Reports - ERICaware of one piece in the puzzle: that was the software-review process. Since then, we have identified seven more pieces. Putting the puzzle together thus far has been

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 392 487 JC 960 150

TITLE Project SYNERGY: Software Support for UnderpreparedStudents. Year Three Report.

INSTITUTION Miami-Dade Community Coll., FL. Div. of EducationalTechnologies.

PUB DATE Sep 93NOTE 141p.; For the Year Two report, see ED 345 804; for

the Year Four report, see JC 960 151.PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) Collected Works

General (020)

EDRS PRICE MFOI/PC06 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Community Colleges; *Computer Assisted Instruction;

Computer Oriented Programs; *Computer Software;*Computer Software Reviews; *Computer Uses inEducation; Educational Media; *EducationalTechnology; High Risk Students; *Partnerships inEducation; Reading Instruction; Two Year Colleges;Two Year College Students

IDENTIFIERS IBM Corporation; Miami Dade Community College FL;*Project SYNERGY

ABSTRACTWith funds from the International Business Machines

(IBM) Corporation, Project SYNERGY was launched in January 1990 toaddress the problem of students deficient in basic skills enteringcolleges. Project SYNERGY I focused on reviewing and compiling a listof useful instructional software for basic skills remediation:Project SYNERGY II focused on software implementation; and ProjectSYNERGY III developed an integrated, adaptive, computerizedmanagement system. Twenty-two institutions in the United States and

Canada, led by Florida's Miami-Dade Community College (MDCC),

participated in reviewing and implementing computer software forcommunity college students. The first section of this third yearprogress report summarizes the software review process results,

including reviews of 259 different software packages. This sectioncontains 35 tables providing ratings of individual software programsfor reading, writing, mathematics, English as a Second Language(ESL), study skills and critical thinking, and multimedia packages.Part 2 provides information on 13 research studies conducted,explaining trends emerging from the studies. Part 3 discusses theimplementation of the Project SYNERGY Integrator, a softwaremanagement system to ensure software standards and track studentprogress through different programs. Part 4 describes the local area

network (LAN) that comprises the Project's environment, focusing onthe physical, social, and cultural conditions of the LAN. The finalsection presents an overview of the state of technology in educationand future plans for the project. Appendixes include a cumulativedirectory of project participants, list of software attributes andlearning objectives and software publishers, and applicationssoftware and hardware configurations. (TGI)

_

Software Support for Underprepared Students

11111111111111111111111-U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Edweaf.oral Resoarcn dnd improvemeM

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

XThis document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it

0 Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

K. Anandam

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

Yearly Three Rep( Al

:

CENIR6d.PIE3MONTCCMMUNITICOLLEGE

Cuyahoga Community College, .

( fr<fpf

. .

N"Y PIM! ARIF

"-, -. ,

A Avgt.,,J4

**477(Or4s"a^14

40:

ir/1 APtdrovevs. kmiks

n.4

..2"; "tar;

'7-i

f-A

tkt,77.1.:-"'

' t/r2o.,.

ornmwty Coilege

Cb Led('

,,-..mmunity Colleges

4 F.ANCLAIR--r\MM UNITY

17 4772 I 11 Iir"v ,

o'

Rar.U4.,

i:/ . Maccmb

-:

3 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Project SYNERGYSoftware Support for Underprepared Students

Year Three ReportSeptember 1993

Miam'.-DadeCOMMU7qtN COLLEGE

Division of Educational Technologies11011 S. W. 104 Street

Miami, FL 33176(305) 237-2551

Miami-DadeCOMMUNITY COLLEGE

Miami-Dade CommunitY CollegeDistrict Board of Trustees

Martin Fine, ChairmanLouis \,.oltson ill, Maria Elena Prio

Newall 1. Daughtrev, Barbara A. lharraChristina L. Mendoza, Reverend Walter T. Richardson

Robert H. McCabe, President, Miami-Dade Community College District

Miami-Dade Community College is an equal access/equal opportunity institution and does notdiscriminate because of veteran, marital or handicap status or on the basis of age, sex, race, national

origin or religion.

FOREWORDIn 1987, the League for Innovation in the Community .

College decided to undertake a joint venture to address aserious national issue basic skills deficiencies among amajority of the students seeking college education. Theproblem continues to worsen as increased numbers of jobsrequire post high school education. Today, the greatestthreat to our nation's well being is the growing underclassof individuals in our society whose skills do not matchthose needed to be productive members of the workforce; L.

instead, they become dependent on the society, depletingits resources and robbing its opportunities to develop asuperior workforce for the twentieth century.

Against this national backdrop, Project SYNERGY is being developed with great promise foreffectively addressing the problem. Project SYNERGY has had the grassroots involvement ofwell over 300 faculty and staff from 22 institutions across the nation and their sustainedcommitment to carry out their respective responsibilities 'in order for the project to move for-ward. Beginning with reviewing existing instructional software, the project is now poised topresent a holistic and integrated approach for addressing the basic skills deficiencies amongcollege students. I am particularly excited about the potential of ProjectSYNERGY Integrator tomake a breakthrough in integrating teaching and technology in meaningful and enduring waysand to develop innovative economic models for making technology affordable at an opera-tional level.

Miami-Dade is honored to have the opportunity to lead this collaborative effort, which has re-ceived a financial boost through two IBM hardware grants worth $2.6 million and a FederalHigher Education Act Title III grant for $2.3 million. We have made some important stridestoward addressing a problem that threatens the very future of our society. I wish all the par-ticipating institutions continued success. We plan to support and promote your accomplish-ments and persuade national, state, and educational leaders to support your efforts.

Robert H. McCabePresident, Miami-Dade Community College, District

C

AcknowledgmentsWe gratefully acknowledge the contributions of individuals and institutions to ProjectSYNERGY. In particular...

The International Business Machines (IBM) Corporation for its awards for ProjectSYNERGY I and II.

The U.S. Department of Education (Title III) for its award for Project SYNERGY IIL

The League for Innovation in the Community College for nurturing inter-institutionalcollaboration.

The publishers who have provided their software for review.

The publishers who have signed the agreement to make their software compatible withProject SYNERGY Integrator.

The College Board for providing its Computerized Placement Tests (CPT's) for pre- andpost-testing in the software implementation studies and its diagnostic test GUIDES forpilot testing.

The staff of ISAAC for establishing an electronic database for Project SYNERGYreviews.

The faculty reviewers, question writers, and administrators of participating institutionsand of the five campuses of Miami-Dade Community College.

M-DCC North Campus and Wolfson Campus administrators and faculty and those atBakersfield College for their support and participation in the software implementationstudies.

The Educational Development Laboratory (EDL) publisher for making available itssoftware for evaluation at Wolfson Campus and Bakersfield College.

Andy Martin and his staff at M-DCC's Media Academic Support for the services theyprovided to produce two videotapes on Project SYNERGY.

The Project SYNERGY Integrator Design Team for its sustained effort.

The staff of Educational Technologies at M-DCC for their team effort to make it allhappen particularly, Lorne Kotler for producing this Year Three Report.

Dr. Robert H. McCabe, College President, for his vision and mission in addressing theproblem of basic skills deficiencies among college students.

Miami-Dade Community College's Board of Trustees for its commitment to and supportof the college's philosophy to provide a second and third chance to the students in thecommunity.

Jon Alexiou, Chair isarnala AnandamProject Steering Committee Project Director

iv

Table of ContentsIntroduction 1

Part One: Software Reviews 4

Synthesis of READING Software Reviews 6

Synthesis of WRITING Software Reviewc. 13

Synthesis of MATH Software Reviews 21

Synthesis of ESL Software Reviews 29

Synthesis of STUDY SKILLS/CRITICAL THINKING Software Reviews 34

Project SYNERGY Software Selector (PS3 ) 39

Mastery Testing ao

Part Two: Software Implementation Studies 41

M-DCC North Campus SYNERGY Center

Bakersfield College SYNERGY Center 56

M-DCC Wolfson Campus SYNERGY Center 68

Richland College SYNERGY Center 86

The University of Tennessee at Martin SYNERGY Center 87

Part Three: Project SYNERGY Integrator and Platform of Neutrality 88

Part Four: Project SYNERGY Environment 94

Conclusion q9

AppendicesAppendix A: Cumulative Directory of Project Participants 101

Appendix B: Software Attributes & Learning Objectives 111

Appendix C: Software Publishers 122

Appendix D: Applications Software & Hardware Configurations 125

Project SYNERGY Resources 131

The use in this document of registered tradenames, trademarks, etc. without specialacknowledgments does not imply that suchnames, as defined by relevant laws, may beregarded as unprotected and, thus, free forgeneral use.

This document was produced by TheresaO'Connell and Isolde Garcia using the IBMAdvanced Academic System Software.

Cover design was done by Lee Kline, Miami-Dade Community College.

Copyright © 1993 Miami-Dade CommunityCollege

vi CJI

IntroductionKama la Anandarn

Project SYNERGY DirectorMiami-Dade Community College

In 1987, the Board of Directors of the League forInnovation in the Community College reached aunanimous decision that the League memberinstitutions should collectively address thenational issue of underprepared collegestudents. Dr. Robert H. McCabe, President ofMiami-Dade Community College, offered to

lead the effort. The following two yearswitnessed a number of dialogues anddiscussions that culminated in a week-longmeeting in Miami in February 1989.

Approximately sixty faculty and administratorsfrom seventeen League and two non-Leaguecolleges participated in the meeting and arrivedat a focus and direction for our effort.

in January, 1990, Project SYNERGY waslaunched, and we are pleased to publish thisYear Three Report. Occasionally, a project comesalong which is the right project at the right timefor the right reason with the right playershaying at least some of the right answers.Project SYNERGY is such a project, addressingthe basic-skills deficiencies among individualsseeking college education. Project SYNERGYrepresents a determined and concerted effort ofnineteen two-year colleges and three four-yearcolleges coordinated by Miami-DadeCommunity College under the auspices of theLeague for Innovation in the CommunityCollege. Project SYNERGY I (January 1990 -December 1991), supported by a $1.3-milliongrant from IBM, focused on reviewing andcompiling a list of useful instructional softwarefor basic skills remediation; Project SYNERGY II(January 1992 June 1994), also supported byIBM with another $1.3-millkm grant, continuessoftware review and focuses on softwareimplementation and research; ProjectSYNERGY III (October 1992 - September 1997)is a $2.3-million Title III grant to Miami-DadeCommunity College to develop an integrated,

1

adaptive, computerized laanagement systemthat will help institutions take a holisticapproach in establishing Learning Environment2000 for Underprepared College Students.

Looking back at the origin's and progress ofProject SYNERGY, I realize that its success ismostly attributed to three phenomena:

grassroots involvement of faculty whoteach underprepared college students.

working at one thing at a time as if theproject were a jigsaw puzzle.

seizing the windows of opportunity alongthe way.

The degree of grassroots involvement will be-come apparent to the reader in Appendix A,

which presents a roster of the 429 faculty, staff,and administrators who have participated inthe various SYNERGY activities. Some haveparticipated in more activities than others andsome have participated for a- longer time thanothers. The collective wisdom emerging fromcollaborative effort will undoubtedly leave itsmark in solving the national crisis of basic-skillsdeficiencies among college students.

As we began with Project SYNERGY I, we wereaware of one piece in the puzzle: that was thesoftware-review process. Since then, we haveidentified seven more pieces. Putting the puzzletogether thus far has been quite challenging,and as each piece falls in its place, the emergingpicture has given us a great sense ofaccomplishment. The picture is not complete byany means; however, if you are curious to knowwhat we are aiming for as the bigger picture,you will find it on page 99.

The SR piece is the software review processdescribed in Part One. As of June 1993, 102faculty across the nation had completed 404reviews of 259 software packages in reading,writing, math, ESL, and study skills/criticalthinking. The reviLw results are available toreaders in this report, as well as through PS3, acomputerized database (see page 39) andthrough an electronic database called IKE (see

Closely corresponding to the objectives in thesoftware review process is the MT piecerepresenting the activity through which facultyfrom SYNERGY colleges, with the assistance ofa computerized tracking system, are writingquestions to corre,pond to the SYNERGYobjectives in reading, writing, and math. ThreeMiami-Dade faculty Norma Agras, DonMeagher, and Melinda Prague arecoordinating the effort that will result in .acomputerized bank of questions to supportmastery testing. The MT piece is described inPart One.

The SI and R pieces go together in many waysand are described in Part Two. As of June 1993,25 faculty in 4 institutions had been involved inthese activities; they are at different stages inthe implementation process. While they haveused or will be using different software,research will be the common thread that willrun across all institutions. This common threadconsists of an internal frame of n?ference for

faculty to engage in research to determine themost effective combination of human andtechnological resources that will yield the greatestbenefit to each student. In our approach tosoftware implementation, research is presentedas an instrument of change and not as a litmustest of good or bad teaching. Besides theSYNERGY reports, a half-hour videotape onour Software Implementation Model is available toreaders.

The FSI and PN pieces go together also and arepresented in Part Three. PSI (Project SYNERGYIntegrator) is an adaptive management systemfor Local Area Networks. It incorporates ProjectSYNERGY learning objectives and mastery testquestions and provides installation options toinclude multi-vendor software for testing andinstruction. It provides linkages among learningobjectives, instructional software, and masterytests in order for the student to have smoothtransitions from One learning objective toanother and from one software package toanother. It is designed to assist faculty to have amore efficient handle on how their students areprogressing and take appropriate action in a multi-vendor software environment. Over 400 facultyand administrators at two- and four-yearinstitutions have been involved in specifyingthe necessary features and functions for PSI.Miami-Dade plans to establish an installed base of66 PSI institutions in the first year after itsannouncement in order to create a momentumfor adoption of PSI by other institutions. Theplan includes the following:

Six PSI Training Centers (four existingProject SYNERGY Centers for SoftwareImplementation plus two new ones).

Ten PSI Pioneer Colleges through a Title IIIconsortium grant.

Fifty PSI Early Adopter Colleges, selectedon the basis of an RFP or by invitation.

PSI is designed to provide, on the one hand, asystem that has standard faculty and studentinterfaces and, on the other, a platform ofneutrality to accommodate multi-vendor

software without affecting the standard userinterfaces.

Our work with faculty and administrators inimplementating software and conductingresearch has drawn attention to many otherfactors that facilitate or debilitate the use oftechnology on a campus. We have coined theexpression Project SYNERGY Environment (PSEpiece) to represent these factors, which aredescribed in Part Four. Environment embracesphysical, social, and cultural aspects that aninstitution should endeavor to provide in orderto maximize the benefits of PSI. Physical aspectsinclude space, hardware, software, location,security, and safety; social aspects deal withpersonnel and the interrelationships among them;cultural aspects expect the institutions tc.

examine their traditional practices (budgetallocation, class size, number of contact hours,beginning and end of terms) and modify them

in order to enhance the efficiency andeffectiveness of PSI. An institution's success inaddressing these aspects is enhanced by plannedcommunication (memos, reports, meetings,phonemail, E-maP) to keep all the participantswell informed of the operations and outcomesof the SYNERGY Center and in encouragingthem to stay involved and make it an evenbetter place.

A major activity embedded in the PSE piece butdeserving special attention is the FD (FacultvDevelopment) piece. It is discussed in Part Fouras well. A half-hour videotape on Faculty Role in

Integrating Teaching and Technology is availal-V

Enjoy your reading.

Part One: Software Reviews

Tim KotlerRica% Participation CoodinatorMiami-Dade Community Colkge

In Project SYNERGY II, we have expanded thesoftware review process beyond reading,writing, and mathematics to include ESL andstudy skills/critical thinking, as well asmultimedia packages in all the disciplines. Inthe original three subject areas, our goal hasbeen to raise the number of reviews perpackage w three for those titles that have beenreviewed already; this goal has not, however,precluded our adding new titles. During lastfall and so far in 1993, the review of software inFtil. and study skills/critical thinking has goneinto full swing. Across the twenty-two ProjectSYNERGY II institutions, there are about fiftyactive faculty reviewers, some of them"veterans" from Project SYNERGY I.

As some readers are already aware, the processof reviewing instructional software in ProjectSYNERGY has been highly systematic, with anemphasis locating packages that arecurrently implemented in an educationalsetting. After the faculty identify softwareprograms, they reserve the titles with theProject's Software Reviews Coordinator,thereby insuring that a package receke no morethan three reviews. Faculty are responsible forsecuring the software, which publishers as aNvh()Ie have bs2en very cooperative in providingtor review on a complimentary basis; thenfaculty request the project team to prepare andsend a review disk specially created for eachpackage.

Each software review collects information abouthardw are requirements, learning objectives

4

covered satisfactorily, instructional modes, andoperational reliability' and format; it alsoprovides plenty of room for open-endedcommentary and insights. While the emphasisin this process has been on the judgments offaculty as "content experts," student input hasbeen encoiraged whenever possible. For thesoftware that becomes compatible with ProjectSYNERGY Integrator (PSI), we will be able tocollect effectiveness data showing PSI userswhich lessons are working in which ways withwhich students and showing publishers areaswhere modifications would be appropriate.

The instructional software is evaluatedaccording to criteria established by facultyteaching underprepared students. These criteria(learning objectives unique to each disciplineand software attributes common to alldisciplines) were evolved through severaliterations starting in February 1989 at the"Workshop on Computer-Based InstructionalSupport for the Underprepared Student"(Miami, FL). A complete list of SoftwareContent Attributes, Reading Objectives, WritingObjectives, Mathematics Objectives, ESLObjectives, .1nd Study Skills/Critical ThinkingObjectives is shown in Appendix B.

To manage the review process, the project teamestablished and has maintained a specialcomputerized database to keep track of thesoftware packages reserved, the reviewersinvolved, and the status of the reviewsunderway. When the Software ReviewsCoordinator receives a completed review disk,

it is checked for consistency and synthesized forinclusion in the Project SYNERGY databasecalled PS:' (see page 39) and for posting on IKE(IBM Kiosk for Education), an electronicbulletin board and database devoted to

information about the use of IBM-compatiblehardware and software as aids to instructionand research at the higher-education level.

Getting on IKE

Developed and operated by the University ofWashington and supported by IBM, IKE isaccessible via modern (toll number), via theInternet computer network (free if you have anaccount on a computer connected to this

network), or via Gopher. For furtherinformation, you may call the ISAAC office at(206) 543-5604, between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM,Pacific Time, or via electronic mail at

[email protected], or write to ISAACAccess, m/s FC-06, University of Washington,Seattle, WA 98195.

If you have access to IKE and would like to seethe project's s<4tware reviews, choose

DATABASES at the main menu. Then chooseSoftware Reviews (Project SYNERGY) to enterthe database of reviews; at this point, type inone or more search words (e.g., disciplinewords, key words from objectives, title words).From a list of software titles that will bedisplayed following the search, you may viewthe review(s).

Progress

As of June 1993, there were a total of 404reviews of 259 software packages in ProjectSYNERGY. Starting on the next page aresyntheses of the reading, writing, mathematics,ESL, and study skills/critical thinking reviewsposted on ISAAC. These are not all claimed to

he ideal packages, merely ones that Seem to havesome useful applications and some satisfactorilyimplemented learning objectives and softwarea ttributes.

The tables highlight the coverage of objectivesand attributes implemented satisfactorily as apercent of the total possible in each

subcategory. The tables also present readinglevel (for reading and writing), number ofreviews, and instructional modes implemented.A list of software publishers' names andaddresses is given in Appendix C.

It should be noted that where there are fewerthan three reviews, the numbers could changeas additional reviews are received. Also, thefaculty's open-ended comments about theuniqueness of the program, their level of en-thusiasm about it, and their judgment of its ap-propriateness for adults and underpreparedstudents are not quantified in these tables.

A final word: as we have noted before, a signifi-cant and integral feature of the software reviewprocess has been the highly positive responsesof the faculty doing the grassroots work. Theybelieve that reviewing instructional software forProject SYNERGY has constituted a central ac-tivity of their professional development for sz..v-eral reasons: they have learned to evaluatesoftware more critically and systematically;they understand better how to use softwarewith their students; and their stature withintheir institution as developmental educators hasbeen enhanced. As one project participant putit: "Some of our faculty who weren't doingmuch with technology are now talking up thesoftware-review process. They're not happywith the early drill-and-practice. This projecthas moved faculty to want to do more. It hasnot only raised their awareness; it has whettheir appetites too."

Synthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviews for Reading

SOFTWARE ID R001 R002 R003 R004 R005 R007 R009 R011

Reading I .E.' \ el (Grade l.evel In of (up to 3)

10-11+1 0-13+3 i 3

7-82

7-83

7-8")

4-121

1013+1

7-13+1

rINSTRI.. CTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and PracticeI utorialSimulation

Comprehensi \ e 1001Partial I ool

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

-

Y

Y

-Y

Y Y

Y

--

Y

NNY

NY

Y

N

-

-

Y

--

N--

Y

C 0 V E R A G E (Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)

TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyWord Learning Skilk (46)Functional Reading (1(1)Basic Comprehension (15)I ransitional Expressions (9)Critical Comprehension (29)Textbook/Technical Reading (18)Reading in Content Areas (29)Rate & Flexibility (11)

11

073

00(1

018

00

13

0

0(1

00

2200000()

0

00

530

1411

00

00

330

284414

0

15

0

0

00000

200

00

69000

11

0

00

0000

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3)Appropriateness (5)Feedback (3)

100100100

100100100

100100100

100

8033

100100100

10080

100

678067

10080

0

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented sarisfac orilyEase of Implementation (6)Adaptability (()Summary Information (6)

10010)67

335033

10010ft67

10010083

10010067

100100

67

6717

83

338383

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Use (7)Adaptability (4)te,4ing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)ppropriatenes (18)

43756750

1(10

11

4325

0

0

8611

437567

100100

89

4350

0100100

39

4375

050

100

56

577567

1008656

140

330

5711

4375

0505733

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilit-N, (3)Format (7)

100

I 43I(X)

4310043

10043

10043

6719

6729

1 10019

I he publi,,her is ,,hown in parenth( ses in the list below:1(001 !pce,i,mtt:i Lqrategu Rcadolg L.Ti(tencil Stp:tent

ik\ ea\ er Inqructional Sv,,tem.,)1(002 flunktng 1 (Compris)R001 Vo, tvel (IBM)R004 Rc,t,idt for Alcaniv I.ez'el IV (11.3N1)R005 Rca,b,/, /*Or hlYntl,a10// I t'Z'CI I (IBM)

R007 (Vont Attack Lez,els 1 -9 (DavidsonAssociates)

1(009 Lesson,; in Reading and Re.isontng 1 (Queue,Inc.)

R011 Spell It (Davidson 8z Associates)

1 5



Reading Level (Grade Level)tt of Reviews (up to 3)

9-133

5-133

1-6

2

7-123

6-131

3-4

1

9-13+1

t/-11.

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Im lemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and Practice - Y Y ì ì `r

Tutorial I I NI' I Y ISimulation X

GameComprehensive Tool

,

_

I -

Partial Tool _ IC 0 V E R A G E (Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)

TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorily

Word Learning Skills (46) 0 0 9 11 24 54 i 0 20

Functional Reading (10) 0 10 0 0 0 10 0 0

Basic Comprehension (15) 100 0 33 53 67 33 20 0

Transitional Expressions (9) 0 (1 0 67 11 0 0 0

Critical Comprehension (29) 34 14 10 0 62 17 7 0

Textbook/Technical Reading (18) 22 39 0 0 61 28 0 0

Reading in Content Areas (29) 7 10 0 0 41 0 0 0

Rate & Flexibilitv (11) 0 18 45 0 36 0 64 0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorily

Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 67

Appropriateness (5) 100 100 80 100 100 100 100 1(10

Feedback (3) -, 33 100 100 33 100 100 100 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orily

Ease of Implementation (6) 100 83 100 50 WO 100 100 100

Adaptability (6) 83 67 100 67 100 100 67 67

Summary Information (6) 83 33 83 67 67 67 17 50

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orily

Ease of Use (7) 71 29 100 29 43 57 100 19

Adaptability (4) 50 100 75 0 100 75 100 25

Testing (3) 0 0 33 0 100 67 67 0

Tracking (2) 50 100 100 100 100 50 100 50

Interactivity (7) 'N 100 86 57 100 100 100 71

Appropriateness (18) 11 61 56 33 44 li__ 67 33

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorily

Reliability (3) 100 100 100 67 100 100 100 '00

Format (7) 19 43 43 29 43 43 57 -L.

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:

R012 SEEN (Conduit) R017 Reading ut D Oblectu'es

R013 Oregon Trail (MECC) Learning)

R014 CORE Reading and Vocabulary Dez'elopment R018 BLS Tutor.qi.qon, Adult 1 ilu, di ion Redding

(Educational Activities, Inc.) pin (BLS)

R016 Ten Steps to improving Reading Skills R021 SpeedReadmg Hie Computer ou,,e (Bureau

(Townsend Press) of Business PraLR022 Analogle.; I (Queue, Int...)

7 IC Table 1.2


SO! TWARI: ID R023 R024 R025 R026 R027 R028 R030 R031

Reading I.e \ el (Grade I .e% el )

1 " 01. Re\ It'%%, (1.1r tl) .1)

5-61

6-1 ;-i-1

10-12/

8-9.51

5-6.5-1

5-6/

1_12/

8_12

3

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and Pnk tice 1 Y Y Y Y Y 1

1 utonal \ Y Y \ \Simulation 1' Y 1'

(. ta me 1

Comprel lens! \e loolPartial I ool Y Y


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorily11 ord Learning Skilk (46) (1 13 15 11 i 5 18 50 10Functional Reading (1(1) 10 0 0 0 0 0 () 0Basic Comprehension 1151 87 /-_, 60 100 10(1 0 100 47I ransitional F. \pressions (9) 11 0 56 89 100 0 100 0

Critical Comprehension (29) 31 0 31 79 41 0 76

le\ thook technical Reading (18) 44 (1 17 11 11 0 0 0


Rate Sr. He\ ibilitv (11) 0 0 0 64 64 0 0 0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyccuracy (3) 100 67 100 100 100 100 100 1(8)

Appropriateness (5) WO 80 100 100 80 WO 100 80Feedback (3) 100 WO 100 33 33 100 100 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorily' Case of Implementation (N 1(8) 83 83 1(8) 100 100 100 100

Adaptability (6) MO 100 67 100 100 100 100 100

LSummary Information (6) 83 83 83 1(8) 83 67 100 83

1 MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorily1---Fat,t, of Use (7) 37 37 43 100 100 43 57 29

Adaptability (4) 50 75 15 1(8) 75 75 100 100

testing (3) 33 67 0 100 33 100 67 0

1 racking (2) 100 100 100 100 WO 100 100 50Interactivit% (7) 100 86 71 71 71 100 100 86Appropriateness (18) 56 ..-)y._ 33 11 11 83 11 11

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent ( f attributes implemented satisfactorily1

Reliability (3) 1 100 100 100 1 100 100 100 10(1 10(1

Format 17) I 43 I 43 29 1 43 19 43 29 29

1 he publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be ow:1(023 1,:cormation I ez.el III (Jostens

.eaming)1(024 Rca,iiit:; I iti ic,i it Sip;tem eaver)R025 Coll(c Aptitude Re,hling Comprelten::to)!

((_1ueue, Inc.)1(026 1 100 ReadoN StrattNies WA I 210

(1.1)1.1

Tably 1 3 8

1(027 Leitrunig 100: Readiv Strate,,,,ies (LA 1 20i(ED) .)

R028 Spelling. III (Jostens Learning)R030 Ann. Adiu:qing Dtwrees orniffieulty Serie:: 1

(Queue, Inc.)1(031 ADD AdiuquiN DeNree!-; of DO-with& 2

(Queue, Inc.)



Reading Le% el (Grade Le% el)g of Review s (up to 3)

11-121

9-11+1

7-q

1

8-13+1_

6-101

9-13+1

6-13+1_

4-61

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=ves, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and Practice1 utorialSimulationGameComprehensi t e FtiolPartial Tool

Y

Ni.

Y

Y

V

V

V

_

`,"

V

X

--

.

N

VY I

V.

V

-

VV

VNi"

V

YV

V-

Y-

-



11 ord Learning Skills (46) 15 15 1_ 1_ 30 11 -,_ 0

Functional Reading (10) 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0

Basic Comprehension (15) 0 0 40 33 53 0 53 -i-_,

Transitional E\ pressions (9) 0 0 11__ 0 100 0 0 (1


Te \tbook 'Technical Reading (18) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -.)-), -- 0

Reading in Content Areas (29) 0 0 0 0 18 0 ! 18 0

Rate ev. Flexibility (11) 0 0 0 9 0 0 I 64 0


Accuracy (3) 0 100 100 100 100 100 100 10(1

Appropriateness (5) 80 80 100 100 100 60 100 80

Feedback (3) 100 100 100 0 100 67 33 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorily

Ease of Implementation (6) 100 100 100 83 100 100 83 100

Adaptability (6) 100 100 100 67 53 67 100 50


MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorily

Ease of Use (7) Di 57 100 Di 57 57 Di 86

Adaptability (4) 50 75-,-/LI lc; 50 15 75 75

resting (3) 0 67 33 0 67 67 67 33

Tracking (2) 100 100 100 50 100 100 100 50

Interactivity (7) 86 86 86 71 100 100 57 86

Appropriatent," (18) 44 44 11 11 11 72 33 33

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent ( f attributes implemented satisfactorily

Reliability (3) 67 100 100 100 100 100 100 1 100

Format (7) ,li 29 14 43 0 43 29 1 14

I he publisher is ,shown in parentht ,ses in the list be ow:

R032 INerii Arta, k: Data Disk Davidson)R033 IVani A ttack ReoL; Pretixe.-: (Davidson)R037 Basic Reading Sk01:, (Projected I. earning

Programs, Inc.)R042 Coulprerloistoil Pod'er I (yel Hi .4. 1..cotis

1 .3 (Nlilliken Publishing Co.)

R045 Diascriptwe Readins III (EducationalActivities, Inc.)

R048 IltteIlcctual SAT l'ocathularu (Queue, Inc.)R049 F.:Thni 1Vood Dunamic Reader (I irnework's)

R050 1- intdamental,4 a Readm, (FducationaActivitie,,, Inc.)

9

i 61 dble 1.4



Reading Level (Grade Level)ft of Reviews (up to 3)

4-5,

1-6

1

10-13+1

6-8/

10-121

6-102

8

1

2-61


Driil and Practice Y Y Y Y Y Y Y -Tutorial Y Y Y Y Y

Simulation Y Y Y - -Game Y Y

Comprehensive Tool Y Y

Partial Tool Y Y Y Y -


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyWord Learning Skills (46) 15 9 17 0 11 15 11 0Functional Reading (10) 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Basic Comprehension (15) 33 0 27 0 20 87 53 40Transitional Expressions (9) 44 0 0 0 0 78 67 11



Reading in Content Areas (29) 14 0 0 3 0 0 0 0Rate & Flexibility (11) 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0


Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 67 100 100 100


Feedback (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 33 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6) 100 83 83 100 83 100 33 100

Adaptability (6) 100 50 100 100 17 100 50 100


MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Use (7) 71 71 100 43 43 43 29 43Adaptability (4) 75 50 100 50 0 75 50 100

Testing (3) 0 0 0 (1 (1 0 0 67Tracking (2) 100 100 100 50 50 100 100 100

Interactivity (7) 86 86 100 86 71 100 71 100

Appropriateness (18) 50 17 33 /*/ 0 12 11 50

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliability (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Format (7) 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 43

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be ow:R053 How to Read for Ereryday

(Educational Activities, Inc.)R056 LEEP Spelling Program (Leep, Inc.)R062 Quantum (EDL)R064 Reading and Thinking III (Queue, Inc.)R065 Reading and Thinking IV (Queue, Inc.)

Table 1.5 10

R067 Reading and Critical Thinking Series(Educulture)

R069 Ten Steps to Building College Routing Skills(Townsend Press)

R070 Reading IV (Jostens Learning)

1


SOFTWARE ID R072 R073 R074 ROM R079 R082 R086 R087

Reading Level (Grade Level)# of Reviews (up to 3)

9- 13+

1

8-13,

8-131

2-31-

5-6

3

3_6

1

1_1.51-

2_1.5

3


Drill and Practii:eT utoria I

SimulationGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

-

Y.

Y

-

Y

Y

.

Y

Y

Y

Y-

1

-Y

Y

.

-

Y

Y

Y



Word Learning Skills (46) 0 28 28 26 15 15 9 /_Functional Reading (10) 0 0 (1 0 0 0 0 0

Basic Comprehension (15) 0 40 40 87 60 53 60 60

Transitional Expressions (9) 0 10(1 100 89 0 0 0 0

Critical Comprehension (29) 0 10 34 41 / 0 14 10



Rate & Flexibility (11) 27 0 0 45 0 0 9 9


Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Appropriateness (5) 80 100 100 100 IOU 100 100 100

Feedback (3) 100 100 100 100 33 0 33 67


Ease of Implementation (6) 83 1(10 100 100 83 100 100 100

Adaptability (6) 100 100 100 100 67 100 100 83



Ease of Use (7) 57 43 43 71 43 43 71 43

Adaptability (4) 50 75 75 75 75 75 100 100

Testing (3) 0 33 33 67 0 0 67 33

Tracking (2) 50 1(10 100 100 50 100 100 100

Interactivity (7) 71 100 100 100 71 57 100 WO

Appropriateness (18) 33 56 56 18 -y) 56 28 11


Reliability (3) 67 I 100 100 100 100 100 1(R) 100

Format (7) 29 1 43 43 43 29 29 29 19

The publisher is shown in parenthises in the list below:

R072 Speed Reader II (Davidson & Associates)R073 Science III: GED Objectiz,es (losten,.

Learning)R074 Social Studies Ill: GEL) Olnectiz'es (Jostens

Learning)R075 Supphment 71!0. Reading Efficiency System

(Weaver Instructional Systems)

R079 Ho:v to Read in Hu' Content /Areas(Educational Acth ities, Inc.)

R082 Read "N" Roll (Davidson & ASM)cia tes)

R086 Learning 100: Reading Strategies (AA 1 20)(EDL)

11087 Learinng 1no. Reading Stralqies IBA 1 2o;(EDL)

1126

Table 1.6


SOFTWARE ID R103 R105 R107 R110 R111 R112 R116

Reading Level (Grade Level)# of Reviews (up to 3)

6-101

6-103

13+1

9-131

3-41

3-82

10-161

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and Practice Y Y Y Y Y Y X

Tutorial Y _. Y Y Y

Simulation Y Y -Game -Comprehensive Tool - - - - Y Y -Partial Tool - - Y Y Y N


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyVord Learning Skills (46) 0 0 4 9 0 24 /Functional Reading (10) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Basic Comprehension (15) 20 13 73 100 67 53 93Transitional Expressions (9) 0 0 67 0 89 22 0Critical Comprehension (29) 0 0 28 14 14 21 59Textbook/Technical Reading (18) 0 0 44 22 44 0 0Reading in Content Areas (29) 0 0 0 0 38 0 0Rate & Flexibility (11) 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 100 67 100 100 1(X) 100Appropriateness (5) 100 60 100 100 100 100 100

Feedback (3) 0 100 33 67 100 100 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs imriemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6) 83 67 83 100 100 100 100

Adaptability (6) 100 67 67 67 50 100 83Summarv Information (6) 83 83 67 50 83 83 83

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needsimplemented satisfactorilyEase of Use (7) 29 43 43 43 29 71 71

Adaptability (4) 75 50 25 25 100 1(X) 75Testing (3) 0 0 67 67 33 100 67Tracking (2) 100 100 100 100 50 100 50Interactivity (7) 100 71 86 71 86 1(X) 1(X)

Appropriateness (18) 11 11 11 22 56 44 33

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliability (3) 100 100 67 100 100 100 100Format (7) 29 29 29 29 43 43 29

The publisher is shown in paren.e.-teses in the list be ow:

R103 Reading for Enriclunent: Main Idea (Queue,Inc.)

R105 Reading.for Enrichment: Finding Hu, Facts(Queue, Inc.)

R107 DOEL Reading Skills (Wisc-Ware)R110 Intellectual PSAT/SAT Reading

Comprehension (Queue, Inc.)

R111 Reading for Information: Level II (IBM)R112 Diascriptive Reading II (Educational

Activities, inc.)R116 Comprehensive Power: Levels 1. K. L (Milliken

Publishing Co.)

Table 1.7 12 2 1

Synthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviews for Writing

SOFTWARE ID W001 W002 W003 W004 W005 W007 W008 W009

Reading Level# of Reviews (up to 3)

111

6-13+3

8-13')

10,

8-13+2

10-123

12-13+.-)

102

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and Practice - Y -Tutorial Y Y y Y Y y

Simulation Y - Y -Game - - -Comprehensive Tool - Y Y - -Partial Tool - - Y Y Y Y



Prewiting (12) 50 33 50 50 67 25 17 42

Writing (25) 36 16 76 72 68 0 8 56

Revision (12) 41 8 67 100 100 0 0 58

Editing (25) 0 8 0 48 28 4 0 0


Accuracy (3) 67 100 1(X) 100 100 1(X) 100 100


Feedback (3) 11 0 100 100 100 0 100 33



Adaptability (6) 50 83 100 1(X) 83 50 100 67



Ease (7) 29 71 71 100 100 71 57 29

Adaptability (4) 50 50 100 100 75 75 100 50

Testing (3) 0 0 0 0 100 0 11 0

Tracking (2) 0 0 100 100 100 0 100 100

Interactivity (7) 57 0 86 100 1(X) 86 100 71



Reliabilty (3) 67 1(X) 100 100 1(X) 100 1(X) 100

Format (7) 29 43 ' 43 29 43 43 29 29

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be ow:W001 Thoughthne: The Intelligent Writer's

Companion (Xpercom)W002 Fine Lines (Houghton Mifflin)W003 The Writing Tutor (Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich)W004 Writer's Helper Stage II (Conduit)WOOS Writing ts Thinking (Kapstrom, Inc.)

W007 Wordhench: The Tool for People Who Write(Addison Wesley Publishing Company,Inc.)

W008 SEEN (Conduit)W009 Prewriting (National Collegiate Software

Clearinghouse)

13 n Table 2.1




101

11

1

3-91

13+.)

82

7-8,

7-83

9

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and PracticeTutorialSimulationGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool

Y

Y

N

-Y

NN

Y

Y

-Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

X

-Y


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPrewiting (12)Writing (25)Revision (12)Editing (25)

1

008

28

422467

0

016

00

00

1740

50242528

000

32

00

2524

8376

10092


100100100

674067

1008033

10080

100

100100100

10010033

10080

0

100100100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6)Adaptability (6)Summary Information (6)

1005050

335067

1003333

1006750

1006733

100100

67

838367

100100100

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase (7)Adaptability (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

1(h)

2567

10071

33

0

250

0

14

11

4325335014

0

57503350

10011.

10075

0100100

11

437567

10010072

05067

10071

39

100100

100100100100

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilty (3)Format (7)

10029

10029

10043

10029

10043

10043

10043

100

29

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:W010 Comma Sense l 19S5 (Wisc-Ware) W017W011 Organize (Wadsworth Publishing W018

Company)W012 Skills Bank (Skills Bank Corporation) W019W015 English Achiez,ement (Queue, Inc.)W016 HBI Wraer (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich)

Table 2.."' 14 2

Punctuation Level IV (Jostens Learning)Combining Sentences Lez'el /V (JostensLearning)The Holt Writing Tutor (Harcourt BraceJovanovich)




10-13+3

8-13+1

6-103

6-13+/

111

71

9-13+3

9-103


Drill and PracticeTutorialSimulationGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool X

Y

Y

--X

Y

Y

Y

-

-

Y

Y

Y

Y

-



Prewiting (12)Writing (25)Revision (12)Editing (25)

000

40

000

40

000

60

42565016

582450

0

000

80

000

16

33203376


Accuracy (3)Appropriateness (5)Feedback (3)

1006033

1006033

100100100

100100100

100 I

100 !

0 I

100

1000

10060

0

10060

(3


Ease of Implementation (6)Adaptability (6)Summary Information (6)

1008367

1005083

8367

0

836783

835017

1008383


Ease (7)Adaptability (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

71

250

10071

28

290o

1004322

71

7533

1008650

10000

10010056

5775

00

4311

10050

100100

8633

432533504311

71

2500

14

39


Reliabilty (3)Format (7) .

10029

6729

1(10

2910029

10029

10029

10079

6743

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be ow:

W021 Grammatik IV (References Software, Inc.)W022 Rightwriter 3.1 (Que Software)W024 Blue Pencil Authoring System (Prentice Hall

Press)W025 CAW: Computer Assisted Writing

(Educational Activities, Inc.)W026 The Computer Writing Resource Kit (D.C.

Heath and Company)

W027 COMSKL-PC (Fox Valle\ TechnicalCollege)

W031 Practical Composition Series 1-V(Educulture)

W032 Norton Textra 2.0 (W.W. Norton andCompany, Inc.)

15 2,:e Table 2.3

Synthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviews for IN riting



121

7-121

7-121

13

1

6-13+/

81

4-10/

8-103

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and Practice y Y Y YTutoria I y y Y Y Y YSimulation - Y - Y -Game -Comprehensive Tool -Partial Tool Y Y Y Y - Y


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPrewiting (12) 8 33 0 25 0 25 8Writing (25) 0 32 0 8 - 0 24 8

Revision (12) () 0 0 17 - 0 0 0Editing (25) 0 0 4 0 - 4 0 0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 1(X) 100 67 100 1(X) 100 100Appropriateness (5) 80 60 MO 1(X) 80 40 1(X) 80Feedback (3) 0 0 - 0 67 33 67 33 33

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6) 83 100 67 83 33 100 100 67Adaptability (6) 50 50 67 100 67 17 67 50Summary Information (6) 17 17 0 17 17 17 17 33

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase (7) 71 57 57 29 43 100 43 43Adaptability (4) 25 75 75 100 75 50 75 50Testing (3) 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0Tracking (2) 0 0 0 0 100 50 0 1(X)

Interactivity (7) 0 57 29 71 86 57 29 100Appropriateness (18) 6 17 17 33 44 17 11 11

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilty (3) 1(X) 1(X) 100 100 100 100 100 1(X)

Format (7) 29 29 14 43 29 43 29 43

The publisher is shown in parenthE ses in the list below:

W033 College Writer (Prentice Hall Press)W037 First Draft (Scholastic, Inc.)W039 Mind Reader (Brown Bag Software)W040 Mind Writer (Daedalus Group, Inc.)W042 101 Misused Words (Projected Learning

Programs, Inc.) (This package providespractice on commonly misused words,primarily homonyms, not covered in thetopics of this table.)

W043

W045

W046

PFS: Professional Write 2.1 (Scott Foresmanand Company)Proteus: The Idea Generator (ProjectedLearning Programs, Inc.)Persuasive Essay lll (Queue, Inc.)

Table 2.4 16 2 r,')

Svnthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviews for Writing


Reading Level# of Reviews (u to 3)

12-13+1

111

5-83

6-101

5-6/

5-8/

81

81


Drill and PracticeTutorialSimulationGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool

NY

N-

Y

Y

-

Y

X

-Y

-Y---Y

NNY

-N

Y

Y

Y

-

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y


TOPICS perzent of objectives implemented satisfactorily

Prewiting (12) () 25 0 0 0 33 0 42

Writing (25) 0 32 20 0 0 64 () 4

Revision (12) 0 50 25 0 0 75 0 25

Editing (25) 12 4 24 8 12 52 20 0


Accuracy (3) 100 67 1(X) 100 1(X) 100 100 100

Appropriateness (5) 100 100 60 100 40 100 1(X) 1(X)

Feedback (3) 0 33 67 0 0 33 67 1(X)



Adaptability (6) 17 17 50 0 67 83 67 50



Ease (7) 14 14 43 57 57 71 100 57

Adaptability (4) 0 75 0 75 100 75 50 _25-

Testing (3) 0 0 0 0 0 67 67 0

Tracking (2) 50 0 0 0 0 1(X) 1(X) 0

Interactivity (7) 14 71 100 14 29 100 86 14



Reliabilty (3) 67 67 67 100 100 1(X) 1(X) 100

Format (7) 29 43 29 29 29 29 29 29


W048 Punctuation (Projected Learning Programs,Inc.)

W050 Report Writing (Compris)W055 Writing qkills: Learning to Write (Queue,

W057 Webster's New Worid Writer (Prentice HallPress)

W060 Snowball (Wisc-Ware)W061 Writing Skills Series: Developing Writing

Skills (Queue, Inc.)W062 Conuna Sense II (Wisc-Ware)W066 Super Scoop (Queue, Inc.)

172 6

Table :3




13+1

8-12/

11

1

9-13+1

6-101

7

I

8-13+-

12I


Y

NY

Y

Y.

-

N

N..

V

Y -

-Y

N


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPrewiting (12) 0 0 0 0 58 0 17 0Writing (25) 4 0 0 8 31 0 71 0Revision (12) 15 (1 (1 (1 41 0 75 0Editing (25) 16 32 20 68 0 32 68 64

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 100 67 33 67 100 100 0Appropriateness (5) 80 100 100 80 80 100 100 60Feedback (3) 33 100 67 33 67 0 100 0

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase of Implementation (6) 100 I(11) 83 67 67 67 83 50Adaptability (6) 83 100 100 50 83 83 100 33Summary Information (6) 83 100 67 50 100 100 17 67

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase (7) 43 100 .13 29 71 43 43 43Adaptability (4) 25 75 100 50 50 25 75 0Testing (3) 67 0 0 67 0 0 0 0Tracking (2) 50 50 50 0 0 50 50 50Interactivity (7) 100 71 71 71 29 57 71 0Appropriateness (18) 11 78 33 11 18 18 50 6

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilty (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 1 100 67Format (7) 43 57 43 29 29 29 29 43

The publisher is shown in parenth( ses in the list below:W068 Skills Bank II (Skills Bank Corporation)W074 Ann Professional (Samna Corptwation)W075 PC Proef (Lewertise Linguistic Software)W076 Parlance (Parlance Software)W077 Alin-Hunk 89 (Ma \think, Inc.)

Table 2.6

W078 Alark I. A Punctuation lool (ResearchDesign Associates, Inc.)

W080 fansh'rs (Research Design Associates, Inc.)W082 Grammar .11"liat Bi 1 eetli You Hace! (Krell

Software, Inc.)

18o



Reading Leveltt of Reviews (up to 3)

117

3-62

101

6-107

83

101

107_

11-13+1


Drill and Practice - X Y Y -

-1 utorial Y N Y Y X Y Y N

Simulation Y

Game Y -

Comprehensive Tool _ . _ _

Partial Tool 1 1( Y Y Y Y Y



Prewiting (12) 8 0 42 0 0 0 0 0

Writing (25) 20 0 48 28 28 0 12 0

Revision (12) 58 0 0 58 58 0 41 0

Editing (25) 96 60 0 64 36 4 84 56


Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 67 100 100 100

Appropriateness (-7,1 60 100 100 100 60 20 80 40

Feedback (3) 33 100 67 100 1 0 100 33



Adaptability (6) 67 100 67 67 50 50 100 100



Ease (7) 57 43 71 43 43 43 71 71

Adaptability (4) 25 75 100 0 0 25 100 75

Testing (3) 33 67 0 33 0 0 0 0

Tracking (2) 50 100 100 50 100 0 50 0

Interactivity (7) 14 86 43 100 71 14 71 86



Reliabilty (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 67

Format (7) 19 57 43 19 19 19 19 43

.The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:

W083 Edit! (McGraw-Hill) W092 Dez,eloping Writins Skills (Queue, Int..)

W084 Grammar Gremlins (Da idson es.: Associates) W093 Bank Street Writer (Scholastic, Inc.)

W087 Prcionter (Prentice Flall Press) W094 Editor (TASL)

W091 Vocabularil Series (Queue, Inc.) W096 Correct Grammar .3 (Writing I o(ils Croup)

Table 2.7


SOFTWARE ID W097 W099 W101 W105 W106 W107


61

12-13+1

13+1

11

1

91

6-13+1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and Practice Y Y Y Y YTutorial Y NSimulation Y - - Y - -Game -Comprehensive Tool Y _ _ _ _

Partial Tool Y Y Y Yr-

C 0 V E R A G E (Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)-TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPrewiting (12) 0 0 0 42 0 0Writing (25) 0 0 () 32 0 24Revision (12) 0 33 8 58 0 25

(25) 56 0 36 0 56 0..Editing

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 100 67 100 100 100Appropriateness (5) 100 60 40 100 80 100Feedback (3) 0 67 33 0 100 33

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6) 100 67 100 33 100 100Adaptability (6) 100 100 67 67 17 50Summary Information (6) 50 67 50 17 67 100

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase (7) 71 14 29 29 86 86Adaptability (4) 100 25 50 25 0 25Testing (3) 100 33 0 0 100 1(X)

Tracking (2) 100 50 0 0 100 100Interactivity (7) 86 43 100 29 100 86Appropriateness (18) 56 6 28 33 33 33

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilty (3) 100 1 100 100 100 100 100Format (7) 57 14 29 29 14 14


W097 Grammar N1asterii IL A,B,C (AmericanLanguage Academy)

W099 Basic Composition Paragraphs Package

(Queue, Inc.)W101 Perlivt Copy (Logicus Incorporated)W105 Writer's Prologue (Daeda lus Group,

Inc.)

Table 2.8 20

W106 English Language Instructional Systems:Grammar, Usage (Weaver InstructionalSystems)

W107 Reading Efficiency System (WeaverInstructional Systems)

2

Synthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviews for Math

SOFTWARE ID M001 M002 M003 M004 M005 M006 M008 M009 MOW,

n of Reviews (up to 3) 3 3 3 1 1 3 3 3 1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Imp emented Satisfac orily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and PracticeTutorialSimulationGameComprehensi. e ToolPartial Tool

Y

-

X X Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

X

X

X

Y

----Y

Y

1

Y

1'

1

Y

1

C 0 V E R A G E Numbers in parenthe(3es represent the number of objectives/attributes.)


Base Ten Notation (81Basic Ups!' Whole Numbers (10)Prime Numbers Sr Factoniation (4)Basic Ops / Positive Fractions (19)Basic Ops/ Positive Decimal, (13)Ratio and Proportions (6)Percents (7)Units of Measure (10)Basic Geometry (41)Basic Ops/Siped Numbers (10)Real Numbers (25)Set Notation (7)Simple Linear Eq. , One Variable (7)Simple Linear lneq. :One\ anable (6)Integer Exponents (9)Polynomials (18)Factoring (6)Graphs (21)Solving Systems of Equations (9)Quadratics (9)Rational Expressions (5)Rational Exponents tit Radicals (9)Geometry (7)

23302363150

86000

In0

430

__"00

0

0

00

0

0

(1

0

0

00

00

00

6032

0

43(t

4433

1738

-i-r--33

80

440

()

0

0

00

00

00

00

05767441->__17

29.) -i--446056

0

6350

25796983

100100

98SO

440

376778

11

038

It

00

0

86

3850

100

21

46100

71

00

9096

071

838983b795

10089604414

100MO

100

899283

100100

0

100

400

I)

000

0

11

00

0

0

0

0

0

320

0

2900

6032

(I

10083

5n" __

83436736

80330

0

0

0

0

0

00

00

032

It

71

670

440

7678

000

0

2530

75

74

0

0

0

ti

19

100

9237

8n100

5i)

75h3

3

rk

44

0

14

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactori y


10080

0

10080

33

1008033

100100

33

67100100

100100

33

100100100

1 00

10033

100

100100



100835(1

100

100100

100100

83

1.00

10083

838383

100100100

83

6733

83100

83

loll100

81


Ease of Use (7)Adaptabilit!, (41Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

4375

0

50

71

11

4330

0

50100

33

2950

0

50100

11

71

75100

100(in

61

292567

304333

435033

10071

17

4375ii

100100

3(1

19

730

IN100

3n

100

73n7

100-,r,

100

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactori y

Rehabiltv (3)Format (7)

10029

6743

1(10

29

1 oo

43

3343

100

41

100

29

too43

100

43

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list belowM001 Pre-AlsetTa 'The Afath I at (The Math Lab) N1005 Aixetra (Jostens Learning)

M002 Ilistmun Aisetra,The Math I at, (The Math Lab) M006 Ind widual SioTh RanA 1,1 (Skills Bank Cirpora)iolo

M003 biter,(letlaie Algetra The Math I al (The Math Lab) M008 Ora! Ind Prat:hie II (Conduit)

M004 Mao; (ostens Learning) 1'0009 ir Rill (WM)

IPS

21 36 Table 3.1


SOFTWARE ID M011 M014 M015 M016 M018 M019 M020 M021 M022(up to 11 I 1 1 1

1- , , 2 1-INSI III_Cr ION AI MODE Implemented Satisfac orily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed!Nil! and l'ra.u. e 1 1 1 1 X \ Y \ YI tutorial 1 1 . Nsuimiati,n 1

Game 1 Yhen-o.e 1.,,.1 1

l'artial T. l 1 1 1 1 X Y -C 0 V E R A G E (Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)

TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilylia,e .1;ri Notatwn .s, II 3s (1 0 100 0 0 0 0

Ba-i. Or-- \\ h. le N. umber- ( I, 40 . 40 ° 10 0 0 0 40rrime \ umber, 6: Fa.t(wation 14; 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0

ba-h: Op, P0,00. e Fraction, , 191 47 74 :2 0 74 16 0 0 0

Ba,l, Op, l',,,im e De.imal, i I l i h2 69 31 0 69 0 0 0 01:atio and Pr,.p..rtion, (h. 0 100 0 100 83 0 0 0 0l'ercent, (7, I 91 0 0 71 0 o o 01. nut, ..1 Measure ilo: lo 0 0 0 IOU o 0 0 oBa-a. Ceonietr 4! 1 63 0 20 49 0 (1 U 0

1.3a-k: op, Signed Number- (10) 10 0 50 40 0 60 10 0

I:ea! Number, (25, 16 32 0 0 20 (1 16 40 0Set \ otation (71 0 0 0 (1 0 0 0 0smirk. I inear Eq One \ ariable (7, 0 29 0 29 37 0 57 57 0

simple 1 i near Inei One % anabie (n 0 17 0 I1 0 0 33 0 0

Int,:ger Ewonent, (9 0 11 0 0 56 0 44 0 0

I'..'ln.rniaI-Isi II 0 0 11 0 0 17 0 0

Fa, tormg II, 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 0

Graph, 121 , 24 it SI 24 10 5 0 0

Sol \ int: t.-, stems ot Equations (91 0 0 67 0 0 11-_ 0 0

Quadrati., (96 0 0 0 78 0 II 44 0 0

Rational Rpre,,ion,13) 0 0 0 40 0 0 60 0 0

Rational Ewonents & Radical, 191 0 0 44 0 0 44 0 0

GO men-% (7 I 43 0 14 29 0 0 0 0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented sa isfactori y\ ct Lira.% (li 67 100 100 100 100 100 100 67 100

Appr,,priatene-s (5, 80 80 50 80 100 80 60 40 80Feedba. I, 0 33 0 (1 loo hi Ii 11 67 0

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorily1 a-e of Implementation fro 100 100 53 10(t 101) 50 67 67 67\daptabilit (6i 30 53 1110 WO 11(1 83 67 53 67Summan. Information (to 67 hi 67 33 67 0 83 83 0

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEa.,' of 1 ,e (71 29 57 29 100 71 57 29 29 29\daptabilou I, 3,. 30 75 75 100 30 75 0 100:,--ting . z 67 13 0 33 33 0 i 33 0

l ia. king .2intera.t: \ it\ 17.

30

71

100

sh100

560

57

100

100

,

0

100

86

3(1

71

100

86\ ppropriatene,, (1, 17 16 11 75 94 30 17 22 72

,01-1 WARE OPER .5i I IONS percent of attributes implemented sa isfactori yReliabilt% ,-,, 67 100 100 100 100 0 13 100

VormAt 7 41 41 41 41 43 29 43 19 29

The pubh,heri, ri in parenthe,e,- in the belowM011 hi < (BLS.\1014 ", I earning,%101; n:.e I. It ,h,tVn, 1 earning.\1016 -: 1, ., r,\1018 . ."; .''n..:ru 6,11 SR \ 1 hinl.o% are

'r iii,\1019 Tsio;. True Bask

Table 3.2 1-1

M020 i %pert AIxetra Tutor (Tusoft)M021 In teer, att,i I quattott 11 (Hartley Cour,eus are)M022 hin; . Rule Mel Al.ithollat aohi Piset:era (Sunburst

Communications) (This 1, a hypothe,i,-te,tingpackage that .:o or, onl \ one of the topit., in thistable )

3 1


SOFTWARE ID M023 M025 M026 M027 M030 M031 M032 M033 M034

# of Reviews (up to 3) 11 3 3 1

-1

1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Imp emented Satisfactorily? I=yes, N=no, X=mi xed


Y

1

I

1

1

Y

Y

I

1

I

1

Y

1

1

I

1

St

1 1



Base Ten Notation (8)Basic Ops , Whole Numbers (10)Prime Numbers ,,:- Facton/ation (4)Basic Ops / Positive Fractions (19)Basic Ops : Positive Decimals (13)Ratio and Proportions (6)lk.reents (7)Units of Measure (10)Basic Geometry (41)Basic Opt; / Signed Numbers (101Real Numbers (23)Set Notation (7)Simple Linear Eq./One Variable (7)Simple Linear Ineq. / One Variable (6)Integer Exponents (9)Polynomials (Is/Factoring (6)Graphs (21)Solving Systems of Equations (91Quadratics (9)Rational Expressions (3)Rational Exponents Sa Radicals (9)Geometry (7)

000

0

oit

i 1

0t)

nO

3n0

43000

043

000

0

0

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

71

.1

0

0

0

n7n789nO

33

14

0000

00

00

00

250

430

33is3033

445660

0

0

00

0

0

U

0

0

0

0It

Snit

sh53

0

0

0

0

0

00

0

0

0

00

0

00

00

00

0

( /

0

0

0

0$x 1

780

o

0

0

0

0

0

00

0ii

ii

ii

'. -

TI

31

ttil

1003;

0

67IOU

0

0

0

0

0It

0

t 1

ii

0

0

it

0

o

4)

0

I I

50

0

31,

44o

0

0

it

050

lc,

230

0

05

0

01

2v

0

it

o

.1

1,.....

o,,,

0it

10

0

00

00

0

0

0

0

0

00

0

0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented sa isfactori y


100

100

100

10(1

100

33

1005033

100

10033

100

1011

I

WuSO

31

ININ100

IN100

it

100

1 iS1

100



100

1 0053

S3

n753

100

10083

100

6783

S1

5050

100s383

100

100

50

51

0

s;-;

0

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorik

Ease of Use (7)Adaptability (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness 1181

__

7367

10010039

29

2333

100

3756

4123

ii

5o

71

78

437333

l00Sh

28

437333

100

71

11

71

750

l00loo33

100

100WO

listloo33

86

2

0

St.

71

50

1

--0

t17

100

71-,

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented sa isfactori y

Rehabilty (3)Format (7)

100

29

100

41

WO

29

100

29

100

20

100

43

l .10

100

100

20

100

20

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list beloM023 Microcomputer Curriculum Prore,--1 Pre-A lgel-ra I'M,

11 (Price Laboratory School)M025 A1xebra II Pant 1 (IBM)M026 .41:,:e-li1.t!.ter Plus (Daidson & As,..ociates I

M027 .N.11,-noomipu )er CI, rnic ulum Prowa .415e1r.i I (Price

Laboratory School)

23

M030 .1;:cro.-0nraer (unti,i,luitti 2

l,it',rat,sr S. hoolM031 :141 ti Atentor (brooks arid Cole)M032 ccrtc, (5 o) 7 ,fisksi Qtit.ut. In, .

M033 Silo. (S. holasth. In,M034 :Vol (./ I (Edusational

Inc I

Table 3.3


SOFTWARE ID M035 M036 M037 M039 M041 M043 M047 M050 M0514 of Re% tows (u p to 3) 1- 1

1- 1 1 1_ 3 11

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfac orily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and Practice N N Y Y N Y Y Y

Tutorial N% N Y Y N - Y YSimulation Y Y

Came Y Y

Comprehensk e Tool Y 1

Partial Tool Y Y Y Y Y X

C 0 V E R A G E Numbers in parentheses represen the number of objectives/attributes.)

1 OPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyBase Ten Notation (S) 75 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0

Basic Ops Whole Numbers (10) 100 0 n0.. hO 0 30 0 0 0

Prmw Numbers & Factorwation (4) 23 0 . 75 50 0 25 0 0 0

Basic Ops. Positive Fractions (19) 74 0 33 74 68 55 0 0 0

Basic Ops Positive De, imals (131 69 0 69 69 0 3) 0 0 0

Ratio and Proportions ( 61 33 hi 17 17 0 0 0 33 0

Percent,. (7) 100 0 71 86 0 29 0 0 0

Units of Measure (10) 90 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

Basic Geometr% (41 I 54 10 0 0 0 0 0 93 0

Basic Ops , Signed Numbers (10) 10 0 70 80 0 0 0 0 0

R.2a1 Numbers (25) 0 0 In 24 0 0 0 0 64

Set Notation (7) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Simple Linear Eq.:One N. anable (7) 0 Sr, 71 43 0 0 0 0 linSimple Linear Ineq .. One % anable (61 0 33 33 0 0 0 0 (1 67

Integer Exponents (9) 0 36 67 0 0 0 0 0 100

Polynomials (15) 0 11 50 11 0 0 0 0 100

Factoring 011 0 30 n7 0 0 0 0 0 53

Graphs (21) 0 0 24 0 0 0 33 (1 95

Sol% ing Systems of Equations (9) 0 33 33 0 0 0 0 0 75

Quadratics (9) (1 33 33 0 0 0 0 0 100

Rational Expressions (3) 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 100

Rational Exponents & Radical,. (9) 0 -11__ 78 0 0 0 0 0 3h

Geometr (7) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8n 0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented sat sfactori y

Accurac% (3) 100 hi 100 n7 100 h7 100 67 IOU

Appropriateness (5) SO 60 50 hi) SO 100 80 WO 100

Feedback (3) 100 0 0 33 33 33 0 100 33

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (61

1100 67 h7 67 31 30 100 100 100

Adaptability (6) 50 53 100 50 100 100 67 100 100

Summary Information (6) 83 53 0 83 17 0 30 100 30

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Use (7) 71 14 57 29 43 43 71 71 43Adaptability 141 0 50 3(1 75 0 , D 50 75 100

Testing (11 67 33 0 0 0 33 0 33 0

Tracking (2) 100 .50 )l 0 100 WO 50 100 100

Interaktk It% (71 71 29 14 Sh Sn 71 37 86 100

Appropriateness (IS) 75 h 72 33 17 33 56 36 75


Rellabiltv (3) 100 100 n7 0 100 100 100 100 100

Format (7) 43 29 29 29 71 29 29 43 41

Ihe publisher is shov,n in parentheses in the list belo%.M035 HI c Tufo Cimr,c,are-400A1 (BLS) M043 of Alai); (Queue. Inc ) (This is basic all% a

1036 Cot!, ot. ra (Queue. Im padkage1037 I lerrv (Sott Warehouse. In,. ) M047 C;reen and Cr.ivluti; I .juat iii. (Sonhur,t

V1034 I xt 4r Twor 1 r:009en, (Tusoft Communkatit ins)M041 o (h.ti ce le- (Queue )n, 1 M050 Cwometru Ow I oulLiatioN, (Jo,ten, Learning)

M051 IBA1 l'er(ma! Covuter .41.;et-ra Sene. (Jostens Learning/

Table 3.4 24 3,6


SOFTWARE ID M053 M057 M059 M060 M064 M065 M066 M068 M071

is of Reviews (up to 3) 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1i_

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Imp emented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and Practice Y V V Y V Y Y Y

Tutorial V ì N. sr' Y N Y N.

Simulation Y Y y Y 1' Y

Game V Y

Comprehen,iy e Tool _ _ Y Y _ _ _

Partial Tool V Y Y Y V N Y

C 0 V E R A G E Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)


Base Ten Notation (8) 50 15 I 0 100 (1 0 0 13 0

Basic Ops: Whole Numbers (10) It) 40 60 100 0 0 0 10 (1

Prime Numbers & Factoruation (4) 0 0 73 100 0 0 (1 0 0

Basic Ops 'Positive Fractions (19) 89 63 47 100 0 11 26 11 0

Basic Ops, Positive Decimals (13) 77 38 54 100 (1 0 13 (I 0

Ratio and Proportions (6) 100 0 17 100 0 33 30 100 0

Percents (71 100 86 (1 100 0 14 37 0 (1

Units of Measure (10) 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0

Basic Geometry (41) 68 0 0 0 0 49 46 0 0

Basic Ops, Signed Numbers (10) 70 0 70 100 20 30 0 0 0

Real NumbeN (23) 0 12 16 0 20 28 0 0 11

Set Notation (7) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1 0

Simple Linear Eq. ;One Variable (7) 0 43 43 0 0 (1 0 0 0

Simple Linear lneq., One Variable (6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Polynomials (18) 0 11-- 50 0 0 0 0 0 (1

Factoring (6) 0 50 67 0 0 0 0 0 o

Graphs (21) 0 29 57 0 29 14 (1 0 32.

Solving Systems of Equations (9) 0 11 44 (I 0 0 0 0 33

Quadratics (9) 0 11-- 44 0 0 0 0 0 33

Rational Expressions (5) 0 0 100 0 0 0 (1 0 0

Rabonal Exponents & Radicals (9) 0 1) 78 0 11 0 0 78 0

Geometry (7) 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0


ccuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 67 100 10(1

Appropriateness (3) 10)t 80 80 100 100 40 100 100 100

Feedback (3) 33 33 0 100 100 1(1(1 0 100 33


Ease of Implementation (6) 83 33 67 100 30 83 50 1 67 100

Adaptability (6) 100 100 100 100 30 83 50 30 100

Summary Information (6) 83 17 67 gs 67 100 67 0 17


Ease of Use (7) 57 29 43 100 29 43 14 43 100

Adaptability (4) 50 75 30 1(10 25 50 23 73 100

Testing (3) 0 0 0 100 33 33 33 67 33

Tracking (2) 100 100 50 100 5° 100 50 50 50

InteractlY ity (7) 10 71 57 100 86 57 57 8t 1 86

Appropriateness (18) 72 11 56 94 44 44 61 17 56


Rehabilty (3) 100 100 100 100 100 IN) 67 100 100

Format (7)19_ 29 43 100 14 29 14 43 29

The publisher i shown in parentheses in the list below.

M053 1113.1,tfath Concert:: I ezvl It' (IBM) M065 Preparl .for Geometry and Alsebra (IBM)

M057 Math Practice and Problem Sol zer (H & N Softy% are) M066 Prim-mles oi.Ma thematic, (Price Laborator). Schoc)1)

M059 A Iathenulic% I rploration Tolkl il (IBM) M068 Spo-zal Topic: iii Mathematio, SeruN (Queue, Inc 1

M060 Alo.lionath (VTAE1 M071 Pre-Calculn, Remenu,'Kuriz Afath Ser;e: (True Basic.

M064 Pre ..,11ccl-ra (Price Laboratory School) Inc 1

25 3,,ls Table 3.5


SOFTWARE ID M073 M075 M087 M088 M090 M091 M092 M093 M096g of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1

-,- 1 1 1

-1 1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfac orily? Y=yes, N=no, X=riuxed

Drill and PracticeTutorialSimulationCameC omprehensit e ToolPartial Tool

YY

YY

_

Y

NNY

Y

1

1

-

)

Y

Y

_

Y

1

1"

N

1

\

1

1

1

1

_

1

1

1



Base Ten Notation (5) 13 0 0 0 0 0 13 ii 0

Basic Ops Whole Numbers (10) 60 t 0 0 0 0 30 il (1

Prime Numbers S.: Factoruation (4) 100 I 0 0 0 0 0 o 0

Basic Ops.' Positive Fractions (19) nii 0 0 it 0 0 l I 0 0

Basic Ops; rosin t e Decimals (13) n' it 0 it 0 0 0 0 0

Ratio and Proportions (h) 83 50 0 it 0 0 (1 (1 0

Percents (7) 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Units of Measure (10 1 l00 0 0 (1 0 o 0 0 0

Basic Goometr. (41) 1 1...... 54 0 10 0 5n 0 76 0 0

Basic Ops:Signed Numbers (10) nil o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Real Numbers (25) 0 0 0 0 0 01 04 o

Sot Notation (7) 0 0 0 0 0 1 29 ti

Simple Linear Eq.. One Variable (71 0 0 14 0 ii 14 ii 100 0

Simple Linear lneq . One Variable (6) 0 0 0 0 ii 0 o 1(10 0

Integer Exponents (9i 0 0 it o It 11 0 100 3n

Polynomials ( PI) 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 53 13

Factoring (h) 0 (1 0 0 li 17 0 1 oil S.;

Graphs (21) 0 52 0 0 35 3s 0 9; (I

Silving Systems of Equations (9) 0 0 0 0 o 0 (1 59 0

Quadratics (9) 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 100 44

Rational Expressions (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 (1

Rational Exponents dr. Radicals (9) 0 (1 0 0 0 (1 0 1)10 0

Geometry (71 0 71 0 0 43 it 0 14 it

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactori y

Accuracy (3) 100 67 100 100 h7 WO 100 100 100

Appropriateness (3) 100 4(1 5(1 50 40 So 100 1(10 40

Feedback (3) 67 0 3333 100 33 0 hi 33


Ease of Implementation (n) 100 51 10(1 100 1(1(1 53 100 100 53

Adaptability (h) 100 53 07 h7 5:: 50 100 100 (17

Summary Information (0) (-,7 100 53 83 81 811 0 hi hiMEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorily

Ease of Use (7) 43 29 71 29 43 57 71 71 43

Adaptabilit (41 73 3(1 23 0 50 50 25 100 75

Testing (1) n7 31 li 0 n7 11 0 n7 n7

Tracking (21 100 100 100 0 50 100 o 100 ii

InteractRit (71 80 57 100 29 100 71 57 100 71

Appropriateness (IS) IN 72 39 31 II 44 44 3i,


Rehabiltv (3) n7 n7 100 IN 100 100 IN 100 100

Format (7) 50 , 41 29 29 29 43 -iu 43 -,,,

1The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list belowM073 Inter.tarv Ala( hemitt, (Ferranti Educational St -.tem.,

In,1075 (7i..iiiretri; T:, o Moos an.) I ttoision, (IBM)

M087 Arr!i,../ Prot loN (Educational OR ities In, )

M088 t;i ,ictrti ..11i-e (Educational A:tit Oles. Inc 1M090 ro,0"iristo- Cum, lawn Prova (Price

I al', wat,

M0(.1 foiNei entura Edits animal SA stems'M092 ALIO; (Ventura Ed matlsinal St stemsi

1093 Co"tuuto W.., toy 1,!tem,I r An iii Ai(Houghton \lifflini

\1096 :;11',1 PS. A I h ( Pris

I aboratsin, hool

Table 3.6 2635


SOFTWARE ID M098 M099 MI00 M103 M104 M106 M107 MI15 M116

a of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 11- 1

1- 1 1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfac orily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and Practice Si 1 1" Y Y Y Y 1 Si

Tutorial Y I 1. V V - .

1

Simulation Y

Game Y

Comprehensive ToolPartial Tool Y Y Y Y 1 Si



Base Ten Notation (8) 0 0 38 0 0 0 50 0 1(10

Basic Ops; Whole Numbers (10) 1) 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 90

Prime Numbers & Factorization (4) 0 (1 0 0 73 0 0 0 100

Bask Ops; Positive Fractions (19) 0 0 h.; 1 11 0 37 0 89

Bai.c Ops; Positive Decimals (13) I (I 38 0 0 0 62 0 77

Ratio and Proportions (6) 0 0 50 0 0 0 33 0 83

Percents (7) 0 0 71 0 0 0 0 0 86

Units of Measure (10) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1 (1 100

Basic Geometry (41) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46

Basic OpsiSigned Numbers (1()) 0 0 40 80 10 0 60 0 100

Real Numbers (25) 96 (1 56 100 0 0 52 12 48

Set Notation (7) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .1

Simple Linear Eq. /One Variable (7) 86 0 8h 86 43 II 86 0 71

Simple Linear Ineq./One Variable (hi 100 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 17


Polynomials (18) 72 28 83 100 0 0 6 is 0

Factoring (6) 33 67 83 83 0 0 0 30 0

Graphs (21) 5 32 48 86 0 81 14 19 19

Solving Systems of Equations (9) 11 56 44 67 0 33 44 56 0

Quadratics (9) 0 89 67 67 0 1 1.... 11 78 0

Rational Expressions (5) 0 0 100 100 0 0 11 0 0

Rathmal Exponents & Radicals (9) 0 78 11 78 0 0 0 67 0

Geometry (7) 0 0 0 (1 0 0 0 0 29

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented sa isfactori y

Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1(10

Appropriateness (5) 100 /00 60 100 100 100 80 80 100

Feedback (3) 100 0 0 33 0 100 0 33 1(10


Ease of Implementation (6) 83 100 50 83 33 100 83 100 100

Adaptability (6) 67 50 33 67 33 100 100 83 67

Summary Information (6) 0 17 17 67 0 33 17 83 83


Ease of Use (7) 100 71 43 43 29 100 10(1 43 7

Adaptability (4) 75 25 25 25 25 100 100 75 73

Testing (3) 33 33 33 0 0 0 100 67 33

Tracking (2) 100 50 50 5(1 100 50 5(1 100 IOU

Interactivity (7) 100 86 86 100 100 86 71 100 100

Appropriateness (18) 61 56 33 n I 11 56 56 11 (17


Reliathlty (3) 100 100 100 11111 100 100 100 100 100

Format (7) 43 29 29 29 29 43 43 29 14

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list belowN1098 Alsehra 1 I trq Semester (Britannica Software)

M099 Alsetra Si cond Semester (Britannis a Softit ar)

M100 The .\ lath I h Pre- Restraint,: and Intermediate AIxebr.,

(Addison Wesle Publishing Compan, Inc 1M103 I f';.'ro...sor, .ossnun .S.ft :Ca re AINebrai (Priifessor

Weissman s Software)M104 Tom-, in Alse)'ra (H & H Publishers)

N1106 The I IWO ton A tialitzer (Sunburst Ctnnmunications)M107 PC Sign. (Pat ific Crest Softit are)N1115 .111,:n (compu ter Curriculum Prince( Alset I'd 11 (Pr.te

Laboratory St hool)N1116 / of Math (Saunders ('ollege

Publishing)

2736 Table 3.7


SOFTWARE ID M118 M120 M121# of Reviews (up to 3) 1 -a 1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfac orily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixedDrill and Practice y yTutorial N Y Y

Simulation yGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool Y Y

C 0 V E R A G E Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactori yBase Ten Notation (8) 0 0 ()

Basic Ups/Whole Numbers (10) 0 10 60Prime Numbers & Factori/anon (4) 0 0 0

Basic Ops/Positive Fractions (19) 0 0 68Basic Opsi Positive Decimals (13) 0 0 15

Ratio and Proportions (6) 0 0 100

Percents (7) (1 14 86Units of Measure (10) 0 0 100Basic Geometry (41) 0 0 63

Basic OpsiSigned Numbers (10) 0 70 60Real Numbers (23) (1 72 10

Set Notation (7) 0 0 0

Simple Linear Eq /One Variable (7) 57 100 71

Simple Linear lneq. r One Vanable (6) 50 67 0

Integer Exponents (9) 0 1(10 36Polynomials (18) 44 94 0Factoring (6) 100 100 0

Graphs (21) 67 81 0

Solving Systems of Equations (9) 67 67 0

Quadratics (9) -al 89 11

Rational Expressions (3) 0 100 (1

Rataonal Exponents & Radicals (9) 0 56 0

Geometry (7) 0 14 29

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 100 0

Appropriateness (5) 100 100 0

Feedback (3) 100 100 0

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6) 83 100 67

IAdaptability (6) 67 100 100

Summary Information (6) 0 50 100

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Use (7) 43 43 14

Adaptability (4) 23 75 50

Testing (3) 0 33 0

Tracking (2) 100 100 50

Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

1

31(10 100 86

56

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactori yReliabilty (3) 100

I

100 10 0 i

Format (7) 29 29 43 I

The publisher is shown m parentheses in the list belowM118 nithow S.htfuot I !Hier (Saunders College Publishing) M121 1 zeruda v Mathematics (Degem Systems, Ltd )M120 .\1iihuc R.iic Alsetra (Satinder, College Publishing)

Table 3.8 28

Synthesi3 of Project SYNERGY Reviews for ESL

SOFTWARE ID E002 i E003 E004 E005 E006 E008 E010 E013

# of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1



-Y

-

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

--

Y

Y

Y

Y

-

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

-



Reading:Word Learning (26)Literal Comprehension (20)Critical Comprehension (18)Functional Skills (21)

Writing:Words/Phrases (51)Sentences (40)Paragraphs (30)Essays (13)

73100

17

33

0000

0000

35000

0000

473

00

0000

8

1500

27505

0000

0000

16

800

4625

00

4000

8000

51

500



10080

0

1001(X)

100

100100

33

1(X)

l(X)

33

100100

0

1001(10

33

1(X)

60100

1001001(X)



335033

1001(X)

100

100100

83

1(X)

1(X)

83

836767

1006783

836767

833350


Ease of Use (7)Adaptability (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

4325

000

22

575033

1001()i)

50

577533

10010050

71

1(X)

010010056

295033

1002950

290

33100

71

11

432567

100576

43100

01001(10

56


Reliability (3)Format (7)

10014

1(X)

431(X)

431(10

4310029

10043

10029

10029

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be OW:

E002 Culturgram, (ICD Corporation) E006 Synonym Antonym 01,1 Analog:, Puzzle Serie,

E003 niagm,sttc Prem-repitzv Grammar (N1crit Audio (Merit Audio Visual)F.008 Tutorcourse 131 S 200G Grammar 200 (BM

E004 1Vri1ing flonmis 5 8, (Nkrit Audio Vn.ual) E010 1-"ncabuhru Ala.ferv ft fnr fiumne.s (American

E005 Sen.aHe Sett Owe Ma+fer (Mt,rit Audio Vesuall Language AkademE013 Conver,ational Demos (Writ Audio Visual)

29 36 Table 4.1

Synthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviews for ESL

SOFTWARE ID E027 E030 E031 E032 E033 E034 E035 E036

# of Reviews (up tol) 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1



Y

Y

Y Y

Y

Y

_

Y

Y,

Y

Y

-

Y

-

_



Reading:Word Learning (26) 0 15 46 35 54 0

Literal Comprehension (20) 0 0 20 35 40 0 _

Critical Comprehension (18) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Functional Skills (21) 0 0 19 29 29 10 -

kV riting:Words/Phrases (51) 0 0 39 63 35 0 -Sentences (40) 13 0 15 38 20 _ 0 _

Paragraphs (30) 0 0 0 0 0 0 _

Essays (13) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorily

Accuracy (3) 100 1(X) 1(X) 100 1(X) 1(X) 100 67

Appropriateness (5) 100 1(X) 80 100 80 100 60 80

Feedback (3) 100 33 100 100 100 33 33 0

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6) 83 83 83 50 83 67 83 67

Adaptability (6) 50 67 67 67 67 50 33 17

Summary Information (6) 50 50 17 67 33 17 33 (1

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Use (7) 43 43 43 43 29 14 57 14

Adaptability (4) 100 75 25 75 50 25 0 0Testing (3) 100 0 33 33 1(X) 0 0 0Tracking (2) 100 1(X) 50 50 50 0 0 0

Interactivity (7) 100 100 86 1(X) 1(X) 43 86 57


SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliability (3) 100 100 1(X) 100 100 100 67 100

Format (7) 43 29 29 29 29 71 71 71

the publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:F027 Punctuate (All- \ raelF030 SIPIOMI,P1 Ant(WV,Pi Ati.110.0/ 1)11.:je C

(Writ Audio Vualal)F031 Coanuitar Ma.ter, II Series (merican Language

1).adem%

1-032 C,r,onni.v Ala.tetu If Sew. R (ALA)E033 ilranonar Ma,teru Serie, C (AL Al

Table 4.2

E034 Talk to Ale (Educational Activities, Inc )(Thisprogram cover:- speaking topics 1

E035 Quick Talk (Educational Activities, Inc 1 (Thisprogram covers speaking topics 1

E036 Cont-eNations (Educational Activities, Inc (Thisprogram covers speaking topics I

30


SOFTWARE ID E039 E052 £053 E054 E059 E062 £066 1 £067

ti of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1



Y

Y

--Y

Y

Y_

-

-

Y

Y_

Y

Y

Y

--Y

-Y_

--

-1'

---

1'

---

1'

-



Reading:Word Learning (26) 0 0 (1 0 38 38 38 38

Literal Comprehension (20) 0 0 0 0 35 45 50 45

Critical Comprehension (18) 0 0 0 0 39 39 (1 0

Functional Skills (21) 0 0 0 0 0 5 (1 0

Writing:Words/Phrases (51) 43 41 16 14. 0 0 () 0

Sentences (40) 78 0 50 30 0 0 0 0

Paragraphs (30) 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Essays (13) 0 0 0 0 0 () 0 0


Accuracy (3) 1(X) 100 1(X) 100 100 100 100 1(X)

Appropriateness (5) 100 1(X) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Feedback (3) 100 33 33 0 100 1(10 33 33



Adaptability (6) 33 17 17 17 33 33 67 67



Ease of Use (7) 29 29 29 29 14 29 100 100

Adaptability (4) 75 25 25 25 25 25 75 75

Testing (3) 67 0 0 0 67 67 1(10 100

Tracking (2) 100 50 50 50 100 100 50 50

Interactivity (7) 100 86 86 86 1(10 1(10 1(X) 100


SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorily,

Reliability (3) 1(X) 100 100 1(X) 1(X) 100 100 1(X)

Format (7) 29 14 14 14 43 29 43 29

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:E039 044NcritiNve I anguage Art, flevelopment E062

(Educational Activibes, Inc.) ,

E052 The COMPress 1 SI Program A (Queue, Inc

E053 The COMPros I SI Program B Queue, Inc 1E054 The COMPress I SI Prosram C (Queue, Inc I E067

E059 CI Oil pi US I II ez,e15, (InstructhinaICommunications Technology)

E066

314 6

CI Oil - US I I e:11 S tionaiCommunications TechnolopRea,ims A r,m0,1 Wor.is Set (", I e:e: 7

(Instructional , Communication,Reablig 4 rowl,1 tV4,1-.1. 'set H I e:v"(Instruct)nal,Communi,ati,m, Tv hnolop

Tabk 1.3



# of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1


Y-

--

Y

Y

Y

,

Y

Y

-

-Y

Y

Y

Y

-

-Y

----Y


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyReading:

Word Learning (26)Literal Comprehension (20)Critical Comprehension (18)Functional Skills (21)


0

100

4414

0

0

0

0

0

80

50

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

040

0

15

0

0

0

22

0

0

0

15

0

0

24

18

0

00

0

0

0

0

8

200

0

0

0

0

0

29

13

0

0

0

0

00

4

8

13

23


100

100

33

100

100

33

100100

33

100

100

100

100

800

100

800

100

100

33

100

100

33

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Implementation (6)Adaptability (6)Summary Information (6)

100

33

83

100

50

83

83

17

83

83

33

67

83

8367

33

17

0

100

6783

83

17

83

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfactorilyEase of Usc (7)Adaptability (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

29

25

100

508e)

11

29

25

100

50

86

11

29

50

33

50

100

22

43

100

0

100

86

11

14

25

0

100

57

28

57

25

0

50

71

11

29

50

33

100

86

11

29

50

3350

100-r)

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliability (3)Format (7)

1 100

L 29

100

29

100

29

100

29100

14

100

29

10043

10029

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:E080 Compreheumen er Proxram Set CP-I I e-xl 6

(In,truLtionaI Communication, TechnolopE083 Comprehen.iors Poet'er Pneg ram Set CP-I 9

(Instru,tional Communication, Techm.,iopE087 H.stc CemireltI0e1 Parap.apit, (Queue, Inc )

Table 4.4 32

4 1

E081 I (EdmationaI Activite,. IncE090 Sort,e( (Research Desip Associate,, In, 1

E091 Vista, le.:e/ 3 (Jostens Learning)E092 7-law-co:am. RI S 30(IC (BLS)

E093 134.41c till,11Ceetipo,titelei (Queue, Inc )



# of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1


Drill and PracticeTutorialSimula4ionGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool

Y

Y

Y

_

Y

Y

_

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

-_

-Y

_

Y



Reading:Word Learning (26)Literal Comprehension (20)Critical Comprehension (18)Functional Skills (21)


00

00

2025

0

0

0

0

0

0

10

18

00

000

0

1645

00

19

300

14

0000

3535

014

0000

318022

0

0000

0000

222800

0000

2

0(1

0



10080

0

10080

0

10080

0

10080

100

10080

100

10060

100

100800

10010067



3317

0

3317

0

33170

836783

836783

83670

3317

0

67830 .


Ease of Use (7)Adaptability (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

5725

05071

11

5725

05071

11

57250

5071

11

71

500

1008628

71

500

100100

28

572533

1008611

5725

05071

11

297500

10078


Reliability (3)Format (7)

100

29

100

29

10029

10029

10029

10014

10029

10029

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be ow:E094 Vistas I et.el 7 (Jostens Learning) E099 Ala;tcrii Set I) (American Language

E095 Yt.t. I e:.el q (Jostens Learning) Academy)

E096 e:.el 11 (Jostens Learning) E101 .11'atIN Maxie & Ahm.ters (Educational Design,

[098 I/twat-Wary Afa,teri. S.:I A (American Language Inc I

Acaclerni,) E106 Vista. I e:.el 5 ()ostens Learning)E108 I ta-ku 7 Spellms Games (Queue, Inc I

33 Table 4.5

Synthesis of Project SYNERGY Reviewsfor Study Skills/Critical Thinkin

SOFTWARE ID C001 C003 C004 C006 C007 C013 C014 C015

tt of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 1 1 1 1 -)1


YY

1

YY

-

yY

-

Y,

N

Y

-Y

N

N

-.

Y

-Y

1


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPersonal Behaviors (35) 0 0 0 6 0 11 3 14

Study Behaviors (15) 0 0 27 33 13 0 0 27

Classroom Behaviors (26) 58 0 0 0 15 0 8 15

Critical Thinking (39) 0 56 23 13 0 0 36 0

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100


Feedback (3) 1(10 100 100 33 100 33 100 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac milliEase of Implementation (6) 83 100 83 83 83 83 100 83

Adaptability (6) 100 67 33 67 100 33 67 67


MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase (7) 100 57 100 71 100 29 57 19

Adaptability (4) 75 25 75 50 100 75 75 75

Testing (3) 0 0 0 33 0 0 67 67

Tracking (2) 0 0 0 0 0 100 1(R) 50

Interactivity (7) 86 100 100 86 86 86 100 71


SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilty (3) 100 100 100 100 100 1(1(1 100 1(R)

Format (7) 29 29 l 29 14 29 29 19 19


C001 Fest Taking (Indiana University C007 Textbook Markin' (Indiana UniversiLearning Skills Center) Learning Skills anter)

C003 Writing Learnin' Logs (Indiana C013 Test Taking Made Lasu ( MCE LawrenceUniversity Learning Skills Center) Production)

C004 Summary Writing (Indiana University C014 Following Directions (MCF LawrenceLearning Skills Center) Production)

C006 Ilow to Read Biology (Indiana COli Cr I \,1( 1-_ (:- ..awrence

University Learning Skills Center) Production)

Table 5.1 34

4 3


SOFTWARE ID C016 C017 C018 CO21 CO22 CO23 CO26 CO27

# of Review- (up to 3) 1 1 11- 1- 1 I 1

I INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Implemented Satisfactorily? Y=yes, N=no, X=mixed

Drill and PracticeI utoria ISimulationGameComprehensi \ e lootPartial 1001 Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

V

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

-Y

Y

Y

_.

Y

Y

Y

-

Y



Personal Behax ion, (35) 49 14 0 0 31 0 0 0

Study Behaviors (15) 60 13 40 60 0 0 (1 (1

Classroom Behaviors (26) 3 73 8 0 0 0 0 0

Cntical Plinking (39) 0 0 0 0 69 15 91 92

CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes imp emented satisf ctorily

I Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 67


Feedback (3) 100 100 100 100 100 0 100 100

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orily


Adaptability (6) 50 67 67 100 100 83 100 100

Summary Information (h) 5(1 0 0 83 83 67 100 83


Ease (7)19 19 19 71 43 43 29 43

Adaptabilit-y (4) 75 50 75 100 100 100 100 75

Testing (3) 33 67 67 67 II 0 0 0

!racking (2) 50 100 50 10(1 100 100 100 50

Interactivity (7) 86 43 14 100 86 57 86 100

Appropriatene,,s (18) 39 11 11 56 33 11 28 28


Reliabilty (3) 100 100 67 100 100 100 100 , -n,

Format (7) 19 19 29 43 19 29 43 14

he publisher shown in parentht ses in the list below:

C016 Snail/ lo 8 ia (id (NICE LawrenceProduction)

C017 ;krTh for Suices;,iiii 1 e,t 1 akow (MCI'wrence Prod uction1

CO18 RuililinN A lotion/ Skill., (MCI' I a\renceProduction)

CO21 CHID! S: ReadoN,Ind(F( u,.ational I esting Service)

CO22 Pc,-clopin,c Cnth al Thn»kin:,'ttoticc SO 1 (Merit Audio

Vkuah

CO23 Crithal IunkinN. Skill (or

Etic, tic Readow Set 2 (Merit AudioVisual)

CO26 Rcaiinw and Cnth ii 1 intikin,: (Queue.Inc.)

CO27 Rcilin Criticallu tr Ilpo-r Grade,(Merit Audio

354 4

Table 5.2


SOFTWARE ID CO28 CO29 C030 C031 C034 C041 C042 C043

# ot Reviews (up to 3) ? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1


Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

-

Y

-

Y -

--Y


TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPersonal Behaviors (35) 6 17 0 0 0 0 0 -Study Behaviors (15) 0 0 0 0 7 0 0Classroom Behaviors (26) 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 -Critical Thinking (39) 79 51 100 10 1 59 49 -CONTENT ATTRIBUTES percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyAccuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Appropriateness (5) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 60Feedback (3) 100 33 100 33 100 100 0 67

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase of Implementation (6) 100 100 83 0 83 83 100 100Adaptability (6) 100 67 100 0 100 100 100 67Summary Information (6) 83 100 100 0 83 50 83 100

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase (7) 43 43 43 29 43 43 43 71Adaptability (4) 100 100 100 75 100 100 75 50Testing (3) 0 33 33 0 100 67 0 67Tracking (2) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Interactivity (7) 100 71 100 71 100 100 100 86Appropriateness (18) 33 11 33 11 33 56 11 28

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilyReliabilty (3) 100 100 100 67 100 100 100 1 100Format (7) 29 29 43 29 43 29 43 1 100

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list below:CO28 Reading Non-Fiction Critically.for Upper

Grades 6.9 9m(Merit Audio Visual)CO29 Analogies (Queue, Inc.)C030 Lessons in Reading and Reasoning 9.0

14.0 (Queue, Inc.)C031 Analogies College Bound 11 12.1)

(Hartley Courseware)C034 Skills Bank II. Study Skills (Skills Bank

Corporation)

able =, 3 36

C041 The Problem Solving Toolbox (C & DComputer Enterprises, Inc.)

C042 Idegen (FinnTrade)C043 Reading Strategies (EDL) (This program

focuses (in vocabulary and readingrate, which are not covered in thetopics in this table.)

4 r


SOFTWARE ID C047 C048 C050 C051 C052 C053 C055 C056

# of Reviewt, (up to 3) 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 ,


Drill and Practice Y Y

Tutorial Y Y Y

Simulation Y Y Y Y - y y Y

Game Y Y Y Y Y Y

Comprehensive Tool Y - - Y - Y Y Y

Partial Tool Y



Personal Behaviors (35) 49 .46 0 20 0 51 49 51

Study Behaviors (15) 0 0 13 53 47 0 0 0

Classroom Behaviors (26) 11 15 (1 23 42 12 11 11

Critical Thinking (39) 95 97 21 74 0 97 95 92


Accuracy (3) 100 100 100 100 100 1(X) 100 100


Feedback (3) 0 0 100 33 33 0 33 0



Adaptability (6) 83 50 67 67 50 67 83 67



Ease (7) 100 100 29 71 0 100 100 100

Adaptability (4) 100 100 25 100 25 100 100 100

Testing (3) 0 0 67 0 33 0 0 0

Tracking (2) 100 0 0 50 0 100 100 100

Interactivity (7) 57 57 86 86 100 57 57 57



Reliabilty (3) 100 100 1(X) 100 1(X) 100 I 100 100

Format (7) 43 43 29 43 14 43 I 43 43

The publisher is shown in parentheses in the list be ow:

C047 Decisions, Decisions. Enzwonment (TomSnyder Productions)

C048 De:isions, Decisions: Telecision (TomSnyder Productions)

C050 SOS -Strategies.tilr Pwblem (C

D Computer Enterprises, Inc.)C051 Readukc and Studu Skills, Forms A t:r 8

(McGraw-Hill)

37

C052 Read/Write SOware to AccompanyMcWhorter (Harper Collins)

C053 Decisions, Decisions: Prejudice ( TomSnyder Productions)

C055 Decisions, Decisions: Substance Abuse(Tom Snyder Productions)

C056 Decisions, Decisions: (Irbani:ation (TomSnyder Productions)

Table 5.4


SOFTWARE ID C058 C059 C060 C062

0 of Reviews (up to 3) 1 1 1 1

INSTRUCTIONAL MODE Im lemented Satisfactorily? Y=ye , N=no, X=mixedDrill and PracticeTutorialSimulationGameComprehensive ToolPartial Tool

Y

N

YY

-Y Y

CO V ER AG E (Numbers in parentheses represent the number of objectives/attributes.)

TOPICS percent of objectives implemented satisfactorilyPersonal Behaviors (35)Study Behaviors (15)Classroom Behaviors (26)Critical Thinking (39)

16

0

11

92

0

()

013

6

000

37

012

92


100

100

0

100

100

100

100

0

33

100

100

0

MEETING FACULTY NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase of Implementation (6)Adaptability (6)Summary Information (6)

100

33

50

100

83

67

83

17

50

100

5050

MEETING STUDENT NEEDS percent of needs implemented satisfac orilyEase (7) I

Ada ptabi li ty (4)Testing (3)Tracking (2)Interactivity (7)Appropriateness (18)

71

75

0

100

57

56

43

1000

100

57

28

5725

0

50

43

11

71

50

0

100

57

56

SOFTWARE OPERATIONS percent of attributes implemented satisfactorilvReliabilty (3)Format (7)

100

43

100

29

100

29

100

43

1 he publisher is shown in parentht ses in the list below:

C058 Decistons, Dectstons Campaign Trail C060 Witming at Math (Academic Success(Torn Snyder Productions) Press)

C059 RcadinN \on Fiction Criticallv (Merit C062 Decisions, Decisions: Foreign Policv (TornAudio Visual) Snyder Productions)

Table 5.5 38 4

Project SYNERGY Software Selector PS3

Project SYNERGY Software Selector, or PS3, is anintelligent software program that helps facultymatch up their individualized instructionalneeds with titles of IBM and IBM-compatiblebask-skills software packages reviewed in Pro-ject SYNERGY. The PS3 database currently in-cludes titles of 259 software packages in read-ing, writing, math, ESL, and study skills/criticalthinking, i.e., all those listed on ISAAC asshown in the previous syntheses. The currentrelease of P53 is the second version. PS3 willcontinue to be updated periodically as newtitles are added.

Using the faculty-developed Project SYNERGYlearning objectives for each discipline, as well asthe software attributes common to all disci-plines, PS3 searches the database to determinewhich software titles match the objectives andattributes selected by the user (see Appendix Bfor a complete list of objectives and attributes).With a series of pulldown menus, the user firstsets the criteria for PS3 to use to search thedatabase.

Under User Preference, the user specifies thefollowing criteria:

Discipline Reading, Writing, Mathematics,ESL, Study Skills/Critical Thinking.

Level of Content Matching Whole Program,Topics/Subtopics, Individual Objectives.

Computer Environment Networked, Stand-alone, Either.

Instructional Mode Drill Sc Practice, Tutorial,Simulation, Game, Comprehensive or PartialTool.

Minimum Acceptable Objectives Score

Percentage score for objectives "ImplementedSatisfactorily."

Minimum Acceptable Attributes Score

Percentage score for objectives "ImplementedSatisfactorily."

Under Topics and Objectives, the user speci-fies which topics/subtopics or individual

objectives PS3 should search for in selectingsoftware titles. Under Attributes, the userspecifies the weight on a scale of 0-10 -- togive to each of the software attributes. The usermay also choose to use the default weights,which represent the average of all facultyreviewers who responded that groups ofattributes "Should Be Present."

After the search criteria have been specified, theuser may instruct PS3 to search the database.PS3 will then display a list, ranked by percent-age score for the objectives implemented satis-factorily, of the software titles that meet theuser's criteria. PS3 can also search the titles inthe database for a match on one or more key-words. The user may elect to see the completereview information for any software title byclicking on it. That information will include thefollowing:

Software: Title, Author, Version, OperatingEnvironment.

Publisher: Name,Number(s).

Address, Telephone

Reviewer(s) (up to three): Name, Address.

Objectives: For each objective, the number ofreviewers who said the objective is"Implemented Satisfactorily" and the numberwho said it is not.

Attributes: For each attribute, the number of re-viewers who said the attribute "Actually Is Pre-sent" and the number who said it is not.

PS3 can print the list of matched software, thecomplete review information on any selectedsotware title, and a complete list of informationon the software publishers.

Miami-Dade Community College now marketsPS3 on a national scale. For information or abrochure, call or write:

Miami-Dade Community CollegeProduct Development ez Distribution

11011 SW 104 St. Miami, FL 33176-3393

(305) 237-2158 Fax: (305) 237-2928

Mastery Testing

From the start of Project SYNERGY (and evenprior to that as this project was conceptualized),faculty have stressed the need for a bank ofquestions and items to be available in ProjectSYNERGY Integrator (PSI) to test students'mastery of Project SYNERGY learning objec-tives, and to do so independently of post-testingthat may be available within individual instruc-tional software packages. To that end, ProjectSYNERGY II has made the production of a bankof mastery test items a key activity.

Faculty teams in reading, writing, and mathe-matics have been writing questions for ProjectSYNERGY Testbank and reviewing them forquality and validity. Additionally, the readingfaculty have been selecting and creating readingpassages upon which some comprehensionquestions are based, while the writing facultyhave been developing writing topics in place ofcreating questions for learning objectives thatdo not lend themselves to multiple-choice test-ing. At the start of this activity in 1992, the pro-ject team prepared and distributed an extensiveset of guidelines and sample questions forquestion writers/reviewers to follow.

Three Discipline Coordinators at Miami-Dade(for reading, Don Meagher; for writing,Melinda Prague; for mathematics, NormaAgras) are responsible for helping facultyauthors to reserve objectives for which to writequestions, sending the completed items Out toother question writers for review, and ulti-mately accepting (or rejecting) the questions forProject SYNERGY Testbank. The Testbank

Coordinator at Miami-Dade (Lorne Kotler) isresponsible for getting the questions and itemsentered into BANQUE, Miami-Dade's comput-erized testbank system that will generate mas-tery tests under PSI.

The goal is to have a minimum of ten questionsper objective for a total across the three disci-plines of more than 5,000 items. Questions areclassified in the Testbank according to Diffi-culty Level (low college prep, high college prep,college level) and Thinking Skill (factual, com-prehension, application). To manage the processof reserving, writing, reviewing (twice, if neces-sary), and accepting items, the project teamdeveloped a special computerized tracking pro-gram for the Discipline Coordinators in theirfaculty offices; entering of the items into theactual Testbank is done at the project team'soffice. Question reliability will be verified in theProject SYNERGY Centers for SoftwareImplementation (CSI's).

Since mid-1992, approximately twenty questionwriters/reviewers have been active across theProject SYNERGY institutions and have pro-duced (as of July 1993) 7(X) questions and items.Faculty claim that the process of writing andreviewing questions in this project has helpedthem to improve their questions. Now we will bestepping up our pace considerably to completethe bank of mastery test items for ProjectSYNERGY Integrator. Also, we intend to seekfurther funding in order to expand the processto include ESL and study skills/criticalthinking.

40

Part Two: Software ImplementationStudies

We arc very pleased to present the studies conducted at three SYNERGY Centers:Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus; Bakersfield College in California; andMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus. While the North Campus began itsimplementation in 1991 and has completed four replication studies, the other two havejust completed their pilot studies using DESKIab. The problem of basic-skillsdeficiencies among college students is equally felt at all three SYNERGY Centers and theconcern of faculty to address this problem is equally strong. The faculty whoparticipated in the studies have expressed their beliefs in the potential of technology tohelp their students, as well as their disappointments at the outcomes not matching theirexpectations. In spite of their disappointments, they continue to explore better ways toincorporate technology in the teaching/learning process.

These faculty are not alone in experiencing a gap between expertations and outcomeswhen it comes to using technology to improve learning. What is unique about them isthat they are doing something to reduce this gap by engaging in research and replicatingtheir studies as they modify 'what they do and how they do it. This is where ProjectSYNERGY'S Software Implementation Model (page 43) provides a structure for facultyto consider research as a vehicle for change and improvement.

We salute the faculty for their contribution to the Project SYNERGY SoftwareImplementation Studies. The North Campus report includes a synthesis of criteria fromall the studies conducted across four semesters, and the other two reports each includethe candid observations of the research coordinators, Greg Chamberlain, BakersfieldCollege, and George Alexander, Wolfson Campus. We are grateful to both of them fornurturing the faculty on the one hand and for looking in from the outside relative towhat factors facilitate or debilitate the use of technology to improve learning.

Following the case studies of these three SYNERGY Centers are some observations bythe Software Implementation Designers for two upcoming SYNERGY Centers Lolita

W. Gilkes for Richland College (Dallas Community College District) and Polly Gloverfor the University of Tennessee at Martin.

41 5'6

Miami-Dade Community CollegeNorth Campus SYNERGY Center

Kama la AnandamProject SYNERGY DirectorMiami-Dade Community College

VictorNwankwoProject SYNERGYSoftware Implementation CoordinatorMiami-Dade Community College

Information about North CampusLocated on a 245-acre site in the Opa-Lockaarea of Dade County, North Campus is theCollege's oldest campus. North campuspersonnel are fond of pointing out that "it allbegan here."

North Campus offers more occupational andtechnical programs than do the other campuses.Most of Dade Countv's police and fire-safetypersonnel are trained here. It houses the onlyprogram for funeral directors in the state. Itscommercial and graphic arts programs arerecognized as the most comprehensive andbest-equipped in the county. Recently, aprogram in film-production technology wasdeveloped to support the fledgling SouthFlorida film industn, .

In Fall Term 1992, North Campus enrolled16,330 credit students or 30'. of the totalstudent body at Miami-Dade. A majority werewomen (58'7, ) and part-timers (61 ). Aboutone-fourth were over 30 years of age. Becauseof its location, North Campus has offered aready access point to higher education for manyminority students. In Fall Term 1992, a majorityof North Campus students were minorities44'7, were Hispanic and 39`, were Black non-

42

Hispanic. Most new students arrivedacademically underprepared (697( ) or needed tostart with English as a Second Language (ESL)courses (137( ).

SYNERGY Center StudiesThe North Campus of-Miami-Dade CommunityCollege was the first to become a SYNERGYCenter in June 1990. Since then, studies havebeen conducted with several courses acrossfour major terms, and their results arepresented in the following pages. Rather thanprovide case studies of individual facultymembers, we plan to provide some informationabout how the research studies were designedand to explain the trends we see emerging fromthese studies.

Project SYNERGY's Software ImplementationModel served as a guide tor our researchstudies (see Figure 1 on page 43). The modelencourages the faculty to rel on their ownnitenial n'a t' Of reference to come up withpersonally meaningful reasons for usingsoftware and evaluating the outcomes. Themodel emphasizes the need for replicating thestudies (the spiral in Figure 1) in the context offormative evaluation in order for faculty tomodify and refine the ways in which they Ube

51

-software until the desired outcomes areachieved. Stated differently, the iterative natureof the accommodation-assimilation cycle permitsthe faculty to take steps small enough to insuretheir personal success and comfort while theyrefine their implementations.

We began with nine faculty two in reading,four in writing, and three in math. Threestopped with the first study and one joined tlie

A

Effort

group in the second. The results presented inthe following pages pertain to these ten facultyacross four semesters. Currently, thirteen faculty,including seven from the original group, are usingthe SYNERGY Center.

The Software Implementation Model did notenjoy the same degree of success among the tenfaculty. Their personal software implementationmodels were more like those shown in Figure 2.

Tim e

Figure I. Software Implementation Model

ON-

Figure 2. Personal Software Impiementation Models

The dangers of quitting too soon because theresults are not spectacular and/or settlingdown to a routine when the results are not quiteconvincing are real dangers in action research.Can they be avoided? Yes, but only if thefaculty are willing to examine the researchoutcomes ca;efully and refine theirmethodologies prior to replicating their studies.

When we began in 1990, the SYNERGY Centerwas presented to the students as an "open iab"for them to drop in at their convenience to meetthe required lab hours for the course and to

spend more time if they wished. During thelater studies, in addition to some open time, labhours have been scheduled for the studentswhen either their faculty conduct classes in theSYNERGY Center or tutors assist the students.At present, the faculty seem to prefer open labor scheduled hours with tutors.

Although we used experimental and controlgroups as our basic research design, we wereunable to assign stUdents randomly to eitherexperimental or control groups; we could assignonly intact classes to these groups, which meant

435 0

that the groups were not comparable at thebeginning of the semester in terms of "repeatingthe course." Also, we were unable to control theexperimental variations systematically becausefaculty were interested in trying differentcombinations within the same semester. Insome instances, there was no "pure"experimental group since faculty allowed theirstudents to use both the SYNERGY Center andthe traditional lab. In action research, thesedifficulties are inevitable. We do acknowledgethe inconsistencies in the results and intend togo beyond individual studies to see what wecan learn. In examining all the studies, we havetried to identify the indicators which point tothe benefits, both educational and economic,and to include some ideas for future research.

Prior to enumerating the indicators, let usmention that we owe these faculty a debt ofgratitude for charting the course towardeducational accountability. The fact that theycontinue to use the SYNERGY Center for moreand more of their students, that they areexperimenting with various combinations ofhuman and technological resources, and thatthe Department of Basic CommunicationStudies has acquired an ownership of the lab isthe best indicator of the usefulness of theSYNERGY Center.

SYNERGY Center Benefit Indicators

When students were given a ch(1ce to useeither the SYNERGY Center or thetraditional lab, they tended to go to thelatter or to neither. In the use instances,they did not succeed as well as when theywere required to Use the SYNERGY Lab(Reading Instructor 1, Study 2; MathInstructor 1, Study 3). It makes sense,therefore, to require these students toparticipate in the SYBERGY Lab.

In the case of research studies where thefirst study yielded better results than thelater ones (Writing Instructor 1, ReadingInstructor 1, Math Instructor 1), the facultyneed to examine how the use of thesoftware could be reorganized from oneterm to another. It is quite possible that thestudents corning to college are different

44

from one term to another, a phenomenonwhich would warrant adjustments.

In the case of CSR and PLATO, anotherway to look at the more positive results firsttime around is to examine the relativecontributions and optimal balance offaculty's teaching in a traditional classroomsetting, students' working in the SYNERGYCenter as an open lab, and the faculty'sholding their classes in the SYNERGYCenter (Writing Instructor 1, Studies 2 and3; Writing Instructor 2, Studies 2 and 3).The presence of faculty in the SYNERGYCenter when students are going throughdrill and practice at the computer does notseem to help.

On the other hand, scheduling specifichours for the students to use the SYNERGYLab when a tutor is also present seems tohold promise for reducing the dropout ratesand increasing the success rates. In thissituation, each student is able to work withhis/her own computerized personal tutorand also receive the personal touch andencouragement from a human tutor whennecessary (Writing Instructor 1, Study 4;Writing Instructor 2, Study 4; ReadingInstructor 2, Studies 1 and 2). Thisparticular method is likely to yield someeconomic benefits as well when comparedto practices in a traditional lab. Futurestudies should attempt to validate thisoutcome. Could the economic benefits befurther enhanced if there were a largerroom to accommodate more terminals thanthe twenty-four in this situation withoutsacrificing quality? What will be the relativemerits of scheduled vs open lab hour iftutors are available in both situations?

In the case of Realtime Writer, it is better toexamine the number of times faculty shouldhold on-line dialogue classes in theSYNERGY Center in order to attain betterresults. In the first study, the faculty heldmore dialogues.

When we examine the number of hoursstudents spent with PLATO or CSR andtheir grades, we find that students spentvarying amounts of time with the software

to receive a "satisfactory" or "progress"grade. This should prompt us to questionwhy we hold on to a term or a quarter or asemester as the required amount of time forall students to complete a course (ReadingInstructors I and 2; Writing Instructors 1

and 2; Math Instructors 1, 2, and 3). Can (orshould) students be motivated to try harderand finish earlier with the availability of aSYNERGY Center, and can (or should)colleges accommodate variable time forexiting from a course and enrolling in thenext?

Some of the students who received an"unsatisfactory" grade seem to have spentsome amount of time in the SYNERGYCenter. It might be helpful if facultyexamined the SYNERGY Center reportsearly in the term and evaluated studentperformance in order to adiust the students'curriculums (Reading Instructor 1, Studies 1and 2; Writing Instructor 1, Studies 1, 3, and4; Writing Instructor 2, Studies 1, 2, and 3;Math Instructor 1, Studies 1, 2, 3, and 4).

The higher withdrawal rate in theexperimental groups in several studiesacross several instructors is of concern tous. Having a tutor in the SYNERGY Centerfor scheduled or open lab hours wouldlikely reduce the withdrawal rate byproviding the human touch. Following aresynopses of the studies accompanied bystatistical tables.

Reading Instructor I

First Study REA 0002 Winter 1991

Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGY

Center (CSR), including a once-a-weekscheduled hour with a tutor. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom and spent a once-a-week scheduled lab hour in the College PrepReading Lab with tutors.

Second Study REA 0002 . Fall 1991

Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (CSR), including a once-a-weekscheduled hour with a tutor. Experimental IImet twice a week in a regular classroom andhad the option to spend lab hours either in theCollege Prep Reading Lab or in the SYNERGYCenter (CSR), including a once-a-weekscheduled lab hour in the College Prep ReadingLab or the SYNERGY Center with a tutor.Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent a once-a-week scheduledlab hour in the College Prep Reading Lab with atutor.

Third Study REA 0002 Winter 1992

Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom, spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (CSR), including a once-a-weekscheduled lab hour with a tutor. No controlgroup was available.

Fourth Study REA 0002 Fall 1992

Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (CSR), including a once-a-weekscheduled hour with a tutor. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom and spent a once-a-week scheduled lab hour in the College PrepReading Lab with tutors.

Table IGrade Distribution of Students in Percents

Study 1

S/I' U W N

Study 2

5/1' U W N

Stud

SI'3

U

Stud% 4

S l' lGroup N Vi, N

Experunental 1 24 7.1 21 4 2ii 7; 7 IR 21 71 11 11 C h4 4 0

Experimental II NA , --, hn 13 21 NA NA

Control 2h rig 12 14 2b hi 11 21 NA 14 hh 21 14

Note:5/1' = Satisfactory U = Unsatisfactory W = Withdrawal NA = Not Applicable

45 A

Table IIMedian and Mode of Hours Spent by Students with CSR

Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 Study 4Group N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode

Experimental I Si i 17 10 11 21 11 13 17 14 14 16 10 10U 4 4 4 1 i r, 2 1 1 1

._

Experimental II S, l' NA 1 ..; 10 14 NA NAU NA 4 1 1 NA NA

Table IIINumber of Students Receiving S/P Grade and Their Hours with CSR

Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 Stud/4Experimental Group

Ni lour,

I

18

I II20 14

I

17

I

18

Up to 10 6 8 6 ; 10

11 - 20 12 11 7 12 621 - 30 1 2

31 - 40 1

Reading Instructor 2

First Study REA 0002 Winter 1991

Experimental met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (PLATO), including a once-a-weekscheduled hour in the SYNERGY Center with atutor. Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent a once-a-week scheduledlab hour in the College Prep Reading Lab withtutors.

Second Study REA 0001 Fall 1991

Experimental met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (PLATO), including a once-a-week

scheduled hour in the SYNERGY Center with atutor. Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent a once-a-week scheduledlab hour in the College Prep Reading Lab withtutors.

Third Study

Did not participate.

Fourth Study REA 0002 Fall 1992

Experimental met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (PLATO), including a once-a-weekscheduled hour with a tutor. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom and spent a once-a-week scheduled lab hour in the College PrepReading Lab with tutors.

Table IVGrade Distribution of Students in Percents

Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 Study 4Group N 5 '1' U W N S/I. U W N S/I' U W N 5/I' U

Expenmental " 1, 87 11 24 42 8 NA 18 67 22 11

(.ontrol 24 '4, 11 27 8; 1 ; NA 18 80 ti 12

Note. 5: - Satifac1or U Unatistactory W Withdratx al NA = Not Applicable

46

Table VMedian and Mode of Hours Spent by Students with PLATO

GrouE.enmentaI 5/I'

Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 Study 4

N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode

20 24 2 22 34 38 NA I I 21 31

NA NA NA 4 1

Table VINumber of Students Receiving S/P Grade and Their Hours with PLATO

Study 1

I

Study 2

I

Stud 3 Stud 4IExperimental Group

Nf four.

20 22 NA 11

Up to 10 4 NA

11 - 20 3 1 NA

21 - 30 7 6 NA 3

31 40 4 3 NA 2

>40 8 NA

Writing Instructor 1

First Study ENC 0020 Winter 1991

Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (PLATO) and in the College PrepWriting Lab. Control met twice a week in aregular classroom and spent lab hours in theCollege Prep Writing Lab.

Second Study ENC 0020 Fall 1991

Experimental I met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (Write & PLATO) and once aweek in a regular classroom and spent a labhour in the SYNERGY Center (PLATO).Experimental II met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (Write) and once a week in aregular classroom and spent a lab hour in theSYNERGY Center (PLATO).

Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the CollegePrep Writing Lab.

4 ^1

Third Study ENC 0020 Winter 1992

Experimental I met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (Write) and once a week in aregular classroom and spent a lab hour in theSYNERGY Center (PLATO). This arrangementwas replicated in Experimental II and 111.

Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the CollegePrep Writing Lab.

Fourth Study ENC 0020 Fall 1992

Experimental I met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (Write) and once a week in aregular classroom and spent once a week in ascheduled lab hour in the SYNERGY Center(PLATO). Experimental II met once a week inthe SYNERGY Center (Write) and once in aregular classroom and spent once a week in ascheduled lab hour in the SYNERGY Center(PLATO) with a tutor. Control met twice aweek in a regular classroom and spent labhours in the College Prep Writing Lab.

5 1,

Table VIIGrade Distribution of Students in Percents


Group N Si l U W N S/I' U W N 5/1' U W N 5/1' U WExperimental I 2; 88 8 4 24 75 23 25 76 4 20 23 74 26Expenmental II NA 2; 68 32 25 44 24 32 23 91 8Experimental III NA NA 23 56 9 35 NA

Control 23 78 4 17 25 80 20 23 70 17 13 1 25 96 4

Note: S/1' = Sati,tactory U = Unsatisfactory W = Withdrawal NA = Not Applicable

Table VIIIDepartmental Holistic Score Distribution of Students in Percents


N 7-8 6 4 3 2 N 7-8 6 4 3 2 N 7-8 6 4 3 2 N 7-8 6 4 3 2Experimental I l're NA NA NA 10 10 90

l'ost 24 4 42 54 15 6 67 27 17 88 12 10 90 10

Experimental II Pre NA NA NA 13 23 69 8

NA 1; 6 41 47 6 10 30 70 13 15 85Experimental III l're NA NA NA NA

l'o,t NA NA 13 77 23 NAUontrol l're NA NA NA 16 69 19 13

NA NA NA 16 94 6

Table IXMedian and Mode of Hours Spent by Students with PLATO

Study 1 Stud 2 Stud 3

Mode N

StudLLMedian ModeN Median Mode N Median Mode N Median

Experimental I 5/1' 23 14 14 18 20 22 15 19 17 17 16 18

U -i- 8 NA NA NAExperimental I! S/I' NA 17 21 19 9 15 16 21 16 21

U NA NA 4 2 2 4 3 2

Experimental III 5/1' NA NA 11 27 28 NAU NA NA 2 5 NA

Table XNumber of Students Receiving S/P Grade and Their Hours with PLATO


Experimental Group I I II I II III I II

N 22 18 17 17 9 11 17 19

I lour,Up to lo ; - 4' 3 3 3 5 7

11 20 14 7 4 7 3 1 7 9

21 10 2 S 7 4 1 3 2 3

11 40 1 I 2 3 2 4 3

48



Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (CSR) and the College Prep Writing Lab.Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the CollegePrep Writing Lab.


Experimental I met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (Write &E CSR) and once aweek in a regular classroom and spent a labhour in the SYNERGY Center and in the CollegePrep Writing Lab. Experimental II met once aweek in the SYNERGY Center (CSR & Write)and once a week in a regular classroom andspent a lab hour in the SYNERGY Center and inthe College Prep Writing Lab. Control mettwice a week in a regular classroom and spentlab hours in the College Prep Writing Lab.


Experimental I met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (CSR & Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom and spent a labhour in the SYNERGY Center and in the CollegePrep Writing Lab. This arrangement wasreplicated with Experimental II. Control mettwice a week in a regular classroom and spentlab hours in the College Prep Writing Lab.


Experimental l met once a week in theSYNERGY Center (CSR & Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom and spent ascheduled lab hour in the SYNERGY Centerwith a tutor. Experimental II met once a week inthe SYNERGY Center (CSR & Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom and spent ascheduled lab hour in the College Prep WritingLab with tutors. Experimental II functioned asthe Control.

Table XIGrade L)istribution of Students in Percents

Study 1 Study 2 I Study 3 Study 4

Group N 511' U W N 5/I' U W N S/P U W N S/P U W

Experimental I 24 73 11 13 20 65 10 23 20 65 5 30 22 95 ;Experimental II NA 23 61 9 30 21 62 38 18 49 17 33

c. ontrol 18 84 h 11 23 61 10 30 14 84 16 NA

Note: 5:1' = Satitactory U = Unatisfactory W = Withdrawal NA = Not Applicable

Table XIIDepartmental Holistic Score Distribution of Stwients in Percents


Group N 7-8 6 4 3 , N 7-8 6 4 3 2 N 7-8 h 4 3 2 N 7-8 6 4 3 2

Experimental 1 Pro 1%c 62 18 11 i4 3 8 NA 17 6 29 35 29

l'o.t 14 11 h7 11 77 23 11 38 62 17 71 24 6

E.pvrirnental 11 l're NA 14 ;(, 41 7 NA 9 11 78 11lt NA 14 24 t4 7 13 62 3 9 78 22

Control Pry 1J, (J4 h 14 ;11 21 29 NA NA

1'. ,t 16 . h 2; ii 14 14 29 41 14 17 ;3 3; 12 NA

Note The po-1 V",1 kx ere cored departmentalla The preea xx ere scored by intructor except in Study 4 which wa scoreddepartmentallx

49s.:

Table XIIIMedian and Mode of Hours Spent by Students with CSR

Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 Study 4Group N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode

Experimental 1 S/1' 10 10 9 10 16 11 13 10 8 20 16 18U 1 4 7, 3 9 9 I 10 10

Experimental II S/ l' NA 14 13 10 13 11 6 9 6 7

U NA 2 6 3 2 2

Table XIVDepartmental Holistic Gain Scores in Study 4

Group N Mean Score

l're l'oct GainExperimental I 17 3.2 1.4 2.2

Experimental II 7 3.8 1.4 1.6

Table XVNumber of Students Receiving S/P Grade and Their Hours with PLATO

Study 1 I Study 2 Study 3 Study 4

Experimental Group 1 1 II 1 11 1 IIN 19 13 14 13 13 21 9

I lour,Up to 10 12 2 6 7 ; ; 7

11 - 2(1 ; 1(1 ; ; 5 13 2

21 30 2 1 3 1 1

31 - 40 2



Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and ()rice aweek in the regular classroom. Control mettwice a week in a regular classroom. Bothgroups were required to write a timed essaythat was departmentally and holistically scoredat the end of the semester.

Second Study


5(1


Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom. Control was notused for this study since an additional sectiontaught by the instructor was not available.


Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom. Both groupswrote pre- and postessays which weredepartmentally and holistically scored.

Table XVIGrade Distribution of Students in Percents


Group N l' F W N 1) F W N l' F W N l' F W

Experimental 2(1 711 5 25 NA 22 59 9 32 22 91 9

Control 19 84 ; NA 19 89 11

Note: l' represents gades A

Table XVIIDepartmental Holistic Score Distribution of Students in Percents


Score N S 7 6 S 4 2 N 10-12 8-9 6-7 1-5 N 10-12 SM 6-7 1-5

Experimental I S 0 13 13 13 47 13 Did Not 13 8 92 24 4 12 63 21

All Others 660 1 2 10 17 52 IS l'articipate 744 4 23 59 13 821 4 20 S8 17

Table XVIIIDepartmental Holistic Gain Scores in Study 4

Group N Mean Score

l're l'ost Gain

Experimental 20 5.3 7.9 2.6

Control 19 5.8 6.5 0.7





Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom.


Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom.


Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom. Control met twicea week in a regular classroom

Table XIXGrade Distribution of Students in Percents

Stud 1 Study 2 Study 3 Study 4IIIII

Group N l' F W N l' F W N l' F W N l' F W

Experimental NA 19 68 S 26 20 7(1 S 2; 22 82 18

Control NA 20 65 5 3)) 21 71 ; 24 22 59 18 23

Note: l' represents grade,. A NA Not applicable

Table XXDepartmental Holistic Score Distribution of Students in Percents

Study 1 I Study 2 Study 3 Study 4Group N 10-12 8-9 6-7 1-5 N 1012 8-9 6-7 1-5 N 10-12 8-9 6-7 1-5

Experimental NA 14 21 72 7 17 6 12 69 11 22 14 69 18All Others NA 867 5 22 58 16 725 4 23 59 13 821 5 20 58 17

Table XXIDepartmental Holistic Gain Scores in Study 4

Group N Mean Score

l're l'ost GainExperimental 15 5.5 6.5 1.0

Control 22 5.6 6.0 0.4

VVriting Instructor 5


Experimental met once a week in the SYNERGYCenter (Realtime Writer and Write) and once aweek in a regular classroom. Control was notused for this study since an additional sectiontaught by the instructor was not available.

Table XXIIGrade Distribution of Students in

Percents

Study 1Group NI F WExperimental 19 84 5 11

Grades A -

Table XXIIIDepartmental Holistic Score

Distribution of Students in Percents

Study 1

Group N 6 4 2Experimental 18 h h 17 22 ii 17

All Others 660 1 2 10 17 52 18

Math Instructor 1

First Study MAT 0003 Winter 1991

Low score on the Departmental Placement Testwas used to select from five sections studentswho were severely handicapped in math.Students who scored 287c and below formedthe Experimental, which met twice a week in aregular classroom; students were given theoption of going either to the SYNERGY Center(PLATO) or to the Math Lab. The studentswho scored higher than 287 formed the Controlgroup. Control met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the Math Lab.

Second Study MAT 0003 Fall 1991

Experimental met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (PLATO). Control met twice a week in aregular classroom and spent lab hours in theMath Lab.

Third Study MAT 0003 Winter 1992

Experimental I met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGYCenter (PLATO). Experimental II met twice aweek in a regular classroom and spent labhours either in the SYNERGY Center or in theMath Lab. Control met twice a week in aregular classroom and spent lab hours in theMath Lab.

52

61

Fourth Study MAT 0003 Fall 1992

Experimental met txx ice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGY

Center (PLA.VO and tux tbook software). Controlmet twice a week in a regular classroom andspent lab hours in the Math Lab.

Table XXIVGrade Distribution of Students in Percents


Group N S 'I' l W N Si P t:: W N S/1' L.1 W N 5/1' L.: W

Experimental I 31 74 In 10 1A ';', 21 24 13 41 24 30 16 41 47 8

Experimental II NA NA 10 41 40 17 NA

Qontrol 26 ill 19 1 1 lti i8 2q 11 14 44 36 21 14 1; 12 32

Note- S I Satisfactory I. = Unsatisfactory W = Withdrawal NA = Not Applica iie

Table XXVDistribution of Students in Percents for Gain Scores on Departmental Exams


Group N <lo >10 N 530 >10 N <30 >10 N <30 >30

Experimental I 21 26 74 1i 41 ri.-; (7 29 71 1) 47 11

Experimental II NA NA 11 1,7 11 NA

(.. ontrid 1g 44 ;i-, lg 11 n; lb 44 'In 12 17 g3

Table XXVIMedian and Mode of Hours Spent by Students with PLATO


Group N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode N Median Mode

Experimental I 5;1 22 ltill 21 20 26 14 22 lg ln 14 20

L.: n 1,11---- g ,) 7 ti 2 4 10 2 2

Expenmental II ti: l' NA NA 20 2g 26 NA

l. NA NA I 2 2 NA

Table XXVIINumber of Students Receiving S/P Grade and Their Hours with PLATO

Study 1 Studv2l Stud .3 Study 4

Experimental GroupN

!lours

I

,,

I

21

I II

11 2"1

In

Up to lo 10 Il 1 1

II 20 n , 1 ,

21 11

1( 4;) 1

.401- 1 4

Math Instructor 2


Experimental met twice a week in a regularclassroom and spent lab hours in the SYNERGY

Center (CSR). Control met twice a week in aregular classroom and spent lab hours in theMath lab.

Table XXVIII

Grade Distribution of Students in Percents

Study 1Group N S/P U W

Experimental 34 41 18 41

Control 36 38 28 14

Note: S/I' = Sat:sfactory & Progres U = Unsatisfactory W = Withdrawal

Table XX/X

Median and Mode of Hours Spent by Students With CSR

Study 1Group N Median Mode

Experimental S/I' 14 9 18

U 6 2 3

Table XXX

Number of Students Receiving S/P Grade and Their Hours with CSR

Study 1Experimental Group

NHours

I

14

Up to 10 2

11 20 7

21 - 30 431 40 1

5 4

6

Math Instructor 3


Students for the Experimental group wereselected at random from names appearing onthe preliminary class rosters of two sections.Students not selected for membership in the

Experimental were assigned to the control.Students in both groups were required to spenda minimum of thirty-two hours in the Math lab,where they had access to tutoring by studentsand faculty as well as to videotap6 andsoftware pertinent to the course material.Those in the Experimental group were given theoption of using CSR in the SYNERGY Center forthe required lab hour.

Table XXXI

Grade Distribution of Students in Percents

Study 1Group/Grade N S/P U W

Experimental 25 44 12 44

Control 36 44 17 39

Note: S/1' = Satisfactory & Progress U = Unsatisfactory W = Withdrawal

Table XXXII

Median and Mode of CSR Modules Completed by Students

Study 1Group N Median Mode

Experimental 5/1' 11 21 29

U 3

Table XXXIII

Number of Students Receiving SIP Grade and Their Hours with CSR

Study 1

Experimental GroupN

flour,.

1

11

Up to 10 9

II 20

21 - 30 1

31 40 1

55

Bakersfield College SYNERGY CenterGreg Chamberlain, N,tt. are Implementation,e,igner an A,,ociate Prote,,or ot C.ornputer

:-,tudie, and I irector of Academic Computing atliaker,hled Lollege l'rote,,or Chamberlain ha, anNI.A m Qomputer Education trom Fresno l'aciticCollege and ha, e \ten,ive ewernince in ,etting upconlputer -tem,. including network, tor thiit undirprepared ,rudent,. I Ie ork, with other!actin% member, in integrating ,otti% arc with cur-riculum and conducting re,earch I le 1, currently.orking on hi, l'h.l in Educational Technologic,at the I_ niversiti ot Northern Colorado.

Information about the College

Bakersfield College is located MO miles north ofLos Angeles in South-central California. TheKern Community College District, a three-college district of which Bakersfield College is amember, is the largest communit\ collegedistrict in Cahlornia. Bakersfield College servesthe major population areas and about h07, ofthe District territory.

Bakersfield College was established in 1913. Thefirst full \ ear of operation on the presentcampus was in 195(1. By 1977, the collegeenrolled nearly 14,000 students in a

comprehensi e program ot instructionalofferings. Proposition 13 had a severe economicimpact on the college, reducing its enrollment toles, than 10,000 in 1985-fth and changing itsfinancial status from a high-wealth district priorto the mid-70's tit a low -wealth district eligiblefor state "equalization- funds b the early YIE!,.

19,t2 enrollment had gradual] \ increased toapprommatek 12,5011, ith man\ potentialstudents being turned a i \ bet. a 11-t: ot the lackot instnic tittnal of teriiig-

-'inc e I YtiO, the arva popu Li thin ha! been

grow ing at I to Ft per year, one of the fastestgrow ing area, in the state; thus, the college hassteadik fallen behind in the percentage ofadults -.LT\ ed. In addition, a significant increasein minorit\ student popula thins (Hispanics

56

increased from 147( in the late 70's to 247c in1992, with total minority enrollment reaching387) has placed extraordinary demands uponthe support services, traditional curriculums.traditional teaching strategies and techniques,and fiscal resources of the college. BakersfieldCollege must meet the needs of this new,diverse, nontraditional student populationwhich now comprises a significant portion ofthe total student body and attempt to serveincreased numbers of students with existingresources.

The percentage of part-time students (takingfewer than 12 credit units) has been 70-757(percent for at least 15 years. The number offull-time day students, the yardstick used inmany studies to define the "traditional"student, was between 2,800 and 3,000 from 1985to 1990. The number of full-time students takingday and /or evening classes is now increasingand is up to 3,337. Evening-only enrollment hasremained at about 357, for the past severalyears.

In 1992, for the sixteenth straight year,Bakersfield College had more female students(55.97) than male (470. Bakersfield Collegeserves a student population with an ethnicitythat is not mirrored in the faculty and staff butis fairly clo.,e to the overall statistics of thecount\ . Ihe percentages are shown in Table I.

Bakersfield College is an open-door institutiondedicated to meeting the educational needs ofthis community with high standards andflexibility toward program development. Inkeeping with the California Master Plan forHigher Education, Bakersfield College servesstatewide purposes while meeting local needs.These local needs create an important role forthe college and its community. First, the cityand its environs are geographically isolated,making commuting to comparable institutionsimpractical. Second, Bakersfield College is oneof only two institutions in the area offeringpost-secondary education. Finally, thecommunity that Bakersfield College serves isone of the most rapidly expanding in Californiaand the nation (eighth fastest in the U.S.); localbusinesses are becoming more diverse andtechnologically advanced, requiring highlytrained personnel.

Table I

Ethnicity at Bakersfield College

Ethnicity Students Faculty Staff County

White 62.3 80.6 58.5 66.6

Hispanic 23.7 8.9 26.8 24.4

Black 6.1 6.7 9.7 5.1

Asian 2.6 2.5 .3

Filipino 1.8

AmericanIndian

2.1 .4 1.5

Other/Unknown

1.4 .8 3.0 3.9

The mission of Bakersfield College lists amongits goals to provide the following:

a significant remedial and developmentalprogram to serve the needs of a diversestudent population and enhance their

ability to make useful contributions to

society.

a wide range of student services to assess,guide, and support students.

Fundamental to these statements is the beliefthat education should be self-directed, lifetimelearning that benefits both the individual andsociety.

There are other local issues that affectBakersfield College. Educational attainmentrates are some of the lowest in the U.S. Forexample, the region ranks last in the state in thenumber of high-school graduates eligible foradmission to the state university systems andhas the state's lowest participation rate forcomprehensive colleges and universities. Whencoupled with the high dropout rate (30 to 407in the area), it is very clear to us that theregion's economic and educational developmentis very much "at risk." Such low educationalattainment is further manifested in communityconditions of poor health care, highunemployment, and limited access to ESL andmigrant-education programs. BakersfieldCollege serves many re-entry students whohave never received appropriate preparation forcollege-level courses. In the Kern County areaalone, there arc 35,000 persons in need of adult-literacy instruction in order to reach a

"functional" level of literacy. Clearly, programsare needed to assist these populations.

Those students who do attend BakersfieldCollege and transfer to a four-year institution inthe California State University Systemconsistently outperform other transfer students,as well as students native to those schools.

Developmental Education atBakersfield College

Offering developmental-education courses toraise skill levels of incoming students to collegelevel is mandated by Title V (sections 55001 and55520) of the California Education Code. Skills-development work must be offered by coursefaculty in addition to the content material, by adevelopmental-program faculty, or by both.

57 66

There is a gap in the state of California betweenwhat high-school graduation certifies and theskills required to function successfully incollege-level courses. The basic-skills needs ofincoming students continue to increase.Though the percentages of total studentsrequesting help in basic skills decreased fromFall 1991 to Fall 1992, the number of studentsincreased in all categories. We feel therecontinues to be a large population of students inneed of remediation that remains unassessed(See Table II).

Table II

Assessment Scores at Remedial Levels

Fall 1992 Fall 1991

Skillsr-

No. ez No 9i

Writing 1,376 33.13 1,081 35.75

Reading 986 23.74 763 25.23

Numerical 2,217 33.38 2,569 84.95

Study 1,950 46.95 1,608 33.17

Totals 4,153 3,024

Developmental education at Bakersfield Collegeis handled mainly by four departments. TheAcademic Development Department offersmore than twenty different developmental-education courses in math, reading, spelling,study, vocabulary, and writing skills. TheEnglish Department offers three courses at twodifferent levels below the freshman-composition level. The ESL Department offerseight course, including grammar, listening,reading, speaking, syntax, vocabulary, andwriting skills courses below its transfer-levelcurricu lum. The Mathematics Departmentoffers six traditional high-school level classesbelow its calculus sequence.

1 he college counselors and ad visorsmultiple criteria (e.g., ASSET placement scores,placement el!say, high school and/or college

transcripts, educational plans) to recommendinitial placements. In addition, students,through self-determination and/or facultyrecommendation, may place themselves indevelopmental-education courses.

Developmental-education courses are allnon-degree-applicable credit courses. Sincethey bear college credit, courses demand thatstudents perform at high levels. Most coursesale competency-based, and courses aregenerally graded on an A-B-C-D-F scale, thoughin some courses students might have the optionof Credit-No Credit grading. In terms ofpassing classes, success differs from course tocourse and section to section. The informalfeedback from participants is that theavailability of the SYNERGY Center increasesretention rates for the first part of the term,enabling more students to get far enough intothe course to see the light at the end of thetunnel and complete the term. This project, aswell as others undertaken recently, have shownus the need for additional campuswide studenttracking and for an institutional research office.

Faculty Case Studies

Since this was our first term participating in thestudy, we approached the project by asking forvolunteers. We held a meeting where thesystem was demonstrated, the PrOjectSYNERGY video shown, and the potentialdiscussed. There was great enthusiasm; manyinstructors indicated a desire to participate. Inreality, very few followed through withcomplete case studies. Many others spent timeevaluating the software for future terms, tryingto see how the SYNERGY Center might be usedfor their classes. No formal reports wererequired of these instructors. Following are casestudies for Joyce Kirst, AssociateProfessor/High Technology Specialist andLearning Disabilities Coordinator, and JerryLudeke, Professor of Reading/LearningSpecialist, along with the responses of otherinstructors who received accounts for theirclasses and had very distinci, and oftendifferent, perceptions of the lab's effectiveness.Joyce and Jerry each speak on their own behalf.

58 6

Use of DESKlab for Disabled StudentsJoyce Kirst has been the coordinator of the Learning I hsabilities l'rogram and the High-Tech Centerfor Students with Disabilities since 1990. Prior tothat she served disabled students at the university,college, and K-12 levels. 1 ler 13.A. in l'sychologyand Special Educathm was earned at St. LuisUniversity in 1961. She earned an M.A.E.D. inCounseling and Guidance for Higher Education in196 from Cal Poly. San Luis Obispo.

The Setting

About the Course

If students demonstrate precollegiate-levelwriting proficiency at Bakersfield College andare identified with verified disabilities, they areeligible to receive specialized instructionthrough the Strategic Learning System's WritingCourse designed to prepare them for college-level English courses. For the current study,students in the Strategic Learning System'sWriting Course were required to master simple,compound, complex, and compound-complexsentence styles, and they were expected to beable to develop 150-word paragraphs in presentand past tenses. The course utilized a

combination of lectures, worksheets and writingassignments, verbal and written feedback on allwork, and mastery-learning techniques.

Those who concurrently enrolled in Word

Processing for Disabled Students also completedfifty-four hours of computer access throughprocedural demonstrations, practice writingassignments, and group projects.Approximately 75(7, of the time was spentwriting and revising essays. All word-processing commands were presented on step-by-step forms developed by the instructor,demonstrated by either the instructor or astudent, and practiced through weekly writingassignments. Grades were based on completingfifty-four hours of computer access. Studentswere expected to use the lab at least one hourper week to work independently on

assignments, in addition to the two hours oflecture/lab time spent in class. The course didnot contribute toward compl,2tion of degreerequirements, using a Credit/No Creditgrading system rather than letter grades inorder to provide a non-competitive learningexperience. However, letter grades were issuedin the companion writing course as usual. In

addition, students were required to pass thestandard writing proficiency Exit Exam devel-oped by the English Department before pro-ceeding to their next English course.

About the Students

All eleven students enrolled in Word Processnixfor Disabled Students had verified disabilitieswhich impacted writing performance in someway. Most had learning disabilities; one hadlow vision, and one was identified withpsychological disabilities. They had beenreferred to the special writing program aftermultiple measures were used to determine anappropriate course placement: sample essay,high-school course sequence and grades,reading level, counselor's evaluation, andstudent's self-report.

Demographically diverse, the studentsrepresented a cross-sec:ion of the general

student population: 7 men, 4 w omen; 2

identified themselves as Black, 2 as Hispanic,and 7 as White; ages 19 to 50; three were singleparents; and 100'Z had verified disabilities.None had taken previous computer-relatedcourses.

59

6a

About the Software

This "hi& utilized Microoft Write and ExpressPub li,her in the SYNERGY Center andWordPerfect in the High 'Tech Center oncampus. Please see a description of CSRprovided in Appendix D.

The DesignTwo sections of this special writing course werepresented in Spring 1993. Each studentreceived information regarding a nelxcompanion course, kord Processing for DisabledStudents, and % as in ited to enroll in bothclasses during the Spring 1993 semester. Theywere told that they would have the option touse a computer for their Exit Exam in May ifthey took the new course. Of the twenty-fivestudents enrolled in two sections of the specialremedial writing class, eleven chose to enrollconcurrently in the computer writing class.

The studs focused primarily on how the skillsof those enrolled in both courses developed inregard to writing and word processing. Thesestudents received computer command forms,demonstrations, or additional writingassignments from the computer class. Theirwriting progress was tracked in the usual wavby the writing instructor, as was that of thestudents in the regular course only.

Monitoring the StudySome students ere more reluctant at first tocompose essays using the computer (theypreferred to handwrite a draft fir,t), but laterthey started each essay directly on thecompu ter.

When sun, e ed, the students unanimo v

preferred the YNERGY Center to the o;c.erHigh Tech Center because the softwareincluded mouse support that they felt made iteasier to learn and remember, the lab was veryquiet, the computers were new, and thefurniture was more comfortable.

Although i tew students focused on meetingthe minimum number of required computer

hours, most exceeded the minimum, and evenused the computers to complete writtenassignments for other courses. Perhaps morenoteworthy is that, by the end of the semester,the instructors in the writing and computercourses observed that all six students were ableindependently to open, write, edit, print, andsave a document, while simultaneouslyattending to proper writing techniques in thefinal product (thesis development, sentencestructure, tense, punctuation, spelling, etc.).The students expressed a sense of new-foundconfidence in their writing and in using thecomputers. All of the students intended tocontinue their English course sequence in thenext semester. Perhaps a larger experimentalgroup would show more variation in students'skill development, but the results remain verypositive for this group.

Student OutcomesThe results were very encouraging. All sixstudents who completed both courses passedthe writing course and the English Exit Exam(th.ing a computer). Of the eleven students whostarted the course, three withdrew and onen.ceived No Credit (due to excessive absences).All cited personal problems (they alsowithdrew from the companion writing course).One additional student was unable to attendclass regularly because he workedunpredictable shifts in the oil industry, but hechose to remain in the course even though heknew he would probably not receive Credit (hisgrade was No Credit for the semester). The sixremaining students earned Credit for WordProcessing for Disabled Students. Notably, all sixalso passed the companion writing course andthe English Exit Exam.

RecommendationsA precourse writing sample should have beenkept to compare against the Exit Exam, thusdemonstrating exactly how the students' skillsimproved.

Since WordPerfect is the campus standard, I

expected the students to learn at least the basic

60 c

commands in that program. However, theyhad to access it in the High Tech Center becauseit was not available in the SYNERGY Center. I

recommend that the campus purchase the rightsto use its standard word processor in ail labs,including this new lab.

The students frequently requested that mousepads be purchased for the lab.

The preparation time for this new courseexceeded my origino expectations. I estimatethat I spent three to five hours of prep for everyhour in class. This prep included learning thenew software, training lab aides, writing newcourse curriculum, setting up and monitoringstudent records, and evaluating the program'ssuccess.

Use of CSR, GUIDES, and SummaryWriting for a Reading Class

Jerry Ludeke has worked with underpreparedstudent, at Bakerstie Id ...oIlege for twenty year,.She has taught study skill., reading, and Englishand has directed the Learning I )isabilitie,Program. After attending sweet Briar College, hereceived her B A. from Indiana UniveNity (19;41inEnglish and art, an NI F A from Tulane University,and an NI A. in c_ounselmg and Gutdance fromStanford University She has ako completed po.tgraduate cour,e, in reading.

The Setting

About the Course

Reading 50 is the third level of the pre-collegiatereading classes. It is the level which must bepassed to certify reading competency forgraduation for those students who enteredcollege without that certification complete,based primarily on ASSET placement scores.Students are placed in the course on the basis ofmultiple measures, the most prominent ofwhich are their ASSET reading score, their high-school GPA, and their high-school record. Theemphasis in the course is on criticalthinking/reading in preparation for collegiate-level classes. Further, the students are expectedto develop the ability to clearly express inwriting their answers to higher-level questionsasked on the material read.

About the Students

The initial enrollment in Section I was 32,reducing to 25 for the 4-week enrollment, ofwhom 20 completed the course. Of the 25students, 48% were White (non-Hispanic), 32%Hispanic, 16% Black, and 47( other ESL (Englishas a Second Language); 16 were males and 9were females. Three (12%) were alreadycertified as having learning disabilities and 36%were ESL students. None had physicaldisabilities that impacted on their classwork.As a result of recent California guidelines whicheliminated our mandatory placement and madeit possible for students to sign into a classregardless of prior performance or testingresults, 25% of the original 32 had not passedthe preceding class. By the time of the 4-weekenrollment figure, only 16% of the 25 remainedwho had not passed the preceding class. Fifteenof the 23 tested (65% ) scored below 55 on theindependent level of the DRP (Degrees of

61 76

Reading Power test), which is below therecommended score for entering the Reading 50class. The lowest score was a 35.

Section II initially had 34 students, dropping to28 on the 4-week enrollment, of whom 21completed the course. Of the 28 students, 29%were White, 43% Hispanic, 21% Black, and 7'7other ESL; 12 were male and 16 were female.Seven persons (25% ) were previously certifiedas having a learning disability, 187 had notpassed the preceding class, and 14 of the 24tested (58% ) were below 55 on the DRP, withthe lowest score being 42.

The DesignAlthough the students were divided randomlyinto two classes at the point of registration, theydid not seem to be especially well-matched foran experimental and control group. It wasdecided that we not design this as a trueexperiment. Instead, both classes would belumped as one for observations and comments.The combined total of 53 students gave us 38%White, 38% Hispanic, 19% Black, and 5% otherESL; of these 537, were male and 47% female.

The emphasis of the study would be on kvkingat (1) the differences between several materialsused in the SYNERGY Center, and (2) theadvantages and disadvantages of using the labfor part of the classwork.

Three materials were used in this study: (1) theCSR Reading Level IV, which was the onlymaterial provided in our SYNERGY Centerappropriate for reading; (2) GUIDES Readingand Study Skills, which we had on approval withpermission to try students on it; and (3)Suinmarv Writing, designed at the IndianaUniversity Learning Skills Center.

As instructor, I chose the point at whichmaterials in the lab were to be introduced. Eachclass went with me as a group into the lab towork for the class hour. This permitted me tointroduce the materials, set the stage,troubleshoot difficulties, monitor the progress,and summarize at the end what had beencovered during the hour. Students who had not

finished a particular assignment during theclasstime were directed to complete it on theirown before the next class and to turn in theprintout which indicated completion. Since thiswas the first use of the materials, all studentswere requested to turn in comments on theusefulness and user-friendliness of thematerials.

At final count we spent eight class hoursworking in the lab, with many students puttingin additional lab time outside the class.

Monitoring the StudyUse of Computers

Students enjoy using computers! Computersoffer constant interaction and readily adjust tothe speedster or to the lolly-gagging student.No one in the group seemed intimidated by thecomputer, though several had no priorexperience. Since we did not go into theSYNERGY Center until the sixth week ofschool, the class had already established acamaraderie so students gave to and receivedtechnical help from neighboring students quitereadily. It helped that the instructor hadworked through all the materials in the studentmode and could thus anticipate confusinginstructions or difficult spots in the programs.It is also true that the basic SYNERGY Centerprogram is easy to access.

Because there were only twenty computers inthe SYNERGY Center, we ran into the necessityto double up on computers; this is baskallyunsatisfactory when students should bethinking for themselves.

The fact that students enjoyed the computerswas seen when, having told them what day tomeet in the lab, I arrived early to find many ofthe students already there, signed in, andpecking away.

Use of Summary Writing

Our first exercise in the SYNERGY Centerinvolved the Summary Writing course fromIndiana University (Student Academic Center,

316 North Jordan Avenue, Bloomington, IN47405, 812-855-7313). This is a well-conceivedprogram in which students are interacting withthe computer and writing on a six-pageworksheet for which the master is provided.Students were N; e ry clearly led through thesteps of writing a summary, practicing it stepby step, and then following through on paper.Each step is checked against answers on thecomputer. When finished, students have anaccurate description and model in hand towhich they can refer in the future. This wasfinished within two days in the lab.

The students and I both were excited about thisprogram. Students felt that the step-by-stepexplanation gave them a strategy for writingsummaries and a new understanding of whatsummary writing entailed. As the instructor, I

was excited because I felt that the program wasso designed that it did a better job of leadingeach individual student through the process ofsummary writing than I could do in the sameamount of time in class. Further, it was anexcellent introduction for me to follow throughon with more extensive materials. I was soenthusiastic that two other Reading 50 teachersused the program with their classes withequally enthusiastic receptions.

Use of CSR Reading Level IV

After several classroom sessions of follow-upon Sunmiary Writing, we returned to theSYNERGY Center to use the CSR materials.

Out of the sixteen modules available in LevelIV, I judged the first seven as being toosimplistic for this class, so the students beganwith R1119: Determining the Implied Main Idea ina Paragraph. Most of the students wentbarreling through getting 807 and 100(7,

without ever getting to the tutorials. Whilestudents were reminded by the pretest to focusand were given ("taught") some helpful tips,they were primarily required simply torecognize the correct answer, a far easier taskthan picking it out and verbalizing it for

themselves. In fact, it was fairly easy to readthe questions with the multiple-choice answers

and successfully guess at what was the mostlogical answer without even reading theselection on which the questions were based.

Use of GUIDES Reading & Study Skills

After several days in the lab working with CSRmaterials and several days back in theclassroom, we returned to the SYNERGYCenter to work on the GUIDES Reading andStudy Skills materials.

These materials are more sophisticated in thateach pretest is diagnostic and, on the basis ofthe first two articles, a student may be branchedto more difficult material. The student is able toget an immediate printout of the diagnostic-testresults showing the different types of questions,the number of questions of each type, and thenumber correctly answered on the first try andon the second try. The printout also gives main-idea responses generated by the students andcompares them to suggested main-ideastatements. (Students have gotten so used tosimply reacting to multiple-choice questionsthat, the first time they have to generate themain idea from what they have just read, theyoften realize they have been workingmechanically and begin to laugh because theywere "caught.") A more detailed instructor'sreport is generated at the same time. The reportrecommends appropriate follow-up materialsbased on the diagnosis. Completing a diagnosticpretest takes most students a class hour.

Students' reactions to the GUIDES Reading andStudy Skills were primarily positive. Theyfocused on the fact that the follow-ups reallyhelped one gain practice in the particular areasshowing weakness.

Student OutcomesCourse-completion rate for both sectionsremained fairly the same. Of the 25 studentsenrolled in Section I, 21 completed the course;21 of the 28 students enrolled in Section II

completed the course as well. However, the rateof students getting a C or above (meetingcompetency) in both sections of my Reading 50

classe, i. ltitt er this ,emester than usual. Of thettt o known anables impacting on that (eighthours spent in the lab rather than in class, and ahigher percentage ot unprepared "ineligible"students), I feel that the inappropriateplacement 01 students tt as probably the strongfactor.

I had questions that I sought to answer duringthe tnal usage of the SYNERGY Center. Will theuse of computers tt ith a precollegiate readingclass improve students reading ability morethan, less than, or equal to the amount ofimprovement gained in a traditional classsetting? Is there a role for computer instructionin remediating deficiencies typically found inthese students' reading abilities? Is computerinstruction most effective within the classtimeor as supplemental to it? What benefits can andcannot be expected from computer instruction?Will the type of remediation gained throughcomputer instruction show up in improvedstandardized test scores or in improvedevidence of critical thinking in response toreading?

In this short period of time, I have no definitiveanswers, but I do hat e preliminan, impressions.

Computer instruction can be a very effectivemeans of instruction. The Summary Writ*course was an example of that. I felt that thetwo hours spent in the lab on this programwere more productive for the students thanspending the same two hours with me inthe classroom setting working on summarywriting. They set the stage for mvclass:oorn follow-up. As long as a computerlab i at ailable to me, I w ill use theSummary lVriting program with my classesduring classtime and will encourage allother Reading 50 teachers to do the same.

Computer instruction is most effectit ewhen it is tollowed tip in the classrotim. If I

were to hat e my ,tudent, do the SttmmaryLlritinx program and then did not tollowthrough with claroorn application of thestratep learned, the program IA mid be oflimited %aim,.

64

Computer instruction can give a falseimpression of thinking, both to the studentand to the instructor. Students working onthe CSR pretests felt that they were thinkingand learning because they were active. Asthe teacher, I felt they were thinking at asurface level and making use of goodmultiple-choice guessing skills withoutbeing asked to do much true criticalthinking.

Management programs are a necessity ifcomputer instruction is to be used in aneducationally sound way. The GUIDESmaterials are impressive and thought-provoking. However, the lack of a man-agement system makes it extremely cum-bersome for a classroom teacher workingwithout backup help to be sure that stu-dents are moving along in materials that arechallenging, helpful, and appropriate toeach individual.

Instructors must be thoroughly familiarwith materials assigned in the computerlab. Without that familiarity, computerinstruction may be helpful on its own, but itwill not be well integrated into the classgoals for maximum benefit.

The quality of results gained from computerinstruction is primarily a function of thequality of materials used. Choose well andcarefully! While an excellent teacherintegrates the computer instruction into thetotal class, if the computer materials areineffective, then the result is fewer hours ofbenefit from that teacher's expertise.

Computers offer a way to adjust to theneeds of students with a wide variety ofskills within one class. Additional work onthe computer for the weakest students in aclass can offer the extra boost needed tobring their performance up to par.

7-

In summary, while I see the potential valueof the SYNERGY Center's being integratedinto the classroom, I feel its value iscurrently limited by the non-availability ofgood materials to develop critical thinking.Because I believe in the importance ofmodeling the thinking process and ofguiding students' practice in ever morecomplex, college-level materials, I feel thattime in the classroom will always be animportant factor in improving reading atthis level unless some outstanding pro-grams are developed which build studentoutput into the program. I have not seensuch programs yet and, until I do, I willprobably be stuck between theAccommodation and Assimilation stages ofKama la Anandam's Software Implemen-tation Model.

RecommendationsTo Faculty and Administrators

Instructional goals must be clear to bothfaculty and student. The faculty must know

how a specific computer program fits intothe course requirements, and students needto know how each computer assignmentleads; to the achievement of specific coursegoals.

Second, time needs to be allotted for

searching the reviewed materials (ProjectSYNERGY is a tremendous help here). Thenmonies need to be spent on worthwhilematerials. The possession of a bank ofcomputers is the baseline, but the useful-ness of those computers educationallydepends on the quality of the materialspurchased.

Further, technical support needs to be pro-vided by the administration so that facultycan concentrate on the students, the soft-ware, and the course goals and curriculum.

Finally, we need a good managementprogram which makes it possible for thefaculty to monitor progress and to givetimely, appropriate feedback to students.

Other ObservationsChristy Ballard, Instructor ofMathematicsChristy took her Math 50 (Basic Math) class intothe lab and used the CPT and a few CSRmodules. She found her students to be"enthusiastic about using the computers" andnoted that several of her students went to thelab on their own time to work throughadditional modules. Fier students requestedmore tutorials on American units of measure,metric units of measure, and algebra. Since wehave only the modules that came with theSYNERGY Center, we are looking into thepossibility of expanding the selection for nextyear. Christy adds: "From the positiveexperience we have had this semester in theSYNERGY Center, I will continue to take myMath 50 classes to the Lab." She has also said

6 5

that she wants to bring in her algebra classes assoon as we have appropriate software available.

Debra Cantrell, Associate Professor,Learning Disabilities Specialist

Debra looked through the available mathsoftware and did not feel it would work for herteaching style. She wants to do all instruction inthe classroom and turn over to the lab most ofthe drill and practice she usually does in class.Next fall, she hopes to do a study with one ofher math classes using the lab for drill andpractice, while the control group has norequired lab hours. She anticipates the addedclasstime gained by removing most of the drilland practice from the classroom will allow her

to provide more remediation. We will beevaluating drill-and-practice software for thispurpose.

Mildred Colvin, Adjunct Faculty,Reading

Mildred took her class to the lab to useSummary Writing and had a very frustratingexperience. She is not very comfortable withcomputer technology and felt unprepared. Shesuggested that we provide comprehensivefaculty computer training so that facultymembers can truly "immerse" themselves in thetechnology and feel comfortable when using itin class. She related that her students, however,felt comfortable and believed that they hadlearned from the sessions. Many students didexpress a desire to return. She felt the lab waspotentially a great tool, as long as the facultywere properly prepared to use it.

Judy Garrett, Professor of ForeignLanguages/ESL

Judy has been reviewing ESL software forseveral years now and, while she did not usethe lab this year, she is hoping to use it nextyear. She would like to see the addition ofsome voice-synthesis capabilities to utilize someof the better ESL software she has found. Asalways, budget constraints are an issue, but wewill do what we can.

Dorothy Stanley, Professor ofMathematics

While Dorothy has not directly participated inthe lab, she took the time to go through the CSRmodules and cross-reference them to thelearning objectives of our math curriculum,making these available to all of the mathfaculty. This process has been a great help toother faculty wishing to use these modules. Shefeels, as do many others, that the modulesprovided with the initial lab are not sufficient inscope to teach an entire course in the lab.

66

Donna Starr, Assistant Professor ofMathematics

Donna previewed some of the existing softwareand did not find something she felt would workfor her Intermediate Algebra classes. She ishoping to add Derive to the system next fall anduse the lab on an ad hoc basis.

Paul Meert, Professor of Mathematics

Paul signed up to use the lab only to find thatthe software provided with the textbook that heplanned to use was incompatible with the1CLAS system. He has since adopted a

different book for next fall that comes with adifferent software package, and we areanticipating being able to accommodate hisneeds in the next term.

Howard Quilling, Professor of LearningSkills

After hearing great things from Jerry Ludekeregarding Summary Writing, Howard broughtall four sections of his Reading 50 course to thelab to use Summary Writing and the word-processing capabilities of Microsoft Works.Howard felt that "the experience was wellworth the effort and also gave the class a newdimension." Several students said that, on someoccasions, they had gone to the lab outside ofthe required class periods. Howard plans totake his classes into the lab next fall and isalready reviewing software for use in the springof '94 wher he plans to teach an AdvancedReading clas, in the lab.

What Have WeLearned?There were many challenges to putting togetherand implementing the SYNERGY Center.Following are what I perceive to be a few of ourproblems. We did not push the participantshard enough to design full-scale researchmodels. Perhaps we should have selected the

713

specific instructors rather than ask the generalfaculty for volunteers. Ideally, some releasedtime or a stipend would be made available forinstructors participating in full studies. We didnot set aside enough funding for supplementalsoftware purchases, thereby frustrating severalof the participants. The most commoncomplaint from users was a lack ofcomprehensive software.

There was not enough *mat training of facultyin the use of the lab. Although there were staffand orientation available to assist, more formalinstructhin would make the faculty better awareof the available resources, and the differentways to implement them.

We initially worked to involve the LearningCenter staff and did not push to involve theMath and English Departments. We did thisthinking that the response was so strong at firstamong just the Learning Center faculty that wewould have too many participants for the firstterm. We will be working more directly withthese other departments in the future.

As a beta site for DESKIab, we received updateswhich were installed during the term, causingon one occasion the loss of some student data.

We were often faced with an unwillingness ininstructors to change methodology, books, andso on to accommodate the shifting instructionalparadigm. In future studies, the need toconsider these changes will be encouragedmore, and additional assistance in doing so willbe provided.

It was difficult to get institutional research data.There is a definite need to track schoolwide

student success and dropout rates.

Our story was not just one of prIblms,however. There were several things we did thatwe felt contributed greatly to the program, andthere were some unexpected benefits as well.

We hired an ambitious, knowledgeable full-timelab manager, with good communication skillsand outstanding technical abilities. We wereencouraged by Miami-Dade's experiences tothink that this person was a very importantcomponent, and we are in complete agreement!

We let success breed success. Many of thefaculty planning to use the lab next year aredoing so because of word-of-mouthencouragement from other participants.

We found an excellent facility, with anenvironment that is very conducive to learning.All institutions must deal with "turf" issues, butthose were solved, thus enabling the facility tobe housed in a large, comfortable room.

We sent technical personnel to St. Philip'sCollege for training with the famous "Bill &Bill" lBill Biggs & Bill Davisl, thus enabling usto operate with very few technical problems.

We located the SYNERGY Center and theFaculty Development Lab adjacent to One

another and added the faculty machines to thenetwork. This setup has allowed easier facultyaccess to the systems for evaluation of materialsand training.

We are finding that many faculty are becomingmore interested in the use of technology in theclassroom. The Math Division chair is veryinterested and will be taking the lead next yearby teaching a class in the lab in the fall.

Students used the facility in most cases morethan asked or required to by their instructors.We found that the students really liked the laband most felt it was helping them to learn.

Where to from Here?The SYNERGY Center was scheduled to be

open during the summer of 1993, with a fewinstructors using it on an informal basis. TheFaculty Development Lab was similarlyscheduled to be open for faculty to continue topreview software, as well as to develop theirown materials.

We have targeted several instructors who areplanning to do studies in 1994. We hope tosolve some of the problems we came across thisyear and provide them with more support andmaterials, although budgets are extremely tight.We hope next year to really get these instructorsthrough the assimilationlaccommodation stages

and on to the adoption stage, and do morecomprehensive and better studies.

67 76,

Miami-Dade Community College WolfsonCampus SYNERGY Center

George Alexander is the Pirector of Nanning andEttectiveness at Miami-Pade t_ommunity College, WolfsonQampus. After attending thtord University on a RhodesscholaNhip, he -pent twelve years as a faculty member anddepartment head at the Lniversity of West inches. At theUniversity ot Miami, he completed a Master's degree andl'h.l (19,(o), and directed curriculum in an innovativetraining program (Microcomputer Education forEmployment of the Disabled-MEED) at the University'sMicrocomputer Institute. Subsequently, in 1991, he wasappointed Pirector of Nanning and Effectiveness for the1,Volfson Campus ot M ia )ade Community College.

Information about Wolfson Campus

Wolfson Campus occupies a 9-acre site in theheart of downtown Miami and is the only urbancampus in the Greater Miami area. Since open-ing its doors in temporary quarters in 1970, ithas served as the main source of further educa-tion for immigrants and refugees arriving inDade County. Wolfson Campus has the largestbilingual education program in the countrywith classes at the College's outreach center inLittle Havana. The atmosphere of WolfsonCampus is cosmopolitan and international

The campus has become known for its literaryand artistic offerings. The New World School ofthe Arts, a joint program with the Dade CountyPublic Schools and Florida InternationalUniversity, is housed on the campus. MiamiBook Fair International, the largest literaryevent in the nation, occurs here. WolfsonCampus provides a full range of professionalprograms including business, architecture, andthe sciences, and the only Legal Assistantprogram in Dade County that is approved bythe American Bar Association.

In Fall Ferm 1992, Wolfson Campus enrolled12,122 credit students or 23", of the College-wide enrollment. Most students were female

I and part-timers (657,1. About 28% wereover 10 years of age. Wolfson has traditionallyhad the highest penentage of students who are

697, in Fall 1992. An additional 14%w ere RIi i k nim-Hispank. Wolfson has a

68

thriving English as a Second Languageprogram, and 22% of new students began inESL. An additional 617c tested as academicallyunderprepared in at least one area.

SYNERGY Center Studies

Recent experience on the SYNERGY project hastaught that implementation goes beyond thebuying of hardware and software, the settingup of a lab, and the selection of teachers. Allthese processes are important and, indeed, timeand great care must be given in doing them.However, there are some hidden traps, andignorance of them or inattention to them can,and most likely will, sabotage the bestintentions of those initiating the project. Thereare at least five factors, any one of which canseriously jeopardize the success of the project.

These are as follows:

The The insecurity of those faculty that arenot computer literate;

the inappropriateness of the softwareselected;

the late arrival of the software and/or thehardware;

the unavailability of the hardware due tobreakdowns; and

student underpreparedness.

7

Insecurity of the Non-ComputerLiterate Faculty

The non-computer-literate teachers feel

very threatened by an environment wherethey ..are not totally in charge of theclassroom. Some teachers retreat into aposition where they say they are morecomfortable without the computer becausethey are able to take the class more quicklyin the direction that they want to. They maymake the excuse that the computer'sinflexibility inhibits creativity in theirteaching. But both can co-exist andcomplement one another. However theirexcuse gets reinforced when glitches withhardware or software occur, and theycannot solve them quickly. They feel eitherthreatened or, at best, harried. As anantidote to this, counseling and trainingbefore the fact works very well. Adequatetime should be allowed for teachers topractice privately with the machines andwith any particular software package that isacquired. It should also be possible forteachers to receive peer tutoring so thatthey can acquire the skills without any lossof face. Equally important is to have a labassistant who can fix the glitches in theSYNERGY Center at all times.

Inappropriateness of the Software

Very often it is ditticult to know before thefact what the needs of the class are. It iscertainly difficult, even after the fact, tomatch the needs of the class with the actuallevel of instruction and skills testing thatthe software delivers. Attempts should bemade to involve all the teachers and toconsult with them before purchasingsoftware. In our case, the software camebundled with hardware and both came aspart of a grant. When the software provesinappropriate or inadequate to meetstudents' needs, the level of frustration willrise, both with the teacher and with thestudents. The project could, in fact, besabotaged by this. Often the computers areabandoned at that stage, and the teacher

uses other resources to keep the class going.It is important never to close the book onsoftware selection, but always to have oneor two teachers searching for other alterna-tives and communicating findings to theother teachers and to the administrators.

Lateness of Hardware or Software

Needless to say, if either hardware orsoftware arrives after the beginning of theterm, the project is dead for that term.However, even less severe delays can haveother subtle effects. Training time can bereduced, thus leaving the teachers harriedor insecure. It is best to allow a much longerlead time as well as a test period of at leastone semester. Deliveries should bescheduled to ensure that all elements ofhardware and all packages of softwarearrive before that test period begins.

Hardware Breakdowns

Hardware breakdowns are unavoidable,but every effort should be made tominimize them. There should always be afull-time staff member available to take careof such situations, to resolve the minorglitches, and to quickly substitute, or adapt,in the case where equipment has to be sentout. Wherever the budget allows, sparesshould be ordered. A word here aboutprinters. It is often the case that savings aremade through the sharing of printers, but,especially in writing classes, this practicecould be shortsighted. There shouldcertainly be enough printers to avoid thebottlenecks that occur at the end of the classwhen all students want to print.

Student LInderprepardness

Students who come into the class

underprepared are at a tremendousdisadvantage because they are not onlylearning the subject matter, but alsoattempting to learn the rudimentary aspectsof keyboarding or computing. This puts anundue strain on them, especially the devel-

69 7,

opmental students. It is best that theprerequisites be clearly stated duringregistration and ad visement and studentsbe required to have some workingknowledge of computers and somekeyboarding skills. Where this is notpossible, and even otherwise, the earlyweeks of the class should have a muchstronger lab component.

All these steps do not guarantee success. Butthe removal of the obstacles do, in fact, enhancethe likelihood that many of the advantageouseffects of teaching basic skills throughcomputers will not be mitigated by other cir-cumstances. It is hoped that revealing thesehidden traps will go a long way towardavoiding them and thereby enhancing the out-comes of using the SYNERGY Lab.

In the case studies that follow, some information about the setting,design, monitoring, and outcomes is repeated so that each study canstand complete by itself.

70

Use of DESKlab for Reading

Jessica Carroll is an Assistant Professor, Language Arts, atMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus. She hasbeen with the Wolfson Campus English Department forfifteen years. She received her B.A. in Elementary Educationand her M.S in Adult Education and Reading Eduaction fromFlorida International University in 1979, 1982, and 1990respectively.

The SettingTwo sections of REA 0002 were used in the pilotstudy. The usual method of instruction was notaltered for one section and the students servedas the control group. Another section wastaught using the SYNERGY Center and thesestudents served as the experimental group.

About the Students

The experimental group started out with 20students. Five students dropped out and 1

moved to another level to leave a final group of14. While 25 students started out in the controlgroup, 5 students dropped the course, and 2students moved to another level leaving 18.

About the Software

Please see a description of DESKIab provided inAppendix D.

The DesignFor developmental courses at M-DCC, facultyuse a 3-point scale in awarding grades tostudents: S - Satisfactory, P - Progress, and U -Unsatisfactory. Some students withdraw fromthe course and they receive a W. Grading wasdone at three separate stages during the firsthalf of the course, just after midterm, and at theend of the course.

This arrangement established a mechanism fordetermining any effects if there were differences

in performance between experimental andcontrol groups at the start of the study. Wecould compare performance early on as well aslater. This is not really a comparison ofprogress over the semester, but rather threeseparate cross-sectional views of performanceat different stages, comparing the performanceof the control group with that of theexperimental eroup (those taught using theSYNERGY Cer.,.er).

Monitoring the StudyAs the students worked through the CSRmodules, some were very successful inachieving passing scores on the pretest andexercises that allowed them to move to anotherskill. I found the Level IV courses to be limitedand not representative of the level of thisparticular reading class. However, during thesemester (approximately at midterm), Level Vwas introduced with the management system.Level V courses were challenging for thestudents and related directly to the skills theyneeded to improve their reading abilities.

The lab time for this particular classimmediately followed the class itself. For somestudents, spending two hours in acomputerized setting was undesirable. Becausethe class was not assigned a lab instructor, mostof the students were given outside assignmentswhen they were supposed to work with thesoftware. In order for the lab component to beeffective, classes that have a lab componentshould be scheduled when there is supervision.

71 66

Student Outcomes

Results are presented below. The measure ofthe performance of the class is the number (orpercentage) of students in each of the gradingcategories: Satisfactory (5), Progress (P), orUnsatisfactory (U). The larger the number ofstudents in the higher categories (such as 5), thebetter the performance.

At the final assessment, 3 students in the ex-perimental group (out of 14 remaining) receiveda passing grade of S. From the control group, 7students out of 18 got an S. The table belowcompares the performance of experimental andcontrol groups at the different points in the se-mester. To make comparisons easy, the fre-quency figures used in computing percentagesin all instances is the total number that startedthe class.

Table I

Grade Distribution

Class/Grade Sails acto Pro ess Unsatis acto Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Grow) N=19 78 A

837( 13%

5%

-

N/AN/AControl Group N=26

MidtermExperimental Group N=19 47% 21 ch 5% N/AControl Group = 26 42% 35% 4% N/A

FinalExperimental N=19 169c 53% 5% 26%

Control Group = 26 31% 42% 4% 23%

te,

Use of DESKlab for ReadingJoyce Crawford is Associate Dean of the School of

Communication at Miami-Dade Community College,Wolfson Campus. She has been with Miami-Dade for fifteenyears. She has a B.A. in English Education from FloridaAtlantic University (19n9) and ,M.S. degrees in EnglishCommunication (1974) and Reading (1971(), both fromFlorida International University. She has an Ed.!). inCommunication Instruction (1993) from the University ofRonda.

The SettingOnly one section of REA 1103 was used in thispilot study. The section was taught using theSYNERGY Center and the students served as anexperimental group. The standard texts for thecourse were Breaking Through College Reading byBrenda D. Smith and Contemporary Vocabularyby Elliott Smith.

About the Students

Students entering M-DCC take the FloridaMAPS placement test. Based on that score, theyare placed into Reading 1105, or they mayprogress from REA 0002 to REA 1105. The exitcriteria for REA 1105 is mastery of roughly 2/3of the test or a raw score of 30 out of 45 items. Ifa student does not achieve a raw score of 30, heor she is not eligible to pass the course.

About the Software


The DesignStudents are pretested in class with theDescriptive Tests of Language Skills (DTLS).This is a college-level test developed by TheCollege Board.

At midterm students are tested with the sameform of the test to monitor progress.

For the final exam, students are given analternate form of the DTLS. The department hasidentified a raw score that is necessary to passthe course (30). At this point, students are

73

assigned a letter grade of A-F for the course.

For this course, a 4-point scale is used in

awarding grades to students. Grades rangefrom a high of A, through B, C, and D or F(both of which indicate failure). In addition,some students drop out/withdraw and receic

a W.

Grading was done at three separate stages: It)during the first half of the course, (2) just aftermidterm, and (3) at the end of the course.

This is not really a look at progress over the se-mester, but rather three separate cross-sectionalviews of performance at different stages.

Monitoring the StudyCharacteristically, students completed selectedassignments from both texts as part If theirhomework, and selected skills, readil.gs, andconcepts were incorporated into the daily class-room lesson. In addition to the two texts men-tioned, students were introduced to CAI viaEDL's Reading Strategies and Quantion ReadingSeries. Students were also introduced to CSRprograms in reading. Atter I deemed that thestudents were comfortable with the computer(about 1 hour), I extrapolated a reading grade-level from their pretest scores and assignedthem to a level in the EDL material. For the CSRmaterial, students were assigned specific skillareas based on results from coursework.

With the EDL material, stude»ts began to teelsuccessful because they were working on theirown levels and no one was rushing them tocomplete a section. Many of the students came

S'

worked on the skill exercises (Tach X and WordStudy) and found these exercises as challengingand stimulating as a game. I am sure that as abyproduct, eye fixations and attention to detailimproved, along with some other skills. As aninstructor, one is ahvays concerned that readingselections be of interest to students. Studentswere able to select any one of ten stories on thislevel to start to work. Given the degree of ex-citement, freedom, and sense of control I

watched evolve in my students, one wouldthink I had declared a holiday or had giventhem something of great value. They did notconsider the selections trite or boring. On thecontra.-y, many students remembered the selec-tions or similar stories in their native languages,or they were intrigued enough to select follow-up materials or novels on the same subject.

The information on reading words per minutebrought smiles and frowns, but it proved to bevery revealing information for students. One ofthe course competencies is to improve readingrate by 50 words per minute (no expectationbeyond 350). Of course, students learned thatone can quickly reach a point of no gain, i.e.,speed but no comprehension. After some ad-justrnents, students learned reading flexibilityinstead of just the notion of speed. The experi-ments and exercises we tried would not havebeen possible without the computer and well-designed, interesting reading material such aswe used from EDL.

As students repeatedly scored g..i7( or better ona level, they were promoted to the next level.Just the sense of accomplishment alone that mystudents verbalized made our use of CAI wellworth the investment. Student scores on thepretest ranged from 15 to 33. At midterm, thescores ranged from 13 to 32. At final exam time,the scores ranged from 20 to 40.

Student OutcomesResults are presented below. The measure ofthe performance of the class is the number (orpercentage) of students in each of the gradingcategories, A, B , C , or D (fail). The larger thenumber of students in the higher categOes(such as A), the better the performance. \

74

Originally, I was concerned about 7 of the 18students. Based on their .pretest scores and in-itial coursework, I felt those students wouldhave difficulty meeting the exit criteria. Of theseven, one passed the final with a 31, 1

dropped, 1 had baby-sitter problems andstopped attending and was given an incompletegrade. One student registered but never at-tended. He should have been dropped from theroll. In essence, my original group of 7 became aviable group of 5. Out of that group, 3 passedthe course.

Among the other students, 3 earned A grades.These students worked diligently on the com-puter material and even improved their readingrates with the EDL material. One student re-ceived a B grade, and one student received a Cgrade. Two students received D grades. How-ever, one met the exit criteria with a final.examscore of 36 and coursework grade average of B.However, he did not give his book report (oraldiscussion of a novel). If he makes up the bookreport, which he can still do, his grade will bechanged to a B. The other student also passedthe final exam with a score of 33 but failed togive his book report. His grade would havebeen a C.

One student received an F grade because hestopped attending before midterm; he had totake care of his grandmothe,-. Two students re-ceived 1 grades. One passed the final exam witha score of 33. He needed the class to qualify totake the CLAST exam. He continued to work onthe CAI material to enhance his chances ofpassing the CLAST exam in reading. His gradewill be changed to a B. The other studentworked in a full-time job and had troublemaking it to class. She passed the final with a 30but missed too many other assignments toreceive a grade. She is making up the work nowand will receive a C grade.

Students who were eventually successful allworked extensively on CAI material. The tablebelow shows the percentages of different gradesat the different points in the semester. To makecomparisons easy, the frequency figures quotedin all instances are percentages of the totalnumber that started the class.

8 6"

Table I

Grade Distribution

Class/Grade A I B C Failed Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Group N=18 J J 22% 33 I 33 I N/A

MidtermE. wrimental Group N=18 5% 11% 17% 56% N/A

FinalExperimental N=17* I 17 I 11% 22% 1 39% 1 11%

*One student had an incomplete grade

75


Barbara M. Golphin is the Lab Manager, Multi-SkillsLaboratory, at Miami-Ride Community College, Wolfsonlampus. she has been with the Wolfson Campus Communi-cations Pepartment for si \ years. She received her B.A. inJournalism from Clark College, Atlanta, Georgia. She is cur-rently pursuing a Master oi. Public Administration degree atFlorida International University, Miami, Florida.

The SettingTwo sections of the instructors' REA 0001course were used in the pilot study. The usualmethod of instruction was not altered for onesection and the students served as the controlgroup. Another section was taught using theSYNERGY Center and these students served asthe experimental group.

About the Students

The experimental group started out with 19students. Three students dropped out to leave afinal group of 16. While 25 students started outin the control group, 5 students dropped thecourse, again leaving 20. Both groups had poorvocabulary skills.

About the Software


The DesignFor developmental courses at M-DCC, facultyuse a 3-point scale in awarding grades to stu-dents: S Satisfactory, P Progress, and UUnsatisfactory. Some students withdraw fromthe course and they receive a W. Students inboth groups received the same handouts andhomework assignments from the textbook andother resources. Some class topics were notcovered in the available computer programs(for example, skimming and scanning newsarticles). Grading was done at three separatestages during the first half of the course, justafter midterm, and at the end of the course.

This arrangement established a mechanism fordetermining any effects if there were differencesin performance between experimental and con-trol groups at the start of the study. We couldcompare performance early on as well as later.This is not really a comparison of progress overthe semester, but rather three separate cross-sectional views of performance at differentstages, comparing the performance of the con-trol group with that of the experimental group(those taught using the SYNERGY Center).

Monitoring the StudyIt is an excellent idea to use computers to sup-port an instructor's teaching method. The com-puterized exercises help to improve the stu-dents' skills by allowing them to work indi-vidually at their own speeds.

The Level IV CSR modules that came withDESKIab were compatible with the topics cov-ered in the course. I liked the CSR format, i.e., apretest, a tutorial, practice exercises, and a post-test component. But the lessons were rathereasy and perhaps should be combined to makethem more challenging for the students. Stu-dents did not find it difficult to get used to theprogram. The students worked fast with theCSR lessons and some were ahead of the courseoutline followed in the classroom.

After the midterm, students started using EDL'sQuantum program, which offered controlledreading, an excellent feature for assisting stu-dents with reading problems.

I monitored the lab performance of both groupsand discussed their progress with their lab in-

structors. The students in the SYNERGY Centerwere more enthusiastic about their assignments,submitted them on time, understood the con-cepts, consistently participated in classdiscussions, and prepared and presented betterbook reports than did the students in theregular class.

The students enjoyed the exercises, requestedadditional and challenging lessons, and appre-ciated being able to work at their own speedwith the controlled reader of the Quantum pro-gram. They requested additional lab timeduring their spare time.

initially, there were more students than com-puters in the SYNERGY Center, but one studenttransferred to another class after my request.The students also had problems printing outtheir book reports and forms. I assumed thatthe lab would be available for students to useduring additional hours (not including lab orclassroom time).

Student OutcomesAt the final assessment, 9 students in the ex-perimental group (out of 16 remaining) receiveda passing grade of S. From the control group, 5students out of 20 got an S. The table belowcompares experimental and control groups atthe different points in the semester. To makecomparisons easy, the frequency figures quotedin all instances are percentages of the totalnumber that started the class. Results arepresented below. The measure of the perform-ance of the class is the number (or percentage)of students in each of the grading categories,.Satisfactory (S), Progress (P) or Unsatisfactory(U). The larger the number of students in thehigher categories (such as S), the better the per-formance. When the final class grade is com-pared for the two groups, the experimentalgroup showed a higher success rate and lowerwithdrawal rate than did the control group. Theexperimental group showed better results inthese two critical measures of performance.

Table I

Grade Distribution

Class/Grade Satisfactory I Progress Unsatisfactory I Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Group N=18 56g 33 J

527 I 4gN / AN / AControl Group N=23 35g

MidtermExperimental Group N=18 78 g 117 N / A

Control Group = 23 65g 26g 1 N/A

FinalExperimental N=18 50% 39g 119

Control Group = 23 22g 65g 13g

77

86


Marjorie Sussman is an Associate l'rofessor at Miami-DadeCommunity College, Wolfson Campus. She has been with theWolfson Campus Communications Department for fiveyears. She received her 13.S. in Elementary Education fromthe University of Vermont and State Agriculture College in19(16 and her MS. in Generic Special Educabon fromFramingham State College in 1985.

The SettingTwo sections of REA 1105 were used in the pilotstudy. The usual method of instruction was notaltered for one section and the students servedas the control group. The other section wastaught using the SYNERGY Center and thesestudents served as the experimental group.

About the Students

The experimental group started out with 17students. Four students dropped out to leave afinal group of 13. Tewnty-seven studentsstarted out in the control group. Ten studentsdropped the course, again leaving 17.

About the Software

Please see a description of Desk lab provided inA ppend i x D.

The DesignTWO REA 1105 (college-level reading) sectionswere taught on Tuesdays and Thursdays (1hour, 15 minutes each meeting). Both usedBreaking Through College Reading (HarperCollins) as the primary text. Supplementalvocabulary packets were also provided. Initialdiagnostic testing was administered using theDescriptive Test of Language Skills (DTLS). Thesame test was used as a midterm exam, and adifferent form was administered for the final.Informal, teacher-made vocabulary quizzes andcomprehension tests were administeredthroughout the semester. Both classes hadidentical homework assignments. To pass thecourse, students were required to have a C

average on all classwork/homework/quizzesand a minimum score of 30 on the DTLS. Thefinal grade was computed on the basis ofweekly comprehension and vocabulary tests,homework assignments on selected reading andvocabulary, a book report, DTLS score, andclass participation/attendance.

For this course, a 4-point scale is used inawarding grades to students. Grades rangefrom a high of A, through B, C, and D or F(both of which indicate failure). In addition,some students withdraw and receive a W.

Grading was done at three separate stagesduring the first half of the course, just aftermidterm, and at the end of the course.

This arrangement established a mechanism fordetermining any effects if there weredifferences in performance betweenexperimental and control groups at the start ofthe study. We could compare performanceearly on as well as later. This is not really acomparison of progress over the semester, butrather three separate cross-sectional views ofperformance at different stages, comparing theperformance of the control group with that ofthe experimental group (those taught using theSYNERGY Center).

Monitoring the StudyThe students and I were excited to be in aclassroom in which we could make use of acomputer to help develop reading skills. We allapproached the challenge positively. But as thesemester went on, the students and I becamefrustrated with the programs available. The lackof computer familiarity on the part of many of

78

the students interfered with their work. Typingskills, or the lack thereof, seemed to hinder thestudents' ability to focus on the main taskimproving reading. However, studentsappeared to enjoy working on the computer,although they felt that it was not adequatelyhelping them improve their reading skills. Theyhad difficulty following directions for computeruse, and the instructor had to constantlym(tnitor students individually to make surethey were correctly using the program. Classtime for the first half of the semester wasdivided between the textbook information andthe computer work 2/3 text and 1/3 computerwork. Another obstacle was the printer:students had problems printing theirdocuments, which directly affected the amountof time they could use for actualcomputer/classwork.

These problems prompted me to virtuallyeliminate the computer as part of my classroominstruction after the midterm exams, as I felt itwas hindering rather than helping the studentsimprove their reading comprehension skills. I

felt frustrated that critical-thinking skills wereminimally addressed in this class as I needed to"find" time to allow students to work on thecomputer. There were not sufficient programsin specific skill areas, i.e. main idea andsupporting detail, at appropriate multilevels, toadequately prepare students to pass the class.

The SYNERGY Center is a great concept which,I believe, requires further study so that it canbecome an effective tool to aid our students intheir acquisition of knowledge. I believe themain reason for the negative feeling towardcomputer-assisted instruction was the lack ofsufficient programs. If I had access to specificskill programs on multilevels, I would havebeen able to let each student work at his/herown level while focusing on each specific skillneeded to efficiently and effectively read.

Student Outcomes

At the final assessment, 7 students in theexperimental group (out of 17 remaining)received a passing grade (A, B, or C). From thecontrol group, 12 students out of 27 got an A,B, or C. The table below compares the gradesof experimental and control groups at thedifferent points in the semester. To makecomparisons easy, the frequency figuresquoted in all instances are percentages of thetotal number that started the class. Results arepresented below. The measure of theperformance of the class is the number (orpercentage) of students in each of the gradingcategories A, B, C, D, or F. The larger thenumber of students in the higher categories(such as A), the better the performance.

Table I

Grade Distribution

Class/Grade I A B C I Failed I Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Group N=17 - 29 g 59 g 1 N/A

Control Grou N=27 4g 19g 44g 22% N/A

Midtermfxperimental Group N=17 6g 41g 41g N/A

Control Group = 27 4g 19g 377 19g N /A

Final ,

Experimental N=17 IN 29g 35g 24g

Control Group = 27 7g 22 g 15g 15g 41'

1

Use of DESKlab for Writing

Sandra M. Castillo is an instructor of Language Arts atMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus. She hasbeen with the Wolfson Campus Communications Depart-ment for four years. She received her B.A. and M.A. inEnglish from Florida State University in 1985 and 1988respectively.

The SettingTwo sections of ENC 1130 were used in thepilot study. The usual method of instructionwas not altered for one section and the studentsserved as the control group. Another sectionwas taught using the SYNERGY Center andthese students served as the experimentalgroup.

About the Students

The experimental group started out with 20students. 3 students dropped out to leave a finalgroup of 17. Twenty-six students started out inthe control group; 4 students dropped thecourse and 1 student moved to another levelleaving 21.

About the Software


The DesignFor the pretest and midterm test, a 3-point scalewas used in assessing students' progress: SSatisfactory, P - Progress, and U Unsatisfac-tory. For this course, a 4-point scale is used inawarding final grades to students. Grades rangefrom a high of A , through B, C, and D or F(both of which indicate failure). In addition,some students drop out/withdraw and receivea grade of W. Grading was done at three sepa-rate stages during the first half of the course,just atter midterm, and at the end of the course.

This arrangement established a mechanism fordetermining any effects that would result ifthere were differences in performance betweenexperimental and control groups at the start ofthe study. We could compare performance earlyon as well as later. This is not really a compari-son of progress over the semester, but ratherthree separate cross-sectional, views of perform-ance at different stages, comparing the per-formance of the control group with that of theexperimental group (those taugllt using theSYNERGY Center).

Monitoring the StudyInitially, I was rather apprehensive because I

was concerned about the questions that the stu-dents might ask, and given my nonextensivecomputer experience, this was something I

looked at as an obstacle. But with the help ofthe lab assistant, things began to fall into place.

Between the two of us, I think the students be-gan to feel much more comfortable with theirown inexperience, and that was indeed com-forting. The transition between "What do youmean this is a computerized 1130 class?" and"Wow, this is really neat!!" was quite wonder-ful. That alone made me feel like change waspossible.

After being introduced to DESKIab, we startedwith CSR Level IV, then moved to MicrosoftWorks, in which students were required tocompose and write a complete essay. I discov-ered that CSR Level IV was not challengingenough for the students in this

80 85

class. Based on this, I requested that we pur-chase the Level V course, which we receivedduring the semester. This was also easy for thestudents, but it could be used more effectivelyin the lab setting. In the class, I did not find themodules any more useful than the previousskills, at least not for ENC 1130. Students werenot connecting the grammar. with the writingbecause they went through the skills so easily.

We experienced quite a few technical difficul-ties that made the class run at a slower pace. Itwas especially problematic when it came timeto print. It might be rather useful to have apermanent lab assistant working with Us in theSYNERGY Center to solve our technical prob-lems. I can amfidentlY say that I am very inter-ested in the possibilities that will continue toemerge with practical usage.

Despite the growing trend toward computer lit-eracy, there are quite a few students who arenot quite ready to face the com-puter/technology frenzy. For this reason, andfor problems (little problems) that can come upgiven certain students reluctance to face thechallenges computers present, I feel that stu-dents for the experimental group should be,creened. That is, they should come in knowingthat thev will be required to work on a com-puter. We can also screen students not only

according to their interests but also according tohow they learn.

Overall, I am pleased with our improvementand, as we move on and implement changes, Iknow we will iron out all the wrinkles. I hopethat I will continue to be involved with theproject and that I might be able to assist withthe research via my suggestions.

Student OutcomesResults are presented below. The measure ofthe performance of the class for early and mid-term exams is the number (or percentage) ofstudents in each of the grading categories: Satis-factory (S), Progress (P), or Unsatisfactory (U).The larger the number of students in the highercategories (such as S), the better the perform-ance. A 4-point scale is used in awarding finalgrades to students. Grades range from a high ofA, through B, C, and D or F (both of which in-dicate failure). Students who withdrew weregiven a grade of W.

The table below compares the performance ofstudents in experimental and control groups atdifferent points in the semester. To make com-parisons easy, the frequency figures quoted inall instances are percentages of the total numberthat started the class.

Table IGrade Distribution

Class/Grade I Satisfactory I Progress 1 Unsatisfactory I Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Group N=2() 307

267657 1

657N / AN / AControl Group N=26

MidtermExperimental Group N.20 157 807 N / A

Control Group = 26 427 507 - N/A

Final

Class/GradeA B C Failed Withdrawal

Experimental N.20 207 5% 507 257

Control Group , 26 47 237 87 467 19%

81 96


Jamaye Despaigne is an instructor of English at Miami-DadeCommunity College, Wolfson Campus. She has been with theWolfson Campus Communications Department for threeyears. She received her B.A. in Elenentary Education fromHampton University and her M.A. in English from KansasState University in 1990.

The SettingEnc 0020 is a basic writing course in the CollegePrep area of the Communications Department.Students spend half their class time reviewinggrammar skills and the other half writingdeveloped paragraphs. Two sections of thiscourse were used in this pilot study. The usualmethod of instruction was not altered for onesection and the students served as the controlgroup. The other section was taught using theSYNERGY Center and these students served asthe experimental group.

About the Students

The experimental group started out with 20students. Five students dropped out to leave afinal group of 15. Twenty-three students startedout in the control group. Eight studentsdropped the course, again leaving 15.

Students in the experimental group seemed tobe especially underprepared and unmotivated.They were generally quiet and reserved in theirclass participation. Students in the control classseemed to be better prepared overall, as agroup, for the class. Their skills from the outsetseemed stronger. Students in the control classseemed to be more verbal, excited, andinterested in the class. They were active inclassroom discussions and scemed to dohomework assignments.

About the Software


The DesignStudents must pass a midterm grammar testwith a score of 80'7( in order to be eligible totake the final exam. The departmental final is a90-minute timed writing exam in which thestudent must demostrate mastery of appliedgrammar skills and paragraph development.Students are asked to write one developedparagraph of 12-14 sentences.

For developmental courses at M-DCC, facultyuse a 3-point scale in awarding grades tostudents: 5- Satisfactory, P - Progress, and UUnsatisfactory. Some students withdraw fromthe course and they receive a W.

Grading was done at three separate stagesduring the first half of the course, just after mid-term, and at the end of the course.

This arrangement established a mechanism fordeterming any effects if there were differencesin performance between experimental and con-trol groups at the start of the study. We couldcompare performance early on as well as later.This is not really a comparison of progress overthe semester, but rather three separate cross-sectional views of performance at differentstages, comparing the performance of the con-trol group with that of the experimental group(those taught using the SYNERGY Center).

Results are presented below. The measure ofthe performance of the class is the number (orpercentage) of students in each of the gradingcategories: Satisfactory (5), Progress (P), orUnsatisfactory (U). The larger the number ofstudents in the higher categories (such as S), thebetter the performance.

Monitoring the StudyI prepare students for both exams by providinginstruction, drill, and practice. Studentsnormally use handouts and their text for drills,while the text is also used for wilting. This iswhat I used in my control group and in theSYNERGY Center. I used the same grammarhandouts but gave them additional appliedgrammar writing assignments (just freewritingto get them used to using the computer andpracticing composing on the computer from thebeginning of the semester). SYNERGY Centerstudents did get additional gtammar skillswork in the lab that the control group did nothave access to. Additionally, SYNERGY Centerstudents did have the benefit of having thesame lab instructor and being together as a classin the lab, whereas the control group wasdispersed to a number of lab instructors in thetraditional lab.

Students in the SYNERGY Center seemed to bein control of their own learning, they seemedcontent while working individually on theircomputers, and they asked for assistance whenneeded. I acted more as a coach and resourceperson at times, responding to individualquestions on different assignments at different

levels, depending on the progress and needs ofthe students. The programs we had availablefor student use were not challenging enough forsome students (did not have a variety of levels)and were quite standard in their mode (drilland practice).

We should shy away from simply substitutingthe computer for chalk, pen, and ink.

Student OutcomesAt the final assessment, 10 students in theexperimental group (out of 15 remaining)received a passing grade of S. From the controlgroup, 9 students out of 15 got an S. The tablebelow compares the experimental and controlgroups at the different points in the semester.To make comparisons easy, the frequencyfigures quoted in all instances are percentagesof the total number that started the class.

Overall, a glance at the statistics below showsthat the experimental group did better than thecontrol group. I feel they did achieve at aslightly higher rate since they were lessprepared than the control group and did betterin their outcomes.

Table I

Grade Distribution

Class/Grade Satisfactory I Progress [ Unsatisfactog Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Group N=20 25% 70% N/AControl Group N=23 _ 23% 73% N/A

MidtermExperimental Group N=20 10%

5%

60%

59%20% J9%

N/A.I N/AControl Group = 2.3

FinalExperimental N=20 50% 35% 15%

Control Grou i = 2.3 39% 21% 35%

83


Ernest Talavera is an instructor of English at Miami-DadeCommunity College, Wolfson Campus. lie has beim with theWolfson Campus Communications Department for eightyears. I ie received his 13.A. from the University of Miami in1982 and M.S. from Florida International University in 1991.

The Sr itingTwo sections of ENC 0002 were used in thispilot study. The usual method of instructionwas not altered for the control group, while theexperimental group was taught using theSYNERGY Center.

About the Students

The experimental group started with 20 stu-dents. One student moved to another level toleave a final group of 19. Four of the remain-ing students in this group were enrolled forthe second time in this course. The controlgroup started with 25 students. Eight of thesestudents were also retaking the course. Onlyone student dropped the course.

About the Software

Please see a description of DESKlab provided inAppendix D.

The Design

For developmental courses at M-DCC, facultyuse a 3-point scale in awarding grades to stu-dents: S-Satisfactory, P-Progress, and U-Unsat-isfactory. Students who withdraw from thecourse usually receive a W.

Grading was done at three separate stagesduring the first half of the course, just after themidterm, and at the end of the course. Both

.111111._

groups took the exams in their respective class-rooms under the same conditions.

This arrangement established a mechanism fordeterming any effects if there were differencesin performance between experimental and con-trol groups at the start of the study. We couldcompare performance early on as well as later.This is not really a comparison of progress overthe semester, but rather three separate cross-sectional views of performance at differentstages, comparing the performance of the con-trol group with that of the experimental group(those taught in the SYNERGY Center).

The measure of the performance of the class isthe number (or percentage) of students in eachof the grading categories Satisfactory (S),Progress (P), or Unsatisfactory (U). The largerthe number of students in the higher categories(such as S), the better the performance.

Monitoring the StudyIn seeking an alternative way of assisting stu-dents, I st-rted with CSR Level IV writingmodules that came with DESKIab. This did notseem challenging enough for the students asthey were able to pass most of the pre-tests foreach module. Following this initial try-out, I

requested CSR Level V courses, which cametoward the midterm. This delay in purchasingLevel V modules caused breaks in grammarcontinuity. By being provided Level V modulesand the CSR management system, we were A..?to order and organize CSR modules for eachstudent.

When students started using DESKIab's wordprocessor (Microsoft Works) to write, I discov-ered that they did not have sufficient time tocomplete their essays and proofread their draftsduring one class period. But as the semesterprogressed, most were able to proofread theirwriting on the screen, thus saying time.

Student OutcomesAt the final assessment, 7 students in the

experimental group (out of 19 remaining)

received a passing grade of S. From the controlgroup, 12 students out 24 got an S. The tablebelow compares the performance ofexperimental and control groups at differentpoints in the semester. To make comparisonseasy, the figures quoted in all instances arepercentages of the total number that started theclass.

Table I

Grade Distribution

Class/Grade 1 Satisfactory] Progress I Unsatisfactory I Withdrawal

Early TestExperimental Group N=19 5% 89% 5%

I N/AControl Group N=25 12% 80% 8% N/A

MidtermExperimental Group N=19 42% 26% 32% N/AControl Group=25 56% 20% 20% N/A

FinalExperimental N=19 32% 63%

I

5%

Control Group=25 48%

I40% 8% 4%

85 9 4

Richland College SYNERGY CenterI.olita W. Gilkes, l'roject SYNERGY Software Implementa-tion Designer, has been supervising the EducationalComputing Laboratories at Richland College for the past twoyears. Additionally, she has taught Introduction toComputers, Database Applications, and classes in theFaculty Support and Multimedia Center. She has alsoworked as an educational software consultant and author forthe past ten years. She has degrees from Boston Universityand the University of Texas at Dallas and is currentlyworking on a Ph.D. in Information Science at the Universityof North Texas.

Richland College, one of the seven colleges ofthe Dallas Community College Di Strict spc.:the Spring, Semester 1993 preparing for ourimplementation of Project SYNERGY in thi fallof 1993. Our SYNERGY team of math, reading,and writing faculty members met regularly withthe coordinator of the Campus Testing Center,the Director of the Tutoring Center, andEducational Computing Laboratory personnelto discuss our questions and ideas regardingthe use of computers in testing andremediation.

Our group took two field trips to visitcampuses with extensive computer facilitiessupporting their remedial programs. We spent aday at St. Phillip's College in San Antonio, and aday at Austin Community College in Austin,Texas. Our dialogues with the faculty at thesecampuses and our examination of theirhardware, software, and lab setups was mostbeneficial. We were extremely impressed by theenthusiasm, dedication, and successes of theteachers involved in computer-assistedremediation.

Throughout these preparatory months, we alsospent considerable time reviewing and evaluat-ing software that might support our program.We are convinced that the quality of the soft-ware we choose to use is as critical to oursuccess as are the teachers and our designmethodologies. The consensus of our team wasthat the software currently available does notmeet our expectations. Our observation is thatthe design of published software has notchanged significantly in the last decade and itdoes not adequately tap the potential of the

computer as a resource tool. Therefore, we haveundertaken a significant development project tosupplement the software that will be availableto use with DESKlab.

In the area of developmental mathematics, ourSYNERGY instructor will be using a newly re-leased textbook with its accompanying softwareand videos. It is a 1993 publication whose de-sign seems to be well conceived, so we havechosen not to undertake a development projectin math at this time. Instead, we will focus onsupplementing the software available for read-ing and writing by developing Windows-basedsoftware that takes advantage of the more in-tuitive graphical user interface.

One member of the team is using Toolbook byAsymetrix to develop a program that will en-able students to examine other students' writ-ings and give written response to teacher-sug-gested prompts. The student peer reviews willbe saved on the network in such a way that theauthor of each paper will be able to downloadcopies of the peer reviews if that is desired. Theteacher will be able to access all of the writingsand comments from his office. Only the teacherand student author will have access to theoriginal text, an important feature that wefound missing from much of the existing soft-ware.

Two member of the team are using MicrosoftVisual Basic for Windows to design a readingprogram that will give students access to nu-merous texts for analysis and written response.The program includes a number of true/falseand multiple-choice questions about the content

86 1-)

of the readings and vocabulary, and it willgrade the student responses to these questionsfor the teacher. All of the student writtenresponses will be evaluated by the teacher, whocan access the program from her office. Thedesign will also include the opportunity forcollaborative student response to some of thediscussion questions.

We are very excited about having the opportu-nity to prepare materials for use with our de-velopmental students, and to test and modifythe materials as necessary. We are looking for-ward to the implementation of ProjectSYNERGY in the fall, to continue ourexploration and discovery into designs andmethodologies to promote student learning andsuccess.

University of Tennessee at MartinSYNERGY Center

Pony Glover, Project SYNERGY Software ImplementationDesimer and Coordinator of the Student Learning Center atThe University of Tennessee at Martin, has substantialexperience in working with faculty in developing andconducting research in teaching and !earning. She

successfully directed the development of the StudentLearning Center under a Title 111 grant at the University ofTennessee. She received her B.A. in English from the UnionUniversity, Jackson, Tennessee in 1962 and her Ed.!). inHigher Administration tn 1987 from Peabody College,Vanderbelt University, Nashville, Tennessee.

During the 1992-93 academic year, TheUniversity of Tennessee at Martin intensifiedplanning for the SYNERGY Center. Throughoutthe year, as the UTM coordinator, I workedwith several IBM representatives to develop theequipment request and to refine the agreementwith IBM. The Academic Affairs Office selectedan appropriate classroom for the facility, and itbecame available in the spring.

During the Fall Term 1992, teachers wereidentified and planning for the courses began.The Developmental English teacher, jennaWright, had reviewed writing software and wasreviewing ESL software; Sharon Robertson wasreviewing study skills software and wouldadapt her study skills course for the SYNERGYCenter. Brenda Lackey, who had been involvedin planning for Project SYNERGY Integrator,was selected to teach developmental

mathematics. Two reading teachers, ReginaHenson and Michelle Perry, also wereidentified. Several persons were able to spndtime at Memphis State Technical Institute,examining DESKIab and discussing it withteachers. The coordinator developed andpublished a schedule of course offerings and labhours for the new computer classroom. Becausethe fileserver and the computers had notarrived by mid-summer, classes in theSYNERGY Center may be postponed until theSpring Term 1994, in order to give teachers timeto become comfortable using the DESKIabmaterials and the networked computers.

The teachers are enthusiastic about theirinvolvement and will move as quickly aspossible to begin their courses. Having alreadyhad very positive experiences in reviewingsoftware and in sharing the reviews, we arenow looking forward to the classroom project.

87 9C

Part Three: Project SYNERGYIntegrator and Platform of Neutrality

Kama la AnandamProject SYNERGY DirectorMiami-Dade Community College

Wayne MartinSenior Project AnalystMiami-Dade Community College

In 1989, the project team began listening to thefaculty who teach the underprepared collegestudents; these faculty laid out the reasons forProject SYNERGY Integrator (PSI). They askedfor a standatd student interface when theirstudents move from one software package toanother. They said that if they bought instruc-tional software without a management system,they could not tell how their students wereprogressing, and if they wished to buy softwarewith a management system, the cost wasprohibitive. They also said that, in an idealconfiguration of technological support, theirstudents should be treated holistically and notcompartmentalized into courses andfragmented into software within courses. For allthese valid reasons, we decided to develop PSI.As the project team envisions LearningEnvir mment 2000 for Underprepared CollegeStudents, we acknowledge that variedinstitutional settings exist to provide thestudents with instruction and support, bothhuman and technological. Within these variedsettings, the project team sees the ProjectSYNERGY Environment (presented in Part Five)as a special case. The Project SYNERGYEnvironment will include a commercially

88

available Local Area Network (LAN), and thedriving force of this network will be PSI.

PSI is designed and is being developed as anintegrated, adaptive system that

provides a computerized management sys-tem in which the students and faculty/stafffeel that they are in control of the activitiesmanaged by the system.

insures that the instructional software willconform to the projecfs standard forinteracting with students (standard studentinterface).

provides linkages among learningobjectives, instructional software, andmastery tests in order for the student tohave a smooth transition from one learningobjective to another and from one softwarepackage to another.

assists faculty to have a more efficienthandle on how their students areprogressing and to take appropriate action.

9 7

incorporates Project SYNERGY learningobjectives, mastery testing, standard op-tions for placement and diagnostic tests,and installation options for other testingand instructional software in order for aninstitution to install and use the systemmore quickly than it otherwise would.

The major components of PSI are shown inFigure 1 (page 90) and include the following:

Databases:

User Databases

Curriculum Databases

Connectivity:

Student Access

Faculty Command and CurriculumManager

Instructional Software Connectivity

Databases

User Databases. The heart of PSI is the set ofuser databases it maintains and the linkagesamong them. The student database contains in-formation about each student and his/her pro-gress. It is configured to allow a student towork in multiple disciplines, in multiple courseswithin any discipline, and across terms and betreated as one person. The faculty database con-tains information about the faculty and staff us-ers of the system, including areas of access anduser preferences for interacting with PSI. Thecourse database contains information about fac-ulty and staff for each course, a list of studentsenrolled, and optional groupings of studentswithin a course.

Curriculum Databases. The objectives databasecontains the Project SYNERGY objectives as laidout in the software review forms for reading,writing, math, ESL, and study skills/criticalthinking. The diagnostics database contains in-formation about the various instruments usedby institutions for placement of students incourses and /or diagnosis of specific learningdeficiencies. The project team is working with

The College Board to include its CPT's(Computerized Placement Tests), with ETS toincorporate its GUIDES (diagnostic tests) asoptions in PSI, and with ACT to do the samewith its COMPASS and ASSET tests. The soft-ware dati.:..^cP contains mastery information oneach instructional software package available toPSI. In particular, it contains information aboutobjectives covered from among ProjectSYNERGY's complete list. The testbank databasecontains mastery test questions for ProjectSYNERGY objectives. The items for the testbankare being developed in Project SYNERGY H byteams of faculty members from the participat-ing institutions. These questions are being en-tered into Banque, an existing computerizedtestbank system owned by M-DCC that will beused by PSI to generate mastery tests forstudents.

Linking Among Databases. Each of the data-bases maintained by PSI contains links to one ormore of the other databases. These linkages aredynamic, being created as new components areadded (e.g., a student is registered in a course, aCurriculum Plan is created, or a new software isadded) and being changed or deleted as cir-cumstances change (e.g., a student drops acourse or a faculty member modifies a student'smastery test).

The records in the student, faculty, and coursedatabases are closely linked to each other. Inaddition, the student's Curriculum Plan is linkedto objectives, instructional software, and testquestions. The diagnostics database contains linksbetween diagnostic information and objective's.The software database contains links betweensoftware units or lessons and the correspondingobjectives in the objectives database. The testbankdatabase contains links between test questionsand ra)jectives in the objectives database.

Connectivity

Student Access. PSI responds to studentsthrough the Learning Guide in such a way thatthey feel they are at the center of the systemwhen they are using it. The Learning

-a

899

Faculty/Staff

Project SYNERGY IntegratorModules, Databases and Files

Students

LearningGuide

Module

Accessories

Module

Curriculum Database Module

Software

Software Report lafo Nettie,* Joh Bffeetheases Data

Files Maintained for Each Software

SoftwareConnectivity

Module

Software

Figure 1. Project SYNERGY Integrator (PSI)

Guide is the manager of student activity in PSI,and it gives the student access to PSI. TheLearning Guide constructs and displays a

Curriculum Plan for each student. A studentenrolled in multiple courses will have multiplecurriculum plans that will be available tohim/her at sign-on. The Learning Guideautomatically creates a Curriculum Plan for astudent as follows: based on the results ofdiagnostic and placement tests, it selects theobjectives to be mastered from the objectivesdatabase; having selected the objectives, itselects a list of appropriate software forinstruction; and it further generates periodictests from Banque to assess the student's mas-tery of objectives. The automatic process maybe modified by faculty according to theirpreferences.

The student may ask for help at any time. Thestudent can send E-mail messages to fac-ulty/staff and receive responses on-line. Thesystem will permit a certain amount of explora-tion and experimentation and will offer advicewhen the exploration seems inappropriate. Wehave included in our design multi-student in-teraction from one termina, to accommodatecollaborative learning. The student will be ableto backtrack in the Curriculum Plan in order toimprove a grade or score. In addition, the stu-dent can request that the faculty adjust the Cur-riCulum Plan if he/she is having difficulty.

Faculty Command and Curriculum Manager.PSI will respond to instructors and their assis-tants through its Command Module in such away that they feel they are at the center of thesystem. PSI accomplishes this by obtaining afaculty profile of how each faculty wishes to usethe system. The options available to the facultyare presented as icons on their desktop,grouped together by function. Where necessary,the faculty will be prOvided prompts to movearound the system and access its manyfunctions.

After the students are registered in PSI.. thefaculty member who so chooses can delete stu-dents in his/her course; access student records,either singly or in groups; access students' cur-

riculum plans to see progress; get various re-ports, either on-line or in print; send E-mailmessages to co-workers or students; and createor modify curriculum plans. In particular, theinstructor can intervene personally in thelearning process for any of his/her students.

Through the Curriculum Manager, PSI can behighly customized, whether through the addi-tion of objectives, diagnostic tools, software, ortest items, or through the modification of cur-riculum plans. When such customizing hasramifications for database linkages, PSI will in-form the faculty of the effects of the customiz-ing and may even suggest the conditions underwhich such change may or may not beappropriate.

Instructional Software Connectivity. The soft-ware database contains information about objec-tives covered, instructional modes, modules,and other software features. This informationallows PSI to create appropriate curriculumplans for each student. PSI will provide a com-mon connectivity mechanism for all the softwareinstalled, initiating the software for the student,passing data to the software, getting data backfrom the software, and maintaining bookmarks.The database is also designed to allow for thecollection of data about the usefulness/ effec-tiveness of the software in the real world. Thisdata will allow the project team to make im-provements in the automated operation of thesystem to create the curriculum plans.

In developing PSI, we aim to do for educationwhat IBM did for the PC industry and whatMicrosoft did for PC applications. If we lookback, we see that the PC market was flounder-ing and moving at a snail's pace until IBMestablished the de facto open architecture stan-dard for PC hardware, and soon after, we wit-nessed a big boom in the PC hardware industry.Similarly, the programming industry wasfloundering and moving at a snail's pace untilMicrosoft established the open architecturestandard for Common User Access (CUA) inWindows for the programming environment.The fully implemented CUA led to a boom inPC applications. Following in the footsteps of

these two trends, we predict that PSI will give aboom to the adoption of instructional softwarein educational institutions because of its openarchitecture standard for user as well as soft-ware interfaces. By Miami-Dade's taking on thishorrendous task of developing PSI, softwarepublishers stand to gain because we provide aplatform of neutrality on which all of us cancome together and work toward a commongoal.

Plans are underway to obtain an initial collec-tion of PSI-compatible software that covers thebreadth of the Project SYNERGY objectives. The

project team is highly committed to forming astrong and healthy relationship with softwarevendors in this regard. Thus far, twelve pub-lishers publisher have signed an agreement andthree more are pending. Their names and ad-dresses follow on the next page. (Please seeAppendix C _ for a complete list of ProjectSYNERGY software publishers.) Of course, thecollection will be updated continually asadditional software meets PSI requirements,and we intend to publish a catalog of PSI-compatible software.

92

101

List of Software Publishers who have Signedthe Software Porting Agreement for PSI

*ACTMr. John Roth2201 N. Dodge St.Iowa City, IA 52243

Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.Mr. David O'ConnorVice President, Educational Multimedia Group6 Jacob WayReading, MA 01867

*American Language AcademyMr. John W. MyrnaDirector of CALL1401 Rockville Pike - Suite 550Rockville, MD 20852

Daedalus Group, Inc.Dr. Hugh Burns1106 Clayton Lane 448EAustin, TX 78723

Educational Activities, Inc.Mr. Alan SternVice President1937 Grand Ave.Baldwin, NY 11510-6377

Educational DevelopmentalLaboratories, Inc.Mr. Irwin HarrisPresidentP. O. Box 210726Columbia, SC 29221

Houghton Mifflin Co.Ms. Susan SoleyManager, Software and Media Dept.222 Berkley St.Boston, MA 02116-3764

Kapstrom, Inc.Mrs. Gay DahlstromP. 0 Box 1230Buda, TX 78610-123()

The Math LabMr. Chris Avery5333 Elrose Ave.San Jose, CA 95124

Ma xth in kMr. Neil Larson2425 Channing Way #B-592Berkeley, CA 94704-2209

Merit Audio VisualMr. Ben Weintraub132 West 21 StreetNew York, NY 10021

Microcomputer Curriculum ProjectMr. Lynn C. SchwandtVice President/Treasurer451 Progress Ave.Waterloo, IA 50701

Milliken Publishing Co.Mr. Michael MooreTelemarketing1100 Research Blvd.St. Louis, MO 63132

Parlance SoftwareDr. Fredrick Wellington542 South Yorktown Ave.Tulsa, OK 74104

*The College BoardMr. Arthur DoyleExecutive DirectorCollege Level and State Services45 Columbus Ave.New York, NY 10023

*Awaiting agreement

Part Four: Project SYNERGYEnvironment

Kama la AnandamProject SYNERGY Director

Miami-Dade Community College

In this report, we wish to introduce the conceptof Project SYNERGY Environment and elaborateon the ingredients which make up that envi-ronment. We believe that an institution's atten-tion to all the ingredients will greatly enhanceits degree of success in introducing technologyto support teaching and learning. The AmericanHeritage Dictionary defines environment as fol-lows: (1) Something that surrounds; surroundings.(2) The combination of external physical conditionsthat affect and influence the growth and developmentof organisms. (3) The social and cultural conditionsthat affect the nature of an individual or community.We would like to apply the last two definitionsto Project SYNERGY Environment, althoughtechnology is not an organism, but functions asif it were.

The organism we have in mind for ProjectSYNERGY Environment is a Local Area Network(LAN) consisting of hardware and software. ALAN has the advantage of letting several termi-nals share the software resources stored on thefileserver that manages the sharing. A LANcannot be all things to all people. It is impor-tant, therefore, to establish the purpose of aLAN prior to putting it in place. Will it bedesignated for use by a particular departmentor will it be designated as a writing lab for useby all students? Will it be shared by two ormore departments? The target departments forProject SYNERGY are those which address theneeds of underprepared college students.Among these departments, one can choose tolet the LAN serve all of them or phase in onedepartment at a time. The size of the studentpopulation in a department will influence thedecision to a great extent. Even though theimplementation can be done in a phased

Victor NwanhwoSoftware Implementation Coordinator

Miami-Dade Community College

manner, however, one needs to think aboutanticipated growth.

In establishing the purpose of a LAN, it is wiseto target specific needs of a selected segment ofthe student population, even at the cost of beingcriticized for showing favoritism toward a par-ticular department, and focus on making that asuccessful experience. For too long, we havespread our resources too thin across too manyareas and have been frustrated with the results.Therefore, we think it is more sensible to choosetarget areas, allocate sufficient resources, makethis effort a success, and then move on to thenext target area. Once the purpose of a LAN isclear, it becomes easier to determine what aca-demic software (instructional as well as pro-ductivity tools) needs to be placed on the LAN.One cardinal principle to apply in the decision-making process here and in subsequent activi-ties is to establish the purpose on the basis ofgrassroots involvement.

Physical Conditions

The use of a LAN is affected by several externalphysical conditions in the environment. Thefollowing highlights describe the more impor-tant conditions.

Physical space must be arranged to accom-modate the hardware, the furniture, and theindividuals who will be using the facility.There needs to be space set aside for theLAN Manager, with a workstation andprinter available. Ideally, this space shouldbe in the same room as the LAN-room so itis easy for the Manager to work withstudents, but also set apart so that the

94 103

Manager's work does not disturb classes orstudents. There should be a separate roomadjacent to the LAN-room that faculty canuse for one-on-one conferences withstudents; four additional workstationsshould be connected to the network forfaculty's use in this room. Finally, thereshould be a third room with tables wherestudents can work together away from thecomputers. Instead of three separaterooms, there could be one large room withthree distinct areas. Ideally, workstationsfor faculty should be in their offices andconnected to the LAN. This goal can beachieved much more easily if the LANs arelocated next to the faculty offices in adepartment.

Access to the LAN for students and facultyshould be convenient and timely. As sug-gested above, is important to have somecomputers connected to the LAN placed infaculty offices to address their needs forconvenience and timelines. For students'access, the location of the LAN, theadequacy of the number of workstations,and the number of available LAN hours(the time of the day and the number ofhours) will address their needs forconvenience and timeliness.

Arrangement of workstations should con-sider various instructional modes such asclassroom teaching, group studies, andindependent study.

The arrangement of a LAN should allowstudents enough space to work comfortablytaking notes and using their books. SFedalconsideration should be given to the needsof physically challenged students.

Traffic patterns within the LAN-roomshould be considered in terms of enteringand leaving the facility in general and withreference to physically challengedindividuals in particular.

Noise level should be controlled in relationto keyboards, printers, and multimediasoftware. Some of it can be controlled bythe choice of hardware and some throughefficient acoustics.

Appropriate lighting and air conditioningdefinitely create a pleasant learningenvironment.

Social ConditionsThe social conditions affecting a LAN are com-prised of technical, educational, research, andmanagement support, as well as communica-tion and training. Integrating technology intothe curriculum calls for some dramatic changeson the part of faculty and, therefore, they needsupport from a person who is empathetic withtheir role shift rather than a technological wiz-ard who may have less appreciation for theteacher's role. For the readers' benefit, we haveincluded job descriptions for a SoftwareImplementation Designer and a SoftwareImplementation Assistant.

The Software Implementation Designer is required to provide technical and educational

support for faculty in desiping effective strategies for integrating teaching, learning, andtechnology and for evaluating the outcomes. The Software Implementation Designer is expected

to ensure that the LAN is providing a conducive teaching and learning environment to allowboth faculty and students to concentrate on their tasks. This expectation require,: minimizingnetwork failures, technical impediments, and interruptions. This individual is expected to

possess good interpersonal skills to work with faculty and help them in using the instructionalsoftware and evaluating the outcomes in a computer-networked environment. This individualwill also be required to prepare reports and presentation materials about implementing andevaluating software and conducting workshops for faculty. A strong background in using

technology for instruction and in working with networks (LAN's), operating systems, and

electronic communication is preferred. Experience in teaching college students is highlydesirable A Master's degree in Educational Technology, Educational Psychology, orEducational

Research is required.

95104

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

The Software Implementation Assistant is expected to work with faculty and studentsfunctioning at various technical skill levels and help them use the LAN efficiently andeffectively. The individual is responsible for the operation, management, and supervision of thenetworked laboratory; for upgrading and maintaining fileserver operations, as well as installing,upgrading and maintaining software; for maintaining the lab schedule, registering students invarious courses, uploading and dowaloading data between mainframe and fileserver, andproducing reports for faculty; for supporting faculty and students in the use of the software,trouble-shooting and other related work to establish and maintain a conducive learningenvironment for students. The Software Implementation Assistant will be expected to handlesecurity issues, manage sharing of the LAN's resources, and avoid violation of software-licensingagreements. A Bachelor's degjee in Education or Computer Science or other equivalent field andthree years of related experience are required. Interpersonal skills to work with faculty andstudents are essential.

Integrating technology with the teaching/learn-ing environment involves a change in the role offaculty to focus on learning more than theydo on teaching, to think of individual studentsrather than a group of students, and to perceivethemselves as facilitators of students' learninginstead of givers of information. These changescan hardly be expected to take place overnight.Therefore, a gradual and systematic shift intheir role as they combine technology with thehuman touch and establish a balance betweenthe two to maximize student learning isessential.

Faculty development is an ongoing process thatprogresses in a spiral fashion as faculty developa better understanding of their own strengths,their students' needs, and the potentials oftechnology to help them meet their students'needs. It involves acquiring skills in usingproductivity tools such as word processing,computerized slide presentations, spreadsheets, and gradebooks, so that faculty canimprove their own productivity levels; acquir-ing skills in exploring instructional softwareand finding ways to integrate it in teaching andlearning with necessary change-3 in the curricu-lum and teaching methods; understanding theimplications of shifting focus from teaching tolearning as mentioned earlier and using tech-nology to support this shift; understanding theimportance of an internal frame of reference forintegrating technology in the teaching/learningprocess in order to make the changes enduringand personally meaningful; understanding therole of tactics (knowing whom to contact, whento contact, how to get support, etc.) to help

one's ideas to come to fruition; and understand-ing institutional policies and procedures withregard to use of technology on campus in orderto avoid frustration and unnecessary labor.

Some faculty will require more support thanothers, and the support will embrace bothtechnical and educational aspects. The SoftwareImplementation Designer and Assistant shouldbe able to accommodate whatever preferencesand style a faculty member may bring. Theconcept of mentoring should be encouraged ineach department to ensure that faculty whohave been the early starters can help the newones.

Since future investment in technology is ques-tionable during times of financial crunch, wepromote the need for accountability in a ProjectSYNERGY Environment. In order to be account-able, we must help faculty make research anintegral part of the teaching and learningprocess. The Software Implementation Designershould assist the faculty in setting up their ownresearch goals, defining a personally meaning-ful hypothesis, laying out the plan forintegrating technology, implementing the plan,and evaluating the outcomes. It is important tohelp the faculty understand that research can beused as an instrument of change rather than asa litmus test of good or bad teaching.Formative evaluation is highly recommended inconducting an evaluation that allows room forfaculty to refine their ways of integratingtechnology through replication of researchacross several terms.

96 105

Generally speaking, people tend to have greatexpectations for what technology can do andshould do. Anything short of their expectationsis blamed on the technology itself. Educatorsare no exception to this syndrome. Designinguses of software for instruction is neither simplenor small. It takes place within the contexi ofan institutional environment and is influencedby a variety of factors, including how familiarfaculty are with the software, how they designits uses, who the students are, and how thestudents respond to the software. Outcomes ofresearch should, therefore, be studied carefullyto identify the ways to improve future replica-tions, rather than being used to judge thefaculty or technology. Our presumption here isthat the decision-makers have been careful inhiring the right kind of faculty and in selectingthe right kind of technology, and, therefore,replications are necessary to determine theappropriate combination of human and techno-logical support to help students succeed.

Administrative support plays a critical role increating favorable conditions for a ProjectSYNERGY Environment to operate smoothly. Itis imperative that the decisions affecting theoperations of the LAN be made on the basis ofgrassroots involvement with a bottom-upapproach. Procedures need to be establishedregarding personnel, budget, software acquisi-tion, LAN scheduling, drawing a balancebetween scheduled classes and open labs forstudents, and adequate security provisions.There should also be procedures for receivingand welcoming visitors as the use of the LANgrows. Additionally, a process should beestablished for reviewing, acquiring, installing,and removing software, thus ensuring that thefileserver is not overloaded with softwarepackages that take up much of the disk space.Our recommendation is to appoint a group offaculty to be in charge of periodic review ofsoftware for the LAN. Project SYNERGYSoftware Selector (P53) would be helpful inselecting new software (see page 39). It mayalso be possible to use the LAN facility togenerate external revenue by conducting short-term courses or workshops for the community.It is recommended that such revenues be usedfor upgrading and maintaining the LAN.

However, it is advisable to ensure that suchexternal activities do not interfere with theregular operation of the LAN.

Communication plays an important role inmaking the Project SYNERGY Environmentappealing to the faculty and students. Asmentioned before, it is important to involve theend-users in the decision-making process aboutpolicies and procedures affecting the use of theLAN; open communication will ensure thatproblems are given immediate attention withinthis environment. A suggestion box should beavailable to solicit feedback from faculty andstudents on what could be improved in theirteaching/learning situation. Each suggestionshould be considered and an explanationprovided as to what action has been taken.Another method of communication that wouldattract the involvement of faculty is discussingthe research results in departmental meetings.

Cultural Conditions

The cultural conditions embrace the beliefs,customs, and traditions of a department and aninstitution, and they do have an impact on theefficacy of using a LAN and on the effectivenessof the outcomes. It is one thing to identify whatthe beliefs, customs, and traditions are; it isanother to modify them when they are found tobe detrimental to the effective use of a LAN. Inmany ways, we are at a crossroads in our effortto integrate technology into the curriculum,teaching, and learning. We can either take theroad that leads to "business as usual" or takethe other that leads to a paradigm shift. Thelatter, no doubt, is filled with uncertainties,emotionally loaded debates, agonies andecstasies.

In this paradigm shift, educators must gobeyond Mission Statements in their catalogsand exhibit a passion for accountability. Theymust be accountable in terms of reducingstudent dropout rates and increasing studentsuccess rates. They must orchestrate the use ofhuman and technological resources to do theright things and do them well. They should nothesitate to question the traditional practices todetermine whether or not they have a role in

97 10

this paradigm shift, and if they do, in whatform. They should recognize that a substantialand enduring solution to a serious, naggingproblem- will require concerted and collabora-tive effort over an appreciable period of time.They should acknowledge that the solution isintertwined with technology, but embracingtechnology depends on the institution's priority,its willingness to put its resources into itspriority, its awareness of its Own political andsocial environment, and its belief in grassrootsinvolvement. They should also acknowledgethat devoting intensive and extensive attentionto one targeted area such as the college-prepprogram for a stipulated time period is likely toyield greater results than dividing its resourcesamong all its departments. In other words,tackling one department at a time is a wiserapproach.

In embarking on this paradigm shift, we mustmake and take time to discuss and debate ourtraditional practices such as class size, numberof contact hours, beginning and end of terms forcourses, teaching focus vs. research orientation,and assessment tools and see how they fit into aProject SYNERGY Environment. No "sacredcows" are to be excluded from this debate. It is

important to make time and take time for thedebates because our cultural beliefs and tradi-tions run very deep and shake the very roots ofour educational systems.

We cannot ask for a better time to engage inthese debates. First, there is less money to goaround for education and greater demand foraccountability. Second, technology is receivedwell when it lessens the economic burden on aninstitution. Gone are those days whentechnology was received with open armsmerely to raise the prestige of an institution.Technology can hardly prosper as an add-onexpenditure. Third, national statistics show thatthe number of faculty nearing retirement is onthe increase. Consequently, the timing is rightfor a paradigm shift in terms of recruiting newfaculty (quantity and quality) and establishingthe institutional expectations of them.

We appeal to our readers to travel the moredifficult road in order to establish viable andvaluable models for integrating technology,teaching, and learning. We will be more thanhappy to share your models with future ProjectSYNERGY readers.

98101

ConclusionKamala Anandam

Project SYNERGY DirectorMiami-Dade Community College

State of Technology in Education

Most individuals in education and in the hard-ware/software business will agree with me, Isuspect, when I say that the state of technologyin education is disappointing. Depending uponour level of investment in terms of time, effort,and funds, some of us might even say that it isdismal. When we consider, on the one hand, theinvestment in large, computer-based systemsand, on the other, the isolated modules pro-duced by individuals (mostly faculty), as wellas everything in between, we realize that bil-lions of dollars have been spent to revolutionizeeducation with technology. The outcomes in theteaching/learning process are not anywhereclose to our expectations.

Despite our disappointment with the state oftechnology in education, we will be quick to ac-knowledge, I am sure, the relentless effort of thepioneers in education who have brought us towhere we are today. What we need now are thesettlers who will establish the infrastructure inwhich the use of technology will become wide-spread. That is what Project SYNERGY is allabout. As mentioned earlier, we began listeningto the potential settlers, the faculty who teachthe underprepared college students, and havedesigned PSI to meet their needs.

PSI is but a Angle piece, albeit an importantone, in the jigsaw puzzle. When all the piecesare put together, we create the bigger picture ofa Learning Environment 2000 for UnderpreparedCollege Students.

Our concept of the Learning Environment 2000for Underprepared College Students is not quitecomplete; a piece is missing in the puzzle. Theomission is intentional in order to allow eachinstitution, department, and /or individual to

identify a piece that will complete the pictureand, thereby, personalize the Learning Environment 2000 for Underprepared College Students forindividual circumstances.

Window of Opportunity

In undertaking to develop PSI and promote itsadoption, we realize that we have to embark ona new direction. Call it a paradigm shift, if youwill. Paradigm shifts share two essential charac-teristics. Their achievement is sufficiently un-precedented to attract an enduring group ofadherents away from competing modes of ac-tivity, and simultaneously, they are sufficientlyopen-ended to leave all sorts of problems forthe redefined group of practitioners to resolve.Project SYNERGY participants make up thi,,"enduring group of adherents."

At the risk of being repetitive, in thi;; paradigmshift, this group must go beyond MissionStatements in the catalogs and exhibit a passionfor accountability. We must be accountable interms of reducing student dropout rates andincreasing student success rates. We mustorchestrate the use of human and technologicalresources to do the right things and do themwell. We should not hesitate to question thetraditional practices to determine whether ornot they have a role in this paradigm shift, and

9910 b BEST COPY AVAILABLE

if they do, in what form. We should recognizethat a substantial and enduring solution to aserious, nagging problem will require concertedand collaborative effort over an appreciableperiod of time. We should acknowledge that thesolution is intertwined with technology, butembracing technology depends on theinstitution's priority, its willingness to put itsresources into its priority, its awareness of itsown political and social environment, and itsbelief in grassroots involvement. We shouldalso acknowledge that devoting intensive andextensive attention to one targeted area such asthe college-prep program for a stipulated timeperiod is likely to yield greater results thandividing its resources among all its depart-ments. In other words, tackling one departmentat a time is a wiser approach. Let us work to-gether and show the way to be accountable.

What Next?

Miami-Dade is exploring ways to get fundingfor continuing the software review process andquestion writing beyond June 1994. Through thecurrent Title III grant (October 1992 - September1997), Miami-Dade will produce PSI, an intelli-gent, adaptive, and integrated management sys-tem for Local Area Networks (LAN's) withgrassroots involvement of faculty at Miami-Dade and all other Project SYNERGYinstitutions. We are pleased that twelvepublishers have agreed to port their software toWindows and make it communicate with PSI

according to our specifications. The convertedsoftware will be known as the "starter set" andwill be used along with PSI at Miami-DadeCommunity College and PSI training centers tobe established across the country. In addition,we would like to establish 10 PSI pioneercolleges and 50 early adopter colleges, giving usa total of 66 institutions where PSI will becomeoperational and provide support for otherindividuals. If you are interested in becomingone of the 66 institutions, please write to:Kama la Anandam, Miami-Dade CommunityCollege, 11011 SW 104 Street, Miami, Florida33176.

While we provide a platform of neutrality forindividuals and organizations (private andpublic) to develop quality instructional softwareand find a market for it through PSI more read-ily than at present, we wish to present"research" as the common thread that will linkthe PSI institutions to determine the usefulnessof a PSI configuration in terms of educationaland economic benefits. The collective wisdomemerging out of research studies conducted byvarious institutions will be widelydisseminated.

Last but not least, we intend to publish a cata-log of instructional software that is education-ally sound as reviewed through projectSYNERGY and is technically compatible withPSI as verified by the Division of EducationalTechnologies, M-DCC.

1001 0

Name

Conlin, Mary LouConnelly, BobCooner-Berger, LindaCooper, Mary JaneCooper, RaynaCortes-Suarez, GeorginaCossio, Matilde "Mattie"Crawford, JoyceCuervo, MargaritaCueto, MarleneCulver, LeeCunningham, JohnDavis, GaryDavis, LornaDearing, CarmenDeChaine, DeborahDennis, VivianDenton, l'egiDespaigne, Jamaye ReneeDietrick, Carol EDominguez, NestorDorsey, DonDoucette, DonDoughty, IrmaDunne, JoeDyett, AdrianEdward, RichardEisel, EdEl Rayess, SuzanneErickson, MichaelEscudero, KatherineEskew, ThomasEvans, ChristineEvseev, AnatoliEwell, ArciaFackrell, JerryFalcon, MariaFancher, AndrewFarben, JanieFaulkner, AnnFeldman, PhilipFernandez, TushneldaFerrer, MartaFitton, Diane

CJlege/ University Legend

Cuyahoga Community CollegeSanta Fe Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusDelta CollegeUniversity of Tennessee at MartinMiami-Dade Community College, North CaMpusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusDallas County Community CollegeJohnson County Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusFoothill CollegeLeague for InnovationMiami-E,Ae Community College, North CampusSt. Louis Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusKirkwood Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, DistrictMonroe Community CollegeMonroe Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusUniversity of Tennessee at MartinMia mi-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusCuyahoga Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMountain View College (Maricipa)Bakersfield College (Kern)Miami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMonroe Community College

LEGEND:Software Review: SR-Reading; SW-Writing; SM-Math; SE-ESL; SC-Study Skills/Critical ThinkingQuestion Writing: QR-Reading: QW-Writing; QM-Math; QC-Coord ma tor

BWPL/QW /SWFWSC

PL/SRFE/PBFWBW/EC/FP/FS/PB /SI/SIDFE/SUDT / FE / FW

SU

FE/PB/SUBWFE

PB/SUFWBW/SMBWFE/FW/SIEC/FW/LS/SIDPB

BWST

FE/PBSWFE (2)/LS/I'BBW/QR/SC/SRPS

SE

PL/Qk /SRFE

PLPB

SE

PB

FE/GPPB

l'BFE/FWBWBW

FW/QMFE/PB/SUSC

13W-Biltmore Workshop Prior to l'roject SYNER(;Y (2/89), I )T-I /esign Team at M-I)CC; EL-Evaluation Committee at M-1X.:C; FE-Faculty Exchange Visit

at M-IXC # in parentheses if more than 1); FS-Faculty Scenario; FW-Faculty Workshop at M-DCC; GP-Guides Pilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-InstitutionalCoordination; PR-Project lirrAing at M-I X.C; PC-Planning Committee (attended the planning meet_ ^g in l'alisades, NY, March 1991);PL-Planning for

Project SYNEW ;Y Integrator (19)1 Survey); I'S-Project Staff; SI-Software Implementation; SI! )-Software Implementation f)ign;SS-Student Scenario; ST-

Steering Committee; SU-Survey Response: 1992-93 (because some were anonymous, not all are named here).

Organirer of a Faculty Exchange Visit

103 A.3

Name

Fit/gerald, JeanneFletcher, JoyceFlowers, Patricia FordFrauman, MaxineGabert, GlenGabriel, DennisGarces, LindaGarcia, IsoldeGarcia, JudithGarrett, JudyGerken, DonnaGil, ArielGilkes, LolitaGist, RichardGlenn, AzaleeGlover, PollyGoldstein, AdrienneGolphin, BarbaraGomez, MariaGonnet, KatherineGonzalez, IleanaGranros, FrederickGraves, FeliciaGreen, RosemaryGriffin, TomGroomes, MarleneGrussing, DaleGuillermina, Dair:asHaasch, JaneHafer ling, JoyHahn, LorraineHajdukiewicz, BillHanus-Zank, CatherineHarrell, Michelle R.Hauser, PaulHaynes, MargotHeggen, BettyHernandez, RosanyHernandez, ReynaldoHigley-Nugent, HeidiHill-Matula, JaniceHolloway, AlexandriaHolmgren, LibbyHumphrey, Ken L.

College/University Legend

Phoenix College (Maricopa) PL/SMNorthern Virginia Community College BWMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus PBLane Community College SEJohnson County Community College ICCuyahoga Community College PL/SRDelta College SEMiami-Dade Community College, District l'SMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus PBBakersfield College (Kern) SEMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE/PB/QM/SUMiami-Dade Community College, Medical Center SEDallas County Community College SIDJohnson County Community College BWMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE/FWUniversity of Tennessee at Martin IC/PL/SID/STMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE

Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus FE (2)/PB/SIMiami-Dade Community College, Medical Center PBDallas County Community College, District BW/PC/SRMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus SUMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FECuyahoga Community College West SMMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus PBCentral Piedmont Community College BW/IC/STMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead Campus FWMiami-Dade Community College, North Campus EC/FE (2) */PBMiami-Dade Community College, North Campus FEFox Valley Technical College BWMiami-Dade Community College, District PSMiami-Dade Community College, Mc lical Center I'BMiami-Dade Communiiy College, North Campus FE/FW/SIMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus FW/I'B/SUMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE (2)Kirkwood Community College SC/SWDelta College PL/SRMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE (2)/LSMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus QMMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus SUFox Valley Technical College PL/SMMoraine Valley Community College SC/SRMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus PB

Johnson County Community College SMMonroe Community College BW

LEGENP:Softwar" Review: SR-Reading; SW-Wntmg; SM-Math; SE-ESL; SC-Study Skills/Critical ThinkingQuestion Wnting: QR-Reading; QW-Writmg; QM-Math; QC-Coordinator

BW-Biltmore Workshop Prior to Project SYNERGY (2/89); DT-Design Team at M-DCC; EC-Evaluation Committee at M-DCC; FE-Faculty Exchange Visitat M-IX2C. (# in parentheses if more than I); FS-Faculty Scenario; FW-Faculty Workshop at M-DCC; GP-Guides Pilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-InstitutionalCoordination; I'll- Project Briefing at M-IX_C; It-Planning Committee (attended the planning meeting in Palisades, NY, March 1991); PL-Planning for'roject SYNEW ;Y Integrator (199 I Survey); l'S- l'roject Staff; SI-Software Implementation; 511/-Software Implementation I )esign; SS-Student Scenario; ST-

Steering Committee; SU Survey Response. 1992-43 (because some were anonymous, not all are named here).

Organizer of a Faculty Exchange Visit

A.4 1041h)

Name Couege/U,niversay Legend

Hungar, JulieIrvine, KipJalloul, Janet T.Jenrette, DaveJenrette, MardeeJohnson, DavidJohnson, JaneJonason, l'atJones, BettyJones, JesseJones, SharlaJordan, EvelynJoyce, MariaJur, BarbaraKah, SusanKahn, SueKaiser, VirginiaKaldor, MikeKann, AnnetteKann, MarleneKaplan, GloriaKaseberg, AliceKellogg, JohnKirst, JoyceKline, JanKlosek, StanleyKolman, HelenKotler, LorneKrnacik, MildredLackey, BrendaLake, RichLamadriz, RocioLamazares, IvonneLamb, BillLandsman, MaryLane, LindaLangan, TerryLawrence, BradLeather, CarolLeitch, PatrickLeitman, CarolynLescail le, RobertLester, JohnLever, Judy

Seattle Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Commumb, College,Miami, Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Bakersfield College (Kern)lohnson County Community ColicDelta CollegeDallas County Community Collegt_Miami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Macomb Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College.Moraine Valley Community CollegMiami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Mia mi -Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Lane Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College,Bakersfield College (Kern)Miami-Dade Community College,Cuyahoga Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Macomb Community CollegeUniveristy of Tennessee at MartinSt. Louis Community CollegeMiami-Dade Com munity College,Miami-Dade Community College,Johnson County Community ColicSanta Fe Community CollegeFoothill CollegeFox Valley Technical CollegeMiami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Miami Dade Community College.Cuyahoga Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,Miami-Dade Community College,

Kendall CampusWolfson CampusNorth CampusDistrictKendall Campus

ge

DistrictKendall CampusNorth CampusNorth Campus

Medical CenterKendall Campus

Wolfson CampusMedical CenterMedical CenterMedical Center

North Campus

Medical Center

Kendall CampusDistrict

Wolfson CampusNorth Campusge

North CampusWolfson CampusMedical Center

Kendall CampusWolfson CampusHomestead Campus

LEGEND:Software Review. SR- Reading, SW-Writing; SM-Math; SE-ESL, SC-Study Skills/Critical ThinkingQuestion Writing. QR-Reading; QW-Writmg; QM-Math: QC-Coordinator

IC

FE

l'BBW /FE/GPEC

FW /SUSK

BW/I'C/SRBW/ICIC

FWFW

l'BIC

PB

BW/FE/RV/SRBW/QM/SMFP/PBFW/SUFW

l'BSM

l'BQR

l'BI'L/SRFE (2)

PS

SWPC

SR

SU

SI /SWBWBW/PLSR

BW

PB

SU

BW/FE/I'L/SMBW

FE

SM

FW /SID

BW-Biltmore Workshop Prior to Privet SYNERG1 (2 i twit; )T-I /esign Team at M fCC, EC Evaluation Committee at M-I ICC; FE-Faculty Exchange Visit

at M-DCC in parentheses if more than 1); FS- Faculty Scenario; FW-Facult Workshop at M-I)l C, X-Caudes it: LS-Lab Scenario; IC-Institutional

Coordination; 113-Project Briefing at M-I It-Planning Committee (a tten led the planning meeting in Palisades, NY, March 1491); II-Nanning forProjwt SYNEW ;ì" Integrator (1)-N1 Survey), I'S-Project Staff; SI-Software Implementation, SI I I-sof tyy a re Implementation Design: SS-Student Scenario; ST-

Steering Committee; SU-Survey Response: 19)2-93 (because some were anonymous, not all are namedhere).

Orgam/er of a Faculty Exchange Visit

105114

.5 A.5

Name

Lewis, SueLipof, IreneLong, GeorgeLore,.TriciaLorenzo, BertLowery, BenLucas, SteveLudeke, JerryLudovici, ElaineLugo, LeonorLukenbill, JeffreyMac Laughlin, JackieMalena, RichardMarin, H.Martel ly, DianeMartin, LouiseMartin, WayneMaspons, MariaMass, CoreyMatas, AdrianaMathews-Emerson, SaraeMazzagatti, RoyMazzagatti, CoraMc Cool, SamuelMcDaniel, WendyMcDonald, JeanMcFadden, NancyMc Fared, JohnMcKeever, BenjaminMcKitterick, TomMcLean, RuthMcManus, LaurieMeagher, DonMedina, IraMedina, MyraMeistrell, SonjaMese, JanMiller, DwightMilmed, JoyceMitchell, CristiMohr, EllenMontiel, YvonneMoo, AndrewMoran, Terry


Miami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusHumber CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusGrambling State UniversityPhoenix College (Maricopa)Bakersfield College (Kern)Miami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusCentral l'iedmont Community CollegePhoenix College (Maricopa)Miami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Conimunity College, Homestead CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, DistrictMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, DistrictMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusFox Valley Technical CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusSinclair Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusHumber CollegeSt. Louis Community College ar MeramecMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Woflson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterLane Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusJohnson County Communtiy CollegeGateway Community College (Maricopa)Miami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusKirkwood Community College

LEGEND.Software Review. SR-Reading, SW-Writing; sM-Math; SE-ESL; SC-Study Skilk/Critical ThinkingQue,tton Writing QR-Readmg; QW-Wnting; QM-Math; QC-Coordmator

FWPB/SIDFE/SUBWPBPCPL/SRPL/SC/SRSI

PB

IC/ PBPL/SMPL/SRPB

FE*/FS/FWFE (2)/FW/SUl'SSUSU

ECSM /SUFE

PB

FE (3)/GP/QW/SW/SUPSPEI /FE*SRl'BSWIC/ PBICBW

BW/FE (2)/QC/QR /SR/SUBW/SESESE

PB/SRPL/SMFE

FWPL/SWBW

FE

IC

BW-Biltmore Work,,hop l'nor to Project SYNERGY (2/89); DT-Design Team at Mi )CC, EC-Evaluation Committee at M-DCC; FE-Faculty Exchange Visitat M-DCC (# in parentheses if more than 1); FS-Faculty Scenario; FW-Faculty Worlo,hop at M-I Gl'-Guides l'ilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-InstitutionalCoordination; PB-Project Briefing at M-DCC. PC-Planning Committee (attended the planning meeting in Palisades, NY, March 1991); I'L-Planning forProject SYNERGY Intewator (Vogl Survey). PS-Project Staff; SI-Software Implementation; SID-Software Implorentation Design; 55-Student Scenario; ST-Steering Committee; SU-Survey Re,,ponse: 1942-Y3 (becauw ..ome were anonymous, not all are named here).

Organwer of a Faculty Exchange Visit

A.6 106

Name College/University Legend

Morrell, Hector Miami-Dade Community College, Homestead Campus FW

Morrison, Chaplain Miami-Dade Community College, Medical Center FW

Moser, Don St. Louis Community College PL/SM

Muller, William Moraine Valley Community College QW /SWMyers, Steven Lane Community College SM

Nation, Patricia Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus FW/PB/SUNelson, John Lane Community College SM

Nelson, Tanya Miami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE/FW

Newmeister, Hillary Bakersfield College (Kern) QWNichols, Katrina Delta College PL/SM

Niles, Jennifer Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus FE (2) /FW/SU

Novatney, Janet Miami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FW

Nwankwo, Victor Miami-Dade Community College, District PS

O'Brien, Barbara Miami-Dade Community College, District PS

O'Connell, Theresa Miami-Dade Community College, District PS

O'Hara, Maureen Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus PB/SU

Ojeda, Maria Miami-Dade Community College, District PS

Orlin, Susan Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus FE/FW/SU /SW

Orr, Don Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus SI

Oseroff, Abe Miami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus FE (2)/FW/PB

Page, Calvin E. Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus FE (3)

Paige, Christine Grambline State University SR

Paiva, Judy Northern Virginia Community College BW

Palazuelos, Mary Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus FE/FW/QM/SM

Pa low, Bill Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus BW/FE*/FW

Paris, Mark Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus LS

Patterson, Bill Foothill Co liege IC

Pattnaik, Suchitra Miami-Dade Community College, District PS

Payne, Michele Kirkwood Community College SW

Pelikant, Maryann Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus SU

Perez, Elena Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus FE/SI

Perez, Maritza Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus FE/GP

Perez, Janis Miami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus SU

Perez, Guillermo Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus SU

Perez Capote, Juan Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus EC /PB

Ferreira, Patricia Miami-Dade Community College, Medical Center PB

Pieke, Martin Humber College SC

Pierce, Tom South Seattle Community College SC

Pierrt, Frantz Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus PB

Piga, Susan Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus SU

Piziali, Gail Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus SID

Pollard, Betty St. Louis Community College at Forest Park BW

Pollard, Lonnie Miami-Dade Community College, North Campus FW

Pollock, Joanne Fox Valley Technical College BW

LEGEND:Software Review: SR-Reading; SW-Writing; SM-Math; SE-ESL; SC-Study Skills/Critical ThinkingQution Writing: QR-Reading; QW-Writing; QM-Math; QC-Coordinator

BW-Biltmore Workshop l'rior to l'roject SYNERGY (2/89); DT-Design Team at M-DCC; EC-Evaluation Committee at M-IX2C; FE-Faculty Exchange Visit

at M-DCC (# in parentheses if more than 1); FS-Faculty Scenario; FW-Faculty Workshop at M-PCC; GP-Guides Pilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-InstitutionalCoordination; PB-Project Briefing at M-IX:C; PC-Planning Committee (attended the planning meeting in l'alisades, NY, March 1991); PL-Planning for

Project SYNERGY Integator (1991 Survey); PS-Project Staff; SI-Software Implementation; 511 )-Software Implementation Design; 55-Student Scenario; ST-

Steering Committee; SU-Survey Response: 1992-93 (because some were anonymous, not all are named here).

organi/er of a Faculty Exchange Visit

107 A.7

Name

Pool, RodgerPorter, DavidPortis, TheodorePrague, MelindaPress, GailPrignam, JudithPutl, SandraPyles, CarolQuesada, Luis M.Radakovich, DanRaichoudary, Ram (Roy)Rakowsky, ChristineRambo, ShirleyRann, AnetteRappoport, JoelRasor, LeslieRead, GarbrielReed, BeatrizReeves, MaryRiccio, NormaRichter, SuzanneRobertson, SharonRodriguez, JesusRodriguer, NinonRoemer, AnnRohr, TedRomeo, JeanRose, JohnRucker, JohnRymer, TomSak, DehorakSaleh, AbedSamet, ScottSamms, EvletteSanderson, Sara LeeSastre, MargaritaSchinoff, RichardSchmelzer, JudySchomer, StevenSchuemann, CynthiaSchurger, JudithSchwartz, PearlScott, DavidSegall, Michaela


Dallas County Community College DistirctMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusGra mbline State UniversityMiami-Dade Community College, Wolkon CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusFoothill CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusJackons County Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusCuyahoga Community College, WestMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community. College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusLane Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusUniversity of Tennessee at MartinMiami-Dade Community College, DistrictMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusSt. Louis Community CollegeDelta CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMoraine Valley Community CollegeLane Community CollegeMonroe Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, DistrictMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiarni-Elade Cornmunity College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusKern Community College, DistrictMiami-Dade Community College, North Campus

LEGENP.Software Revie%: SR-Reading, S1/4 Writing. SM Math, SE-EsL, St_-stud ntical ThinkingQuestion Writing. Qlt- Reading, QW-Writing; QM-Math: 0_ -Coordina tor

IC/STSUPL/SMPB/QC/QWFE/SCFWSM

PB

PB

ST

FE /PBSWFWFW

FE/FSIC

RV/GP/SIFE/FWFW/SWSUIC

SC

PS

BW

SUIC

QMl'BICSMPL/SWFW

PS

PB

DT/EC/FE (3)*/PB/SCFE (2)/FW/SUFW/ ICFW

FS/SC/SUFW

FE

BW/IC /STFP/FW/PB/SU

BW-Biltmore Workshop Prior to Project N ERG) (2 Mg); I If-lkisign Team at NI-I )CC, EC-Evaluation Committee at M-IX:C; FE-Faculty Exchange Visitat M lX.l. (# in parentheses if more than FS-Facult Scenario; FW-Facult y Workshop at M-I )(A..; GP4 ;tildes l'ilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-InstitutionalCoordination, PB-Project Briefing at NI-11U: PC-Planning c.ornmittee (attended the planning meeting in Palisades, NY, March 1991); FL-Planning forProject NEN( ,s Integrator Ii ,0t I sone% . I Pro(ect Stall, SI Sothsare Implementation, SII )-Software Implementation flesip; SS-Student Scenario; ST-Steering l. ommittee, SI Survey Response 19q2 Lo3 (because some were anonymous, not all are named here)

Organizer of a Facult!, Exchange Visit

A .8 108

Name

Senfeld, LeonoreSharpten, RobertShin, AlfredShumaker, PaulSileika, AntanasSiu, GiselleSmith, Lois V.Smith, MelvinSmittle, PatSodon, James R.Spano, CanteenSpence, LeightonSperanza, AngelaStackelberg, CoraStanley, DorothyStearns, MarthaSteer, HelenaStevens-Garcia, MariaStoyanovich, DragolyubSturm, BruceSuco, ElizabethSunico, SharonSusini, SheilaSussman, MarjorieSussman, BarbaraSwan, GregSymons, JimTaghi-Zoghi, KarenTag le, Tessa MartinezTalavera, ErnestTarber, JudityTebbs, DonTennant, JeffThomas, JeanThomas, LindaThomas, SharonThompson, RobertTil lett, BillTixier, LindaTorre lla, RafaelTucker, WalterTul loch, DentonVeiga, Marisella L.Velilla, Angie


Miami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusHumber CollegeCuyahoga Community CollegeHumber CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusSanta Fe Community CollegeSt. Louis Community College at FlorissantMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusCuyahoga Community CollegeBakersfield College (Kern)Central Piedmont Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusDeAnza CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusDeAnza CollegeHumber CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campu-,Miami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMaricopa Community College DistrictDeAnza CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusSanta Fe Community CollegeFoothill CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, DistrictMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusLane Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall Campus

LEGEND:Software Review: SR-Reading; SW-Writing; SM-Math; SE-ESL; SC-Study Skills/Cntical ThinkingQuestion Writing: QR-Reading; QW-Writing; QM-Math; QC-Coordinator

FE (2)

FE/SUPL/SMIC

SE

FW/SIDl'BFE (3)/FW/GPICBW

EC/ICFE

FWPL/SMPC/SMl'C/SRFWFE/PBFEBW

FE (2)/LSQWBWFE/FW/Sl/SR/SUFE (2)/FS/FW/SC/SUICBW/QM/SMLS/SUPB

FE/SIFWBW/SUPL/SMBW

l'SFWSMQW/SI /SU/SWPB /SIPB

FE

FWFWSE

BW-Hiltmore Workshop Prior to Project SYNERGY (2/89); DT-Design Team at M-I /CC. EC-Evaluation Committee atM-IX:C; FE-Faculty Exchange Visit

at M-DCC (tt in parentheses if more than 1); FS-Facultv Scenario; FW.Faculty Workshop at M-I)CC; GP-Guides l'ilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-Institutional

Coordination; PR-Project Briefing at M-I X..C; PC-Piannmg Committee (attended the planning meebng in Palisades, NY, March 1991); I'L-I'lanning for

Project SYNERGY Integrator 0991 Survey); PS-Project Staff; SI-Software Implementation; 511) Software Implementation 1)esign; 55 Student Scenario; ST-

Steering Committee, SU-Survey Response: 1992-93 (because some were anonymous, not all are named here).


109 1 l A.9

Name

Verdieu, LucasVerrett, JoyceVicente, JoseVicenti, WilliamVillamil, JohnVillar, Maria C.Walker, DaisyWalters, JimWalton, DonnaWaluconis, CarlWambu, JudyWarford, LawrenceWarmke-Robitaille, JulieWarren, LucilleWeaver, ChrisWebb-Petschauer, JoniWeglarz, JohnWelch, GeorgeWelch, Reina K.West, CarolynWhalen, WickWhearty, JamesWhetstone, Jr., MikeWhiteneck, AliceWhiteside, DonWidmer, DianeWiley, BennieWilliams, ClaudeWilliams, RogerWillig, BarbaraWilloughby, LoisWinebrenner, LarryWinter, DeobrahWirtel, JosephWolven, FredWong, LindaWright, JennaWyers, LoriYoder, JonathanYoung, EleanorYoung, Nancy WilsonZabsky, HaroldZaldivar, Raquel


Miami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusGrambling State UniversityMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusKean College Of New JerseyMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusPhoenix College (Maricopa)Miami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterSeattle Central Community CollegeKean College of New JerseyLane Community CollegeSanta Fe Community CollegeSinclair Community CollegeMiami-Dade Cornmunity College, Medical CenterAppalachian State UniversityKirkwood Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMacomb Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusFoothill CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusLane Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusCentral Piedmont Community CollegeCuyahoga Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, North CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Homestead CampusLane Community CollegeUniversity of Tennessee at MartinFox Valley Technical CollegeNorthern Virginia Community CollegeSinclair Community CollegeMiami-Dade Community College, Kendall CampusMiami-Dade Community College, Medical CenterMiami-Dade Community College, Wolfson Campus

LEGEND:Software Review: SR-Reading; SW-Writing; SM-Math; SE-ESL; SC-Study Skills/Critical ThinkingQuition Writing: QR-Reading; QW-Writing; QM-Math; QC-Coordinator

FW

IC

ECIC

PB/SIDPB

SI

IC

FE/FW/SWPL/SR /SWPL/SRICSEICLS/SIDSCI'L/SMBW/EC/FE/PB/PL/SWDT/FW/SESM

FW (2)PL/SWFE

SCFW

SU

PB/FEICIC

BW/FE/FW/SUFWSW

BW/FE (2)/FWPB

FE/QR/QW/SR/SWBW

FL/SE/SWICBWIC

FE (2)

l'BSI

BW-Biltmore Workshop l'rior to Project SYNERGY (2/89); DT-Design Team at M-I XX; EC-Evaluation Committee at M-DCC; FE-Faculty Exchange Visitat M-DCC ($ in parentheses if more than I); FS-Faculty Scenario; FW-Faculty Workshop at M-DCC;CIP-Guides Pilot; LS-Lab Scenario; IC-InstitutionalCoordination; PB-Project Briefing at M-I XX; I'C-I'lanning Committee (attended the planning meeting in Palisades, NY. March 1991); PL-Planning forProject SYNERGY Integrator (1991 Survey); PS-Project Staff; SI-Softwa.e Implementation; SID-Software Implementation Design; SS-Student Scenario; ST-Steering Committee; SU-Survey Respome: 1992-93 (because some were anonymous, not all are named here).


A.10 110 is

Appendix B

Software AttributesSoftware Content Attributes:

Accuracy (3)Information is currentThere are no factual errorsContent is free of spelling & grammatical errors

Appropriateness (5)Models and examples are not oversimplifiedContent is free of stereotypes & social biasesIt includes problem-solving situations of varying difficultyIt provides applications to real-life situationsIt is not obscured by jargon or technical terms

Feedback (3)Content provides explanation of correct answersIt provides alternate explanationsAlternate expLnations aim to correct student understanding

Meeting Faculty Needs:

Ease of Implementation (6)Documentation is providedIt presents ways the package can be usedIt provides support materialsIt describes how to assess student performanceSoftware requires minimal teacher time to get student: using

itIt frees up teacher time from tedious tasks

Adaptability (6)Software gives individual attention to students as neededIt can be customized for a group of studentsIt can be customized for a single studentIt can be used for independent studyIt can be used for peer groupsIt can be used for classroom presentations

Summary Information (6)Software maintains student usage and performance recordsIt generates summary reports that can be viewed on screenIt generates summary reports that can be printedIt generates summary reports as an ASCII text fileStudent data are stored on each student diskStudent data are stored on disk for a class of students

Meeting Student Needs:

Ease of Use (7)On-line directions are clear, concise, and completeOn-line help is clear, concise, and completeStudent manuals are providedThey are helpfulStuctent workbooks are providedThey are usefulSoftware provides status messages to minimize confusion

Adaptability (4)Software adjusts content based on student responsesIt allows branching into different parts of the programIt adapts to the first-time versus the experienced userIt adapts to a range of reading abilities

Testing (3)Software incorporates pre-testsIt incorporates post-testsIt allows students to leave a question unanswered & go back

to it later

Tracking (2)Software keeps students informed of progressIt provides a summary of performance & suggests what to do

next

Interactivity (7)Software actively engages the studentIt provides student feedbackIt is tied to the responses and thus is credible and supportiveIt explains errorsIt suggests corrections of errorsIt forgives extraneous errorsIt presents relevant practice exercises

Appropriateness (18)Software allows students to think and solve problemsExamples are appropriate for adult learnersAnimation and/or graphics are usedThey focus attention on important content and processThey allow coverds? of advanced conceptsThey are appropriate i'or adult learnersSound-effects are usedThey focus attention on important content and processThey allow coverage of advanced conceptsThey are appropriate for adult learnersColor is usedIt focuses attention on important content and processIt allows coverage of advanced conceptsIt is appropriate for adult learnersVideo is usedIt focuses attention on important content and processIt allows coverage of advanced conceptsIt is appropriate for adult learners

Software Operations:

Reliability (3)Software is free of programming errorsIt runs with minimum delaysExtraneous input does not disrupt the program

Format (7)Program maintains a bookmark for reentryI'rogram allows the student to magnify printVoice capability is usedThe right quantity is presentedIt is audibleInappropriate dialect is avoidedScreens are free of clutter and dense print

m 126 B.1

Reading Objectives

Word Learning Skills (46)Word Recognition

Phoneme-grapheme relationships (phonics):VowelsConsonantsVowel and consonant combinationsSyllabificationEmphasis (stress)Compound wordsBas,: sight words:Word configurations W, STypical recognition lists (I )ilch, Thorndike, et. al.) W, S

Dictionary SkillsOrder of entries (alphabetizing)Guide wordsParts of word entriesDiacritical markingsSekcting an appropriate dennition for a word in contextUsing dictionaries with different organizational patternsUsing the dictionary as a source of information

Context Clues for Word Meaningshrect definition or restatement clues

Punctuation /typographical cluesExperience clues (reader's knowledge base)Example cluesSummary cluesComparison/contrast clues

Word Elements to Define WordsPrefixes in wordsSuffixes in wordsRoots in wordsCombinations of prefixes, suffixes, & roots

New Words in Specialized GroupingsOccupational/technical words W, 5, P,Academic words from core areas W, 5, P,GWords with multiple meanings W, 5, GWords with similar sounds but different spellings

& meanings W, 5, P. G

COrreCt SpellingAppl ying phoneme/grapheme relationshipsAppl ying knowledge of word partsApplying basic spelling rules)eveloping a personalized system for spelling

improvement

Word RelationshipsAntonymsSynonymslomonyms

Part to %%hole/ whtle to partFunctionRhymeAttributes (characteristics)SpellingMember tit class/class to memberAge or I /

/ effect

W, 5W,W. SW, SW, 5W, S

S, P,

S, P, G5, GS, P,

5, P, G

W, S, P, GW, 5, P, GW, 5, P. GW, S, G

W, SW, SW, S

W,

W, S.W,W, 5, PW, 5,W S,W, 5, PW, S, PW, 5, P

S, P

W, S,

W. 5, PC rea tmg simple analogiesto sho%,. relationships W, S. P5olving analogies W, 5, P

W Word Level S -= Sentence Level

Functional Reading (10)Understanding signs (enter, exit, smoking in designated

areas only, etc.)Understanding forms (college registration, etc.)Understanding simple instructions (in textbooks, tests, etc.)Understanding information found in newspapersUnderstanding information found in restaurant menusUnderstanding information found in telephone directoriesUnderstanding information found on food labelsUnderstanding information found on medicine labelsUnderstanding information found in public transportation

schedulesUnderstanding information found in training manuals

Basic Comprehension (15)TopiaMain Idea

Recognizing the stated main idea of a paragraph/passage P. G

Recognizing the unstated main idea of a paragaph/passage P. G

Formulating the main idea of a paragraph (topicsentence) or of a longer passage (thesis) P. G

DetailsIdentifying the major details of a paragraph/passageIdentifying the minor details of a paragraph/passage

Organizational PatternsSequenceCause/effectComparison/contrastDefinitionExampleFactsEnumerationClassificationl'roblem /solutionMixed patterns

Transitional Expressions (9)SequenceCause/effectComparison/contrastDefinitionExampleSummaryEnumerationProblem/solutionMixed patterns

Critical Comprehension (29)Author's Purpose

Writing to inform or explainWriting to persuadeWriting to elicit motion or moodWriting to entertain

Author's BiasBias by proportion (emphasis)Bias by a choice of informationBias by a word choice's denotation

P = Paragaph Level

P, G

P, C;

P, CP, GP, GP, GP, G

P, GP, GP, GP, GP, G

S, 1', GS, P,

S, P,

S, P, GS, P,

S, P, G

S. P. G5, P,S, P,

S, P,

S, P, GS, P,

S, P, G

5, P,5, P, G5, P, G

C; = Passage Level

B.2 112 121

Bias by a word chok e's connotationEuphemismsStereotypingPropaganda techniques

Author's ToneIronyCynicismWit and humorSarcasmSatire

Making fudgnritsDifferentiating fact and opinionDrawing conclusion,Making inferencesConsidering the author's qualificationsConsidering other viewpoints not expressed by

the authorExamining quantity and quality of evidenceChallenging assumptions or analogous

relationshipsAuthor's Use of Figurative Language

smileMetaphorAllusionPerson iticationI lyperbole and understatementIdiomatic expressions

Textbook/Technical Reading (18)Reading to Study

Relating text passages to visual/graphic materials

Textbook previewing techniquesNote-takingOutliningMappingSummarizing/synthesizingReading-to:study techniques (e.g., SOK)Locating specific information

Interpreting visual materialsChartsGraphsMapsTablesDiagrams/ illustratior,,

Reading for TestsMultiple-choice questionsTrue/false questionsMatching questionsCompletion questionsUnderstanding key words in essay questions

Reading in Content Areas (29)

S, , G5, 1', GS. P, GS.

S, P,S. P.s, C.

S. P, GS. G

S. P, GS, P,5, P, G5, G

S. P,S. P, G

S, P, G

S. P. c;S, P, c;S, P, GS, P,S, P,S. P,

S, P, C5, P,S,

S, P,S. P, GS. G5, I', G5, P, G

5, P. GS, P, GS. P. GS. P, GS, P, G

Mathematicssurveying Le textbook S. G

Applying a reading-to-study technique S.

Applying vocabulary /memory techniques to learnsymbols and formulas 5, P,

Applying steps in analyzing mathematical wordproblems 5, l',G

W = Word Level S = Smtence Level

Applying skills for reading visual materials

Social Sciencessurveying the textbookApplying a reading-to-study techniqueApplying vocabulary /memory techniques to

understand concepts & terminologyRecognizing frequently used organizational

patternsApplying critical comprehension skillsApplying skills for reading visual materials

SciencesSurveying the textbookApplying a reading-to-study techniqueApplying vocabulary/memory techniques to

understand symbols, formulas, concepts,and terminology

Recognizing frequently used organizationalpatterns

Applying critical comprehension skillsApplying skills for reading visual materials

Humanities and LiteratureSurveying the textbookApplying a reading-to-study techniqueApplying vocabulary/memory techniques to



VocationallOccupationallTechnical StudiesSurveying the textbookApplying a reading-to-study techniqueApplying vocabulary /memory techniques to



Rate & Flexibility (11)Builc,'ing reading rateReading phrases rather than individual wordsSkimming techniquesScanning techniquesFlo.ible reading ratesTechniques to overcome bamers to flex. reading

E5tablishing a purpose for readingusing flexible.reading rates:Skimming techniquesScanning techniquesMaking decisions according to purpose:Choosing texts according to information needChoosing texts according to readability level'.:hoosing texts according to level of detail

generalityChoosing texts according to author viewpoint/

bias

S, P,

S. P, GP, G

5, P,

S, GS, P. GS, P, G

5, P, C,

S, P, C,

S, P,C,S, P,

P, G

S, P,S, G

S. P, G

S, P,S, P, G5, l',

S, G5, P, G

S, P,S. P, GS, P,

I', GP, GP, GP,

P. G

P. GG

P. GG

P,G

P. G

P = Paragaph Level C = Passage Level

B.3

Writing Objectives

Prewiting (12)Building Fluency

Free writingKeeping a journalBlind writing

GeneratinglOrganizing Information (Ideas)BrainstormingOustenng and mappingQuestioning (using lists of questions)Engaging in situational writing (case studies)Exammmg developmental models (e.g., definition)Responding to reading,InterviewingReasoning inductively/deductivelyUsing ,ource, (appropriate databases)

Writing (25)Limiting the Thesis

Sentence completionModeling (illustrations, examples)Open-ended options (illustrations used as idea starters)

OrganizinglOutlining Information (Ideas)Expenmentation with original formats/

possibilities (e.g., rhetorical modes) l',EForms and graphic structures to be filled in

(e.g., comparison/contrast, process, etc.) E

Classifying E

Establishing priorities P, EClustering and mapping P, E

Composing a DraftUsing rhetorical modes:Descnption P, ENarration E

Ilustration P, E

(.ompanson /contrast P, ECause/effect P, EDefinition P, EProcess analysis P, EArgument P, EI >rafting topic sentencesI >rafting thesis statementsClarifying main points with supporting details P,

Achieving Unity and CoherenceTransitions 5, E

Key words (repetitions, echoes) 5, P, ESynon yms 5, P, EAntonyms 5, P, ESubordination 5, E

Coordination 5, E

Revision (12)Reassessing Expectations

Audience

s Sentence Level

B.4

l'urposeTone

Evaluating the DraftThesis:UnityFocusOrganization:CoherenceParagraphsEvidence/illustration/detailsSentences:Synta xVarietyCombiningDiction

Editing (25)PrOgfreading

Paragaphing (indenting or blocking)Capital lettersAbbreviationsI lyphenationEnd punctuationInternal punctuationSpecial graphicsApostrophesSpell-checking

Improving Word, Phrase, and Clause UsageNouns singular/plural

possessive formsPronouns singular/plural

possessive formssubjective/objective case

Verbs moodvoicetenses

infinitivesparticiples

gerundsConjunctionsAdjectivesArticles (definite/indefinite)AdverbsPrepositionsSpellingPhrasesDependent clausesIndependent clauses

Improving Word RelationshipsSubject-verb agreementNoun-pronoun agreementSequence of tensesModification

P = Paragraph Level E = Essay Level

114 123

Mathematics Objectives

Base Ten Notation (8)Reading whole numbers and writing in standard notation

from zero to one trillionWriting as a standard numeral a number named by a verbal

expressionRounding a given number to the nearest ten, hundred, or

thousandUsing whole number exponents in power notation to

represent productsUsing whole number products to represent powers with

whole number exponentsWriting standard numerals from expanded numeralsWriting expanded numerals from standard numeralsComparing and ordering whole numbers

Basic Ops/Whole Numbers(10).Recognizing counting or natural numbersRecognizing whole numbersl'erforming the operation of addition on the set of whole

numbersPerforming the operation of subtraction on the set of whole

numbersPerforming the operation of multiplication on the set of

whole numbersPerforming the operation of division on the set of whole

numbersEstimating sums, difference. products, and quotients of

whole numbersRecognizing number propertiesAppl ying rules for order of operationsFinding square roots of perfect square numbers

Prime Numbers & Factorization (4)Determining the factors of a given number of reasonable

magnitudeDetermining prime factorization of numbers of reasonable

magnitudeIdentifying any prime number less than one hundredDetermining the least common multiple using prime

factorization of two or more numbers of reasonablemagnitude

Basic Ops/Positive Fractions (19)Constructing models to reprient fractionsWriting equivalent fractionsSimplifying fractionsComparing fractionsPerforming the operation of addition on the set of rational

numbers using fractional numeralsl'erforming the operation of subtraction on the set of rational

numbers using fractional numeralsPerforming the operation of multiplication on the set of

rational numbers using fractional numeralsl'erforming the operation of division on the set of rational

numbers using fractional numeralsConverting mixed numerals to improper fractional numeralsConverting improper fractional numerals to mixed numeralsPerforming the operation of addition on the set of rational

numbers using mixed numeralsPerforming the operation of subtraction on the set of rational

numbers using mixed numerals

Performing the operation ot multiplication on the set otrational numbers using mixed numw-als

Performing the operation of division on the set oi rationalnumbers using mixed numeral,

Simplifying complex fractionsEstimating sums, differences, products, and quotient, of

mixed numbersRaising fractions to positive integer powersFinding square roots of perfect square fractionsApplying order of operations rules for fractional numerals

Basic Ops/ Positive Decimals (13)Constructing models to represent decimal numeralsComparing magnitude of decimal numbersRounding decimal numbers to an indicated placeExpressing a fractional or mixed numeral as a decimal numeralExpressing a decimal numeral as a fractional or mixed

numeralPerforming the operation of addition on the set ot ra mai

numbers using decimal numeralsPerforming the operation ot subtraction on the set ot

numbers using decimal numeral,Performing the operation of multiplication on the sl ot

rational numbers using decimal numeralsPerforming the operation of division on the set t rational

numbers using decimal numeralsSimp'ifying complex fractions involving decimalsCombining rational numbers in different notationsEstimating sums, differences, products, and quotient, or

decimal numbersApplying order of operations rules

Ratio and Proportions (6)Constructing models of ratiosWriting ratiosIdentifying a proportionSolving a proportionIdentifying and wnting rates including unit ratesSolving word problems using proportion

Percents (7)Constructing models to represent percentExpressing percent numerals as decimal numeralsExpressing decimal numerals as percent numeralsExpressing percent numerals as fractional numeral,Expressing fractional numerals as percent numeralsSolving simple percent problemsExpressing statements and questions contained Ir. prohl ems

involving percents as number sentences or proportionsand then solving the problems

Units of Measure (10)Recognizing appropriate units of length, weight. and

capacity in English SystemConverting within English units of length. weight and eapac 15Recognizing appropriate units ot length, mass, and capacits

in metric systemConverting within metric units of length, mass, and capacitiConverting from English units of length, weight, and capcits

metric units of length. mass, and capacity and vice ta-sa

thmplifying denominate numbers ie g.. t tt , ; inPerforming the operation of addition on dem 'inmate numbers

i.e., numbers repro-enhng units ot measure

"5 124 B.5

Performing the operation of subtraction on denominatenumbers, i.e., numbers representing units of measure

Performing the operation of multiplying a denominatenumber, i.e., a number representing a unit of measure,by a rational number

l'erforming the operation of dividing a denominate number,e., a number representing a unit of measure, by a

rational number

Basic Geometry (41)Recognizing parallel lines and their propertiesRecognizing perpendicular lines and their propertiesRecognizing angles and their propertiesRecognizing squares and their propertiesRecognizing rectangles and their propertiesRecognizing parallelograms and their propertiesRecognizing rhombuses and their propertiesRecognizing trapezoids and their propertiesRecognizing other quadrilaterals and their propertiesRecognizing triangles and their propertiesRecognizing right triangles and their propertiesRecognizing circles and their propertiesConstructing models for perimeter to derive a formula tor

rectanglesConstructing models for perimeter to derive a formula for

squares

Constructing models for perimeter to derive a formula fortriangles

Constructing models for perimeter to derive a formula forcircles

Constructing models for area to derive a formula forrectangles

Constructing models for area to derive a formula for squaresConstructing models for area to derive a formula for

trianglesConstructing models for area to derive a formula for

trapezoidsConstructing models tor area to derive a formula for

rhombusesConstructing models for area to derive a formula for

parallelogramsConstructing models for area to derive a formula for circlesDistinguishing between perimeter and areaComputing perimeter of rectanglesComputing perimeter of squaresComputing perimeter of trianglesComputing perimeter of trapezoidsComputing perimeter of parallelogramsComputing perimeter of rhombusesComputing circumference of circlesComputing area of rectanglesComputing area of squaresComputing area of trianglesComputing area of trapezoidsComputing area of parallelogramsComputing area of rhombusesComputing volume of geometric figuresSolving applied problems involving perimeterSolving applied problems involving areaSolving applied problems involving volume

Basic Ops/Signed Numbers (10)Recognizing integersRecognizing rational numbers

Constructrng model signed numbersFinding the absolute value of rational numbersPerforming the operation of addition on the set of rational

numbers, including negative rational numbersPerforming the operation of subtraction on the set of rational

numbers, including negative rational numbersPerforming the operation of multiplication on the set of

rational numbers, including negative rational numbersl'erforming the operation of division on the set of rational

numbers, including negative rational numbersEvaluating exponential expressions of signed numbersApplying rules for order of operations on rational numbers

Real Numbers (25)Reviewing basic arithmetic with positive real numbers,

powers:rootsReviewing order of operations with positive real numbersRecognizing natural numbersRecognizing whole numbersRecognizing integersRecognizing rational numbersRecognizing irrational numbersRecognizing the symbols < and > with real numbersRecognizing absolute value of a real numberIdentifying number linePerforming anthrimtic with signed numbersUsing number line for definition of signed number

arithmeticUsing rules for definition of signed number arithmeticicPresenting integer exponents of real numbersPresenting positive roots of real numbersEvaluating expressions involving several operationsEvaluating expressions involving grouping symbolsEvaluating expressions involving exponentsRecognizing commutative propertyRecopizing associative propertyRecognizing distributive propertyRecognizing additive identityRecognizing additive inverseRecognizing multiplicative identityRecognizing multiplicative inverse

Set Notation (7)Recognizing set notation symbol for unionRecognizing set notation symbol for intersectionRecognizing set notation symbol for complementFinding the union of at least two setsFinding the intersection of at least two setsFinding the complement of a setPrawing Venn Diagrams

Simple Linear Eq./One Variable (7)Recognizing variables, expressions, and equationsSolving linear equations by addition - subtraction principle

of equalitySolving linear equations by multiplication division

principle of equalitySolving linear equations multi-stepSolving proportionsSolving word problemsSolving absolute value equations

Simple Linear Ineq./One Variable (6)Recognizing inequalitiesSolving inequalities

B.61 2 5

116

Recognizing abs3lute value inequalitiesSolving absolute value inequalitiesGraphing solutions of inequalities on a number lineSolving word problemsInteger Exponents (9)Recognizing an integer exponent and variable basePerforming multiplication with integer exponentsPerforming division with integer exponentsSimplifying expressions containmg negative integer

exponentsPerforming powers with integer exponentsRecognizing scientific notationConverting to scientific notationConverting from scientific notationPerforming arithmetic operations with scientific notation

Polynomials (18)Recognizing constants, variables, terms, and coefficientsRecognizing a monomialRecognizing a binomialRecognizing a trinomialRecognizing a polynomialRecognizing the degree of a polynomialRecognizing the correct order to write a pol ynomialRecognizing rules for exponentsSimplifying expressions containing grouping symbolsEvaluating algebraic expressionsPerforming multiplication by a monomialPerforming multiplication by a binomialPerforming multiplication by a trinomialPerforming multiplication by a polynomial with more than

three termsRecognizing special product formsDividing a polynomial by a monomialDividing a polynomial by a binomialDividing a polynomial by a polynomial of more than two

terms

Factoring (6)Recognizing factorsFactoring by greatest common factorFactoring the difference of squaresFactoring trinomialsFactoring the sum and difference of two cubesRecognizing a :lerfect square trinomial

Graphs (21)Recognizing a number line graphRecognizing the Cartesian coordinate systemRecognizing quadrantsRecognizing ordered pairsRecognizing ordered pairs by quadrantPlotting ordered pairsRecognizing linear equations with two variablesFinding solutions to linear equations with two variablesGraphing a linear equation using a table of valuesRecognizing and /or determining x and y interceptsGraphing a linear equation using interceptsRecognizing the slope of a line from its equationRecognizing the slope of a line from the graph of a linear equationRecognizing the slope-intercept form of a linear equationGraphing a linear equation using the slope-intercept formGraphing linear inequalities on the Cartesian coordinate system

Graphing absolute value linear equations on the Cartesiancoordinate system

Graphing quadratic equationsGraphing quadratic inequalitiesGraphing systems of linear equationsGraphing systems of linear inequalities

Solving Systems of Equations (9)Recognizing systems of linear equationsChecking solution to systems of two linear equationsSolving systems of two linear equations by graphingSolving systems of two linear equations by addition/

eliminationSolving systems of two linear equations by substitutionSolving applications of systems of two linear equationsSolving systems of two linear inequalitiesSolving systems of three linear equationsSolving systems of three linear inequalities

Quadratics (9)Recognizing the zero factor propertyRecognizing the standard form of a quadratic equationSolving a quadratic equation in factored formSolving a quadratic equation by factoringSolving a quadratic equation by using the quadratic formulaSolving a quadratic equation by completing the squareSolving word problems involving quadratic equationsGraphing quadratic equationsGraphing quadratic inequalities

Rational Expressions (5)Multiplying and dividing rational expressionsFinding the LCD of two or more rational expressionsAdding and subtracting rational expressionsSimplifying complex fractionsSolving equations involving rational expressions

Rational Exponents & Radicals (9)Converting radicals to nth rootsConverting nth roots to radicalsPerforming operations with rational exponentsSimplifying radicalsAdding and subtracting radical expressionsMultiplying and dividing radical expressionsSolving equations with radicalsRecognizing complex numbersSimplifying expressions containing complex numbers

Geometry (7)Applying the angle complement and supplement theoremsApplying the sum of the angles of a triangle theoremAppl ying theorems on congruent angles formed when

parallel lines are crossed by a transversalUsing the theorem on the proportionality of sides of similar

triangles to find the length of a side of a triangleUsing the Pythagorean theorem to find the missing length of

one side of a right triangleFinding the perimeters and areas of squares, rectangles,

parallelograms, trapezoids, triangles, circles, and otherregions made from these geometric figures

Finding the volume of prisms, cylinders, pyramids, cones,spheres, and other solids made from these three-dimensional geometric figures

117 12C B.7

ESL Objectives

READINGWord Learning (26)Dictionary Skills

Alphabetizing 13

Using guide wordsSyllabification: stress and other 1

Selecting an appropriate definition for a wordin context 1,A

Determining word meanings by recognizingaffixes and roots:

InflectionalDerivational (changes parts of speech) I,A

Understanding compund wordsUnderstanding word entry information I,A

Context Clues:Punctuation/typographical (e.g., italics, commas) IADirect definition (.e.g., that is to say) B,1

Experience (based on the reader's experience) 8,1,AExample 13,1

SummaryComparison/contrast (e.g., unlike Susan, who is...) I,AAppositivesSynonyms and antonymsFigurative language and euphemismsRelative pronouns used in definition

Word RelationshipsSynonymsAntonymstomonyms

Function /word formsCause/effect (e.g., as a result)Comparison/contrast (e.g., as sweet as sugar)Analogies (e.g., quill is to pen as door is to...)Idiomatic expressions

Literal Comprehension (20)Sentence Level

Word order as clues to meaningParaphraseConnectors (e.g., and, or, but, however)Transition Words as Clues to Meaning:

Sequence/enumeration (e.g., before, after)Cause/effect (e.g., as a result)Comparison /contrast (e.g., still, yet, also)I )efinition (e.g., that is)Example (e.g., such as)Summary (e.g., to conclude)Problem/solution (i.e., conditional sentences)

Passage LevelPreviewing/predicting through skimmingDistinguishing topic from main ideaI hstinguishing main idea from supporting

detailsIdentifying types of support:

DetailsExample,Facts

Reasons

13.13eginning

B.8

B,I,A1,A

A

B,1,A

B,I,A/3,1,A

8,1,AI,A1,A

I,A13,I,A

13,1

I,A13,1

I,AI,A

B,I,A

I,AI,AI,AI,A

AnecdotesScanning for specific informatuniRecognizing pronoun references

I,AB,1,A13,1,A

Critical (Interpretive) Comprehension (18)Recognizing analogies/associationCategorizingDistinguishing between fact and opinionDistinguishing relevant from irrelevant

informationMaking inferencesDrawing conclusions B,I,APredicting outcomes B,I,ARecognizing the author's point of view I,ARecognizing biases and stereotypes I,AEvaluating the credibility of the passage ADetermining the validity of the author's conclusion ADetermining the validity of the author AExamining the quantity of evidence 1

Examining the quality of evidence ARecognizing the author's purpose:

Inform/explain 1,A

Persuade I,AEntertain 1,A

Appeal to the reader's emotion I,A

Functional Skills (21)Study Skills

Following directionsOutlining paragraphsOutlining passagesSummarizing/synthesizingNotetakingUsing memory & retention techniquesTest-taking:

Multiple-choice questionsTrue/false questionsMatching questionsCompletion questionsOoze

Functional Reading SkillsUnderstanding:

signsformssimple instructionsfood and medicine labelspublic transportation schedulestelephone directoriesrestaurant menustraining manualsmapscharts/graphs

1,A

B,1,A1,A

1,A

B,l,A

WRITINGWords/Phrases (51)Nouns (Form & Function)

Singular/plural (irregular nouns)Count/non-count nounsCollective nounsNoun phrases

I=Intermediate

118 127

B,1,A13,1

IAI,Al,A

3,1,A

13

13,1

13

1

13,1

B,1

B, 1

I,A

13,1

A=Advanced

Possessive nouns (punctuation)(;erunds

Pronouns (Form & Function)Pronoun case

Demonstrative pronounsReflexive pronounsImpersonal YouRelative pronounsExtended subjects

Verbs (Form & Function)Subject-verb agreementTo beOther linking verbsIntransitive verbsTransitive verbs and objectDitansitive verbs and object and placementSimple formProgressive (present)Progessive (past)Progressive (future)Perfect (present)Perfect (past)Perfect (future)Perfect progressive (present)Perfect progressive (past)Perfect progressive (hture)Passive voiceConditional (real and unreal)SubjunctiveCausative

Verb Modals (Form & Function)Simple modal auxiliaries or exprsions B,l,ACompound modals A

Adjectives (Form & Function)Adjectives as modifiers (position and order) B,1,A

Adjective case: comparative 13,1,A

Adjective case: superlative B,I,AIrregular adjectives 13,1

Articles B,1,A

Determiners 13,1

Adverbial Structures (Form & Function)Type 13,I,A

l'osition B,I,AOrder 13,1,A

Prepositions (Form & Function)Common prepositions in prepositional phrases 13,I,A

Verb plus prepositions (nonseparable) B,I,A

Verb plus prepositions (separable) I,AVerb plus two prepositions I,AIdiomatic expressions 13,I,A

EditingUsing capitalization ILI

Using correct spelling, suffixes, prefixes B,I,AUsing conventions of Standard American English A

Sentences (41)Writing Simple Sentences

Affirmative/negative declarative sentences 13

Interrogative sentences:Yes/no questions 13,1

Informative questions (Ow. what, when . where) 13

Informative questions (which. whom, whase, why)

13=1kginni g I=Intermediate

I,AI,A

13,1

I,AAA

B,I

13

LAI,AI,AI,A

B,LAB,I,A

I,ALAI,AAA

I,AAA

I,AI,A

AI,A

Negative questionsImperative sentencesExclamatory sentences

Writing Compound SentencesUsing and, or, hutUsing all other coordinators & adverbial

connectorsUsing transitions of sequence (puntuation &

function)Using all other transition words (punctuation &

function)

Writing Complex SentencesUsing while, before, because, after

Using adverb clausesUsing adjective clausesUsing noun clausesUsing reported speechUsing embedded clausesUsing tag questionsWriting compound-complex sentences

Using Appropriate Verb SequencingIn compound sentencesIn complex sentencesIn compound-complex sentences

Identifying Syntactical UnitsClausesFragmentsRun-on sentencesComma splices

Writing Comparative SentencesUsing adjectivesUsing adverbsUsing nouns

Using Sentence Variety and SophisticationInfinitives after verbsGerunds after verbsGerunds after prepositionsVerbals used as modifiers

Proofreading and EditingCapitalizationPunctuation:

Serial commaTransition commaCompound sentence commaAppositive commaCompound sentence semicolon

Spelling

Paragraphs (30)Planning and Development

Topic sentenceTopic & controlling idea in a topic sentenceDifference between topic and titleSupport:

MajorMinor

Conclusion:Restatement of topic sentenceRestatement of major support

Using organi/ation appropriate to purposeUsing logical organization (outlining)

1119

26

I,A

1,A

B,I,A

I,A

13,1

I,AAAAA

I,A

I,AAA

1,A

LAI,AI,A

13,I,A

I,AA

I,AI,A1,A

A

13,1

13,1

B,1,A

B,IA

I,A13,I,A

13,I,A

B,I,A13

13,I,A

I,A

13,I,A

13,I,A

13,I,A

A=Advanced

B.9

DraftingWriting with clarity (unity) & coherence B,I,AApplying transition words according to function B,1,AUsing sentence variety B,I,AWriting sentences with lexical sophistication AUsing language appropriate to audience & purpose A

Rhetorical ModesWriting narrative with correct chronology 13,1,A

Writing description with correct spatial sequence 13,I,AWriting exposition:

Using, illustrations 1,AUsing examples I,AUsing definition I,AUsing comparison/ centrast I,AUsing classification I,AUsing cause/effect AUsing persuasion AUsing analysis A

Proofreading and EditingOrgan iza tion 13,I,AContent I,AAudience A

B=Beginning I=Intermediate

Purpose ATone AMechanics B,I,A

Essays (13)Planning and Development

Multiparagraph composition with thesis statement ADistinguishing topic sentence from thesis statement AFinding & developing controlling idea of a thesis AOutlining the essay A

DraftingUsing necessary paragraph style to produce an

essay AWriting introductory paragraphs AWriting concluding paragaphs A

Proofreading and EditingUnity and coherence AContent AAudience APurpose ATone AMechanics A

A=Advanced

Study Skills/Critical Thinking Objectives

Personal Behaviors (35)

Goal Setting

Understanding goal-settingUnderstanding commitment and perseveranceIdentifying personal goal plans (academic, financial,

occupational)Discrminating amyng competing goalsDeveloping timelines for short- and long-range goalsFinding resources needed for goal completionEvaluating goal accomplishment and modifying goalsDeveloping personal rewards for goal achievement

Values ClarificationUnderstanding value formationKnowing the characteristics of a valueUnderstanding the impact of significant others on value

formationAnalyzing life experiences (family, social, spiritual)Recognizing value indicatorsDemonstrating knowledge of the process of values

clarificationRecognizing and resolving values conflicts

Self-EvaluationUnderstanding the benefits of self-evaluationUsing personal strengths and other resources to enhance

successI )eveloping self-improvement plansIdentifying additional competencies/skills needed for

goal achievementEvaluating performance/improvement

Understanding negative personal habits

13.10 120

Stress ManagementUnderstanding the need for adequate sleep, nutrition,

and exerciseUnderstanding the nature and effects of stressorsAnalyzing current stressorsComprehending appropriate and inappropriate stress-

reduction techniquesDeveloping a stress-management planEvaluating stress-management skills

Time ManagementComprehending time prioritiesDetermining the time needed for each priorityUnderstanding principles of schedulingKnowing techniques for saving timeUnderstanding time-wasters and how to correct themDeveloping and evaluating long- and short-term

schedulesPracticing time-management techniquesEstablishing priorities in a daily "to-do" list

Study Behaviors (15)ConcentrationlMemory

Creating the appropriate study environmentDeveloping the ability to concentrate:

Identifying external distractions/interferenceIdentifying internal distractions/interferenceApplying concentration techniquesRecognizing short-term memoryRecognizing long-term memoryIntroducing effective memory techniques/strategies

(e.g., outlining, using the peg system,chunking/clustering)

Applying appropriate memory techniques to differingtasks

125

Textbook LearningUnderstanding textbook study methods (e.g., SQ3R, marginal

questions)Applying textbook study techniques (e.g., surveying,

constructing topical maps, highlighting, using studyquestions & glossaries)

Reference SkillsKnowing how to use reference materials such as the

dictionary, the library, computers

Test PreparationOrganizing resources such as notes, outlines, and summariesAnalyzing review procedures (e.g., specialized terms, ideas

emphasized in the text, lectures, supplementaryreadings)

Using resources for test preparation (e.g., previous tests,study guides, handouts, group study)

Developing personal study materials (e.g., two-way charts,flashcards, questions, mapping, information integatedfrom several sources)

Classroom Behaviors (26)ListeningApplying effective listening techniques:

Resisting distractions, sta ying focused, exhibitingalertness

Finding areas of interestJudging content, not delivery onlyI Nstinguishing essential from elaborative materialUnderstanding the presenter's principle of organization

Note-TakingKnowing the purposes of note-takingUnderstanding tips for note-taking (e.g., personal shorthand,

discipline-specific techniques, consistency of style, signalwords & phrases)

Understanding note-taking techniques (e.g./,topic/explanation or idea)

Applying note-taking techniquesCombining notes from a variety of sources (text, lecture,

collateral reading, worksheets, study guides)

Test-TakingApplying general test-taking principles:

Preparing physically and psychologicallyPreviewing the testUnderstanding the directionsBudgeting timeflaying adequate supplies

Applying skills for objective tests:Multiple-choiceTrue/falseMatchingCompletion

Applying skills for objective tests:Short answerEssay

Applying techniques for improving test performance:Reviewing exams/testsDiagnosing performanceI )eveloping a plan for improvementEvaluating resultsManaging test anxiety

Critical Thinking (39)Affective StrategiesFostering independent thinkingExercising fairmindedness/suspending judgmentDeveloping confidence in reasonDevelopMg interpersonal skills for collaborative thinkingI >eveloping intellectual perseveranceThinking precisely about thinkingBecoming aware of one's own thinking process

(metacognition) in order to monitor and direct it

Fundamentals of ThinkingUnderstanding the vocabulary of critical thinkingDistinguishing facts from opinionsDistinguishing facts from valuesDistinguishing relevant from irrelevant factsEvaluating evidence and alleged factsRecognizing stated assumptionsRecognizing unstated assumptionsEvaluating stated and unstated assumptionsRecognizing and evaluating causal relationshipsRecognizing and evaluating analogiesNoting significant similarities and differencesRecognizing contradictionsRecognizing implications and consequencesDistinguishing deductive and inductive reasoningIdentifying logical fallaciesMaking plausible inferences, predictions, interpretationsMaking justifiable generalizationsUnderstanding the significance of criteria for evaluationEvaluating the credibility of sources of informationUnderstanding vagueness and ambiguityClarifying contextual meanings of words and phrases

Thinking StrategiesRaising and pursuing root or significant questionsExploring issues from multiple perspectives, including one's

ownAnalyzing or evaluating arguments, interpretations, beliefs,

or theoriesAnalyzing or evaluating actions or policiesUnderstanding problem-solving processesAssessing problem-solving processesUnderstanding decision-making processesAssessing decision-making processesMaking interdisdplinary connectionsUnderstanding strategies for generating new ideasApplying knowledge/insights to various contexts or

different drcumstances

1211 3 6 B.11

Academic Success Prst.;Post Office Box 25002, #132Bradenton, FL 34206

Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.Consumer Software SupportJacob WayReading, MA 01867(617) 944-3700

All-Write32 Doonan StreetMedford, MA 02155(617) 395-4608

American Language Academy1401 Rockville Pike, Suite 530Rockville, MD 20852(800) 346-3469

BLS

5153 West Woodmill Drive Suite 18Wilmington, DE 19808(800) 545-7766

Britannica Software345 Fourth StreetSan Francisco, CA 94107

Brooks and Cole511 Forest Lodge RoadPacific Grove, CA 93950-5098(408) 373-0728(800) 334-0092

Brown Bag Software2105 South Bascom AvenueCampbell, CA 93121(408) 559-4545

Bureau of Business Practice,,24 Rope Ferry RoadWaterford, CT 06386(204) 442-4365

C & 0 Computer Enterprises, Inc.720 Midwest Club ParkwayOak Brook, IL 60521(708) 653-3555

Compris1 Faneuil halt Market PlaceBoston, MA 02109(617) 742-7235FAX: (617) 742-3431

Appendix C

Software Publishers*

ConduitThe University of Iowa Oakdale CampusIowa City, IA 52242(319) 335-4100(800) 365-9774

D.C. Heath and Company125 Spring StreetLexington, MA 02173(617) 862-6650(800) 235-3565

Daedalus Group, Inc.1106 Clayton Lane 448EAustin, TX 7872,3(512) 459-0637(800) 879-2144

Davidson & Associates19840 Pioneer AvenueTorrance, CA 90503(310) 793-0600(800) 556-6141

Degem Systems, Ltd.6220 S. Orange Blossom Trail Suite 316Orlando, FL 32809(407) 859-8525(800) 237-3838

EDLP.O. Box 210726Columbia, SC 29221(800) 227-1606

Educational Activities, Inc.Post Office Box 392Freeport, NY 11520(516) 223-4666(800) 645-3739FAX: (516) 623-9282

*information current as of July 1993

Educational Design, Inc.345 Hudson StreetNew York, NY 10014(800) 221-9372

Educational Testing ServiceRo.-edale RoadPrinceton, NJ 08541(609) 921-9000

Educulture689 West SchapvillScales Mound, IL 61075(815) 777-9697(800) 553-4838

C.1 122131

FinnTrade Inc.2000 Powell Street, Suite 1200Emeryville, CA 94608(510) 547-2281

Fox Valley Technical College1825 N. Bluemound DriveAppleton, WI 54913-2277(414) 735-5683

I larpercolling1900 East Lake AvenueGlenview, IL 60025

H & H Publishers1231 Kapp DriveClearwater, FL 34625(813) 442-7760(800) 366-4079FAX: (813) 442-2195

H & N SoftwareP.O. Box 4067Bricktown, NJ 08723(718) 482-5715

flarcourt Brace & Company7555 Caldwell AvenueNiles, IL 60714(800) 237-2665

Harper Collins Publisher1000 Keystone Inductrial ParkScranton, PA 18512(800) 242-7737

I lartley Courseware133 Bridge StreetDimondale, MI 48821(517) 646-6458(800) 247-1380

I loughton Mifflin222 Berkely SteeetBoston, MA 02116(617) 351-5000

IBMP.O. Box 1328-WBoca Raton, FL 33432(800) 426-3333

IC1) Corporation319 N. Freedom BoulevardProvo, UT 84601

(801) 373-3233(800) 658-8567

Indiana University Learning Skills Center316 North Jordan AvenueBloomington, IN 47405(812) 855-4848

Instructional/CommunicationsTechnology

10 Stepar PlaceHuntington Station, NY 11746(516) 349-3000

(800) 225-5428

Jostens Learning931 Village Boulevard, 907Box 290West Palm Beach, FL 33409(407) 478-4001(800) 221-7927 .

Kapstrom, Inc.PO. Box 1230Buda, TX 78610(512) 295-4095

Krell Software, Corp.Post Office Box 1232Lake Grove, NY 11755(800) 245-7355

LEEI', Inc.1475 1 lolburne RoadMississauga, OntarioCanada L5E 2L5(416) 271-7504

Lexpertise Linguistic Software380 S. State Street - Suite 202Salt Lake City, UT 84111

Logicus Incorporated908 Niagara Boulevard (Suite 292)N. Tonawanda, NY 14120-2060

Lotus WPO1000 Aberwathy RoadBuilding 400, Suite 1700Atlanta, GA 30328

The Math Lab10893 Leavesley PlaceCupertino, CA 95014(408) 265-5659

Maxthink Assoc..2423B Charming Way, 4692Berkley, CA 94704(413) 340-3508

Ment Audio VisualPost Office Box 132WNew York, NY 10011

(800) 753-6488

MCE Lawrence Production1800 S. 35 Streetl'ost Office Box 458Galesburg., MI 49053(616) 665-7075(800) 421-4157

McGraw-liill3017 E. Washingtonlowa City, IA 52245(319) 351-6329

MCPMicro Computer Project2604 Walntu StreetCedar Falls, IA 50613-3593(800) 552-6227

MECC6160 Summit Drive NorthMinneapolis, MN 35430-4003(612) 569-15011

(800) 685-6322

Milliken I'ublishing Co.1100 Research Blvd.St. Louis, MO 63132-0579(800) 643-0008

Pacific Crest Software875 NW Grant AvenueCorvalis, OR 97330(503) 754-1067

Parlance Software542 South YorktownTulsa, OK 74104(800) 765-6654

I'rofessor Weissman's Software246 Crafton AvenueStaten Island, NY 10314(7)8) 698-5219

Projected Learning Programs, Inc.P.O. Box 3008Paradise, CA 95967-3008(800) 248-0757

Que Software11711 N. College AvenueCarmel, IN 46032(800) 428-5331

123 132

Queue, Inc.118 Commerce DriveFairfield, CT 06430(203) 335-0906(800) 232-2224FAX: (203) 336-2481

Research Design Associates, Inc.10 Blvd. AvenueGreen lawn, NY 11740(800) 654-8715

Saunders College PublishingPublic Ledger Building620 Chestnut Street, Suite 560Philadelphia, PA 19106(215) 238-5300

Scholastic, Inc.730 BroadwayNew York, NY 10003(800) 541-3313

Simon & Schuster200 Old Tappan RoadOld Tappan, NJ 07673(800) 223-2348

Skills Bank Corporation15 Governor's CourtBaltimore, MD 21244(800) 451-5726

Soft Warehouse, Inc.3660 Waialae Avenue - Suite 304Honolulu, HI 96816(808) 734-5801

SRA Thinkware ProductsPost Office Box 543Blacklick, OH 43004(800) 621-0476

Sunburst Communications39 Washington AvenuePleasantville, NY 10570(800) 628-8897

TASLBox 8202 North Carolina State UniversityRaleigh, NC 27693-8202(800) 955-8275

Timeworks, Inc.625 Academy DriveNorth Brook, IL 60062(708) 559-1300

C.2

Tom Synder Production,.80 Coolridge ill RoadWatertown, MA 02172(617) 926-6000(800) 342-0236

Town4.end Pressl'avilions at GreentreeMarlton, NJ 080'53(609) 772-6410(800) 772-6410

True Basic, Inc.12 Commerce AvenueWest Lebanon, NI I 03784(800) 872-2742

TusoftP.O. Box 9979Berkeley, CA 94709

Ventura Educational Systems910 Ramona Avenue, Suite EGrover Beach, CA 93433(800) 336-1022

VTAE2564 Branch StreetMiddleton, WI ',3562(608) 831-6313(800) 821-6313

W. W. Norton and Company. Inc.500 Fifth AvenueNew York, NY 10110(212) 354-5500

(800) 233-4830

Wadsworth Publishing Company7625 Empire DriveFlorence, KY 41042(800) 423-0563

Weaver Instructional Systems6161 28 St. S.E.

Grand Rapids, MI 49546(800) 634-8916

WICAT Systems1875 South State StreetOrem, UT 84058(800) 759-4228

William C. Brown Communications2460 Kerper BoulevardDubuque, IA 52001(8(10) 338-5578

Wisc-Ware12)0 West Dayton StreetMadison, WI 53706(800) 543-3201

Wordperfect Corporation1555 N. Technology WayOrem, UT 84057(800) 321-4566

Writing Tools Group201 Alameda del PradoNovato, CA 94949(415) 382-8000

Xpercom4939 Lahoma StreetDallas, TX 75235(214) 521-4333

C.3 124

1 3 :7)

Appendix D

Applications Software Descriptions

Computerized Placement Testsdistributed by

The College BoardP.O. BOX 6800

Princeton, NJ 08541-6800(609) 734-5782 or (215) 750-8410

Being Used at North/Wolfson Campuses

Computerized Placement Tests (CPT's)represent an assessment program based oncomputerized adaptive testing techniques.This methodology customizes tests accordingto each student's abilities, presenting astudent with a series of test questions at theappropriate level of difficulty for his or herabilities, knowledge, and background.Questions that are either too difficult or tooeasy are avoided, and accurate results areobtained with fewer questions administeredwith no time limit. These tests greatly benefitstudents in institutions where developmentalcourses are available.

The CPT's are untimed and require little proctorintervention. They include ReadingComprehension, Sentence Skills, ArithmeticSkills, Elementary Algebra, and College-LevelMathematics. Each test has from 12 to 20questions selected from a pool of 100 questionsand usually takes about 15 to 20 minutes tocomplete. A typical student takes from three tofour tests and spends a total of 90 to 100minutes on them. About half of this time isused by the student to comlete the sign-onprocedure, answer the background questions,go through the familiarization screens, andtake the two verbal tests (ReadingComprehension and Sentence Skills). Theremainder of the time is usually spent on themathematics tests. The tests that areadministered to students are determinedsolely by the institution. Initial questions areselected randomly from those of averagedifficulty. Subsequent questions are selectedautomatically based on the answers to the prior

question(s). Students' scores depend on thedifficulty of the questions they answercorrectly.

Realtime Writerdistributed by

Realtime Learning Systems, Inc.2700 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20008(202) 483-1510 or (800) 832-2472


Realtime Writer is a tool for interactive grouplearning in a computerized classroomenvironment.

It is quite simple in concept. Students sit at a seriesof interconnected computers and communicatewith each other by typing on the keyboards oftheir individual computers and reading theircomputer screens. The communication is live itoccurs in real time.

In its simplest use, the software controlling thecomputers divides the screen of each monitorinto two rectangular areas called windows. Astudent types a message in a private (lower) win-dow dedicated to serving just that one student.When satisfied with the message, the studentpresses a key to send it to the public (upper) win-dow that appears instantly on other students'screens. There, in a scrolling dialogue, it joinsmessages other students have sent.

As in all classrooms, the use of this uniquesoftware is dependent on the goals, the skills,'and the ingenuity of the teacher. Participation isreadily available to all students, who seem toenjoy using the system and are engaged by it.

Rather than having all students talk at once on thesame channel, during most sessions involvingmore than a handful of students, students willtypically be placed into small groups and willcommunicate within their group on a singlechannel.

125134

D.1

It is important to realize that teachers exercisedecision-making in initiating discussions, and toan extent they can control the direction of thatdiscourse. But there is also a dynamic at workwith this system which makes this classroomsetting very democratic. This occurs becausestudents, as well as the teacher, can control thedirection of their conversations. This is aprocess which can cause discomfort for someteachers.

Functions are provided for teacher-managedcourse material presentation, for recording andprinting of class conversations, and for managingclass rosters.

PLATOdistributed by

The Roach Organization, Inc.2607 Oberlin Road, Suite 100

Raleigh, NC 27608800) 869-2(X)0

Being Used at North Campus

The PLATO curriculum meets student needs fromremediation to mainstream to enrichment. Becauseof its flexible design, the PLATO curriculum canassist faculty in the often complex planning re-quired for effective competency-based individual-ized instruction.

The lessons are sequentially designed to rein-force skills previously learned, yet each lessonretains the ability to stand alone. This uniquemodularity allows faculty to design individualprograms according to each student's needs.

The Basic Literacy program (3 - 8 grade levelskills) in PLATO consists of 258 lessons inreading, 139 in writing, and 192 in mathematics.The Advanced Literacy program (9 - 12 gradelevel skills) consists of 82 lessons in reading, 87in writing, atid 263 in mathematics.

The PLATO Oirriculum Manager allows facultyto collect information on the status of students.Reports that show the progress of students, howmany times they have worked with a particularlesson, etc. can be prinWd. In addition, instructors

D.2 126

can display all of the main modules or RoutingActivities set up in the system to see what lessonsare offered.

A Routing Activity is made up of a collectionof lessons and tests. When students areregistered in a course, they can be assigned toa given routing activity. When students signon, they will be presented with a menu ofoptions that will guide them through thelessons assigned to them.

CSRdistributed by

Computer Systems Research, Inc.Avon Park South

P.O. BOX 45Avon, CT 06001

(609) 387-7121(800) 922-1190


CSR's Integrated Learning System (ILS) consistsof curriculum software and the associatedmanagement components. The CSR Basic Skillsofferings include more than 400 courses (modules)which teach individual reading writing and mathskills. The modules are organized into five levels,Level V representing college-level skills.

Each CSR module begins with a pre-test. Ifstudents pass the pre-test, they areimmediately referred to the next module onthe list. If students fail the pre-test, they areled into a tutorial which offers an explanationof the topic and guides them through anumber of step-by-step examples. Theexamples are followed by a series of practiceexercises in which the student is asked tofurnish correct responses. Incorrect responsesare met with helpful hints and suggestions.Once the practice exercises have beencompleted, students are given a post-test. Ifthey pass it, they are ushered to the nextmodule. If they fail the post-test, they are ledthrough the same tutorial a second time.Regardless of whether the student passes orfails the post-test the second time, thestudent is moved to the next module. Onlyafter all of the modules in the segment have

131')

been completed is the student allowed to gothrough the failed module(s) a third and finaltime. All of the courses are presented incolor.

CSR's management components assist thefaculty in designing and deliveringpredetermined sequence of modules to theirstudents, keep track of the students' time ontask and progress, and provide reports onindividual students as well as for the class.

QUANTUM/READING STRATEGIESdistributed by

EDLP. 0. Box 210726

Columbia, SC 29221(800) 227-1606

Being Used at Wolfson Campus

The Quantum Reading Series and theReading Strategies are reading-enrichmentprograms that use high-interest stories toassist students in building rapid fluency inreading. Bach programs build fluency whilereinforcing vocabulary and comprehensionskills. They include computerizedtachistoscopic exercises to developperceptual accuracy by flashing words fasteror slower according to the student'sresponses, so a challenging rate can beconstantly maintained. The fluency traininghas built-in checks which allow students toadjust the presentation rate within a story orfrom one story to another. Literal andinterpretive comprehension checks are usedto assess the recommended reading rate ofthe next story for the students.

Students sign on by entering their student IDat the 1CLAS prompt and selecting the EDLsoftware they wish to use. Students areallowed to repeat lessons and can exit at anytime except through a vocabulary lesson, inwhich case they have to complete the initialtest to assess their understanding.

The Quantum Reading Series covers fivegrade levels ranging from 10.5 through 13.5.The Reading Strategies series contains nine

grade reading levels spanning from grade 1.0through 10.5. Each grade level in both soft-ware packages can be run independently withEDL's management system.

The EDL management system keeps a recordof students activities that can be printed ordisplayed by the faculty in monitoring andadvising students on their progress.

WRITER'S HELPER STAGE II


Writer's Helper Stage 11 is a prewriting,writing, and revising package which workswith other word processors to teach the writingprocess. It offers ninteen prewriting and twentyrevision activities ranging from routineapproaches to writing innovative analyses. Theprewriting tools include Find, Explore, andOrganize, while revising tools includeStructure, Audience, and Checks.

Writer's Helper Stage II assists students infinding an appropriate topic, provides a methodof brainstorming through word-associationlists, and offers several techniques in paragraphdevelopment. The faculty are allowed tomodify, create, and update any of the lists tosuit particular topics and individual teachingstyles. Students are also allowed to export theirwriting to a word processor of their choicewhere they can continue making changes totheir essays.

EdLAN


In addition to these programs, the AcademicDESKIab also comes with EdLAN: IBMEducation LAN and Tools that include thefollowing software: IBM Link Way, MicrosoftWorks, LANSchool, Excelsior Grade, ExcelsiorQuiz, and Express Publisher.

MICROSOFT WORKS

Must of the faculty members in writing startedusing Microsoft Works right away with theirstudents since they are already familiar with

127

136D.3

word-processing programs. Students alsoadapted to the program quite well with only afew exceptions. During class, students wrote,revised, and printed their essays in MicrosoftWorks; their proficiency in using the softwareimproved greatly during the rest of thesemester. However, there were times whensome students had problems logging, writingto, or finding their files to continue with aparticular writing assignment; nonetheless,most of them preferred to use the computer fortheir writing.

LANSchool

LANSchool is another interesting software thatmost of the faculty found intriguing and startedusing creatively. LANSchool allows the facultymember to broadcast computer screens toconnected workstations and project an on-screen pointer for easy instruction. The facultycan take "control" of a student's keyboard atany time and can return this control back to thestudent when a required response has beengiven. This feature greatly facilitates a personal-ized system of instruction even in a networkedenvironment. The faculty member can choosestudents one at a time to work with or can havethe entire class log into LANSchool. The facultymember can also "watch" students computerscreens without the students' knowing that theyare being watched and can send informationback to the students about what they are doingright or wrong.

As the faculty have become familiar withDesk lab, they have starting using ExcelsiorGrade to manage their student information anddata. In addition to grade management, theExcelsior Grade also includes a program forcreating student databases, test scanning,analysis and report generation. Some of thefaculty are already looking at how to useExcelsior Quiz to create tests. The faculty arevet to be introduced to Express Publisher, apersonal desktop-publishing program.

MATHCUE SOFTWARE

distributed bySaunders College Publishing

The Public Building620 Chestnut Street (Suite 560)

Philadelphia, PA 19106

Being Used at North Campus

Math Cue is an interactive software packagedeveloped by George W. Bergeman to supportthe text, Fundamentals of Mathematics (5th ed. byBaker, Rogers and Van Dyke). Practicequestions are presented to students section bysection with annotated solutions. Students usethe software to practice and test their skills andto pinpoint and correct weak areas. In additionto this, the textbook also comes with anothersoftware package, MathCue Solution Finder,which lets students ask questions, and whereappropriate, the software will display resultsand the necessary steps involved in obtainingthe solution. Students may choose to see thesolution to problems answered correctly and toview partial solutions if they need helpbeginning a problem. The program also refersstudents to specific sections of the text forassistance. The software helps students insolving homework problems, reviewing, andexploring basic concepts.

Students can select which chapter to work on, ifthey need a review before working on practiceproblems for a particular chapter. A record ofthe student's activity is kept and can be printedout at the end of the session. A student's recordincludes number of problems worked andnumber answered correctly or incorrectly.

Faculty's weekly reports from 1CLAS containthe amount of time each student spent on thesoftware. Thus, the faculty can determine howmuch students have accomplished by usingboth the student printout and the ICLASweekly report.

D.4 128

13,

Description of the SYNERGY CentersNorth Campus

Hardware/Software Configuration

24 Workstations PS/2 Model 30s

4111111111k

PS/2 Model 80 Server

HARDWAREServer-1

IBM PS/2 Model 80-3118 Mb memory2 300 Mb hard disks1.44" floppy driveInternal Tape Back-upMouse8513 Monitor

Work Stations-24IBM P5/2 Model 30-286

2 Mb Memory30 Mb hard disk1.44" floppy driveMouse8513 Monitor

Printers-61 IBM Proprinter III XL

Connected to server5 Proprinter XL

Connected to Workstations(Software configures them as networkprinters)

SOFTWARE

Operating SystemsDOS 4.0Novell Netware 2.15ICLAS-IBM Classroom LAN Administration

SystemWindows 3.0 on Workstations running

under ICLAS.Operations

When each workstation is booted a batch fileallows the option to go toPLATO or ICLAS.If PLATO is chosen then the workstation canruns the software:

PLATOIf ICLAS is chosen , then the followingsoftware are available under ICLAS:

Realtime WriterCSRWordPerfect 5.1Write under Windows 3.0

Recommended Modifications 2 laser printers rather than the fr dotmatrix printers 1 dedicated administrative work.aation with theinternal tape drive. This means at least a Model ;0 l'S/ 2.

1291 3

Wolfson Campus Academic DESKIabHardware/Software Configuration

2 2141111011.

111611111111MINI

/1111111111, /111M11

MINIM /MIMI

20 Workstations PS/2 Model 55s

27 7HARDWARE

Server-1IBM PS/2 8580 Model A31

12 Mb memcry320 Mb hard disks1.44" floppy drive120 Mb Internal Tape DriveToken Ring Card8515 MonitorMouse

Work Stations-20IBM PS/2 8555 Model 041

4 Mb Memory40 Mb hard disk1.44" floppy driveToken Ring Card8515 MonitorMouse

Printers-22 IBM 4019-E01 Laser Printers

Connected to Workstations(Software configures them as networkprinters)

P3/2 Model 80Server

SOFTWAREOperating Systems

DOS 5.0Novell Netware 2.15ICLAS-IBM Classroom LAN Administration

SystemPre-Loaded Software

AccuplacerCPT-Computerized Placement TestsCPMS-Computerized PlacementManagement System

CSR Language Arts Program Level IVCSR Mathematics Program Level IVEdLAN: IBM Education LAN Tools

Excelsior Grade/Quiz Version 1.1Express Publisher Version 1.1IBM Linkway version 2.0LANSchool Version 3.01Microsoft Works Version 2.00a

Writer's Helper Stage II

Additional SoftwareCSR Language Arts Program Level VCSR Mathematics Program Level VEDL's Quantum Reading Series Levels j-114EI)L's Reading Strategies Series Levels AA -IA

Realtime Writer

D.6 130

.1.3b

Project SYNERGY Resources

PS3 Project SYNERGY Software Selector Program:Reading Writing Math ESL Study Skills/Critical Thinking

Individual License $100

Site License $150Annual Fee for Upgrades $100

Software Implementation Model 45-Minute Video

Each Video $45

Integrating Teaching and Technology 30-Minute Video

Each Video $45

Project SYNERGY Year Three Report

Each Report $10

NOTE: Prices include shipping & handling by regular mail in the U.S. and Canada.

Make checks payable to Miami-Dade Community College and mail to:

Miami-Dade Community CollegeProduct Development and Distribution

11011 SW 104 StreetMiami, FL 33176

131140

Please fee free to call Kama la Anandam (305-237-254M if you areinterested in:

Incorporating Pr*ct SYNERGY principles and strategies at yourinstitution.

Having us conduct faculty workshops.

Sharing with us the results of your research efforts.

Applying for grants to become an adoption site for ProjectSYNERGY Integrator.

Converting your software to be compatible with ProjectSYNERGY Integrator.

132 1 4 1 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Documents

Reports - ERICaware of one piece in the puzzle: that was the software-review process. Since then, we have identified seven more pieces. Putting the puzzle together thus far has been