A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Chapter 1 Participation and Achievement Information -- 1990-91

Background

As mandated under P.L. 100-297, the Department of Education (ED) collects and analyzes the state-reported participation and achievement information of students receiving services under the Chapter 1 local grant, state Neglected or Delinquent (N or D) and Migrant Education Program. This information is reported in A Summary of State Chapter 1 Participation and Achievement Information -- 1990-91 and A Summary of State Chapter 1 Migrant Education Program Participation and Achievement Information -- 1990-91, which are submitted to Congress annually by ED.

Characteristics of Chapter 1 students, staff, and services

• In 1990-91, states reported that over 5.5 million students received Chapter 1 services. Of those 158,000 were enrolled in nonpublic schools.

• The proportion of Hispanic participants in Chapter 1 increased from 15 to 27 percent between 1979-80 and 1990-91, while the proportion of white (non Hispanic) Chapter 1 participants declined from 51 to 41 percent during the same time period.

• Almost one-half of Chapter 1 funded staff were teachers in 1990-91. Teachers and aides constituted 86 percent of the total staff funded under Chapter 1.

• Chapter 1 services remained concentrated in the elementary grades, and most commonly included reading and math. However, the number of students receiving language arts increased over previous years.

• Forty states reported the implementation of over 1,600 schoolwide projects during 1990-91.

Achievement of Chapter 1 students

• States reported achievement gains in all grades for reading, math and language arts. Basic skills reading gains were greatest for students in grades 2 through 4. The largest math increases occurred in grades 2 through 6.

  Gains in reading comprehension and math problems and applications were also highest in the early elementary grades.

• Nationally, 20 percent of Chapter 1 schools were identified for program improvement during 1990-91.

State Agency Neglected or Delinquent Program

• Fifty-seven percent of state Neglected or Delinquent (N or D) participants were 17 to 20 years old.

• About two-thirds received of state N or D participants received Chapter 1-supported reading and two-thirds received math instruction. Chapter 1-supported attendance, social work and guidance were also provided to a substantial number of state N or D participants.

A Summary of State Chapter 1 Migrant Education Program Participation and Achievement Information -- 1990-91

Characteristics of Migrant Education Program (MEP) participants, staff, and services

• In 1990-91, 35 percent of the 437,000 MEP participants migrated across states, 13 percent migrated within a state, and 52 percent were formerly migrant.

  The largest concentration of MEP participants were enrolled in grades K through 6, during both the regular and summer terms.

• The number of full-time-equivalent MEP staff, including teachers and aides, declined between 1989-90 and 1990-91 by 15 percent in the regular term and 3 percent in the summer terms.

• During the regular 1990-91 term, about one-third of migrant students received reading services and one-fourth received math. In addition, one-half of regular term participants received guidance/counseling services, 20 percent received health services, and 19 percent received social work/outreach services.

Achievement of MEP students

• In 1990-91, 34 states reported achievement information for currently MEP students, and 31 reported achievement data for formerly MEP students.

• Average state reported reading scores for all MEP participants ranged from 33.1 to 29.5, and math scores ranged from 41.7 to 36.5.

Reporting issues

Although state reported Chapter 1 and Migrant Education Program participation and achievement information have been collected and reported since the 1979-80 school year, concerns exist regarding the appropriate use and interpretation of the data.

• Data Quality. Although the data submitted by the states goes through an extensive review process, data anomalies remain that some states are unable to explain. In addition, the Chapter 1 Implementation Study determined that many Chapter 1 coordinators are not well grounded in standardized testing and how to assess the completeness of norm-referenced test score information. For example, districts submitted data where the number of students whose Chapter 1 pretest scores were reported, exceeded the number of students enrolled in Chapter 1.

• Unit of Analysis. Although the data provide a picture of Chapter 1 participation at the national and state levels, it is limited in several respects.
  • The smallest unit of analysis is at the state level. Thus it is not possible to examine Chapter 1 participation by individual district or in conjunction with other data bases.

  • Similarly, it is not possible to perform student-level analysis (e.g. service delivery by grade, or achievement results by gender).

  • Finally, the data do not provide a measure of the intensity of services received by each student.

• Use of Norm-Referenced Tests to Measure Achievement. While Norm-Referenced Tests (NRTs) produce objective, reliable information, the NRT achievement data collected by the State Performance Reports do not reflect current advances in testing, and provide inadequate representations of student achievement--particularly in advanced skills.

Copies of both reports are available by writing to the Planning and Evaluation Service, Office of the Undersecretary, 600 Independence Ave, SW, Room 4162, Washington, DC 20202.

-###-

Return to Elementary and Secondary Education Page

mail to esed@ed.gov

Last update October 1996 (smj).