'Be a Scientist!' is a full-scale development project that examines the impact of a scalable, STEM afterschool program which trains engineers to develop and teach inquiry-based Family Science Workshops (FSWs) in underserved communities. This project builds on three years of FSWs which demonstrate improvements in participants' science interest, knowledge, and self-efficacy and tests the model for scale, breadth, and depth. The project partners include the Viterbi School of Engineering at the University of Southern California, the Albert Nerken Engineering Department at the Cooper Union, the Los Angeles Museum of Natural History, and the New York Hall of Science. The content emphasis is physics and engineering and includes topics such as aerodynamics, animal locomotion, automotive engineering, biomechanics, computer architecture, optics, sensors, and transformers. The project targets underserved youth in grades 1-5 in Los Angeles and New York, their parents, and engineering professionals. The design is grounded in motivation theory and is intended to foster participants' intrinsic motivation and self-direction while the comprehensive design takes into account the cultural, social, and intellectual needs of diverse families. The science activities are provided in a series of Family Science Workshops which take place in afterschool programs in eight partner schools in Los Angeles and at the New York Hall of Science in New York City. The FSWs are taught by undergraduate and graduate engineering students with support from practicing engineers who serve as mentors. The primary project deliverable is a five-year longitudinal evaluation designed to assess (1) the impact of intensive training for engineering professionals who deliver family science activities in community settings and (2) families' interest in and understanding of science. Additional project deliverables include a 16-week training program for engineering professionals, 20 physics-based workshops and lesson plans, Family Science Workshops (40 in LA and 5 in NY), a Parent Leadership Program and social networking site, and 5 science training videos. This project will reach nearly one thousand students, parents, and student engineers. The multi-method evaluation will be conducted by the Center for Children and Technology at the Education Development Center. The evaluation questions are as follows: Are activities such as recruitment, training, and FSWs aligned with the project's goals? What is the impact on families' interest in and understanding of science? What is the impact on engineers' communication skills and perspectives about their work? Is the project scalable and able to produce effective technology tools and develop long-term partnerships with schools? Stage 1 begins with the creation of a logic model by stakeholders and the collection of baseline data on families' STEM experiences and knowledge. Stage 2 includes the collection of formative evaluation data over four years on recruitment, training, co-teaching by informal educators, curriculum development, FSWs, and Parent Leadership Program implementation. Finally, a summative evaluation addresses how well the project met the goals associated with improving families' understanding of science, family involvement, social networking, longitudinal impact, and scalability. A comprehensive dissemination plan extends the project's broader impacts in the museum, engineering, evaluation, and education professional communities through publications, conference presentations, as well as web 2.0 tools such as blogs, YouTube, an online social networking forum for parents, and websites. 'Be a Scientist!' advances the field through the development and evaluation of a model for sustained STEM learning experiences that helps informal science education organizations broaden participation, foster collaborations between universities and informal science education organizations, increase STEM-based social capital in underserved communities, identify factors that develop sustained interest in STEM, and empower parents to co-invest and sustain a STEM program in their communities.
The adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards means that many educators who adhere to model-based reasoning styles of science will have to adapt their programs and curricula. In addition, all practitioners will have to teach modeling, and model-based reasoning is a useful way to do so. This brief offers perspectives drawn from Lehrer and Schauble, two early theorists in model-based reasoning.
Assessing science learning in informal environments involves a series of challenges that are difficult to address using traditional assessment practices (National Research Council, 2009). Some of the assessment challenges inherent in informal and afterschool environments include: (a) interactions in these environments are diverse in terms of duration, type of activity, number of people involved; (b) they usually include emerging behavior due to unpredictable interactions with other participants (e.g., peers, family members, and facilitators); and (c) these environments are characterized by a
Cross-national assessments of student learning in mathematics, science, reading, computer technology, and civics have been successfully conducted since the 1960’s. Each subject required professional researchers and educators from different cultural backgrounds to reach agreement on a common definition of the content areas and measurement techniques for formal schooling. Two international organizations, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) and the Organization for Economic and Cooperation and Development (OECD) are now continuously conducting
This background paper is intended to support consideration of assessments "in improving program quality and student learning outcomes in the field of informal science education." This includes three questions: (a) What definitions of engagement, interest, curiosity, and motivation might be used in evaluations of informal and after-school science learning programs and activities? (b) Given the diversity of learning experiences, what are the prospects for developing common definitions of engagement, interest, curiosity, and motivation? And, (c) Given the diversity of types of informal and after
The NRC Framework for K – 12 Science Education (2012) lists five major ideas that are essential to the design of assessments and learning environments: 1) limited number of core ideas of science, 2) cross-cutting concepts, 3) engaging students in scientific and engineering practices, 4) building integrated understanding as a developmental process, and 5) the coupling of scientific ideas and scientific and engineering practices to develop integrated understanding. What implications do these major ideas have for assessment in informal science setting? This paper will discuss each of these ideas
In spring 2009, the Denver Museum of Nature & Science (Museum) contracted with JVA Consulting, LLC (JVA) to conduct a comprehensive process and outcome evaluation of the Passport to Health (P2H) program. The Museum designed P2H, originally a three-year program funded by the Colorado Health Foundation (the Foundation), to improve health outcomes for fifth-grade students as well as their families and teachers throughout the Denver metro area. Appendix includes survey.
This working white paper begins the process of establishing a research agenda for how to use adult volunteers most effectively to engage K-12 students in STEM subjects. It does so by describing a comprehensive review of the literature, searching for articles and papers about programs designed to increase student interest, engagement, participation and academic achievement/attainment in STEM subjects.
The purposes of the STUDIO 3D evaluation were to collect information about the impact upon student learning as a result of participating in the STUDIO 3D Project, as well as to elicit information for program improvement. Areas of inquiry include recruiting and retention, impact on project participants, tracking student impacts, and the project as a whole.
The formative evaluation of Season 2 of Design Squad was performed in two parts. Part 1 included a field test conducted by American Institutes for Research in spring 2008. Part 2, conducted by Veridian inSight, included follow-up interviews with teachers whose classrooms participated in the field test. The teacher interviews were conducted in fall of 2008. This document is the Design Squad, Season 2 final evaluation report. It contains the following sections: Section 1: Highlights from the teacher interviews conducted in fall of 2008 by Veridian inSight. Section 2: Findings from the field test
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Veridian inSight, LLCAmerican Institutes for Research
This NSF Special Report highlights broader impacts. Scientific progress comes in all shapes and sizes. Researchers peer at the microscopic gears of genomes, scan the heavens for clues of our origins. They unearth wind-weathered fossils, labor over complex circuitry, guide students through the maze of learning. Disparate fields, researchers and methods united by one thing: potential. Every NSF grant has the potential to not only advance knowledge, but benefit society -- what we call broader impacts. Just like the kaleidoscopic nature of science, broader impacts come in many forms. No matter the
This report from the National Research Council explores how learning changes the physical structure of the brain, how existing knowledge affects what people notice and how they learn, the amazing learning potential of infants, and the relationship between classroom learning and learning in everyday settings such as community and the workplace. It identifies learning needs and opportunities for teachers and provides a realistic look at the role of technology in education.