第二章 后半部分Word格式文档下载.docx

1、preliminary information about state priorities, program administration and technical assistance and are not intended to represent state implementation across the 39 states receiving funding. Included in this chapter are comments by the RLIS coordinators in the sampled states that illustrate the find

2、ings or provide additional context. Key Findings Key findings on state implementation of the RLIS program include the following: . In the nine states that received the largest RLIS allocations in 200708, state coordinators reported that state goals for the program were consistent with federal goals

3、that focus on improving student achievement and meeting AYP targets; the RLIS program was part of an overall effort in each state to manage federal programs to meet these goals. According to state coordinators, the nine states in the sample integrated RLIS into their ongoing school improvement activ

4、ities to help districts and schools make AYP. State coordinators in all nine of the sampled states reported that the allocations of RLIS funds to districts were the last of their U.S. Department of Education funds to be finalized, which may affect a districts ability to do budget planning. According

5、 to state coordinators, all nine states in the sample required RLIS districts to engage in a comprehensive planning process and to address gaps identified through local needs assessments. Review of each states RLIS-related documents by the researchers showed that there was considerable variability a

6、mong the states with regard to the planning tools they used and to what extent they directed districts through the planning process. 5 State Implementation of the RLIS Program Following are the findings from the analysis of the state interviews and of RLIS-related documents obtained from the states

7、such as grant application and guidance materials, program data reports, evaluation reports and technical assistance materials. The State Coordinator Interview Guide used in conducting interviews in the nine sampled states is included in Appendix A. Goals and Priorities The primary goal of the RLIS p

8、rogram in the nine sampled states was for the districts in those states to make AYP. State coordinators in the nine states in the sample reported that helping rural school districts make AYP was the primary goal of their RLIS program （see Exhibit 2）. State coordinators in two states reported that th

9、eir states set additional goals for the RLIS program such as increasing National Assessment of Educational Progress scores or reducing dropout rates. However, the state coordinators in those two states explained that meeting AYP targets takes priority over any other goals, and districts with schools

10、 in school improvement status must direct their RLIS funds to helping that school make AYP. Exhibit 2 State Goals for Rural and Low-Income School （RLIS） Funds State State RLIS Goal（s） Alabama Make AYP Georgia Make AYP Kentucky Make AYP Louisiana Make AYP Make AYPMississippi ，Increase National Assess

11、ment of Educational Progress scores Reduce dropout rate North Carolina Make AYP Oklahoma Make AYP Texas Increase achievement West Virginia Exhibit reads: The state of Alabama has a state RLIS goal to make AYP. Source: RLIS state coordinator interviews. 6 In the nine states in the sample, the only si

12、gnificant change in state goals over the course of the RLIS program was an increased emphasis on making AYP. RLIS funds are generally very flexible. However, if a district fails to make AYP after receiving these funds for three years, they may be used only for activities that will help the district

13、make AYP. Once the program had been implemented for three years and some districts found themselves in school improvement status, there was an increased emphasis on the goal of making AYP in the nine states that received the largest RLIS allocations in 200708. According to the nine interviewed state

14、 coordinators, districts did not usually set goals for the RLIS program beyond those set by the state. According to state coordinators, districts usually identified, through a consolidated planning and application process, specific strategies and activities they would use to meet the state goal of making AYP. Thus, while the goal was the same as that of