A liberal interpretation of Section 151 of Public Law 93-380, to implement effective local evaluation of Title I programs, is supported. Weaknesses are cited: (1) nationwide impact data, (2) unsound aggregation of Title I achievement gains, and (3) lack of consideration of alternative evaluation methods. (MH)

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)

Oregon has recognized the problems involved in the evaluation of Elementary Secondary Education Act Title I programs, and has worked toward solutions, while recognizing the differing needs of local, state, and federal departments of education. In order to provide help to the local school districts with respect to evaluation, a statewide committee…

Kindergarten pupils enrolled in Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title I schools were selected for the Kindergarten Extended Day (KED) Program if they showed marked underachievement on the Cooperative Preschool Inventory (CPI). KED students attended kindergarten for an additional half day. Since previous evaluations of KED may have had…

Use of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests (WRMT), individually administered wide ranging reading tests, was explored, using Title I evaluation Models A1 and A2. Attention was focused on: (1) relationship of the Title I curriculum to the WRMT and the SRA Reading Test; (2) comparative reading achievement gains on both tests, using Model A1; and (3)…