1. PD 360 Impact Assessment: Impact of PD 360 on Student Proficiency Rates Prepared by Steven H. Shaha, PhD, DBA Summer 2009 1

2. PD 360 Impact Assessment Executive Summary Statistically significant* advantages were verified favoring schools with PD 360 versus District Benchmarks. Math (p<.001) Reading (p<.001) 2 * Statistical significance establishes genuine differences between groups and verifies that impacts were “real” and not merely due to chance and, in this case, due to any pre-existing biases in group differences. The appropriate p-values are included with all differences explained herein.

3. Reading 3 Note to Reader: To better dramatize the magnitude of the consistently favorable impact of PD 360, graphics included hereafter represent a variety of perspectives and a sampling of different interpretive insights, and not an exhaustive nor uniformly arrayed set of results.

4. Improvements vs.. District for All School Levels 4 experienced 72% greater improvement Students in high utilizing schools experienced 72% greater improvement than the district benchmarks (p<.001) The performance gap closed The performance gap closed to no significant difference despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p<.01) Reading

5. Improvements vs. District for Elementary Schools 5 experienced 84% greater improvement Elementary school students in high utilizing schools experienced 84% greater improvement than the district benchmarks (p<.001) The performance gap closed The performance gap closed to no significant difference despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p<.01) Reading

6. Improvements vs. District for Middle Schools 6 experienced 72% greater improvement Middle school students in high utilizing schools experienced 72% greater improvement than the district benchmarks (p<.001) schools flip-flopped with district Performance for high utilizing schools flip-flopped with district performance (p=not significant) Reading

7. Improvements vs. District for High Schools 7 experienced 56% greater improvement High school students in high utilizing schools experienced 56% greater improvement than the district benchmarks (p<.001) The performance gap closed The performance gap closed to no significant difference despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p<.01) Reading

8. Improvements vs. District for All School Levels 8 16% more teachers as registered users High performing schools were characterized by 16% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.001) viewed 2% more segments Teachers in high performing schools viewed 2% more segments than in lower performing schools (p<.01) Reading

9. Improvements vs. District for Elementary Schools 9 2.4% more teachers as registered users High performing elementary schools were characterized by 2.4% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.01) viewed PD 360 11% more minutes Teachers in high performing elementary schools viewed PD 360 11% more minutes than in lower performing schools (p<.01) Reading

10. Improvements vs. District for Middle Schools 10 50% more teachers as registered users High performing middle schools were characterized by 50% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.001) viewed 46% more segments Teachers in high performing middle schools viewed 46% more segments than in lower performing schools (p<.001) Reading

11. Improvements vs. District for High Schools 11 9% more teachers as registered users High performing high schools were characterized by 9% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.01) Reading

12. Math 12 Note to Reader: To better dramatize the magnitude of the consistently favorable impact of PD 360, graphics included hereafter represent a variety of perspectives and a sampling of different interpretive insights, and not an exhaustive nor uniformly arrayed set of results.

13. Improvements vs. District for All School Levels 13 Math The performance gap closed The performance gap closed to no significant difference despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p<.01) experienced 5 times greater improvement - 399% - Students in high utilizing schools experienced 5 times greater improvement - 399% - than the district benchmarks (p<.001)

14. Improvements vs. District for Elementary Schools 14 Math The performance gap closed The performance gap closed to no significant difference despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p<.01) experienced nearly 3 ½ times greater improvement - 235% - Students in high utilizing schools experienced nearly 3 ½ times greater improvement - 235% - than the district benchmarks (p<.001)

15. Improvements vs. District for Middle Schools 15 Math The performance gap closed The performance gap closed substantially despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p=not significant) experienced 4 times greater improvement - 298% - Students in high utilizing schools experienced 4 times greater improvement - 298% - than the district benchmarks (p<.001)

16. Improvements vs. District for High Schools 16 Math The performance gap closed The performance gap closed substantially despite beginning at a significantly lower performance level (p=not significant) experienced nearly 8 ½ times greater improvement - 749% - Students in high utilizing schools experienced nearly 8 ½ times greater improvement - 749% - than the district benchmarks (p<.001)

17. Improvements vs. District for All School Levels 17 11.7% more teachers as registered users High performing schools were characterized by 11.7% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.001) experienced 2.4% more users viewing segments Teachers in high performing schools experienced 2.4% more users viewing segments than in lower performing schools (p<.01) Math

18. Improvements vs. District for Elementary Schools 18 nearly 20% more teachers as registered users High performing elementary schools were characterized by nearly 20% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.001) viewed PD 360 47% more minutes Teachers in high performing elementary schools viewed PD 360 47% more minutes than in lower performing schools (p<.001) Math

19. Improvements vs. District for Middle Schools 19 35% more teachers as registered users High performing middle schools were characterized by 35% more teachers as registered users than lower performing schools (p<.001) viewed 5% more segments Teachers in high performing middle schools viewed 5% more segments than in lower performing schools (p<.01) Math

20. Improvements vs. District for High Schools 20 8% more teacher viewing High performing high schools were characterized by 8% more teacher viewing than lower performing schools (p<.01) Math