Project RED Key Findings

8/7/2019 Project RED Key Findings

1/29

Project RED

ey n ngs

www.projectred.org


2/29

The Project RED Team

Thomas Greaves , CEO, The Greaves Group, Co-Author, Americas , . .

Jeanne Hayes , President, The Hayes Connection, Co-Author,Americas Di ital Schools www.Ha esConnection.com

Leslie Wilson , President, One-to-One Institute, www.one-to-oneinstitute.org

Michael Gielniak , Ph.D., Director of Programs and Development,One-to-One Institute, www.one-to-oneinstitute.org

Eric Peterson, President, Peterson Public Sector Consulting,[email protected]


3/29

The Project RED Missionesearc t ree ma or ssues re ate to . . e ucat on:

Im rovin student achievement.

Unlike other segments, public education has seen only isolatedbenefits attributable to technology. Project RED seeks to definetechnology models that lead to improved student achievement.

Evaluating the financial impact of technology on budgets .Little work has been done to show the ositive financial Im act of

educational technology. Project RED identifies cost savings, costavoidance, and revenue enhancements .

Assessing the impact of continuous access to acomputing device by every student.

Does continuous access increase education outcomes? Whatconditions are necessary to lead to increased academic achievementand financial benefits? What are best practices regarding technology?


4/29

Unprecedented Scope

Unique scope, breadth, and depth:

997 schools, representative of the U.S. school universe 11 diverse Education Success Measures (ESMs) 136 n epen ent var a es n 22 categor es Comparison of findings by student/computer ratios (1:1, 2:1, 3:1,

4:1, or more) Comprehensive demographic data correlated to survey results


5/29

Education Success Measures (ESMs)

at are t e outcomes we w s to mproveAll Schools

1. Fewer disciplinary actions

2. Lowe r dropout rates3. Less paperwork.

5. Higher teacher attendance

6. Higher test scores

7. Higher AP course enrollment8. Higher college attendance plans

9. Higher course comp et on rates10. Higher dual/joint enrollment in college11. Higher graduation rates


6/29

Key Implementation Factors (KIFs)c tec no ogy pract ces mprove earn ng t e most

(rank order of predictive strength )

1. Intervention classes: Technology is integrated into every intervention class.2. Change management leadership by principal : Leaders provide time for teacher

professional learning and collaboration at least monthly.3. Online collaboration: Students use technology daily for online collaboration

(games/simulations and social media.)

4. Core subjects: Technology is integrated into core curriculum weekly or more.

5. Online formative assessments: Assessments are done at least weekly.6. Student/computer ratio: Lower ratios improve outcomes.

. , .schools do these at least monthly.8. Search engines: Students use daily.

. - , ,technology-transformed learning.


7/29

Key Finding 1

Key Finding 2 An Implementation CrisisNine key implementation factors are linkedmost strongly to education success.

Schools are in a technology implementation crisis. While educationtechnology best practices have a significant positive impact, they are notwidely and consistently practiced.

Very few schools implement technology properly despite knowing that

appropriate learning environments.

Ver few schools im lement most of the ke im lementation factors(KIFs) despite previous large investments in infrastructure and hardware.


8/29

Key Implementation FactorsFew Schools Deploy Many

Pct. of Respondents

4%

1%

8 Factors

9 Factors

13%

8%

7%

5 Factors

6 Factors

7 Factors

15%

21%

15%

2 Factors

3 Factors

4 Factors

5%

11%

None

1 Factor

Number of KIFs in Use


9/29

Key Finding 2

Properly implemented technology saves money .

Most discussions focus on the hi h costs of technolo not the

potential for savings. Project RED shows that properly implemented technology canprovide immediate short-term savings at all levels.

For example, LMS features can reduce copy machine and bubblesheet expenses (through the switch to online formativeassessment).

o t e extent t at sc oo systems are w ng to c ange pract cesand states are willing to change policy, the savings can growsubstantially over time.

, - -reduced dropouts and dual/joint enrollment.

.


10/29

1:1 Schools Have Greater Savings

Pct. of Respondents

40%

20%

0%

10%

Paperwork Copy Machine

1:1 Schools 40% 24%Reduction Expense Reduction


11/29

Key Finding 3

: sc oo s emp oy ng ey mp ementat on actorsoutperform all schools and all 1:1 schools.

: s u en compu er ra o as a g er mpac on s u en

outcomes and financial benefits than other ratios, and the keyimplementation factors (KIFs) increase both benefits. In eneral schools with a 1:1 student/com uter ratio out erform

non-1:1 schools on both academic and financial measures. Thelower the student/computer ratio, the better the student outcomes.

best practices. The chart on the next slide illustrates the positiveimpact of the Top Four of our key technology implementationfactors:

Technology is deployed: Intervention Classes Every Period Principal Leads Change management Online collaboration Daily Core Curriculum weekly


12/29

1:1 Works When Properly Implemented

100%

c . o espon en sReporting Improvement

80%

40%

0%

20%

Disciplinary High- Drop-out Paper and

Proper 1:1* 100% 92% 90% 89% 83% 63%

All 1:1 88% 65% 70% 58% 68% 57%

Reduction actionreduction stakes testscores ratereduction CopyMachine Rates

All Other Schools 77% 50% 69% 45% 65% 51%

Proper 1:1: Those schools practicing the top 4 Key Implementation Factors (13 schools) Rev.Intervention Classes Every Period, Principal Leads Change management, Online collaboration Daily, Core Curriculum weekly


13/29

Key Finding 4

The principals ability to lead change is critical. The impact of a good principal has been widely documented.

ro ect s ows t at t e pr nc pa s t e s ng e most mportantvariable across many of the 11 ESMs.

-technology implementations is of paramount importance.

,schools.

When rinci als receive s ecialized trainin and technolo isproperly implemented , the benefits increase even more.

The goal is systemic change, not dependent on an individual, socollaboration at all levels from supt. and school board to

classrooms is key.


14/29

Reduction in Disciplinary Actions

Pct. of Respondents

56%

77%

All other schoolsAll 1-1 Schools1-1 Schools with Principal Change Management training


15/29

Improving Dropout Ratesey o e re ctors

RelativeImportance

DescriptionFactor

13 Intervention classes - Technology integrated into every class period 29.4

9 Principal enabling Professional Learning, Collaboration and leading Change Management 23.4

.

17 Virtual Field Trips Occur (and effect strengthens with frequency) 15.0

Ratio 1:1 Student to Computing Device ratio 8.4

6 Principal trained in Teacher Buy-in, Best Practices and Technology-transformed Classroom 6.8

80%

100%

Dropout Rates Improvement By Predicted Model Quintile

Top Quintile M iddle Quintiles Bottom Quintile0%

20%

40%

60%

15

mprove 72 48 25


16/29

Key Finding 5

Technology-transformed Intervention improves learning.

Technology-transformed interventions (ELL, Title I, special ed andreading intervention) are the top-model predictor of improved highstakes test scores, dropout rate reduction, and improveddiscipline.

-student/computer ratio, with lower ratios (1:1) being preferable.

-to work at their own pace and teachers to spend more time withindividual students and small groups.


17/29

Improving Test Scores

Key Model Predictors Factor Description Relative

Importance

13 Intervention classes Technology integrated into every class period 28.0

9 Principal

enabling

Professional

Learning,

Collaboration

and

leadingChange Management 21.9

19 Online Formative and Summative Assessment frequency 19.2

ore u ec s: ec no ogy n egra e n o curr cu um a eas wee y .

18Online Collaboration (Games/Simulations and Social Media) Students utilizing technology daily 11.2


80%

100%

High Stakes Test Improvement By Predicted Model Quintile

Top Quintile Middle Quintiles Bottom Quintile0%

20%

40%

60%

17

mprove 86% 71% 45%


18/29

Key Finding 6Online collaboration increases learning productivity

and student engagement.

Web 2.0 social media substantially enhance collaboration productivity,erasing the barriers of time, distance, and money.

Collaboration can now extend beyond the immediate circle of friends toinclude mentors, tutors, and experts worldwide.

ea - me co a ora on ncreases s u en engagemen , one o ecritical factors for student success.

-disciplinary actions.

day and connectivity among learners and teachers.


19/29

Schools Using Online Collaboration

Pct. of Respondents

65%

56% 52%

37%

Discipinary Action Reductions Drop-out Rate Reductions

Using Online Collaboration All Other Schools


20/29

Improving Discipline


Importance

18

utilizing technology daily 35.2

13 Intervention classes Technology integrated into every class period 24.819 Online Formative and Summative Assessment frequency 14.1

Principal enabling Teacher Professional Learning, Collaboration and leading 9 Change Management 13.5


60%

80%

100%

Discipline Improvement by Predicted Model Quintile

Top Quintile Middle Quintiles Bottom Quintile% Improvement 72.8% 53.0% 35.4%

0%

20%

40

20


21/29

Key Finding 7

Daily use of technology delivers the bestreturn on investment (ROI).

The daily use of technology in core classes correlates highly to theESMs.

Daily technology use is one of the top five indicators of better

discipline, better attendance, and increased college attendance.

In 1:1 schools, daily use in core curriculum classes ranges from 57%to 62%.

Unfortunately, many schools report using technology only weekly orless frequently for many classes.


22/29

Use of Digital Content in 1:1 Schools

100%

Pct. of 1:1 Respondents

60%

80%

40%

0%Reading Math Science Social

StudiesEnglish/Lang

uage Arts

Daily Use 57% 57% 62% 62% 60%Weekly 38% 34% 31% 28% 35%

Monthly 4% 7% 6% 9% 5%

Not At All 1% 2% 1% 1% 0%


23/29

Improving Graduation Rates


Importance

.

5 Core Subjects: Technology integrated into curriculum at least weekly 22.2

9 Principal enabling Professional Learning, Collaboration and leading Change Management 15.4

19 Online Formative and Summative Assessment frequency 14.3

32 Search En ines: Students usin dail 13.4

18 Online Collaboration (Games/Simulations and Social Media) Students utilizing technology daily 10.9


Graduation Rates Improvement By Predicted Model Quintile

40%

60%

80%

100%

Top Quintile Middle Quintiles Bottom Quintile% Improved 71% 57% 26%

0%

23


24/29

Savings due to Technology

essential.

Figuring out how to pay for it is thec a enge.


25/29

Financial Impact Per Year $25B

Category National Impact Per Student

Student Data Mapping $605,000,000 $11

Online Professional Learning $654,000,000 $12

Teacher attendance increase $718,200,000 $13

Power savings $861,666,667 $16

Digital core curriculum savings $935,000,000 $17

Disciplinary action reduction $1,100,000,000 $20

Post secondary remedial education $1,660,000,000 $30

Digital supplemental materials vs. print $1,700,000,000 $31

Copy machine cost calculations $2,200,000,000 $40

Online assessment savings $2,392,500,000 $44

Dual/joint/AP course enrollment $3,180,343,000 $58

Paperwork reduction $3,300,000,000 $60

End of course failure $5,865,200,000 $107

Total Per Student excluding Dropout Savings $25,171,909,667 $448


26/29

Cost of Dropouts

Nationall , 25% of all students dro out, rou hl a millionstudents a year, [1], and the average dropout fails at leastsix classes before dropping out .[2] Given an averagecost er class of $1,333, the direct avoidable cost isapproximately $8,000.

generations.

[1] NCES, Public School Graduates and Dropouts, 2010[2]Project RED estimate


27/29

Dropout Reduction Benefits

The number of Project RED schools reporting areduction in dropouts due to technology jumps to 89%w en ey mp emen a on ac ors s are emp oye .

A student who raduates from hi h school couldgenerate $166,000 to $353,000 in increased taxrevenues compared with a dropout.

A dropout who would have gone on to college couldhave generated $448,000 to $874,000 in tax revenueover a career of 40 years.


28/29

The Biggest Financial Impact

Dropout Rate Reduction: 3.121 Trillion

ropou s ave e g es

financial impact of any of thevariables discussed in this report.

Students who complete highschool and go on to college have

substantially increased earning

more taxes.

The increased tax payments

continue throughout theircareers.


29/29

Thanks to Supporters & Sponsors

Project RED Key Findings

Documents

Transcript of Project RED Key Findings