Title I makes a difference [1976]

TitleI Makes A Difference

An annual report presenting an overview of federally funded activities for educationally
deprived children in Georgia schools and institutions for FY 76.
Cover art adapted from art work done by Title I student
at Atlanta Regional Hospital
Title I Division of Compensatory Education
Office of Instructional Services Georgia Department of Education
Atlanta. Georqia 30334 Jack P. Nix, State Superintendent of Schools
1976
TitleI Makes A Difference

Introduction
TenYearsof
Title! in Georgia

Reading and math instruction for individual students at Macon Youth Development Center employs audiovisual equipment.
It has been ten years since Congress, in a massive effort to spur realization of the Great Society through education, enacted the historic Elementary and Secondary Education Act. At the time of its passage in 1965, ESE A was the largest federally funded program of categorical aid to education ever authorized and funded, the bulk of the millions specified for compensatory programs for poor children under Title I of the act. For each of the ten years since 1965, Georgia has received from $34 to $44 million under Title I with the stipulation that it be spent for compensatory programs for educationally disadvantaged children living in areas with high concentrations of low income families.
Funding and Participation
Title I allocations to Georgia in FY 66, the first year of ESEA, were $37.5 million. The low point, $34.7 million, was reached in FY 67, and the dollars have been steadily increasing each year since, to a high of $44 million in FY 75.

Since the beginning of Title I Georgia school systems have eagerly sought the funds, establishing a high participation rate from the start. In 1969, for example, 162 of the 193 systems in the state operated projects; in FY 75 all 188 systems participated. Always, better than 80 percent of school districts have operated regular school term projects.
Some school systems have also taken advantage of available Title I funds to operate summer programs, primarily using them for preschool, reading and mathematics activities to insure students maintain advantages gained during the regu lar school year or get a good beginning in first grade. The funds have also been available for activities for eligible children enrolled in non-public schools. In Georgia, these have been mainly church-related schools which used the funds for remedial instruction in language arts in the elementary grades.
The following statistics for selected years of Title I activity in Georgia reflect the consistently high participation rate among public school systems and

4

some of the changing emphases of the programs. For example, the decrease in student participation which began in 1971 reflects the greater concentra-

tion of effort on individual pupils rather than attempts to serve large numbers of students with minimal programs.

1969
Total number of school systems in Georgia Systems participating in Title I

Regular term

projects only

21

Summer term

projects only

5

Both regular

and summer

162

Rate of participation

Number of students served

Number of projects

193 162
84 percent 203,068 public
1,264 non-public 297

1971
Total number of school systems in Georgia Systems participating in Title I

Regular term

projects only

65

Summer term

projects only

Both regular

and summer

122

Rate of participation

Number of students served

Number of projects

189 188
99 percent 181,234 public
914 non-public 336

1970
Total number of school systems in Georgia Systems participating in Title I

Regular term

projects only

17

Summer term

projects only

16

Both regu lar

and summer

146

Rate of participation

Number of students served

Number of projects

190 179
94 percent 256,842 public
956 non-public 326

1974
Total number of school systems in Georgia Systems participating in Title I

Regular term

projects only

142

Summer term

projects only

0

Both regu lar

and summer

188

Rate of participation

Number of students served

Number of projects

188 188
100 percent 115,208 public
563 non-public 234

5

In 1974,54.6 percent of the public schools in Georgia operated Title I activities either in the regular school term, during the summer or both. Slightly more than 11 percent of the total public school population participated in Title I activities, the large majority of these in small school systems with less than 3,000 students each.
In addition to supporting instruction and services for regularly enrolled children in Georgia public and non-public schools, Title I funds also provide special instructional services for children of migrant workers and students in state-operated institutions such as hospitals, special schools for the handicapped and in correctional institutions. Georgia's programs for migrant children were funded at $732,002 in 1975, the bulk of the dollars used to tie into a national network of computers which keeps track of students' health records and educational progress as their families move across the country. Special educational, health and other services are also provided.
Some of Georgia's Title I programs for students in institutions are highlighted in detail elsewhere in this report.
The teaching staff at A tlanta Area School for the Deaf gets a boost
-----'L.._-' from the school's Title I project funds.

Directions
The major change in Georgia's Title I direction has occurred not in dollars allotted or in numbers of children served, but in concentration of effort. When the program began there were few restrictions on expenditures - a list of possible suggestions for funding in 1965 included 49 items. Such diverse activities as classroom construction, special audiovisual equipment for television instruction and summer arts and crafts were included. Since about 1973 the focus has been narrowing at every level federal, state and local. A federal suggestion has been translated into a Georgia Board of Education policy specifying that Title I funds be concentrated in reading, language arts, oral and written communications, mathematics and preschool education. A small percentage of funds is spent on food, transportation, summer library services and community services, these latter areas fundable only after all other sources of the same services have been exhausted.
As result of this new focus, Title I projects in Georgia in 1973-74 fell into 13 activity/service areas, down from 26 in 1972-73 and a great reduction from the 49 originally suggested in 1966.
The concentration of effort also means that in the past few years Title I programs in Georgia have begun to take real direction and effect, according to state level officials. During this period effort has been centered on a few program areas, and activities have been extended to fewer students in an attempt to raise the quality of results. In 1974, for example, 45 percent of the regular and summer programs operated in the state's public schools were in English/reading or readiness and affected 101,336 students, 17.7 percent were in mathematics and affected 39,887 students and 5.3 percent were in preschool and affected 11,872 students. In the service areas, 16.8 percent of regular and summer programs provided 37,805 children food, transportation and clothing, and 12.8 percent provided health services for 28,871 children.
Expenditures of funds represent a similar priority allocation of resources. In 1974,62.8 percent of Title I funds ($24,146,598) were spent for English/reading, 16.5 percent ($6,330,518) for mathematics and 15.5 percent ($5,957,717) for preschool activities. Of all resources in 1974,94.8 percent were spent in the three priority areas; in 1973,82.5 percent; in 1972,73.7 percent. Expenditures also clearly reflect the trend to allocating resources to academic areas as contrasted with

6

services; in 1974,96.2 percent of funds were spent for activities, 3.8 percent for services.

Another shift in Title I direction has been to serving younger children. At first all students were eligible, but funding for secondary level programs has been cut back as evaluation has shown better results from money and effort spent in early grades. In 1973, for example, 75.8 percent of Title I students were in prekindergarten through seventh grade; in 1974 the percentage had increased to 87.4 in those grades. In 1974 summer programs, 95.3 percent of those participating were in elementary grades.

Trends in Programming

Each local district determines the instructional needs of its children eligible for Title I services. To be classified as educationally deprived, a child must be working below expected level of maturity or achievement for his/her age and grade level. Because there is not sufficient funding to meet all the needs identified, priorities must be set by the local system and participants selected accordingly. Emphasis is on quality programs for a few children rather than a smattering for many. The result has been the concentration of effort in language arts, mathematics and preschool.

Aide, paid by Title I funds, helps on playground at Atlanta Area School for the Deaf.

Developed locally by school officials following a study of the community's most pressing educational needs, school system project applications are submitted to the state Title I coordinator with the Georgia Department of Education. The tailoring of programs to meet locally-identified needs is specified in the federal law itself; in addition, the Georgia Board of Education, through its policies and actions, has strongly supported the concept of local planning and control.
A chief focus of Title I has been the improvement of instructional quality through the use of in-service education and teacher aides. In 1969,72 percent of participating school systems reported they were using teacher aides to release the regular classroom teacher from non-professional duties with the result that teachers were able to spend more time on individual instruction for students; 36 percent of systems reported teacher aides were being used to assist teachers with instructional tasks. Overall, 99 percent of systems employing teacher aides reported a degree of success with their use. In-service education for aides and teachers has always been integral to Title I programs; in 1970, 107 of the participating

systems had joint teacher/teacher aide in-service for 9,000 participants during regular and summer terms. In 1974,4,879 teachers and aides in regular and summer programs averaged 40 hours each in inservice. The instruction covered such areas as the use of audiovisual equipment, follow-up reading techniques, evaluation of student problems and progress, analysis of school-community problems and teaching the educationally disadvantaged.
The involvement of community and parents has been another emphasis of Title I since its inception. During the first few years community involvement centered primarily around joint efforts between schools and service organizations - Elks, Lions, Rotary and others - to provide medical and dental examinations, eyeglasses and clothing to children who needed them. Cooperative efforts with other government service agencies such as local welfare offices and health departments were also stressed. In 1969, 159 systems of the 162 (98 percent) which operated Title I programs reported such community involvement. Reported parental involvement was high, also, with 95 percent of the 162 systems reporting parental involvement in such

7

roles as members of advisory councils, presentation at PTA programs, as room mothers and participating in field trips and open houses. Thirty-six percent of the counties having Title I projects reported the existence of formal parent advisory councils. In 1970, systems reported as many as 5,200 instances of volunteers participating in evaluation of Title I activities. By 1974, the number reported was 15,200 parents, other adults, and youth involved in planning, advising and evaluating Title I programs. Most school systems now report formal councils; however, they vary in degrees of effectiveness. The State Superintendent of Schools and state Title I officials have identified this area as one which will receive special attention in FY 77 in an effort to bring about greater, more effective parental and community involvement in the program.
Results and the Future
Efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of Title I programs in Georgia public schools began in earnest in the spring of 1970, when a sample was drawn from second, fourth and sixth graders in both Title I and non-Title I elementary schools in the state. Analysis showed two trends conclusively - many more students were in need of instructional services than were receiving them, and students who were receiving Title I help in reading, mathematics and English recorded gains slightly higher in those areas than non-Title I pupils in the same school; however, they remained behind pupils in non-Title I schools.

tion dollars in every area. Title I evaluation methods are continually reviewed and strengthened by a department of education unit concerned primarily with th is effort.
Managers of Georgia's Title I program - eleven consultants and one administrator at the state level concentrate their attention on helping local systems determine their own needs, prepare project proposals that meet federal and state requirements and monitor activities in systems and institutions to make sure they are as effective as possible. Right now Title I is authorized at approximately its current levels through 1978 under the Education Amendments of 1974; Georgia educators, both state and local, are working to use the funds as effectively as possible through concentrated attention on the children and activities that have shown promise during these first ten years. The hoped-for result is to reduce, and even ultimately to erase, the educational disadvantages deprived children face.
Speech instructor works with young hearing impaired students at Atlanta Area School for the Deaf.

Subsequent evaluations of the effectiveness of Title I programs have been based on local school officials' perceptions of the programs as to the degree they were "unsuccessful, somewhat successful, successful or very successful." In 1974, according to local system evaluations, 91.2 percent of all programs were successfu I or very successfu I; these programs reached 200,868 students. The remaining 8.8 percent were unsuccessful or somewhat successful; these involved 23,964 students. Two-thirds of the successful or very successful projects were in the English/reading, mathematics and preschool areas. Projects which aimed at improving skills had the lowest success rate (3.15 out of a best rating of 4.0),.while projects which sought to provide supplementary classroom instruction and knowledge/ information had the highest success rating (3.66 out of 4.0).
Efforts to improve evaluation of Title I programs in Georgia continue as the state attempts more and more to identify the most effective uses of educa-

8

Activities in
Institutions

Georgia Regional Hospital patient weaves an art activity funded by Title I.
Institutional Progratns
In writing provisions for educationally deprived youth in the United States 10 years ago, Congress did not forget the thousands of young people in state and locally operated institutions for the neglected and delinquent. Surely these people, it was thought, are among those most needful of a boost up in the educational process. So provisions were included in 1966 amendments to the original ESEA for such youth.
Georgia currently provides educational assistance for students in 13 such institutions for neglected and delinquent - state Youth Development Centers at Atlanta, Augusta, Macon and Milledgeville; and Regional Youth Development Centers at Albany, Augusta, Columbus, Gainesville, Macon, Marietta, Rome, Sandersville and Waycross; three institutions for the handicapped operated by the State Board of Education - Georgia School for the Deaf, Georgia Academy for the Blind and Atlanta Area School for the Deaf; and seven institutions for the handicapped operated by the Department of Human Resources -

Young people at Marietta Youth Development Center may check out books to take to their rooms.
Central Georgia Development Center; Georgia Mental Health Institute; Georgia Regional Hospital, Atlanta; Georgia Regional Hospital, Augusta; Georgia Regional Hospital, Savannah; Georgia Retardation Center; and Gracewood State School and Hospital.
In 1973 under the Education Amendments of that year, provisions were added for educational programs for youthful offenders up to age 21. The funds are allocated on average daily attendance data. These are Alto Education and Evaluation Center, Georgia Women's Correctional Institute, Georgia Training and Development Center, Lee Correctional Institute and Georgia Earned Release Correctional Center.
Stipulations for receipt of the top priority funds under both sets of provisions are that the institution must be non-profit and residential; it must have operated an educational program for at least two years before receiving funding; and it must have legal custody of the young people in its care. More and more institutions are becoming eligible for these funds each year; many of those already receiving Title I grants are financing as much as half their educational programs with the federal monies. The institutions currently receiving funds are all statesupported and are operated by state agencies - the Departments of Education, Offender Rehabilitation and Human Resources.
The following descriptions of programs are illustrative of typical efforts.

10

AtlantaArea School fortheDeafClarkston

Close parental involvement is an important feature of the Title I program at this new day school for the deaf operated by the Georgia Department of Education.
Title I funds of $32,728 in FY 76 paid the salaries of a physical therapist and five aides to screen and work with multi-handicapped deaf children. The school's Parents Advisory Committee is composed of officers of the PTA, and parents are involved in the program as their children are evaluated. In addition, the physical therapist suggests ways
(below) Title I funds help Atlanta Area School for the Deaf to offer more individual attention to handicapped students.

(above) Speech therapy is an integral part of the Atlanta Area School for the Deaf program.

11

Atlanta Area School for the Deaf pupil in Title I - funded physical therapy program.

Physical therapist is paid from Title I project funds at Atlanta Area School for the Deaf.
parents can help their children at home. Parents meet with their child's teacher and physical therapist periodically to evaluate his or her progress and to consider new approaches.
Title I funds pay the full cost of the physical therapy program, from evaluation to providing an educational program for multi-handicapped students in the regular educational program for deaf students. All students, birth to age five, in the parent-infant and preschool programs are given developmental

Principal adjusts hearing aid of pupil in parent-infant program at Atlanta Area School for the Deaf.
delay evaluations by the physical therapist. Students in the elementary school with obvious physical handicaps and those referred by teachers are also evaluated. Those determined by the therapist to have multi-handicaps receive therapeutic programs and individualized instruction. Aides work with the therapist both in the classroom and at other stations in the school - the playground or wherever they are needed. The two-year old Title I project served 133 students in FY 76.

12

Georgia Regional Hospital-Atlanta
Georgia Regional Hospital, Atlanta, is operated by the Department of Human Resources.
A Title I art project is therapeutic for disturbed adolescents at this hospital operated by the Georgia Department of Human Resources. Federal funds of $53,210 pay for art supplies and the salaries of a special education art teacher, social work technician, aide, three instructors. The art program involves 18 of the 63 adolescents at the hospital, who are referred there by mental health centers and juvenile courts. Participants weave, draw, paint, do block printing and macrame. They also decorate the walls of the instructional area, always using their own ideas for inspiration. The art teacher never draws anything for the students; they make their own designs and particularly enjoy the free form arts such as weaving. The art program develops an improved self concept for the students, the result of being able to start and finish a project and "feeling good about something you do," says the art teacher. Academic instruction in the basics is also provided at the institute, but, according to teachers, the deficits are so great that academic success is not possible in the short time inmates are at the institute. That is another reason for the success of the art program; students can show progress in a short time period.

Art classes are limited to six participants each, four days a week for 45 minutes each. It is popular because it is not stressful, according to the art teacher. "They get lots of reinforcement and a feeling of accomplishment," she said. Students are allowed to keep their work, and it makes them feel good to give things they have created as gifts to their families and teachers.
"It's problem-solving, but the problem is of thei r own making," the art teacher explained.
Writing is also encouraged as a form of self expression. A disturbed adolescent wrote this poem:
Love, love is love Love is life Love is satisfy with one another Love can be with pride and Never come back again
So listen for all you people
To show love and want to be love
The Title I program at Georgia Regional also provides a retardation clinic, self-help skills, social skills and social work for the 63 adolescents and 83 trainable mentally retarded patients at the institute. Behavioral, psychological and diagnostic testing is performed, as well as achievement and intelligence testing. If grade levels can be determined, patients are individually taught. Help provided includes a program of sensory stimulation; music, speech and language development; physical therapy and selfhelp skills training. Placement counseling and
Disturbed adolescents at Georgia Regional Hospital use a variety of materials, such as wood parts, in art work.

13

(above) Macrame is a popular craft with Georgia Regional Hospital adolescents.

counseling for patients about to return to their families are also given.
Goals of the Title I program are for TM R pupils to show some improvement, up to at least 30 percent accuracy on the "Portage Guide to Early Childhood Education," and for the emotionally disturbed patients to gain in educational achievement and show at least 30 to 50 percent accuracy compared to normal.
The patients' parents are involved in group activities, weekly counseling and discussions of plans for treatment.
The 1976 fiscal year Title I allocation of $53,210 has enabled the institute to hire a teacher and additional instructors, to supplement social work activities and to keep the 16- to 18-year-olds in an instructional unit rather than in the hospital's adult unit.
(below) Classic comics interest young adults in reading at Macon Youth Development Center.
I

14

Lee Correctional Instttute-Leesburg

Inmates at this facility operated by the Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation have average achievement levels below sixth grade and average 1.0.s in the low 80s. In addition, most are unskilled and in need of career guidance.
Title I funds of $16,746 in FY 76 paid the salary of one instructor to work with three others in providing the instruction inmates need in reading, language arts, mathematics and career guidance. Two sections of 20 students each participate in a variety of laboratory-type and audiovisual learning experiences provided by the Educational Developmental Laboratories 100 Reading Program. Inmates selected for the one and one-half year-old Title I program are those with the greatest needs to develop their skills, plus the need for improved self-esteem and more successful patterns of social interaction. Instruction is given both in groups and to individuals with the goal that 80 percent of the participants in both reading and mathematics will show an increase of at least one grade level in achievement for each 100 hours of instruction.

Inmates at Lee Correctional Institute work on basic reading and language arts skills in a laboratory-type program.
Achievement is measured by the California Test of Adult Basic Education. Goal of the career guidance effort is that 90 percent of participants will demonstrate improved understanding of career related information.

Title I furnishes basic reading instruction for youthful offenders at Lee Correctional Institute.

15

Youth DevelopIllent Center - Macon
(above) Macon Youth Development Center is operated by the Department of Human Resources. (below) At the Youth Development Center in Milledgeville, students receive daily progress reports from a central computer in Iowa City.

This five-year-old Title I project received $66,000 in FY 75 to pay for mathematics and reading/ language activities for institutionalized juvenile delinquents. The program of remedial work in reading and math is aimed primarily at students functioning below the fourth grade level in those subjects; 85 students are enrolled in Basic Communication Ski lis, 65 in Basic Math and 75 in the Motivational Reading Library Program. Three teachers work with three classes, six periods each day.
Students are tested for placement in the program when they reach the institution, and their past records of academic achievement in community schools are taken into account. Students who test below fourth grade on the Slasson Oral Reading and California Achievement tests, as well as on a teacher-made test, are placed in the program. Before they leave they are tested again to determine their gain or loss during the average five months stay. The objectives of the instruction are ambitious to advance the students one grade level in both reading/language arts and math during their stay at the center.
The program in Basic Communication Skills works on reading comprehension and ability; Basic Math is designed to develop basic proficiency in addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and measurement; the Motivational Reading Library is individualized and stresses comprehension, "word-attack" skills and library skills.
Individual viewing and listening stations are part of the Title I reading instruction at Macon Youth Development Center.
or

16

Youth Developm.ent Center-Marietta
Reading and math are the skills stressed in instruction at this centerl like other YDCs, operated by the Georgia Department of Human Resources. Two unique features l howeverl are the length of the school day and the Iitoken 1/ economy in which inmates participate.
Since this is a residential center l it is feasible to provide an extended school program - from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. No student attends school continuously during that time; instead the hours are divided
l
among school and work programs and recreation activities. The unifying element in the resident/s day is the token economy which rewards desirable behavior and work with tokens to be spent on cigarettes recreation activities and Iistore ll items.
l
This system of behavior modification provides a strong framework for the school program.
The youth development center houses both boys and girls, generally between 13 and 17, on a shortterm basis. About 20 participate in the Title I reading and math programs, funded this first year at $17,160. A key concept of education at the center must be flexibi lity due to the constant turnover in residents. Each day new students are placed in the program, with those scoring less than sixth grade achievement in reading or math on the WRAT test eligible for the special assistance of the two Title I program assistants/teachers.
During the first year of the program one teenaged boy, Richard, made outstanding progress. He was 16 and totally unable to read, although he was of average intelligence and had experienced several previous attempts at special education. His exact problem was never diagnosed, but he had great difficulty in remembering new words and in building a sight vocabulary. The Title I reading teacher found that phonics instruction was his only possible avenue to reading. After overcoming many emotional blocks caused by years of frustration and humiliation, Richard eventually learned the phonics rules and word attack skills which unlocked the words. At the time of his release Richard was reading at approximately the fourth grade level.
Marietta's Title I program in FY 75 has focused on improving math skills. A needs assessment revealed that on the average, students there were

further behind in math than in reading. Since math is a very sequential skill subject an individualized,
l
diagnostic-prescriptive approach was adopted. The core curriculum is the IPI math program
l
arranged in seven levels of difficulty with 10 different math topics at each level. For each topic a pre-test is given to determ ine precisely wh ich skills need to be mastered.
Youth at Milledgeville facility works on math problems using cassette instruction tape.
Marietta Youth Development Center is operated by the Department of Human Resources.

17

The pre-tests reveal the "holes" in the student's background, since students at this age have uneven patterns of math skills. The student is able to see that the assignment booklets are meaningful and will teach skills that are clearly lacking. Whether the student is present a short time - a week or so and completes only one skill, or whether he or she stays long enough to complete several whole levels, he or she has a clear indication of progress and a feeling of success.
Variety is another positive aspect of the program. The student moves to a new topic before becoming bored with doing the same types of problems over and over. Personal responsibility for learning is encouraged by having the teenagers check their own work and obtain their own booklets.
IPI math is carried out in a learning lab setting, where students quickly become accustomed to the idea that each is "doing his own thing." There is no competiton for "right answers" and no belittling of the slow learner. The teacher becomes a helper and a resource person.
The reading instruction program for adolescents at Marietta Youth Development Center employs audiovisual techniques.

The individualized math program with diagnosticprescriptive procedure has been very effective. Many slow Title I students have been introduced to multiplication and measurement concepts, for example, when before they had done only addition and subtraction.
In the evenings after supper the Title I students meet again for math class. The emphasis in these sessions is on the d ri II and practice these students so badly need. Bingo-like games, flashcard games, controlled reader drills and math filmstrips are used to reinforce basic concepts.
At 7 p.m. the long school day comes to an end. Each Title I student has had two math and two reading classes and has earned the coveted tokens. Probably, too, students have gained not only new academic skills, but new feelings of success and self-worth. For this is the primary focus of the school program: to provide success experiences for these teenaged youth whose previous school experiences have so often been failures.

18

Youth Developm.ent Center-Milledgeville

Title I funds of $178,287 in FY 75 have enabled a tremendously expanded program at this middle Georgia institute for juvenile offenders. Even though the criteria for selecting eligible participants are stringent - inmates must be five or more years educationally deprived to be enrolled - 350 young offenders are being helped this year in the Title I funded reading and mathematics assessment and instructional program.

Students are separated into six different groups, and six teachers provide instruction. Intelligence, achievement and maturity tests are given to assess students' ability when they come to the institution; past school records, interviews, teacher observations and social histories are also considered.
Two approaches are used in providing remedial instruction. A control group receives traditional instruction based on textbooks supplemented by

Milledgeville Youth Development Center is operated bV the Department of Human Resources.
Youthful offender works on math problems at Milledgeville Youth Development Center.

19

(top photo) Student at State Youth Development Center studies individualized assignments which are directed by a computer program. (bottom photo) Title I teacher prepares for next class at State Youth Development Center in Milledgeville.
audiovisual media. An experimental group uses the Westinghouse P. L.A.N. (Programmed Learning According to Need) - a computer-based individualized program in reading and math. Both methods aim to achieve one-tenth of a school year's progress in both reading and math for each month the inmate is in residence.
Title I funds of about $420 per child are providing a teaching and assessment staff supplemented by eight full-time people. In addition, Title I funds are paying for testing that was previously performed by academic teachers on their own personal time; ample supplies and materials and audiovisual equipment have enabled a vastly expanded curriculum.
20

Activities in
Systems

Chattooga
Number of Years With Title I Project 10
Type of Project and Number of Students Reading - 424
Mathematics - 273
Number of Schools in Project Five
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $171,204
Cost Per Child Reading - $227.34
Mathematics - $160.16
Needs Assessment Process Used A schoolwide survey of classroom teachers was conducted in May, 1975.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Student must be functioning at least a half year below grade placement in reading and/or mathematics.
Means of Evaluation Evaluation is designed and conducted by a special
evaluation team which uses for pre- and posttesting the Siosson Oral Reading Test, Gates MacGinitie Reading Test and the California Arithmetic Test.

Locally designed check lists and questionnaires are used to collect additional data from parents, teachers and students.
An eclectic approach is used in both the Chattooga County reading/language arts and mathematics programs. In reading/language arts emphasis is placed on vocabulary expansion and comprehension skills. Some children are tutored on a one-to-one basis, while others work in small flexible groups.
In mathematics, instruction is geared to identified weaknesses in the fundamentals of math and math concepts. Instructional practices are used which show the relation of math to real life situations and wh ich encou rage students to work for rea I ach ievement.
Each Title I school in Chattooga County has a parents' advisory council. In addition, there is a systemwide advisory counci I composed of one parent from each Title I school, the system's Title I coordinator and secretary. Principals serve as nonvoting members. Each council meets a minimum of four times a year. Activities include evaluating project activities, suggesting improvements, disseminating information relative to federal guidelines, planning ways to actively involve more parents in activities, observing Title I programs in action and helping to increase parents' knowledge and understanding of reading and mathematics.

Crisp
Number of Years With Title I Project 11 Type of Project and "'umber of Students Kindergarten - 144 Reading/Language Arts - 765 Mathematics - 340 Number of Schools in Project Five Title I Allocation for FY 76 $311,516 Cost Per Child $338 Needs Assessment Process Used The students' current performance is compared with desired performance.
22

Criteria for Selecting Participants Students must be performing more than one year behind grade placement.
Means of Evaluation Scores on pre- and post-tests are analyzed.
Instruments used for placement and for measuring student achievement in reading were Gates MacGinites Reading Battery A.D. and Siosson Oral Reading Test; in mathematics, the Individualized Mathematics System was used for placement and the Stanford Mathematics Achievement-Levels I-III for achievement; and in kindergarten the Calwell Preschool Inventory was used.
Title I kindergarten students in Crisp County remain in class all day, which is normally from 8:30-2:00. There are six classes with 24 students in each. Reading/language arts students are given one hour instruction daily by the Title I teacher, and mathe-

Effingham.

Number of Years With Title I Project Six
Type of Project and Number of Students Reading/Language Arts - 450
Mathematics - 300
Number of Schools in Project Four
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $150,062
Cost Per Child $217.71
Needs Assessment Process Used A survey was made of parents, students, local businessmen, community leaders and school personnel.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Students who tested low on the individually administered Informal Reading Inventory and the Wide Range Achievement Test in math were selected.
Means of Evaluation Progress is measured as result of pre- and post-tests given.

especially for him, based on measured or demonstrated needs. He is given individualized instruction.
Math students receive approximately 55 minutes of instruction daily. Each student works within a program designed to meet his/her need.
A systemwide advisory committee has 14 members. Eleven are parents. In addition, each school has an advisory committee composed of four parents. Parents with children in the Title I program participate in the needs assessment by serving on the Needs Assessment Committee and by responding to questionnaires. They help to interpret the project to the community and assist in continuous evaluation activities.

Reading classes in the program are composed of small groups. Each student is in a program designed

matics students are normally pulled from their regular classroom for about 40 minutes of special instruction daily. In addition to remedial reading and math teachers in each school, a resource teacher works with teachers and students in all Title I schools. There are also 10 aides assigned to work with teachers.
The system's Community Action Committee was modified to include parents of Title I students, and this committee serves in an advisory capacity. In addition, individual school advisory committees consist of the principal and two or more parents of Title I children. Currently, this school committee is used only for passing on information about Title I projects, but greater emphasis will be placed next year on program planning and evaluation.
(top photo) Crisp County kindergarten students listen to Title I teacher. (bottom photo) Teacher works with small group of kindergartners in Crisp County Title I activity.
23

Fannin
Number of Years With Title I Project 10
Type of Project and Number of Students Reading - 244
Mathematics - 115
Number of Schools in Project Five
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $132,140
Cost Per Ch iId Reading - $395
Mathematics - $377
Needs Assessment Process Used Test data were obtained on all children in grades one-three. Reading and math performance indicated a need for a corrective program in these areas. All elementary principals, as well as the assistant superintendent for instruction, felt these areas were the system's number one needs.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Primary students who are reading significantly
below grade level, as measured by the Language Section of the Stanford Achievement Test are selected.

Primary students are also chosen who are performing significantly behind in mathematical skills as measured by the Math Section of the Stanford Achievement Test.
Teacher recommendations based on past performance in reading and math are used.
Means of Evaluation Language and mathematics sections of the Stanford Achievement Test were given at the beginning and end of the school year and scores compared to show gains made.
Small groups of children, not exceeding 16, are pulled out of regular classes at times when reading and math are not being taught and are given special instruction. The Title I teacher and two teacher aides work with these children for not less than one hour daily in an individually prescribed program. A variety of methods and supplemental materials are used.
The system's Parent Advisory Committee is composed of five parents, one from each of the five elementary schools participating in the program. In addition, each school has an advisory committee comprised of three elected parents. The parents visit Title I classes, offer suggestions for program improvement, review any complaints made and review evaluation data collected.

Forsyth
Number of Years With Title I Project 10
Type of Project and Number of Students Reading/Language Arts - 490
Number of Schools in Project Five
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $114,066
Cost Per Child $219
Needs Assessment Process Used A committee composed of the reading director, reading teachers, classroom teachers and principals determined the need for the project.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Students are selected based on their performance

on the Iowa Reading Test, Informal Reading Inventories, teacher recommendations and school records.
Means of Evaluation The student's performance, behavior and atti-
tudes are observed by his teachers and parents.
The Iowa Reading Test, Reading Mastery Tests, Informal Reading Inventories and individual reading check lists are used to measure progress.
The Forsyth County program consists of small group instruction as well as individual instruction in areas where students are deficient. The objective is that 60 percent of the students will show a gain of five months for every nine months of instruction.
Parents of Title I students are asked to continually observe and evaluate the project and to participate in planning, operation and evaluation. Each school has a parents advisory committee and representatives serve on a system level committee.

24

Kindergarten children learn reading skills through cooking in Hogansville City Title I project.

Hogansville City
Number of Years With Title I Project 10
Type of Project and Number of Students Kindergarten - 54
Reading/Language Arts - 15
Number of Schools in Project Two
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $62,000
Cost Per Child $738.35
Needs Assessment Process Used Kindergarten - Questionnaires were sent to
parents and a simple development test was given to certain kindergarten age children.
Reading - During the last month of the 1973-74 school year a reading readiness test was given children in kindergarten.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Kindergarten - Students from low socio-
economic areas are given first priority. These students are given a development test.

Reading - Students scoring the lowest in the reading readiness test given the last month of kindergarten are placed in the program.
Means of Evaluation Kindergarten - Evaluation was made through
monthly conferences with parents and guardians and by teacher observation.
Reading/Language Arts - The Steinbach Test of Reading Readiness was used.
In the Hogansville kindergarten program major emphasis was placed on reading readiness. Special books and materials were used in this program. In addition, the children were provided experiences in art, music, science and health. Throughout the year they were taken on field trips to various places of interest.
The reading/language arts program was conducted in the primary and elementary schools, and emphasis was placed on helping disadvantaged first graders raise their reading levels.
Parents serving on the advisory committee were volunteers. The committee met every six weeks with the Title I teachers to discuss various aspects of the Title I programs and to offer thei r views on how to more adequately evaluate the program.

25

Lincoln

Marietta City

Number of Years With Title I Project Six
Type of Project and Number of Students Reading - 200
Mathematics - 160
Kindergarten - 80
Number of Schools in Project Two
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $104,801
Cost Per Child Reading - $204.18
Mathematics - $175.22
Kindergarten - $314.88
Criteria for Selecting Participants Students should be a year or more behind
academically.
Students who score the lowest on grade placement tests are selected.
Students are recommended by their teachers.
Means of Evaluation Pre- and post-tests are given to show progress.
Tests used are Gates McGinitie Reading Test, Iowa Test of Basic Skills, State Readiness Test and Keymath (a diagnostic arithmetic test).
Teacher evaluations turned in at the end of the school year are also used to measure the effectiveness of the project.
In each Title I activity in Lincoln County, a certified teacher and aide work with small classes of 20 students or less. These students filter back into regular classes as progress is made.
Principals of each Title I school are responsible for the function of the Parents Advisory Council at his school. All Title I parents meet at the beginning of the school year and elect members to serve on the advisory council. The system's Title I Advisory Committee meets periodically with school level committees, and parents are asked to offer suggestions on the planning, operation and evaluation of Title I projects.

Number of Years With Title I Project 10
Type of Project and Number of Students Kindergarten - 116
Reading/Language Arts - 175
Mathematics - 173
Number of Schools in Project Six
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $170,111
Cost Per Child Kindergarten - $453.04
Reading - $420.94
Mathematics - $426.89
Needs Assessment Process Used Achievement tests were given. Scores indicated
that the mean scores of students in all Title I schools in grades two, three and five were below grade level in reading, math and language.
Tests given at the beginning and end of the school year indicated students were not making significant progress.
The need for kindergarten was based on (1) recommendations of a Comprehensive Study; (2) a study of low achievement test scores in grades two-five indicating a need for preschool education and (3) a high correlation between educational deprivation and economic level of the parents.
Criteria for Selecting Participants In math, participants are selected on the basis of
teacher recommendation and/or standardized test scores.
First priority is given to students who perform from six months to two years below anticipated grade level in reading and who are recommended by the teaching staff.
Means of Evaluation Kindergarten - Caldwell Preschool Inventory
Test
Reading and mathematics - California Achievement Test, 1970 Edition
Marietta City's Title I math program has been operating successfully since October 1974. It is designed for each participant to have an opportunity to improve math achievement scores on stand-

26

Teacher and student work on writing skills in Marietta City project.

school year, 186 achieved the expected gain based on the goal of a year's growth for a year of instruction.
The Title I reading center in each of the six schools serves from 20 to 45 students daily. Students work in small groups or individually. Title I teachers and the regular classroom teachers work closely together to plan and implement the most effective program for each child. An effort has been made to determine the preferred learning style of each student and to capitalize on this in the classroom as well as the reading center.
Some of the objectives of the kindergarten program are to increase the ability of children to work and plan cooperatively, to understand and appreciate each other; to promote growth in the skills of community; to develop the children's understanding of their physical environment; to develop improved health habits such as cleanliness, proper eating and safety and to improve the children's physical skills.

ardized tests by one grade level per year of instruction. In a mathematics laboratory participants are provided with an opportunity to develop an understanding of math concepts and to perfect their computational skills through various methods such as blocks, quiet counters, measurement kits and hand-held calculators. The success of the math program is shown by the fact that from a total of 207 participants in this program during the 1974-75

There is a systemwide parents' advisory counci I and one for each of the Title I schools. The purposes of these committees are to supply information about the unmet needs of the Title I students; to recommend and help plan the type of program that wou Id best fit the needs of the children; and to meet periodically to evaluate the program and make recommendations. The committees meet four times during the school year.

Muscogee
Number of Years With Title I Project 10 Type of Project and Number of Students Prekindergarten - 391 Reading/Language Arts - 2,560 Mathematics - 1,560 Number of Schools in Project 30 Title I Allocaticm for FY 76 $1,653,876 Cost Per Child Kindergarten - $1,139.62 Mathematics - $330.39

Reading/Language Arts - $352.08
Needs Assessment Process Used Research and evaluation staff studied the results
of standardized tests, subjective teacher evaluations and community surveys and determined an acute need for remediation in reading/language arts and mathematics.
In certain schools many children entering kindergarten exhibited a readiness level two to three years below that of the normal five year old.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Prekindergarten students residing within a target
area are selected by their scores on the Cooperative Pre-School Inventory.
In math and reading students are ranked by need as measured by standardized tests - Rank A being the student most in need; Rank B, special education students not yet assigned a class; and
27

Rank C, the student showing the least needs. Students less than one year below grade level are not considered.
Means of Evaluation The project is evaluated by the use of standard-
ized tests and by subjective evaluation by the teacher.
Students are pre- and post-tested. All grades except fou r and eight are given Stanford Achievement Battery. Grades four and eight use the Iowa Test of Basic Skills.
A multimedia approach is used in the reading/ language arts program. The first step is to diagnose each student's difficulty, then a program is individually prescribed, and materials are used that interest the child. Teachers use special projects such as writing, directing and acting in plays, contests in writing and open-ended discussions on current issues. No class exceeds eight students.
Math teachers use as many exploratory type activities as possible, and simple teacher-made games and computers are used to teach concepts, computation and problem solving. The teacher plans daily with each student. Student progress sheets are maintained and shared with the regular math teacher.
The prekindergarten has a loosely structured, activity centered program. Each activity is designed to assist in developing physical and social skills and at the same time help with emotional development of the child.
Parents are involved in the planning, operation and evaluation of Title I projects. Prior to writing a project, the advisory committee meets to discuss, approve or modify a proposed project. Frequent visits, open houses and newsletters keep parents informed during the school year. At the end of the school year the parents advisory committee meets to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the past project and make recommendations for improvement.

Treutlen
Number of Years With Title I Project 11
Type of Project and Number of Students Kindergarten - 80
Reading/Language Arts - 302
Number of Schools in Project Two
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $115,736
Cost Per Ch iId $243.82
Needs Assessment Process Used Kindergarten - Standardized tests, teacher tests
and grades and teacher opinion were used.
Reading/Language Arts - Needs assessment process was obtained through a variety of subjective and objective methods. Teachers' observations and personal knowledge of each child's cultural and academic status were coordinated with several types of standard processes.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Student selection is based on results of standardized tests.
Means of Evaluation In kindergarten the program is evaluated through
tests and parent and teacher interviews.
Students enjoy listening center in Treutlen County language arts activity.

The school level parents advisory committee is elected by the PTA. Members of the school level committee then elect members for the systemwide committee. Also serving as members of the system's committee are some non-school personnel such as representatives from the news media, civic clubs and religious groups.

28

Older students tutor younger ones in Treutlen County reading and language arts program.

In reading/language arts effectiveness is measured through a variety of oral and written tests and by the teacher records.
In the kindergarten program the children learn vocabulary, numbers, colors, shapes, etc. and experiences are provided which help them develop a good selfconcept. The major purpose of the program is to prepare the child for school.
One effective teaching method used in the reading/ language arts program is the student tutorial activity in which older students serve as tutors for younger students. Educational games and materials have also proved successful in teaching the students skills in reading and language arts. Interest centers and student workshops were developed to help in individualized instruction.
Parent Advisory Committees in each school plan Title I activities, acquaint other parents about what's going on in the program and evaluate the programs. Parents receive student progress reports every three weeks.

Upson

Number of Years With Title I Project One
Type of Project and Number of Students Kindergarten - 170
Number of Schools in Project Four
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $113,018
Cost Per Child $597
Needs Assessment Process Used Standardized tests and teacher surveys are used.
Criteria for Selecting Participants Participants are selected based on the SRA
Primary Mental Ability Test and a systemdeveloped preschool inventory by the kindergarten staff.
Observed strengths and weaknesses and special handicapping conditions are identified and recommendations for placement made.
Means of Evaluation Pre- and post-tests are used to measure the effec-

tiveness of the project.
Kindergarten teachers use formative evaluative devices to measure individual student progress.
The kindergarten program is designed to prepare children to enter the regular school program. Each kindergarten teacher uses formative evaluative devices to assure continuous progress of the readiness program and reports the child's progress and recommendations to the parents every six weeks.
The school level advisory committees are composed of 12 parents. The system level committee is com. posed of two representatives from each school committee and representatives from the Health Department and the Department of Family and Children Services. The councils are actively involved in planning and conducting activities and programs in each of the kindergarten centers. An assortment of fund raising activities has enabled the groups to provide additional funding for each center as well as activities for special events and to buy playground equipment.

29

Ware
Number of Years With Title I Project 10
Type of Project and Number of Students Corrective Reading - 535
Kindergarten - 20
Number of Schools in Project Five
Title I Allocation for FY 76 $109,268
Cost Per Child $300
Needs Assessment Process Used A Georgia Department of Education Planning Grant was used to conduct an extensive needs assessment. Test results, parental opinion, community surveys, teacher and administrator opinions were all used in the assessment process.
Criteria for Selecting Participants
Reading
Students in grades two and three who are at least six months behind in reading achievement.
Students in grades four through seven who are at least one year or more behind in reading achievement.
Students recommended by their classroom teachers and who meet one of the other two criteria.
Kindergarten
Students who reach five years of age by November 1.
Students whose scores on the Denver Developmental Screening Test identify them as educationally deprived.

Handicapped children as identified by the Waycross Area Program for Exceptional Children.
Means of Evaluation Pre- and post-tests are given to determine gains.
Basic reading readiness and achievement tests, teacher records and successes in other curriculum areas are also used to determine effectiveness of the program.
In the reading program classes are limited to no more than 14 students per period. An on-going diagnosis of student needs results in prescriptive reading lessons which supplement basic instruction in the regular classroom. A variety of instructional materials helps the Title I teacher meet the needs of individual students. Small classes also make individual attention possible. Students in the reading program are pulled out of their regular classrooms for 40 minutes each day.
At the beginning of the school year all parents of Title I students are invited to the school for a meeting. A committee to serve in an advisory capacity is elected by those parents present. From this school level committee, some parents are elected to serve on the system level advisory committee. Meetings at both school and system levels are held quarterly.
Through questionnaires and discussions parents are involved in determining the needs of their children. Channels of communication are kept open, and parental guidance is used in planning each project. During the year parents are kept informed of project activities and invited to visit classrooms regularly. Evaluation of the project is a schedu led part of the spring meeting of the advisory council, and evaluation results are shared with all parents.

30

The Georgia Department of Education would like your evaluation of this publication. Would you take a few moments to fill in and mail this self-addressed, pre-stamped form? Thank you.
1. Name of publication 2. How do you use this publication?

3. Based on your own experience, do you rate this publication

o very good 0 good 0 fair 0 poor 0 very poor

4. Did you find the material:

Yes

No

Easy to read and understand? Organized for convenient use? Attractive? Complete?

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

5. Other comments.

6. Your job title (teacher, curriculum director, principal, etc.)

.

7. Signature and address (optional).

8. Date

.
Evaluation Forlll

(FOLD ON DOTTED LINE)
BUSINESS REPLY MAIL
NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN UNITED STATES POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY _
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PUBLICATIONS AND INFORMATION SERVICES 103 STATE OFFICE BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30334
(FOLD ON DOTTED LINE)

FIRST CLASS PERMIT NO. 6146
ATLANTA, GA.

(STAPLE OR SEAL WITH TAPE)