Entrance | What's New | Information | Curriculum | Resources | Intranet

---

II + III. Summary of Progress + Status

The Connections Project provides four major activities to assist teachers, mentors, and community members in enhancing student learning through integrated curricula supported by technology. The activities include professional development for teachers, curriculum development activities, community connections programs, and statewide and national dissemination of curriculum models and resources through a website and CD-ROMs.

The project will increase the capacity of educators to teach effectively through integrated curriculum reflecting Nebraska frameworks, the creation of a cadre of 600 teachers able to assist colleagues in effective use of curriculum integration and technology, improved achievement by high risk Nebraska students, and the creation of a national and statewide learning community of middle and secondary teachers.

The project is a part of the High-Performance Learning (HPL) Model established as the school improvement effort in Nebraska. The HPL Model allows local school districts to determine how best to meet community needs by providing for a quality education for all students and be accountable to the district patrons and the state that these services are provided.

Nebraska's commitment to education reform includes a commitment to educational technology. Nebraska's satellite, dedicated solely to educational purposes, the established Internet hub sites providing servers, toll-free access, the two way interactive distance learning pods infrastructure, and CD-ROM capabilities, will be the major technologies utilized in this project.

Return to top of page

GOAL 1: Improve learning in core subject areas by middle and secondary school students in Nebraska through more effective teaching and technology-supported integrated curricula reflecting state curriculum frameworks based on Goals 2000 and national standards.

• Objective 1.1 Educators will develop, implement and evaluate a minimum of 400 technology supported integrated curriculum modules emphasizing core subject areas.

Project Activities:

The Connections Project conducted two workshops that were one week in length during the summer of 1997. These workshops introduced ninety-five (95) teachers from the Lead Sites of Seward, North Platte, Morrill, Ainsworth and the two Youth Rehabilitation and Training Centers (YRTC) at Kearney and Geneva to the Connections Project Challenge Grant. The week's activities consisted of constructivist theory, brain-based learning, multiple learning styles and new technologies for use in the classroom (see attachment #1 and attachment #6). During the week teachers were given unit development guidelines so that they could be developing their own integrated curriculum modules using technology. The expectation is that each of the project teachers would develop two unit modules, one in the fall of 1997 and the other in the spring of 1998. During the summer of 1998 additional work on the unit modules will be conducted by the project's lead cadre for adaptation by the project teachers with their respective unit modules. Currently, project teachers' unit modules are on the project website or on a lead site's website for teachers to continue to refine. We expect to have the units ready for national access beginning in the late fall of 1998.

One of the national presenters used at the North Platte workshop in July, 1997, was Jill Hay of Waco, Texas. Ms. Hay is with Susan Kovalik and Associates of Kent, Washington, which is one of the project's partners. Ms. Hay's presentation laid an excellent foundation for the project teachers. Because we did not use her for the Kearney workshop in June, 1997, we brought her to Kearney on November 22, 1997, for a one-day workshop for those teachers who did not get to hear her in the summer.

Ms. Hay built on her previous presentations at a two-day workshop for the project teachers on January 30-31, 1998, in North Platte, Nebraska (see attachment # 2). As a part of this workshop a "street fair" was held on Saturday morning during which fourteen of the project teachers demonstrated their unit modules using technology. This was a chance for some of the project teachers to show off their units and for other teachers in the project to learn from their colleagues. It was a tremendous success.

 

Evaluation Activities: Teacher Survey Years Module Review

Timeline: Years 3, 4, 5 As developed

Status:

A teacher survey was developed and administered to all teachers in the lead sites in May 1997, providing initial data for the evaluation of the effectiveness of this grant. This pre-survey included the understanding of the state curriculum frameworks, Goals 2000, and the other national standards. Portions of this survey were used in the project planning. A follow-up survey was administered in May 1998, with data reported in Attachment # 3. It should be noted that the results are reported for both years, for all secondary teachers in the participating districts, as well as results from the project teachers.

The strategy for the content and format of the modules is being developed. A possible template for the curriculum modules has been developed and is being piloted by a lead group of teachers. The evaluation team has been involved in the development process and a web site has been created to store these modules so that all project teachers and all web users have access to them. The Connections Web Site can be accessed at URL http://ois.unomaha.edu/connection. During the summer of 1998, a lead cadre of project participants will develop evaluation criteria and unit format for the future project unit plans. The next set of unit plans are due on Dec 1, 1998.

Return to top of page

• Objective 1.2 A minimum of 20% of the curriculum modules developed will relate to the theme of global education, a goal endorsed by the Nebraska State Board of Education. Perspectives, a program featuring international and national leaders and accessible to all Nebraska schools via satellite, will be integrated into these modules.

Project Activities:

Planning for the 1997 summer workshops included the participation of the Director of Social Science for the Nebraska Curriculum Frameworks. He worked with the Project's teachers during the summer workshop and during the academic year to provide the themes from the Perspectives Program. For the 1998 summer workshops, additional work is focusing on mathematics and science activities. In particular, the Office of Internet Studies at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, is leading a two day workshop on the use of Space Data in Education. These workshops will show teachers how to use the wide variety of satellite and space based images of Nebraska for engaged mathematics and science lessons.

 

Evaluation Activities: Module review

Timeline: As developed 1-5

Status

See Objective 1.1 for the general overview and status of these activities.

Return to top of page

• Objective 1.3 By 2002, 80% of participating teachers will be effectively implementing integrated core curricula that reflect state curriculum frameworks.

Project Activities:

During July, 1998, we will conduct a one-week workshop in Kearney, Nebraska, for fifty (50) new project teachers. These teachers will be coming from the Nebraska public schools districts of Mitchell, Valentine, Paxton, Burwell, Litchfield, and Utica, and from two private schools--Catholic High School in Kearney, Nebraska, and St. Johns Lutheran School in Seward, Nebraska. This summer the workshop begins on Sunday afternoon with a "street fair" conducted by Year One project teachers. They will demonstrate their curriculum integration modules using technology. The remainder of the week will be devoted to topics on constructivism, brain-based research, multiple learning styles, Nebraska curriculum frameworks, plus opportunities for "hands on" technology sessions. Teachers will begin development of their curriculum modules (see attachment #4).

 

Evaluation Activities: Teacher survey

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status

The teacher surveys have been administered, and as described earlier, feedback from teachers has been positive. As summer workshop and other training sessions have been conducted, the evaluation team has administered on-site evaluation instruments for formative feedback. This feedback is provided in a web based form, which provides immediate feedback to the project's planning team, teachers and administrators. An example feedback form related to workshop training is at:

http://ois.unomaha.edu/connections/planners/evalsrch/index.htm

Authorized visitors will be required to enter--login: planner; password: planner

Then they may search from:

A sample search result:

Return to top of page

The teacher surveys (attachment #3) from May 1997 and 1998 asked the teachers proficiency in using the state curriculum frameworks for their discipline (item 21). Almost 30% indicated that they were unfamiliar with the frameworks, with another 27% indicating that they had low proficiency for using the frameworks. Only 15% indicated that they had a high proficiency with the frameworks. The project teachers have had training sessions on the frameworks and have been encouraged to use them during 97/98 school year, and their May 1998 data indicates that only 7% are unfamiliar and 15% are low. See chart below.

Return to top of page

• Objective 1.4 Nebraska middle and secondary students in the target school districts will demonstrate their ability to achieve at high levels in the core subjects of mathematics, science, social studies, language arts and foreign languages.

Project Activities:

A wide variety of approaches are being used to examine student learning within the classroom, with planning being conducted by the project's individual classroom teachers to ensure that classroom assessment is realistic, ongoing and appropriate.

 

Evaluation Activities: Achievement scores for core subjects or school-adopted achievement tests reviewed by classroom action research Individual teacher assessment report Student focus groups

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5     Years 3, 5 Year 4

Status:

Based upon the need to carefully map student achievement to specific activities conducted by project teachers, evaluation activities have targeted qualitative analysis approaches on a project wide basis, such as student focus groups, observations, and student artifacts. More quantitative approaches (such as achievement tests) are going to be used on an action research classroom based approach. Within this action research process, teachers will be able to enroll in graduate credit options to help carefully collect and analyze data from their own classrooms. In addition, a graduate assistant at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, is conducting a graduate thesis project related to classroom observations associated with the Connections Project which should be completed during the Spring of 1999.

California Achievement Test scores will not be reported in this report. Two problems exist. First, the tests are typically given in the fall, therefore indicating student progress from the previous school year since the teacher training was conducted during Summer 1997 and teacher activities related to the grant did not begin until Fall 1997 the tests are not appropriate at this time. Secondly, not all students in a given building have contact with project teachers.

In teacher focus groups and interviews, the topic of student achievement was addressed. Many teachers indicated that student motivation and enthusiasm were the most noticeable outcomes of project units. Also mentioned by some teachers was the higher level of student products. One teacher related that when teaching this unit in past years, he had had to return several student papers because it did not meet his standards. This year when teaching the unit, focusing on what he has learned in the project, all the students' work was acceptable and most was at a level much higher that he expected.

Another project teacher related that after observing her students learn when she teaches using what she has learned from the project, she now always thinks of ways to incorporate project activities in all her teaching, because if she did not, she knows her students would be short changed. Her next comment is worth repeating. "I am amazed and excited about the quality of students' work when using this type of teaching."

Although many project teachers are reporting improved student achievement this year, some are indicating that although student motivation is higher, they are not seeing better work or more learning. As the teachers become more comfortable with new teaching/learning techniques, it is hoped that this observable student achievement increase will occur.

The following list of comments from fifth graders who had just completed an integrated unit designed by teachers who are in the Connections Project reflect a very positive outcome.

• "It was real fun. We are lucky to get to do this."
• "We learned a lot."
• "It was interesting and we learned new things."
• "We were always learning."
• "It was fun doing things all the time like building our own rain forest."
• "It was interesting and we learned new things."
• "We did our best because it was really fun and we enjoyed what we were doing."

Return to top of page  

• Objective 1.5 Effective technology-supported integrated curriculum modules will be disseminated for statewide and national use through a CD-ROM, the Internet, and a cadre of technology and curriculum integration facilitators.

Project Activities:

Each of the lead school sites is installing a CD-ROM Lab. In year one the CD-ROM Lab was installed at Seward, Nebraska. A second lab has been installed at Ainsworth, Nebraska. In addition, each of the lead school sites is installing a minimum of five computers and printers for their teachers to access the Internet and to submit materials to our web site for dissemination.

 

Evaluation Activities: Report on progress and dissemination on CD

Timeline: Year 5

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 5. The web server has been developed, and is being used for initial communication and dissemination activities. Much of the dissemination activities will focus on Internet and Web-based access.

Return to top of page

GOAL 2: Build the capacity of Nebraska educators to effectively use technology and curriculum integration to promote student learning and achievement.

• Objective 2.1 80% of participating teachers will be able to identify appropriate technology-based educational resources that support integrated education and state curriculum frameworks based on national standards.

   

Project Activities:

Beginning with the summer workshops in 1997, project site cordinators and technology specialists worked with participating teachers regarding appropriate technology that can support integrated curriculums. The summer 1997 workshops were specially designed sessions on technology. In addition, special computer labs were open each evening for the workshop teachers. Follow-up activities during the academic year included on-site assistance, plus mini-workshops and related staff development activities.

The 1998 summer workshops planned will also support technology integration. Teachers are adamant that they receive technology training that is realistic, accessible, and affordable for their school district. The project staff has attempted to respond with appropriate technology training that will include sessions on Avid Cinema, appropriate uses of the Internet in the classroom and other resources, such as, Clarisworks, SlideShow, PageMaker, Powerpoint, Hyperstudio, and scanner uses.

 

Evaluation Activities: Teachers will list resources and a panel of experts will evaluate their lists

Timeline: Years 3, 4, 5

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 3, 4, and 5. As described earlier, the evaluation team is using a web based feedback process for all training and in service activities.

Return to top of page

• Objective 2.2 80% of participating teachers will demonstrate competency in the use of educational technologies including: the Internet; CD-ROM; and distance learning including two- way interactive video.

Project Activities:

Planning for ways that teachers can demonstrate their competencies in the use of educational technology is currently underway by the Projects Site Coordinators and Technology Specialists. These will include the use of appropriate training and in service tasks, as reflected in the periodic training activities.

 

Evaluation Activities: Teacher self-assessment based on technology competency standards Participant evaluation of professional development workshop program

Timeline: Years 1 , 2, 3, 4, 5 Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status:

Progress on this objective is primarily reported in two ways: year-end teacher surveys and workshop evaluations. Additionally, school visits and teacher focus groups give indication of the progress of this objective.

Figure 4 shows the technology proficiencies of the participants from May 1997 and May 1998.

Specific evaluation instruments for the professional development workshop program were also developed for each activity, with the collaboration of the evaluation team and participating schools. This evaluation was conducted t the end of each day of the workshop and will be used both for evaluation and participant reflection. Most of the instruments were administered on the web.

The project workshops that involved technology received a favorable reaction from the participants. When reporting "general value" of the session, the mean on a 1-5 scale (5-highest) was 4.4, and when reporting on the "effectiveness" of the session, the mean was also 4.4. This would indicate that the participants were pleased with their learning.

In addition, during school visits, the evaluators watched teachers using technology with their students, as well as seeing products of students that were produced with technology. During most school visits, the project computers and related equipment were being used by students, as the site coordinators often reported that students are wanting more and more access to high level computer equipment.

Return to top of page

• Objective 2.3 Participating teachers will regularly use the resources available through the Connections Project web page. (The network will be used a minimum of four times per year by 60% of project participants in the projects final two years.)

Project Activities:

See evaluation activities under Objective 2.3.

 

Evaluation Activities: Web server data analysis

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status:

The web site is well under way, in continual project use, and is constantly being refined. The web server has statistics software installed which can provide limited information about users. The limitations have to do with the fact that the IP addresses of web site visitors can be quite transient. However, some general conclusions can be made.

The Connections web site delivered 21, 529 successful requests (eliminating those images, and the site authors) from June 1997 through May 15, 1998, averaging 61 requests a day. Of those successful requests, 13,299 went beyond the first page. About 56.5% of the requests came from the ESU domains of the participant schools. As mentioned above it is difficult to tell if they are exactly the computers of the participants, for in fact they may be hitting the site from different computers on different occasions (or several may be sharing the same computer, such as in a lab).

Monthly Report:

The spike in the month of July, in the above chart (figure 5), indicates that requests predictably increased when a major staff development occurred. The more detailed weekly report below reveals that usage also increased in June, but was not sustained in the weeks following. However, the July workshop was followed by increased usage, probably due to the fact that many go back to school during August, as opposed to late June and early July. "Hit" levels declined somewhat in September (possibly teachers getting "started" in their classrooms) and rose again in November. The very significant April '98 spike is unexplained, but could possibly be due to visitors after/during the Connections Project site was promoted at several spring conferences such as NETA (Nebraska Educational Technology Association) on April 23 and 24. The weekly chart shows April usage to be high all month, increasing to a peak the week following NETA.

Return to top of page

The entire report is available at:

http://ois.unomaha.edu/connections/evaluation/rprt98.htm

Highlights from various segments of the above web server statistics report include:

• the most frequent hits were during the hours of 10 to 11 a.m. and 3 to 4 pm
• Wednesday is the busiest weekday, with Friday being the least busy
• education domains (.edu and k12.xx.us) made up almost 85% of requests

Weekly Report:

Return to top of page

GOAL 3: Strengthen educational achievement of high risk students including those who are economically disadvantaged, minority geographically isolated, or adjudicated youths (delinquent or incarcerated) through technology-supported integrated curriculum.

• Objective 3.1 High risk students in the target areas will have access to computers both at school and after school and will use these computers to help them succeed academically.

Project Activities:

Each of the lead school sites will order equipment and will be in the process of involving high risk students to use the equipment at both school and after school. The Project Director and Seward Site Coordinator have met with the Staff Development Administrator at the Nebraska Department of Education, where the focus of the meeting was upon tested programs involving parents that can be used in this Project.

 

Evaluation Activities: School district survey

Timeline: Years 2, 3, 4

Status:

A baseline report was written by each site containing the availability of resources before the beginning of the project (see attachment #5)

Return to top of page

• Objective 3.2 Students in Nebraska's school districts with enrollments of under 1,000 will experience a 50% increase in the use of technology-supported education.

Project Activities:

This objective is under review and will need to be addressed at a future date.

 

Evaluation Activities: School district survey

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status:

Teacher and administrator surveys have been administered to each lead school. These annual surveys were developed using items from the pre-survey, as well as additional items as appropriate.

In addition, working with the Office of Internet Studies and the State Department of Education, a statewide teacher survey was administered during the summer of 1997 to gain an understanding of the amount of technology-supported education currently. The results supported the readiness of Nebraska for activities as supported by this project, and in particular related to the use of Web-based and Internet based curriculum activities.

Estimates related to the general support offered at each of the ESU servers were requested from each of the Internet coordinators by written survey, phone, or electronic mail. The information requested establishes statewide estimates related to the total number of teachers using the Internet, the direct connect access available to users, and evolving support plans. The following cumulative statewide totals were found through feedback from the Internet coordinators at each server site and are current as of August 1, 1997.

Estimates:	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4
Number of statewide users supported by the ESUs:	10,200	20,610	24,526	27,176
Number of "direct connected" schools:	186	306	458	577
Number of planned "direct connects" next year:	170	158	258	2,622
Number of individuals with initial ESU training:	5,800	11,545	16,297	17,520

Return to top of page

The following graph suggests a steady pace of growth over the last 4 years related to the number of users supported by Nebraska's K-12 Internet network and which might take advantage of the curriculum and other model activities developed within the Connections Project (figure 7).

Several areas of support are being targeted related to the telecomputing support offered by the Nebraska Educational Service Units to school districts. These include direct connection assistance related to the school building, planning related to direct connection, and training support. The estimates for the overall number of school buildings within the state was approximately 1356 (with approximately 350 of these as one room country schools). Overall growth in this area is considerable and shows that the progress related to the direct connection of schools across the state is continuing at a steady pace, which should permit the Connections Project to spread easily into other areas of Nebraska (figure 8).

The increases in several of the categories can be partly associated with the implementation of Nebraska Rule 88 related to expanded Internet connectivity. In particular, this process has accelerated the planning for direct Internet connections of school buildings within the next year. The following graph shows this rapid expansion related to planned school building Internet connectivity in Nebraska, which should be able to access the developed Connections Project resources over the Internet (figure 9) .

Consistent with hardware and software advances, the training of teachers has been systematic and consistent in Nebraska, and the Nebraska Educational Service Units are continuing basic Internet training, as well as more advanced training related to the Internet. The Connections Project continues to work closely with state Educational Service Units, especially since the pace of the evolution of the Internet requires consistent, periodic training for teachers. The following graph represents the steady pace and evolution of educator Internet training (figure 10).

Return to top of page

• Objective 3.3 80% of teachers who serve Nebraska's adjudicated and incarcerated youth will demonstrate their ability to use educational technology appropriately in their classrooms and improve the educational achievement of their students.

Project Activities:

It was an exciting year in some respects, a disappointment in others for project participants at the Youth Rehabilitation and Training Centers (YRTC) in Kearney and Geneva, Nebraska. Teachers at both institutions participated in all of the Connections Project combined workshops and completed over 80 hours of additional on site inservice training provided by Connections staff. These training sessions included learning how to use word processing in their classrooms, using presentation and video production software, and some Internet training. It was exciting to have all of the participants in the project actively learning to use technology. It was inspiring to have a 100% attendance rate at all of the workshops. More exciting than the involvement of the teachers in training sessions though was the way they shared their knowledge with their students! Many new projects took place this year that would not have had a chance before last summer. Teachers went beyond everything they were taught and helped inspire dreams in their students--dreams of new ways they could express themselves using technology as a tool rather than a product. Creativity was evident from both the teachers and the students; there was no holding back the power that was unleashed.

Both of these sites deal with a population unique to this and most other projects. The students are incarcerated youth from across the state of Nebraska who are sentenced to the YRTC for girls in Geneva and the YRTC for boys in Kearney. The students are placed in groups of ten to fourteen youth about their own age and are required to spend most of their time with their assigned group both in school and during non-school hours. Many of the youth have had little exposure to up-to-date high technology at their home schools, although a few have done some prior work with computers. The average stay at these facilities is approximately three months which makes it difficult to see a lot of progress in most academic areas. The unique ways the teachers at these facilities have taken what they learned this past year and fashioned a program to help their students develop has been an inspiration to their peers.

Students are using technology to express themselves in ways they never dreamed possible: writing and electronic publishing, electronic presentations and video productions. They are excited about learning and are starting to feel better about what they are doing with their lives. Self-concepts have shown a marked increase because students feel the power they so desperately seek. This time though, that power is being used to help other people. Communication is the key word--students are using technology to tell their own story to other youth who are still in the public school systems. Many of these projects are still in beginning stages but they include talking about being locked up, the problems they have had with their addictions and what it is like to loose one's personal freedom. Technology has now made it possible for them to easily create professional productions that can effectively reach thousands of youth.

Another way students have used technology this year is for self-examination. One might think that their topics would look at some hurting action that they committed or humiliation for some childish behavior, but that is not at all what has transpired. Instead, these students have been able to view themselves on videotape helping other people. They have been able to feel good about their actions and have been encouraged by the reactions of those that they interacted with on the videotape. This has also created an additional method for staff to use for evaluation purposes.

Although only half of the classrooms have computers that are less than 10 years old (obsolete), nearly every youth in a classroom with a computer, has the opportunity to use that technology more that once a week. While the individual is valued, teamwork is stressed as a valuable link in the learning process. As always time is at a premium but teachers are finding unique ways of overcoming the limitations. One such example is in using students as mentors to help each other. A new student coming into the program learns to use technology tools from students who have completed creating their own projects. In this way students have triple exposure to available technology: they learn to use it, they use it, and they teach someone else to use it. All of the students in a class also have the opportunity to view each others' work, to encourage each other and to be inspired by creative techniques that they see in each other.

These examples are just a part of the exciting impact that technology and the Connections Project have had on the youth at these two schools this year. Planning has already started for new and even more powerful ways to use technology to help mold the programs at the schools in the coming year. Much good has occurred this year, but like most stories that involve education there also have been some problems.

The foremost problem was in the Internet connections at both schools. The Kearney site only had a connection to the Internet for about half of the school year; the Geneva site still does not have an Internet connection. This frustration has stifled a lot of projects that teachers had planned for involving students in online projects and investigations. Communication was also very hampered because of the lack of Internet access. It is almost a two-hour drive from Kearney to Geneva and a communication link is vital to effectively helping teachers use technology in their classrooms. Part of the Connections Project design was to make connections between teachers and encourage them to communicate; at these two sites that concept never reached fruition. However, efforts by the administration at both institutions have resulted in a promise of funding from another agency for wiring that will provide Internet access by Fall 1998.

Another major problem our teachers experienced was the lack of sufficient time to develop creative units. This is a problem everywhere in education but still one we are trying to address and work through. Time for training has also caused some trying moments this year. It is hard for teachers to get away from the extra duties that accompany teaching and although our teachers have an excellent record for attending project workshops, some onsite training activities have had to be postponed because of time constraints.

In the final analysis, the teachers of both YRTC facilities have done an excellent job of developing new and exciting programs for their students, despite any barriers that they have had to cross this year. They have not let the "time" factor, lack of equipment, nor absence of Internet access stop them from striving for the best they can provide their students. They all care about their students and to their credit, theproblems they have had, have inspired them to be more creative and work harder to get their students the best education they can.

Evaluation Activities: Teacher survey Classroom observations Student product examples

Timeline: Years 1,2,3,4,5 Years 3, 4, 5 Years 2, 3, 4, 5

Return to top of page

Status:

Teachers from YRTC-Geneva and YRTC-Kearney have taken part in the cumulative project activities and the teacher surveys.

A rubric for classroom observations and the evaluation of student products is also being developed. An example student projects are included in Attachment #6 (video--parts 2- 6)

• Objective 3.4 70% of adjudicated youths, students at YRTC-Kearney, YRTC-Geneva, and the Secure Youth Confinement Facility in Omaha with a stay of three months or longer will demonstrate competence in using computers for word processing and budget management and will be able to access the Internet, World Wide Web, CD-ROM, and other technologies to seek information. Students will use multi-media presentation skills to produce information designed to prevent delinquent behavior by other youths.

Project Activities:

Computer equipment has been installed for both Youth Rehabilitation and Training Centers. The Geneva center for girls operates as a more traditional classroom setting while students at the Kearney center for boys have more individualized instructional programs. Following the summer workshops the teacher representatives from both sites, along with their site coordinator and the project director met to plan appropriate uses of educational technology for their respective students. The Omaha facility is nearing the end of its construction.

Evaluation Activities: Teacher survey Classroom observations

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Years 3, 4, 5

Status:

Planning is underway how best to serve the Youth Training and Rehabilitation Centers through the project, and how best to conduct formative evaluation of the related objectives. The centers have also participated in the ongoing teacher survey process, and a rubric for classroom observation is being developed for use within the project at the centers.

Return to top of page

GOAL 4: Establish partnerships among educators, business, agriculture, industry, and parents to infuse "work world" problem-solving and perspectives across the curriculum and to support student learning.

• Objective 4.1 Business, agriculture and industry partners will work with Connections Project teachers to document integrated problem solving at work in their organizations.

Project Activities:

In the past year, several contacts were made with two industries that are partners with the grant. These industries are Valmont Industries located in Valley, Nebraska, and Sundstrand Aerospace Corporation located in York, Nebraska. The Connections Project staff visited Valmont Industries in August of 1997 and met with Tom Whalen, the plant human resources director. This visitation showed the vastness of this global industry. Later that year in December, Dr. Bundy and Ainsworth Site Coordinator, Rick Ripperger, visited Valmont Industries again to begin a tour of the Valley facility and meet with the new human resources director, Mr. Terry McClain. On January 15, 1998, Mr. Ripperger again visited Valmont Industries but this time with a core teacher from Ainsworth Community Schools. During this visit they toured the second half of the plant. Through the input of the classroom teacher and other Connections Project staff members, it was deemed very difficult to find direct ties between this industry and the core classroom curriculum.

The Connections Project staff was also in contact with Sundstrand Aerospace Corporation located in York, Nebraska. In October of 1997 the Connections Project staff visited the Sundstrand facility. It was through this visitation that we met Ted Balisteri, the corporation's human resources director. Also, during this time we were allowed to tour the plant. It was through this visitation that many of the Connections Project staff observed some very direct ties with the core classroom curriculum. In December of 1997 Dr. Bundy and Rick Ripperger visited Sundstrand to establish a partnership with the new human resource director, Mrs. Sue Cordes. On February 26, 1998, Mr. Ripperger again visited Sundstrand, this time accompanied by two core teachers from Ainswroth Community Schools. It was during this visitation that the teachers and Mr. Ripperger participated in a day-long job shadow. By the end of the day it became very evident that a classroom partnership with this industry was possible. Since this visitation, a team of teachers from Ainsworth Community Schools has been developed. It is the intention of this team to develop an integrated project centered around Sundstrand Aerospace Corporation. The team intends to visit the industry on July 15th and 16th, 1998, for a day-and-a-half job shadow. See attachment #7, a memo to Sundstrand Aerospace Corporation detailing the intention for the summer job shadow.

 

Evaluation Activities: Review of video vignettes produced

Timeline: Years 3, 4, 5

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 3, 4, and 5.

Return to top of page

• Objective 4.2 Examples of "work world" problem-solving documented on videotape and through CD-ROM will be accessible to every teacher in the state for inclusion into their course curricula.

Project Activities:

Each CD-ROM Lab plan for the five lead school sites will have videotaping equipment that will be used with each of the projects business, agriculture and industry partners.

Evaluation Activities: Report on accessibility

Timeline: Years 4, 5 (or upon completion of CD and WWW pages)

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 4 and 5.

Return to top of page

• Objective 4.3 A minimum of 20% of lead school district parents will learn to use computer- based educational resources and will use these resources in family-centered learning projects developed to supplement students' class work.

Project Activities: 

1. The Families, Technology and Education Conference:

Craig Manley and Craig Hicks, site coordinator and technology specialist for the Morrill site, attended the Families, Technology and Education conference in Chicago, Illinois, October 30 - November 1, 1997. The national conference was sponsored by Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) and National Parent Information Network (NPIN) and focused on building partnerships between parents and schools.

 

The conference was well organized, but a number of the sessions did not match their description in the program. Some of the sessions were outstanding, and had ideas that may be incorporated into project activities. The following session provided especially helpful information:

 

- Karen Salinas and Beth Simons, Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships at Johns Hopkins University, have created a web site (http://www.csos.jhu.edu/p2000) that describes the planning process and shares many of the best projects.

 

- Tony Wilhelm, Thomas Rivera Policy Institute, Claremont, California, shared information about how the Hispanic community views the use of technology in the home and at school.

 

- P. Kenneth Komoski, director of Educational Products Information Exchange, described programs where students worked as tutors, for time dollars, to purchase computers. The computers were, for the most part, donated by businesses that were updating their equipment.

 

- Mike Eisenberg related some general ways for parents to become more involved in their child's education. He also described what technology may allow us to do in the future.

 

- Edward J. Degnan, University of Central Florida, described how schools in his area are getting the most use of the technology they purchase. This is done by gathering information from the community, and finding ways that the technology could be used outside of the school day. 

 

2. Letter to Parents--In February, 1998, a letter was sent to parents to determine which students will be selected to participate in this pilot project. The letter is the first step in a selection process that will consider whether the student has a computer at home and identify at-risk students (see attachment #8).

 

3. Form Agreements:

In November, 1997, contacts were made with Terri Austin, Challenge Grant Indiana, and Cristine Pfeifer, Lewis and Clark Middle School, Omaha, Nebraska, who are currently implementing a take-home computer project, to determine best-practice models. Forms from the "Buddy System Project" were altered to meet the needs of the Connections Project (see attachment # 8).

 

4. Work with Teachers:

In December, 1997, and January, 1998, the Morrill and Ainsworth sites began talking with teachers to develop some of the projects that may be used to increase the achievement of at-risk students, and to increase the level of involvement of the parents. Two Connections Project teacher- participants agreed to develop alternative family-centered activities for students selected to participate in the project. The activities would focus on family history and would be accepted for credit in place of current class requirements. The teachers also felt that students would be given credit for homework done on the take-home computers. They could type reports, enter data to graph, compose essays, work on term papers, etc.

 

5. Equipment:

Research was done to determine what type of computer would be best suited for this project. At this time machines have not been ordered, but appropriate computers have been identified that will be purchased for this project. The take-home computer package will consist of remanufactured Gateway Solo 2300, Intel Pentium Processor with MS Office 97 SBE software. The purchase price starts at $1,199.

 

Evaluation Activities: Survey school districts on number of parents attending workshops

Timeline: Years 3, 4, 5

Status:

The teacher survey has been administered and analyzed for formative evaluation and planning. An annual survey will continue, with inclusion of additional items as appropriate.

Return to top of page

• Objective 4.4 Teachers will demonstrate the involvement of project business, industry and agricultural partners to improve student learning across the curriculum.

   

Project Activities:

The Project's site coordinators have responsibilities for working with the other members of the planning team and the teachers in the project in what are called areas of specialization. Our lead site coordinator at Ainsworth has the responsibility to work with the planning team and their respective teachers in developing the Project's connections between the classroom and business, industry and agriculture. Seward's lead Site Coordinator is responsible for curriculum integration by disciplines. Parental involvement in the use of technology in the classroom is the area of specialization for the lead site coordinator in Morrill. The lead site coordinator in Kearney has the responsibility for professional development of teachers. Helping planning team members and teachers understand the theory of constructivism is the area of specialization for the North Platte site coordinator.

 

Evaluation Activities: Teacher survey Years Survey of partner participants

Timeline: Years 3, 4, 5 Years 3, 4, 5

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 3, 4, and 5.

Return to top of page

• Objective 4.5 In partnership with the Indian Center, Inc.'s and its six community-based resource centers, Native American students will have increased access to information about job opportunities, career planning, and the educational requirements for those jobs.

Project Activities:

Several meetings have been held with Indian Center, Inc. officials. These discussions have included the necessary equipment and training needed at each site in order for Native American clients to access the Job Placement files through the Nebraska Department of Labor. The Department of Labor officials have also been included in these meetings. The topics have included software needs; Internet connections and phone connections; and appropriate training needed for each of the sites. Technology Specialists from the Project are visiting each of the Indian Center, inc. sites throughout the state to discuss the above topics.

 

Evaluation Activities: Student survey and follow-up

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status:

A computer usage log at each Indian Center, Inc. site is being kept, detailing the users of the computer and the types of activities performed at the computer (see attachment #9). For example, the Indian Center, Inc. reports that the equipment has been used for the following activities:

1) Basic computer skills practice

2) Keyboarding practice

3) Curriculum based games and skill reinforcement

4) Resumé development

5) Basic office skills

6) Internet

An example of the data from one month of one of the Indian Center is described below:

There were 17 users who varied in age from junior high school to 45 years-old and up. Five percent from the junior high age group used the computer. Eleven percent from the high school age group used the computer. From the age bracket of 18-30, 35% used the computer. From the age bracket of 31-44, 23% used the computer and from the 45 and up age bracket, 17% used the computer. In reasons for using the computer, no one said they used the computer for a job search. Eighteen percent said they used the computer for resume use. Fifty-six percent said they used the computer for computer skills practice. Twelve percent said they used the computer for keyboard practice. Five percent said they used the computer for other reasons.

 

Return to top of page

GOAL 5. Create new communities of educators and students through technology to facilitate shared learning, expanding educational resources and barrier free collaboration across Nebraska and the United States to further the national educational goals of educational reform.

• Objective 5.1 Educators across Nebraska and the U.S. will be able to access Connections Project curriculum, resources and results through the project web site and CD-ROMs, and collaborate with project participants.

Project Activities:

The project's web site is being developed at the University of Nebraska-Omaha. A web site design has been selected by our evaluation team, and the web page is up at the following address: http://ois.unomaha.edu/connections/. Our project's technology specialist at North Platte is working with the planning team and the web site designer to continue to select appropriate software and teacher lesson plan format for inclusion on the web site.

 

Evaluation Activities: Monitor web site usage and CD-ROM distribution

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status:

The web site is available to all World Wide Web users at: http://ois.unomaha.edu/connections/

Some example screen dumps of the innovative and professional looking web site are included in Attachment #10.

The site features a frames approach with a vertical navigational bar on the left. This red bar remains in this frame of the browser throughout one's visit to the site, thus enabling quick navigation going to the different segments of the site. Segments include: About, Evaluation, Business, Partners, Families, Participants, Curriculum Integration, Technology Support, Professional Development, and Your Opinion.

The "About" section takes a visitor to links for the Project Summary, information about the Challenge Grant Planning Team (including phone numbers and email links to facilitate easy contact), The Project Consortium Leadership Council information, and a copy of the New Participant Commitment (application ),which all new participants submit via traditional paper media.

"Evaluation" currently features Reports (including the Evaluation Plan and Year One Server Statistics), Observations (Focus Group feedback), and behind the Teacher Products link one can find movie interviews of the January 1998 Street Fair in North Platte and a section devoted to site level staff development events.

The "Business" and "Partners" sections provide lists of the business and other partners to the grant respectively. Links to web sites are provided where available. The "Families" section provides links to several excellent family resources on the web, such as: "Internet for Parents", Boy and Girl scouts, Strong Families, Strong Schools, Domestic Violence Prevention, Child Abuse Prevention, and Parenting Basics for Strong Families - to name a few.

The "Participant" area is a password-protected Intranet, where participants can go to view a project-wide calendar, a web-based Participant Discussion Forum (that has been demonstrated, but not promoted as of yet), and the Community of Learners Data Base (COL). The COL is where participants upload their units and reflections. Thirty-six teachers have uploaded twenty-five individual units. Teachers have also used this online web form technology to submit reflections upon their work. Further details of this database appear in Attachment #10.

The "Curriculum Integration" piece includes links to Nebraska curriculum references, as well as links to Susan Kovalik and Associates and a few constructivist resources. "Technology Support" provides web visitors with links to Apple Computer, Microsoft, Claris, Digital Chisel Multi-media Software, and a step by step tutorial about making clickable maps from one of the projects Technology Specialists.

"Professional Development" will be the location of pre- and post- information about project-wide professional development experiences, and access to the online Professional Development Reflection/Evaluation Form. Planners have used this feature to electronically access and sort feedback almost instantaneously after a workshop, and have then incorporated adjustments in the very next day's delivery of further activities.

Finally, "Your Opinion" is a place where web site visitors can give feedback to the author(s) of this website. Again to emphasize, this site is undergoing constant review and revision in order to meet the demands of the grant and keep up with cutting-edge web serving technology. Appropriate new software and software upgrades have been purchased and implemented.

Return to top of page

• Objective 5.2 Technology will enable students from across Nebraska and the U.S. to collaborate on learning activities.

Project Activities:

Planning for these activities are continuing during each year of the grant.

 

Evaluation Activities: Teachers logs of collaborative distance-learning or Internet-based projects

Timeline: Years 3, 4, 5

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 3, 4, and 5.

Return to top of page

• Objective 5.3 Educators serving the nation's highest risk students including those in juvenile correctional settings will have access to effective curriculum and instructional resources.

Project Activities:

Planning for the curriculum and instructional resources began following the 1997 summer workshops, and is continuing during each year of the project.

 

Evaluation Activities: Determine whether curriculum modules for juvenile corrections settings are completed and marketed and promoted nationally

Timeline: Years 5

Status:

The assessment is in the planning stages and will be implemented during year 5.

Return to top of page

• Objective 5.4 The Connections Project web site, part of the South Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium's electronic network, will provide efficient access to a comprehensive group of resources relating to the project, curriculum integration and technology in education.

Project Activities:

Planning and development is continuing for the Project's web site. This includes connections with the South Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium.

 

Evaluation Activities: Report on web server resources

Timeline: Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Status:

The Connections web site will be available to all web users and be linked to and from the South Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium's web server. The use is being monitored using the server statistics program.

The South Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium's web site can be accessed at:

http://SCRTEC-NE.unl.edu

Purpose:

The following document is for use in providing a brief overview of the evaluation plan of the project entitled The Connections Project. The project is being conducted under the leadership of the Seward Public Schools in Seward, Nebraska, and is a Technology in Education Innovation Challenge Grant, funded by the U.S. Department of Education.

Return to top of page

Project Background:

The Connections Project., the project of focus for this evaluation plan, is currently completing the second year of full operation, and is a five-year project that links technology and Nebraska state curriculum frameworks to transform the education of K-12 students in Nebraska and nationwide. The Connections project provides four major activities to assist teachers, mentors, and community members in enhancing student learning through integrated curricula supported by technology. The activities include professional development for teachers, curriculum development activities, community connections programs, and statewide and national dissemination of curriculum models and resources through a website and CD-ROMs.

The project will increase the capacity of educators to teach effectively through integrated curriculum reflecting Nebraska frameworks, the creation of a cadre of 600 teachers able to assist colleagues in effective use of curriculum integration and technology, improved achievement by high risk Nebraska students, and the creation of a national and statewide learning community of middle and secondary teachers.

The project is a part of the High-Performance Learning (HPL) Model established as the school improvement effort in Nebraska. The HPL Model allows local school districts to determine how best to meet community needs by providing for a quality education for all students and be accountable to the district patrons and the state that these services are provided.

Nebraska's commitment to education reform includes a commitment to educational technology. Nebraska's satellite, dedicated solely to educational purposes, the established Internet hub sites providing servers, toll-free access, the two way interactive distance learning pods infrastructure, and CD-ROM capabilities, will be the major technologies utilized in this project.

Return to top of page

Evaluation Background:

The Evaluation process for The Connections Project continues to expand and evolve, with evaluation related data being collected and systematically reviewed for formative input into specific project objectives and related project activities. The evaluation design is carefully matched to project activities, and is implementing a five year plan for both formative and summative review (see attached spreadsheet). The evaluation is essentially that of an "impact analysis". In evaluation studies, impact analysis can be defined as "determining the extent to which one set of directed human activities affected the state of some objects or phenomena, and . . . determining why the effects were as large or small as they turned out to be" (Mohr, 1992, p.1). In this examination of the effectiveness of The Connections Project, the evaluation design is focused on analyzing data related to each of the goals and related project objectives. The evaluation determines the general progress and impact of the project on K-12 education in the participating schools, and includes a systematic review of the learning environments for both students and teachers. The evaluation also helps document the project as a potential model for replication by other educational institutions and organizations.

Return to top of page

Evaluation Team:

An evaluation team is derived from the Office of Internet Studies (OIS) in the College of Education at the University of Nebraska - Omaha (UNO). The Evaluation Team consists of the following professionals:

Dr. Neal Grandgenett: Dr. Grandgenett is currently an associate professor of mathematics education within the Department of Teacher Education at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. Dr. Grandgenett is active in the examination of technology based learning environments, and has published over 30 articles and research papers related to the topic. He has also presented at numerous conferences related to educational technology, including the National Educational Computing Conference, The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Conference, and the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education Conference. He co-directs the Office of Internet Studies at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, which coordinates various research and grant activities related to the use of the Internet in the teaching and learning process. He recently was awarded the Paul Kennedy Diamond Professorship for outstanding research and teaching in the field of professional education, related to technology and mathematics education

 

Dr. Neal Topp: Dr. Topp is currently an assistant professor of educational technology within the Department of Teacher Education at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. Dr. Topp recently won the Nebraska Information Technology Professor of the Year award, presented by the Applied Information Management Institute, and is active as an education and business consultant. He is a former teacher and administrator with over 20 years of experience in the public schools and higher education. He has presented at numerous national and international conferences, including the National Educational Computing Conference, The Telecommunications in Education Conference, and the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education Conference. He has published numerous articles in the field, directs several grants related to educational technology, and co-directs the Office of Internet Studies at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. He teaches graduate classes in information technology which include a strong emphasis in networking, educational use of the Internet, and teacher training.

 

Dr. Elliott Ostler: Dr. Ostler is currently an assistant professor of teacher education specializing in mathematics and science education at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. Dr. Ostler is very active in developing technology based learning environments, and is an expert in authentic assessment. Dr. Ostler teaches courses in educational research, instructional technology, and mathematics education, and is working closely with several school districts to help them integrate new curriculum and evaluation standards into their instructional processes. He also has numerous publications and conference presentations related to these areas of expertise. In addition to his secondary and university level classroom experience, Dr. Ostler has served as an evaluation consultant on many technology based grants, including federal grants in excess of 5 million dollars.

Return to top of page

Process:

The evaluation process uses multiple sources of information, and includes a comprehensive approach to data collection that is targeting information related to each project goal and objective. These data types include: 1) teacher survey data, 2) electronic data, such as electronic logs, 3) classroom observations and site visits, 4) teacher and student interviews, 5) student projects and portfolios, 6) teacher focus groups, 7) student focus groups, 8) standardized and teacher created test data, and 9) state surveys. All data is summarized and placed within a World Wide Web page format that is available for review by the project staff, participants, and interested stakeholders. The URL is http://ois.unomaha.edu/connections/ for the full evaluation portfolio of the Connections Project.

Return to top of page

Timeline:

Attached is the formal evaluation timeline previously filed with the U.S. Department of Education, and used for formal evaluation planning within the project (see attachment #11).

Status:

The evaluation process emphasizes the blend of both quantitative and qualitative data analysis, with conclusions and implications for each objective based on multiple sources of data. The status of each project objective (along with organizational goals and related evaluation activities) is summarized in the report narrative. The overall evaluation process is well established and underway, and continues to evolve and expand with new interactive capabilities on the world wide web, such as interactive forms.

The evaluation activities draw upon comprehensive data collection procedures that use both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Evaluation work continues to provide useful formative evaluation information to the project, and helps represent the project to various stakeholders. Teachers benefit from reflecting on their project activities and provide important feedback information in surveys, over the listserv, and in personal interviews. Classroom visitations and observations are also conducted. The evaluation teams web page contributes to the historical and portfolio process for representing the project, and assists in project related dissemination of products of use to other projects and educators, such as the curriculum examples, developed instruments, data summaries, and electronic copies of formal reports. This page is also being used as a data collection tool, focused on continual electronic feedback from participants.

Return to top of page

Finally, evaluation work continues on systematic longitudinal evaluation processes, which will help document the overall implementation model of the project. Each of these processes are more fully described within the project report, and through access of the project evaluation web page at http://ois.unomaha.edu/connections/.

IV. Budget--Year 2

DESCRIPTION	ORIGINAL BUDGET, CARRYOVER FUNDS, FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT	MONEY SPENT	MONEY TO BE SPENT	BALANCE	NOTES
SALARIES:
Project Director	41,250	24,062	17,188	0
Fin & Cler Asst	36,483	21,281	15,202	0
Site Coordinators:
North Platte	40,000	28,000	12,000	0
Ainsworth	32,000	18,666	*	*	Site Coordinator has resigned, balance depends upon timing of replacement
Morrill	34,000	19,833	14,167	0
Seward	28,000	16,333	11,667	0
ESU#10	36,000	21,000	15,000	0
Technology Spec'list
ESU 6	23,100	0	23,100	0	Position purchased for summer workshop, presentations & speakers
ESU 13	23,100	10,448	7,463	5,189	Position shifting to a contract position with ESU 13
ESU 16	23,100	10,318	7,370	5,412	Technology specialist retiring, replacement TBD
ESU 17	23,100	7,446	5,319	10,335	Discussions regarding salary continuing
Seward	18,050	10,529	7,521	0
Carryover	23,000	13,417	9,583	0
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
Project Administrator	8,250	4,812	3,438	0
Fin/Cler. Asst.	7,297	4,256	3,041	0
Benefits, cont.
Site Coordinators	22,000	12,833	9,167	0
Technology Spec'list	22,092	12,887	9,205	0
Carryover	39,119	39,119	0	0
EMPLOYEE TRAVEL	30,662	13,321	17,341	0
Carryover	11,776	11,776	0	0
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES
Student Use Equipment	90,000	18,000	*	*	* These funds are for high risk students to take portable computers home. Morrill is the model site for this activity and is the only site to have spent funds to date. May need to carry remainder over to Year 3 as we are awaiting model site results before expending rest of the funds.
Kearney Equipment	5,400	5,400	0	0
SOFTWARE	3,125	0	3,125	0
Carryover	21,000	20,000	1,000	0
OFFICE SUPPLIES
North Platte	3,150	1,243	1,907	0
Ainsworth	3,150	190	2,960	0
Morrill	3,150	1,138	2,011	0
Seward	4,200	2,200	2,000	0
ESU 10	3,700	500	3,200	0
Off. Supplies, cont.
Project Director	5,000		5,000
CONSULTANTS & CONTRACTS
Expert Consult'ts	7,826	0	7,826	0	Summer Workshop Funds
Curric. Dev.	44,625	0	44,625	0	"
School Board Planning Work	7,650	0	7,650	0	"
Distance- Learning Work	4,500	0	4,500	0	"
Carryover	41,430	41,430	0	0
OTHER
Evaluation	79,935	39,967	39,968	0
Teleconference	10,000	0	*	*	May need to carry-over. After Lead Cadre are trained funds will be used.
Video-taping	5,000	1,000	4,000	0
INDIRECT COSTS	17,069	0	17,069	0
FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT	19,783	15,600	4,183	0

1. Summer '97 Workshop

2. MidWinter Workshop (January 30-31, 1998)

3. Teacher Survey, May 1998

4. Summer '98 Workshop for Teacher-Participants

5. Seward Baseline Report

6. Video: Nebraska Connections Project -- Y.R.T.C. Perspective

7. Letter to Sundstand Industries

8. Parent Partnership Program documents

9. Indian Center log

10. Website frames

11. Evaluation Planning Sheet

A:\ANLRPTY2.DOC September 29, 1998

Return to top of page

Last updated 9/22/99. Copyright: Connections Project 1999. Contact: Susan Dahm (sdahm@nde.state.ne.us), 402-471-8574.