EDUC 804 Evaluation Plan for iReady by Donna Runner

Key Questions

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:13:20 UTC

1. What percent of students who participated in the intervention program twice a week for 30 minutes for eight months showed improvement in reading comprehension as measured by the diagnostic assessment?

2. In what ways do students who participated in the intervention program twice a week for 30 minutes for for eight months show increased confidence in reading?

3. To what extent were students engaged in the intervention program?

Data Collection and Analysis Strategies

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:13:30 UTC

archival data-iReady reports

surveys-teachers, students, parents/guardians

focus groups-teachers, students, parents/guardians

Concerns

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:14:14 UTC

Can the gains in student achievement be attributed solely to the intervention program?

How can the accuracy of the survey data be ascertained?

Will enough parents/guardians participate in the survey to allow for accurate analysis of trends?

Rationale

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:25:55 UTC

Approximately 40% of high school graduates do not have the literacy skills to be effective in the work force (Brozo, 2010). Studies have shown that students spend a great deal of time at school engaged in non-literary activities even during the reading block and that the quality and quantity of reading instruction is low (Vaughn And Waznek, 2014). Teachers, who may or may not have a strong background in teaching reading are expected to work with a group of students with a broad range of abilities within one classroom. iReady purports to offer personalized instruction to individual students that will increase their achievement through targeted instruction on specific skills identified by the diagnostic assessment. The purpose of this evaluation is to dtermine if participation in the program actually increases student achievement in reading.

Logic Model

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:28:29 UTC

Program Description

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:38:00 UTC

iReady K-12 Adaptive Diagnostic and K-8 Instruction is a program that identifies why students are struggling in reading then automatically provides individualized online instruction targeted to each student’s unique needs. The lessons provide explicit instruction for students that target phonological awareness, phonics, high-frequency words, vocabulary and comprehension in both literature and informational texts. In addition, teacher delivered remediation lessons on specific skills are offered for students who are below grade level.

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 00:49:57 UTC

Stakeholders

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 01:16:56 UTC

Students in grades 2-8

Teachers

Parents/Guardians

Time Frame

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 01:18:20 UTC

The evaluation will cover eight months of intervention from September 2015 through April, 2016. This time frame was selected to ensure that students received opportunity to participate in enough individualized instruction that three summative assessments could be given.

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 01:30:17 UTC

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 01:39:17 UTC

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 01:39:54 UTC

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 02:53:59 UTC

Audio Narrative

donnarunner — 2015-11-03 03:28:13 UTC

http://vocaroo.com/i/s0XUnagGHzp0

Van Rawls

van_rawls — 2015-11-03 15:28:47 UTC

Hi Donna. Including the time frame for the evaluation was a good idea. I totally missed it.

Van Rawls

van_rawls — 2015-11-03 15:30:57 UTC

Are phonemic awareness and phonological awareness the same thing

Van Rawls

van_rawls — 2015-11-03 15:32:40 UTC

I like your inclusion of the actual I-Ready Reports as artifacts in your evaluation.

Sandt

judesandt — 2015-11-03 21:02:38 UTC

I agree with Van about the inclusion of reports in your evaluation. It gives additional background/information to the plan and helps in the evaluation process.

Sandt

judesandt — 2015-11-03 21:03:51 UTC

I think that student engagement is a tough thing to measure. Is there a specific way you plan on determining time on task?

Sandt

judesandt — 2015-11-03 21:05:19 UTC

Agree again with Van- nice job on the time frame. It provides a definitive start and end date of the evaluation, which I also missed completely and will be adding on mine :-)

Ilene Rattner

irr32 — 2015-11-04 02:40:38 UTC

Hi Donna,

These sound like very good evaluation strategies. I would like to see the text in the parent survey, it is kind of small. Do you think you can make it bigger?

Jennifer M

jennifermeliton — 2015-11-04 19:46:31 UTC

Donna since you are citing an author should there be a reference section on your padlet? Also I agree with Van-great addition of a timeline.

Ilene Rattner

2015-11-04 23:42:34 UTC

Is the parent survey being used to evaluate your key question #3? Would parents be evaluating the student's level of engagement?

Donna

dtdarcy — 2015-11-05 09:58:55 UTC

The article you referenced referred to high school students, but your stakeholders are grades 2-8. I got confused. And my other question was how to measure "engagement" of the student? Thanks. Really nice job!!

Amber Vraim

alv53 — 2015-11-06 01:25:04 UTC

Hi Donna, I think this is a great program to evaluate, many schools use programs similar to this. I think that also giving the time frame of 8 months is a good idea- it allows for extensive use of the program. I think it might also be interesting to consider to what extent teachers are using the data from the program to guide their lesson planning. Also, is twice a week the standard for the program, do some teachers do more or less?

Bob Daugherty

rld86 — 2015-11-07 15:08:01 UTC

Donna...Evaluation question #3. how do you intend to measure engagement? seems subjective at the outset. would be interested to see how you approach measurement.

Bob Daugherty

rld86 — 2015-11-07 15:09:40 UTC

Donna... like the Likert survey instrument. Do you have a plan for collating and representing the data quantitatively, or will it be qualitative?