This presentation was given by Kathy Maksimov, Curriculum Specialist from the Waterford Institute, at the Pacific District Executive Forum on March 11, 2009. The presentation focused on the ability of well-designed instructional technology to replicate teaching best practices across multiple environments and means of measuring program efficacy.

1. Technology to TEACH Kathy Maksimov Curriculum Specialist

2. Modern Computing Technology

3. Manufacturers needed consistency

4. Scientists needed perfect recall and delivery

5. Businesses needed the ability to scale

6. Turned to Technology Consistent, replicable Perfect recall and delivery The ability to scale

7. As educators, we need consistency, perfect recall, the ability to scale, and … … the time to focus on just one child.

9. Our Students Early Predictor

11. A normal classroom Average Students Exceptional Students Troubled Students

16. w = p * e Example: Digging a Foundation

17. The Work Problem What if your students need this much work?

21. The Work Problem … What if your students need this much work?

22. The Work Problem … Solved!

26. The Formation of Waterford - Dusty’s Epiphany

27. Moore’s Law And so on…

28. Doubling Checkmate $184,000,000,000,000,000.00

30. Decision Science

32. Approximation to Precision

33. Linear vs. Exponential Growth Source: Kurzweil 2005, The Singularity is Near

36. A Teacher’s Perspective … “ It’s independently run. I turn it on in the morning and it pretty much through the rest of the day, gives them their time on it and evaluates where they need to be the next day.” - Shannon Skipper, Pre-K Teacher, Gadsen, Alabama

37. Teacher Experience

38. > 450 Hours of Instruction

39. Ways Programs Deliver Instruction Menu Linear / Predetermined Adaptive (Mastery-based) 1 2 3 4 From Chutes and Ladders by Milton Bradley

40. Waterford Delivers Instruction Automatically individualized for each student From Chutes and Ladders by Milton Bradley

41. Waterford’s Sequencing Lesson Pre-assessment Song Book Instruction Practice Extended Practice Assessment Did the student master the learning objective?

42. Sequencing within a Lesson “ Successful” Sara Continue to the next lesson

43. Sequencing within a Lesson “ Needs Help” Sam Mark this lesson to automatically try again later

44. Sequencing between Lessons Automatic Review Automatic Review Try Again “ Successful” Sara “ Needs Help” Sam 1 2 3 1 4 1 2 3 2 1

49. Study Designs

52. Commons Lane – Kindergarten Results Commons Lane = 3 times the gains! Example

53. Commons Lane – 1 st Grade Results Commons Lane = 2 times the gains! Example

62. Hillcrest Elementary - Results Kindergarten Student Rankings on the Utah State Core Assessment Test Number of Students 1996* Example

64. State of Idaho – Results More Use = Higher Gains 36 37 38 39 44 49 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Control 0–1000 1001– 1500 1501– 2000 2001– 2500 2500+ Usage (Minutes) Average Gain Waterford recommends 15 min per day = 2250 min Example

68. A Midwest School - Results 660 640 620 600 580 560 540 520 500 Grade 1 Grade 2 Control – High Control – Moderate Control – Low Exp – High Exp – Moderate Exp – Low Example

73. True Experiments in Education

76. Tucson Results by classroom 4.95 6.10 11.37 10.44 7.85 Diff 92.6% 97.5% 98.3% 90.6% 88.5% Free & Reduced Lunch 29.1% 6.21 1.26 E WEMS Control 49.0% 13.02 6.92 D WEMS Control 22.5% 14.23 2.86 C WEMS Control 39.2% 13.43 2.99 B WEMS Control 16.0% 8.84 .99 A WEMS Control ELL Gain School Example

78. Tucson Results by subject Math Science Example

79. Tucson Results by gender Example

80. Tucson Results by ELL status Example

81. Tucson Results by ELL status Waterford ELL students had the lowest pretest scores and the highest posttest scores! Example

84. Questions?