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

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

doi:10.35608/ruraled.v27i3.488

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.    

Highlights

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)
Within the NCLB legislation the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) was established to provide additional funding to help schools address challenges that are unique to rural districts (Hill & Kusler, 2004; No Child Left Behind Act of 2001)
The results of this study suggest that the majority of rural schools that are eligible for the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) are making adequate yearly progress on No Child Left Behind criteria

Summary

Introduction

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). While acknowledging that the goals of NCLB are laudable, many school administrators, teachers, rural education leaders, and agencies have expressed concern that the requirements of the legislation are challenging for rural schools (American Association of School Administrators, 2003; Coladarci, 2003; Jimerson, 2004; National Rural Education Association, 2004; United States Government Accountability Office, 2004) In light of these concerns, there is a need to examine how rural schools are doing during the initial implementation of the NCLB criteria, those rural schools that are considered among the most challenged (i.e., those eligible for REAP). The third aim was to examine differences in the characteristics of SRSA-eligible and RLIS-eligible schools on key factors including geographical location, proportion of youth from ethnic minorities, proportion of youth eligible for free or reduced lunch, and student/teacher ratio

Objectives

Methods

Conclusion