[ Workgroups 2007 ][ Marketing Help ][ Master Resources List ]

[ Return to Motivate Webpage ]

Summary: on the evening of February 14, Jo published this document as a basis for further action - Motivate_ETICProposal_Key_Points_021408.doc (pdf).

Agenda - #10 - January 30, 2008

Detailed Meeting Record for January 30, 2008 - in process

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro, January 31, 2008 ; corrections February 14, 2008 posted February 20, 2008

Agenda - #9 - November 14, 2007

Detailed Meeting Record for November 14, 2007 - in process

Summary: Five members of the Motivate workgroup attended the November 14 meeting.  Bruce Schafer also attended.  Mary Beth Horton and Susan Parsons (BEC) submitted updates via email prior to the meeting.

Bruce Schafer gave a brief history of computer science in Oregon and the ETIC CS Task Force before presenting a unifying vision for legislative action, OPAS and the task force.  This is in the very early stages of discussion.  The presentation was well-received on several counts:

Next Meeting:  Jo will poll for Wednesday, December 12.

Respectfully Submitted, Jo Oshiro, November 21, 2007

Agenda - #8 - October 10, 2007

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detailed Notes for October 10, 2007

Summary: Five members of the Motivate workgroup attended the October 10 meeting.

Ryan Collay announced that they had just had a phone call from Texas to let the team know that the Bernard Harris Foundation  gave the OSU team the award for the best summer science camp  in the program (http://www.theharrisfoundation.org/programs/summersciencecamp/index.htm).  This was a collaborative effort by 4H, OSU/SMILE, the College of Engineering, the College of Arts and Sciences’ Dept. of Math and Science Education, the College of Education.  When more information is available, Jo will distribute that to the wider OPAS community (done).

Subgroups’ reports:

Agenda - #7 - September 12, 2007

Detailed Meeting Record for September 12, 2007

Summary as Emailed and Posted October 5, 2007: Six workgroup members attended the meeting on September 12, 2007.

There has been a lull in subgroup activity; work is ongoing but not completed.

Jo reviewed recent activity of the OPAS workgroups, Steering Committee, and the status of the ETIC/OPAS Request for Proposals (released August 17; closing September 18; $390K over the 07-09 biennium).  We will try to recruit a spectrum of reviewers from industry, OPAS, ETIC, and a range of educational sectors, and prioritize representation from each OPAS workgroup.  This time, we are being more careful of conflict of interest rules and legal controls, and working to tune the review process for fairness, consensus, and documentability.

The workgroup heartily endorsed a marketing outreach effort to industry and others on behalf of ETIC and OPAS; understanding their roles is crucial for the legislature.

The possible configuration and mission of a STEM center was discussed while reviewing the brainstorming of possible legislative concepts for the 09-11 biennium.  The national model STEM centers are few and young; in general they

• conduct research on the learning process;
• define and model best practices;
• provide professional development;
• build partnerships to support STEM education;
• collaborate amongst informals & formals;
• connect with business.

Regional models allow centers to focus on local programmatic delivery addressing local needs and resources and linking efforts to the local community in ways that meet the statewide mandate. Statewide assessment is crucial:  are we reaching the students we need to reach?

Statewide models:

• may not be appropriate for Oregon’s educational system, predicated on local control;
• can deliver coordination and increased visibility for the many existing ongoing efforts;
• can provide leadership to support regional/local ongoing efforts:
• assuring the mission and mandate coming out of the legislature;
• help create regional centers and networks;
• provide superstructure models for regional centers;
• provide channels for interaction with OSTA, etc and ESDs;
• Legislative support requires more than Metro area or I5 Corridor;
• “clearinghouse” efforts tend to work better if highly focused;
• Being truly statewide takes a lot of energy and effort.

The next meeting will be Wednesday, October 10.

Agenda - #6 - August 8, 2007

Meeting Objective	Review interim activity; connect to resources
3:30 -	Welcome intros
	Overview of current status of breakout groups - Volunteers, Businesses, NOISE Volunteer Engagement Business Engagement TechnoScienceSupersite status NOISE - any updates?
	Do we need to better clarify 'Volunteer Engagement' and 'Business Engagement'? Originally 'Volunteers' were adult and retiree volunteers inside the classroom, and 'Business' focused on specific programs out- or inside the classroom - NEM, internships, job shadows, career fairs, science fairs)
	Overview of related activity: OPAS Steering Committee Funding Legislative Concepts Brainstorm: is there a policy-level or funding-level support that Motivate wants to see implemented at the state level? What is it?
	Do we need to focus better to complete some key projects this year?
	Action Items and Next Steps
- 5:00	Next Meeting - September 12?

Detailed Notes for August 8, 2007 - coming soon

Summary: Seven members of the workgroup attended the meeting on August 8, 2007.  Relevant activities of members were reviewed, whether or not those activities had germinated within the workgroup.

Don Domes discussed necessary and sufficient prerequisites for leveraging the public schools to motivate students.  These include an adequate number of well-prepared teachers, which we do not currently have.   SuperQuest is a successful program addressing teacher preparation but not recruitment; he is talking with John Marsaglia from WOU and John Niebergall about developing a graduate level orientation to teaching class to help smooth the transition for professionals considering the PTE Teacher Certification pathway.  Don also attended a Cooper Hewitt Museum Summer Design Workshop and is thinking of ways to propagate this through a larger sector of the education community than just the PTE Teachers.   Don believes having a Summer Design Institute held on the West Coast next year would be well attended and effective. Work with Tom Thompson at ODE leads them to believe the number of Computer Science (CS) teachers in Oregon is fewer than previously thought and efforts to address this group may not require as much organizational overhead as previously thought.   He also hopes to promote greater teacher-teacher interaction through the Hillsboro School District and has met with Tamra Busch-Johnsen of the BEC on the teacher sabbatical concept, which was warmly received.

Margie Lowe of the Education and Workforce Policy Department of the Governor’s Office met with both Eileen Boerger and Mary Beth Horton.  Margie has recently joined the OPAS Steering Committee and has agreed to help facilitate some connections through both the Salem Chamber of Commerce and supporting outreach to rural areas, in part through her knowledge of state agencies.  Margie offered to help Mary Beth line up BEC internships from government agencies.

Endi Hartigan noted that the State Board of Higher Education has a strategic planning initiative currently involved in outreach to underserved populations; she will see that Don Domes gets an invitation to their day-long event on October 11 at PSU.

Additional items:
• NOISE efforts may have stalled; Ben will follow up with Ray Vandiver and Marilyn Johnson of OMSI and hope to devote some time to this in October,
• Techno Science Supersite: a form has been developed to capture new activity information for posting on the site.  Mary Beth will check on the status and advise.  Redesign work on the TSS is currently delayed because of competing project priorities and the need to engage Morgan Anderson of Intel in those conversations.
• Discussion of possible legislative concepts was tabled; everyone is asked to think about what efforts would be benefited by policy statements and/or funding.
• This workgroup’s subcommittees will not be reorganized because they use different approaches to the same goal; we will keep communication lines open.

The next meeting will be September 12, 2007.

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro, August 29, 2007.

Agenda - #5 - July 11, 2007

Meeting Objective	Review interim activity; connect to resources
3:30 -	Welcome intros
	Overview of current status of breakout groups - Volunteers, Businesses, NOISE Overview of related activity: OPAS Steering Committee
	Action Items
- 5:00	Next Meeting - August 8? September 12?

Detailed Notes for July 11, 2007

Summary: Five members attended the most recent meeting of the Motivate Workgroup on July 11, 2007.

Status of Action Items from the Meeting of June 7 were reviewed; several of these are on hold pending vacations and other scheduling conflicts, and some are ongoing:

• Polish and distribute the volunteers’ survey instrument to further clarify the necessary and sufficient infrastructure for volunteers in STEM activities, and what motivates volunteers (Ben, Jo, Ray)
• Rework the Phase Model to get to common language with educators and informal providers (Ryan, Jo).
• Develop presentation/activity frameworks to lower barriers to participation in National Engineers’ Month activities; some personnel at BEC have been brought into this project; OPAS may continue to provide programming and classroom expertise and resource awareness (Mary Beth, Eileen, Joyce, Ryan, Jo).
• Work to close the loop on NOISE communications – Ryan attempted to “sign up” at the website and no message got through to Jo to put him on the listserv.
• A review of the action items from the meeting of May 9 is needed.

A short report on legislative activity and the steering funding strategy discussion were given; see the Steering Committee Status summary at http://opas.ous.edu///Workgroups2007/index.html#SteeringStatus. 

Jo will distribute the latest roll-up of the funding analysis exercise done by all of the workgroups.  Again, the idea of some sort of clearinghouse or matchmaking function for NSF Broader Participation and Outreach requirements was discussed – should this be an OUS function? A NOISE function? A sponsored meeting?  Assessment and measurement are key pieces of this, and tend not to be done well on the fly.

Eileen reports that Bruce has told her that Margie Lowe, Policy Advisor in the Education and Workforce Development group in the Governor’s Office (with Jim Sager and Lita Colligan) is interested in our work and may have a relatively flexible calendar now that the legislative session is over.  We try to arrange a meeting to explore mutual possibilities.

The next meeting will be Wednesday, August 8.

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro, July 17, 2007.

Agenda - #4 - June 7, 2007

Meeting Objective	More extended discussion of group objectives and priorities; cement working relationships with a face-to-face meeting
10:00 -	Welcome new member John Ossowski; heard but never before seen member Ryan Collay, guest Karen Lakin from Saturday Academy - printable roster
- 11:00	Overview of current status of breakout groups - Volunteers, Businesses, NOISE Overview of related activity: OPAS Workgroups - Motivate, Prepare, Pathways - status summaries OPAS Steering Committee - funding - collected feedback ETIC Pre-College Campus Funding Solicitation - proposal list
11:00 - 12:30	Subgroup Breakout Sessions - review activity and goals for direction, additions and changes - what would take money? how much? where to find it? Volunteers (Ben, Karen, Endi)) Businesses (Eileen, Mary Beth, Joyce, John) NOISE (Jo, Ryan, Ray)
12:30 - 1:00	Lunch - thank you, Eileen
1:00 - 1:50	Breakout Session Reports Wrap-Up Action Items
1:50 - 2:00	Next Meeting - July 11? (Ben will be out of the country) August 8? September 12?

Detailed Notes for June 7, 2007

Summary: The most recent meeting of was the Motivate Workgroup was an extended work session hosted by Agilis Solutions on June 7, 2007.

Bruce Schafer joined us to report on legislative, ETIC, and steering committee activity.  ETIC’s strategic goal is to double the 1999 number of OUS graduates in engineering and applied sciences: that goal is 40% met.  Limiting factors are campus infrastructure, faculty, and motivated, prepared freshman.  Research has seen an 80% increase, far from the ETIC goal of a 5x increase in research funding.

• In the 2005-2006 biennium $751K was awarded in support of OPAS recommendations and goals.  That number will increase in the next biennium, divided across 2 solicitations for proposals, one limited to OUS campuses.
• Summaries of OPAS workgroup activity and the slate of campus proposals for ETIC pre-college programs were distributed.

While reporting on subgroups (Connecting with Volunteers, Connecting with Businesses, Connecting with NOISE) workgroup members had a wide ranging discussion:

• models for volunteer participation – is SMART applicable?
• Internships
• Difficult from the business side, especially for small to medium companies, which most in Oregon are.
• An internship is still an ideal model of a high-quality educational experience with great potential for recruitment of future engineers and scientists.
• We agreed we should not force the connection of getting Oregon high school kids into OUS schools.
• National Engineer’s Month
• Recruitment piggybacked on to the wrap-up survey looks successful so far.
• Eileen and Mary Beth will pick through what’s available to develop 3 grade-targeted frameworks for presentations for each engineering discipline.  Jo will forward some resource links.  We may have access to a classroom teacher this summer who can help with this effort.
• An ideal project:  work with NOISE to package curricular units with connections to regional informal providers, CRLE, and 3rd year high school science and math requirements.  This would need staffing, perhaps a BEC educator intern, and funding for same.
• Ben and Jo are ready to discuss the volunteer survey with OMSI’s evaluation department.
• School districts, not coordinating agencies, have a better idea of the demographics of participants in school-to-work programs.

The next meeting is scheduled for July 11.

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro, 6/8/07

Agenda - #3 - Wednesday May 9

Meeting Objective	Share how the three subgroups are progressing on 2007 action plans Updates on other OPAS Activities
3:30 - 3:35	Welcome
3:35 - 4:05	Subgroup Reports and Next Steps Volunteers (Ben) Results from MESA trial use of volunteer survey ( Jo) Businesses (Eileen and Mary Beth) NOISE (Jo)
4:05 - 4:20	Steering Committee report (Jo) Results of Funding Worksheet Brainstorming (table pending 5/16 mtg)
4:20 - 4:30	Action Items from April 11 Ben - contact Mary Beth to determine if Worksystems, Inc is proposing a classroom volunteer infrastructure that we could use Ray - check to see if there is a problem with listserv responses being received Roger & Ray - provide Jo some reference material linking informal education to results in the formal sphere, including improved test scores Ben - publish revised Funding Worksheet based on feedback given at this meeting and follow-up email Jo - make arrangements for May 9 meeting and present options for June face-to-face meeting
4:30 - 4:40	June face-to-face meeting discussion Wednesday June 13 or another date? Morning or afternoon? Location: OMSI, Murray-Scholls, Capital Center?
4:40 - 4:58	New Items: Brainstorm how Motivate might incorporate Oregon's career-related project graduation requirement (CRLE) into action plans - Oregonian article.
4:55 - 5:00	Next Meeting - June face-to-face - Wednesday June 13?

Summary for May 9, 2007: The Volunteers subgroup reported that the trial run of the volunteer questionnaire may be ready to be taken to OMSI for a final polish.  As of May 11, there were 8 responses.  Ben is still doing fact-finding regarding many aspects of volunteering and connecting volunteer groups, such as the Intel retirees, to additional opportunities.  Many of these efforts involve the BEC.

A lively discussion of the Career-Related Learning Experience graduation requirement was sparked by the Business subgroup report, and touched on the need for mentors, the safety risks in students seeking out mentors on their own, the need for non-parent adult interaction as much as for technical expertise, the opportunities presented by this requirement.

Mary Beth reports that several groups are in the process of or have tried to develop a central clearinghouse model for connecting businesses and volunteers to students and classrooms. Virtually all who take on the effort find it significantly more difficult than imagined and do not complete the program development.   The current, highly successful flagship program, School-to-Work, run out of the Hillsboro Chamber of Commerce, placed 3,000 students this past academic year.  The program is supported by fees paid by the Hillsboro schools.

The Governor’s office has issued a contract through the Northwest Regional Educational Service District (NWRESD) with Jim Francesconi; that effort is currently focused on developing a template for a program that can be customized to fit local needs and resources around the state.  The organizational components include business (e.g. Chamber of Commerce, Employment Department); education (e.g. a community college, ESD) and a connecting organization (e.g. BEC, Chamber, community college).  The NW Workforce Alliance is developing this template in Washington and Clatsop counties, and is beginning to get traction.  These efforts are very relationship-dependent, and how they can be leveraged depends on who owns the relationship.

A speed-dating metaphor was proposed as one mechanism for fostering connections; the workgroup liked the model but agreed a different name might be more appropriate.  Another proposed metaphor was the merit badge.  Pre-packaging with understood models reduces barriers for many volunteers and students.

Kids need an integral role in something they see as laudable.  One model of this is sports.

The BEC is entering in to formal partnerships with IEEE and the Society for Information Management (SIM).  The BEC is also looking for programmatic reviewers for the National Engineer’s Month Program.

The Intel Ambassadors program which formerly ran at Hilhi was proposed as a possible model for further involvement of the Intel Retirees.  The program showed that repeated contact between a volunteer and a classroom results in much higher quality interactions if the adult can visit 4 or more times.  Ben and Don will follow up.

The NOISE subgroup reports that the NOISE communications committee is currently without a chair; Ryan endorses Marilyn Johnson’s suggestion of John Falk and Lynn Dierking of OSU Free Choice Learning.  Free Choice Learning does represent a wider sphere than just STEM education, however. Developing an organization with both a statewide reach and regional nodes of activity is extremely difficult, especially under Oregon’s geographic and demographic constraints.

We will have a face-to-face meeting in June at the Agilis Offices in South Beaverton; Jo will poll for a date June 5 or 7, 10:00 – 2:00 with a group lunch.

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro, May 11, 2007

Agenda - #2 - Wednesday April 11

Meeting Objective	Share how the three subgroups are progressing on 2007 action plans Updates on other OPAS Activities
3:30 - 3:35	Welcome
	Subgroup Reports and Next Steps Volunteers (Ben) Businesses (Eileen and Mary Beth) NOISE (Jo) NOISE leadership report (Ray or Ben)
5 minutes	Website Enhancements (Jo) Workgroup Index Page with Status Summaries Motivate Page Roster links at "Motivate" and in links table Archive of Previous Agendas Working Documents Master Resources List
	Steering Committee report (Jo)
	Funding Worksheet Exercise
	Shall we schedule another face-to-face meeting? June? Morning or afternoon? Location: OMSI, Murray-Scholls, Capital Center, PSU?
4:50 - 4:55	Wrap Up
4:55 - 5:00	Next Meeting - Wednesday May 9 3:30 - 5:00 - Phone & Capital Center

Detailed Notes for April 11, 2007

Subgroups summarized their current status:

• Volunteers (Mission: Increase the presence of STEM-knowledgeable volunteers in the classroom by identifying and overcoming barriers to volunteers' participation.) has made progess on field research, and a volunteers survey that will be beta-tested at the MESA Pre-Engineering Conference on April 14.
• Worksystems, Inc. may be part of a grant working on creating an infrastructure to connect volunteers to the classroom.
• Businesses (Mission: Increase the connections between businesses and educators by targeted recruitment.) has been very successful partnering with BEC to recruit National Engineers' month participants for further volunteer activities; those contacts have been passed on to the appropriate agencies.
• NOISE (Mission: Increase the resources and synergies among STEM education providers by collaborating with NOISE (Network of Informal STEM Educators)) self-organizational activity has been gaining momentum. www.omsi.edu/noise is now providing meeting notes and additional materials.  A question about listserv responses getting through was raised; Ray will follow up with OMSI’s IT people, and also provide website and listserv activity data.

Eileen gave a recap of the ETIC (part of higher education) budgeting: ETIC asked for $20 million base budget – seems secure; an additional request for $34 million was downsized to $17 million by the governor. Ways and Means recommended $7 million; ETIC is trying to get that back to $17 million.

Roger and Ryan will provide some references linking informal education to results in the formal sphere, including improved test scores.

The Group began working on the Funding Worksheet; the discussion will continue via email; Ben is collating the results.

The Group agreed another longer face-to-face meeting in June would be valuable. The next meeting will be Wednesday May 9, 3:30 – 5:30 at the Capital Center.

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro 4/13/07

Agenda for Volunteers Subgroup (Wednesday March 21)

Meeting Logistics	4:00 - 5:00 Via phone only. Please call 503.725.7201 and use conference ID 572017.
Meeting Objective	Follow up on the action items from the March 1st Motivate Workgroup Meeting and to prepare for the next meeting April 11:
Action Items	Ben Investigate surveying Intel volunteers both current and retired who log more than 100 hours/ year Tap into Intel Retirees as a source of potential classroom volunteers Endi Check with Di on PR coverage for general article on the impact of volunteers in the classroom, providing contact information for interested readers Agreed to help compile a survey to solicit desired information on volunteers All Submit survey info to Endi
Review	Draft Survey
	Any items to add to today's agenda?
	Discussion How to increase adult volunteer hours in the classroom Notes from our kick-off subgroup meeting
	Wrap Up

Agenda March 1, 2007 - Kickoff 8:30 - 1:00 at PSU

	Click to get this agenda as a pdf
8:00	Continental Breakfast and Networking
8:30	Welcome (Ben & Eileen) Goal for the Day: Develop the agenda, action items, and metrics for the year
8:35	Round table introductions (Ben) - roster What is your vision of success for this workgroup after 1 year? After 5 years?
9:00	Motivate Workgroup’s Goal and Strategy (Eileen) A Conceptual Framework: The Phase Model (Ben) – handout – “The Phase Model”
9:30	Present the Straw Proposal (Ben & Eileen) – handout – “The Straw Proposal”
10:00	Break
10:15	Discussion of the Straw Proposal What is missing? Ratify the major areas
11:15	Worksheet: How do we translate this into action? – handout “Worksheet” Identify a primary and secondary task for each of the major areas of the Straw Proposal Process – handout “Some possible Methods” Metrics Assignments
12:15	Box Lunch is served while we keep the discussion going
12:45	Wrap Up
1:00	End

Detailed Notes for March 1, 2007

Summary for March 1, 2007: Ben and Eileen hosted a half-day kickoff meeting for the Motivate Workgroup on March 1 at PSU, presenting the Phase Model conceptual framework for student motivation and a proposed workplan for the year. The workgroup ratified work in these three areas and broke into small groups and formulated action items and metrics:

• Increasing volunteers in the classroom;
  • Action Items include a Survey
• Increasing business involvement outside of the classroom;
  • Menu of choices for further involvement
  • Piggyback on survey of NEM volunteers through BEC
• Maintaining connections with NOISE (Network of Informal STEM Educators)
  • Action Items included developing recommendations for an inventory of profiles for NOISE members for Ray to share with NOISE leadership.

The current roster has 13 members including Jo and 4 advisors/interested observers. Meetings are on the second Wednesday of the month, starting in April.

Respectfully submitted, Jo Oshiro 3/12/07

For questions or information regarding OPAS and its workgroups, please email Jo Oshiro or call (503) 725.2910.