Threats to the validity of the Title I Evaluation and Reporting System are covered in two parts: an annotated bibliography of reports concerned with technical issues, and a discussion of threats to validity--from the reporting system in general and from each model in particular. Threats common to all three evaluation models are reported:…

The validity of the equipercentile hypothesis of the Title I Evaluation and Reporting System (TIERS) norm-referenced evaluation model was examined. The California Achievement Test, Reading, was administered as a pretest and posttest to 3,224 seventh and ninth grade students. The equipercentile hypothesis predicts that the posttest percentile…

The tenability of the equipercentile growth assumption was investigated. This assumption is the basis of the norm referenced evaluation model (Model A) for Title I program evaluations, and supposes that a cohort of students, given no special educational intervention, will maintain the same percentile rank over the course of a school year, as…

The internal validity of the RMC models, especially Model A, is examined. Concern centers on limiting evaluation to cognitive outcomes, using constant percentile as the no-treatment expectation, and using norms for one test to establish the expected no-treatment performance level for another test. (MH)

Two ESEA Title I evaluation models developed by the Resource Management Corporation (RMC), were field tested simultaneously with 560 Title I reading students, grades 2-8. Measuring instruments for models 1 and 2 were, respectively, the California Achievement Test (reading vocabulary section), a norm-referenced test; and the Tarmac Reading…

Some of the problems unique to evaluation research, in particular to the evaluation of longitudinal studies of social programs, are presented. A working model found to be useful in structuring compensatory education program evaluation activities is also offered. Since the goals of social programs such as Head Start are dynamic rather than static,…

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)

Title I Evaluation models using uniform procedures and data collection for state and national comparisons are interpreted as federal endorsement of basic, common competencies in reading and mathematics. Basic competencies, content homogeneity, conversion methodology, and validity of the evaluation are discussed. (MH)

Technical problems with norm-referenced achievement testing that can lead to the erroneous evaluation of schools for Chapter 1 Program improvement is discussed, and an alternative testing model is presented. The history of Chapter 1 testing and evaluation policies is briefly reviewed, and problems with the norm-referenced model are explored. Data…

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…

The orientation of this report is that of identifying educational projects which can be considered clearly exemplary. The largest section consists of a 22-step procedure for validating the effectiveness of educational projects using existing evaluation data. It is not intended as a guide for conducting evaluations but rather for interpreting data…