91直播

Over the past few years, the 10,500-student has grown by about 400 students a year, and Superintendent Charles J. Shackett invested heavily in technology to attract new students. The district, based in Idaho Falls, Idaho, built an eCenter, decked out with computers, that allows high school students to take online courses from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. as it fits their schedules. And it created a virtual academy of online courses, in hopes of luring back students who had left the district to be home-schooled.

Both were expensive projects, and Mr. Shackett used money from various sources to make it happen, including a voter-approved bond issue. But he also tapped into the district鈥檚 funds from Title I, the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act program that supports interventions for disadvantaged students. The federal aid went particularly to purchase software for the eCenter and for the online curriculum used by the virtual academy.

鈥淲e want to be the lead on technology,鈥� Mr. Shackett said, and looking at all the ways to pay for it, including such federal funding streams, is important.

Districts across the country are in the same bind: They want to invest in technology and especially in virtual education programs, but a sour economy means tighter budgets. In addition, federal lawmakers have defunded the Enhancing Education Through Technology, or EETT, program, which once provided $700 million a year in grants to districts for educational technology, but had been whittled to $100 million in annual funding before being scrapped.

In response to those financial challenges, district leaders are looking at more creative financial use of federal programs like Title I, which experts describe as particularly flexible. Other potential federal sources are the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which provides support for special education services, and the ESEA鈥檚 Title III, which provides grants to states and districts to help English-language learners gain proficiency in the language and to assist immigrant students鈥� transition to American schools. But Douglas A. Levin, the executive director of the , or SETDA, based in Glen Burnie, Md., said tapping into such funds can be 鈥渂oth an opportunity and a challenge鈥� for districts. Strict federal rules exist about how the money can be used, and not all districts or schools will qualify.

Some of the restrictions make it 鈥渞eally difficult to scale innovation across a district,鈥� Mr. Levin said.

Streams of federal dollars like Title I are often the first place to look for funding when dollars are cut elsewhere, said Richard M. Long, the executive director for governmental relations for the Washington-based . But schools and districts must take great care to follow the rules associated with that money, he said.

For example, schools and districts may use Title I money for most educational endeavors designed to improve outcomes for disadvantaged children. However, that money must be targeted specifically at disadvantaged students鈥攁nd not shared with the general student population鈥攗nless 40 percent or more of students at a school qualify as low-income. Title I money can be used schoolwide if a school meets that 40 percent threshold, Mr. Long said. Any program paid for with Title I money that is used to improve instruction must be part of a school plan reviewed by the state, he said.

Restrictions on Funding

Funding under the IDEA has similar restrictions permitting purchases to be used only for special education students. However, when those students are in mainstream classrooms, that technology can be shared with all the students.

For instance, at the , a K-12 charter school with 3,000 students, the head of school, Desiree Laughlin, has used IDEA money to pay for assistive technologies for her special education students, who number about 300.

In particular, she has purchased a speech-to-text software program that allows students with disabilities to access online textbooks and any other school-related content, by having the computer 鈥渞ead鈥� text aloud. The software also works the other way, allowing students to dictate papers and responses to be entered as text. Ms. Laughlin said she has not used that software with other students in the school, though she believes it could aid many students. But her awareness of the software has led to her find low-cost or free programs for some struggling learners not classified as special education students.

鈥淲e have a lot of students that just like the auditory support, and it fits their learning style,鈥� she said.

In the 6,800-student K-8 in Phoenix, district officials have tapped Title I and IDEA funds for technology projects. With 94 percent of students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunches, educational technology projects paid for with Title I money can reach all students, said Robyn Griffith, a technology trainer in the district.

The district has purchased reading-intervention software for special education students that can be shared with the large ELL population the district serves, since many special education students attend mainstream classes.

鈥淲hen these students are mainstreamed, the idea that they have a tool and only one or two students in the class can use it is patently ridiculous,鈥� Ms. Griffith said, 鈥減articularly with technology.鈥�

She said her district鈥檚 ELL funds mostly go to pay for literacy specialists and have not been used much for technology. Instead, the district is seeking out Title I dollars for such projects, since 鈥渢here鈥檚 more of that to go around, and the technology stuff has a tendency to cross student groups, so it鈥檚 very universal,鈥� she said.

The state of Arizona has been actively encouraging schools to do just that, said Cathy J. Poplin, the deputy associate superintendent for educational technology for the .

鈥淲e鈥檝e really encouraged the blending of money,鈥� as state funding and EETT funding have dwindled, she said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 great opportunity there.鈥�

At the 8,500-student , where 60 percent of students qualify for free or reduced-price lunches, Title I aid is being used a bit differently. The head of school, Matt Arkin, said he most often invests in human capital.

Mr. Arkin has used Title I money to pay for additional staff members to support family engagement鈥攁n important investment, in his view, for low-income students whose families may not be familiar with online education and how to support it.