No description available.

This study is a program evaluation of a small, rural school district’s special education program’s compliance with key processes, including the child study, eligibility, and individual education plan (IEP) processes. The goals of the evaluation were to identify potential weaknesses in the special education program implementation, and to provide suggestions for improvement. The program evaluation model used is the Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) model, which was developed by Daniel Stufflebeam. The research questions assessed the alignment of the school district’s special education handbook with federal and state guidelines for special education, as well as the implementation of the special education processes and procedures as intended, including the use of standards-based IEPs. Additionally, the evaluation focused on factors that either contributed to or inhibited the successful implementation of the special education program. The study used a mixed methods approach with three data sources, which included document analysis of student files, focus groups, and interviews with key staff members. Results indicated that the school district’s handbook was generally compliant with state and federal guidelines, and that the vast majority of students’ IEPs were standards-based. The district was less compliant with documenting research-based interventions during the child study process and with documenting eligibility decisions. The hiring of a compliance specialist was seen as a positive factor in successful program implementation, while high staff turnover appears to be a barrier.

Reading is at the heart of education and it is the basic skill upon which all others are built. Reading difficulties underlie much of the differences in academic achievement between students with specific learning disabilities in reading and non-disabled students; addressing these challenges when children are young is the key for long-term success (Borman, 2005; Cortiella & Horowitz, 2014; Juel, 1988; National Reading Panel, 2000; Torgesen et al., 2001). The purpose of this mixed methods program evaluation was to provide information to stakeholders about the implementation of the Wilson Reading System in the Mid Atlantic School Division (MASD). By examining the fidelity of implementation of the current program used in MASD’s eight of the nine elementary schools and the three middle schools, the evaluator sought to determine the fidelity of implementation as compared to the Wilson Reading System recommended implementation methods by collecting data using a teacher interview protocol and data document reviews. Data showed inconsistencies in both Phase 1 and Phase 2 implementations. Additionally, the evaluator examined assessment data to identify students that successfully completed the program according to WADE post-assessment scores and examined that student’s grade level VSOL reading score to determine if the student is able to master the grade level content after successfully exiting the program. Findings showed fidelity of implementation is vital to determine the impact linked to student outcomes in this study. Recommendations for future research and continuous program improvement included implementing fidelity checks using district personnel, implementing on-going training and a robust data collection system, and implementing reliability and validity measures of the WADE.

This program evaluation study focused on the outcomes of a Math program for elementary level students. This mixed-methods study explored the relationship between the implementation of the Investigations Math program and teachers' perceptions of its impacts. The program theory that guided this study stated that teachers who were provided time and resources to examine best practice Math curricula and instructional methods would: adopt and implement a holistic Math program that updated the curriculum; create positive changes in teacher content and pedagogical knowledge; meet the needs of all students, at all proficiency levels; result in a consistent scope and sequence; and lead to improved student achievement. The findings did not fully support the program theory but did inform the school of study of the positive outcomes that the adoption of the Investigations program enhanced teachers' perceptions of: alignment of the curriculum with Common Core Standards for Mathematical Practice; their capabilities as leaders of the inquiry process within the classroom setting; facilitating a Math program with consistency in concepts, student experiences, and assessment; improved students' consistency of good thinking; and increased number sense, perseverance in solving problems, and use of appropriate tools to construct viable arguments. However, analysis of the ERB-CTP4 math achievement test scores revealed negligible changes in the overall mean student performance as a result of the implementation of the Investigations program. Weaknesses in the assessment materials of Investigations also required a supplemental curriculum to be adopted in parts.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Formative assessment’s evolution over the last 50 plus years has led to the ubiquitous use of the term and ostensibly its practice, yet very little research has specifically addressed teachers’ experiences of formative assessment, particularly in the realm of secondary English. This study’s goal, therefore, was to gain insight into how teachers experience engaging in formative assessment. By exploring their experiences, this descriptive phenomenological study sought to discover what meaning selected teachers ascribe to formative assessment and to thereby elevate teachers’ voices in the formative assessment conversation. This research question guided the study: What are secondary English teachers’ lived experiences of engaging in formative assessment? To answer this question, I generated data from 12 secondary English teachers by conducting in-depth, semi-structured interviews and collecting lived experience descriptions. Collectively, their experiences revealed that they practice formative assessment as a multi-step process, undertaken to determine where students are in their learning and to inform their instruction. They experience formative assessment as integral to their instruction and value informal formative interactions and conversations that are embedded in daily instruction. They consider positive class culture essential for undertaking formative assessment and have concerns that grading, district-mandated formative assessments, and the term itself may be impediments to effectively undertaking formative assessment. Ultimately, these findings offer strong support for the study’s conceptual framework; fill a gap in the formative assessment research; and offer policy makers, instructional leaders, and educational researchers insight into how these teachers understand and practice formative assessment.