[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 125 (Thursday, September 18, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1791]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. PATSY T. MINK

                               of hawaii

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 16, 1997

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2264) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human 
     Services, and Education, and related agencies, for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes:


  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
amendment offered by the chairman of the Education and the Workforce 
Committee, Bill Goodling, which will prevent the Department of 
Education from spending funds on its national testing proposal.
  I can think of no other administration in recent years that has 
demonstrated a stronger commitment to and advocacy for public education 
in this country than the Clinton administration. The leadership of 
President Clinton and Secretary of Education Richard Riley has yielded 
positive results in the expansion and improvement of Federal education 
programs.
  This is why I come to the House with some reluctance today to 
respectfully disagree with an initiative proposed by our administration 
to establish national tests at the fourth and eighth grade levels in 
reading and math.
  The debate on national testing is not new. It has been around for 
decades. Presidential administrations have come and gone, advocates and 
opponents of national testing have changed, but the issues and concerns 
remain the same. I have taken a strong stand against national testing 
in the past and will do so again today.
  The implementation of national tests does little to improve the 
education system of our country, and indeed may actually harm the very 
children we seek to help. It is based on an idea that improvement of 
our education system is dependent upon knowing where the problems are 
and who is doing poorly. Well, if this is the case, then we are already 
there, because we already know which schools are doing poorly and we 
know which children are having difficulty.
  Our teachers make this assessment on a daily basis, and school 
districts and States already have a myriad of tests to determine 
whether students are meeting high academic standards. We don't need the 
Federal Government to tell teachers, parents and school administrators 
who is achieving and who isn't.
  We do need the Federal Government to help school districts to provide 
the resources to assure that children who have difficulties have the 
help they need. The Federal Government can assist in eliminating the 
financial inequities that continue to exist among school districts and 
in providing resources to improve teacher training, math and science 
education, to rebuild and renovate our crumbling education 
infrastructure, to expand early childhood education, and to assure that 
students have up-to-date text books, lab equipment, and computer 
technology.
  We have long held that issues of curriculum and tests should be the 
responsibility of each school district and State. In implementing tests 
and the corresponding curriculum school districts can provide 
appropriate oversight, coordination and safeguards. I fear that the 
temptation to use a national test established by the Federal 
Government, without appropriate safeguards could be misused for high-
stakes purposes beyond their criterion, to track children because of 
low test scores. In its inception the proposed national test for all 
children would not test limited English proficient children and other 
special needs students.
  The diversity of our country requires that we have locally driven 
education systems which are flexible enough to meet the needs of our 
diverse population.
  The guidance the Federal Government has provided up to the present is 
adequate and fulfilling. As the States identify the needs of their 
local schools the Federal Government needs to respond fully and 
quickly.

                          ____________________