Title I -- program, no; funding stream, yes

Does Title I raise test scores? asks Holly Yettick in Education Week. Fifty years after passage of the ESEA, the question remains unanswered, she writes. Evaluation after evaluation has failed to identify decisive, long-lasting impacts of the funding aimed at raising achievement for disadvantaged children. Part of this lack of evidence stems from Title I's design: Researchers face the fundamental problem of defining the object of their analysis, and isolating its effect. Though Title I targets low-income students, over 90 percent of districts nationally get Title I funds, and use them for purposes as disparate as class-size reduction, extended learning time, professional development, or instructional salaries. Federal revenue accounts for roughly 10 percent of U.S. school funding, making it difficult to tease effects from those of larger state and local funding. Nor can Title I funds be assigned randomly to some districts or states and withheld from others, so randomized controlled trials are impossible. Moreover, many different types of students benefit from Title I, making it hard to determine appropriate comparison groups, or what statistics account for key differences between those receiving and not receiving services. In essence, Title I is not an educational program as much as it is a funding stream. The programs that it underwrites vary enormously, with too many variables to allow generic comparison. More

Source:  Public Education News Blast

Published by LEAP

Los Angeles Education Partnership (LAEP) is an education support organization that works as a collaborative partner in high-poverty communities.