Evaluation Of A Non Experimental Design

I am currently working in a title one school in the District of Broward County. In my school there are many interventions utilize through a number of materials and technology. For instance, I-ready is a reading and math online program that is utilized to build the students strength in areas they may fall weak in through enjoyable activities and games. I-Ready gives a pre, mid, and post test to assess the students strength and weakness in that particular subject (math or reading). In addition to I-Ready, we utilize Journey’s reading series that provides a tool kit for Tier 2 and 3 students. The tool kit has a great amount of comprehension strategies and graphic organizers that can be used to develop strength in reading comprehension. Furthermore,

Student 2 increased their score four out of the six times of the intervention period. They reached proficiency one out of the six times but also reached the benchmark goal on the Daze assessment.

Scientific evidence-based interventions are generally assessed through a response to intervention (RTI). The RTI approach can potentially cross over cultural, socioeconomic, and linguistic barriers by assessing each student as an individual. Response to intervention should emphasize how well students respond to changes in instruction rather than what is considered the norm for the society they live in (Klotz, & Canter, 2007). These changes, or lack thereof, in a student’s progress are measured, and modifications to instruction are implemented in the RTI model. This model has multiple tiers of intense scientific, research-based interventions that increase, or decrease due to a student’s need. In a three tier RTI model every

Intervention Central is a free online resource for teachers and school districts to use for the implementation of intervention in or outside of the classroom while following the Common Core State Standards. Jim Wright, a psychologist and school administrator out of New York, created Intervention Central in hopes that the website would help offer high quality RTI in even the lowest budgeted schools. The website offers a wide variety of tools for teachers to use for academic and behavioral interventions as well as assessments and informative articles. Intervention Central also offers training videos and webinars on many different topics. The site breaks the intervention process activities down by subject and subject areas.

Response to Intervention (RTI) is a three-tiered system that provides for increasingly interventions as students move upward through the tiers. The first tier involves all students on a campus. During this tier, all students are provided with effective instruction using research-based teaching and learning strategies. Students are benchmarked at the beginning, middle, and end of each year. About 65%-75% of all students respond to the initial tier of interventions and no further intervention is required. Tier 2 interventions take place in small groups and are in addition to the interventions of Tier 1. The areas of weakness are targeted, and instruction may be provided by the general education teacher or other school personnel. Student progress

An information letter was sent to families, making clear that the intervention would be delivered during regular class time at no cost to parents, and anonymity would be preserved. Informed consent was obtained. A week before the implementation of the program, the school’s Guidance Officer went to the each Year 6 and 7 class to administer the student’s pre-assessment package during school hours. Each question was read aloud to the group and their understanding of each item checked. Each child, then individually rated each question in their own assessment pack.

Consequently, the motivation behind this research based program evaluation is to help incoming Smithville High School (SHS) freshmen feel more transition successfully. The problem this

A rigorous evaluation typically involves either an experimental design (like that used in randomized controlled trials) or a quasi-experimental design. In an experimental design, people are randomly assigned to either a treatment group, which participants in the program, or the control group, which does not. After the program is completed, the outcomes of these two (2) groups are compared. This type of research design helps ensure that any observed differences in outcomes between the two (2) groups are the result of the program and not other factors. Given that randomization is not always possible, a quasi-experimental design is sometimes used. In evaluations using this design, the program participants are compared to a group of people similar in many ways to the program participants. However, because a quasi-experimental design does not randomly assign participants to program and non-program groups, it is not as strong a design as the experimental approach. Because there may be unobserved differences between the two (2) groups of people who are being compared, this design does not allow program evaluators to conclude with the same certainty that the program itself was responsible for the impacts observed. Therefore, it would be conducive to try and conduct an experimental design if at all possible (Cooney, Huser, Small, & O’Connor,

The target population for the GREAT program are students in elementary and in middle school, especially those in 4th through 7th grade. The student who participates in this intervention are not selected by the certified GREAT professional who administer the GREAT program. Also, the students who take part in the program do not have a choice if they want to be part of the intervention or not. It has been noted that the classrooms where the GREAT is hosted is randomly selected by the school’s administrators. Furthermore, all the students within that particular class must participate in all of the lessons in the GREAT program, which take place at least one week from each other. In order for GREAT to be introduced to the selected classrooms, the student’s parents must allow them to take part in the intervention because they are minors and parents must be made aware about the intervention’s goals.

The Response to Intervention framework is a critical element of the Westside Elementary to meet the individual instructional needs of our students. The school utilizes universal screenings to access all students reading data in grades one through five, three times throughout the school year. Primarily, two assessments, STAR and Aimsweb data, determine the pathway of the students and the services deemed appropriate, including teacher information and collaboration with the MTSS team. The students partake in the assessments three times a year; fall, winter, and spring. Tiers are not stagnant; students may receive services from multiple tiers, depending on instructional, academic, and environmental needs. Therefore,

Through program design, data collection will be consistent and paint an enhanced picture of program and student success. Katsikeas, Morgan, Leonidou, and Hult (2016) report that the assessments used in evaluation should be representable of the indicators of the domain they purport to measure. According to Pollari-Welbes (2016) data quality is important because it is a fundamental grant requirement, provides a trustworthy story of collective impact for stakeholders, a sound basis for programmatic and financial decision-making, and is a potential audit focus. This will also help LTR personnel in evaluating program success and will provide data for future specific program recommendations. During the first years of schooling, students move from learning to read to reading to learn (Reynolds, Wheldall & Madelaine, 2011). By narrowing the population served by AmeriCorps members, the LTR program director will have enough data on a targeted population to better understand student outcomes and program success.

Purpose of the evaluation: What aspect of the program would you assess? How does this complement the larger group evaluation? (5 points)

The purpose of Response to Intervention is early detection and identification of learning concerns of students and the development of an individualized plan that addresses the appropriate prescription for resolving the students’ academic or behavioral issue. In our twenty-first century learning communities, students are required to participate and are engaged in educational activities that may challenge their ability to grasp the concept in manners conducive to their learning styles. Schools are challenged to examine their methods of instruction to meet the needs of all children making them successful in all areas of academic content. “A quality school is a place where students learn to think and apply knowledge to new situations, where students are involved in and excited about their learning, where students make individual gains in process and knowledge, where adults know they care about individual students,

The researcher will use the population of Longview, Missouri to collect the data for this program evaluation. The current population will be pulled from seven public schools and three private schools. The population will be approximately 4,000 students from public and private schools on the Longview area. The methods that will be used to collect this data will be the use of a survey, focus groups, and historical data collected from local law enforcement and the board of education. The data will be collected pre-program implementation and post implementation for comparison purposes.

In order to evaluate the program’s impact on students’ emotional outcomes, the following instruments were used: