Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
Autor/inn/en | Fortune, Jim C.; Hutchinson, Thomas E. |
---|---|
Titel | The Contrast Between Title I and Non-Title I Schools. |
Quelle | (1972), (27 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext |
Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
Schlagwörter | Academic Achievement; Classroom Environment; Comparative Analysis; Compensatory Education; Educational Environment; Enrollment; Instructional Materials; Library Facilities; Lunch Programs; National Surveys; Socioeconomic Status; Student Characteristics; Urban Schools Schulleistung; Klassenklima; Unterrichtsklima; Kompensatorischer Unterricht; Lernumgebung; Pädagogische Umwelt; Schulumwelt; Einschulung; Lehrmaterial; Lehrmittel; Unterrichtsmedien; Mittagessen; Socio-economic status; Sozioökonomischer Status; Urban area; Urban areas; School; Schools; Stadtregion; Stadt; Schule |
Abstract | The problem addressed in this paper is to compare the schools identified as participating in Title I, 1965 Elementary Secondary Education Act programs, with those identified as not participating in Title I, with regard to percentage of pupils on welfare, number of target group pupils, percentage of pupils reading below grade level, percentage of pupils receiving free lunches, type and quality of a library and special classroom facilities, conditions of physical plant, and ratings of instructional materials. Since degrees of urbanism had previously been shown to be related to some of the variables in question, the schools were grouped across the urban location variable for each comparison. Data was derived from the 1970 Survey of Compensatory Education, which included over 58,000 schools from 800 districts chosen at random from the states participating in the Belmont system. Of those schools over 33,000 have been identified as having Title I programs and nearly 25,000 have been identified as non-Title I schools. The survey had been so administrated that these schools were weighted to project the national population of elementary schools in districts having enrollments greater than 300 pupils. The comparisons between the Title I schools and the non-Title I schools utilized crosstabulations built on each of the subgroups. (Author/JM) |
Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |