This article has two purposes: to explore the effects of school and student selection pro
cedures on the proportions of various student groups that have access to and/or receive
Title I services, and to assess whether funding inadequacies or student selection pro
cedures are responsible for current levels of Title I service to disadvantaged students.
Data from a demonstration study of compensatory education are used to address both
objectives.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Breglio, V., R. Hinckley, and R. Beal (1978) "Students' economic and educational status and selection for compensatory education." Techincal Report No. 2 from the Study of the Sustaining Effects of Compensatory Education on Basic Skills. Santa Ana, CA: Decima Research .
2.
Feldstein, M. ( 1977) "Distributing federal education aid to low achievement pupils: the predicted achievement method," in M. Guttentag (ed.) Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Vol. 2. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
3.
HEW [U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare] (1976) The Measure of Poverty: A Report to Congress as Mandated by the Education Amendments of 1974. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
4.
NIE [National Institute of Education] (1977 a) Compensatory Education Services: Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
5.
--- ( 1977b) Demonstration Studies of Funds Allocation Within Districts . Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
6.
--- ( 1977c) Using Achievement Test Scores to Allocate Title I FundsWashington, DC. National Institute of Education.
7.
Plotnick, R. and F. Skidmore (1975) Progress Against PovertyNew York: Academic Press.
8.
Vanecko, J., F. Archambault, and N. Ames (1977) ESEA Title 1 Allocation Policy. Demonstration Study—Implementation Decisions and Research PlanCambridge, MA: Abt Associates
