ERIC ED226565: Gifted Science Project: Evaluation Report

a OtIFUMENT RESUME EC 151 060 ED 226.565 Emanuql, Elizabeth, Ed., Gifted Science Project: Evaluation Report. Montgomery County Public Schools, Roc...

0 Downloads 21 Views
a

OtIFUMENT RESUME

EC 151 060

ED 226.565

Emanuql, Elizabeth, Ed., Gifted Science Project: Evaluation Report. Montgomery County Public Schools, Rockville, Md. 1 Aug 80 75p.; The project title is "A Supplementary Educational Service for Gifted Students and Thein Teachers--Science." For related information, see EC 151 059-061. Reports*- Evaluative/Feasibility (142) Tests/Evaluation Instruments (160).

AUTHOR

Ott,'Susan I.,..;

TULE INSTITUTION PUB DATE NPIE

.

PUB TYPE

.

.

MF01/PC03,P1us Postage. *Educational Resources; Elementary Education; Enrichment; *Gifted; *Instructional Materials; Material Development; Microfiche; Program Evaluation; ,/ *Science Programs

EDRS PRICE DESCRIPTORS 9

1

ABSTRACT'

*

,The document contains the evaluation' report on the. Gifted Science PrOject in Montgomery County, Maryland, a program to ,identify resources for students in grades 3-8 who are motivated in science. The Project's primary product is a Project Regource *(PRF) listing people, places, and published-materials that can be used by individual students. An introductory chapter provides a general overview, and descriptions of the Project Resource File evaluation obiectives, the sample population, and evaluation instEuments and, methodology. Chapter,II notes that results of the utikization study.indicate the PRF offered students poRsibilities not -preiqouslx.availabie: Subsequent chapters cover recommendations for prO§ram revisions, PRF revisions, development of instructional and

enOchment objectives, cost analysis; and a prOgram summary. Tables, additional information and sample,forms make up at least half the dodument. (sw) /'

toty):

c..

*ft**** *******************t******************************************* * R productions supplied by EDRS are the-best ti4t -can be made * * k from the original document. *********************************************************************** t,

.

.

.

lo

.:

U.S. DEPAMMENT OF EDUCATION . NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

I

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IERICI

I

e

//fills

document has been reproduced ts received from ttle person or olganization

urv

oricanatmo it

.

Minor chawes have been made to improve reproduction quality

,

.

Points of view or ocunions stated in this docu ment do not necessarily represent official NIE posmon or policy

ii,

(NJ

(

UJ

MONTG;MERYAOUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Rockville, Maryland A

Ns

EVAfUATION REPORT ON THE GIFTED SCIENCE PROJECT

,

)

Ulla

Vis

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS, BEEN GRANTED BY

A

a

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)"

C4

,

\,

'3-

.

Edward Andrews Superinpndent of Schools

,August 1, 1980

'a.

.) 5

. 1a

,e"

-GIFTED SCIENCE PROJECT STAFT

John R. Pancell,a _Coordinator, SeCondary Science and Project Director rj

Gerard F. Consu4gra Science Specialist

.

'

Susan L. Ott Evaluation Specialist 4

DOCUMENT PREPARED BY: law

Susan L. Ott Writer

I.

Elizabeth Emanuel Editor ar

This project was supported4in part by Grantor Project Number 30-77-3-16-0039, 1977 - 1980, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title IV-C. The project title is "A Supplementary Educational Service for Gifted Students end Their Teachers--Science."

t.) et

'CONTENTS o,

#

'

Yage

4

Of°Tables y

List

iv ,

List of Appendixes

v

'Introduction

J..

0 Geneeal OveNview cl Projece'Resource File" ,Evatuaion Objectives ... ,.. :.. Description of Sample Population 1. Tryout SchoolS Stpdents 2.

A. B. C.

,

1

.

D.

3,-; Teachers

1

.

..

.

.

,

.

.

.

.

..

.

2

.

2 2 3

4

A

Media Specialists . Resource Persons Description of Evaluation Instrumeits The Student Envelope 1. / 2. Teacher Notes Report No. 1 prior Experiences Report No. 2 3. Teacher Feedback Report No. 3 4. Student Feedback Report No. 4 5. 4.

4

.

4

5.

E.

.

6. 7. 8.

9.

10:

and* Methodollogy

.

.

.

.

es'

/

5 5 5

.

.

.

-

-

.

B.

C.

D.

Summary ...

6 7 7 7

.

5.

6 '6

Resource Person Feedback Report No. 8 The Informal Principal Survey

Interpretation '

5

,-.

Summary Comments, Repoh No). 5 Media Specialist Report No. ,6 Resource Survey Report No. 7

4.

5

.

Assessment of Program Eflec-iiveness Utilization Study A. Utilization pf Resources Prior to the Project 1. Resource Persons a. Published Materials 13_, . Other Resources c. Uses of Resources During the Project Tryout 2. Comparison of Use Prior to and During the Project Tryout 3.

II.

8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9

.

10

r

Assessment of Re4ources and Services 1.' Students 111 2. Teachers Media Specia14sts 3. Principals 4. Assessment,of Student Science Attitddes, Summary of Program Effectiveness

11 11

13

14

.15 17

.

.

IV.

sr.

4

'18 18

..

19'

RecomTendations for Revisions of the Project Resource Retrievak, N System t A. Teachers B. Media Specialists

20 20 20

Development of Instructional and Enrichment Objectives

21

-,-.

.

:

V.

Cost Analyses

VI.

Summary

VII.

4

4

18

: It-

,

1

10

Recommendations for Program Revisions Teachers A. B. Principals

ITI.

-

1

t;)

.

22 31

4

S.

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Total Number of, Resources Used Before and During Gifted Scicnce'Project Tryout, Octeober.1, 1979 r Januaryt al, -

190

32

, .

<

i. 00'

II

III

IV

,

Use of Different Resources During the Gifred Science Project-Tyyout, October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

'433

Resource Persons Used Before and During the Gifted Science Project Tryout, October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

34

Supplementary Information,Oftained,from Resource,Persbns *During Gifted Science Project Tryout% October'1, 1979 January 31, 1980

.35

Student Assessment of Resources.Used During Gifted qcience Prolect Tryout, October A, 1979 - JanUary 31, 1980

361,

'

Student Attitude Toward Resources'Used Duting.Gifted Science Project Tryout, (By Catiegury), October.1, 1979 r January 31, 1980 ..

VII '

VIII

X

XI

Student Attitude Toward Resources 1.1§n Dur-ing Gifted Science Project Tryout (By Grade), October 1, 1979January 31, 1980

- 38

Student Report of atisfaction with Resodrce Used DuringGifted Science Project Tryout, October 1, 1919 January 11, 1980

39

Student Request for Other kcience Help fromGifted.Science Project, October 1, 1979 - Jarivah 31, 1980

40.

Teacher Aspessment of Gifted Science Project, Octobwr 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

41

Student Attitude Change as Reported by Teachers and Resource Persons During the Gifted Science Project,. October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

42

-

XII

37

Student Experiences as Reported by Teachernd Resource Persons During the Gifted Science Proiect, October 1, 197'§ - January 31, 1980

-iv-

43

.

L

LIST OF APPENDIXES

1.1IY& 4.

.ippendix A

Resource,Categories and Examples Project,Resource File

the 45 4

,

Appendix W

Project Objectives

46

Apptndix C

Reports 1 4- 8

48

Appendix D*

Match of Project Reports With Evaluative Objectives

i Appendix E

A Policy Statement.on Education of Gifted end Taldited Students

I.

A.

INTRODUCTION

GENERAL OVERVIEW

,The Gifted Sciencd Project (GSP) was federallY funded under the Elementary and Secondary Education,Act (ESEA), Title IV-Cf for the identification of iesources for individual gifted students in Grades 3-8. The project was funded for 3 years. During the first year, 1977-78, the staff collected, organized, and classifieeicience resources. An &valuation plan was developed, and reports were designed to collect information on the effectiveness of the project. During the second year, 1978-79, the project was implemented on. trial basIs in 15'public schools and 1 Catholic school, and data were ollected on its use. At the conclusion of the third year of the proje 1979-80, project materials were revised and prepared for countywide implementation. The results of the evaluation effort were analyzed, and they form the basis of this report. ,

PROJECT RESOURCE FILE

,

The primary product of the Gifted Science Projett is a microfiche file (the Project Resource File, or PRF), listing people, places, and publishedmaterials that can be used by individual gifted students. The PRF was designed to support the Program of Studies of. the Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS). The resources in the PRF are indexed as follows:

./

GRADE LEVEL

3 through 8

TOPIC

Energy Lab Skills - alture of Science Living Things Living Things - Environment Matter Universe in Change

CATEGORY (see appendix A for definitions)

Activities Awards and Competitions Career Information Courses, Lectures, and Seminars libraries Mentors Project Ideas Science Processes Visits

4

.

C. -EVALUATION OBJECTIVES

Two sets of objectives were included in the grant proposal: developmental and.evaluative (see appenditc B). The developmental objectives delineated the specific activities that would be conducted to produce the PRF and implement the projeCt in the schnols. The evaluative objectives detailed the activities that would be carried out to assess the products and services developed during the course of the project. Eight evalua tion reports were designed to colledt data to meet these evaluation objectives. These reports are shown in apOendix C. A table showing the correlation of these rekorts with objectives is shown in appendix D.

D.

DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE POPULATION

1.

Tryout Schools

1

Sixteen schools participated in the GSP tryout. Fifteen were Montgomery County public schools, and one was a local Catholic school. Count sChools were chosen by--each area administrative office, using the following criteria: 1.

Two elementary schools and one junior high school Would be chosen from each Administrative area..

2.

Schools would remain open throughout the 1979 and(1980 school years.

3.

Schools would be using the Science Instructional System (SIS), an objectives-based program being developed within MCPS for. Grades K.78.

Nll the county schools chosen to particiloate in the project met the first two criteria. All but two of the schools met the third criterion, and these tWo were selected because of special science and gifted programs that(had been implemented: Though these two schools were not p,art of the SIS, they-were provided with the SIS materials and given an orientation session.

The one Catholic school that participated in the project was chosen through-egotiations with the Archdiocese of Washington after letters of invitation to join the Gifted ScienCe Project had been sent to independent and Catholic school organizations.

,

In February 1979 an in-serVice training session was held for the principal, media specialist, end at least one'teacher of each tryout school. At this meeting, the first edition of the PRY (still under in-service manual were distributed. These materials development) and remained in the schools on a pilot basis for the rest of the 1978-79

-2-

.

School year. The project staff offered to assist the schools inItheir use of the materials; however, only limited upe was made of,the PRF, as a result of its late introduction. Although use was limited, a number of revisions were made to_bOth the,PRF and the in-service manual, based on feedback from teachers who had used the file and the experiences of the project staff. These revised materials:were prepared for use in the tryout period (October 1, 1979 to January 31, 1980) on which thisdreport is based.

9

Because of the limited use of the file during'its introduction in spring 1979., the offer of project staff..to help schools was reaffirmed in fall 1979 and accompanied by a list of specific tasks that the staff These included interviewing students, completing reports, and, would do. This offer was making arrangements with resource persons and parents. followed up by individual contacts, and all loit one of the schools accepted. As a result, GSP staff went to 15 schools and performed one or more of the duties.described above. The use of the PRF described in this report is based largely on arrangements made by GSP staff. There were in9tances, however, where teachers did use the PRF and arrange for student use of resources; and these are also cited in this report.

2.

Students

The students.who participated in the project were selected by the Schools were asked to principal and teachers of each tryout school. follow the guidelines for identifying the gifted and talented specified The actual proceby Montgomery County.Public Schools (see aTipendix E). dures used, however, varied With each school, since these guidelines had not been fully implemented in the county. Some schools attempted to i identify each ilifted student in Grades 3-8, others chose only one class or grade witterubich to start, and others selected only one or two students. Evaluation information on this selection process was not collected. According to estimates from the area specialistsjor gifted and talented, there are approximately 1,100 gifted students in Grades 3-8 in the 15 county schools. .

Because of the differedt approaches to selection and the varying numbers of participating students in each school, no comparisons between schools were planned as part of this evaluation. All the analyses in this reprt are based on the total number of studen$.9 whp used the PRF, regardless of school. As described above, the GSP staff helped 1a,spf the tryout schools in They interviewed students at all the schools--a total a number of ways. For each student, of 214 students, ranging from 1 to 48 at a school. GSP staff selected5 resources from the PRF and completed Teacher Notes

-.3-

)

1 (see appendix C). In sone ceses, they returned the materi-, als to the teacher, who then chose the resaurces to be used/and arranged for their use. If staff help was requested, the GSP staff again talked With the student to, determine which,resource(s) he/she was interested in and then arranged for the student to use the resource(s). Two teachers selected resources at their own and arranged for their use by students.

Repoit No.

Information received indicated that 114 students we;p to have used at least 1 resource during the tryout- period. Of these, feedback reports verified that 103 (46 girls and 57 boys),had used a resource'. Attempts to obtain feedback information on the remaining 11 students Were unsuc-. cesáfUl; ie is not known whether they used a resource.

3.

s)

Teachers

There were 131 teachers teaching Grades 31 .during the tryout period in the 16 tryou6 schools. They were requesteeto complete a Teacher Feedback Report No. 3 (see appendixC) for each stuaent use of a resource. Whether3or not they had a student,who had used the PRF, all the teachers were requestecito complete a Summary Comments Report No..5 (see appendix C).

4.

Media Specialists

The media specialists in the 15 county schools provided information by filling out Media Specialist Feedback Report No. 6 (see appendix C). The Catholic school was not askedgto completethis report, since it did not have a person in this position. -

5.

Resource Persons

A resource person is one who was in a position to have_One7to-one contactwith a student. The categories Activities, Awards, and_Competitions, and Mentors include tesource persons. Other categories either include contact persons who do not work one-to-ode with the student (Courses, Lecturesi and Seminars; Libraries) or include both persons and other types of resource& (e.g., Visits includes both persons and places). Fo consistencyin the analyses to follow, only persons listed under the categories of Activities, Awards and Competitions, and Mentors are considered resource persons. These Were asked to complete a Resource gerson Feedback Report No. 8 (see appendix C) for each student with whom they worke4.

There are 91 resource persons listed in'the PRY; 30 are women, 5 are black, and 3 are, members of other minority groups. Most of these resource persons completed a Resource Survey.Report No. 7 (see appendix C) to indicate whether they had helped a student prior to the tryout (see discussion in section E.8).

-:4-

2.*

E.

DESCRIPTION OF EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS AND METHOPOLOGY

I.

The Student Envelope

.

%

.

-

: .

c

.

.

.

The Student Envelr. ope provided a place where all information concernThirty envelopes were delivered to ing a,single student could be kept. each school, each One containing 5.TeaCher Notes Report No. I, I Prior Experiences Report No. 2 (see appendix C), a Teacher Checklist, and 5 interoffice mail envelopes for.returning reports to the GS,P office. The cher Checklist told the teacher how to arrange for a student to use a source and'how to fill out the JrInuired reports. The'reports themselves i are explained in more detail in the following paragraphs.

it

,

2.

Teacher Notes Report No.

I

_

Report No. I (see appendix C) was developed to obtain preliminary information on usage and, to help teachers keep records of each resource information identifying the student, use; This report has *six parts: teacher, and school; tnformation on the resource; space fo notes about the contact with the resource; information on the use of the resource; expected dates of use; and person working with the student. This report has a duplicate sheet and a carbon and includes directions for one copy to be sent to the GSP office after the use of a resource has been arranged.

,

..

3.

Prior Experiences Report No. 2

Report No. 2 (see appengc C) was designed to obtAin information on the use of similar resourCes by still:lents during the year prior to.the pioject tryout. Teachers were instructed to interview each student, determine the number of experiences the student had had in each resource category, and provide a short description of the experience(s). This report was to be cOmpleted only once for each participating student. During the initial phase of the data collection, it was decided that information from the report was not useful Tor comparing a student's prior experiences with his/her experiences during the project tryout. This comparison was made 6y using the Student Feedback Report No: 4 (see description in.section E.5).

4.

Teacher Feedback Report No.

4,

3

Report No. 3 (see appendix C) was sent to each teacher of a student who fled used a resource in a category other than Activities, Awards and Information -from Part 5 of Report No. I was Competitions, or Mentors. used to determine the time when Report No. 3 would be sent. This report was used to request information on the type of experience the student had had with that resourpe, any perceived change in the attitude of the student toward science, any difificulties the student may have encountered,

-54

s.

-a.

,11

and any additional comments the teacher wished to make. report was sent for eadh resourCe used by a student.

4 separate

5. ,Student Feedback RePort No. 4 Report No. 4 (see appendix C) was sent to each student for whom a Teacher Notes Report No. 1 had been received:during%the tryout period. 'A separate Report 'No. 4 was sent for each xesource used by that student. There are three parts to the report. The first is a series-of questions about the science resource, which can be answered Yes, No, or Not Sure; the second part consists of a Likert,type scale referring to the student's use of the science resource; and the third has spacefor the student to elaborate on his/her experience with that resource. This report was sent to students through thei4pteachers end was returned to the GSP office by those teachers.

6.

Summary Comments Report No. 5

Report No. 5 (see appendix C) was sent to each teacher.in Grades 3.-6 in the elementary tryout schools and to each science teacher of.Grades 7 and 8 in the junior high tryout schools. This report was sent after ehe project tryout had beeh completed. It consists of three parts: the first establishes whether the teacher has used the PRF, the second requests informaticln (on a Likert-type scale) about the teacher's sktisfaction with the services of the project, and the,third requests information on the teacher's satisfaction with the organization of the PRF, a list of positive aspects of the project, and concerns or suggestions for,impFovIng the project.

,

7.

Media Specialist Report No. 6

0 ..

Report No. 6 (see appendix C) combines both record-keeping arid evalua, tion in one report. The first part has space for media specialists to keep a log of the use of all Student Envelopes. This was intended to serve as a record of where the Student Envelope Was at all times. The econd part of the.report provides space for recommending revisions or ' deletions to the PRY, and'the third provides space for listing desred additions' to the school's collection of published materials, based on use of the PRY. The last part,containd requests for additional information ,based an the experience media specialists had with the PRF. This report wasto be completed after the tryout by the media specialists of all but the Catholic school, which had no one in this/position.

5-

-6-

N.

r-

.4"

Resource Survey Report No. ,7

8.

Repoit 4o. 7 (see appendix CY was sent to selected resource persons during summer 1979 to determine their involvement.with students in the 16 tryout schools during the 1978 calendar year. They were specifically asked if they had provided help in science and, if so,,how many students they had wal.ked with. The resource persOns selected to receive Resource Survey RepOrt.No. 7 were those in a position to work directly with a student rather than identifying another Per on to work with 'a student (e.g., the personnel director of an agency mighE arrange for a scientist to work with a student).

..

,

4

'Hindsight leads the'Project staff to believe that this survey should have been sent to'each resource person. 'Since only a few persons were left out, however, this omission will probably not peke a substantial ififference in the validity of the utilization study to be discussed below. In addition, only the survey's of resource persons wilo were listed In the categories Activities, Awards and Competitions, and Mentors were used for this analysis.

9.

Resource Perspn Feedback Report No. 8

.4

.Report No. ,8 (see appendix C) was sent to each resource person who, according to the informationoreceived on Report No. 1,,eithgr had worked e end of the with a kudent or had had an appointment arranged befoie 3_and tr-yout.----This -report is.analogous to_Teacher Feedback Repo t contains the same infumation with a few additions. Quest4 ns are included on how the studentycommtinlcated with the resource persoll, the total. amount of time spent with the student, and whether the resource person felt adequately informed about the- project _orhad additional comments to make.

10.

Ififormal Principal Survey

_

After the tr...yout period waa completed, principals wase.irpterviewee by means of an informal principal survey. This survey wkdesigned after the tryout to collect information from principals. ,Five,qabstions were posed.to all principals to obtain their comments,'criticis0, and sugges-, ..'eThese are as Lollows: . tions concerning the-project. % Can you think of any problems with the project that relate 1. to your'role as a school administrator? .' k

2.

Have you received any responges .from your community about .the project (positive or negative)?

-7-

,

."

j

4.

-

...

1 .4 -

.

r

1,

A

3.

Do you feellfiE this resource hae.helped you to meet the needs of yotir gifted studentsk?

4.

Do you-feel,you were kept adequately informed on'the project? A

5.

Do yOu have.any suigestions for improving the materials 9r services received from the.project?

II.

ASSESSMENT OF PROdRAM EFFECTIVENESS,

A.

UTILIZATION STUDY (Evaluation Objectives 10-11)

1.

Utilization of ResoUrces Prior to the'Project

a.

Resource Persons

Information on the use of resource persons in the PRF prior to the 'tryout period wascollected through Resource Survey Report No. 7, des-' Cribed greviously. Seventy-eight of the 91 resource persons in the PRF were sureyed. The results indicated that 5 (6 perceilt) during the /1978 calendar year had provided services to students in 1 or more of the -tryout schools., When these 5 were aeked bow many students they had helped, the number ranged from 1 student to 6 (responses were 6, 1, 2, 2, and Not Four (5 percent) of the remaining scientists were uncertain whether Sure). they had helped students, and the remaining 69 (89, percent) reported that they-had-net. Students who used resource persons during the project tryout were asked if they had used a similar resource on their own during the previous soR651 year. . Of the students using resource persons only one reported a similar experience in the year prior to the project.

b.

Published 'Materials ,

Dita on the use of published materials by gifted students in the tryout schools during the year prior to the tryout are not available. A survey of the use of materials listed in the.PRF would not exclude the, possibility that s'tudents could acquire the materials either in or outside ofsglool; nor would it be_possible to obtain from school librarians utilization,data that separated the use of materiali-brgifted stu-: dents from their use by other etudents. Though no information of this type is available, there is information from student's who used resources listed-in the PRF during the tryoUt peridd. Of the students using resources listed under the categories Career Information, Project,Ideas, and

-8-

1 41

Science Prodesses, only 6 studehts reported using a similar,resource on their own during the year prior to the tryout. All 6 of these uses were in the Project I,deas categogy,(see table I>:

c.

.

.

1

Just as no information is available on t,he preyious use of published materials,.there also iA none on the use cif facilities listed(in the following categories: Courses, Lectures, and; Seminars; Libraries; and Visits. Of the,stu'denes who used resources listed under the two categories Visits and Courses, Lectures, and Seminars, none reported having used a similar (No library'resources were resource during the previous school year. used during the txyaut.)

2.

4

Other Resources

.

V

Uses of Resources During the Prbject Tryout

The use of resources during the project tryout period is based on feedback-received from 103 students. The number of different resources used du:ring the tryout can-be seen in table II. The use ranged from pone of the total resources available.in the two categories Awards andiCompetitions and Libraries to 33 (37 percent) in the category Mentors.

*

The total number of resources used is Illarger than th& number of diiferent resources used, since many people, places, and published materAls were used by more than one student. The total number,of resources used The number of uses ranged from none is shown by category in t,able I. in the categories Awards and Competitions and Libraries to 56 in the category Mentors.

3.

Comparison of Use Prior to ahd During the Project Tryout

Any comparison of the resources used during the year prior to the project and the tryout period needs to take into account the difference in time periods. Both resource persons and students were Asked to state previous use of similar resources for the full year prior to the project. To make the data s only 4 months long. The tryout period, howeve comparable with the 4-monitr out pegbd all prior experience data were adjtisted to reflect a 4-month pe

od.

Tables I and III provide a comparison of uses of resources prior to and during the project tryout. As can be seen in table I, the increase in the number of total resources used (as reported by students) is very large in every category except two, Awards and Competitions and Libririese No use was made of these during thdproject trybut; hence no informatiefnmk is available on prior use. The data in table III are based on informat,

Although not a direct result of the use of the 2RF, 72 out bf 174 (41%) 1. junior high students registered in the 1980 Montgomery Area Science Fair were from GSP tryout schools.

-9-

0"

received from 7.8 resource persons who completed Resource Survey Report No. 7. Of the 74, 5,"(nT'an adSuRted number of 1.61) reporteceworking

.

with students-prior to bie projelk, and 31 reported (46rking with them during the tryout..s; ,This represents a 1,756 percent increase in use of these persons..,

In collecein

nf tmation on the use of resburceS, two additional The first.was'how the resource perkson h oin nicated with the student, and the second was how much time he/ e spent with the Student. Results of these questions are shown table As can be seen, the mkority of resource per, IV. sots reported that the student visited them at work. The next most frequent$,mode of tommunication was telephone. (Almost all the scientists who repotted 9ommunicating by:telephone also visited with.the student.) The average time spent with i student ranged from 2.2 hours in the category Activities to 3.8 hours in the category Mentors. This figure,is probab1y4iow, since in many cases scientists completed feedback forms while they were still meeting with students, and their estimates were therefore only of the time they had already spent. 'a

questions were abke resoura persitns.

.

4

.

4.

Interpretation ,

4

.

IP

.

The figures repofted above show that students'used more resources of 'the kind lAted in the PRF during the project tryout than they had used during the year before. When confronted with the queStion of whether students would have used such resouraes without the project, we conclude, on the basis of the kinds of resources students reported having used the year before,,that tuch opportunities would'not havt been available to the same degree and that students would not have used them to this extent. Th4 perCentage of resóiffces used in-all-categdfies-is-somewhat low and is probably due to the.unavailability of certain books in school libraries and the 19,ited number of topics in which students were interested. Considering the number of students using iesources during the tryout (r03 students), one co4ld not expect all of the resources listed in the PRF (321) to be used. It is certainly preferable to have more resources listed than would be uSed rather than an insufficient number. i 5:

Summary 1

The use of certain.kinds of resources by individual stddents gifted in science has been shown to have been considerably greater during the period of the tryout of the Gifted Science Project than dufing the year before. It therefore is reasonable to ascribe this increase in use to the project itself and to assume that such use would,not have occurred without the project. 7

B.

ASSESSMENT OF RESOURCES AND-SERVICES (Evaluation Objectives 12 and 13) .

1.

Students

1 Students who had used,a resource obtained Crough the PRI' were asked to complete,Student Feedback Report No. 4. The report listed 4 questions designed to elicit their satisfactioi with the resource (see appendix C). In.all the cateTheir answers to these questions are shown in table V. gories except Project Ideas the'majority Of students responded posit,ively. The majority of students who used resources in'the Project Ideas category answered either No or Not Sure'when asked whether they learned something new abou t. how scientists work.and.whether they would like to use this This can be explained to a certain extent by the science resource again. nature,of the category, since.books in the category Project Ideas would seldom provtde information on how scientists work,ahd are not likeWto be used repeatedly by the'same studeq. k Likert-type scale was Administered to determine the extent of the student's experience with a particular resolirce. The 'student answered three statements -on a 5-point scale from A Lot to Almost None. ,As can be seen in table VI, students whp had used resources in all except one of the categoiies answered questions positively (either A Lot or.Some). The one exception was in the Science Processes category, where 60 percent of the students answered either Not Sure or No o the statement "MS resource made me want to learn more about.the i( ience topic I studied." ....---. .

.

,...

,

The responses to these statements were also analyzed to determine These whether there was any difference in attitude based on grade level. No real differencei are apparent in results are shown in table VII. these data, All grade levels answered each statement positively (A Lot or Some) pore than 70 percent of the time wih the exception of the ..13 Eighth grade students had a tendency to be either unsure eight.h grade. or negative with regard to the statements "This resource made me want to learn more ..." (34 percent Very Little or Almost None).- Though they do not represent the majority of eighth grade students who used resources in the PRF, these are the strongest instances of unsure or negative feedback seen when viewing data by grade level.

In addition to the forced-arwer questions reported above, stude ts were asked to respond to 5 open-ended questions (Questions 9 - 13 of Report No. 4; see appendix C). Questions 9 and 10 asked the.student t elaborate on whether the resource had helped. Results are given by cateProject Ideas is the only category for which there gory in table VIII. In appearp to be some ambivalence about whether the resource helped. this category there were 31 statements 6f how resources-helped and 13 of how they did not help. ,Typical examples-rof how resources helped include the following: ..'

1.

"Helped me"understand how scientists work."

2.

"Showed me how to make crystals."

I

.

3.

"'My skie'S have more glitter with starlight."

4.

"Opened up e, new science for me--I love particle physics." -

TypIcal examples oestatements of why resources did not help include the follpowing: 1.

"KneT...7 most' of

the experiments already."

2. "Book confused me, too difficult." 03.

2

"Didn't do anything."'

rkte that students may have answered both questions affirmatively, i.e., they may have felt they were helped in,some ways and not in others.

-

Two questions asked ehe students to. report what they liked about this, science resource and What they did not like. The results are shown in table VIII. Students appeared to feel iree to make comnents. Many 'studen'ts'answered both questions, 'saying.what they had liked and what they had not. The caegories in which the most comments were made were Mentors and Pr 'egt Ideas. Th ough 33 percent of the responses in the category Manis a were critical as were 37 percent of those in che catd= gory Project-Ideas, the majority of têtponses indicaie that students were pleased lith their experienCes with the resources. .

Students were also asked what other type of science Wklp they would Answers to these questions were coded in'the following manner (see table IX): whether they were interested in more help in che same sciene...topic and, if so, whether they wanted books (including information) or a mentor; whether they wanted help in another sciende topic and, again, whether they wanted books or mentors; whether they wanted a -plAce to visite,- or whether tvAy Wanted no further help. In general, students who are interested in pursuing a resource in a science topic dif4eTent from the one they have just used are more likely to want books or irormation than to want a chance to work.with a mentor., In all categories except Activitie%, Mentors, and Science Processes, however, students expressed intereg% in studying more about the same science like to 'neve.

topic.

,In general, all the results reported above indicate that students had positive experiences Wh the science resource they used. Considering the freedom wi h which ehey expressed themselves on the open-ended questions, it is no unreasonable to assume that-their answers were candid. It seems like y, then, that students using resources from the PRF had experiences that were both desirab/e and (judging from ehe utilization study reported above) not feasible before the Gifted SCience

,n

Prbject. -12-

/e)

.

.e

2.

Teachers

All,teachers of Grades 3-8 in the tryout schools Comments Repokt No. 5 to complete (9ee-appendix C). sent, 108 were returned. Of these, 37 teachers said The reasons cited for PRF and 71 said they had not. were as follows: /^

were sent a Summary Of the 131 reports they had used the not using the PRF

1.,

It was not applicable to the teaching assignment (28).

2.

They were too busy to take the time (10).

"3.

They were not familiar with the PRF (9).

4.

The,PRF was too'coMi;licated (2).

5.

There were no gifted children'in the class (3).

6.

The grade was not chosen as one of the participating ones (2).

7.

The system did not work well (1).

8.

The gride level did not cover what the student was,intereted in (1).

9.

10.

_Other reasons (7). , No reasori (10).

Teachers were asked to give their level of agreement on a LikerttYpe scale, with'a series of 4 statements. The results of this scale are shown in table X. .As can be seen, the majority of teachersagreed with the first 3 statements--that they were.adequately informed.of the purpose of the PRF, that the in-service manual helped them to use the PRF, and that the manual helped them complete the reports. There was marked ambivalence, however, with regard to tlie final statement, "The project helped me to meet the needadf my giftled science pupils." Though 40 percent of the teachers agreed that it had, 36 percent were not sure, and 24 percent did not feel that it had.

t

Teachers were also asked to fist the things they liked about.the Some of the things they liked project and thep concerns about it. included the following: 1.

Pupils were excited and seemed to learn things.

2.

It bus a valuable resource for studWits and teachers alike and took much of the research responsibility off2the,teacher.

3.

It was stimulating Ito students and provided a challenge.

-13--

7 ,

t

'IC

The act that students were in a project got and kept them interested in science.

4.

5. _It'offered an oppottunity to see practical use of knowledge obtained from science units in the classroom. . '

) 6.

'

Students became a resource for the teacher and other. students.

7. 'Resdurce persons were very cooperative in helping students. The greatest nupber of teachers who listed their concerns-mentionelil the problem of, time needed to contact resources and arrange for their use by students and the time needed to complete evaluation forms. In addition, teachers aentioned the following concerns:

3.

1.

They hoped that the projectwould not become Mandatory.

2.

Students did not show the kina of independent followup neces sary for sUccessful implementation.

3.

Gifted students had so many other afterschool activities that it was very hard to scheddte more.

4.

Very few of the recommended books were available.

5.

Some mentors seemed to know less about the project thajt the teacher did. 16

6.

Younger student% (Grades 3, 4 thepUrpose of the program.

7.

Success depended on'parent ,00peration.

8.

Studtnts wert limited to working on objectives in their own grade level.

9.

Some stuhents found it hard to arrangt.foravel to and frOm communiy nesources.

and 5) did not fully Iappreciate

Media Specialists

Media specialists were asked to give their evaluation of the ser vices and materials of the project in Media Specialist Report No. 6 Information was received from 14 of the 15 county (see appendix C).. The media schools (the one Catholic school had no media specialist). specialists were asked wheOer they had requested materials from other project schools and/or had received such requests from other specialists. Only 3 schools reported receiving requests from other media specialists for materials identified in the PRP. 0ne school had 3 requests, another

1

4, and the third 1. VIn answer.to the second question, only 1 media specialist reported repesting materials frob other schools, and she A full accounting is not possible; but certain had made 4 such requests. requests had to be made of more than 1 school,'since the first school When asked to identify resourcek that 'asked may not have had the,boo0. teachers and students found helpful.bu't that were not listed in the PRF, no media specialist responded. 4

A final question asked whether the specialists felt that the organizaTen of the respondents' tional arrangement of the PRF Ngas satisfactory. felt it was, 2 recommended an alternate system, and 2 di,d not feel fami= Specific recommendations given liar enough with the file-to respond. by the media specialists will be discussed.in a following section. It appears that there was a fair amount of interaction between media -centers of the project tryout schools and that the PRF in its present state was satisfactory to most,of the schools' media specialists. 10-fuller'discussion of the-recommendations will be discussed in a later section: 1

4.

Principals

Following completiOn of the project tryout principals were interviewed to find out their experiences with the project. A series of 5 open-ended'questions was asked and"responses were recorded by a GSP staff member. answeriog the first question, "Can you think of any problems with the project th1t relate to your role as a school administrator?" 10 principals either said that they could think of none or that ihere had been none. Problems yentioned included:

/ 1.

"Need more bodies to help teachers.'

2.

"Couldn't devote as much time to"it as I would have liked."

3.

"Teachers were frustrated that they had to serve between mentors and parehts."

4.

"No more than one roject should be started in dne school in any given year; mental energy is consumed by too many things

as)Wiators

and none get fair treatment.'1. 5.

"The participation of the principal should be structured into the project--for instance, a check-off list." .

6.

'Tactical problem with a pair of siblings when one did not want to be in the project."

-15-

r-\ wr

4

The second question inquired, "Have yqm received any responses from your comtunity about the project (either I.Ositive or negative)?" Five of the 16 principals reported that they had received no responses. Of the remaining 11, 2 had received neutral responses, 8 positive, and 1 negative. Positive -responses were from parents on theschool's committee for the gifted who were supportive and other parents who appreciated the individual attention prOvided tbeir children. Negative comments included one from a parent who asked that the child be removed from the project because of already being involved in too many gifted programs. One parent wanted more information on the project iaLorder to be more personally involved.

The third question.asked, "Do you feel that this resource has helped you to meet the needs of your gifted students?" Answers ranged from 2 negatives to a range of qualified and enthusiastic,affirmatives: - /

S.

1.

"Not pavicularly."

2.

"Not that much--too time-consuming."

3.

"Would help, but we've noi effectiveiylpsed the project."

4.

"To a limited eegree; only one student used it,"

5.

"Yes, for the two or three who got involved."

6.

''Might have been more affective if the science staff were veterans to the school and knew the students."

7.

"Has for students who used the program."

8.

"For those.interested in science, yes."

9.

"Yes--has been reinforcement for specific program."

10.

"Yes--especially because it was in a subject other than reading or math." .

11.

"Helped in two ways--schools are vulnerable to patent's criticism to meet student's needs, and this is an identified .program to meet specific needs."

12.

"Without qqestion."

13.

"Yes--anything like this would."

14.

"Excellent program to have available; one moretiing for bright kids."

15.

"Absollitely, teache's unanimouslY feel that."

.

-16-

16.

"Definitely has, we'd have been in big trouble with kids in the 4cience program without this."

As can 1* seen from the range of these .answers, schools had a variety of experiences with the project, ranging from minimal impact to substantial appreciation for filling an unmet need.

The fourth Auestion asked, "Do you feel you were kept adequately informed on the project?" All principals answered Yes, although one principal would have liked to have a more structured role with regard to the project (e.g., a checklist to keep current on what was happening). The flith question asked of the principals, "Do you have anyj suggestions for improving the materials or serviees received from the projedt?", will be discussed in the section Recommendation for Program Revision. t

Thd results of this informal survey were, with few"txceptions, Positive and showed an acceptance, on the part of most principals, of the It is apparent from the answers to the second project and its goals. question that the community (including the parents) has not been involved in the project thus far. To a certain extent, this has been due to the developmental status of the project: during the development period broad publicizing of.the project was not desired, since project materials, proceduTes, and reports were continuously being revised.

C.

ASSESSMENT.OF STUDENT SCIENCE ATTITUDES (Evaluation Vjective 12)

Teachers and resource persons were asked to note on Reports No. 3 and 8 whether they had observed a change in the studerit's behavior as a result of the use of that resource (see table XI). Teachers and resource persons were fairly'evenly divided between feeling that there was a change in the student's attitude, feeling that there was no change, and being unsure. Resource persems (Activitiee and Mentors categories) tended to mark Not Sure more frequently. Some of them stated that they did not feel they knew the student well enough' to judge whether a change had taken place. It appears that students were less likely to show a change in attitude or behavior when they used a resource teachin the Project Ideas category. In addition, it is more likely for whether students using resources ers and resource persons to be unsure in the Activities and Visits categories had experienced any change. This is probably due to (1) the structured nature of such resources, which may preclude a close relationship between a student and a resource person, and (2) the fact that resource persons felt that they did not know the student well enough. ,Very few backup comments were made to substantiate the answer1 to for both resource this question. It appears that it was difficult io make a judgment about any change in attitude' persons and teachers which was directly re1ated to the use of the resource. -17-

D.

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS (Evaluation Objective 14)

The results of the utilization study, based on feedback from students, teachers, media specialists, and principals, indicate that the PRF has provided possibilitiee.for students that were not available before the Gifted Science Project began. For the most part these Opportunities have been positively received, although the problems experienced by students, tmachers, schools, and GSP staff indicate that theSe is room ,for iMprovement. In the next sections re'eommendations for reiisions of t e project and the PRE Will be discussed.,

III.

A.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROGgAM REVISIONS

TEACHERS JR

Teachers were asked on the Summary Comments Report No. 5 to list any suggestions they had for improving the project. Suggestions included the following: 1.

"Would.helP to have mentors' home phone numbers so that teachers could reach them after working hours."

2.

"Direct parent-mentor contact would eliminate the need for a middleman." //

3.

"Would expedite process if a sheet could be devised informing the parent of the project topic and the time availability of the contact."

4.

"Students need a follow-up after each meeting with a contact."

5.

"Would be easier to use if there were a coordinator to help bring together students of similar interests in the same school or nearby area schools: Coordinator would be a parent volunteer trained in the program who could work with the teacher."

6... "Should have some sort of system students could use."

a

7.

"Students could better de.qLde if they were alloved to use the files,(phone numbers couI&be omitted)."

8.

"Would be nice to have an aide to h

9.

"Another in-service training session should be provided."

10.

p with the program."

."Find.mentors and resources convenient to all parts of the county." -18-

)

11.

"Raise the level of print materials; they seem to be appropriate for only elemenery students." 41

v.

"Would like a ialf-day per semester to do PRY research."

13.

"PRF should be enlarged so,that studentS'could study any area they were interested in."

,

B.

PRINCVPALS

)

The'fifth question asked during the informal principal survey was whether principals had any suggestions for inTroving the materials or services received from the project. Five said that the delivery of Othvx specific sugservices from project staff had been excellent. gestions are lived below: 1.

s"Only sAhools that really want to participate should be chosen."

2.

"Find someone who can follow through with paperwork so that the teacher doesn't'have to do it ell."

3.

"Prdgram should be presented at PTA and_faculty meetings in order to show the school how others have used the project and resources." '/

4.

"Resoarces should'be kept current."

5.

"Projecteshould be publicized more."'

6.

"Would like to have materials travel to each school so that staff can see them before they'decide which to purchase."

.

"Would be nice if nesource could travel to the school."

8.

"Teachers need moxe in-service sobner.i'

9.

"'Discovery' type of Coterie's would be nice."

10.

"Create a 'clubs for students and parent's so that interest in the project would be more on the.local level."

-19-.

e,

1

IV.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISIONS OF.:_THE

PROJECT RESOURCE RETRIEVAL SYSTEM c

A.

TEACHERS

Of the teachers who ansWered Question 6 on the Summary Comments Report No. 5, 59 felt that the arrangement of the PRF was satisfactory, 4 did not, and 1 was unsure. Two.of the teachers had suggestions for alternate oTganizatiOns: One wanted the PRF arranged so that students_ coUld use resoufces in topits that might be listed for grade levels other than their own. The oth4r suggestion was to have resources liste4 by topic, with objective(s) and grade level(s) noted for eaph resource. Each teacher could then have a looseleat notebook of these 6 lists (1 for each topic) and an index describing each resource in detail. it../Odld eliminate the need to describe each resource by grade, topic, .

catego*.

B.

MEDIA SPECIALISTS

hree of the'14 media specialists who complated Report No. 6 made speci ic recommendations for revising .the Project Resource File. Two felt that the file needed to be more encompassing, because students were interested in subjeCts that were not necessarily part of the curriculum-at their grade level. In addition, 1'sPecialiSt hlt that science books already a part of the school's collection should be considered for the,file, since it was frustrating not to be able to find a book that sounded excelliont. It was also suggested that the PRF be reorganizaa primarily by topic, with the grade level as the last discriminating factor.. The third media specialist's recommandation.dealt specifically with the cirganizaEMn of the PRF. It was suggested that the file be separated into two sections, one for.print materials and the oeher for resource persons. Placing all print materials in a separate section would_make it possible for students to have access to them without compromising the telephone numbers of mentors. In addition, it wohld make updating the file easierosince only the-fiche on Which mentors were listed would need to be changed. Only 1 of the 14 completing the.report listed desired resources that were not in that school's collection. This respondent identifted 12 resources id the categories Project Ideas, Science Processes, and Career Information.

`

-20-

;

DEVELOPMENT QF INSTRUCTIONAL AND ENRICHMENT OBJECTI4S . (tvaluation Objective 16)

,

* ,

.

In an attempt to determine instructional and enrichment objectives for gifted science students, teachers and,resource persons were asked thinking, to note,.on a scale of 9 items fanging from low- to high-1 The which levels students,had employed when they used that reao results of.these student experiend6 are shown in table XII. A wide range of experiences (from low- to high-level) was evidenced in tile categorles Activities, Mentors, and Project Ideas., It appears that working with a resource_person (inthe categories Activities and Mentors) does tap higher level thinking. It is also encouraging to note thef students who used resources in the category Project Ideas did much more than juat read them; in many cases they carried out projects or e0eriments.

It,

.

.Althoughthe answers to,this scale provide us with some.indi ation of the kinds of, experiences these.students had wi-th their resources, they do not provide enough information to develop objectives for,gifted It may be, however, that if this scale were provided science students. to kesource persons before they worked with students, they might rchoose to direct students into higher level activities.

.

p.

9,

-21-

VI. COST ANALYSES valuation Objective 18)

,Cost analyses have been compiled for the following items: 1.

Operating the 3-year Gifted Science Project

2.

Develoking the project for tryout in A schools

3.

Conducting the project tryout for 16 schools'

4.

Countywide implementation fciTi49-SchOdr; in -Stience, Grade-sT-3-8

5.

Expanding.the GSP to other grade levels (K-2, 9-12)

6.

A similar project in anothr subjett area

7.

Microfiche PRF as compared with paper PRF

8.

Microfiche format used'during the tryout as comparpd with revised format reSulting from the tryout.

-rr

-The costs for Items 1, 2, and 3 are fortthe most part actual budget ,, figures. All remaining costs are estimates lased on the costs in effect at the time tf this writing. r '14

cr,

4 ID

.1

)

ITEM 1

Cost of Operating the 3-Year Gifted Science Project (Based on Budget for 7-1-77 to 6-30-80)

Funded by Title IV-C Grant

$174,879

Teacher Specialists (3)*

Clerical, Part-time

14,135

Professional, Part-time

17,512

,

1,739

Substitute Teachers

4,139

Consultant \

Instructional Supplies

.6,680

Office Supplies

4,300

4

Local Travel

2,538 562

Other Travel

1,258

Furniture and Equipment

34,223

.Fringe Benefits

$261 965

SUBTOTAL

, Funded in Kind by MCPS (Estimates) 4410

,.

26,250

Director, Part-time _

Phone

-...,...

600

Mailing

300

Printing

800

vc;

5,250

Fringe Benefits

of.

SUBTOTAL

$33 2 200

,

TOTAL COST OF OPERATING THE PROJECTTOR THREE YEARS -23,-

$295 165

ITEM 2

Cost qpf Developing the Project for Tryout in 16 Schools (Based pn Budget Payments from 7-1-77 to 10-1-79)

Funded by Ti'tle tv-c Grant

Teacher Saecialtsts (3)

$110,366

4$

Clerical, Part-time

8,672

Professional, Part-time

8,459

Substitute Teachers

8,176

Consultant

1,621

Instructional Supplies

3,368

Office Supplies.

3,133

Local Travel

1,207

Other Travel

562

Furniture and Equipment

1,257

Fringe Benefits

25,924

SUBTOTAL

4

$172 745

Funded in Kind by MCPS (Estimates)

Director,,Part-time

19,700 40

Phoae

500

Mailing

200

Printing

750

Fringe Benefits

3,940

SUBTOTAL

$25 090

$197,835

TOTAL COST OF DEVELOPING THE PROJECT

-244 4

3u

_

;

i

ITEM 3

Cost of Conducting the Project.Tryout for 16 Sch ols (Based on Budget Payments from 10-1-79 to 2-1-8 )'

Funded by Title IV-C Grant ,

$22,41

TeacheiSpecialists (3)

1

.

2,338

,Clerical, Part-time .

191

Instructional Supplies

,

..,

Office Supplies

683

Local Travel

117

5;029

Fringe Benefits-

$30 769

SUBTOTAL

Funded in Kind by MCPS (Estimates) --,.. .

2,900

Director, Part-time Phone

50

Mailing

25

.

580

Fringe Benefits

$3 555

SUBTOTAL c

TOTAL COST OF CONDUCTING THE PROJECT TRYOUT

v

,

. -25-

$34 324

ITEM 4

Cost of Countywide Implementation for 149 Schools in Science,,Grades 3-8 (Estimate),

Director, Part-time

$8,750

Teacher Specialist (Full-time to Provide In-service) Clerical, Part7time

3,600

Microfiche for 149 Schools, 5 Area Offices, and 1 Central Office

154

User's

370

Manual (5 Copies per School)

2,869

Substitute Teachers (1/2 Day In-service)

Local Travel

500

Phone

100

Frihge Benefits

.

TOTAL COST OF COUNTYWIDE IMi'LEMFATION

-26-

,

7,990

$51 933

ITEM 5

Cost of Expanding Project in Science to Other Grade Levels, K-2 and 9-12 (Estimate)

Director, Part-time

$8,750

TeacherY Specialist, Full-time for 1 year

27,600 3,600

Clerical, Part-time

Microfiche foe 169 Schools, 5 Area Offices, and 1 Central Office

226

User's Manual (5 Copies per School)

530

stitute Teachers (II Day In-service)

*

3,211 200

cal Travel

a 150

Phone

7,990.

Fringe Ben fits

TOTAL COST OF EXPANDING PROJECT TO OTHER GRADE LEVELS

-27-

$52 257

4P ITEM 6

D

Cost of a1Similar7Project in Another Subject Area, Gl-ades K-12 (Estimate)

Director, Part-time

$8,750 ,

Teacher Specialist, Full-time for 1 year

.27,600

Clerical, Part-time

co,

3,600

Microfiche for 169 Schools, 5, Axea Offices, angl 1 Central Office

226

User's Manual(5 Copies per School)

530

-,,

Substitute Teachers (I Day In-service)

3,211

Local Travel

300

Phone

200

Mailing

100

Printing

200

Fringe Benefits

7,990

TOTAL COST-OF EXPANDING TO ANOTHER SUBJECT AREA

.

$52 707

-28-,

a

1

40

ITEM 7

Cost of Microfiche PRF -Compared with Paper

Paper Copy for 15 Tryout Schools, 5 Area Offices, and 1 Central 9ffice

Microfiche for Same

$662 '

441

SAVINGS OgTAINED BY4USING MICROFICHE INSTEAD OF PAPER COPY t

,

$221

z

ITEM-8

Cost of Microfiche Format Used During Tryout'COmpered with Revised Format Resulting From the Tryout

Cost of Tryout Format for 149 Schools Cost of Revised Format for 149 Schools

SAVINGS OBTAINED WITH REVISED FORMAT

$985 154

$831

VII.

SUMARY

The analyses tn this report have addressed the evaluation objectives listed in the GSP proposal. \The use of resources ,bas been identified; resources and services have been assessed; and changes in student science attitudes, as well as recommendations for revisions to tpe project and All this information, though its materials and service, have been noted. primarily collected to satisfy the project's evaluation objegtives, has provided project staff with the information needed to revise and improve New emphases will be placed the project materials for implementation. In addition, the PRF organizational on in-service training in 1980-81. system has been completely revised according to the suggestions noted in, this report.

a

4.

-31-

TABLE:, t:

y Total Numbet'of Resources Used Before and During Gifted Science Project Tryout 979 - January 31, 1980

October 1

Category

Total Resources Used Prior to Project (As Reported by Student)*

TOtal No. of Resources Used During Project Tryout

% Increase in Use

Activities

0

Awards and Competitions

0

Career Information

0

7

700

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars

0

2

200

16

1,600

,o

.

Libraries

0

Mentors

1- (adjusted 0.33) 56

16,870

Project Ideas

6 (adjusted 2)

43

2,050

6

600

5

500

Science Processes

Visits

*

0

(Adjusted to Reflect 4-Month Period)

-32--

TABLE II

Use of Different Resources During the Gifted Science ProjeceTryout, October , 199 - January 31, 1980

No. of Different 'Resources Used During Tryout

Total No. of Resources in PRF

% Used During TryOut

Activities

6

50

12

Awards and Competitions

0

i

Career Information

6

61

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars

1

8

Libraries

0

6

d

33

89

V

29

140

h.

4

42

2

9

Category

10

12.5

_

Mentors

Project Ideas

0

.

1

Science Y'rocesses

Visits

-33-

9.5 ie

4

TABLE III

Resource Persons Used Before and During the Gifted Science Project Tryout

October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

No. of Different Resource Persons Used Prior to Project*

5

No. of Different Resourge Persons in'PRF Used During Project Tryout

No.-of -Different Resource Persons Sampled

31

78

(adjusted 1.67)

* (As Reported by Resouece Person and Adjusted to Reflect 4-Month Period)

S.

-34-

% Used Prior to

Project / 1.6

% Used During Tryout

Increase

39.7

1,756

TABLE IV,

Suppletentary Information Obtained from Resource Persons During Gifted Science Project Tryout October 1, 1979 , January 31, 1980

Method of Communication Visited at Work

Visited ,at Home No. %

By Teler phone

By Writing

Another,

No.

%

No.

%

Average Time Spent with' Student tHrs.)

424

0

0

1

5.

2.2

Way

:

Category

No.

Activities

12

71

0

0

3

61

1

2

17

27

1

2

6

9

3.8

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2.5

%

dk

.Mentqrs Visits 1

3

ONO.

%

74

TABLE V

4

Student Assessment of Resources Used During Gifted Science Project Tryout October 1, 1979 - January 3,1, 1980

Question and Student Response (%)

Did you leap

Category

something new about how scientists work?

Did this science resource help you?

Not Yes ' No

Activities

Sure-

6.

Yes

No

75

0

Not Sure

Would you like to learn more about this topic using a different science resource?

WouldsyOu like to use this science resource again?

Yes

No

Not Sure

25

50

19

31

0

0

0

0

86

0

14

Yes

No

25

75

0

0

0

0

Not Sure

75

19

la

0

0

100

0

0

71

0

29

57

14

29

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars

50

50

0

100

0

0

100

0

0

50

0

50

Libraries

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.

Mentors

74

11

15

77

8

15

65

7

27

57

10

33

Projtct Ideas

43

30

27

66

14

20

48

23

30

73

5

23

Science Processes

60

40

0

60

0

40

80

20

0

60

0

40

Visits

50

25

25

50

0

50

50

0

50

75

25

0

Awards andCompetitions Career Information

0'

-36-

,

0-

-3

TABLE VI

Student At'titude Toward Resources Used During Gifted Science Project Tryout (By Category)

A

eik

'October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

Student Attitude (%)

I learned new things.

This science resource made me want to learn more about the science topic I studied:

I liked this science resource.

Not Very Almost A Lot Some Sure Little None

Not Very Almost A Lot Some Sure Little None

Not Very Almost A Lot Some Sure Little None

,

Category 1

(..) ...1 1

-...

29

0

7

0

36

36

21

7

71

14

0

14

0

86

14

0

0

100

0'

0

0

50

0

37

57

0

4

2

47

Proje4 Ideas

20

68

7

5

0

Science Processes

60

20

0

,2

Visits.

25

75

0

0

'Activities,..,----- )54

0

93

7

0

0

0

0

0

71

29

0

0

0

50

0

.0

50

50

0

0

0

33

14

4

2

67

24

4

4

2

48

20

18-

11

'2

52

27

7

11

2

0

20

20

40

20

0

100

0

0

0

0

0

75

2,5

0

0

0

75

25

0

0

0

.

--._/

Caeeer Information

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars

Mentors .

4

t

tr

1 o ._

4

TABLE VII

' '

Student Attitude Toward Resources Used During Gifted Science Project Tryout

S.

(By Grade)

tzt.

October 1, 1979

.s

January 31, 1980

Student Attitudes (7.)

Grade

0

I learned new things.

This science resource made me want to learn more about the science topic I studied.

I liked this science resource.

Almost Not Very A Lot Some Sure Little None

Almost Not Very A Lot Some Sure Little None

Almost Not Very A Lot Some Sure Little None

3

50

50.

0

b

0

83

8

8

0

0

92

8

0

0

0

4

27

61

3

6

3

54

24

9

9

3

78

18

0

0

3

5

47

44

4

7

0

42

31

18

7

4

60

31

7

4

0

6

56

33

0

11

0

56

22

11

11

0

78

11

0

11

0

,

/

7

30

70

0

0

0.

30.

50

20

0

0

70'

20

10

0

0

8

11

78

6

6

0

33

22

33

11

0

33

33

0

28

6

46

Cl

TABLE vIrt

Student Report of Satisfaction with Resource Used During Gifted Science Project Tryout October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980 0

If the science resource

helped you, tell us how it helped you.

- Category

Activities Career Information

If the science resource did not help you, ,Total tell us why it No. of did not. Responses

What did you like about .

this science resource?

What did you NOT like about Total this No.'of science resource? Responses

(%)

(%)

(%)

100

0

16

84

16

19

86

14

7

88

12

8

2

6 7

33

3

Courses, Lectures,

(%)

(k)

t

and

Seminars

.

.C. .

100

0 ,

: Mentors

92

B

50.

6 7

33

72

Project Ideas

40

30

44

63 ,

37

60

Science Processes

80

20

5

80

20

5

100

0

4

67

33

6

Visits

-39-

) a

TABLE IX Student Requests for Other Science Help from Gifted Science Project s

October 1, 1979 - 'January 31 1980

Category

Same Science Topic

AnothertScience Topic

Book (Information) (%)

Boo k

. .e,

(Informa-

Mentor

(7.)

tioln)

(7.)

No More Help (%)

No. of Responses

Mentor (%)

Visit (%)

0

0

7

15

\ a,

o

o

7

...

Activities

33

13

47

Career Information

29

43

29

o

100

0

0

0

o

1

Mentors

35

14.

31

2

10

8

49,

Project Ideas

35

17

28

0

17

2

46

Science Processe's

33

0

33

0

33

o

3

Visits

33

33

33

0

P

o

3

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars

,

/

TABLE X

Teacher Assessment of Gifted Science Project .0ctober 1,

1979 - January 31, 1980

Level of Agreement

Statement to Which Teacher was to Respond

Strongly Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Not

Agree

Certain

%,

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

22

28

37

47

11

14

6

8

2

3

'The In-Service Manual helped me use the Project Resource File.

11

19

31

53

9

15

7

12

0

0

The In-Service Manual helped ma complete the necessary reports.

9

18

21

43

11

22

7

14

1

2

The project helped me meet the needs of my gifted science pupils.

8

15

14

25

20

36

11

20

2

4

I was adequately informed of the purpose of the Project Resource File before using it.

TABLE XI

Student Attitude Change As Reported by Teachrs and Resource Persons * During the Gifted Science Project Tryout October 1, 1979 - January 31, 198G

Category

Yes (%)'

No(%)

Not Sure(%)

No. of Responses

/ Activities

18

0

82

11

-Career Information

60

40

0

5

100

0

0

2

Mentors

39

20

41

41

Project Ideas

36

52

12

33

Science Processes

20

40

40

5

visits

25

25

50

4

36 %

30 %

34 %

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars

Total

* The question to which teachers responded was "Have you observed a change in science attitude, interest, motivation, oir other behaviors, stated or demonstrated by the student, gilich you feel was directly related to his/her involvement with the resource (you)?"

-42-

101

TABLE XII e

Student Experiences as Reported by Teachers and Resource Persons Deming the Gifted Science Project October 1, 1979 - January 31, 1980

,

,

. Category

Activities

Student Experiences

No..

%

Career Information No.

%

Courses, Lectures, and Seminars N. %

-,

Meptors No..

2.

3.

4.

S.

Science Processes

Visits

No.

No.

%

%

,

r

L.-

1.

%

Project Ideas No. %,

The student received information through conversetiod, reading, or observation or was provided data. 13

27

6

50

2

33

47

35

39

32

5

42

4

36

The student observed objects and/or phenomena.

11

23

2

7

2

33

28

21

19

14

2

17

4

36

The student measured objects and/or phenomena.

3

6

0

0

6

0

11

8

7

6

1

8

0

0

9

7

12

1

8

0

0

3

5

0

0

0

0

The student formulated a hypothesis. The student designed procedures for testing a hypothesis.

,

1

2

1

8

1

174

ar 2 ,.

4

0

0

0

0

4

4

TABLE XII

Student Experiences Reported by Teachers and Resource Persons During the Gifted Science Project (Continued) October 1, 1979 -.January 31, 1980

Category Courses, Lectures,

Student Experiences

Activities %

No. 6.

7.

Career Information No.

and

Seminars

Mentors

Project Ideas

%

No.'

%

No.

%

No.

%

Science Processes

Visits

No.

%

No.

The student carried out an activity to solve Pproblem or test a hypothesis

11

23

0

,0

0

0

12

9

13

11

1

8

0

The student used knowledge and/or skills to describe .and/or construct a theoretical model.

0

0

0

0

I:

17

4

3

3

2

0

0

0

6

2

17

0

0

5

4

11

9

1

8

3

%

0 ,8.

The student applied newly acquired scientific knowledge to other problems.

3

C\ 9.

The student developed and/ or used manual skills.

4

8

1

8

0

0

15

1

11

12

le

1

8

0

28

APPENDTX A RESOURCE CATEGORIES AND EXAMPLES IN THE PRE

*********** COMMUNITY RESOURCES 1.

Activities - demonstrations, investigations, or experiment's that are identified and supervised by resource persons and that support selected topi)s and objectives. cExample: The student will help a forester conduct an inventory of woodland plants and environmental conditions in a forest environment.

.2.

Awards_ and Competitions - recognition earned by developing and presenting a science project or paper. Example: The student will participate in the Montgomery Area Science Fair.

3.

Courses, Lectures, and Seminari - science programs sponsored by educational institutions or'organizations. Example: The student will attend a health.seminar sponsored b'y the National Institutes of Health.

4.

Libraries - specialized collections of science-related media: Example: The student will use the Medowside -Nature Center Library under the direction of a naturalist.

5.

Mentors - resource persons who discuss,by telephone or in pefson science topics and objectives and might suggest reading material, ideas for furthermork, and other resoUrces. Example: The student will meet with a,scientist from NASA and discuss the student's interests.

6.

Vtsits - behind-the-scenes tours not normally available to the public or public tours related to science topics and objectives. Example: The student will tour the University of Maryland cyclotron.

********* PUBLISHED MATERIALS ********* 1.

Career Information - published materials that describe science or science-related jobs and careers. The student will use ihe book VeteriNarv Medicine and Example: Animal Care Careers to learn about science careers., )

2.

Project Ideas - published materials shat describe science investigations for use by students on an individual basis or with a resource person.

The student will u*. the book Adventures in Electrochemistry to develop a science project.

Exautple:

3.

cienee Processes - published materials that describe science procgres and skills, such as laboratory techniques; suggestions for sci-\ eince problem solving; and the collection, processing, analysis, and presentation of data. The student will use the book How to Make Your Science Example: Project Scientific to dev.elop science process skills.

-45r

44

APPENDIX B PROJECT,OBJECTIVES _

Gifted Science Project.

A Supplementary Education ServicA for

Gifted Students and Their Teachers-Science ESEA, Title IV, Part C U.

bevelopmental 1'. -

The resource categories related to education for the gifted avaflable to MCPS will be identified.

2:1 The bank of basic and supplementry instructional objectives for the

science(curriculum will.be complfted for GrIA'es 3-8. 3.

The resources available in each category will be identified and crossreferenced to the bank of basic objectives for the science curriculum.

4.

The tdentified resources-will be placed into a microfiche retrieval' system.

5.

A staff in-service training program will be developed and administered.

6.

The system for retrieving the resources will be installed in ehe central media center and 16 local school media centers.

7.

The tryout of the project will be completed.

8.

The design for a systemwide organizations administration, and dissemination of setvices will be completed.

9.

Sample project, materials will be prepared for dissemination to interested persons and the projecX will be publicized statewide and nationally.

-0

-46-

-

APPENDIX P,

(CONTINUED)

Evaluative 10.

The history of utilization of identified resources prior to the onset of the project will be compiled to establish the data base.

11.

The utilization study for the 1979 calendar year wiX1 be completed.

12.

The quality of each resource or activity will be evaluated by the users.

13.

Student, teacher and mentor satisfaction with the administration and services provided by the project will be evaluated.

14.

The assessment of program effectiveness during the first project year will be completed.

15-.

Required revisions to the project activities will be identified.

16.

The bank of basic instructional objectives and enrichment 6bjectives for gifted and talented students will be'revised as indicated froM the proilect evaluation efforts.

17.

The restouice retrieval system will be modified as indicated from the 15roject evaluation efforts.

18.

A cost-effectiveness study of utilization will be complete.

APPENDIX C REPORT NO. 1 TEACHER NOTES Completed bv: Puolost: Distribution:

Teacher Record information on resource selected Difted Science Project office and STUDENT ENVELOPE

See the printed information on the back of the yellow copy.

DireEtions:

A

Grade

Student

.

(Last)

.4"(First)

(Last)

(First)

(Middle)

School

Teacher (Middle)

Resource File No.:

B.

41

Fiche:

Page:

CONTACT or TITLE:

.ADDRESS or AUTHOR: -"N

TELEPHONE:

C.

D.

HOURS:

Notes

Mark the box of the statement which applies:

E]

The resource will be used by thp student. directed below.)

(CoMPlete sections E and F and distributelcopies as

L--

No attempt was made co use the resource. (File both copies of this report 14 the STUDENT ENVELOPE arid DO NOT send the white copy to the Gifted Science Project office.)

However, it could not be arranged. (Please explain below, An at:empt was made to use the resource. then file ooth copies of this report in the STUDENT ENVELOPE and DO NOT send the c.hite copy to the Gifted Science Project office.)

Estimated completion date:

E:.

Expected starting date:

F.

Who will work directly with the student?

0 Teacher

OPerson other than CONTACT shown above.

aktedia specialist

Give name

0 CONTACT shown abrive

ODo not know

DISTRIBUTION:

White/Gifted Science Project office; Yellow/?TUDENT ENVELOPE

GS? REPORT NO.

1

P

1/79

-48-

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 1 TEACHER NOTES Purpose: This report will be used by a teacher to record information op the use of a resource selected from the Project Resource File. It will include details on hoW the student will use the resource. The project staff will use this information to administer project evaluation reports.

Directions:

Use a separate TEACHER NOTES for each resource selected.

A.PRINT the requested information. B. Copy the resource informaticin exactly as it appears in the Project Resource File. (1. Use this section to record:

.Notes on telephone conversations with the child's parent(s) and the CONTACT. The name of the person who will work directly with tile student if different from the CONTACT. Errors discovered in the resource description in the Project Resource File. .Information the project staff should know concerning the resource (e.g., appropriateness, special problems, concerns). D. When it is decided whether the resource will be used, mark the box which applies.

EE.If the student will use the.resource, write the expected starting and the

estimated completion dates in these spaces.

F Mark the box which shows who will work directly with the student. This nfornation is essential for the administration of later evaluation reports. If the first box in section D was marked, distribute the copies of this report as shown. Otherwise, file both copies in the STUDENT ENVELOPE.

-49-

4.

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 2 PRIOR EXPERIENCES Teacher Identify student's prior science experignces Gifted Science Project office and STUDENT ENVELOPE

Completed by: Purpose: Distribution: Directions:

.

See the printed information on the back of the yellow copy.

Student

Grade

Teacher

School

Number of Experiences

Report Date

,)

Resource Category 1.

Activity:

2.

Award or Competition:

3.

Career Information:

4.

Course, Lecture, or Seminar:

,5.

F

_ -

Description

Library:

6.

Mentor:

7.

Project Ideas:

8.

Science Processes:

9.

Visit:

Other Science Activities

0 (a)

The student did not participate in any of the science activities listed above., ,OR

0 (b)) The student participated in a'science activity other than those described Description:

/ above..

DISTRIBUTION:

'Alice/Gifted Science Project; Yellow/STUDENT ENVELOPE;

CSF RF.P0aT No.

2

11 79

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 2 PRIOR EXPERIENCES Purpose: This report will be used by a teacher to provide information on the nature \of the student's science experiences during the 1978 calendar year.

Directions:. 1. 2.

3.

Read the resource category descriptions below. Interview the student and identify the types of resources he/she experienced / during the period January 1, 1978 to December 31, 1978, which is prior to the project tryouts. Write the number.of different experiences the student had for each resource category which applies. Briefly describe the experiences. Use a return addressed envelope, found in the STUDENT ENVELOPE, to send the white copy to the Gifted Science Project office, File the yellow copy in the STUDENT ENVELOPE.

Resource Category Descriptions 1.

Activity. On an individual basis, the student met with a science resource person and completed a science acFivity.

2.

Award or Competition. The student participated in an activity or competition for an award or other recognition by developing and presenting a science project or paper.

.3.

Career Information. On an individual basis, the student conversed with a resource person or read published material which described science or science-related jobs and/or careers.

4.

Course, Lecture. or Seminar. course, lecture, or seminar.

5.

Library. On an individual basis, the student used a specialized library to locate science information.

6.

Mentor. On an individual 'basis, the student met with a-scientist or other science resource person to discuss a science topic. The resource person might have suggested additional readings, resources, and/or ideas for further work.

7.

Project Ideas. On an individual basis, the student used published material to do an individualized science project. The published material was used for independent study or in conjunction with a resource person.

8.

Science Processes. On an individual basis, the student used published material to develop skills and processes of science. These could have included laboratory skills; suggestions for science problem solving; and discussions conderning the_collection, processing, analysis, and presentation of data.

p.

Visit. On an individual basis, the student toured a science or scienceThis could have included a personalized tour led by a related facility. resource person to observe activities and/or procedures aot normally available to the public.

DISTRIBUTION: GSP SEPORT :;0. 1/79,

The student attended a specialized science

W.-lite/Gind Science Project; Yellow/STUDENT ENVELOPE 1

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 3 TEACHER FEEDBACK Completed by: Purpose: Distribution:

Teacher Describe the student's experience with a resource Gifted Science Project office

Student

Resource File No.

Teacher

School

Resource Directions* Our records indicate that the student named above used a Gifted Science Project (GSP) resource. Please interview the student and record the information below. If you need help, call the GSP office at 279-3500 between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The best time to call is between 8:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. when part-time clerical staff are present. Return this report within two days by using the enclosed, addressed, return envelope.

L. Student Experiences. Nine types of student experiences ar: listed below. Interview the student and mark the boxes for aZ: statements which best describe his/her experiences while he/she used the resource. Briefly describe the experiences you marked.

The student received infOrmation througti conversation, reading, or observation or was provided data. Description:

fl

2.

The student observed objects and/or phenomena. Description:

3.

The student measured objects and/or phenomena. Description:

4.

The student formulated a hypothesis related to a problem. Description:

5.

The student designed procedures for testing a hypothesis. Description: 'MFs

0

6.

The student carried out an activity to solve a problem or test a hypothesis. Description:

7.

The student utilized knowledge and/or skills to describe andlor construct a theoretical model. Description:

8.

The student applied newly acquired scientific knowledge to other problems. Description:

9.

The student developed and/or used manual skills. Description:

GSF REPORT NO.,3 1/79

REPORT OONTINUED Oi REVERSE SIDE -527

Page 1 of 2.

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 3 TEACHER FEEDBACK

Supplementary Information.

0

YES

1.

Please respond to the ),,tems below.

(a)

Have you observed a change in science attitude, interest, mptivation, or other behaviors, stated or demonstrated by the studeV, which you feel was directly related to his/her involvement with the resource?

(b)

Describe your observations of this change and add comments you feel wouldohelp to describe the change.

NO

0 UNCERTAIN

2.

State any difficulty the student encountered in using the resource.

3.

Use this space for additional comments you wish to make.

ft

Page 2 of 2

GSP REPORT NO. 3 1/79 -5 3-

Completed by. purpose. Distrioution:

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 4 STUDENT FEEDBACK

Siudent

:ascribe çhw student's experience with the resource Lifted Sci nee Project office

Student

Resource FileNo.

Teacher

School

Resource

:0 ME iTY0ENT:

We want to know what you did with the science resource you used and how Please help us by answering these questions. Read the directions carefully since each part asks you to 0 different things. If you need help or do not understand you are to do, ask your teacher for help. When you have finished answering the questions, give this report to your teacher. you liked it.

Part; Directions: The questions in this part refer to the science resource you used. Answer each question by putting an X in one of the boxes. If you can't decide on a YES or NO answer, then put an X in the box NOT SURE. ,

NOT SURE

YES 1.

Did you learn something new about how scientists work?

2.

Did this science resource help you?

NO

,

3.

Would you like to use this science resource again?

Would you like to learn more about this topic using a different science resource? 5.

a.

Did you use a resource like this last year?

,

ON MY OWN b.

WITH OTHEFS

If your answer is YES, mark whether it was on your own. or with other students.

Part II Directions: The sentences in this part refer to your use of the science resource. Put an X in the space which best describes your experiences.

A LOT 6.

I learned new things.

7.

This resource made me want to learn more about the science topic I studied.

8.

I liked this science resource.

SOME

NOT SURE

VERY LITTLE

ALMOST NONE

THERE ARE MORE QUESTIONS ON THE OTHER SIDE GSP REPORT NO. Revised 8/79

4

Page 1 of 2 -54-

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 4 STUDENT FEEDBACK 71r: ,)

Irections:

Write your answer to each question in tne space below

What kinds of things did you do when you used this science Tesource? '(

9.

10.

If the science resource helped you, tell us how it helped you.

If the science resource did NOT help you, tell us why it did not.

What did you like abot this science resource?

_2.

What did you NOT like about this science resource?

hac ocher type of science help would you like to have?

AS SCOY AS YOU HAVE :=7=,

GS? REPORT NO. 4 Revised 8/.79

REPOR'

Y(.."'UR :EAC5ER

Page 2 of 2

1

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 5 SUMMARY COMMENTS Completed by: Purpose: Distribution:

Toacher Describe the teacher's experience with the Project Gifted Science Project office

School

Teacher Directions:

This report contains three pacts. using the enclosed envelops.

Part / Directions: 1.

Please return the complated report within two days by

Please mark the box of your choice for number I end, if Appropriate, slsborste below.

D

Did you use the Gifted Science Project Resource File?

,

Yes

0 No

\ why.

'If you did not use the Project Resource File, please tell u

iiIt was not applicable to my teaching assignment

0 Other (please explain) Put an X in the box under the column which best describes your level of agreement with each statement. You can elaborate on your answers it. Part III of this report.

Part II Directions:

Strongly Agree

Not Certain

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

I

2.

I was adequately informed of the purpose of the Project Resource File before using 4.

.

.

,..._ .

3.

The IN-SERVICE MANUAL helped me use the Project Resource File.

4.

The IN-SERVICE MANUAt.helped me complete the necessary project

.

reports.

5.

The project helped me meet the needs of my gifted science pupils.

.

\

Part III Directions:

6.

Please mark the box of your choice for number 6 and write a brief statement for items 7 and 8.

Resources in the Project Resource File can be located by grade level, followed by topics for each grade level, followed by resource categories for each topic. Items They are not alphabetized by objecare alphabetized within each topic and category. tive; however, the objective number is on each item in the Project Resource File. Mark the box of your choic\e.

0 This arrangement is sa isfactory and should not be changed.

0 An alternatiA system s ould be used.

(Please explain on the reverse side.)

7.

List the things you like about the project.

8.

Please use the reverse side ta list your concerns or suggestions.

GSP REPORT NO. 5 Revised 2/80

56

.

(.1

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 6 MEDIA SPECJALIST FEEDBACK Completed bv: Purpose:

Media Specialist Describe use of and,recommenda'tions for improving Ire project products and services Gifted Science Project office

Distribution:

Media Specialist

School . .

This 'report will provide an anecdotal record of the use of the,Project Resource File in your school.

STUDEZ' ENVELOPE Log

I.

i

Directiom:

Each time a teacher is issued, a STUDENT ENVELOPE, record the information the Cot.ment section for any notes that you wish to make. When a STUDENT EN:EL,DPI. 15 returned duirng the project tryout or at the end of the tryout, record the date in tht space provided. Use additional copies of this page'as necessary. %

TeachEr

Student

Date ENVELOPE issued

Date ENVELOPE returned

Comment

' ,

,

4

.

...

,

._

,

.

\......

ri:;

-

osP

li ,

- 0

t.1.1)01r ,,O. b

9

57 t

Page I of 4 I

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 6 MEDIA SPECIALIST FEEDBACK

Revision and Deletion Recommendations 6ire'utions:

If you feel-that an item in Olie Project Resource File which describes publl hod materlal should be revised or deleted, record the information in the chart below. Use additional copies of this page as necessary. CHECK ONE ' Revise Delete

Resource File No.

Reagon for Recommendation

. (

.

. ,

,

,

,

4

.

.

-

., #

r

,

,

1

.

r

1

,

1

1

i

i

1--

/

1

.

.

,

i

.

.

CSP RORT NO. 6

Page 2 of 4

1/79

-58-

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 6 MEDIA SPECIALIST FEEDBACK

III.

*or

Desirable Additions to the School Collection

Dire tion-,:

Published materials in the Project Resource File might not be part of your school's collection. If you received a request for an item you feel would be t dLrable addition to your collection, list its Resource File No. in one of the spaces below.

1.

91.

41.

61.

81.

2.

22.

42.

62.

82.

3.

23.

43.

63.

4.

94.

44.

64.

5.

25.

45.

65.

85.

6.

16.

46.

66.

86.

7.

27.

47.

67.

87.

8.

28.

48.

68.

I.

,

'

83.

84.

.

.88. 4

29.

49.

69.

89.

30.

50.

70.

90.

31.

51.

71.

91.

L.

32.

51.

71.

92.

13.

33.

53.

73.

93.

14.

34.

54.

74.

94.

15.

35.

55.

75..

95.

56.

76.

96.

lb. 17.

37.

57.

77.

97.

1S.

38.

58.

78.

93.

1Q.

39:

59.

79.

99.

40.

60.

SO.

100.

4 CYL

nt:POR: NO.

Page 3 of,4

1, 70 -59-

APPENDIX C:(CONTINUED) REPORT NO. 6

MEDIA SPECIALIST FEEDAC,.

IV.

Additional Information'

:Directions:

.

° .

Write your answers in the spac'e provided.

'15

1. Have you had requests from media specialists from other pilot schools-to share published materials, identified in the Project-Resource File?. A

Estimate the number of requests [7] NO 2.

Have you requet-,ted otW media specialists to share published materials from their collection which we're identified in the Project Resource File? t

YES

Estimate the *number of requests

17 NO Use the space below to identify resources (published 'Or, other) which you, teachers, oi gi,ftedt:scionce studenn have found'helpful and which are not now listed in the Project Resource ie. (Aci'd additional sheets as pecessary). 3%

4

.

4.

Resources in the*Project Resource File can be located by grade level, followed by t pics (rich grae level, follOwed by resource.categories for each topic. The item

for

.

are alphat:tized wLth dl. cach topia* and category. :They are not al_phabetized by'objective, h,xcever, tl)e objective nember, is on each item in the Project Resource File.

nark rhe bo% of'your choice.

E(a) This (b)

auangeple.nt is satifactory and should not-be changed.

I "recoiamend.an alternative system be used.

.

.5.

Ple'ase.explain,below.

V ,

List your concerns "'suggestions for using .the Projett Resource File'.

additional sheets 'as necessary.)

c

(Add'

p.

GSP REPORT NO. 6 .109

Rpge 4 of 4

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) REPPRT NO: 7 RESOURCE SURVEY Completed by: Purposev Distribution:

Resource Person Describe services provided to students prior to the project tryout Gifted Science Project

CONTACT

Please answer the following questions. Return this report to the Gifted Directions: Science Project office by using the enclosed stamped envelope. 'If you have a question about the inforthation requested, call the project office at (301) 279-3500 between 8:30 a.m. anth;5:00 p.m. [11

YES

1.

a NO

Did you provide help in science to an individual gifted student, in Grades 3-8, from one of these s5hoo1s during the. 1978 calendar year?

0 NOT SURE ,Montgomelly County Public Schools (7-8Y Argyle Junior,High Schdol Benjamin Banneker Junior High School (70) Beverly Fart§ Elementary School -(316) Cashell Elementary School (1-6) Cresthaven Elementary School (3-6) Germantown Elementary School -(3-6) Grosvenor Elementary School (3-6) (3-6) Mill Creek Towne Elementary School

MOntgomery County Catholic. school

(4-6) (3-6) (7-8) (7-8) (3=6) (7-8) (3=6)

-

,(3=8)

Little Flower' School

2..

Piney Branch Elonentary School Potomac Elementary,SChoOl Ridgeview 4unior High School TiIden-Junior High School Westbrook Elementary School Western Junior High School Ohetstone Elementary School

If you answered YES above, indicate in the space the total number Give us your ., of students you helped on an individual basis. best estimate. .

3.

DesCribe below the science aszistance or service you provided.

4

GSP REPORT NO. ,7 1r79

APPENDIX C (CONTINUEW' REPORT NO. 8 RESOURCE PERSON FEEDBACK Completed by: Purpose: Distribution:

Resource person Describe the stude'nt's experience with a resource Gifted Science Project office

CONTACT Student

Resource File No.

Teacher

SchOol

Directions: Our records indicate that the student named above used you as a science resource. Please record the information below. If you.need help, please call, the'

Clfted Science Project.office at 279-3500 between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The best time to call,is between 8:30 a.m, and 12:30 p.m. wheh part-time clerical staff are present. 'tour prompt reply will be appreciated. Please return this reportkby using the enclosed 'stamped-envelope. Student Experiences. Nine types of student experiences are listed below. Mark the boxes for all statements which best describe the student's experiences while heisha worked with you. Briefly describe the experiences you marked. I.

The student received informa,tion through conversation, reading, or .observation

.

-

1

,

Th.= srudent ooserved objectynd/or phenomena. ,Descriptibn:

'

I

or was pf-ovided data. Description:

3 .

The student measured o jects and/or phenomena.

Descriptn: The student formulated a.hypothesis related to a problem. Description: ,

The student designed procedures for testing a hypothesis: Description:

Li 5'

.7

F.

The student carried out an activity to solve a problem or test's hypothesis. Description:

7,

The student utilized knowledge.atd/or skills to describe and/or construct a theoretical model. Description:

OSP REPORT NO. 1/79

*

S

REORT CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE

.Page 1 of 2

.

APP615.11X C (MINTINUED) REPORT NO. 8

RESOURCE PERSON FEEDBACK 8.

0 9.

II.

The student applied newly acquired scientific knowledge to other problems. Description:

The student developed and/or used manual skills. Description:

Supplementary Information.

OYES

1.

(a)

Have you observed a change in science attitude, interest, motivation, or other behaviors, stated or demonstrated by the student, which you feel was directly related to his/her involvement Ath you?

(b)

Describe your observations of this change and add comments you feel would help to 4scribe the change.

0 NO ED UNCERTAIN

2.

Please respond,to the itemi below:

Check the applicable box(es). with you?

How did the student communicate

t:p Visited you at work

=Visited you at home CM Communicated by telephone CommUnj.cated in writing

CM Communicated in'some other way (Please explain)

3

In* the space to the left, state the tota time to the (include nearest half-hour you.apent helping this stude telephone and writtn communications, and your pla iing time).

4.

staff regarding the Were you adequatelSr informed by the proj project objectives and the procedures for'your participation? (If NO', please explain below.)

,

YES NC\

.

liv4

E J-1 UNCERTAIN

,

5.

Use this space for additional comment/you wish to make.

Page 2 of 2

GSF REPORT NO. 8 1/79

a./

,

(

, APPENDIX D MATCH OF PROJECT REPORTS WITH EVALUATIVE OBJECTIVES

.

..

<

Evaluative Objective

Report That Assesses Each Objective 1

2

4

3

10

5

6

7

x

8

x

x

x,

11

..

X 43

12

x

13'

X

X

X

X

14

X

X

X

46

X

X

XXXXXX

15

16

X.

X

iX

X

17

X

X ..

.,

18

o I

Cost2effectiveness study; all budget data will be used.

4

c

.. ..

,.

I (

l.

i v

-.64-

ti

1.

-

,,

APPENDIX E 4dorned by the Board or Eduranon Vovember 22, 1978

a pacy statement on

Education ot Gifted and Talented Siudents POLICY

I. CONDITION

II. PURPOSE

The Montgomery Count> Board of Education has determined thAt n struLtion of gifted and talented students shall be identified as a priority area of vonLern and that approprtate steps shall be taken to .ontinue to develop s>stemwide plans that assure plus isions for the gifted and talented in each school Students who are gifted have unique educational needs that should be met if these students are to achies.e their, full porenithl

The purpose of this pohcy

is

to continue to ensure that

Montgomery County Public Schools provide a program of appropriate quahtauvely differentitted instruction K-I2 and in all subject areas. to meet the unique needs of gifted and talented students. The following provisions be mage as gifted and talented programs are w be developed and implemented I. Identification procedure% for all Montgomery County public

Montgomery County Public Schools proy ides i number of

school students who are gifted and or talented in any one or

differentiated educational programs and or set-. ices beyond those

combination of the six categories ol gif tedness in an> subjeu area. K-I 2, will be developed. implemented, and evaluated

normally pros ided fe'the general school population. howeYer appropriate differenuated programs and or sers ices are note v.urreri t:. ay adable tor all Montgomery County Public Sv.hools' gifted and talented stuclents The p4rpfise Jf these programs is to

assist students in realizing their conthiiin tothmsekes and to society Pis, 4rani relers 1,) the ,stentatiC Jt'1j en jf instruown

and erlt,e and ,n,:udec

ro How

implenlentawn plan prr,edurei ,urn,uiton and reS1q1r( ahd eF"taluati()n

,

P!7f

PWflt

g fat, and

,dentilltatt,

.111tif vqeition ,zatr,e/t, iron and traintrig%

41

Gifted and talented students are those. whO by virtue of outytanding .ire ,apahle ot high performanyc These are students who reuuire differentiated eduv.auonal programs and lNr serYices beyond those normally proYided bY the regular school program in order to realize their contnbution to self and to society Students capable ot high pertormance include those with demonstrated achieY mem and or potenpal ability in any of the follow ing areas smith or in combination General intellectual abihty 2 Specific academic aptitude I

3 Creative or productie thinking

and central level. across all grades. \A ill be de% eloped. implemented . and systematicallY e \ al uated to prb s. ide an appropriate educational

experience for identified gifted and talented students 4. Selection of st2ffIll be based upon training and experience in theftducation .of gitted and talented students This will include awareness and adYanced skill les el training tu ensure qualified personnel for the gifted and tafented

III. PROCESS' The develoOment. maintenance. and eyaluation of appropriate

programs for gifted and .talented students will require that the superintendent( Annually Ve-Velop implementation and budget plans to achieve the above purposes of this policy I

4 Leadership ability 5 Visual artd performing arts 6 PsYchomotor abili(y; -Montg.-imery Count) Publa. Sv.hools adopts :his idel \ used defmtioniand belie% es that gifted and talented students should he identified hs professionally qualified persons Montgomery Count:. t'uoblic Schools has a comfmtrnent to meet the needs of pfted and talented students and to assist them in the realizatiiin of their potent.al

65 s

2. Curriculum and other resources that will meet the needs of identified gifted and ulented students will be identified. dey eloped. evaluated. disseminated. and revised. These processes shall be continuous. 3. A variety of organizational options at the school. cluster.area.

2. Estabhsh, moniwr. and reuse'as necessary the guipelines for identifying gifted and talented students. 3. Develop Lurriv.ulum materials and essablish resource arrangements to provide instructional materiak o meet the unique needs of gifted and talented students

4 Estabhsh. monitor, and disseminate information about a variety of organizational models tor instrucvon ot gitqc1 and talented students.

APPENDIX E (CONTINUED) c

PuhI

Pros ide assistarke and support to \ 1 ontgomer% Count!, s, book staff in !he area< of .creersing and assessment ol pupils

b \ eeds assessment ol schook s. Nanning des eloping. implementing. and e aluatmg programs

d Personnel selection c Stall training and in-sen. Ice Msintgomerc Counts Public Schools' and commubity smareness

Doelop and assist in implementing a comprehensie Ntalf ass arenbs program as ell as adsanced skill loci training phigrams aimed at ensunng quahtied personnel for the glued and talented

66

Systematically elate programs projects Monitor programs through the Continuum Education Data Application Project 8

IV. FEEDBACK The superintendent will ensure that I. Programs tor gifted and talented pupils %%ill be identified in the Dtres tot t ol Alternauve Programs and Programs fit,. the Gifted

and Talented. as well as reflected in Montgomery County Pubhc Schools Program ol Studies 2 An annual report sin the stdtus and effectiseness of programs

for gated and talented students is submitted to the Board of Education