Title I aims to tackle the academic achievement gap between disadvantaged and advantaged students via federal funding to school districts serving low-income students and to help equalize educational opportunities for students from poor households. Title I has been the largest K–12 program funded by the federal government. Yet, despite 49 years of Title I investments since 1965, persistent efforts to close the achievement gap between disadvantaged students and advantaged students have not been successful. Using existing research, we provide information on current fiscal issues that govern Title I funding to give a better understanding of challenges associated with managing Title I programs designed to close the achievement gap.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerB. D. (2005). The emerging shape of educational adequacy: From theoretical assumptions to empirical evidence.Journal of Education Finance,30(3), 259–287.
2.
BakerB. D. (2012, March). Unpacking the consequences of disparities in school district financial inputs: Evidence from staffing data in New York and Illinois. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education Finance and Policy, Boston, MA.
3.
BakerB., SciareaD., & FarrieD. (2012). Is school funding fair? A national report card.Newark, NJ: Educational Law Center.
4.
BancheroS., & PorterC. (2013, April 16). Unions’ charter-school push labor looks to organize in an educational sector that has largely kept it away.Wall Street Journal, p. A3.
5.
BarnettW., CarolanM., FitzgeraldJ., & SquiresJ. (2012). The state of preschool 2011: State preschool yearbook.New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.
6.
BarnettW., CarolanM., FitzgeraldJ., & SquiresJ. (2013). The state of preschool 2012: State preschool yearbook.New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.
7.
BormanG. D. (2009). National efforts to bring reform to scale in America's high-poverty elementary and secondary schools: Outcomes and implications.Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
8.
BormanG. D., StringfieldS. C., & SlavinR. E. (Eds.). (2001). Title I: Compensatory education at the crossroads.New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
BrownF. (1982). Improving schooling through Title I: A model for change, education and urban society.Education and Urban Society,15, 125–142.
10.
BrownF. (2004a). The intersection of school desegregation and economic globalization in America: Forum on public policy.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
11.
BrownF. (2004b). Nixon's “Southern strategy” and forces against Brown.Journal of Negro Education,73, 191–208.
12.
BrownF. (2006a). Educational equity, globalization and the No Child Left Behind Act. In No Child Left Behind and other federal programs for urban school districts (pp. 309–320). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
13.
BrownF. (2006b). School choice and educational equity under No Child Left Behind in the post-Brown era. In No Child Left Behind and other federal programs for urban school districts (pp. 37–60). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
14.
BrownF. (2009). Quality education for African Americans after parents involved.Education and Urban Society,20(10), 519–528.
15.
BrownF. (2012a). Are traditional university preparation programs the best way to prepare teachers and administrators to teach diverse student populations? In BrownF., HunterR. C., & DonahooS. (Eds.), Diversity in schools: Debating issues in American education (vol. 3, pp. 37–40). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
16.
BrownF. (2012b). Will an increased focus on the market economy and global competition in K–12 public education prepare students to succeed economically: Overview? In HunterR. C., BrownF., & DonahooS. (Eds.), School governance: Debating issues in American education (vol. 7, pp. 208–211). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
17.
BrownF. (2013). Privatization of elementary and secondary education. In RussoC. J. (Ed.), Key legal issues for schools (2nd ed., pp. 29–44). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
18.
CaryK., & RozaM. (2008). School Funding's Tragic Flaw.Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education.
19.
Citizens Commission in Civil Rights (1999). Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act underway in the Congress.Civil Rights Monitor,10(4), p. 1–2.
20.
CohenD. K. (1982). Policy and organization: The impact of state and federal education policy on school governance.Harvard Education Review,52, 474–494.
21.
ColeyR. J., & BakerB. (2013). Poverty and education: Finding the way forward.Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
22.
CroninJ., DahlinM., XiangY., & McCahonD. (2009). The accountability illusion.Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
23.
Darling-HammondL. (2010). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to equity will determine our future.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
24.
DuncombeW. A., & YingerJ. (2005). How much more does a disadvantaged student cost?Economics of Education Review,24(5), 513–532.
25.
GoldhaberD. (2001). The interface between public and private schooling: Market pressure and the impact on performance in improving educational productivity.Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
26.
GrierW. H., & CobbsP. M. (1968). Black rage.New York, NY: Bantam Books.
27.
HarringtonC. D., & OrlandM. E. (1992). Politics and Federal aid to urban school systems: The case of Chapter One. In CibolkaJ. G., ReedR. J., & WongK. K. (Eds.), The politics of urban education in the United States (pp. 167–179). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
28.
HuiT. K. (2014, January 21). Charter school to open near gated community in Harnett County.News & Observer, pp. 1A, 5A.
29.
HurshD. (2007). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of neoliberal education policies.American Educational Research Journal,44(3), 493–518.
30.
JeffryJ. R. (1978). Education for children of the poor: A Study of the origina sn implementation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
31.
KirstM., & JungR. (1982). The Utility of a Longitudal Approach in Assessing Implementation. In WilliamsW. (Ed.), Studying Implementation (pp. 119–148). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
32.
KronholzJ. (2002, February 19). High court's ruling will fuel fight over school vouchers: Judgment on Cleveland's taxpayer plan will subject Florida's program to more scrutiny.Wall Street Journal, p. A28.
33.
LaddH. F. (2012). Education and poverty: Confronting the evidence.Journal of Policy Analysis & Management,31(2), 203–227. doi: 10.1002 Pam. 21615.
34.
LevinH. M., & BelfieldC. R. (2004). Vouchers and public policy: When ideology trumps evidence.New York, NY: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education.
35.
LewinT. (March 6, 2012). Black students face more discipline, data suggests.New York Times, p. A18.
36.
LiuG. (2008). Improving Title I funding equity across states, districts and schools.Iowa Law Review,93, 973–1014.
37.
LuiM. (2007). The economic reality of being Latino/a in the United States. In RothenbergPaula (Ed.), Race, Class, and Gender in the United States (pp. 358–361). Worth Publishers.
38.
LyonsW., & DrewJ. (2006). Punishing schools: Fear and citizenship in American public education.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
39.
MeyerJohn W., ScottW. R., & StrongD. (1987). Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity.Administrative Science Quarterly,32, 186–201.
40.
MoynihanD. P. (2010). A portrait in letters of an American visionary.New York, NY: PublicAffairs.
41.
MillerR. (2009). Secret recipes revealed: Demystifying the Title I, Part A funding formulas.Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
42.
MillerR. T., & BrownC. G. (2010a). Bitter pill, better formula: Toward a single, fair, and equitable formula for ESEA Title I, Part A.Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
43.
MillerR. T., & BrownC. G. (2010b). Spoonful of sugar: An equity fund to facilitate a single, fair, and equitable formula for ESEA Title I, Part A.Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
44.
PaigeR. (2002, June 14). Dear colleague letter to education officials regarding implementation of No Child Left Behind and guidance on public school choice.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
45.
PetersonB., & MinerB. (2000). Vouchers, the right and the race card. In BirnbaumJ., & TaylorC. (Eds.), Civil Rights since 1787: A reader on the Black struggle (pp. 819–822). New York, NY: New York University Press.
46.
ReardonS. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In DuncanG. J., & MurnaneR. J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity? (pp. 91–116). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
47.
RichjanM. (2014, January 28). Bill to offer an option to give vouchers.New York Times, A12.
48.
SawhillI. V., & SmithS. L. (2000). Vouchers for elementary and secondary education In SteuerleC. E., Vouchers and the provisions for public services (pp. 251–278). Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute Press.
49.
SchuchterA. (1968). White power/Black freedom planning the future of America.Boston, MA: Beacon.
TysonK. (2011). Integration interrupted: Tracking, Black students, and acting White afterBrown. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
52.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013). Agency Financial Report. Washington, DC: USDA.
53.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Evaluation of the comprehensive school reform program implementation and outcomes: Fifth-year report.Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.
54.
U.S. Department of Education. (2013). For each and every child—A strategy for education equity and excellence.Washington, DC: Author.
55.
WargoM. J., CompeauP. L., & TallmadgeC. K. (1971). Further examination of exemplary programs for educating disadvantaged children.Palo Alto: American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences.
56.
WatsonD. (2011). “Urban but not too urban”: Unpacking teachers’ desires to teach urban students.Journal of Teacher Education,62(1), 23–35.
57.
WillhelmS. M. (1983). Black in White America.Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.
58.
Witherspoon ArnoldN. (2014, May). “How do you rebuild what's already broken?” The hidden costs of schools in disaster areas. Roundtable, Columbia, MO.
59.
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002).
60.
ZernikeK. (2002, June 30). Vouchers: A shift, but just how big?New York Times, p. 3.
