2012-2013

Africentric, Linden, and West Feeder Systems
TRANSFORMATI ON
Sheli O. Smith, Monica S. Hunter, & Annalies Corbin
PAST Team
Kat Deaner, Maria G. Cohen, Elliot Mork,
Meghan Matta, Brian Coffey, Beth Witte,
and Lori Trent
A PAST Foundation Publication © 2013
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013
.............................................................................................. Introduction 1
.............................................................................. PAST Presents CCS to the World 4
STEM Professional Development.......................................................................5
Understanding the Rationale of the PAST STEM Transformation Model ..................5
.................................... Commitment to the Educational Paradigm Shift in this Century 6
........................................................... What Teachers Want to Know About STEM TPBL 7
.................................................... How Do Schools Replicate Success in Transformation 7
What STEM Transformation Looks Like in Columbus City Schools ............................8
Building Upon Current Successes: Continued and Scheduled Collaboration.........15
............ Coordinating STEM TPBL Implementation with Concurrent District Initiatives 16
Attaining Sustainability of STEM TPBL ........................................................................ 19
.............. How We Identify STEM TPBL Professional Development Course Correction 20
................................... Integrations of STEM TPBL with State and National Standards 22
.............................. Specific Issues Associated with Sustaining STEM TPBL Education 25
What are the Next Steps for Transformation: Recommendations............................28
Knowledge Capture.............................................................................................30
................................................................................................ Research Activities 20
Data Collection and Methods ........................................................................................32
...................................................................................................................... Data Sets 34
....................................................................................................................... Methods 35
......................................................................................................................... Surveys 36
............................................................................................................... Focus Groups 39
Table of Contents
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013
Analyzing Focus Group Information..............................................................................40
........... Challenges Identified by Teachers for a Successful Transition to STEM TPBL 40
........... Best Practices Identified by Teachers for Success in STEM TPBL Classrooms 43
......................... New Perceptions About Student Gains in a STEM TPBL Classroom 48
...................................................................... Leadership and STEM TPBL Success 48
............................................................................................................. Conclusions 54
.................................................................................... References Cited 55
............................................................................................. Appendices 56
.................................................................................................. A. Invitations and Agendas 57
............................ B. Evidence of TPBL in CCS Schools as Reported to PAST Foundation 115
........................................................... C. Example of 2012 & 2013 Teacher Presentations 120
D. .................. Transforming the Schoolhouse: A Roadmap to Community Engagement 126
........................................ E. Inside Out STEM Innovation Conference June 11-12, 2013 157
................................................................................ F. LFS Survey Deployment Schedule 161
.............................................................................. G. WFS Survey Deployment Schedule 163
................................................................... H. LFS/WFS STEM Leader Survey Questions 165
............................... I. AFS Survey Deployment Schedule and Teacher Survey Questions 172
........................................................................................... J. 2012-2013 Survey Analysis 174
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013
Tables
.... .......... 1. Types and Frequency of PAST Professional Development with CCS Schools 9
.... ........................................................................... 2. CCS Feeder System School Data 14
.... ................. 3. Scheduled PD Planning with PAST Foundation in Schools (2012-2013) 15
.... ............................................................................. 4. Ohio STEM Basecamp® Report 17
.... ..................... 5. Evidence of TPBL in CCS Schools as Reported to PAST Foundation 18
.... .......................................................... 6. Pre-Planning TBPL Deliverable Submissions 20
.... ............................................. 7. STEM TPBL Implementation Benchmarks in Schools 23
.... .............................................. 8. Recommendations for Administration and Teachers 29
... ........................................ 9. Knowledge Capture Research Activities by CCS School 31
. ........................... 10. STEM TPBL Research Study Participants by CCS Feeder System 32
. ................ 11. Comparison of Program Design Variables for Transition to STEM TPBL 34
. 12. Overview of Teacher Themes on Successful Implementation of STEM TPBL in My
............................................................................................................... Classroom 38
. 13. Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL
............................................................................................................ (2011-2012) 41
. 14. Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL
............................................................................................................ (2012-2013) 42
. ............................................... 15. Instructional Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013 45
. ...................................................... 16. Cultural Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013 46
. .......................................................... 17. Delivery System Best Practices 2012 & 2013 47
. ....... 18. Teacher Reported Observations of STEM TPBL Student Growth (2012-2013) 50
. ......... 19. What is the Role of the Principal for a Successful Transition to STEM TPBL? 51
. 20. What are the Essential Components of Administrative Support for a Successful STEM
...................................................................................................... TPBL Transition? 53
Tables & Figures
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013
Figures
....................................................... 1. PAST TPBL Forms Associated with Brainstorming 11
......... 2. PAST TPBL Forms Associated with Standards Alignment and Quality Products 12
.............................. 3. PAST TPBL Forms that Reflect Evidence of Planning & Assessing 13
4. .............................................................. 9th Grade Math: Overall Assessment Scores 26
Acknowledgements: All imagery reproduced in this report are the property of the PAST
Foundation.
!
!"#$ &'() *+',-*!. )#"/'0- ,''+1 2,+ )"-',-*2( 0"$$3,*-.
)2#-,'#1 2#' 2++#'11'+ *, -&' 43*(+ 1'0-*",5
60&""( -" 10&""(7 +*1-#*0- -" +*1-#*0-7 0"$$3,*-. -" 0"$$3,*-.7
thè aµµroach to thè uèlnlng a rèlèvant µroLlèn varlès.
6"$' 0&""1' "8'#2#0&*,9 -&'$'1 "# :02)1-",'1; 130& 21
!"#$%&'%(&)&$*7 +,-.$/7 0,%'#1-,$%$&-'7 "# 2'3,4*<=#"2+ 2((>
',0"$)211*,9 -")*01 ?*-& +*8'#1'7 211"0*2-'+ )#"=('$1
or lssuès. Cthèrs choosè to allow èach grauè to uèlnè
"8'#2#0&*,9 )#"=('$1 =. 202+'$*0 .'2#7 1'$'1-'#7 "# @32#-'#
130& 21 5"&)6&'4 % 53$$3, 8-. *, ",' @32#-'# 2,+ 5"&)6&'4 %
53$$3, 9%#$",3 *, 2,"-&'#5 A(-*$2-'(.7 ="-& 2))#"20&'1 2--'$)-
-" +'8'(") :?*0B'+ )#"=('$1; #'('82,- -" -&' 0"$$3,*-.
2,+ 1-3+',-15 C, '20& 021'7 -&' )#"0'11 #'$2*,1 -&' 12$'7 -&'
)#"=('$ +#*8'1 -&' )#"/'0-15 6'8'#2( !"#$1 )#'1',-'+ *, -&'
?"#B=""B <Delne ¥out lto5|ems7 -&' :3#&4' 9,-;3##7 2,+ -&'
095< +,%1/&; =,4%'&>3, <'20& 211*1- -'20&'#1 *, =#2*,1-"#$*,9
2,+ *+',-*!.*,9 )#"=('$1 -&2- #'1",2-' ?*-& -&'$1'(8'1 2,+
-&'*# 0"$$3,*-.5
D#"/'0-1 *, ED4F 2#' ,"- 2 #'13(- "! ('0-3#*,95 C,1-'2+7 -&'.
-2B' -&' ('2+ *, *,1-#30-*", -" )#"8"B' @3'1-*",1 -&2- #'@3*#'
1-3+',-1 2,+ -'20&'#1 -" 1'2#0& !"# 2,1?'#1 2,+ +'8'(")
1B*((1 -" 0"$)('-' 2 )#"+30-5 D#"+30-1 2#' -&' +'$",1-#2-*",
"! ('2#,*,97 1&"?021*,9 ?&2- 1-3+',-1 &28' ('2#,'+ 2,+
$21-'#'+ -&#"39& -&' *$)('$',-2-*", "! 2 )#"/'0-7 *, 2 @3'1-
to solvè a µroLlèn. A µroLlèn can havè an lnlnltè nunLèr
"! 211"0*2-'+ )#"/'0-1 -&2- 2++#'11 -&' *113' !#"$ 2,. 0"#'
0",-',- 2#'25 G )#"/'0- 02, &28' ,3$'#"31 )#"+30-1 -&2-
#'1",2-' ?*-& -&' 1-3+',-1H $"+2(*-*'1 "! ('2#,*,95 E&' 095<
+,%1/&; =,4%'&>3,7 ?%*# $- 2@13,&3';3 <3%,'&'47 0/3 0.-A
?33B 9)%''3,7 2,+ -&' 5%;BC%1 211*1- -'20&'#1 *, )(2,,*,9
2,+ 10&'+3(*,9 #"=31- ED4F5
G,"-&'# *$)"#-2,- 1-') *, -&' ED4F )#"0'11 2))'2#1
*, -&' 2D%)"%$3E F-6&G*E %'6 !/%,3 1'0-*",5 6300'11!3(
*$)('$',-2-*", +#2?1 ", 2 -'20&'#H1 )'+29"9*02( 'I)'#-*1'5
6*$)(. +'(*8'#*,9 2 $'1129' +"'1 ,"- ',13#' ('2#,*,9 *1
-2B*,9 )(20'5 G(( )#"/'0-1 #'(. ", !''+=20B -" 9239' )20' 2,+
1300'115 E'20&'#1 '(*0*- !"#$2-*8' !''+=20B !#"$ -&' 1-3+',-1
*, "#+'# -" +'1*9, -&' ='1- )2-& !"# *,+*8*+32(*J'+ ('2#,*,95
E'20&'#1 =',0&$2#B -&'*# "?, )#"9#'11 *, +'(*8'#. "! 0",-',-
=. 13$$2-*8' 211'11$',- "! -&' 1-3+',-H1 $21-'#. "! -&'
0",0')-1 2,+ 1B*((15 E&' <3.&# H"(,&;7 -&' 095< !'%1#/-$7 2,+
-&' I&63)&$* 8/3;B)&#$ &'() -'20&'#1 2(*9, )#"/'0-1 -" K"$$",
K"#' 2,+ L'I- M','#2-*", 60*',0' 6-2,+2#+17 =3*(+ 0",1*1-',-
2,+ 0('2# 0#*-'#*2 !"# )#"/'0-1 2,+ )#"+30-17 2,+ 211'11
*$)('$',-2-*",5
A1'+ 21 2 ?&"('7 -&' DG6E N"3,+2-*", ED4F ?"#B=""B ',2=('1
-'20&'#1 -" =3*(+ 2,+ *$)('$',- OP1->0',-3#. *,1-#30-*", -&2-
&21 -&' )"?'# -" -2B' 1-3+',-1 ", 2 /"3#,'. "! ('2#,*,9 -&2- ?*((
',+3#' ?'(( ='.",+ -&'*# -*$' *, -&' 0(211#""$5
!"#$%&'(
!"#*&+,(
!"#-.+,(
/0,"#-.+,/#0 THE PAST FOUNDATION
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 1
Introduction
For 13 years the PAST Foundation has worked with communities, local
schools, school districts, state’s departments of education, policy
makers, business, and industry partners to help transform the culture of
21
st
century education. As anthropologists working alongside educators
we have the opportunity to see educational systems in various stages of
transition. We work with urban, rural, reservation, frontier, suburban,
public, charter, transformational, traditional, STEM, and new platform
schools. Through this variety of educational experiences we recognize a
number of key “Kevlar threads” that form primary foundations of all
successful educational efforts. With an eye towards helping schools find
local relevance, we actively work to help educate not just the whole
child, but the whole community.
This report reflects the work of the PAST Foundation with Columbus
City Schools (CCS) STEM Transformation Project for the academic
year 2012-2013. A significant portion of the material in this report
was first compiled in June 2013 as part of our Ohio Race To The Top
(RTTT) Year 2 final report deliverable as a service partner with the
Ohio STEM Learning Network (OSLN), which is supported and
managed by Battelle Memorial Institute. PAST began working with
CCS on its STEM Transformation Project in 2009. Since that time, this
project’s goals, intended outcomes, scope and scale has changed
dramatically (see previously published, 2010-2011 Linden Feeder
Report). As a result, our processes and work with CCS have been
both flexible and agile. Although many good things happened within
CCS during the 2012-2013 schools year, CCS was a district in crisis
and transition. The strain and stress of district scrutiny filtered down to
every level and effort within the district. We closed out the 2012-2013
academic year with some inspiring successes, some set backs, and
some auspicious starts.
Many changes have occurred in CCS since the end of June. There is a
new administration, philosophy and direction for CCS as a whole.
Interim superintendent, Dr. Dan Good, leads the district with a new
focus and energy. As a result, some of the changes recommended in
the Ohio RTTT and in this report have been addressed and
implemented with the change in leadership. Several building
principals and key administrators have moved or shifted with an aim
towards increasing building leadership and sustainability. Starling
Middle School and Dana Elementary School have merged and moved
Professional Development
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 2
into their new building. West High School has now completely
transitioned all grades (9-12) to STEM. Africentric k-12 has introduced
STEM to all grade levels. They await follow through in the
implementation plan they designed. Although some changes have been
made in the Linden Feeder, several strategic decisions need to be
addressed urgently.
As with all transformation effort funding and sustainability is a
constant concern. As anthropologists we know from more than a
decade of observation and interaction with schools in transition that
without full culture shift, no amount of funding can fix instructional
strategy problems. Full culture shift in most school and communities
typically takes 5-7 years. Cultural or paradigm shift assumes a
unified effort and investment. This is not the case across the three
feeder systems in which PAST has worked. Yet, within the CCS
STEM Transformation Project the funding sources that underwrote
the professional development at the Linden Feeder schools and West
Feeder schools will be expended by the end of the 2013-14 academic
year. Full culture shift in these schools, for numerous reasons, is not yet
complete. As the CCS STEM partners decide how support and
additional grant funds will support professional opportunities, it is
important that sustainability be at the forefront of decision-making.
Based on a number of recommendations in this report and knowledge
of shifting district funding and priorities, PAST’s role in the three feeder
system schools for academic year 2013-14 was modified. Currently PAST
is providing on-going STEM professional development as follows:
! Work in the Linden feeder was scaled back to only two schools,
Linden Elementary and Linden McKinley.
! At Linden Elementary School we meet on scheduled days to
facilitate intensive TPBL planning with specified teacher
cohorts.
! On four mini workshops (45 minute check-ins) at Linden
McKinley STEM Academy to see how teachers are
implementing their summer, pre-planned mini-challenges.
! Weekly at West High School for ongoing planning among
teacher cohorts and with administrators regarding strategies for
implementation.
! Bi-Monthly at Starling and Westmoor Middle Schools for
ongoing cohort planning and with administration regarding
strategies for implementation.
Professional Development
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 3
! Monthly with Linden, West and Africentric feeders STEM
Coordinators for accelerated strategies in STEM TPBL
implementation.
Some of the recommendations in this report are already being
implemented. Dr. Hinds at Linden Elementary School is carefully
tracking evidence of planning and implementation of TPBL modules
by her teachers. Diplomas Now (DN) at Linden McKinley STEM
Academy has modified its curriculum to allow for TPBL implementation
alongside the more prescribed DN curriculum. CCS is beginning to
publish TPBL modules created by STEM school teachers across the
district and STEM schools are beginning to work across schools within
feeder systems. These changes reflect both the change underway within
CCS as well as national paradigm shifts in education.
The intent of the PAST process is to be receptive to the evolving nature
of the community and needs of the faculty and administrators tasked
with navigating the ever-changing educational landscape by providing
tools and processes that allow proactive, educational responses without
sacrificing unique cultural attributes. Columbus City Schools has a
diverse population with many unique social and economic factors that
help shape individual schools. We have been fortunate, as an
organization, to have the opportunity to celebrate this diversity through
our partnership with CCS STEM schools.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 4
PAST Presents CCS to the World
Over the course of the year the PAST team strived to present the successes of the CCS
transformation in both print and presentation. Listed here are the publications and
presentation that used CCS examples or focused on CCS topics.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 5
Understanding the Rationale of the PAST STEM TPBL Model
The PAST Foundation stands for Partnering Anthropology with Science
and Technology. Our motto, Access through Innovation
SM
keeps us
focused on exploring and continuously considering ways to link
learning to life. The PAST Foundation has more than a decade of
experience working directly with schools and communities in transition,
and has identified key benchmarks essential to successful school
transformation to STEM education. PAST offers a team of experts, led
by anthropologists working collaboratively with educators towards
identifying the critical needs of educational systems in transition. Using
an anthropological framework, we offer powerful analytical tools to
understand both the visible diversity of communities associated with a
particular educational system, as well as the hidden commonalities
they all possess. Large or small, urban or rural, from whole districts to
the one-room schoolhouse – the PAST Foundation has effectively
partnered on all levels to outline consistent benchmarks that serve as
critical levers in shaping successful school transformational outcomes.
The PAST Foundation STEM Professional Development Model is based
on the notion that good STEM education is directly linked to the level
of innovative instruction and content delivery. To that end, PAST has
developed a culturally focused STEM program design and
development model that is the cornerstone of the school
transformation in PAST Foundation supported schools. The PAST
workbook for building replicable modules began over ten years ago
and has undergone a process of trial, experimentation and on-going
field-testing. The PAST STEM transdisciplinary problem-based learning
(TPBL) model is an instructional strategy that is process-driven via
regular site- specific professional development supported by workbook
materials, intended as hands-on templates for designing and
implementing 21
st
century education. The step-by-step process is
designed to help instructors and community partners build robust and
sustainable practices that engage and excite the learning team of
teachers and students.
Over the years we have been fortunate to have educators across the
country work with us to help us better understand their needs and
outlooks. Coming from an anthropological perspective, our process is
intended to be holistic, dynamic, and agile responding to issues and
STEM Professional Development
Professional Development
Professional Development
Professional Development
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 6
needs of current time. However, we draw upon the success of many
concepts and strategies well established in education throughout the
19
th
and 20
th
centuries, such as, applying design cycles, mastery based
learning strategies, standards, and modalities of learning. We promote
a community-based cultural strategy that uses local, regional, and
global issues as the driving influence in creating guiding statements
and essential questions, for project modules in the classroom. We
promote a transdisciplinary approach to projects in an effort to de-silo
content areas and integrate skill development in ways that more
closely reflect real life. Finally, we contend that education is a life-long
process that begins at birth and continues throughout our mature lives
into our senior years. This extends a culture of learning that relies on
the way we present the process of learning by fully integrating learning
into our lives.
A primary goal of our work is to create a process that takes any topic
and reveals how interconnected all subjects are to one another. We
cannot understand science if we cannot read, nor can we ground
math in real world issues if we cannot problem solve. If we do not
understand the social consequences of increased knowledge and
understanding gained through science and technology, we may
unintentionally change the path of humanity to reach its full
potential. Life is interconnected; learning should be as well.
A second goal of our STEM transformational model is to partner
professionals with educators drawing on compelling events that
engage and excite students. Today’s students should possess the
skills to take what they learn in formal education into their adult
lives. Their school experiences affect how they approach decision-
making, tackle problem solving, and perceive the world around
them. We believe that helping our youth better understand the
interconnectivity of the world will prepare them to be more effective
members of their communities. Students, educators, and community
partners can build programs together that result in amazing learning
experiences and lasting impressions. These successes encourage the
PAST team to keep working at updating and perfecting the process,
keeping it current and responsive to the needs of contemporary
youth.
Commitment to the Educational Paradigm Shift of this Century
The PAST Foundation seeks outcomes and recognized benchmarks as
markers of success that are grounded in attaining an educational
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 7
paradigm shift. Paradigm shifts are inherently disruptive and will
profoundly change the delivery of education. All paradigm shifts take
time to implement fully, typically taking more than two years, and
although there may be setbacks, paradigm shifts have ground swell
momentum, growing until the paradigm becomes the commonly
accepted norm. A paradigm shift to TPBL is not an “add-on” to
current strategies and delivery systems that rely on direct instruction,
and will require re-tooling of the education workforce. Additionally,
educational paradigm shifts generally are differentiated from program
initiatives where the education workforce contends they have a choice
in implementing a new program, add-on. However, in making changes
that achieve a paradigm shift, the education workforce must accept
and apply new skills and tools that will enhance learning in terms of
new modes for delivery of instruction. Although paradigm shifts are
not initially tied to performance evaluations and salaries, ultimately
all performance will be judged by the common understanding of
STEM TPBL, applying criteria defined by 21
st
century learning skills
and outcome.
What Teachers Want to Know About STEM TPBL
Some of the first questions teachers ask are – How does this differ
from any other two-year initiative in education? How will I find the
time to do this? Our approach is designed to support educators in a
process that builds understanding of TPBL as an instructional
strategy that is not just another initiative viewed as add-on to direct
instruction. The PAST Foundation approach to Professional
Development (PD) focuses on process as well as products alignment
to Common Core, Next Generation Science Standards, and State
Educational Standards, along with essential 21
st
century skills. We
offer a systematic process that scaffolds teaching skills and
experience in planning projects in a holistic context, and
implementing projects grounded in real world problems with fidelity
to grade level standards. This process combines a number of
historically successful techniques that build on inquiry-based
learning, mastery, transdisciplinary approaches, and progressive
education.
How Do Schools Replicate Success in Transformation
As in all paradigm shifts, change takes commitment and practice for
it to grow into a set of integrated strategies and delivery systems.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 8
Willingness to change requires reassessment of how one leads,
teaches, and what tools will be used to impart learning. When built
holistically with consideration of schedule, available tools, and
resources, the process takes no more time than currently being
expended on planning and delivering instruction. It does, however,
look different in each school because it acknowledges the
uniqueness of every school and community.
However, while each school will need to meet the particular needs
of students and staff in making the shift, there are common
elements of STEM TPBL that are replicable in tangible terms. TPBL
requires, more teacher planning on the front end, more student
interaction with creating the project and assessment, less lecturing,
and no worksheets. TPBL changes traditional grading curves from
bell shape to an ascending line that reflects gains for all students.
This is due to changes in instructional strategies structured by a
STEM TPBL approach to learning. Traditional instructional strategy
targets verbal learners and thus produces bell curve grade scales,
while TPBL targets multiple learning modalities and is reflected in
the ascending line grade scale. TPBL supports more peer-to-peer
learning and responds to differentiation in learning, as well as
different modalities of learning. Because of its replicable structure,
TPBL lends itself to benchmarking in two important ways: first, in
giving teachers the autonomy to develop the curriculum modules
and short cycle assessments; and second, by administrators tracking
student success in a 21
st
century context. In the end, TPBL produces
results that far exceed current expectations, challenging the current,
status quo.
This set of guiding philosophies form the essential components of
the PAST Foundation’s approach to STEM transformation offering a
fundamental design to address school transformation in persistently
low achieving schools within Columbus City Schools.
What STEM Transformation Looks like in Columbus City
Schools
During the 2012-2013, academic year the PAST Foundation
partnered with 19 Persistently Low Achieving (PLA) schools within
three Columbus City Schools (CCS) feeder systems to ensure
transformational change toward STEM transdisciplinary problem-
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 9
based learning across all content areas. This school transformation plan includes several key
components (Table 1):
! Intensive workshops (day-long and/or multiple-day Professional Development) and/or
Summer and Spring Professional Development workshops
! Administrative Professional Development workshops
! Modeling the structural components for effective STEM Coordinator meetings
! Scheduled on-site visits to work with grade level teacher STEM teams
! Weekly debriefs with CCS administrators and partner agencies
! Hosting and maintaining the virtual project management platform, Basecamp®
Feeder System Level of School
Intense PD
Workshops
Scheduled
PD in
Academic
Year
STEM
Coordinator
Meetings
Admin PD
Sessions
Friday
Debriefings
Virtual
Basecamp
High School 8 •
Middle 4 •
Elementary 4 1 •
High School 12 21 8 4 •
Middle 12 21 8 •
Elementary 24 30 8 •
High School 24 34 0 3 •
Middle 18 35 •
Elementary 18 51 •
124 204 33 12 60
Numbers represent events between May 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013
Types and Frequency of PAST Professional Development with CCS Schools
11
0
9
4
0
1
20
20
20 West
Linden
Africentric
Table 1: Types and Frequency of PAST Professional Development with CCS Schools
All components are aimed at facilitating and accelerating the transformation of education in
these 19 CCS schools. The components are varied and have evolved to meet the demands of
a much needed paradigm shift in CCS educational philosophy. This paradigm shift is
underway globally, and support from CCS educational, business, and industry partners is
helping CCS administrators, faculty, students, and parents change the way they think about
educating the city’s children with thoughtful and consistent intent to attain success for all
students.
To this end, PAST Foundation professional development is benchmarked through continued
interaction, observation and reflection, utilizing ethnographic methods to inform and guide
the PAST team and administrators within the District and schools for real time, course
correction. Of the 391 total faculty from across the three feeder systems, the PAST Knowledge
Capture team conducted focus group discussions with 360 teachers (2011-2013) to capture
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 10
their voice and insights about the process underway. The analysis of
responses to the questions addressed in the focus groups is presented
in the Knowledge Capture section of this report. The ethnographic
insights on the experience of teachers and principals are constantly
used to inform, as well as compare with PD team observations,
interactions, and experiences in training and cohort planning.
Moreover, our Professional Development team utilizes a formative
feedback process to continually evaluate and modify the tools used
to help teachers plan and implement STEM transdisciplinary
problem-based learning. The PAST workbook, Problems>Projects>
Products: Designing Transdisciplinary Problem-Based Learning,
provides templates that can be used by teachers to guide their
transition to STEM TPBL, offering categories aligned to the principles
of design; brainstorming, designing or planning, building, evaluating,
modifying and sharing (Smith and Corbin 2013). The workbook
templates provide teachers and administrators with a process that
enables them to create evidence for benchmarking:
! Effective planning (Figure 1)
! Continuous implementation (Figure 2)
! Student participation in projects
! Alignment to State Standards, the Common Core and Next
Generation Science Standards
! Consistent and structured evaluation through short cycle
assessments, rubrics and standards-based questions (Figure 3)
! Real time, course correction through modification of PD to
meet specific training needs
! Demonstrations of learning engaging authentic audiences.
Through the use of this scaffolded process, the 391 teachers within
schools of the three feeder systems, Africentric (AFS), Linden (LFS),
and West (WFS) have the opportunity to consistently create projects
that address real world problems in a format that is easily transferred
and implemented across the 19 schools within the three systems. In
fact, this spring displaced teachers from the soon to be closed Dana
Elementary School in the West Feeder System, participated in PD in
order to plan their fall 2013 problems and projects they will implement
at their new teaching location, South Mifflin STEM Academy. South
Mifflin is in the Linden Feeder System and these teachers will be
following their principal Pam Eberhardt, as she transfers from one STEM
TPBL, school to another.
Ongoing
modification
is aimed at
shifting the
concept of
evaluation to
“How do we
improve the
ongoing
process to
insure
success?
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 11
!"
!"# !"#$%& ()*+"## %&'()*+%'#, -#,(./
0&(/)(0+#, '"%' %&# */(1#&,%+ '2 "*3%/ '"2*."'4
5&'()*+%'(/. 0%&', 26 -#,(./ (/ #%)" %/- #1#&7 0&28#)'
"#+0, ,'*-#/', */-#&,'%/- '"# 0%&', 26 )&('()%+ '"(/9(/.
%/- "2: '"2,# 0%&', %&# (/'#.&%+ '2 %++ 0&2;+#3
,2+1(/.4 <(1(/. ,'*-#/', '"# '22+, '2 -(,,#)' % 0&2;+#3
#302:#&, '"#3 '2 '%9# 2/ %++ 0&2;+#3,4
!"# ,)-./$+ 0)%-&$1") "#+0, (/ 0+%//(/.
%/ #/'(&# =*%&'#& 2& % ,#&(#, 26 0&28#)',> (/ % ,(/.+#
two-wèèk µèrlou. Thè organlzèr hèlµs uèlnè how a
0&2;+#3 )%/ ;# %--&#,,#- '"&2*." -(66#&#/' 0&28#)',
%/- ,'*-#/', )%/ -#32/,'&%'# '"#(& +#%&/(/. '"&2*."
% 1%&(#'7 26 0&2-*)',4
!"#"$ "&$ '()*+$, - .//0$1 222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222 3#,$1 22222222222222222222222222
456.3!78591
!"# %" #& '"()& *+,
:;!.<3 7=; !8>?7.831
-./+ *01"23/+*"0 %" #& 0&&% +" 4"((&4+,
4?.>:1 5"0'+264+ "2 %2/# 7"62 '"(6+*"08 98:.@A1 !"# #*(( 7"6 4./09& *+ +" '644&&%,
!=65;1
!"# #*(( 7"6 './2& *+ #*+. "+.&2',
;B6>?67;1 !"# %" 7"6 :0"# *+ '"()&' +.& ;2"<(&3 = *''6&,
!"# %&'()#*+ ,--.#/ !"#$ &'()*+, - .//0+ #'+ 1(0' /$02+3$/ 4(534 $( /(*6+7
%&'0#1!/
%&'2.1!/
80)9:0+/$5(3;
-345678 &9:6;/
%&'0#1!/
%&'2.1!/
80)9:0+/$5(3;
-345678 &9:6;/
%&'0#1!/
%&'2.1!/
80)9:0+/$5(3;
-345678 &9:6;/
%&'0#1!/
%&'2.1!/
80)9:0+/$5(3;
-345678 &9:6;/
!"#$% ' ()*+#,'-+) *(.,)""/ 01)() '() ' ")(#)" .2 0)3*+'0)" 01'0 1)+* '43#$#"0('0.(" '$4 0)',1)(" 2.(3 2.5$4'0#.$'+ #4)'"
62& 0+%//(/.4
!"# 23*45""6 (7-&&") (, % 3%/%.#3#/' '22+ '"%'
hèlµs track µrogrèss, uèlnè nèèuèu rèsourcès, anu uocunènt
0&2-*)' (-#%,4 ?' (, % .&#%' '22+ 62& %-3(/(,'&%'2&, '2 *,# 62&
3%/%.(/. &#,2*&)# %)=*(,('(2/> 32/('2&(/. 0&2.&#,,> %/-
%,,#,,(/. &(.2&4 @2,'(/. !:2AB##9 @+%//#&, (, % .&#%' 3#)"%/(,3
62& (/62&3(/. %++ ,'%9#"2+-#&, 26 '"# 0&2)#,,> ,)20#> %/- 0%)#4
!"#$%&' #"
)**+& ,-+.&/-*
01%% 234'1/&5
,-+.&/-
67-181-1&*
9:"#+;:#+-
-:& !"#<&7-5
23=&7-&.
91'&%1/& #>
!"#<&7-5
?4-&"14%*
@&&.&.5
A#"'4-18&
6**&**'&/-
).&4* B*&.
9:"#+;:#+-
-:& !"#<&7-5
!"#.+7- ).&4*5
!"# %
!"# &
!"# '
!"# (
!"# )
!"# *
!"# +
!"# ,
!"# -
!"# %.
89:!8;<8 0= >?@:;A20?B:;, THE PAST FOUNDATION
Figure 1: PAST TPBL Forms Associated with Brainstorming.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 12
!"
!"# !"#$%#$ '(%)*"+$ ,(-)#./%( "#%&'
()*+,-%(*# "./ 0+11#)#2* ,.2*#2* ()#(' ()# 3.+23
*. +2*#3)(*# %#()2+23 45 (00)#''+23 *"# '(6#
&).4%#67 8* +' ( '2(&'".* .1 2-6#).-' &).9#,*'
*"(* ()# #:(6+2+23 *"# '(6# &).4%#6 *").-3"
0+11#)#2* %#2'#'7
!"# !"#$%#$ 01.-#2%#$ ,(-)#./%( "#%&'
-' -20#)'*(20 /"(* +* %..;' %+;# *. 6('*#) (
sµècllc stanuaru Ly allgnlng thè vèrLs ol thè
stanuarus anu thèlr sµècllc conµonènt µarts.
Thè vèrL uèlnès what nastèry looks llkè.
<.) #:(6&%#= *"# >*" 3)(0# (2,".) '*(20()0=
Rèaulng Lltèraturè, uèlnès grauè lèvèl nastèry
/+*" ? ,.6&.2#2*' #:&#,*+23 '*-0#2*' *. 4#
(4%# *. ?= @= A7
B 3("4+5$ !(.$%(.) 6+7(.5 uèlnès what
( 3..0 &).0-,* %..;' %+;#7 !#(,"#)' (20
'*-0#2*' ,(2 4-+%0 *"# )-4)+, *.3#*"#)7 !"#
1(,* *"(* '*-0#2*' "(C# ( '(5 +2 4-+%0+23 *"#
,)+*#)+( '#*' *"# '*(3# 1.) '*-0#2* '-,,#''7
Altèr all, ll you arè thè onè who uèlnès
/"(* ( 3..0 &).0-,* %..;' %+;# *"#2 5.- ()#
,(&(4%# .1 ,)#(*+23 *"(* &).0-,*7
!"#$%&') *++,&-./0
!"#$%&'()*+
'123
!"#,-&'.+ !"#$%&'()*+
+4*&54&
!"#,-&'.+ !"#$%&'()*+ !"#,-&'.+
!"#$%&'()*+
+#4*1% +2,6*&+
!"#,-&'.+ !"#$%&'()*+
&%1
!"#,-&'.+
!"#$%&'()*+ !"#,-&'.+ !"#$%&'()*+ !"#,-&'.+
!"#$%&'()*+ !"#,-&'.+
!"#$%&'( !"#)*+,-./(
!012345(
'
6
5
7
894710 ;569<60<.( =30>.(
&
%
8
894710 ;569<60<.( =30>.(
;
4
?3
9
4
3
894710 ;569<60<.( =30>.(
;
1
4
?6
@ ;
5
A
<
?3
.
894710 ;569<60<.( ,1B?4.(
!"#)*+,(
%39C57 D ;?E3

#0C69?E65?19 F %6G1A5

'6530?6@. D "3.1A043.

&9C6C3H395

#5730

!"#$% '() *#+", *#+ -./$$0$% +0%#+#1, /$2 +).)3/$' -+#4)5', '(/' /22+),, +)/. 6#+.2 0,,1), /+) / ,)+0), #* 6/7, '#
4#2,"6(); /.); (3(+2'* #'*(4%+'"#0 '*(20()0'7 D).9#,*' (20 &).0-,*' ,(2 4# 4#2,"6();#0 45 '*(*# '*(20()0'= E.66.2 E.)#
'*(20()0'= (20 F#:* G#2#)(*+.2 H,+#2,# '*(20()0'7 I"+," '*(20()0' ()# -'#0 +' -& *. 0+'*)+,* (20 '*(*# 6(20(*#'7 !"# 1.)6'
#:+'* *. "#%& *#(,"#)' 4#**#) -20#)'*(20 *"# &).,#'' .1 (%+32+23 %#''.2' /+*" #:+'*+23 4#2,"6();' (20 -20#)'*(20+23 "./ *.
conslstèntly uèlnè nastèry ol concèµts.
89:;8<!8 ,= 0>:?<@8<A A, BA0<;06;B THE PAST FOUNDATION
Figure 2: PAST TPBL Forms Associated with Standards Alignment and Quality Products.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 13
!!
!"#$%&' ) *++,&-
!"#$%&'( !"#$%&'( !"#$%&'( !"#$%&'(
!"#$%&$$' !"#$%&$$' !"#$%&$$' !"#$%&$$'
!"#$%&$$' !"#$%&$$' !"#$%&$$' !"#$%&$$'
!"#$#%
&'#()(*"+,- /0#12+3,%
4(356#$ 7 8110#%
!"#.&/0 #1&"1*&2 3%*45&6 +03563"6+
!"#.&/0 Act|v|t|es.
!"#6,/0+ Ev|dence ol |eotn|ng.
!"(30-"302 2"# 93(:533: 2"# ;(3'+<#< =3($1 #,*30()-# 2#)*"#(1 23 5()+,123($> <#1+-,> ),< 50+6< ;(3?#*21 9+2" ;(3<0*21 2")2
!"#$ &'( )*+,#*#(! )( !"#)- &,'..-//*.0 1 (2*3#- /4 !"# 4/-*. &'( .#-5# 3/!" '. +,'((#-. '(6 3#(&"*'-7. 4/- )*+,#*#(!'!)/(0
8"# 4/-*. ."/9( "#-# -#+-#.#(! !"# #:+#&!'!)/(. !"# !#'&"#-;.< .#! 4/- !"#*.#,5#. '(6 !"# .!26#(!.0 =/.!)(> !"#.# 4/-*. !/ '
&#(!-', ,/&'!)/(? .2&" '. ' .#-5#- /- '( /(,)(# *'('>#*#(! !//, #('3,#. ',, '26)#(&#. !/ 3#!!#- 2(6#-.!'(6 9"'! ). "'++#()(> )( !"#
*/*#(!? '(6 9"'! ). #:+#&!#6 4/- !"# 42!2-#0
8"# !"#$%&&' )*+,,&- ). ' *'('>#*#(! !//, !"'!
hèlµs track µrogrèss, uèlnè nèèuèu rèsourcès, anu uocunènt
+-/62&! )6#'.0 @! ). ' >-#'! !//, 4/- '6*)().!-'!/-. !/ 2.# 4/-
*'('>)(> -#./2-&# '&A2).)!)/(? */()!/-)(> +-/>-#..? '(6
'..#..)(> -)>/-0 =/.!)(> 89/BC##7 =,'((#-. ). ' >-#'! *#&"'().*
4/- )(4/-*)(> ',, .!'7#"/,6#-. /4 !"# +-/&#..? .&/+#? '(6 +'&#0
8"# .+/'0+1 >)5#. ' >-#'! 5)#9 /4 !"# )(!#-+,'$
3#!9##( +-/D#&!. '&-/.. '( #(!)-# A2'-!#-0 E2*#-/2.
!#'&"#-. +/.! !"# ,'->#B4/-*'! 3'&7*'+. )( !"#)-
&,'..-//*. !/ "#,+ .!26#(!. #(5).)/( "/9 ',, !"# +-/D#&!.
'-# )(!#-&/((#&!#6 '(6 9"'! !/ #:+#&! )( !"# 42!2-#0 F/-
!"# 2++#-B>-'6# ,#5#,.? 3'&7*'+. '-# ' A2)&7 5).2', !"'!
',,/9 '6*)().!-'!/-. !/ !-'&7 *2,!)+,# +-/D#&!. /&&2--)(>
.)*2,!'(#/2.,$ !"-/2>"/2! !"#)- .&"//,0
8"# 2,+134#5 ). ' "/,).!)& /5#-5)#9 4/- !#'&"#-.
'(6 '6*)().!-'!/-. !/ )6#(!)4$ !//,. '(6 +-/&#..#.
2.#6 !/ >'2># .!26#(! *'.!#-$ /4 ',)>(#6 .!'(6'-6.0
!"#$%&' #"
)**+& ,-+.&/-*
01%% 234'1/&5
,-+.&/-
67-181-1&*
9:"#+;:#+-
-:& !"#<&7-5
23=&7-&.
91'&%1/& #>
!"#<&7-5
?4-&"14%*
@&&.&.5
A#"'4-18&
6**&**'&/-
).&4* B*&.
9:"#+;:#+-
-:& !"#<&7-5
!"#.+7- ).&4*5
637 8
637 9
637 :
637 ;
637 <
637 =
637 >
637 ?
637 @
637 8A
67896:;6 <= )>?::8:@ THE PAST FOUNDATION
Figure 3: PAST TPBL Forms that Reflect Evidence of Planning and Assessing.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 14
The continuous reflection and modification of the process bolstered by the increased pressure
to produce evidence of effective teaching has accelerated the rollout timeline since CCS first
engaged in the transformation to STEM TPBL education in 2009. As evident in Table 2 on
School Data, CCS slated the rollout time in the initial feeder system (LFS) over a three-year
period. The following transition at the West Feeder System across K-12 took only two years,
and the most recent feeder system to initiate the transition was Africentric, implementing a
process planned for a one-year period for the year-round K-12 school. The, combined efforts of
the STEM TPBL process and the national push to create an effective teacher evaluation system
have helped advance the pace of the CCS transformational plan for transitioning to STEM
TPBL.
Table 2: CCS Feeder System School Data
Feeder System
T
P
B
L

R
o
l
l
o
u
t

(
T
i
m
e

E
l
a
p
s
e

f
o
r

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e

I
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n

i
n

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
Level of School
N
o
.

o
f

S
c
h
o
o
l
s

a
t

S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

L
e
v
e
l
N
o
.

o
f

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
N
o
.

o
f

S
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
C
o
l
l
e
g
e

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
G
r
a
n
t

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
High School 1 OSU OSLN
Middle School 1 Columbus State Univ RTTT
Elementary 4 85 1561 Harvard COSI
High School 1 60 1131
Middle School 2 49 813
Elementary 7 114 2257
High School 1
Middle School 1
Elementary 1 14 353
7446 391
CCS Feeder System School Data
3 yrs
2 yrs NASA
Linden
West
640 36
19
33 691
Columbus State Univ ODE Early College Africentric 1 yr
The PAST TPBL process and tools, when used to their fullest, produce clear paths of evidence
and demonstration for teachers and students as to planning, implementation, and
effectiveness. Thus, with the new national initiatives for rigorous teacher evaluation, the three
CCS feeders systems are poised to lead the district in modeling positive and effective
processes of teacher evaluation that represents a joint effort of the three important
stakeholders: students, teachers, and administrators. The challenge is to get the teachers to
post their planning, and demonstrations of implementation regularly and with fidelity to an
open platform, such as Basecamp®.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 15
Building Upon Current Successes: Continued and Scheduled Collaboration
Information garnered from observation, discussion, and teachers’ delivered products
emphasize the importance of implementing STEM TPBL in a building-wide process that
transforms all grade levels within the building with well-defined leadership and well-articulated
strategies. Building on gathered evidence, PAST realizes how vitally important it is to schedule
and implement regular meetings for planning and building capacity with administrators, and
for collaborative work essential to success for STEM Leaders in specific schools, and faculty
teams.
Ongoing planning is key to successful implementation and building capacity. PAST structured
the 2012-2013 academic PD with this in mind. PAST convened a meeting in early September
Feeder System
T
P
B
L

R
o
l
l
o
u
t

(
T
i
m
e

E
l
a
p
s
e

f
o
r

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e

I
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n

i
n

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
Level of School
N
o
.

o
f

S
c
h
o
o
l
s

a
t

S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

L
e
v
e
l
N
o
.

o
f

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
N
o
.

o
f

S
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
C
o
l
l
e
g
e

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
G
r
a
n
t

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
High School 1 OSU OSLN
Middle School 1 Columbus State Univ RTTT
Elementary 4 85 1561 Harvard COSI
High School 1 60 1131
Middle School 2 49 813
Elementary 7 114 2257
High School 1
Middle School 1
Elementary 1 14 353
7446 391
CCS Feeder System School Data
3 yrs
2 yrs NASA
Linden
West
640 36
19
33 691
Columbus State Univ ODE Early College Africentric 1 yr
Table 3: Scheduled PD Planning with PAST Foundation in Schools (2012-2013)
laying out the total number of potential visits each school had the opportunity to utilize, as well
as the planned structure for the STEM Coordinators’ monthly meetings. The PAST team worked
creatively with all 19 principals establishing tailored routines that fit the needs and parameters
of each school (Table 3).
LFS elementary schools scheduled visits one day per month, while Linden McKinley STEM
Academy scheduled two days per month, one targeted to help Science faculty and Lead STEM
teachers from each grade level, and a second day to review with all the faculty of each grade
level cohort on progress that was being achieved. WFS elementary schools scheduled visits for
one day per month, while the two middle schools each scheduled two visits per month (every
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 16
other Tuesday). The West High School scheduled visits every week
along with a weekly meeting with the school’s STEM Leaders. AFS, in
their initial year began by scheduling intensive PD workshops to first
introduce the high school faculty, then the middle school faculty, and
finally the elementary school faculty to the PAST STEM PD process.
Interspersed throughout the year, AFS used the district-wide, all day
PD to reinforce and practice the STEM TPBL process. Once the
middle and high schools went through the process, cohort planning
was scheduled to introduce the process.
All principals received a schedule of finalized PD planning dates and
times with reminders through Basecamp® just prior to the assigned
PAST STEM Coordinators’ visit to each school. The effectiveness of
scheduling remains dependent on building administrators. In the
weekly debrief with CCS administrators and partners, this issue was
regularly addressed. By the close of the second quarter, PD
resources were moved away from schools where the administrator
was ambivalent or not receptive to TPBL and given to schools
where a clear commitment to implementation was evident in
observed progress.
Coordinating STEM TPBL Implementation with Concurrent
District Initiatives
Complicating factors that can affect the transition to STEM TPBL
are associated with the lack of integration of district-wide programs
and initiatives. In any given CCS feeder system school, multiple
programs are running simultaneously and often without any
integration or coordinated effort. The many acronyms that identify
these programs within the district can also produce an unclear
message on priorities for instructional improvement. Programs
such as PAR, ROUNDS, Learning Circles, and Infinite Campus all
gather data to help guide teachers and student learning, but are
more often seen as evaluation. Read 180, RICA, Diplomas Now,
and 3
rd
Grade Guarantee all provide remediation for students, but
are often defined as instructional strategies. PLCs, BLTs, Cohort
Planning, and departmental planning are intended to help building-
level teams and leadership, but are often described by teachers and
administrators as busy work. Short Cycle Assessments, BOA, MOA,
and EOA, OAA, and OGT along with Dibble, SRI, and TRC all assess
students against standards, but are often used as the primary guide
for instruction. The industry is rife with acronyms, and between
Efforts must
be made to
help school
faculty better
understand
and articulate
the driving
strategies and
delivery system
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 17
district and state level acronyms it is possible to have acronyms within acronyms such as CCIT
(Common Core Instructional TOSA [Teacher on Special Assignment]).
The plethora of programs running concurrently in schools makes the importance of being
thoughtful and strategic in professional development all the more critical. It also requires that
TPBL training and support be incredibly agile and inclusive, open to partnering and integrating
concurrent initiatives in order for faculty to accomplish all that is asked of them in any given
day, week, or quarter. To accomplish this, the PAST team visits the schools for ongoing
planning, working with teachers to enhance innovation and creativity, as well as bring
community partners to assist in planning, implementation, and provide authentic audiences.
STEM Coordinator meetings rotate each month to a different school location to expose the
STEM leaders to work-in-progress in other schools, and showcase the host school’s student
work. For all meetings and professional development PAST conducts systematic outreach,
posting invitations and agendas to engage targeted school teachers and administrators to the
fullest extent possible (Appendix A: Invitations and Agendas). PAST weekly debriefs are open
to all administrators.
PAST recognizes its ongoing role as a “concierge,” guiding teachers to important information
on STEM education. In this aspect of our work, we have committed to building the virtual
platform of Basecamp® providing current links to a constantly growing body of websites where
Community & Higher Ed
Partner Groups
K-12 Schools
Local, Regional &
National Teacher
Groups
Total Individual
Members
Basecamp managed by PAST Foundation and available to all participating schools
Ohio STEM Basecamp Report
53 41 3 1756
Table 4: Ohio STEM Basecamp® Report
teachers can find resources to build upon best practices and problem-based learning (Table 4).
For example, the project path “Good Stuff” provides vetted sites by content area for teachers
to explore and to increase their computer skills, encouraging veteran teachers to cross into the
digital world of information. In addition, the PAST team scans current events, educational
postings, and other information that offers ‘just fun stuff’ in order to reinforce the dynamic
nature and pace of life in the 21
st
century and all of life’s compelling issues. Regularly posted
podcasts challenge, engage and inform teachers about todays transformation in education
including the Common Core Standards and Next Generation Science Standards, and access to
examples of transformation in other schools and inspiring speakers.
By keeping abreast of issues local, national, and global, the PAST team is in position to link
exciting and engaging programs with community partners that bring expertise and resources
to learning. Community resources, like WCBE radio station, Westgate Community Gardens,
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 18
CAR, Central Ohio Robotics Initiative (CORI), Chadwick
Arboretum, Greater Linden Development Corporation, St.
Stephens Community Center, and others are changing the
face and depth of education. Partners allow teachers to step
outside the confines of the classroom and prescribed
delivery and explore real world issues that each and every
one of us face in our schools, in our communities, and in our
nation.
The importance of connecting teachers with resources is
evident by the diversity of reported projects the teachers
implemented in 2012-2013. Appendix B (Evidence of TPBL
in CCS Schools as Reported to PAST Foundation) presents a
list of TPBL projects captured in the weekly reports to CCS
by the PAST team. When documented these TPBL modules
represent an important and valuable resource to CCS. If
each and every TPBL module were documented in the
replicable templates provided, CCS would possess, at
minimum, 175 new TPBL modules complete with aligned
standards and standards-based quizzes. Table 5 (Evidence
of TPBL Modules) reveals that TPBL modules aligned to
content concepts are being created across all content areas
including Engineering. Many of the modules cross content
areas or combine two content areas. Already CCS is taking
advantage of TPBL modules developed in the STEM feeder
schools. For example, Scratch My Back, Solar Cookers, and
Pollinators that appear in the new CCS mini-challenges,
originated at Avondale and Sullivant Elementary schools
(CCS Curriculum Leadership and Development Science
Dept. 2013). This new series published by CCS uses the
Principles of Design, which form the basis of all TPBL
modules developed by Linden, Africentric, and West
teachers. Modeled on the terminology of the 5 E’s (Engage,
Humanities Math Science Engineering
41 31 67 11
Evidence of TPBL Modules
Table 5: Evidence of TPBL in CCS Schools as Reported to
PAST Foundation
Linden McKinley Stem Academy
Grade 10
Allison Walton, Erica Perkins, Kate Brown, Patricia West
American History, Biology, English, Special Education
Themes Throughout the Year
Quarter 1 – Natural Disasters
English Social Studies Science Math
-Truth vs. Reality
-MLA citations
-Steps of the
research process
-Outlining an Essay
-Plot elements and
summarizing

MC- Graphic Novel

MC- 5P persuasive
outline and Socratic
Seminar
- Historical
Documents
- Industrialization
-Progressives/
Immigration
- Technology
- Great
Depression

MC – Who is
Responsible

MC – Theres No
Place Like Home
- Ecology
- Ecology Cycles
- Population
- Biomes
- Cells

MC – How do
natural disasters
effect the energy
flow and nutrient
cycling throughout
an ecosystem

MC – Do natural
disasters effect a
biome diorama
MC – How can we
accurately measure
things in a lab?

MC – Use circle
dimensions to predict
the odds of a town
being hit by a
hurricane

MC – Stock Market
Simulation
DESIGN CHALLENGES – 2
ND
QUARTER
Year-Long
Focus:

How can we exert
positive energy
into our society?

What that looks
like 2
nd
quarter:
How can we make
positive change to
a disastrous
situation?
Main Challenge
(Science Lead)
Crisis Intervention
Plan

Students will
organize a crisis
prevention plan
that outlines how to
deal with a flood on
par with that which
happened in
Columbus in 1913
Additional
Challenges
Interview for a Position (with
English)

Hierarchy of Needs (SS)

Entertainment Database (Eng)

History of Communication (Eng/
SS)

Environmental Disasters vs. Man-
made alterations (with Math)

"Musical Plates" (Plate Tectonics
& Earthquakes)

Polar Ice Caps Study (Climate
Change)
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 19
Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate) developed by the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) in 2002 to help teachers
embrace the constructivist or engineering systems approach to
delivery, CCS is taking advantage of the growing reservoir of these
TPBL modules and disseminating them district wide.
Attaining Sustainability of STEM TPBL Education
Education is an industry that runs on cycling initiatives (two-year to
three-year cycles) that support textbook-based instructional
strategies and a lecture-based delivery system. Multiple initiatives
are rarely integrated, and often the total number of initiatives
running at any given time is a confusing mix of mandates that are
not clearly defined or prioritized. More often than not the funding
behind the initiative is used to hire teachers rather than
sustain the initiative program (Miranda 2013). Thus
initiatives come and go. Over time many teachers and
administrators have become jaded to the experience of
these cycling initiatives. In short, many within the education
industry simply ignore the intent of new initiatives knowing
they have a limited life cycle and primarily serve to subsidize
building personnel.
Without clear articulation of how initiatives are intended to
support the instructional strategy, cultural strategy, or
delivery system of a school, teachers and administrators find it difficult
to differentiate between initiatives and paradigm shifts. In this
context, school transformation to STEM education is simply seen as
another initiative that will cycle through and then “go away” when
the next great “fix” comes along. This perception, linked with the
fact that there is no specific teacher salary criteria tied to
implementing this paradigm shift as it is with initiatives, only
reinforces the concept that transitioning to TPBL is a “personal
choice,” highlighting the discrepancy in understanding the
importance of overarching instructional strategies and delivery
systems for learning and student achievement. As PAST and CCS
continue the transformation in education, efforts must be made to
help school faculty better understand and articulate the driving
strategies and delivery system within the school. Most important to
this process is elevating emphasis of STEM education funding from
‘salaries supplementation’ to program sustainability that is key to a
successful paradigm shift.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 20
Creating an appreciation for sustainability is, in part, tied to teacher evaluation. The evidence
required must demonstrate their facilitation of student learning in the classroom and on
standardized tests. As a major element of PAST PD, teachers are consistently asked to
complete planning documents (2-week Planners, Snapshots, Mini-Challenges, and Backmaps)
and post on Basecamp® both the planned projects and evidence of implementation. The
success of this strategy has been slow and inconsistent, except with the group of “early
adopter” teachers. This reflects the inexperience of administrators and teachers with consistent
evaluation and evidence of work, as a whole across the industry.
Table 6: Pre-Planning TPBL Deliverable Submissions by School
School
Total # of
Teachers
No
deliverables
submitted
Partial
deliverables
submitted
Full
deliverables
submitted
Percentage
Completed
Africentric Elem 8 7 1 0 0
Africentric MS/ HS 20 13 7 0 0
Avondale Elem 16 7 6 3 19%
Dana Elem 12 9 3 0 0
Highland Elem n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Sullivant Elem 12 6 6 0 0
Starling MS 14 8 6 0 0
Valleyview Elem 9 2 0 7 78%
West Broad Elem 18 7 2 9 50%
Westgate Elem 14 4 10 0 0
West High School* 13 3 n/a 10 85%
Westmoor MS 25 3 22 0 0
Linden McKinley** 34 23 8 3 8%
Where deliverables differed -- * Only first quarter backmap ** 6 mini challenges
How We Identify STEM TPBL Professional Development Course Correction
The PAST team looked for evidence within Basecamp® of regular and widespread posting of
work products and have discerned that the most commonly posted evidence of planning by
faculty were the PowerPoint® presentations produced by teachers at the culmination of the
intensive spring/summer professional development workshops conducted by the PAST
Foundation. The presentation by faculty is always required as a non-negotiable product to be
presented to an audience of peers (Appendix C: Example of 2012 & 2013 Teacher
Presentations). Building on this knowledge, in 2012-2013 PAST adopted the strategy of
informing teachers that the evidence of planning was a deliverable tied to the availability of
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 21
on-going funding supporting their PD, adding accountability as a
feature of their training experience.
This modification to our PD strategy changed the number of
planning forms posted by teachers and signals a ‘game changer’
benchmark in the CCS STEM transformation process. However,
even with the articulation of deliverables for Spring/Summer
professional development, posting varied between schools and
appears to be tied directly to administration within the school and
the administrator’s level of understanding of the process and its use
as an evaluative tool (Table 6).
In our experience, it is strategically important that school
administrators articulate and clearly define for teachers what the
benchmarks are for performance evaluation. Benchmarking requires
evidence. The four types of evidence that meet STEM TPBL
learning expectations are:
1. Evidence of Planning
2. Evidence of Alignment to Published State and National
Standards
3. Evidence of Implementation and Formative Feedback
4. Evidence of Student Demonstration of Learning
These four categories of evidence discussed widely in education
can provide teachers guidance to assess gaps among students and
modify learning strategies appropriately.
Evidence of planning is not a chapter number out of a textbook, or
penciled on a post-it. TPBL and the PAST process lend themselves
to systematic feedback, benchmarking, and reflection, all part of a
successful teachers’ evaluation of effective preparation for work with
their students. PAST templates such as the Backmap, 2wk Planner,
and Snapshot provide a cohesive overview of each module laying
out all aspects, from the details of daily activities, to criteria upon
which the product will be evaluated, the standards aligned to the
project, and finally to the short cycle assessments that tie the rigor
of the project to the standards. Thus, these templates can be used
as guides and benchmarks, as well as to inform teachers and
administrators in terms of where learning gaps exist. Today’s teacher is
being expected to create a set of products that demonstrate the
delivery of their instructional and cultural strategies. It is important to
have the tools and replicable process to accomplish this.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 22
During 2012-2013 PAST focused on the hierarchy of STEM TPBL
driving home the point that without first identifying a unifying
problem, projects devolve into unaligned activities that merely
take up time. Over the course of the year we modified a number
of our templates to reinforce the principles of the design cycle,
which are universal to human thought but often go unarticulated.
These changes and modifications were driven by the findings of
our 2011-2012 focus groups and benchmarking process. At the
close of this academic year, we have completed this process again
and have identified several areas we will address with the schools
and faculties participating in our program in the upcoming year
(2013-2014).
Since the initiation of the first feeder system transformation, the
PAST team has gathered observations toward assembling a
series of benchmarks that signify change or where absent,
indicate no change in a school. These benchmarks are dynamic
and as the transformation progresses, benchmarks that have
been attained by all the schools are no longer listed while new
benchmarks are added, as in the example above of the
benchmark of consistent posting by teachers. We have identified
approximately 10 benchmarks that consistently signify change at
any given point. As in any industry, benchmarking progress is an
important and necessary gauge of transformation. At the close
of each school year the PAST team reviews all of the weekly
reports examining the trends in individual schools and the
constraints where future attention should be focused. Table 7
(STEM TPBL Implementation Benchmarks in Schools) provides a
quick overview of the components of change that PAST will focus
on in the coming year.
Integration of STEM TPBL with State and National Standards
Two imperative components of transformation are: 1) a more
comprehensive understanding of Ohio Common Core, Next
Generation Science, and Ohio Standards as aligned to STEM
TPBL content and as drivers for standards-based, test, questions
that elicit synthesis of concepts; and 2) require teachers to
provide consistent evidence of planning and implementation as
a means of instilling the habits of the paradigm shift and
professional evaluation.
An unintentional consequence of heavy reliance on textbooks
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 23
T
a
b
l
e

7
:

S
T
E
M

T
P
B
L

I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

B
e
n
c
h
m
a
r
k
s

i
n

S
c
h
o
o
l
s
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 24
and pacing guides is a demonstrated lack of familiarity and
understanding of educational standards among many K-12
teachers. For these teachers, standards are aligned by publishers
and curriculum counselors and do not require any input by them as
the classroom teacher. The result is most K-12 teachers do not
possess an overarching understanding of why curricula are
benchmarked to state and national standards. This lack of
understanding also leads to prevailing perceptions that hinder full
implementation in effectively utilizing educational standards. Some
of the perceptions teachers have shared with us include:
! Teaching the standard is the goal versus using the standard
to guide teaching.
! There are hundreds of standards for every grade, and there
is no way to get through them in an academic year.
! Only the standards for a single grade level should be taught
at any time, one should never go above or below the
students’ grade level.
! It is not possible to know if a student has mastered a
standard.
! Standards for Ohio are very different than Common Core,
and thus need to be translated for us.
These perceptions demonstrate a lack of hands-on manipulation of
standards in guiding teaching. In fact, there are not hundreds of
standards for each grade. For example, there are only six anchor
standards in Language Arts. Granted each standard has key
components that must be understood to truly master the standard,
but these components are not standards. In TPBL when teachers
design a project for their class and then align the standards, they
are almost always surprised at how many standards they reach and
the wide span across grade levels the project encompasses.
All Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards along
with Ohio State Standards pivot on the verb introducing each
component to define mastery. There are a well-defined number of
verbs that cross cut all content areas and can be used as indicators
for both students and teachers in demonstrating mastery. Once
teachers actually look at the standards, whether from Ohio or from
the national Department of Education, it is clear that standards are
simply concepts that form the foundation of solid knowledge in a
given subject for this time. We noticed the change in teacher
comfort level, almost immediately, when the PAST PD team began
using the word “concept” rather than the term, “standard,” with
“I almost left
at the end of
the semester. I
came here to do
STEM, but
we didn’t do
any. This
semester we did
and it was a
lot better. I
hear they do
STEM in
every class in
10
th
grade. I
can’t wait”
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 25
teachers. Helping teachers grow beyond these perceptions is key to
advancing the whole profession to achieve goals for 21
st
century
learning.
As noted earlier, teachers are not accustomed to creating
deliverables or benchmarking progress in any quantifiable way. Sir
Ken Robinson notes there is a prevalent perception in the
profession that teaching is a “messenger process,” whereby
teachers simply deliver the message without responsibility for
student learning, thus teaching and learning are not synonymous
(Robinson 2013). Compounded by the perception that evaluation is
about success or failure and not an indicator for improvement,
hinders any type of paradigm shift or robust teacher evaluation
system. TPBL helps teachers shift from the burdensome notion
that they must be “sages on the stage,” to become “guides on
the side,” who can enjoy learning and exploration alongside
their students. Teachers who make this shift enthusiastically
concur that learning becomes fun and their passion for teaching
is restored.
Specific Issues Associated with Sustaining STEM TPBL
Education
Above and beyond the benchmarks that identify areas needing
more attention, we must consider the particular facts associated
with the Linden Feeder System. Among a number of challenges
confronting LFS schools, two elementary schools have been
reconstituted, and may or may not have a critical mass of STEM
TPBL trained teachers to continue transformation in fall 2013.
Both schools gained principals who come from CCS STEM schools
engaged in the process of TPBL transformation. It is important to note
that there are now enough CCS schools engaged in the STEM
TPBL transformation, and therefore, even with the movement of six
principals (6 of 19, or 31%), four of the positions, to date, have
been filled with principals engaged and supportive of STEM TPBL.
Early on in the initial phase of transformation, PAST calculated that
a given school or system could withstand a teacher turnover of
30% and maintain continued transformation. Over the years we
have watched the faculty turnover numbers closely, considering the
effects that higher rates of turnover have on a given school’s progress.
For three consecutive years Linden McKinley STEM Academy (grades
7-12) has experienced 50% turnover in the faculty, and it is
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 26
anticipated that in the coming academic year (2013-14) the turnover rate will exceed 75%. In
the single grade level teaching cohort at Linden McKinley where turnover each year has
remained low, at one to two teachers, the continued progress toward full transformation is
readily apparent. In the 10th grade, cohort planning is now an embedded daily occurrence,
and each quarter has an overarching theme, each content area instructor participates in
projects that address a number of issues of the theme, reading occurs in all subject areas, and
demonstration of learning is wide ranging.
The 10
th
grade experience stands in stark contrast to the 9
th
,

11
th
, and 12
th
grades that have
lost over 80% of the faculty. In 2012-2013, ninth grade had half of the academic year slated for
non-TPBL curriculum offered through Diplomas Now, and the second half by TPBL. Upper
grade planning is still siloed, and resulting projects in the 2012-2013 year were highly
disparate, lacking cohesive overarching problems or robust products. The loss of trained STEM
TPBL teachers has both beneficial and deleterious affects. On the good side - CCS now has
approximately 50 STEM TPBL trained teachers dispersed across the district. However, the
down side for Linden McKinley’s progress is that it looks more like a first-year STEM school
rather than a school in its fifth year of transformation because of the consistently high turnover
rate in recent years.
! #$%$ &'(&')'*%) +,- %')% )./&') 0&/1 2/%3 )'1')%'&)
45*6'* 7.85*9': ;
%3
<&$6' 7$%3 =9$)) >?@>A>?@B C*D>;E)'1')%'&F
Figure 4: 9th Grade Math: Overall Assessment Scores reveal difference between student
engagement.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 27
In schools experiencing high turnover
where there is no planned training for
new teachers lacking TPBL experience,
transformation is constrained, if not
completely stymied. Evaluation by those
outside the transformation process
without full comprehension of the
specific challenges that Linden McKinley
has experienced are likely to see the
current situation as evidence of failure of
the STEM TPBL instructional strategy,
rather than inconsistency in administrative policy in supporting the
pilot CCS school in the district.
Rolling out the Diplomas Now (DN)
initiative without good articulation on how
DN would be coordinated with the TPBL
instructional strategy further exacerbated
perception that STEM TPBL failed to attain
expectations for students at Linden
McKinley. Ninth grade teachers who were
gaining success with TPBL in the previous
year, were instructed by DN coaches to
utilize the textbooks provided without
deviation or integration of STEM. The
result, according to Diplomas Now
directors was the worst performance in the
company’s history.
In the second semester when some of the
teachers re-engaged students with TPBL, a
student noted at the end-of-year STEM school
festival, “I almost left at the end of the
semester. I came here to do STEM, but we
didn’t do any. This semester we did and it was
a lot better. I hear they do STEM in every class
in 10
th
grade. I can’t wait” (9
th
grade student,
May 2013). The opinion of the student is
substantiated with the raw assessment scores
for one 2012-2013 Math class, where the
teacher used the DN curriculum in the fall, and
then reverted to TPBL in the spring (Figure 4).
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 28
As evidenced by the grades, students who were not math or logic
learners responded better to TPBL where multiple modalities were
reached through hands-on activities, versus textbook-based delivery,
which primarily targets math/logic learners.
The rallying piece of information among our findings on student
performance is bolstered by the fact that the students’ voice is
also beginning to indicate a clear preference for STEM TPBL
instruction. In an independent survey of students at Linden
McKinley STEM Academy conducted by the Ohio Department of
Education, students expressed their desire to undertake STEM
problems and projects, even though TPBL modules are often more
rigorous than traditional lecture driven classes with worksheets.
Additionally, the voices of over 350 teachers captured the fact that
when teachers use STEM TPBL in their delivery, learning becomes
fun and student engagement increases. Non-STEM schools across
CCS are now asking to be included in the transition to STEM TPBL.
These sentiments signal that the ground swell of the STEM TPBL
paradigm shift is underway at a scale far exceeding current
implementation. To insure the CCS STEM transformation is
successful and sustainable, the district must continue the process,
paying attention to real time needs for successful STEM transition,
and address these needs systematically and with agility.
What are the Next Steps for Transformation:
Recommendations
We closed out the 2012-2013 academic year with some inspiring
successes, some set backs, and some auspicious starts. Each year,
using the PAST process of regular evaluation, reflection,
modification, and informative Knowledge Capture, we have
identified a number of areas that require attention and careful
mentoring. Ongoing modification is aimed at shifting the concept of
evaluation from a post mortem – “Did we succeed, or did we fail?”
to “How do we improve the ongoing process to insure success?”
Table 8 provides an overview of essential elements for guiding
expansion of the CCS transformation to STEM TPBL for
administrators and teachers.
We closed out
the
2012-2013
academic year
with some
inspiring
successes, some
set backs, and
some
auspicious
starts.
Professional Development
• Articulate the Instructional Strategy, Cultural Strategy, and Delivery Systems
that the faculty and initiatives at a school will work within.
• Map out the initiatives for faculty within the school and their connection to
strategy or delivery.
• Articulate the hierarchy of ‘Problems, Projects and Products’ with the TPBL
Instructional Strategy.
• Provide administrators with TPBL training so they understand TPBL
instructional strategy and can lead faculty in defining goals using initiatives to
support strategies and delivery.
• Plan for TPBL training for new teachers using STEM Leads within the
building.
• Advocate for teachers regarding the transition to TPBL in order to build
confidence in process, presentation of evidence, and outcomes.
• Chart fidelity of TPBL modules to assist teachers in continuous improvement.
• Integrate ‘Habits of Mind’ into all areas of instruction, assessment, and
delivery.
• Use consistent format to capture evidence of planning, alignment to
standards, and gap assessment for real time course correction in instruction.
• Exhibit demonstration of student learning throughout the school.
Teachers
Recommendations for Administration & Teacher STEM TPBL Implementation
Administration
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 29
Table 8: Recommendations for Administration & Teacher STEM TPBL Implementation
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 30
Knowledge Capture Program
The Knowledge Capture (KC) Program at the PAST Foundation plays
an integral role in transformation to STEM education for PreK-12
Columbus City Schools (CCS). The KC team of researchers has actively
engaged with CCS PreK-12 staff, documenting the transition to STEM
transdisciplinary problem based learning (TPBL) for administrators
as well as for PreK-12 teachers in the classroom. Through this work
PAST is able to provide real time information to support design and
implementation of professional development (PD) in STEM TPBL.
Utilizing an approach that incorporates one-on-one interviews,
focus groups, and surveys, the Knowledge Capture research team
informs the PAST Foundation’s approach to providing “real time
course correction.” Knowledge Capture assures that PD is
addressing both fundamental training components, as well as
unique issues that emerge within individual schools over the course
of the STEM TPBL transition period.
Research Activities
This report focuses on two academic years: 2011-2012 and
2012-2013. Table 9 (Knowledge Capture Research Activities by CCS
School) lists the individual schools and the type of research
conducted (e.g., interview, focus group, or survey) within three
PreK-12 feeder systems consisting of elementary, middle, and high
schools. Table 10 (Knowledge Capture Program 2011-2013)
provides a breakdown of the total number of individuals (n=467)
including administrators, teachers and other stakeholders who
participated in research conducted by the KC team. Overall, the KC
team has conducted research activities with just over 90% of all CCS
staff participating in the STEM TPBL professional development
provided by the PAST Foundation.
Table 10 (Knowledge Capture Program 2011-2013) shows the
process over the two-year period to include a total of (45) focus
groups held with (360) teachers. During that same period, (27) one-
on-one interviews were conducted with administrators and other
stakeholders. CCS PreK-12 teachers completed a total of (69) online
surveys in the academic year 2012-2013. This included STEM
Leaders/Coordinators (n=27) in two feeder systems (Linden and
West) to gather input from first-, second- and third-year STEM
Knowledge
Capture
assures that
PD is
addressing
both
fundamental
training
components, as
well as unique
issues that
emerge within
individual
schools over
the course of
the STEM
TPBL
transition
period.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 31
Table 9: Knowledge Capture Research Activities by CCS School
!"# $% & !"# $% & !"# $% &
Llnden-Mcklnley S1LM Academy 7-12
(mlddle school, 7-8, hlgh school, 9-12)
! ! ! ! ! ! !
PamllLon S1LM Academy (prek-6) ! ! ! ! !
Llnden S1LM Academy (prek-6) ! ! ! ! ! !
SouLh Mlfflln S1LM Academy (prek-6) ! ! ! !
Wlndsor S1LM Academy (prek-6) ! ! ! !
WesL Plgh School (9-12) ! ! ! ! ! !
SLarllng Mlddle School (6-8) ! ! ! ! ! !
WesLmoor Mlddle School (6-8) ! ! ! ! ! !
Avondale LlemenLary School (prek-3) ! ! !
uana LlemenLary School (prek-3) ! !
Plghland LlemenLary School (k-3) !
SulllvanL LlemenLary School (prek-3) ! ! !
valleyvlew LlemenLary School (k-3) ! !
WesL 8road LlemenLary School (prek-3) ! ! !
WesLgaLe LlemenLary School (k-3) ! ! !
Plgh School (9-12) ! !
Mlddle School (6-8) ! !
LlemenLary School (k-3) ! !
Knowledge Capture Research Activities by CCS School
Research activities included one-on-one interviews (INT), focus groups (FG)
Over the 2011-2013 time period, the Knowledge Capture (KC) team engaged with CCS administrators and
teaching staff to document identified goals and priorities for the transition to STEM education. Research
activities involved one-on-one interviews and/or focus groups with staff at (9) schools in 2011-2012. In Fall
2012, the KC team expanded research activities to include surveys to gather data from STEM Leaders in two
feeder systems (LFS and WFS) to inform PD design for the 2012-2013 school year. The first pre-training
surveys for K-12 teachers (AFS and LFS) were conducted in 2012-2013. These surveys providing baseline data
prior to STEM PD on teacher perceptions of STEM and Transdisciplinary Problem Based Learning (TPBL).
Ethnographic data were analyzed and coded for thematic issues related to teacher concerns, perceived
challenges, priorities, as well as relevant teacher strengths essential to PD design for STEM TPBL in CCS
schools.
kL?: LlS=Llnden leeder SysLem, WlS=WesL leeder SysLem, AlS=AfrlcenLrlc (k-12)
and online surveys (S) with PreK-12 teachers and administrators in 3 feeder systems
$''(')
&+,-'.
&/0112
3$&
45678
9:;; 9:;9 9:;7
<$&
456=8
>$&
456;:8
!"#$%#&'() *+,#$
-.'/01
23(+0")
43.'(
67)
40'%20")
-489
:0'+0")
40'%20")
!"# $%&' )*++ , - + .
/"# 0%1%23 )*++ 4 . ,*
; < = >?
/"# 567 )*+) -
!"# 567 )*+) . + -
/"# $%&' )*+) . ,8
!"# $%&' )*+) ) +8
!"# 0%1%23 )*+) . ,9
!"# :;3<='; )*+) +*
/"# :;3<='; )*+) +>
0"# :;3<='; )*+) +)
; @> @<; A= @A
0"# "'?@%6@7 )*+- +,
0"# 567 )*+- +*
/"# 0A@BC<$%&' )*+- , )+ +,-
0"# 567 )*+- -
!"# $%&' )*+- ) +) ,
!B&D'&
EF37
567<GHI )*+) + ) .
; A ? A< @?> <B
A= > ? C> <?B A= CA
63%D) 7"3D&)
E$F<?B 4)G
)*++
)*+)
)*+-
In the period 2011-2013, the Knowledge Capture team conducted a total of (38) interviews; (45) Focus Groups
(including STEM Leaders, Encore and Special Education staff); and, (69) surveys with (27) STEM Leaders, and (42)
teachers.
Knowledge Capture Program 2011-2013
!"#J!B&D'& "''D'@ #723'FK /"#J/'23 "''D'@ #723'FK 0"#J0L@B;'&3@B; M<+)
43.'( !'".#%#&'$.) HI J0)0'"%2 *%.#K#.I
-D"K0I) E$F?;G
6#0(+ L3"/ M'.0)
600+0"
-I).0,
N0'"
Research Study Participants by CCS Feeder System (Total Participants, n=467)
AB@A -DH.3.'()O
AB@@ -DH.3.'()O
AB@< -DH.3.'()O
P$.0"K#0Q) E$F<RG
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 32
Leaders to prioritize training needs for the 2012-2013 PD program. Additionally, (37) Africentric
K-12 teachers were invited to complete a pre-training survey, and (5) 7-12 teachers entering
their first year of STEM TPBL training in the Linden Feeder System were asked to participate in
the pre-training survey. These surveys provide baseline data on the initial perceptions and
expectations about STEM TPBL for K-12 teachers initiating the shift to STEM TPBL.
Table 10: Knowledge Capture Program 2011-2013
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 33
Data Collection and Methods
The KC research team engages directly with teachers and
administrators to provide ongoing program evaluation of goals and
achievements identified by CCS staff, contributing to the growth and
sustainability of STEM TPBL in individual schools as well as individual
classrooms. Discussion of these issues is organized by the three
school essentials identified in the PAST Foundation STEM TPBL
professional development program. These are:
! Instructional Strategies
! Cultural Strategies
! Delivery Systems
Table 11 (Comparison of Program Design Variables for Transition to
STEM TPBL) presents a view of the diverse range of approaches
implemented in nine schools reported by principles within the
Linden Feeder System (LFS) and the West Feeder System (WFS).
Note that each school presents a unique approach and combination
of program components to support their transition to STEM TPBL
including:
! Varying degrees of STEM TPBL
teacher common planning time for
collaborative work during the
school week and across the school
year.
! Different ways of incorporating
communication about STEM TPBL
between administration and
building staff.
! Differences in organization of STEM
TPBL teacher teams.
The range of approaches for structuring the transition to STEM TPBL
to some degree reflects institutional constraints, but also shows the
variation in building-level administrator and staff preferences for
integrating STEM TPBL planning into weekly/monthly/quarterly
activities. Table 11 also provides a comparison across schools and
feeder systems of the wide-ranging characteristics for transitioning
to STEM TPBL. In this view, we can consider how these variables
inform the design of STEM TPBL professional development in ways
that build upon existing strengths within the school (building-level)
culture that include established modes of communication, social
My role as the
principal is to
set up the
structures, or
the systems, or
the
expectations
that support
our STEM
education.
And then
leave the
autonomy, or
give the
teachers in the
grade level
teams the
autonomy, to
use their
expertise in
the content
area to mesh
the two
together.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 34
n
o
n
e

d
u
r
l
n
g

L
h
e

s
c
h
o
o
l

d
a
y
1

x

W
e
e
k
2

x

W
e
e
k
3

x

W
e
e
k

2

x

M
o
n
L
h
2

x

M
o
n
L
h

a
f
L
e
r

L
h
e

s
c
h
o
o
l

d
a
y
3

x

?
e
a
r

8y
Crade
Level
8y
ConLenL
Area
?es no ?es no ?es no
n=2 n=1 n=1 n=2 n=1 n=1 n=1 n=7 n=2 n=4 n=3 n=4 n=3 n=6 n=3
Sprlng 2012
3001
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3002
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3003
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3006
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3007
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3008
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3009
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3004
! ! ! ! !
Sprlng 2012
3003
! ! ! ! !
Lnd of
?ear 3
Schools
key: ! = school program deslgn lncludes Lhls componenL, ! = school program deslgn does noL lnclude Lhls componenL
The range of STEM TPBL program design components implemented during the 2011-2012 academic year varied considerably
across (9) schools in two CCS feeder systems. Note that (3) of the schools (5002, 5005, and 5007) did not schedule common
planning time during the school day, reporting that teachers were meeting before or after school, lunch time, or on weekends
(offsite) to work collaboratively to plan coordination of projects across content areas and/or grade levels. Principals cited the
main reason for not providing common planning time was due to scheduling issues, including lack of substitute time. Of the
two schools that had neither regular common planning time nor district-wide PD to support STEM TPBL implementation (5002
and 5007), only one school (5007) did not conduct regular opportunities for administrators and staff to communicate about the
planning and progress in transition to STEM TPBL.
Comparison of Program Design Variables for Transition
to STEM Transdisciplinary Problem Based Learning (TPBL)
(Administrator Interviews 2012; Total Schools n=9)
!"#$%"&$'(")*
,-./ -012
0!
Lnd of
?ear 1
Schools
0
%
3
4
%
5
6












7
6
8
9
*
6
*
:
$
5
$
"
3
:

;
*
5
%
7
:
$
*
%
<
"
*
(

-
"
6
*
=
%
5
6
*
,
&
>
3
3
9

?
3
)
*

@
?3663: ,-./ -012
095::":4 -"6*
-*5&>*%
,-./ -012
-*56#
,-./
2*5)*%#>"8
/**$":4#A
,-./ -012
5$ ,$5==
/**$":4#
* 1hese are meeLlngs descrlbed by admlnlsLraLors where S1LM 1Þ8L ls dlscussed wlLh a range of parLlclpanLs LhaL may lnclude Leachers, S1LM
coordlnaLors, deparLmenL chalrs, admlnlsLraLlon sLaff, and engaged communlLy members.
Lnd of
?ear 2
Schools
Table 11: Comparison of Program Design Variables for Transition to STEM TPBL
interaction, collaboration and teamwork, as well as leadership roles inherent to creating a
STEM TPBL learning environment.
Data Sets
KC data is presented in summary form, aggregating data across school grade level groups and
feeder systems. Although each feeder system ranges in the number of years in STEM TPBL
training, the issues identified through ethnographic research are compared in a first training
year, second year or third year context. Most LFS schools are in the third year of transition to
STEM TPBL, but have contended with a significant number of new teachers with no prior STEM
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 35
TPBL training. Within LFS, some schools initiated training in phases,
choosing to lead with a subset of grade levels. WFS also
includes schools in their first or second year of transition,
where schools are initiating training for a sub-set of grade
levels or choosing to transition by grade level over time. In
this view, we can consider the pivotal transition points for
teachers that correspond to a ‘year one’ (Y1), ‘year two’ (Y2)
or ‘year three’ (Y3) transition experience. These pivotal
points define critical benchmarks as indicators of progress in
the context of a three-year training program as described
and self-reported by PreK-12 teachers and principals.
In this report we also utilize pre-training survey data from a
third feeder system, Africentric K-12 (AFS), providing a pre-Y1 feeder
system perspective that contributes to the comparative understanding
of teacher and principal perceptions about STEM TPBL as they initiate
their transition process.
Methods
The KC Program holds an active research IRB assuring that human
subjects research protocols are consistently implemented through
informed consent required for all CCS staff voluntarily agreeing to
participate in KC research activities. All research
participants receive information through a written
consent form and/or verbal consent process, providing
a clear description of the project, purpose of the
research, and method of data management. Most
important, ethnographic protocols for maintaining
anonymity and confidentiality of data is carefully
reviewed with study participants prior to engaging in
research activities to assure participants are informed on
the methods for protecting identity through use of code
numbers in lieu of the individual’s name or school
affiliation.
The KC team has engaged in research activities with CCS staff at
individual school sites, the PAST Foundation facility, and other
locations where CCS staff participated in STEM TPBL professional
development conducted by PAST. Our research has produced a series
of reports during 2011-2013, including preliminary assessments
through “work in progress” summary reports and briefings for the core
STEM TPBL planning and implementation team. These work-in-
progress reports are designed to provide an essential element of real
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 36
time insights to structure PD, in ways that support meeting specific
needs identified by feedback from teachers and administrators through
anonymous data collected from surveys and focus group
discussions. This component of work is the primary path
through which PAST conducts real time course correction,
assuring professional development design and
implementation address emerging challenges and needs
of teachers and building administrators during the
transition to STEM TPBL.
Surveys
In the 2012-2013 academic year, the KC program began
conducting online surveys with STEM Leaders and
teachers. The first online surveys were conducted during
Fall 2012 with STEM Leader/teachers from the Linden and
West feeder systems (n=27). A work-in-progress report
entitled, Knowledge Capture Summary Overview, Columbus City
Schools STEM Leaders Survey was presented to CCS in January 2013.
Of (20) Linden STEM Leaders, (10) or 50% completed the survey. Of
(29) West STEM Leaders, (17) or 59% completed the survey. The online
survey was accessible via Survey Methods©. Each feeder system was
given a distinct online link, providing a systematic mode to track
responses by feeder system (see Appendix F: LFS Survey
Deployment Schedule, and Appendix G: WFS Survey
Deployment Schedule).
Survey design was initially developed from prior KC focus
group data compiled from 2010 to 2012. The PAST
Foundation Professional Development Team also
provided input to the final survey design. The survey
consisted of (13) questions and during the beta test
survey completion time was in the range of 10-15
minutes (see Appendix H: LFS/WFS STEM Leader Survey
Questions).
An online pre-training survey was conducted with the
K-12 faculty of AFS teachers (n=37) during the winter and
spring of 2013. These surveys were conducted over the 2013 academic
semester beginning with high school teachers, followed by middle
school teachers, and concluding with elementary level teachers (see
Appendix I: AFS Survey Deployment Schedule and Teacher Survey
Questions). This pre-training survey provided an opportunity to gauge
existing teacher experience and understanding of STEM and
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 37
transdisciplinary problem based learning, including
descriptive and quantified information about their
experience in team collaboration, existing communication
modes within grade levels and across the school as a
whole, and expectations and goals for successful STEM
TPBL implementation.
In 2012-2013, 37 of 56 Africentric teachers completed the
online survey. This includes high school teachers (n=12),
middle school teachers (n=15), and elementary level
teachers (n=10), for an overall response rate of 66%. This
number includes classroom teachers, unified arts, and
other supporting faculty. The anonymous online survey
was accessible via Survey Methods© and was
administered during an initial professional development
session conducted by the PAST Foundation at the school
site. The three school groups (elementary, middle and high school)
began their training across the 2012-2013 academic year as follows:
high school (initiated in October 2012), middle school (initiated in
February 2013) and elementary level (initiated in May 2013).
To date, we have completed a total of (69) surveys with CCS PreK-12
staff in three feeder systems (see Table 10). Use of surveys
has proven an effective and efficient tool to provide
baseline data for assessing CCS pre-training issues
identified by teachers at the start of training for the
academic year, informing PD design for initial (Year 1)
transition to STEM TPBL education, as well as for those
who are entering their second or third year of PD. In this
approach KC data is used primarily to define the priorities
to be incorporated in the PD design for the specific
coming academic year.
Knowledge Capture research team conducted two staff
briefings in February 2013 to review preliminary analysis of
survey data for the Linden and West feeder systems. The briefings
were organized to review a thematic set of issues identified in the
survey responses, and to develop specific approaches to modify the
design of professional development underway in schools in those
feeder systems. A comparative view of survey themes is presented in
Appendix J (2012-2013 Survey Analysis).
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 38
The survey data included in Appendix J present teacher and STEM Leader survey responses
to the following two questions:
! What are your top three priorities for 2012-2013 for successful STEM implementation
in your school? (see Appendix J: Table 1)
! What do you anticipate will be your top three challenges to STEM implementation in
your school? (see Appendix J: Table 2)
! Additionally, STEM Leaders were asked the following question:
! What are three areas of additional training that you feel you need to support STEM
implementation in 2012-2013? (see Appendix J: Table 3)
!"#"$%&'"() %+ ,-./ -012 -"345"6 ,78$$9
-63(9:8948&$8(36; <%67
,)=:"() .(>3>"'"()
,)=:"() ?99"99'"()
-"345"6 1=;@8(
,45%%$ A3B8)9
,)=:"() 1"53#8%6 C4$3996%%' '3(3>"'"()D
,)=:"() E99="9 C'%B8$8);F 3))"(:3(4"F B"$%G >63:"@$"#"$ 978$$9D
036"() H I%''=(8); E(#%$#"'"()
E'&$"'"() ,-./ -012 06%J"4)9
I%$$3B%63)" G8)5 K)5"6 ,-./ ,45%%$9
L"9%=64"9 3(: -8'"
?:'8(89)63)8#" ,=&&%6)
Survey data analysis is organized by "three school essentials" that define the structural components of the PAST Foundation
professional development program and appear at the left side of the table: 1) Instructional Strategies; 2) Cultural Strategies;
and, 3) Delivery System. Teachers were asked to identify priorities and challenges for "successful implementation of STEM
TPBL in my classroom" for the 2012-2013 academic year. STEM Leaders (n=27) were also asked to identify areas of
additional training to lead other teachers in successful implementation at their schools. A more detailed breakdown for
each Main Teacher Theme is presented in APPENDIX J.
!
"
"
#
$
%
&
'

)
*
+
$
,
-
.
/
0
-
&
1
$
2
3

4
-
.
2
-
#
5
&
#
,

6
+
4
7

!
"
"
#
$
%
&
'

)
8
9
/
3
-
/
.
2
3

4
-
.
2
-
#
5
&
#
,









6
9
4
7
!
"
"
#
$
%
&
'

)
:
;
#
3
&
<
#
.
=


4
=
,
-
#
>

6
;
4
7
Overview of Teacher Survey Themes on Successful Implementation
of STEM TPBL in My Classroom
MNOM@MNOP 06"Q@OM -"345"6 ,=6#"; C(RST -"345"69D
!
"
"
#
$
%
&
'

?
/
>
@
#
.
:


4
0
A
1
1
3

B
,
,
#
$
-
&
2
3
,
Main Teacher Themes
Table 12: Overview of Teacher Themes on Successful Implementation of STEM TPBL in My
Classroom
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 39
Responses were analyzed thematically and a complete view of survey
response themes are presented in Table 12 (Overview of Teacher
Themes on Successful Implementation of STEM TPBL in
My Classroom).
Focus Groups
The PAST Foundation began ethnographic research in
Columbus area schools, conducting focus group data
collection and analysis in 2008, working with
administrators, teachers, students, parents and
community partners from diverse school districts and
communities. Since that time, PAST has continued to rely
on focus group research with PreK-12 teaching staff,
including STEM Leaders/Coordinators, in the Columbus
City Schools. Through this work we have gained a
substantive understanding of the experience and process
for transitioning to STEM education in Columbus City
Schools, identifying key factors associated with stakeholder goals for
STEM education for PreK-12 students. This research also provided a
systematic view of aspects of school and/or community development
and partnerships that support community networks working
collaboratively to develop STEM education. For the period
2011-2013, (45) focus groups were conducted with (360) CCS staff
including PreK-12 teachers, STEM Leaders, Unified Arts, ENCORE,
librarians, physical education instructors, counselors, special
education, and intervention specialists.
Focus groups are generally conducted when teachers are
participating in full-day, off-site professional development conducted
by PAST. A one-hour focus group session is designed to explore
views on transitioning to STEM TPBL at the classroom level. An
important aspect of ethnographic research provides for
confidentiality of all data collected. Participants who voluntarily
agree to join a focus group session are not identified by name or
affiliation with any specific program, school or department within
CCS. Every individual’s anonymity is preserved through the
assignment of a coded number.
Information gained through focus group research includes
perspectives on collaboration, communication, new roles and
relationships among staff, students and parents, as well as ideas
about achievements and challenges faced during the school year.
Additionally, teachers are asked for ideas to better support their STEM
A one-hour
focus group
session is
designed to
explore views
on
transitioning
to STEM
TPBL at the
classroom
level
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 40
PD in the following school year. In summary, focus group data has
been used to help inform PD strategies for real time course
correction for effective PD across different grade levels and different
schools. This is especially important for recognizing unique aspects
of the cultural distinctions across schools where neighborhood and
socio-cultural context plays into the way in which the school
organizes and conducts the transition process for its teachers,
students, and parents.
Analyzing Focus Group Information
Focus group data presented here include three areas of
thematically defined issues identified by teachers for a successful
transition to STEM TPBL. They include:
! Challenges Identified by Teachers for a Successful Transition
to STEM TPBL
! Best Practices Identified by Teachers for Success in STEM
TPBL Classrooms
! New Perceptions About Student Gains in a STEM TPBL
Classroom
These three areas offer a view of major aspects of teacher
experience thus far, including reflections about major changes in
self-reported effectiveness in implementing STEM TPBL, and
differences they have observed in student performance. These
issues are discussed in the sections that follow.
Challenges Identified by Teachers for a Successful Transition to
STEM TPBL
Table 13 (Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to
STEM TPBL 2011-2012) presents a comparative view of issues
associated with first, second, and third year experiences at the close
of the 2011-2012 academic year. Focus group data, gathered at the
close of the 2012-2013 academic year is presented in Table 14
(Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM
TPBL 2012-2013). There are some consistencies evident in Year 1
and Year 2 challenges identified by teachers in focus group
discussion in 2012-2013 in comparison to the issues identified in
the 2011-2012 discussions.
The initial year of training presents obvious challenges for the
individual teacher in adopting new approaches to teaching and
When we can
all kind of
shift…
STEM will
be more
powerful, and
more
productive…
allowing the
children to be
more
exploratory,
and trust them
with materials
and the
technology
that we have
in our
building.
[200-9-45]
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 41
Table 13: Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL 2011-2012
!"#$ &'"
()*++,-
!"#$ ./+
()*++,-
!"#$ .*$""
()*++,-
0'12 34-5
67 .-8
0'1 9 34-5
2: .-8
0'1; 34-5
:7 .-8
!"#$%#&' $)*+ ,-.#&'/.0))#.010+ '0#23
!
4#5,1-6#&' 5%023&% 7*)8
!
.$#'-<=-)=>,='#$? @+$A 9*&&3.%#&' .*&%3&% -)3-5
! ! !
:*5%3)#&' 5%023&% ;06<#&
!
=*%#>-%#*& -&2 $*11*7 %")*0'"
!
!"#$%#&' 5%023&% 3?,3.%-%#*&5 %* !@A= @BCD -,,)*-."
!
@3-."3) .*&$#23&.3 -&2 ,3).3,%#*& *$ ;3#&' %)05%32
!
E35#5%-&.3 %* !@A= @BCD ,)*$355#*&-1 23>31*,+3&%
! !
@3-."3) .*11-;*)-%#*&/%3-+7*)8
! ! !
()*++, B#C=D- A&'-'#&' 5%023&%5 #& -2*,%#&' "-;#%5
!
(DE<"'D F"*#G=+$ =#5053 *$ %3."&*1*'6
! !
F%%3&2-&.3
!
43-1#&' 7#%" 5%023&% +*;#1#%6
! ! !
D-.8 *$ ,-)3&% #&>*1>3+3&%
! !
D-.8 *$ .*++0&#%6 #&>*1>3+3&%
! !
43-1#&' 7#%" %3-."3) +*;#1#%6
! ! !
A&'-'#&' 5%023&%5 #& 05#&' %"3 235#'& .6.13
! !
C0#12#&'<7#23 5%-$$ ;06<#& %* !@A= '*-15
! !
91-55)**+ %** 5+-11/.1-55 5#G3 %** ;#' $*) !@A= @BCD
! ! !
D-.8 *$ %#+3 %* .*+,13%3 -11 2#5%)#.% #&#%#-%#>35
! ! !
H&3$$#.#3&% 053 *$ ,1-&&#&' %#+3
!
H<I='=-D$#D=G" (E>>+$D H&.*&5#5%3&% 5."3201#&' -.)*55 ')-23 13>315
! !
Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL (2011-2012)
Teacher Focus Groups - New Issues 2012
IJKI B)3L<KI @3-."3) :*.05 M)*0,5N &OKP :*.05 M)*0,5 Q:M5RS KTU @3-."3)5 Q@5R
J

(
)
*
+
+
,

K
-
-
"
'
D
=
#
,
-
3+)E- 4$+E>
L#=' .*"I"-
3+)E- 4$+E> (ECMD*"I"-
New issues raised by teachers in the May 2012 Focus Groups are organized to show a comparison across schools at the
completion of the 2011-2012 academic year. Categories for comparison provide a view of schools and/or grade levels within
schools ending the first year of PD (Year 1), the second year of PD (Year 2) and 3rd year of PD (Year 3). Note that Year 1 schools
in comparison with Year 2 and Year 3 schools, reflect more concern with Instructional Strategies (IS). Year 1 issues dropped off
following completion of Year 2 and Year 3 PD. Note also that Year 3 schools show fewest issues related to Cultural Strategies
(CS), suggesting that teacher progress shifts over time. Note that Delivery System (DS) includes continuing challenges, several
of which reflect common institutional constraints (teacher mobility, classroom size, pressure to complete multiple district
initiatives).
N
"
,
=
G
"
$
?

(
?
-
D
"
I



0
N
(
8
OI>,"I"'D#D=+'
P"-+E$)"- #'< .=I"
O
'
-
D
$
E
)
D
=
+
'
#
,

(
D
$
#
D
"
Q
=
"
-

0
O
(
8
N"G",+>I"'D +R (.KL
.SFT ."#)*"$ (A=,,-
(DE<"'D K'Q#Q"I"'D
U
E
,
D
E
$
#
,

(
D
$
#
D
"
Q
=
"
-



0
U
(
8
."#)*"$ FE?M='
(DE<"'D O--E"-
S#$"'D #'< U+IIE'=D?
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 42
!"#$ &'"
()*++,-
!"#$ ./+
()*++,-
'012 34-
156 .-
'07 34-
67 .-
!"#$%#&' $)*+ ,-.#&'/.0))#.010+ '0#23 !
4&23)5%-&2#&' !678 69:; ! !
<3=31*,#&' )#'*)*05 -&2 )313=-&% ,)*>13+5 ! !
?&.*),*)-%#&' !%-&2-)25/@*++*& @*)3 ! !
9)3,-)#&' 5%023&%5 $*) %35%#&' ! !
;-.A *$ -23B0-%3 .*++0&#.-%#*& %* %3-."3)5 -&2 5%023&%5 ! !
?+,)*=#&' 13-)&#&' 5A#115 !
C*5%3)#&' 5%023&% >0DE#& !
!%023&%5 F*)A#&' .*11->*)-%#=31D !
8*%#=-%#*& -&2 $*11*F %")*0'" !
(89:"'8 ;--"--<"'8 83-50)#&' )3501%5 *$ !678 69:; ! !
<3=31*,#&' %3-."3) .*+$*)% 13=31 ! !
63-."3) .*&$#23&.3 -&2 ,3).3,%#*& *$ >3#&' %)05%32 ! !
G35#5%-&.3 %* !678 69:; ,)*$355#*&-1 23=31*,+3&% ! !
63-."3) .*11->*)-%#*&/%3-+F*)A ! !
()*++, =#>?8- 7&'-'#&' 5%023&%5 #& -2*,%#&' "->#%5 !
H22)355#&' >3"-=#*)-1 #55035 !
?&.*&5#5%3&% 2#5.#,1#&3 %")*0'"*0% >0#12#&'/.1-55)**+ !
<3-1#&' F#%" 5%023&% +*>#1#%D ! !
!%023&%5 F#%" >31*F ')-23E13=31 5A#115 ! !
H%%3&2-&.3 !
?&3$$3.%#=3 053 *$ .*++0&#%D ,-)%&3)5 !
;-.A *$ -23B0-%3 .*++0&#.-%#*& %* ,-)3&%5 -&2 .*++0&#%D ! !
;-.A *$ ,-)3&% #&=*1=3+3&% ! !
?23&%#$D#&' ,-)3&%5 #& !678 ,)*$355#*&5 !
;-.A *$ .*++0&#%D #&=*1=3+3&% !
9-)3&%5 F#%" 1*F 5A#115 !
;-.A *$ -23B0-%3 ,)3,-)-%#*&/.**)2#&-%#*& *$ #+,13+3&%-%#*& !
<3-1#&' F#%" %3-."3) +*>#1#%D !
7&'-'#&' 5%023&%5 #& 05#&' %"3 235#'& .D.13 !
:0#12#&'EF#23 5%-$$ >0DE#& %* !678 '*-15 !
!33 3I-+,135 *$ !678 69:; !
!"#$%#&' $)*+ 2#)3.% #&5%)0.%#*& %* !678 69:; -,,)*-." !
H..355 %* +-%3)#-15 -&2 50,,1#35 ! !
C0&2#&' ! !
@1-55)**+ %** 5+-11/.1-55 5#J3 %** >#' $*) !678 69:; ! !
;-.A *$ %#+3 %* .*+,13%3 -11 #&#%#-%#=35 ! !
H..355 %* 3$$3.%#=3 %3."&*1*'D ! !
?&-23B0-%3 .*++*& ,1-&&#&' %#+3 ! !
@*++*& ,1-&&#&' %#+3 )320.#&' #&2#=#20-1 ,1-&&#&' F*)A !
6#+3 %* F*)A F#%" 5%-$$ %* -55355 !678 ,)*')355 #& >0#12#&' !
!%*)-'3 5,-.3 $*) ,)*K3.%5 ! !
?&3$$#.#3&% 053 *$ ,1-&&#&' %#+3 !
!0,,*)% $)*+ 2#5%)#.% ! !
!0,,*)% $)*+ >0#12#&' 13-23) ! !
?&.*&5#5%3&% 5."3201#&' -.)*55 ')-23 13=315 ! !
9)#&.#,-1 0&23)5%-&25 13-)&#&' F#11 1**A 2#$$3)3&% ! !
@"A",+B<"'8 +C (.DE
.FGH ."#)*"$ (I?,,-
J
'
-
8
$
9
)
8
?
+
'
#
,

(
8
$
#
8
"
K
?
"
-



L
J
(
M
(89:"'8 J--9"-
F#$"'8 N O+<<9'?8P
Q"-+9$)"- N .?<"
J<B,"<"'8#8?+'
@
"
,
?
A
"
$
P

(
P
-
8
"
<



L
@
(
M
In the 2012-2013 academic year of STEM TPBL professional development, there are some consistencies evident in
Year 1 and Year 2 challenges identified by teachers in the 2011-2012 focus group discussions (Table 13). The initial year
of training presents challenges for the individual teacher in shifting away from direct instruction to adopting new skills
to create a student-driven learning environment. In the second year of training, the data show that teachers begin to
expand their focus from themselves as STEM teachers/facilitators, to consider potential shifts in student learning
outcomes attainable in a STEM TPBL environment.
;:<?'?-8$#8?A" (9BB+$8
(89:"'8 D'K#K"<"'8
."#)*"$ G9PR?'
(89:"'8 G"*#A?+$
O
9
,
8
9
$
#
,

(
8
$
#
8
"
K
?
"
-



L
O
(
M
PreK-12 Teacher Focus Groups; n=21 Focus Groups (FGs), 153 Teachers (Ts)
3+)9- 4$+9B
E#?' .*"<"-
S


(
)
*
+
+
,

D
-
-
"
'
8
?
#
,
-
Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL (2012-2013)
3+)9- 4$+9B (9>R.*"<"-
Table 14: Teacher Identified Challenges for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 43
developing new modes of interaction with students to attain a student-
driven learning environment. In the second year of
training, the data show that teachers begin to expand
their focus from developing their skills and implementing
changes associated with transitioning away from direct
instruction, to also consider potential changes in students
and learning outcomes in a STEM TPBL environment.
Also evident in the Year 1 transition experience are the
organizational and logistical elements of creating a
collaborative process for planning and coordination
among teachers. A major challenge expressed in focus
group discussions is the issue of gaining teacher buy-in to
achieve a committed enterprise for becoming a STEM
TPBL school. Teachers willing to engage in the
collaborative STEM TPBL approach feel strongly that all
teachers must engage in the effort in order for their school
to effectively create a fully integrated STEM learning environment for
student success across all grade levels.
Challenges identified by teachers included in Table 13 and Table 14
also reflect inherent institutional constraints on resources and time, as
well as issues associated with the fluidity of the system as a whole and
disruptions related to student and teacher mobility across the district.
Identifying these challenges suggest that teachers see the
need to expand understanding of STEM TPBL and its
success in addressing challenges posed by improved and
consistent building-wide communication, as well as across
feeder systems, and between district administration and
the schools. Teachers comment that they want more
information about what is happening in the district related
to STEM TPBL, and that it is helpful to them to know which
schools are making the transition.
Best Practices Identified by Teachers for Success in STEM
TPBL Classrooms
Discussion across all focus groups in 2012 and 2013
produced a range of observations on achievements and
gains in implementing STEM TPBL in their classrooms. As part of these
observations, teachers expressed a commonly held desire about the
importance of sharing information on ‘best practices,’ consistent with
their experience in learning from one another about what works and
what does not. The gains reported by teachers in discussion among
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 44
themselves in focus groups reflected not only on their own
performance as STEM TPBL teachers, but also on student gains in
learning to work collaboratively, staying on task in small group/
team work, increased ability to articulate new knowledge, and
integrating new understanding across content areas. Tables 15, 16
and 17 (Instructional Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013,
Cultural Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013, and Delivery
System Best Practices 2012 & 2013) provide an overview of best
practices organized by the three school essentials.
Table 15 offers a view of gains for both teachers and students. In
particular, Year 2 teachers described an unexpected aspect of their
experience in reporting that they had an increased sense of value
as professionals and respect as content experts in their
collaborative work with colleagues. These comments were made
with great enthusiasm, noting that this was a new experience in
working collaboratively in grade level interaction, or across grade
levels within their school. Teachers also noted a shift away from
communication about particular students and “behavior issues,” to
more discussion about student performance in terms of progress
and learning achievements. Teachers also saw increased student
awareness of this new type of communication among teachers, and
commented that in their view this resulted in raising expectations
for students in explicit ways that showed through student
engagement, enthusiasm, and in their ability to talk about their
class work and explaining the design and purpose of their projects.
This occurred both in communicating with their classmates, as well
as through the process of presenting their work to students in
other classrooms or other grade levels, as well as to community
members.
Table 16 shows a series of activities that teachers felt were effective
in communicating a range of issues that extended from students,
to parents and community members.
Improved student behavior resulting from setting up clear
expectations building wide (Year 2) is consistent with a Year 1 focus
on practicing ‘school habits’ as part of their TPBL learning
experience, extending classroom discussion and practice of habits
to the building as a whole, with increased teacher and student
awareness of behavior goals. Teachers also discovered student
enjoyment in communicating about their work and particular
classroom projects to their parents and to community members,
Students are
starting to see
that synthesis
outside of
their
projects…and
I think that
that brought
us closer
together as a
team, it made
the kids realize
it’s not just
about the
projects, it is
about every
day learning
that we’re
trying to
incorporate all
these things.
[110-2-166]
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 45
Table 15: Instructional Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013
and that this activity also formed an effective outreach strategy involving students in creating
the message and inviting interest from families and neighbors, including potential community
partners.
Table 17 can be interpreted as ‘where the rubber meets the road.’ In this set of reported best
practices, teachers see effective approaches that can support their goals for creating an
‘inquiry-based classroom,’ and a range of changes they achieved in their classrooms noted in
the table in the theme of “Implementation.” These are ways in which teachers reported that
they saw changes in their experience in working with their students. Additional changes that
teachers believe to be beneficial are increased value of collaborative teacher planning and
coordination across their STEM TPBL teams, including creating ways to increase their effective
use of common planning time. Note also that teachers have implemented strategies to
"#$%&'# (&)*+,-.
!"#$%&'%() +,-#.%/$#" ,01,23#3%/(4 5%41"#',5 3-$/6)-/63 +6%"5%()
1$/.%5,4 &,,5+#27 3/ 4365,(34 #+/63 )/#"4 &/$ %81$/.%() +,-#.%/$
!
"/)--0 1*2,#3 9(2/$1/$#3%() -#+%34 %(3/ 1$/:,234 !
;#$,(34 ,()#)%() %( 2/886(%3' /63$,#2- !
<,(5%() 4365,(34 -/8, =%3- %(&/$8#3%/( /( 2"#44$//8 #23%.%3%,4 #(5
46)),43%/(4 &/$ 1#$,(3#" %(./".,8,(3
!
<>?@ A%)-34 #(5 B#8%"' A%)-34 %(2"65, <>?@ #23%.%3%,4 %( ,.,$'
2"#44$//8
!
<,(5%() 1$/:,23 2/81/(,(34 -/8, &/$ 4365,(34 #(5 1#$,(34 3/
2/81",3, 3/),3-,$
! !
C44%)(%() 1#$,(34 -/8,=/$7D 2/((,23%() -/8, "%&, 3/ 42-//" 1$/:,234 !
<365,(34 2$,#3%() <>?@ .%5,/ 1$/:,234 3/ &#2%"%3#3, 2/886(%3'
6(5,$43#(5%() /& <>?@
!
9(.%3%() 2/886(%3' 8,8+,$4 %( 3/ %(3,$#23 =%3- 4365,(34 ! !
<365,(34 ,()#),5 %( 2/886(%3' /63$,#2- #4 1#$3 /& 2"#44$//8 1$/:,234 !
Cultural Strategies (CS) identified by teachers demonstrate they are exploring opportunities for students to
improve their behavior, including better ways of providing feedback on behavior both in and out of the
classroom, as well as building greater recognition of the school's "habits of mind," important for successful
learning. A surprising number of actions are reported by teachers who want to promote STEM student learning
and engage parents and others in the community, increasing interest as well as support for STEM students.
Cultural Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013
2012 & 2013 PreK-12 Teacher Focus Groups; n=34 Focus Groups (FGs), 270 Teachers (Ts)
4&*/)&. (&3# 5.*/#,/&3
6*,' 4)&7&3
4&*/)&. (&3# 5.*/#,/&3 "$28#)&7&3
9&*. :'&
"/)--03
9&*. 4;-
"/)--03
<
$
0
#
$
.
*
0

"
#
.
*
#
&
=
,
&
3

>
<
"
?
5*.&'#
@'=*=&7&'#
<-77$',#A
@'=*=&7&'#
Teacher Reported Actions that Support Success in the STEM TPBL Classroom
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 46
!"#"$%& ()*+ ),-.
)"/01"2 (34$$5
!"##$%&'#( %"#&$#& *+$*, -$*., &" +'("+"/, *#. +$-$0*#& 1+"2$%&, ! !
3#&$(+*&'#( %"#&$#& *+$*, '#%-/.'#( 45!674 ! !
8$*%9$+, :'#. 0*-/$;'#%+$*,$ '# %"#:'.$#%$ '# 9*0'#( &9$'+
,&+$#(&9, *#. %"#&$#& $<1$+&',$ +$%"(#'=$. >? "&9$+,
!
@*%A B*11'#( ! !
C$0$-"1'#( +/>+'%,;*,,$,,B$#&, !
D&/.$#&, ,?#&9$,'=$ %"#&$#& *%+",, B/-&'1-$ %-*,,$, '#
1+$,$#&*&'"#,
!
8$*%9$+, '#%$#&'0'=$ 'B1+"0$B$#& '# ,&/.$#& 1$+:"+B*#%$ >?
*%A#"E-$.('#( &9$'+ *%9'$0$B$#&, '# "&9$+ %-*,,$, F&$*%9$+,
%"BB/#'%*&'#( *>"/& ,&/.$#& *%9'$0$B$#&G
!
D&/.$#&, ,"-0'#( 1+">-$B, &"($&9$+ ! !
D&/.$#&, 0$+>*-'='#( 1+"%$,,H 1+">-$BH *#. 1+"./%& ! !
D&/.$#&, 1+$,$#&'#( &" "&9$+ (+*.$, ! !
D&/.$#&, $#(*('#( '# %"BB/#'&? "/&+$*%9 *, 1*+& ": %-*,,+""B
1+"2$%&
!
7$-$0*#& 1+">-$B, $#(*($ ,&/.$#&, '# I+$*- E"+-.I */&9$#&'%
-$*+#'#(
!
D&/.$#&, 1+$,$#&'#( &" */&9$#&'% */.'$#%$H '#%-/.'#( %"BB/#'&?
B$B>$+,
!
Data analysis over a two-year period identified "Best Practices" identified by teachers in focus group
discussion conducted in 2012 and in 2013. Table 15 on Instructional Strategies for STEM success shows
important gains in STEM TPBL teaching skills and include more effective planning and design to increase
student response to "real world" rigorous problems. Gains in student ability to collaborate, as well as
communicate to others what they are doing and learning in their classrooms was also noted by teachers as
an outcome of their increased STEM TPBL skills.
(678"96
*9:/:";"96
Teacher Reported Actions that Support Success in the STEM TPBL Classroom
Instructional Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013
2012 & 2013 PreK-12 Teacher Focus Groups; n=34 Focus Groups (FGs), 270 Teachers (Ts)
)"/01"2 -"56 ,2/0640"5
+/49 )1";"5
)"/01"2 -"56 ,2/0640"5 (7<=61";"5
>
9
5
6
2
7
0
6
4
%
9
/
$

(
6
2
/
6
"
:
4
"
5

?
>
(
@
)2/9584504&$49/2A
B%23
)"/01"25 C&&$A49:
!"54:9 DA0$"
E"/2 F9"
(01%%$5
E"/2 )G%
(01%%$5
Table 16: Cultural Strategies Best Practices 2012 & 2013
overcome constraints posed by lack of common planning time providing for essential
communication among the teaching team, whether face-to-face, creating a student reporting
process about work in other classes, or through the use of social media.
Taken as a whole, these three tables provide insight across a broad set of strategies that
teachers are discovering that have resulted in observable changes both in their own work, the
work of other teachers, and in their students who are the beneficiaries of the STEM TPBL
learning experience.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 47
Þrovldlng back map for sLudenLs makes expecLaLlons LransparenL !
Small group remedlaLlon !
SLudenLs relaLe whaL Lhey are learnlng ln dlfferenL classes ln ways
LhaL demonsLraLe Lhey are lnLegraLlng learnlng across conLenL areas
!
Modellng S1LM 1Þ8L ! !
Maklng classroom more lnqulry based ! !
SLudenLs undersLand how Lo apply Lhe deslgn cycle ln mulLlple ways !
1eacher encouraglng sLudenLs Lo learn from each oLher before
Lurnlng Lo Leacher for answers
!
SLudenLs are wllllng Lo Lake on leadershlp roles Lo asslsL new
sLudenLs
!
AppolnLlng sLudenL classroom ºgreeLers" Lo reporL acLlvlLles from
oLher Leachers' classrooms
!
!"#$%&'"# )*+
,-."
Schedullng/coordlnaLlng compuLer Llme for sLudenLs prevenLs
classroom confllcLs
!
1eachers feel prepared for class Llme !
1eachers focus on low-performlng sLudenLs Lo lncrease emphasls on
learnlng lssues (vs. behavloral lssues)
!
ulsLrlbuLlng Lasks among Leam members !
CoordlnaLlng Llmlng of pro[ecLs Lo uLlllze shared
resources/maLerlals
!
SLrucLurlng and documenLlng meeLlngs lmproves producLlvlLy ! !
ConslsLenL locaLlon for common plannlng Llme !
S1LM newsleLLers provlded opporLunlLy for Leachers Lo see whaL
oLher grades are dolng, lncludlng ways Lo bulld verLlcal and
horlzonLal sLudenL lnLeracLlon
!
uLlllzlng lacebook !
lnformal dlscusslon abouL pro[ecL lmplemenLaLlon LhroughouL Lhe
school day
! !
MeeLlng before school, afLer school, lunch or weekends ! !
1exLlng ! !
1eachers uLlllze deslgnaLed sLudenL ºgreeLers" Lo sLay lnformed on
class acLlvlLles from oLher conLenL areas
!
Delivery System Best Practices 2012 & 2013
2012 & 2013 Þrek-12 1eacher locus Croups, n=34 locus Croups (lCs), 270 1eachers (1s)
,")'/"& 0"#1 2&)'1-'"#
3)-* ,/"."#
,")'/"& 0"#1 2&)'1-'"# 4%561/"."#
Teacher Reported Actions that Support Success in the STEM TPBL Classroom
7")& 8*"
4'/$$9#
7")& ,:$
4'/$$9#
;<<"'1-=" >#" $<
?$..$* 29)**-*@
,-."
A
"
9
-
=
"
&
B

4
B
#
1
"
.
C.D9"."*1)1-$*
;<<"'1-=" 41&)1"@-"#
?$.D"*#)1-*@ <$&
E)'F $< ?$..$*
29)**-*@ ,-."
Across all areas reported by teachers as effective actions taken in 2012 and in 2013, teachers pointed to their
efforts to gain in implementation successes in their classrooms, as well as in addressing institutional
constraints associated with lack of adequate common planning time and need for regular STEM team
communication.
Table 17: Delivery System Best Practices 2012 & 2013
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 48
New Perceptions About Student Gains in a STEM TPBL Classroom
Table18 (Teacher Reported Observations of STEM TPBL Student
Growth 2012-2013) presents three main themes described by teachers
in discussing their experience in the classroom with STEM TPBL
implementation:
! Student Advances in STEM TPBL Skills
! Changes in Classroom Culture
! Changes in Student Achievement
In these observed changes associated with STEM TPBL
teachers discussed their experiences in terms of things that
were new in the 2012-2013 academic year. This included
observations made by veteran teachers who expressed the
view that a number of these changes were unexpected with
regard to low performing students. Of particular importance
to these teachers was the change seen in students regarded
as ‘low achievers’ or learning challenged students who
require second language tutoring, grade level tutoring or
other types of special education instruction. While teachers
acknowledge that not all students improved to the level
described in Table 18, the fact that they were seeing
changes in students across the board, not just the high
performing students, was acknowledged as a new
experience for teachers. Teachers felt their observations
signaled the potential for all students to improve in their
classroom interaction and achievements, and as a result
raised teacher expectations that students could gain skills at
grade level and higher.
Leadership and STEM TPBL Success
The 2013 focus group discussions were analyzed to identify issues
related to aspects of the transition to STEM TPBL that reflect
perceptions about the role of the principal, as well as administrative
support essential to successful STEM implementation. The importance
of the role of administrative leaders is presented in Table 19 (What is
the Role of the Principal for a Successful Transition to STEM TPBL?).
Issues that emerged in the course of the transition to STEM TPBL
identified by teachers regarding a wider range of issues within the
system as a whole are presented in Table 20 (What Are the Essential
Now I know I can
release a lot of
that responsibility
to the students
because they
actually have the
skills to be their
own manager,
design the projects,
see it through, and
then working
together
[309-3-101]
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 49
Components of Administrative Support for a Successful STEM
TPBL Transition?).
Table 19 is organized by five main themes:
! Creating a Common Vision of STEM TPBL
! Expressing Explicit Buy-in/Active Mentoring
! Holding Teachers Accountable
! Making STEM TPBL Learning Visible
! Bringing the Community into the School; Engaging
with Parents and Partners
These themes include actions or practices that teachers
described as areas ascribed to the responsibility of building
administrator level. In these observations we see links to
earlier discussions on ‘challenges’ associated with teachers
who say they lack clarity in understanding goals and
objectives for transitioning to STEM TPBL, including a clear
understanding of what STEM should look like in their school.
An expectation of mentoring, consistent with the role of the
building instructional leader, is noted by teachers who fear
they will not succeed in gaining new STEM TPBL skills.
Teachers also expressed concern that principals need to
understand the transition process, and reflect this new
understanding in conducting teacher observations/
evaluations, and also in their interactions with students.
Teachers also broadly agreed that principals must
communicate their expectations and commitment to STEM
TPBL to both teachers and to students. The latter includes a
willingness to display student work throughout the school
and to engage with students directly to discuss what the
change is about and why it is important for them. Last,
teachers commented that they were hesitant to initiate
communication to families and community members without
having a clear understanding of the principal’s vision of
STEM, and felt that the principal’s role was critical in taking
the lead to initiate community dialogues about the school’s
transition to STEM TPBL.
Table 20 is also organized by five main themes:
! Integrate Building Goals as They Relate to District
Goals
! Engage with Teachers to Guide/Resolve STEM
Even…non-
functional
readers, non-
writers could do
it [explain their
project], because
of the interest in
the project that
spurred them on
to do the other
things, and by the
end of the year
the test scores
showed, and I do
a Brigance
Comprehensive…
and every one of
the grade levels
came up in
reading.
[140-2-180]
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 50
!"#$%& ()* !"#$$+ ()* !"#&$ ()*
!"#$%&'% )" '*+,%"* -%, .$/0%#*'1#-&''2/$3 ! ! !
4*+,%"*' #/""%#*)"5 .$/0%#*' */ .$/6-%7 !
4*+,%"*' +",%$'*&", *8%9 2)-- .$%'%"* */ &"
&+,)%"#%1'8/2#&'% 2/$3
! !
4*+,%"*' ,%7/"'*$&*% 7&*+$)*9:
)",%.%",%"#%1)")*)&*);%: &##/+"*&6)-)*9
! ! !
!"#$%&'%, '*+,%"* %"5&5%7%"* ! ! !
4*+,%"*' &$% &6-% */ #/--&6/$&*% )" *8%)$
#-&''2/$31.$/0%#*'
! ! !
4*+,%"*' $%#/5")<% &", +*)-)<% 8&6)*'1'*&",&$,' ! !
!"#$%&'%, '*+,%"* #$%&*);)*9 !
4*+,%"*' +'% *8% ,%')5" #9#-% */ 5+),% .$/0%#* .8&'%'
/= 2/$3
!
4%#/", -&"5+&5% -%&$"%$' )7.$/;% .%$=/$7&"#%
*8$/+58 5$/+. 2/$3
!
>$)*)#&- *8)"3)"5 &", ,%7/"'*$&*)/" /= ?$%&- 2/$-,?
.$/6-%7@'/-;)"5 '3)--'
! !
A+)-,)"5 #/"=),%"#% &", -%&,%$'8). '3)--' ! !
4.%#)&- B,+#&*)/" '*+,%"*' .%$=/$7 6%**%$ )" & CDAE
-%&$")"5 %";)$/"7%"*
! !
4*+,%"*' #/""%#*)"5 ),%&' &#$/'' #/"*%"* &$%&' ! ! !
4*+,%"*' 2)*8 -/2 &#&,%7)# '3)--' .%$=/$7 6%**%$ ! ! !
4*+,%"*' *&3% .$),% )" -%&$")"5 &", +",%$'*&", *8&*
5&)")"5 "%2 '3)--' )' "/* 0+'* &6/+* 6%)"5 &" ?F?
'*+,%"*
!
4*+,%"*' &$% .$%.&$%, =/$ 5$&,% -%;%- 2/$3 &* *8%
6%5)"")"5 /= *8% '#8//- 9%&$
!
4*+,%"*' $%&#8 & 8)58%$ &#8)%;%7%"* -%;%- 6&'%, /"
'%**)"5 .%$'/"&- 5/&-'
! !
CCS Teacher Reported Observations of STEM TPBL Student Growth
2012-2013 PreK-12 Teacher Focus Groups; n=38 Focus Groups (FGs), 304 Teachers (Ts)
,-./ 0
123445)
,-./ &
123445)
Teachers reported that growth observed in their students involved unexpected changes in a range of low
performing students including those with below grade level skills, second language students as well as special
education students. In these groups in particular, teachers noted that these students engaged in in new ways in
learning through hands-on TPBL projects.
63."7-) 8"
65.))/449 6:5;:/-
63."7-) 8" 1;:<-";
=238->-9-";
,-./ $
123445) (3-9-) 1:?@;3-9-)
1;:<-"; =<>."2-) 8"
1(AB (CDE 1F855)
Table 18: CCS Teacher Reported Observations of STEM TPBL Student Growth
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 51
Þage 1
!"#$ &'()( *++,(
1. Þrlnclpal should creaLe a common vlslon of S1LM 1Þ8L and
provlde examples/menLorlng LhaL helps everyone Lo undersLand
expecLaLlons bulldlng-wlde, aL Lhe Leam level Lo classroom level
2. Þrlnclpal needs Lo know LhaL learnlng wlll look dlfferenL ln a S1LM
1Þ8L classroom
3. Þrlnclpal should be able Lo coach Leachers on S1LM 1Þ8L besL
pracLlces (8Þs), ldenLlfy 8Þs aL oLher schools ln Lhe lS/dlsLrlcL and
lmplemenL a plan for Leachers Lo vlslL Lhose schools Lo see 8Þs Lhey
can adopL
1. 1he prlnclpal should be flexlble and Lhlnklng 'ouLslde Lhe box'
durlng Lhe LranslLlon [shlfL from LradlLlonal program pracLlces],
provlde consLrucLlve crlLlclsm
2. SLudenLs need Lo see Lhe prlnclpal acLlvely engaged ln Lhe
LranslLlon Lo S1LM 1Þ8L ln Lhe school as well as engage dlrecLly wlLh
sLudenLs ln Lhe classroom
3. 8uy-ln Lo Lhe LranslLlon Lo S1LM 1Þ8L ls lmporLanL Lo assure
Leachers are fully supporLed, prlnclpal musL lead Lhe lnLegraLlon of
Lhe school PablLs
4. Þrovlde more Þu (dedlcaLe funds for subsLlLuLe Leachers)
3. Þrlnclpal needs Lo advocaLe for Leachers Lo bulld confldence ln
process of LranslLlonlng Lo S1LM 1Þ8L
6. Avold same-day schedule changes LhaL wlll lmpacL 1Þ8L
coordlnaLlon (e.g., same day schedule changes undermlne 1Þ8L
coordlnaLlon)
-./0#$1 &("2'(3+
422.,$5"6/(
1. Assure LhaL all Leachers are on board, seL clear expecLaLlons for
all Leachers Lo make Lhe LranslLlon Lo S1LM 1Þ8L
!"7#$1 8&9! &:;<
<("3$#$1 =#+#6/(
1. Make learnlng vlslble ln Lhe bulldlng/onllne for Leachers and
sLudenLs, creaLe an auLhenLlc 'learnlng envlronmenL' Lo engage
sLudenLs ln creaLlng a S1LM 1Þ8L school, lncludlng hold more
sLudenL meeLlngs Lo convey expecLaLlons for sLudenL accounLablllLy
1. 8ulld communlLy parLnershlps Lo supporL school pro[ecLs
2. Lead communlcaLlon abouL Lhe S1LM 1Þ8L LranslLlon process for
parenLs and communlLy
3. CreaLe a brochure for parenLs and communlLy LhaL ls
professlonally done Lo communlcaLe abouL Lhe program (only Lhe
prlnclpal can lnlLlaLe Lhls)
;3#$1#$1 5'( >.)),$#5?
#$5. 5'( 82'../@ 9$1"1#$1
:"3($5+ "$0 :"35$(3+
Teachers identified important ways in which administrative leadership could facilitate the transition to
becoming effective STEM TPBL teachers. In defining a common vision of STEM, principals need to
conduct essential communication to clarify the building leader's ideas and expectations for what STEM
TPBL will look like in their school for teachers, as well as for students, parents and members of the
community.
What is the Role of the Principal
for a Successful Transition to STEM TPBL?
2013 Þrek-12 1eacher locus Croups, n=23 locus Croups (lCs), 163 Leachers(1s)
>3("5#$1 "
>.)).$ =#+#.$
.A 8&9! &:;<
9BC3(++#$1 9BC/#2#5
;,?D#$E425#F( !($5.3#$1
Table 19: What is the Role of the Principal for a Successful Transition to STEM TPBL?
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 52
Transition Issues
! Create a Collaborative Planning Environment
! Recognize New Dimensions of Teacher Evaluation
! Assure Funding for STEM TPBL Project Materials
The issues addressed in Table 20 concern policy
and program implementation that teachers
identified as system-wide changes that could make
the transition advance more easily. Chief among
their concerns were views about the importance of
allowing individual teachers some flexibility in
pacing and specific approach each teacher
undertakes. Teachers acknowledged that principals
have many duties and responsibilities and as a result
there was discussion about the potential strategies
to resolve the tension teachers feel can occur with
many concurrent changes taking place within the
school. These include multiple district initiatives being implemented
district-wide in PreK-12 schools. Teachers expressed concern that
principals, who are often required to attend to district and
management issues, may need to delegate authority to
a new type of ‘lead’ teacher, who can provide intensive
mentoring and take on a focused STEM TPBL
leadership role working with teacher teams as they
advance and gain in developing their STEM TPBL skills.
Teachers also commented on the issue of scheduling
for common planning time, as well as avoiding same-
day or short-notice schedule changes to avoid
disrupting project coordination across content areas on
any given day. Last, teachers felt that they needed
more support in securing funds and materials for
projects, noting that this is an area where the district
and principal could take on a greater role in assuring
project funding.
The issue of new levels of leadership as an outgrowth of more effective
collaboration among teachers, between teachers and students, and
among students is an area of transition that offers an emerging set of
issues, which will inform work in the future. In this aspect of the
transition to STEM TPBL there are implications for restructuring the
traditional school hierarchy where principals and teachers share in
leading collaborative team efforts, and where teachers and their
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 53
T
a
b
l
e

2
0
:

W
h
a
t

A
r
e

t
h
e

E
s
s
e
n
t
i
a
l

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s

o
f

A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
v
e

S
u
p
p
o
r
t

f
o
r

a

S
u
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l

S
T
E
M

T
P
B
L

T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
?
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 54
students work collaboratively, relying on the group as a whole for diverse talents and skills in a
shared learning endeavor.
Conclusions
The Knowledge Capture Program has steadily expanded its research scope and systematic
data collection as the CCS district has extended STEM PD from a single feeder system to three
feeder systems. Qualitative research conducted by the KC team has provided substantive
information and insight on the transition process, informing implementation design and
contributing to real time course correction as emerging issues have been defined through
ethnographic inquiry and feedback from CCS staff. Moreover, KC research data is building
cumulative understanding of the common elements of development phases of the transition
process over time, with clearly defined benchmarks associated with first-year, second-year and
third-year shifts that occur as teachers, students and principals define what STEM TPBL
learning looks like in their schools and in their classrooms. Translation of qualitative data to
quantitative analysis has added a dimension of understanding of the patterns and trends of
existing expectations, goals and perceptions about what can and should happen to support a
successful and most importantly, sustainable transition to STEM TPBL PreK-12 education.
The PAST Foundation is committed to supporting a school transformation process involving
multiple tracks to develop capacity to sustain STEM TPBL education. These involve growing
essential educator skills as well as developing new social structures incorporating changing
roles and relations among principals, teachers, students, parents, and community stakeholders
within each unique school community. Whether PreK-5, middle or high school, the traditional
pedagogical practices of direct instruction that have long been the hallmark of public
education must now be informed by a shared vision of 21
st
century educational strategies. In
this endeavor, we hold an expectation that we are preparing students for a world of
technology that drives exploration and knowledge, communication, collaboration and
leadership at a pace that is no longer in sync with textbooks outdated at press time, and
evaluation that relies on student test scores as the only measure of student abilities and
preparedness for career and higher education.
At the PAST Foundation, we have engaged with our partners in transforming the traditional
school to a 21
st
century STEM education program, utilizing the strengths of qualitative and
quantitative analysis. To this end, we acknowledge the enormous amount of work and
commitment of teachers and administrators contributing to collective efforts to define their
process. Building on their direct experience, it is possible to support new strategies, and
better and more efficient and effective implementation processes as transition in Columbus
City Schools continues to expand. We thank our partners, each and every one, in this effort.
PAST Foundation -- CCS Report 2012-2013 55
References Cited
Hunter, Monica, Sheli O. Smith, Annalies Corbin, and Maria G. Cohen 2013. Transforming the
Schoolhouse: A Roadmap to Community Engagement. PAST Foundation
PAST Foundation 2013. Columbus City Schools STEM Transformation Project. OSLN
Robinson, Kenneth May 10, 2013. “How to escape education’s death valley.” TedTalks, Long
Beach, California
Smith, Sheli and Annalies Corbin 2013. Problems>Projects>Products: Designing
Transdisciplinary Problem-Based Learning. PAST Foundation
Professional Development
Professional Development
Professional Development
56
M
a
y

2
0
1
2

P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

N
a
m

i
d

v
e
|
i
t

n
o
n

r
i
s
u
s

c
o
n
s
e
q
u
a
t

i
a
c
u
|
i
s
.


S
u
n
d
u
y

M
o
n
d
u
y

1
u
e
s
d
u
y

W
e
d
n
e
s
d
u
y

1
h
u
r
s
d
u
y

l
r
l
d
u
y

S
u
L
u
r
d
u
y



±

z

¸

µ

ç








6

,

8

g

±
o

±
±

±
z








±
¸

±
µ

±
ç

±
6

±
,

±
8

±
g








z
o

z
±

z
z

z
¸

z
µ

z
ç

z
6


L
M
S
A

S
u
r
v
e
y




L
l
n
d
e
n

C
O
S
l

N
l
g
h
L


z
,

z
8

z
g

¸
o

¸
±





S
o
u
L
h

L
u
k
o
L
u

S
o
u
L
h

L
u
k
o
L
u

S
o
u
L
h

L
u
k
o
L
u


















57
J
u
n
e

2
0
1
2

P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t



S
u
n
d
u
y

M
o
n
d
u
y

1
u
e
s
d
u
y

W
e
d
n
e
s
d
u
y

1
h
u
r
s
d
u
y

l
r
l
d
u
y

S
u
L
u
r
d
u
y






±

z






S
o
u
L
h

L
u
k
o
L
u


¸

µ

ç

6

,

8

g


W
e
s
L

g
L
h
j
±
o
L
h

L
M
S
A

W
e
s
L

g
L
h
j
±
o
L
h

L
M
S
A

W
e
s
L

g
L
h
j
±
o
L
h

L
M
S
A

W
e
s
L

g
L
h
j
±
o
L
h


W
e
s
L

g
L
h
j
±
o
L
h

W
l
S

g
L
h
j
±
o
L
h



±
o

±
±

±
z

±
¸

±
µ

±
ç

±
6


W
e
s
L
m
o
o
r

L
M
S
A

S
L
u
r
l
l
n
g

W
e
s
L
m
o
o
r

L
M
S
A

,
j
8

S
L
u
r
l
l
n
g

W
e
s
L
m
o
o
r

L
M
S
A

,
j
8

S
L
u
r
l
l
n
g

W
e
s
L
m
o
o
r

S
L
u
r
l
l
n
g

W
e
s
L
m
o
o
r

S
L
u
r
l
l
n
g


±
,

±
8

±
g

z
o

z
±

z
z

z
¸


L
M
S
A

g
-
±
z


L
M
S
A

g
-
±
z

C
.
H
.

L
l
e
m
.

L
M
S
A

g
-
±
z

C
.
H
.

L
l
e
m
.

C
.
H
.

L
l
e
m
.

L
M
S
A



z
µ

z
ç

z
6

z
,

z
8

z
g

¸
o























58

What to Bring
• Laptop Computer or iPad and flash drive if available to you
• Creativity!!
• Any project ideas you would like to consider
• A light jacket (it can be cold in Metro)

June Summer STEM PD with PAST

Monday - Friday. 9 am - 3pm with a one-hour lunch break.

}une 4, 2u12: Beconstiucting the Common Coie Stanuaius Ç Nationwide and Ohio
Farm Bureau 4-H Center Building 2201 Fred Taylor Dr. Columbus, OH

uiaues LNSA anu 9

uiaues West Feeuei System

Nationwide and Ohio Farm Bureau 4-H Center Building
2201 Fred Taylor Dr. Columbus, OH

uiaues LNSA anu 9

uiaues West Feeuei System

Please join us for West H.S. 9
th
- 10
th
Grade Presentations on June 8
th

@ Nationwide and Ohio Farm Bureau 4-H Center Building, 2201 Fred Taylor
Columbus, OH

Metro High School - 1929 Kenny Road, Columbus

uiaue Teams

uiaue Teams of Westmooi Niuule School anu Stailing Niuule


Metro High School - 1929 Kenny Road, Columbus

uiaue Level Cohoits

}une 22, 2u12: Please join us for LMSA 7
th
- 12
th
Grade Presentations
@ Nationwide and Ohio Farm Bureau 4-H Center Building, 2201 Fred Taylor
Columbus, OH



59

)une STEM Professional Development
Agenda and Room Assignments


Agenda

Monday, óJ4 • Pioblem Baseu Leaining foi the 2u12-2u1S School Yeai
• Biainstoiming Pioblems as school anu giaue level
teams
• Common Coie Stanuaius alignment to piojects
• Pioject Planning

Tuesday, óJ5 • Biainstoiming Piojects anu Piouucts
• Backmap piojects foi the 2u12-2u1S school yeai
• Align piojects to common coie stanuaius

Wednesday, óJó • Continue Backmapping
• Rubiics, Foimative Feeuback & Summative Assessments

Tbursday, óJ7 • Backmapping anu in uepth Pioject Planning
• Biainstoim possible pioject paitneis

Friday, óJ8 • Continue planning
• School & team piesentations


Room Assignments

Monday, óJ4 LMSA 7
tb
-12
tb
grade Staff & West HS 9
tb
and 10
tb
grade:
Bob Evans Nemoiial Auuitoiium

Tuesday, óJ5 West H.S. 9
tb
grade: Room 1uu (Eastman Room)
West H.S. 10
tb
grade: Room 11u (Inteinational Room)
LMSA: Room 22u (Nulti Neuia Room)

Wednesday, óJó West H.S. 9
tb
grade: Room 214 (uehies Room)
West H.S. 10
tb
grade: Room 11u (Inteinational Room)
LMSA: Room 22u (Nulti Neuia Room)

Tbursday, óJ7 West H.S. 9
tb
grade: Room 1uu (Eastman Room)
West H.S. 10
tb
grade: S
th
Flooi (Innovation Room)
LMSA: Room 22u (Nulti Neuia Room)

Friday, óJ8 All: Room 11u (Inteinational Room)



60

)une 11- )une 15, 2012
STEM Professional Development
Agenda and Room Assignments

Agenda

Monday, óJ11 • Pioblem Baseu Leaining foi the 2u12-2u1S School Yeai
• Biainstoiming Pioblems as school anu giaue level
teams
• Common Coie Stanuaius alignment to piojects
• Pioject Planning

Tuesday, óJ12 • Biainstoiming Piojects anu Piouucts
• Backmap piojects foi the 2u12-2u1S school yeai
• Align piojects to common coie stanuaius

Wednesday, óJ13 • Continue Backmapping
• Rubiics, Foimative Feeuback & Summative Assessments

Tbursday, óJ14 • Backmapping anu in uepth Pioject Planning
• Biainstoim possible pioject paitneis

Friday, óJ15 • Continue planning
• School & team piesentations







61
A
u
g
u
s
t

2
0
1
2

P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t



S
u
n
d
u
y

M
o
n
d
u
y

1
u
e
s
d
u
y

W
e
d
n
e
s
d
u
y

1
h
u
r
s
d
u
y

l
r
l
d
u
y

S
u
L
u
r
d
u
y




±

z

¸

µ








ç

6

,

8

g

±
o

±
±


W
l
S

P
r
e
K
-
z

W
l
S

P
r
e
K
-
z



W
l
S

P
r
e
K
-
z


±
z

±
¸

±
µ

±
ç

±
6

±
,

±
8


W
l
S

¸
-
ç

L
l
S

¸
-
6

W
l
S

¸
-
ç

L
l
S

¸
-
6

W
l
S

¸
-
ç

L
l
S

¸
-
6

S
L

S
L

S
L


±
g

z
o

z
±

z
z

z
¸

z
µ

z
ç








z
6

z
,

z
8

z
g

¸
o

¸
±
























62














What to Bring
• Laptop Computer or iPad and flash drive if available to you
• Creativity!!
• Any project ideas you would like to consider
• A light jacket (it can be cold in Metro)


August Summer STEM PD with PAST

Monday - Friday. 9am - 3pm with a one-hour lunch break.

August 6, 7, & 1u Metro High School - 1929 Kenny Road, Columbus
• West Feeuei System Pie

August 1S, 14 & 1S Metro High School - 1929 Kenny Road, Columbus
• West Feeuei System S

• Linuen Feeuei System S

63
10/8/2012 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Elliot,
10/23/2012 12:00:00
Avondale
Elementary 4, 5 Elliot,
10/25/2012 9:00:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1 Kat,
10/25/2012 2:30:00
Avondale
Elementary 2, 3 Kat,
11/5/2012 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
12/3/2012 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
12/18/2012 12:00:00
Avondale
Elementary 4, 5 Sheli,
12/20/2012 9:00:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1 Sheli,
12/20/2012 2:30:00
Avondale
Elementary 2, 3 Sheli,
1/14/2013 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
2/11/2013 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
2/26/2013 12:00:00
Avondale
Elementary 4, 5 Elliot,
2/28/2013 9:00:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1 Kat,
2/28/2013 2:30:00
Avondale
Elementary 2, 3 Kat,
3/11/2013 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
4/29/2013 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
5/6/2013 3:45:00
Avondale
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Kat, Elliot,
Avondale Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title
What grade
levels are
involved? Attendees
64
Dana Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title
What grade
levels are
involved? Attendees
10/23/2012 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Beth,
11/12/2012 3:45:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
11/27/2012 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Beth,
12/11/2012 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot,
1/29/2013 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
2/12/2013 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
2/26/2013 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
3/26/2013 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
5/14/2013 8:00:00
Dana
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
65
10/2/2012 7:30:00 Starling Middle
Kat, Elliot,
Brian,
10/16/2012 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
10/30/2012 7:30:00 Starling Middle Brian,
11/13/2012 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
12/4/2012 7:30:00 Starling Middle
Kat, Elliot,
Brian,
1/8/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle
Kat, Elliot,
Brian,
1/22/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle Beth, Brian,
2/5/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle
Kat, Elliot,
Brian,
2/19/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
3/5/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle
Kat, Elliot,
Brian,
3/19/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
4/9/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle
Kat, Elliot,
Brian,
4/23/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
5/7/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
5/21/2013 7:30:00 Starling Middle Kat, Brian,
Starling Middle School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title Attendees
66
Sullivant Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title Attendees
10/16/2012 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Elliot, Lori,
10/30/2012 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Lori,
12/11/2012 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Lori, Beth,
1/15/2013 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Lori, Beth,
1/22/2013 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Lori,
2/19/2013 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Elliot, Lori,
3/19/2013 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Elliot, Lori,
4/23/2013 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Elliot, Lori,
5/21/2013 8:00:00
Sullivant
Elementary Elliot, Lori,
67
Valleyview Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title
What grade
levels are
involved? Attendees
10/8/2012 3:45:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
10/24/2012 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
11/28/2012 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
1/23/2013 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Lori, Beth,
2/27/2013 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
3/20/2013 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
4/8/2013 3:45:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
4/16/2013 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Elliot, Lori,
5/15/2013 9:30:00
Valleyview
Elementary k, 1, 2, 3, 4, Kat, Lori,
68
10/2/2012 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Beth,
10/3/2012 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
11/6/2012 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Lori,
11/7/2012 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
12/4/2012 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Beth,
12/5/2012 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
1/8/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
1/9/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
2/5/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
2/6/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
3/5/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
3/6/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
4/9/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
4/10/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
5/7/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
5/8/2013 8:00:00
West Broad
Elementary Kat, Lori,
West Broad Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title Attendees
69
70
9/5/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli, Elliot,
9/5/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
9/12/2012 8:30 AM 10 Elliot, Lori, Brian,
9/12/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
9/19/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
9/19/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
9/26/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
9/26/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
10/3/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
10/3/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
10/10/2012 8:30 AM 10 Lori, Brian,
10/10/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
10/17/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
10/17/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
10/24/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
10/24/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
10/31/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
10/31/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
11/7/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
11/7/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
11/28/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
11/28/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
12/5/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
12/5/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
12/12/2012 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
12/12/2012 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
1/9/2013 8:30 AM 10 Lori, Brian,
1/9/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
1/16/2013 8:30 AM 10 Elliot,
1/16/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
1/23/2013 8:30 AM 10 Lori, Brian,
1/23/2013 1:45 PM 9 Sheli, Elliot,
1/30/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
1/30/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
2/6/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
2/6/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
2/20/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
2/20/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
2/27/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
2/27/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
3/6/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
3/6/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
3/13/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
3/20/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
3/20/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
3/27/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
3/27/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
4/10/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
4/10/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
West High School
Meeting Date Time Grade Level Attendees
71
4/17/2013 8:30 AM 10 Lori, Brian,
4/17/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
4/24/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
4/24/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
5/1/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
5/1/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
5/8/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
5/8/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
5/15/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
5/15/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
5/22/2013 8:30 AM 10 Sheli,
5/22/2013 1:45 PM 9 Elliot,
West High School
Meeting Date Time Grade Level Attendees
72
10/9/2012 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
10/23/2012 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
11/6/2012 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Beth, Brian,
11/27/2012 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
12/11/2012 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
1/15/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
1/29/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
2/12/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
2/26/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
3/12/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
3/26/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
4/16/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
4/30/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
5/14/2013 8:30:00
Westmoor
Middle Kat, Brian,
Westmoor Middle School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title Attendees
73
Second and Fourtb Tbursdays Scbedule
Nonth Tbursday
Science &
Leau Teachei
Time
Tbursday
Entiie uiaue level
Cohoits
Wednesday
Tiffany Neet with
Annalies
(9am-1uam)
0ctobei 2u12 11 2S
Novembei 1S 29 8, 28
Becembei 1S
}anuaiy 2u1S 1u 24 Su
Febiuaiy 14 28 27
Naich 14 28 27
Apiil 11 2S 24
Nay 9 2S 29


74
Hamilton Elementary School
Meeting Date Time
What school is
this meeting
with? Attendees
10/25/2012 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
11/5/2012 15:45:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
11/29/2012 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
1/17/2013 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
2/14/2013 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
3/14/2013 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
4/18/2013 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
5/23/2013 9:00:00
Hamilton
Elementary Beth, Brian,
75
Linden Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title Attendees
10/18/2012 9:00:00
Linden
Elementary Brian,
11/15/2012 9:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth, Brian,
1/7/2013 10:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth,
1/9/2013 12:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth, Brian,
2/4/2013 10:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth,
2/6/2013 12:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth, Brian,
3/4/2013 10:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth,
3/6/2013 12:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth, Brian,
4/8/2013 10:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth,
4/10/2013 12:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth, Brian,
5/16/2013 9:00:00
Linden
Elementary Beth, Brian,
76
Linden McKinley High School
Meeting Date Time Meeting Title Attendees
10/4/2012 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
10/11/2012 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
10/25/2012 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator
Led
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
11/15/2012 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
11/29/2012 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator led
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
12/13/2012 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
1/10/2013 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
1/24/2013 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator led Sheli, Beth,
2/14/2013 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
2/28/2013 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator led Sheli, Elliot,
3/14/2013 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
3/28/2013 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator led
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
4/11/2013 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
4/25/2013 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator led
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
5/9/2013 All Day
Science/STEM
Coordinator
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
5/23/2012 All Day
Linden All-
STEM
Coordinator led
Kat, Sheli,
Elliot,
77
S. Mifflin Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Attendees
10/10/2012 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
11/7/2012 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
12/12/2012 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
1/30/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
2/27/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
3/27/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
5/8/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
78
Windsor Elementary School
Meeting Date Time Attendees
10/4/2012 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
11/1/2012 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
12/6/2012 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
1/24/2013 9:00:00 Brian,
2/21/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
3/21/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
4/25/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
5/2/2013 9:00:00 Beth, Brian,
79
Westmoor Middle Scbool
STEN Common Planning

PAST Founuation


Septembei 2S, 2u12 Agenua


Location: Westmooi Niuule School

Times: 8:SS AN - 9:24 AN 7
th
giaue
9:27 AN - 1u:1S AN 8
th
giaue
1:4u PN - 2:Su PN 6
th
giaue

Agenda Items:
• Recap of last yeai anu goal setting foi this upcoming yeai
• Biainstoim about how to make common planning meetings piouuctive: what
shoulu common planning meetings look like.
• Review of Backmaps fiom summei PB
• Review of Basecamp

Please bring:
• Backmaps fiom summei STEN PB







80
Westmoor Middle Scbool
STEN Common Planning

PAST Founuation


0ctobei 9, 2u12 Agenua


Location: Westmooi Niuule School

Times: 8:SS AN - 9:24 AN 7
th
giaue
9:27 AN - 1u:1S AN 8
th
giaue
1:4u PN - 2:Su PN 6
th
giaue

Agenda Items:
• Review backmaps fiom summei PB
• Planning foi upcoming piojects

Please bring:
• Backmaps fiom summei STEN PB


81

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig

WFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, November 2, 2012

Location: Dana Elementary, 300 S. Dana Avenue
Time: 9am to 12noon
Arrivals
Welcome and Introductions
• Identify STEM Coordinators and PAST staff
• Host school – Dana Elementary School
o STEM Coordinator from Host School takes meeting minutes
o Posts on Basecamp in STEM Coordinator workspace
• Meeting format
o Strategic Issues & Discussion (90 minutes)
o Content Issues & Discussion (90 minutes)
• Knowledge Capture
o Introduction
o Profile Information and Introduction to Survey
Review roles
• Role of the STEM Coordinators
o Liaison between your building and PAST
• Review building schedules and PAST contacts
The Plan
• Current status of building – sharing by school
o What is the sense of your building?
• Strategic Plan development – create framework for use at next meeting
o Brainstorm in small groups
What’s feasible?
How do we demonstrate evidence of learning?
How many projects can we take on? What size and duration?
What measurements/benchmarks will be used?
How can we seamlessly integrate STEM into instruction?
Share Fidelity Checklist
82

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig




WFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, November 2, 2012

PAGE 2
The Process
• Model Design Cycle
• Problem – Project – Product
Summary & Action Items
• Feedback – how can PAST help?
• Next meeting – topics, time & location

NOTES









83

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



LFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, November 9, 2012

Location: Hamilton Elementary, 2047 Hamilton Ave, Columbus, Ohio
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Introductions
• Identify STEM Coordinators and PAST staff
• Host school – Hamilton Elementary School
o STEM Coordinator from Host School takes meeting minutes
o Posts on Basecamp in STEM Coordinator workspace
• Meeting format
o Strategic Issues & Discussion (90 minutes)
o Content Issues & Discussion (90 minutes)
• Knowledge Capture
o Introduction
o Profile Information and Introduction to Survey
Review roles
• Role of the STEM Coordinators
o Liaison between your building and PAST
• Review building schedules and PAST contacts
The Plan
• Current status of building – sharing by school
o What is the sense of your building?
• Strategic Plan development – create framework for use at next meeting
o Brainstorm in small groups
What are the needs in your building?
How can STEM Coordinators support and address these needs?
The Process
• Model Design Cycle
• Problem – Project – Product
Summary & Action Items
• Feedback – how can PAST help?
• Next meeting – topics, time & location
84

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



WFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, December 7
th
, 2012

Location: Starling Middle School
120 South Central Avenue Columbus, OH 43222
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Introductions
• Identify STEM Coordinators, additional School Representatives, and PAST
staff
• Quick recap of last STEM Coordinator Meeting
• Review agenda for today
• Knowledge Capture: Survey and Paperwork
• Reflection:
1. What PBL highlights have you seen in your school?
2. What areas do you see need improvement?
Content Issue
• How do we share projects: “Evidence of Learning” that includes rigor and
relevance
o Brainstorm Activity: “What are key elements to convey?”
o Different formats for communication
o Share building projects
• Basecamp tutorial
o Good Finds
o Project Ideas
Inspiration and Focus
• Video: Changing Education Paradigms
o Discussion
Summary & Action Items
• Feedback – how can PAST help?
• Next meeting – Friday, January 11
th
, 2013 @ Sullivant Elementary
o What would you like to discuss next time?

85

November 14tb, 2012
STEM Professional Development
Agenda for Africentric Early College

8:00am-8:30am: Welcome anu housekeeping - Bi. West

8:30am-9:00am: Issuing school wiue uesign challenge - Bi. West

9:00am-9:45am: Back to the Basics of STEN, TPBL anu Besign Cycle - Biian
Coffey

9:45am-10:00am: Bieak

10:00am-11:00am: School cultuie - Linua Nyeis

11:00am - 11:30am: Q&A - Linua Nyeis

11:30am-12:30pm: Lunch

12:30pm-1:30pm: Bieakouts
Croup 1 - Besign challenge in uepth

Croup 2 - PLC Piesentation

1:30pm-2:30pm: Bieakouts
Croup 2 - Besign challenge in uepth

Croup 1 - PLC Piesentation

2:30pm-3:30pm: Shaie out, piofessional ieauing mateiials - Bi. West


86

rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
West Ieeder System S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Sprlng 2013
8:00 AM Lo 3:00 ÞM
LocaLlon: 1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212

8:00 - 8:10 AM We|come
8:10 - 10:30 AM Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
8tolostotm
ueslqo/8ollJ
10:30 - 11:00 AM Ga||ery Wa|k
1est/ívoloote

11:00 - 12:00 ÞM know|edge Capture
keflectloos ftom tbe fltst yeot of 51íM lmplemeototloo
12:00 - 1:00 ÞM LUNCn
1:00 - 2:43 ÞM Cont|nue Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
1est/ívoloote
MoJlfy

2:43 - 3:00 ÞM keport Cut
5bote


De||verab|es posted on 8asecamp:

Cpt|on A: 8ackmap 4 CuarLers
lJeotlfy poestloos ooJ ootlloe 4 ptojects pet poottet pet bockmop

Cpt|on 8: 8ackmap 1
sL
CuarLer wlLh 4 deLalled planned pro[ecLs
lJeotlfy poestloo ooJ Jevelop 4 JetolleJ ploos osloq tbe 1wo-week ltoject lloo 1emplote fot
tbe 1
st
poottet bockmop

Logln Lo 8asecamp: basecamp.com

íotet uset Nome:

íotet losswotJ:


87

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



WFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, January 11
th
, 2013

Location: Sullivant Elementary School
791 Griggs Ave
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Recap last meeting, agenda for today
• “What does your school need from a STEM Coordinator?”
Discussion Topics
• Short cycle assessment, how are you doing it in your school?
• Aligning Common Core w/ projects
• Assessment of mastery when working in group
Summary and Action Items
• Next Topics
o Reading Strategies
o Adjusting Instruction
• Quote
• Housekeeping and next meeting:
Valleyview Elementary School February 1
st
, 2013
88

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



Linden STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, January 18
th
, 2013

Location: Linden Elementary School
2626 Cleveland Avenue
Columbus, OH 43211

: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Recap last meeting, agenda for today
• Check in about COSI Night
• Share “Best of” projects from your school
Discussion Topics
• Short cycle assessment, how are you doing it in your school?
• Science Fair Project Ideas
• Resources, grants, In-kinding, Community Partners
• TBT/PLCs- strategies to make them more effective
Summary and Action Items
• Next Topics
o Reading Strategies
o Adjusting Instruction
• Quote
• Housekeeping and next meeting:
South Mifflin Elementary School: February 8
th
, 2013
89

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig

WFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday - February 1, 2013

Location: Valleyview Elementary, 2989 Valleyview Drive
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Recap last meeting, agenda for today, binders
• Special performance by Valleyview Kindergarten & Fourth Grade
(10:00am)
Discussion Topics
• Reading Strategies
o What are some strategies that have worked?
• Adjusting Instruction/Differentiated Learning/Multiple Intelligences
• Vision Statements 1, 5, 10 years
o http://video.msnbc.msn.com/rock-center/50095631#50095631

Summary and Action Items
• Next Topics
o Designing a Classroom
o Other topics?
• Next meeting – West Board Elementary - Friday, March 1
st

Closing and Quote


90

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



Linden STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, February 8
th
, 2013

Location: South Mifflin Elementary
2365 Middlehurst Dr
Columbus, OH 43219
: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Recap last meeting, agenda for today
• Check in: Sharing “Best Websites”
Discussion Topics
• School Garden Planning – Tips, Resources, Lessons, Ideas
• Resources/Supplies, Grants, In-kinding, Community Partners
• TBT/PLCs- strategies to make them more effective
Summary and Action Items
• Next Topics
o Reading Strategies
o Multiple Intelligences/ Adapting Instruction
• Quote
• Housekeeping and next meeting:
Next Meeting: Friday, March 8
th
- Windsor Elementary
91

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig

WFS STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday - March 1, 2013

Location: West Broad Elementary School, 2744 West Broad Street
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Recap last meeting
• Agenda for today
• Role of STEM Coordinators - sharing information
Discussion Topics
• Successes in Year 1
o http://video.msnbc.msn.com/rock-center/50095631#50095631
• Planning for Year 2 - Building on Successes in Year 1
o Design cycle activity
• Planning for Spring PD Training
o What do your teachers need? Want?
• Resources/Supplies, Grants, In-kinding, Community Partners
o Sharing of websites
o Post to Basecamp or other
Summary and Action Items
• Next Topics
o Designing Your Classroom
o 21
st
Century Skills – Delivered through STEM/PBL
• Spring Fling
• Next meeting
o LFS & WFS Combined – Westgate Elementary - Friday, May 3
rd

Closing and Quote

92

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 - Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



Linden STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, March 8
th
2013

Location: Winusoi Elementaiy
1219 E. 12th Avenue
Columbus, 0B 4S211
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Recap last meeting, agenda for today
• Check in about 6
th
Grade COSI Field Trips
Discussion Topics
• What are good leadership qualities?
• Brainstorm examples demonstrated by colleagues or students
• What strategies do you use as a leader in your building?
• How can you improve PBL in your building?
• Create an “elevator speech” about what STEM and PBL look like in your
building
Summary and Action Items
• Next Topics
o Let us know what you would like to know more about
• Video
• Housekeeping and next meeting:
Next Meeting: April 12
th
@ PAST FOUNDATION
93
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 4/22/2013 2:43 ÞM - 3:43 ÞM 9Lh- 10Lh CSu (MeeL ÞAS1)
1uesday, 4/23/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 9Lh ÞAS1
Wednesday, 4/24/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 9Lh ÞAS1
1hursday, 4/23/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 10Lh ÞAS1
lrlday, 4/26/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 10Lh ÞAS1
4/26/13: Þ8LSLn1A1lCnS 2:43 ÞM - 4:00 ÞM 9Lh- 10Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
West n|gh Schoo|
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
94
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 4/29/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM k-1sL ÞAS1
Wednesday, 3/1/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 2nd-3rd ÞAS1
1hursday, 3/2/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 4Lh-3Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
West 8road
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
95
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 4/29/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM k-1sL ÞAS1
Wednesday, 3/1/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 2nd-3rd ÞAS1
1hursday, 3/2/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 4Lh-3Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Va||eyv|ew
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
96
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 4/29/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM k-1sL ÞAS1
Wednesday, 3/1/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 2nd-3rd ÞAS1
1hursday, 3/2/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 4Lh-3Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Su|||vant
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
97

1uuS Kinneai Roau, Columbus, 0hio 4S212 - Phone: 614-S4u-12u8 - Fax: 888-2SS-u79S
www.pastfounuation.oig



STEM Coordinator Meeting Agenda
Friday, May 3rd 2013

Location: Westgate Elementaiy
Su8u Wicklow Ru .
Time: 9am to 12noon
Welcome and Recap
• Introductions
• Agenda for today
• Spring Fling Wed. May 8th
Discussion Topics
• Summary of topics throughout the past year
o The process – design cycle and PPP
o Reading strategies
o Adjusting Instruction/Differentiated Learning/Multiple Intelligences
o School vision statements
o Success in year 1
o Planning for year 2
o Planning for spring PD
o Resources and community partners
o How do we share projects?
o Basecamp tutorial
o Changing education paradigms
o Short cycling best practices
o Common Core with PBL
o Assessment of mastery with group work
• Identifying good STEM and fidelity
• Designing a classroom
Summary and Action Items
• Housekeeping
98
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 4/29/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 1sL ÞAS1
Monday, 3/6/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM k ÞAS1
1uesday, 3/7/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 3rd & 4Lh ÞAS1
1hursday, 3/9/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 2nd & 3Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Westgate
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
99

rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
West Ieeder System S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Westmoor M|dd|e Schoo| 6
th
Grade 1eam A
May 3, 2013
8:00 AM Lo 3:00 ÞM
LocaLlon: 1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212

8:00 - 9:00 AM Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
8tolostotm
ueslqo/8ollJ

9:00 - 10:00 AM know|edge Capture
keflectloos ftom tbe fltst yeot of 51íM lmplemeototloo
10:00 - 12:00 ÞM Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
8tolostotm
ueslqo/8ollJ
12:00 - 1:00 ÞM LUNCn
1:00 - 2:43 ÞM Cont|nue Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
1est/ívoloote
MoJlfy

2:43 - 3:00 ÞM keport Cut
5bote

De||verab|es posted on 8asecamp:

Cpt|on A: 8ackmap 4 CuarLers
lJeotlfy poestloos ooJ ootlloe 4 ptojects pet poottet pet bockmop

Cpt|on 8: 8ackmap 1
sL
CuarLer wlLh 4 deLalled planned pro[ecLs
lJeotlfy poestloo ooJ Jevelop 4 JetolleJ ploos osloq tbe 1wo-week ltoject lloo 1emplote fot
tbe 1
st
poottet bockmop

Logln Lo 8asecamp: basecamp.com

íotet uset Nome:

íotet losswotJ:


100
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
lrlday, 3/3/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 6Lh: 1eam A ÞAS1
Monday, 3/6/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 8Lh: 1eam A ÞAS1
lrlday, 3/10/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 8Lh: 1eam8 ÞAS1
1uesday, 3/14/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh ÞAS1
Wednesday, 3/13/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 6Lh: 1eam 8 ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Westmoor
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
101

rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
West Ieeder System S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Westmoor M|dd|e Schoo| 8
th
Grade
Avonda|e, Dana, and Westgate L|ementary
May 6, 2013
8:00 AM Lo 3:00 ÞM
LocaLlon: 1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212

Westmoor
8:00 - 10:00 AM Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
8tolostotm
ueslqo/8ollJ
10:00 - 11:00 AM know|edge Capture
keflectloos ftom tbe secooJ yeot of 51íM lmplemeototloo
11:00 - 12:00 ÞM LUNCn
12:00 - 2:43 ÞM Cont|nue Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
1est/ívoloote
MoJlfy
2:43 - 3:00 ÞM keport Cut
5bote

Avonda|e, Dana, and Westgate

8:00 - 10:30 AM Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
8tolostotm
ueslqo/8ollJ
10:30 - 11:00 AM Ga||ey Wa|k
1est/ívoloote
11:00 - 12:00 ÞM know|edge Capture
keflectloos ftom tbe fltst yeot of 51íM lmplemeototloo
12:00 - 1:00 ÞM LUNCn
1:00 - 2:43 ÞM Cont|nue Þ|ann|ng |n Cohorts
1est/ívoloote
MoJlfy
2:43 - 3:00 ÞM keport Cut
5bote

102
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 3/6/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM k-1sL ÞAS1
1uesday, 3/7/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 4Lh-3Lh ÞAS1
1hursday, 3/9/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 2nd, 3rd, Mu ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Avonda|e
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
103
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 3/6/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM k-1sL ÞAS1
1uesday, 3/7/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 4Lh-3Lh ÞAS1
1hursday, 3/9/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 2nd-3rd ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Dana
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
104


rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
Afr|centr|c Lar|y Co||ege
L|ementary
S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
9:00 AM Lo 3:00 ÞM
May 9 - May 13, 2013

Locat|on: 300 L. LlvlngsLon Ave, Columbus, Chlo
Date Act|on Items De||verab|es
1hursday, May 9, 2013

Croup 1: 9am - 12 noon
Croup 2: 12 noon - 3pm

ulscusslon 1oplcs:
• 21
sL
CenLury Learnlng Skllls
• Wlcked Þroblems
• Þroblem 8ased Learnlng
• Lnglneerlng ueslgn Þrocess
• 1ransdlsclpllnary
Þlannlng/Learnlng
• SLudenL-1eacher 1eam

Þlannlng - 8ralnsLorm:
• ueslgn Cycle
• 8ralnsLorm 8elevanL
lssues/Þasslon


8lg ldeas/Mlnd map
vlsual Lhesaurus
lrlday, May 10, 2013

Croup 1: 9am - 12 noon
Croup 2: 12 noon - 3pm

Þlannlng - ueslgn, 8ulld & Modlfy:
• 8ralnsLorm Þro[ecL ldeas
• Craphlc Crganlzer
• 1wo-Week Þro[ecL Þlan
• SLandards AllgnmenL
• SnapshoL
• 8ackmaps


llrsL quarLer backmap
Monday, May 13, 2013

Croup 1: 9am - 12 noon
Croup 2: 12 noon - 3pm

Þlannlng - LvaluaLe, Modlfy & Share:
• 8ubrlc CreaLlon
• lormaLlve leedback
• AuLhenLlc Audlences
• MulLlple lnLelllgences



1wo week pro[ecL plan
LemplaLe

105
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
lrlday, 3/10/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 8Lh ÞAS1
1uesday, 3/14/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh ÞAS1
Wenesday, 3/13/2013 8:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 6Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
Star||ng
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
106


rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
West n|gh Schoo|
S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
8:00 AM Lo 3:00 ÞM
May 20 & 22, 2013

Locat|on: ÞAS1 loundaLlon, 1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212

Date Act|on Items De||verab|es
Monday, May 20, 2013

WhaL ls S1LM?
• 21
sL
CenLury Learnlng Skllls
• Þroblem 8ased Learnlng

knowledge CapLure

Why S1LM and 1Þ8L?
• 8ralnsLorm 8elevanL lssues
• ueslgn Cycle




vlsual 1hesaurus
ueflne ?our Þroblems/lssues


Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Pow do we do S1LM and 1Þ8L?
• 1ransdlsclpllnary
Þlannlng/Learnlng
• 1oolbox
• SLudenL-1eacher 1eam

Where and When do you Leach S1LM and
1Þ8L?
• AllgnmenL Lo sLandards
• 8ubrlc CreaLlon




1wo-Week Þro[ecL Þlanner
1 CuarLer 8ackmap


107


rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
Afr|centr|c Lar|y Co||ege
S1LM Leaders
Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
7:30 AM Lo 2:30 ÞM
May 28 - May 30, 2013

Locat|on: norLhgaLe, 6633 Sharon Woods 8lvd.

Date D|scuss|on Items De||verab|es

1uesday, May 28
7:30 AM - 11:00 AM





11:00 AM - 12:30 ÞM
12:30 ÞM - 2:30ÞM


WhaL does lL Lake Lo have lnnovaLlon?
Cvervlew of Þ8L & S1LM
• ken 8oblnson vldeo
• WhaL ls S1LM?
Successes of ?ear Cne
vlslon for ?ear 1wo & beyond
8asecamp 1uLorlal
Lunch
MulLlple lnLelllgences Survey
• ueflne groups
• CreaLe pro[ecL


Croup ldeas



School successes

Check lnvlLaLlons

Share ouL

Wednesday, May 29
7:30 AM - 2:30 ÞM


ur. Llnda !ames Myers, Þh.u.



1hursday, May 30
7:30 AM - 2:30ÞM

9:00 AM - 10:30 AM
11:00 AM - 12:00pm
12:00 ÞM - 1:30 ÞM
1:30 ÞM - 2:30 ÞM





CourL 8oom
CA8S
Lunch
Mld Chlo lood 8ank 1our



108


rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
L|nden Mck|n|ey S1LM Academy
S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
9:00 AM Lo 3:00 ÞM
!une 10 - !une 13, !une 20
Lh
, 2013
Agenda


Locat|on: MeLro Plgh School, 1929 kenny 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43210
Date Act|on Items De||verab|es
Monday, !une 10, 2013






Lunch prov|ded
ulscusslon 1oplcs:
• 21
sL
CenLury Learnlng
Skllls/PablLs
• 1ransdlsclpllnary Þroblem 8ased
Learnlng
• ueslgn Cycle Þrocess
• 1ransdlsclpllnary
Þlannlng/Learnlng
• SLudenL-1eacher 1eam
• Mlnl Challenge share ouL

Worklng lunch - Mlnl Challenge 8ecap

Þlannlng:
• 1wo Week Þro[ecL Þlan 1emplaLe
• 8ackmapplng

1uesday, !une 11, 2013 Þlannlng:
• 1wo Week Þro[ecL Þlan 1emplaLe
• ueslgn Challenges
• SLandards AllgnmenL

Wednesday, !une 12, 2013 Þlannlng:
• 1wo Week Þro[ecL Þlan 1emplaLe
• ueslgn Challenges
• 8ackmapplng

up/ood to 8osecomp by the
end of the doy

4 backmaps (1 per quarLer)
6 ueslgn Challenges (1
lnsplred by each core
conLenL, 2 mlsc.)
6 1wo Week Þlanners (1 per
ueslgn Challenge)
1hursday, !une 13, 2013 Þlannlng:
• AllgnmenL Lo sLandards
(SnapshoL)
• 8ubrlc CreaLlon
up/ood to 8osecomp by the
end of the doy

6 SnapshoLs (1 per ueslgn
Challenge)

1hursday, !une 20
Lh
2013 ÞresenLaLlons up/ood to 8osecomp
N
o
i
n
i
n
g

A
f
t
e
i
n
o
o
n

109
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 6/10/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh-12Lh MeLro
1uesday. 6/11/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh-12Lh MeLro
Wednesday, 6/12/2013 8:30 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh-12Lh
AM- SummlL S1LM Campus
ÞM-MeLro
1hursday, 6/13/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh-12Lh MeLro
1uesday, 6/18/2013-ÞresenLaLlons 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 7Lh-12Lh MeLro
1929 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
LMSA
D|rect|ons to Metro n|gh Schoo|
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
110


rnv v.sr vounu.rion
c..c· · | |·oo¸| . »»o.c| . o»
West n|gh Schoo|
S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
12:00 ÞM Lo 4:00 ÞM
!une 17 - !une 21, 2013
Agenda


Locat|on: MeLro Plgh School, 1929 kenny 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43210
Date Act|on Items De||verab|es
Monday, !une 17, 2013


Þlannlng:
• 1wo week planners
• AllgnmenL Lo sLandards
• 8ubrlcs

1uesday, !une 18, 2013 Þlannlng:
• 1wo week planners
• AllgnmenL Lo sLandards
• 8ubrlcs

up/ood to 8osecomp by the
end of the doy

• 4 backmaps (1 per
quarLer)
• 4 1wo Week Þlanners
for Lhe flrsL quarLer
• 4 8ubrlcs
• 4 SnapshoLs (sLandards
allgnmenL and
assessmenL sLraLegy)
Wednesday, !une 19, 2013 CommunlLy ÞarLnershlps:
• CSu CA8
• !udge Þaul PerberL


1hursday, !une 20, 2013 Þlannlng:
• ÞresenLaLlon creaLlon
up/ood to 8osecomp by the
end of the doy

Sllde show presenLaLlon

lrlday, !une 21, 2013 ÞresenLaLlons

111
DA1L 1IML GkADL WnLkL
Monday, 6/17/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 11Lh-12Lh ÞAS1
1uesday, 6/18/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 11Lh-12Lh ÞAS1
Wednesday, 6/19/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 11Lh-12Lh ÞAS1
1hursday, 6/20/2013 9:00 AM - 3:00 ÞM 11Lh-12Lh ÞAS1
lrlday, 6/21/2013 9:00 AM - noon 11Lh-12Lh ÞAS1
1003 klnnear 8oad, Columbus, Chlo 43212
** A one-hour lunch break wlll be provlded **
Spr|ng 2013 S1LM Þrofess|ona| Deve|opment
West n|gh Schoo| 11th and 12th Grade
D|rect|ons to ÞAS1
Þrevlous 8ackmaps
What to 8r|ng
AnyLhlng needed Lo help you and your Leam plan:
CompuLer (lf avallable Lo you)
8esources
112








LocaLlon: MeLro Larly College Plgh School - 1929 klnner 8d, Columbus, CP 43210
1lme Actlon Item
9:00

Cpenlng 8emarks, 1lffany Chavers
9:13

CrowLh Learnlng CenLer
9:30

10
Lh
Crade CohorL
9:43

7
Lh
Crade CohorL

8reak
10:10

9
Lh
Crade CohorLs & ulplomas now
10:23

11
Lh
Crade & 12
Lh
Crade CohorLs
10:33

8
Lh
Crade CohorL
11:10

Closlng 8emarks
L|nden Mck|n|ey S1LM Academy
Academlc ?ear 2013/2014 Þlannlng
ÞresenLaLlons

!une 20, 2013
9am Lo noon

113








LocaLlon: MeLro Larly College Plgh School - 1929 klnner 8d, Columbus, CP 43210
1lme Actlon Item
12:00 ÞM

Cpenlng 8emarks
12:30 ÞM
9
Lh
Crade CohorL A
12:43 ÞM
9
Lh
Crade CohorL 8
1:00 ÞM
10
Lh
Crade CohorL

8reak
1:10 ÞM
11
Lh
Crade CohorL
1:23 ÞM
12
Lh
Crade CohorL
1:40 ÞM
Closlng 8emarks

West n|gh Schoo|
Academlc ?ear 2013/2014 Þlannlng
ÞresenLaLlons

!une 21, 2013
noon

114
115
Q
t
r

1
Q
t
r

2
Q
t
r

3
Q
t
r

4
l
l
o
o
d

M
u
s
e
u
m
1
u
e
s
l
g
n

a

b
o
a
L

L
o

h
o
l
d

p
e
n
n
l
e
s
k
l
s

L
h
e

?
e
L
l

8
e
a
l
?
,
A
f
L
e
r

S
c
h
o
o
l

1
u
L
o
r
l
n
g
,

C
C
l
1
S
c
h
o
o
l

S
L
o
r
e

u
e
s
l
g
n
2
/
3
8
o
b
o
L

u
e
s
l
g
n

f
r
o
m

r
e
c
y
c
l
e
d

m
a
L
e
r
l
a
l
k
S
y
m
b
o
l
s

o
f

C
h
l
o

b
o
o
k
4
l
l
r
e

L
s
c
a
p
e

Þ
l
a
n
k
A
p
p

d
e
s
l
g
n
8
C
l
l
d
e
r
/
u
r
o
n
e

d
e
s
l
g
n
1
1
/
1
2
C
r
e
e
n
s
p
a
c
e

d
e
s
l
g
n
1
0
W
e
a
L
h
e
r

c
h
a
r
L
l
n
g

a
n
d

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
L

L
o
o
l
s
Þ
r
e
-
k
C
e
L
L
l
n
g

L
o

s
c
h
o
o
l

w
l
L
h

l
c
e
k
C
h
r
l
s
L
m
a
s

s
c
h
o
o
l

s
L
o
r
e
1
u
e
s
l
g
n

a

p
l
a
y
g
r
o
u
n
d
1
L
l
e
c
L
r
l
c
l
L
y

a
n
d

c
l
r
c
u
l
L
s
3
C
l
o
L
h
l
n
g

l
n

d
l
f
f
e
r
e
n
L

c
u
l
L
u
r
e
s
2
u
e
s
l
g
n

a

s
h
e
e
p

w
a
s
h
e
r
2
C
w
l

Þ
e
l
l
e
L

d
l
s
s
e
c
L
l
o
n
2
A
n
l
m
a
l

a
d
a
p
L
l
o
n
s

L
o

s
u
r
v
l
v
e

f
l
o
o
d
s
3
C
a
r
s

a
n
d

e
n
e
r
g
y

d
e
s
l
g
n
4
u
o
n
'
L

f
e
e
d

L
h
e

d
u
c
k
s

a
w
a
r
e
n
e
s
s
4
S
L
.

S
L
e
v
e
n
s

c
o
m
m
u
n
l
L
y

c
e
n
L
e
r

L
o

r
e
a
d

L
o

e
l
d
e
r
s

Þ
r
e
-
k
M
e
g
a
n

Z
o
r
n
e
s

(
S
M
)

&

S
h
a
w
n
a

S
L
r
e
e
L
e
r

(
P
a
m
l
l
L
o
n
)
P
e
a
l
L
h
y

l
o
o
d
s

1
C
r
e
a
L
l
n
g

a

P
o
m
e
Þ
r
e
-
k
C
o
m
m
u
n
l
L
y

L
v
e
r
y
w
h
e
r
e
Þ
r
e
-
k
W
h
e
r
e

d
o

l

b
e
l
o
n
g
?
2
T
P
B
L

P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

b
y

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s

t
o

P
A
S
T

S
T
E
M

C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
s
A
v
o
n
d
a
l
e
W
e
s
L
u
a
n
a
W
e
s
L
P
a
m
l
l
L
o
n
L
l
n
d
e
n
F
e
e
d
e
r

S
y
s
t
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
o
t
e
s
G
r
a
d
e
A
f
r
l
c
e
n
L
r
l
c
A
f
r
l
c
e
n
L
r
l
c
116
Q
t
r

1
Q
t
r

2
Q
t
r

3
Q
t
r

4
T
P
B
L

P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

b
y

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s

t
o

P
A
S
T

S
T
E
M

C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
s
F
e
e
d
e
r

S
y
s
t
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
o
t
e
s
G
r
a
d
e
Þ
h
o
L
o

L
s
s
a
y
s

w
l
L
h

C
M
A

9
-
1
2
S
p
a
n
l
s
h

s
L
o
r
y
b
o
o
k
9
-
1
2
8
o
c
k
e
L
s
9
P
e
r
a
l
d
l
c

8
a
n
n
e
r

s
L
a
n
d

d
e
s
l
g
n
9
Þ
e
r
s
p
e
c
L
l
v
e

u
r
a
w
l
n
g
s
9
M
a
r
c
h

M
a
d
n
e
s
s

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
l
a
l
s
9
C
o
l
d
e
n

8
a
L
l
o
9
8
u
c
k
e
L

f
l
l
l
l
n
g

p
r
o
[
e
c
L
9
L
x
a
c
L

C
e
n
L
e
r

o
f

C
l
a
s
s
r
o
o
m
9
M
a
r
b
l
e

s
o
r
L
l
n
g

m
a
c
h
l
n
e
s
9
L
l
e
c
L
o
r
a
l

e
l
e
c
L
l
o
n

m
a
L
h
9
Þ
l

M
a
L
h
9
S
o
l
a
r

S
y
s
L
e
m

S
c
a
l
l
n
g
9
M
a
L
h

l
n

M
u
s
l
c
9
l
r
a
c
L
a
l

p
r
o
[
e
c
L
9
C
l
L
y

d
e
s
l
g
n
9
8
u
b
e

C
o
l
d
b
e
r
g
8
8
o
l
l
e
r

c
o
a
s
L
e
r

d
e
s
l
g
n
8
C
a
L
a
p
u
l
L

d
e
s
l
g
n
8
n
o
n
-
v
l
o
l
e
n
L

u
e
m
o
n
s
L
r
a
L
l
o
n
/
Þ
o
s
L
e
r
7
l
n
d
o
o
r

C
a
r
d
e
n
1
0
P
u
n
g
e
r

C
a
m
e
s
1
0
P
a
b
l
L

Þ
l
a
L
e
s
,

k
a
L
e

8
r
o
w
n
1
0
u
e
s
l
g
n

a

m
a
p
1
0
u
n
d
e
r
s
L
a
n
d
l
n
g

L
h
e

C
o
l
d

W
a
r
:

8
u
l
l
d
l
n
g

a

8
u
n
k
e
r
1
1
/
1
2
C
a
r

p
r
o
[
e
c
L
2
M
a
k
e

a

C
h
a
n
g
e
6
u
S

1
r
a
v
e
l
3
M
o
L
l
o
n
k
P
o
w

L
a
l
l

l
s

L
a
d
y

L
l
b
e
r
L
y
3
2
u

a
n
d

3
u

h
o
m
e

d
e
s
l
g
n
k
C
o
u
r
L
y
a
r
d

g
a
r
d
e
n
k
-
6
u
e
e
p

l
n
L
o

L
h
e

L
a
r
L
h
3
-
6
L
M
S
A
L
l
n
d
e
n

L
l
e
m
e
n
L
a
r
y
L
l
n
d
e
n
L
l
n
d
e
n
L
l
n
d
e
n
S
o
u
L
h

M
l
f
f
l
l
n
117
Q
t
r

1
Q
t
r

2
Q
t
r

3
Q
t
r

4
T
P
B
L

P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

b
y

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s

t
o

P
A
S
T

S
T
E
M

C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
s
F
e
e
d
e
r

S
y
s
t
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
o
t
e
s
G
r
a
d
e
C
r
e
a
L
e

a

g
a
r
d
e
n
6
8
r
l
d
g
e

8
u
l
l
d
l
n
g
L
n
g
.
8
o
m
a
n

c
l
L
y

p
r
o
[
e
c
L

w
l
L
h

m
u
s
e
u
m

o
f

a
r
L
7
8
u
b
y

!
o
r
d
a
n
'
s

p
l
a
y
7
C
h
r
l
s
L
m
a
s

c
a
r
o
l

p
r
o
[
e
c
L

w
l
L
h

r
e
L
l
r
e
m
e
n
L

h
o
m
e
7
/
8

S
p
e
c
l
a
l

L
u
8
u
l
l
L

a

b
o
a
L
8
S
p
r
l
n
g

f
l
l
n
g

c
a
L
a
p
u
l
L

d
e
s
l
g
n
8
S
o
l
a
r

o
v
e
n
s
k
1
e
r
r
a
r
l
u
m
s
1
C
l
n
g
e
r

b
r
e
a
d

h
o
u
s
e

p
r
o
[
e
c
L
2
W
a
L
e
r

c
y
c
l
e

b
a
g
s
2
/
3
L
a
c
k

o
f

b
u
L
L
e
r
f
l
l
e
s

-

r
a
l
s
e
d

L
h
e
m
2
/
3

&

4
/
3
l
a
m
l
l
y

m
l
n
l

c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s
k
-
3
k
-
3
k
-
3
k
-
3
C
u
l
l
L

c
o
m
m
u
n
l
L
y

c
o
n
s
L
r
u
c
L
l
o
n
k
M
u
s
l
c
a
l

l
n
s
L
r
u
m
e
n
L

d
e
s
l
g
n
k
8
o
L
L
l
e

8
l
o
l
o
g
y
1
Þ
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

S
h
e
l
L
e
r
s
1
C
h
l
o

A
n
l
m
a
l
s
2
Þ
u
f
f
m
o
b
l
l
e
2
1
e
r
a
r
r
l
u
m
s
2
W
a
L
e
r

c
y
c
l
e

s
o
n
g

a
n
d

p
o
s
L
e
r
s
2
l
l
a
L

S
L
a
n
l
e
y
3
1
h
l
n
k

l
l
k
e

a

s
c
l
e
n
L
l
s
L
3
W
l
n
d
m
l
l
l
s
3
8
u
l
l
y
l
n
g

s
o
l
v
l
n
g
4
W
h
a
L

l
f

n
o

p
e
L
r
o
l
e
u
m
?

A
l
L
e
r
n
a
L
l
v
e

L
n
e
r
g
y
3
P
o
w

L
o

C
r
o
w

a

Þ
u
m
p
k
l
n
k
M
a
g
n
e
L

m
o
b
l
l
e
1
M
y

L
n
e
r
g
y
/
L
e
r
r
a
r
l
u
m
2
u
e
s
l
g
n

C
y
c
l
e

S
o
n
g
2
P
o
w

d
o

l

f
l
L

l
n
L
o

L
h
e

w
o
r
l
d

(
f
l
a
g
,

p
l
c
L
u
r
e

o
f

s
e
l
f

a
n
d

d
l
s
p
l
a
y

a
L

"
m
u
s
e
u
m
"
)
2
W
a
L
e
r

c
y
c
l
e
2
l
n
v
e
s
L
l
g
a
L
l
o
n

o
f

L
c
o
s
y
s
L
e
m
3
u
n
d
e
r
g
r
o
u
n
d

8
8

(
m
o
v
e

p
e
o
p
l
e

L
o
d
a
y
)
4
u
e
s
l
g
n

C
y
c
l
e

C
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
3
L
l
g
h
L

a
n
d

S
o
u
n
d
,

g
o
g
g
l
e
s

f
o
r

d
l
f
f
e
r
e
n
L

e
c
o
s
y
s
L
e
m
3
W
e
s
L
g
a
L
e
,

v
a
l
l
e
y
v
l
e
w

&

W
e
s
L

8
r
o
a
d
M
a
l
l

a

C
y
s
L
e
r

C
r
a
c
k
e
r

L
h
r
o
u
g
h

L
h
e

u
Þ
S

w
l
L
h
o
u
L

g
e
L
L
l
n
g

s
m
u
s
h
e
d
3
W
e
s
L
W
e
s
L
S
L
a
r
l
l
n
g
W
e
s
L
S
u
l
l
l
v
a
n
L
v
a
l
l
e
y
v
l
e
w
 W
e
s
L

8
r
o
a
d
W
e
s
L
118
Q
t
r

1
Q
t
r

2
Q
t
r

3
Q
t
r

4
T
P
B
L

P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

b
y

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s

t
o

P
A
S
T

S
T
E
M

C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
s
F
e
e
d
e
r

S
y
s
t
e
m
S
c
h
o
o
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
o
t
e
s
G
r
a
d
e
P
u
n
g
e
r
4
/
3
/
6
L
l
f
e

8
a
c
k

1
h
e
n
4
/
3
/
6
l
u
n
d
r
a
l
s
l
n
g

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L
4
/
3
/
6
S
c
h
o
o
l

C
a
r
d
e
n
k
-
6
C
r
a
f
f
l
L
L
l

3
P
o
w

d
o

l
l
v
l
n
g

L
h
l
n
g
s

s
u
r
v
l
v
e
k
l
a
l
r
y

1
a
l
e

Þ
l
a
y
Þ
r
e
-
k
C
a
n
d
y

s
L
a
L
l
s
L
l
c
s
3
A
r
e
a

a
n
d

p
e
r
l
m
e
L
e
r
3
A
L
l
a
s

c
r
e
a
L
l
o
n
k
8
o
c
k
e
L
s
3
1
e
r
r
a
r
l
u
m
s
2
M
o
v
l
n
g

c
a
n
s

w
l
L
h
o
u
L

L
o
u
c
h
l
n
g
2
M
a
r
b
l
e

c
h
u
L
e
3
8
o
a
L

c
o
n
s
L
r
u
c
L
l
o
n
3
L
o
n
g
e
s
L

p
a
p
e
r

c
h
a
l
n
3
8
u
l
l
d
l
n
g

c
o
n
s
L
r
u
c
L
l
o
n
4
8
l
o
m
e

L
x
p
e
d
l
L
l
o
n

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L

6
6
S
n
o
w

d
a
y

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L

7
S
L
o
r
y
b
o
a
r
d

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L

8
M
l
n
a
L
u
r
e

C
o
l
f

u
e
s
l
g
n

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L

7
8
o
a
r
d

C
a
m
e

u
e
s
l
g
n
9
P
a
p
p
l
n
e
s
s

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L
9
C
u
r
r
e
n
L

l
s
s
u
e
s

p
r
o
[
e
c
L
s
1
0
C
o
m
m
u
n
l
L
y

s
e
r
v
l
c
e

p
r
o
[
e
c
L
s
9
M
u
r
d
e
r

M
y
s
L
e
r
y

l
o
r
e
n
s
l
c
s
1
0
u
r
e
a
m

a
c
L
1
0
8
u
b
e

C
o
l
d
b
e
r
g
9
Þ
r
e
s
l
d
e
n
L
l
a
l

u
e
b
a
L
e
1
0
W
e
s
L
W
e
s
L

P
l
g
h

S
c
h
o
o
l
W
e
s
L
W
e
s
L
  W
e
s
L
g
a
L
e

Þ
r
o
[
e
c
L
s

n
o
L
e
d

w
e
r
e

r
e
p
o
r
L
e
d

L
o

Þ
A
S
1

L
e
a
m

a
n
d

c
a
p
L
u
r
e
d

l
n

w
e
e
k
l
y

r
e
p
o
r
L
s

L
o

C
C
S
W
l
n
d
s
o
r
L
l
n
d
e
n
W
e
s
L
m
o
o
r

119
120
THE PAST FOUNDATION


WEST HIGH SCHOOL 2013/2014
Kathryn Hanigan, Scott Ivery, Jill Jones, Heather Wood

9
th
Grade
2
nd
Quarter Project – Crisis Intervention Plan DESIGN CHALLENGES – 2
ND
QUARTER
Year-Long
Focus:

How can we exert
positive energy
into our society?

What that looks
like 2
nd
quarter:
How can we make
positive change to
a disastrous
situation?
Main Challenge
(Science Lead)
Crisis Intervention
Plan

Students will
organize a crisis
prevention plan
that outlines how to
deal with a flood on
par with that which
happened in
Columbus in 1913
Additional
Challenges
Interview for a Position (with
English)

Hierarchy of Needs (SS)

Entertainment Database (Eng)

History of Communication (Eng/
SS)

Environmental Disasters vs. Man-
made alterations (with Math)

"Musical Plates" (Plate Tectonics
& Earthquakes)

Polar Ice Caps Study (Climate
Change)
CRISIS INTERVENTION PLAN
In March of 1913, a giant flood
ravaged the state of Ohio.
Rainfall over the state totaled
6-11 inches
In Columbus specifically, the
Scioto River reached record
levels and poured 9 to 17 ft
Many Columbus residents
escaped to the safety of
rooftops and trees.
Students’ job is to organize a
crisis prevention plan that
outlines how to deal with a
flood on par with that which
happened in 1913.
Teams made up of 4-6
members, and each member is
responsible for detailing a
specific part of the plan
CRISIS INTERVENTION PLAN
Constraints:
– West High School will
house 500 community
members
– The electricity is out
– No access to the street
(the first floor is
flooded!)
Products Expected to
be completed:
– Organized plan detailing
each of the group
member’s sections must
be turned in (in a neat
and professional binder
or folder)
– Visual aid (model of the
school, poster,
PowerPoint, etc)
– Presentation to
community members
(Historical Society,
Geography and Weather
experts from OSU)
!"#$!% '#( )*!+, #,!"(,* -*,.,/#!#01/
121
THE PAST FOUNDATION


OTHER CONTENT AREA, ASSOCIATED PROJECT
Subject Project Description
Science Maintains organization of portfolio/plan; environmental pros/cons of
tampering with landscapes (ex: purpose of damming); can also bring
in weather mapping, natural disasters, and climate change?
English Biggest part = determining how to communicate with “rest of the
world” during the flood; how did we communicate before electricity?
(other cultures too); will take on the entertainment portion of the
crisis intervention plan (writing their own books? Coming up with a
database of books, games, etc)
Social
Studies
Research historical environmental disasters; bring in “hierarchy of
needs” to populations in crisis (to determine the “most important”
parts of nutrition, health, housing, and entertainment)
Math Work with science on determining sea level, elevation, rainfall
amounts that are defined as “flooding;” takes the lead on the
housing and storage part of the crisis intervention plan to best
arrange quarters for stranded population; works with science on
creating itemized supply and cost list
ALIGNED STANDARDS TO PROJECT
HS-PS2-3 (Apply scientific and
engineering ideas to design, evaluate,
and refine a device that minimizes the
force on a macroscopic object during a
collision)
HS-PS4-1 (Use mathematical
representations to support a claim
regarding relationships abount the
frequency, wavelength, and speed of
waves traveling in various media)
HS-PS4-2 (Evaluate questions about
the advantages of using a digital
transmission and storage of
information)
HS-PS4-5 (Communicate technical
information about how some
technological devices use the principles
of wave behavior and wave
interactions with matter to transmit and
capture information and energy)
ADDITIONAL “REAL-LIFE” PRACTICES -
Incorporate “twists” into the planning of project:
something awful happens in the middle of their
planning that students have to fix…each group gets a
different twist; possible ideas include:
– Outbreak of a disease
– Further flooding, second floor is now not usable
– More people arrived
– A quarter of food supplies went bad
EXAMPLE OF STANDARDS-BASED QUESTIONS
What kinds of foods (and management of waste)
will ensure the proper nourishment of the group?
How can the building house all of those involved
comfortably?
How can West stay connected to the “outside
world?”
How will fitness and first aid be handled?
What can be stored where, and for how long?
!"#$!% '#( )*!+, #,!"(,* -*,.,/#!#01/
122
THE PAST FOUNDATION !"#$!% '(#) *+!,- #-!")-+ .+-/-0#!#120
6/25/13
1
Linden McKinley Stem Academy
Grade 10
Allison Walton, Erica Perkins, Kate Brown, Patricia West
American History, Biology, English, Special Education
Themes Throughout the Year
Quarter 1 – Natural Disasters
English Social Studies Science Math
-Truth vs. Reality
-MLA citations
-Steps of the
research process
-Outlining an Essay
-Plot elements and
summarizing

MC- Graphic Novel

MC- 5P persuasive
outline and Socratic
Seminar
- Historical
Documents
- Industrialization
-Progressives/
Immigration
- Technology
- Great
Depression

MC – Who is
Responsible

MC – Theres No
Place Like Home
- Ecology
- Ecology Cycles
- Population
- Biomes
- Cells

MC – How do
natural disasters
effect the energy
flow and nutrient
cycling throughout
an ecosystem

MC – Do natural
disasters effect a
biome diorama
MC – How can we
accurately measure
things in a lab?

MC – Use circle
dimensions to predict
the odds of a town
being hit by a
hurricane

MC – Stock Market
Simulation
Themes Throughout the Year
Quarter 2 – Conflict Within Society
English Social Studies Science Math
-Can Progress be
made without
Conflict?
-Personal
Narrative
-Expository
Research Process
-APA citations
-Annotated
bibliography

MC – Personal
Narrative
MC- Annotated
Bibliography
- Imperialism
- World War I
-World War II
- Cold War

MC – History of
Afghanistan (The
Kite Runner
graphic novel)

MC – Conflict in
the United States
- Cells
- Cell Cycle
- Mitosis/Meiosis
- Genetics

MC – Hunger
Games Catching
Fire Interactive
Journal

MC – GMO
Project
MC – How can we
understand how
fast cells grow
using graphs

MC – How can our
society predict how
conflict effects
population using
data

MC – Design a
kite using
trigonometry
Themes Throughout the Year
Quarter 3 – Knowledge and Change
English Social Studies Science Math
-Short Story Unit
-Literary Devices
-Figurative
language
-APA citations
-Grammar

MC – Multiple
Meaning Words
Interactive Notebook
MC – Capstone
Research Paper and
presentation
-Discrimination
- Womens Rights
- Civil Rights

MC – Human
Welfare Capstone

MC – Rebuilding
Panem (Hunger
Games Mockingjay)
- Genetics
- Evolution
- Natural Selection

MC – Create a
Species Project

MC – OGT Board
Game
MC – Design a
Target

MC – Fibonacci
Sequence in Nature.
Why is the sequence
advantageous in
nature, how does it
relate to beauty and
the golden ratio


123
THE PAST FOUNDATION !"#$!% '(#) *+!,- #-!")-+ .+-/-0#!#120
6/25/13
2
Themes Throughout the Year
Quarter 4 – What Now?
English Social Studies Science Math
-Have we
progressed in the
cycle of change?
-Utopia
-Aristotles
rhetorical
techniques
-Irony and
Paradox

MC- PSA on how to
make a positive
change within our
community
MC- Brochure:
advertise your
utopia
-Role of
Government in
Society
-Global World
and the U.S.
- Post 9/11

MC – Preparing for
an EMP (One
Second After novel)

MC – Fallout
Shelter
-Science Today
MC – Research
Presentation on
Current Science

TBD
My Favorite Project –
Natural Disasters
Theres No Place Like Home
Problem Statement: After Hurricane Katrina many
people were displaced from their homes. Many
individuals were forced to leave and were unable to
return.
Question/Issue: Where did people move and what
were their experiences before and after Hurricane
Katrina
Activities
Students will analyze the migration pattern of
people out of New Orleans after the hurricane
Analyze experiences of citizens from New
Orleans
Product – Visual profile of an individual
before/after Hurricane Katrina
My Favorite Project –
Conflict Within Society
GMOs and Catching Fire
Problem Statement: You are working with the game
makers for the Quarter Quell to develop a genetically
modified organism that will work in this year clock theme.
Question/Issue: What genetic mutations will you make to
your organism that will make it Quarter Quell worthy?
Activities:
Students will read book 2 in the Hunger Game series
Students will develop their own genetically modified
organism
Students will write a short scenario of how your GMO
will be used in the Quarter Quell.
Product:.
Scenario and model of their GMO
My Favorite Project –
Knowledge and Change
Human Welfare Capstone
Problem Statement: You are challenged to select an
example of a human rights violation that is occurring in the
world today and create a PowerPoint and research paper
that explains the issue and how world leaders are
addressing that issue.
Question/Issue: Identify and explain an example of a
human rights violation in the world today. How are world
leaders trying to solve that issue?
Activities:
Web research
Rough drafts
Using the Universal Declaration of Human Rights document and
finding real world examples of violations of those human rights
Product : PowerPoint and Research Paper
124
THE PAST FOUNDATION
6/25/13
3
My Favorite Project –
What Now?
Advertise your Utopia
Problem Statement: There is a large migration of
people in need of a new home, and there is a
competition to get the most residents.
Question/Issue: How can you advertise your utopian
society? What makes it perfect and better than
all others?
Activities:
Brainstorm your towns layout and characteristics.
Organize a brochure that will advertise all of these
attributes.
Write descriptions that will persuade new residents to
migrate to your town.
Product – A brochure displaying their ideal society
Aligned Standards to Project
English
Reading Literature
Reading Informational Text
Writing
Speaking and Listening
Language Standards
Social Studies
Historical Thinking and Skills
Foreign Affairs from Imperialism
to Post-World War I
From Isolation to World War
The Cold War
Social Transformations in the
United States
United States and the Post-Cold
War World
Science
From molecules to organisms: Structures and
processes
Ecosystems: interactions, energy, and dynamics
Heredity: inheritance and variation of traits
Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity
Engineering Design
Math
Real and Complex Number Systems
Arithmetic with Polynomials & Rational
Expressions
Interpreting Functions
Conditional Probability & the Rules of
Probability

Example of Standards-based Questions
English How do we define a utopia? In a 5 paragraph essay, compare
and contrast the ideal world of two characters from The Hunger
Games.
Social Studies Many people from the city of New Orleans, Louisiana were forced to
leave due to Hurricane Katrina. Identify two pull factors that led
them to choose to move to a new location.
Science Provide two reasons why the Capitol creating GMOs, to use in both
the arena and to monitor the districts, was or was not ethical.

125
126
T R A NS F OR MI NG T HE S CHOOL HOUS E :
knowledge capture program
A P U B L I C AT I O N O F :
127
Transforming the Schoolhouse: Roadmap to Community Engagement
©2013 The PAST Foundaton
ISBN: 978-1-939531-03-2
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013941087
Published by The PAST Foundaton in the United States of America
www.pastoundaton.org
128
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executve Summary iv
Partners 6
Introducton 7
Academic Goals 9
Stakeholder Goals 13
Collaboratve Partnerships 17
Stakeholder Acton 19
Stakeholder Consensus 23
Timeline 26
Recommended Actons 29
Conclusions 30
References 31
Appendices
- How This Report Was Created 33
- Interview Questons 34
129
iv
A ROADMAP TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
In educaton today, there are few undertakings as complex as transforming a persistently
failing school. As technical assistance providers, we have been confronted tme and again
by commonly held perceptons about why “nothing works.” Educators and administrators
express a very real sense of frustraton with turning a failing school, ofen claiming, “we’ve
tried everything already.” When pressed to explain why schools are failing in the frst place,
common statements include “we are underfunded,” “we lack technology,” “we have no control
or infuence over the environment and community in which the failing school lives,”—and the list
goes on. The problems and constraints low-achieving schools face are ofen similar, regardless
of whether the school is urban or rural—as is the desperaton surrounding how best to make
transformaton happen. These issues range from concerns about shifing demographics and
the local economy to neighborhood safety and preserving community values and priorites,
and more.
At The PAST Foundaton, we have more than a decade of experience working directly with
schools and communites in transiton, and have identfed key benchmarks essental to
successful school transformaton. PAST ofers a team of experts, including anthropologists and
educators, working collaboratvely toward understanding the critcal needs of educatonal
systems in transiton. Using an anthropological framework, we ofer powerful analytcal tools to
understand both the visible diversity of communites associated with a partcular educatonal
system, as well as the hidden commonaltes they all possess. Large or small, urban or rural, from
whole districts to the one-room schoolhouse—the PAST Foundaton has efectvely partnered
on all levels to outline consistent benchmarks that serve as critcal levers in shaping successful
school transformatonal outcomes.
The Roadmap series is an opportunity for you to beneft from what we have observed and
learned through these partnerships with a diverse set of communites in multple states across
the country. Each of the Roadmap publicatons will highlight efectve processes associated with
key transformatonal implementaton strategies essental to achieving the necessary culture
shif, embedding and sustaining the success of the transformaton.
Each Roadmap is presented as a case study, providing a context in which to understand real
issues and challenges, as well as the opportunity to witness key steps associated with the work
of implementng school transformaton. We feel strongly that this series must start by detailing
commonly shared aspects of communites-in-crisis, defned by grassroots level of community
conversaton and engagement. In our experience, gaining broad-based commitment from local
stakeholders is an essental step leading to the cultural shif required to achieve successful
school and community transformaton. We begin our Roadmap series with The Roadmap
to Community Engagement for STEM Educaton, a case study of community involvement in
transforming a failing pre-K through 12 school feeder system in Columbus, Ohio.
130
v
The Linden McKinley STEM Academy (LMSA), launched in fall 2009 by Columbus City Schools,
became the frst of the district’s public schools to transiton to a program integratng science,
technology, engineering and math (STEM) with “transdisciplinary problem-based learning”
(T-PBL). LMSA, a combined middle and high school (grades 7 through 12), as well as four Linden
elementary feeder schools (pre-K through 6), are now on a path to completng the transiton to
STEM and T-PBL for all public school students within the Linden community.
As the frst school feeder system in the district to transiton to STEM, there is value in looking
at the stakeholder process conducted jointly by the community with the school district to
evaluate how to best meet the educatonal needs of Linden’s youth. The Linden community
process ofers a natonal “roadmap” for urban communites where public educaton is ripe for
revitalizaton in ways that must also address multple, related issues that extend to the social
and cultural aspects of a community. In this context, strategies to improve pre-K through 12
public educaton must take into account a broad set of interconnected, relevant, and complex
needs of families that seek to atain a quality educaton for their children. Challenged with rising
levels of poverty, shifing demographics, urgent concerns
for neighborhood safety, and a climate of general economic
decline, urban communites like Linden are increasingly
hindered by constraints of limited budgets and insttutonal
capacity to change the course of their educatonal future.
In the case of Linden, local leaders sought to galvanize the
community around a single queston—how to rescue its
public schools—as a critcal component of revitalizing the
community as a whole. Community members actng together as a catalyst for acton joined
with the school district to raise awareness and inspire community leaders to new levels of
advocacy on behalf of the children of Linden. In this consensus-based process, the list of goals
identfed by the community revolved around three urgent issues: 1) increasing the high school
graduaton rate; 2) improving student performance in order to beter prepare them for adult life
by providing them with 21st century STEM career skills; and, 3) assuring “college readiness” to
pursue higher educaton.
In the Linden community, the choice for STEM educaton evolved to consensus through a series
of community meetngs that were held over a period of 18 months. Initally, meetngs were
conducted and led by the school district. In tme, community meetngs were organized and
conducted by neighborhood organizatons in response to issues of concern identfed by local
leaders. The community’s specifc set of issues shaped a collaboratve process, drawing on the
resources of the community to devise and implement short-term strategies guided by long-
term goals. This case study, chronicling the Linden community experience, identfes critcal
components of the process that launched the partnership of agencies, organizatons, and
individuals who joined in an efort to identfy STEM educaton as a viable soluton for Linden’s
community schools and its students.
In the case of Linden, local
leaders sought to galvanize
the community around a single
question ... how to revitalize the
community as a whole.
131
PARTNERS OF THE LINDEN COMMUNITY
TRANSFORMATION PROCESS
Alpha Minority Engineering Lecture Series
AmeriCorps
Apex Builders
Associaton of Community Engineers [ACE]
Batelle Memorial Insttute
Bethel African Methodist Episcopal [AME] Church
Budget Rent-A-Car
Building Trades Insttute
Center of Science and Industry [COSI]
Church Leaders Group
Clarence Lumpkin Constructon Training and Jobs
Commitee
Cleveland Avenue License Agency
Columbus Board of Educaton
Columbus City Council
Columbus City Schools [CCS]
Columbus College of Art and Design
Columbus Educaton Associaton [CEA]
Columbus Metropolitan Housing Authority
Columbus Metropolitan Library (Linden Branch)
Crane Plastcs Corp.
Facilites Master Plan Revision Commitee
Franklin County Department of Job & Family Services
Franklin County Educaton Council
Greater Linden Development Corporaton [GLDC]
Heritage Apartments
Heritage Christan Church
Higher Peaks Child Care
Honda of America
I Know I Can Project
Increase Community Development Corporaton
KidsOhio
Linden Area Educaton Task Force
Linden community residents
Linden public school alumni [Associaton]
Linden public school parents
Linden public school teachers & administrators
Linden-McKinley High School teachers & administrators
Linden-McKinley STEM School Design Team
Malcolm Pirnie Engineering Consultancy
Metro Early College High School Advisory Group
Metro School staf & school administrators
Moody-Nolan Inc.
Natonal Educaton Associaton [NEA]
Natonal Service Learning Corporaton
Natonal Society for Black Engineers [NSBE]
Northgate staf
Ohio Dominican University
Ohio Educaton Associaton [OEA]
Ohio State University [OSU] Minority Engineering
Ohio STEM Learning Network [OSLN]
OSU Aspire
OSU Provost Ofce
Oterbein College
Partnership for Contnued Learning
PAST Foundaton
Peggy’s Monogramming
Project Grad
SAVESNet
South Linden Area Commission
St. Stephen’s Community House
STEM Columbus
Tray Lee Bible School
United Way of Central Ohio
Young Women’s Christan Associaton [YWCA]
HELPFUL INFO
Ethnographic protocols require anonymity of case study partcipants. Therefore, each individual interviewed for the
Linden study was assigned a code number identty. For this case study, individual code numbers range from 501-
509. Code numbers are given within report citatons to reference specifc partcipant views. The second number
in the citaton represents a partcular response within an interview transcript (e.g., 501-25). Case study citatons
provide the reader with an “insider” perspectve of the situaton as well as the essental actons and components
that form an acton “model” for school transformaton. Insight into the experience of one community can inform
other communites about expectatons and potental strategies as a roadmap for initatng school transformaton
planning and implementaton processes.
132
7
INTRODUCTION
The outcomes of the Linden community dialogues and formal planning process
ofer insights into grassroots actons that initally sprang up through community response
to neighborhood public school closures (Bush 2006c, The
Columbus Dispatch 2006a). Community members note that
closure of several Linden area schools including Gladstone
Elementary, followed by closure of Linmoor Middle School
(501-48), created a sense of urgency about the possibility of
closure of Linden-McKinley High School (Bush 2007c, 2007e).
When the school district reached out to community residents
to discuss issues surrounding the future of the high school,
the overwhelming message to the district was a strong and
positve asserton that the high school should not be closed
(505-14b). The range of reasons voiced by community
members in those early school district meetngs pointed to a
set of related issues that were both immediate and long-term
in considering the well being of the community and potental
impacts of closing the high school. As word of the discussion on school closure circulated in
Linden, leaders from diferent segments of the community engaged in new partnerships to
organize and act. As one high school alumnus stated, we wanted to “restore the roar” and build
upon the long standing “panther pride” associated with Linden-McKinley High School (505-32).
Five distnct components of the Linden community process resulted in pivotal actons that
sustained community commitment to school improvement. These fve components of community
acton are presented in the graphic on the next page. The following narratve presents an
exploraton of the specifc issues and strategies the Linden community pursued to atain common
goals, design a strategy for collaboratve community involvement, and reach consensus on a
school improvement plan. The fve points of community engagement provide an understanding
of the fundamental steps essental to turning the tde to achieve school transformaton for Linden
public neighborhood schools.
“...we’re moving to that age
where a high school diploma
will no longer get you where
you think you want to go...and
[we understand] that college
isn’t for everybody...what kind of
focus do you have? And so that’s
where the college and career
readiness really came in.”
QUOTE [ 508- 109]
“We need to do problem based learning when we do these things
in communities. And say, here is the issue, how do we solve this
issue? And how do we know that we’ve done a good job? Isn’t that
what you’re teaching [the] kids? And you have rubrics and problems,
and here is the process, and how do we solve it, and how well did
we do it? So, use your own, I mean – have a process that includes
stakeholders at the onset, instead of waiting for people to say, ‘well
I wasn’t involved I didn’t know anything about it. I’m not sending my
kid here. I’m afraid, or I don’t know, I’m anxious’.”
QUOTE [ 509- 98]
133
Five points
essential to
community
engagement in
school
transformation
Academic
Goals
Define the academic goals Identify stakeholders’ priorities
1
Stakeholder
Goals
2
Collaborative
Partnerships
Build partnerships and broad-based
commitment for a collaborative
community planning process
3
E X I T O N L Y
Stakeholder
Consensus
Implement a consensus-based
process to evaluate school
transformation to STEM education
5
Stakeholder
Action
Facilitate stakeholder action for
school and community
revitalization
4
134
9
DEFINE ACADEMIC GOALS
The first steps taken jointly by the school district and the community
were aimed at understanding academic goals critcal to school improvement. Four
main areas of improvement were identfed:
æ Identfy and implement 21st century curriculum and instructon
æ Improve high school graduaton rates
æ Build program resources that assure career and college readiness
æ Identfy funding support for higher educaton
for Linden high school graduates
Early in the exchange between the school district and the community, a number of problems
were cited by the school district as grounds for considering closure of the high school (Greater
Linden News 2007c, 2007d, 2005). High on the list was declining enrollment in the pre-K
through 12 schools (The Columbus Dispatch 2007, 2006a, 2006b). Contributng to the Linden
situaton was an overall decline in Linden’s populaton from 40.9k to 34.8k in the decade
between 1990-2000, resultng in 12% fewer school-age children residing in the community
(Community Research Partners 2007). Associated with low enrollment in Linden area schools
was a district-wide problem in 2008 of high school graduaton rates of just under 74%
(Columbus Board of Educaton 2010). With funding support from the district, the Community
Research Partners (CRP) conducted a study to gather fundamental informaton defning
academic concerns and other factors afectng Linden public schools to beter understand
the nature of the problems for Linden parents and their children. The study provided the
opportunity to further defne broad-scale community issues including related census and other
socioeconomic trends.
Utlizing focus group data, the study also honed in on a range of stakeholder perspectves
including those of parents, students and members of the religious community, as well as local
business leaders. Study fndings identfed a series of factors associated with the decline in
public school enrollment. However, a single stark fact emerged that pointed to the botom
line consideraton for the school district: only 37% of Linden
children were enrolled in Linden area public schools at
the tme of the study. This informaton underscored the
unavoidable hard economic and fnancial consideratons faced
by the district to maintain local public school operatons (Bush
2007d, The Columbus Dispatch 2006a). Getng to the botom
line for the school district also ofered the opportunity to
beter understand why parents were choosing to enroll their
children in schools outside the district, including the opton
“The community has got to
pass the levy. We’ve got to
support the levy. Because we’re
not going to have a school.
The numbers made sense to
me. You had twenty percent or
better decline in enrollment… It
was an economic decision.”
QUOTE [ 501- 62A]
Five points
essential to
community
engagement in
school
transformation
Academic
Goals
Define the academic goals Identify stakeholders’ priorities
1
Stakeholder
Goals
2
Collaborative
Partnerships
Build partnerships and broad-based
commitment for a collaborative
community planning process
3
E X I T O N L Y
Stakeholder
Consensus
Implement a consensus-based
process to evaluate school
transformation to STEM education
5
Stakeholder
Action
Facilitate stakeholder action for
school and community
revitalization
4
135
10
to enroll students in charter schools (505-48; 509-16; Greater Linden News 2007c; Bush 2006a,
2006b; The Columbus Dispatch 2006a).
Key fndings of the CRP 2007 study found that parents electng to send their children outside
the district stated they were seeking a school environment for their child where students could:
1) experience higher “academic rigor” and “expectatons”; 2) receive quality instructon in a
“best practces” learning environment; and, 3) experience “hands-on learning in ways that apply
to daily life.” Additonally, parents identfed the need to increase community involvement in
eforts to improve the school environment, including opportunites to bolster the reputaton of
Linden public schools and advance school safety measures. College preparedness and providing
access to scholarships and other fnancial assistance were also cited as critcal to opening up
opportunites for higher educaton to Linden public school graduates.
In 2008 and 2009, over 100 Linden students attended the “Summer Engineering Experience
for Kids”—a program of the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE)—where middle-school
students learned basic engineering skills to create hands-on projects. The 3-week camp was
designed to help prepare Linden students for STEM education and careers. The project was
sponsored by partner organizations of the Linden Area Education Task Force, the Battelle
Memorial Institute, and NSBE, and was held at the St. Stephen’s Community House in Linden.
Photo courtesy of The PAST Foundation
136
11
With clearly defned community goals identfed in the CRP study, together the district and
local stakeholders moved forward armed with important understanding about commonly
held goals and values, as well as greater awareness of the problems and challenges for
improving public educaton in Linden. Inital eforts organized by the school district provided
for a series of informaton-sharing meetngs held in diferent neighborhoods to convey news
on proposed school closures (505-14a). However, the informaton sharing quickly galvanized
community response, with local leaders stepping in to organize a series of ongoing meetngs,
including workshops and community dialogues to further defne academic goals and develop a
strategy for school transformaton (504-22a; 505-12a; The Greater Linden News 2009i, 2009k,
2008b). These early actons were embraced by the community, and signaled a deeply held
determinaton to foster an inclusive local process, lay the foundaton for grassroots acton
among those who shared a common goal for school transformaton, and build on a willingness
to work to make it happen (501-8; 505-2; 506-136; 507-59a; 509-84).
“[Parents] equated STEM with the idea that STEM would
give more opportunities to their kids, and that STEM was an
advanced thing that should be brought into their community
and so it was good for them. And so they did community
meetings about it, they did surveys about it, they’ve got
graphs and charts and newsletters about STEM showing up
in their community, they even had the radio stations talking
about STEM and so on.”
QUOTE [ 502- 26A]
137
13
IDENTIFY STAKEHOLDER PRIORITIES
In order to move forward with a plan for action, preliminary
discussions were organized between community leaders and the school district
to identfy key points to assure successful outcomes for a school transformaton
planning process. Five important preliminary areas were identfed as the basis for
initatng a community planning process:
æ Parents commited to enrolling students in neighborhood public schools
æ The community as a whole would pledge to build support for school
levies to assure funding for local public school renovaton
æ The district commited to a community planning
process to atain academic goals
æ The district and community joined in actons to
improve school safety and security
æ The district and the community together formed the Linden
Area Educaton Task Force to take on a joint process to design
a school transformaton plan, and identfy locally supported
actons including ways to avoid future school closures
Closing Linmoor Middle School prompted a strong response from the community, opening up
a series of early exchanges that ultmately led to building a more robust relatonship between
the school district and the community. On the part of the community as a whole, early
discussions revealed there was litle awareness among community advocates of the serious
problems confrontng the school district and parents of Linden students (503-12a) despite
eforts to inform the community (The Greater Linden News
2007a, 2007b). On the district’s part, faced with fnancial
consideratons, school closure policy was being conducted
through normal decision-making channels involving review
and comment by the Columbus City Schools citzen’s task
force, whose members included residents from the Greater
Columbus area (Bush 2007a, 2006b; CEA 2007a). With litle
awareness of district processes and optons to provide
feedback, Linden residents felt they had been lef out of the
loop on decisions to close Linden schools (501-68b; 503-
12b; 509-8a).
“The school belongs to the
community...There is a trust
relationship—the district
representation needs to trust that
the community knows what they
want for their children, and the
community needs to trust that
the district representation has
the capacity to implement that.”
QUOTE [ 504- 22]
138
14
Following a resounding plea by local leaders to support community involvement in creatng
a school transformaton plan (Bush 2007b), the district contnued to hold meetngs in order
to engage stakeholders in a meaningful process for Linden. Many stakeholders took the
opportunity to help in the community’s efort to further defne issues of concern, voicing
their views directly to the Board of Educaton. The issues raised included frustraton over the
quality of educaton in Linden, as well as deeply held fears about impacts to the vitality of the
community associated with closing Linden public schools (505-12b; Bush 2007c; Greater Linden
News 2007a, 2007c). In this efort, Linden area stakeholders convinced the district of their
commitment to work collaboratvely to fnd solutons to
the problems facing their neighborhood public schools,
and in so doing helped set the stage for a community-
based, problem solving process (509-84; Greater Linden
News 2009k).
Early in the exchange of ideas between the community
and the district, leadership from both stepped forward
with propositons responding to fundamental discussion
points essental to initatng a joint planning process
(501-20). With awareness that the school district alone
could not address the broad range of issues raised by
the community, inital stakeholder interests focused on
organizing partcipaton of local leaders and parents
to work with the district, assuring local priorites and
traditonal values would remain integral to a plan for
Linden schools (501-20; 502-76; 504-22a).
Among the optons proposed to the community by the district was the idea of combining the
high school and middle school (grades 7-12) as a way to build sufcient enrollment in a single
facility, improve operatng cost efciencies, and avoid closing the high school (CEA 2008, 2007b;
Bush 2007b). Although this opton would also address the problem of bussing Linden area
middle school students to schools outside of Linden (508-97), many in the community were
initally against the idea of a combined middle school and high school, and expressed their
reservatons and need to explore the issues more fully (505-12a; 508-31; 509-8; Sebastan
2007). In tme, parents did resolve these concerns, allowing the district to gain broad support
for a combined middle school and high school program (508-101).
Enrollment challenges across Linden area pre-K to 12 schools were also an issue of concern
for the district. Gaining commitment from Linden area parents to enroll students in their
neighborhood schools was predicated on the district’s assurance that a school transformaton
plan would be implemented (501-62b). From the community’s perspectve, the district’s
willingness to assure a plan for Linden schools was an important component of reestablishing
trust in the district’s “capacity” to meet the needs of the community (504-22). This included
identfying additonal funding for the district to ensure support of academic goals, incorporatng
provisions for improved curriculum and instructon (502-18,26; The Columbus Dispatch 2008;
Richards 2008; Sebastan 2008).
“The fact that things for young
people to do were no longer
there—like, we used to have the
teen center, right on Cleveland
Avenue, and the teen center had
closed and so there were more
concerns about—there’s nothing
for our young people to do
outside of school. So, there were
sort of a lot of different things
that were going on that made
me more interested in what was
happening with our schools and
teens.”
QUOTE [ 503- 14C]
139
15
The district also needed assurance from parents and residents to help support passage of the
school levy in order to secure funding necessary for renovaton of the high school building
and other operatonal costs in the public school pre-K to 12 school feeder system (501-62a).
Additonally, the community voiced its concerns for reestablishing a safe and secure learning
environment in all Linden schools. Community advocates on this specifc issue stepped forward
to join with the school improvement efort, building on existng work already underway in
partnership with local law enforcement in Linden (507-54).
With the formaton of the Linden Area Educaton Task Force, the district formalized its
commitment to the community to engage in an open, broad-scale, consensus-based process
to develop a school transformaton plan for Linden (Bush 2007c). The Educaton Task Force
was jointly led by two co-directors, one representng the district and the other representng
the community (501-18; 502-62a). The structure of the Educaton Task Force included creatng
commitees to address specifc elements of the school transformaton plan. The commitees
were organized to include a combinaton of district staf and community members working
side-by-side (506-28a). The process also extended the opportunity for the public to partcipate,
involving Columbus area partners to join in the process, bringing with them a range of educatonal
resources and expertse on educaton reform to advocate for school improvement and the work of
the Linden Area Educaton Task Force (502-36b,62b; Greater Linden News 2009c).
Demonstration of student learning is visible in all K-12 Linden STEM feeder schools, where
projects line the school hallways giving students a sense of pride and accomplishment in their
work. Student projects involve research and exploration of solutions to real-world 21st century
challenges experienced in today’s neighborhoods and communities.
Photo courtesy of The PAST Foundation
“So [the community dialogues] really helped us understand what
we needed to do to meet the needs of the community and build
a school and a feeder pattern that they wanted to be engaged
[with], have their students go to, and be involved with.”
QUOTE [ 506- 136]
140
17
BUILD PARTNERSHIPS AND BROAD-BASED
COMMITMENT TO SUPPORT A COLLABORATIVE
COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS
A high priority for community leaders and the district was to ensure
a robust public engagement process, building upon local networks and other
important existng community resources for acton. Three main avenues for
engaging the Linden public were pursued to atain stakeholder buy-in and create
opportunites for collaboraton across diverse interests:
æ Initate outreach and ongoing communicaton to grow
community engagement and understanding of public
school issues and potental actons and outcomes
æ Seek partnerships and support among community leaders who could help
inform others in the community on progress with the planning process
æ Hold community meetngs in diferent neighborhood venues to
increase outreach and understanding of diverse stakeholder issues
Among the inital group of Educaton Task Force members, there was a deeply held understanding
that the work of the Educaton Task Force would be conducted primarily in the community of
Linden, holding work sessions in local venues as a measure of ensuring access to the process, and
gaining community buy-in (501-28a; 502-36a; 503-52). At the same tme, there was an awareness
among Educaton Task Force members that engaging community members, working side-by-side
with district staf, would also lead to mutual ownership of
a process shared by all partcipants (506-22a). Community
outreach strategies to initate community awareness and
invite broad-based local partcipaton relied on utlizing
existng communicaton channels among local community
organizatons including those in the business sector,
promotng the process through local newsleters, religious
group networks and local media (505-36; Greater Linden
News 2009c, 2009d, 2009h, 2009j, 2008a).
On the issue of local buy-in, community leaders felt that
invitng partcipaton of diverse local organizatons and
community members would result in a plan incorporatng
Linden values and “help to assure the right solutons” would
be sought by those who were most familiar with the needs of Linden families (501-28b; 503-38;
504-22a; 506-22b; 509-84). Taking on a leading role, St. Stephen’s Community House, providing
“And so I said let’s move forward,
let’s look at it, what does it
do? Let’s ask the community.
We then did the community
conversations, which we
knew— we all said that in order
to do any of this, it was going
to take parents, teachers and
everybody.”
QUOTE [ 501- 20]
141
18
services to Linden area families since 1965 (St. Stephen’s Community House 2013), helped convey
an intent to conduct a process that would remain local, and directly involve partcipaton of
community leaders in reaching decisions on formal educaton policy for Linden. As co-director
of the Educaton Task Force, the community had confdence that St. Stephen’s would help focus
on priority issues faced by the community, while at the same tme transforming frustraton and
high emotons held by the community through engaging in a proactve strategy for improving the
quality of educaton for students in Linden (501-28b; Greater Linden News 2009i).
Local leaders also recognized the importance of partcipaton by educators and others interested in
STEM educaton from the greater Columbus area who also stepped forward to partner in the efort.
However, there were inital concerns as to their role, as community members voiced their views
that leadership of the process had to be taken up by Linden organizatons, not by groups from
outside the community (502-36b). As understanding grew among Educaton Task Force members
of a deep sense of community pride (502-76), and of the community view that revitalizing the
schools was a path to revitalizing the community as a whole (502-28b), the process shifed to a
true “reciprocal partnership” in which “the community felt they had a genuine say” (508-63,79).
“It’s been an ongoing community process, that the ownership of it has
continued to be the community. That when things were diffcult, and there’s
been rough, rough edges with it, that the community didn’t abandon the
project and the district didn’t abandon the project. And, that says a lot for
both. I mean, you know it’s—they stuck with it, and continued to stick with it.”
QUOTE [ 504- 148]
In 2008 and 2009, Linden area high school students participated in “STEM in the Linden
Area” (STEM LA), organized by the Greater Linden Development Corporation. STEM
LA offered students paid summer internships to work at local businesses. The project was
sponsored by partner organizations of the Linden Area Education Task Force.
Photo courtesy of The PAST Foundation
142
19
FACILITATE STAKEHOLDER ACTION FOR
SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION
Community sentiment regarding a plan for transforming the public
schools involved the idea that school transformaton was integral to an overall
long-term plan for revitalizing the community as a whole. Their views expressed
a set of four important aspects of school transformaton and broadly held
community values and goals:
æ School improvement is transformatve for the community as a whole
æ Retaining community identty thru revitalizing the
schools is a multgeneratonal, broad-based goal
æ School renovaton can also provide economic benefts
to the community, opening up opportunites to contract
local businesses and hire local workers
æ Building on the existng capacity of community
organizatons to collaborate to achieve efectve outcomes
ofers a way to meet real community needs
Recogniton of the fundamental connectons between improving the quality of educaton and
community viability allowed for the process to unfold with understanding and respect from all
partcipants. This led to designing a strategy addressing interrelated issues of vital importance
to the community. Inherent to the community’s goals for school improvement was a sense of
restoring a pride of community, and of building a new vision for Linden in which students could
identfy with a long traditon of past academic success experienced by community members,
many of whom are alumni of Linden-McKinley High School
(502-28b; 505-34; 506-28b; Greater Linden News 1999a,
1999b, 1999c). Additonally, there was growing sentment
expressed in the community that schools should be
reestablished as the “center of the community” (504-30).
As these issues became more clearly defned, Educaton
Task Force members atempted to creatvely align
these broad goals for community revitalizaton with the
community’s focus on improving opportunites for students,
while also conductng the central task of producing a
rigorous evaluaton of the academic optons for school
transformaton for Linden (502-26; 506-22b).
“The ‘Engagement Committee’
[of the Linden Area Education
Task Force] was a combination,
again, of district personnel and
community folks. The focus was
on re-establishing the school as
the center of the community, and
re-establishing the pride that
was in Linden-McKinley [high
school].”
QUOTE [ 501- 20]
143
20
A strategy to grow more broad-based interest in the
school transformaton efort was directed toward a
diverse set of Linden stakeholders. A primary target
of this efort was intended to build awareness of the
potental for improving the economic viability of Linden
(501-40). Launching a campaign called “Learning in
Linden,” a two-fold propositon was put into acton: frst
to convey informaton about the school transformaton
plan and gain support from parents to enroll their
children in Linden schools. Linked to that was a secondary
goal to promote the idea of the potental benefts for
the business community. The later message concerned
the importance of a strong educatonal program that would atract families to Linden, allaying
lingering fears that school closures and/or low performing schools would lead to fewer families
moving to Linden, and fewer families to buy goods and services from local Linden businesses
(501-92; Greater Linden News 2009c, 2009d, 2007a, 2007d).
A related aspect of raising community awareness was tackled by the Greater Linden
Development Corporaton (GLDC) in recognizing the potental impacts of low-performing
schools for future growth and development in Linden (503-16). Opening up their community
newsleter to exploring issues of school improvement, the GLDC newsleter, “The Greater
Linden News,” provided a contnuous stream of informaton as the plan progressed toward
consensus (Greater Linden News 2009g, 2009h, 2008a). The GLDC also worked in partnership
with the Educaton Task Force to inform the community about the potental for transforming
Linden schools to a 21st century learning environment through an integrated program of
science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) and transdisciplinary problem-based learned
(T-PBL). Once people understood STEM, acceptance began to take hold, and “it was like a
ground swell,” and people felt convinced they wanted STEM educaton for their students as a
primary directon to preparing them for the jobs of the future (502-26b; 503-26; Greater Linden
News 2009d).
Essental to this efort was the process of conveying to parents and residents what STEM ofers
and why it was the right decision for Linden (503-22; 505-87; 509-106). Additonally, parents
wanted assurance from the district that as the frst school feeder system to transiton to STEM
educaton, the process would be fully supported through the transformaton to successful
outcomes (505-56; 508-51). One community member commented that the frst tme they
had encountered the term “STEM” and learned that Linden was being considered for STEM
educaton, was through the GLDC newsleter distributed to every household in Linden (505-50).
Gaining community support for the levy to fund school renovaton also opened up a signifcant
set of related issues voiced by the community involving the prospect of constructon contracts
and assurances that consideraton would be given to hiring local businesses and workers (501-
76). Bringing local constructon companies to the table and reaching out to local unions led to
a series of important outcomes, including jointly sponsored local job fairs ofering job training
and formalizing contractor bidding opportunites (Greater Linden News 2009b). For Linden,
“I think the biggest outcome
of this whole thing, that I have
seen, is it has opened the door
between school and community
in a way that it had not before.
And again, I think that’s been a
change on both sides, not just
one side.”
QUOTE [ 503- 46A]
144
21
this was as important for gaining community buy-in as the efort for “selectng the new school
curriculum” (501-78a).
At each step of the process, community leaders reached out to diverse stakeholders not
traditonally involved in educaton advocacy. In this strategy, the Educaton Task Force was able
to build on local knowledge and experience, as well as bring local resources to the table to
create a community-based plan for acton. The result was a community engagement process
that resonated deeply in the Linden community, creatng broadly shared expectatons for the
future of the educaton system and success of Linden’s youth (Greater Linden News 2010a,
2009a, 2009d, 2009h).
“From the very frst I was intrigued—I mean, I thought ‘this sounds
great, it sounds like it could really help our community, you know,
could help move our young people into the jobs of the future.’
Everything they presented sounded—to use old-fashioned words—
‘neat’ or ‘cool’. You know, I was excited about it.”
QUOTE [ 503- 26]
(left) Community members with diverse interests and concerns joined together in a process to
identify collaborative actions to support Linden community revitalization strategies. Their
vision for Linden was integral to the plan for assuring that the quality of education in the
public schools would benefit the community as a whole.
(right) Dialogues were held in Linden to give parents, students and other stakeholders the
opportunity to consider the potential benefits of STEM education for the K-12 Linden
schools. The community gatherings were essential to gaining input from the community and
build support for the decision to transition to STEM education as the best path forward for
Linden students.
Photos courtesy of Greater Linden Development Corp
145
23
IMPLEMENT A CONSENSUS-BASED PROCESS
TO EVALUATE SCHOOL TRANSFORMATION TO
STEM EDUCATION
Identifying STEM education as the best plan for Linden required
laying the groundwork toward understanding the benefts of STEM educaton
for students, and building confdence in the district’s ability to implement STEM
across all grade levels in the pre-K to 12 school feeder system. In reaching
consensus for STEM educaton, the Linden experience suggests a series of
essental steps for successful implementaton of school transformaton:
æ Engage community leaders early in the process, providing mechanisms
to acquire informaton and begin an exchange of ideas between the
district and the community to defne issues of concern to stakeholders
æ Conduct a robust process for identfying academic goals and
commonly held propositons for initatng school improvement
æ Provide a clear and consistent message about STEM educaton for the
community, communicatng informaton in diferent venues involving
local level school administrators and educators, including classroom
teachers, who will conduct implementaton of STEM educaton
æ Work with local leaders to develop short-term strategies to expand
opportunites to educate parents, students, and others in the
community about STEM educaton and strategic connectons to
locally relevant academic goals for a 21st century educaton
æ Establish the connecton between STEM educaton and STEM
careers for students and their parents, as well as others
in the community including local business leaders
Laying the groundwork to reach consensus for school transformaton of Linden area schools was
initated in January 2007 and reached conclusion by January of 2009 with approval by the Board
of Educaton for implementng STEM educaton. In the following tmeline (pg. 26), it is notable
that the community response to the January 2007 district meetng led to an immediate plan for
a stakeholder process embodied in a Task Force structure joining educaton leaders with Linden
stakeholders. Within a few weeks of the school district’s frst community meetng in 2007, the
district joined with St. Stephen’s Community House and commited to organizing a Task Force
stakeholder process open to the public. The Educaton Task Force proceeded to assemble the
group of partners including Linden organizatons and community advocates to hold its frst
146
24
meetng within just a few short months, in spring 2007.
Once launched, the Educaton Task Force was able to
complete its mission over an 18-month period, and by
January 2009 proposed recommended actons to the
Columbus City Schools Board of Educaton (501-24).
Working through issue-driven commitees that included
curriculum and instructon, school safety, and school
renovaton design, the Board expressed confdence in
the community process in approving the plan for school
transformaton presented by the Educaton Task Force
(509-36).
Engaging the community in a highly structured and
robust, but ‘user friendly’ process, the district was able to overcome inital fears about
unavoidable proposed changes, and rebuild trust with parents and community leaders.
Additonally, and most important to the community, the outcomes envisioned involved
developing a meaningful plan for acton also contributng to a broader set of goals relevant to
the community as a whole, gaining broad stakeholder endorsement of the plan. The role of
local leaders to nurture a partnering strategy and process that opened the door to exploring
diverse issues that emerged as diferent voices and issues were identfed, lead to forging new
understanding and alliances across community organizatons and associatons.
The necessary tme to identfy local partners, resources and secure funds to support a rigorous
Educaton Task Force efort was conducted on a parallel track with eforts to gain funding for
new curriculum and instructonal training costs (Ohio STEM Learning Network 2008, Greater
Linden News 2008c), including opportunites to apply for
STEM educaton funding from the state of Ohio. On that
front, the district undertook acton to seek educaton
funds, and with passage of House Bill 119 by the Ohio
legislature (Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce 2009),
began grant proposal development to compete for state
STEM funds for Linden (The Columbus Dispatch 2008).
These eforts contnue as the district moves forward with
school transformaton in Linden as well as in two other
urban, pre-K to 12 school feeder systems within the
Columbus City Schools.
Among Linden leaders, gaining support for a successful
school levy to fund the renovatons of the Linden-
McKinley High School building were also essental
to meetng goals for design of the combined middle
school/high school (The Columbus Dispatch 2009; Greater Linden News 2009d, 2009f).
The resources supportng these actons also extended beyond local enttes as the planning
process gained ground. With funding provided by the Natonal Educaton Associaton
(NEA), the community received major assistance through a grant from NEA’s “Closing the
Achievement Gap” Program. With NEA funding, St. Stephen’s and the Columbus Educaton
“So I would have to say the
[school] board was supportive
of the process. And supportive
of the STEM program being
in the Linden community.
They were supportive of the
decisions the community made
and the superintendent’s
recommendations.”
QUOTE [ 509- 36]
“I was always struck with how
interested and excited people
were to do things, so I never
got the sense that this was
something that [the community]
didn’t want to do. … You know,
I got this sense that it was
sort of a Linden pride kind of
thing they were going to do,
in a uniquely Linden style, with
Linden people.”
QUOTE [ 502- 38]
147
25
Associaton (CEA) jointly held a series of substantve, ongoing “community dialogues,” providing
a forum to garner important insights on community needs linking school transformaton
with social, cultural and economic issues fundamental to the well-being of the community
as a whole. The Linden community dialogue design has been recognized by the NEA as a
successful model for community acton ofering a unique view of the importance of community
engagement for implementng STEM educaton on a natonal scale (501-24; 509-102).
“The design process was really a combination of community
folks working alongside district staff, and really putting the
ownership of this process in everyone’s hands.”
QUOTE [ 506- 22A]
“At the end of the day we got the committees together and
came back with a recommendation, presented it to the
board, the school board. The community conversations, I
think, were phenomenal.”
QUOTE [ 501- 24]
(left) The Girls Empowerment Mural (GEM) project, supported by The Women’s Fund of
Central Ohio, provided important opportunities for students to demonstrate critical thinking
as well as skills and talents gained through education as they consider STEM solutions to
community issues.
(right) GEM takes the power of murals out into the elementary schools, as part of a process
of revitalizing the community as a whole, restoring the pride of community, and a spirit of
working together.
Photos courtesy of The PAST Foundation
148
26
TIMELINE TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
149
27
JANUARY 2007—AUGUST 2009
150
29
CONTINUING THE REVITALIZATION PROCESS
THROUGH STEM EDUCATION
Building on the momentum of implementing STEM education, the
community contnues to express support for the ongoing school transformaton to
STEM educaton. In fall 2012, the Linden-McKinley STEM Academy held the ofcial
rededicaton ceremony, invitng the community to join with students, faculty
and administrators in celebratng the completon of the renovaton of the new
middle school/high school facility (Columbus City Schools 2012). One Educaton
Task Force partcipant observed that, “STEM (educaton) has opened doors in
the community that would not have been opened otherwise” (503-62a; Greater
Linden News 2011, 2010b, 2010c, 2010d, 2010e, 2009b, 2009e, 2009k).
The interest in STEM educaton as a shif toward preparing students for 21st century jobs and
careers remains high, and community leaders express a need to contnue to share the success
of the transformaton with the community more broadly. The following observatons and
suggestons refect ideas in response to the queston about the “legacy” of the STEM school
transformaton process for the Linden community. The following comments provide the beneft
of seeing the range of positve changes that are part of the Linden experience including the
potental for contnuing community commitment to the success of Linden schools.
æ Contnue to hold community meetngs to report on progress;
schedule regular, well-advertsed meetngs that people
can plan to atend with advance notce (503-66).
æ Find ways to contnue to convey what STEM educaton is by taking STEM
out of the school and demonstratng it in the community (503-54).
æ Create a model for other Columbus communites, building upon
lessons learned to beneft the district and neighborhoods in ways
that will establish beter relatons between communites and their
public school system (503-46a; 504-148; 506-38; 509-110).
æ This case study has relevance for transforming existng pre-K to 12
school feeder systems in the future, which involves diferent types of
challenges than creatng a new “start-up” STEM school (506-98).
æ The community has seen new investment in the community as a result
of the redesigned school and the transformaton to STEM educaton –
people think it has worked out for the greater beneft of the community
and in building a sense of pride in Linden students (503-50; 506-79).
151
30
æ The process shows the community has faith in its youth
– this is an important message to convey to Linden youth
and will also be true of other communites making the
transformaton to STEM educaton (504-152).
æ Use the “Design Cycle” to support problem-solving generally in
the community, to follow the process of defning the problem to
identfying viable solutons that the community can endorse and
that assures good outcomes – without this process there is “fear
and mistrust” when people do not have a good understanding
of what is changing and why it is changing (509-98).
æ Engage teachers and students early in the process (509-130).
æ Create a system-wide method for community partners to engage
with STEM schools, including maintaining a “coordinator”
positon to facilitate community involvement (503-48b).
æ Teacher training needs to include orientaton to the community, to
gain familiarity with local partners and resources that can connect
students and the school with their community to support STEM
educaton and problem-based learning (e.g. asset mapping); teachers
who are not from the community ofen are uninformed about the local
community and potental ways to build local partnerships (503-50a).
CONCLUSIONS
In considering the essental steps that were put into moton, it is apparent that there were a
series of successful collaboratve actons implemented and supported by diverse partnerships to
reach consensus for STEM educaton. Building stakeholder “buy-in” to a plan for acton involved
an ongoing series of discussions that both identfed problems and sought out solutons for the
unique challenges identfed through a community planning process.
Refectng on the Linden experience, there is value in considering the potental for using the
consensus framework as a “roadmap” for collaboratve acton for school transformaton. In
considering the basic components of stakeholder engagement, the viability of the model
to support a community process conducted in a shorter tmeframe ofers a path for other
communites an efectve strategy for implementng a 21
st
century approach to educaton.
152
31
REFERENCES
Bush, B. (2007a). “City School Board Approves
Closing 2 Elementary Schools,” The Columbus
Dispatch, January 24, p. 3B.
Bush, B. (2007b). “Linden Leaders Walk Out on
School Forum – Critcs Say the District Did
Litle to Deal with the Issues Before Deciding
to Close Buildings,” The Columbus Dispatch,
January 5, p. 3D.
Bush, B. (2007c). “Linmoor Back on Closing List
–Plummetng Enrollment at Middle School Is
Too Much for Columbus Task Force to Ignore,“
The Columbus Dispatch, January 25, p. 1D.
Bush, B. (2007d). “Task-Force Recommendaton
Board: Is Closing 2 Schools Enough?” The
Columbus Dispatch, January 19, p. 1D.
Bush, B. (2007e). “Linmoor Middle Is Next to Close
in Linden Area – School District Already Has
Closed Four Elementaries in Neighborhood,”
The Columbus Dispatch, February 7, p. 3C.
Bush, B. (2006a). “4 More May Close – Declining
Enrollment in City’s Schools Prompts
Recommendaton by Task Force,” The
Columbus Dispatch, December 14, p. 1A.
Bush, B. (2006b). “Schools Come, Go on District
Building Plan,” The Columbus Dispatch,
November 30, p. 1A.
Bush, B. (2006c). “7 Schools on Columbus’ Closing
List,” The Columbus Dispatch, December 7, p.
1D.
The CEA Voice (2007a). “Board to Consider Public
Input on Closings,” January.
The CEA Voice (2007b). “School Closing Plan
Nearing Completon,” January.
Columbus Board of Educaton (2010). “Interim
Vision Card: 2012 and Beyond,” February 1.
Retrieved 1/28/13 from www.columbus.k12.
oh.us.
Columbus City Schools E-News Bulletn (2012).
“Linden-McKinley Dedicaton,” September
7. Retrieved 12/3/12 from htp://www.
columbus.k12.oh.us.
The Columbus Dispatch (2009). “Linden-McKinley
Leading Next Wave,” March 18, archive.
The Columbus Dispatch (2008). “$600,000 Grant
to Aid Changes at Linden-McKinley,” May 12,
archive.
The Columbus Dispatch (2007). “Forum on School
Closings Schedule for Wednesday,” January 8,
p. 3B.
The Columbus Dispatch (2006a). “Another Tough
Decision – Budget Gaps Won’t Allow Columbus
Schools to Adopt Every Plan on Drawing
Board,” February 7, p. 10A.
The Columbus Dispatch (2006b). “Columbus Board
Schedules Meetngs on School Closings,”
December 27, p. 3C.
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce (2009).
“House Bill 119,” in Legislatve Scorecard
2008/2009, p. 1. Retrieved 2/20/2013
from htp://www.uschamber.com/sites/
default/fles/chambers/fles/A%204.3%20
Legislatve%20Scorecard%20Dayton%20
Area%20Chamber.pdf
The Greater Linden News (2011). “School and
Community Partnerships Are Key,” 16:2.
The Greater Linden News (2010a). “Class of 2015 –
They Get It!” 15:1.
The Greater Linden News (2010b). “Elementary
Students Get Excited about Science,” 15:2.
The Greater Linden News (2010c). “Linden Family
Night at COSI,” 15:2.
The Greater Linden News (2010d). “Linden-
McKinley STEM Academy Progresses,” 15:1.
The Greater Linden News (2010e). “LMSA
Ambassadors’’ Club Helps Out at Library,” 15:1.
The Greater Linden News (2009a). “And The
Survey Says… College Is Very Important For
Linden-McKinley Students!” 14:2.
The Greater Linden News (2009b). “Commitee
Seeks to Connect Residents with Constructon
Training and Jobs,” 14:4.
153
32
The Greater Linden News (2009c). “Learning in
Linden,” 14:2.
The Greater Linden News (2009d). “Learning in
Linden Is Changing!” 14:1.
The Greater Linden News (2009e). “Library Ofers
New STEM Homework Center,” 14:2.
The Greater Linden News (2009f). “Linden-
McKinley Building to Get $27 Million Dollar
Makeover: Community Invited to Be Part of
the Redesign,” 14:1.
The Greater Linden News (2009g). “Linden-
McKinley STEM – A Sample Day,” 14:1.
The Greater Linden News (2009h). “Linden-
McKinley’s STEM Program Is a Student’s Path
to College and a Good Career,” 14:2.
The Greater Linden News (2009i). “Linden
Residents Give Feedback to Columbus City
Schools,” 14:1.
The Greater Linden News (2009j). “Local Church
Leaders Lend Support for New Linden-
McKinley STEM School,” 14:2.
The Greater Linden News (2009k). “More
Than 300 Atend Linden STEM Community
Conversaton,” 14:1.
The Greater Linden News (2008a). “Change,” 13:5.
The Greater Linden News (2008b). “Come for
Dinner - Stay for Conversaton,” 13:5.
The Greater Linden News (2008c). “Linden-
McKinley High School to Receive $600,000
STEM Grant,” 13:4.
The Greater Linden News (2007a). “Critcal
Neighborhood Issue - Your Input Needed!!!”
12:2.
The Greater Linden News (2007b). “Linden Schools
Yeah! Or Nay?” 12:2.
The Greater Linden News (2007c). “Linmoor
Middle School Closing,” 12:1.
The Greater Linden News (2007d). “South Linden
Area Commission News and Notes,” 12:2.
The Greater Linden News (2005). “Important
Announcement,” 10:7.
The Greater Linden News (1999a). “How Did
Linden-McKinley High School Develop?”
January.
The Greater Linden News (1999b). “Linden - On
the Rise or Decline? You Be the Judge,” March.
The Greater Linden News (1999c). “Linden
McKinley: World Class School in the Making,”
September.
Ohio STEM Learning Network (2008). “OSLN
Technical Assistance Workshop.” Retrieved
January 22, 2013 from htp://www.osln.org/
latest-news/2008.php.
Richards, J. (2008). “Columbus in Funding Race for
Math/Science School,” October 30, archive.
Sebastan, S. (2008). “$600,000 Grant to Aid
Changes at Linden-McKinley,” The Columbus
Dispatch, March 10, archive. Retrieved
December 3, 2012 from htp://www.kidsohio.
org/2008/05/10/600000-grant-to-aid-changes-
at-linden-mckinley/.
Sebastan, S. (2007). “Novel Idea or ‘Slap in
Face’ – Plan to Eliminate Middle School Gets
Mixed Recepton,” The Columbus Dispatch,
December 20, p. 1B.
St. Stephen’s Community House (2013). “Programs
& History,” in Saint Stephen’s Community
House.org. Retrieved February 28, 2013 from
htp://www.saintstephensch.org/programs/.
154
APPENDICES
HOW THIS REPORT WAS CREATED
The PAST Foundaton Knowledge Capture Program (KC) produced the Linden case study of
school transformaton. The KC research team relies on ethnographic methods to conduct feld
research, working collaboratvely and directly with school faculty, program partners, as well
as community members involved with educaton reform. This ethnographic study focuses on
the analysis of a 2-year period, 2007 through 2009, when the Linden community embarked on
school transformaton of their neighborhood pre-K to 12 public school system.
The Knowledge Capture approach to learning about school transformaton builds upon the
grassroots actons and partcular experiences of stakeholders engaged in community planning
for school transformaton. In this view, we gain insights into “lessons learned” and defne
critcal components of school transformaton integral to efectve outcomes. These insights are
especially important for STEM educaton where community-wide engagement and collaboratve
partnerships form essental elements of successful school transformaton.
The KC team interviewed nine individuals who shared their observatons on the work of
the Linden Area Educaton Task Force. These individuals responded to a set of open-ended
questons designed to explore the community process from diferent perspectves (next page).
The nine interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Additonally, the KC team analyzed
contemporary published informaton from the study tme period drawing from local news
sources reportng on community issues and events associated with the Linden STEM educaton
planning process.
Ethnographic protocols require anonymity of case study partcipants. Therefore, each individual
interviewed for the Linden study was assigned a code number identty. For this case study,
individual code numbers range from 501-509. Code numbers are given within report citatons to
reference specifc partcipant views. The second number in the citaton represents a partcular
response within an interview transcript (e.g., 501-25). Case study citatons provide the reader
with an “insider” perspectve of the situaton as well as the essental actons and components
that form an acton “model” for school transformaton. Insight into the experience of one
community can inform other communites about expectatons and potental strategies as a
roadmap for initatng school transformaton planning and implementaton processes.
The Knowledge Capture Team
at The PAST Foundation
- Monica S. Hunter, Ph.D. (right)
- Maria Green Cohen (middle)
- Meghen Matta (left)
155
34
Linden STEM Educaton Project
Key Informant Interview
August 2012
1. When did you become involved in the community planning process to consider the
public educaton issues including the closure of Linmoor Elementary?
2. What were the main issues that you felt needed to be addressed by the public school
system?
3. What did you think of the idea of developing community input to the public school
district in considering changes to be made in the school system? Were there short-term
decisions regarding neighborhood schools that the community members identfed?
Were there long-term issues that the community identfed for the public school system?
a. If you know, how did the idea of STEM educaton develop as an opton for the
Linden school system?
b. What do you think were the benefts of selectng STEM educaton as an important
change for the Linden schools?
4. What do you think were the disadvantages of selectng STEM educaton for the Linden
schools?
5. What role did you play in the community process conducted by the school district?
a. Were you part of a specifc commitee, or did you play a role in the broad process
that included designing and supportng commitee actons overall?
6. Who were the primary leaders in determining the actons that followed from the
community process?
7. In your view, what were the key outcomes of the process overall?
8. In your view, were there issues concerning the Linden educaton system that were not
addressed thru the process?
a. If so, what has happened in regard to those issues?
9. Is there a legacy to the process in terms of ongoing community engagement with Linden
schools that resulted from the community planning process?
a. Are there other aspects that developed through the community planning process
that contnue to beneft the community?
10. Can you suggest others who should be included in this series of interviews to capture
the diverse range of perspectves on goals and objectves that were identfed during the
community planning process?
11. Was there anything we didn’t discuss that you think important to understand about the
Linden community and the public school process for implementng STEM educaton in
the K-12 system?
156
157
158
159
160
161
ÞAS1 loundaLlon: knowledge CapLure 2012-2013 School ?ear
!"#$ %$$&$' ()*++, -)#.+/
10/30/12 LlS Survey llve onllne Survey MeLhods launch
11/9/12 LlS leeder sysLem
ÞAS1 loundaLlon/ÞAS1 loundaLlon on
slLe, handouLs glven Lo mlsslng S1LM
leaders
11/13/12 LlS LMSA ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe
11/16/12 LlS LMSA ÞAS1 loundaLlon senL survey llnks
11/29/12 LlS leeder sysLem
ÞAS1 loundaLlon posLed survey llnks ln
8asecamp
11/29/12 LlS LMSA
ÞAS1 loundaLlon senL llnks Lo S1LM
leaders
-00$/&.1 %3 4%( (5'6$7 !$0,+78$/# ()*$&5,$
Llnden survey Laken beLween 11/10/12-12/3/12, 1oLal LlS S1LM CoordlnaLors=20,
1oLal S1LM CoordlnaLors parLlclpaLlng ln survey n=10
162
163
ÞAS1 loundaLlon: knowledge CapLure 2012-2013 School ?ear
!"#$ %$$&$' ()*++, -)#.+/
10/26/12 WlS Survey llve onllne Survey MeLhods launch
10/30/12 WlS WesL Plgh ÞAS1 loundaLlon emall llnk Lo Þ8
11/2/12 WlS leeder sysLem ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe
11/13/12 WlS SLarllng ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe
11/27/13 WlS leeder sysLem
ÞAS1 loundaLlon posLed survey llnks ln
8asecamp
12/7/12 WlS leeder sysLem
ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe, ÞAS1
loundaLlon senL llnk Lo absenL S1LM
leader
-00$/&.1 34 5%( (6'7$8 !$0,+89$/# ()*$&6,$
WesL survey Laken beLween 11/9/12-12/17/12, 1oLal WlS S1LM CoordlnaLors and
1CSAs=29, 1oLal S1LM CoordlnaLors and 1CSAs parLlclpaLlng ln survey n=17
164
165

Linden Feeder System STEM Leader Pre-Training Survey


1. How were you named a STEM leader in your school?

 Self-identified
 Named by principal
 If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________

2. How many years of experience have you had as a STEM leader?

___________________________________

3. How comfortable are you in the STEM leadership role?

 I am very comfortable
 I am comfortable
 I am uncomfortable
 I am very uncomfortable
 I don't know yet how I feel about my new role
 If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________

4. How comfortable are you working in teams?

 I am very comfortable
 I am comfortable
 I am uncomfortable
 I am very uncomfortable
 I don't know yet how I feel about teamwork
 I don't have any experience working in teams
 If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________

5. How comfortable are you working with backmaps?

 I am very comfortable
 I am comfortable
 I am uncomfortable
 I am very uncomfortable
 I don't know yet how I feel about working with backmaps
 I don't have any experience working with backmaps
166
 If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________

6. How comfortable are you leading meetings?

 I am very comfortable
 I am comfortable
 I am uncomfortable
 I am very uncomfortable
 I don't know yet how I feel about leading meetings
 If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________

7. How comfortable are you explaining PBL?

 I am very comfortable
 I am comfortable
 I am uncomfortable
 I am very uncomfortable
 I don't know yet how I feel about explaining PBL
 I don't have any experience explaining PBL
 If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________

8. What are the most effective ways of communicating with your teams? Please rate each option numerically from 1 to 5, with
1=most effective; 2=somewhat effective; 3=less effective; 4=not effective; 5=not available and/or not applicable. [NOTE: You
may assign the same number to the different options listed to rank effectiveness.]

Email
____________________________
Telephone
____________________________
Basecamp
____________________________
Text or twitter
____________________________
In-person [informal]
____________________________
Staff meetings
____________________________
Other: please describe
____________________________

9. What are the most effective ways of communicating with others in the building? Please rate each option numerically from 1 to
5, with 1=most effective; 2=somewhat effective; 3=less effective; 4=not effective; 5=not available and/or not
applicable. [NOTE: You may assign the same number to the different options listed to rank effectiveness.]

Email
____________________________
Telephone
____________________________
Basecamp
____________________________
Text or twitter
____________________________
In-person [informal]
____________________________
Staff meetings
____________________________
Other: please describe
____________________________

10. What are your top three priorities for STEM implementation in the coming year in your school? [Please describe each in 1 to 5
sentences.]
167



1
____________________________
2
____________________________
3
____________________________

11. What do you anticipate to be the top three challenges to STEM implementation in the coming year in your school? [Please
describe each in 3 to 5 sentences.]



1
____________________________
2
____________________________
3
____________________________

12. Please rate each of the following in terms of importance for successful STEM implementation at your school, with 1=very
important; 2=important; 3=somewhat important; 4=not important [NOTE: You may assign the same number to the different
areas listed to rank level of importance.]

Principal and leadership
____________________________
Effective collaboration in teams
____________________________
Consistent and clear communication
____________________________
Increasing parent involvement at the classroom level
____________________________
Building new partnerships in the community
____________________________

13. Please describe up to three areas where you feel you need additional training.

___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
168

West Feeder System STEM Leader Pre-Training Survey
 
 
 1. How were you named a STEM leader in your school? 
 
q Self-identified
q Named by principal
q If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________
 
 2. How many years of experience have you had as a STEM leader?
 
___________________________________
 
 3. How comfortable are you in the STEM leadership role? 
 
q I am very comfortable
q I am comfortable
q I am uncomfortable
q I am very uncomfortable
q I don't know yet how I feel about my new role
q If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________
 
 4. How comfortable are you working in teams? 
 
q I am very comfortable
q I am comfortable
q I am uncomfortable
q I am very uncomfortable
q I don't know yet how I feel about teamwork
q I don't have any experience working in teams
q If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________
 
 5. How comfortable are you working with backmaps?
 
q I am very comfortable
q I am comfortable
q I am uncomfortable
q I am very uncomfortable
q I don't know yet how I feel about working with backmaps
q I don't have any experience working with backmaps
169
q If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________
 
 6. How comfortable are you leading meetings? 
 
q I am very comfortable
q I am comfortable
q I am uncomfortable
q I am very uncomfortable
q I don't know yet how I feel about leading meetings
q If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________
 
 7. How comfortable are you explaining PBL? 
 
q I am very comfortable
q I am comfortable
q I am uncomfortable
q I am very uncomfortable
q I don't know yet how I feel about explaining PBL
q I don't have any experience explaining PBL
q If other, please describe
___________________________________
___________________________________
 
 8. What are the most effective ways of communicating with your teams? Please rate each option numerically from 1 to 5, with
1=most effective; 2=somewhat effective; 3=less effective; 4=not effective; 5=not available and/or not applicable. [NOTE: You
may assign the same number to the different options listed to rank effectiveness.]
 
Email
____________________________
Telephone
____________________________
Basecamp
____________________________
Text or twitter
____________________________
In-person [informal]
____________________________
Staff meetings
____________________________
Other: please describe
____________________________
 
 9. What are the most effective ways of communicating with others in the building?  Please rate each option numerically from 1 to
5, with 1=most effective; 2=somewhat effective; 3=less effective; 4=not effective; 5=not available and/or not
applicable.  [NOTE: You may assign the same number to the different options listed to rank effectiveness.]
 
Email
____________________________
Telephone
____________________________
Basecamp
____________________________
Text or twitter
____________________________
In-person [informal]
____________________________
Staff meetings
____________________________
Other: please describe
____________________________
 
 10. What are your top three priorities for STEM implementation in the coming year in your school?  [Please describe each in 1 to 5
sentences.]
170


 
1
____________________________
2
____________________________
3
____________________________
 
 11. What do you anticipate to be the top three challenges to STEM implementation in the coming year in your school?  [Please
describe each in 3 to 5 sentences.]


 
1
____________________________
2
____________________________
3
____________________________
 
 12. Please rate each of the following in terms of importance for successful STEM implementation at your school, with 1=very
important; 2=important; 3=somewhat important; 4=not important [NOTE: You may assign the same number to the different
areas listed to rank level of importance.]
 
Principal and leadership
____________________________
Effective collaboration in teams
____________________________
Consistent and clear communication
____________________________
Increasing parent involvement at the classroom level
____________________________
Building new partnerships in the community
____________________________
 
 13. Please describe up to three areas where you feel you need additional training.
 
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
171
172
ÞAS1 loundaLlon: knowledge CapLure 2012-2013 School ?ear
!"#$ %$$&$' ()*++, -)#.+/
10/29/12 AlS Survey llve onllne Survey MeLhods launch
10/30/12 AlS Plgh School ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe
2/23/13 AlS Mlddle School ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe
3/7/13 AlS LlemenLary School ÞAS1 loundaLlon on slLe
-00$/&.1 34 -%( (5'6$7 !$0,+78$/# ()*$&5,$
Columbus AfrlcenLrlc Larly College survey Laken beLween 10/30/12-3/7/13, 1oLal AlS
1eachers parLlclpaLlng ln Þrofesslonal uevelopmenL=29, 1oLal AlS parLlclpaLlng ln
survey n=37
173
174
APPENDIX J
2012-2013 Knowl edge Capture PreK-12 Teacher Survey Anal ysi s
A total of (69) surveys were completed by CCS teachers during the academic year 2012-2013.
This included STEM Leaders/Coordinators (n=27) in the Linden and West feeder systems (LFS
and WFS) to gather input from first-, second- and third-year STEM Leaders to prioritize training
needs for the 2012-2013 PD program. Additionally, (37) Africentric K-12 (AFS) teachers were
invited to complete a pre-training survey. The pre-training surveys provide baseline data on the
initial perceptions and expectations about STEM TPBL for K-12 teachers initiating the shift to
STEM TPBL (in this context, considered to be “Pre-Year 1”).
Use of surveys has proven an effective and efficient tool to provide baseline data for assessing
CCS pre-training issues identified by teachers at the start of training for the academic year,
informing PD design for initial (Year 1) transition to STEM TPBL education, as well as for those
who are entering their second or third year of PD. In this approach KC data is used primarily to
define the priorities to be incorporated in the PD design for the specific upcoming academic
year.
The survey data included in Appendix J present teacher and STEM Leader survey responses to
the following two questions:
• What are your top three priorities for 2012-2013 for successful STEM implementation in
your school? (Appendix J: Table 1)
• What do you anticipate will be your top three challenges to STEM implementation in
your school? (Appendix J: Table 2)
Additionally, STEM Leaders were asked the following question:
• What are three areas of additional training that you feel you need to support STEM
implementation in 2012-2013? (Appendix J: Table 3)
Survey analysis produced two types of comparative data: 1) viewed as Main Themes/Sub-
Themes, specific teacher issues are considered informative and strategic for addressing
particular concerns as well as goals identified by teachers in regard to their PD for the
upcoming academic year; and, 2) presented in bar chart format by Main Theme, each feeder
system is shown on a scale where the total number of issues identified shows more generally
how the Pre-Y1, Y2, and Y3 compare across Main Themes. The following provides a brief
explanation of the key differences and is organized by the three school essentials: Instructional
Strategies, Cultural Strategies, and Delivery System.
Top Pri ori ti es for I mpl ementi ng STEM TPBL ( Appendi x J: Tabl e 1)
Appendix J: Figure 1A, INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
Two main themes, “Development of STEM TPBL Teacher Skills,” and “Student Engagement,”
are of highest interest in survey responses. Note that in both areas, AFS had the most number
of survey responses concerning these issues.
175

Appendix J: Figure 1B, CULTURAL STRATEGIES
One area of concern, “Teacher Buy-in,” is of equal interest across feeder systems (Pre-Y1, Y2,
Y3) and is consistent with focus group data, where teachers expressed a range of views on the
importance of gaining teacher buy-in, including holding teachers accountable over time for
making the transition to STEM TPBL as part of a successful strategy for school success. AFS
(Pre-Y1) also viewed developing “Student Habits,” as another area of interest in terms of
modeling behavior for academic success.
Appendix J: Figure 1C, DELIVERY SYSTEM
Issues associated with building-wide implementation were of interest to the Pre-Y1 and Y2
teachers. Only the Y3 teachers identified their interest in “use of data to drive curriculum
design,” showing that they have advanced their classroom skills to integrate use of data in
designing modifications in their planning for class work.
Top Chal l enges i n Maki ng the Shi ft to TPBL ( Appendi x J: Tabl e 2)
Appendix J: Figure 2A, INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
Consistent with “Top Priorities,” (see Appendix J: Figure 1A), teachers were most concerned
with developing new STEM TPBL skills, with the Pre-Y1 school leading with the most number of
specific issues identified, and Y2 and Y3 teachers continuing to note challenges associated with
gaining new STEM TPBL skills. Again, as in “Top Priorities,” (see Appendix J: Figure 1A)
challenges associated with gaining student engagement were also identified by teachers in
their survey responses, including issues related to working with student expectations for STEM
learning, fostering student buy-in, and allowing students to drive problem development.
Appendix J: Figure 2B, CULTURAL STRATEGIES
Two areas of concern are consistent with focus group data. First, “Teacher Buy-In”
incorporates many facets of the transition process that teachers view as key to their own
success in working collaboratively with other teachers, relying on others to coordinate project
work including willingness/lack of willingness on the part of other teachers to shift to TPBL in
the classroom. Second, teachers identified a series of issues that relate to student behavior
including concern about the challenge of facilitating student teamwork/collaboration. Areas
that are perceived to present a challenge outside the teacher’s control include student mobility
(enrollment) and attendance. While these are not a direct factor linked to the shift to STEM
TPBL, they are noted as continuous issues teachers face in advancing student learning.
Appendix J: Figure 2C, DELIVERY SYSTEM
The main area of concern involves the general sense that there is not enough time for planning
and coordination, insufficient classroom space, and lack of adequate materials and supplies to
make the shift to STEM TPBL. Only the Y2 schools indicated a “lack of access to technology”
as an issue of concern. All three feeder systems indicated the necessity of having “support
from the building leader” as an issue of concern.

176
Addi ti onal Trai ni ng for Teachers who are STEM Leaders ( Appendi x J: Tabl e 3)
Appendix J: Figure 3A INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
Both Y2 and Y3 STEM Leaders identified their focus on gaining skills in leading teachers in their
schools in continuing to advance development of new STEM TPBL teacher skills. Also note that
the Y2 and Y3 view of other areas for additional training are identified by a single sub-theme
and are of equal interest across the remaining three areas, “transdisciplinary work,” “student
engagement,” and “student assessments.”
Appendix J: Figure 3B CULTURAL STRATEGIES
First, “Teacher Buy-in,” is noted as an area where STEM Leaders feel they want to build their
skills in strategies that support “buy-in” and increasing “teacher comfort level” with
implementation. STEM Leaders are also interested in gaining new skills in building parent and
community involvement in the STEM learning enterprise.
Appendix J: Figure 3C DELIVERY SYSTEM
In this area of additional training, the Y2 STEM Leaders identified nearly twice as many aspects
of their training as the Y3 group for the 2012-2013 academic year. It is evident in looking
across the set as a whole that STEM Leaders are taking on coordination of new areas of work in
leading other teachers, including organizing more effective meetings and common planning
time, identifying resources for projects including identifying other schools that are also
transitioning to STEM as a resource, and in facilitating district support for their schools. Two
areas shared by the Y2 and Y3 STEM Leaders are directed at identifying “best practices,” and
“visiting other STEM schools,” both of which reveal an interest in building capacity for assisting
teachers with creative project development.

177
!"#
%&'()*
+"#
%&',)*
-"#
%&',.*
!"#$%&'("#)"* ,-./ -012 !
!"#$%&'("#)"* 3(45 6(77)"* !
0%$7(%)"* &'8#$"'& 9:% '$&')"* !
-$(4;$% 4%$(')<)'=
! !
>)&7?(=)"* &'8#$"' @:%5
! !
>$<$?:7)"* %)*:%:8& ("# %$?$<("' 7%:3?$6& ! ! !
A"4:%7:%(')"* ,'("#(%#&BC:66:" C:%$
! ! !
,4;$#8?)"* #()?=B@$$5?=BD8(%'$%?= )"4?8&):" :9 ,-./ ! ! !
A"'$*%(')"* '$4;":?:*= ! ! !
A"'$*%(')"* 4:"'$"' (%$(& )"4?8#)"* ."4:%$ !
C:""$4')"* 4:"'$"' (%$(& ! !
E&&)&')"* &'8#$"'& ': #$9)"$ *:(?& !
A67%:<)"* ?$(%")"* &5)??& !
,'8#$"'& @:%5)"* 4:??(3:%(')<$?= !
,;)9')"* &'8#$"' $F7$4'('):"& ': ,-./ -012 (77%:(4; !
E@(%$"$&& :9 4:??$*$B4(%$$% %$(#)"$&&
!
,'8#$"' 8&$ :9 #$&)*" 4=4?$ ! !
G:&'$%)"* &'8#$"' )"#$7$"#$"4$ ("# :@"$%&;)7 :9
?$(%")"*
! ! !
18)?#)"* 4%)')4(? ';)"5$%& ! ! !
#/012&/ !3323342&/ /$(&8%)"* %$&8?'& :9 ,-./ -012 @)'; %83%)4& ! !
-$(4;$% 4:"9)#$"4$ ("# 9:??:@ ';%:8*; ! ! !
-$(4;$% 4:??(3:%('):"B'$(6@:%5 ! ! !
-$(4;$% 4:69:%' ?$<$? @)'; #$&)*" 4=4?$ ("# -012 ! ! !
/:#$? 7%)"4)7?$& :9 3$;(<):% ("# (4(#$6)4 $99:%' !
."*(*)"* &'8#$"'& )" (#:7')"* ;(3)'& ! !
#/012&/ 526789:; E##%$&&)"* 3$;(<):%(? )&&8$& !
<7;2&/ = >:440&9/?
A"<:?<)"* 7(%$"'& ("# 4:668")'= )" &4;::? ("#
4?(&&%::6
!
A"4:%7:%(')"* ;("#&H:" &'8#$"' @:%5 !
,$$ $F(67?$& :9 ,-./ -012
!
18)?#)"*H@)#$ &'(99 38=H)" ': ,-./ *:(?& !
0> 9:% (?? &'(99 38)?#)"*H@)#$ ! !
/:#$?)"* -012
!
!&$ #('( ': #%)<$ 48%%)48?86 #$&)*" !
I)&)' :';$% ,-./ &4;::?& !
,;(%$ 1$&' 0%(4')4$& @)'; :';$% &4;::?& !
E44$&& ': $99$4')<$ '$4;":?:*=
!
G8"#)"*
!
E44$&& ': 6('$%)(?& ("# &877?)$&
! !
!149&93/;7/982
#0@@:;/
,877:%' 9%:6 38)?#)"* ?$(#$%
!
(

#
A
6
:
:
B

C
3
3
2
&
/
9
7
B
3
D79& E62423 #0FG/62423
<;2GH,
#A6::B3
HI
#A6::B3
H(
#A6::B3
APPENDIX J: TABLE 1 Teacher Identified Priorities for STEM Success
CCS PreK-12 STEM Leader/Teacher 2012-13 Survey (n=total respondents)
#/012&/ C&J7J242&/
K
2
B
9
8
2
;
?

#
?
3
/
2
4

L
K
#
MN4@B242&/7/9:&
>
0
B
/
0
;
7
B

#
/
;
7
/
2
J
9
2
3

L
>
#
M
E27A62; 50?G9&
#A6::B O7F9/3
K282B:@42&/ :P
#ECD E<5- E27A62;
#Q9BB3
E;7&3193A9@B9&7;?
+:;Q
>:BB7F:;7/2 R9/6
S/62; #ECD #A6::B3
T23:0;A23 = E942
N
&
3
/
;
0
A
/
9
:
&
7
B

#
/
;
7
/
2
J
9
2
3

L
N
#
M
178
"#$%$& '()*+#$%$&
,-$*./
012345
.6
012/45
.3
012/75
!"#$%&'("#)"* ,-./ -012 !
!"#$%&'("#)"* 3(45 6(77)"* !
0%$7(%)"* &'8#$"'& 9:% '$&')"* !
-$(4;$% 4%$(')<)'= ! !
>)&7?(=)"* &'8#$"' @:%5 ! !
>$<$?:7)"* %)*:%:8& ("# %$?$<("' 7%:3?$6& ! ! !
A"4:%7:%(')"* ,'("#(%#&BC:66:" C:%$ ! ! !
,4;$#8?)"* #()?=B@$$5?=BD8(%'$%?= )"4?8&):" :9 ,-./ ! ! !
A"'$*%(')"* '$4;":?:*= ! ! !
A"'$*%(')"* 4:"'$"' (%$(& )"4?8#)"* ."4:%$ !
C:""$4')"* 4:"'$"' (%$(& ! !
E&&)&')"* &'8#$"'& ': #$9)"$ *:(?& !
A67%:<)"* ?$(%")"* &5)??& !
,'8#$"'& @:%5)"* 4:??(3:%(')<$?= !
,;)9')"* &'8#$"' $F7$4'('):"& ': ,-./ -012 (77%:(4; !
E@(%$"$&& :9 4:??$*$B4(%$$% %$(#)"$&& !
,'8#$"' 8&$ :9 #$&)*" 4=4?$ ! !
G:&'$%)"* &'8#$"' )"#$7$"#$"4$ ("# :@"$%&;)7 :9
?$(%")"*
! ! !
18)?#)"* 4%)')4(? ';)"5$%& ! ! !
'+(8$1+
9&&$&&%$1+
/$(&8%)"* %$&8?'& :9 ,-./ -012 @)'; %83%)4& ! !
APPENDIX J: TABLE 1A INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES (IS)
What are your Top 3 Priorities for implementing STEM TPBL in your classroom?
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
:$;$<=>%$1+ =?
'"@A ",BC "$DE#$-
'FG<<&
H1+$-8G&EG><G1D-I
J=-F
'+(8$1+
@1KDK$%$1+
H
L
'
"
M
N
O
"
H
P
L
9
C

'
"
M
9
"
@
Q
H
@
'
J
#
D
+

D
-
$

I
=
(
-

"
=
>

3

,
-
G
=
-
G
+
G
$
&

?
=
-

G
%
>
<
$
%
$
1
+
G
1
K

'
"
@
A

"
,
B
C

G
1

I
=
(
-

E
<
D
&
&
-
=
=
%
R
2)"#$" G$$#$% ,=&'$6 HIJK
L$&' G$$#$% ,=&'$6 HIMK
E9%)4$"'%)4 H0%$NIOK
P
M
Q
R
S
OP
>$<$?:76$"' :9
,-./ -021
-$(4;$% ,5)??&
A"'$%#)&4)7?)"(%=
L:%5
,'8#$"'
."*(*$6$"' ,'8#$"'
E&&$&&6$"'
S
/
6
/
S
6
T
/
U
7
4
7
'
(
)
*
+
#
$
%
$
&

)
I

V
$
$
8
$
-

'
I
&
+
$
%


>$<$?:76$"' :9 ,-./ -021
-$(4;$% ,5)??&
A"'$%#)&4)7?)"(%= L:%5 ,'8#$"' ."*(*$6$"' ,'8#$"' E&&$&&6$"'
2)"#$" G$$#$% ,=&'$6 HIJK T O M O
L$&' G$$#$% ,=&'$6 HIMK T M Q O
E9%)4$"'%)4 H0%$NIOK U P V P
9,,@L:HW XY VGK /9 "=> ,-G=-GZ$&
H1&+-(EZ=1D< '+-D+$KG$&

179
1eacher confldence and follow Lhrough ! ! !
1eacher collaboraLlon/Leamwork ! ! !
1eacher comforL level wlLh deslgn cycle and
1Þ8L
! ! !
Model prlnclples of behavlor and academlc
efforL
!
Lngaglng sLudenLs ln adopLlng hablLs ! !
!"#$%&"
(%)*+,-.
Addresslng behavloral lssues !
/*.%&" 0
1-22#&,"3
lnvolvlng parenLs and communlLy ln school and
classroom
!
APPENDIX J: TABLE 1B CULTURAL STRATEGIES (CS)
What are your Top 3 Priorities for implementing STEM TPBL in your classroom?
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
4)%2%5 !#67")%2%5
/.%789
:&;<=>
8?
:&;9=>
8<
:&;9@>
!A)--B C*6,"5
1
D
E
4
D
F
G
E

!
4
F
G
4
H
I
J
H
!

K
)
*
"

*
.
%

3
-
#
.

4
-
L

<

/
.
,
-
.
,
"
,
%
5

M
-
.

,
2
L
B
%
2
%
&
"
,
&
N

!
4
H
O

4
/
(
E

,
&

3
-
#
.

A
B
*
5
5
.
-
-
2
P
4%*A)%. (#37,&
Llnden leeder SysLem (?3)
WesL leeder SysLem (?2)
AfrlcenLrlc (Þre-?1)
0
0.3
1
1.3
2
2.3
3
1eacher 8uy-
ln
School PablLs
SLudenL
8ehavlor ÞarenL &
CommunlLy
lnvolvemenL
<
9
@
@
<
@
@
9
<
?
9
@
!
#
6
7
"
)
%
2
%
5

6
3

Q
%
%
$
%
.

!
3
5
"
%
2


1eacher 8uy-ln School PablLs SLudenL 8ehavlor
ÞarenL &
CommunlLy
lnvolvemenL
Llnden leeder SysLem (?3) 3 1 0 0
WesL leeder SysLem (?2) 3 0 0 1
AfrlcenLrlc (Þre-?1) 3 2 1 0
G//HRSJT UV Q,N 9( 4-L /.,-.,W%5
1#B"#.*B !".*"%N,%5
180
"#$%$& '()*+#$%$&
,-$*./
012345
.6
012/45
.3
012/75
lncorporaLlng hands-on sLudenL work !
See examples of S1LM 1Þ8L !
8ulldlng-wlde sLaff buy-ln !
Þu for all sLaff bulldlng-wlde ! !
Modellng 1Þ8L !
use daLa Lo drlve currlculum deslgn !
vlslL oLher S1LM schools !
Share 8esL ÞracLlces wlLh oLher schools !
Access Lo effecLlve Lechnology !
lundlng !
Access Lo maLerlals and supplles ! !
89%:1:&+-;+:<$
'(==>-+
SupporL from bulldlng leader !
?$&>(-@$& A":%$
B
C
D
E
F
C
?
.

'
.
'
"
C
G

H
#
;
+

;
-
$

I
>
(
-

"
>
=

3

,
-
:
>
-
:
+
:
$
&

J
>
-

:
%
=
K
$
%
$
1
+
:
1
L

'
"
C
G

"
,
M
D

:
1

I
>
(
-

@
K
;
&
&
-
>
>
%
N
APPENDIX J: TABLE 1C DELIVERY SYSTEM (DS)
What are your Top 3 Priorities for implementing STEM TPBL in your classroom?
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
E%=K$%$1+;+:>1
O>KK;)>-;+$ P:+#
>+#$- '"CG
'@#>>K&
Llnden leeder SysLem (?3)
WesL leeder SysLem (?2)
AfrlcenLrlc (Þre-?1)
0
0.3
1
1.3
2
2.3
3
6
/
7
7
6
7
6
7
3
/
6
/
'
(
)
*
+
#
$
%
$
&

)
I

Q
$
$
9
$
-

'
I
&
+
$
%


lmplemenLauon
CollaboraLe wlLh
CLher S1LM
Schools
8esources & 1lme
AdmlnlsLrauve
SupporL
Llnden leeder SysLem (?3) 2 1 0 0
WesL leeder SysLem (?2) 2 0 2 0
AfrlcenLrlc (Þre-?1) 3 1 2 1
8,,CRBES TU Q:L /O ">= ,-:>-:V$&
B$K:<$-I 'I&+$%
181

!"#
%&'()*
+"#
%&',)*
-"#
%&',.*
ueveloplng rlgorous and relevanL problems
!
undersLandlng S1LM 1Þ8L ! !
ShlfLlng from paclng/currlculum gulde
! !
Þreparlng sLudenLs for LesLlng
! !
undersLandlng back mapplng
! !
lncorporaLlng SLandards/Common Core
! ! !
ulsplaylng sLudenL work !
/01&234254674&108 +90: ConnecLlng conLenL areas !
ShlfLlng sLudenL expecLaLlons Lo S1LM 1Þ8L approach !
MoLlvaLlon and follow Lhrough
!
losLerlng sLudenL buy-ln
! ! !
Lncouraglng sLudenL-led ldeas ln deflnlng problems
!
#;<3=&; !22=22>=&; Measurlng resulLs of S1LM 1Þ8L !
Wllllngness Lo LranslLlon Lo S1LM 1Þ8L ! !
1eacher collaboraLlon/Leamwork
! ! !
ueveloplng Leacher comforL level
! ! !
MoLlvaLlon and follow Lhrough
! ! !
8eslsLance Lo S1LM 1Þ8L professlonal developmenL ! !
Lack of respecL for oLhers' work
!
laclllLaLe collaboraLlve Leamwork ! !
Addresslng behavloral lssues
! !
lnconslsLenL dlsclpllne LhroughouL bulldlng/classroom
!
SLudenLs below grade-level skllls
! !
ALLendance ! ! !
ueallng wlLh sLudenL moblllLy !
SLudenLs wlLh low skllls, lncludlng pre-k
!
?10=&; @ A9>><&4;8 Lack of parenL lnvolvemenL
!
Lack of adequaLe preparaLlon/coordlnaLlon of
lmplemenLaLlon
!
Lvldence LhaL 1Þ8L works and ls supporLed broadly by
educaLlonal communlLy
!
ShlfLlng from dlrecL lnsLrucLlon Lo S1LM 1Þ8L approach ! !
8ulldlng-wlde sLaff buy-ln Lo S1LM goals
! ! !
ueallng wlLh Leacher moblllLy !
Access Lo maLerlals and supplles
! !
Lack of Llme Lo compleLe all dlsLrlcL lnlLlaLlves ! !
lnadequaLe classroom slze for 1Þ8L
!
1lme Lo work wlLh sLaff Lo assess S1LM progress ln bulldlng !
SLorage space for pro[ecLs !
Access Lo effecLlve Lechnology
! !
lundlng ! !
lnadequaLe common plannlng Llme
! ! !
SupporL from dlsLrlcL
!
Þrlnclpal undersLands learnlng wlll look dlfferenL !
SupporL from bulldlng leader
! ! !
lnconslsLenL schedullng across grade levels
!
!3>4&42;01;4B= #<6690;
C>67=>=&;1;49&
D
=
7
4
B
=
0
8

#
8
2
;
=
>

E
D
#
F
G=29<05=2 @ /4>=
/=15H=0 I<8J4&
A
<
7
;
<
0
1
7

#
;
0
1
;
=
K
4
=
2

E
A
#
F
#;<3=&; I=H1B490
#;<3=&; C22<=2
C
&
2
;
0
<
5
;
4
9
&
1
7

#
;
0
1
;
=
K
4
=
2

E
C
#
F
D=B=796>=&; 9L #/MN
/?I- /=15H=0 #:4772
#;<3=&; M&K1K=>=&;
CCS PreK-12 STEM Leader/Teacher Survey (n=total respondents)
APPENDIX J: TABLE 2 Teacher Identified Challenges
for Successful Transition to STEM TPBL
(

#
5
H
9
9
7

M
2
2
=
&
;
4
1
7
2
N14& /H=>=2 #<OJ/H=>=2
P(
#5H9972
?0=JP,
#5H9972
PQ
#5H9972
182
!"#$#% &'()*"#$#%
+,#)-.
012345
-6
012.45
-3
012.75
!"#"$%&'() +')%+%,- .(/ +"$"#.(0 &+%1$"2- !
3(/"+-0.(/'() 4567 589: ! !
4;'<0'() <+%2 &.='()>=,++'=,$,2 ),'/" ! !
8+"&.+'() -0,/"(0- <%+ 0"-0'() ! !
3(/"+-0.(/'() 1.=? 2.&&'() ! !
@(=%+&%+.0'() 40.(/.+/->A%22%( A%+" ! ! !
!'-&$.B'() -0,/"(0 C%+? !
!,81%9:%;:<=:18,>
?@,A
A%(("=0'() =%(0"(0 .+".- !
4;'<0'() -0,/"(0 "D&"=0.0'%(- 0% 4567 589:
.&&+%.=;
!
7%0'#.0'%( .(/ <%$$%C 0;+%,); !
E%-0"+'() -0,/"(0 1,BF'( ! ! !
6(=%,+.)'() -0,/"(0F$"/ '/".- '( /"<'('() &+%1$"2- !
&*'9#1*
B%%#%%$#1*
7".-,+'() +"-,$0- %< 4567 589: !
APPDENIX J: TABLE 2A INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES (IS)
What are your top 3 Challenges in making the shift to TPBL?
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
C#D#=@<$#1* @E
&!FG !+HI
!#8;"#, &A:==%
&*'9#1*
F1J8J#$#1*
?
"
8
*

8
,
#

>
@
'
,

*
@
<

3

K
"
8
=
=
#
1
J
#
%

:
1

$
8
A
:
1
J

*
"
#

%
"
:
E
*

*
@

!
+
H
I
L


M
N
&
!
O
P
K
!
M
Q
N
B
I

&
!
O
B
!
F
R
M
F
&
:'(/"( E""/"+ 4B-0"2 GHIJ
K"-0 E""/"+ 4B-0"2 GHLJ
M<+'="(0+'= G8+"FHNJ
O
N
L
I
P
Q
R
!"#"$%&2"(0 %<
4567 589: 5".=;"+
4?'$$-
5+.(-/'-='&$'(.+B
K%+? 40,/"(0
6().)"2"(0 40,/"(0
M--"--2"(0-
3
7
6
7
S
7
6
7
T
.
6
.
&
'
(
)
*
"
#
$
#
%

(
>

U
#
#
9
#
,

&
>
%
*
#
$

!"#"$%&2"(0 %< 4567
589: 5".=;"+ 4?'$$-
5+.(-/'-='&$'(.+B K%+? 40,/"(0 6().)"2"(0 40,/"(0 M--"--2"(0-
:'(/"( E""/"+ 4B-0"2 GHIJ I O L O
K"-0 E""/"+ 4B-0"2 GHLJ P O L O
M<+'="(0+'= G8+"FHNJ R N L N
B++FNCMV WX U:J 6B !@< K"8==#1J#%
M1%*,';Y@18= &*,8*#J:#%
183
"#$%$& '()*+#$%$&
,-$*./
012345
.6
012/45
.3
012/75
Wllllngness Lo LranslLlon Lo S1LM 1Þ8L ! !
1eacher collaboraLlon/Leamwork ! ! !
ueveloplng Leacher comforL level ! ! !
MoLlvaLlon and follow Lhrough ! ! !
8eslsLance Lo S1LM 1Þ8L professlonal developmenL ! !
Lack of respecL for oLhers' work !
laclllLaLe collaboraLlve Leamwork ! !
Addresslng behavloral lssues ! !
lnconslsLenL dlsclpllne LhroughouL bulldlng/classroom !
SLudenLs wlLh below grade-level skllls ! !
ALLendance ! ! !
ueallng wlLh sLudenL moblllLy !
SLudenLs wlLh low skllls, lncludlng pre-k !
,8-$1+ 9
:;%%(1<+=
Lack of parenL lnvolvemenL !
APPENDIX J: TABLE 2B CULTURAL STRATEGIES (CS)
What are your top 3 Challenges in making the shift to TPBL?
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
"$8>#$- ?(=*
<1
'+(@$1+
?$#8A<;-
'+(@$1+ B&&($&
C
#
8
+

8
-
$

=
;
(
-

+
;
D

3

:
#
8
E
E
$
1
F
$
&

<
1

%
8
G
<
1
F

+
#
$

&
#
<
H
+

+
;

"
,
?
I
J


:
K
I
"
K
L
M
I

'
"
L
M
"
N
O
B
N
'

Llnden leeder SysLem (?3)
WesL leeder SysLem (?2)
AfrlcenLrlc (Þre-?1)
0
1
2
3
4
3
1eacher 8uy-
ln
SLudenL
8ehavlor
SLudenL lssues
ÞarenL &
CommunlLy
P
3
P
7
3
7
/
7
Q
3
6
/
'
(
)
*
+
#
$
%
$
&

)
=

R
$
$
@
$
-

'
=
&
+
$
%

1eacher 8uy-ln SLudenL 8ehavlor SLudenL lssues
ÞarenL &
CommunlLy
Llnden leeder SysLem (?3) 4 3 4 0
WesL leeder SysLem (?2) 3 0 1 0
AfrlcenLrlc (Þre-?1) 3 3 2 1
M,,NSTBU VW R<F 6? ";D :#8EE$1F$&
:(E+(-8E '+-8+$F<$&
184
!"#$#% '()*+"#$#%
,-#*./
012345
.6
012/45
.3
012/75
!"#$ &' "()*+",) -.)-".",/&01#&&.(/0",/&0 &' /2-3)2)0,",/&0 !
45/()0#) ,6", 789! :&.$; "0( /; ;+--&.,)( <.&"(3= <=
)(+#",/&0"3 #&22+0/,=
!
>6/',/0? '.&2 (/.)#, /0;,.+#,/&0 ,& >74@ 789! "--.&"#6 ! !
9+/3(/0?A:/() ;,"'' <+=A/0 ! ! !
B)"3/0? :/,6 ,)"#6). 2&</3/,= !
C##);; ,& 2",)./"3; "0( ;+--3/); ! !
!"#$ &' ,/2) ,& #&2-3),) "33 (/;,./#, /0/,/",/5); ! !
D0"()*+",) #3";;.&&2 ;/E) '&. 789! !
7/2) ,& :&.$ :/,6 ;,"'' ,& ";;);; >74@ -.&?.);; /0 <+/3(/0? !
>,&."?) ;-"#) '&. -.&F)#,; !
C##);; ,& )'')#,/5) ,)#60&3&?= ! !
G+0(/0? ! !
D0"()*+",) #&22&0 -3"00/0? ,/2) ! ! !
>+--&., '.&2 (/;,./#, !
8./0#/-"3 +0().;,"0(; 3)".0/0? :/33 3&&$ (/'').)0, !
>+--&., '.&2 <+/3(/0? 3)"(). ! ! !
D0#&0;/;,)0, ;#6)(+3/0? "#.&;; ?."() 3)5)3; !
8#%9(-:#% ;
!<$#
=>$<1<%+-?+<@#
'(AA9-+
APPENDIX J: TABLE 2C DELIVERY SYSTEM (DS)
What are your top 3 Challenges in making the shift to TPBL?
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
B$AC#$#1+?+<91
D
E
F
B
G
E
8
.

'
.
'
!
E
H

I
"
?
+

?
-
#

J
9
(
-

+
9
A

3

K
"
?
C
C
#
1
L
#
%

<
1

$
?
M
<
1
L

+
"
#

%
"
<
N
+

+
9

!
,
O
F
P
!/0()0 G))(). >=;,)2 HIJK
L);, G))(). >=;,)2 HIMK
C'./#)0,./# H8.)AINK
O
M
P
Q
R
D2-3)2)0,"S&0
T);&+.#); U
7/2) C(2/0/;,."S5)
>+--&.,
6 3
6
6
4
/
Q
Q
3
'
(
)
*
+
"
#
$
#
%

)
J

R
#
#
>
#
-

'
J
%
+
#
$

D2-3)2)0,"S&0 T);&+.#); U 7/2) C(2/0/;,."S5) >+--&.,
!/0()0 G))(). >=;,)2 HIJK M J M
L);, G))(). >=;,)2 HIMK M V N
C'./#)0,./# H8.)AINK P P J
=,,ESDBT UV R<L 6K !9A K"?CC#1L#%
D#C<@#-J 'J%+#$

185
!"#
%&'()*
+"#
%&'(,*
-.
#/01123
-4 #/01123
!"#$%&'("#)"* ,-./ -012
! !
3$4$567)"* %)*6%68& ("# %$5$4("' 7%695$:&
! !
;"<6%76%(')"* ,'("#(%#&=>6::6" >6%$ ! !
!"#$%&'("#)"* 9(<? :(77)"*
! !
567&3893/9:29&76; !16< >6""$<')"* <6"'$"' (%$(& ! !
#=>8?&= @&A7A?B?&= 18)5#)"* <%)')<(5 '@)"?$%&
! !
#=>8?&= C33?33B?&=
/$(&8%)"* %$&85'& 6A ,-./ -012 B)'@ &@6%' <C<5$
(&&$&&:$"'&=%89%)<&
! !
3$4$567)"* '$(<@$% <6:A6%' 5$4$5
!
,'%('$*)$& '6 A(<)5)'('$ 98CD)" A6% (55 '$(<@$%&
! !
."@("<$ 7(%$"' 7(%')<)7(')6" )" 7%6E$<'& !
.&'(95)&@)"* %$5(')6"&@)7& B)'@ <6::8")'C 7(%'"$%&
!
.&'(95)&@ :6%$ $AA$<')4$ :$$')"*&
!
,$$ *%(#$ 5$4$5 &7$<)A)< $F(:75$&
!
,$$ $F(:75$& 6A ,-./ -012 1$&' 0%(<')<$& ! !
-$(<@$% :6#$5)"* 8&$ 6A ,-./=3$&)*" >C<5$
!
G(<)5)'('$ <655(96%(')6" B)'@ 6'@$% &<@665&
!
H)&)' 6'@$% ,-./ &<@665&
! !
.AA$<')4$ 8&$ 6A <6::6" 75("")"* '):$ !
I9'()")"* %$&68%<$& A6% 7%6E$<'&
!
C8B9&93=67=9D? #>::16= G(<)5)'('$ #)&'%)<' &8776%'
!
E
>
2
=
>
6
7
2

#
=
6
7
=
?
A
9
?
3

F
E
#
G
5?7/0?6 H>;I9&
J
?
2
9
D
?
6
;

#
;
3
=
?
B

F
J
#
G
KB:2?B?&=7=91&
E1227L167=? M9=0 1=0?6
#5@N #/01123
O?31>6/?3 P 59B?
Q76?&= P E1BB>&9=;
K
&
3
=
6
>
/
=
9
1
&
7
2

#
=
6
7
=
?
A
9
?
3

F
K
#
G
J?D?21:B?&= 1R #5@N
5QH+ 5?7/0?6 #<9223
APPENDIX J: TABLE 3 Teacher Identified Additional Training
for STEM Success
CCS PreK-12 STEM Leader 2012-13 Survey (n=total respondents)
4

#
/
0
1
1
2

@
3
3
?
&
=
9
7
2
3
N79& 50?B?3 #>LI50?B?3
186
!"#$#% &'()*"#$#% ,- ./0123 ,4 ./0153
!"#$%&'("#)"* ,-./ -012 ! !
3$4$567)"* %)*6%68& ("# %$5$4("' 7%695$:& ! !
;"<6%76%(')"* ,'("#(%#&=>6::6" >6%$ ! !
>6""$<')"* <6"'$"' (%$(& ! !
!"#$%&'("#)"* 9(<? :(77)"* ! !
!67/%89%:9;<9/76=
>?6@
>6""$<')"* <6"'$"' (%$(& ! !
&*'8#/*
A/B7B#$#/*
18)5#)"* <%)')<(5 '@)"?$%& ! !
&*'8#/*
C%%#%%$#/*
/$(&8%)"* %$&85'& 6A ,-./ -012 B)'@ &@6%' <C<5$
(&&$&&:$"'&=%89%)<&
! !
APPENDIX J: TABLE 3A INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES (IS)
Areas you feel you need Additional Training
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
D#E#<?;$#/* ?F
&!AG !HIJ &@9<<%
C
6
#
7
%

=
?
'

F
#
#
<

=
?
'

/
#
#
8

C
8
8
9
*
9
?
/
7
<

!
6
7
9
/
9
/
B
K
L
&
!
M
N
O
!
K
P
L
C
J

&
!
M
C
!
A
Q
K
A
&
2)"#$" D$$#$% ,C&'$: EFGH
I$&' D$$#$% ,C&'$: EFJH
K
KLM
N
NLM
J
JLM
G
GLM
O
OLM
M
3$4$567:$"' 6A
,-./ -012
-$(<@$% ,?)55&
-%("&#)<)75)"(%C
I6%?
,'8#$"'
."*(*$:$"' ,'8#$"'
P&&$&&:$"'&
R
1
1
1
R
1
1
1
&
'
(
)
*
"
#
$
#
%

(
=

S
#
#
8
#
6

&
=
%
*
#
$

3$4$567:$"' 6A ,-./
-012 -$(<@$% ,?)55&
-%("&#)<)75)"(%C I6%? ,'8#$"' ."*(*$:$"' ,'8#$"' P&&$&&:$"'&
2)"#$" D$$#$% ,C&'$: EFGH M N N N
I$&' D$$#$% ,C&'$: EFJH M N N N
CHHALDKT UV S9B 4C C889W?/7< !679/9/B
K/%*6':W?/7< &*67*#B9#%
187
!"#$#% '()*+"#$#%
,-
./0123
,4
./0153
ueveloplng Leacher comforL level !
SLraLegles Lo faclllLaLe buy-ln for all Leachers ! !
Lnhance parenL parLlclpaLlon ln pro[ecLs !
LsLabllshlng relaLlonshlps wlLh communlLy
parLners
!
APPENDIX J: TABLE 3B CULTURAL STRATEGIES (CS)
Areas you feel you need Additional Training
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
!#67"#8 9(:*
;/
<68#/+ =
>?$$(/;+: >
@
A
!
@
B
C
A

'
!
B
C
!
D
E
F
D
'
C
8
#
6
%

:
?
(

G
#
#
H

:
?
(

/
#
#
I

C
I
I
;
+
;
?
/
6
H

!
8
6
;
/
;
/
J

Llnden leeder SysLem (?3)
WesL leeder SysLem (?2)
0
0.3
1
1.3
2
1eacher 8uy-ln
ÞarenL &
CommunlLy
1
1
-
1
'
(
)
*
+
"
#
$
#
%

)
:

K
#
#
I
#
8

'
:
%
+
#
$

1eacher 8uy-ln
ÞarenL &
CommunlLy
Llnden leeder SysLem (?3) 1 1
WesL leeder SysLem (?2) 2 1
C<<DLMFN OP K;J 49 CII;Q?/6H !86;/;/J
>(H+(86H '+86+#J;#%
188
!"#$%!&
!"#$ &'()(* +,-./'()(* 01 2$3456 07 2$3486
'(%)*+,(- /012 2332$%,42 /22%,56( !
722 61)82 +242+ (92$,3,$ 2:)/9+2( !
722 2:)/9+2( 03 7;'< ;=>? >2(% =1)$%,$2( ! !
@12)%,56 (%A825%B$25%2128 910C2$%( !
;2)$-21 /082+,56 A(2 03 7;'<DE2(,65 @F$+2 !
G,(,% 0%-21 7;'< ($-00+( ! !
H)$,+,%)%2 $0++)*01)%,05 I,%- 0%-21 ($-00+( !
'332$%,42 A(2 03 $0//05 9+)55,56 %,/2 !
#*%),5,56 12(0A1$2( 301 910C2$%( !
9:)#$#*/;"/#<( +,==>;/ H)$,+,%)%2 8,(%1,$% (A9901% !
APPENDIX J: TABLE 3C DELIVERY SYSTEM (DS)
Areas you feel you need Additional Training
(Teacher Survey, Fall 2012)
?)=@()($/"/#>$
A>@@"->;"/( B#/' >/'(;
+&C! +D'>>@*
E(*>,;D(* F &#)(
9
;
(
"
*

G
>
,

H
(
(
@

G
>
,

$
(
(
:

9
:
:
#
/
#
>
$
"
@

&
;
"
#
$
#
$
I

J
C
K
?
L
C
E
0

+
0
+
&
C
!

?,5825 H22821 7F(%2/ JK&L
M2(% H22821 7F(%2/JKNL
O
!
N
&
7
4
8
8
7
1
1
4
+
,
-
.
/
'
(
)
(
*

-
G

M
(
(
:
(
;

+
G
*
/
(
)

P/9+2/25%)Q05
@0++)*01)%2D7;'<
':)/9+2(
R2(0A1$2( S ;,/2 T8/,5,(%1)Q42 7A9901%
?,5825 H22821 7F(%2/ JK&L & ! O O
M2(% H22821 7F(%2/JKNL & N N !
9NNCOJ?P QK M#I 7A 9::#R>$"@ &;"#$#$I
J(@#<(;G +G*/()
189

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful