This report summarizes data for the Title I, Part A, Grants to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) program. It provides participation data for 2000-2001 as well as comparisons to 1999-2000 and previous reporting years. Topics include: districts, schools, and students served, the range of instructional and support services provided, Title I staffing patterns, and schools' progress towards meeting performance standards. Student achievement information is reported separately in "State Education Indicators with a Focus on Title I, 2000-2001," a companion report. The tables shown in this report reflect data submitted by the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. State-by-state tables follow the text that amplify the participation data and offer readers a more detailed look at several aspects of the Title I program.
The "State ESEA ["Elementary and Secondary Education Act"] Title I Participation Summary Report for 2002-03" summarizes the participation data for the Title I, Part A, Grants to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) program. This program financially assists eligible school districts and schools in providing opportunities for at-risk children to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to meet challenging state content and achievement standards. The Part A program can serve children from preschool to high school and provides supplemental services to many special populations, including children with disabilities, students with limited English proficiency (LEP), and migrant children. This program also provides services to eligible children in nonpublic schools and in local institutions serving neglected or delinquent students and offers other support services, such as family literacy services. This report provides Title I participation data for 2002-03, the first year the "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB)" was implemented. The report also presents comparisons with 2001-02 and previous years that were covered by prior laws, including the "Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IASA)." Topics include districts, schools and students served, the range of instructional and support services provided, Title I staffing patterns, and schools' progress toward meeting performance standards, as reported by states on Parts I and II of the "Consolidated State Performance Reports (CSPR)." The tables shown in this report reflect data submitted by the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Puerto Rico. State-by-state tables follow the text. This report supplements the information provided in the "2002-03 NCLB Annual Report" transmitted to Congress in 2005. (Contains 13 tables, 10 figures, and 5 footnotes.) [This report was produced for the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development; and Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.].
The "State ESEA ['Elementary and Secondary Education Act'] Title I Participation Summary Report for 2003-04" summarizes the participation data for the Title I, Part A (Title I), Grants to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) program. This program provides federal funds to assist eligible school districts and schools in supporting opportunities for at-risk children to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to meet challenging state content and achievement standards. Title I serves at-risk children from preschool through high school, including providing supplemental services to many special populations, including children with disabilities, students with limited English proficiency (LEP), and migrant children. This program also provides services to eligible children in nonpublic schools and in local institutions serving neglected or delinquent students and offers other support services, such as family literacy services. This report provides Title I participation data for 2003-04, the second year the "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001" ("NCLB") was implemented. The report also presents comparisons with 2002-03 and previous years that were covered by prior laws, including the "Improving America's Schools Act of 1994" ("IASA"). Topics include districts, schools and students served, the range of instructional and support services provided, Title I staffing patterns, and schools' progress toward meeting performance standards, as reported by states on Parts I and II of the "Consolidated State Performance Reports" ("CSPR"). The tables shown in this report reflect data submitted by the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Puerto Rico. State-by-state tables follow the text. This report supplements the information provided in the "2003-04 No Child Left Behind Annual Report" to Congress, also prepared by the U.S. Department of Education. (Contains 10 figures and 14 tables.) [This report was produced for the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development; and Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. For the 2002-03 edition of this report, see ED493421.].
Dual language education is a program that combines language minority and language majority students for instruction through two languages. This book provides the conceptual background for the program and discusses major implementation issues. Research findings summarize language proficiency and achievement outcomes from 8000 students at 20 schools, along with teacher and parent attitudes.
As the United States continues to be a nation of immigrants and their children, the nation's school systems face increased enrollments of students whose primary language is not English. With the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), the allocation of federal funds for programs to assist these students to be proficient in English became formula-based: 80 percent on the basis of the population of children with limited English proficiency1 and 20 percent on the basis of the population of recently immigrated children and youth. Title III of NCLB directs the U.S. Department of Education to allocate funds on the basis of the more accurate of two allowable data sources: the number of students reported to the federal government by each state education agency or data from the American Community Survey (ACS). The department determined that the ACS estimates are more accurate, and since 2005, those data have been basis for the federal distribution of Title III funds. Subsequently, analyses of the two data sources have raised concerns about that decision, especially because the two allowable data sources would allocate quite different amounts to the states. In addition, while shortcomings were noted in the data provided by the states, the ACS estimates were shown to fluctuate between years, causing concern among the states about the unpredictability and unevenness of program funding. In this context, the U.S. Department of Education commissioned the National Research Council to address the accuracy of the estimates from the two data sources and the factors that influence the estimates. The resulting book also considers means of increasing the accuracy of the data sources or alternative data sources that could be used for allocation purposes.
