Descriptor
| Compensatory Education | 6 |
| Test Selection | 6 |
| Testing Problems | 6 |
| Program Evaluation | 5 |
| Achievement Tests | 4 |
| Elementary Secondary Education | 4 |
| Equated Scores | 3 |
| Evaluation Methods | 3 |
| Models | 3 |
| Achievement Gains | 2 |
| Comparative Analysis | 2 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Educational Evaluation and… | 1 |
Author
| Fishbein, Ronald L. | 1 |
| Forbes, 2ean W. | 1 |
| Haenn, Joseph F. | 1 |
| Horst, Donald P. | 1 |
| Jaeger, Richard M. | 1 |
| Proctor, Diane C. | 1 |
| Stonehill, Robert M. | 1 |
| Strand, Theresa | 1 |
| Tallmadge, G. Kasten | 1 |
Publication Type
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 4 |
| Reports - Research | 3 |
| Guides - Non-Classroom | 1 |
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Reports - General | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
| Oregon | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
| Elementary and Secondary… | 6 |
Assessments and Surveys
| SRA Achievement Series | 1 |
| Woodcock Reading Mastery Test | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Stonehill, Robert M.; Fishbein, Ronald L. – 1979
The Title I Evaluation and Reporting System (TIERS) was mandated to meet the requirements of the 1974 amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It was hoped that TIERS would lead to a clear report of the effectiveness of Title I programs, based upon a synthesis of nationwide data. It has been extremely difficult to compare…
Descriptors: Achievement Gains, Achievement Tests, Comparative Analysis, Compensatory Education
Peer reviewedJaeger, Richard M. – Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1979
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)
Descriptors: Achievement Tests, Compensatory Education, Elementary Education, Evaluation Methods
Forbes, 2ean W. – 1977
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…
Descriptors: Academic Achievement, Compensatory Education, Disadvantaged Youth, Educational Objectives
Haenn, Joseph F.; Proctor, Diane C. – 1978
Out of level testing is defined and reasons for administering out of level tests, especially in compensatory education programs are explained: (1) to achieve optimum test reliability; (2) to test student achievement--provided out of level test scores are interpreted in terms of the appropriate in-level population; (3) to avoid carelessness and…
Descriptors: Academic Ability, Achievement Tests, Compensatory Education, Educational Testing
Strand, Theresa; And Others – 1979
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)…
Descriptors: Achievement Gains, Compensatory Education, Content Analysis, Criterion Referenced Tests
Tallmadge, G. Kasten; Horst, Donald P. – 1978
In this discussion of the use of achievement tests in evaluating Title I programs, matching content between test and curriculum is the main theme. The point is made that unless a test measures what is taught, it cannot be sensitive to whatever gains the instruction produces. Thus, if different instructional treatments have different objectives, it…
Descriptors: Achievement Tests, Comparative Analysis, Compensatory Education, Content Analysis
