the point of going backto school to better themselves in terms of being more productive, atleast from the standpoint of economics as well as education.
Many of the parentsthat's one of the other things that I feelhas been sort of a carry-over. Many of those original parents. wehave testimonies where some of those parents who started off withFollow Through are now even teachers in the system. That kind ofthing has carried over.
Others are believers. They see real life examples that these per-sons have been able to pull themselves up by the bootstraps andbecome positive and productive citizens. and they feel that that in-centive is there and they would like to see it there.
So, yes. I do feel that has been sort of a carry-over to encouragethat kind of a thing.
Chairman Kii.nm. We very often talk about capital programs,capital investment programs that should be accounted for in abudget in a different way because they are long-term capital invest-ments. Would you look upon the Follow Through program as an in-vestment, this $7.2 million?
Do you think, in the long haul, that the Federal Government willrecoup these dollars from this investment in children and parentinvolvement?
Dr. BUSCH. Again, most definitely. I don't want to hog this. but Iwould say most definitely.
Let me just cite something that was very touching to me as re-cently as this morning. I think it is most germane to our discussionilerP nnw. Prior to leaving Richmond. I was involved with about 35parents in a meeting. It was very interesting.
There was in attendance a grandmother. She pulled me aside.She ha.-4 been very regularly in -olved in some of our parenting ac-tivities. 3he pulled me aside and she simply said to me that shewas very, very concerned and she wasn't feeling too well, so shewouldn't be able to stay the full meeting. I explained to her that Iwould be leaving, too.
71
(iS
The point that she made was simply this. We had a murder inRichmond last evening, a 17-year-old child that was shot in one oftAir project communities. She indicated that two of her grandchil-dren were victims of similar type slayings. She has one othergrandson whom I assume to be in the Follow Through or at least atthat age.
She simply said to me that she was hereat least in the meet-ingwith the idea that she was hoping that she could encourageher younger granddaughter, so this must have been a great-grand-:hill. to come out and get involved and to, quote, learn how to be a.4uod parent so that that great-grandchild, t youngest one, wouldtiot be a victim as the other two that she referenced.
It was a very touching story and, sir, I was very interested inthat because it really sort of gave me the kind of projection andimpetus to come here today. I think in terms of the many types oftcstimonies out there that are very similar to that. T know that thisplrent has been very, very active in our Follow Th. ough Program,this grandparent, anyway. This was one of the touching experi-ences that I had as recently as this morning.
Chairman KILDEE. The Ypsilanti School studies on Head Start in-dicated that this is a program that clearly, just from a fiscal point.3t iew. setting aside education and morality, but from a fiscalroint of view, actually saves the government dollars through dol-;ars not being spent on remediation later or being spent on subse-
delinquency programs or incarceration.Has a similar study been made of Follow Through?Dr. RAMP. Gene Ramp. No. I guess I should start by pointing out
o yOU that that study conducted, the Perry Preschool Project atYpsilanti High School was developed by Dave Weickert who also-ponsors a Follow Through model.
chairman K1LDEE. You mentioned that is the model you areysing at your school.
Dr. RAMP. In fact, that's the model that Dr. Busch is using, asv,-(.11, It just was coincidental that two people from the same modeli:Ippened to be selected fbr this panel. It is all interconnected.
Follow Through, though. per se. has never had the funding. ThePerry Preschool Project was funded through a collection of Federal,
and private nonprofit funding, the Ford Foundation, Carne-t!ie. there were lots of sources of funds for that. There has never
on that kind of interest in Follow Through, in part, I think be-c.ause it is not the big program.
I mean. that study was really geared to comment on Head Start,ipdirectly, at least. A lot of people have taken it as a direct state-ment on Head Start, although I don't think many of the kids actu-ally were in Head Start Programs, per se. The notion is preschooldoes make a difference.
What it didn't say, because the data were never collected, is thatmost of those kids were also part of Follow Through. We know,without collecting the hard data. I was at a graduation at PS 77 inthe South Bronx a couple of years back. Their third krade Followl'hrough graduation class had a speaker who was a sophomore or
junior at Cornell who had graduated from the Follow Through Pro-gram some 15 years earlier.
69
This is a kid from the South Bronx. The odds against him wereprobably eight or nine to one that he would either be in jail or ondrugs or dead by that age. but here is, a college sophomore or ajunior back speaking to a group of Head Start kids.
We've got hundreds and hundreds of examples of things like this.but there has never been the capability to put it together in anymeaningful data base.
Chairman KILDEE. It is interesting that very often, in the worldof finance, steps are taken to protect one's investment. The PerryPreschool Study indicated that this was an investment.
It would be interesting to have a separate study to show thatFollow Through does tend to protect that investment by followingthrough. How do we protect that investment and how well does itserve us to protect that investment? I'm sure we could derive someobjective data if a study were made on that.
Dr. ADAMS. If I might comment on that?Chairman KILDEE. Sure.Dr. ADAMS. In my written testimony, where we were comparing
our Follow Through children with the non-Follow Through chil-dren. the achievement test scores. we do take Head Start childreninto Follow Through, but we can't serve all the Head Start chil-dren, so some of the children who unfortunately were on the lowi-nd were Head Start children, but the gains made in Head Starthad not been continued because they weren't a part of FollowThrough, and we think that's important.
Chairman KiwEE. That would indicate that a study would prob-ably bring us the same information. that Follow Through is ameans of protecting our investment in preschool education.
The hearing has been very, very good today. We do, as I say, ben-efit from these hearings. It helps the program. We will leave therecord open for ten additional days or two weeks for the inclusionof any additional testimony.
I look forward to working with the three of you, as I do with theprevious panel. This is the beginning rf I relationship. We may becalling upon you specifically in thc- future, both before the reau-thorization and after that. You are on our lis; of resource peoplenow.
So, I want to thank you very much and, with that, we will standadjourned.
Dr. ADAMS. Thank you, Mr. Chah man.Dr. BUSCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.Dr. RAMP. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.Chairman KILDEE. Thank you.(Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., the committee was adjourned.f[Additional material submitted for the record follows.]
7
70
STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN MAJOR R. OMENSON TUE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE FOLLOW THROUGH PROGRAM
February 21, 1990
I appreciate this opportunity to express my enthusiastic support
for the reauthorization and expansion of the Follow Through program.
The Follow Through program sponsored by the Bank Street College ofEducation at PS 243 in the Bedford-Stuyvesent neignborhood of mycongressional district has made an important difference in the lives ofthe children end families it serves. Approximately 450 low-incomeyoungsters enrolled in kindergarten through third grade are served atPS 241; about Sot of them previously participated in Head Start,Project Giant step, or other comparable pre-school programs. FollowThrough has enabled these children to maintain and strengthen the gainsthey made in pre-school and has helped PS 243 to become a successfulschool in an extraordinarily difficult environment. More than 70% ofits students continue to achieve at or above grade level on city-widetests at the secoul grade.
Through a rich curriculum, Follow Through students at PS 241 areencouraged to use language, writing, drawing, and other fsrms of
representations to communicate their understandings to each other andto the adults who work with them. Recognizing the importance ofexperience to the healthy development of children, the curriculumattempts to provide first hand experiences that allow children to
expand their understanding of the world. Follow Through students, for
example, have been active participants in anthropological digs at thenearby Weeksville Houses, one of the oldest free African-Americancommunities in the United States. Artifacts collected by the childrenhave become part of a mini-museum which is maintained at the school.
Follow Through has also dramatically strengthened the involvement
of parents and other family members in the education of the school'sstudents. On 4 recent night last month, more than 270 fathers and
father surrogates came out with their children to participate in
"Fathers' Night" at the school. "Grandparents' Day" brings out hundreds
of grandparents to the school every year to visit with their
grandchildren and participate in other events.
74
71
Follow Through and other staff have also made many efforts to
address the serious, unmet health and social services needs of many of
the sChool's students. The effects of the "crack° epidemic on this
neighborhood have been devastating. Many children live in formal, as
well as informal foster care situations because their parents have died
or are unable to care for them. Some teachers try to address the unique
needs of these and other students by making home visits accompanied by
the Follow Through neighborhood worker; other teachers show their
special concern for these children and families in other ways. The
program sponsor and the principal of PS 243 have also been active in
trying to locate alternative sources of funding for the special health
and social services the children need but do not now receive. Many of
these services had been provided through the original Follow Through
program, but are now no longer encouraged by the Department of
Education because of the program's very limited funding in recent
years.
The impact of the Follow Through program at PS 243 has been felt
both throughout the New York City school system and nationwide. Many
educators and education professionals visit the school every year to
see ths Bank Street approach in operation. The program has also
produced some of the key leaders of New York's early childhood
community. Dr. Evelyn Castro, a former staff developer at the school,
is now the Director of the Early Childhood Education Unit of the City
Board of Education. A former direcor of the program. Mrs. June D.
Douglas, is now the coordinator of the Board of Education's Project
Giant Step pre-school progr,ns. There are professionals throughout the
school system who have been signiticantly touched by Follow Through and
who continue to carry Follow Through's important message about the need
for integrated, comprehensive programming in the education of young
children.
In these and other ways, Follow Through has made an essential
contribution to the education and development of thousands of
disadvantaged children in Brooklyn and throughout the nation. I urge
you to reauthorize and expand Follow Through so that many more children
can benefit from the unique services it has to offer.
7 5
72
The University of ArizonaCOnsys of EftrabonTucscut Eacy EaucAPOn Mole% ;TEEM)Panay. Thmugh Spaniel*Tucson Arta...4 95721(KO 1321- $360
Follow Through:
Unique Community Based Education Programs for Children "At Risk"
Dr. Alice Paul and Dr. Amy Schlessman-Frost
The University of Arizona
We have prepared the following summary to help clarify
Follow Through's purposes and offer a vision of its leadership
role in educating young children in our democracy in the next
five years. The primary goal of the Follow Through Program is
"to develop knowledge about various educational practices that
can assist low incow children in developing to their full
potential." Follow Through is distinguished by its comprebensivu
services. It is a community based educational approach
emphasizing parents' democratic participation with the schools in
their children's education.
Follow Through's goal, to improve the school performance of
low-income children in kindergarten and primary grades, may sound
similar to other compensatory education programs, but the
distinctive Follow Through approach is its method. The best way
to explain the importance of method is the popular adage," Give a
man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him how to fish and he
eats the rest of his life." The overall Follow Through strategy
73
is to work with a community to teach all those participants in
education, the families, teachers/educators, and children, hew to
succeed in school.
Some concern has been expressed that Chapter 1 and Follow
Through duplicate efforts. There aro several distinct
differences between Follow Through and Chapter 1 in terms of
purpose, method, and direct services.
The purpose of Chapter 1 is remediation. Follow Through is
a preventative approach rather than remediation. In the field of
medicine, the benefits of prevention are clear, many ills can not
be easily fixed and are best treated by avoiding the problem.
Prcvention is equally desirable in education. Effective Follow
Through programs help prevent "failure" before it happens. The
importance of community based prevention is recognized by other
prevention areas for the 90's, particularly the War on Drugs.
Follow Through can provide models for multi-level, comprehensive
community based programs that are being sought in other human
services.
Follow Through's impact on a child is provided in a
cooperative manner with the teacher in the classroom, not as a
pull-out effort. Recent research indicates that children Nat
risk" are not best served by taking them out of the "normal"
classroom. Follow Through emphasizes integrated learning rather
than isolated remediation.
Another comparison between Chapter 1 and Follow Through is
that Chapter 1 has as its primary focus reading and math. These
2
77
74
elements are important; yet, they are only part of the total
academic program. Follow Through, on the other hand, is a full
time, comprehensive program which deals with each Child's total
needs.
The Follow Through Sponsors and sites have extensive
experience in training. This puts Follow Through in a prime
position to offer leadership in training school personnel and
community volunteers to implement effective strategies for
meeting the needs of children and their families. The current
Follow Through emphasis on demonstration and dissemination is an
effort not to hide these shining lights under a bushel. Follow
Through, as individual sponsors and/or as s group, has the
capability of demonstrating effective educational practices
serving "at risk" children at every level and training personnel
new to teaching.
Follow Through has already established cooperative
relationships with existing community resources which xtend
rather than duplicate services provided for families. Follow
Through can provide models for closer cooperative community
efforts to maximize existing services rather than overlapping
funding.
It might be helpful to view Follow Through investment in a
community as seed money. Follow Through's relationship with a
community might be planned to change over a period of time from
strong federal support during the first few years to
progressively more local financial responsibility with total
3
75
local support as the ultimate goal.
The combined twenty-two years of research based development
of early childhood education appioaches distinguishes Follow
Through programs as models for comprehensive education for
children *at risk." As a result of demonstration and
dissemination efforts, educators will recognize this valuable
resource and may avoid reinventing some wheels by utilizing this
Follow Through training expertise. Follow Through will show its
worth as a sound return on this federal investment in
compensatory education.
4
7S1
76
CDCHICAGO TEACHERS CENTERNORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYxixii sis ruoc,rwv ctocArkr itiwnis main #931`, *13 "36
euttUltAtUNOWITIC M01141/041ew
FOLLOW/ TIMOUGMINKGRINI
To: The Honorable Date E. Kildee. ChairmanSubcommittee on Human Resources320 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20515
From: Naomi Millender. DirectorThe Cultural LingtuiStic ,Sgoreach tCL.A1( follow Throuoh Ptgle.clNortheastern Illinois University, College of Education. Chicago Teachers' Center3901 N. Ridgeway AvenueChicago, Illinois 60618
Re Response tram thi? director ano reactions from various Follow Through partic pantsfrom the F1;144 Elementary School in Chicago tO the Follow Thfougn Congressional Reauthorization Hear Ines
Dale kaa;ri 15, 1 e.e.)0
We recognize that too many ot our nation's low income children do not start school on an cquxfootirig with meg mere fortunate counterparts.In too many caSes. Mese chadren ore rnembe!of families who themselves nave suffered similar disadvantagement. The 'Cycle ofDisadvamagemenr has helped to perpetuate a ruttier of poverty which continueS to drain thehuman anct material resources of our land
a 'glimmer of light' called the National Follow Through Pictsaf art'. has enabled manythousands of low. income Americans to utilize their f.chooling in order to successfully taiti;,through Inis 'cycle of disadvantagernenr.
Eellow Through Ctlitdren grad:rale tram the primary grades ftt - 3, and literally "clisappi-arinto me school elitttstream because marry Ot the fell tale signs Of disadvantagement *Mei !N..would have carried tor lite have been eradicated. Alt of our evidence indicates that.
Foeow Through children ale among those who stay in school longer arid graduate.
12i Follow Through children leave primary grades with more behaviors thatintermediate teachers reward,
(3) Follow Through children (and their parents} have a better appreciation for the ioot schooling in their lives and strive to make the most of it. and
01) F oirow Through children eventually become productive and positive AmericanCitizens.
0
77
Ct. A:Follow Through Responses - Page 2
Foacw Through has otfered children and their tamales a positive vision of their chances toStIcceed within our society Success breeds sucress, and Follow Through childrn are succmt,frOftl thsr (fatty grades.
Follow Through re-organizes the schooling that tow- Mcdale Children feCerve in Order to giveevery child en equal opportunity to learn. The negative behaviors at low.income soc:al;:at,onare replaced by more positive behaviors.
Follow Through understands the often hidden etfects of poverty. and helps teachers,administrators and parents to remnr:e these effects and teaches them how to deal elttucto,with thorn in a positive and constructive mariner
Wah the Venison of the nation now focused on early childhood education, let uu not tor:;,th:e chiiert heed comprehens,6e oral Or preverthvO progfarns_gmokaigul their kinoeroarrei,,1172 prenary gradvs 3y One v ear or two of a pre-school. as all the research !Viz:ales..1Correct beginning. But it a Omy the start.
;:t.7,: of trite PuttOr Demorlstaf:,,n Scp.;:cl ,n C,n,cjga, s,fe of the Cultural LingurshcApproach Fallow Through Project's Oern.,,Psfraborr sct)cff arid the Fgfow_rh..2L12n I'.ta t(Ora ,77 rhahncr tO Mu M.A.?, appfeciatorr ath,77:1aLithor,:e Follow Through.
Sqnea.
)/Lt..0 b 1
Naomi ?Allender DirectorL;nspistC ApOtQaCtifjth2A
i 1
78
CLAPollow Through Responses - Page 3
Tne Cultural Lc iguistic Approach! Follow Through Project - Futter School, Chicago, Illinois.
The Fuller Demonstration School in Chicago, site of the CLA Follow Through ProjeCI. would like
to suggest that some of the funds set aside or earmarked for early childhood educalloh programs
he put into the Follow Through programs. Children make great gair19 In Head Stall and in Whet
pre-schoot iducational programs. We do not want ma chredren to lose this great Start. Thus,
addoilal funds can and should be invested in programs, such as Follow Through, whirh
the childrenS gains and which result in additional progress with other programs initiated at
the pre.school or Head Start level
The firs; . Second and third grade', are vitally important It Is the time when children begin to
sy,i,nosize informaPon learned previously. To ignore children at the most crucial
ce..vopmentat periol in their schooling is a travesty! Educators everywhere understand the
reat iiroortance e thi pimary grades We must pass this understanding on to our
Co'Oss,Onaf representatives.
joLL waik into tne front door of a Follow Through classroom, you know right away !hal
sciriem,ng specai is go,no on here. Children are actively engaged in teaming because their
ciassioom is Sot uP to Promote the skills, and not to penalize children whose school behaviors
often do not 'match' the ideal which leacnerr were taught irt college. My viSion for the future of
Follow Through is for this whole program to be throughout the school. I want it apparent that
sommti,ng spece.il is going on when someone walks into the front door of the School buildingi
From,
Follow Through Teachers and Teacher Aides
The Fuller Demonstration School- Chicago
4214 S. St. Lawrence AvenueChicago, Illinois 60618(312) 548-7610Mrs, Bettye Turner. Master Teacher/ School Coordinator
A )
79
CLA Follow Through Responses Page 4
cie,4,n;ft,e!. Porn Co Throt,gh Parents F WWI Sc.:hoot, Chicago. ltIonots:
uuti..v,5;ale tuture hena; t Anat the FOOYtt Thtoug.h Ptotram has done ter me etc..)I used to sta, hanto and W3Ich the -soaps' when my children would go to school. One
.1.1. ;he program called me and told me to come Out and help For some reason I drd When
..trtr tjw rice n the CI4e;srem. they were SO proud They begged the tO con.e back Now.ir a rcg,Lit school volonteec t..a.1 year I Marled classes at the ilocalt Skills Center. Onor---po to maybe be a teacher aide
p.u !, ,11,n tn.ngs they havo nut ewer Seen heft, (0 It C;,.e.
,' ;?, . ,c D.1,f't7.';. vim blued to make everyday Itylng a lclll beth.,
! . whole s. hoot e vace Fc;:!t.tw Throagh pnma',.1 ..1 1,1,1 Ct program all toe !MK! they are tn Iltts1 , : .st ,
A t,.14i I !"1!( cutP Pa:11nt. I have become 3 teacher in my Own, , tecalr,e I nlafte them upon up lbw( tvekl,
. Ay c.i.v ,..!..pui" al Ihe yald or on the porch Thr.s,
'^3..
; P it ; cit ,. ',uol .11 Ch. .igo 111,114...S
80
Testimony from Bernice Starks, Follow Through Parent:
I Bernice Starks, Being a member of the Follow Through program for 5years, do hereby give my testimony:
I do thank you God for people who care, and when they thought about aprogram such as the Follow Through Program it was indeed a blessingfrom the Lord The program has not only helped our children that arebelowi.oratre level, it also helped our parents to understand how to helptheir children in the academic area. The program is not only a learningexperience, its also fun. With workshops for our parents about thelearning process. I've also been a parent peer tutor since Sept. 1989 , andin that lime rye learned how to teach a child, and to run a classroom in -
any order. I enjoy the Follow Through Program, and hope for the betterthat it never ends.
would like to be a Follow Through member until I'm a grandma. Mrs.
Bettye Turner, and Naomi !Allender are the greatest.
Sincerely,Ms Starks
81
SHIRLEY NEWTON -NAESHALLTESTIMONY
I, Shirley Newton-Merehall am a Parent Peer Tutor at FullerSchool, and a Follow Through parent volunteer. At Fuller School
we have the Follow-Through Program. One out of two schools inChicago with this program and where the parents are able to do
more in-put .There are 8 of us tParent Peer Tutors? and it is
great that we all are able to do more than just tutor children
who are below grade-level. It feels so good to get up in themorning And look forward to a One-on-one with whom the teach..rs
don't have the time to work with, because of his/her Classroom
sire. This program is very important to the children and the
parents and believe me, it's working and I would ltke to see it
continue.
0 ,
testim-myot
Shirley NewtOn-MarshallFuller Schocl Follow Throug!, Proatam4214 South St.LawrenceChicago, Illinois 60653
82
TESTIMONY (March 1, 1990)
1, Partricia Ann James have been with the Cultural Linguistic Approach / FollowThrough Program tor 2 yearS as a Parent Volunteer. I believe in the program becauseit has helped me and my three children in every way possible. This program is veryhelpful to all the children that are in the program. Melville Fuller School is located at4214 South St. Lawrence . It has a Follow Through Demonstration Resource Centerand classrooms tor the Follow Through children, plus an Achievement Center which Iwork in to help the non-Follow Through children who are below grade levbl. I believethat the skills in the Achievement Center are very helpful to the children. We, also useour Black Theme. Black History manual tor every month. We continue to createassembly to help them learn their culture.
Pa1ncia Ann JamesFuller School Follow Through Program4214 S St Lawrence AveChicago. III 60653
83
My name is Judith Aiggins. I have been a Cultural
Linguistic Approach/Follow-Through instructor tor more
than one-half of a decade.
During this period, I have seen children grow into highly
intelligent "thinking machines". The program isbeautiful...children learn to be proud of their
heritage...self esteem flows as the children learn their
greatness. Parents are active partners in the learning
process. Children are scoring1 1/2 years above grade level (measured by the I.T.B.S.
The Iowa Test of Basic Skills. I love this prooram .
Teacters are more than educators in Follow-Through, they are
family. Lc,ve is deeply ingrained into the program. Parents
and teachers know each other on a first name basis.
L earninl Is nortinous for all invlcved ... many Saturdays aro
spent at parent/teacher workshcps. We e...eh have urtieat" .
: tcand , be t.in In tho Follow Through
Program, pe.T.e a?0 kInr. Lear-lira B-ack Xmorlolnr-'
hIstory Is gieat, self-esteemIng WOW", I 1,ve thls piooir
... I get exciteu t!.Ink:r.; it.7,ut It. rh..z pr
IS a lot
This prgrAm makes se...era: th:n1J it er:,..0!:
that there ha,.'e always teen -..11o7".e.i.
.7our3gs Black people who ."teuld .werccma the special
roadblocks all elacks faee .progran shows :hat !Allek.;
have acremp2 is1;ed so very much, as well as disnr:ves the uqly
preudices that have plagued Bla:k Americans tr so 1on4.
This alsc Blat*ks whn are at .the tne
str:ve ach:e..,emer:t. The seccnA thela this pre.:rim
Thr',,nh" ,:hs-ws is :n.it PlIck
ttself, whether it be tLe disoz:very ot now 'Ices !..,!t a
egetab.e, the Letlding of a great. eiecat:::ni,
the setting -!.f An _'_Iyepic le wrIt.1 :1 a
beantifai peee., is always 3 kinl d,alole-t.reampt,.
7!:rouee; teAre:er that. leh:ever.oers ive 1:-:
mi :est ne n t.e Q:a-k in-
inalas:r :7. 7%.1.
*.e1::tes t!: .
Riggins' Testimony - Page 2
Follow Through believes that one must know where he/she,7ame from to better understand where he /she ir going. I love'r.his program. Follow-Through has made a "believer out ofme".
tlr "r$1
ZujIrn RIciolms, Teacherif Intt.!r7e,liar_e L'er,
4::; S. f.t. LawrerIce Ave.
r=r,53
.771
r7ri
85
CHIQUITA ANN WALKERCULTLIRAL LINGUISTIC APPROACH
I. Chiquita Arm Walker am a new parent in the Cultural LAnguistie AptFollow Through Program at Fuller Demonsu-aUon School ,located at 42South St. Lawrence in Chicago. Illinois. My children and I have enjoyedbeing a part of this program. I love helping the children at the school. .Since September 1980 I've been involved in trips, and assemblys. I love theprogram..
Signt'd. Cdei '1,1C14it
Chiquita Ann Walker Volunteer ParentFuller School Follow Through Project4214 S. St. Lawrence Ave.Chicago. II. 60653
86
February 26, 1990
Testimony of Melody Owens. Chairperson of The Follow Through ParentCommittee, Fuller School (Chicago,
1, Melody W. Owens a Parent Peer Tutor here at the FullerElementary School feel very special and thankful to be a part of thispositive natured Program. At first I too was a Follow Through parentvolunteer, only to become what I am today - a parent peer tutor who worksitoth all of the primary children in our school. Through my experience. Ihave teamed various techniques on the basis of education. By attendingworkshops. reading the literature and observing on my own. My perceptionnow is that all children cart learn. Presently I have two daughters enrolledin the Chicago Public School System. Nekia, a first grader here at Fuller,:s also a Follow Through student and currently on the honor roll. Tiffanyattends another school in our district. Gite is the child I was and still amconcerned about. Still with the fundamentals 1 have teamed in tutoring achild I am able to help her. Even with more patience now, and less stress.
There is great advancement and progress toward every student that comesthru this program. Furthermore I am the Chairperson of the ParentCommittee for the Fuller Follow Through program.
Signed,11tz! rz (
Melody Owens ChairpersonFollow Through Parent CommitteeFuller Elementary School4214 S. St. Lawrence Ave.Chicago. 11 5O..53
:j
87
April 3, 1990
To whom ever this may concern, I am a concern parent, with a
Child in the CLA proaram, This program has really helped my son, I
am so proud of the counselors in charge, They have taken time out
to work with these children.my son looks forward in doing the work assignmints, He enjoy
reading the books. So I urge whos ever in charge ELEaz keep this
program alive. It has helped so aany of our children, and we
thank you. ELEASE keep this program alive.
Pit Witherspou-,FULLER S.:HOOL PARENTCHILI/VA', :LL:NOIS