Research Background

CompassLearning Odyssey December 2013

CompassLearning 203 Colorado St. Austin, TX 78701 1-800-232-9556 www.compasslearning.com

CompassLearning 2

Table of Contents

Product Research Basis ................................................................................ 5

Odyssey Reading/Language Arts ............................................................... 27

Odyssey Math ............................................................................................. 30

Odyssey Science ......................................................................................... 31

Odyssey Social Studies .............................................................................. 32

Product Research Bibliography ................................................................ 33

Professional Development Research Bibliography................................. 37

Effectiveness ............................................................................................... 41

CompassLearning 3

CompassLearning 4

Product Research Basis

CompassLearning has always been about teaching more than rote foundational knowledge and discrete procedures. Our attention to brain research and how content is retained and successfully applied or transferred is, and has been, a key differentiator for CompassLearning. This has resulted in us building content that offers vast opportunities for exploration, discovery, critical thinking, analysis and deep reasoning around concepts.

CompassLearning’s Odyssey curriculum is based on the recommendations and research of the national professional organizations, federal advisory panels, and independent groups such as the Instructional Research Group (directed by Russell Gersten and Joseph Dimino) in Long Beach, CA. CompassLearning’s assessment and reporting meet NCLB accountability requirements and requirements for curriculum that is based on scientific-based research. CompassLearning closely monitors federal legislation to assure that we remain compliant. In developing computer-based instructional programs, CompassLearning has chosen pedagogy that best relates to the subject matter and utilizes the unique features of a computer for delivering instruction. The pedagogy was selected based on the educational research of subject area experts and product development teams and incorporates both traditional and current learning theory.

CompassLearning 5

Designed to efficiently and effectively improve instruction for learners at diverse performance levels, the scope and sequence of Odyssey addresses and prioritizes important grade-level competencies. The program’s research-based pedagogy ensures that students are provided with clear examples and focused activities that move from the simple to the complex and from the concrete to the abstract in a manner that provides scaffolded support to the learner. Intervention activities are delivered through engaging, highly interactive, and individualized learning paths that provide targeted instruction on specific skills and concepts. Instant feedback and repetitive skill development ensure that students are mastering critical objectives before moving on to more complex materials. CompassLearning takes cues from a variety of experts and researchers in the field of cognitive and instructional theory. The following theories are incorporated into the design, content, and delivery methods of CompassLearning Odyssey. Marc Prensky and James Paul Gee’s Gaming and Motivational Theories

Odyssey's online activities contain text, graphics, animation, and audio. Students are engaged through music, graphics, animation, and interaction. The use of multimedia is designed to enhance the learning experience; not overwhelm the student. Interactive multimedia addresses the various learning styles and multiple intelligences of students.

CompassLearning 6

Richard Mayer’s Principle of Personalization

Richard Mayer’s Principle of Personalization shows that students performed up to 40% better when content was delivered in a first-person, conversational style rather than with a formal tone (Mayer 2000). In a study published in the Journal of Educational Psychology, Mayer and research partner Roxana Moreno conclude, “The reported results have strong implications for teaching. The most direct practical implication of the present study is that multimedia science programs can result in broader learning if the communication model is centered around shared environments in which the student is addressed as a participant rather than as an observer.” CompassLearning has a team of entertainment writers to take the rigorous instructional content from the curriculum and instruction team and turn it into conversational, age-appropriate activities. Delivering content using an interactive conversational interface allows CompassLearning products to:

Stimulate the brain Connect response to prerecorded characters Create suspension of disbelief and give the computer human-like qualities Create feelings of personal connection

The Role of Positive Emotions in Learning

Students retain what they learn when the learning is associated with a strong, positive emotion (Dulay and Burt, 1977, Krashen, 1982). Age-appropriate humor and positive feedback are incorporated throughout CompassLearning Odyssey activities to engage the student and create positive feelings about the learning activities. Studies have shown that when classroom activities are pleasurable, the brain releases dopamine, a neurotransmitter that stimulates the memory centers and promotes acetylcholine, which increases focused attention (Willis 2007). Eric Jensen’s Work on the Difference between the Child and Adult Brain Students’ minds work differently from adult minds. In Eric Jensen’s study in 2000, researchers took a digital electronic scan of an adult’s brain doing a specific mental process and compared it to children’s brains doing the same process. Results showed that the children use significantly different neural pathways to take in, process, and store the same information as adults — especially in the visual cortex in the back of the brain. CompassLearning Odyssey uses a variety of interactive visual techniques in online activities to bring concepts to life. In the lower grades, characters often play a role in conveying information, whereas the high school courses feature 2–3 minute instructor-led video segments. Bertelsman Foundation Study about the Impact of Media and Technology A Bertelsman Foundation study examined the impact that media elements and technology can have on learning and retention levels. In the study, students were split into two groups to learn about the Civil War. Group A used traditional methods and Group B used media tools and computer instruction. Both scored the same on a teacher-built traditional test administered immediately after instruction. One year later, the students in Group A could recall very few facts they had learned, while the students in Group B displayed recollection of elaborate concepts and ideas that they had extended into other areas of history. Group A defined history as the record of the facts of the past while Group B defined history as a process of interpreting the past from different perspectives.

CompassLearning 7

The Response to Intervention Model

Response to Intervention is designed to provide early, effective assistance to struggling learners. Response to Intervention seeks to prevent academic failure through early intervention, frequent progress measurement, and increasingly intensive research-based instructional interventions for children who continue to have difficulty. CompassLearning promotes a Response to Intervention approach by providing various levels of student support and additional time on task. Madeline Hunter’s Method of Direct Instruction Hunter emphasizes in her method of direct instruction that each activity should begin by setting the stage for the lesson with clear objectives, and then provide an understanding of the standards or what is expected from the student during the lesson. Next, Hunter stresses the importance of the “anticipatory set” or grabbing the student’s attention before moving into teaching through input of information, modeling, and checking for understanding. Many techniques from Hunter’s method of direction instruction are incorporated into CompassLearning Odyssey. In Odyssey, there are multiple opportunities for guided practice and monitoring. Lessons end with closure and opportunities for independent practice.

Robert Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction

According to Robert Gagne, there are nine events that activate processes needed for effective learning. Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction are:

1. Gain attention—grab the student’s attention with devices like story telling. 2. Inform learner of objective—this allows students to better understand what they are

about to do. 3. Stimulate recall of prior knowledge—learners are more successful if they are able to

build on previous knowledge. 4. Present the material—a variety of learning strategies can be used at this stage. 5. Provide guidance for learning—teach the students how to learn.

6. Elicit performance—allow the student to use his or her new skills. 7. Provide feedback—tests, quizzes, or verbal feedback can provide valuable

information. 8. Assess performance—testing will determine if the student has learned the lesson. 9. Enhance retention and transfer—review the lesson by providing additional practice;

put the learner in a transfer situation. These events should create the necessary conditions for learning and serve as the basis for designing instruction and selecting appropriate media to educate students (Gagne, Briggs & Wager, 1992). Odyssey incorporates these events into the various components of a lesson. Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences According to Gardner, there are seven distinct intelligences that can be linked to neurological substrates:

1. Linguistic intelligence—sensitivity to the spoken and written word and the ability to master languages.

2. Logical-mathematical intelligence—the capacity to analyze problems logically and scientifically.

3. Musical intelligence—skill in the performance, composition, and appreciation of music.

4. Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence—as exemplified by dancers, surgeons, and artists. 5. Spatial intelligence—characteristic of pilots, graphic artists, and architects. 6. Interpersonal intelligence—a talent for understanding and relating to other people.

CompassLearning 8

7. Intrapersonal intelligence—the capacity for understanding oneself. Mindy L. Kornhaber (2001) summarizes the response of the education world to Garner’s theory: “[Gardner’s theory] validates educators' everyday experience: students think and learn in many different ways. It also provides educators with a conceptual framework for organizing and reflecting on curriculum assessment and pedagogical practices.” CompassLearning solutions are designed to meet the range of learners in the classroom and help differentiate instruction to meet each student’s individual needs.

Literacy Across the Curriculum

Literacy across the subject areas has become increasingly important in schools today. CompassLearning has reviewed the latest research on teaching literacy in all subjects including the All4Ed Publication, Literacy Instruction in the Content Areas. CompassLearning strives to teach literacy strategies across all content areas through the following activities:

Word Identification: o narrator pronounces words that are on-screen; o glossary gives “student-friendly” definitions for difficult terminology; o glossary teaches students to correctly pronounce terms; and o students continually exposed to dynamic on-screen text with complementing

visuals as text is spoken.

Background Knowledge: o narrator prompts students to think of their own experiences with a topic; and o narrator relates topics in science with everyday life.

Fluency: o glossary aids students in word recognition for difficult words; and o task persistence is made easier for students by avoiding lengthy reading

passages.

Comprehension: o narrator introduces lessons and readings and anticipates and addresses

potential student misconceptions; o “metacognitive bubbles” provide scaffolding to students who need help learning

to “think aloud”, promote self-questioning and self-monitoring, and aid students in making predictions;

o on-screen text is brief and manageable for easier comprehension – students may scroll at their own pace;

o narrator guides students to summarizations and main idea via interactive questioning and guided processing;

o individualized instruction at student’s pace with scaffolding that increases or decreases according to student responses;

o specific feedback is given; and o “hint buttons” are included with questions which are tied to the critical mistakes

guidance. Critical Mistakes Guidance

When developing instructional content, CompassLearning analyzes the most common critical mistakes students make when learning a particular concept. Deborah Schifter, Principal Research Scientist at the Education Development Center, asserts that both students and teachers gain new mathematical understanding by examining the reasoning behind a student's

CompassLearning 9

incorrect answer. CompassLearning’s curriculum experts structure courses and activities to recognize student mistakes and provide personalized feedback to the student based on the error he or she made. As a result, when a student answers a question incorrectly, the program identifies the type of mistake the student is making and branches him or her to feedback specific to that mistake. This is far more valuable to the student than a generic response, turning an error in logic or understanding into an additional opportunity to teach the concept. Additional Research

Other research-based learning theory applied in the development of Odyssey includes:

Allan Collins and Richard Halvorson’s Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology: The Digital Revolution and Schooling in America

Dr. Gary Small and Gigi Vorgan’s iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind

Elizabeth Schnar-Dobler’s Reading on the Internet: The Link Between Literacy and Technology. Reading Online

Lev Vygotsky’s theory that learning occurs through assisted performance

Jerome Bruner’s education learning theories including spiraled learning and scaffolding

Ausubel’s theory about how students learn information

B.F. Skinner’s behaviorist research

J. Guilford’s research on convergent and divergent thinkers

Jean Piaget’s theory of child development and research on abstract and concrete perceivers

Benjamin Bloom’s taxonomy of higher-order thinking skills

Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe’s Understanding by Design

David Rose’s Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning

Roger Bybee’s (BSCS) 5E model of instruction

Robert Marzano and John Kendall, The New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives

Elizabeth Moje, Zhuihui Fang, and Mary Schleppegrell’s work on content area literacy

Michael McKenna, Linda Labbo, David Reinking, and Tricia Zucker, Effective Uses of Technology in Literacy Instruction

The research and findings of these theorists is applied in the Odyssey curriculum as follows:

Direct Instruction— Direct Instruction (DI) is a model for teaching that emphasizes well-

developed and carefully planned lessons designed around small learning increments and clearly defined and prescribed teaching tasks. It is based on the theory that clear instruction that eliminates misinterpretations can greatly improve and accelerate learning. While there are specific DI programs that are scripted, within the scope of Odyssey, the term refers primarily to “teacher-directed” instruction that leaves nothing to chance.

Skill and mechanics mastery are provided as a way to improve students’ comprehension

of material. Opportunities for exploration, discovery, and problem solving, as well as guided work, are included to ensure retention.

Differentiated Instruction— Assessment driven instruction focuses on meeting the needs

of students at different levels of competence as identified by diagnostic and progress monitoring test results. This includes students at different readiness levels, responding to students' interests, and offering students choices in preferred ways of learning or expressing themselves.

CompassLearning 10

The power of differentiating instruction lies in the ability to provide just-in-time learning for students who show a special interest in a subject, in allowing students to move forward in the curriculum once they have achieved mastery, in providing branching down opportunities for students who need intervention, and in being able to track the path a student takes as he or she moves toward mastery. CompassLearning provides this through Odyssey Explorer assessments and learning paths.

Scaffolding—CompassLearning uses scaffolding to prepare students sufficiently to

complete learning tasks on their own by developing appropriate strategies and concepts. The inclusion of technology-based content provides some unique new opportunities to scaffold. For example, the program supports the acquisition of new vocabulary when words are linked to definitions and examples and with audio. CompassLearning creates online and offline performance support documents to help students master specific information processing and communication skills. CompassLearning instructional models include:

o Modeling performance in lessons

o Providing prompts, links, guides, and structures for learning complex concepts

o Removing those structures when the child is ready to learn without them

Tiering modifies instruction and level of difficulty based on results of the Explorer or custom assessment.

Instructional Branching—Instructional feedback is embedded to assist student learning

before, during, and after activities in all CompassLearning products. Assessment tools prescribe an individual learning path based on student mastery before the student begins the activities. At selected points in Odyssey, when a student scores below 70% he or she is branched to a remediation activity that addresses the same objectives as the original activity, but in a different way. Offline activities give follow-up remediation and practice based on teacher observation and data from reports. To encourage critical thinking skills, exploratory activities are included in key activities as well.

In addition to the embedded branching, teachers can add their own “decision points” in instructional sequences to assure that students who are not mastering materials are branched to additional intervention and/or that the teacher is alerted.

A spiraled curriculum ensures that important skills and concepts are reintroduced

throughout different levels with increasing difficulty to ensure mastery and retention.

Technology and active learning lessons address the wide variety of learning

modalities—visual, auditory, tactile, and kinesthetic—characteristic of today’s learners.

Online and offline activities provide materials in various media to address students’ different learning styles.

CompassLearning continuously monitors research, data, and legislation to insure that its products are based on sound instructional principles and that they meet the academic needs of students and school districts.

CompassLearning 11

Common Core

At CompassLearning, we like to say, “We were Common Core before there was a Common Core.” CompassLearning’s curriculum and instruction team brings more than a century of experience and expertise designing and aligning curriculum and content to support standards. They have, and continue to create, highly engaging and rigorous instructional content that align with the requirements and intent of the Common Core State Standards. As the Common Core State Standards continue to evolve – including micro standards and assessments – CompassLearning will continue to align our existing content and continuously build new activities to meet the standards. In addition to closely monitoring the development of the Common Core State Standards, CompassLearning has developed many new learning activities and assessment items to meet the increased rigor and changing pedagogy of the new standards. These activities apply the most recent research-based instructional strategies including:

Planning the curriculum from the desired student outcomes (backward design)

Maintaining students’ interest and aiding information retention with real-world examples and practice (real-world application)

Teaching students at the core of support and growth to maximize achievement (zone of proximal development, scaffolding)

21st century skill development with a technological interface look and feel CompassLearning Odyssey English/Language Arts (informational text, literature and writing) K-12 activities align with the Common Core standards and intent, and also include supports for rigorous and relevant learning through their integration of multiple texts and grade level opportunities:

• Interdisciplinary content with science and social studies texts • Challenging, grade level-appropriate vocabulary (robust language) • Having students try to discover new information, in addition to direct instruction (inquiry-

based learning) • Different levels of support within a single concept (multi-tiered scaffolding) • Integrating skills and concepts with thematic content • Exposure to authentic text and practice using National Geographic Kids® and other texts

(authentic practice) • Reading comprehension strategies (metacognitive skills)

CompassLearning 12

The alignment to the Common Core is available online in the Odyssey Manager in the curriculum sequences, in assessments, and in the reports module for easy assignment and tracking of aligned content and mastery of those objectives. CompassLearning Odyssey Math K–12 is based on how children learn number operations (cognitively guided instruction), as well as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ Principles and Standards for Teaching Mathematics and the 5E instructional model,

CompassLearning Odyssey Math activities develop a deep understanding of concepts and align with the Common Core standards and intent by:

• Moving from concrete to abstract

• Fostering understanding of why, not just how

• Providing multiple representations and real-world examples

• Using virtual manipulatives

• Modeling mathematical reasoning The engaging, content-rich activities feature easy and intuitive features. The online activities provide an opportunity for the students to practice and explore. Manipulatives and tools are incorporated throughout the activities. The offline activities afford another medium to practice and learn the skills, create projects, and authentically assess students.

Like the language arts courses, the alignment to the Common Core is available online in the Odyssey Manager in the curriculum sequences, in assessments, and in the reports module.

CompassLearning 13

CompassLearning 14

Common Core State Standards: Instructional Shifts in Literacy Shifts in ELA/ Literacy

CompassLearning Odyssey Renzulli Learning

Balancing Informational and Literary Text: Students read a balance of informational and literary texts.

In Odyssey, special attention has been paid in the past few years to balancing informational and literary texts used in the elementary language arts courseware. As a result, Odyssey reading/language arts activities contain a blend of fiction and non-fiction selections from traditional to contemporary sources.

The Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) of learning, on which Renzulli is based, emphasizes developing the interests of individual students, and recognizes that various writing genres (such as stories, biographies, and textbooks) accomplish this in different ways. Renzulli’s database of over 40,000 resources provides three separate enrichment categories—fiction, non-fiction, and how to—which offer a wealth of informational and authentic texts. Teachers can search for fiction and non-fiction texts in the database, search for resources aligned to the Common Core standards, or select a specific piece of literature from Literature Connections to assign to students.

CompassLearning 15

Knowledge in the Disciplines: Students build knowledge about the world through text.

The Odyssey reading/language arts learning activities draw from cross-curriculum themes, many in science and social studies. CompassLearning strives to teach literacy strategies across all content areas through word identification, background knowledge, fluency, and comprehension activities. Reading passages across the curriculum include literacy supports such as:

“Think-aloud” features that model reading strategies and ask students to visualize and predict

Links to difficult vocabulary words in the glossary

Read-aloud functionality that allows struggling readers to have a section of text read to them

Metacognitive “thought bubbles” that model good reading practices

Renzulli supports project-based learning, which means that students build knowledge about the world, in large part, through activities. These activities include smaller projects, such as writing a biography or literary response, to larger projects, such as completing a four to six week-long Super Starter Project. Renzulli projects involve solving real-world problems, and this requires working in one or more disciplines. Every Renzulli project includes a research phase during which students develop knowledge by reading texts from relevant content areas.

CompassLearning 16

Text-Based Answers: Students engage in rich and rigorous evidence-based activities about text.

In Odyssey learning activities and assessment items, care has been taken to ask students questions that are text dependent (i.e., not those that can be answered based only on prior knowledge or experience).

Renzulli prompts students to respond in writing in the body of assignments and projects, in response fields in lessons and assessments, in comments and messages to the teacher, in the online student journal, and (at the teacher's discretion) in posts to Collaborative Learning Group message boards. The teacher and peers have opportunities to respond and to press for additional evidence. From http://www.mysteryquests.ca/quests/04/indexen.html#task:

CompassLearning 17

Writing From Sources: Writing emphasizes use of evidence from sources to inform or make an argument.

Odyssey Writer provides a tool for practicing writing—from informative and argumentative essays to research projects. Activities requiring this kind of writing are embedded in the learning activities, and teachers can create additional activities in Odyssey Writer.

The Renzulli enrichment category, Critical Thinking, is devoted to resources that model appropriate and inappropriate uses of evidence. Critical Thinking activities challenge students to analyze material for point of view, bias, logically-supported conclusions, sequential development of a point, and other skills. The Renzulli database also contains other materials that guide students through the process of developing an argument -- for example, the Renzulli Super Starter Projects "Deep Thinkers" and "Raise Awareness"; the Assignment Templates "Analyzing Awesome Authors," "How to Prepare for a Debate," and "So You Have Issues -- Now What? Policy Explorations"; and the Unit Supplements "Research-Based Persuasive Essays" and "Response to Literature."

CompassLearning 18

Staircase of Complexity: Students read grade appropriate text around which instruction is centered.

Odyssey’s reading selections are chosen for their grade appropriateness using a number of tools including readability measures and Lexile levels. Reading passages increase in difficulty through the grade levels taking into account the three dimensions of text complexity: qualitative considerations, quantitative measures, and professional judgment. Students can read at their own paces to assure close and careful reading, and embedded comprehension questions provide checks and rerouting back to the text as needed. Scaffolding is used to support students who read below grade level. Strategy support includes hints and re-teaching of skills and concepts. Re-teaching, when needed, explains the skill in a different way. This instructional design addresses the various learning styles and how students learn. A narrator guides students to summarizations and main idea via interactive questioning and guided processing. “Hint buttons” with questions are tied to the student misunderstandings. As students gain competence, they can choose to use fewer and fewer supports.

For many students, "close reading" involves putting down the book from time to time to play imaginatively with situations or characters, to apply ideas, or to solve problems. Renzulli's book-based resources and Unit Supplements provide these opportunities as well as reading comprehension assessments. In addition, the Literature Connections tool identifies enrichment activities that are categorized as Author Study, Historical Background (grades 3-12 only), Pre-Reading Resources, During Reading Resources, Post Reading Projects, and Themed Resources. Each of the 40,000 resources in the Renzulli database is analyzed and ranked by a curriculum specialist, who assigns it an ability level such as "Grades 3-5 Low." Teachers can view and search by these ability levels so that it is possible to spiral Renzulli content and present increasingly complex texts.

CompassLearning 19

Academic Vocabulary: Students build the transferable vocabulary they need to access grade level complex texts.

In each level of Odyssey, vocabulary words and vocabulary development skills are taught explicitly and implicitly (through hyperlinking) and practiced across the learning activities. This includes high frequency/utility words, content-specific vocabulary, and subject-specific vocabulary to build students’ ability to access more complex texts across content areas. In Odyssey, students are taught word learning strategies such as using root words to help them figure out the meaning of unknown academic language.

Whenever possible Renzulli links to e-books and other online text formats, which allow students to search texts by keyword and develop contextual understanding of important vocabulary. From http://flocabulary.com/1-something-that-doesnt-exist/:

CompassLearning 20

Common Core State Standards: Instructional Shifts in Mathematics Shifts in Math Renzulli Learning

Focus: Narrow and deepen the scope of how time and energy is spent in math activities. Focus deeply on only the concepts that are prioritized in the standards.

In Odyssey, the learning paths have been enhanced by adding content to deepen the instructional lessons aligned with the Common Core Standards and focus tightly on those skills and concepts that will build strong foundations for students. 1

st Grade Focus on “Add and subtract within 20,

demonstrating fluency for addition and subtraction within 10”

Renzulli's differentiated approach enables the teacher to supply each student with appropriate, concept-based instructional, practice, assessment, and project (application) resources. Students are motivated because instruction is tailored to their individual abilities, learning style and interests. Many practice tests are scored online and automatically. The teacher is then free to focus on concepts, rather than grading. In addition, teachers have several instructional options to focus deeper on math concepts that are prioritized in the standards. Teachers can search for activities aligned to a specific Common Core standard, create their own Assignment Template or Unit Supplement, and can choose from existing Assignment Templates or enrichment activities from Unit Supplements to assign to students. 5

th Grade Measurement Focus on Volume

CompassLearning 21

Coherence: Carefully connect learning within and across grades so that students can build new understanding onto foundations built in previous years.

Each standard is not a new event, but an extension of previous learning. In Odyssey, math content is carefully connected within and across grade levels so students can build new understanding onto foundations built in previous years. The Odyssey scope and sequence was built to provide both depth and breadth. In its curricular design, Odyssey combines a horizontal curriculum consisting of what is basically taught within a school year with a vertical curriculum encompassing what is taught from year to year. Most importantly, Odyssey integrates these curriculum designs with a spiral curriculum where concepts and skills are taught every year, but in an upward spiral of difficulty to ensure understanding and to meet the various learning styles of students.

The Odyssey spiraling curriculum maintains consistent content throughout, but increases in depth, detail and critical thinking skills as the student progresses. Students using the Odyssey curriculum repeatedly experience, practice, and critically examine both the likenesses and differences of concepts as they progress through their assignments. As students engage themselves at new levels of experience, they widen and deepen their knowledge while integrating other aspects of knowledge both online and offline. This combination of resources permits students to review, extend, reinforce, and transfer their knowledge in various activities.

When a student logs in for the first time, they complete their Renzulli Profiler. The Profiler is a detailed online questionnaire that determines a student’s academic strengths, interests, learning styles, and expression styles. Once the Renzulli Profiler is complete, the student is presented with a customized portfolio of enrichment activities. Although students are encouraged to retake the Renzulli Profiler each year, in most cases their interests and expression styles tend to deepen rather than to change. This leads to cohesive learning: the student who has explored angles and distances by building a model trebuchet will remember the experience and retain the knowledge gathered in context, and the relevant notes and plans will remain in his or her Renzulli portfolio. Teachers can search for resources for the same concepts at different grade levels to provide activities of increasing difficulty for students.

CompassLearning 22

Fluency: Students are expected to have speed and accuracy with simple calculations.

Practice activities reinforce lesson concepts and support the development of procedural fluency and automaticity. On-going progress monitoring branches the learner to different parts of the learning path depending on his or her mastery of content objectives. Within each topic, concepts are developed in a logical, sequential order and each learning path is a progression of activities based on the assessment of individual student abilities. Odyssey Math builds students’ conceptual understanding through concrete, representational, and abstract instructional sequences. Graphics are used to teach, illustrate, and practice concepts. The progression from concrete to abstract may be present within a single learning activity and/or across grade levels.

Manipulatives and tools are incorporated throughout the activities and a stand-alone math toolkit provides thirteen additional manipulatives for practice and exploration. The toolkit contains virtual manipulatives that are available at all levels of Odyssey Math.

To develop fluency in simple calculations, Renzulli relies heavily on animations, simulations, and games (online activities). This is one type of repetitive practice that many students find engaging and challenging; they are motivated to persist at it in order to improve their speed and their score and develop fluency. As with other activities, teacher can search across grade levels to build student skills as they gain mastery and competence. Example from http://www.primaryinteractive.co.uk/maths.htm:

CompassLearning 23

Deep Understanding: Students deeply understand and can operate easily within a math concept before moving on.

The 5-E instructional model is used in the learning activity design or is developed across several activities in a learning path to ensure students always receive direct instruction as well as guided and independent practice.

Odyssey Math activities develop a deep understanding of concepts by:

Moving from concrete to abstract

Fostering understanding of why, not just how

Providing multiple representations and real-world examples

Using virtual manipulatives

Modeling mathematical reasoning

Renzulli encourages project-based learning, so that students are using math to solve real-world problems. Instead of simply applying a formula throughout a problem set, they must wrestle with a mathematical concept, observing in practical terms how it applies (or fails to apply). Enrichment activities that are labeled Critical Thinking encourage students to not only solve a problem; but to explain, clarify, and interpret the solution. From http://mathforum.org/alejandre/frisbie/student.brick.html:

CompassLearning 24

Applications: Students are expected to use math and choose the appropriate concept for application.

Application of new ideas is central in the 5E instructional design applied in Odyssey. Because each student has specific needs, the instructional design in Odyssey incorporates explicit strategy instruction to support students, individually, as they learn and apply new skills. As a student gains competence, he/she can choose to use fewer supports, making instruction more intense as supports are reduced. Problems are set in real-world contexts to develop connections.

Renzulli students become accustomed to applying math as they solve problems that interest them in fields such as architecture, engineering, business, microbiology, art, social studies, and cooking. Instead of memorizing abstract formulas, students learn mathematical concepts and their applications; when faced with an application, they are able to work backwards and select the appropriate concepts. From http://www.figurethis.org/challenges/c56/challenge.htm:

CompassLearning 25

Dual Intensity: Students are practicing and understanding. There is a balance between these two things and both are occurring with intensity.

Odyssey focuses on both fluency and application to assure that student can use core math facts quickly and apply math in the real world. The program is written on the 5E instructional model and provides students with direct instruction, guided practice, and scored/independent practice. Explain (Direct Instruction)

Elaborate (Guided Practice)

Evaluation (Scored Practice or Activity Quiz)

"Intensity" is an excellent word to describe a Renzulli classroom, because students are solving real-world problems that interest them. They understand, apply, and then understand more deeply, which motivates them to modify and retry their application.

CompassLearning 26

Odyssey Reading/Language Arts

Odyssey Reading/Language Arts combines scientifically-based reading curricula, assessment and performance outcome measures, data-driven instruction systems, and professional development to create an intensive reading intervention program that contains high quality curriculum materials. Odyssey Reading/Language Arts applies the current and confirmed research about reading, vocabulary, and adolescent literacy from contemporary experts including Isabel Beck, Margaret McKeown, Michael Graves, and Joseph Torgesen among many others. Odyssey Reading/Language Arts provides instruction and documentation of growth in the five

competencies of reading. Instructional activities within the curriculum provide instruction, practice, and evaluation of these competencies for a comprehensive instructional program. Growth documentation and progress monitoring is done through the reporting functionality for both assessment and instructional activities. The program incorporates a wide variety of print and technology based materials to create a program based on sound research and design.

The National Reading Panel Report (NRPR) titled Teaching Children to Read (2000) is a key

document in the development of content for all CompassLearning reading products. The NRPR identifies five essential knowledge and skills that must be developed in children if they are to acquire the critical skills necessary to become proficient readers by the end of third grade, as well as being critical skills in the development of higher-level literacy skills in future years. The five core components that are essential in literacy development are: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. An overview of the research used by CompassLearning in the five critical areas of reading is as follows: Research CompassLearning Odyssey

Phonemic awareness is an oral language skill that has a tremendous impact on the future success of reading. The understanding and attainment of phonemic awareness skills is enhanced by instruction, practice, and oral engagement of the specified sounds (Wagner, et al, 1997).

The phonemic awareness activities developed by CompassLearning provide students with opportunities to hear and work with spoken sounds in a variety of engaging ways. Students have the opportunity to isolate, identify, blend, segment, delete, and add sounds to develop an understanding of phonemic awareness.

Phonics is the knowledge and the ability to be able to sound out words. The systematic and explicit instruction of phonics provided learning opportunities that are carefully selected and organized in a set of letter-sound relationships in a logical sequential order. When students fail to develop efficient phonemic decoding skills during early reading instruction, their exposure to text is

CompassLearning uses a systematic and explicit approach to phonics instruction. Phonics instruction activities are developed in such a way that students have an opportunity to immediately apply and practice the phonics skills learned in a decodable text and in meaningful passages.

CompassLearning 27

limited because they struggle to read independently (Share and Stanovich, 1995).

Fluency is the ability of the reader to be able to control the surface information of the text while being able to comprehend the deeper meaning of the text (Rasinski, 2004). Fluency has three important dimensions: Accuracy in decoding, automatic processing, and prosodic processing (Schreiber, 1991). Fluency is an extremely important factor in successful reading. Fluency and comprehension are closely related. When students are not fluent readers, comprehension is problematic. A recent large-scale study by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) found that 44% of the nation’s fourth graders were low in fluency. Students need to hear fluent reading modeled and have the opportunity to read and reread passages as one method in attaining fluency.

CompassLearning activities provide models for students to hear fluent reading as well as the ability to have a single word read to them as they are reading. This support and whole text modeling provides the support necessary for fluent reading. Students may also read and reread passages until an adequate fluency level is attained.

Vocabulary development involves the students’ knowledge of spoken and written words. Students use background and experiences to construct meaning from texts. Pre-teaching vocabulary and making meaningful connects of unfamiliar words to stories aids in the understanding of new and important words. The relationship between knowledge of reading vocabulary and reading comprehension is closely related (Cunningham and Stanovich, 1998). The National Reading Panel (2002) concluded that comprehension development cannot be understood without a critical examination of the role played by vocabulary knowledge.

Vocabulary activities developed by CompassLearning are embedded in meaningful stories and provided students practice opportunities to hear and use with new words in engaging ways. Students are repeatedly exposed to new and important words and have opportunities to apply and practice the new words learned.

Comprehension is the active mental processing that students bring to the act of reading. Reading is intended to be a “meaning-making process”. Active comprehension is at the heart of reading. In fact, some have defined reading as “thinking guided by print” (Perfetti, 1985). The comprehending process is active and purposeful on

CompassLearning comprehension activities provide students the opportunity to demonstrate comprehension knowledge of identified skills directly related to reading passages.

CompassLearning 28

the part of the reader. Comprehension strategies provide readers with tools to connect and assimilate information for the text to a level of understanding that is purposeful (Stahl, 2004).

Odyssey High School language arts activities apply the recommendations outlined in Academic Literacy Instruction for Adolescents: A Guidance Document from the Center on Instruction. This document outlines the following factors which contribute directly to differences in performance on reading comprehension tests in middle and high school:

1. Fluency of text reading 2. Vocabulary, or the breadth and depth of knowledge about the meaning of words 3. Background, or prior knowledge related to the content of the text being read 4. Higher-level reasoning and thinking skills 5. Active and flexible use of reading strategies to enhance comprehension 6. Motivation and engagement for understanding and learning from text

Odyssey High School Language Arts courses address reading fluency, vocabulary and reading comprehension strategy instruction, with careful attention to establishing context and providing scaffolded support throughout the lessons. Odyssey High School also includes regular comprehension checks to ensure that students stay on track, and writing activities to engage students’ imaginations and interests.

CompassLearning 29

Odyssey Math

Odyssey Math connects the research concepts into an integrated curriculum to help all students make sense of mathematics. Through research based processes and instruction, content objectives are linked so they are learned with understanding and practiced to develop fluency. Within the “big ideas” that provide the framework for the curriculum, Odyssey Mathematics identifies central themes, or topics, as the basic structure of mathematics. These topics are sequenced from basic skills to more advanced, complex skills. The Odyssey Mathematics spiraled curriculum presents skills and ideas first in a form and language that can be grasped by the student, and then revisits them in greater depth at subsequent grade levels. If curriculum is organized in a spiraled manner, the student continually builds upon what he or she has already learned (Kearsley, 2004). Organizing the Odyssey Mathematics curriculum in this way provides a natural structure for a learner to make connections between mathematical ideas and to build new knowledge through these connections. An effective standards-based curriculum organizes and integrates mathematical ideas so students understand how ideas connect to, and build on, other ideas. These connections provide natural opportunities for a spiral presentation of the material as well as for scaffolding of learning activities (Vygotsky, 1978). High-quality instruction cannot occur without a solid foundation in content. The “big ideas” of mathematical content have been categorized into five areas by NCTM (1989, 2000) and NAEP (Perie, Grigg, and Dion, 2005):

Numbers and operations Algebra Geometry Measurement Data analysis and probability

CompassLearning also closely follows the research and analysis conducted by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. The conclusions found in its most recent study, Foundations for Success (2008), have been successfully incorporated into Odyssey Mathematics including the

following: Promising Uses of Technology

Computer-assisted instruction that supports drill and practice Well-designed tutorials delivered through computer-assisted instruction Learning supported by the careful, targeted application of computer programming

Instructional Practices

Explicit methods of instruction available on a regular basis Clear problem solving models Carefully orchestrated examples/sequences of examples Concrete objects to understand abstract representations and notation Participatory thinking aloud by students and teachers

CompassLearning 30

The scope and sequence for Odyssey Mathematics includes content that aligns to these findings. As recommended, skills are addressed in contexts that promote problem solving, reasoning, communication, making connections, and designing and analyzing representations. In further support of the NCTM Math Focal points, CompassLearning has developed a 5-6 math product that provides tiered instruction in each of the focal points for those grade levels. This research-based curriculum directly addresses those skills identified as the content emphases for those grade levels. The Common Core math standards were based in part by Singapore’s World Class Mathematics System. In fact, you will find that many schools across the United States are already using Singapore math methodologies in their classrooms. In 2005, Alan Gynsburg and a team of researchers studied why Singapore Math was so effective. Among many aspects, one feature that was most effective was their concrete, pictorial, abstract approach. Teaching students using concrete and pictorial models before introducing more abstract algorithms, ensures that conceptual understanding is developed before an abstract concept is introduced. If the students understand the whys, the steps in the procedures make more sense and become internalized. One pictorial model that Singapore consistently incorporates throughout its textbooks is bar-model illustrations. In Odyssey’s new math activities, we have included the bar-model approach, as well as many other opportunities to connect concrete and pictorial models to abstract algorithms.

Odyssey Science CompassLearning Odyssey Science is based on the documents produced by the American Association for the Advancement of Science that have directed curriculum-revision efforts by educators and scientists in the United States for the last two decades. The publications Science for All Americans, Benchmarks for Science Literacy, and the Atlas of Science Literacy were all used to design CompassLearning’s science courses. The most effective curriculum is research-based and woven within a fabric of mutually supporting ideas and skills to lead the student to becoming a well-informed adult. The curriculum spirals, with the introduction of age-appropriate concept development that adheres to the cognitive research of Jean Piaget, Robert Karplus, Herb Their, Paul Brandewein, Robert Yeager, and many others. CompassLearning Odyssey Science was developed using learning goals based on recognized strand maps and state-specific standards. Determining how states assessed these standards allowed us to set specific goals for student learning and to bring coherence to those standards. CompassLearning curriculum experts paid special attention to the scaffolding that would be necessary to build the correct concept in each major division of our courses, realizing that prior knowledge for some students may need to be altered before the correct concept can be established. Demonstrations in the videos and in the activities in the form of flash animation illustrate to the student how scientific concepts and principles work. Regular comprehension checks guide the student through the learning goals specified in the benchmarks.

CompassLearning 31

Odyssey Social Studies

In 1992, the Board of Directors of National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), the primary membership organization for social studies educators, adopted the following definition: “Social studies is the integrated study of the social sciences and humanities to promote civic competence. Within the school program, social studies provides coordinated, systematic study drawing upon such disciplines as anthropology, archaeology, economics, geography, history, law, philosophy, political science, psychology, religion, and sociology, as well as appropriate content from the humanities, mathematics, and natural sciences. The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world.” CompassLearning Odyssey Social Studies courses are developed using state standards while keeping in mind the integrative and interdisciplinary nature of the social studies as def ined by NCSS. The fundamental design principle used to keep the material organized and coherent is the Understanding by Design model created by Wiggins and McTighe. Understanding by Design is a way of thinking about the design of curriculum, instruction, and assessment that pulls together many ideas and processes that have been tested both through research and classroom use. Used independently, these ideas and processes are valuable. Used within the conceptual framework of Understanding by Design, these ideas and processes can result in a way of thinking about curriculum, instruction, and assessment that can give rise to powerful learning experiences that result in deeper understandings of facts, concepts, generalizations, principles, and other ideas contained in the various state standards. CompassLearning has used Understanding by Design to create learning experiences that will engage learners and result in learners gaining more sophisticated insights and abilities that they can apply in a variety of instances — both in school and in the real world. Understanding by Design differs from conventional thinking about curriculum in that it emphasizes the need to prioritize what students are to know, understand, and be able to do. Rather than viewing all knowledge as being equal, this way of thinking suggests that some knowledge is essential and enduring, some knowledge is important to know, and some knowledge is worth being familiar with. This is a critical idea for designers or design teams to consider, since even a brief review of national, state, and district curriculum standards reveals that there is more content deemed important than can reasonably be covered in most classrooms. Superficial coverage of all content is not the answer if the desire is to help learners understand important ideas. The big, transferrable ideas in the Odyssey social studies activities are communicated to students through the video lectures and conversational interface. Additional information to build the understanding of the ideas is communicated through archival video and short reading passages.

CompassLearning 32

Product Research Bibliography

Ben Ari, R., and D. Shafir. Social integration in elementary school. Ramat-Gan, Israel: Institute for the Advancement of Social Integration in the Schools, Bar Ilan University. 1988.

Black, Paul and Dylan Wiliam. “Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment.” Phi

Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148, 1998. Biancarosa, Gina and Catherine Snow. Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and

high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.).Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. 2006.

Carmines, E.G. and R.A. Zeller. “Reliability and Viability Assessment.” Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications, 1991. Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy. Time to act: An agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career success. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York. 2010 Collins, Allan, and Richard Halvorson. Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology: The Digital

Revolution and Schooling in America. Teachers’ College Press, 2009 Dahloff, M. Ability grouping, content validity, and curriculum process analysis. New York: Teachers

College Press. 1971. Deshler, Donald D., Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar, Gina Biancarosa, and Marnie Nair. Informed Choices

for Struggling Adolescent Readers A Research-Based Guide to Instructional Programs and Practice. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York. 2007

Dulay, H.C. and Burt, M. “Remarks on Creativity in Language Acquisition.” Viewpoints on English as a

Second Language. Eds. M. Burt, H. Dulay and M. Finocchiaro. New York: Regents, 1977. Gagne, Robert M. The Conditions of Learning and the Theory of Instruction. 4th ed. New York: Holt,

Rinehart, and Winston, 1985. Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. 10

th anniversary ed. New York:

Basic Books, 1993. Gardner, Howard. Intelligence Re framed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic

Books, 2000. Garner, R. “Metacognition and self-monitoring strategies.” In S. J. Samuels and A. E. Farstrup (Eds.)

What research has to say about reading instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 1992.

Graham, Steve and Perin, Delores. Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in

middle and high schools – A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. 2007

Haladyna, Thomas, Steven Downing and Michael Rodriguez. “A Review of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing

Guidelines for Classroom Assessment.” Applied Measurement in Education, 15:309–334, 2002. Hunter, Madeline. Mastery Teaching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 1982.

CompassLearning 33

Hunter, Robin. Madeline Hunter's Mastery Teaching: Increasing Instructional Effectiveness in

Elementary and Secondary Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2004. Jensen, Eric. Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development, 1998. Joyce, Bruce R. and Marsha Weil. Models of Teaching. 5

th ed. Allyn & Bacon, 1995.

Kearsley, Greg. “Explorations in Learning and Instruction: the Theory-into-Practice Database,” 2003. Kornhaber, Mindy L. “Howard Gardner.” Fifty Modern Thinkers on Education: From Piaget to the Present

Day. Ed. Joy A. Palmer. London: Routledge, 2001. Krashen, Stephen D. “Theory Versus Practice in Language Training.” Innovative Approaches to Language

Teaching. Ed. R. W. Blair. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1982. Kulik, J., and C. Kulik. Research on ability grouping: Historical and contemporary perspectives. Storrs,

CT: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED350777). 1991.

Langer, J. A., and A. N. Applebee. How writing shapes thinking. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers

of English. 1987. Lou, Y., P. Abrami, J. Spence, C. Poulsen, B. Chambers, and S. d’Apollonia. “Within-class grouping: A

meta-analysis.” In Review of Educational Research, 66, 423-458. 1996. Mayer, Richard E. and Roxana Moreno. “Engaging Students in Active Learning: The Case for Personalized

Multimedia Messages.” Journal of Educational Psychology Vol. 92, No. 4: 724–733, 2000. McGinley, W., and R. J. Tierney. “Traversing the topical landscape: Reading and writing as ways of

knowing.” In Written Communication, 6, 243-269. 1989. Nokes, J. D., and J. A. Dole. “Helping adolescent readers through explicit strategy instruction.” In Jetton,

Tamara L., and Dole, Janice A., (Eds.) Adolescent literacy research and practice. New York: The Guilford Press. 2004.

Oakes, J. Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 1985. Perie, M., Grigg, W., and Dion, G. The Nation’s Report Card: Mathematics 2005 (NCES 2006– 453). U.S.

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2005.

Roehler, L. R., and G. G. Duffy. “Direct explanation of comprehension processes.” In G. G. Duffy, L. R.

Roehler, and J. Mason (Eds.) Comprehension instruction: perspectives and suggestions. Elmsford, NY: Longman. 1984.

Schnar-Dobler, Elizabeth. Reading on the Internet: The Link Between Literacy and Technology. Reading

Online (www.readingonline.org), 2003 Shanahan, T. “Overcoming the dominance of communication: Writing to think and to learn.” In Jetton,

Tamara L., and Dole, Janice A., (Eds.) Adolescent literacy research and practice. New York: The Guilford Press. 2004.

Small, Gary M.D., and Gigi Vorgan. iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind.

HarperCollins, 2008

CompassLearning 34

Taylor, B. T., L. A. Harris, P. D. Pearson, G. E. Garcia. Reading difficulties, instruction, and assessment

(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. 1995. Tomlinson, C. The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 1999. Tomlinson, C. How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 2001. Tomlinson, C. “A synthesis of key research and guidelines.” In Jetton, Tamara L., and Janice A. Dole

(Eds.) Adolescent literacy research and practice. New York: The Guilford Press. 2004. Vygotsky, Lev. “Interaction Between Learning and Development.” Mind in Society. Trans. M. Cole.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978. Webb, Norman L. Alignment Study in Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies of State

Standards and Assessments for Four States. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers, 2002.

Webb, Norman L. Criteria for Alignment of Expectations and Assessments in Mathematics and Science

Education. Research Monograph No. 6. Madison: Council of Chief State School Officers and National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, 1997.

Willis, Judy. Brain-Friendly Strategies for the Inclusion Classroom. Association for Supervision & Curriculum

Development, 2007. Willis, Judy. Research-Based Strategies to Ignite Student Learning: Insights from a Neurologist and

Classroom Teacher. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development, 2006. Wilhelm, Jeffrey D. 2001. Improving comprehension with think-aloud strategies. New York: Scholastic Inc.

CompassLearning 35

CompassLearning 36

Professional Development Research Bibliography Banks, J., Cochran-Smith, M., Moll, L., Richert, A., Zeichner, K., LePage, P., Darling-Hammond, L., Duffy,

H., with McDonald, M. Teaching Diverse Learners. In Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., LePage, P., Hammerness, K., & Duffy, H. (Eds.). Preparing Teachers for A Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able to Do. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2005.

Bernhardt, Victoria L. Data Analysis for Comprehensive Schoolwide Improvement. New York: Eye on

Education. 1998. Blankstein, A.M. Failure is NOT an Option: Six Principles that Guide Student Achievement in High-

Performing Schools. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Corwin Press and HOPE Foundation. 2004. Bryk. A.S. & Schneider, B. Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement. New York: Russell Sage

Foundation. 2002. Carey, K. The Real Value of Teachers: Using New Information about Teacher Effectiveness to Close the

Achievement Gap. Thinking K-16. Washington DC: The Education Trust. 2004. Conzemius, Anne and Jan O’Neill. Building Shared Responsibility for Student Learning. Virginia:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 2001. Creighton, Theodore B. Schools and Data: The Educator’s Guide for Using Data to Improve Decision

Making. California: Corwin Press. 2001. Darling-Hammond, L. Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence.

Education Policy Analysis Archives. 8(1). http://epaa.asu.eduepaa/v8n1 2000. Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., with LePage, P., Hammerness, K., & Duffy, H. (Eds.). Preparing

Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able to Do. Sponsored by the National Academy of Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2005.

Demmert, W.G. Jr. Improving Academic Performance among Native American Students: A Review of the

Research Literature. Charleston, WV: ERIC. Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. Appalachian Educational Laboratory. http://www.ael.org/snaps/Demmert.pdf. 2001.

DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (Eds.). On Common Ground: The Power of Professional Learning

Communities. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective Schools for the Urban Poor. Educational Leadership. 37. 2005. Education Trust. Funding Gaps 2006. Washington DC: The Education Trust. 2006. Elmore, R.E. Building a New Structure for School Leadership. Washington, DC: The Albert Shanker

Institute. 2000. Fullan, M. Leadership & Sustainability: System Thinkers in Action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

2005. Fullan, M. Turnaround Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 2006. Gay, G. Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Teachers College

Press. 2000. George, P.S., McEwin, C.K., & Jenkins, J.M. The Exemplary High School. New York: Harcourt College

Publishers. 2000.

CompassLearning 37

Goode, T., Jones, W., & Mason, J. A Guide to Planning and Implementing Cultural Competence

Organization Self-assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Cultural Competence. Georgetown University. Child Development Center. 2002.

Goodlad, J.I. A Place Called School: Prospects for the Future. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

1984 Hargreaves, A. & Fink, D. Sustainable Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2006. Henchey, N. with Dunnigan, M., Gardner, A., Lessard, C., Muhtadi, N., Raham, H., & Violato, C. Schools

that Make a Difference. Final Report: Twelve Canadian Secondary Schools in Low-Income Settings. Kelowna, B.C.: Society for the Advancement of Excellence in Education. http://www.saee.ca/publications/A_012_IIH_MID.php. 2001.

King, M.A., Sims, A., & Osher, D. (nd). How is Cultural Competence Integrated in Education.

http://cecp.air.org/cultural/Q_integrated.htm#def. Retrieved 12/1/2006. Langer, J.A. Getting to Excellent: How to Create Better Schools. New York: Teachers College Press.

2004. Levesque, Karen, Denise Bradby, Kristi Rossi, and Peter Teitelbaum. At Your Fingertips: Using Everyday

Data to Improve Schools. Berkeley, California: MPR Associates, Inc., National Center for Research in Vocational Education, and American Association of School Administrators. 1998.

Lezotte, L.W.Correlates of Effective Schools: The First and Second Generation. Effective Schools

Products, Ltd., Okemos, MI. http://www.effectiveschools.com/freestsuff.asp. 1991. Little, J.W. The Persistence of Privacy: Autonomy and Initiative in Teachers’ Professional Relations.

Teachers College Record. 91(4). 1990. Lobdell, G. Personal communication. Center for Educational Effectiveness. http://www.effectiveness.org/

2007 Lockwood, A.T. & Secada, W.G. (1999). The Hispanic Dropout Problem and Recommendations for Its

Solution. In Transforming Education for Hispanic Youth: Exemplary Practices, Programs, and Schools. NCBE Resource Collection Series, No. 12. http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/resource/hispanicyouth/ . 1999.

Marzano, R.J. What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. 2003. Marzano, R.J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B.A. School Leadership that Works. From Research to Results.

Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Aurora, CO: McREL. 2005. McKinley, J. Effective Teaching Strategies for High Performing African American Students in an Urban

District. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting in Montreal. 2005.

McLaughlin, M.W. & Talbert, J.E. Building School-Based Teacher Learning Communities: Professional

Strategies to Improve Student Achievement. New York: Teachers College Press. 2006. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Research You Can Use to Improve Results.

http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/re-engineering/rycu/index.shtml. 2005. Noyce, Penny, David Perda, and Robert Traver. “Creating Data-Driven Schools.” Educational

Leadership 57:5. 2000.

CompassLearning 38

Peske, H.G. & Haycock, K. Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged on

Teacher Quality. Washington DC: The Education Trust. 2006. Reeves, D. Closing the Implementation Gap. Educational Leadership. 64(6). 2007. Rice, J.K. Teacher Quality: Understanding the Effectiveness of Teacher Attributes. Washington, DC:

Economic Policy Institute. 2003. Roza, M. How Districts Shortchange Low-income and Minority Students. Funding Gaps 2006.

Washington, DC: The Education Trust. 2006. Roza, M., Guin, K., & Davis, T. What is the Sum of the Parts: How Federal, State, and District Funding

Streams Confound Efforts to Address Different Student Types. School Finance Redesign Project. Center on Reinventing Public Education. Seattle, WA: University of Washington. 2007.

Schmoker, M. Here and Now: Improving Teaching and Learning. In DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R.

(Eds.). On Common Ground: The Power of Professional Learning Communities. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. 2005.

Shannon, G.S. & Bylsma, P. Addressing the Achievement Gap: A Challenge for Washington Educators.

Olympia, WA: OSPI. 2002. Shannon, G.S. & Bylsma, P. Characteristics of Improved School Districts: Themes from Research.

Olympia, WA: OSPI. 2004. Shannon, G.S. & Bylsma, P. The High Schools We Need: Improving an American Institution. Olympia,

WA: OSPI. 2006. Spillane, J.P. Distributed Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2006. Strong, Richard W., Harvey F. Silver, and Matthew J. Perini. Teaching What Matters Most: Standards

and Strategies for Raising Student Achievement. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 2001.

Tschannen-Moran, M. Trust Matters: Leadership for Successful Schools. Jossey-Bass. 2004. Wagner, T., Kegan, R., Lahey, L., Lemons, R.W., Garnier, J., Helsing, D., Howell, A., Rasmussen, H.T.

Change Leadership: A Practical Guide to Transforming Our Schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2006.

Waters, J.T. & Marzano, R.J. School District Leadership that Works: The Effect of Superintendent

Leadership on Student Achievement. A Working Paper. Denver, Co: McREL. 2006. Zurawski, C. Teachers Matter: Evidence from Value-Added Assessments. Research Points. Essential

Information for Education Policy. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association. 2004.

CompassLearning 39

CompassLearning 40

Effectiveness

Rigorous research plays a valuable role toward identifying the true effect of computer based instruction (CBI) or computer assisted instruction (CAI) interventions such as CompassLearning Odyssey. The standards set for rigorous evidence indicate “strong” evidence of effectiveness is obtained through the use of randomized controlled trials conducted in two or more typical settings (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). “Possible” evidence can be attained through the use of comparison-group studies with closely matched intervention and comparison groups (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Conversely, pre-post studies, comparison-group studies that are not closely matched and meta-analyses that include lower-quality studies do not comprise “possible” evidence (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). These guidelines were established to help educators identify and promote evidence-driven progress (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). The rigor of research conducted to validate the efficacy of computerized educational technology as an intervention does not always meet the standards for evidence, while the adoption of this technology is widespread. Methodology and quality of the analysis can pose challenges to interpreting the results (Waxman, Lin, & Michko, 2003). Methodology infrequently makes use of a randomized experimental design and analysis often lacks the quantitative detail to calculate statistical metrics such as effect size (Waxman et al., 2003). Overcoming these obstacles and aligning with evidence-based approaches is challenging given the educational context and the commitment to providing students equal access to learning opportunities. Throughout a more than forty-year history, CompassLearning has worked with schools to gather data to evaluate the effectiveness of the CompassLearning student achievement solutions. These evaluations have taken several forms: from qualitative research to stringent, quantitative research studies conducted by outside evaluators. CompassLearning has a proven track record of positively impacting student outcomes through the utilization of technology based online assessment and instruction. Summaries follow and more information is available at http://www.compasslearning.com/success-stories. Districtwide/ Multilevel

A) In January 2012, administrators in Lake School District (MI) began using Compass Learning

Odyssey in conjunction with NWEA’s MAP tests to measure student progress. Student worked on Odyssey two time a week for 30 minutes each time.

MAP scores for secondary students from September 2011 to May 2012 showed 58% growth across three subject areas

While elementary students showed some growth on MAP scores in the 2010–2011 school year, they showed an average of 1.5 grade levels of growth after using Odyssey in the second semester of the 2011–2012 school year.

B) Beaufort County (SC) schools launched its Odyssey K–8 implementation as a virtual

summer school in 2010 then expanded the program to add weekends and afterschool hours during the academic year.

In 2013, a nine grade levels, K-8, met or exceeded the NWEA norms in math. Seven out of nine grade levels did in reading as well.

CompassLearning 41

Results on the Spring 2011 state test (PASS) showed gains in student proficiency. Second-grade mathematics proficiency grew from 61% to 77% and 3rd-grade math grew from 68% to 81%. First-grade reading grew from 69% to 83%, 5th-grade reading grew from 73% to 80%, and 8th-grade reading grew from 68% to 79%.

C) In the fall of 2011, Jackson-Madison County School District (TN) implemented CompassLearning Odyssey Reading/English Language Arts in the district’s 16 elementary schools and Odyssey Math in the district’s five middle schools. Although the district struggled to provide students with access to the program, students still made improvement on the state test (TCAP).

TCAP scores for students in five out of the six grade levels that take Tennessee’s annual assessment showed improvement.

Fifth graders showed the biggest total TCAP jump of 13 points across all the schools; 8th graders had the next biggest improvement with an 11-point gain over the previous year.

D) Anderson Preparatory Academy (IN) is a military-style, K-12 public charter school which is

located in one of the highest unemployment rates in the state. A majority of its student population lives well below the U.S. poverty level. The school’s biggest challenge was figuring out how to meet a magnitude of educational needs and learning styles with very limited resources. Its solution: digital curriculum, and specifically, CompassLearning Odyssey. Overall, APA has experienced tremendous growth in its first full year of implementation.

On state-mandated standardized testing, the school has seen an increase of 5.85 percent for students who passed both math and ELA.

In math alone, APA saw a 7.94 percent increase.

E) The Burlington Area School District (WI) had been using NWEA’s MAP assessments, but soon realized that teachers needed help translating the test’s data to differentiate instruction for every student. The district implemented CompassLearning Odyssey in the 2011-12 school year across all of grades K–8 in the district. During that school year, the District’s grades K–8 showed improvement on MAP scores: In math and reading/language arts, students increased their National Percentile Rank across the school year, moving from below the national median to above it.

F) During the 2011–2012 school year, Trinidad School District (CO) teachers and administrators selected students in grades 3 through 10 to participate in an implementation of Odyssey learning activities and assessments to target skill development in mathematics, reading, and language arts. These selected students demonstrated significant growth in both reading and mathematics during the year Trinidad implemented Odyssey.

In math, 13 students who participated in the Odyssey intervention moved from below proficient to above proficient status during 2011–2012, while zero non-Odyssey students did. In reading, 49 Odyssey students moved from below proficient to above proficient, while only 2 non-Odyssey students did.

Fourth through 10th grade students who used Odyssey Reading/Language Arts gained an average of 20.7 points on their TCAP (state test) Total Reading scores over their

CompassLearning 42

prior year scores, while their classmates who did not use Odyssey gained an average of only 3.31 points.

Fourth through 10th grade students who used Odyssey Math gained an average of 9.57 points on their TCAP Math scores over their prior year scores, while their classmates who did not use Odyssey gained an average of less than one point (0.59).

G) Crowley Independent School District (ISD) has used Odyssey since 2008 to complement its

core curriculum in grades 6–12, as well as to assist students in credit recovery, credit acquisition, RTI, and preparation for the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).

Since implementing CompassLearning Odyssey, the district’s number of Recognized campuses has increased from two to nine, even with the state competency level increasing from 75% in 2009 to 80% in 2010.

In addition, each school in the district met AYP for the school years 2008–2009 and 2009–2010.

In both of the district’s high schools, all student subgroups achieved significant gains on the TAKS from 2008–2010.

H) In the fall of 2008, East Stroudsburg Area School District implemented CompassLearning

Odyssey in all elementary, intermediate, and high schools as part of a comprehensive approach to address special education and remediation needs.

On average, Odyssey users enrolled in special education increased their NWEA scores from fall to spring in both math and reading.

Special education students in all grades made significant fall-to-spring NWEA gains. Gains for 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th grades, respectively, were +5.47, +3.76, +1.44, and +3.87 RIT points.

I) St. Charles Community Schools uses CompassLearning Odyssey to help attain maximum

student achievement, which is the primary aim of the school district.

Assessment scores and attitudes of at-risk students improved.

In 2008, the percentage of students who scored Proficient or Advanced improved by 25.0% in ELA, 40.0% in math, and 40.4% in reading.

The percentage of Odyssey users who achieved improvement or significant improvement on the MEAP from 2007–2008 ranged from 56.7% in ELA to 62.2% in math and 63.5% in reading.

Elementary School

A) In 2011, third, fourth, and fifth grade teachers at E. E. Jeter Elementary in Shelby County,

TN, implemented an intense math intervention program using Odyssey Math. Students worked on Odyssey 30 minutes per day, five days a week. As a result, Average Yearly Progress (AYP) data improved from 2010 to 2011. The benchmark scores for each grade during the year and the percentage of students achieving the state’s benchmark goals both increased. And in the fall of 2012 when the U.S. Department of Education recognized E.E. Jeter Elementary as a National Blue Ribbon School. On the math portion of the Tennessee Achievement Test:

CompassLearning 43

• 100 percent of 3rd graders scored proficient.

• 80 percent of 4th graders were advanced or proficient with 32 percent advanced. The 4th graders scored 42 percentage points higher than the state.

• 5th grade was 86 percent advanced or proficient with 32 percent advanced. The 5th graders scored 20 percentage points higher than the state.

B) Two second grade teachers at Cottonwood Elementary in Wyoming’s Campbell County

District #1 conducted an informal study with their students during the 2011–2012 school year. Their goal was to determine if CompassLearning Odyssey actually lived up to its claims of enhancing student performance. One teacher (Langston) attended all training sessions and used Odyssey as recommended; the other teacher (Eisenbraun) purposefully did not.

At the end of one semester, more than 94 percent of Langston’s students met or exceeded their projected NWEA RIT scores and as a class, exceeded their growth target by 175 percent. Eisenbraun’s students had average to below average gains, with just 60 percent of students meeting or exceeding their projected RIT scores.

C) Lewis and Clark Elementary School in Sioux City, NE, is a community with a high number of

economically disadvantaged families, most of whom are native Spanish speakers. To raise test scores, the school instituted a systematic, 20-minute daily, school-wide intervention program that included CompassLearning Odyssey. At the end of one school year (2010-2011):

The growth in NWEA MAP proficiency in grade 1–4 for reading ranged from 35.5% to 58.8%.

In math, the percentage of growth in proficiency over the same time period for the same student population ranged from 25% to an astounding 64.7%.

D) At the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year, more than 50% of the students in a 4th grade

class at Zamorano Fine Arts Academy in San Diego, CA, had scored below basic in English/language arts and more than 30% score below basic in math.

Within a six-month period, 24 of 34 students in the class achieved between six months’ and three years’ growth in English/language arts on the California State Test (CST).

In math, 22 students showed a growth equivalent to between six months and two years on the CST during the same period of time.

For the year overall, students’ English/language arts scores on the CST leapt from 41% to 76%, a 35-percent gain.

E) With a goal to ensure that 100% of their students are proficient in math and reading by the

year 2014, Dodgeville’s two elementary schools adopted an in-depth, data-based response to intervention (RtI) strategy, with CompassLearning Odyssey as a key component. NWEA MAP results from the spring of 2011 show that, over the past year, the percentage of students at or above grade level in the two elementary schools has increased:

From 80% to 91% in math

From 75% to 91% in reading

CompassLearning 44

F) Cliffside Elementary School in Cliffside, North Carolina, was challenged with the task of swiftly raising test scores after the school had failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the 2007–2008 school year. The school began its implementation of CompassLearning Odyssey Math in the spring of 2009 and saw immediate gains.

By the spring of 2010, the targeted student group had increased mathematics proficiency from 56% to 86%.

The same group achieved the ancillary benefit of raising reading proficiency from 47.5% to 69.3% over the same period.

G) Vivian Banks Charter School (CA) on the Pala reservation was battling low academic

performance and a school culture of minimal expectations for students. In the fall of 2009, the school began implementation of CompassLearning Odyssey. In less than a year, saw dramatic increases in scores on the California Standard Test (CST).

Mathematics proficiency leapt from 56% to 72%.

English/language arts proficiency increased from 36% to 45%.

Residual effects included exponentially greater student engagement, improved attendance rates, and lower teacher turnover.

H) Burton C. Tiffany Elementary School (Chula Vista, CA) is ethnically diverse, with more than

one-third of the students in the district classified as English learners. One-fifth of district students qualify for free and reduced meals. Four months after its 2010 Odyssey implementation, Tiffany Elementary scored 886 out of a possible 1,000 on California’s Academic Performance Index (API). Tiffany Elementary’s score represented a 24-point gain over API scores from the previous year. In 2009 the school’s API score had increased only 2 points. School leaders attribute the dramatic improvement to Odyssey.

I) Odyssey Math was found to have a potentially positive effect on math achievement by the Department of Education’s What Works Clearinghouse. The rating is the result of a study that found that 5th-grade students who used Odyssey Math in addition to regular coursework scored an average of 103 points higher on the mathematics portion of the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) than students who did not use Odyssey Math. Data from the study covered 207 5th-grade students across four Pennsylvania schools. A control group of students who did not use Odyssey Math scored an average of 1480 on the mathematics portion of the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) standardized test. Students in the test group who used Odyssey Math in addition to their regular classroom curriculum for at least 90 minutes per week scored an average of 1583 on the same test — an increase of 103 points. (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/ elementary_math/odysseymath/index.asp)

Middle School A) In the 2012-13 school year, Ranson International Baccalaureate (IB) Middle School in the

Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District (NC) implemented CompassLearning Odyssey.

CompassLearning 45

On the Common Interim Assessments of the 2012-2013 school year 67 percent of Ranson IB students showed growth in objective mastery in 6th grade math–a more than a 15-point jump.

When Compass Learning was used as a tool to re-loop objectives that had not yet been mastered, growth as large as 25% was realized.

B) During the summer of 2012, Anoka-Hennepin School District (MN) offered students the

opportunity to use CompassLearning Odyssey to continue skill development in math and reading/language arts and to combat summer learning. Odyssey was implemented in two settings during the summer—a school-based intervention and a home-based intervention. The school-based intervention was offered to students entering 6th through 8th grade enrolled in traditional summer school classes at the district’s six middle schools

For all Anoka-Hennepin students who used Odyssey during summer 2012, an increase in the number of hours spent using Odyssey resulted in statistically significantly higher posttest (fall 2012) scores on their NWEA MAP mathematics and reading assessments.

Students who participated in Anoka-Hennepin’s Summer Virtual Learning program scored significantly higher than comparison students on fall 2012 mathematics achievement.

Students who participated in the Summer Virtual Learning program showed small increases in mathematics achievement compared to NWEA’s national MAP norm group across the summer vacation and did not significantly change in reading achievement; in contrast, students in the comparison group lost ground over the summer — possibly indicating summer learning loss.

Summer Virtual Learning (SVL) students’ academic successes followed moderate fidelity of implementation. If all SVL students had met or exceeded the targeted time-on-task goal, it is likely that their gains would have been even larger.

C) In 2011, 6th grade teachers at Moselle Elementary in Moselle, Mississippi, began using CompassLearning Odyssey to improve the state test (MCT2) scores of their students. Students spend 50 minutes two times a week working with Odyssey, and teachers used Odyssey with a projector for whole class instruction.

Language arts boasted an 80 percent growth rate on the MCT2 among all students in 6th grade.

From August 2011 to January 2012 some students improved from a 4.9 instructional reading level (IRL) to a 6.2 IRL.

In math, Moselle Elementary 6th graders saw an 86 percent growth rate from August to January. Several students moved from a 4.9 grade level equivalent (GE) to a 6.4 GE.

As a whole 6th grade class, their MCT2 scores reflected 80 percent proficient or higher in language arts and 87 percent proficient or higher in math.

D) As part of her doctoral dissertation, Carmen Kelsey, a 7th grade language arts teacher in

the Shelby County School District, studied the effects on test scores of students using the CompassLearning Odyssey response to intervention (RtI) model to allow 6th grade high-performing language arts students to work above their grade level (also known as the CompassLearning Odyssey Spiral Up program). Her findings show that those students participating in Spiral Up scored higher on the Discovery Education Test B than those

CompassLearning 46

students not using the program—reinforcing the district’s belief that Spiral Up works. Kelsey compared Discovery Education Test B data from the 2010–2011 school year for two same-sized groups of high performing 6th grade language arts students—one from Middle School A, which used Spiral Up, and one from Middle School B, which did not use the program. Test scores prior to the period studied were similar for both groups. The students using Spiral Up were allowed to work in CompassLearning Odyssey independently, outside of the classroom, for about five hours each week.

Kelsey’s findings were significant. Scores in the experimental group, Middle School A, were higher than those in the control group, Middle School B, suggesting that the implementation of the CompassLearning Odyssey Spiral Up model had a positive impact on the Discovery Education Test B language arts scores of the experimental group.

“We’re opening new paths and letting standard students spiral up, hoping that those kids can then move into enriched and advanced classes by having those new learning opportunities,” says Kelsey. “Then it’s not just about taking the low performers to proficient, but also taking the proficient to the top. It’s limitless.”

E) Western Middle School in Jefferson County (KY) was identified as a Persistently Low

Achieving school and was ranked as the second lowest performing middle school in the state of Kentucky. A new principal decided to implement CompassLearning Odyssey Reading/Language Arts and Math as part of the school’s intervention program. Students utilized the automatically generated NWEA MAP learning paths and spent about 2.5 hours per week in Odyssey. From the Fall 2011 semester to the Spring 2012 semester, Western Middle School’s intervention program showed significant improvement across all grade levels.

In reading, 30% of 6th graders, 36% of 7th graders, and to 44% of8th grade students advanced to a less intensive intervention

In math, 4530% of 6th graders, 23% of 7th graders, and to 214% of8th grade students advanced to a less intensive intervention

F) The Colonial School District (DE) was looking for an effective way to close learning gaps in mathematics. As a test, they asked Marc Emerick, Middle School Math Coach at the district’s George Read Middle School, to use Odyssey with focus groups in his intervention math classes.

Students who had completed interventions based on CompassLearning Odyssey Math assignments outperformed the district and state at every grade level — some by more than 50 percent.

Even though the students only completed Odyssey Math learning activities, the 6th graders outgained their peers in the state by 35% on the state test in reading, 7th graders outgained the state by 64%, and 8th graders outgained the state by 120%.

G) Plank Junior High (Oswego, IL) implemented CompassLearning’s Odyssey Math to improve

the mathematics achievement of students during the 2011-2012 school year. The program was targeted at student scoring below the 40th percentile on NWEA’s MAP test through a program the district called Math Dynamics.

CompassLearning 47

The Math Dynamics group significantly increased their MAP Math RIT scores from fall 2011 to spring 2012 and increased their average MAP Mathematics National Percentile Rank, indicating the Odyssey-using students at Plank gained ground compared to the MAP mathematics national norm group.

Although Plank students not using Odyssey made small gains in math RIT scale scores from fall 2011 to spring 2012, these non-Odyssey students declined in their National Percentile Ranks from fall 2011 to spring 2012. Therefore, Plank students who did not use Odyssey lost ground compared to their peers taking MAP math assessments across the nation from fall 2011 to spring 2012.

H) Jo Nelson Middle School (Santa Rosa, TX) serves nearly 265 students in grades 6–8.

Ninety-five percent of the student population participates in the free and reduced meals program. In 2006, the state designated JNMS a Stage I school because it had not met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for two consecutive years. School administrators put in place an aggressive school turnaround effort, which included implementing CompassLearning Odyssey campus-wide. From 2006–2010 students made the following gains in the percentage of students meeting or exceeding TAKS standards:

Reading—21% (8th graders 34%)

Math—37% (8th graders 55%)

Writing—11%

Science –53%

Social Studies—30% I) Ouachita Parish School System in Monroe and West Monroe, Louisiana, has an enrollment

of more than 19,000 students. The district faces a number of challenges, including a large population of low-income and at-risk students. Prior to the implementation of Odyssey, Riser Middle School was seeing dramatic drops in math scores.

In just two years with Odyssey, Riser went from a state accountability level of Minimal Academic Growth to one of Exemplary Academic Growth and saw its performance score increase from 78.8 in 2006 to 89.8 in 2009.

The percentage of 8th-grade students who received a rating of “basic” or above, which is the rating necessary to advance to high school, has increased dramatically.

J) Empirical Education Inc. conducted a three-year study of the effectiveness of Odyssey

Reading/ Language Arts in grades 6–8 in the Poway Unified School District (CA) schools.

On average, 7th graders who used CompassLearning Odyssey scored 1.17 points higher than expected on NWEA’s MAP Literacy (or roughly 5 percentile points).

8th graders who used Odyssey scored 2.38 points higher on MAP Literacy (or roughly 10 percentile points).

This translates approximately to an additional 27% of a year’s growth for 7th graders, and a 60% of a year’s growth for 8th graders.

K) Talley Middle School (Brandywine School District, DE) was undergoing mandatory re-

structuring and had never achieved AYP when it implemented CompassLearning Odyssey Reading/Language Arts and Math. In a one-year period from 2007–2008 to 2008–2009:

CompassLearning 48

7th-grade reading had an 8% increase in the number of students meeting standards on the state test and 7th-grade math had a 23% increase.

8th-grade reading scores rose by 11% and math scores rose by 5%.

The school made AYP for the first time ever. L) Seneca Valley School District (PA) showed improvement on the Pennsylvania System of

School Assessment (PSSA) from 2006–2007 to 2007–2008 in both math and reading. The district sought a technology-based curriculum and determined that Odyssey was the best solution given its user-friendliness and its alignment to state standards. The reporting and management system appealed to the district due to its accessibility and ease of use.

The percentage of Odyssey users in grades 4–8 who scored Advanced on the PSSA in math and reading improved from 2006–2007 to 2007–2008.

The number of Odyssey users who scored Proficient or Advanced on the 2007–2008 PSSA in math and reading increased for those students who scored Basic or Below Basic in 2006–2007.

The percentage of Odyssey users who scored Proficient or Advanced on the 2007–2008 PSSA in math and reading was higher for those with an average Odyssey learning activity score of 75% or greater than for those with an average of less than 75%, indicating the importance of regularly reviewing progress in Odyssey.

High School A) Seaford High School (DE) was struggling with low achievement rates—40% of student had

failed English and/or math at least once. In 2013, to provide students with opportunities to recover credits and get back on track for graduation, Seaford instituted a summer school program utilizing CompassLearning Odyssey. In the first year, 83 student enrolled in the program in which students could work entirely virtually or onsite at a district building.

Of the 83 students originally enrolled, sixty-four students passed post-tests, earning a total of 89 credits (some students took more than one course).

Twenty-one of those enrolled were able to earn a high school diploma.

B) Students in Prince Georges County (MD) who need to recover missing credits can do so through the district’s Evening School which utilizes CompassLearning Odyssey at two locations: Crossland High School and Northwestern High School. The success of the program is leading to its expansion to another high school and to its use was an intervention tool.

In 2012, 38 students earned credits and 14 students graduated through credits earned.

Additional student earned credits to be able to advance to the next grade. C) After extensive research, the Putman County (TN) School System chose CompassLearning

to support its credit recovery program. Right out of the gate, Cookeville High School (CHS) used CompassLearning Odyssey in its 2012 summer school for credit recovery. That fall, CHS began utilizing Compass Learning as an intervention tool. The intent was to keep students on track within their classrooms, and out of the school’s traditional credit recovery program.

CompassLearning 49

At CHS, 33 percent fewer students (compared to the previous year) were required to attend credit recovery classes.

In a lunchtime program for students with failing grades, 40 of the 44 participating students recovered their courses.

D) Prior to spring 2011, the Clear Creek ISD (TX) had been using a competitor’s product for

credit recovery. Upon review, it was determined the solution was not meeting the district’s needs, and the search began to find an alternative. Odyssey was initially implemented for credit recovery, but today CompassLearning Odyssey in a number of additional innovative ways including special education, Advanced Placement, remediation, and STAAR EOC re-test prep. Some results include:

300 CCISD students recovered more than 600 semester courses in summer school.

In the test prep academy for mandatory re-testers, time spent on Odyssey varied widely, from as little as 20 minutes to as much as 31 hours, but the across-the-board results were undeniable. For example, the highest score increase in writing was 1,912 points and in reading, 1,347.

E) El Dorado High School in El Paso, Texas, faces unique challenges. With U.S. military base,

Ft. Bliss, located just two miles away, the high school serves a growing number of students from military families. Many of these students come to the school from other states as seniors, often lacking the appropriate credits to graduate in Texas. El Paso is positioned across the U.S.–Mexico border from Juarez, Mexico, so the school serves many students who have fled Mexico and arrive with credits not recognized in Texas. These students typically are ESL students. And, sixty-three percent of the school’s enrollment is considered economically disadvantaged—at-risk of not graduating because they have lost credit due to absences, failed courses, pregnancy, or temporarily dropping out of school. In the 2010-2011 school year, El Dorado High School began using CompassLearning Odyssey to address these challenges by helping students recover credits and get back on track to graduate.

“Odyssey has really helped these students because they can work at school and from home to catch up and still graduate on time, even though they had thought graduating wouldn’t be possible,” primary administrator Rodriguez says. “The success stories come as our seniors finish their courses and turn in their paperwork with earned credits. The smiles and tears on their faces make this program worth all of the time I spend with them in the lab.”

F) In late 2010, St. Vrain Valley School District (CO) initiated its eCredit Recovery Program,

using CompassLearning Odyssey, as an opportunity for high school students who have failed specific core courses to recover credits needed to graduate.

In the program’s first session, 29 students completed the program, with 22 students passing–a 75% success rate.

In the second session, 48 students completed the program, with 45 passing—a 94% success rate.

J) Greeley Central High School (CO) implemented Odyssey in 2008 to help at-risk students

improve their academic performance. The program was launched with 20 Hispanic male

CompassLearning 50

students who had just finished their 9th-grade year, but who were performing far below grade-level standards in reading/language arts and mathematics.

By summer’s end, students had moved up an average of two levels in reading and math.

NWEA MAP testing in May and September of 2008 found that the program students showed a year’s growth on average between the two tests.

K) Arbor View High School (Las Vegas, NV) implemented Odyssey in the fall of 2007 to help

raise math scores. Students’ scores on the Nevada Proficiency Exam increased dramatically at Arbor View between the 2006–2007 school year and 2007–2008.

Overall—18.2%

IEP—14.8%

African American—32.5%

Hispanic—18.3%

Caucasian—25.02%

CompassLearning 51