Post on 13-Jul-2020
transcript
AN ANALYSIS OF THE EDUCATION 05' THE CHILDREN
OF MIGRANT AGRICULTURAL WORKERS IN
ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS
DISSERTATION
Presented to the Graduate Council of the
North Texas State University in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements,
For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
BY
\f' *
Jerome IsC Barnes, B*A., M.A.
Denton, Texa s
December, 1970
Barnes, Jerome M., An Analysis of the Education of the
Children of Migrant Agricultural Workers in Arkansas.
Doctor of Education (Secondary Education), December, 1970,
150 pp., 31 tables, bibliography, 83 titles.
The problem is the study of the education of children
of migrant agricultural workers in forty-five school districts
in Arkansas. The study presents data from a questionnaire,
the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form, and the Science
Research Associates Achievement Test.
The purposes of the study include analyzing the state-
wide programs of migrant education and obtaining data relevant
to the educational needs of migrant children in Arkansas.
A questionnaire was sent to principals in Arkansas
schools. Eighty-one per cent of the questionnaires were
returned. The frequency and per cent of the response to
each item in the twelve categories are presented in the 31
tables. The survey revealed that 25 per cent of the schools
had educational programs specifically for the migrant child.
Forty-one per cent of the schools had programs for migrant
children combined with educational programs for disadvan-
taged children, and 34 per cent had no programs for migrants
other than the regular school program.
The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form was analyzed
for 500 pupils. The form is designed to solve problems
associated with obtaining transfer records. The form was
used initially in Arkansas, 1969-1970. The data from the
forms included teacher ratings on Academic Achievement,
Reading Ability, Academic and Special Interests, and Oral
Academic Ability. The number of days enrolled provided an
estimate of the mobility of migrant children. The data
from the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form are presented
in Tables XVI to XXV. The study indicates that the schools
were not prepared to use the form. Categories were often
incomplete or only partially evaluated. The Users Manual
was not followed in completing the form. Also, the
construction of the form failed to allow space for important
data.
The data available from the completed forms described
7 per cent as non-readers. In Reading Ability 56 per cent
were considered below average, 34 per cent average, and 3
per cent skilled. The migrant child, according to the
ratings, has difficulty in each of the Academic Achievement
Categories, few special interests and abilities, and little
interest in reading.
The analysis of the number of days enrolled reveals
sixty as the median number of days enrolled for the migrant
child.
Academic Achievement data are presented for the migrant
children who took the Science Research Associates Achievement
Tests. The study revealed the number and per cent of migrant
children scoring below the achievement level for their grade
placement. The mean grade equivalent is presented for each
of the subjects: science, social studies, language arts,
arithmetic, and reading.
The study of the Science Research Associates Achievement
Tests found that 85 per cent of the migrant children are
below the achievement level for their grade placement. The
mean grade equivalent below grade placement is 1.3.
The study concludes that the schools in Arkansas need
to continue the use of the data instruments and follow the
procedures suggested for the administration of achievement
tests and the use of the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Form. Schools are encouraged to make constant effort to see
that migrant children living in the school district are
enrolled in the schools. Changes are recommended in the
construction of the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form
to provide additional space for standardized test data.
The need for additional study of the Arkansas educational
program for migrant children is stressed.
AN ANALYSIS OF THE EDUCATION 05' THE CHILDREN
OF MIGRANT AGRICULTURAL WORKERS IN
ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS
DISSERTATION
Presented to the Graduate Council of the
North Texas State University in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements,
For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
BY
\f' *
Jerome IsC Barnes, B*A., M.A.
Denton, Texa s
December, 1970
Copyright by
Jerome M. Barnes
1970
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES vi
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . 1
Statement of the Problem Purposes of the Study Objectives Definition of Terras Limitations Basic Assumptions Sources of Data Procedures for Collecting and Analyzing
the Data Chapter Bibliography
II. BACKGROUND, SIGNIFICANCE AND RELATED STUDIES r . 15
Related Studies Significance Chapter Bibliography
III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR TREATING THE DATA 29
Questionnaire Achievement Tests Migrant Transfer Form Chapter Bibliography
IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA 43
Qu e stionnaire Achievement Testing Migrant Transfer Form Summary
V„ SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 95
Summary of Findings Questionnaire Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form Achievement Testing
Conclusions Questionnaire Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form Achievement Testing General Conclusions
Recommendations Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form Achievement Testing General Recommendations
APPENDIX
BIBLIOGRAPHY
121
141
v
LIST OF TABLES
Tabla Page I Categories and Items That Received
Less Than Five "A" Ratings From the Judges on The Questionnaire 34
II The Results of a Questionnaire Sent to Principals of Schools in Arkansas Having Migrant Programs . . . . . 43
III Responses to Items, Category I: General Questions, by Rank Order 46
IV The Per Cent of Response to Each Item in Category I; General Questions 47
V The Per Cent of Response to Category II: The Arrival of Migrant Families 49
VI The Per Cent of Response to Category III: Orientation to School 51
VII The Per Cent of Response to Category IV: Grade placement . . . . . . . 52
VIII The Per Cent of Response to Category V: Placement in Reading 54
IX The Per Cent of Response to Category VI: Curriculum 56
X The Per Cent of Response to Category VII: Special Personnel . 59
Table Page XI The Per Cent of Response to
Category VIII: Special Adjustments . . . . 62
XII The Per Cent of Response to Category IX: Attendance . . . . . . . . . . 63
XIII The Per Cent of Response to Category X: Secondary-Vocational 64
XIV The Per Cent of Response to Category XI: Self-Concept 66
XV The Per Cent of Response to Category XII: Health 69
XVI Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form Analyzed for Each Geographical Area by Per Cent 70
XVII Reading Ability of Migrant Pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form 72
XVIII Specific Comprehension Skills of Migrant Pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form 73
XIX Specific Word Attack Skills of Migrant pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form . 74
XX Oral Academic Characteristics of Migrant Students on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form 75
XXI Academic Achievement of Migrant Pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form 77
Tab le page XXII Special Interests and Abilities
Creative Category for Migrant Pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form . . . . . . . . . . . 79
XXIII Special Interests and Abilities Science Category of Pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form 80
XXIV Special Interests and Abilities Reading Category of Migrant Pupils on the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form 81
XXV An Analysis of the Days Enrolled Per School to Determine the Mobility pattern of Migrant Pupils g4
XXVI The Mean Grade Equivalent, and Per Cent for Migrant Students Scoring Below Grade Placement by Subject 86
XXVII An Analysis of Achievement Testing of Migrant Children by Grade and bub j e c i. . « • « . . . 0 . » 0 .». . . o 89
XXVIII An Analysis of Achievement Testing for Male Migrant Students for Each Subject 90
XXIX An Analysis of Achievement Testing For Female Migrant Students for Each Subject
XXX An Analysis of the Differences Between Male and Female Migrant Students for Each Subject
XXXI An Analysis of the Difference Between Interstate and Intrastate Students for Each Siabject . . o 9 4
vxx:
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The education of the migrant child received increased
attention in Arkansas in 1966-1970 as the problems of educa-
tional retardation, late entrance, early withdrawal, and
frequent moves of the mobile child were the object of new
research. Initial expenditures of funds for disadvantaged
children did not treat migrant children as having unique
needs. With the initial migrant program developed in 1966
by the Springdale school district (4), the Arkansas school
districts and the Arkansas State department of Education
began to increase utilization of the funds available under
Public Law 89-750, Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965,
Title _I, Migrant Amendment (5 ).
The state program reached a peak in the 1969-1970
school year. Yet, no definitive study had been conducted
of the educational program for migrant children in Arkansas,
Evaluation of the program by state department officials as
required by the migrant amendment pointed up the need for
concrete data (2).
The national migrant program directors insisted on a
standardized testing -program for each state's migrant
program (3). An achievement testing program for migrants
was initiated in Arkansas in the 1969-1970 school year.
A constant problem schools in Arkansas and other states
noted about students who move often was the inability tp
obtain adequate records on migrant children. The problem
led to the development of a Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Form, used nationally for the first time in the 1969-1970
school year (1).
The need for relevant data for the purpose of eval-
uation, improvement, and comparison with other state migrant
programs was noted at an in-service workshop for migrant
teachers in June of 1969 (3). The lack of data emphasized
the significance and timeliness of a definitive study of the
educational program for the children of migrant agricultural
workers in Arkansas.
Statement of the Problem
The problem was the analysis of the education of the
children of migrant agricultural workers in the forty-five
participating districts of Arkansas public schools.
Purposes of the Study
The purposes of the study were (I) to provide a
state-wide, analysis of the program to educate the children
of migrant agricultural workers in Arkansas, (2) to provide
data relevant to the educational needs of migrant children,
(3) to provide data relevant to the educational achievement
and grade level of migrant children in Arkansas, (4) to
survey the existing programs for the education of migrant
children in the forty-five school districts of Arkansas that
have the migrant programs, (5) to analyze data from the
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form, and (6) to state
conclusions and recommendations concerning the achievement
level of migrant children, the use of the Uniform Migrant
Student Transfer Form, and the kinds of programs in Arkansas
for the education of migrant children. The conclusions were
drawn and recommendations are made as they relate to the
data established in the study.
Objectives
The study of the program for the education of the
children of migrant agricultural workers included the
following objectives:
1. To make certain analyses about the programs for the
education of migx-ant children in the forty-five school
districts in Arkansas.
a. To suggest changes in the Uniform Migrant
Student Transfer Form.
b. To make recommendations for the improvement
of the migrant program in Arkansas.
2. To provide data on the state's migrant program in
the forty-five districts.
a. The number of migrant children in Arkansas.
b. The number of interstate and intrastate
migrant children in Arkansas.
c. The number of schools and school districts
that have education programs for migrant
children.
d. The mobility of the migrant children in
Arkansas.
3. To obtain the achievement level of migrant children
in the forty-five school districts.
a. The per cent of migrant children below the
achievement level for their grade placement.
5
to. The per cent of interstate and intrastate
migrant children who are below the achievement,
level for their grade placement.
c» The per cent of migrant children who score
below their grade placement on Science
Research Associates Achievement Tests in
science, social studies, language arts,
arithmetic, reading, and composite.
4. To survey the existing programs in Arkansas in the
forty-five participating districts. A questionnaire was
developed to survey the programs. The following were
objectives for the questionnaire:
a. The per cent of programs that offered bi-
lingual instruction.
b» The per cent of school districts that had
programmed instruction for migrant children.
c. The per cent of school districts that had
non-graded educational programs for migrant
children.
d. The per cent of school districts that had
special orientation and withdrawal plans.
e. The per cent of school districts that
provided -pretesting before placing migrant
. children in classes.
f. The per cent of school districts that had
special remedial reading programs for
migrants.
g. The per cent of school districts that
• utilized special personnel such as teacher
aides and tutors to help instruct migrant
children.
h. The per cent of schools that utilized curric-
ular materials developed especially for use
with migrant children in Arkansas.
i. The per cent of schools that had a program to
check for speech and hearing disorders.
j. The per cent of schools that adjusted the
school, calendar to conform with peak agri-
cultural demands for the use of children to
work.
k. The per cent of schools that adjusted the
length of the school day to meet special
needs of migrant children.
1. The per cent of schools that required home
visits by teachers of migrant children,
m. The per cent of schools that adjusted class
size to meet special needs of migrant
children.
n. The per cent of schools that had a migrant
program for vocational training for secondary
students.
o. The per cent of schools that had a means for
discovering the home base of the migrant
child.
p. The per cent of schools that had arrangements
for multiple adoption of state textbooks.
5. To analyze a sample of data from the Uniform
Migrant Student Transfer Form. The areas were the following:
a. Mobility.
b. Academic Characteristics—Reading.
(1) Reading Ability.
(2) Specific Comprehension Skills.
(3) Specific Word Attack Skills.
c. Academic Characteristics—Oral.
(1) Primary Language.
(2) Ability to Communicate in English.
(3) Speecn Disorders«
(4) Hesx?_ng Dx soxciors *
(5) understands Directions•
d» Academic ?ichievement.
(1) Math Computations.
(2) Composition.
(3) Science.
(4) Social Studies.
(5) Math Concepts.
e. Special Interests and Abilities.
*• (1) Creative.
(2) Reading.
(3) Athletic-
6. To compare the programs in operation in the forty-
five participating school districts with the needs of the
migrant children.
Definition of Terms
1. Micrrant.—A migratory agricultural worker. An
adult worker who is employed in seasonal agricultural or
related food processing occupations, and who is required by
the nature and varied locations of his employment to move
from place to place for the purpose of engaging in his
occupation (5).
9
2. Migrant. Children.—A child whose parent, guardian,
or other person having custody is defined as a migratory
agricultural worker; who, due to a change in the location of
his parent's or guardian's employment, moves from one school
district to another in the course of the year; and, whose
school attendance during the regular school term is inter-
rupted or curtailed because of this change of residence, or
who is a temporary resident of a district other than that in
which he regularly attends school (5).
3* Interstate Migrant Children.—The children of
migrant agricultural workers whose movement is across state
lines. The home base of this migrant is in another state.
Intrastate Migrant Children.—The children of
migrant agricultural workers whose movement is within
Arkansas.
5* Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form.—A stand-
ardized student record form adopted on a national basis for
all states that have migrant programs (1).
6 * Science Research Associated Achievement Tests Form
C.—published by the Science Research Associates and used
in Arkansas for the testing of migrant children.
10
7* EIeir.eHilary arid Secondary Education Act of 1965—-
passed by the United States Congress as Public Law 89-3.0,
8• Elementary and Secondary Education Act--Migrant
Amendment, Public Law 89~750—Amendments to the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 that, made funds available
to state departments of education for the development of
programs for the education of the children of migrant agri-
cultural workers (5).
Limitations
The study was limited to the migrant school children
in 151 schools of the forty-five participating school dis-
tricts in the State of Arkansas and the programs for migrant
children in the districts. A part of the study involved the
Uniform, Migrant Student Transfer Forms and was limited to the
migrant children who moved during the school year and whose
schools completed and sent the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Form to the state department of education.
Basic Assumptions
It was assumed that the migrant children enrolled by
the 151 schools in the forty—five school districts were
representatively similar to migrant children as defined in
the definition of terms. It was further assumed that the
schools followed the stated definition of a migrant child,
used proper testing procedures for administering the Science
Research Associates Achievement Tests, and utilized the
Users Manual in completing the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Form.
Sources of Data
The data for the study were compiled from three primary
sources. A questionnaire was constructed and sent to the
principals of 151 schools participating in the migrant
program. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form was
filled out on each migrant child that moved out of a school
district. The form was sent to the Arkansas Department of
Education. The Science Research Associates Achievement
Tests were given to all migrant children in the schools that
had migrant education programs in Arkansas.
Procedures for Collecting and Analyzing
the Data
The data were collected from three different sources.
A questionnaire was constructed, submitted to a panel of
migrant specialists, revised and sent in December, 1969, to
the principals of all schools in Arkansas having migrant
programs. One hundred twenty—two questionnaires were returned
12
and analyzed for the number.-and- per: cent of response for each
category and item on the questionnaire. The responses were
checked for number and per cent for each of the geographic
areas and for the level of the school—elementary, junior
high, and senior high.
To obtain further information on migrant children in
Arkansas, 500 Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms were
analyzed. These forms were sent by school districts to the
Arkansas State Department of Education, Federal Division,
during the 1969-1970 school year. These forms provided
personal data, number of days present, academic ability,
and special interests of the child. The forms were made
available by the Ax*kansas State Department of Education as
they v/ere received from the schools.
The children in the migrant programs in Arkansas were
given the Science Research Associates Achievement Tests the
third week of October, 1969. Each migrant child in the 500
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms was tested and
Science Research Achievement Test scores were obtained.
Test scores were available for 151 of the 500. The Science
Research Associates scores were analyzed by subject area.
The grade level differential was obtained by finding the
difrerence between the actual grade placement of the child
and the grade equivalent score on the Science Research
Associates Achievement Test scores. The data were analyzed
to find the number and per cent of interstate and intrastate
migrant children. Also, the number and per cent for male and
female, by grades and by subject, were obtained.
14
CHAPTER BIBL IOGEAPHY
1. Haney, George E., h School Transfer Record System for Fa I'm Migrant Children, Washington, Office of Education, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1965, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 032.
2. Miller, Winford, Annua1 Evaluation for the Education of Migrant Children: Arkansas, 1968, Little Rock, State Department of Education, Division of Federal Programs, 1968.
3 • _________ , Love and Understanding of the Migrant Child; Speeches Delivered at the Migrant In-Service Training Workshop, June 2-5, 1969, Arkansas State University, Little Rock, State Department of Education, Division of Federal Programs, 1969.
4. Murphy, Sara, "First Come Love and Understanding," Southern Education Reporting Service, Nashville, Tennessee, March, 1963, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 042.
5. United States Senate, Report of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1969.
CHAPTER II
BACKGROUND, SIGNIFICANCE AND RELATED STUDIES
The migrant children studied were disadvantaged child-
ren with special needs, problems, and deficiencies. They
lacked status and stability. Many of the general problems
of other disadvantaged children were apparent, and the
multiplexing factor of mobility. A public health survey
paper summarized the problems by stating, "As a result,
children of migrants enter school later, attend fewer days,
show greatest retardation, achieve the least progress, drop
out of school earliest, and consitute the largest single
reservoir of illiterates (18, p. 211)." The attention the
disadvantaged child had been receiving failed to include the
peculiar needs of the migrant mobile child of agricultural
workers.
The problems of the migrants have not gone entirely
unnoticed, for in the late thirties the Farm Security
Administration established a series of labor camps for
migrants (14, p. 106). Presidents from Franklin D. Roose-
velt to Dw.ight D. Eisenhower have sought to find solutions
16
to migrant- problems. Presidential commissions have searched
for accurate information en migrants. Attempts were begun
to discover migrant travel patterns, the reasons for migra-
tion, the amount of income received, and the educational
levels of migrant children (14, p. 107).
However, when the Office of Education made a survey in
1963 (9, p. 1), the state departments of education of thirty-
eight states did not return the questionnaire. Through
other contacts, the survey revealed that only seven states
were making special efforts to enroll migrant children,
although twenty-two states allowed migrant children to
enroll. "In no state were more than 150 students involved,"
concluded the report (12, p. 3).
At the same time that initial studies and inquiries-
were being conducted, journalists and novelists were sub-
jecting the conscience of the era of plenty to Truman E.
Moore's The Slaves We Rent (10), Louisa R. Shotwell's The
Harvesters (14), and Dale Wright's They Harvest Despair (23),
Books by educators such as Elizabeth Sutton's Knowing and
Teaching the Migrant Child (16), and Shirley Greene's The
Education or_ the Migrant Child (5) pointed out the education
deprivation of the mobile children and the need for special
approaches to their education. George Haney, for the United
17
States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, surveyed
the literature and summarized the programs in various states
for educating migrant children (7). Senator Harriston
Williams of New Jersey pushed for legislation to aid the
migrant family and the education of migrant children (10).
If the states and national government had neglected to
solve the unique problems of the migrant children, a host
of private agencies and religious groups had been aware of
the problems. The Migrant Ministry of the National Council
of the Churches of Christ, the Bishops Committee for Migrant
Workers, and the United States Catholic Conference, Division
for the Spanish Speaking, were three agencies that worked
with migrants and published information that voiced the
plight of the workers and their families (19).
New York, New Jersey, California, Texas, Florida, and
other states with a high concentration of migrants improved
their programs for the education of the children of migrant
workers. In 1963, a survey by R. p. Ward for the Texas
State Board of Education reported that 48,775 migrant chil-
dren were enrolled in Texas Public Schools (17, p.6). Ward's
survey was the beginning of a full-scale program to attempt
to solve the problems of the education of migrant children
The impetus peaked et the national level in 1966 with
the passage of a Migrant Amendment to the Title _I of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 19 65 (21, 22).
Mike Zotti, teacher, former migrant child, and director
of the Springdale, Arkansas, summer program for migrant
children stated:
Our main purpose is to furnish the successful atmosphere for these students that eludes them during regular school. We furnish food service, medical service, educational service, but even more important we furnish love and understanding (11, p. 1).
Sara Murphy, writing for the Southern Education Reporting
Service paraphrased Zotti's statement to say, "First Come
Love and Understanding" (11, p. 1).
From the Springdale beginning, the Arkansas migrant
program has grown to 2,658 in 1967-1968, and an estimated
7,000 in 1968-1969. Forty-five school districts had pro-
grams for the 1969-1970 school year, involving 151 individual
schools (8, p. 1).
A public health survey paper for 1960 set the number
of migrant children under age eighteen as between 320,000
and 500,000 (18). The United States Department of Agri-
culture in 1954 decided the number of migrant children was
approximately 175,000 to 225,000 (18). In 1962 a United
1 Q
States Senate Subcommittee placol the nu-r-ber at 150,000,
then in .1969 adjusted the number to between 150,000 and
250,000 (2, 22).
The United States Office of Education estimated that
228,000 migrant children were served by migrant education
programs during fiscal year 1968, with many additional .
migrants estimated for fiscal 1969. These were under Tit1e
I_ alone (22, p. 66).
Related Studies
In the government reports there was no agreement as to
the exact number of migrant children, but general agreement
existed as to the fact of their educational retardation.
Senate Report No. 71, 1967, stated, "Over 30 per cent of all
migrant children have less than eight years of education and
40 per cent have less than eleven years. The median educa-
tional attainment of all farm workers is 9.9 years as
compared to 12.2 for workers in other occupations (21, p. 19)."
In the 1969 Senate report. Senator Williams stated that "The
migrant and his family had attained an average grade level
of 8.6 years and over 17 par cent are functionally illiterate
(2 t p« vii). Joe Frost reported that the average degree
of retardation for migrants was about three years, with a
ranqe of one year for six- and seven-year-olds to five years
for sixteen*-year-o la migrants (4, p« 131). However, Frost
inferred that even though ability testing scores indicated
subnorma1ity in intelligence for migrant children, he stated
that "Despite test results most migrant children were
bright, capable, and willing to learn. This conviction was
supported over and over again in the classroom (4, p. 132)."
George Haney pointed up the relationship of attendance
and educational retardation, stating that "Many studies and
state reports have shown that the high rate of retardation
among migrant children is highly correlated with school
attendance (7, p. 18)." He also stated that "The biggest
factor in attendance is that migrant children are educa-
tionally retarded and are sixteen years of age or older
before they complete the sixth, seventh or eighth grade. So
they drop out (7, p. 31)."
Ken Cook, in a study of dropouts in Arkansas, found a
significant relationship between curricialum course units
and the dropout rate (3). Cook's studies found that home
visits were successful in working with migrant children (3).
Haney also noted that "Most migrant children are far below
their- grade level and their school achievement is usually
under fourth grade (7, p. 1)."
21
The National Committee on the Education of Migrant
Children reported that the grade achievement of migrant
children was two to three grade levels below their grade
placement; and that the difference increases as the grade
level rises (13, p. 3). A United States Health, Education
and Welfare report for the 1966-1967 school year showed
kindergarten through second grade as 1.0 grade behind in
reading and arithmetic, three through four as 1.5 grades
behind, and by grade nine the difference was 5.6 in arith-
metic and 6.0 in reading (20, p. 99). The United States
Department of Labor released information showing that 66
per cent of migrant children under sixteen were below their
grade level for 1967. Seventy-two per cent were below for
1568 (21, 22).
A Colorado report in its evaluation of migrant children
found 67 per cent were educationally retarded (7, p. 2). A
study conducted in California found that the range of grade
level below achievement was .4 to 1.4 years in a comparison
study of 100 migrant children (1, p. 7). An Iowa study
reported a difference of only .83 grade levels behind for 260
migrant children tested (15, p. 5). An Arkansas migrant
study of the reading ability of migrant pupils found a range
of 13 per cent below grade level in grade one, and 19 per
cent below grade level in grade six (8, p. 17).
22
Significance
The success- of -the Migrant Amendment -to th-3. Elementary
and Secondary Education Act, as reflected by the number of
state programs and the number of migrants being served,
seemed to indicate a very rosy picture for the future.
However, the Senate Report, 1969, summary of the migrant
program struck a strong note of warning:
Nevertheless, some nagging problems remained unsolved during the year, giving rise to the belief that the overall progress of migrant education in America increased only slightly in 1968. Questions of basic educational philosophy remain unanswered, and large numbers of migrant children continue to be untouched by educators and unnoticed by the formal educational process (22, p. 66).
And further:
What is less clear is the degree of qualitative improvement in migrant education, and in the migrant child's preparation for life beyond the agriculture field and the migrant worker camp (22, p. 67).
The report also showed the reflection of this warning in the mention of disagreements among migrant educators as to the, " . . . quality and direction of migrant education
(22, p. 68)."
Disagreements were expressed at national migrant
conferences held in Austin, Texas, and Denver, Colorado.
At the Denver conference the report stated, "Every group
reported dissension and disagreement on (1) the basic
23
purposes for records transfer, (2) the underlying philosophy
of migrant education., and (3) the relevance of specific
items in the proposed student record (22, p. 68),"
The disagreement did not cause the failure of the
records transfer idea. Instead, the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Form was adopted for the 1969-1970 school year.
The following were stated as an overall summary of the
records problem;
(a) Teachers need information concerning many aspects of student status.
("b) The most desirable such information is objective information calling for as little intuitive judgment as possible.
(c) Over-reliance on intuitively generated information can potentially be as harmful as helpful.
(d) Measurement instruments are not avail-able to generate objective data concerning migrant students.
(e) In the absence of objective data, teachers must make many intuitive judgments concerning migrant student needs.
(f) It is extremely difficult and of question-able value to pass along a bread array of unstructured intuitive judgments from school to school (22, p. 70).
The preceeding studies described the national and state
concern for the mutual problems of educational retardation
among migrant children and the steps taken to find solutions.
24
The public schools in Arkansas needed to know more about the
migrant children they servedi The purposes of the study
were to help schools understand better the Arkansas migrants,
to lead to further research, and to much closer analyses of
individual problems that faced teachers of migrant children.
The national interest in the migrant child has continued.
In 1970, a book by Robert Coles, Uprooted Children, in vivid
prose highlighted the problems of the migrant child (9).
Chet Huntley, national television commentator, chose as his
final special to end his career and begin retirement, a
critical look at the condition of the migrant. Ten years
previously, Edward R. Murrow had presented a television
special on the same subject.
Coles began his book with the following statement:
For nine months the infant grows and grows in thw womb, in a way grows rather ironically; the quarters are limited; at the end an x-ray shows tne small but developed body quite bent over on itself and cramped; yet so very much has happened— j.ndeea, a whole new life has come into being. For some hundreds of thousands of American children i_hat stietcn of time, those months, represent the longest rest ever to be had, the longest stay in any one place. From birth on moves and more moves take place, quick trips and drawn-out journeys. From birth on for such children, it is travel and all that goes with travel—that is, forced travel, undertaken, by migrant farm workers, who roam the American lana in search of crops to harvest and enough dollars to stay alive, if not to prosper,
or as I have often heard it modestly put, "to live half-right."
How, in fact do such children live, the boys and girls who are born to migrant farmers? What do they gradually and eventually learn; and what do they have to teach us. . . (2, p. 3).
Two important questions for the study were: What do
migrant children learn; and, what do educators and teachers
need to know to teach migrant children?
26
CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. California State Department of Education, California Plan for the Education of Migrant Children: An Evaluation Report, July 1_, 1967—June 30, 1968, Sacramento, California State Department of Education, 1968.
2. Coles, Robert, Uprooted Children; The Early Life of Migrant. Farm Workers, Pittsburgh, University of Pitts-burgh Press, 1970.
3. Cook, Ken, "The Relationship Between Certain School practices and Dropout Rates of the High Schools of Arkansas," unpublished doctor's thesis, Department of Education, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, 1963.
4. Frost, Joe L., "School and the Migrant Child," Child-hood Education; Journal of the Association for Childhood Education Internationa1, XLI (November, 1964), 129-132.
5. Greene, Shirley E., The Education of Migrant Children, Washington, National Education Association, Department of Rural Education, 1954.
6. Haney, George E., A School Transfer Record System for Farm Migrant Children, Washington, Office of Education, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1965, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 032.
7 • , "Problems and Trends in Migrant Education," School Life, LVI (July, 1963), 5-9.
8. Miller, Winford, Annual Evaluation for the Education of Migrant Children; Arkansas, 1968, Little Rock, Arkansas State Department of Education, Division of Federal Programs, 1968.
9. Miller, Winford, Love and- Understanding of the Migrant. Child; Speeches Delivered at the Migrant In-Service Training Workshop, Arkansas State University, Jones-boro, June 2-5, 1969, Little Rock, Arkansas State Department of Education, Federal Divisions, 1969.
10. Moore, Truman E., The Slaves We Rent, New York, Random House, 1965.
11. Murphy, Sara, "First Come Love and Understanding," Southern Education Reporting Service, Nashville, Tennessee, March, 1968, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 042.
12. National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, The School and the Migrant Child; A Survey Interpreted, New York, The National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, 1963. *.
13. National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, "Who Is The Migrant Child?" Fact Sheet Number Two, New York, The National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, 1958.
14. Shotwell, Louisa R., The Harvesters; The Story of Migrant People, Nev; York, Doubleday and Company, 1961.
15. Standage, Mrs. Richard E., Director, Migrant Action Program: Annual Report, 1968, Mason City, Iowa, Iowa State Department of Education, 1968.
16. Sutton, Elizabeth, Knowing and Teaching the Migrant Child, Washington, D.C., National Education Association, Department of Rural Education, 1960, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 001 100.
17. Texas Education Agency, Texas Child Migrant Program, Austin, Texas Education Agency, 1969.
18. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Children and Youth of Domestic Agricultural Migrant Families; A Survey Paper, Public Health Service, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1960.
19. United States Deportment of Health, Education,- and Welfare, Education of Children of Agricultural Migrants % Annotated Bibliography, 1954-1962, Washington,. Govern-ment Printing Office, 1962.
20. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Title jL, Year II: The Second Annual Report of Title JE of the El em en tar V and Secondary Education Act, of 1965, School Year 1966-67, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1967.
21. United States Senate, Report of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1967.
22. United States Senate, Report of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington, Government printing Office, 1969.
23. Wright, Dale, They Harvest Despair: The Migrant Farm Workers, Boston, Deacon Press, 1965.
CHAPTER III
METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR TREATING THE DATA
Three major sources of data were available for the
study. In the 1969-1970 school year, two sources of data
became available for study for the first time. One was the
Science Research Associates Achievement Tests adopted by
all schools having migrant programs in the state of Arkansas,
The tests were given the third week of October, 1969. The
second source was the Uniform Migrant Scudent Transfer Form.
The form was a standard form used for the first time on a
nation-wide basis in the 19 69-1970 school year. The third
source of data was a questionnaire constructed and sent to
the principals of each of the schools in Arkansas that had
migrant programs. Each source made available information
previously lacking and needed. The specific procedure for
obtaining the data follows.
The Questionnaire
A questionnaire was constructed based on a study of
migrant programs xn other states, a review of the literature
•0
on migrant education, atid the questions posed "by specialists
and participants in a migrant in-service workshop. The
workshop was held June 2-6, 1969, at Arkansas State Univer-
sity, Jonesboro, Arkansas (2).
The questionnaire was a check-list type with twelve
categories. These categories were: I General Questions,
II Arrival of Migrant Families, III Orientation to the
Schoolt IV Grade placement, V Placement in Reading, VI
Curriculum, VII Special Personnel, VIII Special Calendar
Adjustments, IX Attendance, X Secondary-Vocational,
XI Self-Concept, and XII Health.
To check for validity of the responses to the question-
naire, the first two questionnaires from the same school
district were compared for correlation of response. Twenty-
nine pairs were checked and the correlation of .77 was
obtained. The check for validity indicated that most of
the questionnaires were filled out by the principals
independently. However, five pairs or 17 per cent were
filled out in identical fashion. The .77 indicated that
the response per school principals within the same system
was fairly similar.
To ascertain the reliability of the questionnaire, a
copy and a judge's analysis form was sent to five
specialists in migrant education. Upon receiving the judge's
analysis forms the questionnaire was revised, refined, and
completed, *fc>st items were accepted by the judges as
providing important and useful data. Several minor changes
were made and were added.
The submission of the questionnaire to the judges was
for the purpose of assuring that the questionnaire would
provide important and useful data. The judges were asked to
rate each category and each item within each category. The
judges used the following criteria:
"A" If the category or item is essential and should
provide useful data.
"B" If the category or item is NOT essential but may
provide data.
"C" If the category or item should be eliminated.
"D" If the item should be altered.
Items receiving a "C" rating from three of the five
judges were eliminated. Any items rated "D" and altered
by a judge were reviewed. No category or item received
three "C" ratings. However, the items or categories rated
"B," "C," or "D" by even one judge were re-evaluated in lieu
of the suggestions by the judges. Changes were determined
by a restudy of the literature and the nature of the judge's
comment. An attempt was made to satisfy each of the comments
made by the judges. r
Changes made included the writing of separate direc-
tions for Category I, General Questions, giving the principals
three choices for each item in the category. The directions
were stated as follows:
Check "M" If the program is specifically in operation
due to the presence of migrant children and funds made
available for migrant children.
Check "C" If the program is a coordinated program for
educationally deprived children and children of low income
families, and includes some migrant children.
Check "No" If programs exist only in regular school
programs that would exist if no migrant children were in
school.
Tables III and IV in Chapter IV provide the reaction of
the principals to Category I.
Among other changes, Item 6.8 was eliminated from
Category VI, Curriculum, and placed in Category XII, Health.
The words "within a single class," were added to item 6.10
of Category VI. "Prom Federal funds," was added to item
6.14 of Category VI. The directions for Category IX,
Attendance, were changed from "check as many," to "check
33
those you believe to be most, responsible." Directions for
Category IV, Grade Placement, were changed to "choose the
three methods of grade placement, that are used roost often
by your school."
At the suggestion of the dissertation committee and
the judges for the questionnaire, the categories of Self-
Concept and Health were added to the questionnaire.
The following table presents the response of the panel
of judges. The items included are those that did not
receive five "A" ratings by the judges. See Appendix C
for the cover pages and sample pages from the form used by
the panel of judges.
'The revised questionnaires were sent to principals in
December, 1963. A letter was mailed on December 8, 1969,
requesting the superintendents to encourage the principals
to complete and return the questionnaires. A copy of a
letter from Louie Counts, the Director of Special Programs
in Arkansas, was enclosed. The mailout to principals included
a questionnaire, cover letter requesting the principal's
cooperation in the study, and a letter from Louie Counts
requesting the principal's cooperation on behalf of the
Arkansas State Department of Education. A Christmas card
reminder was sent in late December prior to the holiday
TABLE I
CATEGORIES AND ITEMS THAT RECEIVED LESS THAN FIVE "A" 'RATINGS FROM THE JUDGES ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE*
34
RATINGS** CATEGORY ITEMS
A B C D
II 4 1 0 0 2.1 3 2 0 0 2.2 3 2 0 0 2.3 3 2 0 0 2,4 4 1 0 0 2.5 4 1 0 0 2.6 4 1 0 0
III 3.3 4 0 1 0 3.4 4 0 1 0 3.7 4 0 1 0 3.8 4 0 , 1 0
IV 4.2 4 0 1 0 VI 6.1 4 1 0 0
6.2 4 1 0 0 6.8 3 0 0 2 6.9 4 0 0 1 6.10 4 0 0 1 6.13 4 0 0 ^1
VII 7.2 4 0 0 1 VIII 4 1 0 0
8.1 4 1 0 0 8.2 4 1 0 0 3.3 4 1 0 0 — 1 8.8 4 1 0 0
*A copy of the questionnaire is included * *AiI other categories and items received
in Appendix A. five "A" ratings,
35
vacation., Cn January 1, 1970, a second letter was sent to
principals who had not returned the questionnaire. A post-
card was enclosed that allowed the principal to request
another copy of the questionnaire? to state that he would
soon return the questionnaire; or to request a copy of the
results of the study. A second copy of the results of the
questionnaire and a final request letter was sent on
January 31, 1970.
A total of 151 questionnaires were sent to principals
in forty-five school districts having migrant programs. Of
the 151 questionnaires sent, 122 were returned for a total
of 81 per cent. The questionnaires were tabulated and the
frequency of response found for each item of the twelve
categories. A second tabulation was made to discover the
frequency of response among elementary, junior high and
senior high schools. A third tabulation was performed to
discover the frequency of response for ,each of the four
geographic areas. (See Appendix E for geographic distri-
bution map.) These three separate tabulations served to
check the accuracy of the results. For each item in each
category, the per cent of the response was determined
using 122 as the total number.
w
Ac'hievernent Test ing
A decision was made at the national level that required
each state to choose an. achievement testing program and
begin keeping standard records on the educational achieve-
ment level of migrant children. The Science Research
Associates Achievement Test, Form C, was adopted by schools
in Arkansas. The tests were given the third week of
October, 1969. Most of the schools tested in October, but
some schools tested in November•and December. All migrant
children included in the study had been tested by December
31, 1969. To adjust for the differences between the test
dates,the grade equivalent was used with 6-2 for a sixth
grade student tested in October, and 6-4 for a sixth qxade
student tested in December.
The Science Research Associates Achievement Tests pro-
vided information for Science, Social Studies, Language
Arts, Arithmetic, Reading, and a Composite Score. The
information was obtained from the Science Research Associates
printouts of test results sent to the Arkansas State Depart-
ment of Education. The data used were the Science Research
Associates grade equivalents obtained for 151 migrant
children, grades 1-12. The grade equivalents were obtained
for the subject and the grade on 151 migrant children. The
37
sample included eighty-five males and sixty-six females.
The migrant children whose achievement scores were
?
recorded were those for whom Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Forms had been received by the Arkansas State Department of
Education. Five hundred of the forms were received by the
department during the period of the study, September, 1969,
to April, 1970. However, very few forms were available
until January of 19 70, and each month thereafter the number
increased until the spring months when large numbers of
forms were being received. One hundred fifty-one,or 30
per cent of the 500 migrant children had been tested and
test scores reported by Science Research Associates to the
Arkansas State Department of Education, Federal Programs
Division, by April 15, 1970.
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Records
The development of the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Form was the outgrowth of years of frustration and wishing
on the part of teachers, administrators, counselors, and
others working to solve the educational problems of the
children of migrant workers. The mobility of migrant
children, the erratic admission, and withdrawal habits and
the lack of any school records had posed perennial problems.
38
The information desired ineluded ability, achievement,
health, emotional and family data. 'Hie information had
immediate utility if the school was to adequately serve the
child's needs, as the length of the migrant's stay at a
particular school was often very short. The most immediate
items a principal wanted when the migrant child enrolled
included age, grade placement, reading ability, and.the
name and location of the previous school. Often the prin-
cipal had been unable to secure any of these. To test and
determine the proper placement was time consuming and
costly. To delay proper placement was harmful to the pupil.
Thus, the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form was adopted
to attempt to secure records cjuic"kly and uniformily, allowing
schools to better serve the migrant child,
Th® Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form used was a
revised version of a form used in California for obtaining
transfer records for migrant children. The form was
developed by a records transfer standing committee, presented
before a national conference of State Directors of Migrant
Education, and the United States Office of Education and
modified to reflect the observations of the conference (1).
The form was adopted for use in all states having a
liugrant program in the 1969-19 70 school year. The form was
39
introduced and explained to v.eacherS T administrators ancx
migrant personnel at migrant in-service workshops and at
local meetings of migrant program personnel. A Users Manual
to instruct, migrant personnel in the details of filling out
the form was sent to all schools in the program (1,3).
A National Migrant Data Bank was established and
located at Little Rock, Arkansas. The National Migrant
Data Bank began its organizational operation during the
1969-1970 school year (1).
The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form was designed
tc provide information through four moves. There were
spaces for four schools and each item allowed for four
separate boxes to be checked by the individual school. The
form was published with four copies, one copy to be retained
by the school from which the migrant withdraws. The lower
portion of the form containing the four categories of
achievement and interest information was made an optional
part and may be detached.
Each student record form, when completely filled in,
contained a total of 1,435 characters indicating attendance
and evaluation at four different schools. An individual
school needed only to fill out 360 characters.
40
TTie form provided four specific categories of infor-
mation. These were: Academic Characteristics—Reading?
Academic Characteristics--Oral; Academic Character!sties—
Subjects; and Special Interests and Abilities. The teacher
or other migrant personnel checked the appropriate box by
each itera for the four categories. Other information
included health records, achievement and ability testing, .
and personal data. For the study the name of the migrant,
the school, sex, birthdate, days enrolled and all items
checked in each of the four categories of information were
recorded.
The forms recorded were those sent ot the Arkansas
State Department of Education by April 15, 1970. The forms
were completed by the individual school for all migrant
children as they were recognized by the school according to
the definition of migrant children. The initial group
enrolled on the forms were those children identified the
previous year and for whom the 1969-1970 migrant program was
planned. The forms became available for the study only when
the migrant child moved. Mo forms were sent to the state
department of education until the family moved and the child
withdrew from the school. The form was then sent to Special
Programs Division of the Arkansas State Department of
41
Education, Open receipt of the forms, the migrant, personnel
filed the forro until requested by another school. This
required that the data be secured from the form in the time
between receipt and request. Thus, it was necessary to com-
pile the data weekly until April 15, When the data from 500
forms had been completed.
The migrant students whose forms were recorded were then
checked to obtain Science Research Associates Achievement
Test scores. Only 151 of the 500 had been tested, scored,
and sent to the Arkansas State Department of Education. The
sample was based on the achievement scores of these 151
migrant students.
The questionnaire, Science Research Associates Achieve-
ment Tests, and the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form
provided adequate data for the study. The response of the
principals to the questionnaire and the co-operation of the
personnel of the Arkansas State Department of Education,
Special Programs, Migrant Division, made the study possible.
42
CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY
1o Haney, George E., A School Transfer Record System for Farm Migrant Children, Washington, Office of Education, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1965, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 032.
2. Miller, Winford, Annual Evaluation for the Education of Migrant Children: Arkansas, 1968, Little Rock, State Department of Education, Division of Federal Programs, 1968.
3• Users Manual for the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Record and Its Associated Record Transfer System, Sac-ramento, California, State Department of Education, 1968.
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
Questionnaire
The principals of schools in Arkansas returned 122 out
of 131 questionnaires for a return of 81 per cent. (See
Table II.)
TABLE II
THE RESULTS OF A QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO PRINCIPALS OF SCHOOLS IN ARKANSAS
HAVING MIGRANT PROGRAMS*
1 i 1 _
School Level
Geographic Area
* . r - I a +> u
.u
t n -H
& t n • r | a
£ •r ' £
0) 6 CD i—i m
M 0
- H £
b
^4 0
- H a <D in
I II H I IV
Number of Returns 122 69 14 39 20 18 75 9
per cent of Returns oi ! O X I
I
' 57 12 31 16 15 62 7
**Differences in total per cent are due to rounding.
43
The geographic comparison (See Appendix .Lor -Loc*C\tj.oO-
of geographic areas) indicated an adequate per cent represen-
tation for each area. The migrant program was divided into
six geographic areas by the state department of education.
For the study, areas four, five and six were combined into
one area and designated as area four. Hie returns were
analyzed to find the four geographic areas and the school
levels-—elementary, junior high and senior high. Table II
shows the number and per cent for each area and school level.
An analysis of the categories and items follows.
Category I; Gen era 1Ques t ions ,
The following directions were given for Category I,
General Questions:
Check ( M ) If the program is specifically in oper-
ation due to the presence of migrant children and funds
made available for migrant children®
Check ( C ) If the program is a coordinated or
combined program for educationally deprived children and
children of low income families, and includes some migrant
children.
Check ( No ) If programs exist only in regular
school programs that would exist if no migrant children
were in school.
"X'^>
Twenty-five per cent of the principals checked iteiRS
"M" that stated a program was specifically in operation
owing to the presence of migrant children and funds made
available for migrant children. Forty-one per cent checked
items "C" that a migrant program was combined or coordinated
with programs in operation for educationally deprived
childred and children of low income families. The "M" and
"C" choices totaled-66 per cent. The remaining 34 per cent
answered that no programs existed for the items checked
other than the regular school programs. Table III gives
the per cent that each of the seven items received. The
seven items are listed in rank order for migrant, coordinated,
and "no." The last column in Table III is the per cent of
the migrant column plus the coordinated column.
Table IV furnishes an analysis of the per cent of the
response for each item in Category I, General Questions,
for each of the three designations, migrant, coordinated
and "no„" Also, the individual items are identified.
The migrant and coordinated programs when summed and
.ranked, disclosed that health needs were checked by 73 per
cent of the principals. Flanned instructional programs
were subscribed to by 66 per cent, while the third highest
was special interests and abilities, 64 per cent.
46
TABLE III
RESPONSES TO ITEMS, CATEGORY I GENERAL QUESTIONS BY RANK ORDER' •A' it
Rank
Migrant. Coordinated No Migrant and Coordinated
Item Per cent*
Item Per cent*
Item Per cent*
Item Per cent*
1 1.6 26 1.5 51 1.6 50 1.5 73
2 1.1 25 1.4 46 1.7 43 1.1 66
3 1*5 22 1.3 46 1.3 42 1.2 64
4 1.2 19 1.2 45 1.4' 41 1.4 59
s;< 1.7 16 1.7 41 1.2 36 1.3 58
6 1.4 13 1.1 41 1.1 34 1.7 57
•7 f 1.3 12 1.6 24 1.5 27 1.6 50
the number of questionnaires returned. **To identify items, see Table IV.
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO EACH ITEM IN CATEGORY I, GENERAL QUESTIONS.
47
Items in Questionnaire
r~ ~ —
I Mig-rant
1 i
Coordi-nated
No Program
1.1 There is a planned instruc-tional program in operation that leads to discovering and meeting the needs of miqrant youth»
25 41 35
1.2 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the special interests and abilities of migrant youth.
19 45 36
1.3 There is a planned program in operation that provides for cultural enrichment of the lives of migrant youth.
12 46 42
1.4 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the healthy self-concept development of migrant youth.
13 46 41
1.5 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the health needs of mig-rant youth.
22 51 27
1.6 There is a planned program in operation for the in-service training of teachers who teach miqrant children.
26 24 50
1.7 There is operated during the summer months a program chat provides for the needs of migrant youth.
16 41 43
48
Self-concept and cultural enrichment received 59 and 58 per
cent, respectively. Fifty per cent, had developed programs
for in-service training. Summer programs were in operation
in 57 per cent of the schools responding to the questionnaire.
An analysis of the questionnaire revealed that of the
principals who marked all seven items the same for this
Category I, fifteen, or 12 per cent, considered their pro-
gram an all migrant program. Twenty-four, or 20 per cent,
deemed their program a combined or coordinated program, and
seventeen, or 14 per cent, stated that no program existed
that was separate from the regular programs.
Category II; Arrival of Migrant Families
The response of the principals to the items of Category
II indicated that 58 per cent informed the migrant family of
programs available for migrant families and their children
only as they enrolled, at the school. Fifteen per cent had
a committee to welcome migrant families, but 56 per cent
stated that neither the school nor community had any planned
program for the arrival of migrant families. The response
to item 2.5 specified that 40 per cent of the schools had
in their area a representative of the Arkansas Employment
and Security Division. The representative was not con-
nected with the schools in any direct way, although he was
49
TABLE V
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY II THE ARRIVAL OF MIGRANT FAMILIES
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
School Level
Geographic Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
Elementary
junior High
Senior High
I II III IV
2.1 A committee func-tions to welcome migrant families.
15 7 2 5 2 4 8 1
2.2 Signs are posted to welcome migrants and indicate services.
2 2 0 1 0 1 0 2
2.3 The community has a welcome wagon to greet migrants.
11 5 3 3 7 2 2 0
2.4 Migrant parents are informed when children are enrolled.
58 30 10 18 10 15 29 5
2.5 The Employment and Security Division provides help.
43 21 8 14 8 14 20 2
2.6 Neither the school nor the community greets migrants«,
56 33 6 17 6 7 39 4
*Differences in total per cents are due to rounding,
50
able to give important information to the migrant families
concerning schools and other community services. Table V
gives the response to Category II for the grade level and
geographic! area.
Category III: Orientation to School
Sixty-two per cent of the schools replied that they
had no different plan for orienting the migrant child to the
class than for any other student. Sixty-one per cent of the
schools specified that the orientation of the migrant child
was left to the classroom teacher. Only 30 per cent admitted
the existence of a planned program for orientation for
migrant children. Table VI provides the response for
Category III.
Category IV; Grade Placement
The directions for Category IV were different', as each
principal was asked to check the three methods of grade
placement that were most often used by the school. The
grade placement of migrant children was determined most
often by school records, test results, and the appraisal
of teachers. The two next highest items were age and
reading ability, with physical and social development used
least often. Table VII shows the complete results for
Category IV.
51
TABLE VI
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY III ORIENTATION TO SCHOOL
*
a
School Level
Geographic Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per ce
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per ce
Elementary
!
Junior High
Senior High
I II III IV
3.1 Planned orien-tation 30 16 4 10 6 7 15 4
3.2 Teachers plan orientation
50 26 5 19 9 11 25 7
3.3 Holding classes used
2 1 1 0 0 0 2 0
CO
• Held out until
records come 6 4 0 2 0 1 5 0
3.5 No planned orientation
66 34 9 23 11 9 43 2
3.6 Attempts to identify home
50 26 7 16 9 10 2.9 4
3.7 Planned with-drawal procedure
35 18 5 12 9 10 12 4
3.8 Teachers plan withdrawal
Pi 1 -P"Pr\ /»* vs m 4 J. J. ,
30 15 3 12 12 9 18 2
due to rounding,
52
TABLE VII
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY IV; GRADE PLACEMENT*
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent** School
Level Geographic
Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent**
Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
I II III IV
4.1 Appraisal of Teachers
44 25 5 14 6 7 33 5
4.2 Tests 53 28 6 20 8 13 37 5
4.3 Age 35 20 2 13 5 7 27 3
4.4 Reading Ability 35 21 4 10 10 12 18 3
4.5 Physical Maturity
15 6 4 5 2 4 11 0
4.6 Social Adjustment
6 2 0 3 1 3 3 0
4.7 School Records 77 38 10 30 12 18 53 8
*Principals were asked to check the three used most often.
**Differences in total per cents are due to rounding.
t-
53
Category V: Placement in Reading
The response to Category V specified that most migrant
children were assigned to a regular classroom teacher who
determined reading experiences. Thirty-four per cent said
that the migrant child was evaluated for reading ability,
placed in a regular grade, and his reading experiences
planned by the teacher. The same per cent stated that the
migrant child was placed in remedial classes if evaluation
revealed a need. Thirty-four per cent used programmed
reading materials. The Science Research Associates Reading
Laboratories and the Educational Development Laboratories
were used predominately. A majority of the schools reported
that migrant children were given remedial help in vocabulary,
comprehension skills, and specific word attack skill.
Table VIII presents the complete response for Category V.
Category VI; Curriculum
Ninety-one per cent, the highest per cent any item on
the questionnaire received, stated that the educational
program for migrant children was integrated with the regular
education program. Seventy-two per cent declared that no
classes existed in which only migrant children were placed.
Comments to these items on the questionnaire and opinions
54
TABLE VIII
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY V: PLACEMENT IN READING
Items on Questionna ire*
Total Per cent**
School Level
Geographic Area
Items on Questionna ire*
Total Per cent**
Elementary
Junior High
I
Senior High
I II III IV
5.1 Regular teacher plans reading
52 25 7 19 7 6 34 5
5.2 Evaluated, then placed
34 23 4 7 6 7 19 2
5.3 Non-graded mig-rant class
3 1 2 2 2 0 2 0
5.4 Tested, assigned remedial
34 19 4 11 10 7 15 2
5.5 Use programmed reading
34 18 4 11 4 8 17 4
5.61 Remedial in vocabulary
57 33 7 7 9 11 32 5.
5.62 Remedial in comprehension skills
55 31 7 17 9 10 33 5
5.63 Remedial in word attack skills
51 30 6 15 10 11 29 3
**Differences in total per cents are due to rounding.
55
expressed by the migrant specialists who judged the validity
of the questionnaire disclosed a strong sensitivity to any
indication of segregation of migrant children from the other
children in the school
Home visits by teachers of migrant children were recog-
nized by 37 per cent of the principals as being worthy.
Also, 35 per cent indicated that field trips were encouraged
for migrant children.
The results of the questionnaire revealed that schools
provided special instruction in math, 31 per cent; social
studies, 20 per cent; and science, 18 per cent. Special
opportunities for migrant children were available to a
limited extent with drawing receiving 30 per cent, music,
29 per cent, and painting, 25 per cent.
The schools had developed special curriculum materials
primarily in reading and math. Table IX gives the response
to additional subjects included in the items for Category VI.
The replies to item 6.9 in Table IX suggested that the
Arkansas State Department of Education had not developed
special curricula for the instruction of migrant children.
However, 26 per cent revealed that the state department of
education made possible the multiple adoption of text books
for reading in elementary schools. The practice of
TABLE IX
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY VI: CURRICULUM
56
Items on Questionnaire Total Per cent
6.1 The school administers a set of achievement tests before the child is placed in a class.
16
6.2 The school requires or encourages teachers to plan field trips for migrant children.
3 5
6.3 The school requires or encourages teachers of migrant children to make home visits. 37
6.4 The educational prograr.. for migrant chil-dren is integrated with the regular programs. 91
6.5 There are no classes in which only migrant children are placed. 72
6.6 The school has provided special instruction designed to meet the needs of migrant youth:
6.61 Math 6.62 Science 6.63 Social Studies
31 18 20
6.7 The school has provided special opportuni-ties for migrant children to explore their special interests:
6.71 Drawing 6.72 Painting 6.73 Music 6.74 Drama 6.75 Science 6.76 Athletics 6.77 Other
30 25 29 5 8 11 16
6.8 The school has developed special curricula for the instruction of migrant children in:
6.81 Math 6.82 Science 6.83 Social Studies 6.84 Reading (
24 8 9
44
57
TABLE IX—Continued
Items on Questionnaire Total Per cent
6.9 The state department of education has devel-oped and made available special curricula for the instruction of migrant children in:
6.91 Math 6.92 Science 6.93 Social Studies 6.94 Other
5 4 4 6
6.10 The school has arranged with the state depart-ment of education to use "multiple-adoption" of textbooks so teachers will have texts available on various ability levels within a class.
6.10.1 Elementary Reading Only 6.10.2 Junior High 6.10.3 Senior High
26 11 5
6.11 The school has bilingual classes in some subjects. 2
6.12 The school teaches English as a second language. 2
6.13 The school has special compact courses designed for migrant children. 2
6.14 To aid in the instruction of migrant child-ren the school has added from migrant funds:
6.14.1 Educational Television 6.14.2 16mm Films 6.14.3 35mm Filmstrips 6.14.4 Overhead Projectors 6.14.5 Language Labs 6.14.6 Language Tapes 6.14.7 Headphone Sets 6.14.8 Tape Recorders 6.14.9 Language Master
8 19 28 35 13 24 22 32 8
TABLE IX—Continued
58
Items on Questionnaire Total Per cent
6.15 The school has arranged for small group instruction for migrants.
31
6.16 The school has a program for oral language development. 11
6.17 The school has arranged for individualized instruction for migrant children.
16
6.18 The school adjusts class size so teacher-pupil ratio will be low for classes.
24
6.19 The school's class size is below 20 for migrant children.
30
multiple adoption was less in junior and senior high
schools.
Only 2 per cent of the schools had bilingual classes,
taught English as a second language, or had special compact
courses designed for migrant children.
Item 6.14 provided a breakdown of the expenditure of
migrant funds for instructional aids. A surprising 8 per
cent of the schools had spent funds for educational tele-
vision. "The last five sub-items (See Table IX) of 6.14
are aids geared to language and reading instruction and
listening skills. However, only 11 per cent said they had
a program for oral language development.
59
TABLE X
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY VII; SPECIAL PERSONNEL
* School Geographic -P £ Level Area <D 0
Items on U Questionnaire CD
CU u ro w K
rH +> a 5-1 I II III IV
fO CD 0 0 4-> 6 •H •rl
0 a) C C EH r—} 3
w b CO
7.1 Specially Trained 13 2 3 1 0 5 2 0
Teachers 13 0
7.2 Extra Teachers 8 4 0 ' 4 2 1 6 0
Added 8 0
7.3 Teacher's Aides 11 5 2 4 3 2 5 1
7.4 Tutors Employed 11 7 2 2 2 0 8 1
7.5 Parents of Migrants 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Used 0 0 0
7.6 Guidance and 8 3 2 3 1 2 5 1
Counseling 8
*Differences in total per cents are due to rounding.
60
Thirty-one per cent of the principals checked that their
schools had programs for small group instruction. Twenty-
four per cent of the schools adjusted class size to keep
teacher-migrant children ratio low, with 30 per cent
reporting that classes for migrant children had 20 or less
pupils.
Category VII: Special Personnel
Table X revealed the response of the principals to
Category VII, Special Personnel. The frequency of response
disclosed that few schools were making use of special per-
sonnel to help with the instruction of migrant children.
Only 13 per cent reported that the teachers had any special
training for teaching migrant children. Write-in comments
noted that special training was limited to the one state-wide
program held by the state department of education.
Category VIII; Special Adjustments
The data provided by the questionnaire on special
adjustments found few special calendar changes to accomodate
migrant children and their families. No school stated that
they had a split term. The only item in the category to
receive a sizeable response was that parents were allowed to
take children out of school classes for crop work. A few
61
schools, 7 per cent, start and end the year early to meet
local crop labor demands. Table XI supplies the complete
response to Category VIII.
Category IX; Attendance
Principals explained in Category IX that they considered
the two main causes of poor attendance by migrant children
to be the lack of education in the migrant family, 78 per
cent, and the parent's attitude toward education, 73 per
cent. A close third was the need for the school-aged migrant
child to care for the younger brothers or sisters. Twenty-
five per cent considered the lack of food and clothing to be
a hindrance to attendance. Table XII furnishes the complete
data for Category IX.
Category X: Secondary-Vocationa1
The principals were asked in Category X to state the
vocational subjects older migrant students were encouraged
to take. The results showed that the older migrant pupils
were encouraged primarily to sign for homemaking, agricul-
ture, and industrial arts. The per cent for Table XIII was
obtained by adding the frequency possible for junior and
senior high, a total number of fifty-three. A total of 122
was used on all items in other tables.
62
TABLE XI
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY VIIIs SPECIAL ADJUSTMENTS
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
School Level
Geographic Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
I II III IV
8.1 School year started early
7 2 3 1 0 5 2 0
8.2 School year ended early
4 2 2 1 0 3 1 0
8.3 School has a split term
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8.4 School closed for crop work
1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
8.5 Early morning make-up work
2 1 1 1 0 2 0 0
8.6 After school make-up work
7 3 2 1 0 2 4 0
8.7 Parents take child out of school
17 8 9 0 2 4 11 0
8.8 Holidays are reduced 7 2 5 1 1 5 2 0
*Differences in total per cents are due to rounding
63
TABLE XII
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY IX: ATTENDANCE
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
School Level
Geographic Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
Elementary
Junior High
1,
Senior High
1
I II III IV
9.1 The language barrier 2 2 0 1 . 0 1 2 0
9.2 Lack of education in family
73 40 7 25 16 13 39 6
9.3 Attitude of migrant parents 78 43 10 27 15 14 44 5
9.4 Caring for siblings 57 33 5 19 5 9 39 3
9.5 Need for children's earnings 34 16 4 15 3 10 .20 2
9.6 Lack of acceptance 7 3 1 3 0 4 3 0
9.7 Lack of adequate facilities
2 1 0 2 0 0 2 0
9.8 Lack of food or clothing
25 15 2 7 2 2 21 0
9.9 Lack of school records 4 2 1 2 0 3 1 0
*Differences in total per cents are due to rounding.
64
TABLE XIII
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY X: SE CO NDARY-VO CATIONAL
Items on Questionnaire Number of Schools* Per cent
10.1 Work-Study Programs 7 13
10.2 Agriculture 29 55
10.3 Distributive Education 10 19
10.4 Industrial Arts 15 28
10.5 Home Economics 31 58
and senior high schools reporting for this category.
Category XIs Self-Concept
The response of the principals to the first four items
of Category XI was less than 50 per cent for each item. Only
28 per cent indicated that none of their teachers had an
attitude of impatience with the migrant child or his parents
because of the irregular attendance of the child. Thirty-two
per cent stated that the migrant child had an unhealthy self-
concept. However, 29 per cent of the principals stated that
65
their migrant programs 'had resulted in a better self-concept
on the part of the migrant child. Table XIV gives the ,
complete response to each item.
Principals were asked to check one or more of the items
under 11.5 in Table XIV. Sixty-nine per cent were willing
to choose one or more of the items given. Sixty-nine per
cent suggested that the migrant child should be integrated
with other children, and 59 per cent considered that the
migrant child should be treated as other children. Other
responses were cultural enrichment programs, 36 per cent,
and showing the migrant child special attention, 26 per cent..,.
No principal stated that the self-concept could best be
improved by placing the migrant child in separate classes or
by ignoring the child. Thirty per cent agreed that the self-
concept would be improved by helping the migrant child to
accept his parents' role in the migrant stream. Thirty-six
per cent took the opposite philosophical attitude that self-
concept could be improved by helping the migrant child gain
a vision of leaving the migrant stream.
Category XII: Health
The questionnaire returns reported that the health needs
of the migrant child received major attention. Sixty per cent
checked eye, ear, and dental check-up programs. Sixty-five
66
TABLE XIV
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY XI: SELF-CONCEPT
Items on Questionnaire
-p
<D o
u CD PL,
fO -p 0
School Level
>i • u (0
G 0) S CD •—1 w
• s B
O -H a p b
& •H tn 5 O •H a 0) CO
Geographic Area
IX III IV
11.1 Special in-service programs that helped teachers come to appreciate migrant.
39 22 11 26
11.2 None of the teachers express an attitude of impatience due to absences.
28 16 8 16
11.3 Evidence exists that 50 per cent or more of migrant children do not have a healthy self-concept.
32 16 13 10 14
11.4 Evidence exists to indicate migrant children develop a better self-concept as a result of the school's program.
29 15 4 10 15
TABLE XIV—Continued
67
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
School Level
Geographic Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent*
Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
I II III IV
11.5 The self-concept of the migrant child is best improved or developed by:
11.51 Integration with 69 39 8 21 13 11 39 6 others
11.52 placing in sepa- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rate class
0 0 0 0 0
11.53 Showing special 26 14 3 9 4 6 16 5 attention
11.54 Ignoring 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.55 Treating same as 59 10 30 19 9 15 34 5
others 11.56 Helping child to
accept his parent's 30 18 2 10 2 5 19 3 role as migrant
11.57 A program for 18 10 2 6 3 5 9 1
parents 11.58 Build vision of
leaving the migrant 36 20 2 14 4 9 20 3 life
11.59 Cultural enrich-36 20 12 22
11.59 Cultural enrich-36 20 3 12 3 9 22 2 ment program 12 22
*Differences in total per cents are due to rounding.
68
per cent provided funds for glasses, and 62 per cent had
funds for clothing and shoes. Funds for medicine and dental
work were rated at 42 per cent.
Thirty-five per cent of the schools stated that they
provided for a check-up for speech disorders, and 27 per cent
for dental check-ups. Only 16 per cent gave physical exam-
inations by a medical doctor. Three per cent supplied
medical and accident insurance for the migrant child.
Table XV presents the complete data for Category XII.
The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form
The study of 500 Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms
provided data on Academic Characteristics—Reading, Academic
Characteristics—Oral, Academic Achievement, and Special
Interests and Abilities. The individual items of each
category checked by the teachers or migrant personnel varied
from approximately 50 per cent on the Academic Achievement
Category to less than 25 per cent on the Special Interests
and Abilities Category. Other information provided included
health items, achievement and ability testing, and personal
data. For the study the name of the migrant, the school,
sex, birthdate, and number of days enrolled were recorded.
69
TABLE XV
THE PER CENT OF RESPONSE TO CATEGORY XII: HEALTH
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent School
Level Geographic
Area
Items on Questionnaire
Total Per cent
Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
I II III IV
12.1 Physical Exam by Doctor
13 5 3 5 1 2 10 1
12.2 Eye, Ear, Teeth Check-up
66 39 9 17 9 12 40 4
12.3 Speech Disorder Check-up
35 18 7 11 8 7 20 1
12.4 Funds for Glasses
65 34 9 22 7 12 42 3
12.5 Dental Checkup by Dentist
27 13 5 9 3 7 16 1
12.6 Funds for Dental Work
42 25 7 10 5 11 25 1
12.7 Funds for Clothing
62 33 10 20 7 12 39 4
12.8 Funds for Medicine
42 22 7 13 4 8 28 2
12.9 Medical and Acci-dent Insurance
3 1 0 2 0 0 3 0
70
The forms were analyzed to find the number from each
of the four geographical areas of the program developed by
the Arkansas State Department of Education. Table XVI
reports the number and per cent of school districts providing
forms and the number and per cent of forms received. All
four areas were each represented in the 500 forms, with
Area III, the largest program,supplying the greatest number
of forms.
TABLE XVI
THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF UNIFORM MIGRANT STUDENT TRANSFER FORMS AVAILABLE
FROM SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN EACH OF THE GEOGRAPHIC
AREAS
Area Number of School
Districts*
Per cent of School Districts**
Number of Forms
Per cent of Forms
I 3 7 74 15
II 5 11 144 29
III 13 30 263 53
IV 1 2 19 4
*Total number of school districts = 45. **Based on 22, approximately 50 per cent,
71
Achievement scores other than the Sc1ence Research
Associates Achievement scores were listed on eighty-nine
of the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms. No analysis
was made of the scores, as the forms did not specify the
grade level of the migrant student.
Health information was included on forty-one of the
forms, but varied from a partial listing of immunization and
innoculation to non-specific checks by visual or audio
health examination. The information on achievement tests,
ability tests, and health records was too incomplete to make
an analysis. The information from the Science Research
Associates Achievement Tests was limited to the composite
score, form identification, and grade level of the test.
The grade equivalent was listed on some forms.
The number of days enrolled supplied data on the mobility
of the migrant students and is presented in later discussion
and in Table XXV.
Academic Characteristics—Reading
Reading Ability.—The four choices for evaluating reading
ability were: non-reader, below average, average, and skilled.
Two hundred fifty-seven forms included reading data. Only
7 per cent of the 257 were classified as non-readers.
72
Thirty-four per cent were checked as average, while only 3
per cent were designated as skilled readers. Table XVII
presents the results for Reading Ability.
TABLE XVII
READING ABILITY OF MIGRANT PUPILS ON THE UNIFORM MIGRANT STUDENT
TRANSFER FORM
Items for Reading Ability
Number of Forms
Per cent of Forms*
Non-Reader 19 7
Below Average 143 56
Average 88 34
Skilled 7 3
Total 257 100
Specific Comprehension Skills.—Each of the five items
in Specific Comprehension Skills was rated a "weak"
classification at the level of 70 per cent or greater.
Table XVIII gives the findings for Specific Comprehension
Skills. The items to receive the highest per cent as "weak"
were vocabulary knowledge and ability to infer meaning.
These two received 79 and 78 per cent, respectively.
TABLE XVIII
SPECIFIC COMPREHENSION SKILLS OF MIGRANT PUPILS ON THE UNIFORM MIGRANT
STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
73
Items for Specific
Comprehension Skills
Total Number
of Responses
Weak Strong
Items for Specific
Comprehension Skills
Total Number
of Responses
Number of
Responses
Per cent
Number of
Responses
Per cent
Gets Main Idea 235 167 71 68 29
Recalls Details 229 165 72 64 28
Follows Sequence 223 168 75 55 25
Vocabulary-Knowledge 228 179 79 49 21
Ability to Infer 228 178 78 50 22 Meaning
Specific Word Attack Skills.—Each item in Specific
Word Attack Skills was given a 70 per cent or greater
rating as "weak." The highest per cent any item obtained
as "strong" was knows beginning sounds, which received
30 per cent. Table XIX supplies the number and per cent
for each item.
74
TABLE XIX
SPECIFIC WORD ATTACK SKILLS OF MIGRANT PUPILS ON THE UNIFORM MIGRANT
STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
Items for Specific Word Attack Skills
To t a 1 Numb e r
of Responses
Weak Strong
Items for Specific Word Attack Skills
To t a 1 Numb e r
of Responses
Number of
Responses
Per cent
1 Number of
Responses
i i Per cent
Knows Beginning Sounds 224 156 70 68 30
Pays Attention to Syllables 218 168 77 50 23
Uses Context Clues 223 172 77 51 23
Speed of Recognition 224 166 74 58 26
Sound Discrimination 270 215 80 55 20
Academic Characteristics—Oral
The Oral Academic Characteristics information disclosed
that 97 per cent of Arkansas migrant students were English-
speaking. Only 3 per cent were Spanish-speaking. However,
26 per cent of the migrant students had difficulty in the
ability to communicate in English, and 32 per cent were
rated "poor" in understanding directions. Eleven per cent
75
had some speech disorders, and 4 per cent had hearing dis- •
orders. See Table XX for complete ratings on Oral Academic
Characteristics.
Academic Achievement
The category for Academic Achievement allowed three
choices. The pupils were rated difficult, average, or
skilled. The "difficult" rating for the five subjects
ranged from 53 to 42 per cent. Four per cent or less
obtained "skilled" ratings in Academic Achievement. Compo-
sition received a 59 per cent rating and was considered the
most difficult achievement item for migrants. The pupils
were regarded as least skilled in science and social studies;
each rated less than 1 per cent. Table XXI presents the data
for Academic Achievement.
Special Interests and Abilities
Special Interests: Creative.—The number of Uniform
Migrant Student Transfer Forms completed for the category
was small. (The per cents given are for the total number
of individual pupils rated.) Drawing, painting, and music
received higher ratings than those of carving, creative
writing, and drama. Only 3 per cent were rated as having
"strong interest" in drawing. The other items received
76
TABLE XX
ORAL ACADEMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF MIGRANT STUDENTS ON THE UNIFORM MIGRANT
STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
Category Item Number Per cent*
Primary Language
English Spanish Other
234 6 0
97 3 0 Primary
Language
Total 240 100
Ability to Communicate
Difficult Average Skilled
62 161 13
26 68 6
in English Total 236 100
Speech Disorder
Severe Mild None
1 25
209
1 10 90
Total 235 100
Hearing Disorder
Severe Mild None
3 7
207
1 3
96
Total 217 100
Understands Directions
Poor Fair Good
78 119 46
32 50 19
Total 243 100
'Per cent column may not equal 100% due to rounding,
TABLE XXI
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF MIGRANT PUPILS ON THE UNIFORM MIGRANT
STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
77
Category Item Number Per cent*
Difficult 129 53 Average 102 42
Hath Skilled 12 5 Comprehension Comprehension
Total 243 100
Difficult 114 59 Average 74 39
Composition Skilled 4 2
Total 192 100
Difficult 109 57 Average 81 42
Science Skilled 2 1
Total 192 100
Difficult 109 57
Social Studies
Average Skilled
81 2
42 1
Total 192 100
Difficult 139 61
Math Concepts
Average 79 34 Math Concepts Skilled 11 5
Total 229 100
*Per cent column may not equal 100 per cent due to rounding.
78
1 per cent or less as being of. "strong interest" to migrant
students. Table XXII provides the data for each item.
Special Interests: Science.—The data suggested that 78
per cent of the migrant students represented were interested
in math, 54 per cent in natural science, 47 per cent in
social studies, and 10 per cent in industrial arts. Only 5
per cent were regarded as having "strong interest" in math,
with 3 per cent or less having "strong interest" in the
other items. Table XXIII shows the data for each item.
Special Interests: Reading.—The teachers and other
migrant personnel who completed the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Forms considered the migrant students to have almost
no "strong interest" in reading. The Reading-Interest Cate-
gory received a 4 per cent rating for "strong interest" in
mysteries and biographies, and 2 per cent or less on the
other items. Those receiving "some interest" were mysteries
and adventures, 53 per cent; science, 46 per cent; and sports,
40 per cent. Table XXIV exhibits the data for the category.
Mobility
The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms provided
information as to the number of days the migrant student
was enrolled in the individual school system. An analysis
was made of the data to obtain information on the mobility
79
TABLE XXII
SPECIAL INTERESTS AND ABILITIES—CREATIVE CATEGORY FOR MIGRANT PUPILS ON THE
UNIFORM MIGRANT STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
— - —
Item Interest Number* i
Per cent**
Drawing
Some Strong
106 9
82 7
Drawing
Total 115 ! 89 i
Painting
Some Strong
71 5
i 5 5
1 4
Total 76 59
Carving
Some Strong <-
14 0
11 0
Carving Total 14 11
Creative
Some Strong
43 1
33 1
Writing Total 44 34
Music
Some Strong
65 3
50 2
Total 68 52
Drama
Some Strong
25 0
19 0
Total 25 19
*The total number of migrants rated was 129. **Differences in total per cents are due to rounding,
TABLE XXIII
SPECIAL INTERESTS AND ABILITIES—SCIENCE CATEGORY OF PUPILS ON THE UNIFORM MIGRANT STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
SO
Item Interest Number* Per cent
Some 11 10
Industrial Arts
Strong 0 0 Industrial Arts
Total 11 10
Some 7 6
Home Economics
Strong 0 0 Home Economics
Total 7 6
Some 61 54
Natural Science
Strong • 4 4 Natural Science
Total 65 58
Some 54 47
Social Science
Strong 3 3
Total 57 50
Some 89 78
Math Strong 6 5
Total 95 83
*The total number of pupils rated was 114,
TABLE XXIV
SPECIAL INTERESTS AND ABILITIES—READING CATEGORY OF MIGRANT PUPILS ON THE
UNIFORM MIGRANT STUDENT TRANSFER FORM
81
Item Interest Number* Per cent
Mysteries-Adventure
Some Strong
Total
57 4
53 4
Mysteries-Adventure
Some Strong
Total 61 57
Biography
Some Strong
Total
36 5
34 5
Biography
Some Strong
Total 41 39
Non-Fiction
Some Strong
Total
30 2
28 2
Non-Fiction
Some Strong
Total 32 30
Science
Some Strong
Total
49 1
46 1
Science
Some Strong
Total 50 47
Sports
Some Strong
Total
43 1
40 1
Sports
Some Strong
Total 44 41
*The total number of pupils rated was 107
82
of the migrant pupil. Of the 500 forms, 441,or 88 per cent,
had furnished information on the number of days enrolled.
The range was from 1 to 290 with a mean of 63 days. The
median number of days enrolled before moving was 60. Eighty
per cent had moved by the end of 100 teaching days, or
approximately one semester. Table XXV is arranged with a
class interval of 25 days to exhibit data as to the
frequency and per cent of the moves made by the migrant
child.
Achievement Testing
The 500 names of migrant students identified by the
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms were each checked
to obtain standardized achievement scores. The schools in
Arkansas with migrant programs were each to have adminis-
tered the Science Research Associates Achievement Tests.
Form, Cj the third week in October, 1969. The Science
Research Associates company provided the Arkansas State
Department of Education with a copy of all scores. These
printout copies were surveyed to find scores on the migrant
students whose Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms had
been received and which had become a part of the study. The
survey revealed that 151 migrant students had been tested
and scores received. This was only 30 per cent of the
td
2 H-3
V CD V f t 0J H
u (D 3 ft Q> H
D fl> .3 ft 01 H
a o
EJ1
< 0) H-O 0) H §
U> N)
*3
dd
X I
> c Cb H* 0
> c pi p.
0
to bo
I OJ H H O X
R cn p. o m
a 0
TO p. 0 01 H
s
CO to
B o
u> to
•d o p. H-0
(D h f t c CO p. TO
W fl> Dl H
W X cu 3 p. 3 DJ ft H-0 3
0) rt <D
O p. 0>
O iQ 0 3 Cb O <D TO
p. W
(D O
a s (D (D
13 ft
< p. TO C P
s
•o H-
£ (D H p. OJ
a cn o
^ o o t*
a cn
8 00 O
O
8 > #
w a
^ *-3 > \ 2
a cn Q ^ a cn O Q C > O Q
ffi > w to O » w H O
O 0 a O F H H3 t 1
> \ a
NA
ME
cn H9 a M M ••3
0 1 i rn H3 KJ
cn H3 > *-3 W
tsi H
CO
o o t 1
H
o
cn
a M Si H3
It1
> 03 h3
a
w
H
CO
a a tr* w
cn w X
dd pi
f-3
> «-3 M
dd H !*> »-3
O M
O H h3 K
O a a
K!
cn
!> *-3 W
H o
TABLE XXV
AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAYS ENROLLED PER SCHOOL TO DETERMINE THE MOBILITY
PATTERN OF MIGRANT PUPILS*
84
Number of Days Enrolled by
Class Interval of 25
Number of Migrant Pupils
Who Moved
Per cent of Migrant Pupils
Who Moved
0-25 82 19
26-50 97 2 2
51-75 104 24
75-100 66 15
101-125 53 12
126-150 2 1
151-175 17 4
176-200 3 1
201-225 - 9 2
226-250 6 1
251-275 1 1
276-300 1 1
Total 441 88
*Mean = 63, Median = 60, Range = 1-290.
85
migrant students whose forms had been sent in to the Arkansas
State Department of Education.
Achievement Testing by Subject
The Science Research Associates Achievement Tests
yielded achievement scores for 151 migrant students in
science, social studies, language arts, arithmetic, reading,
and a composite score. Table XXVI presents the subject,
the number of students for whom scores were available, and
the mean grade equivalent that the migrant student scored
below his grade placement. The mean was obtained by finding
the difference between the grade in which the migrant student
was placed at the time of the administration of the tests
and the achievement grade equivalent score reported by the
Science Research Associates Achievement Test results. For
each subject the difference was determined and the sum of
the differences was divided by the total number of migrant
student scores for the subject to provide an achievement
mean grade equivalent score.
Table XXVI also contains the per cent of migrant students
scoring lower on achievement than their grade placement. As
most differences were negative mean scores, the per cent be-"
low provided a comparison between the migrant students scoring
above and below their grade placement. The migrant students
86
TABLE XXVI
THE MEAN GRADE EQUIVALENT AND PER CENT FOR MIGRANT STUDENTS SCORING BELOW GRADE PLACEMENT BY SUBJECT
Subject Number
Mean Grade Equivalent Below Grade Placement
Per cent Scoring Below
Grade Placement
Science 69 - 1.7 78
Social Studies 69 - 1.8 80
Language Arts 106 - 1.9 85
Arithmetic 150 - 1.1 79
Reading 151 - 1.3 84
Composite 151 - 1.3 85
scoring at their grade placement were included in the
per cent above.
An analysis of the data of the study disclosed that a
composite 85 per cent of the migrant students for whom test
scores were available were below their grade placement in
achievement. The mean composite score indicated that
migrant students were 1.3 (one year, three months) below
the grade in which they were placed at the time of the
testing. The data revealed a greater disparity between
87
achievement and grade placement for science, social studies,
and language arts than for arithmetic and reading. Arith-
metic, with a - 1.1 grade equivalent, had the lowest
disparity between placement and achievement.
The tests for science and social studies were not
given below grade five. The language arts portion was not
given to grades one and two. One migrant student did not
complete the arithmetic tests; thus there was a difference
of 1 in the total number for arithmetic and that for reading
and composite scores.
Achievement Testing: by Grades
The Science Research Associates Achievement Test scores
were analyzed by grades. The number of migrant children
for each grade varied according to subject. Grade ten
included any tests given to migrant students for grades
ten through twelve. The tests chosen to be used in Arkansas
were intended for grades one through nine; however, some
schools gave the tests to migrant students in grades ten
through twelve. In the study the grade equivalent was
adjusted to prevent an inflation of the grade equivalent
difference for grades ten and up.
88
The analysis by grades revealed positive, at or above
grade placement, scores for grade one in arithmetic, reading,
and the composite score. Positive scores were also obtained
in grade five for science and social studies. In each
instance where positive scores were obtained the number of
migrant children tested was small, and girls were represented
more than boys. Table XXVII presents an analysis of the
achievement testing of migrant children by grade and subject.
The data in Table XXVII indicated the progressively
greater difference between grade placement and grade
achievement in each subject as the migrant child advanced
from grade one through high school. The exceptions are
seen in the composite difference for grades five and six,
which are the same,and grades eight and nine,which are
less than.grade seven but more than grade six. The range
of differences in achievement was from + 0.0 to - 3.5
grades below grade placement for grades ten and up.
Achievement Testing: Males and Females
The achievement test scores were also investigated to
determine the contribution of male and female migrant
students to the total, scores for subjects and grades. The
data for the composite score revealed a -105 grade equiv-
alent below the grade placement for the 85 males as
TABLE XXVII
AN ANALYSIS OF ACHIEVEMENT TESTING OF MIGRANT CHILDREN BY
GRADE AND SUBJECT
89
Subject (GE-GP)*
CD CD +>
CD M tn S1 •H S-i 0 i—1 <D (0 1 £ to
d) <1) G -H p -H O O d) •H V3 tj> 01 +> -H 'O &
(0 •H 0 3 a +> •H +> (0 n U 13 O 0 ro 4 S-l 0) CD Q O a CO W CO < e Pi O
1 8 + 0.2 + 0.2 0.0
2 22 - 0.4 - 0.6 - 0.5
3 14 - 1.3 - 0.6 - 0.8 - 0.7
4 22 - 0.8 - 1.1 - 1.0 - 1.0
5 17 + 0.2 + 0.2 - 1.2 - 1.1 - 1.5 - 1.3
6 21 - 0.6 - 1.3 - 1.6 - 0.9 - 1.2 - 1.3
7 14 - 2.4 - 2.3 - 2.8 - 2.1 - 2.2 - 2.4
8 10 - 2.2 - 2.4 - 2.1 - 1.4 - 1.8 - 1.9
9 17 - 1.3 - 2.3 - 2.9 - 1.8 - 2.0 - 2.1
10 6 - 2.4 - 1.4 - 3.5 - 2.9 - 3.3 - 3.5 & up
Total 151 69 69 106 150 151 151
*GE-GP is the difference between the achievement grade equivalent score and the grade placement of the pupil.
90
compared, to — 1.1 for the 66 females. The greatest
difference for males was in language arts, and for females
in social studies and science. The greatest amount of
difference in a subject between males and females was in
language arts. See Table XXVIII for an analysis of the
data for males and Table XXIX for an analysis of the data
for females.
TABLE XXVIII
AN ANALYSIS OF ACHIEVEMENT TESTING FOR MALE MIGRANT STUDENTS FOR EACH
SUBJECT
Number for Each Subject
Subject Number for
Males
Mean G-E* Below G_p**
Per cent of
Migrant
69 Science 44 1.9 84
69 Social Studies
44 1.9 84
106 Language Arts
60 2.4 91
150 Arithmetic 84 1.3 80
151 Reading 85 1.6 94
151 Composite. 85 1.5 89
3 w JL U - t V U X C I i U •
**Grade placement at time of testing,
TABLE XXIX
AN ANALYSIS OF ACHIEVEMENT TESTING FOR FEMALE MIGRANT STUDENTS FOR EACH
SUBJECT
91
Number for each Subject
Subject Number for
Females
Mean G-E* Below G-P**
Per cent of
Migrant
69 Science 25 - 1.3 68
69 Social Studies
25 - 1.3 72
106 Language Arts
46 - 1.2 76
150 Arithmetic 66 - 0.9 79
151 Reading 66 - 0.9 71
151 Composite 66 - 1.1 77
*Achievement grade equivalent. **Grade placement at time of testing.
Although the objectives of the study did not state a
prediction as to the differences between male and female
migrant students, Table XXX shows the number, mean, and
standard deviation for male and female migrant students.
9 2
TABLE XXX
AN ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MALE AND FEMALE MIGRANT STUDENTS
FOR EACH SUBJECT
Male Female
£ c T3 0 0
+1 5-1 *H U -H u * (0 +> * a] +> <D a) & Tf to a) Cy "•d as
- n Q G 0 a -H o a o a -H g (0 1 (0 > j~ (0 1 (0 >
3 2 CD W 4J <U D 0) w +> a) CO s £ 0 w Q ' 13 £ o CO Q
Science 4 4 - 1 . 9 2 . 2 0 2 5 - 1 . 3 1 . 9 8
Social 4 4 - 1 . 9 2 . 4 1 2 5 - 1 . 3 2 . 2 2
Studies 2 . 2 2
Language 6 6 - 2 . 4 1 . 8 8 4 6 - 1 . 2 1 . 8 2
Arts
Arith-8 4 - 1 . 3 1 . 4 5 6 6 - 0 . 9 1 . 2 6
metic 1 . 2 6
Reading 8 5 - 1 . 6 1 . 6 1 6 6 - 0 . 9 1 . 5 1
Composite 2 8 5 - 1 . 5 1 . 6 1 6 6 - 1 . 1 1 . 2 5
*GE-GP is the difference between the achievement grade equivalent and the grade placement at the time of testing.
Achievement Testing—Interstate and Intrastate
An analysis was also obtained by dividing the migrant
student in the study into interstate and intrastate migrants,
The interstate migrant was identified by information
indicating that he had moved into Arkansas from another
93
state. The 151 migrant pupils were divided into the two
groups, and the differences found between the mean equivalent
achievement scores and grade placement for each group. The
interstate group obtained greater differences between
placement and achievement in each subject. The greatest
differences between the two groups were in social studies,
science, and reading. Table XXXI provides the number, mean,
and standard deviation for the two groups in each subject.
Summary
The data from the three basic sources were analyzed and
presented in Tables II-XXXI of Chapter IV.
The data for achievement testing were easily stated.
The findings included a composite per cent of 85 for migrant
pupils below the achievement level for their grade place-
ment. A mean of - 1.3 was obtained as the composite
average the migrant pupils scored below grade placement.
The study of the mobility of the migrant pupil revealed
a mean of 60 days enrolled and a median of 63 days. The
range was 1-290.
The findings were discussed to some extent for each
category. However, the number of items prevented mentioning
each in detail. Additional references are made in the
context of the summary, conclusions, and recommendations in
Chapter V.
TABLE XXXI
AN ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE STUDENTS
FOR EACH SUBJECT
94
Intrastate Interstate
Subject
Nuniber
Mean
GE-GP*
Standard
Deviation
Number
j Mean
GE-GP*
Standard
Deviation
Science 23 - 1.40 2.22 46 - 1.8 2.13
Social Science
23 - 1.23 2.21 46 - 2.1 2.23
Language Arts
36 - 1.76 1.89 70 - 1.9 2.15
Arith-metic 52 - 1.04 1.30 98 - 1.2 1.48
Reading 53 - 1.15 1.44 98 - 1.5 1.70
Composite 53 - 1.21 1.43 98 - 1.4 1.52
*GE-GP is the difference between the achievement grade equivalent and the grade placement at the time of testing.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The problem of the study was to. make an analysis of the
educational program for the children of migrant agricultural
workers in the forty-five participating school districts in
Arkansas.
The purposes of the study included: the analysis of
the problem, the providing of data on the education of
migrant children, a survey of the existing program, an analysis
of data from the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form, and
Science Research Associates Achievement Tests.
Three sources were consulted to obtain the information
needed. The following is a summary of the findings from
each of the sources of data.
Questionnaire
A questionnaire was constructed to survey the educa-
tional program in Arkansas. The questionnaire was sub-
mitted to a panel of specialists in migrant education,
refined and sent to the 151 principals of the forty-five
96
school districts in Arkansas that had migrant programs. The
questionnaire contained twelve categories, each a check-list
type to allow the principals to check the items appropriate
for the migrant program in operation in his school. Eighty-
one per cent of the principals returned the questionnaire.
The returns were analyzed to determine the number and per
cent of schools reporting the various items.
Twenty-five per cent of the principals declared that a
program in their school was in operation because of the
presence of migrant children. Forty-one per cent designated
the school's program for migrant children as combined or
coordinated with other programs designed for educationally
deprived children. Thirty-four per cent stated that no pro-
gram existed for migrant children other than the regular
educational program for all children.
An analysis of the response to Category I, General
Questions, found that health needs received the greatest
attention, followed by planned instructional programs and
programs for meeting the special interests and abilities of
migrant children.
The twelve categories were analyzed and the data
presented in Tables II-XXXI in Chapter IV. In general, the
items in the categories that were based on the literature
97
describing the national or typical migrant child received
few responses. Examples included: the rating of 2 per
cent using holding classes, 3 per cent having non-graded
migrant classes, 2 per cent using bilingual classes, 2 per
cent teaching English as a second language, and 1 per cent
using migrant parents as aides in the schools to help with
migrant children.
Items that were based on information stressed by the
Arkansas State Department of Education and the migrant in-
service workshops received responses from 25 per cent of
schools stating that the school's program was specifically
for migrant children and the 41 per cent that stated that
their programs were coordinated programs. Examples included:
the 15 per cent that said a committee existed to welcome
migrant families, the 30 per cent that had planned orien-
tation procedures for migrants, the 16 per cent that
administered achievement tests before making a grade place-
ment, the 35 per cent that encouraged field trips for migrant
children, the 37 per cent that encouraged home visits by
teachers, the 24 per cent that related the development of
special curriculum for instructing migrant children in math,
the 16 per cent that arranged for individualized instruction
98
for migrant children, and the 13 per cent that had specially
trained teachers for migrant children.
The items receiving the highest per cent responses
were those least peculiar to the needs of the migrant or
other disadvantaged children. Examples included: the
58 per cent that said migrant parents are informed of
special services of the school when they enroll the children
in school, the 50 per cent that allow the regular teacher to
plan the orientation of the migrant child to the school, the
77 per cent that used school records to determine grade
placement, the 52 per cent that allowed the regular teacher
to plan the reading program, the 91 per cent that had
educational programs integrated with the regular school
program, and the 66 per cent that provided for eye, ear, and
denta1 checkup s.
The items that asked for the opinion of the principal
revealed a strong desire to integrate the migrant child into
the regular school program so as to avoid creating any
feeling of inferiority or discrimination.
Seventy-eight per cent of the principals considered the
main cause of poor attendance to be the attitude of the
migrant child's parents, 73 per cent to the lack of education
in the migrant family, and 57 per cent to the need to care
for younger children in the family.
99
On the topic of the improvement of the self-concept of
the migrant child, 69 per cent of the principals thought the
best procedures were integrating the migrant child with
other children, 59 per cent suggested treating the migrant
child the same as other children, 36 per c.nl flesired cultural
enrichment programs, and 18 per cent recommended special
programs for the parents of migrant children.
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form
A second source of data for the study was the Uniform
Migrant Student Transfer Form. The form was used for the
first time nationally, and in Arkansas in the 1969-1970
school year, to attempt to solve the problems associated with
the transfer of records of migrant children. The transfer
records became available as the migrant children moved,
and the schools sent the migrant forms to the Arkansas
State Department of Education. Five hundred were analyzed
during the time of the study, and the data organized to
provide the number and per cent of items checked on each of
the categories that furnished educational information. The
items varied,such as the number of days enrolled and items
on the child who had "some" or "strong" interest in reading
mysteries-adventures books.
100
The study revealed that confusion existed among
school personnel as to the procedures for completing the
transfer record forms and the purposes of the records
transfer system. Of the five hundred forms analyzed, the
per cent on which data were registered ranged from 56 per
cent on Academic Characteristics to 25 per cent or less on
the Special Interests and Abilities Category. The
achievement and ability test information and the health
information were too vague and inconsistent to make a
valuable contribution to the study.
The information on the number of days enrolled allowed
a study of mobility and revealed a median of 60 days and
mean of 63 days. *»
The category concerned with Reading Abilities and
Academic Achievement received the greatest number of
responses. Personnel that completed the transfer forms
considered the migrant children below average in reading,
weak in specific comprehension skills, and weak in specific
word-attack skills.
Twenty-six per cent said the pupil had difficulty
communicating in English, although 97 per cent were
English speaking. However, 32 per cent of the children
had difficulty in understanding directions.
101
The Academic Achievement Categories revealed that over
50 per cent of the migrant children had difficulty in math,
comprehension, composition, science, social studies, and
math concepts.
The Special Interests Categories disclosed that the
migrant child had few creative interests. A small per cent
exhibited some interest in drawing, painting, and music.
Science-oriented interests were primarily in natural science
and math.
The Reading Interest Category specified that the
migrant child had little interest in reading. Very few had
strong interest in reading. Mysteries-adventure stories/
science, and sports reading received a "some" interest rating.
Achievement Testing
The third source of data was obtained by collecting
Science Research Associates Test scores on the 500 migrant
students whose Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms had
been received and analyzed as part of the study. One
hundred fifty-one migrant students had been tested and their
scores reported by Science Research Associates to the
Arkansas State Department of Education during the period
of the study.
102
The Science Research Associates Achievement Test scores
provided data by grade and subject on the academic achieve-
ment of migrant children. The study of composite scores
disclosed that 85 per cent of the migrant children were
below the achievement level for the grade in which they
were placed at the time of the administering of the
achievement tests. The composite grade level was -1.3 for
the 151 migrant students. The greatest disparity between
achievement and placement was in language arts, - 1.9; and
the least disparity, - 1.1 in arithmetic.
An analysis by grades revealed a progressively greater
disparity between achievement and placement as the grade
level increased from grade one through grade ten. The
study of male and female migrants found a composite grade
equivalent below placement of — 1.5 for the eighty-five
males and a - 1.1 for the sixty-six females. Research on
interstate and intrastate migrants revealed a composite
grade equivalent below placement of - 1.4 for interestate
and - 1.2 for the intrastate pupil.
Conclusions
The survey of the literature concerning the education
of the migrant child, the analysis of the data obtained
103
from the questionnaire, the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Form, arid the Science Research Associates Achievement Tests
suggested the following conclusions:
Questionnaire
1. The response to the questionnaire revealed that
25 per cent of the schools in Arkansas have educational
programs in operation for migrant children, but that most
of the schools have either programs combined with other
programs for disadvantaged children or have no special
programs for migrant children other than the regular school
program. (Tables II and III).
2. The principals exhibited extreme sensitivity on
items that suggested that migrant pupils were treated in a
separate manner. (Table XIV).
3. The principals stated the schools had arranged to
meet health needs of migrant children. (Table XV).
4. The response to the questionnaire and verbal
comments made to migrant specialists by teachers at the
migrant in-service workshop (June 2, 1969, Arkansas State
University, Jonesboro, Arkansas) suggested that the Arkansas
migrant students were not typical.
5. The data indicated that although a major stream
moves through the state, that few interstate migrant pupils
104
enter the Arkansas educational system during the regular
school year. Support for this conclusion was noted in items
6.11 and 6.12 in Category VI of the questionnaire. In
these two items principals stated that Arkansas schools did
not have bilingual classes or teach English as a second
language. The lack of such programs suggested that few
Arkansas migrants were of Spanish-speaking background.
The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form data also supported
the conclusion. Only 3 per cent of the 500 forms received
listed Spanish speaking migrants. Thus, the migrant stream
whose home base is in the southern Texas area did not enter
the Arkansas public schools to any extent during the time of
the study. However, many of the migrant stream pupils may
have been involved in summer programs which were not surveyed
in the study.
6. The above conclusions suggested the possibility
that the Arkansas migrant pupil was a child of a family
engaged in agricultural employment and thus qualifies for
funds under the definition of a migrant pupil. Conceivably,
many of the children designated as migrant children in
Arkansas were actually children of underemployed, Caucasian
and Negro families who work part of the year in agricul-
tural-related occupations and who move frequently.
105
7. Regardless of definition, the migrant pupil of the
study scored - 1.3 grade levels below his achievement for
his grade placement, and 32 per cent of the principals
stated that 50 per cent did not have a healthy self-concept.
8. The questionnaire, Category VI, Curriculum, revealed
that some attempt had been made to help meet the curriculum
needs of migrant children, especially in those programs
specifically designed for migrant children. Others said that
they were attempting to meet the needs of migrant children
through the regular school program.
9. The questionnaire devulged that few funds for
migrant children were spent to add guidance and counseling
personnel.
10. The questionnaire, item 6.14 of Category VI,
indicated that migrant funds were spent to provide instruc-
tional aids. Category VI also specified that migrant funds
were spent to improve the instructional program, and, in some
cases, innovations were made to help meet the needs and
solve the problems unique to the migrant child.
11. The above conclusions were made on a face-value
evaluation of the data. However, the conclusion reached
must be tempered by the following questions:
106
a. Were typical migrant pupils in the school
districts but not enrolled in school?
b. Did the response to items on the questionnaire
keyed to the typical migrant reveal that few schools
were doing anything to identify and encourage migrant
children to enroll in school?
c. Were comments picturing the Arkansas migrant
as non-typical simply excuses for failing to encourage
the children of migrant families, Caucasian, Negro
and Mexican-American to enter the schools?
d. Have principals sought to discover pupils who
fit the technical definition of a migrant simply to
obtain funds?
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form
The analysis of the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Form resulted in the following conclusions:
1* T h e Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms available
were helpful in providing transfer records and data on
migrant children. However, the forms were not completed
in sufficient detail to provide the quality and amount of
information intended for the records transfer system.
107
2. The Users Manual was intended for use by the teacher
or counselor or other migrant personnel who completed the
form. The manual was a well-written, thorough, programmed
approach to aid in the completion of the form. However,
it was not followed by personnel who completed the Uniform
Migrant Student Transfer Form during the time of the study
except for the administrative data such as name, date of
birth, number of days enrolled, and the school's code number.
Test information and health information were incomplete and
too vague to be used in the .study.
3. Sections of the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer
Form that provided the most useful data were those of
Academic Characteristics—Reading. This led to the
conclusion that schools in Arkansas were placing some emphasis
on the improvement of reading and language arts skills. A
supporting conclusion was that the emphasis in migrant
education centered on the elementary migrant child. This
explains in part the good response to the Academic Character-
istics—Reading section of the form.
4. The construction of the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Form required that personnel completing the form
make judicious decisions. The ratings such as "weak,"
"strong," "average," "poor" and "skilled" provided useful
108
information but were limited in objective analysis. The
type of ratings required that the personnel who supplied the
judgments know the pupil well or have access to teacher
evaluations and standardized testing. On many of the 500
forms, only one item out of the four or five in the
categories on Specific Comprehension Skills or Specific
Word Attack Skills and Difficulties was checked.
5. The low per cent on many categories and items
suggested that the teacher either had not had time to know
well the characteristics of the migrant child because he was
not enrolled in the school long enough. Or, possibly that
the person filling out the form did not know the child well
enough to mark the categories.
6. The literature surveyed revealed that speech and
hearing disorders were of great concern. Schools in
Arkansas stated health programs were in operation. Yet,
only one child had a severe speech disorder, and only two
severe hearing disorders. Only 10 per cent had "mild"
speech disorders and 3 per cent "mild" hearing disorders.
Thus, while only 4 per cent of the migrant children had
physical hearing disorders, 32 per cent were rated as "poor"
in understanding directions and 50 per cent as "fair" in
understanding directions. Thus, 82 per cent were checked as
109
"poor" or "fair" in understanding the directions given to
them by teachers in the classroom. If the problem of not
understanding directions was not a physical probelm and not
a language problem, the conclusion was that an educational
problem, possibly vocabulary or, organizational learning
skill deficiencies reinforced by the mobility of the migrant
child and the lack of the healthy self-concept was responsible.
7• 1he Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form's category
on Academic Achievement was filled out on 49 per cent or
less of the forms. This section should have been the
easiest for teachers to complete. This supported the con-
clusion that many of the forms were completed by personnel
other than the classroom teachers, and that teachers were
not consulted in the completion of the form.
8. The completion of the Special Interests and
Abilities items also suggested that the personnel did not
know the migrant child well. These sections of the form
could have supplied valuable data, provided each was filled
in properly by personnel who knew the migrant child well.
9. The analysis of the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Form and contacts with schools that had migrant
programs revealed that some schools did not send forms to
the state department of education because no migrant children
110
moved during the time of the study. The lack of mobility
was advantageous for the pupil, but led to the conclusion
that many of the migrant pupils so designated were not in
fact migrant children.
10. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form provided
useful data on mobility, but no information as to the
attendance record of the child at the school or of the days
lost between the withdrawal from one school and the admission
to another school.
Achievement Testing
The analysis of the Science Research Associates.
Achievement Tests led to the following conclusions:
1. Some schools did not meet the October dates set for
administering the achievement tests.
2. Tests were given to migrant pupils above the ninth
grade, and the forms of the Science Research Associates
Achievement Tests used were not consistent in the different
schools or even with different pupils within the same school.
3. The decision to use one test program for the state
migrant program was a major step in the accumulation of
standardized objective data on the achievement levels of
migrant children.
Ill
4„ The Science Research Associates Tests revealed that
85 per cent of the Arkansas migrant students were below
their achievement level for the grade level they were in
at the time of the test administration and that the mean
composite score for the 151 migrant children in Arkansas
for whom scores were available was - 1.3 achievement levels
below grade placement.
5. The number of Science Research Associates scores
available was fewer than anticipated and may have tended to
decrease the validity of the results of the achievement
testing to some extent. However, the 85 per cent consistency
of the migrant scores available led to the conclusion that
the pattern of difference between placement and achievement
was representative.
6. The few areas in which positive grade placement
scores were found included more cases of females than male
migrant students.
7. The grade placement achievement difference was
greater for males than for female migrants.
8. The disparity between placement and achievement was
progressively greater as the grade level of the migrant
child increased.
9. Little difference existed between interstate and
intrastate migrant children on achievement ability.
112
General Conclusions
The following are general conclusions from the study:
1. The three sources of information provided important
data, although less data than anticipated at the beginning
of the study.
2. An important beginning was made in making objective
standardized data available for further research into the
multiplexing problems facing the migrant child, the teachers
who work with migrant children, and the administrators of
migrant programs.
3. The schools in Arkansas were making some efforts
to meet the needs of migrant children, although much was
lacking and desired.
4. The personnel of the Arkansas State Department of
Education were genuinely and conscientiously making efforts
to organize and administer programs for the education of
migrant children in a manner to meet the unique needs of
migrant children and to coordinate and facilitate the
cooperation of Arkansas schools in the- national program for
the records transfer system. The Arkansas State Department
of Education sponsored two state-wide migrant in-service
workshops and numerous local organizational meetings to
support the migrant program. During the study, a booklet
113
entitled Program for Effective Learning: A Guide for
Teachers of Migrant Children was produced by the Migrant
Education Section, Federal Programs Division, Arkansas
State Department of Education, Little Rock, Arkansas,
August, 1969. The purpose of the booklet was to aid
teachers in working with and understanding migrant children.
5. The development of National Migrant Data Bank was
a bold and creative decision and should aid in further
research organized and functioning.
6. Principals of the schools in Arkansas have
attempted to expend migrant funds for educationally desirable
purposes in order to meet the needs of migrant children.
7. The failure of the schools to meet the basic
assumptions limited the findings of the study.
a. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms
were not completed and mailed promptly to the Arkansas
State Department of Education.
b. The Users Manual for the Uniform Migrant
Student Transfer Form was not followed in completing
the form.
c. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms
were not completed by the same personnel.
114
d. The analysis of the Uniform Migrant Student
Transfer Form failed to indicate close co-operation
among teacher's, administrators, and counselors in
furnishing data for completing the form.
e. The Science Research Associates Achievement
Tests were not always administered in the third week
of October.
f. The Science Research Associates Achievement
Tests were given to pupils above grade nine in some
schools and not others. A different form was given to
students above grade nine.
Recommendations
The analysis of the data revealed that the following
recommendations would help to improve the program for the
education of the children of migrant agricultural workers
in Arkansas:
1. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form should be
changed tp include the grade level of the migrant child. A
code should be used to include the information on the form.
2. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form should
include the days absent and the days present at each school.
3. The Academic Characteristics—Reading and Oral,
the Academic Achievement, and the Special Interests and
115
Abilities sections of the Uniform Migrant. Student Transfer
Form should be re-worded to use less space on the form. Too
many items were included for a regular teacher with a
large number of migrant children. If special migrant
personnel were used to fill out the forms,then those
persons will not know the traits on the individual migrant
children that should be checked. The entire section needs
to be reworked with some specific objectives in mind that
can more economically and efficiently be achieved by the
classroom teacher. The dual categories should be eliminated,
For example, directions such as "check the items in which
the migrant child is weak," should be followed by a single
box for "gets main idea," "recalls details," "follows
sequence," "vocabulary knowledge," "ability to affirm
meaning," etc. When rating "weak" or "strong" it is not
necessary to include both on the form.
4. The space saved by a rearranged section eliminating
many of the rating of judgmental data should be replaced by
expanding the test information section. The change to state-
wide standardization of achievement testing has made
available the information that should be included on the
migrant form. As the records transfer idea was intended for
more than just administrative school information, the change
116
must be made. On the 500 forms examined, the test information
given was the composite data, and does not provide much help
for the receiving teacher. Knowing the migrant child's
reading, math, and science score; grade level of achievement;
and grade equivalent would allow the teacher to immediately
make preliminary analyses of the needs of the migrant
children and avoid the time and financial cost of retesting.
5. The procedure for filling out the Uniform Migrant
Student Transfer Form should be altered. The nature of the
form demanded a co-operative effort to fully complete the
migrant form. Thus, selected duplicate portions of the
form should be made and sent to appropriate personnel for
each migrant student. The health nurse should receive a
health form, fill in and return it. The classroom teacher
should receive the Academic Characteristics—Reading and Oral
Characteristics, etc., complete and return it. The actual
form should be completed by one designated individual from
the information furnished by teacher, nurse, counselor, and
admini stra tor.
6. The Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form should be
completed and mailed to the Arkansas State Department of
Education as soon as possible after the withdrawal of the
migrant child in order to reduce the time that will elapse
117
between withdrawal, transfer, mailing, and the receiving
school's request for the form to the state department of
education.
7. Funds should be made available for every school in
Arkansas, especially the small schools, to have guidance
counselors. The guidance counselor should complete the
Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form.
8. The Arkansas State Department of Education should
keep a copy or reproduction of each of the Uniform Migrant
Student Transfer Forms received.
9. The National Migrant Data Bank should conduct
continuing research on the migrant education programs in
each state, provide studies for individual states, and make
comparisons with the national composite program.
10. No analysis was made of the success or failure of
the migrant student to present his copy of the Uniform
Migrant Student Transfer Form to the school. Future research
should include this factor.
11. The Users Manua1 should be followed in completing
tlie Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Forms.
118
Achievement Testing
The following recommendations were made as a result of
the analysis of the Science Research Associates Achievement
Scores available for migrant children in Arkansas during
the time of the study:
1. The test date set by the Arkansas State Department
of Education should be met by all schools in the migrant
program.
2. A decision should be made and state-wide implementa-
tion should be followed as to the testing of migrant pupils
in grades nine through twelve. Also, consistent forms should
be used, or a scale, according to age or some other criteria
be agreed upon for the upper grades.
3. The test scores should be placed on the Uniform
Migrant Student Transfer Form for each subject.
4. Migrant students who transfer to a school should be
given the Science Research Associates Achievement Test
immediately, if not previously tested at the school from
which he is transferring or another school during the year,
so that the scores would be available. The school should
not wait until the end of the year or semester before testing.
5. The testing program should have included early testing
of migrants for occupational and vocational interests.
119
General Recommendations
The analysis of the educational programs in Arkansas
also suggested that the following recommendations would be
helpful:
1. The use of Science Research Associates Achievement
Tests and the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Form should
be continued. The data should be accumulated, and made
available for research.
2. Research should include experimental comparisons
of migrant and non-migrant pupils.
3. Research is needed on the curriculum, the develop-
ment of a better self-concept, and the types of programs
that best meet the educational needs of migrant children.
4. Consideration should be given and experimental,
research conducted to develop computer curriculum analyses
of migrant children. This would include the programming of
curriculum material for the individual migrant. For example,
a migrant student could enroll on Monday, present his transfer
records, have the achievement portion of the records analyzed
and the data transmitted to the state computer bank by phone
or other communication channels and have programmed non-
120
graded material printed and mailed to be available to the
school for the individual migrant child on Tuesday.
121
APPENDIX A
122
A QUESTIONNAIRE TO SURVEY THE PROGRAMS FOR THE
EDUCATION OF MIGRANT CHILDREN
IN ARKANSAS
DIRECTIONS: (For general questions only)
CHECK (M) if the program is specifically in operation due to the presence of migrant children and funds made available for migrant children.
CHECK (C) if the program is a co-ordinated or combined program for educationally deprived children and children of low income families, and includes some migrant children.
CHECK (No) if programs exist only in regular school programs that would exist if no migrant children were in school.
(M) (C) (No)
GENERAL QUESTIONS
1.1 There is a planned instructional program in operation that leads to discovering and meeting the needs of migrant youth.
1.2 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the special interests and abilities of migrant youth.
1.3 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the cultural enrich-ment of the lives of migrant youth.
1.4 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the healthy self-concept development of migrant youth.
1.5 There is a planned program in operation that provides for the health needs of migrant youth.
1.6 There is a planned program in operation for in-service training of teachers who teach migrant children.
1.7 There is operated during the summer months a program that provides for the needs of migrant youth.
123
DIRECTIONS: For all of the remaining topics on the questionnaire check with an "X" all items that represent your school or community's program for the education of migrant children.
II ARRIVAL OF MIGRANT FAMILIES
2.1 A committee functions to identify and welcome migrant families.
2.2 Signs are posted to welcome migrants and indicate services that are available.
2.3 The community has a "welcome wagon" to greet migrant families.
2.4 Migrant parents are informed about school and community services when the migrant children are enrolled in school.
2.5 The Employment and Security Division of the State of Arkansas has representatives who provide mig-rant families with information concerning agri-cultural employment.
2.6 Neither the school nor the community has a planned program for the arrival of migrant families,
Other comment:
III ORIENTATION TO SCHOOL
3.1 The school has a plan in operation for orienting the migrant child to the school that assumes the migrant child needs special consideration.
3.2 The teachers of migrant children plan the intro-duction of late-entering migrant children so as to minimize their embarrassment.
3.3 Migrant children are placed in "holding classes" designed for migrants, until records can be obtained.
3.4 Migrant children are not admitted to the school until transfer records are presented.
3.5 The school has no plan for the orientation of mig-rant children that is different from the orienta-tion of other children.
1.24
3.6 The school attempts to identify and contact the "home-base" of the interstate migrant child.
3.7 The school has a special procedure for the with-drawal of migrant children.
3.8 Teachers of migrant children have planned for the withdrawal of migrant children so as to provide for continuity in educational program and sequence in subject matter.
Other comment:
IV GRADE PLACEMENT
DIRECTIONS: Check the three (3) methods of grade placement that are most often used by your school to determine the grade placement of migrant children.
4.1 Appraisal of teachers 4.2 Test results 4.3 Chronological age 4.4 Reading ability 4.5 Physical maturity 4.6 Social adjustment 4.7 School record
Other method:
V PLACEMENT IN READING
5.1 The migrant child is placed in a grade and the regular teacher plans and directs his reading program.
5.2 The migrant child's reading ability is evaluated, then he is placed in a grade and the regular teacher plans and directs his reading.
5.3 The migrant child is assigned to a non-graded class designed for migrant children.
5.4 The migrant child is tested and assigned to a remedial reading class designed for migrant children with reading difficulties.
125
5.5 Migrant children are assigned to a programmed reading program purchased with migrant funds:
5.51 Science Research Associates Reading Laboratories
5.52 Educational Development Laboratories 5.53 PLAN—Program for Learning in Accor-
dance with Need 5.54 Craig Readers 5.55 Rheem Califone Reading Program 5.56 Other:
5.6 Migrant children are tested and given remedial instruction, as needed, in the following areas
5.61 Vocabulary 5.62 Comprehension skills 5.63 Specific word attack skills
5.7 Other comment:
VI CURRICULUM
6.1 The school administers a set of achievement tests before the child is placed in a class.
6.2 The school requires or encourages teachers to plan field trips for migrant children.
6.3 The school requires or encourages teachers of mig-rant children to make home visits.
6.4 The educational program for migrant children is integrated with the regular educational program.
6.5 There are no classes in which only migrant child-ren are placed.
6.6 The school has provided special instruction designed to meet the needs of migrant youth in:
6.61 Math 6.62 Science 6.63 Social Studies
6.7 The school has provided special opportunities for migrant children to explore their special interests in:
6.71 Drawing 6.75 Science 6.72 Painting 6.76 Athletics 6.73 Music Other: 6.74 Drama Other:
126
6.8 The school has developed special curricula for the instruction of migrant children in:
6.81 Math 6.82 Science 6.83 Social Studies 6.84 Reading
6.9 The State Department of Education has developed and made available special curricula for the instruction of migrant children in:
6.91 Math 6.92 Science 6.93 Social Studies 6.94 Other 6.95 Other
6.10 The school has arranged with the State Department of Education to use "multiple-adoption" of text-books so teachers will have texts available on various ability levels within a single class.
YES, Elementary Reading only YES, Junior High YES, Senior High
6.11 The school has bilingual classes in some subjects, 6.12 The school teaches English as a second language. 6.13 The school has special compact courses designed
for migrant children.
6.14 To aid in the instruction of migrant children, the school has added from migrant funds:
6.14.1 Educational Television 6.14.2 16mm Films 6.14.3 35mm Filmstrips
_____ 6.14.4 Overhead projectors 6.14.5 Language Labs 6.14.6 Language Tapes 6.14.7 Headphone sets 6.14.8 Tape Recorders 6.14.9 Language Master
6.15 The school has a program for oral language development for migrants.
6.16 The school has arranged for small group instruc-tion for migrant children.
127
6.17 The school has arranged for individualized instruction for migrant children.
6.18 The school adjusts class size so teacher-pupil ratio will be low for classes with migrant children.
6.19 The class size for migrant children is: 15 or less 15 - 20 20 - 25 25 - 30 30 Plus
Other comment on the curriculum of your school as related to the education of migrant children:
VII SPECIAL PERSONNEL
7.1 The school provides teachers who have special training for teaching migrant youth.
7.2 Extra teachers are hired to teach migrant child-ren during peak migrant enrollment periods.
7.3 Teacher aides are hired to help teach migrant children.
7.4 Tutors are employed to give individual instruction to migrant children.
7.5 Parents of migrant children are employed to aid in the instruction of migrant children.
7.6 Additional guidance and counseling personnel have been added to help with the problems of migrant children.
7.7 Other special personnel: .
VIII SPECIAL ADJUSTMENTS
8.1 The school year is started early: (Mo) (Wk) 8.2 The school year is ended early: (Mo) (Wk) 8.3 The school term is split to allow migrant child-
ren to work. 8.4 The school is closed at peak crop periods to allow
pupils to work.
128
8.5 Hie migrant children are allowed to come to school early each day to make up work they have missed.
8.6 The migrant children are allowed to stay after school for special classes to make up work they have missed.
8.7 Parents are allowed to take children out of school for crop work.
8.8 Holidays are reduced and some are eliminated to cut down on the calendar length of the school term.
8.9 Other adjustments:
IX ATTENDANCE
DIRECTIONS: Check those you believe to be most responsible for the irregular attendance of migrant children in your school:
9.1 The language barrier 9.2 Lack of education in the family 9.3 Parents'attitude toward education 9.4 Need for pupil to care for younger brothers or
sisters 9.5 Need by family for the child's earnings 9.6 Lack of acceptance by the community 9.7 Lack of adequate school facilities 9.8 Lack of proper food or clothing 9.9 Lack of school transfer records
X SECONDARY-VOCATIONAL
DIRECTIONS: Check programs older migrant children are encouraged to take:
10.1 Work-Study 10.2 Agriculture 10.3 Distributive Education 10.4 Industrial Arts 10.5 Homemaking
129
XI SELF-CONCEPT
11.1 Special in-service programs have been success-ful in helping teachers come to appreciate the migrant child and understand his problems.
11.2 None of the teachers express an attitude of impatience with the migrant child or his parents due to the child's irregular attendance.
11.3 Evidence exists that fifty per cent or more of the migrant children do not have a healthy self-concept.
11.4 Evidence exists to indicate that migrant child-ren develop a better self-concept as a result of the school's program for migrant children,,
11.5 The self-concept of the migrant child is best improved or developed through: (check one or more)
11.5.1 Integration of the migrant child with other children.
11.5.2 Placing migrant children in separate classes designed for migrant child-ren.
11.5.3 Showing the migrant child special attention.
11.5.4 Ignoring the migrant child. 11.5.5 Treating the migrant child the same
as other children. 11.5.6 Helping the migrant child to come
to accept his parents'role in the migrant stream.
11.5.7 A program for the parents'of mig-rant children designed to increase the parents view of the worth of education.
11.5.8 Helping the migrant child to gain a vision of leaving the migrant stream and rising in the economic scale.
11.5.9 Cultural enrichment programs for migrant children.
130
XII HEALTH
The Health program for migrant children includes:
12.1 A physical examination by a medical doctor. 12.2 Eyes, ears, teeth check-up by a nurse or local
citizens. 12.3 A check-up for speech disorders. 12.4 Funds for glasses. 12.5 Dental check by a dentist. 12.6 Funds for dental work. 12.7 Funds for clothing and shoes. 12.8 Funds for medicine. 12.9 Medical insurance and accident insurance.
131
APPENDIX B
132
COVER LETTER FOR QUESTIONNAIRE
September 15, 1969
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Superintendents of Migrant Education Programs
FROM: Louie Counts, Supervisor of Special Programs
SUBJECT: Migrant Education Data Gathering Instrument
Mr. Jerome Barnes is writing a dissertation at North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, on education of the migrant children in the public schools in Arkansas.
We have been providing information to Mr. Barnes on this subject. Any co-operation you can give in completing this questionnaire would be appreciated as he needs to get a large percentage of returns from individual schools to have an effective survey.
133
APPENDIX C
134
A FORM FOR A PANEL OF JUDGES » <$
for
A QUESTIONNAIRE TO SURVEY THE PROGRAMS FOR THE
EDUCATION OF MIGRANT CHILDREN
IN ARKANSAS
DIRECTIONS—PART ONE;
The questionnaire has ten (10) categories indicated by the Roman numerals I — X. For each category, the judge should indicate by the appropriate letter the following:
A. IF THE CATEGORY IS ESSENTIAL AND SHOULD PROVIDE USEFUL DATA.
B. IF THE CATEGORY IS NOT ESSENTIAL BUT MAY PROVIDE DATA.
C. IF THE CATEGORY SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.
A space is provided for additional comments on each category,
DIRECTIONS—PART TWO:
Each category has several parts. The judge should indicate by the appropriate letter the following:
A. IF THE ITEM IS ESSENTIAL AND SHOULD PROVIDE USEFUL DATA.
B. IF THE ITEM IS NOT ESSENTIAL BUT MAY PROVIDE DATA.
C. IF THE ITEM SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.
D. If "D" is used, it indicates that the item should be altered. A space is provided for each item so that suggestions may be made at the discretion of the judge.
Note: An item marked "D" and altered will be assumed to then be rated "A" unless otherwise indicated.
135
FORM FOR A PANEL OF JUDGES—PAGE ONE
I GENERAL QUESTIONS*
Comment:
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
Additional comments:
*This is a sample page. A similar page was prepared for each of the twelve categories of the questionnaire.
136
APPENDIX D
ESTIMATED DATA FOR THE ARKANSAS MIGRANT PROGRAM, 1969-1970
137
AREA DISTRICT COUNTY INTRASTATE INTERSTATE TOTAL
II
III
Gentry* Benton 107 180 287
Rogers Benton 156 107 263
Bentonville Benton 85 57 142
Lincoln Wa shington 36 38 74
Farmington Washington 56 23 79
Springdale* Washington 454 412 866
Bald Knob* White 297 217 514
Central White 50 34 84 Judsonia White 2 68 70 Searcy White 142 25 167
New Port* Jackson 168 245 413 Beedeville Jackson 56 25 81 Hoxie Lawrence 45 16 61
Marshall* Searcy 77 92 169
Forrest City* St. Francis 111 122 233 Hughes St. Francis 92 50 142 Helena Phillips 127 69 169
Wynne* Cross 202 37 239 Cross County Cross 30 12 42 Parkin Cross 88 18 106
Marion* Crittenden 43 25 68 Crawfordsville Crittenden 37 15 52 Earle Crittenden 36 5 41 Common Poinsett 41 4 45 Lepanto Poinsett 30 43 73 Marked Tree Poinsett 35 6 41 Trumann Poinsett 152 43 195
138
AREA DISTRICT COUNTY INTRASTATE INTERSTATE TOTAL
III Armorel Mississippi 30 41 71 Blyt'heville* Mississippi 269 186 455 Burdett Mississippi 17 13 30 Dell Mississippi 59 59 118 Dyess Mississippi 50 31 81 Etowah Mississippi 32 43 75 Reiser Mississippi 43 32 75 Leachville Mississippi 105 78 183 Luxora Mississippi 97 58 155 Manila Mississippi 76 60 136 Osceola Mississippi 20 7 27 Shawnee Mississippi 71 43 114 Wilson Mississippi 104 55 159 Lake City Craighead .89 81 170
IV Altheimer* Jefferson 84 12 96
V Washington* Hempstead 0 54 54 Horatio Sevier 14 31 45
VI Lakeside* Chicot 73 100 173
*Designates co-ordinating school district to administer the migrant program.
139
APPENDIX E
•d A 0) •a -H 3
* CD <W -p to to «3j d +>
0 3
H 0) > »d •H o ti a
H C T3 •H ffl (0 S ffl
(0 > H
K > *d o 0) <0 o * a 0) w o a
co O CO (0 O <G
140
<r
f \
141
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Coles, Robert, Uprooted Children: The Early Life of Migrant Farm Workers, Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, 1970.
Good. Carter V., Essentials of Educational Research, New York, Meredith Publishing Company, 1966.
Greene, Shirley E., The Education of Migrant Children, Washington, D.C., National Education Association, Department of Rural Education, 1954.
Manis, Jerome G., A Study of Migrant Education, Kalamazoo, Michigan, Western Michigan University, 1958.
Moore, Truman E., The Slaves We Rent, New York, Random House, 1965.
Shotwell, Louisa R#, The Harvesters: The Story of Migrant People, New York, Doubleday and Company, 1961.
This Is the Migrant, New York, Friend-ship Press, 1958.
Sutton, Elizabeth, Knowing and Teaching the Migrant Child, Washington, D.C., National Education Association, Department of Rural Education, 1960, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 001 100.
Williams, Vinnie, The Fruit Tramp, New York, Harper & Brothers, 1957.
Wise, John E., Robert B. Nordberg, and Donald J. Reitz, Methods of Research in Education, Boston, D. C. Heath and Company, 1967.
Wright, Dale, They Harvest Despair: The Migrant Farm Worker, Boston, Beacon Press, 1965.
142
Articles
Downie, N. M., "Comparison Between Children Who Have Moved from School to School with Those Who Have Been in Continuous Residence on Various Factors of Adjustment," Journal of Educational Psychology, XLIV (January, 1953), 50-53.
Evans, J. W., Jr., "Effect of Pupil Mobility Upon Academic Achievement," National Association of Elementary School Principals, XLV (April, 1966), 18-22.
Frost, Joe L., "School and the Migrant Child," Childhood Education: Journal of the Association for Childhood Education International, XLI (November, 1964), 129-132.
Haney, George E., "Problems and Trends in Migrant Education," School Life, LVI (July, 1963), 5-9.
Heffernan, H., "From Prunes to Nuts to Cotton," Nationa1 Education Association Journal, XXXIX (October, 1950), 500-501.
Murphy, Sara, "First Come Love and Understanding," Southern Education Reporting Service, Nashville, Tennessee, March, 1968, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 042.
Perrodin, A. F. and W. T. Snipes, "Relationship of Mobility to Achievement in Reading, Arithmetic, and Language in Selected Georgia Elementary Schools," Journal of Educational Research, LIX (March, 1966), 315-319.
Stockburger, Cassandra, "Audiovisual Education for the Migrant Child," Journal of the Department of Audio Visual Instruction, X (January, 1965), 36-37.
Reports
Annotated Bibliography of Migrant Related Materials, Tallahassee, Florida, Florida State Department of Education, 1968.
Arkansas Farm Labor Report, 1968, Little Rock, Arkansas, Employment Security Division, 1968.
143
Bennett, Fays, The Condition of Farm Workers and Small Farmers in 1968, A Report to the Board of Directors of the National Sharecroppers Fund, New York, National Sharecroppers Fund, 1968.
Blubough, Ronald, School Bells for Migrants, Washington, Office of Education, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1968, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 017 359.
Children and Youth of Domestic Agricultural Migrant Families: A Survey paper, Washington, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, 1960.
California Plan for the Education of Migrant Children: An Evaluation Report, July 1_, 1967-June 30, 1968, Sacra-mento, California, State Department of Education, 1968„
Croft, Fred A., Some New Approaches to Migrant Education, A Speech to The Indiana State Department of Public Instruction, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1967, Reproduced by the Bishops' Committee for the Spanish Speaking, San Antonio, Texas, March, 1967.
Dill, Nance Afton, Migrant Children in California Schools: A 1961 Survey of Schools Serving Children of Seasonal Farm Workers, Sacramento, California State Department of Education, October, 1961, in Education Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 611.
Education of_ Children of Agricultural Migrants; Annotated Bibliography, 1954-1962, Washington, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1962.
Education of_ Children of Agricultural Migrants, Washington, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1962, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 838.
Evaluation Report, Texas project for the Education of Migrant Children, 1967-1968, Austin, Texas, Education Agency, 1968.
144
Education for Migrant Children, Austin, Texas, State Board of Education, December, 1962, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 611.
Evaluation Report for Migrant Program, School Year 19 66-6 7_, Title I ESEA (P." L. 89-750), Naples, Florida, Collier County Board of Public Instruction, October 1, 1967, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 014 349.
Fact Sheet; Children in Agriculture Under Federal Law and Other Fact Sheets, New York, United States Department of Labor, National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children of the National Child Labor Committee, June, 1963, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 639.
Fourth Annual Conference on Families Who Follow the Crops, Sacramento, California, Governor's Advisory Committee on Children and Youth, Subcommittee on the Migrant Child, February, 1964, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Nuinber ED 002 688»
Haney, George E., A School Transfer Record System for Farm Migrant Children, Washington, D.C., Office of Education, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1965, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 032.
Harris, Alton E., Summer Migrant Project: Evaluation Report, Leoti, Kansas, Unified School District Number 467, Wichita County, 1967,in Educational Resources Informa-tion Center, Document Number ED 019 162.
Heathershaw, John G«, History of Federal Interest in Migrant Education, Gainesville, Florida, Florida State Univer-sity, June, 1958, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 664.
Heathman, James E., Migrant Education: A Selected Biblio-graphy, Las Cruces, New Mexico, New Mexico State University, 1969, Educational Resources Information Center, Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
145
Heffernan, Helen, Reality, Responsibility and Respect in the Education of Children from Families Who Follow the Crops, Sacramento, California, California State Depart-ment of Education, February, 1964, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 013 675.
Hughes, John F., Report on Conferences on Special Education Programs for Migratory Children of Migratory Agricul-tural Workers, Washington, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, September, 1966, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 808.
Kemper, Conley C., ed., Texas Migrant Labor; The 1968 Migration, Austin, Texas, The Texas Good Neighbor Commission, 1968.
Kurth, Anne, ed., Children and Youth of Domestic Agricul-tural Migrant Families, Washington, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1960. A survey paper reprinted from Children and Youth in the 1960's with permission of the 1960 White House Conference on Children and Youth.
Lopex, Leo, et. al., Basis for a_ Plan of Action for Improving the Education of Migrant Children, Sacra-mento, California State Department of Education, January, 1967, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 011 805.
McGowen, Dewey, Jr., Educational Program for Children of Migratory Agricultural Workers Under the Provisions 2 . Title I_ of. the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Hartford, Connecticut, Department of Education, November, 1967, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 019 165.
Metzler, William H., and Frederic Sargent, Problems of Children, Youth, and Education Among Midcontinent Migrants, June, 1962, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 012 632.
146
Mi errant. Children and Youth, Washington, National Committee for Children and Youth, September, 1963, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 055.
Miller, Winford, Annual Evaluation for the Education of Migrant Children: Arkansas-, 1968, Little Rock, Arkansas, State Department of Education, Division of Federal Programs, 1968.
Miller, Winford, Love and Understanding of the Migrant Child: Speeches Delivered at the Migrant In-Service Training Workshop, Arkansas State University, Jones-boro, June 2-5, 1969, Little Rock, State Department of Education, Division of Federal Programs, 1969.
Orientation Classes for In-Migrant Transient Children, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Milwaukee Public Schools, December, 1962, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 722.
Part Time Citizens: Notes for Interdepartmental Conference on Migrants in Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, Kansas Council for Children and Youth, Kansas University, June, 1962, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 406.
Petrie, Ronald G., The Education of Migrant Children in Oregon, Salem, Oregon, State Board of Education/~~1962, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 649.
Florida s Migrant Education Program, Report of the Workshop, Chinsegut Hill, July 18-27, 1966, TallahaiHe, Florida, State Department of Education, January 24, 1967, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 011 471. "
Potts, Alfred M., Providing Education for Migrant Children, Denver, Colorado, State Department of Education, 1961, i n Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 658.
147
Potts, Alfred M., Report of the National Workshop on the Education of Migrant Children, New York, National Committee on Education of Migrant Children, 1964.
Program for Effective Learning: A Guide for Teachers of Migrant Children, Little Rock, Arkansas State Depart-ment of Education, Migrant Education Section, Federal Programs Division, 1969.
Proposed Curriculum Program for Texas Migratory Children, Austin, Texas, Texas Education Agency, 1963, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number 002 652.
Rapton, Avra, ejt. aJU, Domestic Migratory Farmworkers: Personal and Economic Characteristics, Washington, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report Number 121, Economic Research Service, September, 1967.
Report of the National Workshop on the Education of Migrant Children, St. Louis, Missouri, New York, The National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, March, 1964, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 00? 616.
Report on the Educational Needs of Migrant Workers, Austin, Texas, Texas Education Agency, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 642.
School and Health Record Transfer System for Migrant Children of Migratory Agriculture Workers, Sacramento, California State Department of Education, 1967, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 014 367.
School and the Migrant Child: A Survey Interpreted, New York, National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, 1963, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002~ 650. ~~
Segalman, Ralph, Army of Despair, The Migrant Worker Stream, Washington, Educational Systems Corporation, 1968, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document
- Number ED 021 671.
148
Shields, Virginia, Oral Expression, Remedial Speech and English for the Migrant Child, Grades One—Twelve, Naples, Florida, Collier County Board of Public Instruction, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 010 745.
Special program for In-Migrant and Transcient Children in Depressed Areas: Project Proposal, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Milwaukee Public Schools, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 020 251.
Standage, Mrs. Richard E., Director, Migrant Action Program: Annua1 Report, 1968, Mason City, Iowa, Iowa State Department of Education, 1968.
State of California Migrant Master Plan, Sacramento, State Office of Economic Opportunity, 1965, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 013 681.
Study of Migrant Children in Oregon Public Schools, Salem Oregon, Department of Education, April, 1960, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 615.
Summary of the Office of Economic Opportunity Programs for Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers, Washington, Educa-tional Projects, Inc., February 15, 1967, in Educa-tional Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 013 161.
Teaching Children Who Move with the Crops, Fresno, California, Fresno County Project, Fresno County Department of Education.
Texas Child Migrant Program: A Guide for Programs for the Education of Migrant Children, Austin, Texas Education Agency, 1969.
Texas Project for the Education of Migrant Children. 1967-3-968, An Evaluation Report, Austin, The Evaluation Secftion, Division of Assessment and Evaluation, Texas Education Agency, 1968.
149
Texas State Department of Health Migrant Project, Annual Report, Austin, Texas State Department of Health, 1966, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 013 680.
Third Annua1 Conference on Families Who Follow the Crops, Sacramento, California, Governor's Advisory Committee on Children and Youth, Subcommittee on the Migrant Child, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 002 620.
Thomas, Donald R., Determining an Effective Educational Program for Children of Migratory Workers in Wisconsin (Phase 1), Madison, Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin, January, 1961.
Users Manual for the Uniform Migrant Student Transfer Record and Its Associated Record Transfer System, Sacramento, California, State Department of Education, 1968.
Wey, Herbert, Coordination of Programs for Migrants, Working Paper for National Meeting on Migrant Problems, Coral Babies, Florida, Miami University, 1968, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 017 356.
Who Is The Migrant Child: Fact Sheet Number Two, New York, National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children, 1958.
Public Documents
Report of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington, United States Senate, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 1967.
Report of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington, United States Senate, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 1969.
Second Annual Report of Title I of_ the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 School Year 1966-67, Washington, Office of Education, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1967, in Educational Resources Information Center, Document Number ED 021 946„
150
Unpublished Materials
Cook, Ken, "The Relationship Between Certain School
Practices and Dropout Rates of the High Schools of Arkansas," unpublished doctor's thesis, Department of Education, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas, 1963.
Croft, Fred A., "Some New Approaches to Migrant Education," A Speech to the Bishops' Committee for the Spanish Speaking, San Antonio, Texas, March, 1967.
Jeffrey, James Fred, Jr., "An Evaluation of the Texas
Migrant Pupil Project," unpublished doctor's thesis, Department of Education, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas, 1966.
Sutton, Elizabeth, "Working More Effectively With Migrant Children in our Schools," a paper presented at the Migrant In-Service Workshop, Arkansas State University, June 2-5, 1969. Mimeo.
Wood, Helen Cowan, "The Educational Needs of Migrant
Children," a paper presented at the California State Conference on Migrant Education, September 23-24, 1966. Mimeo.
"Working with Migrant Children in our Schools," Tallahassee, Florida, State Department of Education, and the Palm Beach County Public Schools, West Palm Beach, undated. Mimeo.