TEACHING INCENTIVE ACT OF 1965 WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1965 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, GENERAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION OF THE The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Brademas, William Ford, Scheuer. Staff member present: Hartwell D. Reed, Jr., counsel. A quorum is present. [H.R. 10590 follows:] [H. R. 10590, 89th Cong. 1st sess.] A BILL To provide salary incentives for teachers who choose to teach children in elementary and secondary schools in school districts having high concentrations of low-income families Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Teaching Incentive Act of 1965". DECLARATION OF POLICY SEC. 2. The Congress hereby declares it to be the policy of the United States to strengthen the educational opportunities available to children in school districts having high concentrations of low-income families by providing salary incentives for all motivated teachers, whatever their training or experience, but particularly for highly trained and experienced teachers, to seek or, in the case of highly trained and experienced teachers, maintain employment in elementary and secondary schools in such districts. Alternate SEC. 3. (a) In order to carry out this policy the Commissioner is authorized to make payments to State educational agencies for grants to those local educational agencies which are eligible for basic grants under title II of Public Law 874, Eighty-first Congress, as amended, to enable the local agencies to supplement the salaries otherwise paid teachers employed by such local agencies by employing the teachers who satisfy the requirements hereinafter set forth for a full twelve-month period at the same monthly pay rate that would have been applicable to their employment for the academic year, provided that the local agencies may allow such teachers annual leave limited to a maximum of thirty days. (b) The teachers who qualify for such increased compensation shall be limited to those who (1) have both a master's degree or higher and three or more years of teaching experience in elementary or secondary schools and who either commence or remain teaching in the school district governed by the local agency after January 1, 1966; or (2) regardless of training or experience, commence teaching in the school district governed by the agency after January 1, 1966, unless, immediately prior thereto, they were teaching in a district governed by another such agency. 1 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT SEC. 4. No payments shall be made under the provisions of this Act to any local educational agency for any fiscal year unless the appropriate State educational agency finds that the ratio of the average of all teacher salaries paid by the local agency for that school year to the average of all such salaries paid by the local agency for the previous school year, excluding all supplementary sums payable under this Act, is equal to or greater than the ratio of the average of all teacher salaries paid by the local agency for school year 1964-1965 to the average of all teacher salaries paid by the local agency for school year 1963–1964. APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF FEDERAL LAW SEC. 5. A teacher receiving a salary supplement provided by this Act shal not, solely because of such receipt, be deemed to be a Federal employee or be sub ject to the provisions of laws relating to Federal employment, including those relating to hours of work, rates of compensation, leave, unemployment compensation, and Federal employee benefits. APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZED SEC. 6. There are authorized to be appropriated such amounts as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. DEFINITIONS SEC. 7. For the purposes of this Act the definitions applicable under title II of Public Law 874, Eighty-first Congress, as amended, shall apply. Mr. PERKINS. We are delighted to have one of our most outstanding Members of Congress as well as a most outstanding member of this committee, Congressman Roman C. Pucinski, who for many years has been interested in trying to better the educational opportunities of all of the youth of this country and especially the so-called educationally deprived. It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you here, Mr. Pucinski, and we will be delighted to hear your views on H.R. 10590 which, to my way of thinking, may be an extremely effective approach to bringing into the deprived areas our best schoolteachers. I think you are to be complimented for introducing legislation of this type. Unless we provide appropriate compensation for the teacher who teaches in the poorer sections of the city and the rural areas of the country where the facilities are not so good, we are just not going to be able to upgrade education in this area. It is a great pleasure to welcome you here, and you may proceed in your own way. STATEMENT OF HON. ROMAN C. PUCINSKI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a privilege for me to appear before you today in support of H.R. 10590 which I introduced early this year in an effort to help bring to public schools in so-called poverty areas better qualified teachers to meet the special educational needs of such schools. H.R. 10590 would provide Federal assistance to local school districts for the purpose of paying qualified teachers an additional 2 months' salary each year. This legislation is designed to help local school superintendents encourage the best qualified teachers to accept difficult assignments in the so-called poverty areas. Testimony before this committee, both on legislation dealing with education and during hearings on the poverty bill, clearly indicates that one of the great problems which school administrators face throughout the country is to persuade teachers possessing degrees to accept assignments in poverty areas. Mr. Chairman, as a member of this committee, I have heard a great deal of testimony about the special educational needs of culturally deprived children in poverty areas. Yet, we all know that it is the exception rather than the rule to find teachers with either a master's degree or doctor's degree in education teaching in these areas of special needs. We have approved considerable legislation to upgrade the quality of American teachers by making available to them various Federal aid programs including loans, fellowships, Federal scholarships, and other aids. However, it is common knowledge and a matter of record that those teachers who do possess a higher course of study and win advanced degrees invariably accept assignments in the suburbs of our large urban areas where salary schedules are higher. We really cannot blame teachers for seeking the highest remuneration for their ability. After all, they too, are human, and it is understandable that they would seek the highest compensation as a reward for their extra effort to qualify themselves for the teaching profession. This migration of our better trained teachers to the higher salary communities of America has created a serious drain on the availability of teachers who are willing to accept more difficult assignments in poverty areas. Couple this with a general reluctance on the part of teachers in our large cities to accept assignments in poorer neighborhoods and you can see what a serious problem school administrators face in providing children of poverty a minimum standard of good education. The purpose of H.R. 10590 is to help stem this tide without delay. It is not my intention in any way to criticize existing programs, particularly since I have supported all of them. But in each instance, including the National Teachers Corps, the new category of teachers who will be trained with Federal assistance will take considerable time before they are ready to accept assignments in any school system, let alone the poverty stricken areas. H.R. 10590 would make funds available immediately so that upon enactment of this legislation, with no further delay, school superintendents could encourage their better qualified teachers to accept employment for 12 months without interruption instead of for 10 months as is now the case throughout the country. As a practical proposition, school superintendents would have the services of these highly trained teachers for 2 additional months each year, and the teachers, in turn, would receive 2 additional months' compensation at the job they know best. This would mean that, in a city like Chicago, where a teacher with a master's degree now can receive up to $11,000 a year for working 10 months, she would be able to earn an additional $2,200 for the additional 2 months of employment at the same school. The only condition is that she agree to accept an assignment teaching in a poverty area as designed by the General Aid to Education Act. This is generally an area of high concentration of youngsters who are members of a family whose annual income is less than $2,000 a year or is receiving public assistance. Mr. Chairman, it is estimated that this legislation could affect approximately one-third of the teachers in America's public schools and would cost the Federal Government approximately $100 million. annually in Federal aid. This is admittedly a large sum; but when we consider the millions of dollars we are now spending on the antipoverty program and all other programs to help prepare unfortunate victims of poverty for gainful employment, we may discover that this is perhaps one of the best investments we can make in America's educational future. I need not tell the members of this distinguished committee how important a role quality in education plays. You are all experts in this field. I am sure we can readily agree that our greatest problem now is to provide teachers who are trained to meet the special problems in these poverty areas. I am sure that school administrators throughout America will tell you that because of seniority rules the experienced veteran teacher usually selects her assignment in a higher income community. Unfortunately, it is the new teacher with the least experience who gets assigned to poverty stricken, low-income areas where cultural deficiency is the rule rather than the exception. The great tragedy of America today is that in those schools which need the greatest degree of experience and educational resources, we find too often the new, the novice, the inexperienced teacher trying to wrestle with this difficult problem. I have the greatest admiration for the young men and women of America who accept this challenge as their first teaching assignment. But I submit, Mr. Chairman, that well-meaning and dedicated as they are, these young teachers just do not have a chance in the hard-core areas of economic need and cultural shortcomings. I have discussed this problem with many educators and they have assured me that with an opportunity to work a full 12 months and earn the additional income available under H.R. 10590 these culturally deprived schools would start attracting in large numbers the more qualified and experienced teacher, particularly those with advanced teaching degrees. I should like to also point out that H.R. 10590 would permit a school administrator to give a teacher, accepting an assignment in these schools of special need, a brief paid vacation of no more than 4 weeks as an added inducement to get her talents into these lowincome communities. Mr. Chairman, I am convinced that the only way we can improve the quality of our schools in these deprived areas is to bring in more qualified teachers. H.R. 10590 is one way to help accomplish this goal. An added argument in support of this legislation may be that it would help keep teachers more permanently assigned to schools in low-income areas. One of the difficulties faced by school administrators is the mobility of children in above-mentioned areas. It is very common for lowincome families to move several times during the school year. The changes in residence, as we all know, require the transfer of students from school to school. It is important to have a stabilizing factor within the school to aid the students in their adjustment to the new situations they encounter. The stabilizing factor, of course, should be the faculty. This is not the case in many schools. The entrance and departure of several students each week or even each month cannot only be damaging educationally and psychologically to the children but also very discouraging to the teachers. The large amount of paperwork, the constant necessity of keeping vast and accurate records, the transferring of records from school to school, aside from the preparation and the conduct of classes daily for the balance of the enrolled pupils are a constant drain on the energies, ideas, and ideals of teachers. Many teachers abandon their careers for these reasons. We cannot allow qualified personnel to leave a profession so vital to our citizens. It is our fond hope that the salary incentive as sponsored in H.R. 10590 will not only attract to the schools the new graduates but will serve as an attraction to those teachers already in the systems. The experience of the latter group would allow it to concentrate its efforts on the students since it already had become accustomed to the methods and procedures of its particular school system. The counseling possibilities would be enlarged. It may be difficult for us to understand how much counseling is necessary in the lowincome areas. Many parents are occupied with making some sort of living and have very little or no time to devote to their children; in turn, the children seek or need some person who is older to whom they can turn for advice or just for friendship. This person more often than not is the teacher. From my observations, I can honestly say we have many dedicated teachers who are willing to give of their time to these children. We must keep in mind though that some incentive is needed and should be provided to keep them in the necessary districts. 1 hope my colleagues bear in mind that with the additional 2 months salary, as prescribed in H.R. 10590, the teachers will be required to work for the board of education in their respective districts. They will also be allowed up to 30 days vacation under this plan. The work the teachers will do during the 2-month period will be at the direction of the school system. They may be employed in summer schools, Head Start programs, cultural enrichment programs, or other valuable services to the school. It is evident that the purpose of the bill is twofold: 1. To combat the drain of qualified teachers from the low-income districts. 2. To provide a working force during the summer months which may be utilized for the benefit of the students who are considered to be culturally deprived. I am convinced that this legislation will go a long way toward helping stabilize changing communities of America where segregation of the public schools has become an increasing problem. You will recall that during testimony on the poverty bill there was considerable discussion about segregated schools. Very often, in peripheral areas with changing community patterns, an all-white segregated school becomes segregated nonwhite within a period of 6 months to 2 years as neighborhood patterns change. You will recall testimony before this committee which showed how in one city school administrators had contemplated that a school would be 60 percent white and 40 percent nonwhite based on their projections. Yet, within a few months these projections went right 57-880 0-66- -2 |