K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Bridges

www.bridgeslearning.com

Program Description

Bridges Learning Development is a family of five programs that improves student achievement via lab-based intervention that develops students’ cognition. Bridges is not a curriculum-based remedial program. It is designed to improve general intellectual and behavioral functioning, which should improve learning competence across all subjects. The Bridges systems are designed to develop the base skills of cognition, sensory integration and visual- and auditory processing. These skills are the foundation of all learning and help improve self-control and concentration as well. By helping at-risk students develop their cognition, Bridges aims to reduce referrals to special education. Bridges aims to improve the 26 cognitive abilities and 11 perceptual skills essential to classroom learning. Up to 20% of students in a subscribing school may be referred to Bridges for assessment of these critical cognitive and perceptual abilities. Based on assessment results, an individualized plan of scientifically designed activities is designed for each student, to stimulate cognitive and perceptual growth. Students referred to Bridges spend 30-40 minutes twice a week working thru their individualized plans. The duration of a student’s experience in the lab varies per student because his/her plan is individualized; the range is typically five to nine months. The five programs available from Bridges Learning are: Learning Development (K – Adult); Learning Discovery (Pre-K – 2); Bridges PM (K – 8); Concept Prep (3 – 8); and Career Discovery (8 – 10).

Bridges is the implementation of the Structure of Intellect (SOI) Model School, an educational service that raises students’ grades in school by making them better learners. The Program is founded on 30 years of implementing SOI materials and methods developed by Dr. Mary and Robert Meeker, and is based on the early work of Dr. J.P. Guilford. The Program builds attention, memory, and other learning abilities essential to better reading, spelling, mathematics, and other basic skills. Unlike tutoring processes and video or software, the Program enhances the core intelligence of the student, and prepares them to learn. Because the Program measurably improves general academic performance, the mind’s ability to focus, and overall intellectual competence in school, it reduces referrals to Special Education, developmental instruction, disciplinary action, etc.

Evidence of Effectiveness

McDermitt Combined School – Humboldt County School District, Nevada

Of those students involved in Bridges during the 1999-00 school year, who took both the October 1999 and October 2000 TerraNova examination, the total normal curve equivalent (NCE) scores improved in reading, language arts, math and science by 33.1%, as compared to the school-wide average of 9.2% gain. There were 21 students in the Bridges group and 59 students in the overall group.

School Year

Reading

NCE Average

Language

NCE Average

Math

NCE Average

Science

NCE Average

1999-2000

21.7

24.1

27.1

22.5

2000-2001

34.8

39.5

35.0

Indiana NWEA RIT Score Analyses in Reading and Math

Comparative analysis of median NWEA Achievement Levels Test (ALT) scores for Bridges students in Indiana and the median scores in the 1999 NWEA Norming Study reveals that Bridges students out-gained their grade-level peers despite significant barriers to academic success. This 1999 NWEA Norming Study represents a general distribution of scores across all students at each grade level.

It is important to note that Bridges students represent a specific subpopulation of students who are at-risk of academic failure. At-risk students are expected to score lower than their grade-level peers on the ALT and to lag behind their grade-level peers on gains in Reading and Math. On the contrary, results indicate Bridges students surpassed growth made by their grade-level peers in all but 5th-Grade Reading, where Bridges fifth graders realized gains equal to those made by their peers.

Grade 3 Comparisons

	Bridges Students (n=30)		Norming Study (N=500K)
	Reading	Math	Reading	Math
Fall RIT	177	182	188	188
Spring RIT	192	197	198	200
Learning Growth	+15.0	+15.0	+10.0	+12.0

Grade 4 Comparisons

	Bridges Students (n=30)		Norming Study (N=500K)
	Reading	Math	Reading	Math
Fall RIT	193	195	199	199
Spring RIT	204	205	205	208
Learning Growth	+11.0	+10.0	+6.0	+9.0

Grade 5 Comparisons

	Bridges Students (n=30)		Norming Study (N=500K)
	Reading	Math	Reading	Math
Fall RIT	202	208	206	207
Spring RIT	208	218	212	215
Learning Growth	+6.0	+10.0	+6.0	+8.0

Lamar Consolidated Independent School District, Rosenberg, Texas

The Lamar District serves 14,000 students on 22 campuses, near Houston. In 1996-97, Bridges was implemented on eleven campuses. Student achievement data were gathered for five campuses new to Bridges (3 elementary and 2 junior high), pre- and post-treatment.

Findings:

· A 31% increase in achieving Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) passing rates was accomplished in one year by student groups on the five Bridges campuses, compared to Texas Statewide norms.

· A 54% increase in achieving TAAS passing rates was accomplished in one year by student groups on the five Bridges campuses compared to Lamar Districtwide norms.

· 70% and 60% increases in achieving 1997 TAAS passing rates were accomplished in one year on five Bridges campuses by ten student groups. These groups were examined because 0% (0 of 10) achieved 1996 TAAS passing rates that equaled or exceeded either Texas Statewide or Lamar District-wide norms.

Teacher Support

A required, five-day “Basic Bridges” training course is provided for the individual designated by the school as the Bridges Specialist. Topics covered include the theory and practice of SOI assessments and interpretation, and the Integrated Practice Protocol (IPP) activities undertaken in the Learning Center. This course is conducted at regional locations on a frequent schedule and which considers the time and travel of proximate subscribing schools.

Additionally, a required five-day “Practicing Bridges” course is provided for the Bridges Specialist and the paraprofessional. Topics covered include the hands-on supervision of Learning Remediation activities in the Learning Center.

A Curriculum Consultant or Inservice Trainer conducts an onsite review during the year, generally between two and four months after start-up commencement for first year subscribers, and near the mid-year point for continuing subscribers. A year-end summary of Program results based on data provided by the school, the onsite review, and Support Center records is provided.

Toll-free telephone support is available from the Bridges Support Center year-round between 9am ET and 5pm PT (1-888-345-1401).

Required School Commitment

· 100% of the faculty must support the Program. This commitment must be formal and communicated to Bridges prior to classroom implementation of program materials.

· The subscribing school must commit a full-time individual to be responsible for overall Program supervision and operation.

· The subscribing school must provide a dedicated, classroom sized space for the Learning Center that can be screened from any outside distractions or traffic during use if not, physically isolated.

Equipment Requirements

· Windows 95, 98, 2000 or XP

· Mac OS 9

· Laser Printer

· Telephone enabled to make calls to 800 and 888 area codes and local calls, and installed in the Learning Center prior to Program commencement.

· Two wooden planks, each measuring 1"x4" x 96

· Two 60-minute timers.

Costs

Bridges Learning Development	Costs per School Year
	2003-04	2004 +
Student Materials (per student served)	$ 85	$ 85
Staff Development, Tech & IP License	$24,766	0

Bridges Learning Discovery	Costs per School Year
	2003-04	2004 +
Student Materials per student	$ 32	$ 32
Staff Development, Tech & IP License
Training & setup-1^st classroom	$ 10,800	$ 0
Each additional classroom	$1,600	$ 0
Each additional facilitator	$ 800	$ 0

The “Basic Bridges” course is a required cost for the staff member designated as the Bridges Specialist. The course is not held on the school site, but is held regionally for various schools’ personnel. The cost of having more than two persons attend this training is $375/person for each of the third or more persons from any one school.

NOTE: A minimum order of materials to serve 50 students is required.

For Information Contact

Bridges Learning Systems, Inc.

49 Old Solomons Island Road, Suite 206

Annapolis, MD 21401

(800) 639-4423

Email: [email protected]

Current Location in Nevada

No school in Nevada has chosen this program during this state remediation funding cycle.

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

California Early Literacy Learning

Extended Literacy Learning (CELL/ExLL)

www.cell-exll.com

Program Description

Professional development and best teaching practices are the main purposes behind CELL/ExLL. The CELL/ExLL framework of instructional activities includes oral language, phonics, higher-order thinking skills, and reading and writing activities. CELL/ExLL is designed to meet the needs and strengths of each individual child. The CELL/ExLL model stresses and encourages active participation from each child regardless of his or her current level of literacy acquisition. High progress children are encouraged to continue their rapid growth while low progress children are guided through the process with continuous support and an opportunity to accelerate their learning. The opportunity to try new learning in a risk-free environment and practice new strategies throughout the day are encouraged. CELL/ExLL trains teachers to use a gradual decline of teacher support and a gradual increase in student independence based on demonstrated student capability.

The K-3 framework (CELL) for the program is designed to help the beginning reader develop the necessary skills to master alphabetic principles, phonemic awareness, and concepts about print in a literature-rich environment.

The Extended Literacy Learning Framework (ExLL) for grades 3-6 is based on an alignment with the K-3 Framework extending it into the intermediate grades where content area study and application of skills have increased importance.

CELL/ExLL collects diagnostic information to inform instruction and assessment data to ensure accountability. Teachers are trained to administer the Observation Survey and to improve their observation of children to better inform instruction. Standardized test measures are provided to track both individual student and class achievement.

Evidence of Effectiveness

CELL/ExLL are research-based programs. All elements of the framework were selected because of their substantial support in the research literature. CELL/ExLL participants assist in the collection of data that is used to document program success and individual student gains. It is a primary focus of CELL/ExLL research to analyze and report data generated by individual participating schools and districts. Some examples are as follows:

NOTE: A Southern California CELL/ExLL pilot program compared achievement in grades 1-4 on the California Achievement Test (CAT-5) over a four-year period (1994-1997). Schools that had full CELL/ExLL implementation showed increases of 10, 10, and 11 normal curve equivalents in reading comprehension. Schools with partial implementation of CELL showed increases of 2, 6, and 5. And schools that participated in a district developed CELL/ExLL clone had normal curve equivalent scores of 2, 1, 3, and 5. These data are a strong indication that program replication is affected by altering standards, procedures, or training.

Charles Mack Elementary - Elk Grove Unified School District, 1997

Kindergarten students began the year as non-readers and reached a level equivalent to mid-first grade by spring testing. Achievement of first-graders increased from upper Kindergarten to beginning second, and second-graders who began the year just below grade level scored high fourth grade by spring testing. These randomly selected children received no intervention or support services other than effective classroom teaching using the CELL/ExLL framework.

Wyoming Indian School, Wyoming (N=200)

In this study, half of the school staff participated in the CELL/ExLL program and half did not. Significant increases in text reading scores were reported in each grade level for teachers who participated in the program compared to those who did not.

CELL/ExLL and Reading Recovery

Many schools that have selected CELL/ExLL also participate in the Reading Recovery program. Though Reading Recovery, by design, is an intervention and not expected to affect the cohort, many districts track these data. Test data for first grade students were tracked over a four-year period in mathematics, reading, and total battery. Three years of data during Reading Recovery participation show scores in the 22-31 national percentile range. Year-end scores following the first year of CELL/ExLL implementation show a dramatic increase in all three areas to the 44-50-percentile range. It is interesting to note that the achievement increase was also seen in mathematics. These data help support the primary importance of reading and writing instruction in the elementary grades. It also suggests that even a powerful intervention like Reading Recovery improves with the support of effective classroom teaching.

CELL/ExLL and Special Education Referrals

Regarding special education referrals, a study conducted over a three-year period indicated that Non-Title I schools with neither Reading Recovery nor CELL/ExLL showed an increase in percentage of referrals from 2.6 to 3.7 percent. Title I schools supported by Reading Recovery showed a referral reduction from 3.0 to 2.8 percent. The demonstration school supported by Reading Recovery and CELL/ExLL showed a significant reduction in referrals to special education from 3.2 to 1.5 percent. These data confirm both the effective combination of a balanced program of reading and writing instruction with a powerful early intervention.

Aspects of Reading

This program addresses the following aspects of reading, as identified by the National Reading Panel and listed in the No Child Left Behind Act:

·         Phonemic Awareness ü

·         Phonics ü

·         Fluency ü

·         Vocabulary ü

·         Comprehension ü

·         Motivation

Teacher Support

Professional development is the cornerstone of CELL/ExLL implementation. To ensure school-wide support for CELL, a School-Based Planning Team participates in a year-long series of planning activities and framework training sessions. The School-Based Planning Team is composed of the school principal, a reading specialist, a special education teacher, and one teacher from Kindergarten, first, second and third grades. Generally, a member of the team will emerge as a leader and agree to be trained as a Literacy Coordinator.

The ExLL training model for grades 3-6 is similar to the CELL model. Teachers representing each grade, the principal, and other specialists participate in a separate yearlong series of trainings. It is expected that ExLL schools will have participated in CELL in a prior year or are participating in both trainings in the same year.

Implementation Schedule

School-Based Planning Team

· Observation Survey Training (1 day)

· 5 One-day Training Sessions

· Monthly Guided Meetings (90 minutes)

· West Coast Literacy Conference and CELL Institute

Desert Heights Elementary

13948 Mt. Bismark Street

Reno, NV 89506

Phone: (775) 677-5444

Contact: Debra Duty-Deery

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

ELLIS

www.ellis.com

Program Description

The ELLIS program teaches English language skills for non-English speakers. A computer-based program, ELLIS uses a full multi-media experience to teach the following:

· Thematic units based on real-life topics

· Video-based language modeling, then the student moves to more active learning exercises

· Student controlled video and audio playback

· Voice recording and playback

· Diagnostic, achievement, and proficiency testing

· Native language support to facilitate instruction

· Complete records management and reporting system

· Comprehensive workbook and tutor activities

· Interactive games and activities

All lessons are provided to the learner in a consistent format, beginning with a pre-test, then moving to watching a video for context, then repeating scenes, then practicing conversation skills by listening and speaking. Ellis supports Spanish-speaking students, but there are dozens of other languages supported by this program.

There are two suites for K-12: ELLIS Kids 2.0 and ELLIS Academic3.0. Ellis Kids is designed for young learners at three levels of proficiency: preliterate, beginner, and low intermediate. Ellis Academic is designed for students aged 12 and up of any proficiency level, teaching basic social and business English. Products can be purchased individually or in complete suites.

ELLIS Kids Suite

· Kids Essentials is the most basic level, aimed at preliterate learners or those only literate in their native language. The focus of the program is vocabulary development and phonics-based reading skills.

· Kids Level One and Level Two is for beginning to intermediate learners. Full-motion video stories introduce five integrated tutorials in vocabulary, listening, grammar, pronunciation and communications skills. Lessons are presented in a “Watch-Learn-Practice-Play” sequence to give students a predictable format for learning, while instructional games and songs add fun and motivation. Frequent on-screen feedback, opportunities to review, and the option of extended practice activities through a “randomization” feature provide even further learning support. The available native language instruction and navigational help smoothly integrates with ELLIS Kids’ solid methodology to help create more confident, excited and independent learners.

· Kids Management and Reporting System is the ELLIS records management system for teachers to view and print reports. Teachers can also control individual or class instructional paths through each product by determining which lessons students get access to.

ELLIS Academic Suite

· Intro is for beginning middle and high school ELL learners.

· Middle Mastery is for intermediate middle and high school ELL learners.

· Senior Mastery is for advanced middle and high school ELL learners.

· Master Pronunciation is for intermediate to advanced students to work exclusively on pronunciation skills.

· Placement is a computer adaptive test for placement within the Academic Suite.

· Instructor Utilities is the ELLIS records management system for teachers.

Evidence of Effectiveness

Indianapolis Public Schools

Sixty-five percent of students enrolled in the ELL program attended a non-compulsory lab where the ELLIS program was utilized as an integrated portion of their 30 to 50 hours of total instruction. The following results were obtained:

· During the 2000-01 school year, 210 students who were pre- post-tested on a standardized testing instrument showed an average gain of 8.0 points in reading improvement and 209 students who were pre- and post-tested on the same instrument showed an average gain of 6.0 points in listening skills.

· During the 2001-02 school year, 312 students who utilized ELLIS were pre- and post-tested on a standardized testing instrument showed an average gain of 6.5 points in reading improvement and 306 students who were pre- and post-tested on the same instrument showed an average gain of 5.7 points in listening skills.

For traditional non-multimedia instruction, a 5.0-point gain for 100 contact hours is expected. While level gains are significant, an increase of greater than 5.0 points in half the time or less (30-50 hours of total instruction incorporating ELLIS) is significant.

South Carolina – Literacy Volunteers of Low Country

· The regular non-ELLIS program participants showed a 40% level of success for completion of at least one level of the CASAS and BEST instruments.

· A combination of the regular program and at least 12 hours of the ELLIS program showed a 52% level of success for completion of at least one level of the CASAS and BEST instruments.

· Those students who participated only in the ELLIS program showed a 62% level of success for completion of at least one level of the CASAS and BEST instruments.

Malaysia

Using the Educational Testing Service worldwide benchmark for English proficiency (TOEFL) to compare student growth, ELLIS students performed significantly higher statistically in vocabulary and reading comprehension than non-ELLIS users. The survey also found that ELLIS produced 50% improvement in 30% less time compared to non-ELLIS classes.

Aspects of Reading

This program addresses the following aspects of reading, as identified by the National Reading Panel and listed in the No Child Left Behind Act:

·         Phonemic Awareness ü

·         Phonics ü

·         Fluency ü

·         Vocabulary ü

·         Comprehension

·         Motivation ü

Teacher Support

ELLIS provides the following support:

· Onsite Installation

· Onsite Training

· Training Kit (Teacher Training Video, Reference Guide, CD-Tutorials, Help-at-a-Glance Reference Cards)

· Instructor Guide

· Continual training/support online

Equipment Requirements

As this is a computer-based program, schools will need to have hardware with multimedia capabilities sufficient to run the program, as well as headphones and other peripherals. Ellis is designed for networked environments.

Costs

Prices vary according to selected products, number of computers, and physical sites. Volume discounts can be up to 35%. Volume discount levels are based on accrued purchases from the purchasing agent, which includes both current and past purchases.

The following are the costs of implementing ELLIS on 10 stations in one location. Each amount includes native language support for three languages, rights to copy for supplemental workbooks, one additional year of technical support via telephone, and appropriate volume discounting:

Kids Suite for 10 stations, one location: $19,500

Academic Suite for 10 stations, one location: $32,070

NOTE: Training is sold separately from the program.

For Information Contact

Ralph Gilstrap, Authorized ELLIS Dealer

Interactive Learning Technology

1650 East 12500 South

Draper, UT 84020-0668

Phone: (801) 523-9350

Current Location in Nevada

Clark County School District

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Image-Making Within the Writing Process

www.image-making.org/combined.html

Program Description

Image-Making Within the Writing Process operates in the classroom as part of the language arts program. Recognizing individual learning styles, the program defines all children as author/illustrators and draws young writers into a rich creative process using work and picture images to create outstanding published books. Children employ reading, writing, and oral language skills necessary to the development of literacy, gain access to visual and kinesthetic modes of thinking which serve to heighten their conceptualization process, and engage in higher level problem-formulating and problem-solving activities.

Through a series of process-oriented art activities, each child begins by creating a portfolio of hand-painted textured papers. These textured papers are used by the class to brainstorm describing words as well as to spark story ideas through free association. As children’s imaginations are awakened, discovered creatures and settings become rich resources for imaginative stories. Children find stories hidden in their textured papers. When it is time for the children to begin the process of putting ideas down on paper, they are purposely not directed toward either writing first or making pictures first. Because verbal as well as visual modes of thinking are equally valued, your author/illustrators are given the license to follow their own creative process in story‑making. In this way, they approach writing from a position of personal strength and enthusiasm.

Textured papers then become the raw materials for building colorful collage images. As children weave together story images in pictures and words, stories unfold through a lively, interactive creative process. As stories evolve, children are taught how to read their collage images in order to increase descriptive detail and literary language in their writing. Collage images also provide a concrete tool for revision. As a result, completed published books are highly evolved in story line, descriptive language, and visual expression.

Evidence of Effectiveness

· Research findings based on analytic scoring of writing samples demonstrate that the writing skills of participating students dramatically improve, particularly in the areas of topic selection, plot development, sense of story-craft, use of descriptive language, and overall imagination. The program also enhances students’ abilities to express ideas through the dynamic interweaving of word and picture images as compared to non-participating students.

· This program has been validated by the National Diffusion Network for students in grades 1-2; however, it has been successfully implemented in grades K-12.

· University of New Hampshire – Laboratory for Interactive Learning

The study involved 555 first- and second-grade students from 13 schools in 3 different states: New Hampshire, Hawaii, and Texas. Because of evidence that demonstrates that success in developing literacy skills during the primary years is crucial to success throughout one’s school career, first and second grade students were targeted for this study. Sites were selected to insure that participating students represented a range of achievement levels, socio-economic levels, and geographic regions. The treatment group was comprised of 16 classes of students who participated in Picturing Writing and Image-Making as a year‑long Language Arts program. The comparison group was comprised of 12 classes of students who were participating in the Language Arts program that was currently being used in their classroom.

Results:

1. A distinct difference was found between groups, with the treatment group clearly demonstrating stronger qualities of sense of setting, beginning, middle, end, plot development, use of descriptive language, voice, and overall quality of writing. This was true for both grades one and two.

2. A distinct difference was found between treatment and comparison groups with the treatment group demonstrating a heightened ability to express their ideas through the use of visual elements of color, texture, shape, detail, composition, sequence, and overall use and quality of visual information. This held true for both grades one and two.

Teacher Support

Teacher-training for Image-Making Within the Writing Process is divided into two separate workshops:

· Picturing Writing: Fostering Literacy Through Art - Training will lead teachers through a simple progression of art-and-literature-based mini-lessons which build a foundation of understanding regarding sense of setting, beginning, middle, end, plot development, character development, and use of descriptive language. A comprehensive slide show will detail classroom practices. Classroom modeling techniques and management tips will be woven throughout the two-days.

· Image-Making Within The Writing Process: Constructing Stories Through Collage - Training will provide teachers with the necessary tools to allow students to culminate their experience as artists and writers using a very dynamic collage technique. This unique collage process builds directly on the skills students have acquired through Picturing Writing: Fostering Literacy Through Art.

A Complete Implementation Package is available which includes all of the materials necessary to implement the program in a classroom of 25 children.

Equipment Requirements

The Complete Implementation Package - a box containing all the materials necessary to implement the program.*

*School-wide or multi-classroom kits can be individually designed to reduce costs.

Costs

Teacher-Training Fee Structure (fees include a complete set of instructional materials and all the art materials used during the workshop):

Two Days Three Days Four Days Five Days

$250/participant $325/participant $425/participant $500/participant

NOTE: It is strongly recommended that schools purchase two days of training.

Classroom Art Materials

Complete Implementation Mini Kit Complete Picturing Writing

Kit Kit

$250/box $95/box $295/box

Shipping and Handling: $20 per box

For Information Contact

Liz Arcieri or Beth Olshansky

Laboratory of Interactive Learning

University of New Hampshire

Thompson Hall, 105 Main Street

Durham, NH 03824-3547

Phone: (603) 862-3691

(603) 659-6018

Current Location in Nevada

No school in Nevada has chosen this program during this state remediation funding cycle.

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Thinking Maps

www.thinkingmaps.com

Program Description

Thinking Maps, developed by Dr. David Hyerle, are visual teaching tools that foster and encourage life-long learning. Isolated applications of semantic maps and graphic organizers have been used for years by teachers for presenting content information. The Thinking Maps approach for school-wide participation is unique and successful because the Thinking Maps language for learning takes an important step beyond the sporadic, isolated uses of graphic organizers. The eight Thinking Maps are an organized set of frameworks based on fundamental thinking processes. This flexible array of maps is introduced directly to students so that they will independently transfer thinking skills to content learning across disciplines, and to life-long learning. The outcome is that a school utilizes a core set of graphic tools for cognitive development, instruction, and assessment.

Research shows that long lasting, meaningful school change does not occur without a consistent, in-depth, long-term vision in whole schools. Working with isolated teachers and pull-out programs for students does not support the ongoing transformation of a school community. The Thinking Maps implementation design consists of four areas:

1. Intensive, interactive, and motivational staff development sessions for introducing Thinking Maps to all staff members; an Implementation and Assessment Guide details specific steps for creating school-wide success.

2. Resource materials for teachers to effectively and efficiently introduce students to each Thinking Map and to cross content learning.

3. Ongoing follow-up classroom visitations (co-teaching); meetings with teachers in grade level and/or subject area clusters to share content applications and student outcomes.

4. Student portfolios developed based on the use of Thinking Maps as midrange tools for reading, writing, mathematics and for assessment of students’ thinking about content across disciplines over time.

The materials for the program provide each teacher with basic and essential support at each grade level for introducing the Thinking Maps to students and into the classroom environment.

Evidence of Effectiveness

Friendship Valley Elementary, Maryland

The Maryland School Performance and Assessment Program (MSPAP) tests students in six categories -- reading, writing, math, science, social studies, and language. At Friendship Valley School, the Thinking Maps program was introduced in 1995 and was fully implemented in 1996. Review of results from the MSPAP indicates substantial gain across all subject areas, with the largest gain in writing (+27.3%).

Subject	1995	1996	95-96 Gain
Reading	51.4%	57.5%	6.1%
Writing	43.6%	70.9%	27.3%
Language	49.1%	69.2%	20.1%
Math	59.1%	70.0%	10.9%
Science	58.2%	76.4%	18.2%
Social Studies	57.3%	71.8%	14.5%

Margaret Fain Elementary School - Atlanta, Georgia

The first Thinking Maps school in inner-city Atlanta was Margaret Fain Elementary, a Title I school-wide school with over 70% free or reduced lunch population. The school was placed into Title school-wide improvement in 1994 due to low scores on the Georgia State Test of Basic Skills in reading and math. The Thinking Maps program was fully implemented during 1995. The following charts show dramatic improvement in test scores following implementation of the Thinking Maps program:

Thinking Maps Test Score Summary from Across the Country

NOTE: All of the teachers in each of these schools and systems received comprehensive, cross-discipline training and classroom follow-up coaching for a minimum of one school year. Administrators representing the schools or school systems in which the Thinking Maps program was implemented reported the analysis and presentation of the test score results shown below. In all cases, the administrators have evidence that the results are directly related to the use of Thinking Maps by students. The scores are comparisons of results using state tests from year to year.

School/Description

Location

Test Instrument

Results

Carl Waitz Elementary – 100% Title I

Mission, Texas

Texas State: TAAS

· Reading: Increase from 62.7% to 88.2%

· Math: Increase from 41.2% to 76.5%

Claremont Elementary

Catawba Co., NC

NC State End-of-Year Tests

Writing: From 1994 to 1996, scores rose from 33% to 46% to 63% at the 4^th grade.

Tuttle Middle School

Catawba Co., NC

NC State End-of-Year Tests

Writing: From 1994 to 1996, scores rose from 44% to 68% to 73% at the 8^th grade.

Chadbourn Elementary – Title I

Columbus Co., NC

NC State End-of-Year Tests

Writing: From 1993 to 1995, scores rose from 35% to 51% to 61%.

A.T. Allen Elementary

Cabarrus Co., NC

NC State End-of-Year Tests

· Reading: Increase from 77% to 89% in 1998

· Writing: Increase from 29% to 77% in 1998

· Math: 80% to 91% in 1998

Teacher Support

Teachers receive a resource manual that explains the understanding behind the methodology with examples and ideas for making cross-content connections. Special sections detailing Conflict Resolution, Substance Abuse Prevention, and Curriculum Unit Design provide teachers with specific mapping designs for all grade levels. A set of 8 Thinking Maps posters is also included in each manual.

Staff Development

Three days of school-wide staff development include workshops on model teaching, co-teaching and coaching, and grade-level meetings. There is a focus on improving teacher questioning techniques using Thinking Maps, as well as a focus on improving student reading, writing and math skills for state and local tests.

The Innovative Learning Group will provide guidance to teachers in maintaining portfolios for each student on reading, writing, and mathematics problem-solving throughout the year.

Equipment Requirements: None.

Costs

Materials

K-12 Thinking Maps: Tools for Learning $95.00

K Draw Your Thinking $100.00

1-2 Show Your Thinking $100.00

3-4 Map Your Thinking $100.00

K-12 Cooperative Desk Maps $89.00

There is a 6% Shipping/Handling Charge for all orders

Staff Development - $3,750*

The basic design for bringing Thinking Maps into an elementary or secondary school includes a one-day initial staff development workshop, two to four days of follow-up visitations, ongoing technical assistance for assessment purposes and curriculum development support, and material resources for students and teachers.

· Interactive Introductory Workshop: One Day $1,250

· Follow-up Visitation: Two Days $2,500

*Does not include per diem for vendor out-of-state travel.

For Information Contact

Tom Hutton, Sales Representative

3931 Olive Street

Las Vegas, NV 89104

Phone: (702) 457-7695

Email: [email protected]

Current Location in Nevada

McDermitt Combined School – Humboldt County School District, Nevada

Indiana NWEA RIT Score Analyses in Reading and Math

Grade 3 Comparisons

Fall RIT

Grade 4 Comparisons

Fall RIT

Grade 5 Comparisons

Fall RIT

Aspects of Reading

Nye County School District

ELLIS

ELLIS Kids Suite

ELLIS Academic Suite

Indianapolis Public Schools

South Carolina – Literacy Volunteers of Low Country

Malaysia

Aspects of Reading

Clark County School District

Two Days Three Days Four Days Five Days

Complete Implementation Mini Kit Complete Picturing Writing

Friendship Valley Elementary, Maryland

Margaret Fain Elementary School - Atlanta, Georgia

Thinking Maps Test Score Summary from Across the Country

Staff Development

Materials

Staff Development - $3,750*

Clark County School District