Thanks for the comments and questions! Our assessment of interest, relevance, and self-efficacy is based on surveys, observations, and focus groups. We've written up a bit on this in conference proceedings, with a more complete article in preparation. 

We have looked at impacts on the near-peer mentors, one interesting outcome is that they report being more likely to take up future opportunities for community engagement and educational outreach. Anecdotally, they experience growth in leadership and communication skills, plus a real sense of mastery. Lots more to do here, though. 

On the need for hands-on learning... yes! The making and project-based learning communities really value this.  

Great questions, Brian. As I mentioned in reply to Amy's question, our assessment of interest, relevance, and self-efficacy is based on surveys, observations, and focus groups. We've written up a bit on this in conference proceedings, with a more complete article in preparation.

As far as the design of activities, we do a lot of testing to make sure the scope and complexity are in the right ballpark so that our participants will be successful. Our near-peer mentors (undergrads) are really important in designing activities - they have a keen understanding of what will be doable and appealing to our participants. Finally, we use low-cost materials because our participants have told us they want to take their projects home and share with siblings, parents, etc.

I have heard many of our undgrad facilitators say, "I wish there had been something like this for me when I was in middle school." The ability to give back to their community is really powerful and empowering for them. Being the expert and leader in a school setting is also powerful. In their undergrad classes, it may be hard for them to feel a sense of mastery (after all, just as they 'get it', we move on to a new topic), but in this program they have to chance to realize how much they have grown and learned. There is more room to study this impact. 

Great questions, Fran. I'd love to hear more about this, too, how the undergrads are prepped for this teaching experience!

Fran and Amy, I'd be happy to answer your questions! Our undergrad STEM Ambassadors are extensively trained on everything from how to build and teach the STEM making projects, the preparation and logistics related to the program (managing supplies, getting to/from the site, data collection, etc.), classroom management, and safety protocols.

The activity list for each semester's program is pre-planned so that we have consistency across all sites. This is helpful, especially as it relates to activity training for our undergrad staff/volunteers and supply management. When it comes to which activities, we do take input from our undergrad team, but the process is largely driven by one of our Lead STEM Ambassadors, an undergrad who has come up through the program and is now heavily involved in this planning. Together we ensure that our projects span various STEM concepts, can be completed in a 90-min session, and fall within our budget. 

I appreciate your comment Andee. We do have a community of passionate teachers who include making and project-based work in their classes. I think there is plenty of room for this with NGSS, but the informal setting does give us some additional freedom in terms of content as well as prioritizing affective outcomes such as interest, relevance, and self-efficacy. 

On the sustainability front, one approach we've used is having our undergrads involved through course-based service learning. They get academic credit and part of the course is designed to prepare them for their role. Another route is to work with schools as a (paid) service provider for their afterschool programs. We also have a proposal in review to develop similar programs at other California State Universities (fingers crossed!). We are excited to keep this work going!