2283 Views
  1. Sarah Dunton
  2. ECEP Alliance Director
  3. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  4. MGHPCC, ECEP Alliance
  1. Maureen Biggers
  2. http://womenandtech.indiana.edu
  3. Executive Director
  4. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  5. Indiana University Bloomington
  1. Josh Childs
  2. Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Leadership and Policy
  3. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  4. University of Texas at Austin
  1. Carol Fletcher
  2. https://www.linkedin.com/in/carol-fletcher-20740511?trk=nav_responsive_tab_profile
  3. Director, EPIC
  4. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  5. ECEP, University of Texas at Austin
  1. Anne Leftwich
  2. http://@anneleftwich
  3. Associate Professor
  4. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  5. Indiana University Bloomington, ECEP
  1. Debra Richardson
  2. http://www.ics.uci.edu/~djr
  3. Professor
  4. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  5. University of California Irvine
  1. Ryan Torbey
  2. https://www.linkedin.com/in/ryantorbey
  3. Project Specialist
  4. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  5. University of Texas at Austin
  1. Jayce Warner
  2. Research Associate
  3. Presenter’s NSFRESOURCECENTERS
  4. University of Texas at Austin

The ECEP Alliance

NSF Awards: 1822011

2020 (see original presentation & discussion)

Grades K-6, Grades 6-8, Grades 9-12, Undergraduate

The Expanding Computing Education Pathways (ECEP) Alliance addresses systemic inequalities present in computing and computer science education. ECEP deploys a collective impact model to catalyze state teams through policy, interventions, and metrics that impact broadening participation in computing (BPC). Our alliance of 22 states and the territory of Puerto Rico, collaborates on efforts to increase the number and diversity of students pursuing computer science education. Serving as the backbone organization, ECEP builds a common agenda around BPC, facilitates communication among a broad based group of leaders and change makers, supports mutually reinforcing activities, and promotes adoption of longitudinal data systems for tracking BPC-related outcomes. In collaboration with our state teams we have refined policy recommendations to meet the unique needs of each state, served as a knowledge broker and connector, expanded resource networks, and developed scalable models and interventions for BPC. 

At the state level, leadership teams engage in ECEP’s 5-stage model of state change, building strong leadership teams, impacting policies, hosting statewide convenings, developing landscape reports and strategic plans, and developing goals and metrics to track and measure efforts. As ECEP pursues historic education reform around BPC, we are challenged with trying to avoid the unintended consequences that typically beget policy designs and implementation. The CAPE model allows us to see, through data, that equity issues related to Capacity for CS education, Access to CS education, Participation in CS education, and Experiences of CS education continue to challenge the computer science community’s best efforts.

Pandemics and climate change are just a few examples of how our lives are becoming more dependent on computer science to solve everyday problems. To solve these problems, we need to have diverse voices represented in computer science education, and have those voices lead us in our pursuit of computer science education reforms. Furthermore, diverse voices and perspectives are needed to address policies that have prevented low-income and marginalized communities from successfully leveraging computing to participate fully in today’s innovation economy. As educators, policymakers, and other relevant stakeholders shape what comes next in our country’s education agenda, equity-centered computer science education should be at the forefront.

Resource:

This video has had approximately 533 visits by 346 visitors from 208 unique locations. It has been played 190 times.
Click to See Activity Worldwide
Map reflects activity with this presentation from the 2020 STEM For All Video Showcase website, as well as the STEM For All Multiplex website.
Based on periodically updated Google Analytics data. This is intended to show usage trends but may not capture all activity from every visitor.
show more
Original Discussion from the 2020 STEM For All Video Showcase
  • Icon for: Maureen Biggers

    Maureen Biggers

    Co-Presenter
    May 4, 2020 | 11:38 a.m.
    Our 2020 video highlights two prominent models driving efforts of the Expanding Computing Education Pathways (ECEP) Alliance. 1)The 5-Stage model for how to change a state’s approach to CS education and 2) The CAPE model which is a framework for examining equity throughout the CS Ed ecosystem including a) Capacity for equitable CS education, b) Access to equitable CS education, c) Participation in equitable CS education, and  d) Experience of equitable CS education.   We would love to hear feedback about how the CAPE model fits with how you are attempting to address equity issues in your work. Please share with the community how you are looking at equity in each of the four CAPE stages. What’s working for you and what are your persistent challenges? We hope this will be an opportunity to learn from each other as we all work to broaden participation in computing.   Best Regards, ECEP PI Team  
     
    3
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Richard Kick
    Pati Ruiz
    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Renee Fall

    Renee Fall

    Researcher
    May 5, 2020 | 05:15 p.m.

    I appreciate ECEP's model and support of CS ed reforms at the state level, and I've witnessed its impacts up close now in two states, which are very different. Can you share a bit about how the 5th stage works? Is data or data infrastructure being shared across states?  In terms of the CAPE model, it seems state education policy most likely addresses Capacity and Access, whereas Participation and Experience are influenced at the district, school, or classroom level. Do you find that to be the case in ECEP's experience? Are ECEP states finding ways to address Participation and Experience via state policy changes? 

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Carol Fletcher
  • Icon for: Jayce Warner

    Jayce Warner

    Co-Presenter
    May 6, 2020 | 12:38 p.m.

    Those are great questions, Renee. I think Stage 5 may happen differently across states since states differ in terms of what education data are collected and how. States also differ in terms of who can access the data. The important thing is that there is a team of folks in the state who can access the data, is invested in broadening participation in computing for their state, has the capacity and ability to analyze and report the data, and has the network/connections for making sure the reported data reach the right decision-makers in the state. I suspect that for most states that team would be led by someone in the state education department since state ed department staff are more likely to have access to the data. In Texas, we don't really have anyone at the ed dept with that kind of capacity and vested interest. However, we are fortunate that our team (CS ed researchers at the University of Texas) is able to access all of the state public education, so we have taken it upon ourselves to analyze and report out the CS ed data. 

    In terms of sharing across states, that is an area where we need a lot of work done. Right now, data are not very comparable across states due to differences in how the data are collected and reported as well as differences in CS ed policy. ECEP is currently working on a project with the six New England states to tackle that problem by creating common metrics across states to report out. The hope is to scale this work to the broader ECEP community and eventually the nation.

    As for CAPE. I think you make a great point. I agree that state ed policy has greater influence over Capacity and Access than Participation and Experience. There are some ways, however, in which state policy could impact Participation and Experience. For example, in terms of Participation, state policy that mandates or suggests prerequisites for certain courses would impact who is able to take those courses. For Experience, course standards written at the state level could explicitly address issues of equity and inclusion in CS.

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Maureen Biggers
    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 6, 2020 | 01:04 p.m.

    Just to build on what Jayce has said regarding state policy and experience, this is one of the reasons why supporting states to create standards for CS is an important component of a project like ECEP. On it's surface, it may seem like standards writing is not directly connected to BPC, but if ECEP leaders are involved to ensure that standards include explicit attention to equity, diversity, inclusion, the social impacts of computing, etc., then we know that students are more likely to experience these things as well. 

     

  • Icon for: Alison Heimowitz

    Alison Heimowitz

    Facilitator
    May 5, 2020 | 11:50 a.m.

    Great to see a project aimed at increasing the number and diversity of students participating in computer science education. I am wondering if you can speak a little more about how your team worked with historically marginalized communities to identify barriers and co-create the 5-Stage model? In what ways does the model take into consideration differences in barriers across communities?   

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Anne Leftwich
    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 5, 2020 | 02:52 p.m.

    The ECEP 5-stage model is just a starting point for most states. The first stage of building a diverse leadership team is where states work to intentionally include the voices of traditionally underrepresented groups in CS. Each state also uses the process of developing a CS landscape report to determine where their most persistent gaps may be occurring. For some states, that might be women in CS, for some it might be students of color, and for others, it might be rural students or Native American students. Once the data points to these specific areas of inequity, states can then develop strategies and interventions that address the unique challenges of their populations of focus. 

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Anne Leftwich
  • Icon for: Ann Gates

    Ann Gates

    Higher Ed Faculty
    May 5, 2020 | 12:36 p.m.

    Hi Maureen!  I enjoyed viewing ECEP's informative video and learning about ECEP's well-designed framework.  ECEP's mission aligns with the Computing Alliance of Hispanic-Serving Institutions (CAHSI).  I look forward to reconnecting and setting aside time to reinforce our common efforts.  

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Anne Leftwich
  • Icon for: Debra Richardson

    Debra Richardson

    Co-Presenter
    May 5, 2020 | 02:20 p.m.

    Yes indeed Ann ... ECEP would love to have better connections with CAHSI.

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Anne Leftwich
  • Icon for: Maureen Biggers

    Maureen Biggers

    Co-Presenter
    May 5, 2020 | 01:59 p.m.

    Hi Ann. Thanks and it will be great to reconnect and explore ways our Alliances can do just that!

     

  • Icon for: Ann Gates

    Ann Gates

    Higher Ed Faculty
    May 5, 2020 | 03:22 p.m.

    Let's plan a meeting after the semester ends in a couple of weeks!

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 5, 2020 | 04:38 p.m.

    Thanks Ann - we would love to circle up with your group to see how we can work more closely together. Sarah Dunton will follow up to get something on our respective calendars!

  • Icon for: Kenne Dibner

    Kenne Dibner

    Facilitator
    May 6, 2020 | 11:17 a.m.

    Thank you so much for such a thoughtful video. Very informative, and the frameworks are clearly articulated. One thing I wondered is who the intended user is for the CAPE framework, and what grain size should they apply their thinking - it seems to me that it can be useful in multiple contexts, but I wondered if it has limitations for policy decisions in certain spaces? I'm always happy to see thoughtful, scholarly approaches to supporting policy stakeholders determine courses of action, so I'd like to know a little more about how you expect this can be used. Thanks again for a wonderful video!

  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 6, 2020 | 12:55 p.m.

    This is a great question. Because ECEP's unit of analysis is at the state level, we originally developed the CAPE model to consider a state-wide ecosystem. For example, at the level of capacity, is state funding for CS education provided to all school districts by formula (meaning "baked into" the formula funding from the state) or does it require individual districts to apply for special, short term grants? This has equity implications because most small or rural districts don't have the bandwidth to apply for funding to support a program that may only have 1 teacher at 1 high school initially. This creates inequities that favor large, multi-high school districts and an administrative staff who can apply for and manage special grants from the state. That is an example of how equity can be interrogated at the state level. However, it is also possible to use this model at a district or campus level as well. Using the same component of capacity, a district could examine how teacher capacity differs across schools. I know there are many districts here in Texas that offer a whole suite of CS courses at their more affluent schools and none at their less affluent schools. What is the role of the district in ensuring that qualified teachers are available for all of their schools and students? Even individual teachers can use this framework to examine their own CS programs. For example, if a teacher or school has a policy of requiring students to have completed Algebra I before enrolling in a CS course, this can have huge implications for diverse enrollment in CS due to institutional bias in prior advanced math pathways that result in fewer capable black, brown, or low income students having taken Algebra 1 before high school. So, while in theory, students of color may have "access" to CS, they can't really "participate" at the same rate as non-minority students if these policies are actually denying them access upon entry to high school. We presented a paper on this at SIGCSE '20 if you'd like to see the empirical evidence for how this is playing out across Texas. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3328778.3366...

     
    3
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Kenne Dibner
    Maureen Biggers
  • Icon for: Judi Fusco

    Judi Fusco

    Facilitator
    May 6, 2020 | 12:28 p.m.

    Great project! I visited your website to learn a little more... You have a lot of resources!  I kept poking around because I was super curious about what states were doing and I found this!  https://ecepalliance.org/about/alliance-members

    So much happening.  Can you talk for a minute about what exciting indicators of progress you've seen in different states?  

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Anne Leftwich
    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Sarah Dunton

    Sarah Dunton

    Lead Presenter
    ECEP Alliance Director
    May 6, 2020 | 06:24 p.m.

    Hi Judi - thank you for going the extra mile and visiting our website. Yes, there are a lot of resources there.


    In our most recent national ECEP convening, we asked each state team to prepare a mini-presentation outlining their broadening participation in computing-focused progress over the past year. Responses ranged from passing legislation that is supportive of CS education with an equity focus (Alabama), to the release of an equity guide designed to bring more K-12 administrators into the work of broadening participation in computing (California).


    Other areas in which state teams have made progress include:



    • The development of pre-service teacher pathways (Co-PIs Anne Leftwich and Leigh Ann DeLyser are leading additional research on pre-service pathways)

    • Creating state-level data dashboards, and other collection and dissemination of data such as landscape reports

    • Hosting statewide computer science education summits to democratize decision making and build consistent messages around the past, present, and future reality of BPC efforts


    Some of our past videos also highlight the progress made in ECEP states too. 

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Judi Fusco
    Anne Leftwich
  • Icon for: Judi Fusco

    Judi Fusco

    Facilitator
    May 10, 2020 | 01:13 p.m.

    Thank you.  I am excited to check out the equity guide.   Excited to hear about new legislation too.  I'll look for past videos.  

  • Icon for: Debra Richardson

    Debra Richardson

    Co-Presenter
    May 10, 2020 | 01:47 p.m.

    Judi, Thanks for checking out the Equity Guide... hope it's useful for you.  We'd love to hear any feedback.  

    Unfortunately, a lot of legislation requiring $$ has not moved forward due to what states have had to deal with due to COVID-19.

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Richard Kick
  • Icon for: Deborah Seehorn

    Deborah Seehorn

    NC ECEP State Lead
    May 6, 2020 | 04:46 p.m.

    Great video!  You have succinctly described the ECEP 5-stage model and incorporated CAPE into the 5th stage to focus on data and measuring BPC progress.  So happy ECEP was able to submit another video this year and to highlight and share the resources available for broadening participation in computing.

     
    3
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Judi Fusco
    Anne Leftwich
    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Sarah Dunton

    Sarah Dunton

    Lead Presenter
    ECEP Alliance Director
    May 6, 2020 | 06:52 p.m.

    Thank you for your feedback Deborah. Since the last ECEP Summit, we've been developing ways to talk about how the 5-Stage model and the CAPE Framework work together. Making this video helped us to be concise.

    We also just published this news article on our ECEP Website talking about how the 5-Stage Model of State Change, the CAPE Framework and our revised Theory of Change inform our broadening participation work. 

  • May 7, 2020 | 02:15 p.m.

    Thanks for this great and clear video! We've been partnering with the ECEP team in Rhode Island to survey their 1st-12th grade students about their experiences and beliefs about computer science. We were really lucky to be approached by their state Office of Innovation a few years ago. Do you have suggestions for other ways for researchers like us to connect with school districts and departments of education to build researcher-practitioner partnerships?

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 7, 2020 | 03:55 p.m.

    Thanks for highlighting this Allison. I would encourage any researcher who is exploring ways to connect their work with broader impacts in K-12 to check out the ECEP membership website https://ecepalliance.org/about/alliance-members to connect to ECEP state leaders. These amazing individuals are often doing much more than state level policy work but also teacher professional development, student camps, curriculum development, and BPC research of their own. They are the folks who can serve as Mavens and Connectors, to borrow from Malcolm Gladwell, and who understand the CS landscape well enough to help you find strong partners. Many of the ECEP state leaders are part of RPPs themselves. I also recommend reaching out to the Career and Technology directors at state agencies, even if you aren't in an ECEP state, as computer science is part of CTE in many states. 

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Allison Master
  • Icon for: Stacey Sexton

    Stacey Sexton

    Researcher
    May 8, 2020 | 03:45 p.m.

    Another set of resources geared toward building researcher-practitioner partnerships are the RPPforCS project (of which I am a member of the leadership team), and the National Network of Research-Practice Partnerships. Both of these groups offer resources to support the creation, sustainability, and improvement of partnerships. You can read RPPforCS' latest write-up for the quarterly publication NNERPP | Extra for an overview of our community and the work that we do.

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Carol Fletcher
  • Icon for: Debra Richardson

    Debra Richardson

    Co-Presenter
    May 8, 2020 | 04:22 p.m.

    Thanks Stacey ... we're aware of the RPPforCS project, as many of us have RPPforCS grants (and one of our PIs is also on your leadership team).  We have certainly all learned from the RPPforCS project in developing our own projects, which have contributed to ECEP in multiple ways.

  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 7, 2020 | 04:27 p.m.

    I'm curious to hear how other researchers and practitioners are examining equity across the CS ecosystem. If you have examples of how equity is being measured or explored in capacity for CS ed, access to CS ed, participation in CS ed, or experiences of CS ed, please share!

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Stacey Sexton

    Stacey Sexton

    Researcher
    May 8, 2020 | 04:35 p.m.

    Hi Carol!

    Equity has been a huge focus of the CS for All Springfield RPP project. One way that we are attending to Access by tracking the rollout of the Professional Development and the project-created lesson plans over time, noticing the schools and classrooms that are we are impacting and even more so noticing those we have yet to reach. As time goes on, I could imagine a future study that looks at the students' subsequent course taking patterns and performance. In the CRōCS project that I'm an evaluator for, their primary focus has been on influencing the student experience through focusing on culturally responsive and equitable pedagogies.

    A few other folks and I are doing some work that grew out of a pre-RESPECT workshop to look at equity as a capacity within a research practice partnership, which we posit influences how an RPP team might approach their own equity interventions.

    Great video, by the way! 

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
    Carol Fletcher
  • Icon for: Carol Fletcher

    Carol Fletcher

    Co-Presenter
    May 8, 2020 | 05:14 p.m.

    Love this idea of equity itself being a capacity building characteristic of an RPP - thanks for sharing Stacey.

  • Icon for: Joanne Stewart

    Joanne Stewart

    Higher Ed Faculty
    May 8, 2020 | 12:06 p.m.

    How great that CS has this higher level organizing structure! Could you say a little more about how communication works in ECEP? How does information move from the top down, and how does information come back from local and state levels?

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Anne Leftwich

    Anne Leftwich

    Co-Presenter
    May 8, 2020 | 12:53 p.m.

    In addition to what Maureen said below, we also have tried to employ smaller working groups that focus on specific issues (like preservice pathways or community colleges) to help narrow our focus areas. 

    We also tend to collaborate across states to present at conferences and publish articles. 

    Also, each month in the Zoom meetings, we rotate through and feature states that have new ideas or policies that have been put into place. It's truly an amazing collaboration between states, building and sharing policies, materials, and resources that work to support the broadening of participation in computing.

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Carol Fletcher
    Sarah Dunton
  • Icon for: Maureen Biggers

    Maureen Biggers

    Co-Presenter
    May 8, 2020 | 12:47 p.m.

    Hi Joanne, and thank you for your comment. Our leadership team, including PIs and evaluators, meets for 90 minutes every two weeks via Zoom and we're also in close communication using various channels in Slack. For the full ECEP group, we hold monthly community meetings via Zoom and enjoy participation from at least (one and often more than one) team member from each of our 23 participating states + PR. They share highlights, we have featured presenters that align with our mission followed by Q&A, the ongoing work is supported and encouraged by all. Annually we meet face to face as a full group to further motivate, collaborate, share and drive the important work of this alliance. Communication is two way all along the way! Please let us know if you have other questions about how this works.

     
    2
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Carol Fletcher
    Sarah Dunton
  • May 9, 2020 | 05:51 p.m.

    These issues of equity are vitally important. Thank you for taking this on on and it looks like you're doing a fantastic job. Allison Master and I wrote a review paper recently that takes on some of these issues, especially on gender stereotypes and STEM, which possibly may interest you (below). Reciprocally, we'll look more deeply into your wonderful program. Your video succeeded in being enticing and informative. 

    http://ilabs.washington.edu/sites/default/files...

     
    1
    Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available

    Anne Leftwich
  • Icon for: Sarah Dunton

    Sarah Dunton

    Lead Presenter
    ECEP Alliance Director
    May 11, 2020 | 09:02 a.m.

    Thank you for posting your paper about the STEreotypes, Motivation, and Outcomes (STEMO)model. I look forward to a deeper dive in to your paper and the interventions you highlight. We appreciate the feedback on our video, and are certainly happy to talk more about how our efforts align with yours. 

  • Icon for: Clayton Lewis

    Clayton Lewis

    Researcher
    May 12, 2020 | 04:39 p.m.

    Great to see this work!

  • May 12, 2020 | 06:16 p.m.

    Great work.  With such a well developed, comprehensive framework, seems like the ECEP and CAPE framework should be in EVERY state.  Does your team have a devoted outreach for state-level policy makers and their possible adoption of this program?

  • Further posting is closed as the event has ended.

Multiplex Discussion
  • Post to the Discussion

    If you have an account, please login before contributing. New visitors may post with email verification.


    For visitors, we require email verification before we will post your comment. When you receive the email click on the verification link and your message will be made visible.



    Name:

    Email:

    Role:
    NOTE: Your email will be kept private and will not be shared with any 3rd parties