Summary of academic groups

During the fall semester, I facilitated an academic skills

curriculum to a group of 8th grade boys (n=3), and the same curriculum
to a group of 7th grade boys (n=7). The same curriculum was provided
to each group. Each meeting, all students used a grade tracker to
record their current class grades and how many missing assignments
they had using their school-distributed device, and would write down
the missing assignments they planned to complete that week on their
goal charts. After that portion, I would facilitate a short lesson
targeting a specific skill (see Action Plan for sequence and scope). The
inclusionary criteria was: having a passing ISTEP score, not receiving
Tier 3 special education services, with 1 or more failing (F = 59% or
lower)grade, and many missing assignments. One 7th grade student
did not have any Fs but was on the verge and had a high volume of
missing assignments.
To evaluate the success of the group, I looked at student grades,
observational and teacher report data, and a pre and post test. Due to
weather causing delays and snow days, the post-test was not
delivered.
Grades
Since one of the inclusionary criteria was having one or more classes
with a grade of F, that was the first thing that I looked at. Most
students showed a decrease in the number of Fs they had from pregroup to quarter 1. The 8th grade students continued to reduce or
maintain the number of Fs they received in quarter 2; however,
most of the 7th graders increased their number of Fs in quarter 2.
Most students in both groups increased in the number of Fs they
received in quarter 3.
Simply looking at the frequency of Fs does not fully capture
the potential of students changes in grades. Since an F is anything
below 60%, some students could have improved their grade, but not
enough to reach a D. Therefore, I looked at the number of classes that
students grades improved even by 1%. All students had an increase of
at least one grade. The students in the 8th grade group improved the
grades of a combined 8 classes in quarter 1, 12 classes had improved
grades in quarter 2, and 7 classes had improved grades for quarter 3.
For the 7th graders, they showed a combined improvement in 24
classes from pre-group to quarter 1, 10 classes saw increased grades
in quarter 2, and 13 improved in quarter 3.
Observational Data
Teachers reported that most of the students in both groups did
appear to be taking classes more seriously, at least in terms of
completing all of their assignments. I noticed a marked change in the
social interactions of the three 8th grade students over the course of
and after the group. All three interacted positively with each other

and began to interact with their peers as well, where before they had
each been rather socially isolated.
Conclusions
The data suggests that the 8th grade students showed the most
marked change in grades during quarter 2, while the 7th graders
changed most for quarter 1., and neither group could maintain their
grades after a full quarter without the group. I do plan to follow up at
the end of quarter 4 to see if there are any lingering influences. These
results suggest that it might be more helpful to taper off of sessions
instead of just ending at the quarter. In the future, I plan to extend the
group into the third quarter and meet every two weeks instead of
weekly, then terminate the group for the final quarter.
Limitations
Though I delivered the same curriculum to both groups, the
dynamics of the groups were different, so I had t o modify the way in
which I delivered the material. Another limitation is that many of my
students ended up receiving additional support through other
resources in the school (I ended up seeing all 3 8th graders individually
for other issues). One student was identified as needing Tier 3
services, several students began attending an afterschool homework
help, and several others became more involved in extracurricular
activities (drama club, sports,etc.). Though I think that this group did
contribute to any changes in their grades and academic engagement, I
acknowledge that it is not the only factor.

Table 1. 8TH Grade students change in grades

Name

Pre

Q1
77
76
66.3
59
63
55
55
67
80

Q2
75
75
63.6
76
51
73
77
68
81

Q3
65
69
63
94
77
76
63
56
87

72
69
55
78
77
55
54
63
67

42
81
82
61
83
79
75
83
49

57
83
89
70
85
70
83
76
61

67
96
83
64
82
81
86
73
62

75
98
78
66
76
40
76
95
44

Table 2. 7th Grade students change in grades

Student

Pre

Q1
44
97
93
69
62
72.297
85
59
98
100
47
68
95
100
99
68
80.405
67
88
48
94
68
34
53
33
48
100
68
68
64
95.223
51
100
99

Q2
54
97
95
76
54
66
90
72
92
99
52
68
95
96
92
71
79
76
93
55
65
77
53
57
37
67
99
76
75
65
70
59
99
92

61
99
80
71
24
70
80
77
28
94
24
47
89
100
89
60
72.135
63
80
74
75
29
28
38
41
41
98
65
69
59
61
96
100
90

Q3
66
87
85
60
50
56
85
75
81
97
56
69
91
87
82
77
73
60
76
53
66
71
29
47
62
63
81
71
50
62
30
83
71
85

80.405
46
8
60
87
95
52
65.151

74
57
15
67
82
84
63
67

65
58
29
12
70
28
43
44

Chart 1

8th grade change in # of "F" grades

5
4
# of 'F's"

3
2
1
0

Pre

Q1

Q2

Q3

Checkpoints

Chart 2

7th grade change in # of "F" grades

20
15
# of "F's"

10
5
0

Pre

Q1

Q2

Checkpoints

Q3

44
65
36
33
67
77
41
45

Chart 3

Individual 8th grade students frequency of "F's"

6
5

4
# of "F's" 3

1
0
Pre

Q1

Q2

Q3

Chart 4

Individual 7th grade students

frequency of "F's"
18
16
14
12 2
10 2
8 2
6 3
4
2
0
2
1
0
Pre

5
4
1
2
1
3
0
1
2
Q1

1
3
3
3
0
1
Q2

2
1
3
0
1
2
Q3