Thanks for the encouragement.  We need integration to dispel the "two sides of the brain" myth that people are EITHER artistic/creative OR scientific/analytical.  At the Da Vinci Science Center, Leonardo is our STEAM hero!  We have had resistance from some arts people who are worried their content will be diluted, or that integration will give administrators an excuse to reduce arts-dedicated class time, but most artists are aware that many of the skills overlap those of scientists and engineers (observation, experimentation, communication, argument from evidence, asking questions).  On the STEM side, arts-integration can seem like an unnecessary add-on to some teachers, but many have interests in the arts/humanities themselves and see it as a natural way to broaden engagement, provide meaningful context, and deepen learning.  We're working to increase the arts connections in our own programs, and we encourage the STEAM approach in our professional development classes.

Yes - our projects ARE very complementary.  We like to introduce the teachers in our PD program to some of the artists listed on your website (many from MIT Media Lab), and others like AI portrait artist, Nettrice Gaskins (whose new book I recommend), and many others who use light and motors in their work.  The "art-technology" intersection in K-12 education could be enhanced by more collaboration between tech ed, art, computer science, science, and math teachers, but it's very difficult for these teachers to find time to co-plan, and there is an unfortunate separation of the "core subject" teachers from the "specials" teachers.  Our PD program has encouraged the teachers to have students work on projects in groups, and we have emphasized the need to teach teamwork through fun interactive exercises followed up by reflection and discussion so that students learn this valuable skill AND have more success making their creations.

Thanks for the question.  With a 3-minute video, it's hard to describe the project, its impact, AND the challenges we faced!  Recruitment of volunteers was restricted to schools with at least 50% free/reduced meals, and at first we included only visual arts teachers.  Later (because we had trouble finding enough participants), we expanded to include teachers of music, STEAM classes, tech ed, and librarians who facilitate Maker projects.  And, as you suspected, a few did drop out because they decided that they didn't want to use the equipment in their art classes.  Some art teachers see their students for only 25 class periods in an entire academic year, so introducing a new multi-day project is a very big change to their plans.  The most enthusiastic adopters are the ones who enjoy jumping into something new and learning along with the students (who pick up this digital stuff easily).  Our teachers all have a lot of freedom within their districts.  I can't tell you how many times I've heard, "I can make ANY project fit the art standards and district curriculum."

Three cohorts, each with ~15 teachers, had staggered starts, beginning in summer 2018.  Each cohort was in the program for 2 years.  Each year, they received ~28 hours of PD in the summer, followed by ~16 hours of workshops during the school year, and ~16 hours of online discussion/assignments...I think it's a good model, but COVID definitely affected our participation.  Teachers also received free demonstration/outreach classes from the Da Vinci Science Center for their classes, so they had opportunities to see the recommended approaches being used with their own students.  These classes were definitely FUN (the scribbling machines in the video, and paper circuits, for example).  Teachers reported that the students were very engaged by the projects that used Makey Makeys and Hummingbird Bit kits, and they were very excited to design for the 3D printer and laser cutter.  We're working on a set of lesson plans to upload to OERCommons.