Interim Reports for PEEC

1. Interim Reports for PEEC April 3, 2003 • Sustainable Schools • CO-SEED • Community Mapping Program • A Forest For Every Classroom

2. Sustainable Schools Project “I’ve seen kids in the lunchroom looking at labels, wondering if their food is local, and what’s in it. They never did that before. And I’ve gotten excellent feedback from parents, saying ‘I’ve been trying to talk to my children about nutrition and where food comes from and they were not listening…but now they are interested!’” --Champlain Principal

3. Sustainable Schools Overview • Evaluation Focus: • First year process implementation • First year outcomes • Change in teacher practice • Key Methods: • Teacher pre-post interviews • Teacher pre-post surveys • Workshop, classroom and meeting observations • Staff and community advisor interviews • Internal process watching by SSP staff and faculty • Document review • Trial of pre-post student assessment activity

4. Sustainable Schools Interim Report (Teachers set up the Living Machine with Community Partner)

5. SSP Outline Draft • Process strengths • Providing capacity-building, facilitation and support • Intensive one-on-one mentoring • Rapport and trust being built • Whole school involvement • Administrative support • Providing tools, skills for curriculum development as a foundation for school change • Summer workshop enthusiasm • Pre-existing internal model (4/5 team) aids diffusion • Challenges • Limited PD time: Conceptual depth curtailed • Teachers not required to document work • Are community members building capacity for teachers or replacing them? • Role of community advisory board • Teachers’ other pressures • Teacher Outcomes • Changes in teaching practice • Dialogue about sustainability created amongst faculty • Teachers’ utilization of schoolyard • Collaboration amongst teachers • Relationships between community resources and teachers • Student Outcomes • Teacher perspectives on student outcomes • Student multi-grade-level pre-post activity analysis

6. The CO-SEED Project “The attitude toward education and kids has changed in a positive manner in Littleton because of the increased interaction between students and Joe Blow on the street.” -Littleton High School Principal

7. CO-SEED Overview • Evaluation Focus: • Process: Sustainability beyond ANE involvement • Civic engagement, school-community relations: survey process development • Student achievement: Student writing assessment • Teacher practice change • Key Methods: • Site visits • Staff, teacher, administrator, community partner interviews • Surveys: three groups • Classroom and meeting observations • Creation of internal monitoring system: ELCs, SEED Team • Document review

8. CO-SEED Interim Report Bradford Seed Team

9. CO-SEED Outline Draft • Process Findings • The model: Essential process features • CO-SEED sites after Antioch involvement: the sustainability of CO-SEED • The Role of the ELC • Teacher Outcomes • Changes in teaching practice (discussion by site, discussion summary) • Increased collaboration amongst teachers • Analysis of Pre-Post Survey data: Malden and Antrim Teachers and School Staff • Presentation of Pre-Survey summary table: Bradford Teachers and School Staff • Student Outcomes • Teacher perspectives on student outcomes • Analysis of Pre-Post Survey data: Malden and Antrim Students • Presentation of Pre-Survey summary table: Bradford Students • Writing Assessment: presentation of pilot process and findings • Evidence of School/Community Change • Discussion of school-community interactions • Analysis of Pre-Post Survey data: Malden and Antrim Community Members • Presentation of Pre-Survey summary table: Bradford Community Members

10. CO-SEED Outline Draft • Interim Program Recommendations • Train ELC staff consistently and provide networking and professional development • Provide incentives and criteria to encourage teacher documentation • “Plan for the diffusion you want to see”: highlight teacher leaders, disseminate successful examples • Encourage networking and sharing of ideas between past (and present) COSEED sites • Transition leadership/facilitation in SEED team during year two • Evaluation Needs Assessment • Five-year plan • Identify and assess ELC impacts • Continue inquiry into sustainability question as new sites become emeritus • Writing assessment continuation • Student achievement focus?

11. Assessment of Student Writing What is the impact of CO-SEED on students’ writing abilities?

12. The Community Mapping Program

13. CMP Overview • Evaluation Focus: • Process • Teacher Outcomes • Community and Student Outcomes • Colorado: Student Achievement pilots • Key Methods: • Site visits • Staff, teacher, student and community partner interviews • Teacher and student pre and post surveys • Classroom, institute and meeting observations • Document review

14. CMP Interim Report “I think that when you see a large scale map you don’t think about the actual land that’s there. But when you actually go out there it’s different…you see what’s there. Now I have something real to associate with the maps. It makes it more meaningful.” --7th grade student

15. Interim Teacher Outcomes • Educators Discover Community Resources • CMP Educators Stimulate Colleagues to do Place-based Education • CMP Provides Positive Public Relations for Schools • CMP Helps Educators Provide Service-Learning Opportunities • A Catalyst for Interdisciplinary Teaching • Technology at Work in the Field and in the Classroom • Maps: A Powerful Tool • Educators Remain Enthusiastic about CMP after Year One

16. Interim Community Partner Outcomes • The Community Partner Relationship: A Challenging but Rewarding Endeavor • Increased connection with the school • Working with Adolescents and Schools: Dispelling the Myth • The Value of Final Products • Introduction to Technology

17. Student Outcomes and Process Report • Interim Student Outcomes • An Affinity for Real World Learning • Inter-disciplinary Learning Mimics Real Life • Increased citizenship skills and pride • Increased “sense of place” • Environmental knowledge

18. Program Processes Program Strengths • Staff availability, communication • Trainings • Flexibility • CMP as a “toolbox” • Service-learning • Community partner model Programmatic Challenges • Technology as a barrier • Lack of planning time for educators • Teacher expectations vs staff expectations • CMP staff underused or used primarily for tech support and chaperones • Weak Community Partner relationships • Teacher comfort taking kids outside

19. A Forest for Every Classroom

20. “Being part of this model and connecting with other teachers and the partners has given me the tools and the courage to put out my teaching philosophy to colleagues at my school. This has enabled us to actually make some significant movement towards change in the science content at my school.” --FFEC Teacher

21. FFEC Overview • Evaluation Focus: • Process implementation • Partnership functioning • Teacher practice change • Student outcomes • Key Methods: • Site visits • Teacher and staff focus groups • Student Surveys • Informal student interviews • Classroom and institute observations • Document review

22. FFEC Interim Report (National Park Ranger with 7th graders)

23. FFEC Interim Findings • Process Effectiveness • The partnership, the model • Process strengths • Partnership offers diverse perspectives and resources • Community/network created • Personalized, respectful, fun • Balance of content (experts) and modelling teaching skills • Expectation of curriculum development (product) • Barriers • Better definition of and emphasis on service-learning component • Connecting teachers with their local resources, not just the NP • Keep examples do-able and undaunting • Teacher Outcomes • Changing practice • Teachers’ utilization of local human resources • Curriculum Implementation beyond year one • Curricular change in the schools • Relationships between teachers and community resources • Student Outcomes • Students’ perception of and relationship to their local community • Building community in the classrooms • Teacher perspectives • Student survey results • Discussion of students’ levels of civic engagement

24. FFEC translated from teachers to students Summer Institute for Teachers at MABI Fall Math Class for Middle School Students at MABI

25. Cross Program Report Thoughts

26. Cross Program Report Contents Introduction • Place-based Education Evaluation Collaborative (PEEC) • Brief overview of each program • Context • Place-based Education • Service-learning • School Change and Professional Development Methods • Teacher Question defined, Student Question defined • Cross program common methods under development Discussion • Common impacts on teachers • Discussion of civic engagement in students • Process: Greatest strengths and challenges of each program CO-SEED SSP FFEC CMP Conclusions and Recommendations • Recommendations for all programs, and place-based education • Plans for future PEEC research

27. Cross Program Questions teacher practice: How does participation in one of these place-based education programs change teachers’ teaching practices? Cross program objectives: • Teachers/schools implement/adopt place-based education beyond project/program intervention • Teachers understand that program is related to standards, a tool for teaching, not an add-on curriculum • Students are more engaged in learning through service OR teachers encourage service learning

28. Cross Program Questions student civic engagement: How does participation in one of these place-based education programs affect students’ levels of civic engagement? Cross-program objectives: • Student learning occurs out in the community OR teachers use community in their teaching • Students are more engaged in learning through service OR teachers encourage service learning • Students will have knowledge/motivation/skills for stewardship/citizenship behavior community question: Cross-program objective: • Forging connections between school and community (formation of partnerships)

29. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED)

30. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC)

31. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC) • Offer resources or training in specific, useful skills if you expect service-learning to be specific and useful (CMP)

32. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC) • Offer resources or training in specific, useful skills if you expect service-learning to be specific and useful (CMP) • Before intervention, help establish or locate one good model in a school--a successful teacher/team completing an example project--to encourage ‘spread of effect’ (SSP) • => either seek out schools with this model in place, or create this scenario in the first year of working with a school (example of how PD-focused program complements the whole-school change model)

33. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC) • Offer resources or training in specific, useful skills if you expect service-learning to be specific and useful (CMP) • Before intervention, help establish or locate one good model in a school--a successful teacher/team completing an example project--to encourage ‘spread of effect’ (SSP) • => either seek out schools with this model in place, or create this scenario in the first year of working with a school (example of how PD-focused program complements the whole-school change model) • Encourage (or require) teachers to participate in teams

34. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC) • Offer resources or training in specific, useful skills if you expect service-learning to be specific and useful (CMP) • Before intervention, help establish or locate one good model in a school--a successful teacher/team completing an example project--to encourage ‘spread of effect’ (SSP) • => either seek out schools with this model in place, or create this scenario in the first year of working with a school (example of how PD-focused program complements the whole-school change model) • Encourage (or require) teachers to participate in teams • Lead teachers in learning new assessment techniques for community-based, place-based, service-learning curriculum.

35. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC) • Offer resources or training in specific, useful skills if you expect service-learning to be specific and useful (CMP) • Before intervention, help establish or locate one good model in a school--a successful teacher/team completing an example project--to encourage ‘spread of effect’ (SSP) • => either seek out schools with this model in place, or create this scenario in the first year of working with a school (example of how PD-focused program complements the whole-school change model) • Encourage (or require) teachers to participate in teams • Lead teachers in learning new assessment techniques for community-based, place-based, service-learning curriculum. • Involve teachers, administrators, community members in program evaluation from the start of contact so that they: • Know what to expect and are cooperative. • Can provide insight into place-specific evaluation indicators that might be especially useful.

36. Interim Recommendations for Four Programs • Involve community partners early in process, and as integrally as possible, and provide community partners your organizational support as well as educators/schools (CO-SEED) • Create a culture of respect, communication, support and rapport with participants to promote buy-in (FFEC) • Offer resources or training in specific, useful skills if you expect service-learning to be specific and useful (CMP) • Before intervention, help establish or locate one good model in a school--a successful teacher/team completing an example project--to encourage ‘spread of effect’ (SSP) • => either seek out schools with this model in place, or create this scenario in the first year of working with a school (example of how PD-focused program complements the whole-school change model) • Encourage (or require) teachers to participate in teams • Lead teachers in learning new assessment techniques for community-based, place-based, service-learning curriculum. • Involve teachers, administrators, community members in program evaluation from the start of contact so that they: • Know what to expect and are cooperative. • Can provide insight into place-specific evaluation indicators that might be especially useful. • Distinguish between place-based ed. and service-learning and prepare schools, teachers, staff accordingly.

37. Text about PEEC on each report Antioch New England Institute is part of the Place-based Education Evaluation Collaborative (PEEC), a unique partnership of organizations whose aim is to strengthen and deepen the practice and evaluation of place-based education initiatives. Other PEEC members are: Shelburne Farms, Vermont Institute of Natural Science, Orton Family Foundation, Upper Valley Community Foundation, Vermont Education for Sustainability Project, National Wildlife Federation, the National Park Service and the US Forest Service. This year, in addition to the Co-SEED Project, three other place-based education programs were evaluated: The Community Mapping Program; The Sustainable Schools Project; and The Forest For Every Classroom Program.