Thank you for your questions Sarah.

Q: I'm interested in hearing more about the first step of your model - finding leaders. What does that process look like for the team?

ECEP’s 4-step process, specifically the finding leaders stage, evolves differently in each ECEP Alliance state. For some states an initial core of leaders with an interest in advancing computer science education emerges. Sometimes stakeholders in states begin with the organizing allies step, usually a summit or other convening. Holding state gatherings focused on computer science education is one strategy that can lead to the identification of leaders. No matter how a state begins organizing around CS education, finding leaders is about finding people who will commit to maintaining a focus on equity and broadening participation in computing. We coach states on building broad based leadership teams that include diverse representatives from K-12, higher education, government, industry, community-based organizations, and the research community.   

Q: What do those leaders need to commit to for work through ECEP to move forward?

When states join ECEP we ask them to commit to NSF’s broadening participation in computing goals to develop strategies to engage the 70% of students who are missing in computing. In order to achieve NSF’s goals, we want state leadership teams to utilize ECEP’s services and resources, and actively participate with the community via monthly virtual calls and annual in-person meetings. ECEP members continuously report that advice from other state teams, as well as access to experts and organizations, allows them to develop strategic computer science education efforts.

Q: Are there plans to continue the work in some way, beyond the current funding period?

We are actively pursuing funding that will allow us to continue our work beyond the current funding period. We know that there are a lot of non-ECEP states actively seeking resources on how to build sustainable BPC strategies into their state plans. We are available for coaching and consultations.     

Glad you liked the video Richard. Keeping broadening participation at the center of our work as an alliance involves the ECEP PIs, Co-PIs and state leaders constantly holding each other accountable. This high level of communication and accountability allows us to build strategies and policies that serve the missing 70%, the students who are underrepresented in computing. We rely on internal expertise and collaborations with projects like NCWIT, CSforAll Teachers, the CSforAll Consortium, CSTA, and your project, AccessComputing, to deepen our knowledge and infuse new resources. 

We track activities through formal evaluations of state level work, and informally during our monthly calls. With our evaluation team, SageFox Consulting, ECEP designed a state survey and a community survey that allow us to track activities at the state level. Recently we expanded our data collection to hone in on BPC-specific activities. We asked states about the ease of BPC-data collection (how easy is it to collect K-12 data?) and the value of collecting the data (if you had access to this data, would it further your state BPC strategies?). Based on feedback from our state leaders, and our commitment to advancing BPC work, we are developing new support tools for the alliance that will help us to better track success and identify gaps in our work.  

Yes, ECEP does connect many people across a range of positions in computer science education policy reform efforts. As state leaders develop their broad-based teams, they do most of the connecting. Every ECEP state is unique, which means they are all at different stages in their state efforts, have distinct leadership team designs, and diverse strategies to address BPC. Students benefit from our work when states leadership teams advocate for policy changes that support equity in CS education, build teacher professional development opportunities, and adopt CS standards that address equity.

We do not develop curriculum, and leave curriculum decisions up to state teams. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Education, in collaboration with the Education Development Center, Inc. and the Massachusetts Computing Attainment Network (MassCAN), developed a K-12 CS Curriculum Guide to help 'demystify the landscape of computer science (CS) curricula options and to provide a curated collection of high quality CS curricula for students in grades K-12'. This is one example of how a state addresses the issue of curriculum adoption considerations.    

As for our findings, you can find us on Twitter at @ECEP_CS and on the web at https://ecepalliance.org. The publications page is where we post articles about our work. 

One such example that we completed with the help of ECEP was our landscape report in Indiana. It allowed us to see what areas we were doing well in and what areas we needed to improve in: bit.ly/CSforINFinalReport 

And the next step using the IN Landscape Report is a major Summit of stakeholders from the DOE, providers, districts, government, guidance counselors to help promote a high level understanding of both cs education at K-12 levels with the emphasis on broadening participation, and challenges to be tackled as next steps are being developed for systematic implementation. ECEP is making this June 1 Summit possible.

Thank you for the feedback and your questions Christopher. Collaborating with other projects nationally and locally is instrumental in the success of ECEP. We rely on the resources and expertise of other NSF funded projects to expand our capacity to broaden participation for all students. We recently invited Richard Ladner, AccessComputing PI, to our annual meeting to discuss his research on broadening participation for students with disabilities. Richard helped us consider new data collection methods to assist our state teams in identifying gaps in K-12 computer science access for students with disabilities. Richard and the AccessComputing team are incredible allies in this work, and have worked with us since the launch of ECEP. 

Across the ECEP Alliance we have a broad-base group of involved stakeholders and were intentional in making this a key aspect of our state change model. Because our state teams are all unique, it is hard to identify a missing group of stakeholders. Through our state leadership teams and national collaborations, we work to ensure that we are not missing anyone at the table. 

Fantastic, Sarah.  Nice work getting Richard and the AccessComputing network involved!  As you continue to build and work with your state-level stakeholders, what are your expectations for them?  Will your network begin to sustain with all stakeholders having specific tasks moving forward (marketing, mentoring, fundraising to keep the project going, etc)? 

We encourage our state leadership teams to develop strategic plans that include goals for a sustainable model. Currently all 16 states and the territory of Puerto Rico are working on tasks specific to their unique needs at this juncture in their state efforts. So yes, all states and stakeholders are working on building sustainable efforts but they all look a little different. Marketing, fundraising, awareness raising, and leadership team development, all play a role in state efforts.  

Allison, thanks for posting a link to your video. As educators and researchers continue to build the CS for All movement, it is important to have many pathways and on-roads for students, educators, and other stakeholders to engage in. Your work is a nice example of a unique pathway. As your middle school curricula develops, please send updates. 

Here is a sampling of a few of the resources supporting broadening participation in computing that we point partners to: 

    NCWIT resources: These can be searched by goals and audience. There are a number of resources that address classroom strategies for increasing participation in K-12 classrooms.  

    K-12 Computer Science Framework: Equity is addressed in a number of sections of this document. There is a section on developing standards that 'allow for engagement by all students'. 

    CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards: Many states use these standards as a guide when developing their own state state specific standards. Diversity, equity, and inclusion are emphasized.