Evaluation of Flexibility Under "No Child Left Behind": Volume III--The Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP Flex)

Autor/inn/en	Christensen, Gayle S.; Amerikaner, Ary; Klasik, Daniel; Cohodes, Sarah
Institution	Department of Education, Washington, DC.; Urban Inst., Washington, DC.
Titel	Evaluation of Flexibility Under "No Child Left Behind": Volume III--The Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP Flex)
Quelle	(2007), (79 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Federal Legislation; Grants; Educational Technology; Teacher Effectiveness; Rural Education; Federal Aid; Rural Schools; Educational Legislation; Academic Achievement; School Districts; School District Spending; Financial Support; State Aid; Teacher Qualifications; School Safety; Low Achievement; Achievement Gains; Federal Programs; Resource Allocation + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Bundesrecht; Grant; Finanzielle Beihilfe; Unterrichtsmedien; Effectiveness of teaching; Instructional effectiveness; Lehrerleistung; Unterrichtserfolg; Ländliche Erwachsenenbildung; Rural area; Rural areas; School; Schools; Ländlicher Raum; Schule; Schulen; Bildungsrecht; Schulgesetz; Schulleistung; School district; Schulbezirk; Finanzielle Förderung; Lehrqualifikation; Unterdurchschnittliche Leistung; Achievement gain; Leistungssteigerung; Ressourcenallokation
Abstract	This study focuses on flexibility provisions in the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) provision of NCLB. Specifically, it addresses REAP Flex, a program that allows rural districts additional control over how to spend portions of their federal funding. REAP Flex is part of a series of NCLB flexibility initiatives aimed at rural schools. The four primary findings of this study were: (1) Half of eligible districts participated in the REAP Flex program; (2) REAP Flex authority was most often used to provide additional funds for services under Title I, Part A. Districts also commonly used REAP Flex to focus on programs related to Title V, Part A (State Grants for Innovative Programs), and Title II, Part D (Educational Technology State Grants). The program funds most commonly used for other program purposes came from Title II, Part A (Improving Teacher Quality State Grants), and Title IV, Part A (Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities); (3) Districts focused their efforts on targeting low-performing student subgroups and raising reading and math outcomes via improvements in technology and teacher quality; and (4) The primary reason eligible districts do not participate in REAP Flex is a lack of information. The main reason districts do participate is to address funding restrictions. The following are appended: (1) Methodology; (2) Data Tables with Standard Errors; (3) REAP Flex Authority District Administrator Survey; and (4) REAP Flex Authority District Interview Protocols. (Contains 20 exhibits.) [This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service by the Urban Institute.] (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	US Department of Education. Available from: ED Pubs. P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Tel: 877-433-7827; Fax: 301-470-1244; Web site: http://www.edpubs.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10