Search

Noting that many children in the United States are not well nourished despite the recent economic boom, the state of Maryland began the Maryland Meals for Achievement (MMFA) program, a demonstration project to see if providing a classroom breakfast free to all students can improve student nutrition and academic achievement. This interim report summarizes and explains findings from the MMFA program. The MMFA project was implemented in six Maryland school districts in fall 1998, with comparison schools selected from the same district as participating schools. Evaluation data were obtained from surveys, school records, and individual interviews with administrators, teachers and other school staff, parents, and students. The findings indicated that the classroom breakfast program was associated with improved student achievement, behavior, and attention, and decreased school absences and complaints of hunger. The overall conclusion of the report is that the Maryland Meals for Achievement has led to modest but educationally important improvements for participating students. Two appendices contain overheads summarizing the findings and the data collection instruments. (KB)

Maryland's School Improvement Through Instructional Process (SITIP) program involves all 24 local education agencies in implementing one or more of the following research-based instructional models: Active Teaching, Mastery Learning, Student Team Learning, and Teaching Variables. Following a review of background information, state education agency initiatives and assistance activities are described, an evaluative overview is presented, and local impact is discussed. The state initiatives consisted of planning, training activities, and technical assistance to local education agencies. Planning was flexible, interactive, ongoing, and based on an open systems approach, resulting in a high degree of local participation and commitment to the program at nearly all sites. State-sponsored training activities included an assistant superintendent's retreat, an instructional leadership conference, and followup workshops. Technical assistance was provided by an eight-person team that provided statewide leadership while encouraging local ownership and that developed networks and teaching/learning opportunities for local teams to share successes and build expertise. Impacts of the SITIP program on student achievement, student attitudes, teacher's knowledge of models, school environment, and administrators and central office staffs are reported, along with concerns and recommendations by local SITIP participants. (TE)

This study examined the roles, functions, and effectiveness of a group of teachers who became Instructional Leaders (ILs), assuming major responsibility for assuring the implementation of a voluntary school improvement program within their respective schools. The program, called SITIP (School Improvement Through Instructional Process), and initiated by the Maryland State Department of Education, supported local education agencies in their adoption and implementation of four research-based instructional models: Active Teaching; Mastery Learning; Student Team Learning; and Teaching Variables. Data were collected for the IL study from local educators, students, and state technical assistants in the form of observational interviews, questionnaires, and document analysis. Factors or conditions related to the success of teachers as ILs are summarized in the form of recommendations. For a teacher to be successful as an IL: (1) implementation in the first year should be limited to the teacher's school; (2) ILs should be given sufficient time to plan and develop enough materials for a complete course before implementation begins; (3) the IL should be involved from the initial phases of planning and training; (4) IL expertise in the instructional model is necessary; (5) IL leadership style should be democratic; (6) the two key tasks of the IL are training and coaching other teachers in the innovation; and (7) administrative support is essential for IL success. (JD)

The impact of the School Improvement Through Instructional Process (SITIP) program in Maryland schools was studied. The program encouraged application of research on planned change to implement one or more of four instructional models: Active Teaching, Mastery Learning, Student Team Learning, and Teaching Variables of "content" and "time." The study addressed four areas: impact, implementation, dissemination, and technical assistance. The extent of program impact was measured on educators and students through the use of questionnaires, interviews, observation, document analyses, and student assessment. The SITIP design was perceived as: (1) encouraging collaboration between the schools and the State Department of Education; (2) increasing communication using a common knowledge base about school and classroom effectiveness; and (3) helping local education agencies establish cross-hierarchical teams with the purpose of improving instruction. The models were perceived by local educators as having both subjective and objective value. Teachers' positive opinions had as much influence as standardized test data in determining program maintenance or expansion. Teachers' negative opinions or concerns had little influence in determining maintenance or expansion but did influence the relative impact of the project. Twelve tables are included. (JD)

The impact of the School Improvement Through Instructional Process (SITIP) program in Maryland schools was evaluated. The program encourages application of research on planned change to implement one or more of four instructional models: (1) Active Teaching--emphasis on direct instruction, review and discussion of homework, individually supervised seatwork, weekly review, and maintenance; (2) Mastery Learning--objectives broken down into prerequisite and component skills, instruction aligned with objectives to be mastered, "no-fault" testing, corrective work, and testing of final mastery of objectives; (3) Student Team Learning--peer tutoring and team competition for facilitating student learning; and (4) Teaching Variables--two variables strongly related to student achievement,"content" and "time," are emphasized, with ongoing observation supporting and evaluating classroom instruction, assessment of prior learning, alignment of curriculum objectives to testing instruments, and evaluation of the effectiveness of student engaged time. This publication contains six sections. Section I is the introduction; section II contains an overview of Maryland's school improvement program. In section III, an evaluation overview is presented. Section IV discusses state initiatives and assistance. Section V outlines local implementation and program impact. Section VI contains the summary and conclusions. Included are 64 tables and 10 charts and figures. (JD)

This paper summarizes the first 18 months of Maryland's School Improvement through Instructional Process (SITIP) program, begun in fall 1980. Four general methods of data collection were used for the project: observation, interviews, questionnaires, and document analysis. Of Maryland's 24 local education agencies (LEAs)--Baltimore City plus 23 counties--19 submitted proposals and implemented plans responding to SITIP. Of 455 teacher-administrators at 58 schools in these 19 LEAs who were invited to respond to the general survey, 329 completed and returned it. The Maryland State Department of Education selected four categories of research-based innovations for improving academic instruction, including more active teaching and student team learning. Implementation strategies were also limited to four, from districtwide to single school (lighthouse approach). The document provides planning, training, and implementation descriptions for the roles and responsibilities of state education agency staff, local educators, central office staff, school-based administrators, and teachers. Conclusions indicate that while, for example, state education agency staff should initiate and encourage participation, build and maintain commitment, and provide assistance as resource coordinators, teachers should carry out classroom implementation and function as "project directors" if administrators do not take on that responsibility. (JBM)

All 24 of Maryland's county school systems participated in a voluntary school improvement program that involved the adoption and implementation of one or more of four research-based, instructional processes: Active Teaching, Mastery Learning, Student Team Learning, and Teaching Variables. A 5-year study of this program produced findings on a number of research topics. Findings in two of these topic areas are discussed in this paper: identification of the characteristics associated with institutionalization of innovations, and identification of the factors best predicting the institutionalization of innovations at the school and district levels. The paper briefly reviews related research, then describes the study methodology. Data collection methods used in the 180 schools involved in the program included analyzing local and state documents, observing training events and classroom implementation activities, evaluating annual questionnaire responses from representative program participants, and interviewing project coordinators and implementers. Successful institutionalization was associated with three types of factors: procedural, policy, and organizational. The strongest predictors of institutionalization were administrative support and instructional gain. Districtwide institutionalization correlated strongly with school institutionalization. Institutionalization failed where there was little evidence of instructional gain in the first year and where staff, program, or organizational changes were prevalent. (PGD)

This report on trends in school improvement test results presents an analysis and synthesis of 1978-1984 student performance data from four state-mandated testing programs: (1) the Educational Quality Assessment Program in Pennsylvania; (2) the Minimum Basic Skills Program in New Jersey; (3) the Delaware Educational Assessment Program in Delaware; and (4) the California Achievement Tests in Maryland. Although the overall goal of each state program is assessing performance related to designated learning objectives, the programs vary widely in basic content and analytic approach. The assessment analyzed performance data at the elementary, intermediate, and secondary levels of schooling, focusing on year-to-year trends. The analysis had two major components: (1) assessment of the common performance areas of reading and mathematics; and (2) the assessment of unique performance areas which addressed content skills only with a particular state (self-esteem, understanding others, writing, interest in school, social responsibility, knowledge of law and government, health, creativity, career awareness, appreciating human accomplishments, and knowledge of human accomplishments, in Pennsylvania; spelling and language, in Delaware; and language, in Maryland). The findings suggest that student achievement performance trends in the four state regions are generally positive and consistent with results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Long term trends tend to be most positive at the elementary level and decrease at the intermediate and secondary levels, suggesting that more attention be given to school improvement programs aimed at secondary education. (BS)