Abstract:

Instructional Strategies for Teaching Pre-

Algebra to a Diverse Group of Learners

Planning effective instruction for a classroom full of learners demands

that the educator know what works and more importantly what works

better for the group of people residing in the educator's classroom today.

This action research study tested the efficacy of using the full compliment

of assessments included in the curriculum adoption at the researchers

school and that of guided note taking. Each strategy was implemented in

its own separate unit of a pre-algebra class.

The researcher used student growth, which was determined by

the difference observed between a student's pre-test percentage

score and their final unit test percentage score, as the metric by

which to evaluate each strategies efficacy.

Measurable growth was observed with both strategies. The All

Assessments strategy showed greater and more consistent growth among

learners than that which was observed during the Notes strategy. These

findings indicate that more research is needed on the effectiveness of using

assessments for learning and a need for further study to evaluate the

efficacy of guided note taking. Findings in this study should be considered

as illuminating but not conclusive as the sample used is not generalizable.

Robert

Ojeda May,

2010
Instructional Strategies for Teaching Pre-

Algebra to a Diverse Group of Learners

by

Robert

Ojeda

A project

submitted in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Arts in Teaching

Brandman University, Visalia

May, 2010
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. The Problem....................................................................4

Purpose of Study.......................................................................5

Definition of Terms...................................................................5

Research Questions..................................................................5

II. Literature Review..........................................................6

III. METHODOLOGY..........................................................11

Strategy 1: All Assessments with Second Chance..................12

Strategy 2: All Assessments, Summarizing and Note Taking. 12

Data Collection and Recording...............................................13

IV. Study Results...............................................................13

Figure 1 All Assessments Pre-Test and Final Test Raw

Percentage Scores

.............................................................................................

14

Figure 2 Notes Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage

Scores...................................................................................15

Figure 3 All Assessment % Points Growth from Pre-Test to

Final Test

.............................................................................................

16

Figure 4 Notes % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final Test 17

Figure 5 All Assessments and Notes Growth Comparison. .18

V. Conclusions..................................................................18

VI. Concerns and Limitations...........................................19

REFERENCES...................................................................21
I. The Problem

Today's classroom is a diverse place where students from a myriad of

backgrounds and abilities are brought together with the expressed purpose

of developing knowledge and skills that will assist students in growing as

individuals while preparing them for the next level in their academic lives.

The classroom where this study took place embodies these conditions and

strives towards these intentions. To effectively realize success as measured

by today's formal assessments this researcher recognizes the need to find,

specialize and implement a system of instructional strategies which will

help assure that each of these groups of learners are engaged, challenged

and trained to use their skills and knowledge to any challenge life throws at

them.

The students comprising the sample in this study class are energetic,

curious and reside in a supportive and peaceful mountain community. In

pre-algebra the half are performing at grade level with about 25% below

and about 25% or so above. Are there ways challenge each learner and

teach them in a way that best meets their needs while doing so for all

learners? Are there instructional strategies that could be implemented that

would yield better results for more students? Can this be accomplished

within the confines of the time currently used to plan? A safe assumption is

that there is likely to be many permutations of strategies that can be

implemented in this classroom that will yield a different result as

represented by student performance on chapter tests. The purpose of this

action research study will be to evaluate the specific effectiveness of

several strategies as used by this researcher in this classroom.

The study sample of students are distributed by their performance on the

2009 California Standards Test for Math as, Advanced 24%, Proficient 29%,
Basic 41%, Below Basic 6%, Far Below Basic 0% (CST Report, 2009). It has

been observed by the researcher that this group of students are generally

encouraged to keep up with their

academic work. The group is comprised of fifteen students, most of whom

have been in the same class together for the duration of their school years.

Finding the right strategies for todays students is important, but so is

developing strategies that can be used as a base program from which to

specialize for the next year's students who will come with unique

instructional requirements.

Purpose of Study

This action research study sought to locate and evaluate instructional

strategies for use in teaching pre-algebra to a specific group of seventh

grade students. The purpose for doing so was to improve the effectiveness

of instruction as determined by measurable student growth observed

during a series of instructional units.

Definition of Terms

In this study I will be using the term "self-contained" which is define as a

group of students who are taught all core academic subjects, physical

education and art by the same teacher. When referring to the subject I will

at time use the term "diverse population" when doing so I am referring to

the distribution of math scores as reported by the 2009 CST test and

formative assessments administered by this groups regular school teacher,

myself. The abbreviation CST stands for the California Standards Tests. The

term STAR refers to the California's Standardized Testing and Reporting.

Research Questions

What strategies can I use in my self-contained classroom during math that

will allow me to meet the needs of my advanced, grade level and low
performing students? Can an improvement in student scores on summative

assessments be accomplished without

significantly increasing planning time? Which strategy or combinations of

strategies when used result in an improvement in the consistency and

quantity of growth each student experiences as measured by comparing a

unit's pre-assessment and the unit's summative assessment?

II. Literature Review

A person's ability to reflect on his/her work is important for the process of

learning to be successful. McMillan and Hearn explain, "Evaluating what

they learned, what they still need to work on, and how they can get there

can all support deeper understanding rather than superficial knowledge"

(2008). Reflection can take many forms including, students grading their

own assessments which are then used to guide them in their learning. To

be effective reflection must include opportunity to improve performance

and new opportunities to demonstrate learning and skill development.

Formative assessment can provide valuable information students need.

As stated by Campos and O'Hern, "feedback from... assessments can be

used to help students with goal setting. This allows the students to take

responsibility for their learning and become more independent learners"

(Campos, 2007). Developing students into self- motivated learners likely

requires shifting the reins of their learning into student hands. Access to

control over their learning appears to motivate personal responsibility and

a genuine desire to improve.

Providing feedback through frequent assessment can influence learning

and achievement. Evertson and Neal discuss the use of assessment,

"ongoing formative assessment [is] a means for determining what [has]

been learned and what else [is] needed... Although often neglected in U.S.

classrooms, there is considerable evidence that formative assessment is

an essential component of classroom work that facilitates learning and

can substantially raise student achievement" (2006). Students
who receive regular and specific feedback in the form of formative

assessment should score higher than when formative assessment is largely

absent.

Intrinsic motivation is key to success. The road to intrinsic motivation

requires thoughtful planning and experimentation as Oginsky recalls, "even

through research supports and I believe, that non-controlling, positive

feedback leads to a positive classroom environment, and thus to an

increase in intrinsic motivation, increasing positive non-controlling

feedback to students did not increase intrinsic motivation in this classroom

study" (2003). The group who are being taught must be carefully

considered when determining what type of feedback will aid them in

developing their own internal motivation for learning.

The objective of assessment must be consistent with the nature of it's

implementation, "the goals for developing diagnostic item models for

formative assessment are

quite different from... [research] goals... First, we are less concerned with

generating instances with psychometric parameters that can be predicted

very accurately, and more concerned with generating instances that

consistently measure patterns

of understanding with accuracy sufficient to focus instruction" (Graf, 2009).

Formative assessment that guides instruction must be constructed and

evaluated so as to provide the information that will aid in planning effective

instruction in addition to supporting feedback for students.

When construction assessment which will determine the efficacy of

certain strategies it is necessary to determine the appropriateness of the

assessemnt choice. "Often the instruction in the classroom is not geared

toward the same objectives as those measured on the assessment, or the

assessment may, in fact, fail to provide information about student's

strengths and weaknesses as real targets for further instruction" (McDivitt,

2003). What is assessed is what should be instructed or the results cannot

be trusted as being the results of instruction, rather the product of other

means.
 Learning can occur in two phases, encoding/writing and external

storage/studying, when notes are involved as a tool for recording new

information and during the process of reviewing those notes prior to an

assessment. In a study examining the efficacy of students copy and pasting

notes from internet sources Igo, Bruning and Riccomini explain that,

"students might not learn much during the encoding phase if they do not

engage in deep mental processes as they take notes... in the external

storage phase of note learning, students learn as they study a set of notes

that already have been created" (Igo, 2009). It is important that when notes

are used as a tool for study that they should be created carefully so as to

assure their legibility and accuracy. One of the concerns the study raised

was that when students reviewed using their own hand created notes they

often reinforced errors and omissions that were recorded or missed in the

encoding phase.

Benefits in performance can possibly be realized if students are guided in

how to choose items to include while note taking. Igo suggests that

educators, "teach students how to evaluate which ideas to include in their

notes, [as it] could have positive consequences for both the encoding and

the external storage phases of note learning" (Igo, 2009). If taught to

strategically consider the content they include in their notes, students

should benefit by having both less to study which will be more time and

energy efficient and the information they will be reviewing will be of a

higher quality.

In a study by Neil Toporski and Tim Foley the need for a streamlined

interactive approach is indicated. The researcher studied the unique needs

of the modern distance education class setting. In this report it was

explained that there exists a trend towards providing "theatrical" and

"diverse... presentation methods." The authors list strategies formulated

during the study that promote a successful schooling experience, they,

"make it interactive,... keep it engaging and motivating,... put things in

context,... maintain diversity,... use collaborative strategies,... reduce

cognitive Load,... [and] provide adequate scaffolding" (Toporski, 2004). Mr.

Toporski and Mr. Foley's

conclusion validates the conclusions of similar studies that a more

effective classroom can be created in the physical space of a classroom or

within the e-classroom by using differentiated approaches that stimulate

the many people take in new information.

Katherine Gibson studied how teachers perceive strategy based reading

instruction and its affect on comprehension. Her study was based on a

small sample of teachers who had a positive attitude going into the study

about using strategy based reading. She discovered that, "[teachers]

surveyed have positive feelings towards strategy based reading

instruction... [and] find strategy based reading instruction an effective way

to improve reading comprehension," (Gibson, 2009). Ms. Gibson's study

supports the idea that attitude can influence success.

In his article in Education Leadership Using Data to Improve Student

Achievement - How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning, Thomas

Guskey suggests giving students the opportunity to improve their

performance on assessments through a second chance (Guskey, 2003).

This researcher is curious if modifying the current method of assessment to

include several "chances" to hit the mark will yield higher scores on these

assessments overall.

In Robert J. Marzano's article in Educational Leadership What Works in

Schools he reports study results that show a average 34 point percentile

gain and a 0.50 standard deviation from the mean for a subject who uses

the strategy of note taking and summarizing (Marzano, 2003). In this study

I will evaluate the effectiveness of, "asking students to generate verbal

summaries, asking students to generate written summaries,... asking

students to revise their notes, and/or correcting errors and adding

information" (Marzano, 2003). Specific importance seems to reside in the

retooling of notes after first taking them. They should be regarded as a

malleable model which represents the learners current understanding of

and needs for the focus content.

The literature concerning differentiating instruction calls for many

approaches, attitudes and methods of implementation. Some have

advocated for diving in where the

whole system is transformed rapidly, while many more have called for a

gradual adoption process with a long term more is better philosophy.

Sondergeld and Shultz advise: "use content you feel comfortable teaching;

do not attempt to differentiate every lesson you teach—you will get

frustrated and feel burnt out; begin slowly, with maybe only one or two

differentiated units a year; invite parents or classroom aides into the

classroom to assist with" (Sondergeld, 2008). Change in the classroom

routine and lesson design should be gradual so as to maintain the energy

and vigor of learners as well as educators.

Self evaluation is key to understanding what is working and what can be

improved. Friend and Pope outline what each teacher needs to focus on in

and some simple guidelines for success, "First, sometimes the most

successful way to go about changing is to do so in small increments...

Second, find colleagues with whom to share your efforts... Third, set goals

for yourself and celebrate when you accomplish them... Finally, remember

that working on differentiation is a clear example of lifelong learning,"

(Friend, 2005). This descriptive report reinforces what has been stated by

the Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.

The basic philosophical orientation of the educator is important to

understanding the expected response from students as initiated by the

nature of the relationship between the student and educator. In "Theories

of Intelligence, Learning and Motivation as a Basic Educational Praxis,"

Steven Van Hook examines the nature of this relationship. The term

"andragogy" is used to describe the paradigm shift that is and must happen

in education. Whereby "pedagogy" is rooted in the concept of the teacher

guiding the child in learning, andragogy instead views the learner in terms

of participating in their own self-actualized learning experience (Van Hook,

2008). This calls to mind the concept of "ownership" often used to describe

when students are observed applying the concepts they have learned in
new novel ways.
 Summary and note taking when properly executed require extracting the

essence of the information being studied. Marzano explains, "students must

analyze the information in depth... in order to decide what information is

important to make notes about and information that is not, students must

be able to mentally sift through and synthesize information" (Marzano,

2000). An ongoing use of note taking as a regular component of learning

will likely result in the development of students abilities to pick out the

information they will most likely need to know for later use. Motivating

students to use this strategy to in a meaningful way might be accomplished

by allowing the use of student generated notes during assessment tasks.

III. METHODOLOGY

Each strategy selected for evaluation in this study was implemented in

this researchers classroom for two weeks in the following manner. Each

new strategy was isolated from influence by the other strategies during

evaluation to the degree practical in this real classroom environment.

Students were instructed using in the researcher's normal teaching style

that included working problems as a group until it was clear to the

researcher that the majority of students were able to continue

independently. At this point instruction continued on a case by case basis

as the need presented itself. This was determined through teacher

observation or through the direct request of students. Efforts were taken to

maintain a consistency of instruction during each strategy evaluation.

Before beginning instruction on the unit's lessons a pretest was

administered. During the course of the unit, quizzes were administered.

The number of quizzes was determined by the strategy being evaluated.

Each quiz was given the afternoon the day reteaching for the lesson being

quizzed had been completed. A mid- chapter quiz was given after the sixth
or seventh unit lesson had been corrected and retaught. This was followed

by more lesson quizzes administered as previously

described. The unit was completed with a final chapter test consisting of

questions from the whole unit. During testing students were directed to

move into "test mode" where they moved their desks so they had a one foot

gap between their desk and their nearest neighbor. This was done to

minimize distractions that might impact assessment results. Students were

not allowed to talk to each other during quizzes and tests. They were

allowed to ask the researcher for clarification on questions. Each quiz and

test was corrected in class by the students and then reviewed by the

researcher. This was done to provide students with immediate feedback on

their work.

Strategy 1: All Assessments with Second Chance

All unit assessments included with the textbook adoption were used.

After each assessment was given and corrected, either a quiz or test,

students were offered the chance to correct the problems they missed,

while displaying their work, for additional credit. In the case of quizzes,

students were offered the chance to earn back all credit by working the

problems out again and resubmitting their corrected quiz. On tests

students were offered the chance to correct their missed problems for half

the credit missed. The researchers intention was to determine if student

performance could be influenced by a greater frequency of assessments,

coupled with immediate feedback and the opportunity to correct

assessments for additional credit. Only raw uncorrected scores were used

in this study. The improved scores were used only for calculating student

grades.

Strategy 2: All Assessments, Summarizing and Note Taking

During instruction students were asked to divide a page down the middle.
In the left margin students were directed to take notes that included lesson

examples and vocabulary. In the right margin students were directed to

expand on notes with their

own examples and explanations. A pre-test assessment was given the

first day before instruction. Midway through the unit a mid-chapter test

was given. At the end of the Unit a chapter test was administered.

Data Collection and Recording

Data used to evaluate the instruction strategies was collected through

formative assessment, observation and summative assessment. Each

strategy received a one unit time frame, which generally worked out to a

two week period. The first day of each unit a complete chapter test was be

administered. The score of these assessments was converted to a

percentage mean for the whole class and compared on an individual basis

with mid-chapter assessment scores and the chapter summative assessment

scores.

Unit formative assessments consisted of several lesson quizzes given the

day after formal instruction on the quiz content had been completed and

only after a session of homework correction and reteaching. Copies of all

assessments were kept to allow for comparison among content areas as

determined by the lesson designation printed in each section of each

assessment. These were used to determine any changes in performance as

related to each lesson area.

IV. Study Results

To compare the two strategies it was necessary to find a way to measure

the efficacy of each strategy for the class as a whole. The researcher chose

to compare growth in scores from the pretest to the final test (Figure 1 and

2). A mean of this set of differences was calculated for each strategy as was

the standard deviation for each. The justification for comparing the two
strategies in this manner was that this measure quantified the growth

students made during each strategy and provided a clear picture of how
consistently this growth was seen over the population (as shown by the

standard deviation).

Figure 1 All Assessments Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage Scores
Figure 2 Notes Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage Scores

The subjects showed a mean growth of 55 percentage points in the All

Assessments unit of the study. Individual scores fell within a standard

deviation of 14.21 percentage points of the mean. The highest growth in

percentage points observed was observed in subject 7015 at 79 percentage

points of growth. The lowest observed growth was observed in subject 7003

at 37 points of growth (Figure 3).

Figure 3 All Assessment % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final Test

During the Notes unit subjects showed a mean growth of 31 percentage

points. In this unit scores fell within a standard deviation of 22.86 points

from the mean value. The highest growth was observed with subject 7006,

who showed a 67 percentage point growth from their pretest score. The

lowest growth observed during this unit was that of subject 7005, who

showed a -5 percentage points loss from their pre-test score to the final

score (Figure 4).

Figure 4 Notes % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final Test

Differences were observed with the two strategy unit mean growth

measures (Figure 5). A difference of 24 percentage points separate the two

strategy growth means. Data distribution, as determined by the standard

deviation, showed a 9 percentage point difference in the growth range. The

All Assessments strategy elicited greater and more consistent growth from

this population of students. Conversely the Notes strategy showed less

growth and less consistency in the growth students experienced during that

unit.
Figure 5 All Assessments and Notes Growth Comparison

V. Conclusions

It is difficult to determine what to include when planning instruction.

There are endless variables to consider that may or may not have a

significant impact on the engagement and subsequent retention of learning

expressed by students. This research study was motivated by a desire to

compose a means of comparing the efficacy of different strategies. Prior to

this study, using all the included assessments that come with a given

curriculum adoption had not seemed, to the researcher, to be of obvious

benefit. However, the results of this study are convincing enough for this

researcher to consider more carefully the role assessment can play in

aiding student learning.

The results of the note-taking unit came as a surprise. It was assumed

that the notes unit would show at least as good a growth as the unit using

all assessments. After all, the strategy of guiding students to expand on

their notes both during and after instruction is frequently and widely

encouraged. During the All Assessments unit, students were not asked to

do anything with their notes beyond recording what was necessary for them

to get started on their assignments. If these findings illuminate anything it

is that it is highly beneficial for the educator to have a measure for

determining and to reflect on what kind of growth is occurring during each

instructional units. It is also important to consider carefully what is being

included in lessons and whether or not each of those things is worth the

planning and instructional time.

Student motivation may have played a significant role in why the All

Assessment strategy showed greater success. The ever present pressure of

a coming formal assessment coupled with the imediate feedback offered by

each student's correcting of his or her own paper and immediately being

given time to correct their errors for additional credit may be a motivating

force. In many ways having frequent assessment is like the immediate

feedback individuals receive when they play a video game. If a mistake is

made the player knows right away and begins looking for ways to complete

the task successfully. Subjects in this study were observed to be highly

motivated to correct their mistakes for additional credit, which in turn

provided needed review for content they were weak on.

VI. Concerns, Limitations and Future Research

 This study was conducted with a very small sample of students and should

not be considered generalizable. As is the nature of action research, in

many ways the study

was designed and redesigned while the units were being instructed. Where

it casts light it exposes even more shadows. Comprehensive and

comparable pre-tests were not available so final chapter tests were given in

there place. Growth was assessed based on the differences between the

pre-test score and the final unit test score. In the case of the all

assessments unit it is the researcher's belief that the pre-test given was of

greater difficulty than the final test for that unit. Which if true could mean

that the benefits of that strategy were greater than the data indicated.

For this study to be statistically testable it would need to be replicated, a

control established where neither strategy was in use and a larger data set

compiled to compare each strategies performance as averaged over several

units time. This study should be considered as a preliminary work, wherein

it is this researcher's belief a need for additional study is indicated by the

findings.
References

Brighton, Catherine M.; Hertberg, Holly L.. (2004-00-00).

Reconstructing the Vision: Teachers' Responses to the Invitation to

Change. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education. v27 n2

p1-20 2004. National Middle School Association. ERIC #: EJ807413

CST Report. California Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR)Three

Rivers Elementary School - All Students. 2010-02-01.

http://star.cde.ca.gov/star 2009/ViewReport.asp?

ps=true&lstTestYear=2009&lstTestType=C&lst

County=54&lstDistrict=72207-

000&lstSchool=6054423&lstGroup=1&lstSubGroup=1

Di Fatta, Jenna; Garcia, Sarah; Gorman, Stephanie. Increasing Student

Learning in Mathematics with the Use of Collaborative Teaching

Strategies. 2009-05-00. ERIC #: ED504828

Evertson, Carolyn M.; Neal, Kristen W.. Looking into Learning-

Centered Classrooms: Implications for Classroom Management.

Working Paper. National Education Association Research

Department. 2006-07-00. National Education Association Research

Department. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/

contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED495820. ERIC #:

ED495820

Friend, Marilyn; Pope, Kimberly L.. (2005-00-00). Creating Schools

in Which All Students Can Succeed. Kappa Delta Pi Record. v41

n2 p56-61 Win 2005. ERIC #: EJ683473

Gibson, Katherine D. (2009-06-00). Teachers' Perceptions of Strategy

Based Reading Instruction for Reading Comprehension. ERIC #:

ED505543
Goodnough, Karen. (2003-04-00). Issues in Modified Problem-Based

Learning: A Study in Pre-Service Teacher Education. ERIC #:

ED477797

Guskey, Thomas R. Educational Leadership. Using Data to Improve Student

 Achievement - How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning.

Pages 6-11. February 2003 | Volume 60 | Number 5.

ASCD.http://www.ascd.org/publicat

ions/educational_leadership/feb03/vol60/num05/How_Classroom_Asse

ss ments_Improve_Learning.aspx

Hall, Arnita Rena. Mini Literature Review Based on Brain Research and its

Effect on Educational Practice. 2007-06-26. ERIC #: ED497408

Hertberg-Davis, Holly L.; Brighton, Catherine M.. (2006-00-00).

Support and Sabotage: Principals' Influence on Middle School

Teachers' Responses to Differentiation. Journal of Secondary Gifted

Education. v17 n2 p90-102 Win 2006. ERIC #: EJ746048

Igo, L. Brent; Bruning, Roger A.; Riccomini, Paul J.. Should Middle School

Students with Learning Problems Copy and Paste Notes from the

Internet? Mixed-Methods Evidence of Study Barriers. 2009-00-00. RMLE

Online: Research in Middle Level Education. v33 n2 2009. National

Middle School Association.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/

ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ867141.

ERIC #: EJ867141

Lopez, Doreen M.; Schroeder, Linda. Designing Strategies That Meet the

Variety of Learning Styles of Students. 2008-05-01. ERIC #: ED500848

Marzano, Robert J.; Gaddy, Barbara B.; Dean, Ceri. What Works in

Classroom Instruction. 2000-08-00. Mid-Continent Research for Education

and Learning. http://www.eric.ed.

gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet

?accno=ED468434. ERIC #: ED468434

Marzano, Robert J. What Works in Schools. ASCD Online. 2003.

http://www.as

cd.org/publications/books/102271/chapters/Instructional_Strategies.aspx
McMillan, James H.; Hearn, Jessica. "The Key to Stronger Student

Motivation and Higher

 Achievement." Educational Horizons. v87 n1 p40-49 Fall 2008. Pi Lambda
Theta, Inc.

2008-00-00.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/

ERICServlet?accno=EJ815370. ERIC #: EJ815370

Oginsky, Terri. Supporting the Development of Intrinsic Motivation in the

Middle School Classroom. 2003-06-20.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/

contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED482246. ERIC #:

ED482246

Saban, Ahmet. (2009-00-00). Content Analysis of Turkish Studies

about the Multiple Intelligences Theory. Information Analyses;

Journal Articles; Reports - Research. Educational Sciences:

Theory and Practice. v9 n2 p859- 876 Spr 2009. Educational

Consultancy, Ltd (EDAM). Kisikli Mh. Alemdag Cd. Yan Yol Sk.,

SBK Is Merkezi No:5 Kat:1, Uskudar-Istanbul, 34692 Turkey. Tel:

+90-216-481-30-23; Fax: +90-216-481-31-36; e-mail:

[email protected]; Web site:

http://www.edam.com.tr/estp.asp. ERIC #: EJ847783

Spires, Michele S.; Jaeger, Janet. (2002-05-00). A Survey of the

Literature on Ways to Use Web-Based and Internet Instruction

Most Effectively: Curriculum and Program Planning. ERIC #:

ED477459

Sondergeld, Toni A.; Schultz, Robert A. (2008-00-00). Science,

Standards, and Differentiation: It Really Can Be Fun!. Gifted

Child Today. v31 n1 p34- 40 Win 2008 .Prufrock Press Inc. P.O.

Box 8813, Waco, TX 76714-8813.

Tel: 800-998-2208; Tel: 254-756-3337; e-mail: [email protected];

 Web site: http://www.prufrock.com. ERIC #: EJ781689

Toporski, Neil; Foley, Tim. Design Principles for Online Instruction: A

New Kind of Classroom. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education--

TOJDE v5 n1 Jan 2004. 2004-01-00. ERIC #: ED494439

Van Hook, Steven R.. Theories of Intelligence, Learning, and Motivation as a

Basic
 Educational Praxis. 2008-06-15. ERIC #: ED501698Online

Submission Westberg, Karen L., Ed.; Archambault, Francis X., Jr., Ed.

Profiles of Successful Practices for

High Ability Students in Elementary Classrooms. Research Monograph

95122.

1995-09-00. ERIC #: ED413702

Wolpert, Gloria. Successful Daily Practices of Inclusion

Teachers of Children with Down Syndrome. 2001-03-27. ERIC #: ED453160