Speech #980101850

Mr. Speaker. as a strong supporter of the migrant student record transfer system (MSRTS) in Little Rock. Ark.. I am pleased that the appropriations bill approved by the House last Thursday for LaborHHSEducation includes $255.744.000 for the migrant education program. This appropriation. which is the same as the fiscal year 1983 level. includes funds for the MSRTS. which maintains health and academic records on each migrant student and transfers them with the child as he moves from school district to school district. I have witnessed the maturation of this system of inter- and intraState coordination. and recognize its great value to the migrant community. The appropriations measure also includes $7.500.000 for the high school equivalency program (HEP) and the college assistance migrant program (CAMP). which enable students from poor families of migratory and seasonal farm workers to obtain high school diplomas and subsequently to be placed in steady employment or into postsecondary education. I think my colleagues will agree that considering the legislative history of the program. the preponderance of evidence overwhelmingly supports the position that Federal categorical funding is required if the needs of migrant children are to be met adequately. As you will recall. States. given their own priorities and concerns. have never responded to this mobile population. Prior to Public Law 89750. in 1966 only three States had appropriated any funds for migrant education. The migrant program differs from other educational programs in that the highly mobile child is often the concern of many school districts in more than one State. Therefore. the success and continuity of the migrant childs education depends largely on the leadership of the Department of Education with the joint cooperation of the States. Under Public Law 89750. for the first time. payments were provided under title I. ESEA to State education agencies to provide and meet the special education and health needs of migrant children between the ages of 5 and 17. In this act. States were required to coordinate with other States in the transmitting of pertinent information in respect to school records for migrant education. The national migrant student record transfer system became the eventual result of this provision. Education of migrant children presents unique workload problems for the school districts. These children move frequently from school district to school district for periods which often do not coincide with normal school terms. The lack of educational and health histories prior to MSRTS made grade placement difficult and medical needs unknown. The U.S. Department of Education. with the cooperation of the States. moved swiftly to correct these various inequities and developed curriculums in reading. math. early childhood. and oral language. They also developed a very extensive health record which provides teachers and administrators immediate access in connection with the placement and provision of health care for migrant children. Since that time. you can find many exemplary demonstration models for coordination. teaching exchange. and joint curriculum development. through this program. Interagency coordination has become a reality. with the Department of Education working with both the U.S. Health Department and the Rehabilitative Service in providing muchneeded and complex service to the migrant population. Since the original amendment of 1966. Congress has strengthened this law on several occasions in order to be sure that the total needs of migrants and handicaps were being met. Public Law 90247. signed into effect on January 2. 1968. was the basis of calculation for payment to the States. Again in 1970. Public Law 91230 was signed into effect on April 13. 1970. which required the States receive their money based on the number of migrant children served. Then later. Public Law 93380 was signed into effect on August 21. 1974. which allowed the States to operate the programs for migrant children directly through the local education agencies (LEAs). which was a clear indication even at this late date that some States did not really care about this mobile population of migrant children. The latest amendment to that act was Public Law 95561. dated November 1. 1978. which even went further and strengthened MSRTS and the transferring of the education and health information on migrant children. Prior to 1966. 9 out of 10 children of migrant farmworkers never entered high school and only 1 out of 10 who entered ever graduated. Most migrant children up to that time usually dropped out of school in the fourth or fifth grades. As one can understand. their attendance was erratic due to their traveling. and with the need of the families to have them working in the field. as well as other conditions of the poverty which surrounds them continually. there was a great lack of continuity of curriculum and instruction. Above all. a prevalent negative attitude by the local community. coupled with the migrant students commitment to their families and their poor health and nutrition. certainly detracted from their ability to learn when they did attend school. Since the Federal Government moved so humanely and has continued its efforts to strengthen the migrant program. it has become one of the most effective Federal programs. A large part of the credit for this is due to the cooperation of the Federal and State authorities. To date. the migrant program currently serves approximately 800.000 migrant children in 49 States plus Puerto Rico. I firmly believe that the migrant program is a model that can be used in the development of many other educational programs. and hope my colleagues will join with me in assuring that this success story is continued.