Gambar halaman


Educational Research and Statistics

National Center for Education Statistics


numbers of teachers available for a given number of students has grown, but private schools still have lower pupil/teacher ratios than public schools. Shared Data Collection. There was continued interest in data collection agreements with other agencies to reduce duplication on surveys, meet legislative requirements, and address high priority information needs. The Department of Defense Dependents Schools and their Defense Manpower Data Center, as well as the Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language Affairs within the Department, augmented the High School and Beyond Study. NCES again supplemented the Bureau of Census' Current Population Survey to obtain data on pupil mobility, homework, and adult education. Libraries. The Center published a report entitled, "Three Years of Change in College and University Libraries, 1979 to 1982. A major new survey

of public libraries was also completed which showed that in 1982, public libraries reported a total attendance of 15.5 million per typical week. This figure is up substantially from 8.5 million in 1978. Attendance at libraries outside metropolitan areas showed a small decline.

Publications. In addition to The Condition of Education and the Digest of Education Statistics, NCES produced 82 other publications, including: 25 reports; 41 bulletins, announcements and special reports; 11 announcements of the release of data tapes; and 5 statistical highlights and internal reports.

1986 Budget Proposal

The 1986 budget request for the National Center for Education Statistics is proposed at the freeze level of $8,747,000, the 1985 appropriation level, to help control the Federal deficit. This level is consistent with the recent appropriations history of maintaining this activity at a constant level. Estimates for 1987-1990 for this program in the President's Budget are maintained at the 1986 level, rather than increased to offset the cost of inflation, thereby achieving further deficit reductions. These funds will be used to provide descriptive data on elementary/secondary, postsecondary and vocational education in the United States, and to make the data available to policymakers and the public in a timely, useful manner. Elementary/Secondary Education. The budget request includes $2.5 million to provide data on elementary/secondary education, about the same amount as in 1985. Through the Common Core of Data Survey System, NCES will continue to collect basic statistics on enrollments, completions, staff and finance in the Nation's public schools. NCES' second public school sample survey will provide data addressing the issues of teacher quality, time-on-task and in-service training. Planning will also begin on the design of a new longitudinal study, NELS:88, one cohort of which will be the sophomore high school class of 1988.

Educational Research and Statistics

2. National Center for Education Statistics

1986 Budget Proposal--continued

Postsecondary Education. For postsecondary education data, $3.8 million, a decrease of $0.5 million from fiscal year 1985, is requested. This will provide for implementation of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), a revised system employing consistent definitions for the broad spectrum of postsecondary institutions. IPEDS will collect data throughout the postsecondary sector on enrollments, awards/degrees, staff and finances. In addition to the IPEDS program, a study of postsecondary transcripts will be completed using data from followups of the earlier longitudinal studies (NLS-72 and HS&B) to gather data on course taking, while the biennial survey of Recent College Graduates will provide continued trend data on the employment status of college graduates.

Vocational Education. The Carl Perkins Vocational Education Act (P.L 98-524), passed in October 1984, requires the Center to operate a national vocational education data reporting and accounting system. The new system will replace the earlier Vocational Education Data System (VEDS), mandated by the Education Amendments of 1976 (P.L. 94-482), which experienced a number of problems. The new system will be designed to improve the quality of the data while reducing the burden of collecting it, by relying on sampling and biennial data collection. Redesign of NCES' vocational education data collection system will focus on utilizing, to the extent possible, surveys designed for more general purposes, including IPEDS and the Common Core of Data. The budget request also includes $1.0 million, an increase of $0.5 million over fiscal year 1985, to complete the vocational education data reporting system with sample surveys and universe counts providing information on the vocational enterprise, including programs, completers, staff, finances, students, and facilities.

Statistical Information Dissemination. Providing information to the education community is a major NCES activity. The request includes $1.4 million to continue support for the Statistical Information Office, including production of The Condition of Education and Digest of Education Statistics reports, maintaining the Fast Response Survey system for data on policy issues, and supporting refinements and processing of education data projections and allocations of Federal formula grant funds. Building on the Department's Education Indicators project, useful measures for returns of education and State level indicators of educational need and drop-out rates will be developed.



TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1985.






Mr. NATCHER. At this time, we take up the budget request for libraries in the Department of Education. We have before the committee Mr. Donald J. Senese, and before you proceed with your statement, tell us who you have sitting with you there at the table.


Mr. SENESE. Mr. Chairman, it is good to be here. On my left is Malcolm Davis, Acting Director of the Center for Libraries and Education Improvement; and to his left is Ray Fry, Director of the Division of Library Programs. On my immediate right is Sally Christensen, Director, Budget Service, Office of Planning, Budget and Evaluation; and to her right is Carol Cichowski, Director, Special Education, Rehabilitation and Research Analysis Division.

Mr. NATCHER. We are delighted to have all of you before the committee.

Mr. Senese, as I understand, you shortly will be leaving your present assignment, and I want to wish you, on behalf of our subcommittee, the best of everything in the future.

Mr. SENESE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. NATCHER. I hope everything works well for you, and you are successful in your new endeavor. We will be pleased to hear from you at this time.

Mr. SENESE. Mr. Chairman, we have submitted our statement, and I would like to give the highlights of it this morning.


We appreciate this opportunity to appear before you to discuss the 1986 budget for the Libraries account. For fiscal year 1986, the administration is not requesting any funds for the library grant programs. This action reflects our belief that State library agencies have been strengthened through participation in these programs, and should now assume responsibility for basic library services and

[blocks in formation]

that other sources of funds can be made available to support the other library activities.

We recognize the importance of maintaining high-quality library services throughout the Nation; however, over the past 30 years. the Federal investment in programs authorized by the Library Services and Construction Act and the Higher Education Act amounts to almost $2 billion. In addition, budgetary savings of $130.9 million in fiscal year 1986 would result from terminating the library programs in this account.


Of the $125 million appropriated for the Libraries account in fiscal year 1985, over 90 percent was for programs authorized by the Library Services and Construction Act and administered by the States. One of these programs, Public Library Services, has for all practical purposes met its goal of extending access to the services of public libraries to all segments of the Nation's population and is therefore being proposed for termination. Access to public library services has now been extended to about 96 percent of the population. Federal support has also served as seed money, stimulating State aid for public libraries. At present, 43 States appropriate funds for their own State-aid programs, and the Federal contribution to public library services is only about 5 percent of the total spent on public libraries.

The Public Library Construction program shares with the Public Library Services program the goal of extending access to the serv ices of public libraries to all segments of the Nation's population. Funds appropriated during the past 21 years for the construction of new facilities, additions, renovation, and remodeling have enabled the States to provide the basic library facilities necessary to serve the public. State governments should now assume responsibility for further construction, where necessary. Their ability to assume this task is indicated by their matching the 1983 grants by a ratio of 2 to 1, instead of the required average matching of 1 to 1.

The Interlibrary Cooperation program is also proposed for termi nation. The Federal seed money of over $94 million has stimulated projects linking libraries through telecommunication systems, established resource sharing projects not linked to automation, and advanced the training of library personnel to handle resource sharing and the technological advances inherent in more complex library networking. Even in the absence of required matching. States have recognized the cost-sharing benefits of interlibrary cooperation, with 28 States now providing a total of $85 million in State aid for these purposes.

New programs providing for improved library services to Indian tribes and to native Hawaiians were authorized by the LSCA Amendments of 1984 and are being initiated in fiscal year 1985 through set-asides of $1.77 million and $590,000, respectively, from mandatory set-asides from LSCA Titles I, II and III. Unlike the other LSCA funds, these funds are not awarded through the State library agencies. It is hoped that these funds, which will be awarded in September, will provide the incentive for library improvement through the direct involvement of Indian tribes and native

Hawaiians in making library materials and services available to all.


The three small discretionary grant programs assisting libraries through Title II of the Higher Education Act are not considered to be a critical Federal investment. The impact of eliminating them would be minimal.

The Library Career Training program is proposed for termination because there is no longer a critical shortage of librarians. Adequate Federal and State grant and loan programs for students are now available to support the training of needy persons as librarians and information specialists, thus eliminating the need for this small categorical program.

The Library Research and Demonstrations program, also proposed for termination, has generated new knowledge and uses of the new technology in library and information science; however, such research has been and will continue to be conducted by the Department of Education's National Institute of Education and its National Center for Education Statistics, by other Federal agencies such as the National Endowment for the Humanities, and by private foundations and research groups.

The Research Libraries program, which has strengthened many of the Nation's major research libraries through projects supporting materials acquisition, preservation of materials, and bibliographic control and resource sharing, should now be terminated. Private sources of funds, as well as funds from other Federal agencies such as the National Endowment for the Humanities, are available for further research library needs.


We believe that library services are vital to educational excelence and lifelong learning. However, these Federal programs have strengthened State library agencies over a period of 30 years, and other sources of funding are available. There is no longer a clear need for the Department of Education to continue support for liorary programs.

My colleagues and I are available to answer any questions you may have.

[The biographical sketch follows:]

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »