Separate selection and pretesting of students eliminate regression effects in the pre-post achievement gain measured in the RMC Model--A method of program evaluation. (CP)

To inform reauthorizations of Title I, the federal government's largest program for elementary and secondary education, the Congress has required the Department of Education to conduct national assessments of Title I. Two of these studies have gathered Title I data over several years: the Prospects study, completed in 1997; and the ongoing…

The Elementary and Secondary School Improvement Amendments of 1988 (P.L. 100-297) require the U.S. Department of Education to conduct a national longitudinal study of Chapter 1 of the Elementary Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The department commissioned the selection of experts qualified to provide design suggestions and advice for the national…

Twenty-six papers concerning Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I program evaluation--presented at the 1978 American Educational Research Association/National Council on Measurement in Education meeting--are summarized. Speakers from the federal government are: C.T. Cross (see ED 156 695); R.L. Fishbein; and D. Ozenne. State department…

The National Study of Effective Title I Schoolwide Programs was initiated to address the lack of information on how schoolwide programs affect teaching and learning and student outcomes and to develop a critical empirical base for strengthening the implementation of Title I programs in service of students in high poverty schools. This paper…

Meta-analysis of Title I program evaluations shows the norm-referenced model overestimates positive effectiveness; while the regression-discontinuity design underestimates it. Potential biases include residual regression artifacts, attrition and time-of-testing problems in the norm-referenced design, and assignment, measurement, and data…

Many difficulties are encountered when large-scale monitoring of federally-funded programs (including Title VII bilingual education programs) has been attempted. These difficulties may be categorized as follows: (1) differences in perception of the purpose of monitoring; (2) variance in the definition of the treatment (program) and expectations…

This report begins by considering the design of compensatory education evaluations. A professional evaluation of Elementary Secondary Education Act Title I must make a precise accounting of the relations among expenditures, implementation, outcome and impact; measure effectiveness over a long enough term to determine if the benefit and gain last;…

Seven considerations in designing the Title I Evaluation and Reporting System are reviewed: satisfying state, local, and federal needs; summative evaluation; differences in Title I subprograms; local use of different achievement tests; comparative analysis data; use of approved evaluation designs; and use of a common reporting metric. (MH)

This report presents the analytic plan for a study of demonstration Title I projects. The study is to be one of distributional equity: what kinds of instructional services are received by what kinds of students. It is mandated by the United States Congress and will provide the basic analysis for possible modifications in the Elementary and…

A research strategy that the National Institute of Education (NIE) has adopted to obtain information about what Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is accomplishing toward achievement of two of its objectives is presented. These two objectives are to fund special services to low achieving students in the poorest schools and to…

Twelve common errors which can invalidate an otherwise sound evaluation are identified, and ways to avoid them are presented. The hazards are: (1) grade-equivalent scores; (2) inappropriate statistical adjustments with nonequivalent control groups; (3) administering norm-referenced tests at inappropriate times of the school year; (4) inappropriate…

The norm-referenced evaluation model (RMC Model A) for Title I project evaluation, consists of procedures whereby the expected posttest standing of a treatment group under the null condition is generated from their pretest standing. It is assumed that the treatment group is not selected on the basis of their pretest scores and can be considered…

Title I evaluations using the RMC Model C design depend for their interpretation on the assumption that the regression of posttest on pretest is linear across the cut score level when there is no treatment; but there are many instances where nonlinearities may occur. If one applies the analysis of covariance, or model C analysis, large errors may…

The three RMC models endorsed by the U.S. Office of Education for the evaluation of Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I programs are based on narrowly conceived approaches to evaluation--the measurement of cognitive achievement gains. Each model requires the comparison of observed student performance with an estimate of what level of…