Evaluations of compensatory education programs provided under Chapter 1 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act (ECIA) indicate that the traditional provision of a less challenging curriculum, limited achievement goals, and emphasis on pull-out programs for compensatory instruction actually hamper the ability of low-achieving students to develop critical thinking skills, lower their learning expectations, and stigmatize them as inferior. Because of a lack of coordination between regular and compensatory education classes, Chapter 1 students end up with less instructional time than other students, and the reading skills teaching they receive is not related to other learning and study areas. Chapter 1's emphasis on mastery learning techniques that may improve standardized test scores fails to help students learn how to work independently and develop cognitive strategies. Disadvantaged students continue to be taught relatively low-level reading skills that do not transfer to the higher-level knowledge and skills that comprise literacy. Remedial mathematics programs have been criticized for fragmenting the curriculum into enrichment programs, differential programs, and developmentally based programs rather than emphasizing the interdependence of ideas and the use of reasonable procedures to arrive at an answer. Disadvantaged students need access to a sound core curriculum that is as rich and balanced as that provided to high achieving students. (FMW)