February 28, 2006 RECEIVED MAR 1 - 2006 Mr. Gene Jones & Ms. Marjorie Powell Associate Monitors Office of Desegregation Monitoring US District Court 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Mr. Jones & Ms. Powell: This accompanies a copy of the quarterly written update of March 1, 2006, in compliance with the June 30, 2004 memorandum opinion of the U.S. District Court. Please let us know if you would like more information. Thank you for your adviee and support in earrying out our responsibilities. Sincerely yours. Karen Director, PRE xc: Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge & Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 February 28, 2006 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Dear Mr. Walker: This accompanies the quarterly written update of March 1, 2006 in compliance with the U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). Sincerely yours, Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Gene Jones Ms. Marjorie Powell Mr. Robert Pressman Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 February 28, 2006 Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421-5817 Dear Mr. Pressman: This accompanies the quarterly written update of March 1, 2006 in compliance with the U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). Mr. Walker has asked that we furnish you with copies of reports. Sincerely yours, DeJamette, .D. Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Gene Jones Ms. Marjorie Powell Mr. John Walker Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 Mr. Gene Jones & Ms. Marjorie Powell Associate Monitors Office of Desegregation Monitoring US District Court 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED MAR 1 - 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Mr, Jones & Ms. Powell: On Monday, March 13 the evaluation team for Pre-K Literacy will convene at the IRC, 3001 South Pulaski Street, in room 10 at 10 AM. In a later mailing you will receive the proposed plan and questionnaires for the evaluation. We invite you to attend. Please contact us if you would like more information. Sincerely yoiKS, Karen DeJamette,rh.D. Director, PRE xc: Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge & Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 February 28, 2006 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Dear Mr. Walker: On Monday, March 13 the evaluation team for Pre-K Literacy will convene at the IRC, 3001 South Pulaski Street, in room 10 at 10 AM. In a later mailing you will receive the proposed plan and questionnaires for the evaluation. We invite you to attend. Please contact us if you would like more information. Sincerely yours, Karen DeJamette, Ph.D. Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Gene Jones, Associate Monitor Ms. Marjorie Powell, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Chris Heller LRSD Counsel Friday Eldredge & Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock School District (LRSD) QUARTERLY UPDATE to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua Intervenors March 1, 2006 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF V. M H PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. ET AL., DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL., INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL., INTERVENORS Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE) Instructional Resource Center (IRC) Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206IN IN Little Rock School District (LRSD) IN IN QUARTERLY UPDATE to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua Intervenors IN IN March 1, 2006 IN RECEIVED mar 1 - 2006 OFFICEOF desegregation monitoring IN LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF IN V. IN PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.I ETAL., DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ETAL., INTERVENORS IN KATHERINE KNIGHT, ETAL., INTERVENORS IN IN IN d Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE) Instructional Resource Center (IRC) Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 d dIntroduction This is the sixth quarterly written update by the Little Rock School District (LRSD) and its Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE), submitted in accordance with the U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Rem^y (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). The organization of this report is that of the Compliance Remedy: II A. B. c. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. LRSD must promptly hire a highly trained team of professionals to reinvigorate PRE. The first task PRE must perform is to devise a comprehensive program assessment process which must be deeply embedded as a permanent part of LRSDs curriculum and instruction program. During each of the next two academic school years (2004-05 and 2005-06), LRSD must hire one or more outside consultants to prepare four (4) formal step 2 evaluations. PRE must (1) oversee the preparation of all eight of these step 2 evaluations
(2) work closely with Dr. Ross and any other outside consultants . . . and (3) provide the outside consultants with any and all requested assistance and support... Evaluations will contain numbers and grade levels of teachers and administrators who contributed data, recommended program changes necessary for improved academic achievement by Afncan-American students, and brief explanations of how each change will increase a programs effectiveness. . . . PRE must notify the ODM and Joshua in writing of the names of those eight programs. In addition, after PRE and Dr. Ross have formulated a comprehensive program assessment process and reduced it to a final draft, PRE must provide a copy to the ODM and Joshua at least thirty days before it is presented to the Board for approval ... by December 31, 2004. PRE must submit quarterly written updates on the status of the . . . four step 2 program evaluations . . . during the 2004-05 school year and the four step 2 program evaluations that will be prepared during the 2005-06 school year ... to ODM and Joshua on December 1, March 1, June 1, and September 1... [ODMs responsibilities.] [Joshuas responsibilities.] Four step 2 program evaluations are due to the U. S. District Courts October 1, 2005 and four more not later than October 1, 2006. The Compliance Report is due October 15, 2006. [This Compliance Remedy supersedes earlier one.] 11 11 k II II II * i K a Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 2 of 5M Status as of March 1, 2006 M A. Hire a highly trained team of professionals. I IN LRSD hired a highly trained team of professionals in 2004 who met the Compliance Remedys requirements and reported this accomplishment in its first quarterly written update of December 1, 2004. This team continues to carry out diligently the Compliance Remedy, as stated in this sixth quarterly written update. IN Arthur Olds joined the PRE Department in November 2005 as testing coordinator. His resume is in Appendix A. R B. Devise and embed a comprehensive program assessment process. IN IN The PRE Department has continued to develop its comprehensive assessment process including a district portfolio, as reported in the fourth and fifth quarterly written updates. In addition to the LRSD senior administrators and principals who consult the portfolio, Dr. James Catterall used its data in his step 2 evaluation of the Districts Year-Round Education option in several schools. IN IN IN To support the portfolios expansion, frequent updates, and future utility, PRE is designing a data warehouse which LRSD staff and others can consult on a real-time basis. The LRSD Computer Information Department is consulting with Janis Group, Inc., a firm with expertise in storing, integrating, and efficiently accessing data. After determining this sophisticated data warehouses purpose(s), this team is determining which data sets to include. The data warehouse will bring the portfolio alive by supporting frequent updates of the portfolio and timely reports for purposes of developing policy, planning, research, and evaluation at levels of classrooms, schools, grades, departments, and the district. IN IN Education for the Future (EFF) devised a welcome page and questionnaires for an on-line school climate survey. EFF based the questionnaires on interests that derived from consultations on the districts mission and operations. Principals, teachers, students, and parents will participate in the survey this spring, and its results will go into the district portfolio. Appendix B shows the questionnaire drafts. IN C. Hire outside consultant(s) to prepare eight formal step 2 evaluations. If If M Step 2 evaluations of 2004-2005 During LRSDs December vacation, the Center for Research in Educational Policy (CREP), directed by Dr. Steve Ross at the University of Memphis, submitted draft evaluation reports for CompassLeaming (CL), Reading Recovery (RR), and SMART/THRIVE (S/T). Dr. Catterall sent his draft evaluation report for Year-Round Education (YRE) in early January. LRSD forwarded these four draft reports, as they arrived, to the U. S. District Court, to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, and to counsel for the Joshua Intervenors. PRE received final reports by early February and forwarded them to the same parties prior to their due dates. Summaries of the evaluation reports, submitted to the LRSD Board of Directors for their approval February 23, are in Appendices C through F. They include recommendations and resulting expectations. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 3 of 5LRSD evaluation policy requires follow-up of evaluation recommendations. Evaluation teams for each program will convene during the next year to consider how LRSD implements the external evaluators recommendations. To prepare for this, PRE will collect appropriate data from administrators of the four programs evaluated last year. Step 2 evaluations during the 2005-2006 school year Dr. Ross presented CREPs proposed designs for step 2 evaluations during the 2005-2006 school year21'-Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC), Pre-K Literacy (PKL), and Read 180to school principals January 18. In September, Dr. Catterall heard feedback about the evaluation design for A+ from the principal, teachers, and parents at Woodruff Elementary School. He also conducted a focus group and interviewed the principal. PRE recruited stakeholders for the four evaluation teams, and 22 participated on February 9 in reviewing their roles and discussing the four proposed evaluation designs (found in Appendices G, H, I, and J of this sixth quarterly written update). Their schedules indicate data collection starting in February. Joshua counsel did not attend
but ODM officers did and recommended more team members, with which PRE complied. Appendix K lists members of all four teams. D. PRE (1) oversees the preparation of the step 2 evaluations, (2) works closely with Drs. Ross and Catterall, and (3) assists them. PRE continued working closely with the CREP team in completing their three step 2 evaluations of last year, reviewing closely and discussing with CREP its three draft reports in early January, convening the evaluation teams on January 12 for their reviews, submitting comments to CREP for incorporation into its final drafts, then submitting the final drafts to the Board of Directors for approval at its February session. PRE wrote evaluation teams questions and observations and distributed them the next day to all team members for further contributions and corrections. A week later, final comments went to CREP, and CREP sent a research brief, written in simpler language, for each program. Names of participants at the January 12 session and their comments appear in Appendix L. On January 19, PRE convened the evaluation team for reactions to the draft report of the YRE evaluation and wrote down participants remarks, which went to all team members for additional contributions and corrections. After a week, having received no more, PRE sent the teams notes to Dr. Catterall for incorporation into his final draft. PRE submitted this final report to the Board of Directors for their approval February 23. Appendix L records participants names and their comments from January 19. I E. Evaluation will have (1) numbers and grade levels of teachers and administrators who submit data for evaluations, (2) recommended program changes necessary for improved achievement by African-American students, and (3) succinct explanations of how each change will increase its respective programs effectiveness. a During its critical reviews of the first four draft evaluation reports, PRE reminded the external evaluators of this requirement
and the resulting final reports included these three required Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 4 of 5IN H elements. PRE will assure that the final four evaluation reports by external evaluators will also satisfy these requirements next year. F. Delivery of names of programs to be evaluated and the comprehensive program assessment process to ODM and Joshua. IN Earlier quarterly written updates have reported that PRE notified both ODM and Joshua of all eight LRSD programs selected for step 2 evaluations and furnished both parties with the LRSD comprehensive program assessment process per F of the U. S. District Courts June 30, 2004 remedy (page 65). In addition, PRE has notified ODM and Joshua of occasions when critical issues regarding the evaluations have been considered and decided. IN G. PRE must submit quarterly written updates on the status of step 2 evaluations. IN IN Per G of the June 30, 2004 remedy by the U. S. District Court (page 65), PRE submitted its first written quarterly update on December 1, 2004, its second on March 1, 2005, its third by June 1, 2005, the fourth prior to September 1, 2005, and the fifth written quarterly update by December 1, 2005. PRE now submits this sixth written quarterly update prior to its due date of March 1, 2005. To date, PRE has met all due dates of the remedy including the first annual report which the Court postponed from its original date of October 1, 2005. IN IN IN IN IN IN II n H N Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 5 of 5 A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. 1. J. K. L. APPENDICES Resume of Mr. Arthur Olds, new Testing Coordinator Draft questionnaires for on-line climate survey of LRSD teachers Summary of CompassLearning Evaluation Summary of Reading Recovery Evaluation Summary of SMART/THRIVE Summary of Year Round Education Draft design for Step 2 Evaluation of A+ by Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Draft design for Evaluation of 2L^ Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) by CREP Draft design for Evaluation of Pre-K Literacy (PKL) by CREP Draft design for Evaluation of Read 180 by CREP Evaluation team members during 2006-2007 for A+, CCLC, PKL, and Read 180 Teams and their feedback to draft evaluation reports of CL, RR, and S/T January 12 and YRE January 19, 2006 Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendices I I 1 H IN Appendix A IN IN Testing Coordinator IN Arthur Clyde Olds DI ID Planning, Research, & Evaluation Department Little Rock School District ID ID ID ID ID ID Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix AEDUCATION: FOREIGN LANGUAGES: TEACHING EXPERIENCE: Arthur Clyde Olds 23 Sandstone Conway, Arkansas 72034 (501) 329-6106 arthirr.olds@conwaycorp.net A.B.D. Michigan State UruversitySpanish M.A. Michigan State Urtiversity-Spanish (1974) B.A. Brigham Young University-Spanish/History (1970) Teaching Licensure-State of Aricansas: ESL (K-12), Spanish (K-12), Latin (K-12), Middle School Spanish: Read, Speak, Write-Excellent Latin: Very Good French: Very Good 1990-present: Dunbar Magnet Middle School ESL school coordinator/ESL testing. I keep the ACSIP plan up to date and keep the several administrators and faculty current concerning school wide statistics, as I serve as School Testing Coordinator. I help with the Title 1 plan and budget and recently wrote an awarded grant of $100,000 for our after-school tutoring program in math and literacy, which I help coordinate. Teach all levels of Latin and Spanish, including our "Introduction to Foreign Language" courses. I have also taught reading. Serve at Dunbar as a member of the Campus Leadership Team, the Steering Corrunittee, NCA/COE chair. Discipline Hearing Committee chair. Foreign Language Department chair. Building Coordination Committee, SECME chair and team member (summer workshop). Quiz Bowl team leader and OM judge at Region and State competitions. For the LRSD serve on the Foreign Language Curriculum Revision Committee, on the District Textbook Adoption Committee in two cycles, the Middle School Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment Committee and the Activities Advisory Board. Also serve as a "Pathwise" Mentor for new teachers and teach computer classes for teachers in the district. 1980-present: Spanish Instructor in the Public Schools of Arkansas Taught all levels of Spanish, operated the language laboratory and served as Sparush Club advisor. Organized two torrrs to Mexico. Schools include: Southside-Bee Branch/Guy-Perkins, Perryville/East End, Magnet Cove and Parkview (Little Rock). English Instructor in the Public Schools of Arkansas Taught all levels of English (7-12), including Honors English, same schools. Co-director of a nationally recogiuzed restructuring program at Perryville High School that coordinated English, History and Cultural Studies. Worked under the direction of the State Department of Education and the Arkansas International Center at UALR. University of Central Arkansas (Instructor of Spanish1980-84) Taught all levels of Spanish, organized and conducted two summer programs in Mexico, and served as advisor to student teachers in the dq3artment. Developed third and fourth year proficiency testing and taught general education courses. Also worked in tire Elderhostel Program (Division of Continuing Education.) Taught English Composition I and II. University of Arkansas at Little Rock (Instructor of Spanish) Taught all first second and third year comses. 1969-1980: Graduate Assistant and Visiting Assistant Professor of Spanish Michigan State University (1973-80), Alma College (1976), University of Wisconsin-Madison (1972-73) and Brigham Young Uruversity (1969-72). Taught all first and second year courses offered by the departments as well as special sections of "Spanish for Travelers." Had full responsibility for planning and conducting classes, text selection and production of materials for special classes. Also had language laboratory responsibilities. II w II R II R R RA. C. Olds, page 2 ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE: 1990- Arkansas Foreign Language Teachers Association General Board present: and President of the Arkansas Classical Association. 1985-90: Arkansas State Coordinator for National Spanish Exam of the American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese. I 1985-88: President and Vice President, American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese DeSoto Chapter and Member, General Board of the Arkansas Foreign Language Teachers Association. K 1980-84: Department of Foreign Languages, University of Central Arkansas Student teacher advisor, proficiency testing and evaluation, textbook selection, sponsor oiLasociedad hispdnica, high school language festival judge, local university coordinator of National High School Spanish Exams, department publicity. National Committee of the Educational Testing Service CLEP Exam revision, foreign language reviewer for Publications of the Arkansas Philological Association, book reviewer for La Celestinesca. M 1974-80: Michigan State University: Department Chair Search Committee, Graduate Committee, Graduate Steering Committee, Advisory Committee, College of Arts and Letters Graduate Committee. H 1971-72: Brigham Young University: Department representative to College of Humanities Graduate Committee and Graduate School Advisory Committee. n RELATED WORK EXPERIENCE: 2001: Six week technology workshop, University of Arkansas at Little Rock IN 1997: SECME Summer Workshop, Tuskegee Institute 1991: II Summer workshop, Kingston, Jamaica, sponsored by the Arkansas International Center at UALR 1988: II Summer workshop, Guadalajara, Mexico, sponsored by the Arkansas International Center at UALR n 1985: Oral Proficiency Workshop of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, held at UALR 1984: First cycle of Program for Effective Teaching II 1974- Contract translation (Spanish to English/English to Spanish) for local present: businesses and legal translation for lawyers and the court II 1983-84: Editorial Board, Publications of the Arkansas Philological Association 1973-79: Editor, Tropos II11 A. C. Olds, page 3 II PUBLICATIONS/LECTURES: Papers presented at the Arkansas Philological Association Meetings
"Calisto: el loco enamorado (La Celestina)." (1997) "Celestina: Character as Author (La Celestina)." (1995) "Parmeno and Sempronio (La Celestina) and the Process of Self-Creation." (1993) "The Thrust and Parry of Rojas' Prose: The Ironic Vision of La Celestina." (1991) "Mirrors of Ambiguity: The Author in Search of Self in Miguel de Unamuno's La novela de Don Sandalio, jugador de ajedrez." (1989) "If I'm OK and You're OK, Why Can't We Communicate?" More on the continuing Saga of Don Quijote and Sancho." (1988) "Irony and La Celestina
The Wonders of Rojas'Prose." (1987) "Penas arriba : Adventure ofthe Archetypal Hero." (1986) M B B Other papers / lectures: "Coordination and Cooperation: The High School and the University in Global Studies." Ark. International Studies Conference (UALR, April 1989.) "Don Quijote y Sancho: El problema de la comunicacion." Tropos, 8 (1980), 17-27. "Structure and Narrative Technique in La Celestina: The Aside." Mid-West MLA (Indianapolis: November, 1979). "Scholarly Publishing: Dialogue Between an Editor and a Graduate Student." American Association of Comparative Literature Meetings (State College, Pennsylvania: April, 1979). Lockert, Lucia Fox. Spanish and Spanish-American Women Novelists. Scarecrow Press, 1979. (Book-length translation) "Testing and Foreign Language Teaching" (1977) and "Oral Practice in Context" (1976). Presented as part of a series on Foreign Language Teaching organized at Michigan State University. B 11 B PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Arkansas Foreign Language Teachers Association, Modem Language Association, Mid-West MLA, American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese, Societe Rencesvals, Sigma Delta Pi, Comediantes, Arkansas Philological Association, Arkansas Classical Association, Mid-America Medieval Association, American Classical League, Classical Association of the Middle West and South B PROFESSIONAL TRAVEL
1997: SECME workshop, Tuskegee Institute. 1991: Summer workshop, Kingston, Jamaica. 1988: Summer workshop, Guadalajara, Mexico. 1981, 1982, 1986, 1987: Guided study programs in Mexico. 1969-70 and 1970-71: Semester Abroad programs in Spain with BYU. 1970 and 1971: Extensive Summer European travel. 1966-1968: Close daily contact with Spanish-speaking people of Colorado, Texas and New Mexico. B B B REFERENCES: Available on request. B BAppendix B 4 I H n II n n n n n On-line Climate Survey Draft Questionnaires for Administrators (Principals), Staff (Teachers and others), Students, and Parents Prepared by Education for the Future For Planning, Research, & Evaluation Department Little Rock School District Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix B cII Education for the Future i I II Strongly Dim^ Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree w I am a valued member of this School District I am able to participate meaningfully in District decisions that impact my responsibilities 1 am able to work with District leadership to generate special resources when I need them I am allowed to be an effective leader in my school I am encouraged to find unique solutions to issues in my school I clearly understand the specifics of what I am held accountable for in perfonnance reviews I enjoy my job 0. I understand what is expected of me in my role Others in the District have the same understanding of the nature of my role that I have People in the District can explain the Districts vision People in the District respect me S) 11 Principals in the District generally like what they do here The District leadership cares about me The District leadership trusts my judgment The District provides an organizational climate in which all schools can succeed CD The District strategic plan will lead us to make our vision a reality There are opportunities forme to develop my skills There is a District-level strategic plan in place As a rule, District leadership requires that I use specific strategies to accomplish District goals in my school District leadership provides adequate resources for me to get my job done effectively District leadership provides me with direction District leadership supports my decisions II II II Everyone who works in this District is expected to deliver high quality work Good work is consistently recognized in this District II Copyright 1991 -2005 Education for die Future Initiative, Chico. CA. Page 1 of 2 II II II H Education for the Future I Wliat are the most effective things that the District does to facilitate your effectiveness? 4 What are the least effective things that the District does in relation to your effectiveness? What should the District be doing, that it is not doing currently, to help make you more effective? Hn fl fl - - - - - - - - - - - - Administrator Demographic Data- - - - - - - - - - - - - Demoi^raphic data, which is used for suniniary analysis, will not he reported if individualscan be identified. fl fl Ethnicity: (fi// in all that apply) Q African-American O American Indian/Alaskan Native O Asian O Caucasian 0 Hispanic/Latino O Other_______________ Gender
O Female O Male 1 am a(ii): O Elementary Assistant Principal O Elementary Principal O Middle School Assistant Principal O Middle School Principal O High School Assistant Principal O High School Principal O Other School Administrator O DistrictAdministrator O specify:_________________ n n I have been in iny current position: I have been an administrator for: O 1st Year O 2-3 Years O 4-6Ycars O 7-t()Yc
irs O ll-14Years O 15-20Years O 21-25 Years O 26+Yeiirs O pt Year O 2-3Years O 4-6 Years O7-10Years O ll-14Years O 15-20Years O 21-25 Years O 26-30Years O 31-35 Years O 36-4()Years O 41 +Years Copyright 1991-2005 Education for the Future Initiativc.Chico.CA. Pagc2()f2 Education for the Future This PDF file is for content review purposes onlynot intended for use in questionnaire administration. For more information about administering and analyzing Education for the Future questionnaires, please visit http:ileff.esuchico.edul(iueslionnaire_resourcesl. [ Strongly Agree Neutral Agree I feel: I Strongly Disagree Disagree Demographic daia, which is used for summary analysis, will not be reported if individuals can be identified. Ethnicity: (fiil in all that apply) O African-American O American Indian O Asian O Caucasian O Latino/IIispanic O Other like I belong at this school that the staff cares about me that learning can be fun that learning is fun at this school recognized for good work intrinsically rewarded for doing my job well clear about what ray job is at this school tliat others are clear about what my job is at this school I work with people who: 11 I am a(n): O classroom teacher O instructional assistant O certificated staff (other than aclasKTOcyni tcacitcr) O classified staff (other than an inairucttonal xssistant) treat me with respect listen if I have ideas about doing things better My administrators: CD Iremsfor teachers only: I teach: O pre-kindergarten O primary grades O upper elementary grades O middle school grades O high school grades 9-10 O high school grades 11-12 I have been teaching: O 1-3 years 04-6 years 07-lOyears O 11 or more years treat me with respect are effective instructional leaders facilitate communication effectively support me in my work with students support shared decision making allow me to be an effective instructional leader are effective in helping us reach our vision I have the opportunity to: develop my skills think for myself, not just carry out instructions I believe student achievement can increase through: differentiating instruction effective professional development related to our vision integrating instruction across the curriculum teaching to the state standards the use of computers the use of varied technologies providing a threat-free environment close personal relationships between students and teachers addressing student learning styles effective parent involvement using ongoing smdent assessments related to state standards student self-assessments teacher use of student achievement data /love: working at this school seeing the results of iny work with students Education for ihr Future Initiative (2tX>6) Chico, C A: Education For the Future Continued * K BIB i Education for the Future I j Strongly Agree 1 1 Neutral Agree 1 believe: j Strongly Disagree Disagree II M every student can leam the instructional program at this school is challenging this school provides an atmosphere where every student can succeed quality work is expected of all students at this school quality work is expected of me quality work is expected of all the adults working at this school the vision for this school is clear the vision for this school is shared we have an action plan in place which can get us to our vision this school has a good public image it is important to communicate often with parents 1 communicate with parents often about their childs progress 1 communicate with parents often about class activities the school buildings and grounds are clean I work effectively with: n II special education students English learners ethnically/racially diverse students students who live in poverty low-achieving students Morale is high on the part of: II n teachers students support staff administrators A A Items for teachers and instructional assistants only: Student outcomes for my class(es) are clear to me Student outcomes for my class(es) are clear to my students Teachers in this school communicate with each other to make student learning consistent across grades I know the state standards I teach to the state standards Learning is fun in my classroom 1 love to teach A A e Education for ihc Future Iniiiative(2006) tliico, C!A
Education for the Future fl CD @ @ Continued (S> > n Education for the Future i What are the strengths of this school? B B B What needs to be improved? B B B B B B B B Education forthe Future Initiativc<2(>06) Chico.CA: Education for ibc Futurc BM Education for the Future H StudentsI Strongly Agree MH I am in: 03' Grade 04' Grade 05' Grade 06' Grade 07' Grade I am: 08*^ Grade 09'Grade O IChGrade O 11* Grade O 12' Grade I Neutral Agree I Strongly Disagree Disagree II H II AAA AAA A A O African-American O American Indiiin/ Alaskan Native O Asian O Caucasian O Hispanic/Lalino O Other I am: O Boy OGirl I am: O participating in extracurricular activities O involvedinacommunity service project O enrolletl in a service learning class When I am at school, I feel: I belong I am safe I have fun teaming I like this school This school is good 1 have freedom at school I have choices in the way 1 learn My teacher(s) treat me with respect My teacher(s) care about me My teacher(s) think I will be successful My teacher(s) listen to my ideas My principal cares about me My teacher(s) is a good teacher My teacher(s) believe I can leant I am recognized for good work I ani challenged by the work my teacher(s) a,sk me to do The work I do in class makes me think I know what I am supposed to be learning in my classes I am a good student 1 can be a better student Working hard will make me do well in school Very good work is expected at my school 1 behave well at school Students arc treated fairly by teachers Students are treated fairly by the principal Students are treated fairly by school resource officers (SRO) Students at my school treat me with respect I am safe from bullies Students at my school are friendly 1 have lots of friends I have support for learning at home My family believes
I can do well in school My family wants me to do well in school My school building and grounds are clean Copyright 2006 EducaGon for the Future Initiative. Chico. CA. A 5. Page 1 of2 Education for the Future Students I What do you like about this school? What do you wish was different at this school? Copyright 2006 Education f<r the Future Initiative, Chico, CA, Page2of2 II M Education for the Future H This PDF file is for eowteiit review purposes onlynot Intended for use in questionnaire administration.. For more information about administering and analyzing Education for the Future questionnaires* please visit htlp:/!cffx!iuchico.edulqiiestumnaire,_re3oiirccsi. Disagree = Strongly Disagree I feel welcome at my childs school j Stron^yAg^ Neutral Agree H 14 14 14 14 14 14 I am informed about my childs progress I know what my childs teacher(s) expect of my child My child is safe at school My child is safe going to and from school There is adequate supervision during school There is adequate supervision before and after school Teachers show respect for the students Students show respect for other students The school meets the social needs of the students The school meets the academic needs of the students The school expects quality work of its students The school has an excellent learning environment I know how well my child is progressing in school I like the schools report cards/progress report I respect the schools teachers I respect the schools principal Overall, the school performs well academically The school succeeds at preparing children for future work The school has a good public image The schools assessment practices are fair My childs teacher(s) help me to help my child learn at home 1 support my childs learning at home I feel good about myself as a parent I feel educational opportunitie.s at my child's school are provided equitably The school buildings and grounds are clean I feel 1 am a valued parmcr in my childs education 1 have access to school materials and resources that support my childs education CO 14 14 14 fl Childrens grades: O Kindergancn O First Grade O Second Grade O Third Grade O Fourth Grade O Fifth Grade O Sixth Grade O Seventh Grade O Eighth Grade O Ninth Grade O Tenth Grade O Eleventh Grade O Twelfth Grade Number of children in this school: CD My native language is: O Chinese O Eastern European O English O Japanese O Koretm O Spanish O Vietnamese O Other______________ Copyright 2006 Education for die Future Initiative, Chico.CA. @ Number of children in the household: Ethnic background: (fill in all that apply) o Black O American Indian/Alaskan Native O Asian O White O Hispanic/Latino O Other_______________ Responding: O Mother O Father O Guardian O Other @ @ Page 1 oQ Education for the Future i M M What are the strengths of this school? H What needs to be improved? K Copyright 2006 Education for the Future Initiative, Chico, CA. Pagc2of2 H Appendix C n H H H fl CompassLeaming (CL) Evaluation by Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis Summary and Evaluation Team Prepared by Planning, Research, & Evaluation Department Little Rock School District Quarterly Written Update March 1, 20006 Appendix C Summary: CompassLearning Evaluation Evaluation conducted by Dr. Steven Ross (CREP) Reported by PRE Department B Summary of CompassLearning (CL) Implementation in LRSD: CL is a computer-based program for improving learning in language arts, reading, and math with personalized lessons tailored to each students needs. CL also helps teachers manage their students learning and gives administrators on-going perfonnance reports. LRSD introduced CL (initially called Jostens) ten years ago but left election to use CL to each school. During 2004-2005, 19 elementary schools used CL in grades K-5. Lab attendants and/or technology specialists assist teachers with integrating lessons into their curriculums. Students work on language arts, reading, and/or math for 30 to 60 minutes per week in computer labs with a lab attendant and classroom teacher present. Some also had CL activities in their regular classrooms. B B Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for CL included: (1) analyses of CL student achievement and program data, and (2) surveys and interviews with principals, CL specialists, teachers, and parents. At school faculty meetings, 356 elementary teachers returned questionnaires in which they indicated their familiarity with CL and their opinions of it
318 indicated at least some experience with CL. At the next page are evaluation team members. Bl B B Results: Evaluators found mixed, small CL effects in African American achievement scores. While LRSD provided fully adequate computer equipment and personnel, teachers used CL student reports little and exposed their students to less CL than prescribed. Teachers, lab attendants, and technology specialists regarded CL program implementation, impacts, and strengths very highly Parents/guardians of CL students supported CL, too, but did not fully understand it. Principals who stopped CL still supported it. Recommended Program Modifications: > > > > Ensure students spend the recommended effort60 minutes each for language arts, reading, and math each week for grades K - 5, or 90 minutes in grades 3 - 5. Teachers should understand CL reports most critical for adapting lessons to needs of African American students and use the CL reports to assist lab attendants. Principals must use monthly CL class-level and school-level reports to monitor and adjust instructional interventions for African American students. Improve district coordination to ensure language and math activities align with the LRSD curriculum and follow recommended CL guidelines. B Expectations of Program Modifications < Progressive gains on standardized test scores over time 4 Closer adherence to CL guidelines 4 More proficiently using student perfonnance data to meet the individuals needs B B B Quarterly Written Update March 1, 20006 Appendix C4. More effective instructional leaders of schools through deeper understanding of CL 4 resources and teacher skills to address student learning deficiencies Frequent monitoring and more timely supportive interventions Evaluation Team Members for CompassLeaming H Team Leader - Dr. Karen DeJamette, PRE Department CL program specialist - Mr. Travis Taylor, Instractional Technology Department Statistician - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - Dr. Deborah Lowther, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External consultants - Dr. Deborah Lowther, Dr. Dan Strahl, Mr. Aaron McDonald, and Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External reviewer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies PRE Reviewers - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, and Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Amy Thompson Teachers - Ms. Amy Thompson and Ms. Thelma Watson, Fulbright Elementary School Principal - Ms. Deborah Mitchell, Fulbright Elementary School M IN IN IN IN IN IN Quarterly Written Update March 1, 20006 Appendix C Appendix D Reading Recovery (RR) Evaluation by Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis Summary and Evaluation Team M H Prepared by Planning, Research, & Evaluation Department Little Rock School District a K H Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix D riSummary: Reading Recovery Evaluation Evaluation conducted by Dr. Steven Ross, University of Memphis Summary by PRE Department Summary of Reading Recovery (RR) Implementation in LRSD: RR teachers tutor students one-on-one for 30 minutes every school day for 12 to 20 weeks. Successful completion (called discontinued) equips students to learn at grade level and lessens the need for special attention. RR teachers designate students not up to grade in less than 20 weeks as Incomplete and those not up to grade by 20 weeks as recommended for further action. LRSD has expanded RR and partnered with the UALR College of Education to train teachers and advance their skills. In the 2004-2005 school year, 28 trained RR teachers served 18 of the districts 34 elementary schools. Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for Reading Recovery included: (1) analyses of RR student achievement and program data, (2) principal, teacher, and parent surveys and interviews, and (3) observations of RR tutoring sessions. H Evaluators observed 16 RR teachers and collected questionnaires from 22 and another 156 nonRR teachers in classrooms. They also interviewed 10 principals and 4 teachers in training. Evaluation team members are found on the next page. H Results: n 91 9i in iR H 9{ RR improved African-American students reading skills. There are opportunities for further improvements in RR. RR experts observed well trained teachers who applied the RR model with high fidelity. RR teachers regard RR program highly for aiding African American students. RR impressed non-RR, classroom teachers, too, as beneficial to African American students. Principals agreed that their African American students are bridging the achievement gap through RR. Parents/guardians of RR students perceived RR as benefiting their children. H [fl Recommended Program Modifications: An expanded program with more RR teachers should monitor students more often after they discontinue RR to ensure sustaining their momentum. More LRSD students need RR than RR teachers can tutor. RR teachers might feel pressure to discontinue one group of students in order to begin another group. If true, the necessary follow-up contact can not occur
and therefore the fl slippage in achievement that has been seen in other districts might occur in H LRSD, too. In an expanded RR program, RR teachers can more closely monitor their discontinued students and maintain their gains. In addition to expanding RR, LRSD should explore a transitional plan for students who discontinue. Such a plan could involve daily monitored reading that would also buffer against slippage. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix D fl Increased professional development of classroom (non-RR) teachers would better enable them to integrate their RR students back into the classroom once discontinued and to give them appropriate instruction and feedback so that they keep on improving. Increase LRSDs partnership with UALR to help develop the transitional plan and the professional development for classroom (non-RR) teachers. Future studies might analyze more in-depth a small number of students who kept on gaining after discontinuing RR. Many principals and RR teachers cited examples of profound student achievement and sustained, noteworthy success of former African-American RR students. Such studies could determine what factors led to successes and how teachers can better help other students. H Expectations of Program Modifications: Reading Recovery has valuable components that, with changes, can be even more effective. With program modifications, the Little Rock School District could expect: Progressive gains on standardized test scores over time. Increased number of students involved in the Reading Recovery program. Closer adherence to Reading Recovery guidelines, particularly the number of sessions required for optimum benefits. More teachers throughout the district better able to serve at-risk students. Sustained achievement of students upon completion of the Reading Recovery program. A stronger relationship with experts at UALR that would continue to provide the Little Rock School District with the most up-to-date research findings and best practices for reading and literacy instruction. Evaluation Team Members for Reading Recovery Team Leader - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Reading Recovery program specialist - Ms. Pat Busbea, Early Childhood / Elementary Literacy Department, and Dr. Linda Dorn, UALR College of Education Statistician - Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External consultant - Dr. Anna Grehan, Mr. Aaron McDonald, and Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External reviewer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies PRE reviewer - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Michelle Bonds-Hall Teacher - Ms. Michelle Dorsey, Chicot Elementary School Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix Dfl fl fl fl fl N fl fl fl Appendix E SMART/THRIVE (S/T) Evaluation by Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis Summary and Evaluation Team n Prepared by Planning, Research, & Evaluation Department Little Rock School District M M Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix E fl Summary: SMART/THRIVE Evaluation Evaluation conducted by Dr. Steven Ross, University of Memphis Reported by PRE Department Summary of SMART/THRIVE (S/T) Implementation in LRSD: SMART and THRIVE, designed by two veteran LRSD teachers, serve at-risk students. In 1999, LRSD implemented and funded them in part by the Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement Program and NSF. w I S/T purposes are to prepare students entering Algebra I (8 to 9* grade) through supplemental lessons (SMART), prepare students to meet state standards in Algebra I (THRIVE), and instill confidence. SMART meets for two consecutive weeks in the summer. THRIVE meets every other Saturday in spring semester. SMART uses a co-teaching model with one teacher and one high school student mentor, while THRIVE uses a co-teaching model with two certified teachers. II Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for S/T included: (1) analyses of S/T student achievement and program data
(2) surveys, focus groups, and interviews with principals, S/T specialists, teachers, students, and parents
and (3) observations of classes and teachers. I I Evaluators observed five O^-grade classes and collected questionnaires from S/T teachers (IOS and 18 T) and Algebra I teachers (25 S and 33 T). Evaluation team members are listed on page 2. Results: o o o O O n Eighth and ninth grade African American students in either S, T, or both more likely scored as proficient or advanced. Substantial gains on Algebra I End of Course exam, strongest among students in both S and T. African American students in both comparison and S/T groups performed the same as others on the ITBS. Students, their parent and instructors, and principals expressed satisfaction with S/T. Students and teachers noted increased self-confidence. Recommended Program Modifications: > > > > > 1 Expand scope of S/T to more students. Increase frequency of classes for S/T. Train more teachers for S/T. Follow S/T students through graduation and beyond to learn long-term outcomes. Provide transportation to students. Expectations of Program Modifications A A raising student achievement among African American students provide the district with a model that can be easily replicated, gain information about factors that set S/T apart from classroom Algebra and preAlgebra classes sustained remediation of African American students Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix EEvaluation Team Members for SMART/THRIVE n Team leader - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, PRE Department Smart / Thrive program specialist - Ms. Vanessa Cleaver and Ms. Marcelline Carr Statistician - Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External evaluators - Dr. Lyle Davis, Mr. Aaron McDonald, and Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy, and Gail Weems, UALR College of Education External reviewer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies PRE reviewer - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Rose Cook Teacher - Ms. Tonjuna Iverson, Parkview Magnet High School N H H H M H M Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix E Appendix F Year Round Education (YRE) Evaluation by James Catterall, Ph.D. University of California at Los Angeles Summary and Evaluation Team Prepared by Planning, Research, & Evaluation Department Little Rock School District n Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix FN M Summary: Year Round Education Evaluation Conducted by Dr. James Catterall Reported by PRE Department Summary of Year Round Education (YRE) Implementation in LRSD: The YRE design is a single track 45-10 calendar in which all students and teachers in the school are in class or on vacation at the same time. The 45-10 refers to 45 days enrolled during a quarter then 10 days of Intersession/vacation. Formal Intersession programs operate for five days within an Intersession break, and student attendance is voluntary. Mabelvale, Stephens, and Woodruff Elementary Schools have operated on a YRE calendar since school year 2000-2001, while Cloverdale and Mitchell Elementary Schools began YRE in 2002-2003. fl Evaluation Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for YRE included: analyses of YRE student achievement and program data, and surveys and interviews with administrators and principals, special education teachers, classroom teachers, and parents from each school. The following list shows the number of teachers included from each grade level
Pre-K, 10
K, 9
1 8
2"*, 9
3"*, 8
4', 7
5"', 7
self-contained, 3
principal, 1
and LRSD office, 3. fl fl Results: Conclusion III.l. YRE schools outperformed the comparison schools with respect to percentages of students proficient in literacy and mathematics over a five-year span leading up to spring 2005, an advantage measured in percentage changes in scores over the base year as well as in absolute percentage proficient point gains. fl fl Conclusion III.2. Based on analyses of test score residuals, YRE schools outperformed other schools very modestly in literacy and significantly in math on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmarks. This means that YRE schools generally performed higher than would be expected from both past performance and student demographics. It also means that comparison schools generally fell short of predicted scores, particularly in mathematics. fl fl Conclusion IV. 1. YRE schools showed significantly more progress between 2000 and 2005 than did comparison schools in five important indicatorsstudent mobility, disciplinary referrals, short-term suspensions, and African American student proficiency in both math and literacy. Attendance rates showed no meaningful change for either school group. The magnitude of these changes for YRE schools and their consistent outpacing of changes in comparison schools are significant indications of positive developments in YRE schools. fl fl Conclusion V.l. Two different analyses point to small performance advantages for students who attend YRE-school Intersessions in comparison to students who do not
Direct comparisons of the percentages of students proficient on the 2005 Benchmark tests and correlations between Intersession attendance and academic indicators come to the same conclusion. Either in one way or in some combined way, the observed differences may reflect just which students chose to attend Intersessions and which students did not. Under either circumstance, a sound argument for attending Intersessions can be made. fl Conclusion VI. 1. Parent, student, and teacher surveys accumulated over three years provide an overall appraisal of achievement conditions in YRE- versus regular-calendar schools. With respect to academic advantages or conditions that might contribute to academic advantages, about 60-65 percent of parents and students reported higher achievement in YRE schools. Teachers Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix F fl reported better conditions for learning, but feweronly about 35 percentreported actual academic achievement differences favoring YRE schools when asked this question directly. Recommended Program Modifications: Institute academic-enrichment and student-tutoring sessions during Intersessions, which are mainly recreational, or craft-, special interest-, or hobby-focused. Intersessions could be occasions of voluntary or urged academic assistance. Increase the numbers of students who participate in Intersessions. Since they particularly and YRE education generally showed positive impacts on student achievement, it makes sense to help the Intersession program reach more students. About 36 percent of all students in grades 3, 4, and 5 across YRE schools had never attended an Intersession as of spring 2005. Potentially effective steps to boost participation are communications between teachers and parents (although we did not find inadequacies in this area), family assistance that might foster attendance (such as child care for very young siblings), and added incentives for teachers to create and offer attractive opportunities. H Ml Ml Ml Ml Bl Bl Boost African American student participation in Intersessions. Participation rates among the few white and other non-African American students are extremely high. Attempts to recruit students for Intersessions will largely be greeted by African American audiences. Bl Retain the YRE structure of four evenly spaced terms punctuated by the two-week Intersession and vacation periods. Bl Bl Expectations of Program Modifications: The modification of Intersessions to include academic opportunities would increase instructional time and effectively shorten breaks between academic terms. This would add academic continuity. A direct expectation would be higher academic achievement levels. An indirect benefit would be improving teacher-student relationships through exposing more teachers and students to each other and additional experiences of teachers with the same students. n Increasing participation in Intersessions would extend academic benefits to greater portion of YRE-school students and permit additional Intersession course offerings. Both of these changes would lead to higher achievement. Similar to the indirect benefit above, expanded Intersession program would greater exposure would improve teacher-student relationships. M M Boosting Intersession enrollments of African American students would increase their academic success. B Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix FEvaluation Team Members for Year Round Education 4 4 Team Leader - Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department YRE program specialists - Ms. Janice Wilson, Principal of Woodruff Elementary School, and Ms. Sophia Parchman, Assistant Principal of Mann Arts and Science Middle School Statistician - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, LRSD Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies External evaluators - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies External reviewer - Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy, and Gail Weems, UALR College of Education PRE reviewer - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Diana Layne-Jordan, parent and PT A president, Stephens Elementary School Teacher - Ms. Judy Harbour, fifth grade teacher at Stephens Elementary School N fl fl fl fl fl fl Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix F Appendix G Proposed Plan for Evaluation of the A+ Program at Woodruff Elementary School James Catterall, Ph.D. University of California at Los Angeles II II Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix GProposal for the Evaluation of the A+ Program at Woodruff Elementary School 4 Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question'. 4 1. Has the A+ program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Proposed Design Examination of achievement test scores between 2001 and 2005for Woodruff School and for comparison schools developed for the 2005 YRE program evaluation. (Scores will include 2006 if scale scores are made available for all applicable grades 60 days in advance of the due date of the draft report.) Descriptive year-to-year test score changes will be described. A predictive model for 2006 Benchmark test scale scores will be undertaken if data are available. H H Examining performance indicators from the Portfolio of Data for the Little Rock School District for differences between African American and white students (2005 edition or 2006 edition if available). These data include Benchmark proficiency scores, attendance, student mobility, and student behavioral indicators. Supplemental (Qualitative/Level 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of A+ at Woodruff Elementary School in 2005-06? Proposed Design Surveys and interviews with all Woodruff teachers will assess the scope and history of teacher and staff participation in A+. Expert observation of one demonstration A + lesson of each teacher followed by expert debriefing of teachers regarding purposes and methods, and teachers appraisal of outcomes. H Assessment of the impact of A+ on the Woodruff School Culture (norms, assumptions about students and teaching and learning) based on intervie'ws, surveys, and follow-ups. H M Collection of sample student group or individual art products with brief written student comment about the objects connections to their learning. Students to decide. About 2 per classroom. Public display in school hall(s). Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix G H n 2. What is the level of participation in A+ by African American students relative to other ethnic groups? Proposed Design Assessing student participation by classroom for 2005-06 and 2004-05 using archival records and current student rosters. What are the perceptions of teachers and Art Specialists regarding A+ program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Proposed Design Assessed by surveys, interviews and observations of teachers and art specialists. 3. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Proposed Design It Assessed through a universal parent survey and by randomly selected telephone interviews of about 25 parents throughout the school, stratified K-2 versus grade 3-5. Basic school statistics 2005-06 Woodruff has 219 students in grades K-5 17 Caucasian, 2 other, and 238 African American (92% A-A) It It Summary of Instruments and Participants by Evaluation Question It Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. What are the effects of participation in A+ on the achievement of African American and other students? Participants Students at Woodruff and comparison school(s Data Sources It ITBS Grades K-5 Arkansas Benchmarks for 3-5) It It Supplemental Questions: 1. What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of A+ at Woodruff in 2005-06? All students All teachers Art Specialists District Arts Coordinator Grade 3-5 student surveys Parents Student surveys Teacher Survey (faculty meeting) Art Specialist Phone Interview District Art Coordinator Phone Interview Classroom Observations It M M H Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix G4 4 4 4 4 4 2. What is the level of participation in A+ by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school?_____________________ 3. What are the perceptions of teachers and Art Specialists regarding A+ implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? All students Comparison schools All African American vs. all Caucasian All teachers Art Specialists Parents School records/archival data ITBS and Benchmark scores. Teacher Survey Art Specialist Interview Parent Survey In-depth parent interviews 4 Timelines September, 2005 Initial meeting with principal and lead teachers 4 January, 2006: 4 February: 4 March-April: May-June: July-August: 4 4 September 1: October 1: Planning/refinement, consultation with PRE and instrument development Review of proposed evaluation by team and any changes Begin observations. District Arts Coordinator Interview (phone)
select Art Specialist and Observation School Samples
begin Art Specialist Interviews (phone) Teacher Survey (at faculty meetings), complete Art Specialist Interviews
complete observations
complete Student Focus Groups. Records/Archival data analyses Achievement data analyses/complete survey and interview analyses, review of draft report by PRE and evaluation teams, feedback from PRE, and preparation of final report Submit final report to PRE. LRSD submits final report to U.S. District Court. 4 Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix GAppendix H Proposed Plan for Evaluation of 21 Century Community Learning Centers Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis p H W P P P P P P n R n n p p p Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix HProposal for Evaluation of 21 Century Community Learning Centers in the Little Rock School District (LRSD)^ Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question: 1. Have the 2L Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What is the nature and level of implementation of the CCLC programs? 2. What is the level of participation in CCLCs by African American students? 3. What are the perceptions of teachers and school administrators regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians and students of program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? School and Program Descriptions fl fl Several schools in the LRSD have hosted CCLCs, which offer academic support
math/science activities
music/arts/drama
entrepreneurial programs
drug/violence prevention, counseling, and character education
tutoring/mentoring
parent involvement
technology and communication
family literacy/education
recreational programs
extended library hours
and services for truant, suspended or expelled students. Individual centers provide a subset of the possible activities. A summary of CCLC programs, based on their respective grant applications, is provided below
fl fl Woodruff Elementary School (WES) is one of 30 elementary schools in the district. The WES program includes visual and performing arts enrichment, family services, educational technology, cultural activities, and educational and recreational field trips. Program sessions are both before- and after-school, on Saturdays, and during intersessions. Parent/family services are also provided. fl fl Henderson Health Sciences Middle Magnet School (HHSMMS) is one of eight middle schools in the district. The HHSMMS program was developed as a comprehensive out-of-school program which includes before- and after-school elements, a summer program, and a Saturday program. An after-school Tutoring Club is designed to assist students academically. Morning sessions are organized to provide homework help and extended access to the library and technology resources. Enrichment opportunities are coordinated with community partners. A summer camp focuses on mathematics, literacy, and science, with technology as a strong component. H M Mabelvale Magnet Middle School (MMMS) is another of eight middle schools in the LRSD. The CCLC at MMMS is intended to provide remediation and enrichment in the areas of mathematics and literacy, as well as social and emotional development for students. This Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H fl program extends the schools magnet thematic programs and also builds on a previous Safe Schools/Healthy Schools grant. The program includes an after-school Tutoring Club, a Homework Club, and an Enrichment Club which provide extended learning opportunities relating to MMMSs magnet areas of Environmental Science, Medical Studies, and Technology. ri ri Southwest Middle School (SMS) is the third LRSD middle school that provides a CCLC. The grant application from this site was not available for review, but CREP presumes that its program is similar to that of the other two middle schools in the district which host a CCLC. The design ofthe program will be determined during the initial implementation of the evaluation. ri ri McClellan High School (McCHS) is one of five high schools in the district. Its program includes a drug and violence prevention program and a youth development component emphasizing counseling, service learning, mentoring and employment opportunities. Program sessions are scheduled both before- and after-school and on Saturdays. The program also operates in the summer, with a six-week Algebra 1 program and a two-week 9*** grade transition program. Parent/family sessions are also provided. ri ri Hall High School (HHS) is another of the five high schools in the district. The HHS program includes a drug and violence prevention program and a youth development component emphasizing counseling, service learning, mentoring, and employment opportunities. Program sessions are scheduled both before- and after-school and on Saturdays. The program also operates in the summer with a six-week Algebra 1 program and a two-week 9*** grade transition program. Parent/family sessions are also provided. ri ri Proposed Design ri A mixed methods design will be used to gather information about the various CCLCs in the LRSD. In addition, a case study design will be used gather information about MMMSs CCLC. The goal of the mixed methods design is to obtain broad information regarding a variety of programs with respect to stakeholder perceptions of implementation and impact. The goal of the case study design is to obtain in-depth information to assist in understanding and judging a program in the context in which it operates. The detailed program description can then lead to naturalistic generalization of the program to other contexts (Worthen, Sanders, & Fitzpatrick, 1997). Both quantitative and qualitative data sources will be employed to address the research questions as follows: 3 n n Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H n K H ri riH I Primary Evaluation Question: 1. Have the Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? For the achievement analysis, the preliminary plan is to employ a quasi-experimental design which compares students participating in CCLCs activities versus matched comparison students who do not participate in CCLC activities. The actual analysis used will be the approach that is the most rigorous for the data sources available. Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. 2. 3. 4. What is the nature and level of implementation of the CCLC programs? Interviews will be conducted with the school principal and site coordinator. All teachers will be surveyed. Students who participate in the program will be surveyed. For the Mabelvale case study, observations of program components will also be conducted. A brief (20-min.) student focus group (n = 5 to 7 students) will also be conducted to ascertain students perspectives of the program components. What is the level of participation in CCLCs by African American students? Participation records and observation data will be analyzed. What are the perceptions of teachers and school administrators regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? This question will be addressed via the teacher survey and administrator interviews. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians and students of program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A parent survey consisting of closed- and open-ended items will be administered to parents. A student questionnaire will be administered at all schools. A focus group will be conducted with MMMS students. Table 1 below provides a summary of the research questions and associated data collection sources. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H Table 1. Summary of Instruments and Participants by Evaluation Question K Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. Have the Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Participants Data Sources LRSD Students ITBS and Arkansas Benchmark Reading and Math Subtests Supplemental Questions: 1. What is the nature and level of implementation of the CCLC programs? CCLC Program/School administrators CCLC Teachers CCLC Students Administrator Interviews Teacher Survey Student Survey Student Focus Group (case study) CCLC Observations (case study) A ] 2. What is the level of participation in CCLCs by African American students? CCLC Students School records/participation rosters CCLC Observations (case study) i 3. What are the perceptions of teachers and school administrators regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians and students of program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 2005 - 2006 Timeline September-February: Spring Semester
May-June: July-August: September 1: October 1: CCLC Teachers CCLC Program/School Administrators Teacher Survey Administrator Interviews K Parents of CCLC students CCLC Students Parent Survey Student Survey Student Focus Group (case study) >] li Planning/refmement, consultation with PRE and CCLC representatives, and instrument development
review by evaluation team Conduct observations, administer teacher questionnaire (at faculty meeting), conduct interviews and focus group, and administer parent and student questionnaires Analyses of records data
analyses of survey, observation, and interview data Analyses of achievement data
analyses of survey, observation, and interview data, submission of draft report of findings to PRE, review by evaluation team and feedback from PRE Delivery of final report to PRE LRSD delivers report to US District Court. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H H H H LRSD 21"* CCLC (Mabelvale) DRAFT Observation Tool 4 444 44 4 44 44 Date Day of Week Time in Time Out Have attendance Sheet Yes/ No Which program was being observed? After school tutoring Homework Club Enrichment Club Summer Camp Other Locale: Locale: Locale: Locale: Library other: Student composition Number: | Estimate of the number of students identified as African-American: [ Student Activity: What were the students doing? (Check all that apply and annotate briefly) Literacy Math Computer use for: research, recreation, academic support/skiii development, homework Exploring Environmental Science Medical Studies Technology other: Were students working Alone? Purposively together? With an adult (teacher/volunteer/parent)? Adults: How many adults were present? Who were the responsible adults? What were the responsible adults doing? Were parents present? community volunteer CCLC staff Other: Yes No If yes, what were they doing? I I I I ] ] [ o o ] Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H r Describe the student/staff interaction: ID What materials were in use? n Overall Quality of Time and Social Atmosphere: How well did this slice of time represent a learning center? B Characteristic incius/Veness 4 All of the students were involved Time spent involved Students involved were involved all of the time Quality of activities: enqapement Quality of activities: academic relevance Individualized attention Activities were engaging for students Activities were relevant academically and adapted to the students needs Individualized attention was provided in a timely manner to students in need of it 3 Most of the students were involved Students who were involved were involved most of the time Activities were usually enqaqinq for students Activities were relevant to academics but less adapted to student needs Individual attention was provided when students asked 2 Some of the students were involved 1 Few to none of the students were involved B Inclusion of peers The students appeared to include all their peers in their group activities Students generally included one another in their group activities Students involved were involved some of the time Activities were marginally enqaqinq for students Academic relevance of activities was minimal or difficult to ascertain Individual attention was provided, but it was sporadic or delayed Student involvement was marginal at best Activities were not enqaqinq for students Activities were not academically relevant Students with needs for individual attention appeared to be ignored B B Interactions: social acceptability and resolution Most students were engaged effectively with others and in a socially acceptable manner Student interactions were occasionally marked by minor conflicts which were quickly and amicably resolved Social isolation appeared in a few instances (other than for disciplinary purposes) Student interactions were marked by minor conflicts which were somewhat resolved eventually Some students were clearly isolated by their peers Student interactions were contentious and adult intervention did not occur Additional Comments: Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H I F n n H H B BLRSD 2P' CCLC DRAFT Interview Items' Subjects'. Principal, Counselor, Coordinator What role(s) do you play in the operation of the 2P' CCLC at your school? 4 What is the primary purpose of your 2P CCLC program? Whom does your program serve? What type(s) of students do you believe benefited the most from the program? 4 Why? How? What do you see as the most successful aspects of the program? What challenges, if any, have there been to implementing the program? In terms of recruiting and retaining students, how successful do you think the program has been? What kinds of practices have contributed to success in recruiting and retaining students? If you do not think the program has been successful in recruitment and retention, what do you think has inhibited those efforts? How successful do you think the program has been in establishing a close partnership between the Center and your school? What kinds of practices have contributed to your success in establishing a close school/program relationship? If you do not think there is a close partnership, what do you think has hindered the relationship? How successful do you think your program has been in engaging the parents of the students who participate in the program? What kind of practices have contributed to your success in this area? If you do not think the program has engaged the parents, what do you think has stood in the way? How successful do you think your program has been in initiating community involvement or partnerships for the program? ' Items modeled on the CEEP Evaluation of KentuckyE 21 Century Community Learning Centers. Year 2 Interim Report. P 37 ff. Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix HWhat kinds of practices have contributed to your success in this area? If you think you have not been successful, what do you think have been the barriers? Your program offers a variety of approaches (clubs) and program schedules for reaching students. Have you seen any differences in participation by students of various ethnicities in any of these programs? (sub questions to be modified dependent upon individual program design) Approaches Homework club Tutoring club Enrichment club Program schedules Saturday program Summer camp (2005
2006) Before-school program After-school program Is there anything else that you think we should know about your programs efforts to provide students with a 2T Century Community Learning Center? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H I 14 14 Id n RI n MLRSD 2 TCCLC DRAFT Teacher Survey Items^ We are interested in knowing what you think about the 2P Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) program at your school. Your answers will remain anonymous. What is your role in the 2P Century Community Learning Center? (Mark the best description) 4 o o o I am part of the faculty at the school and I also work with the CCLC. I am part of the faculty at the school but I do not work with the CCLC. I am not part of the faculty
I work only with the 2P Century Community Learning Center program. What is your opinion of the following statements about 2P Century Community Learning Center program at your school? (strongly agree
agree
disagree
strongly disagree) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The CCLC program offers students enough choice of activities. The CCLC program offers academic help to students who need it. The CCLC offers students a safe place to be after school. The CCLC program appeals to a wide variety of students. The CCLC program reaches students families. How many of the students that you know who participate in the program are exhibiting the following (Almost all of them, many of them, some of them, a few of them, almost none of them)? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Improved academic performance Increased school attendance Improvement in how they relate to classmates Improvement in how they relate to teachers Improvement in how they behave in class Greater self-worth and self-esteem Involvement in community services Development as leaders Greater awareness of health issues Greater awareness of drug and violence issues Improvement in computer skills/computer literacy Open-ended: 1. What do you think are the strengths of the current 21 Century program at your school? 2. In what ways, if any, do you think the program at your school might be improved? w T. Some items derived from the Fort Worth after-school teacher survey (program teachers, atxxjt the program) Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix HLRSD 21 CCLC Possible Student Survey Items We would like to know what you think about your schools 2T Century Community Learning Center (CLCC). We will not use your name, but we do -want to know something about you. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. What grade are you in this year? (6, 7, 8) What is your gender? {male, female) Which ethnic group best describes you? {Native American, Asian American, African American, Hispanic American, Caucasian American, Other). Do you belong to the CLCC Homework Club? (Yes/No) Do you belong to the CLCC Tutoring Club? (Yes/No) Do you belong to the CCLC Enrichment Club? (Yes/No) Do you participate in the program before school? (Yes/No) Do you participate in the program after school? (Yes/No) Do you participate in the Saturday program? (Yes/No) Do you plan to attend the Summer Camp this summer? (Yes/No) I I n Please tell us how much you agree with these statements about the programs at your schools 2L' Century Community Learning Center, (strongly agree
agree
disagree
strongly disagree) 1. I like the programs the community learning center offers. 2. There are enough different activities from which to choose. 3. I like the teachers who work in the community learning center program. 4. Being in the after-school program is better than other things I could be doing after school. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Teachers in the program give me help when I ask for it. I feel safe in the after-school program. Teachers and other adults in the program make me feel comfortable. I would sign up again for the program. 1 would tell other kids to sign up for the community learning center activities. n Please select the answer that best describes what you think. The Center has helped me to... 1. Like school more (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 2. Come to school more often (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 3. Get better grades (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 4. Behave better at school (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 5. Work better with other students (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) b. Feel better about myself (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 7. Talk to my teachers more (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 8. Understand the importance of graduating from high school (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) n n n n Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix HLRSD 21 CCLC (Mabelvale) DRAFT Student Focus Group Items We would like to know what you think about Mabelvale's 21' Century Community Learning Center. 1. 2. What do you think are some of the best things at the Center? Do a lot of kids participate in the program? Why do you think that is? 3. What is the best thing about the Enrichment Club? Homework Club? 4. How could the program be improved? The Tutoring Club? 5. Does participating in the program help you with your school work? How do you know? 6. Does this program make you want to come to school? Why or why not? 7. What have you learned about working with other kids by participating in this program? 8. Does this program offer you extra opportunities that you dont have a chance to investigate during the regular school day? If so, what are some of them? 9. Do you plan to take part in the Summer Camp this year? Why? Why not? 10. Do you like being part of the schools Community Learning Center? 11. What activities offered by the Learning Center have the grown-ups in your family enjoyed? Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix HAppendix I IB HI HI w Proposed Plan for Evaluation of Pre-Kindergarten Literacy BB IB Bl Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis n Hl Hl HI HI Hl HI Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1fl fl Proposal for the 2005-2006 Evaluation of the Pre-Kindergarten Literacy Program Little Rock School District Outline Version Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question 1. Has the pre-kindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of pre-kindergarten literacy programs in elementary schools with pre-kindergarten programs in the Little Rock School District in 2005-2006? 2. What is the level of participation in the pre-kindergarten program by African- American children relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 3. To what extent does the pre-kindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify African-American children who may be at-risk for academic failure and monitor progress? 4. What are the perceptions of pre-kindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers regarding the pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of the principal, kindergarten teachers, and first grade teachers in the school regarding the pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of pre-kindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Program Description The Little Rock School District recently developed a Curriculum System for Pre- K Literacy. The program is a comprehensive map which emphasizes communication. collaboration, and coherency. Implemented in fall 2005 in all pre-kindergarten classrooms in the district, the Map for Pre-K Literacy provides content guides with strategies and resources, concrete benchmarks for each month of the school year, and formative assessments for planning. The structure specifically addresses critical early Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 learning skills such as oral language, listening comprehension, vocabulary, phonological awareness, print awareness, and alphabet knowledge and early mathematics skills. Instructional orientations include group activities and learning centers using a variety of literature and hands-on activities which are theme-based. The curriculum map calls for recommended and required formative monthly assessments. pi PI Elementary Schools with Pre-K classrooms # of Pre-K Classrooms Bale Brady Baseline Fair Park Forest Park Chicot Western Hills Jefferson Carver Dodd Meadowcliff M. L. King Geyer Springs Pulaski Heights Romine Washington Wilson Woodruff Mabelvale Terry Fulbright Otter Creek Wakefield Watson Franklin Stephens Rockefeller McDermott 2 2 2 2 4 1 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 3 4 1 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 2 PI pl PI p n TOTAL 69 Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1Proposed Design A mixed-methods design will be employed to address the research questions as follows: Primary Evaluation Question 1. Has the pre-kindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? A. 2005-2006 Pre-Kindergarten Students: A treatment school, pre- and post-test design will be employed for pre-kindergarten students. All elementary schools with pre-kindergarten classrooms will be examined. Pretests'. Posttests'. Work Sampling System by Pearson Work Sampling System by Pearson B. 2005-2006 Pre-Kindergarten Students as Incoming Kindergarten Students in Fall 2006: In fall 2006 (when pre-kindergarten students enter kindergarten) comparisons will be made between students who attended pre-kindergarten in the district and those students who did not. Cunently, there are approximately 12 elementary schools in the district that administer Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) to incoming kindergarten students. c. H 2004-2005 Pre-Kindergarten Students: Within each of the elementary schools in the district, kindergarten students who participated in the Little Rock district pre-kindergarten program in 2004-2005 will be identified and their achievement gains compared to other kindergarten students in the district. M Pretests'. Posttests'. DRA or DIBELS (whichever has the most usable database) administered in Kindergarten 2005-2006 Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Reading and Math Subtests H Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions fl 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of pre-kindergarten classroom environments and instruction at the schools implementing in 2005- 2006? fl Observations of pre-kindergarten classrooms will be made at a sample of schools. A minimum of 15 classroom observations will be conducted. The pre-kindergarten teacher survey will address this question via closed-ended and open-ended items. Paraprofessional teachers in each pre-kindergarten classroom will also be surveyed through closed-ended and open-ended items. A random sample of 10 principals will be interviewed Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I v by phone. Kindergarten and first grade classroom teachers in schools with pre-kindergarten classrooms will also be surveyed. 2. What is the level of participation in the pre-kindergarten program by African- American children relative to other ethnic groups at the school? Student records/archival data for 2005-2006 will be analyzed. 3. To what extent does the pre-kindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify African- American children who may be at-risk for academic failure and monitor progress? Analysis of available pre-kindergarten screening and program assessment data, including the Early Screening Inventory. The pre-kindergarten teacher survey, paraprofessional teacher survey, principal interview, and classroom observations will also address this question. 4. What are the perceptions of pre-kindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals regarding the pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? p The pre-kindergarten teacher survey and paraprofessional teacher survey will directly address this question. m 5. What are the perceptions of the principal, kindergarten teachers, and first grade teachers in the school regarding pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? n The kindergarten and first grade classroom teacher survey will address this question via closed-ended and open-ended items. A random sample of principals will be interviewed by phone. w 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of pre-kindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? The parents of pre-kindergarten children survey will be conducted to address this question via an instrument including closed- and open-ended items in schools with pre-kindergarten programs. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question Evaluation Question Primary Question Participants Data Sources 1. Has the pre-kindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of Afiican-American students? All kindergarten and first grade students at 30 pre-kindergarten schools and other elementary schools Pre-kindergarten student participants within above samples DIBELS (fall 2006 - approximately 12 schools for incoming K students) ITBS (2005-2006 kindergarten data) Pre-kindergarten student program data - Work Sampling System scores (2005-2006 data) Supplemental Questions II 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of pre-kindergarten classroom enviromnents and instruction at the 30 schools in 2005- 2006? All pre-kindergarten teachers All kindergarten and first grade classroom teachers at schools with pre-kindergarten programs Principals at pre-kindergarten schools Pre-kindergarten teacher survey Paraprofessional teacher survey Random sample of 10 principal phone interviews Kindergarten and first grade classroom teacher survey (faculty meeting) Pre-kindergarten classroom observations (min. of 15 observations) H II 2. What is the level of participation in pre-kindergarten by African- American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? All pre-kindergarten schools School records/archival data 3. To what extent does the pre-kindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify African-American children who may be at-risk for academic failure and monitor progress? All pre-kindergarten teachers All pre-kindergarten teachers will provide student assessment data Principals at pre-kindergarten schools Pre-kindergarten student program and assessment data including the Early Screening Inventory. Pre-kindergarten teacher survey, paraprofessional teacher survey, and classroom observations (min. of 15 observations in at least 10 schools) Random sample of 10 principal phone interviews Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 4. 5. 6. Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question, Continued Evaluation Question What are the perceptions of pre-kindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers regarding pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? What are the perceptions of principal, kindergarten, and first grade classroom teachers regarding the pre- kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of pre- kindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Fall 2005- February 2006 February-March April May-June July-August September 1 October 1 Participants All pre-kindergarten teachers All K-3 classroom teachers in experienced RR schools Principals at pre-kindergarten schools Parents of pre-kindergarten children in schools with programs Timelines Data Sources Pre-kindergarten teacher survey Paraprofessional teacher survey Kindergarten and first grade classroom teacher survey (disaggregated by grade) Random sample of 10 principal phone interviews Pre-kindergarten parent survey Planning, refinement, and consultation with PRE and pre-kindergarten experts
instrument development
review by evaluation team Conduct observations. Pre-Kindergarten Teacher, Paraprofessional Teacher, Kindergarten Teacher and First Grade Teacher Surveys Pre-kindergarten school Principal Phone Interviews Pre-Kindergarten student data, records/archival data analyses Achievement data analyses/complete survey and interview analyses Submit draft report of findings to PRE for review by evaluation team and feedback from PRE. Deliver final report to PRE. LRSD submits final report. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 H I I I I I I I I I n DRAFT Principal Interview Questions Little Rock School District Pre-K Schools I. General Information Describe the implementation of your schools PRE-K program. How does the PRE-K program fit within the broader literacy initiative in your school? Which of the components provided by the PRE-K literacy program do you feel are most effective? Are there any components that you feel are ineffective? Describe your role in the PRE-K program implementation. How would you describe teacher support for the PRE-K program? Can you think of specific positive or negative comments made by teachers about the program? What additional resources have been needed to support your PRE-K program? Resources include time, space, materials and personnel. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I IL Classroom Level Changes Specifically, what contributions has the PRE-K program made in terms of
Providing African American students with equal learning and performance opportunities? V Reading instruction? H Identifying those children at risk for academic failure (especially with regard to African American students V n Teacher professional development? I Monitoring of student progress and achievement? n How does your PRE-K program accommodate special needs children? I n HI. Results What differences in achievement have you seen in PRE-K students? Specifically, how has the program impacted the achievement of African American students? I Do you think that PRE-K program is helping to close the achievement gap between African American and white students? Explain. I How has the PRE-K program impacted classroom teachers? I Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 RIV. Professional Development What specific training or support have you received as an administrator regarding the PRE-K program? What training or support have the PRE-K teachers received regarding the PRE-K program? Any plans/suggestions for continuing the professional development process at your school? V. Parental Involvement How would you describe parent support for the PRE-K program? Describe efforts to inform and involve parents. Are parents more involved now than in the past? How would you describe community support for the school in general, and the PRE-K students in particular? VI. Closure Do you have any suggestions to improve the PRE-K program? Are there any important aspects of program implementation that have not been mentioned today? Any additional comments you would like to make? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 I DRAFT PRE-K TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE School Name:_________________ General: Please evaluate using the scale provided'. Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree I have a thorough understanding of my schools PRE-K program.____________________________________ I have received adequate initial and ongoing professional development/training for implementation of the PRE-K program._____________ Professional development provided by the district has been valuable.__________________________________ The principal is an effective instructional leader. Teachers are given sufficient planning time to implement the PRE-K program.____________________ Student achievement has been positively impacted by the PRE-K program.____________________________ Overall, this program is valuable for improving the achievement of African-American students._________ I have time to collaborate with other PRE-K teachers.____________________________________________ I have adequate materials to implement the program.___________________________________________ The content areas presented in the curriculum map are appropriate for pre-k literacy instruction._______ The monthly benchmark goals are realistic for pre-k literacy programs.__________________________________ The interim and anchor assessments in the pre-K literacy curriculum are useful in assessing growth and progress._______________________________________ I have a thorough understanding of the pre-k curriculum map.___________________________________ Because of the PRE-K program, more parents are involved in the school.______________________________ Preschool teachers in the school are generally supportive of the PRE-K program._________________ Teachers in the school (not preschool teachers) are generally supportive of the PRE-K program._______ Teachers are encouraged to communicate concerns, questions, and constructive ideas regarding the PRE-K program.__________________________________ The PRE-K program is useful in monitoring progress of African American students.____________ The PRE-K program is useful as a screening tool for assessing at-risk African American students._______ With the PRE-K program, children are excited about learning. u I I I n H n Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I Effectiveness of PRE-K Literacy Components: Please rate the effectiveness of the following components: Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree The PRE-K program is valuable in preparing children for kindergarten._____________________ Instructional elements of the PRE-K program assessments, programs, materialsare based on scientifically-based reading research.___________ Because of the PRE-K program, systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, oral language, vocabulary, concepts of print, and comprehension occurs daily in our schools classrooms.______________________________ The literacy and language components are effective for reading readiness.________________ Group activities engage the students and complement instruction.______________________ Learning centers engage the students and complement instruction. DEMOGRAPHICS: How many years of experience do you have as a PRE-K teacher? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years of experience do you have as an employee in any school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years of experience do you have as an employee in this school? Less than one yr.___ 1-5 yrs___ 6-10 yrs____ 11-15 yrs___15 or more yrs___ What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School Diploma or less___Associates Degree/Some college Bachelors Degree____Masters Degree____ Degree beyond Masters What best describes your cultural background? American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander African American Hispanic/Latino___Caucasian Multi-Racial Gender: Male____ Female Age range: 29 yrs. or less 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older Open-Ended: What are the most effective aspects of the PRE-K program? What are the least effective? Do you think the PRE-K program should be continued? Why or Why Not? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I DRAFT CLASSROOM TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE PRE-K SCHOOL PROGRAM School Name: Grade Level: Please describe your understanding of the PRE-K program at your school: n I have a thorough understanding of my schools PRE- K program.__________________________________________ The PRE-K program will positively impact students at the school._________________________________________ The PRE-K program will improve the overall achievement of African American students at this school._______________________________________________ Our school has a sufficient number of preschool teachers._____________________________________________ Preschool teachers are positive about the PRE-K program.____________________________________________ The PRE-K program will help prepare students for success in kindergarten.______________________________ The PRE-K program can help identify at-risk students._____________________________________________ The PRE-K program will prepare students for reading readiness.___________________________________ It is my understanding the components of the PRE-K program are based on scientifically-based research. The principal supports the PRE-K program._________ Because of the PRE-K program, systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, oral language, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension occurs daily in our schools classrooms.______________ The PRE-K program is actively engaging parents in their childs learning. Strongly Agret Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix I M M DEMOGRAPHICS: How many years of experience do you have as an employee in any school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs____ 11-15 yrs____ 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ II How many years of experience do you have as an employee in this school? Less than one yr.___ 1-5 yrs___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs___15 or more yrs___ II What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School Diploma or less___ Associates Degree/Some college____ II Bachelors Degree Masters Degree____Degree beyond Masters What best describes your cultural background? II American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander African American Hispanic/Latino___Caucasian Multi-Racial II Gender: Male Female Age range: 29 yrs. or less___30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older II II Open-Ended: What are the most effective aspects of the PRE-K program? Il What are the least effective? Il Do you think the PRE-K program should be continued? Why or Why Not? II II II If Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix I DRAFT PRE-K PARAPROFESSIONAL TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE School Name: General: Please evaluate using the scale provided: Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Agree I have a thorough understanding of my schools PRE-K program.________________________________ I have received training and development regarding my work with PRE-K students._______ The PRE-K teacher in my classroom is an effective leader._________________________________ The principal at this school is an effective instructional leader._____________________________ I am able to communicate concerns regarding the students with the PRE-K classroom teacher. The classroom teacher and I spend time planning instructional activities._________________ Student achievement has been positively impacted by the PRE-K program._______________ Overall, this program is valuable for improving the achievement of African-American students. I have time to collaborate with other PRE-K paraprofessionals at this school._________________ I have adequate materials in the classroom to do nyjob-_________________________________________ Pre-K classroom teachers in the school are generally supportive of the program.____________ Pre-K Paraprofessionals in the school are generally supportive of the program.____________ Children in the PRE-K class are excited about learning.________________________________________ The PRE-K program is useful in monitoring progress of African-American students._________ The PRE-K program is valuable in preparing children for kindergarten.______________________ My role as a PRE-K Paraprofessional is valuable in the PRE-K classroom.________________________ Mentoring and/or coaching I receive from the Pre-K classroom teacher is helpful to me._______ Because of the Pre-K program, more parents are involved in the school. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I DEMOGRAPHICS: How many years experience do you have as a PRE-K Paraprofessional? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years experience do you have as an employee in any school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years experience do you have as an employee in this school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School Diploma or less Associates Degree/Some college Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Degree beyond Masters What best describes your cultural background? American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander African American Hispanic/Latino___Caucasian Multi-Racial Gender: Male Female II Age Range: 29 yrs. or less 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older II OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS: H M M II What are the most effective aspects of the PRE-K program? II What are the least effective? Il II Do you think the PRE-K program should be continued? Why or Why Not? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I DRAFT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PRE-K PARENT QUESTIONNAIRE Dear Parent/Guardian: We would like to know what you think about your childs preschool experience. Please take a few minutes to complete the following survey. All responses are completely confidential. Ethnicity of your Child: African American Caucasian_______ Hispanic________ Asian___________ Other Gender: Male Age:__ Female Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree strongly Disagree My child enjoys the preschool class. I believe my childs preschool class is adequately preparing him/her for kindergarten.________________________ My child is excited about learning. I receive information from my childs teacher regarding units or themes of study.________________________________ My child is becoming reading ready due to preschool._____________ I receive feedback regarding my childs language skills. My child enjoys group activities in the preschool class.___________________ My child enjoys the learning centers in the preschool class.________________ My childs preschool teacher is an effective instructor.__________________ My child enjoys looking at books/ being read to at home._______________ My child brings home information from the school that helps me understand what he/she is learning. 1 like the school my child is attending. I believe my child can get a good education at this school. I believe African American students can achieve at this school. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I R What are the best things about your childs preschool experience? What changes would you like to see in the preschool program at this school? M II II II II II II II H Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix I Appendix J Proposed Plan for Evaluation of Read 180 I Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis I Quarterly Written Update March I, 2006 Appendix J * Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width), Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered a I Proposal for the Evaluation of Read 180 in the Little Rock School District: Outline Version DRAFT COPY ONLY Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question-. 1. Has the Read 180 program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of Read 180 at the schools implementing it in 2005-06? 2. What is the level of participation in Read 180 by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 3. What are the perceptions of Read 180 teachers regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. M 5. What are the perceptions of other teachers in the school regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Read 180 students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Program Description H Read 180 is a reading intervention program that is aimed at assisting struggling adolescent readers. Currently, five middle schools and all eight high schools in LRSD use this program. Students are targeted to participate in the program based on results from the Arkansas Benchmark Exam. Students that participate in the program typically spend equal portions of their 90-minute English or Language Arts class working with adaptive software, reading independently, and receiving instruction in large and small group settings. H I Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Une width). Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered Appendix J fl I Proposed Design H A mixed-methods design will be employed to address the research questions as follows: Primary Evaluation Question'. n 1. Has the Read 180 program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? The preliminary plan is discussed below. The actual analysis used will be the approach that is the most rigorous for the available data sources. I A. Whole School'. A treatment-control school, pretest-posttest design will be employed in Grades 6-9. The analysis will control for pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. It may be decided to examine (a) all schools relative to the entire district middle and high school database or (b) a stratified random sample of Read 180 schools relative to matched control schools (this will only be possible in the middle schools). p n B. Read 180 Sub sample: Within each of the Read 180 schools, students who participated in the program will be identified and their achievement gains compared to predicted scores based on school status, student pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. n Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: n 1. What is the quality and level of implementation of Read 180 at the schools implementing it in 2005-06? n Read 180 teachers will be surveyed and a random sample will be interviewed. The principals will also be interviewed. Observations of Read 180 sessions will be made at a sample of schools. A minimum of 10 observations will be conducted. To the extent resources are available an attempt will be made to observe at all the sites. n 2. What is the level of participation in Read 180 by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? n Student-level Read 180 records/archival data will be analyzed. n 3. What are the perceptions of Read 180 teachers regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? n All of the Read 180 teachers will be surveyed, and a random sample will be asked to participate in brief interviews to address this question. 4. What are the perceptions of other teachers in the school regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? I Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix) * Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered -n 4i A survey will be developed and administered to non-Read 180 teachers to address this question. 5. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Read 180 students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A parent survey will be administered to address this question. Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question fl fl fl fl fl fl Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. Has the Read 180 program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African- American students? Supplemental Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of Read 180 at the schools implementing it in 2005-06? 2. What is the level of participation in Read 180 by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 3. What are the perceptions of Read 180 teachers regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of other teachers in the school Participants Data Sources Read 180 students ITBS and Benchmark Exam Read 180 teachers Principals at Read 180 schools Read 180 students All Read 180 schools Read 180 teachers Non-Read 180 Teachers at schools using the program I Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Read 180 Teacher Survey Read 180 Teacher Interviews Principal Interviews Read 180 Observations (min. of 10 1-hour observations) SOM/Read 180 SCU/Quality Assessment Form Read 180 Student Survey (all Read 180 students) Read 180 Student Focus Group (random sample) School level Read 280 reports Read 180 Teacher Survey Teacher Survey (random selection of teachers) Appendix J * Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", CenteredI Evaluation Question regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Read 180 students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Timelines January February-April May-June July-August September 1 October 1 Participants Data Sources v Parents of Read 180 students Read 180 Parent Survey H W Planning, refinement with PRE and other LRSD staff Instrument development Begin observations Continue observations Principal and teacher interviews Administer parent and teacher questionnaires Data analysis on non-achievement data sources Achievement data analysis Submit draft report of findings to PRE Receive feedback from PRE and evaluation teams Submit final report to PRE for Board approval the same month LRSD submits final report to court n n n n I n n n 1 Quarterly Written Update March I, 2006 Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered Appendix J * n I ( Pead 180 Questionnaire For Non-Read 180 Teachers Draft Copy Only (NOTE: The Read 180 Questionnaire will be presented to teachers on a form that can be scanned) Circle the grade level(s) you teach: 6 7 8 9 Circle your ethnicity: Caucasian African American Circle your gender. Hispanic Asian Male I Multi-Ethnic Female Please let us know what you think about the effectiveness of Read 180 by rating the following items from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Arc you able to identify which students are taking or have taken the Read 180 classes? Yes No If "yes" please answer the flowing questions: Read 180 Items 1. I have an understanding of the Read 180 program _______goals._________________________________________ 2. I have an understanding of the Read 180 program classroom implementation (how the classes are _______structured).____________________________________ 3. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes demonstrate continuous _______improvement in literacy skills_____________________ 4. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes submit work that reflects _______improved writing._______________________________ 5. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes show more willingness to read _______aloud in class.__________________________________ 6. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes demonstrate improved _______written and orol vocabulary skills._________________ 7. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes demonstrate better test _______taking skills.___________________________________ 8. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes show increased _______comprehension of assigned reading._______________ 9. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes show increased attention and interest in learning. Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree strongly * Agree Appendix J * { Formatted Table Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line widfti), Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered10. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes have improved classroom behavior. H Open ended: What do you think are the strengths of the Read 180 program? What do you think are the weaknesses of the Read 180 program? What changes do you recommend for the Read 180 program? Should your school continue using Read 180? _Yes _No Briefly explain why_____________________________________ I V H Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix) n n n n n n I n Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered n Survey of Computer Use for Read 180 Draft Copy Only School Observer Name Observation Date Grade Observed 6 7 3 9 Number of Students in Read 180 Class (by ethnicity):_____African American _____Non-African American How many computers were available for Read 180? ___One ___2-4 ___5-10 ___11 or more Computer Configuration and Use How frequently did malfunctions occur on computers used for Read 180? ___Never ___Rarely ___Occasionally ___Frequently ___Extensively Most of the computers used for Read 180 were: ___Up-to-date ___Aging but adequate ___Outdated/limited capacity Read 180 Computer Activities______________ In which subject areas did students complete Read 180 computer work (check all that were observed)? ___Reading Comprehension ___Vocabulary ___Spelling What was the overall level of African American student attention, interest, and engagement while using the Read 180 computer program? ___Low ___Moderate ___High TALLY the types of questions students asked while using the computer Read 180. ___Content area (e.g. how to solve a problem
the meaning of a word) ___Software use (e.g., how to log in
how to move to next section, how to take a test) ___Computer use (e.g., how to get the mouse or keyboard to work properly) ___Non-Read 180 questions, (e.g.. Do 1 have to sit next to John? Can I go to the restroom?) TALLY each time the teacher provided the following types of instruction specifically for student use of Read 180 computer activities: ___Content area (e.g. reading, vocabulary) ___Software use (e.g., how to log in, find correct lesson) ___Computer use (e.g., locate software, use mouse) ___Classroom behavior rules ___No Instructions were given Observer Notes: What was the overall level of NON-African American student attention, interest, and engagement while using the Read 180 program? ___Low ___Moderate ___High What was the level of academically focused time while students were using the computer for Read 180? ___Low ___Moderate ___High I Quarterly Written Update March I, 2006 Appendix J Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width), Tabs: 5.75", Centered + 5.88", Centered Draft Copy Only Parent/Guardian Consent Form Hl * Dear parent or guardian, As part of a study conducted by the Center for Research in Educational Policy, The University of Memphis, and endorsed by the Little Rock School District, we are requesting permission for your child to participate in a group interview of 5 to 7 students from your childs school. During the group interview (focus group), a trained researcher will ask your child questions regarding his/her participation in the Read 180 program (your son's/daughter's language arts/reading class). The questions are designed to help us find out how well the Read 180 program is helping to improve student reading skills and learning. IB The focus group should take approximately 20 minutes and will only pertain to the Read 180 class that your child is taking. The focus group will be conducted during a Read 180 class. Individual responses to the questions will not be seen by anyone at the school, and the identity of individuals participating in the focus group will remain confidential. The responses to the focus group will be reported together in summary form to school personnel. I n Please note that your child is not required to participate in the focus group. Your permission is required to participate. If you give permission, please have your child return the completed form to his/her teacher. n
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.