Instructional Professional Development (IPD) Subcommittee

April 21, 2006 - Meeting Notes

Committee Chair: Winnie Miller.

Location: PSU,

IPD Mission:  Increasing the capacity of teachers and faculty to deliver learning experiences that inspire and prepare students. Identifying and providing professional development programs and strategies that enhance their knowledge, skills, and mastery.

Recommendations:  The three priority strategies in this focus area were to develop pooled resources for teaching engineering and applied science projects, elucidate the role of engineering in supporting core curriculum, and improve the relevance and quality of teaching at the post-secondary level.

Resources:

Agenda posted Friday, April 7, 2006 2:30

9:30 - Define
  Needs assessment survey
-12:00 Carla's Questions:
  • How can we measure the interest-level of teachers in teaching project-based engineering concepts in high school during the school day? Many teachers complain about being forced to deliver specific content for standardized tests.
  • Who will participate in any professional development that we might seek to create?
  • Who is our target audience?
  • Will we be able to reach them?
  • Who will fund the professional development that we would like to offer?
  • Will participants pay to attend or be paid to attend? Will they receive professional development or graduate credit?
  • Are any school districts currently offering professional development that includes any type of engineering component?
  • In preparation for OPAS, a guide was prepared outlining different organizations in Oregon that provide science and math teachers with projects and activities that teach science and math through engineering concepts ( see - http://opas.ous.edu///materials.htm) MESA and SMILE being two of the organizations -- How can we partner with existing organizations such as OSTA, OMEC, OCTM, MESA and SMILE to create the best professional development and reach teachers efficiently?
12:00 - 12:30

Next Steps

Next Meeting Time

Notes Final posted May 3 , 2006 - Jo - [download pdf]

OPAS Instructional Professional Development Subcommittee
Notes for the Meeting of April 21, 2006, PSU

Attendees:  Carla Faini (PSU), Kent Foster (Microsoft), Larry Flick (OSU), Meghan Helzerman (Clackamas ESD), Kathryn Schwartz (SAO Foundation), Jo Oshiro (OUS OPAS Staff), Winnie Miller (OCTM/ Clackamas SD)

MISSION: Increasing the capacity of teachers and faculty to deliver learning experiences that inspire and prepare students.

Identifying and providing professional development programs and strategies that enhance their knowledge, skills, and mastery.

RECOMMENDATIONS: 3 priority strategies in this focus area were to

  • develop pooled resources for teaching engineering and applied science projects
  • elucidate the role of engineering in supporting core curriculum
  • improve the relevance and quality of teaching at the post-secondary level.

Defining Goals & Action Plan:

                The discussions detailed below informed the creation of individual action plans which are collected in the table below.  Discussion of the focus and wording of the Mission and Recommendations as stated above threaded through the whole meeting.

Discussions:

  • Related Activities & Data:
    • OPAS Marketing had guest speakers Skip Rochefort, Pre-College Outreach & Professor of Chemical Engineering & Eda Davis-Butts, Director of SMILE.  The information garnered leads the Marketing Committee to believe the real focus of OPAS should be Middle School; however we may need interim goals.
    • OPAS Steering Committee
    • The State has a contract for access to the “Microsoft Portal”, aka MSDNAA – Microsoft Developer’s Network Academic Alliance.
    • Bryant York, CS Prof at PSU, is doing a study using the kids’ logic game program suite “Zoombinis” – hypothesizing that all kids can learn logic regardless of ethnicity or socioeconomic status.
    • Computer Science Teachers’ Association (CSTA) is saying that some of the resistance to taking AP CS classes is that while colleges and universities recognize the credit, college CS Departments do not track AP CS students straight into 200-300 level classes; CS Departments say the students aren’t ready; this increases student and parent resistance to AP.  In another committee meeting, a Superintendent said he likes AP because without that cachet and nationwide validation, he would not be able to introduce anything close to that degree of academic rigor – too many parents who view high school as a social & athletic time would object too strenuously.  Kids usually live up to expectations, but parents and/or society often delivers them low expectations.
  • Needs assessment survey:
    • Instead of a blanket survey, could we use some targeted focus groups, with known first adopters & change agents?
  • How do we successfully get teachers to participate in professional development opportunities?  Many opportunities lack participants, despite offering stipends.  MESA has had success in this arena; Carla will provide data to Larry Flick. Carla points out that MESA has formal and informal networks to provide ongoing support to MESA teachers.  There are apparently barriers; we apparently do not have data and maybe not even anecdotal evidence on what the barriers to Professional Development are. NSF sees this problem nationwide.
  • Is this a K-12 focus or a K-20 focus for this subcommittee?  The passion of the members is with K-12, and especially grades 4-10.  The transitions are especially critical:  Elementary -> Middle School; Middle School -> High School; High School -> College.
  • The Career Related Learning Plan (aka Education Plan & Profile) for high school students is now a state requirement.  Larry points out that we need to pick our target students.  90% of High School students think they are going to college;  many get there and pay for college but actually take what amounts to remedial levels of math and writing.
  • Other states: 
    • Maine’s Learning Technology Initiative which spent 1% of the state’s education budget to give every 7th grader a laptop (which stays with the school);
    • Michigan Freedom to Learn Act.
    • Need to survey others
  • Additional resources discussed:  ITEAC Survey; The Math Forum our of Drexel University in Philadelphia PA; American Society of Engineering Education has a K12 day – someone on OPAS Steering should go. [Bruce Schafer is attending the conference; the K12 day precedes the conference and is put together with a consortium of ASEE and local resources in a short time frame.  Previous quality has varied widely, but is worthwhile to check out if local.]
  • Carla's Questions: rather than being answered explicitly, after the above discussions, Carla said she felt we had addressed all of these.  Jo’s attempts at recording the answers:
    • How can we measure the interest-level of teachers in teaching project-based engineering concepts in high school during the school day? Many teachers complain about being forced to deliver specific content for standardized tests. Focus groups leading to surveys
    • Who will participate in any professional development that we might seek to create?
    • Who is our target audience? Middle school
    • Will we be able to reach them?
    • Who will fund the professional development that we would like to offer? Look at state, NSF, private foundations
    • Will participants pay to attend or be paid to attend? Will they receive professional development or graduate credit? Depends on focus/survey results
    • Are any school districts currently offering professional development that includes any type of engineering component?
    • In preparation for OPAS, a guide was prepared outlining different organizations in Oregon that provide science and math teachers with projects and activities that teach science and math through engineering concepts ( see - http://opas.ous.edu///materials.htm) MESA and SMILE being two of the organizations -- How can we partner with existing organizations such as OSTA, OMEC, OCTM, MESA and SMILE to create the best professional development and reach teachers efficiently?

Conclusions/ Action Items:

  • Kent will send Jo info for posting - Microsoft Developers' Network Academic Alliance (MSDNAA), also known as the "Microsoft Portal", for which the state has a contract. Many teachers at recent conferences, such as OACTE, did not know about this resource.
  • All members look at the OPAS Diversity webpage resource table as a model for electronic collaboration pending the acquisition/implementation of a more sophisticated electronic collaboration tool. Jo sent out an email with the link on Monday, April 24: http://opas.ous.edu/Committees/DIVR.html#PrevResources.
  • Carla will connect with Intel to see if OPAS can post Intel's CLICK - Computer Learning is Cool for Kids
  • Carla will get Larry data on professional development history of MESA programs.
  • Kent will get Jo links on various other states with initiatives that bring technology learning and/or engineering into the classroom; Maine and Michigan were mentioned in particular. He will do a survey of other states; he thinks there are about 10.
  • Kathryn will get the link on the ITEAC survey to Jo for posting.
  • Jo will ask Bill Becker and Steve Day for an update on how the standards work is being done, and if there is analagous work being done for Math.
  • Jo will post the "Clackamas County Pre-Engineering Program At A Glance" brought by Meghan.

Before the Next Meeting:  please correct, vote [download a spreadsheet ballot], prioritize, and/or take ownership of the following, as condensed from the Action Plan worksheets below by Jo (who, despite what she has spent the last 10 years convincing numerous kids of, is neither omniscienct nor infallible):

  • Amended Mission statement: Improve the relevance and quality of K-14 teaching by inspiring and connecting teachers to deliver learning experiences that enhance students’ engagement in STEM subject matter and skills.
  • Amended Recommendations:
    • Develop and disseminate pooled resources for teaching engineering and applied science, which are connected to state standards.
    • Elucidate the role of engineering in supporting core curriculum
    • Prioritize, in this order:
      • Middle School
      • High School freshman & sophomores
      • Elementary grades 4-5
  • Action Plan, in order of priority (some activities can be concurrent and/or tasked out):
    • Discuss with a selected focus group of teachers and administrators  (previous experience leads the committee to believe that ferret-like followup is necessary to collect this data when wider sampling is needed):
      • Who in their school/district is teaching technology?  The science teacher, the librarian, math teacher, tech teacher, art teacher, nobody?
      • What are the barriers to teachers taking Professional Development?  Sub time, travel time, lack of confidence in the immediate usefulness of the materials presented, lack of ongoing support, stipend, length of PD, lack of administrative support?
      • What should the ideal PD opportunity look like?
      • What would make them excited about taking engineering projects/curricula/skills into their classroom?
    • Catalog available resources:
      • Does such a catalog/clearinghouse already exist?  If so, can we piggyback on it?  If not, determine where this living document should be housed.
      • Review OPAS Materials in the binder you received at the summit, or at http://opas.ous.edu///materials.htm.
      • Develop a matrix of Professional Development opportunities, summarizing & linking topic, locale, time, credit offered, cost/stipend to make them easy to browse for workability.
      • Develop a catalog of Best Practices outside the state of Oregon
      • Webpage
      • Compile a list of a minimum of 5-7 foundations to support this work
    • Develop a supportive network for teachers bringing engineering into the classroom
      • Partner with existing organizations such as OSTA, OMEC, OCTM, MESA, SMILE
        • Can we identify more of these?  Do we have contacts in them?
      • Professional Development session/conference
        • Select a topic(s)
        • Create hard materials
    • Help the OPAS Marketing Committee create a PR campaign, aimed at teachers, to elucidate the role of engineering curricula/skills/projects in supporting core curriculum.

Next meeting – Monday May 22, 2:30 – 4:30 (virtual – thanks Kent for hosting!):

  • Verify mission, recommendations, action plan/ priorities (there will be an interim vote via email to Jo; results posted on the website)
  • Ongoing reports:  links, grant sources, other states

Compilation of Action Plans from the OPAS IPD Meeting, April 21, 2006

Corrections & clarifications welcome

Objective

Benefit

Activity

Action

Who

When

(CF) Engage Middle School teachers & students in hands-on, inquiry-based learning in STEM fields

Retention of students most at-risk of dropping out of school; workforce development: teaching kids how to analyze and solve problems; pipeline expansion for college enrollment (focus on STEM fields)

Identify available resources for teaching engineering, technical & applied sciences, including whether they are connected to state standards.

First Step: review info already gathered by OPAS & ask committee members to identify additional resources

All members of IPD Committee

Next Meeting

 

 

 

Select project topics/curriculum to feature in a professional development session

 

 

(KF)Define a “Best Practices” outside Oregon

 

(KF)Survey 10 states who successfully increased STEM delivery in Middle & High School

Select which states to survey; develop list of contents; schedule site visits

 

 

(KF) Contact other states who received grants in FY 2005

 

(KF)Explore what programs & funding at the federal level might support STEM, e.g. MSP Program – Academic Improvement & Teacher Quality Program

 

 

 

 

 

(KF) Explore private funding opportunities, e.g. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

(KF) Compile a list of 5-7 foundations

 

 

(WM) PK-12 Teachers will be aware of and have access to resources available for integrating pre-engineering skills

 

(WM) Collate and catalog of available materials.

(WM) communicate via TOMT webpage (link to OPAS)

(WM) OPAS Staff

(WM) summer conferences

Objective

Benefit

Activity

Action

Who

When

(LF) MS Degree Certificate

 

(LF) NSF Proposal: Develop PD & coursework on use of spreadsheets as strategic thinking tools for Middle School teachers (ITEST)

(LF) workshop courses, in-school/classroom observation feedback

(LF) MS & HS General Science teachers; Bend, Corvallis, Portland

(LF) Summer & Academic Year for 3 years

(LF) Distribute as PD program on Construction Engineering

 

(LF) PD Video DVD classroom demos of activities (ATE)

Produce Video

Math/ Sci/ Tech Teachers

(LF) Structure time {up} to PD group forward at district/school

(MH) Determine how goals are similar to increasing quality education & produce quality workers

 

(MH) Identify key partners with stake in education (OWIB, Economic Development, etc.)

(MH)Review strategic plans to identify potential partners.  Contact them for informational meeting.

 

 

(MH) Create “pooled resources” & portal for teachers to access info.

 

(MH) Develop matrix of existing Professional Development opportunities

(MH) Compile list.  Determine where to house “living document”.

 

 

(KS) Communication – linking existing resources to teachers

 

(KS) Compiling list of PD opportunities & communication

research
compilation
dissemination
web?

all [IPD]
need to assign or identify additional resources?

 

(KS) Short, direct communication to teachers

 

(KS) Teacher Development Day-long conference

(KS) {Hard} materials showing how to make the link; plan/hold conference

need to assign or identify additional resources?

Professional Development Day

 

 

(KS) PR Campaign to elucidate the role of engineering is supporting core curriculum

(KS) Create materials that show how to make the link; disseminate

Work w/ Marketing Committee

?

Objective

Benefit

Activity

Action

Who

When

(JO) Improve the relevance & quality of K-14 teaching by inspiring & connecting teachers to deliver learning experiences that enhance students’ engagement in STEM subject matter & skills;
Focus on Middle Schools

 

(JO)Develop networks to provide access to Professional Development, including ongoing support for in-class activities

(JO) (1) Survey with ferret-like follow-up – who has hands-on responsibility for science & tech at MS and HS across state (later elementary, also); identify first adopters, change agents, evangelists; identify what teachers need to take advantage of PD – admin support? Stipends? Sub payments? (2) People/web links to professional groups; (3) conferences?

 

 

 

 

(JO) Figure out which models for PD work & why – verify the MESA model; are there others?

 

 

 

 

 

(JO) Develop PR campaign to elucidate the role of engineering in supporting core curriculum – target teachers.

 

 

 

 

For questions or information regarding this webpage, please email Jo Oshiro or call (503) 725.2910.