AN ANALYSIS OF THE EDUCATION 05' THE CHILDREN OF MIGRANT .../67531/metadc... · 150 pp., 31 tables,...

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


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


Total Per ce


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*


Total Per cent** School

Level Geographic

Area


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


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


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


Total Per cent*

School Level

Geographic Area


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


Total Per cent*

School Level

Geographic Area


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


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


-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


Total Per cent*

School Level

Geographic Area


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


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


Total Per cent School

Level Geographic

Area


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


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


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


77

Category Item Number Per cent*

Difficult 129 53 Average 102 42

Hath Skilled 12 5 Comprehension Comprehension

Total 243 100


Composition Skilled 4 2

Total 192 100


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.

Date post:	13-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times