1. 1 Introduction to SATEC San Antonio Technology in Education Coalition Provides resources to improve mathematical skills by use of technology in classroom instruction.

2. 2 Types of Resources Technical Support to Teachers. Professional Development for Teachers. Hardware and Software for the Classroom.

3. 3 In the Classroom Students use technology to help make connections between abstract mathematical concepts and concrete, real-world experiences. We seek a seamless integration of technology into the curriculum and instructional procedures.

4. 4 Qualitative Findings High Fidelity Schools  Teachers tended to use the graphing calculators to work practical problems during lessons.  Teachers tended to emphasize the process and the meaning of the process, rather than product with both graphing calculators and computers.

5. 5 Qualitative Findings High Fidelity School  Teachers seemed enthusiastic, engaging, and to demonstrate effective teaching practices that included brief explanations of what was going to happen, a demonstration of how to work a problem, guided practice with graphing calculators or computers, checking for understanding, and closure of the lesson.

6. 6 Qualitative Findings High Fidelity School  Teachers seemed to point to various aspects of a problem being worked because the lessons were visually orientated on graphing calculators or computer screens.  Teachers seemed to have high expectations with the use of technology and communicated these high expectations to their students.

7. 7 Qualitative Findings High Fidelity School  Teachers seemed to like what they were doing--the technology seemed to add a very positive dynamic to the classroom.  The classroom environment and atmosphere were generally very positive and work oriented.

8. 8 Qualitative Findings High Fidelity School  The instruction in these classrooms were very labor intensive. In other words, teachers had to do quite a bit of explanation, modeling and demonstrating before, during, and after the use of technology.

9. 9 Evaluation Methods A post test, non-randomized comparison group design was used to evaluate the impact of SATEC on student performance. Eight (8) high schools (4 SATEC and 4 non-SATEC). SATEC Classrooms: 12 Algebra I SATEC teachers in SATEC schools.

10. 10 Groups of Students Group 1: Students in non-SATEC schools. Group 2: Students in SATEC schools but assigned to non-SATEC classrooms. Group 3: Students in SATEC schools and assigned to SATEC classrooms.

11. 11 Study Variables End of Course Algebra I Examination (EOCE). Final course grade for Algebra I class. Total days absent from school. At-risk index for academic failure. Student ethnicity.

12. 12 Description of Sample A total of 2,444 students (1,317 non- SATEC school students, 634 non- SATEC classroom students and 493 SATEC students. More African Americans in SATEC group. More Mexican Americans and Whites in non-SATEC group.

13. 13 Study Limitation No pre-intervention check on group equivalence. Non-randomly assigned groups. Limited implementation of SATEC use in some classrooms.

14. 14 Results by Type of School/Classroom A chi-square test showed there was a significantly higher passing rate on the EOCE for SATEC Students (41.7%) vs. non-SATEC school students (34.9%), but not the non-SATEC classroom students (40.1%).

15. 15 Overall SATEC Classroom Results by Race/Ethnicity White students = 81% pass rate on EOCE. Mexican American students = 31% pass rate on EOCE. African American students = 11% pass rate on EOCE. (We would like to discuss this finding during the Q&A)

16. 16 Result for Course Grades There was no significant difference between non-SATEC students and SATEC students on final course grade. One reason may be the higher rate of absence for SATEC students.

17. 17 Results for Student Absence Students enrolled in SATEC classes actually missed more Algebra I class than their non-SATEC counterparts.

18. 18 Logistic Regression After controlling for student gender, ethnicity, English proficiency, and at-risk status, SATEC students were 1.5 times more likely to pass the EOCE than non- SATEC school students.

19. 19 Adjusting for Limited Technology 1 One school with SATEC labs did not implement the SATEC curriculum. After this one SATEC school was excluded from analysis, SATEC students showed a higher passing rate (59%) than non-SATEC schools (39%) and non-SATEC classroom students (40.9%) on EOCE.

20. 20 Adjusting for Limited Technology 2 After this one SATEC school was excluded from analysis, SATEC students missed a similar number of days of school (5.8 days) than non-SATEC school students (6.0 days) and non-SATEC classroom students (6.8 days).

21. 21 Adjusting for Limited Technology 3 After this one SATEC school was excluded from analysis, SATEC students were 1.9 times more likely to pass the EOCE than non-SATEC classroom students with adjustment for student gender, ethnicity, English proficiency, and at-risk status.

22. 22 Adjusting for Limited Technology 4 After this one of SATEC school was excluded from analysis, SATEC students were 2.5 times more likely to pass the EOCE than non-SATEC school students with adjustment for student gender, ethnicity, English proficiency, and at-risk status.