Table of Contents
Executive Summary:Memo to Texas RE: Alternative Education
1
Dropouts 2
Effects of Poverty
Educating beyond Irritating Behaviors
3
4Computer BasedConcerted Cultivation
5
Computer Based Curriculum (CBC)
6
7
8
Best Practices In Alt Ed9
Legacy of Success: Pathfinders10
A+LS Comprehensive System Description Authored by: D.A.Tijerina March 5, 2010
Prepared for Austin ISD Request for Proposal – Spring 2010 This document was never used, nor presented to the client.
Executive Summary
To: Curriculum Review Team
From: Derly Tijerina, Independent Consultant
Date: March 2010
Re: A+nywhere Learning System (A+LS)
About this Document
This proposal is about packaging and delivering effective instructional plans to any student based on
the guidance and control of a teacher. But first, we glance on how we got here.
For a variety of reasons, educators seek a way to help individual students with specific academic
progress. Campus and district administrators look to curriculum and technology to support teachers
in the quest. The blended art of instructional technology offers instructional content to teachers to
“supplement” traditional classroom instruction. Curriculum identifies the specific academic goals and
technology provides processes to store and deliver these supplemental materials to teachers, so that
they can help students.
When a student achieves the targeted goals, the process is effective. When a group of teachers help
targeted students, then their process is effective. A district that builds processes to help teachers to
deliver custom (individualized, targeted, aligned and packaged) instructional plans helps teachers to
effectively help students.
So again, this proposal is about packaging and delivering effective instructional plans to any
student based on the guidance and control of a teacher. With that as a focal point, we describe
content, tools and support systems that make your instructional technology efforts effective.
A+LS Comprehensive System Description Authored by: D.A.Tijerina March 5, 2010
A+ Learning System Proposal March 2010
Page 2
Simply too Complicated
The simple goal is to help individual students learn. It quickly gets complicated when we separate
reading/ELA, math, science and social studies, then spread it over pre-k through college readiness,
offer a variety of instructional technology-products/delivery-mechanisms/coordinating-processes, add
dimensions for special needs, and finally factor-in constraints in human capital. But nobody really
wants it to be complicated.
So here, we will concentrate on helping individual students with targeted-learning and
effective processes used to plan (design, store and deliver) teacher-guided student-learning
experiences.
Specifically, that means that an individual learner, progressing through a custom learning plan, is the
cellular event in our plans. The only complexity that happens is due to variations of custom plans.
They don’t all have to be custom, but everyone needs simple rules. This provides some clarity in
how-and-when a plan is created, selected, replicated, modified and/or distributed. If a campus
designs “individual learning plans” for a group of learners, how-and-when does a teacher assign the
right learning plan to the right student?
“. . . an individual learner, progressing through
a custom learning plan, is the cellular event
in our plans.”
A+LS Comprehensive System Description Authored by: D.A.Tijerina March 5, 2010
A+ Learning System Proposal March 2010
Page 3
Keep It Simple
To keep it simple, we focus on three steps in a process and three levels of operation.
Teachers: The teacher-student level is the most basic, but it also defines the minimum unit for the
process (i.e. the “cellular event” or smallest unit of “systemic” learning). That is, a teacher
guides the student to an individual learning plan. So s/he plans, then monitors the student during
the learning process and reports the progress as needed. A student progressing through an
individual learning plan for a specified period and recorded in data is one completed unit (i.e. a tutorial
sequence, an intervention, or a remediation plan).
Campus: At the campus level (level two of the three operational levels), we focus on types-of-
students and types-of-teachers who have access to types-of-delivery-mechanisms (which each
deliver an instructional plan to a student). Campuses design, store and deliver instructional
technology options for teachers to achieve as many units of success (one-student achieving one-
targeted-goal over one-time-period) as possible.
District: The district allocates resources in a formula that includes curriculum guidance (to
identify goals), technology infrastructure (networks, student-devices, instructional management
systems and training/professional development) and operational scheduling supports. The
district then, plans “capacity” by student populations and tries to match support capacity (i.e.
planning tools and reporting/monitoring systems to guide and assist campuses) to help their
teachers to help individual learners.
The whole system is simplified by coordinating all activities in a three-step process within each level.
Each level has their own details to 1) plan, 2) monitor and 3) report on student-learning-progress.
This proposal describes tools and instructional supplements that can fully support this three-by-three
process planning environment.
A+LS Comprehensive System Description Authored by: D.A.Tijerina March 5, 2010
A+ Learning System Proposal March 2010
Page 4
Background
This memo provides an Executive Summary of the capabilities of the A+ Learning System and
introduces background and supporting materials, which distinguish the A+LS as a versatile and
comprehensive system of instructional supplements (content), assessments and planning
tools. The overall objective is to increase capacity in schools/school-systems to effectively deliver
individualized learning plans.
Individualized learning plans consist of instructional material (available for self-paced learning), which
can be selected in response to recent assessments and organized by LEA (Local Education Agency)
educators to meet immediate instructional needs on a student-by-student basis. A “system” of
instructional supplements provides building blocks, which educators use in a variety of planning and
delivery methods. These delivery methods vary and planning takes place at all levels (student, class,
non-local-group, school/campus/building and district levels). But ultimately, individual learners are
experiencing carefully sequenced content intended to achieve a goal (a named objective in terms of
skills or performance expectations.)
Capacity to deliver individualized learning plans increases when teachers can guide more
students to more effective learning plans. Therefore, capacity implies a process in which teachers
guide students and campus/district support systems guide teachers. American Education Corp (AEC
– publishers of the A+nywhere Learning System) and Educational Technology Learning, together,
build systems for campus/district planners to use to assist teachers and for teachers to use to help
students.
A+LS Comprehensive System Description Authored by: D.A.Tijerina March 5, 2010
A+ Learning System Proposal March 2010
Page 5
What the A+ Learning System Includes
The goal of building capacity means that instructional content will be systematically selected
and delivered. That means that campus/district planners need to distribute pre-packaged learning
plans, while teachers maintain the freedom to adjust/refine a learning plan for an individual student.
Every learning plan is aligned to curriculum guides. Pre-packaged learning plans are designed for a
type-of-student and a type-of-academic-problem. Pre-packaged plans are ready-to-use when
needed. The teacher customizes a plan for one student, without disrupting other plans. The objective
is to balance between the two; distributed-pre-packaged plans vs. teacher-refined-custom plans.
This requires a single integrated system that includes tools to plan, monitor and report. But to be
complete, it also requires these tools to operate at all three levels:
Teachers must be able to effectively plan, monitor and report on the progress of
one learner (within campus/district guidelines).
Campuses must be able to define and pre-package learning plans, which are
targeted for use by a type-of-teacher with a type-of-student. And finally,
Districts must to able to efficiently and effectively provide a planning system
(which produces and distributes packaged learning plans), a monitoring system, a
reporting system and instructional materials/content to flow to the individual
learners via custom-or-packaged learning plans.
Therefore, the A+ Learning System includes the following:
A+LS Comprehensive System Description Authored by: D.A.Tijerina March 5, 2010
A+ Learning System Proposal March 2010
Page 6
Therefore, the A+ Learning System includes the following:
Content
Instructional Content (also called lessons or “activities” within A+LS software) for delivery-to and use-by individual students or for teacher-directed class work
A Full Suite of Assessments ready-to-go for K-12+College Readiness
TEKS and TAKS Manuals, which are embedded and dynamically linked to activities/lessons
Tools: Plan, Monitor, Report
An Instructional Management System to plan, align, prepackage and distribute learning plans (includes Planning, Monitoring and Reporting Components)
A full set of Design, Management and Administration Tools to configure, adjust and create any of the above (lessons / assessments / monitoring & reporting processes)
A comprehensive Assessment Management System (130,000 aligned assessment items)
A Curriculum Framework for coordinating and synchronizing any third party Computer Based Curriculum (CBC) to extend and enhance existing content
Capacity-Building Support
Support and reference documents
Training (supplemented by A+ University Topical Training Video-Vignettes)
Professional Development
A+ Learning System CapabilitiesProblem‐Solving View
Individual Learning Plans Course Credit Recovery Curriculum
Ali
Student Class Campus District
PlanLearning Plans
RtI Level 2
RtI Level 3
Student Type
Grade Level
Remediation
Tutorial/RtI
Alignments
Course Definitions
Short/Frequent Assessments
Progress by Class
St d d
Universal Screening Benchmarks
Monitor Progress Reports
SSI Reports
Standards Attainment
RtI Level 2
Credits Earned
At‐Risk Students
Total Usage (by Site)
R t
Growth Measure (Post‐test minus Pre‐Test)
Progress by Lesson (activity time‐on‐task)
Class/Section
Grade Level
Graduation & Dropout Rates
Data for:
AYP
A biliReport (activity time on task)
Mastery (by TEKS Skill or TAKS Objective)
Grade Level
Non‐local Group(sub‐population)
RtI Level 2
RtI Level 3
Accountability
District‐Driven Assessments
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
delta 9000Curriculum Systems for
Continuous Improvement
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 1
3 Info User Communities: Why Their Needs are Different
Title: Info Manufacturing
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Goal: To build a useful framework for any learning system.
Educational Results, LLC helps educators design, build and operate district-wide curriculum systems. The following p y f gpages are intended to frame the discussion for stakeholders and project team members at various levels of planning.
Small districts and large districts alike must have full coverage with a local mix of people, products and processes. Educational Results helps you to monitor and operate an effective set of services which can provide continuous and
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 2
effective set of services, which can provide continuous and on-going support for classroom instruction.
The Challenge
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
delta 9000Curriculum Systems for
Continuous Improvement
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 3
3 Info User Communities: Why Their Needs are Different
Title: Info Manufacturing
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Policy Level;Federal, State, Local
District Level
Organizational Layers: The balance between generalizations and details.
Teachers
Campus Level
Plan Level;Resource Allocation, Scheduling, Staffing
Teacher;Specific Student(s), TAKS
t TEKS kill
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 4
> > time > > > > time > >NOW
3 Levels of Needs
concepts, TEKS skills
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Organizational Layers: Levels of Use Determine Details of Plans
District Level
Teachers
Funding
Campus Level
Projections(expectations)
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 5
> > time > > > > time > >NOW
Budget
3 Levels of Needs
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Organizational Layers: Operations Reach from Campus Budget to Daily Support
District Level
Teachers
Campus Level Staffing
Logistics& Support
Planning
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 6
> > time > > > > time > >NOW
Budget
Scheduling
3 Levels of Needs
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Organizational Layers: Teachers Need Detail & Privacy Protection
District Level
Teachers
Campus Level
TrainingPlanning
PrepReportingFollow-up
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 7
> > time > > > > time > >NOW
3 Levels of Needs
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Organizational Layers: From Cycle to Cycle General Needs are the Same
Current NeedsDistrict Level
Future NeedsDistrict Level
Teachers
New Cycle BudgetCampus Level
HISTORY:Semester or Short Cycle
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 8
> > time > > > > time > >NOW
3 Levels of Needs
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
delta 9000Curriculum Systems for
Continuous Improvement
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 13
3 Layers of Information Delivery
Title: Info Manufacturing
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
School BoardCommunity,
Constituency, Teachers
Regulatory Agencies
Reporting: Info for External Use
Localization Layer
District Reporting
cted
Info
rmat
ion Protected Inform
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 14
Storage(Information Repository)
Prot
ec
mation
3 Levels of Delivery
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
District
Partners, Planners, Patrons
Community Meetings
Reporting: Publishing for Target Audiences
Localization Layer
Reporting
Published for Target Audience
orm
atio
n Protecte
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 15
Storage(Information Repository)
Prot
ecte
d In
fo
ed Information
3 Levels of Delivery
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
DistrictPartners, Planners, Patrons
CommunityConcerns
Campus Information: Outside Influences on Information
Strategy & Goals
Reporting Objectives
Localization Layer
Reporting
Campus Info Instruments
Policies & Procedures
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 16
Data & Information
Models
Report Templates, Data Sets, Forms Data
Records
3 Levels of Delivery
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Request 1
Request 2 Request 3
Campus Information: Creating Reusable Models
Implementation 1
Localization Layer
Reporting
Campus Info Instruments
Implementation 2 & 3
Guidelines
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 17
Data & Information
Models
Report Templates, Data Sets, Forms Data
Records
3 Levels of Delivery
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Data/Documents: Using Models for Raw Data Delivery
Reporting
Campus Info Instruments
Archive Reports, Spreadsheet Views,
Unfiltered Data
Localization Layer
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 18
Data & Information
Models
Report Templates, Data Sets, Forms Data
Records
Data/Documents
3 Levels of Delivery
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
Compliance Reporting, Domain-Specific Apps,
Portals by Topic
Dir Level
Ops Level
Activity Level
Data/Documents: User Interfaces (Skins), Applications and Views
Reporting
Campus Info Instruments
Data Marts, Spreadsheet Views,
Unfiltered Data
Localization Layer
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 19
Data & Information
Models
Report Templates, Data Sets, Forms Data
Records
Data/Documents
3 Levels of Delivery
Overview - Data UtilizationDelta9000 – Curriculum Systems Overview
delta 9000Curriculum Systems for
Continuous Improvement
Copyright 2008Delta 9000, LLCSlide 20
Title: Info Manufacturing
1
Best Practice Continuum (BPC)
T. Kuhn (1996) observe the “failure of existing rules is the prelude to a search for new ones”
(p.68).
The 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act allows
opportunities for the prelude of a powerful teaching and learning model to be developed,
implemented and monitored to accommodate the vast array of learning diversity within our
educational systems. Math and Reading content, presented through the Cognitive-Field
Interactionist Learning Theory leads to improved levels of learning as measured by the Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Specifically, at Tiers II and III, a Best Practice Continuum will supply:
diagnostic, electronic assessments identify individual (TEKS)
identified TEKS needing immediate intervention
prioritized, target-specific intervention treatments for struggling students
support for least restrictive environment (LRE) goals, but also the quasi-concept of
Universal Design (UD)
tools targeted for electronic prescriptive and classroom Direct Teach
The overall intervention design must be productively implemented within various educational
case study scenarios.
The basis for the use of the Tier II intervention curriculum will emphasize relevancy and
engagement to motivate students to mastery, and beyond, state and national standards. The
constructivist approach (promoted by Dewey, Vygotsky, Bruner, and others) creates conditions
for outstanding student achievement by encouraging interactive learning in which students are
engaged in a dialogue with teachers rather than simply taking information on face value.
Previously passive students become interested in learning through personal involvement. Setting
an expectation that students will take ownership for their learning eliminates the fog that besets a
lecture-style learning environment of the mid 1900s.
Even the most disadvantaged students can be engaged by an interactive learning environment,
especially after they realize they have much to offer others. [1 Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991).
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press. 2 Brown, J.S., Collins, A. & Duguid, S. (1989). 3 Situated cognition and the culture of
learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.3 4 Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A.
(1998). 5 Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in America’s Schools,
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, p. 8.] The electronic curriculum, both diagnostic and prescriptive,
will facilitate this type of learning environment where students are encouraged to ask questions,
2
analyze and challenge hypotheses, and think independently. Teachers draw students into
discussions by asking questions that follow from previously presented information in the Tier II
intervention time.
The Socratic Method of questioning encourages students to come to their own conclusions and
construct their own meaning. During the additional 30 minutes within the Tier II intervention,
curriculum will engage students in deeper and more meaningful explorations of the core
academic contents, especially Reading and Math. The students work on the computers with the
A+ Learning System curriculum.
The research from Southwest Educational Development Laboratories (SEDL) found the
meaningful interaction between humans reinforces the Behaviorist Stimulus-Response provided
by the electronic curriculum. By forming and expressing conclusions based on available
information from the software and analyzing the opinions and conclusions of others through
dialogue, the students build a better understanding of concepts that spiral into specified goals of
increased independent, critical thinking.
The process further encourages student learning and personal growth through collaborative
relationships among fellow students, teachers, and families, within the learning environment. The
learning expands students’ academic, philosophical, social, and economic horizons, and better
prepares them to enter our 21st century Knowledge driven economy in a meaningful capacity.
The Three Tier Image and the Three Tier Process Concept Design & Schematic are visuals that
identify how the possible “intended audience” are determined by data. Based upon gathered
qualitative and quantitative data, students not meeting predetermined cut scores are reviewed by a
Student Support Team (SST).
The SST, at its most basic configuration, is composed of a teacher, administrator and
parent/guardian. At the SST meeting, questions regarding the cognitive and social/emotional data
are generated as the team reviews the possible reasons for the learning difficulty. If the review of
the data clearly indicates the student is not meeting the expectation of the Tier I learning
environment, the team will suggest and agree upon an Individual Learning Plan (ILP) for the
student.
The ILP will cover not only the possibilities of the cognitive and social/emotional interventions at
the Tier II level, but also instructional practices within the regular classroom to support and
transition the student back into the regular classroom. The amount of days the student receives
the additional 30 minutes of Tier II intervention service is at a minimum of 20 days or at a 110%
achievement level of the identified TEKS.
3
In addition, delivery of differentiated instructional practices within the classroom (RAFTS,
Webquest, Tiered Instruction based upon the individual student’s readiness, interest and student
profile) are established to further support the individual strategies/programs of the Tier II
intervention.
The ILP documents the expected academic results, which are best achieved when there is a tighter
fit through unification of electronic curriculum based upon identified, student need and alignment
of appropriate program intent with the student needs. The conversations within the SST and
among educators impacting the learning program of the student must focus upon the
target=specific TEKS, review the expectation of the TEKS, establish an agreed upon meaning of
the expectation, and craft instructional strategies to further facilitate the transfer of information
into sustainable, purposeful understanding with student worth and value interwoven throughout
the resources.
Individualized and formative assessments at frequent intervals, along with dialogue determining
what the data indicates, are established means of communication to insure teachers,
administrative staff, parents and student connect support and encourage one another in order to
achieve the increased levels of learning. Depending upon the age of the student, the software
material results can be shared at each session (S-R theory impacting learning) with the student.
The educator overseeing the Student Management System within the Tier II learning environment
will also report the bundled software results weekly to all SST members. All documentation, at a
minimum, will be reviewed monthly by the SST or earlier if requested and calendar space allows.
When the SST reconvenes to review the formative records, they determine if the child has made
adequate progress according to the ILP expectations. If so, the child is returned to Tier I with
continued monitoring by the SST over the next 20 days.
Based upon Cognitive-field Interactionist and Constructivist learning theories, authentic, project-
based evaluations, coupled with traditional pencil/paper assignments and assessments would best
reflect the progress within Tier I or the need to return to Tier II. For students placed in small
group, Tier II intervention of additional 30 minutes, not demonstrating adequate progress of the
documented data, the SST would recommend the change of assignment from Tier II to Tier III for
an additional 30 minutes added on to the intervention (total of 60 minutes) and one-to-one
instruction time to address the identified need(s). Continuation of target-specific, TEKS learning
tasks would be documented and reviewed as previously defined in Tier II. This process is
replicated for each student, in any classroom, at any campus not meeting the necessary academic
growth and development to meet the expectations of the foundation skills and competencies
specified in the Accountability Program.
4
Training/Staff Development
Training and Staff Development for the “Best Practice Continuum” requires 2-days of the
educators immediately following the staff training in the A+ software. After the initial 2-days, at
a minimum, there would be 2-days per month for the first semester. The 2-days, on site visit will
provide the following and other needs negotiated by the campus with the company:
o Review of data, ensuing dialogue regarding data driven decisions based upon identified
student needs;
o Review process of Individual Learning Plans (ILP), the templates to guide the Student
Support Team (SST) meetings;
o Review the communication cycle plan to insure two-way
collaboration/support/implementation;
o Purpose of the follow-up monitoring in the Tier II location, in the classroom, the student
achievement growth, professional development for continuous professional growth; and
o Familiarization with the guides, templates, data analysis sheets as tools to guide decisions
and coaching/modeling/monitoring purpose/forms/use of documentation for improved
student achievement.
The 2 days per month during the first semester will be documented, shared with the campus staff
and administration during an exit review. Discussion from the exit will establish specific follow-
up “next steps” to be observed and review during the next monthly visit.
During the second semester of implementation, as identified on the process and schematic sheet,
will have one day whole group (limit of 45 participants) review/adjust/plan for continuation of the
on-campus support. On site visits will continue, but the visits will only be 1 day per month,
unless renegotiated with the company and district staff.
The case load per each consultant will range from 90-120 Tier II students. Campuses with
greater needs will require additional consultant to facilitate the BPC, manage the case load and
assist with data collection/review/guidance/recommendation. Detail reports of the documentation
will be exactly as it was in the first semester. Transition monitoring of students as they return to
Tier I or move to Tier III will also take place during the second semester.
The identification of a “point educator” at the campus and at the district will assist the two-way
communication and dissemination of pertinent documentation. Special emphasis will be given to
relinquish process implementation of the BPC to the point educator in a trainer-of-trainers, field
based training. A continuation of follow-up, support, coaching, modeling and overall BPC
strategies may be up-dated and renewed annually, for a nominal fee, based upon negotiated
services between the company and the district. Depending upon the student population utilizing
the program and the campus utilization of categorical funding, the following fiscal resources
5
could be identified through coordinated efforts, to provide not only the initial start-up, but also
the sustaining fees of the services to meet identified student need(s) through the Three Tier
Intervention Model in Reading and in Math:
o Title I
o State Compensatory Education
o Title II A, Professional Development
o ARI/AMI funding for appropriate grade levels
o Texas High School Allotment
o Up to 15% of the Reauthorization of IDEA from 2004
o Local Funding as generated by state foundation formulae
o Specified amount from the local tax base generated funding
In closing, just one of many templates is attached with the proposal. The template is am
Implementation Plan used for planning and follow-up monitoring by the consultants and the
“point educators”. As with any new program, there will be identified needs unique to each
student, unique to each campus population and unique to each district. The BPC is flexible,
adjustable, and an ongoing, living resource to address the process identified, target specific needs
of students.
The attached power point is one that is used in the initial training overview, before we establish
the Professional Learning Community within the district, campus, classroom and Tier locations.
We adhere to the Texas Comprehensive Center competencies for working systemically with a
learning environment;
1. Create Coherence;
2. Collect, interpret, and use data appropriately;
3. Ensure continuous Professional Learning;
4. Build relationships through understanding of one another; and
5. Promote an atmosphere of continuous learning for adults as well as student by
responding to changing conditions.
To quote a former Golden Glove shortstop from the St. Louis Cardinals, Ozzie Smith, regarding
what it takes to be successful and achieve identified goals in our 21st Knowledge based society,
“Change is not an option. It is a necessity!”
Dr. Lura Davidson, PhD
1
Best Practices Using the A+ny Where Learning System
Lura Davidson, Ph.D.
Agenda
Presentation
Summarize
Questions & Answers
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
2
A+ny Where Learning SystemWhat? Multi-Purpose, Electronic Curriculum Resource
Why? Identified student needs; Data Driven Decisions!
How? Questions resulting from the data; Training for
When? Immediately; Ongoing
Where? A+nyA+nyTimeTime and A+nyA+nyWhere Where by A+nyA+ny Educator Educator trained to implement A+ A+ for enduring understanding and
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
from the data; Training for the teachers
understanding and increased Student Learning! Student Learning!
A+ny Where Learning System:
Technology Learning Center (TLC)DesignDesign for “win win” resultsDesignDesign for win-win results
Instruct, Reinforce and Accelerate
Driven by a Student Profile used to generate an Individual Learning Plan (ILP)
Constant Monitoring and Communication
Vaughn-Gross Three Tier Intervention Model
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
3
Three Tier Intervention Model
Tier IIIResources? Data?
Tier II
Tier III
SupplementalIntervention
Intensive Intervention
Tier I
(Core Classroom Instruction)
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
Students identified as A+A+ t-Risk
Diagnostic/Prescriptive Courseware Assessments; g pDifferentiation of Content, Product and Process
Focused TEKS Intervention
Students learn “how” to learn; Work smart!
Students become responsible for their learningp g
Behaviorist Learning Theory is applied
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
4
Focused TEKS Intervention
Formative AssessmentsFormative Assessments
Courseware Assessments for Monitoring
ILP developed by a Student Support TeamClassroom Teacher friendly and able to authorAdministrators may monitor learning resultsy gTime, date and grades documented for program evaluation
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
Students Like the Program
“A+A+ gave me a second chance ”A+A+ gave me a second chance.
“I liked it. It is fun!”
“A+A+ broke things down for me to understand. Sometimes the teacher goes too fast for me.”
“Oh, WOWWOW, it helped me a lot!”Oh, WOWWOW, it helped me a lot!
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
5
SummarizeA+A+ Learning System
Auditory and visual units correlated to TEKS K-12l d Built-in Student Management System
Data applied to the Vaughn-Gross 3 Tier Intervention Model to determine the level(s) of intervention/accelerationTechnology Learning Center (TLC) Design Model
Win-Win Best Practice for allall stakeholders.
Alignment of Student Needs, Program(s) resources and Funding
Copyright 2008 – Educational Results, LLC
Thank You!
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Educational Technology Learning 1256 Main Street, Suite 263 Southlake, Texas 76092
(888) 919-6100 (817)310-3901(fax) www.edtechlearn.com
Memo To: Invited Guests
From: Derly Tijerina, Educational Technology Learning
Date: April 2008
Re: Best Practices: A Systematic Approach to Response to Intervention
Overview
The Vaughn-Gross three tier model for RtI is now familiar to many educators. However, a
comprehensive systematic approach takes administrative planning, curriculum tools and hands-on
training.
You already have a powerful tool (A+ Learning System). Applying knowledge of curriculum goals to
specific enumerated (i.e. assessment data) needs is not obvious nor intuitive. In one abbreviated
symposium/conference setting you will hear about:
EXPERIENCE from Dr. Lura Davidson, Adjunct Professor Concordia University (see reference letter
attached from 2005). She retired from Southwest ISD, where she held the position of Assistant
Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment, then Executive Director of School
Improvement. She used A+ as one tool among several to build a systematic approach to meeting
educational needs.
SPECIFIC CAPABILITIES of assessment tools and reports to meet decision making needs.
PLANS and DIRECTIONS of other A+ users in your area.
DETAILS of WHY-TO, WHEN-TO and HOW-TO use specific tactics on your campuses.
Who Should Come
Superintendents that need to sustain budgets from 6100, 6200 and 6300 funds.
Curriculum specialists and those who establish their strategic plans, budgets and workloads.
A+ Learning System users who need to generate reports that are focused on curriculum goals.
SEE ATTACHED for baseline presentation for the Best Practices discussion.