Update on the Girard Foundation Grant for the Evaluation Analysis of One-to-One Academy Dr. Dennis Johnston Dr. Richard J. Beach Classroom of the Future.

Update on the Girard Foundation Grant for the

Evaluation Analysis of One-to-One Academy

Dr. Dennis JohnstonDr. Richard J. Beach

Classroom of the Future Foundation

December 8, 2006

22

One-to-One Academyat Lemon Grove Middle School

• Each student hasa personal tabletwith wireless netat school & home

33

One-to-One Academy Support

Estimated $495,000 over 3 years•Lemon Grove School District•Lemon Grove Middle School

•Classroom of the Future Foundation

•The San Diego Foundation

•Girard Foundation•Cox Communications

•Motorola•DT Research

44

Key Findings

• Student attendance significantly improved• Teacher instructional practice changed to

allow more individualized instruction• Academic performance improved,

however, group differences were not statistically significant

• Leadership initiative for district built on preliminary findings

55

Research Evaluation

• Collaboration between Classroom of the Future Foundation and Lemon Grove School District and teachers at Lemon Grove Middle School grades 6, 7 and 8

• Information analyzed:– Student demographic data– Attendance data– Academic achievement data– Teacher interviews

66

Cohort Design

• Grow from 60 to 180 to 300 studentsin 3 years

• Compare effects of 1-1 vs 2-1technology

77

Cohort Design

3 years of 1-13 years of 1-1

2 years of 1-12 years of 1-1

1 year of 1-11 year of 1-1

88

Days Absent Decreased

• One-to-One cohorts evidenced less than half the days absent than two-to-one cohorts

• Suggests greater school connectedness, increased school completion and less likelihood of dropping out

• Fiscal impact: $100,000 for both middle schools– District revenue could increase $108,000 annually =

3 days X 1200 2-1 students @ $30 per student

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

3 Year 2 Year 1 Year

2-1 Cohort 1-1 Cohort

99

Teacher Instructional Practice

• Teacher expectations are positively impacted through One-to-One

• Instructional decision-making processes are informed through One-to-One participation

• Student engagement and movement toward student centric instruction has increased as a result of One-to-One

1010

Teacher Expectations: Technology as Teaching Tool

• “Never thought it would be used everyday…but it is!”

• “I am able to work closer with kids in smaller groups”

• “I wish my textbook was online…students and parents would have no excuses for not having resources available”

• “Technology has made many more resources available”

1111

Teacher Perceptions: Impact on Students in One-to-One

• Students not intimidated by technology• Students more engaged• Students more independent• E-mail use changes

– 6th grade is used in class for project discussions– 7th grade tends to be more gossip oriented which

requires more monitoring

1212

Teacher Insights:Instructional Practice Improved?

• “The ability to differentiate, prepare and monitor kids is much easier”

• “More student centered … able to work with kids in smaller groups at about the same level”

• “The ability to give immediate feedback”• “Students are on their own more; making

choices and moving at their own pace”

1313

CST Scores Increase as Years in One-to-One Increase

(Test Scores Reflect 2005 CSTs)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Raw CST Score

0 1 2 3

Years in One-to-One

MathELA

1414

Proficiency Levels Increase as Years in One-to-One Increase

(1=Far Below Basic; 2=Below Basic; 3=Basic; 4=Proficient; 5=Advanced)

0

1

2

3

4

Average Proficiency

Level

0 1 2 3

Years in One-to-One

MathELA

1515

Few Differences in Test Scores are Statistically Significant

• Darker color indicates greater significance• Mobility factor reduced cohort size and diversity

(more lower performing students left district)

1616

Bold Leadership Initiative

• Preliminary results presented to Lemon Grove school board and new Superintendent Ernie Anastos in February 2006

• Created “Middle School Student Success Model” for 1,500 middle schools students in 2006-07– Standard curriculum for students performing at grade level– Strategic intervention for students one grade behind with

extra math and language arts and on-line history/science– Intensive intervention for students more than one grade

level behind with more individualized instruction through 1-1

• Rely upon 1-1 technology with home network access to school curriculum resources

1717

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

1818

Research Results Summary

• One-to-One technology improved instructional practice, student attendance and academic performance

• Statistical measures of test scores are fraught with challenges from mobility rates and incomparable test measures

• Results built confidence of school board and district leadership to institute radical change in middle school environment