TexTESOL-IV Advocate

As the Legislature recedes, national issues come to the fore

2009-06-10T22:00:00.000-07:00

That long sigh of relief that you heard earlier this week was mine, as the close of the 2009 session of the Texas Legislature removed a huge weight from my shoulders. Following the actions of the Legislature is like watching a hockey game from the top floor of a neighboring skyscraper: You know something is going on, but you have no way to learn what. The good news is that the Lege apparently didn't pass any xenophobic legislation aimed at our students, and did not take advantage of the recession to slash education spending. Students are not more likely to show up in your classes with a concealed Glock. Nothing happened to make me feel the need to call each of you in the middle of the night with a list of your Senators and Representatives.

Therefore, we can turn our attention to a much more visible target, the U.S. Congress and Executive Branch of the Federal Government. Here, the outlook is considerably less grim than for the Texas Lege, where inertia is usually a positive sign. Congress is under fairly rational and progressive leadership, so we should don't have to fear too many surprise attacks on our profession.

Currently, TESOL is watching two pieces of legislation that bear directly upon our students:

S 729 (with companion bill HR 1751), called the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act (DREAM - don't you just love these acronyms?!), returns to the states the authority to give resident status to some undocumented alien minors. This authority was used before 1996 to allow children of undocumented immigrants, who in many cases had lived in the US since infancy, to enroll in public colleges and universities as residents rather than out-of-state students. Proponents of the DREAM Act claim that its passage will send a clear message to immigrants and native-born residents alike that we value education for all the residents of our country.

The DREAM Act, introduced in the House on March 26, 2009, is currently referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning and Competitiveness, chaired by Rep. Ruben Hinojosa, (D. Tex) from the Lower Rio Grande Valley. On the Senate side, S 729 was introduced on the same day by Senator Richard Durbin (D., Ill) and referred to the Judiciary Committee. If you would like to read comments on the House bill by its chief sponsor, Red. Howard Berman (D. Calif), click here. If you would like to express your opinion on this proposed legislation, Check out TESOL's Advocacy Action Center's site here.

The Families Learning and Understanding English Together Act (HR 1224), introduced on Feb. 26 by Rep. Raul Grijalva (D. Ariz), would provide funding for organizations which promote family literacy, including ESL. According to the NCSDAE (National Council of State Directors of Adult Education), current state and federal funding for adult literacy education is sufficient for only 3% of the 93,000,000 Americans in need of such learning. Rep. Grijalva's proposal will help to alleviate this serious shortfall, and will promote that old proverb "The family that studies ESL together prospers together." To express your views on HR 1224, click here.

Good news: Economic Stimulus Passes; Bad News: Texas Legislature in Session

2009-03-14T09:02:00.000-07:00

First, the good news:

From the TESOL Advocacy Action Center (http://capwiz.com/tesol/issues/alert/?alertid=12758751&type=CU):

Education and the Stimulus

The federal economic stimulus package, entitled the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, was passed late on February 13, and signed by President Obama on February 17. This historic law, which authorizes $787 billion in spending to aid the economy, includes about $115 billion for education, which is roughly twice the Department of Education's annual budget of $59 billion. This include:

$77 billion in direct funding for education
$40 billion in state stabilization funds to help avert education cuts.
$13 billion for Title I under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
$12 billion for Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) programs.
$5 billion in incentive grants for states that pursue higher standards, quality assessments, robust data systems and teacher quality initiatives.
$5 billion for Early Childhood, including Head Start, early Head Start, child care block grants, and programs for infants with disabilities.
$2 billion for other education investments, including pay for performance, data systems, teacher quality investments, technology grants, vocational rehab, work study and Impact Aid.
$30.8 Billion for College Affordability, including additional tax credits and an increase in the Pell Grant award

What about Adult Education?

While Sen. Patrick Leahy's (D-VT) proposed amendment to include the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act among the programs eligibile for public safety and other government services funds for states did not make the final bill, ... the text in the final bill was changed to reference the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act in relation to what districts can do with funds they receive under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (Title XIV).

The Department of Education has posted a page on it site with details and updates on funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Information is available at
Education Department: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

**********

By the way, if you are interested in following the progress of this stimulus package as it affects education, you can check out the following website: http://www.recovery.gov/ At the present time, all that I found there was a bunch of language on the proposals for enhancing transparency (the mot du jour), but I am sure more information will be forthcoming as the money actually gets sent out to the states and communities.

In addition to the economic stimulus package, Congress is considering a host of bills which may impact our mission and profession. The TESOL Advocacy Action Center tracks these bills at the following site: http://capwiz.com/tesol/issues/bills/. Checking this site, you can find the title and sponsors for these bills as well as TESOL's position on them, and links to the text of the bills and their progress through committee. The site also facilitates contacting your legislators to write to them about these bills.

Other TESOL Issues:

The Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs at the U.S. Department of State requested public feedback on a proposed online English language program targeted towards learners in other countries. TESOL submitted its comments, noting concern about the potential impact of such a program on intensive English programs as well as failure to consult leading professional organizations, including TESOL, in the development of the curriculum of the course. You can read the comments at http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/bin.asp?CID=321&DID=11879&DOC=FILE.PDF .

And now for the bad news:

I always view the biennial meeting of the Texas Legislature with considerable trepidation. A good deal of my concern has to di with the brief, copressed nature of their session. The Lege, as we affectionately call it, has about 90 days to consider all the business of the state for the next two years. This can lead to hastily-considered legislation which can cause a lot of mischief for educators. In addition, much of the action in the Lege takes place in the last few days, when the body is in a hurry to pass bills before the statutory deadline for adjournment. Finally, a good bill can always be vetoed by the Governor, often after the Legislature has adjourned, and there isn't a lot that can be done about it.

Currently, there is one issue which really gives me sleepless nights, though it is not directly related to language teaching. It is related to community college employees, which comprise a goodly number of our ESL colleagues here in TEXTESOL-IV, so I am exercising my prerogative as your Ill-Tempered Linguist to call your attention to issue of proportionality in appropriation of benefits.

Put simply, the issue of "proportionality" boils down to this: Currently, the State of Texas pays for part (a "proportion") of the instructional costs of the community colleges, who make up the balance with tuition and local taxes. But the State pays 100% of the cost of employee benefits (esp. health care and retirement). Advocates of "proportionality" want to reduce this contribution to the same proportion as that in which they pay for instructional costs. This will lead to millions of dollars of additional costs for the local districts, and could force osme districts to scale back benefits received by employees, including teachers.

Proportionality is a very bad idea, and all community college teachers should be very concerned about this. Several Representatives and Senators have introduced bills to prevent the use of proportionality in funding benefits. TCCTA (Texas Community College Teachers Association) has a very informative page on this subject, along with a guide for action by community college teachers.

http://tccta.typepad.com/main/2009/03/bills-on-proportionality-gain-sponsors.html

Congressional Action to support ESL learners

2008-08-22T14:24:00.000-07:00

The following message appears on the US Advocacy Action Center for TESOL. Read it carefully. If you want to take action to support this initiative, please take go to the following address:

http://capwiz.com/tesol/issues/alert/?alertid=11720101

******

As all ESL educators know, immigrants to the United States have made significant economics, social, and cultural contributions that enable the countryto better understand the rest of the world. A new bill introduced both in the House and Senate honors those contributions by providing immigrant families access to critical assistance such as English language and civics education. The Strengthening Communities through Education and Integration Act will help immigrant communities become a more integral part of the American fabric and maximize their social and economic contributions. This bill, sponored by Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA) in the House and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) in the Senate will:
Increase resources for adult education by codifying English literacy and civics adult education programs and creating a new appropriation for these programs.
Increase the authorization for Even Start Family Literacy programs to $350 million.Provide resources for expanded learning time programs for English language learners in middle and high school.
Create a $1,500 tax credit for teachers of English language learners and a deduction for their certification.
Create a 20% tax credit to employers that expend their resources to provide English language instruction and GED training.
Make grant money available to states to establish New American Councils that bring together business, faith, civic, philanthropic, non-profit and education stakeholders to create and implement immigrant integration programs.
Urge your members of Congress to support this important initiative by asking them to co-sponsor the Strengthening Communities through Education and Integration Act!

Dog Days Advocacy Tuneup

2008-07-25T09:59:00.000-07:00

ADVOCACY ISSUES FOR THE SUMMER DOLDRUMS

Hurricane Dolly has passed and the temperature is climbing back to the high ‘90’s. Not a good environment for mobilizing the masses to assault the citadels of power. Add to that the fact that the citadels are mostly empty: Congress is 2 weeks away from one of its many recesses, and candidates are stuck in that awkward moment between primaries and conventions.
The lazy, hazy days of summer are a good time to tune up our advocacy mechanisms and get ready for the battles to come. Here are some tips to follow for becoming an effective advocate:
· Have a good source of information about the issues that concern you: When you contact your lawmakers or agency heads, you need to be armed with facts, not rumors and impressions. An excellent place to start is TESOL (www.tesol.org). Our parent organization has a robust and active advocacy organization, which keeps membership current on the issues that affect our professional lives and the students we serve.

TESOL has two resources that are very useful for grassroots advocates:
1. At http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/seccss.asp?CID=32&DID=37, you can see all the positions taken by the Board of TESOL on public issues. The latest three are the following:
a. Position Statement on the Status of, and Professional Equity for, the Field of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (June 2008)
b. Position Statement on Professionalization and Credentialing for Adult ESOL Educators (April 2008)
c. Position Statement on Teacher Preparation for Content-Based Instruction (March 2008)
2. A very valuable TESOL resource is the US Advocacy Action Center, a one-stop mobilization tool, with instant access to your lawmakers and action alerts about key issues.
Go to http://capwiz.com/tesol/home/ and read about the latest legislative alert: support for the American Competitiveness Through International Openness Now (ACTION) Act of 2008 (S. 2653), also known as the “ACTION Act” (I do hope it will attract a less distracting acronym!) (http://capwiz.com/tesol/issues/alert/?alertid=11212261) This act seeks to take a number of measures to facilitate educational exchanges and entry of F-1 students to the US

· Write an informative, persuasive letter about your issue. Your congressperson and senators receive tons of mail every day, so your communication needs to be well-crafted to be effective. This means paying attention to the following points:
o Don’t make your letter too long: 1 page, 2 at the very longest.
o Don’t be abusive or threatening: it is such a short distance from the staff person’s chair to the waste can.
o Do your best to appeal to the national interest and the interest of the section represented by your legislator. Facilitating entry by F-1 students to the US is good for the U.S. (and Texas) . Of course, it is also good for Kazakhstan, but your senator doesn’t represent Kazakhstan.
Here again, the Capwiz folks at the Advocacy Action Center can be very helpful. For each Action Alert, they develop a template for writing an effective letter on the issue. By following this template, and modifying it to fit your circumstances, you can develop a hard-hitting e-mail or printed letter on your issue. (For a pertinent example of this template, enter your zip code in the box on the above-cited Action Alert page regarding the ACTION act).
· Don’t forget to follow all applicable laws and regulations regarding legislative communication! Specifically, do not
o Use letterhead stationary of your institution to write your letter;
o Use your institution’s e-mail server to send e-mail communications to legislators;
o Do your advocacy activity on your institution’s time, while you are at work.
Finally, stay in touch with the Advocacy Blog of TexTESOL-IV (http://textesol-iv-advocate.blogspot.com/) to get information about issues that affect our profession here in Southeast Texas.

Common Sense on Capital Hill

2008-07-25T09:37:00.000-07:00

On February 14 of this year, Senators Norm Coleman (R, Minn) and Jeff Bingaman (D, NM) introduced a bill called the ACTION (American Competitiveness Through International Openness Now) Act. its purpose, among other things, is to facilitate access to our universities by international students by streamlining government procedures which make it harder for students to obtain F-1 visas.

I urge you to read Senator Coleman's remarks, reprinted below from the Feb. 14 issue of the Congressional Record, and consider lending your support to this worthy proposal. You can do so by going to the US Advocacy Action Center for TESOL, at http://capwiz.com/tesol/issues/alert/?alertid=11212261

********

By Mr. COLEMAN (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
S. 2653. A bill to further United States security by restoring and
enhancing the competitiveness of the United States for international
students, scholars, scientists, and exchange visitors and by
facilitating business travel to the United States; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, today, along with my distinguished colleague from New Mexico, Senator Bingaman, I am introducing legislation to restore and enhance our Nation's competitiveness for international students, scholars, scientists, and exchange visitors,
and better facilitate legitimate business travel to the U.S. In the immediate aftermath of the events of 9/11, it was necessary to take the steps we did to improve and enhance our Nation's security. But in the more than 6 years since 9/11, these well-intentioned changes have had unintended consequences, stifling legitimate academic and scientific exchange and international business travel, and tarnishing our Nation's image around the world.

Three years ago, Senator Bingaman and I introduced a similar bill designed to reverse the decline in the number of foreign students studying at American colleges and universities. At that time, international applications to U.S. graduate schools and to English as a Second Language, ESL, programs were plummeting, and visa delays were numbering in the thousands. Visa delays were also negatively impacting the scientific and business communities, resulting in billions of
dollars of losses for the U.S. economy, as scientific research, conferences, and business meetings had to be canceled and shifted to overseas locations.

Over the past 3 years, there have been improvements with visa issuance, and it is the State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs, particularly Assistant Secretary Maura Harty, who deserves much of the credit. I am pleased with their advancements to enhance consular staff;
adopt newer, more efficient technology; offer international students, scholars, and exchange visitors preferential consideration when scheduling in-person interview appointments; and extend security clearance validity. The Department also has established a business visa center to field inquiries from U.S. businesses and their worldwide counterparts, although the center cannot expedite in-person interview appointments or the processing of visa applications.

This is not to say that visa delays have disappeared entirely. Delays do continue to occur, albeit not at the huge volume they once were. Because of this, there is a lot of lingering uncertainty about the process which generates a great deal of concern for international students, scholars, exchange visitors, and business travelers, and reinforces a perception that America is not a welcoming place for international visitors.

Indeed, serious concerns remain regarding the U.S. position in the competition for international talent, particularly among higher education, the scientific community, and the private sector. Our competitiveness problem is not just a visa problem--we cannot solve it simply by fixing the visa problems that were created after 9/11.

The U.S. now faces strong competition for international students, scholars, scientists, and exchange visitors. The United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the European Union all have coordinated, government-led strategic plans in place for attracting international students and scholars to their colleges and universities. Even our neighbor to the north, Canada, plans to announce a strategic plan this year. Meanwhile, traditional sending countries such as China and India are expanding their own higher education offerings, both to retain more of their own students and to attract international students. In the face of this competition, the U.S. still struggles along with piecemeal efforts, with each positive action seemingly cancelled out by a
negative action and persistent negative perceptions. The results are worrisome.

While international student enrollment in the U.S. declined in both the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 academic years, and remained stagnant in 2005-2006, over the same period, enrollment in the United Kingdom jumped more than 80,000, in Australia and France more than 50,000, and in Germany and Japan more than 20,000. In 2006, then-U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair announced a goal of attracting an additional 100,000 international students to Great Britain in the next 5 years.

Although we have started to see the enrollment numbers tick upwards slightly just this past year--in Minnesota, 9,048 international students were studying at colleges and universities last academic year, contributing $186.4 million to the state's economy--it is still below the peak level of 9,143 achieved in 2003-2004, so there is still ground to make up for what was lost over the past 3 years to ensure we regain our place as the most desired destination for study and for research.

Even if we return to pre-9/11 numbers, we may find we have lost market share to competing nations. Why should this matter to the U.S.? Recent public opinion polls taken around the world show that the U.S. has fallen out of favor. But these same polls also show that foreigners who have personally visited the U.S. have a significantly more favorable opinion than those who have
never visited.

International students and scholars benefit greatly from their experiences in the U.S., not only from their studies and research, but also from living in daily American life. They carry these experiences home, often becoming ambassadors of goodwill and understanding. Many go on to achieve leadership positions in their home countries in government, business, or education.

These exchanges also benefit American students, researchers and business colleagues, who similarly have the opportunity to learn about another culture in this globalized world.

Two expert commissions recently issued recommendations citing international educational exchange as a critical form of public diplomacy outreach. Last November, the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Commission on Smart Power cited international educational exchange as a key element for improving America's declining standing and influence in the world. Just last month, the Secure Borders and Open Doors Advisory Committee, a federal advisory committee tasked by the Departments of Homeland Security and State to provide
recommendations on the Departments' missions to protect not only America's security but also ur economic livelihood, ideals, image, and strategic relationships with the world, cited the need for a proactive national strategy to mobilize all the tools and assets at our disposal to attract international students and scholars to the U.S.

International students and scholars are not only important for public diplomacy, they also are essential for our Nation's global competitiveness. They make significant contributions to our economic growth and innovation. According to recent National Science Board data, nearly half of all graduate enrollments at U.S. colleges and universities in the science and engineering fields are international students. And these students often go on to positively impact future research and technology output in this country. I strongly support efforts to build up America's own supply of science and technology talent, but we also must continue to actively attract international
talent to our shores if we are to retain our innovative edge.

It is a reality of our time that, at the high-skill level, the temporary immigration system has become a conveyor belt of talent into the permanent immigration system. Most foreign students do want to go home after graduation, but some want to stay and use the knowledge they have acquired at our universities. For example, Ms. Indra Nooyi, the current CEO of PepsiCo, the world's fourth largest food and beverage company, is herself a former international student who received her master's degree from Yale University's School of Management.

So it is for all these important reasons that Senator Bingaman and I once again introduce legislation on this important issue: The American Competitiveness Through International Openness Now, ACTION, Act of 2008.

This year's bill once again calls for the establishment of a strategic plan for increasing the competitiveness of the U.S. in recruiting international students, scholars and exchange visitors. The U.S. can no longer sit back and rest on its laurels when engaging in this global competition, especially when all of our competitors clearly have stepped up their game.

Our biggest problem is our inability to marshal the efforts of all the relevant agencies into one coherent effort. Too often, these agencies work in an uncoordinated manner, or worse, at cross purposes. The PR blunder cases, where one arm of our government sets up exchange programs to attract people and another arm of the government detains them at the border, is only the tip of the iceberg. Our legislation would create a White House-chaired International Education Coordinating Council to guide the work of the myriad agencies that affect our competitiveness for international students and exchange visitors.

One of the most important provisions in the legislation would remove the nonimmigrant intent requirement for international students, the so- called 214(b) rule. This outdated requirement that all applicants for student visas must intend to return home after their studies makes no
sense, especially when talent-starved high-tech industries actively court international students upon graduation. As I stated earlier, our ability to attract international talent is essential to sustaining our competitive edge in the world. Retaining such a requirement is simply out of step in this day and age, especially when most of our competitors are going out of their way to enact policies to make it easier for international students to stay after graduation.

The bill calls for further improvement in the timeliness and efficiency of the visa issuance process for those in the sciences. It directs the Secretary of State to issue guidance to reduce the length of time to issue visas to scientists to a maximum of 30 days, and to provide a special review process for those cases that are delayed more than 45 days. It also directs the Secretary of State to review and update the Technology Alert List on a regular basis, and to consult with academia and the private sector as part of this review, to ensure the list reflects the current state of technology.

It also calls for expediting visa reviews for so-called ``Trusted Travelers'': easily identifiable, low-risk frequent travelers who have a history of past visa approvals, haven't violated their immigration status, and have provided their biometric data, plus any additional information required, to the consulate. This would both ease travel for these individuals and permit consular resources to be focused on more important cases. There is also a provision to also allow expedited visa reviews for international students, scholars and exchange visitors who leave the United States temporarily to visit their families or attend conferences and require a new visa to return to the same program. Today, these people can be stranded abroad for months without being able to return to their programs. The legislation calls for the reinstatement of domestic or stateside visa renewals for those here on employment-based non-immigrant visas. This practice was discontinued in 2004, because U.S. consulates abroad were better equipped to collect the required biometric data from the renewal applicant. Given today's available technology, we should seek to reinstate this practice. This would help to alleviate the volume of renewal applicants at our overseas consulates, as well as help renewal applicants who often opt to forgo travel overseas due to the uncertainty of timely and efficient processing of their renewal applications.

Finally, there has been much public debate about driver's licenses and Real ID. In our well-intentioned efforts to ensure that only persons in the U.S. legally are able to acquire driver's licenses, we have unintentionally hamstrung the ability of legal nonimmigrants to have licenses. Real ID's unrealistic documentation and renewal requirements for international students and scholars send yet another negative signal about America's openness to them, and frankly ignore
technical advances which could provide both better assurances about a person's legal status and licenses of a longer validity. Our bill will correct this problem in a way that will strengthen, not weaken, the integrity of driver's licenses.

For all of these reasons, our legislation is endorsed by NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the world's largest professional association advocating for international education and exchange programs, by the National Foreign Trade Council, the Nation's premier business organization dedicated to advancing global commerce, and by USA Engage, a leading broad-based coalition of trade associations promoting global economic engagement.

The American way of life owes its success and vitality to its historic ability to harness the best in knowledge and ideas, not only those that are homegrown, but also those that come from outside our borders. The longer we wait to take action, the more we risk missing out on future U.S. academic, business, and research success.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 2653

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``American Competitiveness
Through International Openness Now Act of 2008'' or as the
``ACTION Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Although the United States is engaged in a global
competition for international students and scholars, the
United States lacks a comprehensive strategy for conducting
and succeeding in this competition.
(2) In January 2008, the Secure Borders and Open Doors
Advisory Committee of the Homeland Security Advisory Council
issued a report that specifically cites international
education as a key component of public diplomacy, stating:
``America is losing competitiveness for international
students for one primary reason . . . because our competitors
have--and America lacks--a proactive national strategy that
enables us to mobilize all the tools and assets at our
disposal, and that enables the federal bureaucracy to work
together in a coherent fashion, to attract international
students.''
(3) Attracting the world's most talented students and
scholars to campuses and research institutes in the United
States will contribute significantly to the leadership,
competitiveness, and security of this Nation.
(4) The international student market has been transformed
in the 21st century. Traditional competitor countries have
adopted and implemented strategies for capturing a greater
share of the market. New competitors, primarily the European
Higher Education Area, have entered the market. Traditional
sending countries, such as China and India, are expanding
their indigenous higher education capacity, both to retain
their own students and to attract international students. All
of these changes are giving international students many more
options for pursuing higher education outside their home
countries.
(5) The number of international students enrolled in United
States higher education institutions declined in the academic
years 2003-04 and 2004-05, and remained constant in academic
year 2005-06. In academic year 2006-07, international student
enrollments increased 3 percent, yet remained below the peak
level, achieved in the 2002-03 academic year.
(6) From 2003 to 2006, international student enrollments
increased--
(A) by more than 80,000 in the United Kingdom;
(B) by more than 50,000 in Australia and France; and
(C) by more than 20,000 in Germany and Japan.
(7) Anecdotal evidence indicates that international
students, scholars, and scientists continue to find the
process of gaining entry to the United States to be demeaning
and unnecessarily cumbersome.
(8) While intensive English programs in the United States
are a gateway to degree programs, international student
enrollments in such programs have declined by almost 50
percent since 2000, and many schools offering such programs
have closed. This is due primarily to the difficulty of
obtaining a United States visa for the purpose of studying
English.
(9) At a time when talent is both scarce and mobile and
attracting talent is essential to the leadership,
competitiveness, and security of the United States, it is as
important for our Nation's visa system to be a gateway for
international talent as it is for it to be a barrier to
international criminals. Although the Department of State has
made significant progress in improving the United States visa
system, the system still does not effectively serve this dual
purpose.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of
the United States--
(1) to make international educational exchange a priority
in order to promote United States leadership,
competitiveness, and security;
(2) to restore United States competitiveness for
international students, scholars, scientists, and exchange
visitors;
(3) to ensure that all agencies of the United States
Government work together to create a welcoming environment
for legitimate international students, scholars, scientists,
and exchange visitors, without sacrificing safety;
(4) to pursue a visa policy that keeps the United States
safe, prosperous, and free, by--
(A) addressing legitimate security concerns; and
(B) keeping the United States a welcoming Nation; and
(5) to ensure that United States consulates have adequate
resources to perform their required duties.

SEC. 4. ENHANCING UNITED STATES COMPETITIVENESS FOR
INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS, SCHOLARS, SCIENTISTS,
AND EXCHANGE VISITORS.

(a) Strategic Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives
a strategic plan for increasing the competitiveness of the
United States for international students, scholars,
scientists, and exchange visitors.
(2) Content.--The strategic plan submitted under this
subsection shall include--
(A) a clear directive to the Department of State, the
Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Education,
the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, and
other Federal departments that impact--
(i) the propensity of international students, scholars,
scientists, and exchange visitors to visit the United States;
(ii) the ability of such individuals to gain entry into the
United States; and
(iii) the ability of such individuals to obtain a driver's
license, Social Security card, and other documents essential
to daily life in the United States;
(B) a marketing plan, including continued improvements in
the use of the Internet and other media resources, to promote
and facilitate study in the United States by international
students;
(C) a clear division of labor among the departments
referred to in subparagraph (A);
(D) a plan to enhance the role of the educational advising
centers of the Department of State that are located in
foreign countries to promote study in the United States and
to prescreen visa applicants;

[[Page S1071]]

(E) a clarification of the lines of authority and
responsibility for international students in the Department
of Commerce;
(F) a clear role for the Department of Education in
increasing the competitiveness of the United States for
international students; and
(G) a clear delineation of the lines of authority and
streamlined procedures within the Department of Homeland
Security related to international students, scholars,
scientists, and exchange visitors.
(b) International Education Coordination Council.--
(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Executive
Office of the President a council to be known as the
International Education Coordination Council (referred to in
this subsection as the ``Council'').
(2) Purpose.--The Council shall coordinate the activities
of the Federal Government in order to further the purposes of
this Act.
(3) Chair.--The President shall designate an official of
the Executive Office of the President to preside over the
Council.
(4) Composition.--The Council shall be composed of the
following positions, or their designees:
(A) The Secretary of State.
(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security.
(C) The Secretary of Education.
(D) The Secretary of Commerce.
(E) The Secretary of Energy.
(F) The Secretary of Labor.
(G) The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(H) The Commissioner of Social Security.
(I) The head of any other agency designated by the
President.
(c) Elimination of Nonimmigrant Intent Criterion for
Students.--
(1) In general.--Section 101(a)(15)(F)(i) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)(i))
is amended--
(A) by striking ``having a residence in a foreign country
which he has no intention of abandoning,'' and inserting
``having the intention, capability, and sufficient financial
resources to complete a course of study in the United
States,''; and
(B) by striking ``and solely''.
(2) Presumption of status.--Section 214(b) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act is amended by striking
``subparagraph (L) or'' and inserting ``subparagraph (F),
(L), or''.
(d) Countering Visa Fraud.--The Secretary of State shall--
(1) require United States consular offices, with particular
emphasis on consular offices in countries that send large
numbers of international students and exchange visitors to
the United States, to submit to the Secretary plans for
countering visa fraud that respond to the particular fraud-
related problems in the countries where such offices are
located; and
(2) not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act,
report to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate
and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives on the measures taken to counter visa fraud
under the plans submitted under paragraph (1).
(e) Improving the Security Clearance Process for
Scientists.--
(1) Duration of security clearances.--The Secretary shall
extend the duration of security clearances for scientists
admitted under section 101(a)(15)(J) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J)) until sooner of--
(A) the expiration of the program for which the scientist
was admitted; or
(B) the date that is 5 years after the beginning of such
extension.
(2) Portability of security clearances.--
(A) Validity across nonimmigrant classifications.--Except
as provided under subparagraph (B), a security clearance
issued with respect to an individual classified within a
nonimmigrant classification shall remain valid with respect
to a change of the individual to another nonimmigrant
classification if the security clearance approved in
connection with the first classification is in substantially
the same field as the field involved in the subsequent
classification.
(B) National interest waiver.--Subparagraph (A) shall not
apply with respect to an applicant for a security clearance
if the Secretary determines that the application of such
subparagraph with respect to such applicant is not in the
national security interests of the United States.
(3) Visa processing time.--The Secretary shall issue
appropriate guidance to--
(A) reduce the length of time required to issue visas to
scientists to a maximum of 30 days; and
(B) provide for a special review process to resolve
instances in which the length of time required to issue visas
to scientists exceeds 45 days.
(4) Review of technology alert list.--
(A) Interagency process.--The Secretary shall establish an
interagency group to review the technology alert list not
less frequently than once every 2 years.
(B) Chair.--The interagency review group established
pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be chaired by an
appropriate official of the Department of State.
(C) Consultation.--As part of its assessment of the current
state of technology, the interagency review group shall
consult with academic experts and with companies that
manufacture and distribute the items on the technology alert
list.
(D) Implementation.--The Secretary shall--
(i) promptly revise the technology alert list in accordance
with the recommendations of the group; and
(ii) promptly notify consular officials of the Department
of State of the revisions.
(5) Annual report.--
(A) Submission.--The Secretary shall submit an annual
report on the implementation of this subsection to--
(i) the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of
the Senate;
(ii) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(iii) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
(iv) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives;
(v) the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of
Representatives; and
(vi) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
(B) Contents.--The report submitted under subparagraph (A)
shall include such information as the Secretary determines
appropriate, including--
(i) progress made to reduce the length of time required to
process visas to scientists, including the average processing
time to complete security clearances for visa applicants in
each nonimmigrant visa classification under section
101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act;
(ii) any revisions made to the technology alert list under
paragraph (4);
(iii) the number of individuals in each nonimmigrant visa
classification who have--

(I) received a security clearance in the preceding year;
(II) been approved for a visa after receiving such
clearance; or
(III) been denied such clearance; and

(iv) the distribution of such individuals by country of
nationality.
(6) Definitions.--In this subsection:
(A) Scientists.--The term ``scientists'' means individuals
subject to clearance under section 212(a)(3)(A)(i)(II) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(3)(A)(i)(II)).
(B) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of State.
(C) Technology alert list.--The term ``technology alert
list'' means the list of goods, technology, and sensitive
information that is maintained by the Department of State.
(f) Short-Term Study on Tourist Visa.--Section
101(a)(15)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(B)) is amended by inserting ``for a period
longer than 90 days'' after ``study''.
(g) Drivers' Licenses for International Students and
Exchange Visitors.--Section 202(c)(2)(C) of the Real ID Act
of 2005 (49 U.S.C. 30301 note) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(v) Provisions for nonimmigrants monitored under the
student and exchange visitor information system.--With
respect to a nonimmigrant subject to the monitoring system
required under section 641 of the Illegal Immigration Reform
and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1372)--

``(I) notwithstanding clause (ii), a temporary driver's
license or temporary identification card issued to such
nonimmigrant pursuant to this subparagraph shall be valid for
the shorter of--

``(aa) the period of time of the nonimmigrant's authorized
stay in the United States; or
``(bb) the standard issuance period for drivers' licenses
provided by the State; and

``(II) valid status under that monitoring system shall be
deemed to be valid documentary evidence that the nonimmigrant
maintains status for purposes of clause (iv).''.

(h) Change of Status for Certain F-visa Holders Seeking
Adjustment of Status.--An individual who has been in valid
status under section 101(a)(15)(F) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) shall be considered
to have remained in such status until the beginning of a
fiscal year if--
(1) a petition under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of such
Act has been filed on behalf of such individual and has been
approved for such fiscal year;
(2) the cap with respect to such petitions provided in
paragraph (1)(A) or (5)(C) of section 214(g) of such Act was
reached before such fiscal year; and
(3) such individual's valid status under section
101(a)(15)(F) of such Act would otherwise terminate not more
than 6 months before such fiscal year.
(i) Social Security Enumeration at Ports of Entry.--
(1) Finding.--Congress finds that section
205(c)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
405(c)(2)(B)(i)(I)) requires the Commissioner of Social
Security to assign Social Security numbers, to the maximum
extent practicable, to aliens at the time of their lawful
admission to the United States--
(A) for permanent residence; or
(B) under any other status which permits such aliens to
engage in employment in the United States.
(2) Memorandum of understanding.--Pursuant to such section,
not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Commissioner of Social Security, the Secretary
of State, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall reach
agreement on a memorandum of understanding to expand the
enumeration-at-entry program to include all eligible
individuals seeking admission to the United States under
section 101(a)(15)(J) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J)).
(3) Implementation.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of the enactment of this Act,

[[Page S1072]]

the expanded enumeration-at-entry program described in
paragraph (2) shall become effective at all United States
ports of entry.

SEC. 5. FACILITATING BUSINESS AND ACADEMIC TRAVEL.

(a) Expedited Visa Reviews for Trusted Travelers.--
(1) Requirement.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall
establish a trusted traveler program for international
students, researchers, scholars, and individuals engaged in
business, which shall operate in accordance with such
guidance and procedures as the Secretary may determine.
(2) Trusted traveler described.--The trusted traveler
program shall provide for expedited visa review for--
(A) frequent low-risk visitors to the United States, who--
(i) have a history of visa approvals;
(ii) have not violated their immigration status;
(iii) have provided biometric data; and
(iv) have agreed to provide the consulate with such
information as the Secretary may require; and
(B) aliens admitted under subparagraph (F) or (J) of
section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(15), who--
(i) are pursuing a program in the United States;
(ii) have not violated their immigration status;
(iii) have left the United States temporarily; and
(iv) require a new visa to return to the same program.
(3) Authority to waive personal appearance.--
Notwithstanding section 222(h) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1202(h)), the Secretary may waive
the requirement for an in-person interview by a consular
officer with respect to trusted travelers described in
paragraph (2).
(b) Enhancing Consular Resources and Performance.--
(1) Requirement.--The Secretary of State shall--
(A) issue instructions providing for--
(i) enhanced staffing of United States consulates with high
demand for visas and long visa-processing backlogs; and
(ii) enhanced training, in partnership with institutions of
higher education, leaders in educational exchange, and the
business community, for consular officers with respect to
processing visas for international students and scholars and
individuals traveling for business;
(B) issue strong operational guidance to all United States
consular posts to eliminate inconsistencies in visa
processing; and
(C) through regular reviews, hold such posts accountable
for removing such inconsistencies.
(2) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall report to the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives
on the implementation of this subsection.
(c) Restoration of Revalidation Procedures for Employment-
Based Visas.--
(1) In general.--Section 222 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1202) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(i) The Secretary of State shall issue regulations to
permit an alien granted a nonimmigrant visa under
subparagraph (E), (H), (I), (L), (O), or (P) of section
101(a)(15) to apply for a renewal of such visa within the
United States if--
``(1) such visa is valid or did not expire more than 12
months before the date of such application;
``(2) the alien is seeking a nonimmigrant visa under the
same subparagraph under which the alien had previously
received a visa; and
``(3) the alien has complied with the immigration laws of
the United States.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 222(h) of such Act is
amended, in the matter preceding subparagraph (1), by
striking ``Notwithstanding'' and inserting ``Except as
provided under subsection (i), and notwithstanding''.
(d) Comprehensive Human Capital Workforce Plan.--The
Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall jointly--
(1) develop a plan for the appropriate selection, training,
and supervision of Federal Government officials whose contact
with foreign citizens impacts the international image of the
United States, including consular and customs and border
protection officials; and
(2) submit an annual report on the implementation of the
plan described in paragraph (1) to--
(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives; and
(D) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives.

NYTimes Article: The Ethics of Overseas Recruiting

2008-05-15T08:06:00.000-07:00

Does your institution use overseas recruiters to find students for your program? If so, who pays for the recruiter's services? The student? the program? Both?

A very interesting article appeared in the 5/11/08 issue of the New York Times about the practices and issues related to using overseas recruiters.

As a lifelong devotee of bratwurst, I have never been too curious about how it is made. However, pulling back the curtain is sometimes necessary to gain further understanding.

TexTESOLERS invited to participate in Adult Ed Meeting

2008-05-15T06:46:00.000-07:00

Attention, Adult Education activists:

Please note the upcoming symposium on Adult Literacy strategies, sponsored by the National Coalition for Literacy (of which TESOL is an active member). Attendance is free.

*********

The Dollar General Literacy Foundation and the National Coalition for Literacy cordially invite you to attend the

DOLLAR GENERAL PRESENTATION SERIES: Pathways to Partnerships

Speakers include:

Mayor Susan Narvaiz of San Marcos, TX

Karl Eschbach, Institute for Demographic and Socioeconomic Research,

Denine Torr, Community Initiatives, Dollar General Literacy Foundation

Lynn Selmser, Policy Director, National Coalition for Literacy

Low literacy has a tremendous impact on the workforce competitiveness of Texas and the problem is growing. Join business representatives, adult education professionals and policy makers for presentations and dialogue about sharing strategies and best practices for working together to address this issue.

Thursday, May 29, 2008
8:30 am to 3:00 pm (Lunch provided)
Sheraton Houston Brookhollow Hotel
3000 North Loop West, Houston, TX 77092

RSVP to TCALL by May 20, 2008 by emailing tcall@tamu.edu or by calling 800-441-READ. There is no registration fee.

Hotel Reservations: The Sheraton Houston Brookhollow Hotel has reserved rooms at the rate of $85/night, bloc - National Coalition for Literacy. Reservations may be made by calling 1-888-627-8196 by May 14, 2008 to receive this rate. Visit the hotel website for information about the accommodations. http://www.starwoodhotels.com/sheraton/property/overview/index.html?propertyID=341
For more information, please contact Jennifer Maloney, Director - National Coalition for Literacy, at Jennifer.maloney@ncldc.net, 301-602-6358, or on the web at http://www.national-coalition-literacy.org/.

What Fresh Hell Is This? - SBOE Version

2008-04-24T07:59:00.001-07:00

Recently, a major dust-up has erupted in the contentious world of state education policy. Responding to a recent legislative mandate, a conservative faction on the State Board of Education has advanced a plan for a complete overhaul of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) standards, and in the process have stirred the wrath of teachers and educational researchers around the state.

The gist of the proposed new standards is to resurrect the phonics-based language curriculum which I treasure as one of my childhood memories, along with the Brooklyn Dodgers, Adlai Stevenson and the Studebaker. Unfortunately, absent from my memories are any recollections of reading classes, probably because the old phonics-based basal readers were so boring that I often zoned out, daydreaming about the books that I read at home before coming to school.

If you are interested in educating yourself about this issue, here are some sources:

a) Read the proposed regulations themselves, at the following link: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/032808ELA_R_TEKS.pdf

You can marvel at how detailed the prescriptions are, specifying at what grade level children should be taught that nouns ending in “y” form the plural by changing the “Y” to “I” and adding “-es.”

b) Read a recent Houston Chronicle story about this controversy: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5716392.html

c) Read polemics on both sides of this issue at the following blog: http://www.susanohanian.org/show_outrages.html?id=6296

One thing to note is that the State Board of Education is soliciting public comment for 30 days, ending on May 18. If you wish to submit your views to the Texas Education Agency, you can do so by the following means:

• Mail: Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez, Policy Coordination Division, Texas Education Agency, 1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX 78701, 512-475-1497.
• Online: rules@tea.state.tx.us
• Fax: 512-463-0028.

EDITORIAL COMMENT: What has all this to do with ESL teaching? Well, at the outset maybe not much. However, may English teachers are fearful that the new proposed TEKS standards for English are actually a frontal assault on research-based instructional policy, and this trend directly threatens our profession. After all, who has not heard the notion that ESL instruction of non-native-speaking kids is unnecessary: “Just put the kids in a mainstream classroom, and they will learn English just as my sainted great-grandparents did.”

The State Board of Education is scheduled to vote on these standards on May 21. I urge you to take an interest in this issue, and I will be following it on the TexTESOL-IV Advocacy Blog, which you can access at

Inaugural Advocacy Message

2007-12-01T08:07:00.001-08:00

Advocacy SoapBox or
The Ill-Tempered Linguist
By David Ross

As I begin my duties as your Advocacy Representative on the TexTESOL-IV Board of Trustees, I would like to begin my defining my vision of the role of an advocacy representative, and then discuss a few issues which impact us as ESL/EFL educators.
We see every day the impact that legislative and administrative actions have on our professional and personal lives. Just in the last year, the State Legislature’s veto of community college appropriations, the failure of the US Congress to pass meaningful immigration reform, the relaxation on procedures for admitting international students into the USA, the expansion of Pell Grants, the preservation of in-district tuition for undocumented immigrant college students, even the bond issues in various school districts have major results for us as we carry out our teaching mission. Therefore, it is wise for us to pay attention to these matters and make our voices heard on issues that have vital importance for us and our students.
The greatest advocate for our cause is the organized voice of the membership of TexTESOL. I see my role as calling attention to key issues affecting us, mobilizing our members to address these issues, and when the occasion warrants it, under the direction of the TexTESOL-IV Board, directly addressing decision-makers with our legislative agenda.
I have also created a blog at the following address: http://textesoladvocate.blogspot.com/ Its purpose is to serve as a forum for discussion of legislative and policy issues impacting our profession. Anyone is welcome to contact me (david.ross@hccs.edu) with an issue (no complaints about supervisors, please!), which I will publicize on the blog; members are also free to participate in discussions via the comment pages on the blog as well.
I will look forward to hearing from you in the next year.
*****
International students are coming back! By way of a Thanksgiving treat to us, the Houston Chronicle led off its 11/22 issue with the news that international students are beginning to return to the US as a destination of choice for higher education. For the article, check the following site: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5321936.html ). Reasons may include a relaxation of State Department regulations which, since the advent of SEVIS in 2000-2001, had had it quite burdensome for students in other countries to apply and pay for F-1 visas, as well as the dramatically declining value of the dollar, which makes education in the US a relative bargain for many students.
Attracting international students to study in the US helps us in several ways:
Students from abroad who study in the USA are the accounting equivalent of a US export: they bring assets to the USA, providing jobs and income to US schools.
International students provide a valuable element of diversity to a school, giving countless American students an experience of the world without leaving their campus.
Successful international students also can serve as ambassadors of good will towards our country when they return home – Heaven knows we could use more good will nowadays.
Is your school positioned to take advantage of this new trend? I recommend that TexTESOL members take a good look at the policies and practices of their respective institutions to see whether their schools are in a position to take advantage of this positive developmentin the world economy.

****

Securing the retirement of teachers. It is always worthwhile to remember that, underneath all of our professional specialization, basically we are teachers. Currently Congress is considering legislation which will remove a cruel provision which affects primarily public school teachers. In the dock are the infamous “Government Pension Offset” and the “Windfall Elimination Provision,” two amendments to the Social Security Act which prevent those covered by other government pension plans from receiving the full social security and survivor benefits they have earned in the past. The result is that those employees, predominantly teachers covered by state teacher retirement plans (including Texas with TRS), see their retirement and survivor benefits sharply reduced compared to those who worked the same number of years but were covered only by Social Security.
The good news is that there is a lot of sentiment in Congress for repealing these odious provisions, so that teachers and other public servants may enjoy the same benefits as other working people. 329 Representatives have co-sponsored HR 82, which would eliminate these discriminatory measures; a companion Senate bill, S206, has attracted 35 sponsors. Neither of Texas’ Senators have joined as co-sponsors, so members may want to get in touch with them.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Washington Office:284 Russell Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510-4304Phone: (202) 224-5922Fax: (202) 224-0776Main District Office:10440 North Central Expressway, #1160Dallas, TX 75231Phone: (214) 361-3500Fax: (214) 361-3502

Senator John Cornyn
Washington Office:517 Hart Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510-4302Phone: (202) 224-2934Fax: (202) 228-2856Main District Office:221 West 6th St., Ste. 1530Austin, TX 78701Phone: (512) 469-6034Fax: (512) 469-6020

Introduction to TesTESOL Advocate

2007-11-30T08:14:00.000-08:00

This will be a forum for discussion of issues that affect the professional lives of ESL/EFL students in Region IV of TexTESOL.