A comparison of the effects of two Title I models on reading comprehension

Title I Schoolwide Programs and Title I Pullout Programs represent two Title I models designed to help children of low socioeconomic status improve reading comprehension. The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to determine which Title I model was more effective using California Achievement Test Reading Comprehension Normal Curve Equivalent (NCE) scores as the measure of effectiveness and (2) to determine from structured administrative interviews how the results of this study might improve the Title I program choices of administrators. Eight school districts in rural Southeastern North Carolina were selected for this study. Six null hypotheses were formulated in order to study the effect upon reading comprehension student achievement of Title I Schoolwide Programs as compared to Title I Pullout Programs over a period of three years. Independent variables in the study were Title I Schoolwide Programs and Title I Pullout Programs; gender; ethnicity; and grade levels, 3rd, 4th and 5th. The dependent variable in the study was reading comprehension as measured by the California Achievement Test. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures. Over three grade levels the findings indicated there were no significant differences between the two programs. However, findings indicated a significant difference between Title I Schoolwide Programs and Title I Pullout Programs California Achievement Test Reading Comprehension Normal Curve Equivalent scores during the first program year which was the third grade. The general finding favored Title I Schoolwide Programs over Title I Pullout Programs. The overall results suggested that Title I Schoolwide Programs had the same effect on the total student population that Title I Pullout Programs had on a limited number of eligible students within the student population. Because there were no significant differences in the two Title I program models, grade levels third, fourth, fifth, gender, and ethnicity, administrators believe this indicates program choice flexibility. The results from the structured administrative interviews also revealed the need to consider a variety of data resources in addition to reading comprehension subtests when making Title I program decisions