[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 154 (Thursday, November 4, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H11489-H11499]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT SCHOOLS SHOULD USE PHONICS

  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to 
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 214) expressing the sense of 
Congress that direct systematic phonics instruction should be used in 
all schools, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con Res. 214

       Whereas the ability to read the English language with 
     fluency and comprehension is essential if individuals are to 
     reach their full potential;
       Whereas it is an indisputable fact that written English is 
     based on the alphabetic principle, and is, in fact a phonetic 
     language;
       Whereas the National Institute of Child Health and Human 
     Development (NICHD) has conducted extensive scientific 
     research on reading for more than 34 years, at a cost of more 
     than $200,000,000;
       Whereas the NICHD findings on reading instruction conclude 
     that phonemic awareness, direct systematic phonics 
     instruction in sound-spelling correspondences, including 
     blending of sound-spellings into words, reading 
     comprehension, and regular exposure to interesting books are 
     essential components of any reading program based on 
     scientific research;
       Whereas a consensus has developed around scientific 
     research findings in reading instruction, as presented in the 
     1998 report of the National Research Council, Preventing 
     Reading Difficulties in Young Children;
       Whereas the Learning First Alliance composed of national 
     organizations such as the American Colleges for Teacher 
     Education, American Association of School Administrators, the 
     American Federation of Teachers, Council of Chief State 
     School Officers, National Association of Elementary School 
     Principals, National School Boards Association, National 
     Parent Teachers Association, and National Education 
     Association have agreed that well sequenced systematic 
     phonics instruction is beneficial for all children;
       Whereas more than 50 years of cognitive science, 
     neuroscience, and applied linguistics have confirmed that 
     learning to read is a skill that must be taught in a direct, 
     systematic way;
       Whereas phonics instruction is the teaching of a body of 
     knowledge consisting of 26 letters of the alphabet, 44 
     English speech sounds they represent, and 70 most common 
     spellings for those speech sounds;
       Whereas reading scores continue to decline or remain 
     stagnant, even though Congress has spent more than 
     $120,000,000,000 over the past 30 years for title I programs 
     (of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 6301 et seq.)) with the primary purpose of improving 
     reading skills;
       Whereas the 1998 National Assessment for Educational 
     Progress (NAEP) found that 69 percent of 4th grade students 
     are reading below the proficient level;
       Whereas the 1998 NAEP found that minority students on 
     average continue to lag far behind their non-minority 
     counterparts in reading proficiency, many of whom are in 
     title I programs (of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.));
       Whereas the 1998 NAEP also found that, 90 percent of 
     African American, 86 percent of Hispanic, 63 percent of 
     Asian, and 61 percent of white 4th grade students were 
     reading below proficient levels, many of whom were in title I 
     programs (of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.));
       Whereas more than half of the students being placed in the 
     special learning disabilities category of Special Education 
     have not learned to read;
       Whereas the cost of Special Education, at the Federal, 
     State, and local levels exceeds $60,000,000,000 each year;
       Whereas reading instruction in far too many schools is 
     still based on the whole language philosophy, to the 
     exclusion of all others and often to the detriment of the 
     students;
       Whereas the ability to read is the cornerstone of academic 
     success, and most colleges of education do not offer 
     prospective reading teachers instruction in the structure of 
     spoken and written English, and the scientifically valid 
     principles of effective reading instruction: Now, therefore, 
     be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) phonemic awareness and direct systematic phonics 
     instruction should be used in all schools as a first and 
     essential step in teaching a student to read;
       (2) pre-service professional development of reading 
     teachers should include direct systematic phonics 
     instruction; and
       (3) all Federal programs with a strong reading component 
     should use instructional practices that are based on 
     scientific research in reading.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. McIntosh) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. McIntosh).
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 214 expresses the importance 
of

[[Page H11490]]

using proven, scientifically based reading instruction in the 
classroom, in preservice teacher training and in Federal education 
programs.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Goodling). Although he could not attend when this was discussed in 
committee, the gentleman has given his full support for this.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. What the resolution says basically is a concurrent resolution 
expressing the sense of Congress that direct systematic phonics 
instruction is one of the necessary components of an effective reading 
program.
  I think all of you who are here probably have been taught using many 
methods, including, I imagine everyone, phonics. My wife is a first 
grade teacher of 43 years. If she were told that she could only teach 
phonics, she would probably tell them where to go. If she was told she 
could not teach phonics, she would tell them where to go. If she was 
told she had to teach whole language, she would tell them where to go 
and how to get there. If she was told she could not use whole language 
with all of her other methods of teaching reading, she would tell them 
where to go and how to get there. But the important thing is, it is one 
of the important components in the teaching of reading. I think 
everyone here would agree with that, because that is probably the 
method that was used, and it is scientifically based.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his support and 
his willingness to discharge this bill from committee and commend him 
for his help in getting it to the floor today. I also want to express 
my appreciation to him and his staff for focusing on quality, research-
proven techniques in teaching reading in the Student Results Act, title 
I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act which passed recently; 
and also in the Reading Excellence Act which passed last year.
  The need for this resolution is clear: American students are not 
reading as well as they should and some are not able to read at all. 
The 1998 National Assessment of Education Progress, the NAEP test, has 
found that 69 percent of fourth grade students are reading below the 
proficiency level. Let me repeat that. Sixty-nine percent of fourth 
graders in America are not reading up to standard. Minority children 
have been particularly hard hit by reading difficulties. According to 
the NAEP test, 90 percent of African-Americans, 86 percent of Hispanic 
Americans, and 63 percent of Asian students were reading below the 
proficiency level. That is unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. What we need to 
do is make sure that we focus on doing the best we can to teach those 
children how to read. What that means is that they cannot read history, 
they cannot read literature, they cannot read science in order to 
understand their other classes. No wonder they become frustrated, no 
wonder they disrupt the class, no wonder they drop out of school.
  At least half of the students being placed in the special learning 
disability category of special education have not learned to read. The 
cost of special education, Federal, State and local, is exceeding $60 
billion a year. If only a quarter of those students are there because 
they cannot read, it represents more than $15 billion of effort at 
local schools. Just think how many schools could be built or computers 
purchased or books bought or teachers paid if these students were 
taught to read in the first grade.
  The cost to those who never learn to read adequately is much higher 
than that. Job prospects for those who cannot read are few. Americans 
who cannot read are cut off from the rich opportunities of this Nation. 
The tragedy is that students who cannot read often end up in juvenile 
hall, or on the streets, susceptible to gangs and drugs, or as school 
dropouts.
  But the good news is that this is a problem we can fix. According to 
Dr. Benita Blachman, one of the leading researchers in reading 
instruction, ``direct, systematic instruction about the alphabetic 
code, phonics, is not routinely provided in kindergarten and first 
grade, despite the fact that, given what we know at the moment, this 
might be the most powerful weapon in the fight against illiteracy.''

                              {time}  1115

  As she said, this is perhaps the most powerful weapon in the fight 
against illiteracy. In fact, the evidence is so strong for systematic 
phonics instruction that if the subject being discussed was, say, 
treatment of mumps, there would be no discussion. We would take care of 
it, we would have a plan and the children would be saved. The solution 
is to teach children to read the first time around.
  According to the National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development, the ability to read depends on one's understanding of the 
relationship between letters and speech sounds that they represent. 
Systematic instruction on phonics teaches this skill, 26 letters used 
to symbolize about 44 speech sounds and the most common way they are 
spelled.
  The research in reading makes it clear that all students can benefit 
from phonics instruction and that about one-third of all students need 
explicit training in phonics if they are to learn to read at all. That 
means one-third of our young people today, if they do not get 
instruction in phonics, will never be able to read. That is something 
that we cannot afford to leave unaddressed in this House.
  For children who do not receive reading instruction or even reading 
exposure at home, phonics instruction is essential if they are to learn 
to read.
  Mr. Speaker, according to the American Federation of Teachers, 
``Phonemic awareness instruction, when linked to systematic decoding 
and spelling, is the key to preventing reading failure in children who 
come to school without these prerequisite school.'' That is, those 
children who have not learned to read at home.''
  The NEA states, ``Mastering basic skills is important. Children need 
to know their phonics.'' They are right.
  It not surprising that support for this approach is becoming 
widespread in the education community, from the National Education 
Association to the American Federation of Teachers, the National Parent 
Teacher Association, the Council for Chief School Officers and numerous 
other education groups which form the Learning First Alliance. They 
have concluded that well sequenced systematic phonics instruction is 
beneficial for all children.
  Phonics is now being promoted by the scientific and some in the 
education community as an essential component of effective reading 
instruction.
  On a personnel level, I will share with my colleagues in the House, I 
have heard so much from parents and teachers about the success 
experienced by their children who have received explicit systematic 
phonics training. I have got with me today several statements by Title 
I teachers, one in Indianapolis, on the effectiveness of phonics 
instruction in teaching children to read.
  Mrs. Linda Jones, who teaches learning disabled children in 6th, 7th 
and 8th grade says, ``Since I've been using the Direct Approach,'' 
phonics, ``my children are very excited about learning. One of my major 
problem students has become the best student in the class. Now everyone 
enjoys coming up to the board. We pull words out of reading 
comprehension exercises. Now we are pulling words such as 
`hyposensitize' out of the dictionary,'' states teacher Stuart Wood.
  I also have a letter from a teacher at Allisonville Elementary School 
in Indianapolis. She tells me how her student from Africa, a little boy 
that I actually had a chance to meet, who knew no English when he came 
to that class, his name was Filimon Adhanom, and Filimon did not know 
how to read, did not know how to write, did not know how to speak 
English, and he learned those skills in her classroom with phonics 
instruction.
  In this letter, a summer school teacher in the same district tells 
how her school kids were behind in reading, and they caught up after 
just 15 days, with just 25 minutes a day of phonics instruction.
  In this letter a parent says, ``I am writing because I know the pain 
of a child that attends school every day and cannot read. I am writing 
to you, Mr. Congressman, because 10 years later I see the joy of 
independence in that same child who can now read.''
  I could go on and on. I have a lot of these letters, and they all 
tell the same

[[Page H11491]]

story. And it just is not in my district or just in Indiana. This story 
is being repeated in every community across America.
  That is why I introduced this resolution. It is my hope that it will 
encourage the use of this successful technique in classrooms across 
America.
  Believe it or not, despite the wealth of scientific evidence 
supporting systematic phonics, despite the anecdotal evidence that I 
talked about today, there are in fact children today in America who are 
not receiving this type of instruction, teachers who do not have the 
benefit of this learning tool. There are schools in my own state which 
are having to use their scarce funds to instruct newly hired teachers 
how to teach phonics because they have not been taught in college or in 
their teacher training courses.
  This resolution is aimed at getting the word out, getting the word 
out about the need for phonics instruction, the need for our children 
of all backgrounds to have this instruction so they can have the 
ability to learn and to read. Many students will not get a second 
chance.
  Andrea Neal, a very gifted writer for the Indianapolis Star, put it 
this way: ``It is reasonable and necessary to require elementary 
teachers be trained in the most effective phonetic programs. To do 
otherwise is to commit educational malpractice on our children.''
  We need to start teaching kids to read. Phonics is the way to make 
sure that happens. As the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) 
said, it is one of the ways in which teachers need to be able to teach.
  So while Concurrent Resolution 214 contains no mandate, I hope it 
will convey an important message to schools and teachers and children 
and their parents all across this Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, once again I am befuddled, bewildered, but mostly amazed 
by the explanation given by the chairman of the Committee on Education 
and the Workforce of what this resolution does.
  He says it is only one of many methods that can be used to teach 
reading. But I am reading the resolution itself, and it says ``direct 
systematic phonics instruction should be used in all schools as a first 
and essential step in teaching a student to read.''
  Mr. Speaker, this resolution states that phonics-based instruction 
should be used by all schools in their efforts to teach children to 
read and should be included in pre-service teaching requirements.
  What other insulting gimmicks will the Republican leadership think of 
next? This resolution ignores the volumes of research on reading 
instruction that shows the need for a balance between phonics and whole 
language instructional techniques. This resolution also takes the 
unprecedented and demeaning step of placing Congress in the classroom 
by dictating a particular curriculum choice, regardless of the view of 
our teachers, principals and superintendents at the local level. Is 
this what Republicans mean when they say Washington knows what is best 
for local communities?
  Mr. Speaker, when our committee considered the President's America 
Reads legislation during the last Congress, we learned from witness 
after witness that a solely phonics-based curriculum or solely whole 
language based curriculum is not effective in teaching children to 
read.
  Last year, reading instruction experts testified before our committee 
that a balanced approach, using phonics and whole language, is the most 
effective and proven way to teach children to read.
  What is most objectionable about this resolution is its forcible 
intrusion into the classroom through a Federal endorsement of what 
should be locally determined curriculum.
  Why does the Congress need to make an affirmative statement that 
phonics and phonics solely should be utilized in schools? I say that 
anyone who votes for this resolution dictating how teachers and local 
school boards should teach reading should never again speak of local 
control of our schools.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Schaffer).
  Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the previous speaker and 
others who are considering this matter that the resolution before us is 
a sense of Congress resolution and in no way represents any sort of 
mandate or dictate or requirement at the Federal level, merely a 
statement of opinion based on some simple observations from the 
scientific community and the academic community that phonics works and 
should be preferred.
  Let me give you a perfect example of an expert who speaks forcefully 
on the matter. This is a letter that I received from the Colorado 
Commissioner of Education.
  ``I am writing in response to your recent inquiry,'' which was about 
this bill. ``I strongly support the need to redress the balance in 
American reading instruction. Sadly, over time, that balance has tilted 
against phonics, which throughout our history has been a foundation of 
solid reading skills.
  ``The proper interaction between the 44 sounds, or phonemes, and the 
26 letters of the English language is something that must be well 
understood by all who would aspire to teach our young children. 
Tragically, by their own testimony, our reading teachers in 
overwhelming proportion have not received this training in anywhere 
near the measures needed.
  ``Today, at the national and state levels, there is broad consensus 
that teacher training must be dramatically redesigned. Nowhere is that 
redesign more needed than in the area of reading, the essential 
foundation for all learning. Furthermore, ensuring that every teacher 
possesses a strong grounding in phonics must be at heart of our 
redesign in reading.
  ``Being most grateful for your outstanding work on behalf of Colorado 
children, I remain sincerely yours, William J. Maloney, Colorado 
Commissioner of Education.''
  I would submit there is one more expert that should be considered, 
and this expert is like many throughout the country, this is a 
grandmother who sent me an e-mail on this very bill. Here is what she 
says.
  ``I would like to go on record that I have six grandchildren in 
Larimer and Weld Counties in Colorado, and I must tell you that the two 
that are in Weld County (Eaton School District), are excellent readers, 
which teaches phonics. The four here in Larimer County (Ft. Collins 
schools) are terrible readers, not taught phonics. Thank you.''
  That letter is from B. Bessert of Fort Collins.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Roemer)
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member from the State of 
Missouri for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to articulate some deep reservations and concerns 
about this resolution. Certainly, as a parent of three children, I want 
my children to be able to read; as a member of the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce I want the scientific community to be able 
to make recommendations to our local school boards and to our teachers 
on what method works best; and as a Member of Congress, we certainly 
want to share with the American people some of our ideas on this.
  But as a Member of Congress, I am very hesitant to say that I am the 
expert on reading here in Washington, D.C., and our local school boards 
should prioritize and use this as the first method of teaching our 
children in Indiana, in Nebraska, in Georgia, in New Jersey and 
throughout the country, as to what we should be telling our first grade 
and second grade teachers we think this is the priority, that we think 
this is the first way you should do this; we think this is our 
preferred method, so you should do it in all 50 states. I do not think 
that is our role, quite frankly.
  Now, if the resolution read, as it does in the third resolved clause, 
``all Federal programs with a strong reading component should use 
structural practices that are based on scientific research in 
reading,'' period, I think we could all agree to that. But the first 
resolved clause, probably the most important resolved clause, says 
``Direct systematic phonics instruction should be used in all schools 
as a first and essential step in teaching a student to

[[Page H11492]]

read.'' All schools, the first and essential step.

                              {time}  1130

  I am here to stand up for my local school boards and my local 
teachers and my local parents and say, you guys should figure this out. 
I am not sure we should be telling them the preferred way, the 
priority.
  Additionally, the National Academy of Sciences study issued last year 
recommends a combination of methods, that phonics and whole language 
should be blended for our young people. Now, could we say that? I am 
not even sure we should say they should be blended.
  I think that the third resolve clause, saying that all Federal 
programs with a strong reading component should use instructional 
practices that are based on scientific research in reading, and not 
dictate to our local schools what should be taught first, what should 
be taught in all schools, what should be priorities, what should be 
preferred, I think that goes a bit too far for our local school boards 
and our local parents.
  Let us continue to give them the choices and the discretion, so I 
have reservations and caveats about this resolution.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Horn).
  Mr. HORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, we have experts who will tell us one thing and then 
another, and that is not the test. The test is experience: what happens 
when we teach phonics?
  California went through this for the last 50 years in K through 12 
education. In the thirties in Pasadena and other ``progressive'' 
schools they banned phonics. In one of the major cities in Los Angeles 
County in the fifties they had banned phonics.
  A friend of mine who was a fifth grade teacher kept two erasers in 
her hand. One was when the principal came through the door, to wipe out 
the phonics she had put on the blackboard. That went on for a year or 
so. At the end of that year, achievement tests were given. The 
principal said to her, ``Mrs. Patterson,'' her name was Isabel 
Patterson, ``Mrs. Patterson, you just have a very unusual, unique 
class. In this whole city of 350,000 people, your class has been 25 to 
50 percent ahead of every single other class in this school system.''
  Mrs. Patterson just smiled and said, ``Thank you, Principal.'' He 
praised her teaching and all that. He did not know she was teaching 
phonics. She was the only one in the whole city who was teaching 
phonics. That is why her students were way ahead of every student in 
that city.
  That school district now has adopted phonics, and so have most 
districts in California. They are through with what went on in the 
thirties. I think when we realize that this individual was not only an 
outstanding teacher, she was also becoming an entrepreneur. With her 
limited funds she started buying houses. She gave $2 million to the 
Isabel Patterson Child Development Center at California State 
University, Long Beach.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from 
Missouri, for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, in a couple of days I have one of the most important 
meetings on my schedule for the next couple of months. It is with a 
person named Ms. Jordano. Ms. Jordano is my daughter Jacqueline's first 
grade teacher. My wife and I are going to the parent-teacher 
conference. When we go to the patient-teacher conference, we are going 
to listen to what she has to say, because we respect her ability after 
years in the classroom to know about how to teach a first grader how to 
read.
  Today I find myself in a different role. We are giving unsolicited 
advice to the reading teachers of America as to how they ought to teach 
reading. We certainly are entitled to our own opinion, but I think to 
offer that opinion as an institution is an abrogation and overstepping 
of our authority as the Congress of the United States.
  I would consider voting for this resolution on one condition. If we 
are going to take responsibility for determining reading curriculum for 
the teachers of America, let us give the teachers of America 
responsibility for determining other questions about education. Let us 
let them decide whether to fully fund the IDEA. Let us let them decide 
whether to put 100,000 qualified teachers in classrooms across America. 
Let us let them decide whether to fix the crumbling school buildings 
that exist in communities across America, and build new schools. Let us 
let the teachers of America decide whether we should make a true 
national commitment to pre-kindergarten education, which we do not 
presently have. Let us let them decide whether we should increase Title 
I funding, as many of us advocated on this floor just a few weeks ago.
  I suspect if we yielded that authority to them, that they would vote 
in favor of all those things for education. I suspect the majority will 
not want to do that. For that reason, we should get back in our proper 
role, defeat this superfluous amendment, and pass real education 
legislation to improve America's schools.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Guam 
(Mr. Underwood).
  (Mr. UNDERWOOD asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my dismay and disappointment that this 
House is taking up an entirely unnecessary resolution endorsing phonics 
instruction and criticizing whole language reading instruction.
  As a former dean of a school of education and a teacher trainer who 
included a discussion of the fundamental underpinnings of various 
teaching strategies in several courses that I taught for nearly two 
decades, this really does take the cake. This is one of the most 
preposterous resolutions I have ever seen about a teaching strategy.
  Different teaching strategies work for different people for different 
reasons. Teaching strategies have a psychology base and a philosophical 
base which is continually tested and tempered by practice and by 
classroom trial and error, by experience in unique and diverse 
communities around the country.
  To quote something that is frequently said on the other side, ``The 
best decisions about education are left to individual communities, to 
individual teachers in classrooms, to the local situation,'' of course, 
except when it comes to phonics versus whole language.
  I cannot imagine why a national legislative body would spend its time 
on this issue, which is hotly debated and should be hotly discussed in 
classrooms and in schools of education around the country, but a 
subject for congressional thinking? Neuroscience, applied linguistics, 
phonemes, phonics, morphemes, syntax, grammatical rules which are 
psychologically real in our minds, to speech events, understanding 
speech events, how many people here are equipped to understand the 
meaning of these terms and debate them with comfort and assurance?
  What is next, a resolution on new math, a resolution on creationism, 
a resolution on the role of lab work in science courses, a resolution 
on direct instruction, a resolution on our favorite surgical technique 
in medicine, on our favorite offense to be used by football teams 
around the country, a resolution on the superiority of walking over 
running in exercise?
  The best way to teach reading is an issue which belongs in research 
institutions. It is a matter which is best left up to classroom 
professionals and for communities to sort out.
  This resolution, as my colleague, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Clay) pointed out, is so absurd, it is the one time that perhaps I 
really wish I could vote on this floor so I could vote against it.
  Written English is a crazy language in written form. The companion 
measure to this should be to go back to that earlier movement in the 
earlier part of this century when we tried to make English totally 
phonetic. That would

[[Page H11493]]

really facilitate phonics, and then we would have to spell phonics F-O-
N-I-K-S.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Isakson), a member of the committee.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise for a couple of reasons. The 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) made some very great statements, 
and he referred to the resolve clauses, but he neglected to refer to 
the amendment which appears at the end of that page which, in my 
judgment is effective, as one who is a big advocate for children, 
because it amends the whole code, which says that phonics is one of the 
necessary components.
  The truth of the matter for any of us who have been in education, 
this debate today is like many debates that go on in America between 
whole language advocates and phonics advocates. I will tell the 
Members, both of them are right. Both of them should be included. This 
says our teachers do have the choice, and it is very important.
  I rise today because I want to pay tribute to the United States 
Department of Education for providing us in Georgia with a Goals 2000 
grant which allowed us to develop the phonics-based Reading First 
program in Georgia under Dr. Cindy Cupp, which enabled our Title I 
schools, after its implementation, to raise our children across the 
board by higher than the 25th percentile in each and every category.
  Phonics is one, but not the only one. It should be included and not 
excluded. With the amendment, this resolution ensures that we recognize 
it as a methodology, it is not a curriculum, and we encourage schools 
to use all the best methods to teach our children.
  I commend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. McIntosh). Most importantly 
of all, I commend this Congress for focusing on America's number one 
problem in public education. That is, the poor reading performance of 
our children as they leave the third grade.
  We should give our teachers every resource to meet the needs of every 
child, whether it be whole language or whether it be phonics-based.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I would respond to the gentleman from Georgia, who said 
that the amendment to this bill corrected what the problem was. It does 
not.
  An amendment that amends the title, and that is what this amendment 
or footnote at the end of this resolution says, is ``concurrent 
resolution expressing the sense of Congress that direct, systematic 
phonics instruction is one of the necessary components of an effective 
reading program.''
  That is just in the title, it is not in the body of this resolution. 
It has no effect whatsoever on what is in this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would urge my colleagues to support this 
resolution, and would like to share with them some of the materials I 
have put into the Record.
  The first is a statement from Indiana State Senator Teresa Lubbers, 
who is an expert on education, having been a teacher herself and worked 
mightily in that area in our State Senate. She has worked to improve 
the performance of Hoosier students, and she is absolutely convinced 
that our success depends on our ability to produce competent teachers.
  She goes on to say, one ingredient of that is, ``I am also convinced 
that phonics awareness is the preferred and proven way to teach 
reading. We do our children a disservice when we allow them to move 
ahead without a mastery of reading, which ensures frustration and 
failure throughout their school years.''
  Mr. Speaker, I would mention again the statistic I said in my opening 
statement: 67 percent of our fourth graders in America are below 
standard in reading. That is unacceptable. This resolution says, let us 
do everything possible to make that work for them. Phonics is one of 
the ways in which teachers can do that.
  A second statement that I would like to enter into the Record would 
be from Linda Wight Harmon, who is a parent. She talks about her eldest 
daughter, Catherine, who uses the skills of reading in the second 
grade, where she learned phonics from a private tutor in a computerized 
language program.
  Another is a list of several success stories from teachers in our 
public schools in Indiana.
  The letter that I mentioned earlier from an elementary schoolteacher 
in grade one, Ms. Kristi Trapp, who talked about her student from 
Africa, the young man who was not able to read at all but was able to 
learn in her school; then also another teacher from that same school, 
Mrs. Karin Jacob.
  Finally, we have several other things from parents. One of them is 
from Diane and Bill Walters, who talk about the never-ending story of 
trying to get Justin, their son, to be able to read, and several 
statements that were prepared for the interim study committee in the 
Indiana State Senate, one from Ms. Diane Badgley, another came from 
Peggy Schafir, another from Susan Warner.
  All of these parents and teachers talk about the success of phonics 
for their children. That is what we are talking about today, is the 
children of America and how we can help them learn to read.
  Finally, I include for the Record a list of commonly asked questions 
about reading instruction that was prepared by Dr. Patrick Groff, who 
is a board member and senior adviser to the NRRF.
  The material referred to is as follows:

           Commonly Asked Questions About Reading Instruction

       (By Dr. Patrick Groff, NRRF Board Member & Senior Advisor)

       Q: What Do Children Need To Learn In Order To Read Well?
       A: Four main things: (1) phonics information and how to 
     apply it to recognize words; (2) familiarity with the 
     meanings of words; (3) the literal comprehension of what 
     authors intended to convey; and (4) a critical attitude 
     toward what is read.
       Q: What Is Phonics Information?
       A: The relationship or correspondences between how we speak 
     and spell words. The individual speech sounds in our oral 
     language generally are represented regularly by certain 
     letters, e.g., the spoken word--rat--is spelled r-a-t.
       Q: What Is A Phonics Rule?
       A: The rule that a speech sound is spelled frequently by a 
     certain letter (or cluster of letters), and in no other way. 
     For example, the speech sounds /r/-/a/-/t/, in this order, 
     are spelled r-a-t over 96 percent of the time. Children apply 
     phonics rules to gain the approximate pronunciations of 
     written words. After this, they usually can infer the normal 
     pronunciations.
       A: How Does The Application Of Phonics Information Work?
       A: The child first perceives the individual letters in a 
     word, e.g., rat. He or she than ``sounds out'' this word by 
     saying its three speech sounds, /r/-/a/-/t/. As children's 
     skills grow in phonics application, they can quickly 
     recognize frequently occurring letter clusters such as at (as 
     in fat, cat, mat, etc.).
       Q: How Is Phonics Information Best Taught?
       A: In a direct, systematic, and intensive fashion. Here 
     both teacher and pupil know precisely what are the 
     instructional goals, and the skills to be learned are 
     arranged into a hierarchy of difficulty, and adequate 
     practice for learning to mastery is provided.
       Q: What About Children Who Can Recognize Individual Words, 
     But Whose Reading Comprehension Is Relatively Poor?
       A: These children are lacking in one or all of the 
     following: (1) background knowledge in the topics they 
     attempt to read; (2) knowledge of the meanings of words in 
     these topics; (3) ability to make inferences about the 
     content being read; and (4) ability to follow the 
     organization or structure of the text that is pursued. 
     Teaching for these children should concentrate on these 
     matters.
       Q: What Is The Relationship Of Knowledge Of Phonics 
     Information and Reading Comprehension?
       A: Nothing develops the quick and accurate (automatic) 
     recognition of written words better than does proper phonics 
     instruction. Then, nothing relates more closely to reading 
     comprehension than does automatic word recognition. The 
     ability to recognize words automatically allows children to 
     direct their mental energy when reading toward the 
     comprehension of written material.
       Q: My School Tells Me That My Child Has Been Taught To 
     Apply Phonics Information. But He/She Still Has Difficulty 
     Recognizing Words. What Is The Problem?
       A: It is highly probable that your school actually teaches 
     phonics information in only an indirect, unsystematic, and 
     non-intensive manner. Since many of today's schools do not 
     teach phonics skills sufficiently nor suitably, home 
     instruction often becomes necessary.
       Q: Isn't The Spelling Of English Too Unpredictable Or 
     Irregular For The Application Of Phonics Information To Work 
     Well?
       A: No. True, there are notable exceptions to some phonics 
     rules, e.g., the pronunciation and spelling of tough. 
     Nonetheless, the

[[Page H11494]]

     notable successes of direct and systematic phonics programs 
     disprove the above charge.
       Q: My Child Reads Slowly, But Accurately, At The Same Speed 
     Both Orally And Silently. Is This A Matter Of Concern.
       A: Accuracy in reading almost always is a more important 
     goal than rate of reading, especially with beginning readers. 
     Very high rates of speed in reading, in fact, are 
     illusionary. They inevitable are simply scanning or skimming, 
     rather than true reading. Even the average university student 
     actually reads around the same speed, orally and silently.
       Q: Isn't It True That Many Children Cannot Learn Phonics 
     Information?
       A: To the contrary, rarely is this so. Only the small 
     number of children with genuine central nervous system 
     dysfunctions experience significant difficulty learning 
     properly taught phonics information.
       Q: My Child's Teacher Says That ``Sight'' Words, Recognized 
     As ``Wholes,'' Must Be Learned Before Phonics Instruction Is 
     Begun. Is She Correct?
       A; No. The Assumption that children recognize words by 
     ``sight,'' that is, without using their letters as cues to 
     their recognition, is not substantiated by the experimental 
     research. Individual letters are the cues all readers use to 
     recognize words. For example, we know cat and rat are 
     different words because we see that their first letters are 
     not the same. ``Sight'' word advocates never answer the 
     question: ``If children recognize words as wholes, how are 
     the wholes recognized?
       Q: What Is A Reasonable Time Schedule For Children To 
     Develop The Ability To Recognize Words Independently, Without 
     Someone Else's Help?
       A: With proper phonics teaching it is justifiable to expect 
     the normal child to reach this state by the end of grade two. 
     More apt pupils can become self-sufficient in reading at even 
     an earlier age. Reading independently means the ability of 
     children to read without help any topic they normally can 
     talk about or otherwise understand.
       Q: I Have Heard About The ``Look/Say'' Method Of Teaching 
     Reading--Is This A Valid Approach?
       A: No. ``Look-Say'' methodology assumes that if children 
     are given enough repeated exposures to words as ``wholes,'' 
     they will learn to identify them as ``sight'' words. Phonics 
     teaching is de-emphasized and delayed. ``Look-Say'' suffers 
     the same basic weakness as any other ``sight'' word method.
       Q: What Are the Best Ways To Test My Child's Reading 
     Abilities?
       A: First, listen to him or her read aloud. If he or she 
     guesses at words, some additional direct and systematic 
     phonics instruction is called for. Then, jot down critically 
     important parts of the story your child reads aloud. Have him 
     or her retell the story. How many consequential points were 
     omitted? If this is more than 20 percent, discuss ahead of 
     time with your child the topic and the special words of the 
     next story he or she reads. Unfamiliar words and topics are 
     the greatest handicaps to reading comprehension.
       Q: Is The ``Language Experience'' Method Effective For 
     Reading Development?
       A: In this approach children dictate sentences to teachers, 
     who transcribe them on large sheets of paper as children 
     watch. It is theorized here that anything children can so 
     ``write'' they also easily can read. Since most LE programs 
     do not teach phonics directly, systematically, and 
     intensively, they do not prove to be a superior way to teach 
     children to read.
       Q: I have Heard That Children's Guessing At Words, Using 
     Sentence Contexts As Cues To Word Identities, Can Substitute 
     For The Application Of Phonics Information. True Or False?
       A: False. The use of context cues is a relatively immature 
     and crude means of word recognition, utilized extensively 
     only by beginning readers. Able, mature readers generally 
     recognize words automatically, not through the use of context 
     cues.
       Q: Won't The Intensive Teaching Of Phonics Information 
     Cause Reading Comprehension To Be Largely Ignored Or De-
     emphasized In Schools?
       A: This is an unverified apprehension. Intensive phonics 
     instruction simply develops a necessary tool for the 
     expeditious realization of the ultimate goal of reading: to 
     comprehend literally, critically analyze, and enjoy and 
     appreciate written material. In fact, intensive phonics 
     teaching is the most felicitous and quickest way to create 
     independent readers, i.e., children who can readily 
     comprehend any written topic about which they can talk or 
     think.
       Q: Does Teaching Children To Syllabicate Long Words Help 
     Them To Recognize These Words?
       A: Yes, with proper teaching. Children readily can identify 
     the number of syllables in a spoken word. Thus, they 
     correctly will say there are four syllables in interesting. 
     Teaching dictionary syllabication of words to help children 
     read them is not the most productive practice, however. A 
     better procedure is to teach children to first identify the 
     vowel letters in long words, and then to attach the consonant 
     letters that follow. The syllabication of interesting thus 
     becomes int-er-est-ing. Manipulate becomes man-ipul-ate.
       Q: Books Called ``Basal Readers'' Are Widely Used in 
     Schools. Are They The Best Means By Which To Teach Phonics 
     Information?
       A: These books, given grade-level designations, are 
     accompanied by instructional manuals for teachers. 
     Unfortunately, they generally do not teach phonics 
     information adequately. With rare exceptions, they do not 
     teach enough phonics information to prepare children to 
     recognize quickly and accurately the words they present in 
     their stories. It has been found that almost any basal reader 
     system is improved by the addition of intensive phonics 
     teaching.
       Q: Many Schools Now Tell Children To Use ``Invented 
     Spelling.'' Are There Any Dangers In This Practice
       A: Yes. To avoid frustrating these young pupils, they 
     should be provided words to read that their phonics training 
     has prepared them to recognize. Also, long and convoluted 
     sentences should be avoided. As children's reading abilities 
     grow, these controls can be relaxed progressively.
       Q: It Is Said That Literacy Instruction Should Be 
     ``Integrated.'' What Does This Mean?
       A: Literacy consists of writing as well as reading ability. 
     It greatly reinforces a child's ability to recognize a word 
     if he or she learns to spell and handwrite it immediately 
     after learning to identify it. Urging children to write this 
     word at this time in original sentences has the same 
     desirable effect.
       Q: My School District Has Adopted The ``Whole Language'' 
     Approach To Reading Development. What Are Its Views On 
     Phonics Teaching?
       A: Whole Language advocates insist that reading instruction 
     must not be broken down and taught as a sequence of 
     subskills, ranging from the least to the most difficult for 
     children to learn. They assert that all reading skills of 
     every kind must be learned coinstantaneously. Therefore, 
     whatever phonics information individual children may need to 
     know they easily will infer on their own as they read ``real 
     books.'' Since children supposedly best learn to read simply 
     ``by reading,'' no direct and systematic teaching of phonics 
     is necessary. It is important to note that there is no 
     experimental research evidence to support this view of 
     phonics instruction.
       Q: What Is The Whole Language Theory Regarding Reading 
     Comprehension?
       A: The Whole Language (WL) approach urges children to omit, 
     substitute, and add words--at will--in the materials they 
     read. It also encourages children to ``construct'' 
     idiosyncratic versions of the meanings that authors intended 
     to communicate. It is a ``pernicious'' practice to expect 
     children to give ``right'' answers regarding word identities 
     and the meanings of written text, a leader of the Whole 
     Language movement admonishes teachers. As with their views on 
     phonics instruction, the proponents of Whole Language offer 
     no empirical verification for their opinions about how 
     reading comprehension should be developed. The most 
     unfortunate consequence of Whole Language teaching is that 
     children are not made ready by it to read critically. Since 
     children in Whole Language classes are not always expected to 
     gain the exact meanings that authors intended to impart, they 
     are not prepared to examine them critically.
       Q: Shouldn't Children Who Speak Nonstandard English (e.g., 
     ``I Ain't Got No Pencil. They be Having' My Pencil.'') Learn 
     Standard English Before Being Taught To Read?
       A: While mastery of standard English is required in many 
     jobs, it is not expedient to wait until children who speak 
     nonstandard English learn the standard dialect before 
     teaching them to read. Moreover, there have been successful 
     reading programs with nonstandard speakers, who usually are 
     children from low-income families. Taking time out of reading 
     programs to deliberately try to change children's dialects 
     neither is an economical use of this time, nor particularly 
     effective in developing reading skills. Learning to read 
     standard English, fortunately, does have the desirable side 
     effect of teaching children how to speak standard English.
       Q: Some Schools Say They Are Teaching ``Metacognition'' In 
     Their Reading Programs. Is This A Necessary Or Valuable 
     Practice?
       A: Metacognition refers in part to children's conscious 
     awareness of how well they are progressing, during the actual 
     time they are reading. For example, children would ask 
     themselves, ``Does what I am reading make sense to me? If 
     not, why not?'' Schools that emphasize this overt self-
     examination by children of their reading and performances 
     find that pupils learn to comprehend reading material better 
     than otherwise is possible.
       Q: What Is an Effective Way For Parents And Other 
     Interested Parties To Find Out If Their Schools Are Teaching 
     Reading Properly?
       A: The first question to ask of schools is, ``Have you 
     adopted the Whole Language approach to reading development?'' 
     If so, describe how it is conducted.'' If the answer is yes, 
     it usually will be the case that pupils are not being given 
     proper instruction in word recognition nor reading 
     comprehension. Then, ask to see the syllabus for teaching 
     phonics information that teachers are required to follow. 
     Determine if phonics information is being taught directly, 
     systematically, and intensively. Calculate how adequately 
     children are prepared, through phonics lessons, to recognize 
     the words in the stories they are given to read.
       Q: I Have Discovered That My School Teaches Reading 
     Improperly. Now What Do I Do?
       A: The policies for reading instruction ordinarily are set 
     by the central office staff of the school district. It is 
     delegated to do so by

[[Page H11495]]

     the school board. Ask these officials to defend in writing 
     the defective reading program they have sanctioned for use by 
     teachers. Particularly, request citations of the experimental 
     research on which this unsound reading program is based. If 
     you have found that the unsatisfactory reading program is the 
     Whole Language approach, you will receive no such list of 
     experimental research studies, since the empirical research 
     does not support Whole Language. In this event, demand that 
     your school board make a public policy statement as to 
     whether the district's reading programs must be based on 
     experimental research evidence. Few, if any, school boards 
     will say otherwise. Then, remind the board that it logically 
     cannot continue to authorize the use of the Whole Language 
     scheme. Your appearances at board meetings, and letters to 
     the media will give you added opportunities to convey this 
     message.
                                  ____

                                                   April 13, 1999.
     To Whom It May Concern:
       Filimon Adhanom is a student in my room who came from a 
     remote area in Africa. The language he speaks we can not find 
     an interpreter for. He came to me this year with no English 
     background and no school experience at all.
       Each day in my classroom, we would work on the sounds on 
     the ``Smart Chart'' as a whole group. Each day Filimon would 
     sit and listen. During our ``Smart Chart'' time each day I 
     would allow the children to come up and say the sounds of a 
     certain row. Then one day I happened to call on Filimon just 
     to see if he was catching on and to my amazement he could say 
     the whole column of sounds. He earned a star for his effort 
     and before long he knew all the sounds on the ``Smart 
     Chart''.
       Soon after this Filimon starting sounding out words he 
     really didn't know the meaning, but because of the sounds he 
     had learned from the chart he now can read, sound out most 
     words, spell, write, and even spell big daddy words that have 
     three syllables. The ``Direct Approach'' to phonics gave 
     Filimon the key to unlocking the world of English and how it 
     works.
       I feel that the Direct Approach to Phonics is a necessary 
     tool to helping not only ESL students, but all students high 
     or low. It has been one of the most encouraging programs I 
     have seen for years. I wish every child could have the 
     opportunity to work with the ``Smart Chart''. It gives each 
     child a key to unlock the world of letters, sounds, and 
     reading.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Ms. Karin Jacob.

  The following statements were given by Hoosier parents before the 
Interim Study Committee of the Indiana State Senate.

                      Testimony From Diane Badgley

       I'm writing because I know the pain of a child that attends 
     school everyday and can not read. I'm writing because 10 
     years later I see the joy of independence in the same child 
     who can now read and has been given a choice to his future. I 
     have learned, children don't fail, adults fail children.
       Kyle started preschool at age 3, I helped in the school, we 
     were fortunate enough to not have me away at work. This 
     allowed for a lot of time for one on one interactions and 
     reading. I was always told that if I read to my children 
     every day they would become readers. It worked well for 
     Kyle's older sister Jodie. She was reading before she entered 
     the first grade.
       Throughout preschool, kindergarten and first grade Kyle 
     struggled with knowing the names of all the letters in the 
     alphabet. In second grade we tried to get him to understand 
     the letters on a page can be sounded out to make words. This 
     seemed impossible and painful for all of us including the 
     school. As a result of daily embarrassment and the need to 
     fit in, Kyle was able to memorize some books, so it appeared 
     he was reading. However, after testing, the Public School 
     recommended Special Education placement.
       Kyle was removed from his second grade class and placed in 
     a smaller class with children with all different emotional 
     and physical special needs and with a teacher who thought she 
     knew how to help him. This is when emotional struggles 
     started for Kyle. In his world he was not only failing 
     academicly but also socially. I assured Kyle the placement 
     was temporary, because he would be taught to read in this 
     class and then be able to rejoin his friends.
       But, in third grade he was still not reading. When Kyle was 
     invited to sleep overs at a friend's house, he refused for 
     fear he would have to play games that required reading 
     (Monopoly, Clue, Charades), or take a turn reading jokes out 
     of a joke book, or read a scary story at midnight. Once, Kyle 
     tried going to a sleep over. He hadn't been there long when 
     we got a call asking us to pick him up. He was behaving 
     badly. You see, Kyle would much rather be seen as a bully 
     than a dummy.
       Kyle was promoted each year. Each year, he struggled with 
     reading and with his peers, they teased him, they couldn't 
     believe he couldn't read. He was passed on year after year 
     because of Special Ed. Accommodations and adaptations--books 
     on tape, an aide to write his essay tests, reduced spelling 
     list, untimed test--and working through recess and lunch to 
     get all the work done. But still not reading enough to be 
     independent. I kept thinking what year will they focus on the 
     reading?
       One day when he was in fifth grade, I found Kyle's older 
     sister reading him a note from a girl in his grade. That was 
     when I realized, ``This is all wrong. He will never fit in 
     unless I find a way to teach him to read. He needs to be out 
     playing during recess, eating lunch with other kids. Playing 
     games at sleep overs, playing on the computer, reading and 
     writing his own love notes.''
       My husband, Keith, is a director of a department for a 
     plastics company in Richmond, Indiana. Keith admitted to me 
     that the would never hire Kyle--his own son--unless he 
     learned to read. Even in a maintenance position, Kyle would 
     be a safety hazard in the work place.
       I realized then, as Kyle's mother, I had nothing to loose. 
     I signed a home schooling form and enrolled Kyle in a private 
     reading clinic. The clinics reading instruction is based on 
     the 30 years of NICHD (National Institute of Child Health and 
     Human Development) research. Kyle learned how to break apart 
     words into sounds. For him, this was the key that unlocked 
     the door. He went every day with homework on weekends. It was 
     intensive, bit it was like magic. Kyle wanted to go! He was 
     reading on grade level in 6 months!
       This experience taught me that Kyle did not fail reading 
     all those years, the system failed Kyle. I am not asking 
     public schools to teach all children Physics X, we are 
     talking about reading. We know now because of the NIH 
     research all children can learn to read, it is our 
     responsibility to teach them.
       Since Kyle's success, I have attempted to help other 
     parents and schools with their children. Kyle is in High 
     School now, and is still reading on grade level and is on the 
     academic track. I have been unable to stop telling my story 
     and have started `Parents' Coalition for Literacy. My board 
     is made up of businessmen, an attorney, a pediatrician, 
     college department heads, primary and secondary teachers and 
     parents. We now know it will take a whole community to teach 
     ALL children.
       How well one reads sets the foundation for future success 
     in school, work and relationships. Because our family was 
     financially able to help Kyle build that foundation, he is 
     ready to face the future. Our hope is that all Indiana 
     children will have the same choices.
                                  ____


                      Testimony of Susan L. Warner

       Good Afternoon. I'm Susan Warner, and I want to thank you 
     for taking the time to have this important discussion about 
     reading. I title this humble effort ``Bill's Story.'' My six 
     year journey to learn about the teaching of reading began 
     when our son showed difficulties in speech. We took three 
     year old Bill to his school for speech testing. This 
     coincided with the pre-school teacher noticing that Bill 
     didn't always ``hear'' her. Bill did have chronic ear 
     infections as a toddler, so we had his hearing tested. In 
     both sets of tests, he was pronounced, ``just fine,'' and we 
     were temporarily relieved. In kindergarten he passed all of 
     his ``sounds'' of the alphabet test. I taught him ``hooked on 
     phonics'' in hopes that it would help him learn to read, but 
     nothing worked. I was beginning to learn about the difference 
     between ``phonics'' and ``phonemic awareness.'' By this time 
     Bill's happy disposition was gone, and it was a huge 
     undertaking just to get him to the bus stop because he hated 
     school.
       First grade testing revealed that Bill tested 
     ``borderline'' by state guidelines. He did not qualify for an 
     IEP, because the results of testing did not show a two year 
     grade deficit in learning yet. Private testing confirmed that 
     although Bill possessed an IQ of 109, he had difficulty 
     processing auditory information. We still wonder why the 
     state guidelines are structured to allow children to fail.
       Again, on our own, we found a program called Fast Forward 
     which Bill completed the summer before second grade. The 
     second grade teacher was confident that with intensive 
     phonics he would make progress. It didn't take long to see 
     that Bill was still failing and frustrated, and needed help. 
     Through a friend, we hired Linda Mood Bell clinicians. It was 
     no surprise that Bill now at age 8, was reading far below his 
     ability.
       It is difficult to express what the Linda Mood Bell program 
     has done for our son. After eight weeks he was finally 
     reading. The LMB tutors were my son's lifeline. Without them, 
     Bill would have failed school at second grade. Bill made 
     gains in every area. When his principal and teacher came to 
     observe, they could not believe his progress. Bill started to 
     be his funny self. I knew that we were making progress, when 
     he went from saying that tutoring made him want to say the 
     ``CH--'' word, to after 8 weeks saying that he wanted to say 
     the ``SH--'' word. Unfortunately, the rebuilding of his self-
     esteem will probably take years.
       Last week Bill earned his first ``spelling star.'' We are 
     using the tools that the LMB program has taught us. 
     Unfortunately, he is still behind after spending over 
     $25,000.00 in testing and remediation, and we have a long 
     road ahead of us. Instead of working to pay this off, my days 
     are spent driving back and forth for the purpose of expensive 
     remediation. However, it is a small price to pay because our 
     son no longer looks at the pictures in a book to figure our a 
     word. What happens to children who don't have Pat and Susan 
     Warner for parents?
       I am so proud of Bill. He has persevered through things 
     that no child should have to experience. From the humiliation 
     in front of his peers, to some thinking that he was just 
     lazy, and everyone telling him that he could

[[Page H11496]]

 learn to read, when he could not. He will be tested yet again this 
     month to see if he qualifies for an IEP.
       The good news is that in PHM, we TOPA tested all of our 
     kindergarteners in the spring. We have identified children 
     who have a lack of phonemic awareness. They will get 
     Earobics, and some will get Fast Forward. We are looking to 
     incorporate Structures of Intellect into our gym curriculum. 
     Our teachers are being trained in programs such as Linda Mood 
     Bell, Language, and Wilson. This type of early intervention 
     will make a difference.
       As an elected school board member, I will continue to 
     support programs for early intervention. The new 
     accountability legislation demands results. I hope the state 
     will help pay for results. I intend to be accountable, but 
     schools need your support.
       Recently, I leafed through the contents, and indexes of 
     text books pertaining to the teaching of reading at a local 
     college. I found little to support the current research about 
     teaching reading. I returned Monday to check, and found two 
     books that did explain phonemic awareness. Unfortunately 
     these were masters degree texts. It should be no surprise, 
     that many children don't learn to read. It is a crime.
       I will continue to channel my energy into improving the way 
     we teach children. It is how I avoid being consumed by what 
     has happened to my son, by a state system, that should 
     protect children. I urge this committee to please take steps 
     to show us that you support improvement too. Thank you.
                                  ____


              Testimony of Diana, Bill and Justin Walters

       There is a popular childs book, titled, ``The Never Ending 
     Story''. Well, this is our sons never ending story.
       Today Justin is sixteen, his story began over nine years 
     ago. Justin comes from a two parent home he has a older 
     sister, a dog of his own and a pony. Justins parents are both 
     college graduates. He has had a well rounded family life and 
     social life. We believe we did ``all the right things'', we 
     began reading to Justin and his sister daily at a very early 
     age. Nursery school with French class, music, and art began 
     at age three. We waited the extra year to begin our son in 
     school. Justin began his first year at age six. His class had 
     60 students all in one huge room. Two teachers one aid. We 
     parents volunteered weekly to help. Even at this young age 
     his teacher chose to put Justin in the lower reading group. 
     Why? He had not even begun to read yet. I was a twice a week 
     volunteer I saw the other students picking up books and just 
     read. Was our son not doing the same? I was told not to 
     worry, some catch on sooner than others just go home and work 
     on the alphabet and read to him. Allow him to enjoy reading.
       Justin began first grade at Madison in the Penn Harris 
     Madison school district. We noticed at once that Justin is 
     not able or did not respond to reading his first grade books 
     out loud to us. He preferred that we read them to him. He 
     enjoyed the stories but he had no knowledge of how to sound 
     the words out. We were told after questioning the teacher not 
     to worry that he understood the concept, just to keep reading 
     to him, and point to the words, he would ``catch on.'' We did 
     this every night after school, we believed that the educated 
     teacher knew how to teach reading.
       By the third grade we grew even more frantic. Justin was 
     doing well in most classes, keeping up, even doing better 
     than average in Math, Science, History. He had great friends 
     and the teachers thought that he was a wonderful kid. He was 
     very intelligent for his age. He was a great kid. One thing 
     still stood out, he could not read the books he brought home. 
     His father and I took turns reading his school books for him, 
     Justin continued to listen and remember what we read.
       Justin was fortunate enough at this time to have a 
     substitute teacher. To our surprise she stopped me in the 
     hall at school one volunteer day. Asking me if I had noticed 
     that Justin was having trouble reading, perhaps he had a 
     reading disability. This was the first time that a teacher 
     had come to me, this was the first time anyone had said the 
     word disability! Was this why he could not ``Catch On''? This 
     substitute suggested that the school have Justin tested. With 
     her help we were able to go through the channels to have 
     Justin tested. The tests showed that Justin did have more 
     than a two year lag in reading, while being average and above 
     in the others subjects. We were told that he must have a 
     reading disability, but, when asked what, these teachers and 
     experts could not tell us. Justin could be given a I.E.P. 
     Individual Educational Plan, and put into a government paid 
     program, ``Chapter One''. This class was for forty-five 
     minutes with twelve or fifteen other students. The teacher 
     was a aid said to have taught reading in New York State. We 
     were also told that we should be very happy for these 
     accommodations. We were hopeful that this was the solution 
     for Justin, these were ``trained educated'' people in charge 
     of our sons education.
       By Justin's fourth and fifth grades years the school 
     corporation sent a part time Learning Disability teacher out 
     to our school. Justin received 45 min. daily reading help. 
     This same teacher would also read Justin's tests for him and 
     work sheets. When asked how he was doing, she said that 
     Justin had some kind of reading disability but was not sure 
     what. When asked about Justin's lack of phonics and his 
     inability to sound out words, she said that he was fine in 
     that area.
       Justin was now going into the Middle School. His L.D. 
     teacher was concerned that he would not make it in a regular 
     class without modifications. She was scared that he would get 
     lost. So, it was suggested that he be put into direct 
     services for all his classes.
       Justin's first day was a nightmare. He came home in tears, 
     asking ``what had he done so wrong as to be put in that 
     room'' he described the classroom as kids who did not care, 
     they stood on tables and sat under them, they yelled and 
     some cursed. He was scared. Justin was not in the L.D. 
     program for a behavior problem or a attention problem. He 
     just could not read to his grade level. Within minutes of 
     Justin's arrival home his new teacher called. She asked 
     the same question, ``why was Justin in her room'' it was 
     clear he did not belong there. She suggested that he go 
     back into the regular class room but that he could go to 
     her for help. When he could find her and when she had 
     time. She has twenty-one or more other students. Justin 
     was also given 45 min., daily direct reading time with a 
     untrained aid. He was told to read to her, and if he tried 
     hard enough that he would read better. He read, she 
     corrected his misread words. This went on for sixth and 
     seventh grades. During this time we had continued trouble 
     with the teachers of Justin's classes even taking time to 
     read his I.E.P. We were told by one that they had too many 
     to read and she for one did not have time to read them. 
     Justin struggled and tried to cope. We continue to 
     question and to seek help.
       By Justin's eighth grade year he had lost his friends, he 
     believed that they were embarrassed to have a friend who 
     could not read. His best friend of eight years stopped 
     calling, stopped coming over. Justin would sneak into the 
     L.D. room for help, hoping that none of his friends would see 
     him.
       After about a month of school, we decided that we needed to 
     help, and save our son. We enrolled Justin in a newly opened 
     private school. He needed quality teachers who would give him 
     a quality education. We believed that the I.E.P. was just a 
     bad fitting Band-Aid. It helped him to cope but did not deal 
     with his real issues. We did not have much time in Justin's 
     educational life to save him.
       Justin had a great year. The school tailored better to 
     Justin's way of learning. He had wonderful caring teachers. 
     Justin's self-esteem rose. He saw that he could learn. But, 
     Justin still was not reading anywhere close to grade level. 
     We were still trying to keep up with all his reading at home. 
     This school lasted only for one short year, but while still 
     open, in the spring the school offered space to a language 
     program called ``Linda Mood Bell''.
       We decided to have Justin tested, the results told us 
     Justin was in the eighth grade trying to cope at a First 
     Grade reading level. No wonder Justin could not take notes, 
     read his school books, or even write verbal instructions 
     down. This program was a intense phonemic awareness program, 
     after researching this method we learned that there had been 
     great success with teaching a non reader with this program. 
     We planned to begin as soon as possible. To Justin's 
     misfortune, the school after one year lost its support and 
     funding. It closed and with it we lost the reading program, 
     before he was able to begin.
       Justin returned to the public school system, again with a 
     I.E.P. In his ninth grade year, he still read between first 
     and a fourth grade level, trying to again ``keep up''.
       In November of that year, we and Justin, decided that he 
     could not cope any longer. Justin had to read that was the 
     bottom line.
       We, along with other parents from this area having the same 
     problems with the schools reading or non reading programs, 
     decided we needed to take drastic measures. After doing our 
     own research we continued to read over and over that a non-
     reader would greatly benefit in a phonemic awareness program. 
     Sharing the expense of air flight, room and board, local 
     transportation, plus a hourly fee we parents brought teachers 
     from the Linda Mood Bell program back.
       With the agreement of our school system Justin would attend 
     a four hour daily intensive reading program. Every morning he 
     would go to the one on one program, working with the Linda 
     Mood Bell instructors. At noon we would drive him back to 
     High School for his required classes. Justin did this for 
     four months; at the end of this time Justin was tested again. 
     He tested at eighth grade reading level with a fifth grade 
     spelling level. In some tests he even tested higher. He was 
     able to read! He was able to see a new word and break it down 
     and sound it out. He felt good about himself, he really could 
     be taught to read. He was not a failure.
       That summer he attend summer school catching up on missed 
     required classes. He then went to one to two hour sessions 
     daily with a Linda Mood Bell teacher that I brought back for 
     the month of June.
       Things are not perfect yet, he still needs encouragement, 
     Justin continues working with a tutor out of the school 
     system, so he may receive the correct reading program suited 
     to give him the optimal help. He has continued to increase 
     his reading skills. We feel Justin has been a victim of our 
     school system. He was not to blame but he is the one person 
     suffering the consequences.
       He has not given up, he continues to meet teachers with 
     little understanding of a person who learns differently. This 
     year, Justin's Sophomore year of High School, Justin's father 
     and I met a teacher at Open

[[Page H11497]]

     House she made comments intended, we believe, to 
     compliment Justin. Her words were, ``never would have 
     known Justin was a L.D. student, he does not look like 
     one.'' When she realized our surprise at her words she 
     stuttered, ``But he works so well with the other 
     students''. I did not know whether to laugh or cry. We 
     have done a lot of the latter so this time we will do the 
     first.
       Since the first few days of school we have painfully 
     watched Justin read and take and retake his drivers test. 
     Three times, with only one over the minimum missed, on the 
     third try he was so nervous he could not drive to the testing 
     site. He knew if he missed it again he would have to wait a 
     month to retake the test, and not be able to drive without a 
     adult. Justin chose to have the test read to him this time, 
     in the license branch in front of everyone, he passed 100 
     percent.
       We will continue to fight for and give Justin love and 
     support. It will be a ``Never Ending Story''.
       Justin now reads notes left by us, and he leaves us notes 
     written by him with correctly spelled words. I save every, 
     ``Mom took lunch money. Please call for hair cut.'' What 
     sweet words for a parent to see and read.
                                  ____


                       Testimony of Kristi Trapp

       I used a phonetic approach (Smart Chart) with all of the 
     first grade students that attended summer school. A test was 
     created to allow students to demonstrate knowledge of 
     phonemic awareness. Students verbally displayed knowledge of 
     long and short vowels, vowel teams, blends, and diagraphs. It 
     also provided a means of evaluating their use of phonetic 
     rules. Decoding and word attack skills were evaluated too.
       Almost every student had mastered the entire chart by the 
     end of summer school. These results reflect using a phonetic 
     approach for 15 days, twenty-five minutes each day. The 
     phonetic approach is called ``Direct Approach''.
       Pretest Average--50 percent.
       Posttest Average--89 percent.

                        FIRST GRADE TEST RESULTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Posttest
                      Pretest (percent)                        (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
56...........................................................         95
12...........................................................         62
64...........................................................         91
69...........................................................         87
30...........................................................         89
93...........................................................        100
29...........................................................         82
14...........................................................         69
58...........................................................         78
85...........................................................        100
58...........................................................         91
87...........................................................        100
76...........................................................         93
55...........................................................         87
27...........................................................         93
58...........................................................         87
56...........................................................         96
6............................................................         67
37...........................................................         78
28...........................................................         78
75...........................................................         98
45...........................................................         96
40...........................................................         93
69...........................................................         98
44...........................................................         98
62...........................................................         87
33...........................................................         93
56...........................................................         95
85...........................................................         98
23...........................................................         76
38...........................................................         85
30...........................................................         93
36...........................................................         75
40...........................................................         75
36...........................................................         89
27...........................................................         89
64...........................................................         95
82...........................................................         98
65...........................................................         89
65...........................................................         93
40...........................................................         85
69...........................................................         91
87...........................................................         98
45...........................................................         93
51...........................................................         80
29...........................................................         76
44...........................................................         85
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       I have seen a dramatic improvement in where my kids are 
     this year using the phonetic approach compared to last year 
     without it. I gave the first theme test for our reading 
     series and was shocked to find almost all of my students in 
     the ``A'' range. The students have more confidence in their 
     independent reading and writing skills. I spoke at a PTO 
     meeting recently about my reaction, my students reaction, and 
     their parents reaction to using the Phonetic Approach. The 
     parents at the meeting seemed to all be in favor of this 
     approach after hearing the difference it is making. Several 
     parents during conferences shared that ``their kids knew so 
     much more than their older kids did at this age because of 
     the strong phonetic foundation we are providing''. That made 
     me feel so proud of what we are doing. One parent told me 
     that her fifth grade daughter was struggling with spelling 
     and that she might have her first grader help mark the 
     spelling words for her sister. A first grader helping a fifth 
     grader that is unbelievable isn't it? Hopefully we will 
     receive the funding so that grades 1-5 will be able to use 
     the Smart Chart. My students are so enthuastic about using 
     the Smart Chart that they often break into chanting the 
     sounds on the chart.


                Using Phonics Throughout the Curriculum

       I use phonics all day long. It is not an isolated activity. 
     We use phonics in reading, spelling, math, social studies, 
     science, and health. When we are learning about a new subject 
     and big words are involved we need to know what they mean and 
     be able to read them. We used word attack sills on the more 
     difficult words before we actually read in subject area. That 
     way the kids will know the difficult words in advance and be 
     able to comprehend the story much better.
                                  ____


                    Direct Approach--Success Stories

       I incorporate vocabulary words from content area subjects. 
     We talk about analyzing words by dividing them into 
     syllables, marking the letter sounds and using our chin and 
     hand to count syllables. It's very exciting!
         --Mary Lyon, Longfellow Middle School, 6th Grade Title I 
           Reading
       I teach Math to 6th graders, but I work with the Reading 
     teacher to pull out words from the Math book. (ex: data, 
     information). I help students decode so they can then do the 
     Math.
         --Burnedia B. McBride-Williams, IPS #28, 6th Grade Math
       Before reading a comprehension page, we scan and pull out 
     any words which may be ``stumbling blocks''. We mark them on 
     the board and use them in sentences. Then we are better 
     prepared to read for meaning.
         --Dorothy Mason, Title I Reading, IPS #44
       When my son was in first grade, he used to say, ``I hate 
     school, how old do you have to be to quit?'' He was so 
     frustrated because he couldn't read. The school did not 
     ``believe'' in phonics. When my son learned The Direct 
     Approach, he got the ``tools'' he needed to read. The logical 
     approach made sense to him. He started reading on his own 
     instead of me reading to him. With only one year of the smart 
     chart, in second grade, he scored 4th grade reading 
     equivalency on the Stanford Achievement test! Pretty amazing!
         --A happy mom!
       Each Monday, the class writes their spelling words 
     phonetically. As I put the marks on the words on the board, 
     the kids are telling me what marks to make. They have learned 
     the chart so well, that if I forget a mark, they give about 
     half a second before saying, ``Mr. Schwitzer! You forgot the 
     (missing mark)!'' It's incredible! The first week of 
     November, half the class got 100% on their spelling tests.
         --Lou Schwitzer, Grade 4, IPS #44
       I teach 7th grade Title I Reading. After a slow start, when 
     my students felt the phonics tape was a little too ``first 
     grade'' for them--I gave them several multiple syllable 
     words. The students struggled with the larger words, so we 
     began at the intermediate level. Now everyone enjoys coming 
     up to the board. We pull words out of reading comprehension 
     exercises. Now we're pulling words such as ``hyposensitize'' 
     out of the dictionary! (It means reduce sensitivity to 
     allergens, etc.!)
         --Stuart Wood, Longfellow Middle School #28
       Second grade students are decoding three and four syllable 
     words! After decoding, they are able to spell the words 
     without looking. Our spelling grades have improved greatly. 
     We have had four weeks where we had everyone with 100%! 
     Children get extremely excited and almost fight to come to 
     the chalkboard to mark and spell words! When we use the 
     Phonics Pad worksheets, we do the top part as a class. They 
     call out how to mark the words! They get so excited, they 
     have trouble sitting still! Each child does the bottom part 
     for review. I'm seeing such improvement!
         --Ruth Esther Vawter, IPS 107, Grade 2
       Since I've been using the Direct Approach, my children are 
     very excited about learning! One of my major problems has 
     become my best student. We use the smart chart to mark and 
     sound out any word that we don't know. We can now sound out 
     long words and they're asking for longer words. Comprehension 
     skills are improving because we mark and decode unknown words 
     before reading paragraphs!
         --Linda Jones, 6, 7, 8 L.D.
       So far, we're doing 1 or 2 words we call ``challenge 
     words'' or ``third grade words.'' If I don't have one on the 
     board, they ask where their word is. I call them ``Detective 
     Smith'' (their last names) as they ``decode'' words!
         --Reta Cunningham, IPS #109, Second grade
       I teach 8th grade boys. The very worst reader in my room 
     loves to use the yard stick to lead the smart chart drill. 
     (He sometimes balances on his chin to point!) The boys try to 
     ``beat'' the ``lady on the tape!'' Marking their spelling 
     words really helps them focus on each sound.
         --Public School Teacher, Middle School
       An easy game to play for reinforcing the sounds on the 
     smart chart is called ``Make these letters grow''. I write 
     __ame on the chalkboard. The children create word families 
     such as blame, came, fame, etc. Phonics works!!!
         --Shirley J. DeNoon, IPS #57
       My students love to use the words ``macron'' and ``breve''.
         --Janet Johnston, IPS #109, Grade 1
                                  ____


                            Reading Failure

       My name is Linda Wight Harmon. I'm a product of Indiana 
     public schools and to this day I make my living using reading 
     and writing skills I learned in first grade and analytical 
     skills I learned as a college business major. My husband is 
     Tim Harmon, the managing editor of the South Bend Tribune. To 
     this day, he uses skills he learned in the first

[[Page H11498]]

     grade and later the Indian University School of Journalism.
       Our eldest daughter is Catherine. Today, she uses skills 
     she learned in SECOND grade from private tutors andd 
     computerized language programs. She is now a self-sufficient, 
     very motivated fourth grader inher Montessori classroom. She 
     has an average IQ, a whopper vocabulary, an inquisitive mind, 
     naturally curly hair, books in her backpacks, the best 
     reading comprehension in her class, notebooks scribbled with 
     stories . . . and a well-developed fear of failure from first 
     grade.
       That was the year that no one at a National Blue Ribon 
     school could teach an editor's daughter to read.
       She started out eager, but quickly lost her spirit when her 
     first spelling list--words like watermelon, apple, red, 
     green--was a complete mystery. She had no idea that letter 
     linked to sounds, something her Kindergarten teacher warned 
     us about in our previous town. Even then, she couldn't tie 
     her shoes, couldn't tell left from right, couldn't count to 
     30. Twice she'd had hearing tests because she didn't hear 
     everything we said to her.
       But the principal at the new school calmed our fears. She 
     assured us her teachers knew what to do. They put Catherine 
     in a special ``Discover intensive Phonics'' class. It went 
     right over her head. By Christmas, she could not tell the 
     difference between the words ``as'' andd ``apple.'' Next, the 
     teachers put her on an early intervention list, which meant 
     she was observed for three of the four remaining months while 
     the teachers did nothing. She grew increasingly frustrated. 
     She couldn't write. She couldn't read and the children in her 
     class pointed that out to her. The teachers gave her easier 
     work. Nightly, she cried herself to sleep, dreading the next 
     day of failure.
       That summer, we took her to a neuropsychologist in 
     Indianapolis. In 45 minutes, he told us our daughter had a 
     profound learning disability. In three hours, he had 
     pinpointed her deficit as a lack of phonemic awareness, a 
     common, easily-detected problem in non-readers. he found her 
     reading level to be ``Kindergarten-9th month'' and that, 
     unless she was properly instructed, she would and, I quote, 
     ``Never really read.''
       He told us the approach that would best address her 
     deficits was Lindamood-Bell, a multi-sensory, structured 
     approach that focused on auditory processing, but he doubted 
     we could find it or, for that matter, any other method to 
     teach dyslexics to read. He told us: ``You need to get 
     Catherine some hobbies.''
       Armed with an IEP, she went back to the Blue Ribbon school 
     for second grade. She sat alone in the hall and listened to 
     tapes of a teacher as she followed along with her finger. She 
     was seated next to a smart girl who was assigned to read 
     work-sheets to Catherine and spell the answers. She went to 
     the resource room for a half hour a day. She felt stupid. She 
     cried herself to sleep. She begged not to go to school. Tim 
     and I more than once carried her into class in our pajamas, 
     leaving her sobbing in her seat. And it got worse. She talked 
     about hating her life and wanting to die. Then one morning, 
     waiting for bus and sobbing, she threw up her breakfast . . . 
     into my hands.
       It was then that I saw how clearly this Blue Ribbon school 
     was teaching my daughter pre-bulimia skills, not pre-reading 
     skills. Catherine has never been back to a public school.
       My mother, my husband and I have spent hundreds of hours 
     researching the right way to teach this child to read, using 
     the prescription of the National Institutes of Health 
     research, something her teachers had never heard of. 
     Catherine has spent six weeks in a computer therapy program 
     that trained her brain to distinguish sounds--phonemic 
     awareness--then 120 hours with Lindamood tutors who taught 
     her the 44 sounds in the English language and how to link 
     them to letters.
       At the end of the fourth week, the tutors said, ``Can you 
     get Catherine some books? She's read all we have.'' At the 
     end of the eighth week, she tested at second grade, second 
     month.
       The money I've lost track of--but we've spent well over 
     $30,000 finding her deficits, undoing what the Blue Ribbon 
     school did wrong, remediating her issues and getting the job 
     done right.
       And we're not alone. Lindamood has taught roughly two dozen 
     children to read in South Bend in the last 18 months. But the 
     thing is--all of this could have been done in Kindergarten 
     and first grade. Our daughter--and many, many other 
     children--could have been assessed in the beginning in 
     Kindergarten, taught with other children who needed multi-
     sensory, systematic approaches and they all could have 
     learned the right way in the beginning, in groups, with a 
     properly trained teacher, in a regular classroom. These 
     approaches have been around a long time. They aren't 
     revolutionary. They don't make people Republicans or 
     Democrats--but I can guarantee they do create the foundation 
     for a literate voter.
       But what keeps me up at night--and should you also--is the 
     six kids in Catherine's first grade who were in the same 
     boat, and the two dozen who didn't read that well even with 
     the phonics. Then there are the children in inner city 
     schools--one out of four in the South Bend Community school 
     system is classified as Special Ed. There are thousands of 
     Catherines in this world, but the incidence of reading 
     failure is MUCH higher than the incidence of LD. With or 
     without Title 1 funding, with or without literate parents, 
     with or without upscale suburban tax bases, with or without 
     breakfast, our children are not learning to read because 
     their teachers do not have enough tools and the teachers 
     aren't accountable anyway.
       Today, if it weren't for the research from the National 
     Institutes of Health, Rutgers University and Lindamood-Bell, 
     I would be writing to you as the parent of an illiterate 
     child. Instead, I'm here to beg you to stop what I found at 
     one of Indiana's best schools: Ignorance. My daughter's 
     teachers didn't know the early warning signs of reading 
     disorders--I've told you five of them in the past few pages, 
     more than they knew after earning master's degrees in reading 
     from major state universities.
       As a parent and as a voter, I do believe that the United 
     States should have the highest literacy rate in the world. It 
     is to our shame that we do not. It is also due to our short-
     sightedness that we don't do everything possible to teach all 
     children to read in Kindergarten and first grade so they can 
     read their own textbooks, learn in classrooms for the next 
     eleven years and graduate from high school. Instead, we brush 
     the non-readers and poor-readers aside and muddle through, 
     cheating them and their regular-learning classmates out of a 
     first-class education and spending increasing amounts each 
     year helping students who read their own textbooks.
       Educators do not heed the educational research from the 
     National Institutes of Health, yet we would sue a family 
     physician who failed to act on half the early warning signs 
     of cancer as established by that same research body. If the 
     education community can't force itself to do the job, then 
     legislators simply must protect the children of this country 
     from needless reading failure and put educators in the 
     position where they can and do teach all our children to read 
     . . . on time.
     Linda Wight Harmon.
                                  ____

       ``As an Indiana State Senator who has worked for many years 
     to improve the performance of Hoosier students, I am 
     absolutely convinced that our sources depends on our ability 
     to produce competent readers. The world opens to the child 
     who can read and, unfortunately, leaves behind those who 
     cannot. Our obligation is to make certain that every child is 
     given the best opportunity to become a reader. I am also 
     convinced that phonemic awareness is the preferred and proven 
     way to teach reading. We do our children a disservice when we 
     allow them to move ahead without a mastery of reading, which 
     ensures frustration and failure throughout their school 
     years. Anything we can do to prevent this from happening is 
     worth our effort. After all, they don't get a second chance 
     to get this right.''
     Indiana State Senator Teresa Lubbers.
                                  ____


               Testimony Before Study Committee--Indiana

       Thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is Peggy 
     Schafir, and I'm a parent from Richmond, Indiana. I'm here to 
     tell you about the enormous struggle and ultimate success my 
     child encountered in learning to read. Our experience has 
     been very painful, and my purpose for speaking is to prevent 
     other children and families from having to live through that 
     same pain and failure.
       I have two children. Ben, who is 16, learned to read as if 
     by magic. Matt is 14, and has struggled with reading most of 
     his life.
       Before they started kindergarten, we prepared our boys the 
     best we knew how. We read to them daily. We made sure they 
     saw us reading for business or pleasure. We tried to give 
     them rich experiences--both by exploring new places and 
     things in person, and by discovering them in books. We tried 
     to create a home rich in language and literature.
       For Ben, it was enough. For Matt, it wasn't.
       At the end of one year of kindergarten, Matt was still 
     struggling with matching sounds to letters. His teacher 
     recommended that we have him repeat kindergarten. We did, and 
     it appeared to work. When he started first grade, Matt knew 
     all of his sounds and letters. He seemed ready to learn to 
     read.
       Imagine our disappointment when he did not. At the end of 
     first grade, Matt was not reading. We worked with him 
     diligently over the summer, following all the advice we could 
     gather. In second grade, Matt received extra support at 
     school.
       In a sense, it appeared that Matt could read. If we read a 
     book to him, he could read it back to us word for word. But 
     if we took a word out of the book--one he had read easily--
     and wrote it on a piece of paper, he had no idea what it was. 
     What is more, he seemed to have no idea how to go about 
     figuring out what it was.
       By the time Matt reached third grade, we began to 
     experience real behavior problems. We tried everything we 
     could think of. At one point, Matt was seeing a child 
     psychologist, an optometrist (who gave him exercises to 
     improve his visual tracking), and a speech pathologist. But 
     the behavior told us we were still not doing enough. We 
     decided to have Matt tested by a private reading tutor in our 
     community.
       In third grade, Matt knew four sight words.
       In third grade, Matt became frustrated trying to read pre-
     primer books.
       In third grade, Matt was basically a non-reader.

[[Page H11499]]

       We learned from the testing that Matt had very poor 
     phonemic awareness. In other words, he could not separate 
     word ``dog'' into its component sounds /d/ /o/ /g/ or blend 
     the sounds /k/ /a/ /t/ to say ``cat''. All his hard work 
     learning to match the sounds and letters was important, but 
     he needed more information before letters could convey worlds 
     to him. Matt needed to learn how to hear, order, segment, and 
     blend sounds.
       Working with the reading tutor two hours a week, Matt began 
     at last to make progress. By the beginning of fourth grade, 
     he was reading at second grade level. A personal triumph--but 
     still enough of a discrepancy for him to be tested for 
     learning disabilities. We were told that reading was a ``high 
     expectation'' for Matt. He would always need accommodations. 
     He had to be placed in the ``least restrictive environment''.
       After our first case conference, my husband took Matt to 
     Earlham College for a soccer practice. He was in a hurry, so 
     he drooped Matt off at the parking lot. ``You've been here 
     before,'' he said. ``Just find the sign for the Athletic 
     Building, then find the sign for the Coach's Office''. Oh, 
     no. Matt would have to read. He looked at his father through 
     the car window and said, ``Dad, I can't.'' That evening, my 
     husband said, ``Peggy, we have to fix this. It's going to be 
     up to us.''
       That began a journey which has taken a lot of our time, our 
     energy, and our savings. It is a journey which has been worth 
     every step.
       First, we took Matt out of school (using a home schooling 
     form) and enrolled him in a very intensive reading clinic in 
     Nashville, Tennessee. (I don't want to mislead you about 
     Matt's enthusiasm for this--on the way, he kept kicking the 
     dashboard and screaming, ``I am not going to Nashville!'') At 
     the clinic, Matt continued to work on his phonemic awareness, 
     and on how to use letters to get information about sounds. 
     The instruction was systematic, explicit, and very intense--
     Matt worked four hours a day one-on-one with his tutors. Yes, 
     the environment was restrictive, but only for a short time. 
     Matt was at the clinic for six weeks. The alternative of 
     remaining in the world of illiteracy would have restricted 
     him for the rest of his life.
       In those six weeks, Matt progressed from a second grade 
     reading level to a fifth grade reading level. He returned to 
     school, and we monitored him very carefully. Occasionally, he 
     slipped, and we enrolled him again in a variety of clinics 
     until he could solidify his new skills.
       In total, Matt received 720 hours of remediation. He is now 
     an 8th grader, reading at grade level with 90% accuracy. His 
     reading speed improves daily. Last year. on one of our many 
     car trips to and from clinics, Matt turned to me and said, 
     ``Mom, this is the best year of my life. I'm finally getting 
     my dyslexia fixed.''
       We have our son back. He is happy and confident again. 
     College is a very real option in his future. I want to be 
     honest with you. We have lived through a very severe case of 
     dyslexia. Even so, if we had caught Matt's delay in 
     developing phonemic awareness back when he was in 
     kindergarten, all of our lives would have been very 
     different. Waiting until fourth grade to accommodate and 
     remediate was very expensive, and I don't mean just in terms 
     of dollars. This expense can be avoided.
       This is what I have learned as a parent: Reading is an 
     incredibly complex process, which can break down at any 
     stage. To help our children master this process, we must know 
     where they are breaking down as soon as possible. We must 
     know how to address our children's needs, and be prepared to 
     deliver what they need in the amount needed.
       My husband and I were fortunate to be able to do that for 
     Matt. I am here today because I hope that every child in 
     Indiana can get that same attention.
       Matt's first need was phonemic awareness. In that, Matt was 
     not alone. Poor phonemic awareness is the single most common 
     factor among people who do not read. Please, as you consider 
     policies about reading, remember children like Matt. Think of 
     the Matt that might have been, what the future holds for him 
     now, and share with me the dream that all children will enter 
     the world of literacy.
       Thank you. I'll be glad to answer any questions I can.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. Speaker, let me just close and say this does not need to be 
controversial. It simply says one method that we think is important for 
our teachers to teach is the use of phonics. They will have complete 
discretion in their classroom about how they teach, but let us 
recognize the fact that when 67 percent of our fourth graders are below 
standard on reading something is desperately wrong. We have to use what 
the scientific studies say work, that is phonics, and this Congress 
should go on record today as being in favor of teachers using this as 
one method in their classroom.
  Finally, I would address the Congress in saying this is not a 
mandate. This is, at its core, a sense of Congress resolution, that 
this issue is so important that the body wants to go on record urging 
our teachers to use phonics, urging our teaching training schools to 
teach phonics as one method among many that they will use to teach our 
children to read.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barrett of Nebraska). The question is on 
the motion offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. McIntosh) that 
the House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. 
Con. Res. 214, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________