State-Wide Evaluation of the New Hampshire ESEA Title II, Part D Grant Program. Final Report
Author: Knestis, Kirk
Date: 2011-10-20
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Academic Achievement,Thinking Skills,Learner Engagement,Educational Technology,Educational Opportunities,Program Effectiveness,Stakeholders,Resource Allocation,Teaching Methods,Professional Development,Grants,Disadvantaged Schools,School Districts,Student Needs,Technology Uses in Education,Instructional Improvement,Teacher Improvement,Student Improvement,Accountability,Access to Information,Disclosure,Access to Computers,Program Evaluation,Measures (Individuals)

The Title II-D grant program, &quot;Enhancing Education Through Technology,&quot; (EETT) provides financial assistance to higher poverty school districts that have the greatest need for technology support or have been identified as being in need of improvement. In 2009, the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) provided an additional $650 million in Title II-D funding to schools. With the ARRA Ed Tech funds, state educational agencies had the opportunity to implement 21st century classrooms in their schools with the goals of enhancing instruction, facilitating teaching and learning, and improving student achievement. Through both EETT regular and ARRA grant funds, the New Hampshire Department of Education (NHDOE) funded three technology-focused projects beginning in Fall 2009: (a) ARRA 21st Century Classrooms, (b) Classroom Technology Mini-Grants, and (c) the Tech Leader Cohort (TLC) Program. In this report, evaluation focused on the program effectiveness, transparency, accountability, and equity of Title II-D grant program activities. Five research questions were developed by Hezel Associates to further refine the focus of the evaluation. These five research questions are presented with the conclusions. These questions are: (1) How well are school staff members turning classrooms into technology-rich learning environments, fully equipped with hardware, software, and rich digital resources for learning?; (2) To what degree are these settings encouraging mediating outcomes for students including interactive learning, higher-level thinking skills, and student engagement?; (3) To what degree does the provision of technology tools translate into real opportunities for students to collaborate and connect with new content?; (4) How are new technologies and resources serving students of various groups, including those with the highest need?; and (5) How are grantees doing in terms of training teachers not only how to use technology but also how to translate their new skills into practice in their teaching? Based on main findings stemming from the research questions, the authors offer the following recommendations: (1) Ensure there are strong technology infrastructures and technical support staff in place prior to implementation; (2) To the extent possible, address causes to minimize delays in the purchasing and deployment of new technologies; (3) Ensure grantees effectively communicate the project goals and outcomes to all stakeholders; (4) Capitalize on the increased appreciation for and excitement surrounding school technology integration for project sustainability; (5) Continue to provide teachers with high-quality, relevant, focused professional development opportunities; (6) Continue to provide teachers and students with the positive support and encouragement needed to facilitate their technology implementation and use; (7) Expand existing supports to facilitate nuanced applications of technology resources and higher-order instructional approaches; (8) Provide additional assistance to schools in need of improvement (SINIs) for obtaining their full allocation of resources and identifying strategies for putting the resources to use; (9) Budget and provide time for teachers to learn, plan and share information about new technologies; (10) Encourage more discussions among educators about the benefits of allowing students to access the school network from home; (11) Provide teachers will the skills needed to deliver challenging and engaging technology applications to students and experiment with new instructional practices involving technology; (12) Provide schools/districts with guidance and tools (both short-term and long-term) to help them evaluate the impact(s) the technology is having on student achievement; and (13) Provide guidance to educators on best practices for using technology for differentiated learning. Appended are: (1) List of Acronyms and Abbreviations; (2) Evaluation Timetable; (3) Bibliography of References; (4) Evaluation Instruments; (5) NH Title II-D Logic Model; and (6) Tables of Findings. (Contains 30 tables, 89 figures, and 75 footnotes.) [For related report, &quot;State-Wide Evaluation of the New Hampshire ESEA Title II, Part D Grant Program. Interim Report,&quot; see ED542709.