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

Background

Improving Education for Indian Students in the Context of Education Reform: Challenges and Obstacles provides an analysis and assessment of the quality of the comprehensive plans that were developed by Title IX grantees and submitted as part of their 1995-96 formula grant applications. The purpose of this report is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of these comprehensive plans and to assess the overall quality and feasibility of the strategies developed by local educational agencies (LEAs) to meet the needs of American Indian students. Data were collected through (1) a review of a sample of 1995-96 formula grant applications and comprehensive plans and (2) telephone interviews with representatives from LEAs, state and national Indian education organizations, state education agencies (SEAs), and directors of former Indian Education Technical Assistance Centers. This report was produced by Policy Studies Associates, under contract to the U.S. Department of Education's Planning and Evaluation Service (PES).

This was the first time Title IX grantees were required by law to develop comprehensive plans and were given a limited timeframe to develop the plans. As a result, the timing of this study may have been premature. However, this report provides a good indication of the quality of comprehensive plans in the first year.

Key Findings

The analysis revealed that a lack of awareness, misunderstanding, and poor timing impeded the development of Title IX comprehensive plans.

• Some grantees are not aware of the requirement to include a comprehensive plan in their Title IX application and, as a result, fail to discuss, most, if not all, of the required issues. Others are aware of the requirement but are unclear about what type of information to include and how to present it within the document.

• Grantees have a myriad of questions and are unclear about the roles and responsibilities of Title IX staff and other district staff vis a vis the development and implementation of the comprehensive plan.

• Title IX grantees are concerned that coordination and collaboration with other education programs may reduce the nature and quality of Title IX services by having funds diverted to non-Indian students, leaving fewer resources available for American Indian students--and that American Indian students' cultural needs may be overlooked if program lines are blurred through coordination and integration.

• Some grantees were unable to complete all of the components of the comprehensive plan because information on Goals 2000, consolidated plans, and content and performance standards development were not available at the time the formula grant application was completed.

• Title IX staff are sometimes excluded from, or when invited, do not participate in state and district planning activities. In addition, the Title IX program is often isolated and disconnected from other federal and local educational programs and activities within school districts.

Summary Characteristics of LEAs Comprehensive Plans

Almost half of all Title IX applications that were reviewed failed to mention a comprehensive plan. Key components were often lacking or poorly developed in the applications.

• More than half of all the applications and comprehensive plans did not refer to: (1) content and performance standards; (2) coordination among federal, state, and local programs; and (3) their plans to assess the performance of all American Indian students (i.e., not just those being served directly by Title IX).

• The district's enrollment size appears to have had some bearing on the content of the comprehensive plans. Small districts with fewer than 100 American Indian students were less likely to refer to the relationship between the goals of their comprehensive plan and those of other state or local programs than were large districts.

• The Title IX applications and comprehensive plans tend to describe cultural enrichment and academics as separate projects activities, and are often vague on how the grantees would meet the requirement to address the "culturally related academic needs" of Indian students.

• About half of the applications provided only a vague description of professional development; however information from telephone interviews suggested that there is widespread agreement on the serious need for professional development targeted to teachers, other school staff, parents, and community members who work and live with American Indian students.

• Many of the applications did not discuss state and local improvement plans and did not mention how the Title IX comprehensive plan may be consistent with the goals stated in those documents. Most applications also provided little, if any, details describing coordination between Title IX and other state and federal programs.

• Although almost every application reviewed described how the progress of Title IX would be assessed, fewer than half indicated whether they intend to assess the progress of all American Indian students in their district, as required.

• In general, there is little coordination in the project applications that address content and performance standards and performance goals and benchmarks for attaining goals. For the most part Title IX performance goals and benchmarks address only project level, student-focused goals that are behavioral or skills-based--and are often unchallenging. Furthermore, the goals and benchmarks that are set are often based on participant's performance on standardized tests, and in some instances, however, the goals that are set reflect either very low, or overly ambitious, expectations for students.

• Almost half of the Title IX applications did not discuss a strategy for communicating students' performance results to parents or the community. Most provided brief, general information on dissemination strategies that were similar among projects.

Suggested Approaches for Improving Title IX Comprehensive Plans

Since this review of LEA comprehensive plans began, ED has provided technical assistance to Title IX grantees to help them effectively implement Title IX projects. The following are suggested approaches for ED to consider as they continue to develop the content and focus of their technical assistance and try to address the most significant issues and problems that affect grantees' ability to develop and implement high-quality Title IX comprehensive plans.

The Department should clarify concepts, goals, and expectations through technical assistance.

• ED program officers and technical assistance providers should host a series of local community meetings and workshops to: explain the goals and objectives of the reauthorized ESEA and the implications for Title IX, Indian parent committees, and Indian education in general; clarify common misunderstandings; and respond to specific questions and concerns that exist among LEA staff and members of the American Indian community.

• The formula grant application and technical assistance materials should provide clear and consistent definitions of key concepts that help Title IX grantees improve their understanding of comprehensive planning. Concrete models should define and illustrate: coordination, culturally related academic needs, content and performance standards, and program goals and benchmarks. These models should be developed and disseminated as part of the formula grant application and through federally sponsored technical assistance.

• Assistance provided to LEAs should meet the varying needs of school districts that differ significantly in terms of their enrollment size and the concentration of American Indian students in attendance.

• Federally sponsored technical assistance providers should provide professional development to practitioners (e.g. teachers, state and district administrators and program coordinators, parents) on integrating culture and language with high standards and the learning of academic skills.

• Federally sponsored technical assistance providers should provide technical help in assessment and program evaluation by defining a common language for standards-based assessment and by identifying assessment strategies that are consistent with state and local content standards and with local Title IX program goals and benchmarks.

The Department should increase participation and linkages among LEAs, SEAs, and the American Indian community in addressing the needs of American Indian students.

• Federal program officers and technical assistance providers should consider strategies for broadening the participation of Title IX staff, tribal government representatives, parent committee members, and other members of the American Indian community in the development of Goals 2000 plans, state consolidated plans, local comprehensive plans, and other state and local education reform efforts.

• ED and SEAs should keep Title IX grantees informed about state and local content and performance standards. Where feasible, states and districts should provide opportunities for Title IX staff and other members of the Indian education community (e.g., representatives from the education departments of tribal governments, American Indian language experts) to be involved in the development of such standards.

• ED should set challenging but reasonable goals and benchmarks through progress indicators so that all stakeholders--teachers, administrators, monitors, parents, and tribal communities--can use them to assess program and student progress.

Copies of the report, Improving Education for Indian Students in the Context of Education Reform: Challenges and Obstacles, can be obtained from the Planning and Evaluation Service, Office of the Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W. Room 4162, Washington, DC 20202-8240.

-###-

Return to Elementary and Secondary Education Page

mail to esed@ed.gov