Hello Melssa, 

I appreciate that the program allows students to remain engaged in science throughout the school year. Similarly, working on authentic problems is what is missing in many schools today. Hence, to have student learning and problem-solving in a real-world context is sure to promote and will ultimately sustain many students’ interest in science. I also really love that the project gets parents involved early in the program. This parental involvement provides a built-in support system that will also encourage students’ sustained interest in science.  

 

Dear Marion, 

Thanks for your interest in our program.  The program will be using virtual field trips for the first time this year and I see that your program has developed a virtual field trip in response to covid 19.  In what ways will this experience be modified in response to the pandemic? 

Hi Rebecca,

 

thanks for your comment. I have answered your questions below:

 

1. Examples or projects:

We make the projects relevant to the students by allowing them to identify real world problems that they may face in school or the community at large. Recently, the students worked in the Morehouse 3D printing lab to design prototypes for devices to aid students with vision or hearing impairments to enhance their learning. The students used the design process to identify a problem, research current initiatives and products to address the problem, and came up with their own innovative design to addressing those with these impairments. Another example of a specific project when the topic was “using sound to build communities” students used arduino kits to create levitation devices in science, created sound proof boxes (similar to studios) in math, and explored Black history as students learned how songs, dance, poems and speeches were used to tell a story in English. 

2. In regards to recruitment, we took a gorilla marketing approach; we went to local elementary, middle and high schools to pass out fliers, sent emails to schools throughout the Atlanta metro area, and gave presentations at local PTA meetings, etc. Once parents or students expressed interest, they were directed to apply for the program. Everyone who applied was invited for an Assessment Day where the students took a serious of interactive tests in math, science and innovation.

the students were then selected based off of their test scores and application. We created a scale to accept students who are top students (GPA), interested in STEM and would truly benefit, students who are have an average GPA and  have some interest in STEM, and students who have may have interest but have not been exposed to STEM. Throughout the program we have a Parent University where are parents attend workshops and are given resources to better support STEM students. Parents are excited and interested in discovering ways to support their children, a lot of times they just don’t have the resources. In addition, in innovation the students do reflections where they identify colleges and/or careers they hope to pursue. From there we help them make action plans to get them excited about pursuing STEM.

 

3. In regards to COVID-19 we made some pivots in the curriculum, as our students are a younger group (currently rising 7th-9th graders). We are offering a virtual program in which the students will have live sessions w/ instructors, discussion boards, and collaborate with each other on assignments. The students will still be able to experience interactive learning, as we will be disseminating laptops along with kits for them to follow along with their instructors when building different devices, etc. In addition, we are incorporating enrichment piece through virtual field trips, etc. 

Hi Rebecca, 

Thanks for exploring our video and asking about our project.  

In terms of your question about change in student affect with regard to STEM and post-secondary education....Students reported high levels of STEM self-efficacy in Science, Math, Technology, Problem Solving and Innovation as well as high confidence in working and leading a research team.   Students also demonstrated high interest in skill sets important to STEM careers as well as in entering STEM careers. 

Assessments are ongoing with students taking part in evaluation activities at the end of each semester and each summer so we will be looking at changes over time.  

Before making changes to the program for this summer, we conducted focus groups and surveys with the parents and engaged the faculty team in the decision making process.  It may be of interest that it will be critical for programs to carefully construct questions to ask about participation options since we received vastly different responses depending on the wording of the questions.   For example, when asked if the children had a computer, 100% of the parents said yes.  However, when asked what they needed for their child to be able to fully participate, 50% said they needed a computer with notations such as the one they have does not work properly or that it was on loan for the school and they will not have it in the summer.  

Dear Shannon and Melissa,

Thank you for such helpful responses!

Shannon -- I'm impressed that your project is able to be responsive and flexible to allow students do identify the projects to work on. Can you tell me a bit more about how that process works? I would imagine that students needs some scaffolding to identify "workable" problems, and that the project needs to invest a significant amount of time to make problems accessible for the target age group. Additionally, is the whole day of each experience dedicated to the same problem, or do you have supporting activities? (I'd be super impressed either way, but I legitimately am curious as to how you can pull together such a robust program that meets students' self-identified interests).

Melissa and Shannon -- It seems to me that a key component of your project is about making the effort to push for equity through access. It sounds like you didn't cut any corners with respect to getting the word out through a serious amount of elbow grease, and that you had a very principled recruitment approach. It also seems that you spend a lot of time evaluating your own recruitment process. Seeing as how the application process is pretty substantial (having families show up to have their children take a skills test can be rather daunting), did you find any obstacles to families' motivation or ability to bring their children to get tested or remain involved in the program? 

Dear Rebecca, 

I think you may be interested in the reply to Meltem below where I discuss program retention which is quite high.  32 of the original 37 students who began in Summer 2019 were retained through Spring 2020 for an 86.5% overall 1 year retention rate.   In that reply I do address the fact that there is a substantial commitment by the families to participate over a 3 year period and that it is likely that the initial upfront commitment to participate in the Assessment Day and application process contributes to program retention.  While it is possible that this is an initial hurdle for some students/families, 127 students participated in the Assessment Day out 139 applicants.  

Shannon or one of the PI's can address the rest of your question more fully, but I just wanted to point out that the program includes short-term and long-terms projects and that the students participate in a variety of subjects including science, math, innovation, and English to engage with PBL learning opportunities.

Dear Robert,

Over the course of the program, students participate in surveys and program information is obtained from focus groups with parents and focus groups with program faculty.  Process evaluation was conducted by documentation of student participation and accomplishments, student surveys, and by information from program faculty and staff. Qualitative components of the program have been assessed by surveys, and focus groups.  Quantitative components of the program have been measured by quantitative goals, objectives and benchmarks. 

The project has 3 goals and a number of measurable objectives that we evaluate over the course of the project. 

Goal 1:  Increase student awareness and knowledge of educational opportunities and STEM careers.

Objective a. Increase student engagement in STEM educational opportunities

Objective b. Motivate students to pursue the appropriate education pathways for STEM and cognate careers

Objective c. Motivate and build interest of students to pursue STEM and/or STEM cognate career trajectories

Objective d. Introduce students to the innovation process underlying STEM based problem solving in a real-world project-based context

 

 Goal 2: Increase student knowledge, skills and practices represented in STEM and/or STEM cognate workforce.

Objective a. Provide technology-rich experiences that develop discipline-based knowledge and practices

Objective b. Provide opportunities to develop critical thinking and communication skills needed for entering STEM workforce sectors

Objective c. Increase student STEM self-efficacy

Objective d. Increase student exposure to innovation and creativity in STEM disciplines

Objective e. Engage parents and role models in student learning

Goal 3: Increase broadening participation of underrepresented populations in STEM

Objective a. Provide early engagement of underrepresented minority students in STEM programs opportunities

Objective b. Motivate underrepresented minority students to pursue STEM careers

Please also see the reply I just entered to Rebecca's question above for an example of some of our outcomes.  

Melissa,

This is substantial. How big is your team? I think your team's success in this project must start with a good team foundation...so now I'm curious about the back-end of this project!

The PI on the project, Dr. Trawick, has extensive experience bringing together collaborative teams.  iSTEM-Xe faculty members include Morehouse faculty from STEM departments, the Center for Teacher Preparation and Leadership, along with an Academic Advisor Specialist and 6-12^th grade STEM faculty. Several members of this team have collaborated together for many years and first came together under a DR-K12 project and then worked together on a similar ITEST project prior to this current ITEST project.  In addition to the faculty, the program has a full time Program Coordinator, Shannon Jolly.  A number of other individuals are brought into the project for specific components as needed.    

Hi Chris,

thanks for your response! 

Hi Jamie!

Thanks for your comment. We’ll be sure to check out Urban Advantage!

Hi Michael,

Thanks for your comment. We indeed do have plans of following-up with our cohort once they’ve moved on from the program to track progress and identify ways to enhance the program in the future.

Dear Michael,

This is one of the challenges with the funding cycles for typical NSF grants.  As with most NSF funded projects, the granting period does not provide for follow up opportunities as the funding will end before they complete high school.  However, these students enter in 6-8 grade and will participate for 3 years so we will follow them through 8-10th grade.  The project team had prior funding with a similar program and we are currently exploring funding opportunities to support the development of a tracking and support system for these students that can serve as a model to potentially utilize for this program as well when the time comes.    

Given the potential impact of your project, I would think it would be worth applying for a small supplement that extends the project by 2 years to collect follow up data and report.  Wouldn't the be a great project for a graduate students?  The results could provide a lot of insight into how well it worked and maybe even which aspects contributed to the long term success.  

Thanks Michael, 

We are exploring a number of potential options.  We do feel that such follow up will provide important outcome data as well as contribute to understanding the mechanism of success.  

What a great project! Beyond following/tracking the students, does your project incorporate those students who may have "aged out" as mentors or assistants?  

Dear Andrea, 

Thanks for your interest and question. 

The students will not age out of the program as the program is 3 years long and the students participate for 3 years in the program.  The students enter the program when they are in 6th, 7th, or 8th grade and stay in it for 3 years so that they are in 8th, 9th, or 10th grade the last year of the program.  

However, the project team has invited back some participants from a prior ITEST project to serve as neer-peer mentors/assistants for this current ITEST program during the summer sessions.  In addition, for that prior ITEST project, prior participants from a DRK-12 project and an LSAMP project served as need peer mentors/assistants.  

Dear Jonathan, 

Thank you for your interest in our project. I would say that one of the biggest challenges in integrating across the subject areas is time....how much time is allocated to each area, and how are these time blocks arranged?  This is a constantly negotiated issue within the team and is implemented differently at different times such that sometimes two subjects are combined and co-taught, other times one area may have a longer block than another, etc.  For example, science and innovation may need longer blocks for their projects.  The team meets multiple times per month and has a long standing working relationship and so is able to make shifts in these areas as needed.

Several of the pre-college teachers have used some PBL in their classrooms.  A professional development PBL workshop was conducted at the beginning of the project that also included brainstorming and consensus building on topics for the PBL topics.  During the academic year, team meetings are held early in the week on each week that there is a Saturday session to provide professional development and support to the faculty for the upcoming session. In addition, there are several team meetings held prior to the summer session for professional development and support.  Training has been ongoing for the blackboard technology that will be used for the virtual summer session.  

Melissa, it is great to hear more about the program! I would love to hear more updates as your program continues. 

Hi Marcia, 

Thanks for your question.  Students are challenged to work above grade level in all aspects of the program.  Parents report that their children have come to appreciate this as they experience greater success in their school classroom experience.  Students report high levels of STEM self-efficacy in Science (4.0), Math (3.9), Technology (3.9), Problem Solving (4.1) and Innovation (4.5) on a 5 point scale.  That being said, mathematics is probably the subject that students report as being the most challenging. 

Thanks Susan!