Presentation on theme: "Amy Reschly, Ph.D. & James Appleton, Ph.D."— Presentation transcript:
1 Amy Reschly, Ph.D. & James Appleton, Ph.D. Student EngagementAmy Reschly, Ph.D. & James Appleton, Ph.D.
2 Antidote to conditions noted by many educators… A ‘meta-construct’Brings together many separate lines of research (e.g., belonging, behavioral participation, motivation)Fredericks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2004Antidote to conditions noted by many educators…Students are characterized as bored, unmotivated, and uninvolved*Interest in engagement has exploded – nationally, internationally, across disciplinesTheoretical level: Meta-constructApplied or practical applications:
3 Student EngagementEngagement is the primary theoretical model for understanding dropout and is, quite frankly, the bottom line in interventions to promote school completion.Student engagement has emerged as the cornerstone of high school reform initiatives.Both academic and social aspects of school life are integral for student success; engagement at school and with learning are essential intervention considerations.New construct – promising but there is a lot that we don’t knowGenerally can say that engagement is an alterable, multidimensional constructMeans of understanding student behavior and performance as for addressing student needs3 definite statements we can make about engagement right nowChristenson et al., 2008
4 Engagement is the primary theoretical model for understanding dropout and is, quite frankly, the bottom line in interventions to promote school completion.Finn (1989)Participation-Identification ModelIndicators of withdrawal and engagement over several yearsBelonging, Identification, RelationshipsEngagement comes from the dropout literaturePrimary theoretical model of dropout: Finn’s participation-identification model deescribes school completion and dropout in terms of engagement with school – there are behavioral and affective componentsFlip to next slideFits with empirical work on dropouts and completers: can differentiate these groups based on engagement early in elementary schoolThere is something about the affective of social side of schooling –What we know from the literature Teacher student relationshipsPeer relationshipsMore specifically related to dropout, Qualitative and survey studies of dropouts
5 Finn’s Participation Identification Model Participation in Successful IdentificationSchool Activities Performance with schoolparticipation leads to successful performance, promoting feelings of identification or belonging at school; which in turn, promote on-going participation.Opportunities for participation change as students progress through the educational system. Initially, successful participation may involve attending school and being prepared for class; in later years, class preparation requires greater effort (e.g., homework, outside projects), and there are more opportunities to participate in nonacademic aspects of school, such as band, clubs, or other extracurricular activities (Finn, 1989)For students who are at risk for dropping out - this cycle starts to break down. Less likely to show the increased and varied forms of participation as they go through school, less successful, reduced feelings of belonging…Begin to disengageFlip back
6 Engagement is the primary theoretical model for understanding dropout and is, quite frankly, the bottom line in interventions to promote school completion.Finn (1989)Participation-Identification ModelIndicators of withdrawal and engagement over several yearsBelonging, Identification, RelationshipsEngagement comes from the dropout literaturePrimary theoretical model of dropout: Finn’s participation-identification model deescribes school completion and dropout in terms of engagement with school – there are behavioral and affective componentsFlip to next slideFits with empirical work on dropouts and completers: can differentiate these groups based on engagement early in elementary schoolThere is something about the affective of social side of schooling –What we know from the literature Teacher student relationshipsPeer relationshipsMore specifically related to dropout, Qualitative and survey studies of dropouts
7 Dynarski & Gleason (2002) McPartland (1994) Provided extra personal support for studentsCreated smaller and more personal settingsMcPartland (1994)Provide opportunities for success in schoolworkCommunicate the relevance of education to future endeavorsCreate a caring and supportive environmentHelp students with personal problemsCurrently what we know about dropout interventions is… BUT we can say those with evidence of effectiveness, like Check & Connect which we’ll talk about a little toward the end, address student engagement in a comprehensive wayDynarski & Gleason reviewed federally funded dropout intervention programs - - there are a lot of things that are ineffective; however, two recommendations from this larger database includedMcPartland’s
8 Student engagement has emerged as the cornerstone of high school reform initiatives. National Research Council publication, “Engaging schools: Fostering high school students’ motivation to learn”I can, I want to, I belongCompetence, Autonomy, BelongingThe other “ABCs”URL:Engagement is becoming a major issue among educators across the nation.Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Connell & Wellborn, 1990; NRC, 2004; Ryan & Deci, 2000
9 A common theme among effective practices is that they have a positive effect on the motivation of individual students because they address underlying psychological variables such as competence, control, beliefs about the value of education, and a sense of belonging. In brief, effective schools and teachers promote students’ understanding of what it takes to learn and confidence in their capacity to succeed in school by providing challenging instruction and support for meeting high standards, and by conveying high expectations for their students’ success. They provide choices and they make the curriculum and instruction relevant to adolescents’ experiences, cultures, and long-term goals, so that students see some value in what they are doing in school. Finally, they promote a sense of belonging by personalizing instruction, showing an interest in students’ lives, and creating a supportive, caring social context.National Research Council, 2004, p. 212
10 McPartland (1994); Dynarski & Gleason (2002) Both academic and social aspects of school life are integral for student success; engagement at school and with learning are essential intervention considerations.McPartland (1994); Dynarski & Gleason (2002)More than….Academic performance, behavior
11 Engagement Theory4 subtypesAntidote to: students characterized as bored, unmotivated, and uninvolved“the student’s psychological investment in and effort directed toward learning, understanding, or mastering the knowledge, skills, or crafts that academic work is intended to promote”“Energy in action, the connection between person and activity”Academic engagement refers to being a good learner, getting good grades, being promoted, etc.Behavioral engagement refers to being a good citizen in the school, getting to school regularly and on time, participating appropriately in class activities, getting homework done on time, and avoiding disciplinary infractions.Cognitive engagement refers to believing in the need for school and classes to achieve goals and believing that school matters.Affective engagement refers to feeling connected and having a feeling of belonging in school.Academic and behavioral engagement can be measured with the data we routinely collect on students.Cognitive and affective engagement are harder to measure; we are using the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI) to collect data on these components of student engagement.Cognitive: relevance/utility of school work, autonomy, competence,Affective: belonging and identification with the values and goals of the schoolDropping out is the most extreme form of disengagementChristenson & Anderson, 2002; Newmann, 1992; Russell et al., 2005
12 Student Engagement Model ContextStudent EngagementStudent Outcomes
13 We – Sandy Christenson, Jim Appleton, Sarah Berman, Patrick Varro, Deanna Spanjers, and myself, recently wrote a chapter on student engagement for Best Practices.We took the NASP pyramid of interventions – universal, targeted and intensive and divided it into universal and individualized strategies3 tiers didn’t work for a number of the strategies – some could fit into either scenario – with small groups, individuals, etc.We reviewed the literature on engagement and complied a list of suggestions for each type of engagement.Intervention considerations: importance of the person-environment fit and the distribution of responsibility for change across the school, family, community as well as the student (Christenson & Anderson, 2002).Overlap among sub-types and suggestions & suggestions address social, academic, and behavioral goals – some of which won’t be new – viewing this instead as engagement organizing interventions under one rubric
14 Academic Engagement Universal Strategies Ensure the instructional match is appropriate for the students and clear directions of what is expected are providedUse mastery learning principles to guide instructional planning and deliveryUse principles of effective instruction (e.g., direct instruction, scaffolding, guided practice; informed feedback; pacing of lessons)Ensure that there is both academic press (high expectations, well structures learning environment) and support for learning (caring environment)Christenson, Reschly, Appleton, Berman, Spanjers, & Varro, 2008
15 Academic Engagement Universal Strategies Maximize instructional relevance (e.g., clearly stated purpose, graph progress toward goals)Attend to the effect of the organization/structure of the school on learning (e.g., smaller learning communities, Academies)Allow students to have choices within course selection and assignments (Skinner et al., 2005).Christenson et al., 2008
16 Academic Engagement Universal Strategies Increase time on task and substantive interaction through cooperative learning, whole class or group instruction (Greenwood et al., 2002) and peer assisted learning strategies (Boudah, Schumacher, & Deshler, 1997; Lee & Smith, 1993)Provide home support for learning strategies to fit content areaEnhance critical thinking through project work and ungraded writing assignmentsChristenson et al., 2008
17 Academic Engagement Universal Strategies Use supplemental program within school, i.e., Academic Coaching Team (Hansen, Cumming, & Christenson, 2006)Increase opportunities for success in schoolworkEncourage parents to volunteer in the classroom (Lee & Smith, 1993)Enhance teacher-student relationships and/or teacher-student support (Hughes & Kwok, 2006)Christenson et al., 2008
18 Academic Engagement Universal Strategies Reinforce students frequently and base it on the amount of work completed (Skinner et al., 2005).Utilize a variety of interesting texts and resources (Asselin, 2004; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000)Incorporate projects that take place in the community (Lewis, 2004)Christenson et al., 2008
19 Academic Engagement: Individualized Strategies Utilize after school programs (tutoring, homework help)Increase home support for learning – such as home-school notes, assignment notebooks, and academic enrichment activitiesImplement self-monitoring interventionsEnsure adequacy of educational resources in the homeHelp parents to understand and set expectations (Klem & Connell, 2004)Christenson et al., 2008
20 Academic Engagement: Individualized Strategies Help parents to understand and set expectations (Klem & Connell, 2004)Foster positive teacher-student relationship for marginalized studentsUtilize Behavior Education Programs: Have students check in with the teacher each hour to ensure they have pens, notebooks, etc. Check in with teacher each hour, check-out at the end of the school day (Hawken & Horner, 2003).Seek out and utilize college outreach programs and tutors for students (Rodriquez et al., 2004)Christenson et al., in press
21 Behavioral Engagement: Universal Examine suspension policies; strive to eliminate out-of-school suspensionExamine discipline policies; ensure they are considered fair, nonpunitive and understood by students. End reliance on negative consequences as a means of managing student behavior.Encourage social interactions and planning for the future though smaller learning communities that target vocational interests (e.g., Academies)Christenson et al., in press
22 Behavioral Engagement: Universal Offer developmentally appropriate social skills training to all students as part of the curriculumImplement school-wide positive behavioral support systems that include positive reinforcement and group contingenciesUse coordinated, collaborative home-school interventions to address attendanceInvolve students in hands-on-learning that is directly related to future career paths or interestsChristenson et al., 2008
23 Behavioral Engagement: Universal Create an orderly routine environment that promotes consistencyOffer professional development on classroom management strategiesGather student input about classroom rules, school climate and evaluation of coursework/assignments; use feedback to make appropriate changesEncourage participation in and provide extracurricular activities; actively seek to involve uninvolved studentsChristenson et al., 2008
24 Behavioral Engagement: Universal Consider ways of having multi-level sports teamsEnsure that the school climate, school culture is respectful to all studentsSystematically monitor student population on key variables (attendance, academics, behavior) for signs of disengagement from school and follow up with students showing signs of withdrawal.Christenson et al., 2008
25 Behavioral Engagement: Individualized Provide additional, supplemental supports for students not responding to positive behavioral support systems implemented school-wideDevise an individualized approach to addressing attendance or participation issues at school; strive to understand student perspective and unique family circumstancesImplement programs that work to build specific skills such as problem solving, anger management or interpersonal communicationChristenson et al., 2008
26 Behavioral Engagement: Individualized Provide an adult mentor who works with students and families on a long term basis to foster engagement in school and deliver the message that school is important (i.e., Check & Connect)Develop specific behavior plans or contracts to address individual needsProvide intensive wrap-around servicesProvide alternative programs for students who have not completed schoolChristenson et al., 2008
27 Behavioral Engagement: Individualized Encourage parents to monitor and supervise student behaviorImplement student advisory programs that monitor academic and social development of secondary students (middle or high)Implement school-to-work programs that foster success in school and relevant educational opportunitiesChristenson et al., 2008
28 Cognitive Engagement: Universal Guide students in setting personal goals in courses and monitoring their progressProvide student with choices when completing assignmentsEnhance or explicitly identify relevance of schoolwork to future goals (see six year plan for St. Paul Public schools ninth graders atFocus on necessary steps to reach/pursue personal goals and career aspirationsChristenson et al., 2008
29 Cognitive Engagement: Universal Set learning/mastery goals over performance goals – ensure mastery goals permeate the philosophy of the classroom/school cultureProvide students with challenging and motivating assignments that relate to life outside of schoolModel learning strategies when teaching specific conceptsProvide feedback that emphasizes self control and the link between effort/practice and improvementChristenson et al., 2008
30 Cognitive Engagement: Universal Provide professional development training to teachers (e.g., goal setting and self-regulation combined with informed feedback that focuses on improvement and enhancing intrinsic motivation)Encourage students who are “on the cusp” to put forth effort to earn credits by calculating a graduation achievement rate (e.g., number of credits earned divided by number of credits possible, compared with % needed to graduate) (Hansen et al., 2006)Encourage parents to deliver messages related to motivational support for learning (high expectations, talk to students about school and schoolwork)Christenson et al., 2008
31 Cognitive Engagement: Individualized Enhance student’s personal belief in self through repeated contacts, goal setting, problem solving and relationship (e.g., Check & Connect)Implement self monitoring interventions (e.g., graph progress toward goals)Explicitly teach cognitive and metacognitive strategies (e.g., mnemonic strategies) and teach effective note-taking and study skillsDiscuss the link between student’s effort and the outcome/behavior/success achieved to increase the student’s perceived self control, self-efficacy, and self-determinationDesign tasks that have the characteristics of open tasks (e.g., student interests, autonomy, collaboration with peers) (Turner, 1995).Christenson et al., 2008
32 Affective Engagement: Universal Systematically build relationships/connections for all students - Educators identify students who may not have a connection with a staff member (i.e., list all students names at grade levels and determine who knows the student) and match staff members and alienated students for future regular “mentor like” contactAddress size through implementation of smaller learning communitiesEnhance peer connections through peer assisted learning strategiesImplement a mentoring program (use of college age students)Christenson et al., 2008
33 Affective Engagement: Universal Increase participation in extracurricular activitiesCombine social support for students (from teachers, peers, parents, and community) with high levels of academic press (i.e., teacher belief that they are challenging students and student perception that they are being challenged (Lee & Smith, 1999).Create a caring and supportive environment (ethos) (Baker, 2001)Christenson et al., 2008
34 Affective Engagement: Universal Intervene early, persistently, and across the contexts of school peers, school adults, and the home and community to change student developmental trajectories.When evaluating results, be sure to check for delayed outcomes associated with early interventionsChristenson et al., 2008
35 Affective Engagement: Individualized Build personal relationship with marginalized students – enhance relationship with one caring adultPersonalize education (e.g., alter assignments to match personal interests and goals)Assist students with personal problemsProvide extra support for students in a timely fashionTo improve generalizabilty, intervene across peer, family, and community contexts when possibleChristenson et al., 2008
36 Intensive Intervention Example: Check & Connect A model designed to promote student engagement at school and with learningApproach is based on enhancing strengths and connections between home, school, and community through relationship building, problem solving, and persistenceDrawn from the literature on resiliency, cognitive-behavioral interventions, systems theory to address complex social problem, person-environment fit, motivation
37 The “Why” of Check & Connect Drawn from the literature on resiliency, cognitive-behavioral interventions, systems theory to address complex social problem, person-environment fit, motivationDropout literature:Status vs. alterable variablesEarly signs of withdrawal & engagementUnusual things about the design of Check & Connect is that they had some built-in time to do research and really get into the literature when designing the program.One of the things we know from the resiliency literature is that a relationship with a competent and caring adult is the best documented asset of resilient children – this adult doesn’t need to be a parentSystems theory – dropout is a complex problem – schools, families, peers, and communities as well as studentsPerson-environment fit – the universal intervention research goal is to understand what works, for whom, and under what conditions --Not just about the env. Or the student but how these fit together.If we go to the dropout literature – there are a couple of things that we know –Some variables that predict dropout are not good intervention targets for schools – race, SES, region of the countryWe can, however, look at variables that are alterable – and we have these at student, family, and school contexts
38 A model designed to promote student engagement at school and with learning Approach is based on enhancing strengths and connections between home, school, and community through relationship building, problem solving, and persistence
39 Check & Connect Components Check….continuous assessment of student levels of engagementMonitored on a daily-to-weekly basisAlterable risk factors: Attendance, Behavior, AcademicsConnect….basic and intensive levelsBasic: feedback, discussion, problem solvingIntensive: problem solving, academic support, community service/recreationAttendance/TruancyTardinessSkippingAbsencesBehavior ProblemsAggressionBus referralsSuspensionsAcademicsFailing classes/Behind in creditsLiteracy skills
40 Role of the Mentor/Monitor Person responsible for helping a student stay connected to school.Described as a mentor, case manager, advocateRelationship is built over time, based on trust and familiarity:ongoing efforts (e.g., checking grades and attendance)informal connections (e.g., checking in with the student)Social CapitalMentor is the Key or linchpin to the Check & Connect programWe have used different terms to describe this person – have shied away from the term ‘mentor’ because there are so many different kinds of mentoring programs – this is very different because of the monitoring, training, and structure.Primary goal is to keep youth from slipping through the cracksSub-bullets:Systematic monitoringInformal connectionsWhen I was working as a monitor, I greeted students as they came in in the morning – said ‘hey’ during lunchWe think of this as a means of increasing social capital – someone who cares about them
41 Develop individualized intervention strategies. Promote access to services for students/families.Assist students and families in navigating secondary school system.Some of the things that monitors do:Bullet 1:Standard intervention all kids get – what monitors do is tailored for individual studentsBullet 2: broker of servicesBullet 3: in some cases, families need assistance in navigating secondary school system. This may be particularly necessary for families who were dropouts or had negative experiences in school themselves, for families with limited experience with our educational system, etc.
42 Monitoring is essential for students at-risk of dropping out for two reasons . . . Provides a systematic and efficient way to connect students with immediate interventionsProvides an essential link to students’ educational performanceBullet 1:Bullet 2:Alterable variables related to student performance – critical link to improving student performance
43 Check….. Student Levels of Engagement Risk factors monitored regularlyIncreased risk leads to interventions to reconnect.At least weeklyAs soon as students who signs of incresed risk or disengaged, more intensive interventions begin
44 Connect… Basic and Intensive Interventions General information about monitoring system.Monthly problem solving around different topics related to the importance of staying in school (e.g., economics of staying in school, how to ask for help).Regular feedback.Problem solving around risk factors.
45 We have hypothesized that: The unique feature of the Check & Connect procedure is not the specific interventions per se, but the fact that interventions are facilitated by a person, the mentor, who is trusted and known by the student and who has demonstrated his or her concern for the school performance of the youth persistently and consistently over time.
46 Check & Connect – Secondary Level Pilot Study: Quasi-experimental design, students with Emotional or Behavior Disorders.C&C students were significantly more likely to..be currently enrolled in schoolNever have dropped outBe on track to graduateSinclair, Christenson, Evelo, & Hurley, 1998Quasi-experimental study – High school students with EBD were significantlyless likely to dropout,more likely to persist in school,and more likely to access educational services (alternative programs, transition planning).They were more likely to be on track to complete school in four years; and more likely to have completed school at the end of five years.Sinclair et al., 2005
47 Chronically truant students in grades 6-12 with and without disabilities in suburban schools on the School Success truancy prevention initiative (N=363) have shown improvement in attendance, skipped classes, out-of-school suspensions, and academic performance.About 65% of Check & Connect students (N=91) are successfully engaged (equivalent of 0-1 day absent per month), with no incidences of class failures.More effective if students are referred before absences exceed 25% of the school year.Last bullet: more effective if we start before the problems are the most severe
48 Check & Connect – Elementary Level Pre-post intervention results for elementary students with and without disabilities (N= 147 with 2 years of intervention) in suburban settings reveals that tardies to and absences from school have declined, and overall attendance has improved.86% of students who received intervention for at least two years (N = 147) showed increased levels of student engagement as evidenced by significant increases in the percentage of students who were absent or tardy less than 5% of the time, an improvement of 104% over baseline behavior.Also, over 90% of the school staff (N = 123) perceived students were showing improvement in homework completion, attendance, and interest in school.87% of school staff reported parents were more supportive of their child’s education(Lehr, Sinclair, & Christenson, 2002).
49 Other ApplicationsEarly Risers I: Implemented with students in Kdg and 1st grade who were highly aggressive. Students in C&C displayed significantly fewer problem behaviors during the 2-years of interventionEarly Risers II: 1st and 2nd graders who were highly aggressive and poor readers living in povertyCombined with Reading Interventions. Significant differences in phonological awareness; no differences in ratings of aggressive behavior
50 Project ELSE (Early-Literacy School Engagement Project) 2000-2004 Implemented Check & Connect with Kindergarteners at-risk for learning to read. 6 Schools randomly assigned to treatment and controlStatistically significant differences in early literacy skills and engagement (attendance and tardies) for students in C&C with EL as compared to controlPositive changes in teachers’ perceptions of children’s behavior and academic competenceO’Shaughnessy, Draper, Christenson, Militch, Waldbart, & Gabriel (2004)
52 STUDENT ENGAGEMENT INSTRUMENT (SEI) Jim Appleton also prepared this section of slides, which summarize the development and validation of the SEI.
53 Instrument BlueprintAn instrument development blueprint was followed in much the same way that other rigorously-researched and professionally-developed measurement instruments have been created and published.
54 Urban Midwest Instrument Validation Study 8th graders (Think Aloud)2,577 of 3,104 diverse, urban 9th graders1,931 (~75%) in analyses51% female, 40% Afr Amer, 35% White, 11% Asian, 10% Hispanic, 4% Amer Ind61% FRL; 8% Sped ServicesA large-scale validation study was conducted to fine-tune the wording and the measurement characteristics of the SEI.
55 ConclusionsBased on actual student responses, the six survey Themes and the overall instrument were valid and reliable.When checked against student’s academic and behavioral records, the SEI themes aligned as expected.The validation study data confirmed that the instrument is both valid and reliable.
56 Replication StudiesUrban Midwest, Rural South Carolina, and Rural Midwest studiesInstrument measurement characteristics were supportedConstruct (Theme) validity evidence is strongThree replication studies corroborated the evidence found in the original SEI validation study.
57 (For Advisors and Schools) GCPS Data and Reports(For Advisors and Schools)The Research and Evaluation Office analyzed the data from the SEI that students took this fall.
58 Advisor Report—Side 1 Student Names Theme Key Subscale (Theme) AveragesClass AveragesThis slide shows key features of the Advisor Report.
59 Advisor Report Sample—Side 2 Interpretive Guide: Reminders about how to read and use the reportSEI Themes and Item TextThe back side of the report provides reminders about how to read the report and what items went into which Themes.
62 References & Resources Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). School completion and student engagement: Information and strategies for educators. In A. S. Canter, L. Z. Paige, M. D. Roth, I. Romero, & S. A. Carroll (Eds.), Helping children at home and at school II: Handouts for families and educators (pp. S2-65–S2-68). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Retrieved October 25, 2006 fromAppleton, J., Christenson, S.L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44,Christenson, S.L., & Anderson, A. R. (2002). Commentary: The centrality of the learning context for students’ academic enabler skills. School Psychology Review,31(3),Christenson & Thurlow (2004). School dropouts: Prevention, considerations, interventions, and challenges. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(1),Christenson, S.L., Reschly, A.L., Appleton, J.J., Berman, S., Spanjers, D., & Varro, P. (2008). Best practices in fostering student engagement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds). Best Practices in School Psychology (5th Ed). National Association of School Psychologists.
63 References & Resources Finn, J.D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59,Fredericks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74,Lehr, Sinclair, & Christenson (2004). Addressing student engagement and truancy prevention during the elementary school years: A replication study of the Check & Connect model. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 9(3),National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine (2004). Engaging schools: Fostering high school students’ motivation to learn. Washington, DC: The National Academies PressReschly, A. & Christenson, S.L. (2007). Reading and School Completion: Critical Linkages Among Reading Performance, Grade Retention, Special Education Placements and High School Dropout. Manuscript under review.Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, & Hurley. (1998). Dropout prevention for high risk youth with disabilities: Efficacy of a sustained school engagement procedure. Exceptional Children, 65(1), 7-21.Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow (2005). Promoting School completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71,
64 Contact InformationJames Appleton, PhDDepartment of Research & EvaluationGwinnett County Public Schools437 Old Peachtree Road NWSuite 2.240Suwanee, GA 30024Amy L. Reschly, PhDDepartment of Educational Psychology & Instructional Technology325N Aderhold HallUniversity of GeorgiaAthens, GA 30602