Attempting to improve standardized test results using Study Islands' web-based mastery program

State standardized testing has always been a tool to measure a school’s performance and to help evaluate school curriculum. However, with the school of choice legislation in 1992, the MEAP test became a measuring stick to grade schools by and a major tool in attracting school of choice students. Now, declining enrollment and a state budget struggling to stay out of the red have made school of choice students more important than ever before. MEAP scores have become the deciding factor in some cases. For the past five years, the Hancock Middle School staff has been working hard to improve their students’ MEAP scores in accordance with President Bush's “No Child Left Behind” legislation. In 2005, the school was awarded a grant that enabled staff to work for two years on writing and working towards school goals that were based on the improvement of MEAP scores in writing and math. As part of this effort, the school purchased an internet-based program geared at giving students practice on state content standards. This study examined the results of efforts by Hancock Middle School to help improve student scores in mathematics on the MEAP test through the use of an online program called “Study Island.” In the past, the program was used to remediate students, and as a review with an incentive at the end of the year for students completing a certain number of objectives. It had also been used as a review before upcoming MEAP testing in the fall. All of these methods may have helped a few students perform at an increased level on their standardized test, but the question remained of whether a sustained use of the program in a classroom setting would increase an understanding of concepts and performance on the MEAP for the masses. This study addressed this question. Student MEAP scores and Study Island data from experimental and comparison groups of students were compared to understand how a sustained use of Study Island in the classroom would impact student test scores on the MEAP. In addition, these data were analyzed to determine whether Study Island results provide a good indicator of students’ MEAP performance. The results of the study suggest that there were limited benefits related to sustained use of Study Island and gave some indications about the effectiveness of the mathematics curriculum at Hancock Middle School. These results and implications for instruction are discussed.

Improving learning by connecting chemistry curriculum to students' experiences

The purpose of the study was to design, implement, and assess the effects of a teaching unit about fuel sources and chemical energy on students’ learning. The unit was designed to incorporate students’ experiences in a way that was aligned with the Michigan High School Content Expectations. The study was completed with all of the students taking General Chemistry in a rural Michigan high school in the 2010-11 school year. There were 138 participants total. The participants were mostly Caucasian and the majority were in the 11th grade. Of these, 77 constituted the experimental group and were taught the unit. The additional 61 participants in the control group were given the posttest only. Data was derived from the results of pre/post tests, final assessment projects, and the researcher’s observations. A pretest that contained questions about the fuel sources was administered at the beginning of the unit. An identical posttest was administered at the completion of the unit. A final assessment project required students to choose the best fuel source for the area, and support their opinion with facts and data from their research or the learning activities and labs performed in class. The results of the study revealed that the teaching unit did produce significant learning gains in the experimental group. The results also indicated that the teaching unit added value to the current General Chemistry curriculum by expanding what students were learning. The instructional goals of the unit were aligned with the Michigan High School Content Expectations. The results also revealed that the students were able to learn to support their thinking and decisions with explanations based on the data and labs. These are essential science literacy skills. The study supported the view that connecting the required curriculum with students’ experiences and interests was effective, and that students can learn important science literacy skills, such as providing support for arguments and communicating scientific explanations, when given adequate teacher support.

Teaching and aligning upper level mathematics classes to Michigan high school content expectations in an alternative education setting : approaches and issues

After teaching regular education secondary mathematics for seven years, I accepted a position in an alternative education high school. Over the next four years, the State of Michigan adopted new graduation requirements phasing in a mandate for all students to complete Geometry and Algebra 2 courses. Since many of my students were already struggling in Algebra 1, getting them through Geometry and Algebra 2 seemed like a daunting task. To better instruct my students, I wanted to know how other teachers in similar situations were addressing the new High School Content Expectations (HSCEs) in upper level mathematics. This study examines how thoroughly alternative education teachers in Michigan are addressing the HSCEs in their courses, what approaches they have found most effective, and what issues are preventing teachers and schools from successfully implementing the HSCEs. Twenty-six alternative high school educators completed an online survey that included a variety of questions regarding school characteristics, curriculum alignment, implementation approaches and issues. Follow-up phone interviews were conducted with four of these participants. The survey responses were used to categorize schools as successful, unsuccessful, and neutral schools in terms of meeting the HSCEs. Responses from schools in each category were compared to identify common approaches and issues among them and to identify significant differences between school groups. Data analysis showed that successful schools taught more of the HSCEs through a variety of instructional approaches, with an emphasis on varying the ways students learned the material. Individualized instruction was frequently mentioned by successful schools and was strikingly absent from unsuccessful school responses. The main obstacle to successful implementation of the HSCEs identified in the study was gaps in student knowledge. This caused pace of instruction to also be a significant issue. School representatives were fairly united against the belief that the Algebra 2 graduation requirement was appropriate for all alternative education students. Possible implications of these findings are discussed.

Looking at the effectiveness of an earth science unit designed using the Understanding by Design process

This report shares my efforts in developing a solid unit of instruction that has a clear focus on student outcomes. I have been a teacher for 20 years and have been writing and revising curricula for much of that time. However, most has been developed without the benefit of current research on how students learn and did not focus on what and how students are learning. My journey as a teacher has involved a lot of trial and error. My traditional method of teaching is to look at the benchmarks (now content expectations) to see what needs to be covered. My unit consists of having students read the appropriate sections in the textbook, complete work sheets, watch a video, and take some notes. I try to include at least one hands-on activity, one or more quizzes, and the traditional end-of-unit test consisting mostly of multiple choice questions I find in the textbook. I try to be engaging, make the lessons fun, and hope that at the end of the unit my students get whatever concepts I‘ve presented so that we can move on to the next topic. I want to increase students‘ understanding of science concepts and their ability to connect understanding to the real-world. However, sometimes I feel that my lessons are missing something. For a long time I have wanted to develop a unit of instruction that I know is an effective tool for the teaching and learning of science. In this report, I describe my efforts to reform my curricula using the “Understanding by Design” process. I want to see if this style of curriculum design will help me be a more effective teacher and if it will lead to an increase in student learning. My hypothesis is that this new (for me) approach to teaching will lead to increased understanding of science concepts among students because it is based on purposefully thinking about learning targets based on “big ideas” in science. For my reformed curricula I incorporate lessons from several outstanding programs I‘ve been involved with including EpiCenter (Purdue University), Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS), the Master of Science Program in Applied Science Education at Michigan Technological University, and the Michigan Association for Computer Users in Learning (MACUL). In this report, I present the methodology on how I developed a new unit of instruction based on the Understanding by Design process. I present several lessons and learning plans I‘ve developed for the unit that follow the 5E Learning Cycle as appendices at the end of this report. I also include the results of pilot testing of one of lessons. Although the lesson I pilot-tested was not as successful in increasing student learning outcomes as I had anticipated, the development process I followed was helpful in that it required me to focus on important concepts. Conducting the pilot test was also helpful to me because it led me to identify ways in which I could improve upon the lesson in the future.