Love that students helped in producing this video. Based on the work so far, what elements of the program/partnerships do you think would be most essential in order to create similar opportunities in other communities?

Nice!
Were the students all recruited at once (in each location)? That is, is there a “first cohort” and a “later cohort”? I am curious about the development of a sort of engineering culture, and whether you had had the chance to watch newcomers get integrated/apprenticed?

Very interesting approach. Did students work in groups? How many groups were involved? How will you determine if they develop a productive identity?

Yes, students work in groups, generally 2 or 3 students per group. (Groups bigger than 3 seem to be harder to manage in terms of sharing of roles and responsibilities). We had 20 students per site this year, with 7-8 groups. (They fluctuate as youth become more familiar with each other and ideas shift). In terms of productive identity, we use the “productive identity work framework” [PIW] we developed, which operationalizes identity work along 3 lines: a) knowledge and practice, b) positioning & recognition, c) leveraging structures/agency. We use interviews, observations, student work, and survey to triangulate on these points. We’d be happy to share our paper on these ideas if you want. We do not make claims that students did or did not develop a productive identity, but rather we speak to the ways in which their identities developed along the aspects of the PIW framework (as we view identity work as always on-going and situational). Still, we think this gives helpful insight into the potential “sticking points” that youth face as they seek to develop identities in engineering.

I have been following this project for years. Have you been able to follow alumni of the program? Any interesting patterns there?

A couple of our alums are now in college. One is at Notre Dame on scholarship, another is at Michigan State. Some of the senior members who are still in K-12 have also come back to participate as mentors and Get City experts to the current youth.

Nice video! I like the approach. Have you encountered any challenges in implementing the program? Any plans to scale-up to other communities—if so, what types of challenges would you anticipate?

I love how you included the youth video in this!

I can’t imagine how differently I would have seen science and engineering growing up if I had been able to be part of something like this.

Thanks, Kate! We’re really excited about what they have accomplished and it would not be right to not have them as co-producers of this video!

Nice program. I’m wondering what you’ve found are the critical supports that facilitate student-driven interactions with local STEM expertise and, more speculatively, how that might work in a less resource-rich, university-remote setting. (Dean Livelybrooks, not a presenter/facilitator and, thus, Anonymous)

I totally agree that the use of story is a good entry point to engage diverse learners. Particularly for very young learners and those with little to no prior knowledge to frame or approach tasks. But I wonder what the impact is on students’ use of disciplinary discourse. If we accept the idea that part of developing their identify as engineers is to “talk and behave” like them, where do they develop this skill? The story genre features and expectations are quite different than a story (narrative) genre. Is that where the network of experts come in? If so, are you evaluating the extent to which students “take up” that discourse and relating it to their productive identities in engineering?

I meant to say The story genre features and expectations are quite different than a engineering discourse.