Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Self-Contained EIP

No description
by

Sylvia Jud

on 5 May 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Self-Contained EIP

Creating the Self-Contained Classroom
Using Nationally Normed Tests
An homogenous classroom of EIP students
Change, change, change...
Self-Contained -
Progress Monitoring
1st Grade
Single Teacher Model

maximum 14 students
Single teacher offering services
Workshop Model for Reading and Math
Small groups consisting of 3 students per group
2nd Grade
Co-Teacher Model

maximum 28 students
Two teachers offering services
Workshop Model for Reading and Math
Small groups consisting of 5-6 students per group
Shared classroom
Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)

Monday, May 5, 2014
Sylvia Jud, Hickory Hills Elementary Arts Academy
A Case Study
Individual Class v. Co-Teaching
An action plan to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 different models
Is a co-teaching EIP model as effective as an individal EIP model?
EIP, Early Intervention Program, is a state initiative to serve students at risk of not reaching or maintaining grade level in reading and/or math. Traditionally, these students have been served by a reading or math specialist, the EIP teacher, in one of two ways: augmented - where the EIP teacher would come into the students' classroom for additional support, or pull-out - where the EIP teacher would pull-out a small group of students to work on specific skills in a dedicated space outside of classroom distractions.
The Workshop Model, using the Daily 5, was used in both models
Students were assessed using the Measure of Academic Progress
MAP was administered 3 times during the school year - Fall 2013, Winter 2013 and Spring 2014
Progress is measured using a RIT score which is projected by the computer
Both models have similar demographics of students - 70% ESOL (+/- 3%), students qualified in both reading and math, little transiency (students withdrawn/none added to roster)
Self-Contained EIP Models
Created by the Northwest Evaluation Association
Nationally normed
Computerized adaptive assessment
Scores available in 24 hours
Monitors academic progress 3x/year
Data
1st Grade:
Reading:
Count of students taking MAP assessments = 10
Count of students who met or exceeded projected RIT = 4
%age of students who met or exceeded their projected RIT = 40%

Math:
Count of students taking MAP assessments = 10
Count of students who met or exceeded projected RIT = 8
%age of students who met or exceeded their projected RIT = 80%
Reading:
Count of students taking MAP assessments = 20
Count of students who met or exceeded projected RIT = 14
%age of students who met or exceeded their projected RIT = 70%

Math:
Count of students taking MAP assessments = 20
Count of students who met or exceeded projected RIT = 10
%age of students who met or exceeded their projected RIT = 50%
2nd Grade:
Interpreting Data
The data shows that students in the first grade individual self-contained classroom made more progress in math than in reading (80% compared to 40%).
On the contrary, students in the second grade co-teaching model, made greater progress in reading than in math (70% compared to 50%).
When progress is combined over both subjects, students in 1st and 2nd grades equally averaged 60% in meeting or exceeding projected RIT scores.
Conclusion
In evaluating the data, I was able to conclude that both EIP models, self-contained individual teacher and self-contained co-teachers, are effective in working with at-risk students and helping to close the achievement gap.

While the data shows that the progress is not extraordinary, this is the first year for such models in our school, thus allowing for the potential of greater progress in the future.
Full transcript