PDF pending restoration
ERIC Number: ED172974
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1979-May
Reference Count: 0
Structural Approaches to Meeting Rural Education Needs.
Mack, David P.; Stephens, E. Robert
In recent years various structural approaches have been used in the United States to improve the delivery of elementary and secondary educational services to rural students. Post World War II interest in reorganization of local districts into larger administrative units has shifted to three other approaches popularized in the 1970's (each with supporters and opponents), i.e., provisions of specialized services from decentralized state education agencies (SEAs), formation of special district education service agencies (ESAs), and development of education cooperatives. A current study of characteristics of 31 networks of all types of service agencies in 26 states reveals that a majority of the Special District ESAs are making more significant contributions of programs and services to public Local Education Agencies (LEAs) than a majority of the Regionalized and Cooperative ESA networks. Most Special Districts have a more comprehensive, faster growing staff. Federal involvement in all three approaches appears crucial. Regional SEA/ESAs enjoy more state involvement and Cooperatives have more public LEA involvement. The federal government should adopt a consistent funding policy for ESAs and all districts should receive their fair share of services. Federal school improvement efforts should take advantage of the unique ability of ESAs to service rural schools. (SB)
Descriptors: Administrative Agencies, Administrative Organization, Agency Role, Comparative Analysis, Delivery Systems, Education Service Centers, Educational Administration, Educational Development, Educational Improvement, Elementary Secondary Education, Government School Relationship, Organizational Change, Program Evaluation, Rural Education, School Districts, State Departments of Education, Success
Publication Type: Speeches/Meeting Papers; Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: N/A
Sponsor: Bureau of Elementary and Secondary Education (DHEW/OE), Washington, DC.; National Inst. of Education (DHEW), Washington, DC.; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Education (DHEW), Washington, DC.; Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Paper presented at the Rural Education Seminar (College Park, Maryland, 29-31 May 1979)