ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 

 

 

 

We want to thank the many people who have contributed to these program descriptions.  In particular, we want to thank school district staff who provided information on programs currently being utilized effectively in the State of Nevada.  In addition, we want to thank the Department of Education and Dr. George C. Hill, University of Nevada, Reno, for the information provided on the effectiveness of the programs.

 

Legislative Committee on Education

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PREFACE

 

The purpose of this book is to provide educators with information regarding research-based remediation programs that have been approved by the Legislative Committee on Education and the State Department of Education as being successful in improving the academic achievement of pupils in the subject areas of reading, writing, mathematics and science.  Please note that these programs should be viewed as only one piece of a comprehensive plan for improvement for your schools, and should not be considered an isolated “fix-all” for your pupils.  In choosing a research-based remediation program, school principals and faculty must thoughtfully consider the needs of their students, as well as the philosophy of their school.      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                        INTRODUCTION

 

At the national and state levels, multitudes of efforts are in progress to set high standards for student learning.  State policies are being set to challenge, support, and monitor schools as they work to improve learning for all students.  Incentives for improvement and sanctions for continued low performance are being established.  At the same time, a number of remediation programs across the country are beginning to demonstrate the ability to increase the academic achievement of students.  With the state standards movement maturing and with increasing numbers of remedial program developers showing data to support the effectiveness of their designs, the state is set for education reform.  (Catalog of School Reform Models: First Edition; Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (NWREL), 1998.)

 

The Nevada Education Reform Act (NERA) of 1997 established a structure for the Legislature to view the public education system as a whole; to establish a statewide mission statement; to formulate a series of goals; to identify policies and programs that foster change; and generally to set the tone for reform and improvement.

 

The preamble of the bill and members of the Legislative Committee on Education have established guiding principles for NERA:

 

Ø      Nevada=s system of public education must support high standards for all students and high expectations that they will achieve those standards;

Ø      The state must invest its efforts and its resources in education programs that produce results tied to achieving those standards; we can no longer afford unproductive policies and programs;

Ø      The process of reform must create a cohesive structure.  The standards developed under the reform act should be linked to the new statewide assessments.  In the same manner, technology, accountability, remediation, and school improvement must be built into that same structure.

 

As a part of NERA, the Legislative Committee on Education is required to recommend to the Department of Education programs of remedial study that have proven to be successful in improving the academic achievement of pupils in the subject areas of reading, writing, mathematics and science.  The Legislative Bureau of Educational Accountability and Program Evaluation, with assistance from the Department of Education and other education consultants, developed a List of Effective Remedial Programs (21 programs) and presented this list to the Legislative Committee on Education in March 1998, with an updated List provided to the Committee in January 1999, March 2000, and January 2001.  Upon approval of each List by the Committee, the following recommendations were made:

 

1.      The programs should undergo an on-going process of evaluation to determine their continued effectiveness on increasing the academic achievement of low performing students; and

2.      Additional programs should be reviewed for possible inclusion on the List.

 

 

For this year, staff again convened to review the entire list of 31 approved programs, as well as 28 new programs that were submitted for review.  Based upon the review, staff recommended that one (1) program be added to the List.  The final list of 32 programs was presented to the Legislative Committee on Education on January 9, 2002; the Committee approved the List as presented.  The State Department of Education adopted this same list of programs on January 14, 2002.

 

Sources of Information

 

Sources utilized to obtain information on programs include the following:

 

·        State of Nevada School Districts

·        Show Me the Evidence!  Proven and Promising Programs for America=s Schools; Slavin, Robert E. and Fashola, Olatokinbo S.

·        Catalog of School Reform Models, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory

·        Blueprints for School Success: A Guide to New American Schools Designs, Educational Research Service

·        Results Based Practices Showcase, Kentucky Department of Education

·        Educational Programs That Work, National Diffusion Network

·        Ten Promising Programs for Educating All Children, Education Research Service - Arlington, Virginia

 

Criteria for Selection

 

The following set of criteria were used to review the programs:

 

Intended Audience

 

·        Grade Level

·        Types of Students (Gifted and Talented; At-Risk; Title I; English Language Learners; Special Education; Bilingual; Mainstream; Race)

 

Description of the Program

 

·        Type of Reform (Comprehensive or Curricular)

·        Subject Matter (Reading, Writing, Mathematics, or Science)

·        Length of Time Program has been Implemented

·        Locations of Implementation (in Nevada?)

·        Number of Students Already Served

·        Private (for profit) or Non-Profit

·        Goals of the Program

·        Types of Activities/Content (how is the program delivered and when)

·        Time Line for Effectiveness

 

Alignment of Program to Nevada Standards and State Examinations

 

·        Since FY 1999-00, programs on the List are required to submit information on how closely aligned the content of the program is to Nevada’s new state standards.  If the program has an assessment, alignment to the state required norm-referenced test is also required. 

 

Evidence of Effectiveness

 

·        3rd Party (independent) Evaluations

·        Self Evaluations

·        Program has been Replicated

 

Requirements for Implementation

 

·        Professional Development for Teachers

·        Equipment/Materials Needed

 

Costs

 

·        Professional Development

·        Equipment/Materials

·        Cost Per Student

 

Program Information

 

The following document provides descriptive information about each program adopted.  Information includes:

 

·        Evidence of Effectiveness

·        Program Description

·        Aspects of Reading Addressed by the Program (as appropriate)*

·        Correlation to Nevada State Standards

·        Teacher Support

·        Equipment Requirements

·        Costs

·        Contact Information

·        Location in Nevada where the program has already been implemented

 

*Definitions for the six (6) aspects of reading are as follows:

 

Phonemic Awareness

 

Ability to hear and say the separate sounds in words.

Phonics

 

Recognition of letters and the understanding of sound-symbol relationships.

 

Vocabulary

 

Recognition and understanding of words encountered in text.

 

Fluency

 

Reading with a rapid and expressive tone. 

 

Comprehension

 

Ability to construct meaning from different types of texts, both at a literal level and at a conceptual level of understanding that allows the student to extend meaning beyond the text.

 

For further information regarding any of the programs included in this booklet, or in the event that you are aware of a researched-based effective program that was not included in this document, please contact Mindy Braun, Education Program Analyst (LCB Fiscal Division) at 684-6821.  It is the intent of the Legislative Committee on Education that this List be reviewed and updated on a regular basis so that the contents remain current with new trends and technology in remedial education programs.

 

This document may also be accessed at:

 

www.leg.state.nv.us/Division/Fiscal/LeBeape.cfm