children out of school in america - University of Tennessee Digital ...

-secondary school children by sex and race;
frequency and duration (Appendix T, Table III
and Table IV)
-family characteristics such as poverty indicated
by AFDC and other public assistance as sole or
partial support, educational attainment of head
of household, and female-headed households
(Chapter 5, Table VII).
III. OCR Data
COF Staff extracted from the OCR Reports raw
figures on the number of students, by race and
ethnic group, enrolled in schools, the number enrolled
in various types of special education classes
and the number of students suspended during the
1972-1973 school year. No information was included
in the reports on file in the OCR office (at
4th Street and Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20202) on the percentages of students,
by race and ethnic group enrolled in the school districts,
enrolled in various types of special education
programs or suspended at least once. These computations
were performed by COF from the raw
figures extracted from the OCR reports.
OCR data on special needs (EMR) was analyzed
for Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi and
South Carolina, (Chapter 4, Table I and Appendix
M, Tables I-V). School discipline data was analyzed
for Arkansas, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio and
South Carolina, (Chapter 5, Tables II, III and V and
Appendix R, Tables I-V). In addition, we analyzed
suspension (Appendix S, Appendix T, Tables I and
II) and special education OCR data (Appendix N,
Table I) on 15 of the 17 districts where we surveyed.
IV. Other Information (Chapter 3, Table II; Appendix
N, Tables II and III; and Appendix U).
COF staff also collected information on school
programs, policies and practices in 17 school districts
where the children in our survey went to
school. We interviewed teachers, counselors and
officials, asking primarily about special education,
discipline and other policies which could exclude
children from school.
V. Sample Questionnaire
All monitors used an identical questionnaire prepared
by CDF. They also received an accompany-
ing packet of materials which included an instruction
sheet, a memorandum explaining the basis for the
report, a set of definitions of terms, and a guide to
reasons why children might be out of school, in
special schools, or in special programs. All monitors
participated in workshops conducted by CDF staff
members before beginning the survey.
All school official interviews were conducted by
CDF and AFSC staff working from much more
detailed material.
In many cases, monitors recorded surnames of
persons interviewed. Most often they recorded just
the family relationship of the person interviewed if
an adult ("mother," "father," etc.) or the first name
if a child was interviewed. Addresses were almost
always recorded. On the "children in household
chart" as well as the individual sheets for children
with problems, first names of children were recorded
so that we would not confuse each child referred to
when we later analyzed the questionnaries. Because
of this identifying information, individual questionnaires
will not be released to any group or individual
outside the·Children's Oefense Fund.
Following are the list of definitions and the questionnaire.
They are included in their original form
with only the empty spaces for monitors to write in
omitted. If we were to do this study again, we would
clarify and revise the questionnaire. For example,
we would probably delete references to "exclusion"
and "non-enrollment" which are somewhat misleading
terms and substitute the term "out of schooL"
We also would change the first page of the questionnaire
labeled "Monitor Sheet H" to reflect changes
and instructions discussed with all monitors in the
workshops:
--change "H" to "A"
--change title to reflect that the survey covered children
with special needs in school as well as children
out of school
-add "and ethnicity" after "Race"
-