Adequate Yearly Progress in Small Rural Schools and Rural Low-Income Schools

Thomas W. Farmer, Man-Chi Leung, Jonathan Banks, Victoria Schaefer, Bruce Andrews, Robert Allen Murray

Abstract


Adequate yearly progress (AYP) on No Child Left Behind criteria was examined for a randomly selected sample of districts that qualify for the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP). The sample involved 10% of districts that were eligible for the Small Rural Schools Achievement (SRSA) program and 10% that were eligible for the Rural and Low-income Schools (RLIS) program. Based on district reports, nearly 80% of SRSA schools made AYP, 11% failed, and 11% did not have adequate data. For schools in the RLIS program, districts reported that 65% made AYP, 29% failed, and 6% did not report adequate data. The SRSA and RLIS samples had different patterns for the categories of students that did not make AYP. Also, SRSA and RLIS districts were differentially distributed across the United States. Implications for interventions are discussed.

References


American Association of School Administrators. (2003). No child left behind: A guide for small and rural districts. Arlington, VA: Author.

Coladarci, T. (2003). Gallop goes to school: The importance of confidence intervals for evaluating "adequate yearly progress" in small schools (The Rural Schools and Community Trust). Washington, D.C.: The Rural Schools and Community Trust.

Hill, M. & Kusler, M. (2004). No Child Left Behind and Rural Education: Implications for policy and practice. National Association of State Boards of Education and America Association of School Administrators: Alexandria, VA.

Jimerson, L. (2004). The devil is in the details: Ruralsensitive best practices for accountability under no child left behind (The Rural Schools and Community Trust). Washington, D.C.: The Rural Schools and Community Trust.

Johnson, J. (2004). Unpublished. 2002-2003 REAP data: National compilation. Arlington, VA: The Rural School and Community Trust.

Johnson, J. & Strange, M. (2005). Why rural matters 2005: The facts about rural education in the 50 states. Arlington, VA: Rural School and Community Trust.

National Rural Education Association. (2004). Critical issues in rural education position paper I: "No child left behind." Norman, OK: Author.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110,115 Stat. 1425 (2002) (available online: http://www.ed.gov/legislation/esea02/).

Sherwood, T. (2000). Where has all the "rural" gone? Rural education research and current federal reform. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 16, 159-167.

Smith, E. (2005). Raising standards in American schools: The Case of No Child Left Behind. Journal of Education Policy, 20, 507-524.

U. S. Government Accountability Office. (2004). No child left behind act: Additional assistance and research on effective strategies would help small rural districts. (GAO-04-909). Washington, D.C.: Author.


Full Text: PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Publication of the National Rural Education Association - http://www.nrea.net

Report problems or questions about to the website to jshedd@library.msstate.edu