TEAMS Evaluation 1993-1994 Conclusions & Recommendations Summary by Carla Lane, Ed.D. [This article has been divided into a number of separate web pages for browser-loading ease. You may view (and select) the contents by section title from the Contents below, or click on the "Next" button at the bottom of each page.] Contents Evaluation Design Planning & Evaluation Project (PEP) Sites TEAMS Distance Learning Staff Development Model Summary Introduction TEAMS Distance Learning is an Educational Telecommunications Network (ETN®) service of the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE). The TEAMS Project was funded through the Star Schools Programs of the United States Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) from 1990-92. TEAMS Distance Learning programs are currently supported by LACOE and the APOLLO 2000 Star Schools Project for 1992-94. TEAMS provides live, interactive instructional telecasts for students in grades two through six, their teachers and parents across the country and in Canada. Programs are designed by specialists in curriculum, instruction and parent education, using input from students, parents and staffs of participating agencies. Programs are produced and telecast through a cooperative effort between the TEAMS staff and ETN. The 1993-94, Year 2, the evaluation plan for the TEAMS (Apollo 2000) Star Schools was designed as a continuation of the Year 1 data collection. It provides data from the project as a whole, as well as in-depth data from 37 designated evaluation sites across the country. The research study focused on answering questions about: Impact of TEAMS (Apollo 2000) on students, parents and staffs Adoption and institutionalization of TEAMS (Apollo 2000) in each area, including its impact on systemic reform How TEAMS (Apollo 2000) promoted the adoption of the National Educational Goals Evaluation activities for the Year 2 evaluation design began in October 1993. Site visits were conducted during the Spring of 1994. Data gathering was concluded in October 1994.   Evaluation Design The 1993-94 TEAMS (Apollo 2000) Evaluation Design was based on the Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) Evaluation Model developed by Daniel Stufflebeam, et. al. It also contains the major elements of Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM) which measures the adoption of an innovation. It was developed by Gene Hall and Susan Loucks. Part I: Overview of Evaluation Design A. Project Goals and Objectives B. Overall Project Context How is the TEAMS (Apollo 2000) project organized? How is each partner region organized for TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? How has TEAMS (Apollo 2000) developed in that region? Input What resources has TEAMS (Apollo 2000) provided in each region? What resources were added through the PBS pilot with PMN? What resources were added through other partnerships? What resources have states, regional agencies, districts, schools and others provided? Process a. Installation How have districts, schools, teachers been selected to participate? What are patterns of beginning implementation of TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? b. Implementation How have TEAMS (Apollo 2000) programs been delivered? What technical assistance has been given? What support materials and process are available? Teacher Involvement How are first, second, third and fourth year teachers involved with TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? Product (Outcomes) How many participants, districts, states have received services and what kinds of services were received? What are the participants' demographic characteristics? What is the difference in using live or tape versions of programs? What types of interaction creates the greatest benefits? What have been the benefits to teachers, students, parents and administrators? What are the effects of being part of a national telecommunications project? What are the effects of being part of TEAMS Net? What outcomes resulted from the PBS pilot with PMN? What outcomes resulted from other partnership? C. In-depth data from selected TEAMS (Apollo 2000) sites Context School data Support structures Resources Reform efforts Demographics Testing, assessment information Behavioral and attendance information TEAMS (Apollo 2000) student data Demographics Testing, assessment information Behavioral and attendance information TEAMS (Apollo 2000) Teacher data Demographics Education and training Teaching experience Participation in reform efforts Input TEAMS (Apollo 2000) Planning Resources Used for TEAMS (Apollo 2000) Process Installation How did the school learn about TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? How did they decide to use TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? How did they get ready to use TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? Organization How are they organized to use TEAMS (Apollo 2000)? Implementation How do they use the TEAMS (Apollo 2000) programs? How do the teachers prepare for the TEAMS programs? How do the teachers facilitate the TEAMS programs? How do the teachers manage the TEAMS programs? How do they use the support materials? What pre and post activities do they use? How do they assess the impact of the TEAMS programs? Program Series Evaluation How do they rate the TEAMS (Apollo 2000) program series? CBAM What Stages of Concern are teachers in at various points of implementation: Beginning use of the TEAMS program First year of TEAMS use Second year of TEAMS use Third year of TEAMS use, and Fourth year of TEAMS use? What level of use is related to each year in TEAMS? What is the innovation configuration of TEAMS at the site Product How has TEAMS (Apollo 2000) benefited the school as a whole? What changes have students experienced from TEAMS? What benefits have teachers experienced from TEAMS? What benefits do parents see or experience?   Part II: Products of the Evaluation Report on Organization, Installation, Implementation and Impact of TEAMS TEAMS School Intervention Plan Teacher Involvement and Use of TEAMS by Year in Program Successful TEAMS School Site Models   Next