Bianca


 * XYZ* Unified School District** - **Closing the AIMS mathematics achievement gap**

Fountain Hills Unified School District is experiencing a human performance gap in the mathematics academic performance of middle school level students on the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards. Currently, only 57% of total sixth grade students, 72% of total seven grade students, and 56% of total eight grade students achieved a passing performance level on AIMS mathematics. The desired performance is a school-wide AIMS results average of 90% by June, 2014. The student achievement gap with regards to the Arizona Academic Standards for mathematics at the middle school is a problem that needs to be addressed as soon as possible to ensure that the students moving up to this grade levels will not suffer a gap in their mathematics competencies. Also, closing this gap may improve the middle school classification label and thus bringing the district as an organization closer to reaching its mission and vision, and its goal of having four excelling schools.
 * Executive Summary**

The intervention project includes a cause analysis for the identified gap and outlines three possible intervention strategies, as well as their strengths and limitations. The chosen performance improvement intervention will close the student achievement gap through the implementation of a computer-based instructional program that exposes students to mathematics concepts and content through engaging leaning activities. It also provides solutions that will allow FHMS administration and mathematics teachers to make data-driven decisions aimed at guiding instruction and intervention.

**Module 1**
The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) provides a school classification for all public schools that have been in operation for a minimum of three academic years. ADE uses the Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) results to label a school as Excelling, Highly Performing, Performing Plus, Performing, or Under Performing. The AIMS measure the degree of student competencies in the Arizona academic standards for writing, reading, mathematics, and science against four performance levels: exceeds, meets, approaches, and falls far below (ADE, 2010). Only exceeds and meets levels are acceptable as passing performances (ADE, 2010).
 * Problem Summary**

XYZ Middle School (XYZMS) students received, as in the past years, the lowest AIMS scores compared with the other students in the district. The XYZMS students’ performance scores for the mathematics standard are particularly worrisome. The mathematics achievement gap is apparent in that 43% of sixth grade students (see Appendix A), 28% of seven grade students (see Appendix B), and 44% of eight grade students (see Appendix C) did not meet a passing performance level as measured by the AIMS in the spring 2011. Since the AIMS scores are tied to the school classification label, XYZMS received once again the lowest label in the district. Furthermore, for the past three years, XYZMS is the only school in the district with a downgraded performance label (see Appendix D).

Fountain Hills Unified School District was founded in 1974 and lies within a small community northeast of Phoenix, Arizona. The district’s population encompasses a total of approximately 2100 students,150 teaching staff, and 25 administrative staff. All four schools have met AYP in the past four years.
 * Background of Organization**

Important information and materials include AIMS test scores, district-, school- and student- level assessments results, the district’s technology plan, professional development and technology budgets, and available regional, state, and federal grants. As XYZUSD is a public school district, all public relation materials and annual reports may be available through the district and local state education department websites or may be obtained through the superintendent and principals offices. The URL of the XYZUSD site is [|http://www.xyzusd.org]. The website for the Arizona Department of Education is http://www.ade.az.gov. Detailed information about the AIMS standards and assessment results may be retrieved from [].

This plan will affect the XYZMS student population, as well as the teachers and other staff members responsible for the selection and implementation of this performance improvement intervention. Since the intervention also concerns the parents of current and prospective middle school students, the local community is another key stakeholder. The catalyst for change in an organization involves distributed and shared responsibility between district and school leaders and teachers. Thus, key decision makers will include the district’s administrative team, the district’s technology committee, as well as the mathematics department’s leads. The key personnel will include the current XYZMS principal, the XYZMS assistant principal, and a mathematics teacher at each grade level, as well as the middle school mathematics department lead teacher. Furthermore, the director of the technology will be involved in all technology-related purchasing decision and implementation processes concerning instruction and professional development systems.
 * Stakeholders and Decision-Makers**

**Module 2**

 * Organizational History and Background **
 * History ** . The district's four campuses include: one high school, grades 9-12 with approximately 700 students; one middle school, grades 6-8 with approximately 500 students; one elementary school, grades 3-5 with approximately 450 students; and one other elementary school, grades PreK – 2 with approximately 450 students. The certified teaching staff has an average of ten years teaching experience. In addition, more than 50% of the total certified staff hold a Master degree or beyond and 100% of them are highly qualified. The total operating budget is approximately twelve million dollars with a per pupil expenditure of roughly five thousand dollars.

The demographics of the district are predominately white, which make up approximately 78% of the total population. The remaining break down is: approximately 12% Native American, approximately 8% Hispanic, and 2% African American. Students classified with special needs make up approximately 10% of the population. A total of 10% of the student population qualifies for Title I.

Every XYZUSD classroom is equipped with 21st century technology tools, including projectors, document cameras, white interactive boards. Every XYZUSD teacher and student has access to web 2.0 instructional tools. Furthermore, every teacher has a laptop and the current student to computer ratio is lower than three to one**.**


 * Misssion. ** XYZUSD’s mission is to achieve and celebrate educational excellence.

The student achievement gap with regards to the Arizona Academic Standards for mathematics at the middle school is a problem that needs to be addressed as soon as possible to ensure that the students moving up to this grade levels will not suffer a gap in their mathematics competencies. Also, closing this gap may improve the middle school classification label and thus bringing the district as an organization closer to reaching its goal of having four excelling schools. Closing performance gaps, particulary student achievement gaps will bring the district as an organization closer to reaching its vision and mission.
 * Vission and Goals. ** XYZUSD’s vision is to become the best school district in the State of Arizona. This will be evident when all stakeholders create an environment where:
 * All schools are labeled excelling by the State of Arizona.
 * Schools are safe and vibrant places where there is an emphasis on student learning through doing.
 * Students are challenged and excel according to their abilities and exit our school system prepared for their next level of learning.
 * Teachers continually advance their practice using effective research-based professional strategies and direct access to student data warehouse.
 * All staff seeks continuous quality improvement and innovation in support of educational excellence for all regular education and special needs students.
 * The community provides the resources to enable the district to continue its mission.


 * Performance Gap: Cause Analysis **
 * Actual Current Performance ** . Only 57 % of total sixth grade students, 72 % of total seven grade students, and 56 % of total eight grade students achieved a passing performance level, and thus a school-wide performance average of 61 %, as measured by the AIMS in the spring 2011. XYZMS has the lowest classification label in the district.


 * Desired Performance. ** A school-wide AIMS performance average of 90% by June, 2014. This means an annual increased performance level of 11% for the sixth grade students, 6% for the seven grade students, and 11.3% for the eighth grade students for each of the next three years. XYZMS will be labeled excelling by June, 2014.


 * Performance Gap. ** The performance gap can be measured as the difference between the desired performance levele and the actual performance level (Chevalier, 2007). The performance gap in the FHMS students’ performance on AIMS mathematics is 33% for the sixth grade students, 18% for the seven grade students, and 34% for the eighth grade students.

**Cause Analysis**. A systematic assessment of the work environment, as well as individual-related factors affecting a performance gap is imperative to effectively identifying the causes for the performance problem and for providing the most appropriate solution to close the performance gap (Chevalier, 2007). Interviews with key personnel (see Appendix E), data from classroom observations, and surveys provided an insight into the factors that may have contributed to the current level of performance. Thus, the elements that may be affecting XYSMS students’ low performance on the AIMS mathematics test are outlined below.

XYZMS is a closed, modern, and clean campus that is monitored by security cameras and highly visible administrators. All teachers are provided with laptops and there are five computer labs that may be shared among all three grade levels. In addition, every classroom has four student computers and is equipped with a ceiling-mounted projector. Technology implementation in educational institutions has a positive impact on student outcomes as measured through test scores when technology informs pedagogy (Chandra & Lloyd, 2008; Martin, Strother, Beglau, Bates, Reitzes, & Culp, 2010). The interview with the XYZMS principal revealed that staff may not be motivated to take on more responsibilities such as integrating technology into their lesson plans on a regular basis, since there is a lack of incentives. Another motivation-related factor may be staff uncertainty regarding continued employment due to budget shortfalls.

Furthermore, there is no recognition or reward system in place to encourage technology integration and increased student performance. Whereas staff financial incentives include pay-for-performance, these performances do not include technology integration or AIMS outcomes. The current technology plan outlines the need to provide staff with incentives for integrating technology into their curriculum, such as additional pay and preparation time, as well as new technology tools. However, these incentives have not been secured. Thus, there is a need to shift resources to programs or practices that have the greatest impact on student learning and teacher effectiveness.

Assessments indicate the extent to which students have mastered standards targeted for instruction and teachers may use the information regarding students’ standards mastery to guide the next instructional steps to improve these student outcomes (Bergan, Burnham, Bergan, & Callahan, 2011). This past school year, the district has piloted Galileo ATI as its electronic student assessment system to the increase amount of information available to improve instruction. Galileo ATI reports revealed that, unlike their peers in the other schools who have administered assessments several times throughout the year and whose students had greater success on the AIMS test, the XYZMS teachers mathematics have used the program to assess their students only twice, at the beginning and the end the school year. Although the mathematics teachers have the capacity to learn how to use the program, the feedback from the mathematics teachers indicated they did not feel comfortable creating and administering assessments using Galileo ATI, since they have not received sufficient instruction during their preparation programs in this area. Another reason for limited use was that the district- and school-level leadership did not clearly define staff expectations as to how the administration of Galileo ATI assessments aligns to the district’s mission and vision.

The feedback from the mathematics teachers also suggested that there is a lack of vertical alignment between grade levels, which would be extremely useful in ensuring differentiated instruction based on individual students needs and on past achievement performance gaps. Therefore, another cause to the students’ performance gap may be lack of opportunities for staff to collaborate and to ensure vertical alignment of their instruction based on the individual students’ needs. Moreover, since the district receives the AIMS results after school is no longer in session for the year, the administration does not share the data with the teachers in the beginning of the next school year. Thus, the teachers have to develop their own assessments, which take time and effort, given the high number of students per class.

Learning is not uniform and evolves in nonlinear ways from the learners’ experiences, attitudes, and motivation (Driscoll, 2005). This has great implications to the standards based approach to student assessment and to instructional design. Standards may not be taught uniformly, and a single instructional approach does not achieve learning equity for all students. Moreover, in the Internet era, students no longer have a passive role in their own education and their engagement has become an essential part of the learning process and thus critical to student achievement (Storm, Storm, Wing & Beckert, 2009; Tapscott, 2008). Today’s students are enthusiastic about using technology and show increased engagement and motivation through the computer-assisted learning process (Cavus, 2007; Chandra & Lloyd, 2008). Thus, potential causes for the XYZMS student performance gap may also include lack of mathematics computer-based programs that would facilitate differentiated instruction, increased student engagement, and achievement growth.

**Module 3**
** Three Intervention Strategies ** The three interventions seek to address XYZMS students achievement gap as measured by the AIMS. To improve this human performance gap, the strategies offer solutions for monitoring student progress with regard to state and district performance objectives and for forecasting student performance on high-stake tests such as AIMS to determine students at risk of not meeting state standards. Moreover, they provide solutions that will allow XYZMS administration and staff for make data-driven decisions aimed at guiding instruction and intervention. Similarly, the proposed interventions would allow XYZMS mathematics teachers to reach their students through engaging and individualized instruction. The interventions differ in cost of implementation and the level of benefits they derive.

**Low end intervention.**The low cost strategy seeks to provide additional Galileo ATI professional development for the mathematics teachers to assist them in overcoming the lack of assessment literacy. The intervention will ensure more effective use of the existing comprehensive assessment system by equiping the mathematics teachers with the skills that allow them to assess the students' performance level faster and more efficiently. The week-long professional development session costs approximately $5,000 and offers staff hands-on experience navigating through all the available resources and how to use assessment data to aid in decision-making and inform instruction. Furthermore, the training will provide an in-depth overview of the different types of assessment available in the program, which include benchmark and formative assessments, pretests and posttests, placement tests, and computerized adaptive tests. T his strategy will ensure that the teachers use the data effectively to inform their instructional practices and thus increase middle school students’ mathematics performance.

**Middle end intervention.** The medium cost intervention would build on the low cost intervention. It includes the implementation of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Destination Math, a computer-based mathematics intervention program. Destination Math allows teachers to customize interactive courseware matched to the students’ individual needs identified through Galileo ATI assessments. This strategy requires a dedicated server, a school site license, and two six-hour teacher training sessions. The two on-site training sessions are intended to prepare staff and administrators to utilize the program to its fullest potential. Destination Math also involves a $1,500 annual support renewal, in addition to the $23,000 implementation costs.

**High end intervention.** The high-end solution is the implementation of Pearson SuccessMaker Math computer-based instructional program. SuccessMaker Math is an interactive multimedia program that provides content and reporting capabilities aligned with state standards. SuccessMaker is designed to develop and maintain mathematics skills through visual learning modules that engage the student, and to provide immediate feedback and tutorial intervention when necessary. The main features of SuccessMaker program include an initial placement based on a diagstic assessment, mixed presentation of strands within a particular level, the capability to adapt to the students’ performance, and mastery assessment. Furthermore, since SuccesMaker is a web-based solution, students may access it from home as well as at school. This feature allows for increased usage and parental involvement. The total cost of this comprehensive solution is approximately $45,000 and includes the cost of a server, 70 concurrent licenses, and professional development opportunities tailored to different user groups. The district’s technology team will receive a four-hour overview of the server and clients software installation, as well of the SIS student data export format and SuccessMaker import procedures. The XYZMS admininstrative team will receive an initial six-hour professional development session focused on the programs’ reporting capabilities. The teachers will be receiving ongoing professional development throughout the school year to ensure their comfort with the SuccessMaker program and its assessment and reporting capabilities. An additional $5,000 will be allocated as stipends for the mathematics teachers for their participation in these professional development opportunities.

** Chosen Intervention Strategy ** After careful considerations and based on the feedback from the other group members, the high-end strategy appears to offer the most comprehensive solutions to closing the XYZMS students’ performance gap. Whereas the first two interventions provide solutions for student assessment, these solution rely on the teachers designing and administering the assessments, which may contribute to increased pressure and workload for the staff. The third strategy offers a build-in solution that assesses students’ mastery of a learning objective. It also ensures its subsequent review as the students progress through the courseware. The courseware includes research-based learning models and individualized interactive lessons that are adaptable so that every student achieves skill mastery. The high-end strategy supports the main instruction of the mathematics teachers in its understanding of the standards-based and state-aligned curriculum, as well as of the individual needs of the student. This solution exposes students to mathematics concepts and content in an engaging way, while reinforcing skills already taught in the classroom. The chosen strategy also includes a teacher stipend for taking advantage of available professional development, ensuring effective use of the available reports to identify students who need remediation and to monitor student progress.

**Module 4**
** Justification for Intervention Strategy ** The low end intervention offers the least expensive solutions for closing the performance gap. Galileo ATI program provides educators with research-based tools that allow them to create and maintain reliable and valid assessments aligned with Arizona state standards (ATI, 2010). The district has already purchased the program to forecast student standards mastery on the AIMS tests. The Galileo ATI professional development workshop will better equip FHMS teachers to begin using the program to quickly and effectively assess their students’ mastery of mathematics standards and to establish instructional goals based on the assessment data. Although the low cost intervention allows mathematics teachers to measure students’ performance against achievement levels related to state standards, it does not offer strategies to individualize learning plans and to raise student perfomance. The teachers are still left to tailor instruction, enrichment, and re-teaching interventions based on individual student achievement level. Thus, this intervention is also the least efficient one in that it does not address all the causes for the performance gap.

The medium cost strategy builds on the low end intervention’s strengths. In addition to the more effective use of the technology-based assessment program, it also offers XYZMS the opportunity for implementing an intervention program. Destination Math offers research-based instructional models educators may use as supplemental instructional resources to support their instruction, either as extensions of teaching and learning or as a way to provide individualized instruction in a highly engaging and interactive learning environment (Blumenfeld, 2009). Moreover, Destination Math allows for total student immersion in a full multimedia environment, rich in engaging animations and simulations, and in opportunities for student interaction with the content. The two professional development sessions will introduce staff to the course setup, the class roster creation, and to successful instructional strategies with the use of Destination Math. However, some of the teachers expressed concerns that two sessions may not be sufficient for them to grasp the program’s full instructional potential, to model lessons, and address any program management concerns. In addition to having to create student assessments, teachers will also have to match the individual student needs with the content of Destination Math program and assign lessons and workouts to students to address specific learning objectives related to closing student achievement gap. Thus, middle end intervention’s weakness is reflected in the lack of a reward and support system that would alleviate the additional stress and workload it puts on the mathematics teachers. Moreover, research shows that students should use Destination Math for a minimum of three periods per week in order for it to be effective. This also has great implications for instructional design, the mathematics teachers having to reassess their lesson plans to include appropriate students computer time.

The high-end solution offers the implementation of a comprehensive computer-based mathematics instructional system. Pearson SuccessMaker features courseware designed to emulate a human tutor and to continually adjust the content based on students’ prior knowledge and responses (Thrall & Tingey, 2003). One of the strengths of this intervention is SuccessMaker’s Initial Placement, which allows for student assessment and placement to the appropriate level of learning. Following the student’s initial mastery of an objective, the courseware presents the student with dynamically sequenced content appropriate to his or her individual needs. SuccessMaker facilitates adaptive individualized instruction and is aligned to state standards. In addition to being based on continued research and focused on the most efficient instructional strategies, another strength that the high end intervention offers is the ease of diagnosing and forecasting student performance. Similarly, it also uses technology to support effective mathematics teaching and skills practice, and to enhance and organize curriculum. Although it involves the most expensive solutions, which may be considered a weakness, the high end intervention may prove the most effective and best long-term solution in closing the performance gap.

Gatti Evaluation’s (2010) research study concluded that students using SuccessMaker demonstrate significant learning gains and statistically outperformed students using print supplemental math programs. In addition to improved efficacy, students also showed high level of engagement with the content (Gatti Evaluation’s, 2010). Teachers found SucessMaker as effective due to its interactivity, differentiated content, immediate feedback, and student engagement (Gatti Evaluation’s, 2010). Moreover, student mathematics achievement is directly proportional with increased levels of SuccessMaker usage, with ten hours of program usage enough to ensure SuccessMaker users outperform non users (Gatti Evaluation’s, 2010).Since SuccessMaker is a web-based program, students can also access it from home to increase the time spent on task. This feature also promotes family connections to mathematics and increased parental involvement, which, as the teacher survey suggested, may contribute to higher student motivation to perform better. Unlike the other two interventions, the high end one limits teachers’ time and effort that they would have to spend with student assessment and designing individualized instruction. It also provides a support system and built-in rewards by ensuring ongoing professional development opportunities to assist teachers and administrators to effectively track individual student progress, and by securing stipends for teachers to attent these offerings. Thus, the high end strategy also features the most comprehensive solutions based on the causes of the problem and on the identified barriers to performance. To conclude, the high end intervention strategy best meets XYZUSD organizational goals in that it proves to be the most effective at increasing XYZMS student math achievement.

** The Manager’s Many Roles ** The IT Director is the project manager spearheading the implementation of the selected intervention. After having identified the stakeholders, she will be leading the district’s technology team through every phase of the implementation and delivery processes. She will assign responsibilities to each team member based on their strengths and expertise. Similarly, she will communicate clear goals and timelines for each one of the project’s tasks. In addition, she will ensure that the project’s funds are appropriately allocated. Moreover, she will be working closely with the XYZMS principal and site mathematics teachers to ensure effective scheduling of student computer use and to overcome any system-related issues. This project manager will also act as a motivator by providing teachers with research data to encourage them to use the program in their instruction. Moreover, the IT director will act as a contact person between the district and Pearson, Successmaker’s developer, and as main facilitator of staff professional development.

The human capital represents the main resource for this implementation. It includes the members of the technology team, XYZMS administrators, mathematics teachers, as well as parents. In addition, this strategy includes capital improvement funds, as well as a virtual server and student computers. Project milestones documentation, agendas and notes from weekly staff meetings, as well as classroom observation and surveys are means for ensuring effective use of project resources. Similarly, along with purchase orders, tthe echnology and finance departments’ databases will track hardware purchases and program licenses.

Afetr the server installation, the program will be deployed to all computers in the XYZMS labs, as well as to all computers in the mathematics classrooms. Moreover, the schools' website and notification systems will inform parents of the program's availability for student home use. The technology team will import the student and course-related data from the student information system, and will ensure that all XYZMS staff and sudents have access to the program. Every XYZMS mathematics teacher will be using the SuccessMaker program for ninety minutes of supplemental mathematics instruction each week. The existing computer labs have sufficient capacity to accomodate all students. In addition, the teachers may use the existing classroom computers with the students who show the most significant performance gap. XYMZ administrators and teachers will attend training sessions facilitated by a program specialist from Pearson and initially focused on the key components of the program, such as SuccessMaker's learning environment functionality and reporting system, as well as on how to implement them in practice. Follow-up trainings will ensure teachers' familiarity with all aspects of the reporting system and with its most recent versions. On a as needed basis, additional training sessions will provide a more in-depth understanding of the program and how to best address students' individual needs, and will support consistent implementation of the program.

SuccessMaker features a complex reporting feature for storing student assessment and progress data. XYZMS administarators will be accessing these reports to monitor system use, student achievement progress, and to inform their decision-making process. The mathematics teachers will be using reports to inform classroom instruction, to identify students needing remediation, and to monitor student progress. The district's intranet portal will store data from classroom observations, meetings, as well survey responses. This data is accessible based on staff user level security settings and, in addition to SuccessMaker data, will ensure an effective evaluation of the intervention.

**Module 5**
** Financial and Budget Information ** The cost for the SuccessMaker implementation is $45,000 and includes the procurement of a server, 70 concurrent licenses, and professional development opportunities tailored to different user groups. The IT director will secure the allocation of these funds from the district’s capital improvement budget. An additional $5,000 are to be allocated as stipends for the mathematics teachers for their participation in the programs’ professional development opportunities. The HR director will ensure the stipends’ provision from the district’s maintenance and operation budget (see Appendix F).

** Technical Information ** The implementation of this intervention strategy requires the purchasing a server to host the SuccessMaker program (see Appendix G). The existing computer labs have sufficient capacity to accommodate all students. In addition, the teachers may use the existing classroom computers with the students who show the most significant performance gap. All computers meet the client requirements for the SuccessMaker deployment (see Appendix H).

** Project Assessment ** Formative and summative assessments will help evaluate the effectiveness of the project. Formative assessmenets will include data collected through weekly walk-throughs and observations. The observation checklist will include questions focused on the use of SuccessMaker to improve and augment instruction (see Appendix J). XYZMS principal will review and share this data with the mathematics department on a bi-weekly basis. Summative assessments will include student progress reports available through SuccessMaker’s reporting portal. XYZMS principal and mathematics techers will review these reports on a weekly basis. Moreover, summative assessments will include annual AIMS data.

References

Arizona Department of Education (ADE). (2010, June). //Arizona’s assessment program for school year 2010-2011.// Retrieved June 13, 2011 from []

Beastall, L. (2006). Enchanting a disenchanted child: Revolutionising the means of education using Information and Communication Technology and e-learning. //British Journal of Sociology of Education//, //27//(1), 97-110. doi:10.1080/01425690500376758.

Bergan, J., Burnham, C., Bergan, J., & Callahan, S. (2011). //Composition of a comprehensive assessment system.// Assessment Technology, Inc. Retrieved from []

Cavus, N. (2007). Assessing the success rate of students using a learning management system together with a collaborative tool in web-based teaching of programming languages. //Journal of Educational Computing Research//, //36//(3), 301-321.

Chandra, V., & Lloyd, M. (2008). The methodological nettle: ICT and student achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 1087-1098. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00790.x

Chevalier, R. D. (2007). //A manager's guide to improving workplace performance.// New York, NY: American Management Association.

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). //Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.).// Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Martin, W., Strother, S., Beglau, M., Bates, L., Reitzes, T., & Culp, K. (2010). Connecting instructional technology professional development to teacher and student outcomes. //Journal of Research on Technology in Education//, 43(1), 53-74.

Strom, P., Strom, R., Wing, C., & Beckert, T. (2009). Adolescent learning and the Internet: Implications for school leadership and student engagement in learning. //NASSP Bulletin, 93//, 111-121.

Tapscott, D. (2008, November 30). How to teach and manage 'Generation Net'. //BusinessWeek Online//. Retrieved July 17,2011 from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ content/nov2008/tc20081130_713563.htm


 * Name removed