This conference reaction paper tracks some of the common themes that run through five papers presented at the same conference at the session on curricular and instructional issues in compensatory education with special reference to Chapter 1 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 1981. The reaction paper attempts to interpret the diverse lines on inquiry represented in the five research papers and establish a general framework for thinking about compensatory education programs. It focuses on basic conditions that seem to account for how instructional effects are achieved. The five papers make a case that the conventional wisdom of instructional design for compensatory education is wrong. Mastery-type plans with their emphasis on small steps through the content may prepare students to do well on standardized achievement tests, but the validity of that criterion for judging what students know and are able to do is questionable. Compensatory students are getting higher scores on standardized tests, but their ability to do schoolwork independently is not improving. These papers suggest that the instructional designs typical of compensatory education fragment the educational experiences of students and, thus, fail to provide them with the coherent mental representations necessary to do schoolwork. This effect appears to be especially pronounced when students are grouped apart from their peers for remedial instruction. These conclusions point to a need for redirection at the level of curriculum and instruction. That redirection is likely to require a fundamental change in how Chapter 1 is designed and administered. A list of references is included. (PS)