[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 20]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 28883]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



           SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT SCHOOLS SHOULD USE PHONICS

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON-LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 4, 1999

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this measure.
  This resolution expresses the sense of Congress that phonemic 
awareness followed by direct systematic phonics instruction should be 
used in all schools. It further expresses the sense of Congress that 
phonics instruction should be an integral part of pre-service teaching 
requirements so that teachers will have the skills to effectively teach 
reading. I have concerns with this legislation on many levels.
  As the Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I can very much 
appreciate new learning tools that could benefit our children. I seems 
likely that phonics do have a positive impact on our children.
  According to some educators, phonics-based instruction teaches 
learners that there is a relationship between sounds and printed 
letters. In order to benefit from formal reading instruction, children 
must have a certain level of phoneme awareness. Reading instruction in 
sound symbol relationships also may heighten children's awareness of 
language.
  However, we must note that phonics alone is not the solution. 
Instruction in phoneme awareness and phonics is not the sole component 
in a program that teaches learners how to read. Rather, phonics 
provides a foundation of skills and strategies which can be used to 
quickly and efficiently decode words and build reading fluency, which 
is essential to reading comprehension.
  Whole language, a learning tool that emphasizes reading for meaning 
and using literature rather than rules, has often been advocated over 
phonics. Schools often use a mixture of phonics and whole language.
  This measure is far too limited in its scope. Phonics may be a good 
learning tool, but there are countless other means of learning 
available such as whole language. We should not limit the language of 
the measure to only include phonics. The schools should be free to 
choose their learning tools.
  Choice is indeed important here, and this legislation inappropriately 
attempts places Federal restraints on our local schools: this measure 
takes away choice from our Nation's schools. Yet, it should be left to 
the individual schools to determine which learning tools are applied to 
their students. After all, who is a better judge of the needs of our 
children? Our teachers and school administrators or those of us here in 
Congress? I think that the answer is clear.
  It is unfortunate that this bill was offered as a suspension. Had we 
been able to amend this bill, we could have ameliorated the many 
problems contained in its language.