HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaabsa0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCOMENT RESUME
00139 - [A1051687]
Indian Education in the Public School Systep Needs More
Direction from the Congress. 5-164031(1); HRD-76-172. March 14,
1977. 43 pp. + appendices (13 pp.).
Report to the Congress; by Robert F. Keller, Acting Comptroller
General.
Issue Area: Education, Training, and Employment Programs (1100);
Education, Traininge and Employment Programs: Programs for
the Educationally Deprived (1102).
Contact: Human Resources riv.
Budget Function: Education, danpower, and Sccial Services:
Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education (501).
organization Concerned: Office of Indian Education.
Congressional Relevance: House Committee on Education and Labor;
Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare.
Authority: Indian Education Act, title IV (20 U.S.C. 241aa et
seg. (Supp. V); P.L. 92-318).
A review of special Indian education focused on
projects carried out by grantees, local commtnity involvement,
and the quality of program administration. Under funding
authorized by the Indian Education Act cf 1972, about $141
million bas spent by grantees for special projerts to meet
Indian children's needs in elementary and secondary schools.
Findings/Conclusions: Several problems were zcted in carrying
out programs. Local educational agencies did not use uniform
methods and criteria to identify Indian children served. The
definition Indian is too geAeral in legislation ani
regulations to allow for eligibility determinaticn. Special
educational needs of Indian children were not adequately defined
or assessed and thus funds were used for various projects
according to local interpretations. Also, program goals were not
established and some grantees did aot evaluate project
effectiveness. Participation by Indian parents was not always
active, partly because of lack of guidance from local
educational agencies. Program administration by the office of
Indian Education needs improvement. RecomLendations: Congress
should modify leg.islation to clearly define eligi.ble Indian
children and their needs. The Commissioner of Education shopild:
(1) establish clear goals and means to measure effectiveness of
Indian education; (2) require annual project evaluation; (3)
improve technical assistance to grantees; (4) clarify parent
committee responsibility; and (F) require imptoved information
systems for resolving grantee problems. (HTW)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaabsa0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)