CLAY COUNTY EDUCATION FOUNDATION

MATCHING GRANTS PROGRAM 2007-08

EVALUATION REPORT
Project Title_Harnessing the Background Knowledge_____________

# Low performing students ___176____

Teacher(s) first & last names involved in project___Mari Haynes_______________________________________

School (s) Involved in Project

_Green Cove Springs Junior High

School phone # 529-2140__

This Final Report and Budget must be typed and either sent to:
Barbara Denton @ Grant Office C/O or e-mailed to bdenton@mail.clay.k12.fl.us by May 1, 2008
1. Please specify the number of persons involved in the project.
_176___ Low-Performing Students

_____ Other students_____

_______ Parents

_____Volunteers

_5__ Teachers

2. Write a short project summary that clearly demonstrates how this project motivated low performing
students to increase achievement in reading, math, or science.
Our project enhanced the current Reading Curriculum by providing an opportunity for
students to increase their background knowledge. We utilized New Connections to English
Grades 6 -8 books that are rich with information and presented on a tiered reading level that
is interesting yet below grade level.
3. Give a description of the project activities in detail. Include your business/community or volunteer
involvement, if any, and how your project supports Sunshine State Standards.
Students worked in a one-on-one support situation during their reading lab time. We also
provided some small group time, especially for the ESOL students who needed to acquire
both the background knowledge and the English language. This project was an extra
station for ESOL and low performing students. Students began using the level books that
were at their instructional level or lower tiered books that provided needed background
knowledge of a particular subject matter.
4. Funding from this grant provided methods and materials in order to reach students who scored Level 1 or
Level 2 in the reading, writing, math, or science portions of the FCAT. What materials or methods did this
grant fund? Can they be used again in the future?
We used the New Connections to English Grades 6 8 books and some writing paper and
supplies. These books are in the reading lab and will also be used next year. It is hoped that
we may expand on this project in the future by obtaining more books.
4. State the strengths and weaknesses of this project. Please include how you would improve the program if
you were to implement it again.
The most difficult part of the project was the transience of the students. We have some
students that seemed to make great progress, but moved away before we were able to do the
final testing. The anecdotal tests of these students showed that their speaking and reading
abilities have increased at the predicted 2 years rate. We feel this may be an inherent
problem with the ESOL population in particular. The biggest strength was that the students
were a captive audience. They were required to participate in the reading lab as part of the
Reading Curriculum. This meant that the students were available as often as the attended
school. The buy-in from the students was also a tremendous help with the project.

5. Describe the Evaluation Results that measured academic gains. The Results should include tangible and
intangible evidence that objectives were or were not met and provide both quantitative and qualitative data.
At a minimum, the evaluation must include baseline data with the identified benchmarks related to
activities designed to reach project goals, whether or not the benchmarks were met and how the meeting of
these benchmarks has assisted the schools in increasing student achievement. Explain what tools you used
to provide both kinds of data. Examples for quantitative data include: pre and post tests, evaluation of
student portfolios using a rubric, and comparison of test scores/achievement levels. Examples for
qualitative data include: questionnaires, focus groups, and interviews. Also, please provide numbers where
possible. For example, numbers of mentors involved, number of mentor hours, number of books
purchased/distributed, etc.

Initial Think Link results scored 55% below Lv3 from previous yr. assessment
Second Think Link results scored 61% below Lv3 on grade level
Final assessment is still being compiled
Teacher Assessments showed that all students (100%) were able to go up at least one tier from
the beginning. Some students increased 2 tiers (35%) and others increased 3 (52 %).
We will not receive the FCAT results until after the evaluation period of this project.
However, we feel confident that an increase of student background knowledge was achieved,
which should translate to higher FCAT scores.

6. If you have changed your plan for evaluating your project from the one described in your application,
please explain your evaluation methods.

7. What are the future plans for this project? If it is to continue, how will it be funded?
We plan to continue utilizing the materials we received and attempting to increase the
background knowledge of students. We would like to increase the original 100 books we
received, but have not delved deeply enough in how to do this.

8. Final Budget: Please indicate on the next page how funds were actually spent.

EDUCATION FOUNDATIONS MATCHING GRANTS PROGRAM

FINAL BUDGET REPORT 2007 - 08

Expense

Amount

New Connection to English Grade 6th-8th 100 books

$426.15

1 - Basic Oxford Pic/Dictionary CDs/2

$42.95

2 Basic Oxford Eng/Spanish Picture Dictionary

$30.90

Total Grant

Submitted by:

$500.00

____Mari Haynes______________

Total Expenses

Date

$500.00___________

_____5-1-08__________________

If there is a difference between the total grant amount and the total expenses, please provide a brief explanation
below:

2.

Matching Grants Evaluation Form 07-08

Please limit your Evaluation Responses to three pages including the budget page.
Please email the evaluation To:bdenton@mail.clay.k12.fl.us