Digital Learning Transformation

Phase 1 Update

June 16th 2015

{P.S. – this video was filmed on an iPad}

Summary

Phase 1 of the Digital Learning Transformation represents transformation and growth

with teaching and learning.

Phase 1 Sites:

• Gage Elementary

• Pinewood Elementary

• Riverside Elementary

• Lincoln K-8

• Friedell Middle School

• Willow Creek Middle School

• John Marshall 9th grade team

• Rochester Alternative Learning Center

Classroom sets in Phase 1:

• Century High School

• John Marshall High School

• Mayo High School

Timeline October 2014 – teaching staff at phase 1 sites received iPads (professional

development and experimentation began).

December 2014 – 3,500 iPads were imaged, scanned, cased, and distributed to phase

1 sites. 100 charging carts were wired and distributed to necessary classrooms.

January 2015 – parent sessions were hosted at the phase 1 sites.

January 26, 2015 – iPads were distributed over the course of 2 days. Technology staff,

Instructional Technology Specialists, Instructional Coaches, and other staff aided in

distribution, Apple ID configuration, etc.

January 2015 – Apple Education Technology Profile first survey administered to phase

1 staff as a benchmark

April 2015 – parent and student surveys administered

May 2015 – staff input/feedback listening sessions occurred (face to face)

May 2015 – Apple Education Technology Profile second survey administered to phase 1

staff

Funding and Break/Fix

RPS leased to own 3,500 iPads for $1.42 million over a four-year period.

Break/Fix Statistics (from January):

80 broken screens @ $40 = $3200

25 misc. parts @ $35 = $875

Breakage rate of 1%

Professional DevelopmentMinnetonka Technology Institute

• March 4-5, 2015 with 34 attendees from RPS Elem/MS/HS Site Visits

Breakout Sessions Included:

• 1:1 Implementation, Computer Programming K-5, Classroom Creativity, Online

Learning, Staff Development, Assessment, Innovation, and more

Instructional Technology Specialists

• Offer ongoing, individualized work with sites, PLCs, and classroom teachers on

meaningful infusion of technology to enhance and personalize student learning (LMS

use, AppSmashing, Digital Curriculum Transformation, and much much more)

Site Instructional Coaches

• Work with Heather Willman and Instructional Technology to increase capacity to

coach high quality instruction using technology as a tool

Elementary Collaboration

• Monthly meeting between phase 1 sites to share and collaborate instructional ideas

Professional DevelopmentiPad EdCamp at Longfellow

• Feb 16 – staff district wide

Professional DevelopmentDigital Learning Institute

• Solution Tree – Collier County Schools Florida

• Site Visits and Breakout Sessions – Interactive Textbooks, Digital Formative

Assessment, Student Work That Matters, Engagement, Professional Development,

and more.

Tech Thursday @ Willow Creek

Digital Buzz

• Monthly digital newsletter distribute to all sites with tips,

information, etc.

Lightening Round @ RALC

• Instructional Coach captures photos of what is happening

at the site. Impromptu and brief explanation during staff

meetings.

Education Technology Profile Report

The Education Technology Profile (ETP) was designed to provide districts and schools

with general demographics of technology use and an overall profile of the levels at

which faculty are using technology in their classrooms. RPS asked all phase 1

teachers to complete the ETP in February and again in May to establish a baseline of

technology used based upon the SAMR model.

SAMR Model

Let’s learn about the SAMR Model – as explained by students.

Education Technology Profile Report

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Redefinition

Modification

Augmentation

Substitution/Augmentation

Substitution

Phase 1 Parent Survey ResultsPhase 1 Parent Surveys were completed in early April (2 months into the phase 1 of

Digital Learning Transformation) through an online survey.

Top themes from the parent surveys:

• Limit apps/games that student can download

• Teachers need to communicate with parents more on how they are using the iPads

• Monitoring screen time/apps/games at home

• More textbooks available on the iPads

510 responses (286 Classroom and 224 1:1)

• 76% of all parents believe their child is using an iPad at school at least once daily.

• 64% of phase 1 parents state that their child uses their iPad for learning at least

once daily outside of school.

• 39% of parents either agree or strongly agree that their child has shown greater

interest in school since the introduction of iPads for learning.

• 15% of parents either agree or strongly agree that they have experienced an

increase in communication with their child’s teacher since the introduction of iPads

for learning

Phase 1 Student Surveys were completed in early April (2 months into the phase 1 of

Digital Learning Transformation) through an online survey.

Top 5 themes from the student surveys:

• Limit apps/games that student can download

• Students would like more textbooks available on the iPads

• Student want to use the iPads more often and/or in more classes

• Students would like to have a choice when it comes to cases

• Students are experiencing connectivity issues

Phase 1 Student Survey Themes

Phase 1 Student Survey Results

3,139 responses (1,692 Classroom and 1,447 1:1) – grades 3-12

• 28% report using an iPad hourly at school

• 47% report using an iPad daily at school

• 64% of 1:1 students report using their iPad for learning at least once daily outside of

school

• 67% of all students either agree or strongly agree that they have more interest in

school since the introduction of iPads for learning

• 67% of all students either agree or strongly agree that their performance in school

has improved since the introduction of iPads for learning

• 64% of all students either agree or strongly agree that they have experienced an

increase in communication with their teachers since the introduction of iPads for

learning

• 11% of all students report being distracted by the technology in school

Staff Feedback | Common ThemesFace to face staff meetings at all phase 1 sites occurred in the months of May and early

June.

Areas for enhancement:

• Access Points

• Sharing devices throughout the day can be frustrating (secondary)

• Games, camera, and some social media can be a source of distraction

• Flash player (secondary)

• Learning Management System – consistency

• Dollars to purchase apps

Staff Feedback | Common ThemesFace to face staff meetings at all phase 1 sites occurred in the months of May and early

June.

Areas for reinforcement:

• Craving more PLC & professional development – a deeper dive into the apps and

abilities

• Enjoying Casper Focus

• Using less paper

• Individualized learning is enhancing the classroom (shy students are engaging)

• Instructional technology specialists, technology integrationists and instructional

coaches are amazing

• Google Classroom is amazing for collaboration

• Instant feedback and formative assessment – brilliant

• Creates efficiencies

• Middle & High School Students are learning to manage their choices

• Digital Textbooks

• App Repository

• Students video taping their work

RPS Response to Parent & Student

Surveys

Examples of how our teachers & administrators are engaging with parents:

• Google Docs

• Parent/Teacher conferences {bilinguals used iPads}

• Emails from teachers featuring digital projects

• Technology Open House

• PreciouStatus

RPS Response to Parent & Student

Surveys

Examples of how our teachers & administrators are engaging with parents:

Technology Open House

Locations:

• Willow Creek

• John Marshall

• Longfellow 45/15

Top Downloaded Apps

IXL 3858

Drive 3806

Docs 3795

Classroom 3574

Educreations 2953

Slides 2878

Sheets 2824

Pic Collage 2703

Socrative 2475

QR Reader 1742

MackinVIA 1707

Calculator iPad 1531

Kidblog 1488

popplet lite 1471

Classkick 1415

Quizlet 1396

Nearpod 1393

Raz-Kids 1373

ShowMe 1369

QR Reader 1310

Destiny Quest 1303

Haiku Deck 1279

iMovie 1209

Dictionary 1206

Google Earth 1199

Notes 1113

YouTube 1085

ComicBook! 1065

Doodle Buddy 1049

ChatterKid 1047

ThingLink 1041

Prezi 1031

ScreenChomp 1025

Tellagami 991

Epic! 986

Bookshelf 963

SpellingCity 951

A few thoughts from teachers on apps

Opt-in White List

This is a hybrid of our current practice, with an “opt in” list for

designees (building admins, parents).

• Technology would be able to limit the apps for these users

• Parents could opt in on Skyward if they wanted their child to be on a

restrictive white list

• The list of apps would be very specific and the process and apps

would be posted on our public site

• Pilot program this fall at a middle school level

Current Longfellow Third Grade MCA Data

Spring 2013 – Mean score of 350.5 - 55% proficient (51 students)

o 12% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 43% of third graders were ‘Meets’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 16% of third graders were ‘Partially Meeting’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 29% of third graders ‘Do Not Meet’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

Spring 2014 – Mean score of 352.4 - 59% proficient (52 students)

o 17% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 42% of third graders were ‘Meets’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 14% of third graders were ‘Partially Meeting’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 27% of third graders ‘Do Not Meet’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

Spring 2015 – Mean score of 358.2 - 70% proficient (56 students)

o 25% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 45% of third graders were ‘Meets’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 14% of third graders were ‘Partially Meeting’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

o 16% of third graders ‘Do Not Meet’ on the MCA III Reading Assessment

3rd Grade MCA III Reading Data (MCA score of 350 or

greater is proficient):

Current Longfellow Third Grade Data

3rd Grade MCA III Math Data (MCA score of 350 or

greater is proficient):

Spring 2013 – Mean score of 357.3 - 71% proficient (51 students)

o 29% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Math Assessment this spring

o 43% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Math Assessment this spring

o 18% of third graders were ‘Partially Meeting’ on the MCA III Math Assessment

o 10% of third graders ‘Do Not Meet’ on the MCA III Math Assessment

Spring 2014 – Mean score of 361.1 – 79% proficient (52 students)

o 42% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Math Assessment this spring

o 37% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Math Assessment this spring

o 6% of third graders were ‘Partially Meeting’ on the MCA III Math Assessment

o 15% of third graders ‘Do Not Meet’ on the MCA III Math Assessment

Spring 2015 – Mean score of 362.7 - 80% proficient (56 students)

o 46% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Math Assessment this spring

o 34% of third graders were ‘Exceeds’ on the MCA III Math Assessment this spring

o 9% of third graders were ‘Partially Meeting’ on the MCA III Math Assessment

o 11% of third graders ‘Do Not Meet’ on the MCA III Math Assessment

Current Longfellow Third Grade NWEA Data

Spring 2013 – Mean RIT 185 (68% NPR)

o District Mean RIT 184 (65% NPR)

o National Mean RIT 179 (50% NPR)

Spring 2014 – Mean RIT 195 (63% NPR)

o District Mean RIT 195 (63% NPR)

o National Mean RIT 191 (50% NPR)

Spring 2015 – Mean RIT 212 (75% NPR)

o District Mean RIT 207 (62% NPR)

o National Mean RIT 203 (50% NPR)

Current Third Grade Cohort NWEA Growth Math Scores.

These are there scores from first grade, second grade and this current

third grade year for the current cohort of third graders.

Current Longfellow Third Grade NWEA Data

Spring 2013 – Mean RIT 183 (66% NPR)

o District Mean RIT 182 (64% NPR)

o National Mean RIT 177(50% NPR)

Spring 2014 – Mean RIT 191 (54% NPR)

o District Mean RIT 193 (59% NPR)

o National Mean RIT 190 (50% NPR)

Spring 2015 – Mean RIT 206 (69% NPR)

o District Mean RIT 202 (58% NPR)

o National Mean RIT 199 (50% NPR)

Current Third Grade Cohort NWEA Growth Reading Scores.

These are there scores from first grade, second grade and this

current third grade year for the current cohort of third graders.

Longfellow

MCA-III Grade 3 Reading

350.5 352.4

358.2

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

390

Spring 2013 Spring 2014 Spring 2015

Longfellow

206202 199

191 193 190

183 182177

0

50

100

150

200

250

Longfellow69% NPR

District58% NPR

National50% NPR

Longfellow54% NPR

District59% NPR

National50% NPR

Longfellow66% NPR

District64% NPR

National50% NPR

ReadingNWEA 3rd Grade Spring RIT scores

Next Steps

• Phase 1 will continue in the fall at the same sites.

• Discussion of growth and student achievement

• Discussion of what phase 2 could look like – funding challenges