Nonpublic School Students in Title I, ESEA Programs: A Question of "Equal" Services. A Special Report from the Title I District Practices Study.

Autor/in	Jung, Richard K.
Institution	Advanced Technology, Inc., Reston, VA.
Titel	Nonpublic School Students in Title I, ESEA Programs: A Question of "Equal" Services. A Special Report from the Title I District Practices Study.
Quelle	(1982), (78 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Recht; Access to Education; Compensatory Education; Educational Administration; Educational Finance; Educational Opportunities; Educationally Disadvantaged; Elementary Secondary Education; Federal Legislation; Federal Programs; National Surveys; Parochial Schools; Private Schools; Program Administration; Public Schools; Resource Allocation; School District Spending; School Districts; Shared Services; Student Participation + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Education; Access; Bildung; Zugang; Bildungszugang; Kompensatorischer Unterricht; Bildungsverwaltung; Schuladministration; Schulverwaltung; Bildungsfonds; Bildungsangebot; Bildungschance; Bundesrecht; Konfessionsschule; Private school; Privatschule; Public school; Öffentliche Schule; Ressourcenallokation; School district; Schulbezirk; Schülermitarbeit; Schülermitwirkung; Studentische Mitbestimmung
Abstract	Based on data from a study of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, this report describes the level of nonpublic school student participation in the Title I program during 1981-82, assesses whether nonpublic students receive an equitable share of Title I resources, and examines variables affecting the access of nonpublic students to Title I services and the quality of services received. Following notes on methodology, cross-time comparisons are made of nonpublic students' access to Title I services. Next, the relationship between nonpublic student participation and enrollment patterns in terms of region and urbanicity, the relationship between participation and district size, and the selection of nonpublic school students are discussed. Within-district comparisons with services received by public school students include amount of Title I instruction, class size and pupil-instruction ratio, instructor experience and qualifications, coordination with regular curriculum, location of instruction, and subjects and grade levels. An analysis of the equality of expenditures concludes generally that record-keeping provisions are inadequate for assessing whether nonpublic students are receiving a fair share of Title I services. Effective management strategies for increasing the participation of nonpublic school students and areas for future research are also considered. Additional data are appended. (MJL)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC