Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

A.

Assignment to a person or group the responsibility for making needed
improvements in education and other public and private services
for the benefit of migrant workers and their families.

This group is to have access and impact into all agencies serving migrant workers and their families. Better coordination processes established in order that exchange of concepts in education and related services coincide across state lines.

B.

Development of administrative procedures that accommodate interstate cooperation, i.e., personnel exchange visits, participation with state liaison and multi-state coordinated projects.

C.

Establishment of a system for conducting interstate planning, i.e., state education agency allocation of funds to effect a mechanism for improved interstate planning.

III.

Recommendations for Federal-State-Local Relationships

A.

The U.S. Office of Education (USOE) should mandate interstate planning and cooperation.

B.

Require by interstate cooperatives or other administrative structures using federal funds to develop federal-state-local operating procedures for cooperation.

C.

Standardize, by using comparable operating criteria, state, and local needs assessment and evaluation between states.

TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

Two broad categories of recommendations were developed. The first section

consists of task force position statements that address goals for migrant

education, limitations or guidelines in pursuit of cooperation, task force

strategy and the need for more public information concerning migrant stu

dents and families.

Section Two of the report highlights critical areas of change needed at

the federal, state and local levels.

Within this second category are such

recommendations as assigning coordination responsibility, administrative

procedures, interstate planning, and federal and state program regulations. Also included are suggestions for project and task force action to be im

plemented during the future months.

These are reflected in project objec

tives and tasks for 1977.

Additional recommendations that relate to children of migrant workers and

their families will be presented in subsequent task force publications.

Section One

Task Force Position Statements

I.

Goals for the Education of Migrant Students

The following statements represent the position of the ECS task force on migrant education. The statements reflect the basic assumptions

made by the task force and provide a framework for understanding sub

sequent recommendations.

It is recognized that:

A.

The educational goals and expectations established for migrant

students must be the same as those for all students in preschool

through postsecondary programs.

B.

Program goals should be student oriented, rather than program

oriented, so as to insure that programs serve students individually.

instead of institutions.

C.

Opportunities must be developed for states to cooperatively provide

services and to meet their legal and moral obligations to migrant

students and their families in order to implement the educational

goals on an interstate basis.

D.

In order to implement these objectives successfully (on an inter

state basis), some administrative as well as student-oriented

goals are needed.

E. Migrant programs must address the unique educational and related

needs of migrant students, particularly the expansion of existing

programs for limited or non-English-speaking migrant students as

a means of equalizing educational opportunities.

II. Traditional and Legal Constraints Affecting Education and Other Com

prehensive Services for Migrant Families

The diversity of responsibility for education and other traditional

migrant services on federal, state and local levels is reflected in

numerous laws, regulations and customs, many of which were enacted

before the education of migrant students became a recognized equal

educational opportunity need.

The Interstate Migrant Education Task

Force recognizes that:

A.

Constitutional limits and national traditions regarding state and

local prerogatives exist that restrict the nature of possible change

in education and other migrant services.

B. Federal or state efforts must not usurp the constitutional preroga

tives of respective levels of government.

C. The lack of national, state and local policies (statutes, regulations

and administrative guidelines) concerning interstate, interagency and intrastate cooperation is a major barrier to interstate coopera

tion.

D. There are limitations on state and local expenditures.

State and

local funds are often earmarked for certain services or age groups.

E. Compulsory attendance laws varying from state to state are a

potential barrier to providing continuity in the education of mi

grants.

F.

The administrative procedures of state government agencies are

sometimes barriers to interstate cooperation.

G.

Local schools as well as states are reluctant to make comparisons

of pupil performance.

III.

Implementation: Position Statements on a Task Force Strategy to Create
Better Educational Opportunities and Other Comprehensive Services for
Migrant Families

It is recognized that:

A.

One of the primary aims of the task force is to establish an inter

state and interagency system of cooperation that will maximize the

quality of education and other services for migrant families and

emphasize each state's responsibilities in these areas.

B.

The goals of interstate and interagency cooperation may best be

achieved by utilizing third-party intermediary, regional approaches,

and multistate and migrant stream structures.

c. The Education Commission of the States, or a similar third party,

must be involved in efforts to achieve interstate cooperation and provide opportunities for activities currently not possible under federal grant guidelines or restricted by the amount of monies pro

vided to the states for administration of migrant education programs.

« PreviousContinue »