This article explores the All-Day Neighborhood Schools (ADNS) program, operated as a partnership between the New York City Board of Education and local philanthropists from 1936 to 1971. Designed to expand the resources available to children and parents, the program included after-school activities, additional teachers, professional development,…

This study was the third in a series, and its primary objective was the identification and description of successful compensatory educational programs for disadvantaged children. Programs were considered successful if they demonstrated cognitive benefits that were statistically and educationally significant. The second objective of this study was…

This publication contains the evaluation forms sent by the Florida State Department of Education to school administrators, staffs of other agencies, similar staffs in other states, and parents of disadvantaged children served by Title I programs. Sample responses are given and results summarized. A section is included on in-patient treatment of…

According to the American Institute for Research at Palo Alto, California, Apparently, as the unit of analysis is narrowed from the nation as a whole to states and then to local projects, more signs of positive impact on participating children can be identified.'' (Author)

Compensatory Education at its best is merely iodine being used to cure cancer. The problems of America's social, political, and educational systems are far too mammoth to be placated by this feeble effort. (Author)

In this manual, project directors of the Intensive Reading Instructional Teams (IRIT) program in Hartford, Connecticut, public schools, are provided with suggestions for evaluating compensatory programs such as the IRIT. Three models for basic Title I evaluation are discussed and compared: a norm-referenced model, a control group design, and a…

This report provides a description and evaluation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I-funded programs for the state of Mississippi. A needs assessment survey conducted in the state indicated that 214,443 students needed assistance in reading, 189,568 needed assistance in language arts, and 194,825 needed assistance in…

School district personnel responsible for administering Title I programs recognize that for a student to take advantage of remediation the individual must be present for instruction. Many evaluations of Title I programs have attributed increased achievement to increased attendance, without explicitly investigating this assumed relationship. This…

The goals of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I program operated by the Public Schools of the District of Columbia were to provide disadvantaged children with supplemental instructional services to improve their performance in reading and mathematics and to support their affective and psychomotor development. This volume of the…

This transcript of a National Public Radio broadcast records a discussion regarding various aspects of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Areas addressed include: Title I reading classes; the legislative history of Title I; readings by children in a Title I program; parent advisory councils; Title I aides; evaluations of Title…

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I evaluations submitted by local education agencies to the Virginia Department of Education are compiled in this report to summarize statewide Title I implementation during the 1977-78 school year and summer. An overall summary of Title I programs is presented in narrative form, as are descriptions…

This Local Education Agency (LEA) Self Analysis Instrument for ESEA Title I is one of the products developed and validated by the SEA (State Educational Agencies) Management of Compensatory Education, a multistate project funded through ESEA Title V-505. An additional product of the project was a LEA Process Model said to support the…

This study assesses the effectiveness of innovative programs for high risk students at four community junior colleges with somewhat different approaches to remedial education. Each program is described in terms of organizational structure, subject matter content, instructional strategies, counseling services, philosophy and objectives, grading…

Explains differences between Title I and Chapter I in four primary areas: targeting of funds; fiscal requirements; program design, implementation, and evaluation; and accountability. Argues that the changes significantly diminish the federal role in compensatory education, allow for abuse in implementation of the program, and may cause serious…