The Effects of Title I Funding on Student Achievement in Reading: Dan River Middle School

TITLE I FUNDING1

Elizabeth J. Hoskins

Longwood University

The Effects of Title I Funding on Student Achievement in Reading: Dan River Middle School

At Dan River Middle School (DRMS) in Pittsylvania County, Virginia, one of the most crucial sources of instructional funding is allocated by the federal government through Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This Title I funding is defined as “financial assistance to local education agencies (LEAs) and schools with high numbers or high percentages of children from low-income families to help ensure that all children meet challenging state academic standards” (US Department of Education, 2015). Schools receiving Title I funding must use these allocations to target students most at risk of not meeting the state academic standards, unless the school is operating a school-wide Title I program. Because more than 40% of students at DRMS come from low-income households, the school may use its Title I funding to benefit all students through a school-wide program. DRMS received $21,293.39 in Title I funding for the 2016-2017 school year (Pittsylvania County Schools, 2016). The school allocates much of this funding for reading programs in an effort to increase student achievement in this area.

According to Emily Reynolds, principal at DRMS, the mission of the Title I program at Dan River Middle School is to provide students with academic supports in the areas of reading and math (personal communication, 5 October 2016). Additionally, the school will identify, remediate, and monitor students in need of Tier 2 and Tier 3 math and reading interventions. Based on 2015-16 reading SOL assessment data, 76% of students (408 of 500) passed the reading SOL test. The accreditation benchmark was 75%. It is clear that while the benchmark was met in the area of reading, there is room for improvement. At DRMS, Title I funding specifically related to reading is primarily allocated for the Fusion Reading program and remedial tutoring.

Purpose

The main goal of this project is to analyze Dan River Middle School’s Title I budget, with specific emphasis on the effect the school’s allocation of Title I funding has on students’ reading achievement scores. I will research outside the division to explore the background of Title I, then examine the school’s current Title I budget to examine the efficiency of the allocation of these funds with regard to students’ achievement in reading. Specifically, I will look at the school’s new Title I-funded reading remediation program, Fusion, as well as Title I-funded reading tutors and the Read Naturally program, and analyze the effects that these resources have on student progress. Fall, mid-year, and spring MAP scores for students participating in Title I remediation programs will be measured for growth. I will specifically analyze the cost of the Fusion, Read Naturally, and tutoring programs (including personnel, supplies, and technology) by reviewing the budget, purchase orders, and timesheets. Depending on the determined efficacy of the Title I reading programs, I will also explore possible options for Title I appropriations for the 2017-2018 school year. Success specifically related to this project will be measured by the research that I collect on general Title I funding, my analysis of Dan River Middle School’s Title I budget, and the measurement of the efficacy of the Title I-funded programs by 5/6/2017.

Title I Reading Budget

Fusion Reading

Goals. The Fusion Reading program was adopted at DRMS beginning in the 2016-2017 school year. This program from Glencoe uses leveled nonfiction texts in order to teach skills necessary for students to become better readers (Glencoe, 2017). Students are identified to participate in the program as an exploratory course, based on their reading MAP and SOL scores from the previous school year. Identified students will participate in the Fusion program for two consecutive years. The main goals of Fusion Reading are to increase student engagement and to support growth in reading comprehension for students who are reading below grade level.

Needs Assessment. According to the Pittsylvania County Schools Title I Needs Assessment for Dan River Middle School for 2016-2017, $8,575.10 has been allocated for supplies. This includes the Fusion Reading student packages, TOSCRF testing supplies, remediation supplies, books and movies, and a SmartBoard, board mount, and CAT-5 extender for the Title I reading classroom. Also included in this Title I materials and supplies expenditure category are remediation supplies for the math remediation lab, remediation resources for math classrooms, the SumDog math remediation online program renewal, and the iXL math subscription renewal for the math remediation lab.

A total of 84 students were enrolled in year one of Fusion. At $28.71 per student, the Fusion Reading student packages cost the school $2,154.04, over one quarter of the Title I budget allocated for materials and supplies. Next, the Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF) student forms were purchased for $465.30. A novel and movie library for the program was purchased at $144.45. Also purchased at one per student included steno pads, spiral notebooks, 1” binders, sets of five tabbed dividers, and manilla folders. A class set (14) of dry erase boards, markers, and digital timers were also required for Fusion Reading. These supplies totaled $448.11. Finally, because the classroom used for the Fusion Reading program did not have a SmartBoard, this technology had to be purchased as well. The SmartBoard and applicable accessories totaled $1,773.

Student Growth. The original goal of this project was to measure MAP and SOL data for growth for students enrolled in the Fusion program; however, after delving deeper into the project, it became apparent that the TOSCRF was the most accurate method of measuring student progress. The TOSCRF is given in the fall, winter, and spring as a means of measuring student growth, and thus, the strength of the program. Because spring TOSCRF testing is not completed until mid-May, fall to winter comparisons have been made for this project.

Of the 55 students with valid fall and winter test scores, 87% (48 students) increased their TOSCRF scores from August to January. 5% (3 students) maintained their scores, and 7% (4 students) decreased their scores. It is important to note that, although 84 students were projected to participate in the program, several were transient and moved out of district after being enrolled in the beginning of the year and, due to the nature of the Fusion program, students cannot be added once school begins. Furthermore, many students were absent during the pre- or post-test sessions, so valid scores are not available for these students.

Analysis. In analyzing the efficiency of the allocation of Title I funds for the Fusion reading program, it is obvious that students are benefiting from the program. The bottom-line dollar amount for adding Fusion was $4,984.90 of the school’s available $21,293.39 from Title I. Based on the 87% of students who increased their TOSCRF scores in reading, spending nearly ¼ of the school’s Title I budget on the Fusion program is justified. Because Fusion is a 2-year longitudinal program, it will be interesting to see the growth these students exhibit after completing their second year.

Remedial Tutors

Goals. Based on the school’s identified target areas of reading and math, remedial tutoring is integral to the academic growth of students at DRMS. In order for Title I funds to be used for tutoring, tutors must hold a valid teaching license. Tutors remediate during the school day through a pull-out model during math and English core classes, as well as during Title I math and reading exploratory classes. The goal of the Title I tutoring program at DRMS is to provide intensive, small group support to identified students who are not currently performing on grade level.

Needs Assessment. According to the Pittsylvania County Schools Title I Needs Assessment for Dan River Middle School for 2016-2017, $12,718.29 has been earmarked for Title I tutoring. This figure includes both math and reading interventions in grades 6-8. Because many students at DRMS need tutoring services beyond what Title I funds will cover, the school will generally use funding from other sources (for example, student fundraising) to pay for additional tutors if the Title I money is exhausted for the school year.

At the current point in the school year, only $3,660.10 of the allocated $12,718.29 has been spent on Title I tutoring this school year. This low amount is due to the fact that, in order to be paid with Title I funds, tutors must hold a current Virginia teaching license. The school has had difficulty this year establishing and retaining such tutors.

Student Growth. Because Title I tutors generally work with different students each session, there is not necessarily a scientific method to measure the growth of the students affected. When spring MAP and SOL scores for reading are available, however, the expectation is that the school as a whole will improve due to the tutoring services throughout the year.

Analysis. Without hard achievement data to back up the use of these funds for tutoring, it is difficult to justify this budget decision. More information will be available after the MAP testing window closes and after all reading SOL tests are completed. See the budget recommendations section for ideas to improve this area of the budget for the 2017-2018 school year.

Read Naturally Program

Before beginning this project, I was under the assumption that the school’s Read Naturally program was funded through Title I; however, as I began my research, I learned that the program is actually funded through the central office special education budget. Because the focus of this project is on the school’s Title I budget, I am not including figures or data related to Read Naturally.

2017-2018 Budget Recommendations

Note: It is important to mention that, because the Title I allotment for DRMS changes yearly, figures for 2017-2018 are projected based on the budget for 2016-2017. These numbers are rough estimates and simply meant to be a guide since the exact amount will not be known until next year.

Tutoring Budget

With only $3,660.10 of the allocated $12,718.29 tutoring budget spent so far this school year, an issue obviously exists. Because Title I money does not carry over from year to year, DRMS could risk losing over $9,000 that could be used elsewhere. The tutoring section of the Title I budget needs to be reduced, especially due to the fact that money from student fundraisers can be used to cushion this budget if the need arises. Because only ¼ of the budget has been used at this point in the school year, it is necessary to cut the tutoring budget to an estimated $5,000.

Professional Development

By reducing the tutoring budget, approximately $7,000 in Title I funding would be available. The only expenditure category not budgeted for in the needs assessment was the professional development category. A workshop on reading across the curriculum or poverty would be extremely valuable for staff members at DRMS, and would address Title I goals.

Writing Program

Title I funding at the division level has already provided the opportunity for a new Title I-funded position for the 2017-2018 school year. While the details of this position are still being considered, due to this year’s 60% overall pass rate on the Grade 8 Writing SOL (which is ¼ of the school-wide English SOL score for accreditation purposes), I would recommend this position being geared toward writing remediation. Because the funding for the salary and benefits for this position would not be coming from the school-wide Title I allotment, the remaining money not used for professional development could be used for supplies and a writing curriculum.

Reflection

Element 6.1 (Management and Operations Systems)

Through this project, I was able to evaluate the school’s Title I budget process as it relates to student reading achievement. I developed a clearer understanding of equity as it relates to school finance. Furthermore, I was able to apply my understanding of budget principles to furthering student achievement in reading.

Element 6.2 (Data and Resources)

As I delved into this project over the course of the semester, I developed an understanding of managing fiscal resources at the school level as I analyzed the Title I budget. Moreover, I was able to analyze student achievement data (such as TOSCRF scores) in order to determine the effects of the allocation of funds on school-wide reading growth.

Element 5.4 (Advocacy)

In analyzing the Title I budget, I was able to use the data to advocate for the needs of the students of DRMS. Through making suggestions for the future allocation of Title I funding at the middle school level, I prioritized reading and writing remediation in order to benefit the students and the school overall.

Element 4.3 (Assessment System)

Throughout this project, I furthered my understanding of the importance of assessment. As I explored the needs assessment, receipts, purchase orders, and tutoring time sheets, I was able to assess the efficiency of the budgeting process with regards to Title I spending. Moreover, as I assessed student progress in reading, I was able to correlate student growth with the resources allocated to Title I reading remediation.

Element 3.2 (Equitable Access)

I certainly learned a lot about equity through analyzing the Title I budget. While researching the history of Title I funding, it became very apparent that educational funding is not a “one size fits all” equation. Students need different supports in order to succeed, and the allocation of funds should be distributed equitably rather than equally. Thus, as I made recommendations for the Title I allocations for 2017-2018, I made sure to consider the needs of the students first and foremost.

Element 2.2 (Decision Making)

Decision making was a crucial aspect of this project, as I navigated through the principal’s current decision making process with regards to how Title I funds are allocated. I was able to better understand the rationale for allocating money to each component of the budget, which has been generally based on student achievement. In making recommendations for the 2017-2018 school year, I was able to delve deep into the decision making process by altering the allocation of funds to a more conducive formula for student success, based on 2016-2017 data.

Areas of Improvement

As I reflect on the success of this project, it is critical to consider what I would change in the future as far as improving the integrity of this project. First, I would do more thorough research before completing the proposal for the project. Before beginning, I was under the assumption that the Read Naturally program was funded through Title I; however, it was actually part of central office’s special education budget. This reduced the amount of areas I had planned to analyze through the scope of the project.

Furthermore, I would have liked to have been able to disaggregate spring MAP, SOL, and TOSCRF data for the students enrolled in Fusion Reading. Although the winter TOSCRF scores were beneficial in determining the efficiency of the program, this project would have been stronger if it had not been due before the spring testing window closes. It will be quite interesting to revisit this project with those scores in able to have more data to solidify the claim that Fusion is a wise choice for utilizing the school’s resources.

Finally, I would have liked to have more data to track the students involved in Title I tutoring for reading. While I understand that DRMS runs a school-wide Title I program, allowing all students to benefit, I was not aware that teachers did not have running lists of the specific students who were tutored. In the future, this would be good data to analyze, as MAP and SOL scores for these students could aid in determining the adequacy of the allocation of funds toward the Title I tutors.

Conclusion

Through this project, I was able to analyze Dan River Middle School’s Title I budget, with specific emphasis on the effect the school’s allocation of Title I funding has on students’ reading achievement scores. I researched outside the division to explore Title I funding in general, then I examined the school’s 2016-2017 Title I budget to examine the efficiency of the allocation of these funds with regard to students’ achievement in reading. Specifically, I analyzed the Fusion program, as well as Title I-funded reading tutors, and analyzed the effects that these resources have on student progress in reading.

I analyzed the cost of the Fusion and tutoring programs (including personnel, supplies, and technology) by reviewing the budget, purchase orders, and timesheets. Based on the determined efficacy of the Title I reading programs, I also recommended possible options for Title I appropriations for the 2017-2018 school year. Due to meeting my goals based on the research that I collected on general Title I funding, my analysis of Dan River Middle School’s Title I budget, the measurement of the efficacy of the Title I-funded programs, and the recommendations for next year’s budget, this was an overall successful learning opportunity.