committee believes that no other legislative language is necessary at this time. The Committee hopes that such funding for decoders, for deaf children who currently do not have access to them can continue."

The Department of Education has reported that there are about 55,000 deaf students in the United States enrolled in school programs receiving direct aid from the federal government. It has been estimated that up to 80 percent of these young people still do not have access to a decoder.

A priority should be placed on developing and implementing a plan that would support, over a two-year period, the placement of a decoder in the home of every deaf child in the United States. At the recommended funding level of $2.5 million for fiscal year 1992 and again in fiscal year 1993 decoders could be distributed to deaf students under a long-term loan program managed through schools and other means. After that, the incremental cost of maintaining the program for new students entering school programs would be minimal.

PROGRAMMING

The number of hours of closed-captioned programs available on broadcast TV, cable TV, and home video has continued to increase in the last year. These increases have in part resulted from NCI's prudent use of Department of Education funding to gain matching financial support for captioning from those private sector entities involved in television, i.e. advertisers, program producers, networks, and cable programmers. Department of Education initiatives are also partially responsible for the increased diversity of captioned programs available to deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans. For example, one initiative provides funding for captioning of all major sporting events televised by the networks and basic cable systems; a second initiative provided funding for the captioning of prime time movies, mini-series, specials and, for the First time, daytime dramas. Older deaf and hard-of hearing persons who are home during the day are now able to enjoy a significant amount of daytime television.

Since last Fall, NCI has used DOED funds for the captioning of syndicated TV programs to obtain matching funds from program producers. This strategy has expanded the use of these federal funds to enable the captioning of four of the most popular syndicated series. These federally-funded captioned programs are joined by a variety of syndicated shows which continue to be captioned with full private sector support. Currently, 12 of the 15 highest rated syndicated series are captioned.

All three major commercial television networks and the Public Broadcasting Service continue their financial commitment to share captioning costs. As a result, 100 percent of all prime time (evening) programming on those three commercial networks is now captioned, a significant increase over the 66 percent of just three years ago. In addition, most PBS adult and children's programs are captioned. The other commercial network, Fox Broadcasting, began participating in captioning for the first time this year, and approximately two-thirds of its prime time schedule is now captioned.

Captioned news and public affairs programming on the networks has increased over the past several years, through a combination of federal and network funding. This year, for the first time, "The MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour" on PBS is captioned. In addition, Cable News Network (CNN) has begun to provide limited captioning and is currently seeking funding support to make that important source of national and international news accessible to deaf and hard-of- hearing Americans. Other funding from DOED enables NCI to caption many children's TV programs, including "Sesame Street," "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," and many other PBS, commercial network, basic cable, and syndicated programs.

Despite these promising notes, on-going federal support of the captioning service is essential to assure that captioning services continue or at least the current level for deaf and hard-of-hearing citizens. Substantial portions of the television schedule are largely still inaccessible to those deaf and hard-of-hearing person dependent on captioning for access. For example:

-More than 95 percent of basic cable programming is not captioned;
-Only 19 percent of all broadcast daytime programs are captioned; and

-With the exception of "Nightline," there are no network late-night programs captioned.

It is only through the government's continued investment in the captioning service that the deaf and hard-of-hearing audience for captioning will continue to be mainstreamed into the most vital of America's mass communications medium. Other activities recommended for funding in fiscal year 1992 are as follows:

TECHNOLOGY

Federal support of on-going investigation of various new technologies such as Descriptive Video Services to assist visually-impaired persons in enjoying television should be maintained.

ONGOING RESEARCH

Over the past eleven years, NCI has initiated a number of research studies into the effectiveness of captioned television as an educational tool. NCI believes that federal support for wide-ranging additional research into caption readability and the measurement of its effect on the acquisition of reading skills is desirable and necessary. With the audience for the captioning service steadily increasing, the availability of increased captioned programming for children, and the potential of using captioned television as a tool in the effort to combat illiteracy, additional research should be undertaken that will lead to improved captioning standards and techniques.

NCI recognizes that the current economic environment requires moderation in the hopes and aspirations placed on federal resources. Therefore, these fiscal year 1992 recommended levels approximate the appropriated levels for these activities during fiscal year 1991.

NCI believes the above are critical funding areas that fit the leadership role that Congress has played in the development and growth of the closed captioned television service. NCI wishes to express its sincere appreciation for the confidence that Congress and the Department of Education have shown in giving NCI such a crucial role to play in the development of so vital a service for so many previously ignored deaf and hard-of-hearing persons.

Thank you for this opportunity to submit this testimony.

Senator BURDICK. Thank you. With the $1 million you are recommending, how many students could obtain a decoder in the first year of this program?

Ms. BESS. Well, you said $1 million. We have in our written testimony a request for $2.5 million over a 2-year period, and that will support 20,000 children over 2 years, meaning 10,000 each year. Senator BURDICK. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF J. DAVID EDWARDS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JOINT NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR LANGUAGES AND THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES. Senator BURDICK. Dr. David Edwards, National Committee for Languages and International Studies, is our next witness.

Dr. EDWARDS. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify. The National Council for Languages and International Studies is an umbrella organization representing 41 professional associations concerned with languages, international studies, international education.

First we would like to thank you and the subcommittee very much for the increases for foreign language funding in title VI last year and for the funding of the new Foreign Language Assistance Act, a small program that supports foreign languages at the elementary and secondary schools. This year we are requesting increases to these programs for foreign languages and international studies and for literacy.

Specifically we are asking that the subcommittee consider increases in the Foreign Language Assistance Act, title VI of the Higher Education Act, and the English literacy grants of the many important Federal programs. We feel that these three are among the least adequately funded, and also among those where-they are very small programs, and Federal seed money can be very effective

in this area, particularly as the States begin to cut back on their education budgets.

There are a number of issues we are concerned about that affect the U.S. international competence, our economic competitiveness, our global awareness, and our communication skills.

First, although enrollments are at an all-time high in terms of foreign language study, there is still a significantly inadequate number of students studying second languages in the United States.

Second, the study of the hard languages, such as Russian and Japanese, are increasing at great rates, but still less than 1 percent of our students are studying these languages spoken by threefourths of the world.

Third, despite new requirements for elementary foreign language programs in five States, most of the States do not teach foreign language programs at the elementary levels, where the students can learn the programs the most effectively and the most efficiently. And then, because we do not begin second language study early in this country and continue it throughout a student's education, as they do in most other countries, we fail to develop any serious competence or serious expertise in languages in the United States.

One of my colleagues jokes that we feel in this country that we are born with something in our larynx that does not allow us to speak second languages. It simply is not true; we just simply do not develop it early and continue it.

A fifth problem is that-and this is perhaps the most pressing issue we face-35 States now have severe teacher shortages in the area of foreign languages. And this is across all major foreign languages. Japanese teachers in the elementary schools, for example, are almost nonexistent. We are also simply having trouble finding Spanish and German teachers.

And finally, our Nation wastes tremendous resources by allowing illiteracy in any language, and by failing to preserve communication skills in languages other than English.

PREPARED STATEMENT

For these reasons, particularly the need to preserve our language resources, the need to begin language studies early, and the need to address the severe teacher shortage that we have in the United States right now in foreign languages, we respectfully request that the subcommittee consider increases for the Foreign Language Assistance Act, title VI of the Higher Education Act and the English literacy grants.

I thank you very much for your time and your consideration, Mr. Chairman.

[The statement follows:]

STATEMENT OF J. David EDWARDS, PH.D., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JOINT National COMMITTEE FOR LANGUAGES AND THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES.

The Joint National Committee for Languages and the National Council for Languages and International Studies are organizations representing forty-one major associations concerned with languages and international education. JNCL-NCLIS represents the less-commonly-taught languages, including Chinese, Japanese, Arabic

and Russian, as well as more traditional languages such as Latin, French, Spanish and German. Also included are a number of associations concerned with languages and technology, such as the International Association of Learning Laboratories, and the Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium. Members such as the Modern Language Association, the Linguistic Society of America, the National Council of Teachers of English and Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages are concerned with second languages, literacy, and English as a Second Language as well as research. Finally, other members such as the Alliance for Education in Global and International Studies and the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business address language issues in the broader context of economic competitiveness and international education.

JNCL-NCLIS urge increased federal support for literacy, foreign languages and international education. There are numerous federal programs dealing with these issues that merit consideration for increased appropriations. Specifically, we recommend that three programs deserve particular attention for fiscal year 1992: The Foreign Language Assistance Act (Title II, Part B of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) should be increased to $10 million for fiscal year 1992. Title VI, Foreign Languages and Area Studies, of the Higher Education Act (and its attendant overseas programs), should be funded at $55 million. Finally, English Literacy Grants (Adult Education Act, Title III, Part C) should be restored to their original funding level of $5.888 million and include an increase for inflation.

As recent events have dramatically demonstrated, these areas are vitally important to our nation's educational quality, economic competitiveness, military security and international understanding. As our world continues to experience rapid social, political and economic changes, there is nothing of greater importance than the ability to understand and cope with change. In order to comprehend events in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, the European Community, Latin America or the Soviet Union, our nation will require a globally aware citizenry and high level international expertise to deal with new challenges and opportunities. We must speak the languages of our customers, clients and competitors whether they are Japanese, German, Russian, Spanish or English. In order to do this our educational system will have to address the crisis in international education that has been festering for over two decades.

The member associations of JNCL-NCLIS are greatly concerned about a number of issues that affect our nation and our students. First, although enrollments may be at an all time high, there are still an inadequate number of students studying foreign languages. Less than twenty percent of our elementary students take a second language. Second, study of less-commonly-taught languages such as Russian, Japanese and Chinese is increasing rapidly. But still less than one percent of our students, at all levels, take these languages spoken by three-fourths of the world's population. Third, despite new requirements for foreign languages at the elementary level in five states, foreign languages continue to be taught primarily in high school and college rather than in the lower grades where they are learned more easily. Fourth, because language study does not begin early and continue through long, highly-articulated sequences, we fail to develop serious competence in the language or languages. Fifth, and perhaps most pressing, thirty-five states now have or project within the next two years, major foreign language teacher shortages. These shortages are not just in the less-commonly-taught languages, but also in such politically and economically critical languages as German, French and Spanish. Finally, and most basic, our nation wastes tremendous resources by allowing illiteracy in any language, and by failing to preserve and utilize the skills of individuals with a language other than English.

Groups ranging from the National Governors' Association to the Council of Chief State School Officers to the American Council on Education have called for increased and improved foreign language instruction in the nation's schools. The Foreign Language Assistance Act is the only federal program devoted to model elementary and secondary foreign language programs. At a time when a number of states are being forced to reduce the commitment to education in general and languages in particular, this program provides much needed matching funds for foreign language instruction.

Funded for the first time last year, the Foreign Language Assistance Act supports model elementary and secondary foreign language programs. While we are delighted that the Department of Education has given priority to elementary programs, we are concerned that they are restricting the program to just five languages: Korean, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and Russian. We encourage and promote the need to develop and support the less-commonly-taught languages at the elementary level. Nevertheless, we are concerned that a majority of the states do not have such programs and that it will take time and resources to develop them. There are some excellent

elementary programs in Japanese, for example, in Ohio, Georgia, Iowa, Maryland, North Carolina and Oregon which can benefit immediately from this program. Increased appropriations will allow other states to develop similar models. In the meantime, however, quality elementary programs in other languages should not be excluded. Given the tremendous demand for elementary language classes, the very serious shortage of teachers in all languages, and the need to promote the less-commonly-taught languages, we urge that the Subcommittee consider an appropriation of $10 million for fiscal year 1992.

Title VI, Foreign Languages and Area Studies, of the Higher Education Act (and its related overseas Fulbright programs) is all that remains of the nation's commitment under the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) to address our national security needs through the development of expertise in foreign languages and area studies. Title VI provides necessary seed money to assist national foreign language and area studies centers, scholarly and applied research, undergraduate training and fellowships. Recently, as a result of the concern for our nation's economic competitiveness a section was added to create international business centers. Intensive summer language institutes were created during the last reauthorization in Section 605. However, these institutes, which could help to resolve the nation's severe foreign language teacher shortage, have not been funded. Consequently, we urge that the appropriation for Title VI (and the related Fulbright programs) be increased to $55 million with a portion of the new funds devoted to summer language institutes. Finally, English Literacy Grants (Adult Education Act, Title III, Part C) provide funds to assist limited-English-proficient (LEP) adults in learning and functioning in English. The 20,000 to 40,000 adults in Los Angeles alone who are turned away from English as a Second Language programs every year is ample demonstration of the need for this program. Secondly, a small portion of this program supports the National Clearinghouse on Literacy, the only nationwide source of information on literary in existence. Given the great need for information and the overwhelming number of LEP adults desiring to learn English, we urge that these grants be restored to their original appropriations level of $5.888 million plus an increase for inflation.

We understand the very difficult decisions the Subcommittee must make in determining which programs receive funding and funding increases. We are aware as well and greatly appreciate that the Subcommittee has been supportive of foreign languages and literary in the past. In this regard, the members of JNCL-NCLIS are committed to cost-effective, quality programs of benefit to our students and nation. Our requests are not made lightly and we have attempted to make them reasonable. Thank you for your consideration and support.

Senator BURDICK. Thank you. We understand the importance of languages, of course. We always have to do a little balancing in them. There is this thing called the budget. Thank you very much. Dr. EDWARDS. Thank you, sir.

STATEMENT OF EILEEN D. COOKE, ASSOCIATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION

Senator BURDICK. Eileen D. Cooke, American Library Association, is our next witness.

Ms. COOKE. Good morning, Senator. I am here representing the American Library Association, a nonprofit educational organization of over 52,000 members, librarians, trustees, educators, and other friends of libraries, and I am here particularly to urge the committee to reject the administration's budget for categorical library programs.

In our view, this is just another attempt to eliminate library programs by the Department of Education. They are proposing, in the administration, a 75-percent cut from $143 million to $35 million. And reading the budget background information is both maddening and mystifying. In one part they are talking about the fact that, in their view, that LSCA, for example, is too flexible, that it needs to be focused, and they are recommending focusing, instead of $100-and-some million, $35 million on adult literacy, ignoring all the other literacy activities that can be carried on, plus many other