University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An analysis of program planning in schools with emerging excellence in science instructional design

(USC Thesis Other)

An analysis of program planning in schools with emerging excellence in science instructional design

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, som e thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand com er and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. AN ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM PLANNING IN SCHOOLS WITH EMERGING EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN By Karen M. Carroll A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFOERNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION August 2000 Copyright 2000 Karen M. Carroll R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3018062 Copyright 2000 by Carroll, Karen Marie All rights reserved. ___ ® UMI UMI Microform 3018062 Copyright 2001 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90007 This dissertation, written by K a rjen ^ .M ar^ ie^ jC ar^ rol.l.............................. under the direction of h.sjc. Dissertation Committee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of re quirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Dean of Graduate Studies Date Q . Q .Q D ISSE R TA TIO ^O M M IT T EE Chairperson R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Karen M. Carroll William McComas AN ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM PLANNING IN SCHOOLS WITH EMERGING EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN Science educators agree on many of the program elements that characterize exemplary science instructional programs, but it has not been clear how the processes of planning and implementation lead to excellence in program design. This study focuses on two K-12 school clusters located in unified school districts and one K-12 school cluster spanning two non-unified districts that are in the midst of building new science programs. The clusters were selected for support by an organization of educators, scientists, and businesspersons because they were recognized as likely to produce good programs. The investigation centers on three research questions: (1) To what extent have schools engaged in science education reform achieved excellence? (2) How did schools engaged in science program improvement go about achieving their goals, and (3) What contextual factors are most closely related to the realization of quality program elements? The degree to which each program studied met indicators of quality suggested by the National Science Education Standards (NSES) are described according to an Innovation Configuration (IC) Chart. Using a Stream Diagnostic method of analysis, levels of practice were associated with contextual factors categorized as Social, Organizing, R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and Resource. Findings reveal the importance of a balanced and synchronized function of all components, including administrative commitment, teacher participation, and favorable logistical aspects. Individual reform projects were more likely to be successful if they included exemplary program elements and mechanisms for program managers to access district personnel and procedures needed to implement programs. A review of the cluster case histories also revealed the positive impact of cooperation between the funding organization and the project, the degree to which professional development is directly related to the new program, and the availability of resources and support for each exemplary program element. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF FIGURES vi I INTRODUCTION 1 The Case for Reform 1 Statement of the Problem 3 Purpose of the Study 3 Significance of the Study 7 II A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 10 Introduction 10 Part A Characteristics of Good Science Programs 12 Part B Planning and Preparation for the Implementation of Good Science Programs 29 Part C Accomplishing the Institution of Excellent Science Programs 55 III METHODOLOGY 61 Purpose of the Study 61 Nature of the Study 61 Selection of Study Samples 63 Research Design 68 Data Collection 77 Data Analysis 81 Assumptions and Limitations 83 IV RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 85 Introduction 85 Description of Projects 90 Analysis of Programs, Part 1 101 Justification for Assigning Levels of Practice 104 Analysis of Programs, Part 2 130 ii R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Social Factors that Limited Progress in Program Planning and Implementation 137 Social Factors that Enhanced Progress in Program Planning and Implementation 199 V DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS 266 Introduction 266 Factors that Influenced Progress in Program Planning and Implementation 271 Implications of the Findings 294 Questions for Future Study 298 Concluding Thoughts 299 REFERENCES 303 APPENDICES 313 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 2-1 Morphology of a Sequential Planning Process 30 2-2 Stages of Concern (SoC) 40 2-3 Levels of Use (LoUs) 41 2-4 Purposes of Different Professional Learning 49 Strategies 3-1 District Demographic Profiles 67 3-2 Innovation Configuration (IC) Chart: Levels Of Practice of Program Element "Planning Goals and Strategies” 71 3-3 Codes Applied to Program Elements for Stream Charts 75 Renaissance Project Levels of Practice of Ideal 4-1 Program Elements According to the National Science Education Standards 102 4-2 Summary: Levels of Practice for Renaissance Project K-12 School Clusters 132 4-3 Summary IC Levels of Practice for the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster that are Greater than 1, with Related Contributing Factors 133 4-4 Summary: IC Levels of Practice for the Pampas High School Cluster that are Greater than 1 , with Related Contributing Factors 134 4-5 Summary: IC Levels of Practice for the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster with Contributing Factors 135 4-6 Summary: IC Levels of Practice 1 for the Pampas High School Cluster with Contributing Factors 135 tv R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 4-7 Summary: IC Levels of Practice 1 for the Hope High School Cluster with Contributing Factors 5-1 Suggestions for Planning and Implementation of Science Programs 136 295 V ' R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2-1 2-2 3-1 3-2 4-1 5-1 PAGE Conceptual Framework: Quality Science Programs, Contributing Factors, Research Questions, and Organization of Literature Review 11 Sample Stream Analysis Chart 60 Conceptual Framework: Quality Science Programs, Contributing Factors, and Research Questions 68 Sample Stream Diagnostic Chart Template 73 Sample Stream Diagnostic Chart Template 89 Stream Analysis Chart for Study of Planning and Implementation of Quality Science Programs 268 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Case for Reform The modest showing of United States students in international comparisons of achievement in science has increased national concern about the quality of science education in this country and has rekindled public interest in improving science teaching and learning. Results of the Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS) indicate that American students leave our schools less prepared in science than do students in most other developed countries (Zucker et al, 1998). The TIMSS does not fully explain what factors are responsible for students’ success in science, but the study does suggest that certain conditions of teaching and learning are associated with higher test scores; for example, schools with higher-scoring students exhibit grade level content focus, depth of content coverage rather than breadth, an absence of tracking, and curricula that are sequenced and coherent (Schmidt, 1997). While public awareness and concern result from the publication of test scores and other comparisons of student achievement, science educators also base their call for reform on new information about the ways that students learn science (Caine & Caine, 1994). Research in human cognition indicates that sequencing concepts and providing multiple contexts iTr student applications of concepts are necessary to develop student understanding (Lowery, 1998). In collaboration with scientists and science educators, some curriculum developers are designing programs that incorporate m ethods that reflect learning research and 1 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. that are based on the results of carefully controlled field testing (Nelson, 1999; Cozzens, 1996). Because the science lessons that most students in U.S. schools receive do not lead to demonstrable student understanding, it is important to rethink the way that science is taught. To bring about change, schools and districts should introduce materials, methods, and programs that have been used in schools where students have been successful in the study of science. The availability of good programs for adaptation or adoption would seem to increase the likelihood of good experiences in science for students; however, planning for their installation is necessary; and an orchestrated process of implementation that includes appropriate professional development must occur. The introduction of new programs requires cooperation on the part of numerous individuals who function in varied roles. In the collaborative processes of planning and implementation, personal factors interact with prevailing culture, and these become paramount when changes are initiated (Fullan, 1987). The manner in which stakeholders are informed and involved, ways that problems are tracked, anticipated, and interpreted in a systemic context, and strategies for making appropriate interventions in ever-changing circumstances ultimately determine the success or failure of an innovation. In 1993, the National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment (NCSESA) began the development of the National Science Education Standards (NSES), which were published in 1996. According to the NSES, schools and districts with quality science programs have goals that are known and clear to program participants. Students demonstrate deep understanding of science concepts ? R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and engage in science as they collect data, reflect on the results of their investigations, and analyze phenomena. In the ideal classroom, all students are able to access and use science equipment, materials, and other resources for experimentation and direct investigation of phenomena. They improve their oral and written communication skills as they record their findings, make conclusions, and discuss their findings with others. Students also leam how to solve real problems as they apply science concepts in real situations and integrate their knowledge across disciplines. In effective science classrooms, K-12 teachers of science model curiosity, openness to new ideas and data, and skepticism. All students participate fully in learning science (NSES, 1997). Statement of the Problem While there is growing consensus around the key elements that are necessary for optimal student success in science, how these elements are translated into effective programs through planning and implementation has not been clear. In looking at the results of reform efforts in schools and districts, evaluators characteristically find meaningful improvement difficult to document (Boyd, 1992). Clarification of the specific actions and conditions that directly result in programs that meet the criteria of quality science has not been attempted, for it is generally not possible to identify schools that are likely to produce high quality science programs. Purpose o f the Study Knowledge about factors that contribute to effective science teaching and learning is essential. Science educators need to be clear on the science concepts that are important for students to understand and the skills at which students need to be J R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. proficient. It is essential to determine the effectiveness o f science programs in developing desired knowledge and skills. Finally, there is the need to know what must be done to institute quality programs. In order to put a new or an existing program in place, there is a need to plan for its institution. This investigation was designed to assess the effectiveness o f planning and implementation in the attainment of excellent operational science programs. The effectiveness of a program may be estimated by aligning program elements with quality criteria that are based on the NSES. Factors related to levels of excellence may be researched, and knowledge o f relationships can be used to devise strategic plans for the design of quality programs. Science programs selected for support for their promise to deliver the program elements o f quality programs are suitable for a study o f planning and implementation for excellence; the study o f good programs informs those who would replicate or build on the promising practices. Program elements that are described in terms of excellence in the NSES include: - planning: goals and strategies - student discussion, interaction and input - relevance of curricula - expectations for students - methods of assessment - equal access - teachers’ collegiality - professional development - science as inquiry administrative support. - availability of resources Locating Quality Science Programs. A solution to the problem of selecting schools for the study of planning and implementation is to look at sites that have been chosen for support because of their recognized promise to deliver excellent science programs. Over time, the schools and districts in this study have been given recognition through awards, accreditation and evaluation reports, and have established a reputation R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. in the Orange County science education community for having effective science programs. Their programs were selected for support by a group of Orange County businesspersons and educators in a proposal writing process. Analysis of the planning and implementation that occur in these schools should reveal factors associated with the achievement of excellence in program design. Discernment of patterns and relationships among project goals, objectives, and the conditions that make possible their realization has implications for program developers and other stakeholders who attempt to improve science teaching and learning in schools. Achieving Excellence in Program Quality Design. The factors that affect students’ attitudes, motivation, engagement, persistence, and academic achievement are many and complex; however, innovative science programs that adhere to research- based criteria of excellence in design hold promise. Planning and implementation may be considered successful if they lead to program elements that closely approximate descriptors of excellence on which experts in science education agree. To focus on successful conditions and procedures of planning and implementation, one must first determine the quality of programs so that links can be made to the ways that excellence is achieved. To gauge the degree to which school clusters in the study have developed very good program elements, an Innovation Configuration chart can be used to display levels of excellence in a decreasing order. Criteria outlined in the NSES may be stated as levels of achievement of excellence in the program elements. The actual status of program implementation for each of the elements may be determined by comparison with the levels of practice according to the IC Chart. Stream charts 5 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (Porras, 1997) can be used to visually represent those levels and the factors that are related to them. Monitoring Change in Programs and Systems. According to those who study organizational change, vision not only precedes reform efforts, it also emerges from them (Senge, 1990a; Fullan, 1993). As a climate of change is shaped by design and through accident, problems are recognized, assessed, and addressed by participants and by change managers. In a spirit of continuous improvement, new information often substantially redirects a course of action, whereas tenaciousness to an established structure and steadfast adherence to plan details may impede progress. As implementation proceeds, therefore, goal-oriented behaviors will be in a constant state of correction. This investigation provided a glimpse of the factors that come into play in schools that are likely to demonstrate excellence in science program design. In education, there is a perpetual infusion of new' ideas and information about how students leam and which methods are effective under what circumstances. Interpretation of this information by practitioners results in a never-ending supply of new or slightly changed ideas for lessons and student learning experiences in science. Ideas may lead to whole new programs, which in turn must be tested for their effectiveness before endorsement by the science education community. In some cases, only certain parts of programs may produce results of consequence, and these need to be expanded or modified in context. Consequently, a useful study of planning and implementation takes into account that the versatility of in a system may be an essential attribute. 6 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Significance o f the Study While exemplary programs are recognized as end products, little is known regarding the processes of planning and implementation that occur in schools that develop good science programs. Documentation of the working dynamics o f program planning; identification o f the elements, processes, and patterns associated with excellence; and finding the essence o f effective science program planning and implementation will benefit decision-makers in education who must initiate, promote, and support new programs in circumstances that are likely to produce excellence. Guidelines for launching new programs should come out o f the study, so that policy makers who support the development of new programs may be assisted by the identification o f components that are commonly associated with successful planning and implementation. Determination of essential linkages among components will help in the formulation of criteria for the selection and support of promising grant proposals. Using the results of this study, program planners may recognize alternative and preferred pathways to achieve programs that match criteria of excellence. When program elements are aligned with contextual and behavioral links that enhance the likelihood of attaining quality programs, the links may be interpreted and adapted to conform to the specific circumstances of other groups that are attempting to improve their programs. Finally, administrators and teacher leaders who initiate and participate in planning for program implementation will be assisted by the identification of effective science program planning and implementation practices. Understanding the operative 7 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. principles that are known to produce excellence in program design can provide a framework for the evaluation of programs in place and classroom practice. According to Bruyn (1963), 'T he inner perspective assumes that understanding can only be achieved by actively participating in the life of the observed and gaining insight by means of introspection”. The investigator assessed and interpreted the contexts of Renaissance Project school clusters and inferred the perspectives, motives, and intentions of persons responsible for planning and implementing the projects. She is immersed in the culture of the districts, schools, and science education programs and is familiar with the school clusters and their personnel; she is not, however, a participant in the programs that were studied; nor does she have any impact on the course of their project planning and implementation. Personal experience, insight, intuition, and tacit understandings informed the analyses of data. Reflection on the results of the study was influenced by 34 years of experience in classroom science teaching, with 12 of those years largely focused as a science specialist in curriculum development, lesson design, and professional development. Project 2061 of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the NSES were used to clarify excellence, and the personal bias o f the investigator favors hands-on, inquiry-based science activities that are sequential and coherent. The research questions were these: 1. To what extent have schools engaged in science education reform achieved excellence? 2. How did schools engaged in science program improvement go about achieving their goals, and what were the actions and conditions associated with their efforts? 8 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 3. What contextual factors are most closely related to the realization of quality program elements? The data of the investigation include the information that emerged in observation and communication with participants in the three K-12 school clusters that were designated Project Tomorrow Renaissance Projects. In the study, processes were viewed holistically—as systems wr ith both internal and external dimensions and relationships (Patton, p. 40). Participants in the projects changed course as they weighed new options; recognized new priorities; experienced outcomes that were successful, unsuccessful, intended, and unintended; and found the context of their projects changed both internally and externally. The systemic nature of the projects was evident in analyses according to the Stream Diagnostic Charts. Events, processes, roles, and emerging directions w'ere recorded in Streams under the categories of Social Factors, Organizing Arrangement, and Resources. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER II A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction This review o f the literature is organized around the conceptual framework of the study, which explores the planning and implementation of excellent science programs. The framework is presented in Figure 2-1. An understanding o f the known attributes of exemplary science programs is prerequisite to their recognition and selection for identifying the factors that contribute to the development of effective programs. While science educators tend to agree on what constitutes excellence in science teaching and learning, how quality programs are planned and implemented is still not well understood. To establish the theoretical base for this investigation, it was necessary to define the characteristics of good science programs and what is known about the processes involved in building good programs. The literature review is divided into three parts, which are centered on the research questions. Research Question One asks: To what extent have schools engaged in science education reform achieved excellence? Part A outlines the characteristics of good programs, some of which have been identified or developed in response to existing problems. Research Question Two asks: How did schools engaged in science program improvement go about achieving their goals, and what were the actions and conditions associated with their efforts? Part B looks at the processes that managers of change have used to institute new programs, and includes discussion of the known 10 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 2-1 Conceptual Framework: Quality Science Programs. Contributing Factors. Research Questions, and Organization of Literature Review National Science Education Standards Research on Exemplary Practice - Social Factors - Organizing Arrangements Part B. Research Question 2 - Resources Internal External Research Question 2 Part A Effect of related factors on program outcomes Research Question 3 Part C. Embedded activities - Planning - Coordination - Classroom practice - Support Research Question 2 Part B. Levels of Practice (implementation) of Program Elements, Quality of Science Programs Research Question 1 Part A Research is centered on the elements and characteristics o f quality science programs (Research Question 1, Part A), the factors that determine levels of achievement of quality programs (Research Question 2, Part B), and patterns of relationships among levels of practice and the factors known to affect program quality (Research Question 3, Part C). 11 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. relationships between process and product in terms o f outcomes. It lists and describes conditions and strategies of effective planning and management of change, and includes the importance of leadership, individual concerns, professional development, and collaboration. Research Question Three asks: What contextual factors are most closely related to the realization of quality program elements? Part C recapitulates some implications for planning and implementation o f excellent science programs that have been drawn from the research. Part A Characteristics of Good Science Programs Need to Define and Encourage Quality Science Programs While the goals and objectives of science education have always changed somewhat in response to changes in the national interest (DeBoer, 1991), public awareness of deficiencies in U.S. students’ preparation in science were particularly aroused by Sputnik in 1957, publication of A Nation At Risk? in 1983, and release of the results of the Third International Math and Science Study in 1996. Over the last half century, there has been widespread agreement that science instruction in the United States is not effective and that it needs to be improved (DeBoer, 1997). Reform of science instruction began prior to Sputnik, but the little Russian satellite rallied national support for the curriculum projects of the “Golden Era” of science reform (Bybee, 1997). Mid-century, educators moved away from applied science and toward a structure-of-the-discipline approach in which students followed the thinking of scientists as they used raw data to draw conclusions. The 12 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. curriculum projects of the 60s were successful in that they updated content, organized around central themes, and established student centered approach. The projects did not take into account students' interests, relate content to the experience o f students, or time the teaching of abstract concepts to accommodate student readiness (Quick, 1978, cited in DeBoer, 1997). In its 1981 Charter, the National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE) was asked to clarify the status of education in the U.S. and to make policy recommendations to Secretary of Education Richard Riley. The commission compared curricula, standards, and expectations of the United States with those of other countries. Findings were summarized in the influential A Nation At Risk!, which found secondary school curricula substantially lacking. The report referred to a curricular “smorgasbord” where students typically chose less challenging pathways. In the report, the commission made recommendations for actions to be taken by educators, public officials, governing boards, parents, and others with a stake in the preparation o f U.S. students. Reforms were made at the state level, where requirements for graduation and teacher training were increased. Subject matter frameworks and courses of study in school districts were mandated. In accordance with the reforms, science educators continued academic and public discussions of appropriate science content and methods of teaching. The message of A Nation at Risk! continues into the second millennium: the education of students in science must improve for the U.S. to be competitive in a technological world. The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 1996 and 1997 measured and compared student achievement in science and math in more than 13 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 40 countries and rekindled public concern about the quality of science education in the United States. In addition to providing data on student achievement, the TIMSS suggests factors that are related to the low scores of American students. The study revealed that in the U.S., both elementary and secondary schools repeat the same science and math topics grade after grade so that American students are less likely to expand their knowledge and grasp of science than they are to be exercised on what they already know. Multiple sets o f standards are in place from district to district across the country and these have led to the "splintered vision’’ that fragments our collective effort to achieve demonstrable science literacy for all (Schmidt, 1997). The study also found that U.S. teachers have less time to prepare lessons than do teachers in Japan or Germany (Schmidt, 1997), and videotapes o f teachers teaching reveal that the lessons of U.S. teachers are less "fine-tuned” than teachers in other countries, such as Japan (Stigler & Hiebert, 1997). The results o f the TIMSS solidified the willingness of the American people to continue providing support for the improvement of science instruction in the 1990s. Three National Science Foundation (NSF) studies conducted in the late 1970s reported that in spite of the curricular reforms o f the 1960s, science teaching practices were much as they w'ere in the 1950s. Most teachers taught by lecturing with textbook- based recitation, and teachers were always in control. Answers to nearly all questions were found in the textbook, and inquiry was non-existent. Activities were workbook exercises in which students followed directions and verified information. In the early 1980s, researchers reported that the main goal o f ninety percent o f science teachers was preparation of students for further formal study of science. Over 90 percent of all 14 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. science teachers used a textbook 95 percent of the time (Weiss, cited in Kyle, 1994); therefore, the textbook determined the student experience. Most science teachers continued to present science through lectures and recitation strategies. The goals o f over 90% of science teachers were related to specific content (Kyle, 1994). Collectively, these studies imply the need to disseminate knowledge of programs and practices that are known to be effective and the need to focus professional development on the implementation of effective programs. To determine the success of programs and to identify factors associated with success, the U.S. Congress mandated a national study of Effective Schools Programs and other school-based reforms. The study was carried out by SRI International under contract in 1991-92. Investigators found that somewhere between a fifth and two- thirds of districts reported having reforms under way, but that actual change taking place is often much less than claimed by schools in a reform mode. In some cases, reform is little more than change in routine and may not be related to student outcomes. The report heightens awareness that reform efforts need to be programmatically centered on student achievement. Characteristics of Excellent Science Programs In 1985, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) undertook characterization o f the optimal student experience in science in its Project 2061. Five expert panels with members from the biological and health sciences, social and behavioral sciences, physical and information sciences, engineering, mathematics, and technology accomplished the task. Science for All Americans was published in 15 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1987 and defined the science content that all graduates should know and understand and laid the groundwork for the science standards movement that followed. In 1993, the National Research Council (NRC) published the National Science Education Standards (NSES). While states and other agencies and organizations also sponsor the writing of standards, frameworks, and criteria o f excellence, Science for All Americans and the NSES most clearly reflect consensus about the nature of good science teaching and learning. According to Susan Loucks-Horsley (1996) the '‘spirit of the Standards” encompasses learning through active engagement, inquiry, collaboration in constructing knowledge, time for students to develop deep understanding, and personal meaning through application. Published in December 1995, the NSES include content standards, standards for science teaching, professional development, assessment, science education programs, and science education systems. In writing the National Science Education Standards (NSES), the National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment (NCSESA) was able to draw on considerable research on the nature and attributes o f quality science education programs and effective science education reform. The NSES provide criteria for use in planning and implementation of quality science programs. According to the NSES, planning leads to a K-12 science program that is consistent within and across grade levels. Goals and expectations for students and selection o f units are based on a philosophy, vision, and purpose articulated throughout planning and implementation. Assessments, support systems, and formal and informal expectations of teachers are also aligned with goals, student expectations, and frameworks. Planning for quality science programs specifies the persons who will determine, maintain, and upgrade 16 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. program elements. Planning details the selection of developmentally appropriate and relevant curricular materials. Planning promotes student understanding through inquiry; connects science to other school subjects; includes all content standards and necessary unifying concepts and processes, and shows a balance of physical, life, earth and space science, technology, personal and social perspectives; and the history and nature of science. Ideally, good teaching strategies are incorporated in the design of programs. Teachers are supported as they fine-tune their practice in professional development that is planned and coordinated with program elements. According to the NSES, successful programs are supported by administration, parents, and other community. Meaningful assessment requires students to demonstrate understanding o f concepts and is used both to inform teaching and to provide feedback to students. Excellent science programs incorporate a curriculum that is coherent and organized according to a scope and sequence that is developmentally appropriate. When societal issues related to science and technology are infused into the standard curricula, students are more likely to become scientifically literate and capable of making informed decisions based on their knowledge of science. A discussion of the elements considered to be essential to excellence in science program follows. Inquiry Teaching. Inquiry is a set of processes by which scientists and students ask questions about the natural world and investigate phenomena. In using inquiry, students acquire knowledge and develop understanding of concepts, principles, models, and theories (Wenning, 1999). Student inquiry in the science classroom is seen as students engage in a range of activities that give them 17 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. opportunities to observe, collect data, reflect, and analyze firsthand events and phenomena. Conducting scientific inquiry requires that students have easy, equitable, and frequent opportunities to use equipment, materials, and other resources for experimentation and direct investigation o f phenomena. Teachers may allow students to pursue topics in which they hold a particular interest as they balance student- centered developmental learning with teacher directed activities. In an exemplary science class, students collect data, reflect on the results of their investigations and discuss them with others, and analyze phenomena. Students critically analyze media, books, and journals. They have a voice in decisions about the content and context, and help design the learning environment. Ideally, students collaborate with each other and take responsibility for the learning of their fellow team members and classmates (NSES, 1995). Ordinarily, students who are taught according to traditional methods and materials have little opportunity to explore alternative solutions to problems and they are often expected to come up with one right answer. Exercises called "problem solving” approach may in reality be nothing more than opportunities to do calculations and answer questions posed at the end of textbook chapters (Taagepera et al, 1997). Students need practice to delimit, clarify, and refine problems. According to Ost (1975), students need to practice solving comprehensive problems. Such problems require more than simple, discipline-based knowledge. Skills, concepts and processes from interdisciplinary settings are integrated with cognitive, affective and psychomotor tasks in comprehensive problem solving. 18 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Kyle, Shymansky, and Alport (1982) found that students who experienced the inquiry-based science curricula o f the 60s performed better on achievement measures than did students who had traditional courses that focused on content over process. Attitudes were more positive and higher order thinking skills were demonstrated to a greater degree. Students’ performance in reading, mathematics, and communication skills was also better. The data were interpreted to validate the innovative curricula, but some investigators point out that there were differences in the levels of students being compared; only the top 20 percent of students were tracked into courses where the curricula were used (Grant, 1997). Role of Administration. District and site administration must be committed to the goals and structure of a program (McLaughlin, 1992). In schools with exemplary science programs, administrators work with teachers and community members to find the resources that are needed to support programs (Dana, T.M. et al, 1997). District level administration and principals watch for opportunities to secure funding for program improvement and use grant writing opportunities to refine their ideas for new programs. Administration and teacher leaders design professional development experiences that match teachers’ needs (Hall and Hord, 1987). District and site-level administrators continuously appraise professional development opportunities for themselves and for members o f their staff. They encourage teachers to attend workshops, classes, relevant meetings, and to visit the classrooms of other teachers at their own school and at other schools (Leithwood, 1992). Administrators encourage teachers to attend workshops, classes, relevant meetings, and to visit the classrooms of other teachers at their own school and at other schools (Leithwood, 1992). Other 19 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. important roles of administration in the planning and implementation of programs are to encourage the participation of stakeholders, ensure that progress is made over time, assess the effectiveness of actions taken, and smooth the way for program leadership (NSES, 1995). In its study of reform, SRI International (1995) suggested that districts in which the central office takes an active role in support of reforms are more likely to develop sustainable programs. The research group noted that schools depend on their districts for many things, such as good will, permission to experiment, resources, and supportive organizational structures. District policies, actions, and conditions can also seriously impede school-level initiatives. Lack of mechanisms for working together across district lines in those districts that are non-unified makes realization o f an inter district project virtually impossible. Roles of Parents and Community. Planning and implementation o f science programs ideally structure ways for parents to leam what good science teaching and learning look like and ways for parents to support their child’s interest and accomplishment in science. While many parents look to see what their children are learning in the science textbooks that are brought home, teachers and administrators do well to encourage parents to examine student work. Record sheets and graphs reveal the investigative work that goes on in classrooms. When knowledgeable parents work with teachers in the classroom as volunteers or invited guests, they can look for the active engagement of students as they leam (Lapp, 1984). In visiting classrooms, parents can see for themselves whether or not there are adequate resources to support hands-on instruction. Reviewing instructional materials 20 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. enables parents to see whether or not conceptual learning prevails over the transmission o f facts. As involved members o f the community, parents can determine if science is part of the core curriculum and whether or not the district and school are committed to science for all students. At home, parents can reinforce their child’s interest in science by asking open-ended questions, discussing newspaper stories and TV programs on scientific topics, and encouraging healthy skepticism about conclusions that are made on the basis of limited information. In some circumstances, parents may be involved in the processes o f planning and implementation along with educators. Participation of community members can result in rich programs and provision of resources to science classrooms beyond those that the educational system is able to supply. Parents help to find resources for teaching science. Local foundations and philanthropic organizations and corporations may be identified and contacted. If they are able, parents can help teachers organize materials for student hand-on activities. If they have the background, parents can be co-teachers or consultants for specific science units or lessons. Parents can be powerful advocates for inquiry and hands-on science (Cozzens, 1996; NSES, 1995). Role o f Assessment. To evaluate the effectiveness of a science program, it is necessary to determine whether its operational format actually results in students’ acquisition of conceptual understanding and skills. Planning lays out methods of assessment so that teachers can establish students’ prior knowledge and gauge the effectiveness o f their instruction. Multiple methods should be used to measure student understanding. Assessments may be performance tasks, paper/pencil tests, portfolios, student interviews, embedded assessments, and projects (Grant, 1997). Good 21 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. assessments are intended to be fair to all students, and may make use of educational technologies such as video, computers, and telecommunications (NSES, 1995). The assessment of student achievement is not a simple issue. Three types of knowledge in science include declarative, structure and metacognition (Shavelson & Ruiz-Primo, 1998). Prepositional or declarative knowledge about facts, concepts, and principles is efficiently measured in multiple-choice and short-answer achievement tests. Concept maps are valid and reliable to assess structural knowledge; experts demonstrate rich interrelationships while novices cannot. In metacognition, individuals monitor their thinking. Ways to measure the construct have not been worked into achievement testing. Not only are there different kinds of knowledge, science as a process requires measurement of aspects of student achievement other than acquisition of factual knowledge and concepts. Scientists conduct investigations in which they test their theories. Achievement in science, therefore, includes procedural knowledge— knowing how to do something. Paper-and-pencil tests do not measure this type of procedural knowledge. Rather, student-conducted hands-on investigations or performance assessments are a more valid measure of science process. (Ruiz-Primo & Shavelson, 1996). Curricular Materials. Historically, little science has been taught in elementary schools in the United States. Hoping to motivate teachers to teach more science with an inquiry-based hands-on approach, the National Science Foundation resumed development of instructional materials for elementary school science in 1986 in its TRIAD projects. The Foundation’s Directorate for Education and Human Resources 22 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (EHR) in its Review of Instructional Materials for Middle School Science Division of Elementary, Secondary, and Informal Education (cited in Cozzens, 1997) provided guidelines for the identification of quality science materials. The TRIAD projects involved teams of scientists, materials developers, teachers, and publishers. The criteria for reviewing instructional materials hinged on three foundational questions: (a) is the science content included correct? (b) How well designed are the materials to provide for conceptual growth in science? (c) How well do the materials align with the NSES? (Cozzens, 1997). The Projects’ reviews resulted in an endorsement of materials that met their criteria, such as Full Option Science Series (FOSS), Insights, and Science and Technology for Children (STC) at the elementary level. In the early 1990s, the NSF supported the development of instructional materials for middle school science students. The materials recommended by EHR contextualize subject matter, are conceptual in format, emphasize application of concepts, and often employ a Science, Technology, and Society (STS) perspective. The Foundation recognizes a continuing lack of programs and materials that would provide a coherent and comprehensive scope and sequence for K-12 science and continues to support refinement and enhancement of existing materials as well as ongoing, research-based materials development (Stutsman, personal communication, April 13, 1999). In its Review of Instructional Materials, the EHR also set standards for pedagogical design that include a logical progression of concepts to develop conceptual understanding; opportunities for students to support, reject, and revise explanations of phenomena; and connections of science to everyday issues and events. 23 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Instructional materials need to be developmentally appropriate for ALL students and reflect current knowledge about effective teaching, learning, and assessment. The Foundation encourages development of projects that (a) involve students in research experiences and the scientific process; (b) use technology to facilitate collaborative learning among students and teachers; (c) teach design constrained by specifications and context; and (d) use authentic workplace situations for disciplinary content, workplace competencies, and career awareness (Cozzens, 1997). In secondary schools, the selection o f instructional materials is critical. If teachers do not possess a natural talent for lesson design, they are likely to rely heavily on textbooks. When excellent curricular materials are chosen and teachers are trained in their use, the probability of achieving optimal student results is highest. Professional organizations in science such as the National Science Teachers Association disseminate science activities that are deemed excellent and publish position papers that advocate inquiry, STS, and hands-on teaching for all students (NSTA, 1990). Focus on guides, frameworks, and standards since the publication of A Nation at Risk! has ensured that guidelines are available to help in the design of excellent programs and the selection of good curricular materials. Due in part to legislation following release of the report, typical school science programs have a scope and sequence outlined in frameworks or courses of study. In 1989, Bill Aldridge of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) wrote an article advocating the inclusion of the life, earth, and physical sciences each year so that students would study each of these over time at a developmentally appropriate level. “Essential 24 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. changes in secondary science: scope, sequence, and coordination” was first published in NSTA Reports! and placed emphasis on providing students opportunities to study each o f the three disciplines. Sequencing and coordinating Earth, life, and physical science across grade levels better ensures that students receive a foundation for further study in the sciences and for science related careers than does limiting the student experience to just one or two of the disciplines in science. The sequence and organization of concepts is important to develop student understanding o f concepts, as is the design of the student experience around content. Some practitioners have seen promise in cross-age tutoring to enhance learning on the part of tutors and the children whom they tutor. The Peer Research Laboratory at the City University o f New York studied the benefits of tutoring for both tutors and the children that they tutor. Tutees are motivated and leam as they communicate with their tutors. Tutors leam their subject matter efficiently and how to listen and communicate effectively, and they leam about learning (Gartner & Riessman, 1993). Teaching Standard F o f the NSES addresses ongoing planning and development o f school science programs. When designing programs, teachers need to place: • Less emphasis on treating all students alike and responding to the group as a whole, and more emphasis on understanding and responding to individual student's interests, strengths, experiences, and needs. • Less emphasis on rigidly following a single curriculum, and more emphasis on selecting and adapting curricula. • Less emphasis on focusing on student acquisition of information, and more emphasis on student understanding and use of scientific knowledge, ideas, and inquiry processes. 25 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. • Less emphasis on presenting scientific knowledge through lecture, text, and demonstration, and more emphasis on guiding students in active and extended scientific inquiry. • Less emphasis on asking for recitation o f acquired knowledge, and more emphasis on providing opportunities for scientific discussion and debate among students. • Less emphasis on testing students for factual information at the end of the student unit or chapter, and more emphasis on continuously assessing understanding. • Less emphasis on maintaining responsibility and authority, and more emphasis on sharing responsibility for learning with students. • Less emphasis on supporting competition, and more emphasis on cooperation, shared responsibility, and respect; and • Less emphasis on working along, and more emphasis on working with other teachers to enhance the science program. Programs encompass (1) curricular materials and methods used in the classroom, (2) teacher practitioners and what they do, and (3) the resources that support programs in the classroom. Planning for effective science programs at both the national, state, and local levels must specify criteria for each of these. Infusion of Science. Technology, and Society. In the last several decades, there has been a renewal of efforts to promote science education to better the condition of society and the need to plan for an unknowable future. A good learning environment may enable students to connect what they leam in the classroom to real problems (Ost and Yager, 1993). A Science, Technology, and Society approach is meant to instill scientific literacy as it encourages interest in the interactions among science, technology, and society in solving real problems. It may also help students become better at thinking critically, reasoning logically, solving problems creatively, and 26 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. making decisions (Aikenhead, 1994). STS science instruction is relevant to students' lives, and for that reason must proceed to the level of application (Solomon, 1994). Research supports STS teaching in terms of student achievement. Purposeful introduction of STS content results in greater achievement of STS objectives, and students fare as well on standard subject matter tests as do students in groups who experience traditional teaching. On the other hand, students who experience traditional teaching do not achieve STS objectives (Klopfer & Cooley, 1963). In 1982, the National Science Teachers Association in its Search for Excellence began recognition of exemplary programs that included aspects of science literacy, technology applications, and components designed to help all students develop critical thinking skills. Criteria for selection of the programs were derived from Project Synthesis and included science for meeting personal needs, resolving current societal issues, assisting with career choices, and preparing for further study (Ost& Yager, 1993). Identification of Exemplary Schools Several agencies recommend programs or provide recognition to those that meet criteria of excellence. The U.S. Department of Education in Washington, D.C. recognizes Blue Ribbon Schools that match the criteria of its National Review Panel. The Panel requires nominating schools to demonstrate how curriculum, instruction, assessment, scheduling, staff development, hiring, and student advising are designed to promote student success. For documentation of the claims made in schools’ applications, the Blue Ribbon Schools Program requires that the schools provide quantifiable evidence of the effectiveness of school community practices and 27 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. initiatives on student outcomes and school performance. Other agencies that promote promising practices are the National Diffusion Network and the National Laboratories, both of which have databases o f science programs that have been identified at national, state, and local levels. The Eisenhower National Clearinghouse also conducts a broad-based search, nomination, and review process to identify promising practices in science (U.S. Department of Education Office o f Educational Research and Improvement, 1998). That selection process has four stages: (I) each consortium of the Regional Laboratories solicits nominations using a customized application form; (2) panels of science educators in each region evaluate the programs’ innovativeness, support of national standards, effectiveness, and transferability; (3) representatives from each of the ten regional ENC consortiums conduct a review to ensure consistency across the nation; and (4) Site visits are made to confirm that selected programs and practices conform to their descriptions in nomination and review materials. Schools that were successful on the TIMSS may provide clues regarding effective practice; for example, Minnesota schools ranked #1 on the Earth science part of the international exam. State officials credit the consistency of the Earth science curriculum across all state schools at the 8th grade, where the concepts were tested. The opinions of science educators who are well-regarded in their communities are no doubt a source of information about good science programs in their areas. Principals and science department chairs would also be a reliable source o f information about good science programs in schools. Once possible sites for study are identified, an investigator needs to visit the schools to observe the teaching and learning that 28 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. actually takes place. In order to assess whether or not programs are truly excellent, criteria must be formulated or adapted from reliable sources. In this study, schools likely to develop exemplary science programs were identified by a non-profit group of businesspersons, university professors, school administrators, and teachers in a selection process that involved proposal writing. The investigator used an Innovation Configuration chart based on criteria outlined in the NSES to determine the degree to which the schools had achieved excellence in the elements of their program design (Appendix Al. Part B Planning and Preparation for the Implementation of Good Science Programs Effective Planning in Business and Education Both business and education have contributed to our knowledge of effective planning and implementation of innovations. In both settings, the actual process of laying out plans often is carried out in a linear fashion. Groups often begin with problem clarification, gathering of relevant information, and construction of models that encompass potential solutions. After arriving at a consensus on goals and objectives, groups list the basic tasks that need to be accomplished. Models may be totally new and untried structures, or they may involve the adoption and adaptation of existing formats. Older management models of planning outlined the steps of planning in this sequential fashion. For example, Paul Nutt (1981) of Ohio University conceived a planning morphology with five stages and three steps. 29 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 2-1 Morphology of a Sequential Planning Process Planning Steps Planning Stages Formulati on Search Synthesis Analysis Phase I — Problem 1. Silent listing of problems Identification 2. Sequential recording 3. Group interaction - rate problems Concepts Phase II — Knowle 4. Silent listing of solutions to problems dge Exploration 5. Sequential recording 6. Group interaction - rate solutions Detailing Phase III — Formul 7. Program Development ate Plan - Evaluation Phase IV — Present 8. Record objections to final solutions plan to users — prog;ram evaluation Implemen tation Phase V -Presentat development - 9. Record unnecessary criticisms to current practices ion to resources contrailer, priority (Nutt, 1994). R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Planning Stages include Formulation, Concept, Detailing, Evaluation, and Implementation; Planning Steps are Search, Synthesis, and Analysis. Figure 2-2 is an application o f the morphology to a Program Planning Method (PPM) of Delbecq and Van de Ven. To the extent that leaders embrace the tenets o f organizational change, they strategize bringing stakeholders on board. Courses o f action designed to achieve goals and manage change in organizations may be categorized according to beliefs about the roles of essential players and what it takes to motivate new behaviors on the part of all who are involved. The Rand Change Agent study identified four patterns of project planning strategies: top down, grass roots, no planning, and collaborative planning. Wherever the impetus for change originates, success is more likely if all levels of participants to perceive themselves as partners in some way. Three factors that affect teacher commitment to new projects include the motivation of district administrations, the planning strategies that are employed, and the scope of a project. Projects that involve whole districts are more likely to engage the interest and commitment of teachers than are those that focus on a few schools or on parts of schools (McLaughlin and Marsh, 1978). Planning strategies may also be referred to as compliance-based, rational, empirical-rational, normative-re-educative, and emergent. Strategies that are based on compliance require authority for enforcement and do not change minds or hearts. To bring about change through edict, leaders must represent or work in concert with management, law, or other authority. Models of planning and implementation developed over the last several decades tend to minimize mandates and compliance as they incorporate participation at various stages of the 31 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. process (Argyris, cited in Schein, 1998). The value of participation is discussed in Participation of Stakeholders in Planning, which follows this section. Rational methods of planning include research and dissemination of knowledge about the innovation, selection of knowledgeable and skilled personnel to carry out tasks, analysis of the systems within which changes will occur, and communication o f intent. Empirical-rational strategies are based on an assumption that men are rational and follow rational self-interest. In line with this assumption, change- agents propose a situation that is desirable and in line with the interests of a group. Utopian thinking is an empirical-rational strategy; change agents present a vision that can be translated into goals. The worthy promises that appear in grant and investment proposals give funding agencies hope that they are building a better tomorrow, and may be placed in this category (Chin & Benne, 1969). Persuasion that is based on the desirability of outcomes is often incorporated at some stage of program planning and implementation. Change agents may work to reshape worldviews. According to Chin and Benne (1969), normative-re-educative strategies require change agent awareness of client perceptions so that ways may be structured for clients to participate in planning. In the participatory setting, leaders would build on value systems and attitudes that are based on socio-cultural norms. Over a 20-year period, Nutt (1998) compiled a database of 376 business decisions made by managers at private firms, government agencies, and non-profit organizations. He interviewed executives familiar with specific decisions and responsible for carrying them out. He recorded sequences of planning steps taken and the results o f those steps. Decisions were considered completely successful if they 32 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. were adopted and used for at least two years. One third of business decisions were initial failures, around one half were partially implemented or discontinued, leaving fewer than 20% that were successful. Nutt did not discuss the impact of new information or the advisability of changing or rejecting the innovations that he studied. Nutt identified a common strategy was employed in cases where planning and implementation led to implementation of an innovation as originally conceived. Referred to as “intervention” by Nutt, the strategy involves stakeholders in seeing a disparity between expectations and practice. Courses of action mandated by management alone were on the whole not successful in achieving implementation. His model did not address whether or not innovations or plans were appropriate or whether they were abandoned simply because better solutions may have presented themselves as events unfolded and situations changed. Theories of emergent planning involve co-strategists learning about their organizations as they continuously discover alternative tools and processes. Goals themselves may undergo refinement or transformation. Projects that are not well conceived may need to be abandoned; at the same time, they may include the germ of a good idea that is worthy of expansion. Detailed plans for action that will take place over a year or more will in all likelihood be discarded as goals are revisited and results are evaluated (Mintzberg, 1987). In the last several decades, a model of emergent planning began taking hold while the more traditional notion that a plan must be followed with little deviation was questioned. In the past, good strategies were judged according to their logic, detail, and specificity; successful implementation meant that a plan was followed faithfully. The reality is that actual links between actions and their 33 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. outcomes become lost in the detail of what happens in the course of planning and implementing an innovation over time. As people act in new ways as they implement new programs, paradigm shifts occur. As individuals collaborate, personal learning takes place (Fullan, 1993). It may not be practical to solidify intent well ahead of action, as there is a need to continuously reflect on the results of actions. Systems are basically organized to maintain stability, and introducing change is disruptive. According to Fullan, four core capacities needed to make change are personal vision building, inquiry, mastery, and collaboration. Institutional counterparts include shared vision building, norms and practices of inquiry, organizational development and know-how, and collaborative work cultures. Organizations that undertake planning for change need to appreciate difficulty as a natural part o f the process. Diligent planning and actions that seem logical may sometimes worsen conditions, while actions that have questionable merit may result in positive outcomes after all. Managers do not foresee as often as they come to understand the dynamics o f a process through experience. Getting all stakeholders on board in advance is not really possible, because many factors and their effects will not be evident until implementation is underway. Ownership is not achieved ahead of the fact but comes out of full engagement in problem solving over time. Ownership grows strong as a change process takes hold. For these reasons, organizations are less likely to achieve known and fixed objectives than they are to discover where they really need to be and how to get there as action proceeds. According to Mintzberg (1987, p. 68), ‘"Smart strategists appreciate that they cannot always be smart enough to think through 34 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. everything in advance.” Strategies form as often as they are formulated; they emerge in situations that unfold. Participation of Stakeholders in Planning. Data from field studies indicate that participation in the formulation phase of planning improves the likelihood of program success. A review of the factors having an effect on reform in the Coalition of Essential Schools concluded that it is helpful for a whole faculty to be involved in developing vision, understanding mission and purpose, and planning for implementation. Whole-staff or team meetings of teachers are typical in successful reform efforts (Hord, 1997). Robertson (1994) emphasizes the need to involve a range o f personnel in decision-making. In schools that are empowered at the site level, a greater proportion o f individuals participate with greater frequency in more kinds of professional development. Darling-Hammond likewise (1996) promotes shared decision making in processes that are designed to bring about curriculum reform and transform teaching. While numerous authors recommend wide participation, Fullan (1993) warns that because of the dynamic nature o f change, ideas presented at the start of a program may not be relevant once implementation is underway. This reality must be balanced against the need to involve all participants to gamer support. While initial shared visions change, bringing staff together to develop vision, identify problems, work towards solutions, and leam builds a healthy organizational culture as it advances the progress of an innovation. In schools, a learning community can be brought about with the endorsement and active participation of the principal (Hord, 1997). 33 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Leadership for Planning and Implementation. The qualities, abilities, and actions of those who lead determine the success of planning and implementation of new programs. Leaders’ beliefs, biases, and repertoire of strategies strongly influence the directions that come to be embedded in the plans of an organization. Leaders build shared vision, surface and challenge mental models, and engage in systems thinking (Senge, 1990a, 1990b). They encourage the personal visions of individuals, which in turn shape what becomes the shared vision of an organization. As leaders represent institutional or corporate points of view, they also reveal their own vision. Good leaders need to be thoughtful, knowledgeable, and open (Senge, 1990b), as they must challenge assumptions in ways that do not provoke defensiveness. At times, managers of change confront complex issues with equally knowledgeable people, so leaders need to acknowledge existing expertise, validate different perspectives, and reveal the reasons for their advocacy of an innovation. Leaders of reform efforts in science education do well to immerse themselves in reform literature and be true to their ideals in word and in deed, relying on their ability to gain support through communication of their personal vision. Leaders (1) have strong community ties, (2) embrace isolation and immersion, (3) take on public identities through stories, and (4) inspire loyal followers who carry out plans without force or compliance (Gardner cited in Bennis, 1996). Leaders acquire these attributes through full participation in the world from which their craft is derived. By observing schools in the midst of change, researchers distinguish patterns in the behaviors and techniques of effective change agents. Effective change facilitators watch for opportunities to take action (Hall and Hord, 1987). Principals actively cultivate a climate that is conducive to the successful implementation of 36 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. change (McLaughlin & Marsh, 1978). They are the primary conduits of needed support for teachers who are being asked to change their practice, and effective principals intervene directly and constantly as new programs are being put in place. Application o f Change Theory in Program Planning and Implementation When change is on the horizon, some individuals avoid involvement for as long as possible. Persons may place blame for existing problems on persons or situations that are unrelated to proposed changes. Lewin's change model of unfreezing, changing, and reffeezing explains change as a dynamic process that involves a painful cognitive restructuring of thoughts, perceptions, feelings, and attitudes (Schein, 1998). Some people need to experience discomfort before they are willing to come on board. “Survival anxiety" is a feeling that changes must be made in order for needs to be met (Argyris, cited in Schein, 1998), and may tip the balance in favor of making change for some individuals. Willingness to explore new ways of doing things begins when expectations or hopes are not realized, resulting in disappointment and frustration. In the early 1970s, Wallace, Dossett, and Hall o f the University of Texas at Austin developed a model representing the personal side of change, the Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM). Their work and that of Frances Fuller, Shirley Hord, and others resulted in a useful taxonomy that provides diagnostic techniques, intervention procedures, and ways to monitor change in organizations. Readiness for change is estimated in charts of Stages of Concern and Levels of Use. Courses of action or interventions are prescribed for the different states and levels to increase the likelihood of successful implementation. The CBAM model has influenced ways that 37 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. change is managed in education, and its tenets are widely applied as change is introduced in schools. The model stresses the importance o f understanding teacher attitudes and skills so that staff development, coaching, support, and solutions to problems are in line with teachers’ perceptions of their needs. Planning and implementation of new programs require knowledge o f change as a process and of the institutional and personal elements inherent in the change process. For teachers at various levels of expertise, there need to be multiple entry points along a learning continuum as well as multiple options. For example, introductory workshops and technical assistance are most useful for teachers who have little experience with hands-on science or the inquiry approach in teaching science. Emerging leaders, on the other hand, need professional development time to strategize and hone their skills with their peers (Grant, 1997). Effective interventions are tailored to the concerns of teachers. Beginning teachers care most about class control, mastery of the content they teach, their relative security, evaluation by supervisors, and appraisal by pupils (Fuller, cited in Hall & Hord, 1987). Before they become fully immersed in their work, new teachers have unrelated concerns, such as those that are personal and social. The complexity of task concerns increases with experience, and later in their careers teachers are more ready to judge the impact of what they do and how their practice might be improved. Knowledge of the varying needs of teachers at different stages in their careers is crucial to the processes of planning and implementation (Loucks-Horsely, 1998). Individual Stages o f Concern During Change. The Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM) establishes individual and group profiles that suggest specific actions or interventions as needed to drive planning and implementation. Seven Stages of 38 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Concern have been identified (SoC), which measure individual perceptions of and feelings about an innovation. The stages range from early self concerns through task and impact concerns and may be assessed during ^one-legged conferences” or brief conversations that occur when change facilitators encounter the users of an innovation in the usual course of day-to-day exchange (Hall and Hord, 1987). The stages are listed in Figure 2-3. The extent to which programs are in place can be assessed through alignment with Levels of Use (LoU). LoUs range from nonuse to full implementation and are listed in Figure 2-4. Mechanical use of materials and participation in a new program is typical in the early stages of an implementation, but making program modifications to improve student achievement are not realistic unless changes are based on experience and real data. Good planning anticipates individuals’ concerns at each stage and determines LoUs in order to anticipate users’ needs. At lower LoUs, teachers are not ready to share or assist others or engage in meaningful program evaluation. Change facilitators estimate Levels of Use through observation and interviews. When innovations are implemented, differences may be observed in the degree to which practice is true to that intended. The Rand Study determined whether or not imiovations were successfully established (McLaughlin and Marsh, 1978), but did not address whether or not projects closely adhered to intended program design. It is possible that no plan can be put into place in multiple settings without some adaptation 39 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 2-2 Stages of Concern (SoC) Impact Stage 7 Refocusing: The more universal benefits of the innovation are explored, including the possibility of changes or replacement. The Individual has definite ideas regarding alternatives. Stage 6 Collaboration: The focus is on coordination and cooperation with others regarding use of the innovation. Stage 5 Consequence: Attention is given to the impact of an innovation on the students in an immediate sphere of influence. The focus is on relevance of the innovation for students and evaluation of student outcomes, and changes that might improve student outcomes. Task Stage 4 Management: Attention is focused on the processes and tasks of using the innovation and accessing information and resources. Issues of concern are related to efficiency, organizing, managing, scheduling, and demands. Self Stage 3 Informational: Awareness of an innovation and interest in learning about it. An individual is interested in aspects of the innovation such as its effects and requirements. Stage 2 Personal: Individual is uncertain about the demands of an innovation, his or her adequacy to meet demands, and what his or her role might be. The reward structure of an organization, decision-making and potential conflicts with existing structures of personal commitment are considered. Financial and status implications o f the program are weighed. Stage 1 Awareness: An individual is interested in aspects of the innovation such as its effects and requirements. Unrelated Stage 0 A potential user of an innovation has no knowledge of the innovation or no awareness of its possibilities for use. Hall and Hord, 1987 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 2-3 Levels of Use (LoUs) Level 0 Non-use The individual has little or no knowledge of the innovation, no involvement with it, and is doing nothing toward becoming involved. Decision Point A Takes action to learn more detailed information about the innovation. Level I Orientation The individual has or is acquiring information about the innovation and/or has explored its value orientation and what it will require. Decision Point B Makes a decisions to use the innovation by establishing a time to begin. Level II Preparation The individual is preparing for the first use of the innovation. Decision Point C Begins first use of the innovation. Level III Mechanical Use The individual focuses most effort on the short-term, day-to- day use of the innovation with little time for reflection. Effort is primarily directed toward mastering tasks required to use the innovation. Use is often disjointed and superficial. Decision Point D-l Routine pattern of use is established. Level IVA Routine Use of the innovation is stabilized. Few, if any, changes are being made in ongoing use. Minimal efforts and thoughts to improve innovation use or its consequences. Decision Point D-2 Changes use of the innovation based on format or informal evaluation to improve expected benefits. Level IVB Refinement The innovator varies the use of the innovation to increase the expected benefits within the immediate sphere of influence. Variations are based on knowledge of both short and long term consequences and benefits. Decision Point E Initiates changes in the use of the innovation based on input from and in coordination with colleagues to improve expected benefits. Level V Integration The innovator is combining own efforts with related activities of colleagues to achieve a collective impact within the collective spheres of influence. Decision Point F Begins exploring alternatives or major modifications to the innovation presently in use. Level VI Renewal The user reevaluates the quality of use of the innovation, seeks major modifications of, or alternatives to, present innovation to achieve increased impact, examines new developments in the field, and explores new goals for self and the larger community. From Hord, S. M., Rutherlbrd, William L., Huling-Austin, Leslie and Hall, G. E. (1987) p. 55. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and promising practices may be unsuccessful because they are transferred without regard to differences in settings (Chin & Benne, 1969). Assessing the status of an innovation is an ongoing challenge. According to evaluators, researcher-developed curricular materials in science fail without adequate linkage between consumers and researchers. Materials may not suit consumers in the first place, may not be used as intended, or programs may not be adequately understood at the onset of implementation. For example, the 1970s studies of the post-Sputnik curriculum projects concluded that they were not successful overall because teachers charged with their use did not receive adequate prior direction or support during their use (Fullan, 1993). Disappointment results when adequate time for change to take place is not provided, and when efforts are referred to as unsuccessful before fruition is possible (Hall and Rutherford, cited in Hall & Hord, 1987). Because of the fluidity of the change process, Senge (1990a) reminds change managers to look at what takes place over time rather than expect immediate results. In this sense, immediate issues of cause and effect are actually less indicative of the success of an innovation than are the dynamic interrelationships across a system in which an innovation is placed. Confronting Problems through Intervention. Marsh and Jordan-Marsh (1985) identified three clusters of personal concerns: (1) organizational, political, professional. (2) decision-making, commitment, and (3) self-task. Building on the work o f Bandura and Janis and Mann, they suggested strategies 42 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to help those who must evaluate an innovation for possible adoption or adaptation; for example, a balance sheet helps individuals identify risks and gains. The inner beliefs of individuals are more powerful than incentives from the outside, and leaders must assure potential supporters that outcomes are achievable. Information about self-efficacy concerns surface in performance situations, and those who plan need to provide experiences that are designed to build confidence and competence. Users may begin at the same point, but not all users progress through SoCs and LoUs at the same rate. Leaders consequently need to tailor opportunities that they make available and messages that they deliver based on individual readiness. Early in a process, the same experience can be provided to everyone, while individualized contact and communication strategies or interventions become necessary later in the process of implementation. The number of contacts meant to influence the practice and behaviors of program participants positively correlate with the success of implementing an innovation as defined by progress in stages of concern, levels of use, and innovation configurations (Hall & Hord, 1987). Innovation Configuration (IC) charts can be used to analyze the levels of practice of program elements. Individuals may adapt, or in some cases greatly modify programs that are introduced. Clarification o f configurations informs decisions to make (Hall and Hord, 1987), and helps to see how closely actual practice approximates an ideal or full implementation. For clarification of the way an innovation is meant to look as it 43 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. is put into place, an Innovation Configuration (IC) chart can be constructed. A set of descriptions is generated to gauge both the extent o f implementation and the fidelity to an intended structure and course of action. As a benchmark, an ideal state of program practice is stated. Next, a close approximation to that ideal is described. Another, operational state should be depicted to form a continuum. Such a grading of practice may enable program managers to compare their own image of an innovation with that of the developer, and it may be helpful for staying on track as a project is initiated. Using an Innovation Configuration chart for the purpose of mapping progress in implementation, coordinators, participants, and evaluators need to understand the nature of the innovation, distinguish approximations that will lead to its realization, and recognize instances of misapplication or subtle substitution. Through interviews, observations, and an analysis of key documents, questions about the actual use of the innovation can be answered. A sample IC chart showing degrees to which a curriculum module is practiced follows: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 All units and most activ ities are taught Most units and activities are taught Some units are taught A few selected activities are taught No units nor activities are taught For a program, there might be eight to fifteen components for which to list degrees of practice, with two to six variations for each. The practice is 44 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. iterative, interactive, and collaborative (Caffarella, 1999). The Innovation Configuration for this study is found in Appendix A. Effective Professional Development. The ability of teachers to productively engage in the planning and implementation of good science programs depends to a large degree on their level of preparedness. If participants do not have an adequate repertoire of what works in the classroom, they cannot contribute effectively. Teachers have the primary responsibility for planning and implementing curriculum within their individual systems (Fullan, 1993) and teacher preparation therefore directly affects the quality of students' learning experiences in science. For K-12 teams to plan a sequential continuum of K-12 experiences in science, teachers must have both content and pedagogical content knowledge (AAAS, 1993). Nonetheless, teachers’ understanding of what science content is appropriate for students at a given developmental level and what activities best facilitate student learning is essential to effective teaching and learning (Shulman, 1986, 1987). By raising a level of awareness and increasing project related knowledge, professional development is helpful if teachers are to participate effectively in the development of a plausible plan. It is necessary to advance teachers along a continuum of awareness, understanding, and expertise regarding the rationale for and technical management of programs (Loucks-Horsely, 1998). Professional development affects students’ current learning and future opportunities by contributing to teachers’ knowledge base, their range of teaching methods, 45 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ability to diagnose student states of readiness and learning styles, and expertise in assessing student progress. Some investigators have determined that curriculum development and related tasks constitute an effective vehicle for professional development, as teachers consider alternative representations o f content for students as they engage in the tasks (Parke & Coble, 1997; Darling-Hammond, 1998). Curriculum development as a part o f program design provides opportunities for this kind of growth. In the nurturing of teachers as mentors, facilitators, trainers, and instructors, capacity is built for program development and implementation. Efforts to improve instruction should build in practical and immediate support of teachers in the classroom as they begin to implement new curricula. The demands of program materials and methodologies that are new to teachers require them to expand their knowledge of the resources and the correct ways that they are to be used in order to be effective. Supervisory personnel such as administrators and department heads typically do not have the time or expertise to provide sustained support to science teachers at the classroom level (Alfonso, 1986), so knowledgeable peers are usually the first to be consulted by teachers as they begin to implement new programs (Lortie, 1975). For this reason, whenever new programs are introduced, teachers need to be given time in which they may interact as a part of their professional development. 46 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. According to Hall and Hord (1987), mandatory, all day, “one size fits all” workshops do not work. The Rand Change Agent Study that took place between 1973 and 1977 looked at four federal change agent programs and concluded that programs and the staff development related to programs must to be suited to local settings and personnel. Questions that come up in workshops may be relevant only to subsets or individuals within a group of participants. Some persons already have the answers to questions that are asked and may be bored; others may not even perceive the problem. Only teachers who are interested in the questions that arise attribute relevance to the overall experience on evaluations. Rather than try to meet a range of needs with a single experience, leaders need to design alternatives for teachers at various levels of experience and Stages of Concern. There is considerable evidence to support the design of professional development to meet specific needs of personnel at whatever level of readiness to implement that they may represent and to the unique situation of individual projects. The model developed by Berliner (1994) outlines consecutive stages in teachers’ professional development, including Novice, Apprentice, and Expert levels. Apprentices may in turn be referred to as Advanced Beginners, Competent, or Proficient. In some schemes, Experts are termed Professional teachers. It is a developmental continuum in which knowledge and experience are taken from one phase to the next. Susan Loucks-Horsely (1998) has clarified 47 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the types of professional development strategies that are best suited to the stages, and these are displayed in the chart in Figure 2-5. The novice stage includes student teachers and first year teachers who begin building the skills that they need to work with students in the classroom. Novices lack confidence until they see how students learn in response to what they do. Immersion in inquiry and the processes o f science, workshops tailored to programs, and teacher networks are among the strategies suited for teachers who are building awareness and building knowledge (Loucks-Horsely, 1997). Apprentice teachers begin to take responsibility for the learning of students with some confidence, and see that they can grow in their ability to teach. Apprentice teachers are usually idealistic, and feel the need to motivate all students in their charge. They are open to new ideas and likely to engage in extra professional activity, including professional development. Apprentice teachers need mentoring and are vulnerable to being discouraged and about a third of new teachers leave the field after a few years (NCTAF, 1996). As teachers continue to build knowledge and translate begin translating theory into practice, they benefit from curriculum development and adaptation and partnerships. As teachers continue to grow in their self-confidence, they may be categorized as expert teachers. These teachers artfully and skillfully adapt to the needs of students. Expert teachers are student advocates and exhibit competence in what they do. They find satisfaction in the positive testimonies of their students and are sometimes taken for granted by administration. At this 48 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 2-4 Purposes o f Different Professional Learning Strategies Strategy Novice Apprentice Expert Advanced Beginner Com petent P roficien t Developing A w areness Building Knowledge Transiting In to Practice P racticin g Teaching R eflecting Immersion in Inquiry X X X Immersion in Science World X X Curriculum Implementation X X X Curriculum Replacement X X X Curriculum Development and Adaptation X X Workshops and/or Institutes X X X Action Research X X Case Discussion X X X Study Groups X X X Examining Student Work X X X X Coaching and Mentoring X X X X Partnerships X X X X Professional Networks X X X Developing Professional Developers X X X X Technology X X X X X =Significant impact at stage indicated x = Supportive experience for stage indicated Adapted from Loucks-Horsely, 1997 49 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. stage, teachers are more likely to get help from their colleagues in networks than they are to appreciate formal professional development, but they value opportunities for growth. This is a stage where peer observation can be valuable as a means of instilling good ideas about teaching. Ongoing professional growth requires provision of opportunities to observe others, share successes and concerns, and reflect on their practice (Steffy & Wolfe, 1998). Curriculum implementation and replacement, coaching and mentoring are effective, and professional teachers are effective professional developers (Loucks-Horsely, 1997). Expert teachers skillfully monitor and adjust their teaching. They facilitate the learning of all their students, who may be very diverse and fall into a wide range of ability. Expert teachers communicate expectations to students and are current in their knowledge and understanding of the educational research that directly applies to their classroom challenges and responsibilities. They belong to professional networks and organizations and may be leaders in these groups. Distinguished teachers are relatively few in number and include those who are exceptionally effective with students and the community at large. They influence policy at local, state, and national levels and are accorded recognition. Experts continue to expand and refine their skills in reflecting on the results of their teaching strategies, action research, case discussion, and examining student work. They can be of great help to other teachers in professional development settings (Loucks- Horsely, 1997). 50 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Role of Collaboration It is difficult for teachers to fine-tune their practice when they are isolated, never observe other teachers teaching, and have no time to discuss their practice and its results (Darling-Hammond, 1998). Isolation may be the result of a system that does not foster collaborative discourse, but teachers also isolate themselves because of the demands of interacting with students throughout the teaching day (Flinders, 1989). When teachers are included in planning new programs, they are put into situations where they may express their points o f view and where they may be exposed to the wisdom and experience of others. In this sense, teacher-teacher professional collegiality is a key to school success and to effective school change (Lieberman, 1986). Collaborative reflection in clinical settings and in the classroom enhances and promotes individual refection. When teachers work together to achieve goals, they make decisions, raise questions and seek answers, find areas of agreement, and arrive at conclusions together. When teachers discuss their work and its results, instructional programs become richer because practitioners are more likely to incorporate some of the new ideas that come out of their discourse. For this reason, Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) advocate: • Placing professional growth experiences in clinical settings to allow for modeling, coaching, and problem solving. • Experimentation and reflection on classroom practice that is driven by participants. 51 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. • Engaging teachers in concrete tasks such as peer observation, discussions of assessment, and collaborative evaluation. Role of Personal Reflection Processes of planning and implementation provide forums for groups that are collaborative and which in time may evolve into learning communities. In learning communities, enthusiasm for ideas and programs is infectious and the interactions that occur influence what happens in classrooms. The learning community in turns sets the climate for the ongoing planning and implementation that occurs as new programs are put into place. According to Levine et al (1993), learning is enhanced in social settings. In professional development that is related to the planning and implementation of new programs, participants both teach and learn. The exchanges that occur in dyads, task groups, focus groups, social groups, and project based networks allow organizations and their members to redefine their beliefs, values, and metaphors. Cognitive structures are modified, and these are collectively reflected in the paradigm shifts that occur as groups reconfigure their systems and_redesign subject matter programs. In networks, teachers focus on themselves and become engaged in “a powerful genre of staff development” (Goodlad, 1996). They may be powerful resources to each other (Zigarmi, Betz, and Jensen, 1977), and this reality is recognized by those who influence professional development policy, such as the federally funded Center for Research on the Context o f Secondary School 52 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Teaching at Stanford University. The Center recommended the reorientation of federal programs to enable teachers to be part of like-minded groups (Rothman, 1993). Science teacher organizations such as the National Science Teachers Association, the National Association of Biology Teachers, the American Chemical Society, and the American Association o f Physics Teachers Association operate on the premise that science teachers greatly benefit in sharing with each other. Role of Motivational Elements Deal and Kennedy (1982) discussed ways that managers use cultural factors to bring about change. They recommend building a positive climate by instituting rituals and celebrations and by providing members of the organization. Senge (1990a) also advocates nurturing individuals through celebration o f their successes. Helpful to project planning is the kind of professional development that instills a positive view o f program participation (Little et al, 1987). Emotional aspects may sometimes determine whether or not teachers decide to participate in the planning and implementation of new programs. Factors that influence decisions to be involved include the intrinsic motivation and commitment of individuals, prevailing beliefs and values, and the effects of group dynamics on participants (Vroom, 1964). Planning, therefore, needs to include strategies that 53 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. promote the desirability of programs in a rational sense, in a social context, and from a personal perspective. As leaders emphasize the positive aspects of a program for improving student attitudes and achievement, they may also suggest that participation in the planning and implementation of a new program can be professionally advantageous to individuals (Booth-Butterfield, 1996). The morale of teaching cohorts within schools, learning communities, and groups in a professional development setting affect the levels of learning that can be achieved, and social factors can promote programs (Organ and Lingl, 1995; Ortner, cited in Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Inquiry, willingness to experiment, and collaborative work can become the norm as teachers find satisfaction in mutual support, appreciation, recognition, and success. Role of Experience Through experience, teachers come to know the aspects of their subjects and methodologies that best accommodate student understanding, achievement and positive attitudes. No matter how desirable a proposed program may seem, credible testimony about program effectiveness comes from the classroom teacher, and teachers need to implement a program with students before they are able to see its value. Preparation for and use o f a program with students in the classroom give teachers opportunities to master technical features, to understand the science behind program design and student activities, and to practice the teaching strategies inherent in the program (Lederman, Gess- 54 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Newsome, and Katz, 1994). Important changes in teachers’ beliefs may also follow the implementation of a new program, especially where there is recognition of positive outcomes for students (Loucks-Horsley et al., 1987). Part C Accomplishing the Institution of Excellent Science Programs Effecting Change in Science Programs at the School Level In the change literature reviewed, successful planning and implementation of programs in schools are related to: 1. A learning community that provides a climate of inquiry, collaboration, innovation, and ongoing formative assessment and evaluation. Ideally, members o f an elementary staff or the science department in a middle or secondary school agree on standards of student performance and periodically measure the results of their practice against those standards. Data may be collected that make a case for improvement, and major discrepancies automatically signal a call for change. Planning for change of science programs may also begin when practitioners become aware of existing programs elsewhere that claim to improve student attitudes and achievement. When successful programs in schools are identified, teachers should evaluate the potential of the programs for adoption or adaptation on site. When change is anticipated, it is important for principals and district administration to be on board. 55 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Needs assessments must be done as planning for a new program starts, but results of early needs assessments may have reduced relevance as planning and implementation proceed. Needs assessments provide information on the initial status of existing programs that can be used in constructing a rationale or change; the information will also be needed as baseline data for assessment and evaluation down the line. Once problems are defined in terms of student performance, all staff who will be involved should get release time to set the goals and objectives for an improved program. When these are in place, program improvements that will address the needs are either designed from scratch or adapted from successful programs that are in place elsewhere. If training is available for a promising program that is being considered, teachers attend. When a course of action is defined, teachers receive additional release time to continue planning and prepare for implementation. 2. Strong leaders and support from both site and district level administration. Principals are key as they provide opportunities for teachers to plan, take on leadership roles, and participate in professional development; As implementation of a new program begins, the principal and co change agents provide support such as listening to complaints, answering questions, providing missing materials, and making helpful suggestions when appropriate. In planned and chance encounters, one-on-one conferences, and regularly scheduled support sessions, co-change agents assess individuals’ Stages of Concern and design interventions accordingly. As teachers progress 56 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. beyond Mechanical to a Routine Level of Use (See Figure 2-4), and greater in- depth professional development is planned and offered (Figure 2-5). As individual department members move toward and into an Impact Stage o f Concern, opportunities are provided to address a Refinement Level of Use. Teams of co-change agents determine Innovation Configurations and work with teachers to achieve optimal implementation. Teams use SoC and LoU information to strategize ways of circumventing the impediments to full implementation. Principals and teams use chance encounters with staff to make on-the-spot checks of user concerns, to make suggestions or corrections where these may be necessary, and to arrange times for observation of programs and conferences with staff. In schools with good science programs, administrators support teachers and teachers work with administrators in planning and implementation. The district office cooperates with school sites, provides needed resources, and eases the flow of necessary paperwork. Districts balance the needs of those schools that are in the midst of reform with the needs of other schools that adhere to traditional approaches. 3. Stakeholder participation in problem clarification, vision formulation, program standards development, and design for implementation; In Participation of Stakeholders in Planning (Part B), the literature cited references degrees of involvement for stakeholders in the planning and implementation of new programs. Teachers, parents, and other community - even students - who will be impacted by implementation may be brought in for 57 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. initial definition of problems and solutions; they at least need to be kept well informed throughout a process of innovation. Input through open forums and needs assessment may be enough to preclude staff feeling left out of the loop, but evidence suggests that greater levels of participation do enhance the likelihood of success for a new program. 4. Structured time and support for participants to plan, share and problem solve collaboratively; In Role of Collaboration (Part B), the isolation of teachers is mentioned as a condition that prevents both the infusion of new ideas and the kind of support that teachers need to grow in the skills of their craft. The literature cited recommends placing professional growth experiences in clinical settings to allow for modeling, coaching, and problem solving, experimentation and reflection on classroom practice, peer observation, discussions of assessment, and collaborative evaluation. 5. Knowledge of change theory and ways to assess Stages of Concern and Levels of Use, and to construct Innovation Configuration (IC) charts for assessment of levels of practice. In the change literature cited, the importance of ongoing intervention on the part of leaders is affirmed. The instruments mentioned above provide graded descriptions of awareness and practice that principals and teachers can use to decide on appropriate courses of action. 6. Flexibility of leaders and participants as situations undergo constant change and as new information becomes available. 58 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Formative evaluation of programs is ongoing. As goals and standards for student achievement are revisited, criteria for success generate evaluation questions. Instruments are designed for gathering relevant data, and information is aligned with evaluation criteria. When teachers have implemented the program long enough to be comfortable with it and long enough to assess results in terms of student performance, the process begins again. The approximate time for the above sequence to occur is five or six years (Fullan, 1993). A useful diagnostic tool for organization and visual portrayal of the factors that are related to a programmatic status is the Stream Analysis Chart. Stream Analysis represents the relationships within an organization or project graphically (Porras, 1997). Systems and subsystems are organized in columns (streams) of similar factors, which are connected by arrows to other factors in the same and in other streams. The effects of specific conditions and actions on a program analyzed together and separately in sets of relationships. A Sample Stream Analysis Chart is portrayed in Figure 2-6. Stream Analysis enables a person who is studying a system to identify the factors that are related to success as well as the sources of problems. Stream charts can be used to visualize all aspects of a system wide project or program. Charts enable leadership to track actions and connect them to their consequences. The method may clarify' actions that need to occur. 59 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 2-2 Sample Stream Analysis Chart Category 4 Stream Category 1 Stream Category 2 Stream Category 3 Stream Relationships conditions and actions that influence program Category 1 Factor 1 Category 2 Factor 1 (affects Category 1 Factor 2) Category I Factor 2 (affects Factor 1) Category 4 Factor 1 (affects Category 3 Factor 1, which also affects this factor) Category 3 Factor I (affects Category 1 Factor 2) Factors that influence the direction of an organization or program are listed in separate boxes. The boxes are placed in columns or streams that denote categories, such as "social factors” or “organizing arrangements”. One- and two-way arrows indicate if one factor affects another or reciprocated impact among factors. (Porras, 1987) 60 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Purpose of Study While there is consensus on the characteristics of quality science programs, there is a need to know how the processes of planning and implementation accomplish the achievement of program elements that exemplify excellence. This investigation was designed to determine and assess the conditions and actions associated with planning and implementation in schools recognized as likely to develop good science programs. The study establishes patterns of relationships among project goals, objectives, conditions, and actions that lead to quality science programs. Findings will be useful for program developers and other stakeholders who attempt to improve science teaching and learning in schools. Nature of the Study The study was conducted according to the tradition of naturalistic inquiry, in that the observer was close to the persons involved in the study (Patton, 1990, p. 39). Over time, the investigator became immersed in the project to a degree that was necessary for her to determine 1) what three K-12 school clusters likely to achieve excellence in program design did in the planning and implementation of their science programs, 2) the conditions and 61 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. actions that were related to the development of the programs, 3) differences and commonalities among the conditions and actions of the three clusters, and 4) patterns of relationships among the clusters that may be responsible for the achievement o f quality programs. The study was inductive in that data were analyzed to reveal patterns, commonalities, and unique factors associated with outcomes in the projects. It was also deductive in that it was limited to gathering data that were directly related to the key components o f the conceptual framework, which were in turn theoretically derived. The inquiry was guided by theory, as the investigator hypothesized that patterns of specific factors would be related to expressions of excellence in the levels of practice of program elements across programs in the three K-12 school clusters. A corollary statement would be that an absence of essential related factors would be found where there were lower levels of practice denoting lesser approximation to excellence. Personal experience, intuition, and tacit understandings were brought into the analysis and synthesis of the data. In reflecting on the results of the study, introspection was informed by 34 years of experience teaching science, including 12 years largely focused as a science specialist in curriculum development, lesson design, and professional development. According to Bruyn (1963), “The inner perspective assumes that understanding can only be achieved by actively participating in the life of the observed and gaining insight by means of introspection”. The research was Orientational in that efforts were 62 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. made to capture the particular perspectives and contexts of the individual project school clusters. The investigator was a part o f the culture and familiar with the school clusters, but was not a part of the reform projects that were analyzed. Triangulation occurred in that multiple sources of information were examined. Selection of Study Samples In recent years, the schools and districts in this study have been given recognition through awards, accreditation, and evaluation reports and have established reputations in the Orange County science education community for having effective science programs. The sites selected for the study were K-12 school clusters that had been chosen for support by a group of Orange County businesspersons and educators (Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science) because of their recognized promise to deliver excellent science programs. A proposal writing process was used by the non-profit group to specify the purpose, structure, and potential outcomes of programs that they would fund. Analysis of the planning and implementation that occurred in these would reveal factors associated with the achievement o f excellence in program design. In Orange County California, a number of businesses have organized to support Renaissance Projects, which are intended to improve science teaching and learning in the county. Each project represents a cluster of elementary and middle schools that feed into a single high school. Renaissance Project 63 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. proposals are selected on the basis of their promise to improve student outcomes in terms o f attitudes toward and achievement in science. The samples of this investigation are purposive rather than random (Patton, 1980). The method of selection is appropriate when an investigation requires groups or individuals with special attributes, as nothing could be learned from samples that do not demonstrate the elements of interest in a study (McComas, 1992). Persons who knew the groups’ histories and potential selected the school clusters for support. Beyond previously demonstrated capacity, the criteria of the Selection Committee of Project Tomorrow used to select the K-12 school clusters include: 1. Demonstrated commitment through building shared vision and active involvement of teachers, administrators, district personnel, parents, post secondary education institutions, community members and business. 2. Advancing systemic change with a clear and specific plan of action and implementation timeline; proactive, professional, and responsive school culture; ambitious goals, objectives, and standards for K-12 science and technology education and on-going professional development. 3. Assessing progress and evaluating results using academic measures of achievement and performance outcomes to evaluate their science program. 4. Using innovative technology that supports a dynamic science curriculum; accessing resources beyond the classroom; and providing real-life experiences within an interactive environment. 5. Creating an educational model that increases science and technology literacy for all students and that is easily replicated and cost effective. (Project Tomorrow Prospectus. 1996). 64 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Four K-12 school clusters in 6 districts were selected for support by the Project, but the investigator served for one year as coordinator for one of the clusters, which includes the Westminster Elementary and Westminster High School in the Huntington Beach Union High School District. Because she influenced the direction of that project, it was not suitable for an unbiased study. The remaining three school clusters constitute the study groups of this investigation and include the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster in the Shasta Hills Unified School District, the Hope High School cluster in the Pleasant Hills School District, and the Pampas High School cluster in the Reinhardt Union High School and Reinhardt City (Elementary) School Districts. Renaissance Project K-12 school clusters and project participants along with their extended communities constitute the sample, and the composition and dynamics of project school clusters were free of direction, intervention, or influence on the part of the investigator. The groups were selected by Project Tomorrow either to implement an original plan to improve science teaching and learning through purposeful technology or to participate in a process of training and strategic planning through the National Science Resource Center (NSRC). The condition of purposeful technology was dropped after the first year of Project Tomorrow sponsorship of projects, with the intent to support improvement through NSRC Strategic Planning Institutes and National Science Foundation (NSF) supported curricula. Teams representing each of the three clusters supported by Project Tomorrow attended the NSRC Strategic Planning 65 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Institute during July of 1998 at the campus of Hewlett-Packard in California’s Silicon Valley. Taking part were teachers, administrators, and community partners representing Tedesco Canyon, Hope, and Pampas High School K-12 clusters. While the goals and overall direction of the projects were somewhat determined by the six day agenda of the National Science Resources Center, the plans that resulted were unique. The project school clusters are located in two unified and two non unified school districts. Demographics of the four districts are presented in Figure 3-1. The Shasta Hills Unified School District is a very large district of around 35,000 students. Enrollment in Reinhardt Elementary and Reinhardt Union High School districts together is nearly 50,000. Two smaller districts, the Magnolia and Centralia Elementary school districts also feed into Reinhardt High Schools, and these also include project schools. Enrollment in the Pleasant Hills Unified School District exceeds 25,000. Forty-eight percent of high school students in Shasta Hills Unified meet the A-F requirements for the University of California, while sixteen percent in Reinhardt Union and thirty-six percent in Pleasant Hills Unified meet those requirements. Ethnic balance in the schools ranges from 67% Hispanic, 7% Black, 17% White, 5% Asian, and 5% other at Adelaide Price Elementary School in the Pampas High School cluster to 3% Hispanic, 1% Black, 8% Asian, 86% white, and 2% other found at Travis Ranch in the Pleasant Hills 66 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 3-1 D istrict D em ographic P rofiles Shasta Hills USD Reinhardt Union HS District Reinhardt City Elementary District Pleasant Hills School District Number o f high schools 4 9 0 3 Number o f middle schools 4 8 0 4 Number o f elementary schools 26 0 23 19 A. Ind 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% Asian 8.2% 8.8% 8.1% cn o P. Isl 0.2% 0.6% 0.2% o . S3 s — = X > Filip. 2.0% 2.4% 0.7% P 5 Hisp. 15.3% 61.6% 26.3% o Af. A 2.1% 2.9% 1.9% White 71.9% 23.3% 62.7% Numbers o f teachers 1,700 1,000 950 1,200 Numbers o f 35,000 28,000 20,000 25,000 students 48,000 % HS Grads meeting A-F Req. 48% 16% NA 36% Free/Red. Lunch 10% 42.4% 82% 21% Eng. Lang. Learners 7% 31% 58% 16% Data Source: EdData at http://www.ed-data.kl2.ca.us March 18, 2000 67 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Elementary School District. There is a wide range of test scores in the districts with Renaissance Project schools as well. At Francisco Middle School in SHUSD, students average as high as the 80th percentile in math at the 7th grade level, while at Westland Elementary in the Pleasant Hills district students score in the 91st percentile in math and the 80th percentile in reading. Harvey Moore elementary in the Reinhardt City Elementary School District showed the lowest scores of all schools in the three K-12 school clusters, with students at the 27th percentile for both math and reading at the fifth grade. Research Design The conceptual framework of the study is based on three research questions, and is diagrammed in Figure 3-1. The first research question was: To what extent have schools engaged in science education reform achieved excellence? To determine the quality of science programs in the projects, criteria expressed as ideal program elements were derived from the National Science Education Standards (NSES) (1987) and other documents, including Science for All Americans (AAAS, 1989). Innovation Configuration (IC) Charts (Hord et al, 1987) served as a rubrics. Levels of practice of the elements were delineated according to how closely programs match an ideal expression of the element. Program quality was estimated through an alignment of program elements with the levels of practice. Part of an IC Chart is given in Figure 3-2, and the complete IC Chart used for the study is presented in Innovation 68 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 3-1 Conceptual Framework: Quality Science Programs. Contributing Factors, and Research Questions Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Research Ouestion 2 National Science Education Standards, Science for A ll Americans Part B. Resources Internal External Research Question 2 Part A Effect o f related factors on program outcomes Research Question 3 Part C. Embedded activities — Planning Coordination Classroom practice Support Research Question 2 Part B. Levels o f practice (implementation) o f ' Program Elements, Quality o f Science Programs Research Question 1 Part A Research on Exemplary Practice Research is centered on the elements and characteristics of quality science programs, the factors associated with levels of achievement of quality programs, and patterns of relationships among levels of practice and the factors known to affect program quality. Research Question 1 addresses the elements and characteristics of quality science programs, which are established through alignment with levels of practice of program elements according to Innovation Configuration Charts. Research Question 2 deals with the factors that affect the levels of achievement of quality programs. These are organized in Stream Diagnostic Charts as Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. Research Question 3 focuses on the patterns of relationships among levels of practice of program elements and the factors that are known to affect program quality according the stream charts. 69 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Configuration Chart (Appendix A ) . Because each of the projects had both secondary and elementary components, the two were considered as a whole, with a balance of the strong and less strong aspects of each. The three projects have been in a state o f development for slightly over two years as this is written, and it takes at least five or six year for an innovation to be fully implemented (Fullan, 1993). This was taken into consideration, and judgments were made as to whether or not full implementation would be possible with the plans and courses o f action being taken in the projects. Whether or not aspects of excellence meeting the quality criteria o f the study were built into the programs was also taken into account. The program elements that are described in terms o f excellence in the IC Chart include: - planning: goals and strategies - quality curricula - methods and use o f assessm ent and use o f assessm ent - teachers’ collegiality availability o f resources student discussion, interaction and input expectations for students - equal access - professional development - administrative support. An example of a program element expressed at decreasing levels of practice is presented below in Figure 3-3. 70 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 3-2. Innovation Configuration TIC) Chart: Levels of Practice of Program Element “Planning: Goals and Strategies” Level 1 (Ideal) Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Yearlong and short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants Goals are in place; ways to reach goals may not be fully clear to program participants. Goals are written and articulated; participants are either unaware of the goals or largely ignore them in day-to- day action. No long or short terms goals. In an IC Chart, the first cell in a row describes a program elements according to its best expression. The next cell will describe a close approximation to the ideal. Characterization of a third configuration that is less close to a desired condition will follow, and the last cell in a row will state an absence or a poor expression of the program element (Hall and Hord, 1987). Research Question Two was How did schools engaged in science program improvement go about achieving their goals, and what were the actions and conditions associated with their efforts? The investigator interviewed administrators, proposal writers, project managers and coordinators, teachers, representatives of funding agencies, workshop presenters, students, and community members. Persons consulted and their titles are identified by their initials in Project Personnel Consulted (Appendix B, Part 1) and Schedule of Interactions with Projects (Appendix B, Part 2). Proposals, curriculum materials, relevant letters, memos, emails, and reports were analyzed to identify project details that would inform and frame responses to the research questions. 71 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The list of these documents is found in Renaissance Project Documents, (Appendix E). Conversations were initiated with interviewees, and initial questions were followed with additional questions based on responses. Interview questions are found in Interview Questions (Appendix F). The framework embodies the extent to which programs exemplify quality science, the roles and actions of participants, structural and procedural factors of organizing arrangements, and internal and external resources. Activities for the purpose o f gathering the data occurred between May 1997 and October 1999 are found in, Schedule of Interaction with Projects (Appendix B) and include: 1. Attendance at meetings and events of Project Tomorrow, Beckman@Science, the National Science Resource Center, districts, and schools that were attended by Renaissance Project leaders and participants 2. Interviews of administrators, teachers, students, representatives of funding agencies, and individuals in the community 3. Collection of Renaissance Project flyers, agendas, and handouts 4. Attendance at project professional development events and planning meetings 5. Interviews with district and school administrators, project coordinators, Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science personnel, and participants to determine (1) the nature of student assessment and how student data are collected, analyzed, and used in program evaluation; (2) levels of administrative support; 72 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (3) ways that parents and other community members participated in and supported the program; (3) who participates in planning and implementation, roles of leaders and participants in their districts, schools, and processes of planning and implementation; (4) sources and levels of funding, methods o f planning and implementation, and characteristics o f leadership, relationships, politics, resistance, and support; 6. Observations and interviews with students in projects; examination o f student work; 7. Examination of projects' curricular materials; 8. Determination of ways in which leaders interact with outside groups, including funding agencies, media, parents, and community leaders; 9. Access and study of Project Tomorrow Renaissance Project and Beckman@Science proposals, strategic plans, interim reports, and final reports according to the quality criteria of the NSES and with the use o f Innovation Configuration and Stream Diagnostic Charts. Stream Diagnostic Charts (Porras, 1987) were used to display factors that are related to the quality criteria expressed as program elements. An example of a Stream Analysis Chart is shown in Figure 3-4. Stream Analysis is an organizational development method that is rooted in systems theory, addressing organizations as open systems with subsystems having Streams of similar factors. In the charts, factors or variables that fall into the same category are placed in the same column, which is referred to as a Stream. The factors may be causally or rationally connected within and across streams, as changes in some factors bring about changes in others or in the levels of practice. Relationships were described in the data, which were observed and 73 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. recorded by the investigator, obtained in responses to interview questions, or acquired in the documentation o f the projects. The method provides graphic representation of the complex sets of relationships that exist in organizations. A difficulty in applying systems theory to organizations has been making sense of numerous interrelationships; with the Stream Analysis approach, interrelationships are indicated by the arrows that connect factors that may also be analyzed separately. Figure 3-2 Sample Stream Diagnostic Chart Template Program Elements Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE 1 (variable categorized as Program Element). PE 2 (issue related to program element or descriptor). p e : 4 SF 1 (variable categorized as social factor) R 1 (variable categorized as resource) SF 2 OA 2 R 2 SF OA r : Heavy lines surrounding box indicates IC Level of Program Element. Arrows indicate relationships. Direction of arrows may indicate flow o f effect, influence, or causality. (Adapted from Porras, 1987) 74 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The Stream Analysis Charts for this study were organized so that conditions and actions of a program (Contribution Factors) could be displayed in association with a level of practice for each program element. The related factors were organized in columns or streams under the categories of Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. As information was obtained, it was organized under the stream categories of Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources for each of the levels of practice of the program elements. As they were recorded, each factor was given a code according to the program element, IC level o f practice, and Stream. Each program element is coded “PE” and further coded for the program element as follows. Codes were assigned to the data as it was gathered so that it could be conveniently organized into the stream charts, and these are found in Figure 3-5 below. Table 3-3 Codes Applied to Program Elements for Stream Charts Planning: Goals and Strategies G Student Discussion, Interaction and Input SD Quality Curricula C Expectations for Students (Standards Based Expectations) SBE Methods and Use of Assessment A Equal Access (Science for All) SfA Teachers’ Collegiality TC Professional Development and the Learning Community. PD Science as Inquiry SI Administrative Support AS Availability of Resources AR 75 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A level of practice for each o f the above program elements was assigned to each K-12 school cluster in the left hand column or stream o f a single Stream Chart. Related factors were coded for the streams of the stream analysis charts and for the program element to which they were related; for example, in Stream Chart 1, Planning and Goals, persons who contributed to the initial formulation of goals and who are involved in the ongoing discussion of goal achievement are listed in boxes labeled “SF” for social factors. That central office personnel were willing to reconfigure the project to better align with new goals of Project Tomorrow was pivotal; therefore, “SF G 1” is assigned to the box with the initials of those persons. Three other groups of persons also contributed to the final expression of project goals, and these were grouped according to their sites: SF G 2, persons at Tedesco Elementary; SF G 3, persons at Tedesco Canyon High School, SF G 4, persons at Rancho Santa Margarita. Related factors that were classified as Organizing Arrangements were coded “OA”. For Goals in the Tedesco Canyon Cluster (and there was but one box in that stream), “OA G 1” denotes the fact that administration had empowered the writing group to outline goals that would be achievable through established central office procedures. The third stream of factors, Resources, was also coded “R” and according to Program Elements addressed. Research Question Three asks: In what wavs are contextual factors related to the realization of quality program elements ? For this question, program elements and contributing factors were connected by one- and two- 76 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. way arrows to show directions of influence. Some factors affected the Levels o f Practice directly, while others impacted one or more other factors either within the same stream, in other streams, or both. Relationships were established among these Factors and the levels of practice of the program elements according to the Innovation Configuration Charts. In this investigation. Stream Diagnostic Charts show linkages among the levels of practice and with other factors. The Stream Diagnostic Chart was represented above in Figure 3-4. In the chart, coded boxes are assigned to factors that are connected in specific ways, and arrows are drawn to connect the factors. The arrows may establish causal relationships, and they may also be bi-directional if there is strong interplay between two factors or between a variable and the program element. Columns of each chart are assigned to the variable streams as Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. Data Collection The investigator interviewed people who could present useful insights into the results of their efforts and the reasons for those results; she observed project participants as they met to plan, implemented their program, and demonstrated their results. She analyzed project documents such as proposals and reports. Transcription of taped interviews was attempted at the beginning of data collection, but the laborious task made this approach impossible to continue because o f the large number of opportunities to acquire knowledge 77 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. that was relevant. Notes were initially taken in a narrative format, either by hand or by direct entry into Microsoft Word. As the database became large, it was organized first in cells wdthin rows and columns in Microsoft Excel worksheets, and later transferred to tables in Microsoft Word. For example, project coordinators and their roles were placed under their project title as a single row. As patterns were recognized, the four streams of the stream charts (levels of practice o f program elements, Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources) were finalized and notes were recorded directly onto the charts. Information that remained in the older formats was coded according to the scheme in Figure 3-4 for later organization in the final format of the stream charts. Responses elicited through initial interview questions were used to frame prompts for further questions in probing. Surveys were not used. A number of documents representing projects’ intent, progress, changes, and results were used by the investigator and were made available to her because of her involvement in a related project. Information contained in the written materials filled gaps in the data and was included with that drawn from observations and interviews to construct the final Stream Diagnostic Charts. This investigation documents factors that are related to the planning and implementation of science programs in three of the K-12 school clusters that were selected by Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. A variety of sources were consulted for information about the nature of the projects. A 78 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. sam ple o f k ey players and participants w as ch osen to represent different roles in the projects. T hese persons were: 1) Project coordinators in each of the three K-12 school clusters. The investigator called each coordinator and set up interviews, in which she was able to ask the questions that elicited information about the structure, procedures, and progress of the projects. The researcher was also able to ask additional questions on an ongoing basis as the projects were underway, as all were present at a number of events and meetings. Opportunities to observe meetings and events in the clusters themselves were also sought in conversations with the coordinators and they were afforded. The dates and nature of the events where observations were made or interviews were conducted are listed in Schedule of Interactions with Projects (Appendix B. Part2). 2) Administrators at the schools and in the districts of the three K- 12 school clusters, including the science coordinator in the Reinhardt Union HS District who is also a principal at Pampas HS; the science coordinator in the Shasta Hills USD who is also principal at Tedesco Elementary School; the Director of Special Projects in the Shasta Hills USD, and the Director of Curriculum in the PHUSD. Administrators were encountered and interviews were conducted at events and meetings of the projects that were attended by the researcher. Appointments were attempted, but the principals and directors were largely 79 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. in accessib le and recom m en ded project coordinators as better sources o f inform ation. 3) Teacher Leaders who participated in project planning and proposal writing, and/or who were involved directly in the process of implementation. These included one teacher in the Reinhardt Elementary SD; one at Pampas HS; the Field Studies mentor and teacher at Tedesco Elementary School in SHUSD; one secondary and two elementary teachers in the Pleasant Hills SD; 11 Beckman@Science Teacher Leaders, and elementary science specialists in the SHUSD; and other teachers in the districts. Program leaders and participants were contacted directly for personal interviews, and several telephone conversations occurred; other teacher leaders and participants were interviewed before or after meetings and events. Interview questions are found Interview Questions (Appendix FT As interviewees responded to the questions, additional questions were generated to elicit clarification, details, and additional information. 4) Business partners of the clusters, including the Manager of Corporate Communications at Beckman-Coulter (Pampas HS Cluster) and the retired Senior Vice-President o f the Edison Corporation (Hope Cluster) were interviewed at meetings and events of Project Tomorrow, the school clusters, or Beckman@Science. The Director of Programs and Projects of Project Tomorrow and the Executive Director of Beckman@Science were of invaluable assistance in 80 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. obtaining the reports and documents that were analyzed in the study. With the permission of the Executive Director of Project Tomorrow, I was able to access photocopies of the proposals and quarterly and annual reports, and memoranda of the projects. The Executive Director of Beckman@Science permitted the study of proposals and reports in the offices of the program at California State University, Fullerton. Project personnel consulted in the study are listed Project Personnel Consulted in (Appendix B. Part 1) and Schedule of Interactions with Projects (Appendix B. Part 21. Project documents that were examined are listed in Renaissance Project Documents (Appendix El. Data Analysis As an implementation theory, Stream Analysis can be used to outline the tasks that must be done in the planning of a project, to classify problems and clarify the factors that are related to them, and to track progress in the development of a program. In this study, the method was used to organize and to visually represent the configurations of science programs and the sets of factors that influence the three programs. The format of the Stream Analysis Charts was designed to relate emerging factors to the program elements of science programs in each of the three K-12 school clusters. The factors were persons, conditions, and actions that affected the level of practice o f the assigned program element for each cluster. An Innovation Configuration IC level of practice of each program 81 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. element is placed in the left-hand column of a single chart. The three streams to the right of the first column were designated for recording the persons, conditions, and actions with influence on the level of practice under the categories of Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. Linkages were established by using arrows to connect the contributing factors to the levels of practice of program elements and to other factors within the same stream or different streams. Program elements and contributing factors were connected by one- and two-way arrows to show that one factor affected the levels of practice or other factors. The arrows may establish causal relationships, and they may also be bi-directional if there is strong interplay between two factors or between a variable and the program element. A comparison o f linkages across school clusters permits identification of common elements and circumstances of planning and implementation that characterize the levels of achieving quality science programs. For establishing patterns of relationships, an additional set of charts (Figures 34 - 51) were constructed. The linkages among levels of practice of for the same program elements for each of the three K-12 school clusters w'ere put onto the same chart so that they could be compared. Similarities and differences in levels of practice, contributing factors, and relationships were summarized in boxes with double lines for each program element. The charts are found in Appendix C. and discussions of the patterns that were found are discussed in Chapter Four. Conclusions derived from the patterns are discussed in Chapter Five. 82 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Assumptions and Limitations It was assumed that the selection process o f Project Tomorrow resulted in the choice of K-12 school clusters that were likely to demonstrate outcomes that could be measured in terms of excellence within the time interval o f this study. It was presupposed that successful implementation and program effectiveness could be gauged as levels of practice of program elements in an Innovation Configuration Chart based on the National Science Education Standards. It was also assumed that the dynamics of planning and implementation occurring in these groups could be accurately observed, recorded, analyzed, inter-related, and related to the criteria or levels of practice under the categories of Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources in Stream Diagnostic Charts. Generalization beyond the three project school clusters is limited because of the small number of groups available for study, although schedules for planning and early implementation events were sufficient to contextualize and interpret the processes of planning and implementation of projects in the three school clusters of this study. The investigation reported in this paper takes place in California, a state characterized as "below average''’ - on the TIMSS, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and other standardized tests such as the Standard Achievement Test (SAT) (Public Agenda. 1999). In California, schools serve a student population that is more diverse and economically disadvantaged than in many other states with fewer resources dedicated to meet its challenges. If 83 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. processes of planning and implementation lead to quality science programs under the relatively adverse conditions of California schools, the identification and clarification o f those processes would be valuable to other schools in the State and wherever change for the sake of improvement is undertaken. Such a review is the central goal of this study. 84 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND ANALYSIS Introduction Project Tomorrow is a group of businesses in Orange County, California that have come together to support models of excellence in science teaching and learning. Beginning in 1997, K-12 clusters of schools were invited to write proposals for support through Renaissance Projects, each to include elementary and middle schools and the high school into which they feed. Project Tomorrow specifies criteria for the selection of proposals that promise to change how science is taught; student attitudes and academic achievement are to be targeted for improvement simultaneously. This investigation documents factors that are related to the planning and implementation of science programs in three of these projects. The three Project Tomorrow Renaissance Projects have some goals, structural elements, procedures, and most resources in common, but the unique features of their plans and courses of implementation have resulted in three very different programmatic representations. How these are played out provides insight in terms of the conditions and actions from which different results may be attained. Each of the three projects is designed to provide opportunities for students to better develop and demonstrate understanding of science concepts. Because Project Tomorrow first intended to improve science through the incorporation of “meaningful technology”, initial proposals from all projects relied heavily on 85 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. technology applications such as distance learning, telecommunication, computer based presentations, robotics, programmed learning and assessment, and calculator or computer based laboratories. Project Tomorrow decided to support improvements through academic rather than technological channels for two reasons: 1) it was not financially feasible for the project to provide Orange County schools with the latest technologies, and 2) a member of the Project Tomorrow Board of directors convinced management that hands-on science for elementary students would better ensure increased student learning in science. Projects are intended to provide models of good practice for dissemination. Analyses of planning and implementation in the three K-12 school clusters enabled the investigator to determine patterns of relationships of factors leading to program excellence according to the National Science Education Standards (NSES). The three K-12 school clusters selected for support include the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster in the Shasta Hills Unified School District, the Pampas High School cluster in the Reinhardt Union High School and Reinhardt City (Elementary) School Districts, and the Hope High School cluster in the Pleasant Hills School District. More information is available about the project in the SHUSD than in the other two districts because that district has been implementing its project as a fully funded partner for more than two years. The project in Pleasant Hills has also made notable progress, partly because that K-12 cluster of schools began building their secondary and elementary programs prior to getting outside support. No new programs have actually been initiated in Reinhardt, 86 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. although individuals in the elem entary district are aw are o f the p ossib ilities for involvem en t and potential funding. The first part of this chapter provides descriptions of the Renaissance Projects of the three K-12 school clusters. Following characterization of the projects are the narrative summaries of the analyses that were directed to the research questions of the study. The questions that guide this investigation of planning and implementation center on levels of practice of program elements according to an Innovation Configuration (IC) Chart and clarification of the processes, events, and conditions that are linked to the levels of practice (see Innovation Configuration Chart. Appendix A). The questions that guide this study are these: Question One. To what extent have the schools that are engaged in science education reform achieved excellence according to criteria defined in the NSES? Question Two. What processes did schools engaged in science program improvement employ in achieving excellence? Question Three. What factors are related to the realization of quality program elements? To answer Question One, an Innovation Configuration (IC) Chart (Appendix A ) (Hall & Hord, 1987) was used to assess differences in the quality of outcomes of the processes of planning and implementation of science programs. The chart represents levels of practice of program elements that are adapted from statements made in the NSES. Levels of approximation to an ideal state (levels of 87 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. practice) a llo w charting th e d egrees to w h ich program s in sch o o ls and districts have a ch ieved criteria o f ex c elle n c e . To answer Question Two, processes and events of the projects in the three K-12 school clusters were observed, recorded, and classified according to three streams of factors: Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. The conditions for each program element for each of the three school clusters were recorded on the Stream Diagnostic Charts in Appendix C (Porras, 1997) for subsequent analysis of relationships. An example of a Stream Chart is provided in Figure 4.1. The charts track contextual factors and unique aspects of programs and graphically represent the factors that may be related to the achievement of excellence according to IC Chart Levels and to each other. To answer Question Three, patterns o f interactions were noted on the Stream Diagnostic Charts with the use of uni- and bi-directional arrows. When the charts were completed, a narrative format was used to summarize findings, contributing factors could have been (1) essential to the institution of programs at some stage; or (2) not directly related to quality science, yet serve indirectly as mechanisms for support, program delivery, or validation; or (3) spuriously correlated. In some cases direct causation was implied in the statements of those who were interviewed or in project reports. The method of analysis enabled the investigator to organize the information that was recorded in direct observation, obtained in the interviews, and derived in a study of the project documents. Mapping the levels of practice o f the program elements in the streams and 88 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 4-1 Sample Stream Diagnostic Chart Template Program Elements Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources SF 1 (variable categorized as social factor) SF 2 SF 3 Heavy lines surrounding box indicates IC Level o f Program Element. Arrows indicate relationships, direction o f arrows may indicate flow o f effect, influence, or causality. (Adapted from Porras, 1987) PE 2 (issue related to program element or descriptor). OA2 OA I (variable categorized as technology) PE 3 OA 3 R 2 R I (variable categorized as resource) R 3 PE 1 (variable categorized as Program Element). connecting them with contributing factors as dictated by the connections made or implied by the data sources permitted the researcher to clarify, sort-out, and relate the factors that influenced project outcomes. Once the data were gathered, organized, and related, patterns of interactions were discerned through comparison of the relationships for the same program element among the three K-12 school clusters. 89 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Description of Projects Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project The Tedesco Canyon High School cluster is part o f the Shasta Hills Unified School District that is located in the more recently developed and more affluent “South County”. The district has fewer low-income families, fewer Limited English Proficient students, and a more highly educated parent population than do other districts in Orange County as a whole. The Board of Trustees and district administration are sensitive to community concerns, and have generally promoted textbook-centered programs to better improve scores of students on standardized tests that are content-based. The original proposal of the cluster schools suggested an interaction of high school and elementary students along with the use of technology to enable teachers and students at different locations in and out of the district to communicate in real time. It was initially hoped that Project Tomorrow funding would help to get cluster schools online and provide equipment for distance learning and telecommunication among schools. After Project Tomorrow selected the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster for support, the Project Tomorrow Board of directors realized that it would not be able to raise the amounts o f money that it had originally planned. At that time, leadership in the Shasta Hills Unified School District (SHUSD) decided to scale down the project, abandon its pursuit of technology for distance learning, and concentrate on a cross-age teaching 90 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. component that was already in place but that could be modified and expanded. At the onset o f the project there were two project coordinators, one for science and one for technology. The technology coordinator withdrew when Project Tomorrow eliminated support for technology; the science coordinator remained and became the Renaissance Project coordinator. The project has two secondary components, its docent and its Career Explorations Seminar Program, both of which are described below. The Tedesco Canyon High School K-12 cluster project also has several elementary components; these include the docent program (that brings high school students into elementary classrooms to work with the students), the Beckman@Science funded program that supports the training of district teachers in the NSF supported curricula, the SHUSD Summer Institute for elementary teachers that is currently supported by Project Tomorrow, the Academic Year Seminar program for elementary teachers, and Family Science Night, which is conducted for families in the Renaissance Project schools that are taking part in Project Tomorrow. The district also has a science specialist program that is being blended with the Beckman@Science project, in that all of the specialists have been kit trained. The lessons that the specialists present in the elementary classes are modules that are a part o f the NSF supported curricula that are a part o f the Beckman program. Of all of the programs that are part of Project Tomorrow, the docent program at Tedesco Canyon High School has received the most publicity and recognition. Following are descriptions of the programs that comprise the Shasta Hills 91 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. R enaissance Project; inform ation about districts is also sum m arized in D istrict D escriptions (A p p en d ix D ). Tedesco Canyon Renaissance Project Summer Science Institute. The summer science institute is organized for teachers every August and is five days in duration. Using the district’s high school science mentor teachers as instructors, the Institute focuses on science concepts for two grade levels per year to match the district’s science framework. Each day, the high school mentors present content, using handouts, lectures, overheads, videos, and laboratories. The mentors teach the participating elementary teachers content in the life, earth, and physical science and provide laboratories to support the content. In addition to labs that develop teacher understanding, hands-on activities that are appropriate for students in the two grades are also provided. The 1997 Institute focus was science for grades two and four. In 1998, grades three and five were covered, and in 1999 the Institute addresses grades one and six. The district science coordinator and the elementary science mentor train teachers in the use of Full Option Science System (FOSS) kits that have been endorsed by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and that are aligned with the California State Content Standards. During the Institute, the project coordinator, works with the high school students in the docent program to begin developing the six mini-lessons that they will teach in their assigned schools and at their assigned grade level. Tedesco Canyon Renaissance Project Academic Year Seminars. To complement the summer science institute for teachers, several two-hour science 92 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. seminars are given in the district during the academic year. In the 1998-99 school year, one was conducted at the Fullerton Arboretum and featured science in the garden; another which was held at the Tedesco Field Studies facility and featured astronomy. District kit training was also provided at the Tedesco facility. Tedesco Canvon Renaissance Project High School Docent Program. The docent program is a high school class for students who want to become elementary teachers or who want to improve their research and presentation skills. The course is also designed for the high school students to learn science concepts as they prepare lessons for younger students. The project coordinator, works with high school students to begin developing the six mini-lessons that they will teach in their assigned schools and at their assigned grade level. Coordinating with the prescribed content at the grade levels addressed, the high school students are trained to work with students in elementary classrooms as "docents” by the project coordinator. Students are assigned topical concepts and given resources. From texts and the Internet, they seek information and activities that will support understanding of the concepts at the grade level where they will be working. The coordinator, a science teacher, tests the students' understanding of the subject matter and works with them to create or adapt materials and activities for the elementary students. High school docents build kits to include the lessons. The docents are transported to the participating elementary schools as a group, where they present the lessons and leave their kits behind. The program was built on a pre-existing program in which high school students were trained to conduct nature walks and to present lessons in 93 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the district’s F ield Studies Program at T ed esco Elem entary S ch ool in T ed esco C anyon. During the academic year, docents read and investigate the designated district grade level curriculum. According to the teacher and project coordinator, the rationale for inquiry and inquiry teaching methods are taught to the students, docents create “elicitation activities” that generate student questions about science concepts. In this part of the lessons that are written for elementary students, docents introduce vocabulary, use visuals, and do demonstrations for the students. That part of the lesson is followed by a development activity for the whole class. The activities are hands-on and give students the opportunity to collect data that reinforce the concepts being taught. The lessons provide an application of the science concept and additional applications to be done in the classroom or to be taken home. Tedesco Canvon Renaissance Project Family Science Night. Materials for Family Science Nights are purchased from Math, Science and Beyond of the San Diego City Schools and are presented at the cluster elementary schools. During the 1998-99 school year, lessons covered forces, work, and simple machines. The events provide opportunities for the project to develop community awareness, to give recognition to students and teachers, and to provide Project Tomorrow with public relations opportunities. Tedesco Canvon Renaissance Project Science Career Seminar Course. The class was offered for the first time during the 1998-99 school year and was taught 94 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. by the project coordinator. Students explore careers that require an understanding of science and technology on the Internet, in the school’s Career Center, and at nearby colleges and universities. Guest speakers are a part o f the program, and students job shadow at nearby businesses. They must present their findings about the careers that they study to their peers in a seminar setting. Tedesco Canvon Renaissance Project National Science Foundation Supported Curricula. In the second year of supporting Renaissance Projects, a Project Tomorrow requirement for participating districts was attendance at a Leadership and Assistance for Science Education Reform (LASER) Strategic Planning Institute. The Tedesco Canyon High School cluster sent a team consisting o f the project coordinator and district science coordinator; an elementary science mentor; and a parent and business partner representing UNISYS to Palo Alto in July of 1998. Since the Institute, the science coordinator has arranged for all 17 district science specialists to be trained in the FOSS Landforms unit, and the unit will be done in all sixth grades district-wide. The elementary science coordinator and the mentor did kit training for 25 early elementary teachers in August of 1999, and two district science specialists are Beckman Lead Teachers for Orange County. It is possible that the district science coordinator will lead the district into a textbook based program in the new adoption cycle. It is anticipated that there will be a blending of hands-on and textbook based science at the elementary grades in the SHUSD. 95 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Pampas High School Cluster Renaissance Project The Project proposal writing team promised to articulate curriculum K-12 across four districts and to use technology to improve the learning of science. Rich Lodyga, the District science coordinator and principal at Pampas High School, put together a team consisting of two science teachers at his school, a science department chairperson from Riverdale Jr. High School, an elementary teacher leader, and a community partner to write the proposal, to plan, and to lead implementation of their project. Since being awarded $10,000 in seed monies in the spring of 1998, the team has done little more than assemble some of their leaders for monthly committee meetings, hold a Family Science Night, and send teachers to Educator Awareness events at Beckman-Coulter, Inc. The business partner of the cluster arranges those events. She is the Public Relations Coordinator for Beckman- Coulter. As one of the Year Two Project Tomorrow funded projects, a K-12 team including members from both the secondary and elementary districts attended the Beckman@Science Strategic Planning Institute at Palo Alto California in July of 1998. The project coordinator was given an stipend of $5,000 for one year to work with the Advisory Committee planning group to devise and begin implementation of an interdistrict plan for science. The group decided to begin at the elementary level and to improve the teaching of science with technology. Included in the Reinhardt Renaissance Project proposal, Project STANCE, was alignment of the districts’ curricula with the California State Science Standards and a Summer 96 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Institute. In the institute, teachers would learn how to incorporate presentation technologies into the students’ learning experience in science. For lack of funding, personnel, and follow-through, the Institute did not take place. At the end of the first year of the project, nine Reinhardt elementary teachers attended Beckman@Science training, and two of those are Beckman Lead Teachers for Orange County. The administration of the elementary district, however, is committed to a previously developed plan for elementary science that is based on their language arts curriculum. For the second year of support, Project Tomorrow determined that the coordinator position be split between the high school district and the elementary district. At the present time, there appears to be no incentive for the elementary district to move forward in implementing the Beckman@Science kit-based science or otherwise supporting the K-12 plan devised by the Project STANCE planning committee. The planning team was to send six teachers to the summer science institute at the University o f California, Irvine (UCI) for two computer classes. When asked, the project coordinator said that he did not know if anyone from Reinhardt had attended those classes. He also stated that he was “out of the loop.” Additional information is summarized in District Descriptions (Appendix D ~ ). Hope High School Cluster Renaissance Project The Hope High School cluster is located in the Pleasant Hills school district. Situated inland from the coast, the region includes housing tracts with large 97 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. homes, some of which are affordable to young professionals starting out. As in the Shasta Hills district, there are fewer low-income families and Limited English Proficient students than in most other districts in the county. The Hope project has three parts. The primary funded effort at the high school is the use of IMMEX in the teaching of science, and this is done two ways. First, honors students such as those in the Advanced Placement Physics class of the project coordinator are using IMMEX to write programs that include scenarios and embedded data for students in other classes to use in developing their problem solving skills. Second, the programs are made available to students in other classes at district high schools, to middle school students, and to elementary students. Hope High School Cluster Renaissance Project IMMEX Program. Problem sets are scenario-based. For example, “True Roots” is a program that presents a story about a child who is uncertain about the identity of her biological parents and conducts a genetic investigation. The problem set was written at a workshop at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) by high school teachers, aligned with the content standards o f the Los Angeles Unified School district, and validated by UCLA faculty members. Field studies were done with undergraduate students who rated the problem "moderate to easy"; it was anticipated that the problems would be "moderate to difficult" for high school students. Using the software, students perform one or more randomly assigned problems. The teacher installs the software, generates and assigns unique student ID's, provides activity sheets for students to take notes while problem solving, and 98 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. collects student performance data. Each student may then be provided with his/her own search path map. The computer lessons are followed with a discussion of problem-solving strategies, in which examples of non-productive strategies and examples o f good performances are examined. IMMEX analysis software produces visual representations of students’ searches o f a problem space. Boxes on the screen correspond to problem set items the students select in solving a problem. The tests can be grouped into a variety of formats to show sequences o f student selections. Programs that are in the software bank at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) are available and are being used by students in the Hope High School cluster. Hope High School Renaissance Project Infusion. A second part of the Pleasant Hills Yorba-Linda Renaissance Project is Infusion, which is an approach to enabling students to better understand and retain concepts and information based on graphic organizers and other methods to improve transfer of study skills. In In fu sin g th e T e a c h in g o f C r itic a l a n d C r e a tiv e T h in k in g in to E le m e n ta ry In stru ctio n , Robert Swartz and Sandra Parks address the teaching of thinking skills (Sprang, 1997). Lessons use graphic organizers along with direct instruction from the teacher and student responses. The materials incorporate explanations for the necessity o f teaching thinking and study skills, why individuals have difficulty performing the skills well, and how to teach the skills at various grade levels. An Infusion lesson has four parts: 1. Lesson Introduction, in which students are introduced to both content and thinking skills. 99 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2. Thinking Actively, in which thinking skills are taught in the context of a content area, using the best practices appropriate for the content. 3. Metacognition, a process in which students map out their own thinking processes to identify how they think and how they might improve. 4. Applying the Thinking, where students transfer learning in one subject to a similar subject or an unrelated subject. Hope High School Cluster Renaissance Project National Science Foundation supported, kit-based curricula. A third component is the NSF supported curricula that are being implemented in partnership with Beckman@Science, which in turn provides training in the FOSS, Insights, and Science and Technology for Children modules. The person who was Manager of the Beckman@Science Materials Resource Center is now the district science coordinator. The director of Curriculum, one middle school teacher, two elementary teachers, and a scientist partner attended the LASER Strategic Planning Institute in Washington D.C. in the Summer of 1997. The Hope cluster came on board with Project Tomorrow in the fall of 1998. The stated intent of the Project is to move forward and expand implementation of IMMEX, Infusion, and Inquiry (the NSF supported curricula). As of the end of the 1998-99 school year, 65 teachers and 48 students had written IMMEX software. A Summer Institute was held for teachers in conjunction with students in summer school. The secondary project coordinator, and Elsie Samms, chemistry teacher, are working with UCLA to develop IMMEX as a review tool for 100 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Advanced Placement science teachers. At that time, half the teachers at Hope High School, Mt. Bernardo Middle School, and Wayne Ranch Middle school had received instruction in using Infusion. Teachers in other disciplines are also being trained, are using the software, and are using the Infusion methodologies. Information about districts is also summarized in District Descriptions (Appendix D). Analysis of Programs. Part 1 The first of three research questions asks: To what extent have the schools that are engaged in science education reform achieved excellence according to criteria defined in the NSES? In answering this question, an Innovation Configuration (IC) Chart (Appendix A ) (Hall & Hord, 1987) was used to assess levels of practice of program elements that represent the outcomes o f planning and implementation of science programs by the three K-12 Renaissance Project school clusters. Statements derived from the NSES specify quality program elements (Level 1), and levels o f approximation to an ideal state (levels o f practice) allow charting the degrees to which programs in schools and districts have achieved criteria o f excellence. The IC levels of practice for the three projects are displayed in Table 4-2, Renaissance Project levels o f practice o f ideal program elements According to the National Science Education Standards. Following Figure 4-2 is narrative justification for assigning the levels. 101 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4-1 R en aissan ce Project L ev els o f Practice o f Program E lem ents A ccording to the National Science Education Standards Program Element Tedesco Canyon HS K-12 Cluster Pampas HS K-12 Cluster Hope HS Cluster Planning: Goals and Strategies (G) Level 1: Short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. Level 2: Goals are in place; ways to reach goals may not be fully clear to program participants. Level 1: Yearlong and short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants Quality curricula (C) Level 1. Curricula take into account students' interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, experience, and the ways that students learn. Level 3. Curricula appropriate for som e students; attempts to make materials interesting are minimal or artificial. Level 1. Curricula take into account students' interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, and experience. Methods and use o f assessment (A) Level 1. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student understanding. Level 2. Students occasionally have opportunities to demonstrate conceptual understanding and process skills through graphic, oral, or written communication and/or performance tasks. Level 1. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student understanding. Teachers' collegiality (TC) Level 2 Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to articu late a science cur riculum; some adjus tments are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. Level 2 Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to art iculate a science curriculum; som e adjustments made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. Level 1. Teachers meet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. Science as inquiry (SI) Level 3. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. Level 3. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers them selves. Level 1. Teachers consistently model and foster student inquiry as they interact with students. 102 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4 -2 R enaissance Project L evels o f Practice o f Ideal Program Elem ents A ccording to the National S cien ce Education Standards, continued Program Element Tedesco Canyon HS K-12 Cluster Pampas HS K-12 Cluster Hope HS Cluster Availability o f Resources (AR) Level I. Adequate equipment and materials for student hands-on learning. Media, technological resources accessible and resources from outside the school are used. Level 2 Eauipment and materials are available for use in science program, although lacking in some aspects; media and technology resources are also present but lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not access resources outside the school. Level 1. Adequate equipment and materials for student hands-on learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school are used. Student Discussion, Interaction and Input (SD) Level 1. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. Level 3. Teachers occasionally orchestrate discourse among students about scientific ideas. Level 1. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. Standards Based Expecta tions (SBE) Level 1. Students are Level 2. Students are Level 1. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. held to standards and are aware o f expectations. self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. Science for All (SfA) Level 3. Tracking in Level 1. Teachers Level 1 place; not all students are able to take science beyond state or district requirements. recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. 103 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. T able 4-2 R enaissance Project L evels o f Practice o f Ideal Program E lem ents A ccording to the N ational S cien ce E ducation Standards, continued. Program Element Tedesco Canyon HS K-12 Cluster Pampas HS K-12 Cluster Hope HS Cluster Professional Development (PD) Level 2. Although Level 2. Although Level 1. Teachers teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessments are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by leadership teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessm ents are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by leadership grow together as part o f a supportive learning community that is centered on teaching and learning; structures are in place for teachers to continuously co-plan their own professional development. Administrative Support (AS) Level 1 District and Level 2. District and/or Level 1. District and site level administration knowledgeably attends to the implementation o f inquiry based, hands- on science. Admin istration is open to trying new practices that are research based. site level administration acknowledges and supports need to implement inquiry based, hands-on science; may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research based. site level administration knowledgeably attends to the implementation o f inquiry' based, hands-on science. Administration is open to trying new practices that are research based. Justification for Assigning Levels of Practice Tedesco Canvon Renaissance Project Program Element G. Planning: Goals and Strategies. IC Level 1 Justification. Short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. Fewer than five percent of K-6 teachers are currently involved in the docent project, but the Beckman@Science Project has the potential for implementation district-wide if the Shasta Hills Unified School District Strategic Plan for Beckman@Science is followed. Goals of the Renaissance Project programs are clear to participants for the following reasons: 104 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1. Goals were formulated by a wide range of representatives of district leadership in the process o f proposal writing for both Project Tomorrow and for Beckman@Science. 2. District support for and benefit from Project Tomorrow and from Beckman@Science are widely publicized within the district and community. 3. Teachers who host docents in their classrooms attend quarterly or biannual planning meetings. They are in accord with the project coordinator and the District science coordinator in what the project is intended to accomplish. 4. Teachers who host docents in their classrooms have the option o f attending the summer science institute where they begin preparing for the curricular focus. There is not a one-to-one correspondence between teachers and attendees, but the format is realistic and effective. 5. Science specialists meet regularly with each other and with the science coordinator. 6. Progress and events o f the Renaissance Projects are reported at district-wide meetings as a matter o f course. Program Element C. Quality Curricula. IC Level 1 Justification. Curricula take into account students' interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, experience, and the ways that students learn. Students’ interests are taken account in the following ways: 1. Enrollment is optional in the docent and the science careers programs, which are advertised to students who want to be elementary teachers, want to polish their presentation skills, or who are interested in a science or technology related career. 2. Students are given the freedom to develop their own lessons and presentations as long as they follow the district curriculum and the guidelines of the course. 3. The curricula that are available to students as part of the elementary component of the docent program and through Beckman@Science are 105 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. hands-on. High school students serve as role models and present lessons to the students; interaction with the older students is motivational. The materials available through the Beckman@Science program are extensively field tested and designed to interest students at a given grade level. Students’ knowledge, understanding, and abilities as well as practitioner knowledge of how students learn is taken into consideration. 1. The docent program is based on the premise that one learns efficiently in a process of teaching. The program is also intended to motivate the younger students by providing role models. The docents are guided by their teacher as they research science information and find prototype hands on activities that can be modified for elementary science learners. 2. Science specialists teach science at least one lesson per week, and the specialists have been trained in the use of the NSF supported curricula. In developing the modules, curriculum developers based lesson design on a Piagetian model of readiness according to age and grade level. Program Element A Assessment. IC Level 1 Justification. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods are used to assess student understanding. At the high school level, docents are graded on the lessons that they design and present to the elementary students. In the science careers class, students are assessed on the presentations that they make in a seminar setting. In both of these classes, students use rubrics to assess themselves and each other. At the elementary level, some of the teachers who have been trained in the use of the NSF supported curricula have also been trained to use student science notebooks and rubrics to determine whether or not students achieve understanding of the concepts and 106 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. processes being taught. In those cases where science notebook training has been a part o f the professional development for the use of NSF supported kits, students are given rubrics according to which they receive grades based on their demonstration of process and understanding in the science notebooks. Project Tomorrow assists the project with the administration of attitudinal surveys, but that activity is limited to but a few o f the schools that are participating in the docent program. The Committee demands that district and project leadership examine every thing that they do at every step along the way of implementation. Program Element TC. Teachers’ Collegiality. IC Level 2 Justification. Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to articulate a science curriculum; some adjustments are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. The reason that IC Level 2 rather than IC Level 1 was assigned to Shasta Hills is that most teachers in the district are not a part of leadership and therefore do not participate in the decision-making that takes place strictly at a leadership level. There is a very broad representation of teachers and administrators involved, but a broader group of teachers are not involved. In the elementary classrooms, science is basically taught by 17 science specialists. All students get science except for grades K-3. The specialists teach in every elementary classroom grades 4-6, but they only provide 51 minutes of science per week. Shasta Hills has multiple groups within the district that meet on a regular basis to ensure that teachers talk to each other about teaching and learning. The 107 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. groups include leadership meetings at the district office, where the project is discussed; project related meetings including leadership and participants in various configurations for programs and events planning; summer institute and academic year seminar planning meetings; meetings of the science specialists with each other and with the science coordinator for training and for planning lessons for the classroom; Framework Committee meetings, where district curricula is related to standards and the state framework; mentor meetings and science mentor meetings; and site departmental and program related meetings. Program Element SI. Science as Inquiry. IC Level 3 Justification. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. Students are provided with experiences that promote scientific attitudes. The project coordinator works with her docents every day as they study science concepts, look for student activities to reinforce the concepts, seek out and put together resources to support the concepts, and prepare their presentations. In the sense of acquiring conceptual understanding of science principles, the program is very effective. What the students are to accomplish, however, is determined by the instructor. While students take initiative in seeking the information that they need to design and present lessons for younger children, the teacher also provides much of the information. Experimentation takes place for the purpose of trying out the hands- on activities that the students design. The high school students have technological challenges and experiences that promote concept development. If the secondary 108 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. program were being implemented district-wide and if the elementary program were further along, the project might have warranted an IC Level 1. Three district teachers have received training through Beckman@Science and model inquiry teaching in the classrooms to which they are assigned. These teachers guide student thinking with their own questions; they also use student questions as springboards to discussion of science ideas and students’ conclusions that are based on exploration and experimentation. The three individuals have had an extended period of growth and considerable training, where they have demonstrated ability to do inquiry teaching in the workshops that they present to other Orange County teachers. Other science specialists and other district teachers who are not science specialists, however, are at a mechanical level of use. Many non-specialists do no science at all. Program Element AR. Availability of Resources. IC Level 1 Justification. Adequate equipment and materials are available for student hands-on learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school are used. For the docent program, Project Tomorrow pays for all kit materials. The science specialist program costs the district over one million dollars per year; the PTA at one of the sites pays for part of one science specialist position. Local businesses contribute spots for students in the science careers ciass and contribute to the support of Family Science Night. The district has a Nature Center that is next to a park and equestrian center with a farm, has a technology plan that put all district classrooms online, and is working with the county and other outside 109 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. agencies to set up distance learning. The district also has a foundation. The Shasta Hills school district is in an affluent area, and makes the most o f its community ties. Susie Wilson, Public Relations Coordinator for the district, nurtures numerous business partnerships, political connections, and societal interest. The district is publicity conscious, and Ms. Wilson sets a positive tone for the district in the community. Program Element SI. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input: IC Level 1 Justification. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. The docents must discuss scientific ideas, because their task is to demonstrate those ideas with the information and activities that they put together for younger students. They work together in designing lessons, in the preparation of their presentations, and in presenting and working with the elementary students. They consult with their teacher when they need to ask questions, when they need some ideas, to check for the accuracy of their information and for the suitability of their plans. The elementary students also communicate with each other about scientific ideas, because the NSF supported curricula are designed for group work. At this stage in the implementation of the elementary kit-based program, however, relatively few teachers are trained or have had much practice in the skills of inquiry teaching. Program Element SBE. Standards Based Expectations. IC Level 1 Justification. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their 110 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. own learning according to high standards and expectations, docents are responsible for the design o f elementary science activities, kit assembly, and organization of presentations. A subtle difference o f interpretation makes the program element IC Level more convenient for application to The Renaissance Project programs; expectations for students in a program are rigorous and real, but may specify requirements for students that do not directly address standards content. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. In the case of the Tedesco Canyon docent program, students are responsible for their product. The product must be approved by the teacher and project coordinator, who is in turn responsible both to her district and to Project Tomorrow in showcasing her students to investors in the Orange County business community. At the elementary level, the Beckman@Science supported program requires students to demonstrate their understanding through writing or otherwise expressing their understanding of science concepts, often in a science notebook and in the form o f a conclusion to an investigation. Students know what is expected o f them, as they are provided with the rubrics by which they will be measured. Students using NSF supported curricula kits and notebooks have rubrics that clarify expectations. Program Element SfA. Science for All. IC Level 3 Justification. Because students are tracked in the Shasta Hills Unified School District, few high school students will ever have a class such as the docent or the science career seminar classes. The docents are only able to work in a few of the district’s classrooms, so 111 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the vast majority of students do not benefit from either the secondary or the elementary component o f that project. District wide, there has been growing emphasis on teaching to State Science Content Standards with textbooks to improve test scores and to satisfy parents. Students are tracked at the middle schools as well, so seventh and eighth grade students do not all receive the same level of instruction in science. Science specialists cover all district classrooms for grades 4-6. A few teachers have been trained at the first grade level, but plans for grades 2 and 3 are uncertain at this time. There is no district wide program at the secondary level, and science classes are tracked from grade seven through grade 12. Even in the elementary grades, the Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) program places children in different classrooms based on assessment of their giftedness. Program Element PP. Professional Development. IC Level 2 Justification. Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessments are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by leadership. For program related professional growth, docents co- teach with regular classroom teachers and are meant to provide a model of hands- on science. The kits with lessons and equipment that the docents leave behind are intended for use by the classroom teacher in subsequent years. Topics and skills addressed in summer science institutes and Academic Year Seminars are now related to the kit based science of the NSF supported curricular modules. The professional development that occurs in the district is highly structured and well 112 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. planned; however, it only provides for approximately 23-35 teachers at two grade levels each year. District and site planning committees provide forums for professional dialog. Individual teachers are encouraged to take advantage of the professional development opportunities that are available in the district and nearby. Opportunities abound at the University of California, Irvine; California State University, Fullerton; Chapman University; and at local community colleges. Science specialists model and co-teach with regular classroom teachers. They receive kit training through Beckman@Science. In addition to the district’s summer science institute, teachers also attend two-hour seminars that are held quarterly during the school year. Often, teachers enroll in college courses because very few district workshops include content. A number of teachers attend classes at the University of California, Irvine summer science institute and are using the California Science Project for help in developing the curriculum o f the new Medical Academy o f Tedesco Canyon High School. The district also provides professional development opportunities for elementary teachers at the Tedesco Field Studies site, where mentors and science specialists assist the science coordinator and the Field Studies Coordinator in giving workshops. Few districts have an inclusive, coordinated structure for professional development in place to the extent of the Shasta Hills Unified School District. A reason for assigning IC Level 2 rather than IC Level 1 to professional 113 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. development in the district is that leadership at the high school is somewhat closed. After taking extensive coursework, one high school teacher planned to give workshops, but found that opportunity was not open to her; for example, the same three male high school teacher/mentors have been planning the summer science institute with the science coordinator for about a decade. Program Element AS. Administrative Support. IC Level 2 Justification. District and/or site level administration acknowledges and supports the need to implement inquiry based hands-on science. Administration may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research based. Structures are in place to guarantee teacher growth in the methodologies of teaching inquiry based hands-on science. While teachers involved with the project do inquiry teaching, district emphasis on test scores drives California Science Content Standards based teaching. Support of logistics, materials and personnel is excellent, for example, transportation is provided for project students. Instrumental in the writing of the proposal and making possible the transactions necessary for its implementation are the director of special projects, the coordinator of public relations, the director of technology, along with the project coordinator and the chairperson of the science department at Tedesco Canyon High School. All persons meet with Project Tomorrow and its board as they are able, and advocate strongly for their district. The district science coordinator and the field studies mentor teacher meet as required with Beckman@Science to advocate for the elementary program. 114 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The district science coordinator is also the coordinator o f the district’s Gifted and Talented (GATE) program and is influenced by community regard of high test scores; she therefore supports a California Science Content Standards based program. She sets the agenda and activities of the science specialists and science mentors. At the secondary level, she fully empowers the coordinator of the secondary component of Project Tomorrow. The project coordinator does not interact with higher level district administration beyond the level of the director of special programs. The support o f the superintendent, school board, and community for science programs and the science specialists is very real. The specialist program in particular is very expensive, and it is maintained without question in all budgetary considerations. Pampas High School Cluster Renaissance Project Program Element G. Planning: Goals and Strategies. IC Level 2 Justification. Goals are in place; ways to reach goals may not be fully clear to program participants. Technology centered goals persist and are adapted for the improvement o f science. Goals for elementary science are based on the Beckman strategic plan that was constructed at the NSRC LASER institute in Palo Alto in July of 1998. That plan has not been implemented at the elementary level, however. Widespread elementary district participation is not evident. Ways to reach goals are not fully clear either to leadership or to program participants. Teachers representing the high school, one junior high school and one 115 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. elementary school are aware of the goals, but administrators in the elementary district have been reluctant and largely unavailable to meet with the group. Relatively few people have been involved in planning or any concrete activities related to the program. Elementary teacher leaders who are part of Beckman@Science (there are nine) are aware of the goals for that program. While they are connected to the Beckman project, they have not been connected to each other, the district, or the Project Tomorrow K-12 Project. The situation is gradually changing, but it has nothing to do with Project Stance (the Project Tomorrow project funded with $10,000 seed money). Loyal and persevering Reinhardt elementary teacher leaders who are a part of the Beckman@Science program are gradually making inroads into the many schools of the Reinhardt City School District. A Project Stance team has been reconfigured and continues articulation across the two districts. A new project coordinator has been appointed at the high school and a project co-coordinator position has been created at the junior high school level. There is still no driving force for change at grades K-5. Program Element C. Quality Curricula. IC Level 3 Justification. Curricula appropriate for some students; attempts to make materials interesting are minimal or artificial. High school and middle school components were to be loosely based on improving achievement in science through student access to information on the Internet and use of presentation tools to develop and demonstrate understanding. The elementary part o f the project is theoretically based on the NSF supported curricula, but only a few teachers in the large district have received training in the 116 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. m aterials, w h ile use o f the materials is not officially sanctioned or endorsed by district leadership. The Pampas High School Renaissance Project K-12 school cluster decided to begin with elementary and build, while at the same time improving learning in science with technology. In the Reinhardt City School District, district leaders decided to tie the science curriculum to the language arts scope and sequence - completely negating the need for a scope and sequence in science. Ail district kit materials were taken from school sites to the district office to be reused in kits to be constructed around language arts modules. In the meantime, a few elementary teachers are independently being trained at Beckman@Science and are using the NSF supported curricula. At the secondary' level, it has been business as usual. Curriculum committees within the Reinhardt Union High School District are realigning their courses with the new California State Content Standards. Program Element A. Assessment. IC Level 2 Justification. Students occasionally have opportunities to demonstrate conceptual understanding and process skills through graphic, oral, or written communication and/or performance tasks. The Renaissance Project planners at the high school and middle school had every intention of devising ways for students to demonstrate their understanding through technology based presentations and electronic portfolios. As the technology on which the proposal was based was not forthcoming in any of the four districts, the project did not get off the ground in its first year of planning. Some high school and middle school are encouraged to make PowerPoint 117 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. presentations in science. At the high school, individual teachers claim to guide students in self-assessment according to rubrics, but the isolated instances of teacher practice are not project related. Electronic portfolios were part of plan for high school and middle school initially. Proposal writers intended for students to keep a burnable CD record of their work beginning in elementary school and to carry the disk from teacher to teacher and from district to district. Without computers in place, this part of the project could not begin; and those who proposed the assessment strategy had no control over whether or not computers were purchased in the elementary district. Departments and other segments of the two districts have never been coordinated around the planning and implementation of the Renaissance Project. While the Beckman@Science program emphasizes use of student work to assess understanding of science at the elementary level, only a few teachers have been trained in the use of those strategies during the first year of planning and implementation. At the elementary level, teachers who have received Beckman@Science training discuss use of student work for assessment in countywide groups, but there are no project related opportunities in the districts for teachers to discuss student work or to reflect on their practice. Project Element TC. Teacher Collegiality. IC Level 2 Justification. Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to articulate a science curriculum; some adjustments are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. Teachers in Project Tomorrow schools co-plan with the coordinator 118 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and each other, but not for current or team taught programs. Non-project teachers at sites coordinate occasionally. Beckman@Science Lead Teachers (2) co-plan with other County B@S Lead Teachers. Prior to the Renaissance Project and as part of the California Science Project, the districts convened annually to articulate curriculum and classroom practice K-12. That event was first coordinated by the science coordinator for the Reinhardt City (elementary) School District and had the support of administration at that time. When the administration changed in that district, the position of science coordinator was discontinued. Now the high schools and the middle schools continue to meet at an annual event, but the elementary districts do not participate. Teachers from Pampas High School, Riverdale Jr. High School, and Kosta Elementary School who attend the Renaissance Project Advisory Council planning meetings talk about ideal approaches to teaching science when they meet, but it has not been possible to bring other teachers into the conversations. The planning group has not discussed real classroom project activities or classroom situations because there is no program being put in place. Nine elementary' teachers meet with other teachers in the Beckman@Science program to talk about the effective methods of using the NSF supported curricula, but there is no comparable structure in the district for this purpose. Program Element SI. Science as Inquiry. IC Level 3 Justification. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than 119 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. Project related science was to be based on student research, presentations, and use of technology. Teachers piloting the NSF supported curricula are being trained in inquiry teaching. Teachers discuss scientific attitudes and process, including skepticism, asking questions that require data collection and openness to new ideas. Individual teachers who meet as part of the Pampas High School cluster Renaissance Project Advisory Council planning group may demonstrate inquiry teaching and emphasize the process nature of science at some level. The investigator visited the classroom of the project coordinator, and saw students working on individual research projects with multiple resources. She attended two workshops given by a Pampas High School Teacher who provided numerous ideas for ways to get students engaged in their own learning. She also accompanied a teacher from the elementary district as she took a tour of elementary classrooms in Pasadena Unified School District when a team of four Reinhardt City (elementary) School District teachers were released by their district to observe the inquiry teaching in that district. Program Element AR. Availability of Resources. IC Level 2 Justification. Equipment and materials are available for use in the science program, although lacking in some aspects; media and technology resources are also present but lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not access resources outside the school. Schools are getting wired and online. There is no current plan to establish science resource center for elementary teachers. Both the Reinhardt Union High School district and the Reinhardt City (elementary) School District 120 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. have large numbers of disadvantaged students and are substantially funded by federal entitlement programs. Reinhardt schools have been designated California digital schools. The federal and state programs considerably augment the resources o f both the secondary and the elementary districts. Program Element SD. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. IC Level 2 Justification. Students occasionally work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas; students provide input that is used by the teacher in planning the direction of the class. Project related science was meant to include active engagement of students in technology based projects and through student collaboration and discussion in group projects. Teachers piloting NSF supported curricula use methods to solicit student input and stimulate student discussion, but they are few in number in comparison with the very large number of teachers district wide. Program Element SBE. Standards Based Expectations. IC Level 2 Justification. Students are aware of the expectations of the school. They receive letters from the school regarding assignments and the format of required research papers. Project related science includes attention to student outcomes, but communication of project based expectations in science is uncertain. The high school district mails out standards for submitted research papers in any subject, including science. For the few elementary teachers using notebooks with the NSF supported curricula, rubrics are provided so that students know what is expected of them. 121 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Program Elem ent S fA . S cien ce for A ll. IC L evel 1 Justification. Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. Project related science includes attention to student diversity. NSRC materials are built around National Science Education Standards and Science for All, and Beckman@Science teacher training emphasizes strategies for developing skills across the curriculum for all students, including those who are Limited English Proficient. Program Element PP. Professional Development. IC Level 3 Justification. Needs assessments provide for teacher input and are occasionally referenced in the planning of professional development. Teacher growth in science content is hit or miss. Teacher growth in the methodologies of science instruction is hit or miss. Teachers are given a selection o f workshop sessions to attend to match their needs, but workshops that are offered are derived from needs as perceived by leadership. Some teachers attend institutes and work-shops outside o f the district, including those that are offered at the University o f California, Irvine; California State University, Fullerton; Chapman University; and local community colleges. In the elementary district, the numbers of teachers enrolling in Beckman@Science workshops is gradually increasing. The four Reinhardt Lead Teachers have attended kit training for the NSF supported curricula, two weeklong professional development sessions, and attend monthly meetings for the Beckman@Science teacher leaders. 122 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Program E lem ent A S . A dm inistrative Support. IC L evel 3 Justification. District and/or site level administration equivocal about the teaching o f science. Both districts profess to support innovative teaching strategies and encourage teacher participation in professional development, but there is minimal buy-in at elementary district for making changes in science. Instead, there is emphasis on improving test scores through focus on language. The Reinhardt Union High School District promotes the teaching of excellent science through supporting teacher attendance at workshops both in an out of the district and enrollment in courses and institutes at nearby colleges and universities. Good science teaching can be seen in classrooms in the high school and in the elementary districts, although the elementary district direction currently supports language arts and math to improve test scores. The districts do not have a K-12 program in place, and administrative representatives o f the elementary district consistently fail to appear at meetings for inter-district planning. Hope High School Cluster Renaissance Project Program Element G. Planning: Goals and Strategies. IC Level 1 Justification. Yearlong and short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. Goals that include inquiry and Infusion are communicated for all parts o f the District’s two related projects. The secondary project coordinator and the elementary science coordinator orchestrate the Renaissance Project in the Pleasant Hills school district, but there is also wide 123 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. participation of teachers in district-wide in planning and implementation of both the elementary and the secondary parts of the Renaissance Project. A rating of 1 is given to the project in the district because the programs are being implemented according to plan and in a manner that demonstrates fidelity to the intent of the projects as expressed in their proposals to Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. Program Element C. Quality Curriculum. IC Level 1 Justification. Curricula take into account students’ interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, and experience. Both IMMEX and Infusion focus on relevance and developing critical thinking. Programs are written by teachers and honors level high school students who are become very engaged in the process. Infusion lessons have documented success and are commercially available for adoption and adaptation. At the behest of the secondary project coordinator, the district has taken part in the professional development offered by developers of the program. Over 100 teachers in the district have been trained, but not all in science. The Infusion methodologies are meant to improve students’ acquisition, retention, and transfer of information in and across all disciplines. The elementary component of the project is based on the implementation of the NSF supported curricula, and in the first year of implementation nearly 100 teachers were trained through Beckman@Science. Program Element A. Assessment. IC Level 1 Justification. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student 124 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. understanding. Students at Hope high school and middle school students are writing or using IMMEX problem sets; Infusion strategies require writing, speaking, and other expressions of student thinking. The IMMEX products that Hope’s students have designed E ire remarkable in terms of potential use in assessment. Students and teachers who have written the programs have clearly gone through very complex processes of invention, design, and thinking through the processes o f science. Likewise, the reports and assignments that students write as a part of the Infusion aspect of the project can be used to assess process skills acquisition and transfer. At the elementary level, science notebook training is an integral part of the district’s strategic plan for assessment and permits the measurement o f students’ understanding of science through their writing. In the Professional Development of K-12 teachers for the application o f IMMEX, teachers are taught to see the thinking of students as they look at the cognitive maps that are produced in student use of the software programs. In the Professional Development of K-6 teachers, time is provided for students to discuss what they have learned as teachers use rubrics to grade their science notebooks. Program Element TC. Teacher Collegialitv. IC Level 1 Justification. Teachers meet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. While decisions regarding selection of kits at the elementary level are made mostly by leadership, a large advisory committee meets to provide direction and input. Beckman@Science Lead and piloting teachers meet both within and outside the district to co-plan, get 125 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. training, and make curricular decisions. The secondary project coordinator and a colleague at her school co-plan progression of IMMEX and Infusion projects; The elementary science coordinator manages the implementation of the Beckman@Science kit based elementary program; she and the secondary coordinator have begun to align the elementary and secondary components. To bring teachers onboard the project, it has been necessary to get as many of them trained as possible so that they are familiar with and ready to implement the new programs. This is happening at both elementary and secondary levels. Program Element SI. Science as Inquiry. IC Level 1 Justification. Teachers consistently model and foster student inquiry as they interact with students. In the Hope project, Infusion is meant to bring in strategies that enable students to organize their thinking as they improve their study skills; Inquiry designates the nature of the kit based elementary component, and IMMEX refers to the software program that enables students to design inquiry tasks in which students must solve a problem or make conclusions based on data. All district K-6 teachers are receiving instruction on how to conduct inquiry lessons using the NSF supported curricula. As much preparation of teachers to implement the project has occurred as has been possible, and far more than any of the other districts in the study sample of this investigation. Program Element AR. Availability of Resources. IC Level 1 Justification. There is an adequate equipment and materials for student hands-on learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school 126 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. are used. Site and district level administration have accommodated the need of the secondary project to install as many computers as possible at each school so that the IMMEX software can be used at all levels. For the elementary component, the district has hired a person to refurbish the science kits, and has purchased the required number o f kits for each module to be implemented. Program Element SD. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. IC Level 1. Justification. Teachers regularly orchestrate discourse among students about scientific ideas. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. The Infusion methodologies require students to work together in designing projects and for completing other types of assignments. IMMEX software requires students to work alone, although two people may occasionally work on one computer project. The methodologies that accompany the NSF supported curricula at the elementary level rely heavily on student interaction, input, and discussion. Not only do students need to work together to solve their problems and accomplish their tasks, teachers are also trained to use student work and student comments to base the direction of classroom instruction. Program Element SBE. Student Based Expectations. IC Level 1 Justification. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. Honors students must write an IMMEX program that leads other students to understanding of a science concept. Other students who use the IMMEX programs solve the problems that 127 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. have been designed for them. Part of using the Infusion strategies entails letting students know what is expected of them, and the same is true for teachers using the NSF supported curricula. Part of the training that the teachers receive is use of science notebooks with rubrics so that students will know the concepts and skills that they are to acquire. Before each lesson, the elementary students using the materials write the data and the question of the day that they will explore. Program Element SfA. Science for All. IC Level 1 Justification. Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. The IMMEX programs provide alternative pathways of arriving at conclusions and they track the different pathways so that teachers are able to see how students think. Infusion methodologies are designed to refine students’ study skills and to give them opportunities to do higher level thinking. These methods are being taught to all district teachers in all disciplines at the high school and middle school levels. At the elementary level, materials are meant to provide quality science curriculum to all students at all grade levels K.-6. The NSRC materials built around National Science Education Standards and Science for All. Program Element PD Professional Development. IC Level 1 Justification. Teachers grow together as part of a supportive learning community that is centered on teaching and learning; structures are in place for teachers to continuously co plan their own professional development. High School and Middle School teachers receive professional development in IMMEX and Infusion — a few at a time. Two 128 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Beckman@Science Lead Teachers attend NSRC kit training. Workshops and institutes to continuously train teachers in the Pleasant Hills school district in IMMEX, Infusion, and the NSF supported curricula are scheduled well ahead of time throughout the academic year and into the summer. Professional development in these projects addresses some of the content that is important for implementation of the programs. The professional development that supports the three components of the project is mostly concerned with the strategies of using the materials rather than the science content. The professional development plan is focused on the reform efforts of the district and includes IMMEX and Infusion at the secondary and the middle school levels as well as training in NSF supported curricula for all K-6 teachers. Program Element AS. Administrative Support. IC Level 1. Justification. District and site level administration knowledgeably attends to the implementation of inquiry based, hands-on science. Administration is open to trying new practices that are research based. Structural and personnel changes made in district to accommodate hands-on science, materials, and professional development. Evidence that administration strongly supports the project and science is seen in that 1) the director o f Curriculum initiated the project to reform science by sending a team to the NSRC in Washington D.C. in 1997, 2) the district hired a full time science coordinator in 1999, and 3) the district has purchased the kits, provided the professional development for use of the kits, and 4) has hired a part time person to refurbish kits. 129 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Analysis of Programs. Part 2 The second of three research questions asks: How did schools engaged in science program improvement go about achieving their goals, and what were the actions and conditions associated with their efforts? To answer Question Two, processes and events of the projects in the three K-12 school clusters were observed, recorded, and classified according to three streams of factors: Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. The conditions for each program element for each o f the three school clusters were recorded on Stream Diagnostic Charts ('Appendix C) (Porras, 1997) for subsequent analysis of relationships. The charts track contextual factors and unique aspects of programs and graphically represent the those that are related to the achievement of excellence according to IC Chart Levels and to each other. In Stream Analysis, charts are used to graphically represent the relationships within an organization or project. The method is rooted in systems theory and takes into account both the systems and subsystems of a group and its activities (Porras, 1997). Factors that affect each other and project outcomes are grouped in streams of similar factors and connected both within and across the streams. Using this system o f representations, the effects of action on one part of a system may predict what will subsequently or simultaneously result in all other parts. Stream Diagnostic Charts can be used to evaluate complex sets of relationships. When factors affecting a system are identified, clarified, and fully understood in terms of connectedness to each other and to the system as a whole, 130 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. difficu lties m ay b e anticipated and circum vented and rem ediation can be d evised to address m ultiple im peding circum stances. Stream Diagnostic (Appendix C) represent the Innovation Configuration (IC) levels of practice of the program elements of quality science according to the National Science Education Standards and the factors that are related to the IC Levels. Those factors are categorized in the Streams of the Stream Diagnostic Charts that are found in Stream Diagnostic Charts (Appendix CL Each Renaissance Project encompasses science programs K-12. If a secondary and an elementary component of a project were at different levels according the levels of practice on the IC Chart, an overall IC Level for the two was assigned. Stream Analysis (Porras, 1997) enables a complex set of relationships within an organization to be evaluated simultaneously. Representation of the ways that Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources are connected to each other and to the levels of practice of the science program elements permits separate analysis of the factors and characterization of the system in which they operate together and influence each other. The Steam Diagnostic Chart is divided into columns (streams), one for each variable. Related factors may be components or problems and are placed in streams along with brief descriptions to highlight their centrality to the accomplishment of program or project goals. On the chart, elements are connected by arrows to factors in the same or in different streams that affect or are affected by changes made to one or the other. The format for assigning components to streams and for the linking of factors is found in Figure 4.1. 131 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. In this investigation, the four streams of the Stream Diagnostic Charts were Program Elements, Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. Eleven program elements were specified according to three levels or degrees of practice in an Innovation Configuration Chart. A level or degree o f practice for each of the eleven program elements was designated for each of the three projects in the study; the levels of practice are delineated in Innovation Configuration Chart (Appendix AL The projects of the Tedesco Canyon, Pampas High School, and Hope High School clusters were analyzed according to the factors associated with the levels of practice. Contributing factors are represented in Stream Diagnostic Charts ('Appendix C) and are summarized in table 4-3 through 4-8. Table 4-2 Summary: Levels of Practice for Renaissance Project K-12 School Clusters Program Elements Tedesco Canyon H.S. Cluster Pampas H.S. Cluster Hope H.S. Cluster Goals 1 2 1 Curriculum 1 I Assessment 1 2 1 Teacher Collegiality 2 2 1 Science as Inquiry -» -> j 1 Availability o f Resources 1 2 1 Student Discussion, Interaction, and Input 1 3 1 Standards Based Expectations 1 2 1 Science for All 3 1 1 Professional Development 2 2 1 Administrative Support 2 3 1 The above chart the Innovation Configuration Levels of Practice for the eleven program elements in the Study. The IC Chart is found in Appendix A. 132 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. T able 4 -3 Sum m ary: IC L ev els o f Practice for the T ed esco Canyon H igh School C luster that are Greater than 1. w ith related contributing factors. PE TCHS TC 2 The teachers in the district’s many well-structured groups network extensively and well. However, there are a greater number o f teachers that do not have the opportunity to participate in the mentor, science specialist, framework, or other committees. SI High school program is based on student presentations, docents asked to conduct inquiry teaching with younger students, but they are novices. The elementary program that is based on inquiry is limited in scope, and the science coordinator may move to textbook science to improve test scores. SfA 3 Students in the district are tracked in science beginning in middle school, and the GATE program has high status in the district. Students with special needs are not recruited into the high school program, and there are only three classes in the district. PD 2 There are no immediate plans to provide training in science to teachers at grade 3, as science specialists are the ones responsible for teaching science in grades 4-6. The district would be ranked according to an 1C Level 1 if more teachers were included. At the high school level, many teachers are not able to participate in planning for professional development in the district. The same teachers leaders have been primarily responsible for planning and conducting professional development for over a decade. AS 2 The level o f administrative support for the high school component o f the projects is extraordinary, and support for the established elementary program is also greater than in most districts. The district is assigned an IC Level 2 because the elementary science coordinator holds onto the likelihood o f a textbook based program being adopted in their district to improve test scores; she is also not promoting more than 51 minutes o f science per week for most elementary classes. If administration com es to advocate quality science for all students according to the N SES, the district would be given an IC Level 1. 133 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. T able 4 -4 Sum m ary: IC L e v els o f Practice for the Pam pas H igh School C luster that are G reater than 1. w ith R elated Contributing Factors PE PHS G 2 The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary district does not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. C -» J There is no project related curriculum at the high school level and the adopted district curriculum is based on the language arts framework. Partly for that reason, it is fragmented and incoherent. A 2 At the high school level, the technology needed to assess students on the basis o f projects and presentations or to compile electronic portfolios for students does not exist. There is also an absence o f an inter-district structure for decision-making and facilitation that is needed for the coordinated assessment o f students over time K-12. Only Beckman trained teachers use embedded assessment with student science notebooks. TC 2 A small number o f teachers who are part o f a project related committee meet monthly, but few others participate. Beckm an@ Science trained teachers function independently. SI -> (See Curriculum, above) AR 2 The technology needed to implement the project originally proposed to Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science could not be purchased. SD -> j There is no adopted program in either district that is project related, centered on group work, or officially adopted by either district. SBE 2 There has been no project related communication o f expectations. PD 2 There has been little project related professional development in the districts. AS 2 The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary district does not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. 134 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. T able 4-5 Sum m ary: IC L ev els o f Practice 1 for the T ed esco Canyon H igh School Cluster w ith Contributing Factors PE Tedesco Canyon High School K-12 Cluster G 1 Top level administration encouraged the writing o f proposals and was flexible in working with funding group(s) to modify plans. C 1 The high school program actively engages students, and the elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. A 1 High school students are assessed on their products and presentations, and elementary students are graded through embedded assessment based on their work in science notebooks. AR 1 Projects in the district are supported by Project Tomorrow, Beckman@Science, the PTA, a district Foundation, and the district itself. SD 1 docent and Beckman@Science programs are built around student discussion and group work as w ell as interaction with the instructor. SBE 1 Programs and their expectation are highly publicized through mailing, at Family Science nights, and in the press. Table 4-6 Summary: IC Levels of Practice 1 for the Pampas High School Cluster with Contributing Factors PE Pampas High School K-12 Cluster SfA 1 The Reinhardt district has a high percentage o f minority students and Limited English Proficient students, and a number o f Reinhardt teachers in both districts are committed to providing all students with a quality curriculum and good teaching. Reinhardt science teachers have received training in bilingual instruction and methods for working with other types o f special needs students, and a number o f them have become trainers for teachers countywide themselves. Equity, access, and attention to the needs o f students were written into the proposals o f the districts. 135 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4 -7 Summary: IC L ev els o f Practice 1 for the H ope H igh Sch ool C luster with C ontributing Factors PE Hope High School K-12 Cluster G 1 Top administrators in the unified district signed o ff on proposals and have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and provide professional development events to move the projects along. C 1 The curriculum incorporates some inquiry, gives students an opportunity to solve problems in science or to write science problems for others. The elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. A 1 High school students are assessed through their products, which are science problems written into IMMEX software. Software tracks the thinking and conclusions o f student users o f the software, and teachers are trained to interpret the cognitive maps. Students in the elementary program are graded through embedded assessment in students' science notebooks. TC 1 Teachers using IMMEX and Infusion talk to each other in workshops, but communication is not always formal. At the elementary level, teachers using Beckman kits are trained together at grade level and will be given formal sessions at grade level to troubleshoot. SI 1 Problems being written for student use o f IMMEX software are intended to be inquiry-based. Beckman kits, which are being adopted district wide, are also inquiry-based. AR 1 Computers for the project in the PHUSD are systematically being supplied by the school site(s), the district, local businesses, and Project Tomorrow. Kits for elementary science are currently being purchased with money from Beckman@ Science and the state Instructional Materials Fund (IMF). SD 1 For the high school programs, student interaction is built in through Infusion. Students who write IMMEX programs also interact with each other and with their instructors. At the elementary level, discussion and student interaction is built into the NSF supported materials; methods for conducting class and small group instruction are provided in training. SBE 1 Family Science nights highlight both the secondary and elementary programs. Project Tomorrow assists with press releases. SfA 1 The NSF supported curricula are designed to provide quality science to all students. District and project plans are to ultimately provide all teachers o f all subjects and classes with training in the use o f IMMEX and Infusion. PD 1 Professional development at the high school, middle school, and elementary levels is centered on the components o f the projects. At the elementary level, all teachers K-6 are being trained in the use o f kits. AS 1 (See Goals, above) 136 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The factors that limited progress in planning and implementation of quality science programs were summarized in tables 4-3 through 4-8. The relationship of the contributing factors to the levels of practice of the program elements for the three K-12 school clusters are analyzed below. Social Factors that Limited Progress in Program Planning and Implementation Tedesco Canyon K-12 School Cluster Social Factors. Teacher Collegialitv. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Level Collegiahty The teachers in the district’s many well-structured groups network extensively and well. However, there are a greater number of teachers that do not have the opportunity to participate in the mentor, science specialist, framework, or other committees. From Figure C-4. Tedesco Canyon. Teacher Collegialitv PE TC IC Level 2. Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to articulat^ a science curricu-um; some adjustments are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. SF TC 5 Science leadership is relatively closed; not all teachers network with leaders. SF TC I District mentors {HS): JJO, SM, and TG - traditional (M/Elem.): KC, MC SF TC 2 Proj. coord.: KF SF TC 3 Tedesco Canyon HS: JJO, dept. chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coordinator SF TC 4 Trabuco Elem.: KC, principal & district science coord.; MC, science specialist & mentor; three science specialists work together in district and at Beckman @Science. 137 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Social factors connected w ith teacher co lleg ia litv in the T edesco C anyon High School Cluster. Not all district teachers have an opportunity to directly participate and contribute. Over time in the Tedesco Canyon K-12 cluster, leadership has not substantially changed; the persons who develop science programs in the district have largely remained the same, while teachers who are not involved perceive that they have no opportunity to contribute meaningfully. Social factors connected with Science as Inquiry in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Leve High school program is based on student presentations, docents asked to conduct inquiry teaching with younger students, but they are novices. The elementary program that is based on inquiry is limited in scope, and the science coordinator may move to textbook science to improve test scores. From Figure C-5. Science as Inquiry. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF SI 5 KF guides docent activities. SF SI 1 KC, director o f curriculum, and school board place emphasis on state test scores. SF SI 2 Community | pressures emphasis on state test scores, AP and SAT scores. SF SI 4 Science specialists and other classroom teachers being trained in inquiry at Beckman @Science. SF SI 3 KC emphasizes textbook information, test taking skills for State standards assessments and for accountability to GATE parents. PE SI IC Level 3. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. 138 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. S o cia l factors connected with S cien ce as Inquiry in the T edesco Canyon High School Cluster. Persons involved in program design operate on beliefs that are not fully supportive of inquiry science. Political pressures influence administrative decisions to encourage back-to-basics. In the Tedesco Canyon cluster, science specialists do inquiry teaching and reach all district students in grades 4-6, but only 51 minutes per week are provided by the specialists. Real inquiry is not seen in the lessons taught by the high school students, although the elementary students do experience hands-on science and are asked questions. The elementary students are also given answers, and not all district students can be a part of the model for logistical reasons such as transportation. The lessons are loosely correlated with the district curriculum, but they are not fully coordinated with other lessons taught by the classroom teacher. Each lesson is a one-time experience for the elementary students. Social factors connected with Science for All in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Science Level Students in the district are tracked in science beginning in for All 3 middle school, and the GATE program has high status in the district. Students with special needs are not recruited into the high school program, and there are only three classes in the district. 139 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -9. T ed esco C anyon K -12 C luster. Science for A ll High school program showcases successful students and does not recruit students with special needs. SF SfA 2 Community pressures emphasis on test scores, honors classes for students.. SF SfA 1 KC, director o f curriculum, and school board place emphasis on State Test Scores. SF SfA 3 KC is GATE coordinator and insures avail ability o f honors classes for district’s students. PE SfA IC Level 3. Tracking in place; not all students are able to take science beyond state qq_ district requirements. Social factors connected with Science for All in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Program Developers and Managers in the Shasta Hills Unified School District (SHUSD) design, implement, and advertise for students with special talents and ability and not for all students. The administration of SHUSD tries to strike a balance between satisfying community demand for back-to-basics, honors, advanced, and GATE classes and serving the needs of all students. In the high school program, students with special needs do not qualify for the program and are not recruited. The district science coordinator interacts primarily with GATE parents and is responsible for the configuration of the districts’ elementary science program. While the curricular materials for the elementary program are inquiry-based, only the science specialists are trained in use of the materials. The science specialist program does not serve students in Kindergarten through grades three, while students in grades four through six receive only 51 minutes of instruction from a specialist each week. 140 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. S o c ia l factors connected w ith Professional D evelop m en t in the T ed esco Canyon High School Cluster Professional Development Level o In the SHUSD, there are no immediate plans to provide training in science to teachers at grades 2 and 3, and science specialists are the ones responsible for teaching science in grades 4-6. The district would be ranked according to an IC Level 1 for the elementary level if more teachers were included. At the high school level, many teachers are not able to participate in planning for professional development in the district. For the most part, the same teacher leaders have been responsible for planning and conducting professional development for over a decade. From Figure C-10. Tedesco Canyon K-12 Cluster. Professional Development SF PD 1 KF (HS project coordinator) linked with CSUF masters’ degree program, with mentors is linked with California Science Project and UCI summer science institute. SF PD 2 KC and MC work with science specialists, mentors, and district framework com mittee. They design professional development and present with mentors and science specialists PE PD IC Level 2. Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs ^ ' assessments are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by A leadership. SF PD 3 JJ, S M ,' 'G, KC, and MC have been planning the professional development in science for all teachers for over ten years. KF is most recently on board with leadership since involvement with Project Tomorrow in 1996. Social factors connected with Professional Development in the Tedesco Canyon High School District. In the past, leadership has not expected all elementary teachers to teach science, and includes the same people in planning for 141 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. program related professional development from year to year. The established district structure for staff development in science has centered on the summer institute which is held at the Field Studies Center at Tedesco Elementary School. Every year, the program for elementary teachers at two designated grade levels is planned by three male high school teachers. Other district teachers have participated in various science education programs and projects over the years outside of the district, but they are not usually used to provide professional development. Out of approximately 700 K-6 teachers, there are 17 science specialists who teach all of the science at the upper elementary level. Little if any science has been taught in grades K-3. With the help of three Beckman teacher leaders, all science specialists in the district have been trained, and an additional 70 teachers, including 25 first grade teachers, have been trained. As the district coordinator has provided training for these teachers, she has increased professional development opportunities in the district. Social factors comiected with Administrative Support in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster The level o f administrative support for the high school component o f the projects is extraordinary, and support for the established elementary program is also greater than in most districts. The district is assigned an IC Level 2 because the elementary science coordinator holds onto the likelihood o f a textbook based program being adopted in their district to improve test scores; she is also not promoting more than 51 minutes o f science per week for most elementary classes. If administration were to advocate quality science for all students according to the NSES, the district would be given an IC Level 1. 142 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -1 0 . T edesco C anyon K -12 C luster. A dm inistrative Support SF A S 4 KC sets activities of science specialists and Science mentors. SF AS 2 KC and MC interact with Beckman@Science and advocate for district. SF AS 1 JJO, director o f special projects; SW, coordinator o f public relations; N N , dir. o f technology; KF, project voord. interact with Project Tomorrow and advocate for district. SF AS 3 KC also coordinator o f GATE program and is also influenced by community regard o f high test scores; an advocate for science content standards based instruction. PE AS IC Level 2. District and/or site level administration acknowledges and supports need to implement inquiry based hands-on science. .<__ Administration may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research based. Social factors connected with Administrative Support in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Top administration of the SHUSD initially encouraged central office personnel, site administration, and teacher leaders to work together in achieving support from Project Tomorrow. The group put together a proposal that built on an existing field studies docent program and that incorporated distance technology; it was one of two proposals selected in year one. Writing a Memorandum of Understanding that would satisfy both business and education was difficult for the group, but the willingness of the director of Special Projects to work with Project Tomorrow in the process made that task one that was possible to carry out. The director also works steadily with the project coordinator to make the resources of the district available to the project and to 143 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. troubleshoot procedural difficulties. The coordinator herself had little experience with the protocols and procedures at the district office, and could not have easily accomplished what she has without the assistance of the director. The director of Instructional Technology has also been a great help to the project; he worked diligently with administrators and teachers in designing the program. When Project Tomorrow withdrew technology as an option for districts, he continued to assist the project coordinator. The superintendent and the district coordinator o f public relations also advocate for the district at public events. The district science coordinator did not want to work with the secondary part of the project; instead, she chose to work with Beckman@Science on the elementary part of the project. Administrative support for the project is excellent; the project is not assigned a level one because the elementary science coordinator changed the format of the elementary program to accommodate the structure of her district. In the SHUSD, science specialists teach the science lessons that students receive, and not all grade levels are included. The elementary science coordinator is including more teachers and new grade levels as pieces of the new curriculum are added. She continues to advocate adopting traditional textbooks in the next textbook adoption. She is not promoting practice of the hands-on, inquiry-based curricula according to the format intended by developers; rather, she is adapting the materials to the structure of the existing curricular and professional development frameworks of the district. 144 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Other social factors that affect administrative support are the roles of parents and other community in the district. The district science coordinator claims that parental pressure necessitates purchase of textbooks and teaching of content over inquiry^. GATE parents insist on the availability' of GATE and honors level classes. Pampas High School K-12 Cluster Social factors connected with Goals and Planning in the Pampas High School Cluster Goals Level The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary district and 2 does not support the project, as it continues to support the Planning newly established science program in the district. From Figure C-12. Pampas High School Cluster. Goals and Planning SF G 5 Elementary district administrators do not prioritize science. SF G 3 Riverdale Jr. High: SM, principal; LP, d e p t.^ chrm. meet and organize professional development (tech.) with team. SF G 1 District: JB, supt., on Project Tomorrow board; RL, principal and district science coord., also on board o f PT. SF G 2 Savanna HS: RL, is T principal, dist. science coord., and on Project Tomorrow board. JJ is teacher, project coord. PT is teacher, on team. PEG IC Level 2: Goals are in place; ways to reach goals may not b€~ fully clear to program participants. SF G 4 MZ, elementary teach er, team member on Project Tomorrow board and Beckman trained. LR Beckman trained, & science facilitator. JR is former facilitator, works for Beckman. 145 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. S ocial factors connected w ith G oals and Planning in the Pam pas H igh School Cluster. The superintendent of the high school district sits on the Project Tomorrow board and encouraged the involvement of that district. A teacher from the elementary district participated in writing the proposal and attended an elementary Strategic Planning Institute affiliated with Beckman@Science. When the leadership group began meeting, they failed to include a larger group. The project coordinator, who was in the high school district, could not get the administration of the elementary district to participate. Teachers in high school district schools other than Pampas were unaware of what the project had to offer or of ways they could participate. The elementary teacher who had been a part of the project from its inception stopped participating because she could not get district administration or leadership on board. A few elementary teachers became part of the Beckman project through opportunities that came about apart from the project and its planning group. Most teachers in the two districts have been unaware of the project. Social factors connected with Curriculum in the Pampas High School Cluster Level Curriculum There is no project related curriculum at the high school level and the adopted district curriculum is based on the language arts framework. Partly for that reason, it is fragmented and incoherent. 146 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C-13. Pampas High School Cluster. Curriculum SF C 1 Rheinhardt LASER team includes RL, JJ, ZM, LP, and HH. SF C 3 LR facilitated design o f literature linked science curriculum out-side o f Beckman/NSRC context. SF C 2 N o interdistrict curriculum connection after an initial effort in early 1990s as part o f California Science Project. SF C 4 NSRC piloting elementary teachers not connected by project or administration; piloting teachers not in contact within district. C IC Level 3. Curricula appropriate for some ^ students; attempts to make materials interesting are minimal or artificial. Social factors connected with Curriculum in the Pampas High School Cluster. The elementary curriculum considered to be project sponsored and supported is aligned with the NSES, research based, and exemplary according to the criteria o f this study; however, only 25 out of 850 teachers have been trained and are piloting the curricula in two years. There is no project related science program at the secondary level. The social factors that prevent the implementation of a quality program include a secondary coordinator who has been unable to make contact with the administration of the elementary district; a secondary level science coordinator who continues to support established practice and who does not interact with the elementary administration. The elementary administration is not willing to abandon its plan to connect science lessons to the language arts curriculum. 147 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. S o c ia l factors con n ected w ith A ssessm en t in the Pam pas H igh S ch o o l Cluster Level A t the high school level, the technology needed to assess students on the basis o f projects and presentations or to com pile electronic portfolios for students does not exist. There is also an ab sen ce o f an inter-district structure for decision-m aking and facilitation that is needed for the coordinated assessm ent o f students over time K -12. O nly Beckm an trained teachers use em bedded assessm ent with student science notebooks. From Figure C-14. Pampas High School Cluster. Assessment SF A 1 RL in charge of dissemination o f HS district policy, testing in science (professional development). SF A 2 JJ, PT, LP, and ZM discuss methods o f assessment; i.e., electronic portfolios passed from grade to grade across schools and districts. PE A IC Level 2. Students occasionally have opportunities to demonstrate conceptual undes standing, process skills through graphic, oral, or written com munication and/or performance tasks. Assessments likely to be multiple choice, fill in the blank, or other traditional paper and pencil, vocabulary-based tests. Social factors connected with Assessment in the Pampas High School Cluster. The project proposal included assessment of student work in electronic portfolios K-12 and student presentations, but the technology was never purchased. Teachers implementing the National Science Foundation (NSF) supported curricula are trained to assess student work in science notebooks. The secondary coordinator and the science coordinator of the high school district were unable to convene stakeholders to formulate a K-12 assessment strategy. The secondary coordinator 148 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and the science coordinator of the high school district were unable to convene stakeholders to formulate a K-12 assessment strategy, and the elementary administration did not support work with the secondary group to develop a K-12 plan. Social factors connected with Teacher Collegialitv in the Pampas High School Cluster Level Collegiality A small number o f teachers who are part o f a project related committee meet monthly, but few others participate. Beckman@Science trained teachers function independently. From Figure C-15. Pampas High School Cluster. Teacher Collegialitv SF TC 2 JJ receives stipend (no release time) to meet with elementary and jr. high teachers at Jr. High and elementary teachers. PETC 1C Level 1. Teachers meet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. SF TC 1 RL is widely respected by teachers, who speak well o f working with him in district professional development — coordinates professional development in science with teacher leaders. Social factors connected with Teacher Collegialitv in the Pampas High School Cluster. The science coordinator the high school district made every effort 149 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to continue the interdistrict and district wide science professional development day that was started with the California Science Project. While the elementary district no longer participates, an annual event continues in the high school district. After two years, the administration of the elementary district discontinued participation of elementary teachers. At the secondary level, teachers at individual schools collaborate in program planning, but none has resulted in project related changes. At the elementary level, a group o f teachers worked to develop a different science program. Social factors connected with Science as Inquiry in the Pampas High School Cluster Science Level The inquiry based curriculum is being used by very few as teachers in the elementary district and the district supported Inquiry program is not inquiry based. At the high school, no project supported program exists. From Figure C-16. Pampas High School Cluster. Science as Inquiry SF IT 3 Elemen-tary emphasis on reading and math — not science. SF IT 1 Administrative attention to research based methodologies; support o f building technology. SF SAI 2 JR, LR are Beckman@Science teacher leaders and work with teachers independent o f district. SF IT 2 Professional development is not focused on inquiry at high school or middle school. PE SAI IC Level 3. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. 150 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Social factors con n ected w ith S c ie n c e as Inquiry in the Pam pas H igh School Cluster. Only a few teachers in the elementary district have been trained specifically in inquiry-based teaching. Administration in the high school district still focuses on technology, and at the elementary level there is still a focus on reading. Social factors connected with Availability of Resources in the Pampas High School Cluster Availability Level o f Resources 2 The technology needed to implement the project originally proposed to Project Tomorrow and Beckman@ Science could not be purchased. From Figure C-17. Pampas High School Cluster. Availability of Resources SF AR 1 N o administrative buy in for science program improvement in elementary district. SF AR 2 Strong administrative support for technology in high school district, but resources not focused on project related program. PE AR IC Level 2. Equipment and materials are available for use in science program, although lacking in some aspects; media and technology resources are also present U *it— lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not access resources outside the school. Social factors connected with Availability of Resources in the Pampas High School Cluster. The availability of resources to the project is restricted 151 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. primarily because of budgetary problems, but individuals in the two projects failed to make adjustments when Project Tomorrow was unable to provide enough funding for “meaningful technology” to improve science education. While Reinhardt has digital high schools, there has been no coordination of technology resources to support a project related science program. Social factors connected with Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input in the Pampas High School Cluster Student Level There is no adopted program in either district that is Discussion, 3 project related, centered on group work, or officially Interaction, adopted by either district. and Input From Figure C-18. Pampas High School Cluster. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input SF SD 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math - not science. SF SD 2 Professional development directed to use o f technology to improve science teachinj and learning. SF SD 1 Administrative attention to research based methodologies; support o f building technology. PE SD IC Level 2. Students occasionally work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas; students provide input that is used by the teacher in planning direction o f the class, ideas. A Social factors connected with Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input in the Pampas High School Cluster. While individual teachers in both districts lead 152 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. students in discussions and elicit student input, no project related program is in place. The social factors include the inability of the high school science coordinator, district coordinator, and other involved persons working with the districts to involve the administration of the elementary district. The superintendent and assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction are completely focused on an agenda around language arts and math. Social factors connected with Standards Based Expectations in the Pampas High School Cluster SBE Level 2 There has been no project related communication o f expectations. From Figure C-19. Pampas High School Cluster. Standards Based Expectations PE SBE IC Level 2. Students are held to standards and are aware o f expectations. SF SBE 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math — not science. SF SBE 2 Project Coordinator is high school teacher and unable to influence direction in elementary district. SF SBE 1 Tnterdistrict effort to align curriculum K-12 according to California Science Content Standards; participation minimal. 153 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Social factors con n ected w ith Standards B ased E xpectations in the Pam pas High School Cluster. Both districts have standards which are communicated to students and parents, but there are no project related communication of expectations. A social factor related to a lack of articulation of standards across districts include primarily the absence of participants from the elementary district when K-12 standards are discussed by the project planning group. Social factors connected with Professional Development in the Pampas High School Cluster Professional Level There has been no project related professional Development 2 development in the districts. From Figure C-21. Pampas High School Cluster. Professional Development SF PD 2 JJ receives stipend (no release time) to meet with elementary and jr. high teachers at Jr. High and elemen-tary teachers to plan project activities and professional development. PE PD 1C Level 2. Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessments are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by k leadership. SF PD 1 RL coordinates professional development in science with teacher leaders and sits on Project Tomorrow board; JJ is point person with Project Tomorrow for project including report and design o f professional development. Social factors connected with Professional Development in the Pampas High School Cluster. Two social factors are responsible for the current professional development in the high school district. An elementary science coordinator started an annual interdistrict science professional development day 154 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. several years before the districts became involved with Project Tomorrow. When the elementary district pulled out after two years, the science coordinator of the high school district continued the event for the high school. The planning group had planned to include all district technology training as part of the project; this became irrelevant when Project Tomorrow withdrew its offer o f support for building technology to improve science education. Professional development in the elementary district has followed a plan that is not centered on the hands-on, inquiry-based curricula supported by Beckman@Science. Social factors connected with Administrative Support in the Pampas High School Cluster Administrative Level The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary Support 2 district does not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. From Figure C-22 Pampas High School Cluster. Administrative Support SF AS 2 RL, JJ, ZM,and HH attended LASER and interact with Beckman @Science. SF AS 4 LR, ZM, and other elem. teachers supported in Beckman training; not now a district direction. SF AS 3 RL coordinates sci. curr. in secondary district; LR facil- tated curr. dev. in elem entary district. SF AS 1 JB, Supt. sits on PT board; RL, Principal and District Science Coordinator on PT Board; ZM, elementary teacher on PT board; HH, business partner on PT Board._____ PE AS IC Level 2. District and/or site level administration acknowledges and supports need to implement inquiry based, hands-on science. Administration may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research bas'Stf 155 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Social factors connected with Administrative Support in the Pampas High School Cluster. The superintendent and the science coordinator of the high school district both sit on the Project Tomorrow Board, but they have been unable either to get the administration o f the elementary district to the table to discuss the K-12 project; nor have they been able to facilitate the development of a substantive, coherent project- related program at the high school level. There is no administrative support for science in the elementary district. Social factors connected with Program Elements in the Hope High School Cluster. According to the criteria of this study, there are no Levels of Practice less than one for the Pleasant Hills School District, considering the length o f time that the district has been supported by Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. Organizing Arrangements connected with Teacher Collegialitv in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Teacher Level The teachers in the district’s many well-structured groups Collegiality 2 network extensively and well. However, there are a greater number o f teachers that do not have the opportunity to participate in the mentor, science specialist, framework, or other committees. 156 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C-4 Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Teacher Collegialitv SF TC 1 District mentors (HS): JJO, SM, and TG; (M/EIem.): KC. MC. SF TC 2 Proj. coord.: KF. ^ SF TC 3 Tedesco Canyon: JJO, dept. chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coordinator. _ SF TC 4 Trabuco Elem.: KC, principal & district science coord' MC, science specialist & mentor; j science specialists work together in district and at Beckman@Science. SF TC 5 Science leadership is ^ relatively closed; not all teachers ^ network with leaders. Organizing Arrangements connected with Teacher Collegialitv in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Essential organizational arrangements include the meetings that are set up among administration and teacher leaders to design and strategize implementation of the project related programs. They include the meetings of the elementary science coordinator with the high school mentors who plan the summer science institute and follow-up sessions, the meetings of the elementary science coordinator with the 17 science specialists who deliver science lessons to all students in grades 4-6, and the meetings of the administrators and teachers who are responsible for the high school docent and science career seminar program. The summer science institute is taught at a secondary or community college level for K-6 teachers, and is loosely related by content to the kits that teachers are using according to the district science standards. The program is not 157 OATC I Leadership OA TC 2 Project OA TC 3 Summer inst. land academic yr. planning meetings. OA TC 4 Science specialists meetings. OA TC 5 Framework committee meetings. OA TC 6 Site meetings. R1 TC 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent program, family science nights. R TC 2 Beckman@ Science funding supports kit-based elementary science. R TC 3 PTAs and foundations support science specialists. R TC 4 Supt., school board support science programs. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. directly aligned with the NSF supported curricula The science specialists have been trained in the NSF supported curricula; they teach the kits that are part of the Beckman@Science program, but the materials are somewhat abbreviated and adapted because specialists only provide 51 minutes of science instruction per week. For the project, administrators and teacher met to write the proposal and now meet to strategize the implementation of the program. A major difference in the effectiveness of the planning group in the SHUSD and other districts is that district level administration has empowered coordinators to accomplish the tasks necessary to make the program happen. The administrative structure and the participation of the director of Special Projects in project implementation has made all the difference in the access of participants to the procedures o f the district office that make the program possible. The teachers who are part o f leadership have made the programs successful, but the district is not accorded a level one because there is little infusion of new persons for capacity building; rather, leadership and decisions are orchestrated by the same persons who continue in planning of science programs over years. Staff at sites interact collegially, but not all sites are part of the project at the secondary level. Resources impact the organizing arrangements as social factors impact and are impacted by the organizing arrangements. Project Tomorrow finances the docent program and the related family science nights. The structures would not be in place were it not for the support of the non-profit entity. In a similar manner, Beckman@Science supports the training of teachers in the NSF supported curricula 158 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and the purchase of the units. A foundation and the local PTA supplement district resources in the support of the science specialist program, but what the specialists are now doing is a direct result o f the support of Beckman@Science. Organizing Arrangements connected with Science as Inquiry in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Science Level High school program is based on student presentations, docents as 3 asked to conduct inquiry teaching with younger students, but they Inquiry are novices. The elementary program that is based on inquiry is limited in scope, and the science coordinator may move to textbook science to improve test scores. From Figure C-5 Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Science as Inquiry SF SI 5 KF guides docent activities. R SI 1 Project Tomorrow support o f docent program PE SI 1 Teachers trained by Beckman@Scienc e are learning inquiry skills and piloting NSRC kits. 4 SF SI 1 KC, director o f curriculum, and school board place emphasis on state test scores. SF SI 2 Community pressures emphasis on State test scores, AP and SAT scores. OA SI 1 docent program m addresses two grades at cluster schools per year. (2-4, 3-5, 1-6) OA SI 2 summer science institute and kit training address two grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). R SI 2 Beckman@Scie nee emphasis on inquiry teaching through NSRC kits/module. PE SI IC Level 3. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. 159 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Organizing Arrangements connected with Science as Inquiry in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The docent program addresses two grades per year, and the project coordinator tries to teach the high school students how to do inquiry teaching with the elementary students. The inquiry does not equal the kind of process that occurs in the elementary classrooms where the NSF supported curricula are being used. The grade levels that are being phased in that part of the project are the same as those established for the science summer institute. The docent program is supported by Project Tomorrow, and the elementary component is supported by Beckman@Science. Organizing Arrangements connected with Science for All in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SfA Level Students in the district are tracked in science beginning in middle J school, and the GATE program has high status in the district. Students with special needs are not recruited into the high school program, and there are only three classes in the district. From Figure C-9 Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Science for All PE SfA IC Level 3. Tracking in place; not all students are -■•able to take science beyond state or district SfA 1 NSRC curricula and inquiry teaching with use of notebooks intended to maximize learning in science for all students in district. SfA 2 Emphasis on teaching to Calif. State Science Content Standards with textbooks to improve test scores and to satisfy parents. SF SfA I KC, director o f curriculum, and school board place emphasis on state test scores. OA SfA 1 District science coordinator is also GATE coordinator. OA SfA 2 Docent program available to students who are successful in ■ school. . ^ ------- OA SfA 3 Science specialist program for grades 4-6 only R SfA 1 Project Tomorrow support o f programs. OA SfA 2 Transportation neecred for docent program 160 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. O rganizing A rrangem ents co n n ected with S c ien ce for A ll in the T edesco Canyon High School Cluster. An organizing arrangement that determines the level to which SHUSD students access science is the science specialist program, which serves only grades four through six. The GATE coordinator o f the SHUSD is also the elementary science coordinator who maintains a system of tracking in the district. At the secondary level, the docent program is only suited for successful students who are able to write, plan, and make presentations to adults and to children. Because o f the limits of transportation, it is not possible for large numbers of students to participate. The science specialist program costs the district over a million dollars a year, but it reaches all students in grades four through six, and the NSF supported curricula are being phased in slowly at grades one and two. There are no immediate plans for grade three. Students at the middle and high schools are tracked in regular, honors, and advanced classes. Secondary project related programs are supported by Project Tomorrow and the elementary' program that is bringing science to grades one and two is supported by Beckman@Science. Organizing Arrangements connected with Professional Development in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Professional Development Level 2 There are no immediate plans to provide training in science to teachers at grades 2 and 3, as science specialists are the ones responsible for teaching science in grades 4-6. The district would be ranked according to an IC Level 1 if more teachers were included. At the high school level, many teachers are not able to participate in planning for professional development in the district. The same teachers leaders have been primarily responsible for planning and conducting professional development for over a decade.____________ 161 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -1 0 T ed esco C anyon H igh S c h o o l Cluster. Professional Development OA PD 4 Regular mentor m eetings. OA PD 3 NSRC kit training. OA PD 2 Quarterly science specialists meetings. R2 PD 2 Beckman@ Science funding supports kit-based elementary science. O A PD 5 Districtwide, school science professional development day(s). OA PD 1 summer science institute and academic year seminars (district-wide opportunities) R1 PD 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent program and science career seminar programs. SF PD 1 KF linked with CSUF masters’ degree program, with mentors, California Science Project^ and UCI summer science institute. SF PD 2 KG, MC work with specialists, mentors, committees. They design prof. development and present. ^ PE PD IC Level 2. Although teachers occasionally partici- ate in planning professional d ev elo p ment and needs assessm ents are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by leadership. A ^ Organizing Arrangements connected with Professional Development in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The structure for professional development has allowed a smooth transition from the old curriculum to the NSF supported curricula. A framework committee realigned the district’s existing curricula with the new state standards, and publication of the standards was used as an opportunity to introduce new curricula at the elementary level. A system for ongoing professional development addresses two grade levels per year. In the first year of implementation, elementary teachers representing grades two and four attended the summer science institute, where the three high school mentors used lecture and laboratories to teach content and to give the teachers ideas as to the 162 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. kinds of activities that they could do with their students. At the institute, high school students recruited as docents worked with the project coordinator to design activities and kits that aligned with the district’s standards for those grade levels. Established professional development days provided time for the project coordinator to explain the program to teachers at the high school and at the participating elementary schools. Organizing Arrangements connected with Administrative Support in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Level The level o f administrative support for the high school component o f the projects is extraordinary, and support for the established elementary program is also greater than in most districts. The district is assigned an IC Level 2 because the elementary science coordinator holds onto the likelihood o f a textbook based program being adopted in their district to improve test scores; she is also not promoting more than 51 minutes o f science per week for most elementary classes. If administration comes to advocate quality science for all students according to the NSES, the district would be given an IC Level 1. From Figure C-l 1. Administrative Support. Tedesco Canyon Cluster OA AS 2 KF empowered to interact w ith f roject Tomorrow. OA AS 3 KC interacts with Beckman @ Science. OA AS 4 Relationship o f KC to dir. o f ed. services and asst, supt. curr. unclear._____ OA AS 1 KC, Science curr. coord, is principal and is empowered to „ determine structure o f science in district. R AS 3 Super intendent, school board, and com-munity support o f science pro grams, sci. specialists R AS 4 Problems vvrth docent program include: recruitment, transportation, storage, coordination . SF AS 1 JJO, dir. o f Special Projects; SW, Coord, o f Public Relations; NN, dir. o f Technology; KF, Proj. Coord. Interact with Proj. Tomorrow and advocate for district. 163 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Organizing Arrangements connected with Administrative Support in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The district science coordinator is also the principal of an elementary school and the district’s GATE coordinator. Whatever interaction she has with the Assistant Superintendent, it is she who convenes the teacher leaders and designs the structure o f programs. The director of Special Projects works with the science coordinator and the project coordinator. She facilitates approvals and expedites the mechanisms that permit implementation of programs. The Level 2 is assigned for the cluster because the science coordinator has been reluctant to prioritize a quality science program over textbook-based science to satisfy parents and school board members who place emphasis on rote learning and test scores. There is movement towards recognition of the value of the NSF curricula, so it is possible that the cluster will merit a Level 1 within the next year or two. The district’s position on the purchase o f state adopted textbooks versus hands-on science is not finalized and could go either way. Organizing Arrangements connected with Goals and Planning Strategies in the Pampas High School Cluster G Level The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary district does 2 not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. 164 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -1 2 . G o a ls and P lanning Strategies. Pam pas H igh S ch ool Cluster OA G 1 Site administrators have Blial responsibilities. OA G 2 Non-unifief districts determines little focused coordination K-12. SF G 1 District: JB. supt. on Project Tomorrow board; RL, principal and district science coord., also on board o f PT. ■ PE G 1C Level 2: Goals are in place; ways to reach goals may not be fully clear to program M participants. SF G 2 Savanna HS: RL, is? principal, dist. science coord., and on Project Tomorrow Board. JJ is teacher, project coord. PT is teacher, on team. SF G 3 Riverdale Jr. High: SM, principal; LP, dept. _ chrm. meet and organize professional development (tech.) with team. Organizing Arrangements connected with Goals and Planning Strategies in the Pampas Fligh School Cluster. The district science coordinator is also principal at Pampas High School and the project coordinator is also a full time teacher at Pampas High School. There has been no full time coordinator to oversee the implementation of the project. Grades K-6 are located in the Reinhardt City Elementary District, and Grades 7-12 in the Reinhardt Union High School District; there are no formal mechanisms in place for the two districts to coordinate what they teach. Science teachers at the intermediate schools in the high school district do work with administration and the high school teachers to develop to design and participate in professional development, but the administration of the elementary district has not encouraged elementary teachers to work with intermediate and high school teachers. The superintendent and the science coordinator of the high school 165 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. district sit on the Project Tomorrow board; the superintendent was instrumental in the school districts’ decision to write a proposal for Project Tomorrow. The presence of the administrators on the board, however, has not helped to get the elementary district involved. A Reinhardt elementary teacher also sits on the board, but she also has been unable to involve her district. Organizing Arrangements connected with Goals and Planning Strategies in the Pampas High School Cluster c Level There is no project related curriculum at the high school level and J the adopted district curriculum is based on the language arts framework. Partly for that reason, it is fragmented and incoherent. From Figure C-13. Quality Curriculum. Pampas High School Cluster C IC Level 3. Curricula appropriate for some students; attempts to make materials interesting are minimal or artificial. SF C 2 No interdistrict curr-^------ iculum alignment after early 1990s with Calif. Science Project. SF C 3 LR facilitated design of literature linked science m curriculum out-side o f Beckman/NSRC context. SF C 4 NSRC piloting elementary teacners not connected by project or administration or in contact within district. 1 6 6 )A C 1 Project related neetings OA C 2 Technology classes for teachers, HSf" and MS. OA C 3 Annual science professional development day, leadership planning team. )A C 4 No established nechanism for handling nterdistrict projects- mances, other. R C 1 Project Tomorrow supports inter- district team with known focus on TASER, NSRC kits, technology for HS, MS. R C 4 High school district supports science as much as possible with limited fesources. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. O rganizing A rrangem ents connected w ith G oals and Planning Strategies in the Pampas High School Cluster. In the Pampas High School Cluster Project, organizing arrangements affect social factors and are affected by resources. Project related meetings occur with the support of Project Tomorrow and for the purpose of implementing the project proposal. Technology workshops were offered to fulfill the curriculum requirements o f the proposal. While there is support for the science programs at the high school and middle schools, the science curriculum is not coordinated K.-12. The project coordinator would have supported involvement of elementary teachers with project funds, but no one made arrangements for expenditures across district lines. At the elementary level, the district has coordinated science activities with the sequence o f the language arts curriculum, changing the sequence of student science experiences with no consideration for coherence of concepts. Organizing Arrangements connected with Assessment in the Pampas High School Cluster Level At the high school level, the technology needed to assess students on the basis o f projects and presentations or to compile electronic portfolios for students does not exist. There is also an absence o f an inter-district structure for decision-making and facilitation that is needed for the coordinated assessment o f students over time K- 12. O nly Beckman trained teachers use embedded assessment with student science notebooks. 167 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -14. A ssessm en t. Pam pas H igh S c h o o l C luster R A 1 Project Tomorrow support o f tech assessment methods. OA A 1 Practices o f portfolios, ^ performance testing, not districtwide (H S). SF A 1 RL in charge o f dissemination o f HS district policy, testing in science (professional development). OA A 2 Piloting teachers o f NSRC teachers do not meet within elementary district to coordinate use o f notebooks. SF A 2 JJ, PT, LP. and ZM discuss methods o f assessment; i.e., electronic portfolios passed from grade to grade across schools and districts PE A IC Leval 2. Students ^ occasionally have oppor tunities to demonstrate conceptual understanding and process skills through graphic, oral, or written com munication and performance tasks. Organizing Arrangements connected with Assessment in the Pampas High School Cluster. The proposal for Project Tomorrow called for performance assessment through student preparation o f PowerPoint and other presentations. That part of the proposal has not been coordinated or implemented for the project. The elementary part of the project includes student assessment through their writing in science notebooks. The district has not taken advantage of the resources that could put that program in place. Organizing Arrangements connected with Teacher Collegialitv in the Pampas High School Cluster TC Level A small number o f teachers who are part o f a project related 2 committee meet monthly, but few others participate. Beckman@Science trained teachers function independently. 1 6 8 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -15. Teacher C oliegialitv. Pampas H igh School C luster O ATC I Project related meetings. OA TC 2 Planning fol*" professional development. OA TC 4 Site programs planning meetings. R TC 1 Project T omnrrniu M. v / t t i v / f t l V/ » * supports initial' interdistrict collaboration. SF TC 2 JJ redbives stipend (no release time) to meet with** elementary and jr. high teachers. OA TC 5 Piloting teachers o f NSRC teachers do not meet within elementary district to coordinate. widely respected by teachers, who speak well o f working with him in district professional development, etc. — coordinates professional development in science with teacher leaders. PE TC IC Level 2 Teachers Hicct- occasionally throughout the school year to articulate a science curriculum; some adjustments are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. Organizing Arrangements connected with Teacher Coliegialitv in the Pampas High School Cluster. Teachers co-plan in project related meetings. High school district science teacher leaders plan with the science coordinator for the annual district-wide professional development day. For two years, the high school and the elementary districts collaborated for the event through the California Science Project, but that has been discontinued. Teacher interaction in the districts is not focused to improve science teaching in a coherent way. 169 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. O rganizing Arrangem ents connected w ith S c ien ce as Inquiry in the Pampas H igh S c h o o l Cluster SI Level There is no project related curriculum at the high school level and 3 the adopted district curriculum is based on the language arts framework. Partly for that reason, it is fragmented and incoherent. From Figure C-16. Science as Inquiry. Pampas High School Cluster SF SI 2 Professional development is not focuset^ on inquiry at high school or middle school. SF SI 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math - not science. OA SI 1 District curriculum leadership .structure. OA SI 2 Districts’ professional development directions and evaluation. SF SI 1 Some administrative knowledge o f research based methodologies; support o f technology. SF SI 2 JR, LR are Beckman@Science teacher leaders and work with teachers independent ofA district. _ PE SI IC Level 3. Teachers encourage student questions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answers themselves. Organizing Arrangements connected with Science as Inquiry in the Pampas High School Cluster. The science coordinator and teachers that are a part of the planning group for the K-12 project have some knowledge of inquiry teaching. The science coordinator teaches science methods at a university as adjunct faculty. The project coordinator has participated in several university science programs including the California Science Project. Five members of the team attended the 170 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LASER institute, where inquiry teaching was a focus. The project component with high potential to incorporate inquiry teaching, however, is the NSF supported elementary program, which has not been a direction of the elementary district. Because several Beckman teacher leaders are Reinhardt teachers, there is a small contingent of teachers in the large district that are publicizing the benefits of that program. Other efforts to implement inquiry teaching have been hit-or-miss. Organizing Arrangements connected with Availability of Resources in the Pampas High School Cluster AR Level The technology needed to implement the project originally 2 proposed to Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science could not be purchased. From Figure C-17. Availability of Resources. Pampas High School Cluster PE AR 1C Level 2. Equipment and materials are available for use in science program, although lacking in some aspects; media and technology resources are also present but lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not acceSfe resources outside the school. OA AR 1 Standard district policies for purchase and storage o f equipment. OA AR 2 No arrangements for expenditures across district lines. Organizing Arrangements connected with Availability of Resources in the Pampas High School Cluster. The standard procedures for providing resources at the secondary, middle, and elementary level have not been adequate to implement 171 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the project according to the proposal written for Project Tomorrow or to the strategic plan outlined at the LASER institute. The organizing arrangements limit implementation across the districts; no one has initiated any procedures to bring the project together in the two districts. As persons in the planning group wait for the central offices to put new procedures in place and to approve actions and expenditures, there has been loss o f time for implementation. Organizing Arrangements connected with Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input in the Pampas High School Cluster SD Level There is no adopted program in either district that is project 3 related, centered on group work, or officially adopted by either district. From Figure C-18. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input Pampas High School Cluster OA SD 1 Districts’ curriculum leader ship structures. SF SD 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math — not science. SF SD 2 Professional development directed ter* use o f technology to improve science teaching and learning. OA SD 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. SF SD 1 Administrative attention to research based methodologies; support o f building technology. PE SD IC Level 2. Students occasionally work in groups where they discuss scienti-fic ideas; students provide inpjft that is used by the teacher in planning direction o f the class ideas. ___ 172 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. O rganizing A rrangem ents connected w ith Student D iscu ssion . Interaction. and Input in the Pampas High School Cluster. For the most part, the organizational arrangements that influence inquiry teaching also affect emphasis on student discussion, interaction, and input. The science coordinator and teachers that are a part of the planning group for the K-12 project have some knowledge of the advantages of and the ways to conduct student discussion. The science coordinator teaches science methods at a university as adjunct faculty. The project coordinator has participated in several university science programs including the California Science Project. Five members of the team attended the LASER institute, where teacher-directed student discussion was a focus. The elementary project component with high potential to incorporate student discussion, however, is the NSF supported elementary program, which has not been a direction of the elementary district. Because several Beckman teacher leaders are Reinhardt teachers, there is a small contingent of teachers in the large district that are publicizing the benefits of the methodologies associated with that program. Efforts to implement incorporate student discussion and interaction have been hit-or-miss. Organizing Arrangements connected with Standards Based Expectations in the Pampas High School Cluster Level There has been no project related communication o f expectations 173 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -1 9 . Standards B ased E xpectations. Pam pas H igh School C luster OA SBE 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. SF SBE 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math - not science. SF SBE 2 Proj. Coord, is high school teacher, unable to influence elementary district. PE SBE IC Level 2. Students are held to standards and are aware o f expectations. OA SBE 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. SF SBE 1 Interdistrict effort to align curriculum K-12 according to California Science Content Standards; participation minimal. Organizing Arrangements connected with Standards Based Expectations in the Pampas High School Cluster. District leadership at the high school level communicates expectations to parents, but thus far these have been related to grade requirements and formats for assignments. Letters of expectations are given to students and are sent home. There has been no communication of project- or standards- based expectations. At the elementary level, no information about the NSF supported curricula has emanated from the district office or sites; individual teachers may focus on standards-based outcomes in exchange with parents. Organizing Arrangements connected with Professional Development in the Pampas High School Cluster PD Level There has been no project related professional development in the 2 districts. 174 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -21. Professional D evelop m en t Pam pas H igh S ch o o l C luster PE PD IC Level 2. Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessm ents are used, opportunities for teacher growth are argely orchestrated by leadership. SF PD 2 JJ receives stipend (no release time) to meet with elementary' and jr. high teachers at jr. high and elem en tary teachers to plan project activities and prof. development. SF PD 1 RL coordinates professional development in science with teacher leaders and sits on Project Tomorrow board; JJ is point person with Project Tomorrow for project including report and design o f professional development. OA PD 4 Site programs planning meetings. OA PD 5 Piloting teachers o f NSRC teachers do not meet within elementary district to coordinate. OA PD 2 Committee and meetings to plan _|professional development. OA PD 1 Project related m eetings. OA PD 3 Committee and — [meetings to plan annual science professional development day. R P D 1 Project Tomorrow supports budget that includes professional development. R PD 2 Beck- man@ Science provides professional development in kit-based elementary science which is part o f interdistrict plan. R PD 3 Eisenhower funds are used to provide teachers with professional development opportunities in science. Organizing Arrangements connected with Professional Development in the Pampas High School Cluster. The organizing arrangements that influence professional development in the Reinhardt District include the structures that are in place to provide districts’ teachers with opportunities to grow in content and methodology. The high school district supports individual teachers’ decisions to participate in workshops, seminars, conferences, and institutes. The district also 175 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. provides professional development days and an annual district-wide science day. The persons who meet as part of the project planning group are also instrumental in planning the day. Teachers are asked to list, choose, and prioritize the events that would best meet their needs. For the project that was originally based in technology, short courses were available for teachers to learn the presentation technologies that their students were to use for performance assessments. Project Tomorrow would have supported the technology workshops for teachers, but teachers were not recruited for participation. At the elementary level, districts have provided professional development for teaching reading and math; the elementary district science/technology coordinator also worked with teachers on the new direction in science that was not project based. The Reinhardt elementary Beckman teacher leaders receive training for that program, which is not the official elementary science program. There is no solid professional development plan based on the project. Organizing Arrangements connected with Administrative Support in the Pampas High School Cluster AS Level The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary district does 2 not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. 176 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -22. A dm inistrative Support. Pam pas H igh School Cluster PE AS IC Level 2. District and/or site level administration acknowledges and supports need to implement inquiry based, hands-on science. Administration may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research based. SF AS 2 RL, JJ. ZM, and HH attended LASER and interact with Beckman@ Science. n SF AS 3 RL coordinates sci- m ence curriculum in Secondary district; LR facilitated curriculum development in elementary district SF AS 4 LR, ZM, and other elementary teachers supported in Beckman training; not now a district direction. OA AS 1 RL, district science coordinator is principal and is empowered to determine struc ture o f science in district. OA AS 2 JJ is empowered by RL to interact with Proj. Tomorrow. _L« R AS 2 Beckman @Science provides training and kits for pilot elementary). OA AS 3 No official representation from elementary district to Beckman@ Science. R AS 3 Superinten dent, school - board, and community support of science programs (Beckman- Coulter). Organizing Arrangements connected with Administrative Support in the Pampas High School Cluster. The science coordinator could be influential in moving the project along. Because he is also a high school principal, the time that he has to work on the project is very limited. For this reason, he has designated a project coordinator. That person is a full time teacher. While the project coordinator is in theory empowered to run the project, no one is giving him access to the district mechanisms that would make action possible. The elementary district administration does not participate in project planning. 177 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. R esources con n ected with T eacher C oliegialitv in the T edesco C anyon H igh School Cluster Level The teachers in the district’s many well-structured groups network extensively and well. However, there are a greater number o f teachers that do not have the opportunity to participate in the mentor, science specialist, framework, or other committees. From Figure C-4. Teacher Coliegialitv. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PETC IC Level 2. Teachers meet occa sional ly throughout the school year to articulate a science curriculum; some adjust ments made to ■ + — sequence, coordinate. SF TC 1 District mentors_(HS): JJO, SM, and' TG; (K-8): KC, MC. SF TC 2 Proj. coord. KF SF TC 3 Tedesco Canyon: JJO, dept, chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coordinator. OA TC 3 Summer institute and aca- -Idemic year seminar planning meetings. SF TC 5 Science leadership is relatively closed; not all teachers network with leaders. SF TC 4 Trabuco Elem.: KC, principal & district science coord.; MC, science specialist & mentor; 3 science specialists work together in district and at Beckman@Science. OA TC 1 Leader ship meetings. OA TC 2 Project related meetings* OA TC 4 Sci ence specialists meetings OA TC 5 Frame work Committee meetings. OA TC 6 Site programs meetings. R1 TC 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent program, family ^ ien ce nights. R TC 2 Beck- man@Science funding supports kit-based elementary science. R TC 3 PTAs and foundations support science specialists. R TC 4 Supt., school board support science programs. 178 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. R esou rces con n ected with T eacher C o lieg ia litv in the T ed esco Canyon H igh School Cluster. Many of the structures that are in place for teachers to work together were in place before funding by Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. However, the project entails other meetings for planning and implementation that would not occur were it not for these two proposals. Teacher Collegiality for the Tedesco Canyon cluster was given a two rather than a one because the majority o f teachers in the SHUSD do not participate in the committees and working groups for the district or for the projects. Uninvolved teachers complain that they are not asked for their input and are not invited to be part of leadership. While the elementary component o f the project is to include all students, over the time o f this study, only the 17 science specialists and a few first grade teachers are piloting the NSF supported materials. Resources connected with Science as Inquiry in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SI Level High school program is based on student presentations, docents asked to conduct inquiry teaching with younger students, but they are novices. The elementary program that is based on inquiry is limited in scope, and the science coordinator may m ove to textbook science to improve test scores. 179 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -5. S cien ce as Inquiry. T edesco Canyon H igh S ch o o l Cluster PE SI IC Level 3. Teachers encourage student ques tions, but often directly answer questions rather than provide opportunities for students tf find out answers themselves. SF SI 1 KF guides docent tivities. H C ' SF SI 2 Community pressures emphasis on state test scores, AP and SAT scores. SF SI 3 KC emphasizes * textbook information, test taking skills for State standards assessments and for accountability to GATE parents. OA SI I docent program addressee two grades at cluster schools per year (2- 4,3-5, 1-6). OA SI 2 Summer f science institute and kit training address^ two grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). SF SI 4 Science specialists and other classroom teachers being trained in inquiry at — Beckman@.Science. OA SI 2 District relies., on science specialist program. R SI 1 Project Tomorrow support o f docent program. R SI 2 B eckman@ Science em phasis on inquiry teaching through NSF supported modules. Resources connected with Science as Inquiry in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Resources have affected the teaching of inquiry-based science in the SHUSD. Project Tomorrow financially maintains the docent program, which introduces inquiry as a teaching method for use by the high school students. Beckman@Science trains teachers in the use of inquiry at both novice and advanced levels. The organizing arrangements are predetermined according to the schedules that were established in the district for professional development, but the two resources have impacted what happens in the science workshops of the district. The resources have increased the inquiry teaching that happens in the district; without the impetus of the docent and the Beckman programs, there would not be 180 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. an extended and renewed focus on science as inquiry. The general regard for textbook based instruction continues, but aspects o f inquiry-based, hands-on science are being more widely introduced and practiced. The Tedesco Canyon cluster is not given a high ranking for science as inquiry because the docent program reaches so few students and because the NSF supported curricula are taught by the science specialists for only 51 minutes per week. At the elementary level, the balance of traditional methods and inquiry teaching could easily change with the new state textbook adoption. Resources connected with Science for All in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Level Students in the district are tracked in science beginning in middle school, and the GATE program has high status in the district. Students with special needs are not recruited into the high school program, and there are only three classes in the district. From Figure C-9. Science for All. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE SfA IC Level 3. Tracking in _ glace; not all students are able to take sci. beyond requirements. SF SfA 4 HS program showcases successful students and does not recruit at risk students. SF SfA 1 KC, dir. of curr., and school board place emphasis on state test scores. SF SfA 2 Community emphasizes test scores, honors programs. * SF SfA 3 KC GATE coord, insures avail ability of honors classes for district’s students. OA SfA 2 Trans portation needed for, docent program OA SfA 2 docen ogram for successful students. * OA SfA Three sci. specialist program for grades 4-6 only. R SfA I Proj. Tomorrow supports docent program. R SfA 2 Beckman @Science emphasis on inquiry teaching_|_ and use of notebooks with all students. 181 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Resources connected with Science for All in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The character of the SHUSD program funded by Project Tomorrow precludes it as a program that can benefit all students. Even though Project Tomorrow supports the docent program, cost and logistics make it impossible to implement district wide. The target population includes students who can write well, think on their feet, and present well. Project Tomorrow takes potential sources of funding to see the project because it shows well. The intent of the Beckman program is to include all students; it has brought hands-on science to more students that would otherwise have had it. The present district configuration provides 51 minutes o f science instruction per week to students beginning at the fourth grade. Some first grades teachers have been trained in the use of the NSF supported modules, and the district intends to include second grade teachers in the summer of 2000. There is no plan to incorporate the third grade. Resources connected with Professional Development in the Tedesco Canvon High School Cluster Level There are no immediate plans to provide training in science to teachers at grade 3, as science specialists are the ones responsible for teaching science in grades 4-6. The district would be ranked according to an IC Level 1 if more teachers were included. At the high school level, many teachers are not able to participate in planning for professional development in the district. The same teachers leaders have been primarily responsible for planning and conducting professional development for over a decade. 182 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -10. Professional D evelop m en t. T ed esco C anyon High S ch o o l Cluster OA PD 3 NSRC kit training + OA PD 4 Regular mentor meetings OA PD 2 Quarterly science specialists meetings R4 PD 4 UCI summer science institute, California Science Project R2 PD 2 Beck- man@Science funding supports kit- based elementary science OA PD 5 Districtwide, school science professional development day(s). OA PD 1 summer science institute and academic year seminars (district- wide opportunities) R3 PD 3 Supt., school board support science programs - (mentors, science specialists) Rl PD 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent program and science career seminar programs. SF PD 1 KF Proj. Coord, linked with CSUF masters’ degree program, with mentors is linked with California Science Project and UCI summer science institute. SF PD 2 KC and MC work with science specialists, mentors, and Framework Com mittee. They design professional development and present with mentors and science specialists. PE PD 1C Levdl Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessments are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by leadership. Resources connected with Professional Development in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The SHUSD summer science institute and other structures for professional development in the district were in place for several years before either Project Tomorrow or Beckman@Science came into being. For the duration of the summer program, Project Tomorrow pays the salary of the project coordinator, who works with the docents to design activities that match district standards. The Beckman program has contributed directly to professional 183 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. development in the district in that around 80 SHUSD teachers have been kit trained, including all of the 17 science specialists. This ensures the teaching of NSF supported science modules in all SHUSD classrooms in a limited way (51 minutes per week) in grades four through six and an additional 60 classrooms. In a district with over 700 K-6 teachers, 10% of teachers have been trained. More related to the level of practice assigned to professional development for this project is the lack of input from the majority of the district’s teachers. Leadership does not solicit input from all teachers; nor does it involve many teachers outside a group that has been doing professional development in the district for over a decade. The California Science Project (CSP) with the guidance of the Science Education Programs (SEP) office at UCI has also provided project related professional development in a sense. Some of the time and money associated with that summer institute was provided to SHUSD teachers to plan their health academy. The district itself provides funding for the science specialist program and the professional development associated with it. The funding for science programs in that district far exceeds the support provided in most California districts. Resources connected with Administrative Support in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster AS Level 2 The level o f administrative support for the high school component o f the projects is extraordinary, and support for the established elementary program is also greater than in most districts. The district is assigned an IC Level 2 because the elementary science coordinator holds onto the likelihood o f a textbook based program being adopted in their district to improve test scores; she is also not promoting more than 51 minutes o f science per week for most elementary classes. If administration com es to advocate quality science for all students according to the NSES, the district would be given an IC Level 1. 1 8 4 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -l 1. A dm inistrative Support. T e d e sc o C anyon H igh School Cluster PE ASnC Level 2. District and/or site adminis tration supports inquiry based hands-on science, wedded to particular model and not fully open to new practices. I SF AS Dir. special projects; coord., public relations; dir., technology; project coord, advocate for district (Project Tomorrow). SF AS 2 Science coord. Interacts witf^~ Beckman@ Science, advocates for district. OA AS 1 KC, science curriculum coor dinator is principal and is empowered to^ deter-mine structure o f science in district. — i ----------------------------- R AS 1 Proj. Tomorrow Support. OA AS 2 KF is empowered by KC to interact with Project Tomorrow. SF AS 3 Science coord, manager o f GATE program, influenced by community regard for test scores; advocates science content stan dards based instruction. OA AS 3 KC interacts with Beckman @Science. SF AS 4 KC sets activities o f science specialists and Science mentors. OA AS 4 Relationship o f KC to director o f educational services aiflrt"1 assistant supt. unclear. 4 R AS 2 Beckman @Science support o f NSRC kit based science. R AS 3 Superintendent, school board, and ■"tcummunity support o f science programs and specialists. R AS 4 docent program problems recruitment, trans portation, storage, sustainability. Resources connected with Administrative Support in the Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The relationship of administrative support and resources is bi-directional. Administration has courted both Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science because of the available funding and also because of the prestige o f being selected by each of the agencies. At the same time, the existence of funding has encouraged the support of administration for programs. Central office personnel are careful to satisfy the demands o f Project Tomorrow, which 185 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. support the project. The director of special projects in particular eases the implementation o f the docent program by making sure there are no procedural delays. While the roles of upper level administration (superintendent and assistant superintendent) are unclear in support of the project, implementation of programs progresses. While the project coordinator is not a certificated administrator, she sits on the Project Tomorrow board of directors and is therefore a liaison between the funding group and district administration. Participation of the district’s director of public relations at a social level has enhanced the regard o f Project Tomorrow for the of the district. At a point in time, the director of technology was clearly disillusioned with the non-profit organization because support for technology was greatly reduced. Ultimately, he was careful not to cause irreversible hard feelings between the district and Project Tomorrow. The science coordinator has done well to stay on board with Beckman@Science as well. She is bridging their model that uses science specialists and the Beckman model, which includes all teachers and all students in a district. Resources connected with Goals. Planning Strategies in the Pampas High School Cluster G Level The project is meant to be K -12, but the elementary district does 2 not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. 1 8 6 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -12. G oals. Planning Strategies Pam pas H igh S ch o o l Cluster R G 1 Project Tomorrow funding required results oriented goals in original proposal. PE G IC Level 2: Goals are in place; w ays to reach goals may not be fully clear to program participants. R G 3 Beckman@Science funding supports kit-based science and provides Strategic Planning Institute in which goals and objectives are clarified. R G 2 Initial Project Tomorrow Resources were for meaningful technology to improve students’ learning in science. Due to less money available and due to strong call for hands-on science, non-profit group pulled back funds that were to be spent on technology. ___________ _____ ___ _______________________________________ Resources connected with Goals. Planning Strategies in the Pampas High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow required the formulation of goals and objectives in its original proposal. In general, the goal was to improve student learning in science through the use of technology. While the district and the initial schools involved were aware of the promise, the subject was dropped when Project Tomorrow withdrew its offer of wide support for technology. Beckman also withdrew its offer of support when it became apparent that the elementary district was not involved in the K-12 project. Teachers and administrators in both the elementary and the union high school district were initially aware o f the presence 187 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and support of the two projects, but enthusiasm waned as the planning group was unable to build programs. Resources connected with Curriculum in the Pampas High School Cluster c Level There is no project related curriculum at the high school level 3 and the adopted district curriculum is based on the language arts framework. Partly for that reason, it is fragmented and incoherent. From Figure C-13. Curriculum Pampas High School Cluster C IC Level 3. Curricula appropriate for some students; attempts to make materials interesting are minimal or artificial. SF C 1 LASER team - with one elementary teacher. SF C 2 No interdistrict curriculum connection. ■ S F C 3 LR facili tated design of ' literature linked sci. curriculum. SF C 4 NSRC piloting elemen tary teachers not ’ Supported in district. OA C 1 Project related meetings OA C 2 Technol-ogy classes for teachers - HS,MS. -♦ R C 3 Beckman @Science funding supports kit-based elementary science. R C 2 Elementary district prioritizes support for language arts and math - not science. _ _ R C I Proj. Tomor-row supports inter-district team for LASER, NSRC technology for HS, MS OA C 3 Annual Science professional development day, leadership planning team. R C 4 High School district supports science as much as possible with limited resources. OA C 4 No established mechanism for handling interdistrict projects- finances, other. 1 8 8 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. R esou rces connected w ith Curriculum in the Pam pas High S ch o o l C luster. For the elementary district, Project Tomorrow provided the opportunity for an interdistrict team to attend the LASER institute in Palo Alto. At that time, all team members expressed a commitment to the NSF supported curricula for grades K-6. Curricula for the high school were not discussed; rather, the team decided to begin at the elementary level. Unfortunately, the administration of the elementary district does not support incorporation of that curricula. The supported curriculum of the elementary district is not sequential or coherent in that it is aligned with the language arts curriculum. There has been no discussion of an appropriate curriculum for grades nine through twelve. Resources connected with Assessment in the Pampas High School Cluster A t the high school level, the technology needed to assess students on the basis o f projects and presentations or to com pile electronic portfolios for students does not exist. There is also an absence o f an inter-district structure for decision-m aking and facilitation that is needed for the coordinated assessm ent o f students over time K -12. Only Beckm an trained teachers use em bedded assessm ent with student science notebooks. 189 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. From Figure C -14. A ssessm en t. Pam pas H igh S ch ool C luster OA A 1 Practices of portfolios, perfor-magce. testing, not districtwide (HS). R A I Project Tomorrow support of technology assessment methods. SF A 1 RL in charge o f HS district policy, testinj in science (professional development). R A 2 Notebook training provided through Beckman@Science. SF A 2 Planning team ▼ discusses methods of assessment; i.e., elec-tronic portfolios passed grade to grade across schools and districts. OA A 2 Piloting teachers of NSRC materials do not meet within their district to coordinate use of notebooks. R A 4 Proj. Tomorrow dir. of Projects provides technical assistance for survey analysis; committee evaluates reports, projects. PE A IC Level 2. Students occasionally have opportunities to demonstrate con ceptual under standing, process skills with graphic, oral or written commun ication and/or performance------ tasks. Asses*------ ments likely to be multiple choice,^" fill in the blank, other traditional paper and pencil, vocabulary-based tests. Resources connected with Assessment in the Pampas High School Cluster. The two funding agencies that provide the support for the projects in this study have links to good assessment practice. Project Tomorrow expresses understanding of the value of performance assessment as it demonstrates the SHUSD docent program to potential investors, and it assists with attitudinal surveys of participating students and teachers. The Reinhardt planning team had proposed that students demonstrate understanding of science concepts in individual and group presentations using PowerPoint, HyperStudio, or other software. Their proposal had also promised to establish electronic portfolios that would be added to by each teacher as students progress from grade to grade. The decision of Project Tomorrow not to support technology in the district halted the ambitious plan of the 190 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. project for assessment. The Beckman@Science program provides training for teachers in the assessment o f student work in science notebooks, and approximately 20 out of around 800 K-6 elementary teachers have received that training. Resources connected with Teacher Collegialitv in the Pampas High School Cluster TC Level n A small number o f teachers who are part o f a project related committee meet monthly, but few others participate. Beckman@Science trained teachers function independently. From Figure C-15. Teacher Collegialitv. Pampas High School Cluster PETC IC Level 2. Teachers meet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. SF TC 1 RL^ respected by teachers, who coordinates district professional with teacher leaders. SF TC 2 JJ receives stipend (no ^ release time) to meet with elementary and jr. high teachers at jr. high and elementary' teachers. OA TC 1 Project related meetings. OA TC 2 Planning for "Summer Institute”, Saturday workshops. OA TC 3 Planning for annual science rofessional development day. OA TC 4 Site programs plan ning meetings. R T C 1 Project Tomorrow supports initial interdistrict collaboration. R TC 2 Beckman @ Science funding supports kit-based elementary science. OA TC 5 Piloting teachers o f NSRC teachers do not meet within elementary district to coordinate. 191 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. R esources conn ected with T eacher C ollegialitv in the Pam pas H igh School Cluster. Project Tomorrow did increase the interaction o f teacher leaders in the two districts in that people came together to write the proposal and to plan. Discussions have not occurred district wide. The science coordinator has worked with teacher leaders in both districts to plan days for science articulation K-12, but lack of participation on the part of the administration in the elementary district has brought about discontinuation of those days. Four elementary teachers are Beckman teacher leaders who work collegially at a county level, but not in their own district. Resources connected with Science as Inquiry in the Pampas High School Cluster SI Level There is no project related curriculum at the high school level - > and the adopted district curriculum is based on the language arts framework. Partly for that reason, it is fragmented and incoherent. From Figure C-16. Science as Inquiry. Pampas High School Cluster SF SI 2 Professional development is not focused* on inquiry at high school or SF SI 3 Elementary emphasis on reading anH m ath — nnf R SI 2 Beckman@ Science emphasis on inquiry teaching. R SI 1 Project Tomorrow supports efforts to improve science teaching. SF SI 2 JR, LR are Beckman @Science teacher leaders and work with teachers independent of district. SF SI 1 Some administrative knowledge of research based* methodologies; support of PE SI IC Level 3. Teachers ■ *- encourage student questions, may directly answer questions . OA SI 1 Dist. curr. leader ship .structure. OA SI 2 Districts’ prof. dev. directions, evaluation. 192 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esou rces connected w ith S cien ce as Inquiry in the Pam pas H igh S ch ool Cluster. In the process of designing its Request for Proposals, Project Tomorrow consulted with leaders in science education in the design o f criteria; inquiry was part of the RFP. While the proposal written by the Pampas High School team indicates knowledge of good teaching in science at the high school level, the strong inquiry-based component is supported by Beckman@Science. The support has not accomplished widespread implementation of the program, which lacks the backing o f the elementary district. Resources connected with Availability o f Resources in the Pampas High School Cluster. AR Level The technology needed to implement the project originally proposed to Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science could not 2 be purchased. From Figure C-17. Availability of Resources. Pampas High School Cluster R AR 1 Project ^Pemorrow supports K- 12 efforts to innovate and coordinate with seed money for project. R AR 2 Beckman(2} Science provides kits for pilots. R AR 4 Suppor tive business partnerships. R AR 3 Federal funding available to Rheinhardt district. SF AR 2 Strong administrative ~ support for tech nology in high school district. OA AR 2 No T arrangements for expenditures across district lines. OA AR 1 Standard district policies for purchase and storage o f equipment. SF AR 1 No administrative buy in for science pro-gram improvement in elementary district. PE AR 1C Efevet" 2. Equipment, materials avail^ able although lacking in some ways; media and technology resources also lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not access resources outside the school. 193 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources connected with A vailability o f R esources in the Pam pas High School Cluster. When the idea for the K-12 project originated, the two districts intended to augment their technology with the help o f Project Tomorrow. When support for technology did not materialize, the district was left with what it could do on its own. The districts do have technology plans, but the budgets are limited. No additional monies for science materials became available as a result of Project Tomorrow. For the elementary district, Beckman@Science would have paid for science modules had the administration of the elementary district followed through with its strategic plan. Resources connected with Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input in the Pampas High School Cluster SD Level There is no adopted program in either district that is project related, centered on group work, or officially adopted by either district. From Figure C-18. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Pampas High School Cluster SF SD 2 Prof. dev. directed to use o^~ technology to improve science teaching and learning. SF SD 3 Elementary emphasis^m reading and math - not science. OA SD 1 Districts’ curr..leadership structures. SF SD 1 Administrative attention to reseaFffi based methods; support o f technology. R SD 1 Project Tomorrow supports efforts to improve science teaching. R SD 2 Beck- man@ Sci. emphasis on student centered instruction. OA SD 2 Districts’ professional dev. directions, evaluation, and prof development. PE SD IC Level 2. Students occasionally worl? in groups where they discuss scientific ideas; students provide^ input that is used by the teacher in planning direction o f the class. a 1 9 4 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources con n ected with Student D iscussion. Interaction, and Input in the Pampas High School Cluster. While Project Tomorrow would support a student centered program, no student centered project has been developed for the secondary- level. Beckman@Science chose not to fund the elementary component of the project because of the lack of commitment on the part o f the administration of the elementary district. The twenty Reinhardt teachers who have attended Beckman training have been given tools to orchestrate student discussions at a novice level. Resources connected with Standards Based Expectations in the Pampas High School Cluster SBE Level There has been no project related communication of 2 expectations. From Figure C-19. Standards Based Expectations. Pampas High School Cluster OA SB E1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. SF SBE 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math — not science.**- R SBE 1 Project Tomorrow supports efforts to improve science teaching. R SBE 2 Beckman @Science emphasis on National Science Education Standards. SF SBE 2 Project coordinator is high school teacher and unable to influence direction in elementary district. OA SBE 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. PE SBE IC Level 2. Students are held to standards and are aware of expectations. SF SBE 1 Interdistrict effort to align curriculum K-12 according to California Science Content **“ Standards; participation minimal. 195 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources connected w ith Standards B ased E xp ectations in the Pam pas High School Cluster. The two Reinhardt districts have traditional methods for communicating academic expectations to students and parents, which are not project related. The planning committee did explore the alignment of the NSF supported curricula with the California State Content Standards. Other Orange County districts associated with the Beckman program for the reform of science education are selecting modules that are aligned with the standards, and Reinhardt elementary teachers have been trained in those modules through Beckman@Science. The curricula are not currently part o f the established district curriculum. Resources connected with Professional Development in the Pampas High School Cluster PD Level There has been little project related professional development in 2 the districts. From Figure C-21. Professional Development. Pampas High School Cluster PE PD IC Level 2. Teachers occasionally participate in planning prof. dev., needs assessments; largely orches trated by leadership. 4 — — _ SF PD 1 RL ^ coordinates prof. dev. in science with teacher leaders; JJ works with Project Tomorrow. 1 SF PD 2 JJ receives stipend to coord. Project. SF PD HH o f Beckman Coulter organizes Ed. Awareness event. OA PD 1 Ed. Awareness event. ^ ___ OA PD 2 Committee plans "Summer Inst.”, - workshops. OA PD 3 Committee plans annual science prof dev. day. _lOA PD 4 Site programs planning.____________ ^O A PD 5 Piloting teachers of NSRC do not meet R PD I Project Tomorrow supports budget, prof. dev. R PD 2 Beckman . @Science provides prof. dev. in kit- based eiem. sci. - part of interdistrict plan. R PD 3 Eisenhower funds are used to provide teachers with prof. dev. opportunities, sci. 196 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esou rces con n ected w ith Professional D evelop m en t in the Pam pas H igh School Cluster. Professional development through Project Tomorrow consisted of “Educator Awareness'’ events conducted by Beckman-Coulter, at which scientist employees explained skills that are needed in the workplace to participating teachers. Beckman@Science is training in the use of NSF supported curricula, but only 23 teachers in the large district have been trained in those units. The professional development structure in the high school district is highly regarded by teachers. Each year, a professional development day is provided for science teachers. Teachers indicate their interests, and teacher leaders present workshops in their areas o f expertise. Loosely associated with the technology focus of the Pampas High School K-12 cluster, computer workshops have been included in district offerings. Project Tomorrow would pay for teachers attending. Resources connected with Administrative Support in the Pampas High School Cluster AS Level The project is meant to be K-12, but the elementary district does 2 not support the project, as it continues to support the newly established science program in the district. 197 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -22. Professional D evelopm ent. Pam pas H igh S ch ool Cluster PE AS IC Level 2. Admin, sup ports hands-on science— may favor a partic ular model, not be open to new practices. SF AS 1 JB, RL, ZM, HH, on PT Board. SF AS 4 LR, ZM, other elem. teachers supported by B@S training and kits. ^ SF AS 2 RL, JJ, ZM, and HH attended LASER. SF AS 3 RL, LR facilitate curr. dev. in districts. OA AS 1 RL determines structure of district science. OA AS 2 JJ rep to Proj. Tomorrow. R AS 1 PT support. _ R AS 2 B@S provides training, kits. OA AS 3 No " official representation from elementary dist. to B@S. ~ R AS 3 Supt., school board, and business support sci. programs. Resources connected with Administrative Support in the Pampas High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow initiated a proposal writing process for providing support for improving science in Orange County schools. Superintendents were notified and invited to attend informational meetings, where it was announced that several million dollars might be awarded to one or more districts. Districts’ administrators set up writing committees, Reinhardt included. The superintendent of the high school district sits on the Project Tomorrow Board of directors, and wholeheartedly supported the project of the Pgjnpas High School K-12 cluster. The problem of support from administration lies in the elementary district. Beckman@Science has made no inroads into the elementary district administration for support of the program at the elementary level. 198 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors that E nhanced Progress in Program Planning and Im plem entation Tedesco Canyon High School K-12 Cluster Social Factors connected with Goals and Planning Strategies in the Tedesco Canyon School Cluster G Level Top ievel administration encouraged the writing of proposals 1 and was flexible in working with funding group(s) to modify plans. From Figure C -l. Goals and Planning Strategies. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF G 2 Trabuco Elem.: KC, prin. & district sci. coord.; MC, sci. spec. & mentor. R G 1 Project Tomorrow Funding required results oriented goals in original proposal. SF G 1 District Office: JJE, dir. o f spec, projects; SW, pub. relations coord.; NN, dir. o f technology. OA G I District and site curriculum leaders empowered to write goals and proposal by Supt. and asst. Supt. SF G 4 Rancho St. Gregory MS: BM, tech. mentor; MB, tech. mentor; LM, science teacher (teacher attrition, tech reduced). PEG IC Level^t Short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to programs participants. SF G 3 Tedesco Canvon HS: MM, ** principal; JJO, dept, chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coord. - science; LA, proj. coord. - tech.; (tech component reduced). R G 2 Proj. Tomorrow Resources were for meaningful technology to improve students’ learning in science. Due to less money available and due to strong call for hands-on science, non-profit group pulled back funds that were to be spent on technology. 199 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. G oals and Planning Strategies. T ed esco Canyon H igh School Cluster. The Shasta USD made full use of its winning proposal and its affiliation with Project Tomorrow to publicize its project. The project coordinator was invited to speak at each secondary, middle, and elementary professional development event to keep district teachers informed. The district science coordinator updates all science specialists monthly about both Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. District leadership was instrumental in reworking goals when Project Tomorrow withdrew its offer to support “meaningful technology”. The director of Technology was reluctant to do so, but the district agreed to base its goals on the improvement of science teaching and learning without technology as the core focus of its proposal. The original project co-coordinator was a technology teacher; she dropped out of the leadership role as the goals and objectives were re-worked. The middle school teachers who were part of the original writing group also stepped back when the focus of the proposal shifted from technology. Social Factors. Quality Curriculum. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Level The high school program actively engages students, and the elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. 2 0 0 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -2. Q uality Curriculum . T ed esco Canyon H igh School C luster PE C IC Level 1. Curricula take into account students’ interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, experience, and the ways that students learn. SF C 5 Rancho S Gregory M S: BM, tech. mentor; MB, tech. mentor; LM, sci. teacher. SF C 2 District mentors (HS): JJO, SM, and TG;, —IfM/Elem.): KC, MC. |SF C 3 Proj. coord.: KF. SF C 1 Trabuco Elem.: KC, ■principal & district sci. coord.; MC, science specialist & mentor. SF C 4 Tedesco Canyon: MM, principal; JJO, dept, chrm. & mentor; KF, Proj. coord. _ OA C 2 Proj. related meetings. OA C 1 Leadership meetings. OA C 3 Summer institute and academic year seminar planning meetings. OA C 4 Sci. spec, meetings. OA C 5 Framework Committee meetings. OA C 6 Site programs meetings. Social Factors. Quality Curriculum. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The high school curriculum is based on the elementary district standards, while the structure o f the program is patterned after a pre-existing program in the district that relied on high school students working with younger children in field studies. The chairman o f the science department at Tedesco Canyon High School is one of the mentors that designed that program, but her turned the project over to another member of his department. The elementary science coordinator and the elementary field studies mentor are the ones who lead curriculum and professional development in the district. These two individuals work with Beckman@Science to enhance the district curricula with the NSF supported modules. The organizing 201 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. arrangements represent the structures within which the persons work to implement the secondary and elementary components of the project. Social Factors. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Level High school students are assessed on their products and presentations, and elementary students are graded through embedded assessment based on their work in science notebooks. From Figure C-3. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PEA IC Level 1. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student undemtanding^^ SF A 4 Science specialists and other elementary teachers attend Beckman@ Science kit training, which includes ways to assess student work. _ SF A 1 KF and ■ PP facilitate docent designs o f projects for elementary students. SF A 2 KF ■ facilitates science career seminars. SF A 3 KC works with all aspects of sci. specialists, including assessment - most concerned with district standardized test scores. OA A 1 Docents organize their projects (performance tasks) during the summer science institute and in the academic year class. R A 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent, career programs i L R A 2 Proj. Tomorrow dir. o f projects provides technical assistance, survey analysis; committee evaluates reports and projects. ______ R A 3 Science specialist support from district budgets and PTAs. R A 4 Notebook training provided through Beckman (^Science- Social Factors. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The persons responsible for the design and implementation of both the secondary and elementary parts of the program built performance assessment into the project. 202 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. High school docents give presentations to the elementary students and to each other, and rubrics have been written to grade them on the quality of their preparation and presentation. Assessment for the elementary part o f the program is embedded through analysis of student work in science notebooks. Rubrics are designed to rate students on the questions that they ask, on the collection and organization of data from their investigations, and their conclusions. Social Factors. Availability o f Resources. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster AR Level Projects in the district are supported by Project Tomorrow, 1 Beckman@Science, the PTA, a district Foundation, and the district itself. From Figure C-3. Availability of Resources. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE AR IC Level 1. Adequate equipment and materials for student hands-on learning. Media, technological resources accessible and resources from outside |~ the school are used. SF AR 1 KF and PP work with docents in summer and academic year programs; KF on PT board. R AR 4 SW, coord, o f public relations, JJ, dir. o f spec, projects, and KF interact with Project Tomorrow. SF AR 2 Science specialists and some classroom teachers in designated grades using NSF supported curricula. R AR 4 District and community support science programs. SF AR 3 KC coordinates resources or science. 203 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. A v a ila b ility o f R esources. T edesco C anyon H igh School Cluster. The successful social interaction of the coordinator of public relations, the director of special projects, and the project coordinator with the executive director and the director of programs of Project Tomorrow has been most beneficial to the Tedesco Canyon cluster. The project has had little difficulty securing the approval of Project Tomorrow for its plan and its expenditures. At the elementary level, the district science coordinator has been able to use the resources of Beckman@Science to purchase additional curriculum modules. The science specialists and teachers at each school are responsible for maintaining the science kits at this time, which is not the National Science Resource Center (NSRC) model for materials support. Social Factors. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SD Level Docent and Beckman@ Science programs are built around student 1 discussion and group work as well as interaction with the instructor. From Figure C-7. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE SD IC Level I. Students regularly woflt in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. 2 0 4 SD 1 KF and PP work with docents in summer and academic year programs. SD 2 Science specialists and some classroom teachers in designated grades using NSRC kits R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. Student D iscu ssion . Interaction, and Input. T ed esco Canyon High School Cluster. The docent program builds in student discussion and interaction, as the students have to work in teams to research, design, and present the elementary lessons. The science specialists and other teachers who use the NSF supported modules have been trained in methods of inquiry teaching and leading student discussions. Without competent teachers to facilitate student learning, neither component could be effective. Social Factors. Standards Based Expectation. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SBE Level Programs and their expectation are highly publicized through 1 mailing, at Family Science nights, and in the press. From Figure C-8. Standards Based Expectations. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF SBE 1 KF and PP work with docents in summer and academic year programs SF SBE 2 Science special sts and some classroom teachers in designated grades using NSRC kits. SF SBE 3 KC and MC work with science specialists and provide rationale for student expectations. PE SBE IC Level 1. Studentf— are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. 205 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. S o cia l Factors. Standards B ased E xpectations. T ed esco C anyon H igh School Cluster. The persons who designed the programs built in ways for students to be accountable. The use of rubrics by the teachers in both the secondary and the elementary components o f the program ensures knowledge on the part o f students of how they are being graded and for what they are responsible. The programs are also widely publicized in the community; family science nights and mailings provide rationale for the hands-on programs and draw an audience as awards are given to students and teachers. Pampas High School K-12 Cluster Social Factors. Science for All. Pampas High School Cluster Leve The Reinhardt district has a high percentage o f minority students and Limited English Proficient students, and a number o f Reinhardt teachers in both districts are committed to providing all students with a quality curriculum and good teaching. Reinhardt science teachers have received training in bilingual instruction and methods for working with other types o f special needs students, and a number o f them have become trainers for teachers countywide themselves. Equity, access, and attention to the needs o f students were written into the proposals o f the districts. From Figure C-20. Science for All. Pampas High School Cluster SF SfA 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math — for all students. SF SfA 2 Districts’ demographics represent a wide spectrum o f ethnic and language minorities. SF SfA 1 Administration, RL, JJ, PT, and other teacher leaders committed to success for all students. PE SfA IC Level 1. Teachers recognize and ^ respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. 206 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. Science for All. Pampas High School Cluster. The student population includes a large number o f second language learners. As individuals, teachers on the planning committee o f the Pampas High School cluster demonstrate commitment to Science for All Students. One teacher gives workshops on how to teach Limited English Students, and a second teacher gives workshops on how to improve students’ reading skills through science. The science coordinator of the high school district teaches method at the university level Hope High School K-12 Cluster Social Factors. Goals and Planning Strategies. Hope High School Cluster G Level Top administrators in the unified district signed off on proposals and 1 have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and provide professional development events to move the projects along. From Figure C-23. Goals and Planning Strategies. Hope High School Cluster PE G IC Configuration Level 1 : Yearlong and short-term goals are evident and ways to reach SF G 2 EsDeranza HS: MS. Droiect coord, and ES besan Infusion, Inquiry, and IMMEX prior to beginning project. the goals are formulated and clear to participants. SF G 1 District: P.F.. dir. o f curr.. attended LASER in get elementary part off the ground-- no full time person to coordinate for two years. SF G 2 Haden MS.teacher SH works with MS and dist. on use oflM M EX for assessment districtwide. Attended LASER. SF G 3 KP is lead teacher, served at interim project coor dinator K-6. SF G 4 JH with B@S for two years and now full time science coord, for district. 2 0 7 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. G oals and Planning Strategies. H ope High S ch o o l C luster. The project coordinator decided to adopt the IMMEX and Infusion programs before the opportunity to apply for support through Project Tomorrow came about. She worked with the programs and orchestrated professional development for other teachers in her district. At the high school level, teachers were already implementing the programs. The project coordinator wrote the proposal with its goals and timeline in collaboration with other teacher leaders. The director of curriculum took a team of five to the LASER strategic planning institute in Washington D.C. in July of 1997, before the Beckman@Science opportunity to apply for funding came about. At that institute, project goals were written. The coordinator has been responsible for informing high school and middle school teachers about the project. Since the fall of 1999, the district has had a full time science coordinator to manage the implementation of the elementary component of the project. She has been able to accomplish the training of about 75% of teachers in the second year of the project. The trainings have been invaluable for communication of the goals of the project to all district teachers. Social Factors. Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster c Level The curriculum incorporates some inquiry, gives students an 1 opportunity to solve problems in science or to write science problems for others. The elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. 208 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -24. Curriculum. H op e H igh School Cluster SF C 1 MS, project coordinator, presents at IMMEX and Infusion conferences. SF C 2 PF, director of curriculum, attended LASER at Washington D.C., has buy- in to NSRC curriculum. SF C 3 JH finished year at Beckman@Science and is now science curriculum coordinator. PE C IC Configuration Level -fr Curricula take into account students’ interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, and experience, a Social Factors. Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster. Three persons are responsible for the direction of project related curriculum in the Pleasant Hills School District. The director of curriculum took a team of five people to the LASER strategic planning institute in Washington D.C. in July of 1997, spearheading adoption of the NSF supported curricula prior to its introduction in Orange County through the Beckman project. Finally, the project coordinator had discovered the IMMEX and Infusion programs separately at an National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) convention prior to the support of Project Tomorrow. She was able to make a case for supporting the three projects in her proposal to Project Tomorrow. Finally, an elementary teacher in the district was hired by the Beckman Science Materials Center to manage professional development and materials management in 1998. There she became familiar with the NSF supported modules, and has been able to advance the elementary component. 209 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. S o cia l Factors. A ssessm en t. H ope H igh School C luster High school students are assessed through their products, which are science problems written into IMMEX software. Software tracks the thinking and conclusions o f student users o f the software, and teachers are trained to interpret the cognitive maps. Students in the elementary program are graded through embedded assessment in students’ science notebooks. From Figure C-25. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster SF A 2 JH, KP, SH, MF trained on use of notebooks for assessment o f students. SF A 1 MS and ES orchestrate IMMEX, Infusion, and Inquiry aspects o f secondary programs with cognitive mapping for assessment. PE A IC Level 1. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student understanding. Social Factors. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster. The IMMEX program selected by the secondary project coordinator tracks student thinking in the choices that they make solving the science problems written into the software program. The results of student input are sent to the University of California, Los Angeles where they are analyzed, graphically represented, and returned to teachers and students for use in the assessment of student thinking. The project coordinator has been active as a trainer in association with UCLA for use of the program for several years. District teachers and students are writing problem sets for elementary students that are matched with the NSF supported modules. The usefulness o f the software for assessing the thinking o f elementary students for teachers in their evaluation of student understanding and for improving instruction 210 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. has not been conclusively demonstrated. Preliminary data regarding its use with medical students is said to be promising. The science coordinator of the elementary component o f the project has trained district teachers in the use of science notebooks for assessment of student work. Social Factors. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster TC Level Teachers using IMMEX and Infusion talk to each other in 1 workshops, but communication is not always formal. At the elementary level, teachers using Beckman kits are trained together at grade level and will be given formal sessions at grade level to troubleshoot. From Figure C-26. Teacher Collegialitv. Hope High School Cluster SF TCP 3 MS holds Ph.D. h physiology, is AP physics teacher, and has respect of students, teachers, and administrators. SF TCP 2 KP, interim coordinator, is classroom teacher and helped to build enthusiasm for the elementary project. SF TCP 1 JH is respected by teachers, and builds a sense o f prestige for teachers working on the (elementary) project. PE TCP IC Level 1. Teachers meet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levpls to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. ^ — Social Factors. Teacher Collegialitv. Hope High School Cluster. Organizing Arrangements have a great bearing of the number of opportunities for teachers to convent to talk about the programs. The social factors affect professional development by determining the structured settings in which 211 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. stakeholders discuss the project, participate in planning, assess student work, and evaluate the progress of the program. The project coordinator works with the district to bring teachers together for training, discussion of use of IMMEX and Infusion, and discussions of student work and student thinking. The elementary science coordinator has formed a steering committee composed of teachers and community members. This group is responsible for the districts strategic plan for science. Social Factors. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster SI Level In theory, problems being written for student use of IMMEX 1 software are inquiry-based. Beckman kits, which are being adopted district wide, are also inquiry-based. From Figure C-27. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster OA SI 3 Beckman @Science kit and notebook training. OA SI 2 Beckman@Science Leadership training. SF SI 1 MS, ES, promote inquiry to be included with IMMEX and Infusion o f other critical thinking skills. OA SI 4 PF empowers MS, JH, and KP to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. SF SI 2 KP and other B@S trained teachers vocally embrace inquiry as a preferred approach to teaching science. SF SI 1 JH encourages inquiry as science coor dinator, and provides ^ training in inquiry nationally as part of the NSRC faculty. R SI 2 Beckman@Science works closely with JH, proves technical assistance, training, and kits to piloting teachers. PE SI IC Le^el I. Teachers consistently model and foster student inquiry as they interact with students. A 2 1 2 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster. The persons who are the managers of the science programs of the district are ensuring that inquiry is included as a primary methodology in teaching science in project related programs of the district. The problem sets that are a part of the IMMEX program are intended to be inquiry based. The secondary project coordinator is a Ph.D. scientist and is committed to developing critical thinking skills in her students through both IMMEX and the methodologies of Infusion. The elementary science coordinator not only received training in the basics of inquiry teaching, she also attended the Exploratorium where she experienced advanced training. She and the coordinator of an elementary' project in another district are providing training in inquiry teaching to the teachers in their districts. The director of curriculum is a former science teacher and fully empowers the secondary project coordinator and the elementary science coordinator. Social Factors. Availability of Resources. Hope High School Cluster AR Level Computers for the project in the PHUSD are systematically being 1 supplied by the school site(s), the district, local businesses, and Project Tomorrow. Kits for elementary science are currently being purchased with money from Beckman@Science and the state Instructional Materials Fund (IMF). 213 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -3 0 A vailability o f R esources. H op e H igh S c h o o l Cluster PE AR IC Level 1. Adequate equipntSnt and materials for student hands-on learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school are used. n 4 SF AR 1 PF, director o f ■ Curriculum, very supportive o f secondary and elementary projects. SF AR 2 JH, Science Coordinator, was Manager o f B@S H Materials Resource R AR 1 Project Tomorrow supports K- 12 efforts to innovate and coordinate with seed money for project. SF AR 3 MS, project coordinator, writes grants for IMMEX and Tnfusion projects, manages budge for project. R AR 2 Beckman@Scien ce provides training and kits for pilots. Social Factors. Availability of Resources. Hope High School Cluster. The executive director o f Beckman@Science discovered that the district had attended the LASER institute in Washington D.C. and invited the district to apply for an incentive grant. This person also arranged for a PHUSD teacher to work at the Beckman Materials Resource Center, where district teachers first accessed training and materials. The teacher is now the elementary science coordinator of the district; her ongoing contact with Beckman keeps the district in good standing with that program. The secondary project coordinator works with Project Tomorrow in publicizing the project; she keeps the district in an eminent position with the Project Tomorrow board. The project coordinator also wrote the proposal for 214 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. support of the secondary program, while the director of curriculum was primarily responsible for writing the proposal for the Beckman incentive grant. Social Factors. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Hope High School Cluster Level For the high school programs, student interaction is built in through Infusion. Students who write IMMEX programs also interact with each other and with their instructors. At the elementary level, discussion and student interaction is built into the NSF supported materials; methods for conducting class and small group instruction are provided in training. From Figure C-29 Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Hope High School Cluster SF SD 1 MS and ES actively sought out strategies designed to improve students’ thinking. SF SD 2 PF and JH push professional devel opment directed to teaching strategies that promote student thinking.__________ SF SD The 36 teachers that have received B@ S trainiqg have received training in group work and discussion techniques. PE SD IC Level 1. Students regularly work in groups whjyi they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. Social Factors. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Hope High School Cluster. At the secondary level, students work independently on problems posed in the IMMEX software, but students who write the problem sets work in teams and design the problems. Infusion methodologies include group work and 215 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. discussion. The secondary project coordinator sought and promoted the two programs. The teachers who have been trained through the Beckman program have also received training in how to ask good questions, respond to student questions, direct discussions, and facilitate students working in groups. Social Factors. Standards Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster SBE Level 1 Family Science nights highlight both the secondary and elementary programs. Project Tomorrow assists with press releases. From Figure C-30 Student Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster PE SBE IC Level 1. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. SF SBE 1 Administrative " attention to communica tion of expected outcomes and communication with M parents. SF SBE 2 MS and ES: Professional development directed to use ofgrapfaic- organizers, transfer of skills across assignments (high school and middle school), use of IMMEX software. SF SBE JH instructs in us«r of rubrics with students. OA SBE 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. OA SBE 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. R SBE 1 Project Tomorrow -(supports TK-12 - Infusion and Inquiry. R SBE 2 Beckman@ Sci. emphasis on National Science Education Standards. 216 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. S o cia l Factors. Standards B ased E xpectations. H ope H igh School C lu ster. Expectations are tied closely with the assessments, which are intended to provide feedback to students and teachers. The elementary component includes student assessment that is graded with rubrics, and students are familiar with the rubrics before and as they do their work. The rubrics are based on process skills and on content that are standards based according to the California State Content Standards. At the secondary level, content is based on district standards. Rubrics are used and there is some self-assessment by students as they use the IMMEX software. The communication of expectations for the secondary component is facilitated by the secondary project coordinator, while expectations regarding student outcomes in elementary science are communicated by individual teachers based on the objectives o f the NSF supported curricula and the NSES. Social Factors. Science for All. Hope High School Cluster SfA Level The NSF supported curricula are designed to provide quality science 1 to all students. District and project plans are to ultimately provide all teachers of all subjects and classes with training in the use of IMMEX and Infusion. From Figure C-31 Science for All. Hope High School Cluster SF SfA 2 Districts’ demographics show fewer low income students than those of other project districts. SF SfA 3 JH advocates and directs implementation of NSF modules which are based on Science for All. SF SfA 1 MS, project coord., committed to introduce IMMEX and Infusion strategies to all teachers in all grades and across disciplines. PE SfA IC Level 1 ^ ----- Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fuHf- in science learning. 2 1 7 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. Science for All. Hope High School Cluster. While the secondary science coordinator teaches Advanced Placement physics, she is including the teachers of all high school and middle school students in the professional development on the use o f IMMEX and Infusion methodologies. Only honors level students would be able to write the problem sets for the IMMEX software, but all students are able to use the software to solve problems once they are written. Infusion methodologies are suitable for all students, as are the NSF supported materials that are advocated by the director of curriculum and the elementary science coordinator. Social Factors. Professional Development. Hope High School Cluster PD Level Professional development at the high school, middle school, and 1 elementary levels is centered on the components of the projects. At the elementary level, all teachers K.-6 are being trained in the use of kits. From Figure C-32 Professional Development. Hope High School Cluster SF PD 2 JH maintains contacts with National science professional development group; presents for NSRC. SF PD i MS works with UCLA and gives presentations for IMMEX. PE PD IC Level 1. Teachers grow together as part of a supportive learning community that is centered on teaching and learning* structures are in place for teachers to continuously co-plan their own professional development. — 218 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. Professional D evelopm ent. H ope H igh S ch o o l Cluster. The coordinators of both the secondary and elementary components o f the project are both expert professional developers who give presentations and workshops in areas related to the curricula and teaching strategies of their programs in the district. The secondary coordinator is affiliated with UCLA, assists in both training and research for IMMEX, and presents the programs at national and regional events such as the NSTA conventions. The elementary science coordinator is a member of the faculty of the National Science Resources Center and will be the facilitator o f a LASER Strategic Planning Institute in the near future. She does training in her district modeled on the training that she has received through the Beckman projects and through the Exploratorium. Social Factors. Administrative Support. Hope High School Cluster Level Top administrators in the unified district signed off on proposals and have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and provide professional development events to move the projects along. From Figure C-33. Administrative Support. Hope High School Cluster SF AS 3 District and site administrators supportive of MS. OA AS 2 JH organizes professional development for elementary science. SF AS 1 PF orchestrated team going to LASER in Washington DC prior to Project. OA AS 2 PF responsible for professional development for all disciplines. SF AS 2 JH committed to B@S prior to project prior to becomini district science coordinator. ^ PEAS IC Level 1. District and site admin, attends to implementation of inquiry based, hands- on science. Administration is open to trying new practices that are research based. 219 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Social Factors. A dm inistrative Support. H ope H igh School Cluster. N o t only is the district administration supportive of science and the alliances with Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science, they are supportive specifically of the programs that are being implemented as part of the project. District and site administrators are purchasing computers to be used with the IMMEX program. Several district professional development days have been devoted to the methodologies of Infusion, and the district paid for consultants to come from out of state to present the program as well as for the materials for all teachers. At the elementary level, the director of curriculum arranged for the district to send a team of five to Washington D.C. to attend the LASER institute. The district has not only established the position of elementary science coordinator, they have also hired a full time clerk to manage the materials for the program. Space for storage of the kits has also been provided, and will be expanded as the program grows. There is no controversy in the district or the community as to whether hands-on, inquiry- based science is the best way to provide science to students in the district. Organizing Arrangements that Promoted Progress in Program Planning and Implementation Tedesco Canyon K-12 School Cluster Organizing Arrangements. Goals and Planning Strategies. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster G Level Top level administration encouraged writing o f proposals, and 1 was flexible in working with funding group(s) to modify plans. 2 2 0 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From F igure C -l. G oals and P lanning Strategies. T ed esco C an yon H igh S ch o o l C luster OA G 1 District and site curriculum leaders empowered to write goals and proposal by Supt. and asst. Supt. SF G 2 Trabuco Elem.: KC, principal & district science coordtr MC, science specialist & mentor SF G 1 District Office: JJE, dir. of special projects; SW, public relations coord.; NN, dir. of technology (tech component reduced). SF G 4 Rancho St. Gregory MS: 1BM, Tech. mentor; MB, Tech. mentor; LM, Science Teacher (teacher attrition, tech reduced). SF G 3 Tedesco Canyon HS: MM, principal; JJO, dept. chrm. & ^ mentor; KF, proj. coord. — science; LA, proj. coord. - tech.; (tech component reduced). . PE G IC Level l : Short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. Organizing Arrangements. Goals and Planning Strategies. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The science coordinator of the district convenes district leaders to work on curriculum and to plan professional development, so a K-12 leadership cadre was in place when it became possible to write the proposal for project tomorrow. Representatives o f site and district administration and teachers from high school, middle school, and elementary science and technology. The elementary science coordinator wrote the proposal for the Beckman incentive grant. Now that the projects have been funded, the leaders use professional development days to communicate the goals and intent of the project to district teachers at all grade levels. 221 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizing Arrangem ents. Q uality Curriculum. T edesco C anyon H igh S ch ool Cluster c Level The high school program actively engages students, and the 1 elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. From Figure C-2. Quality Curriculum. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF C 3 Proj. Coord.: KF. OA C 2 Project related meetings OA C 6 Site pro grams meetings. OA C 4 Science Specialists meetings: OA C 1 K-12 Leadership meetings. OA C 5 Frame-work Committee meetings?- SF C 2 District mentors (HS): JJO, SM, and TG;-* (M/Elem.): KC, MC. OA C 3 Summer Institute, academic year Seminar planning meetings. SF C 1 Tedesco Elem.: KC, Principal & District Science. Coord.; MC, Science Specialist & mentor.______ SF C 4 Tedesco Canyon: MM, principal; JJO, dept, chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coord., science. SF C 5 Rancho St. Gregory MS: BM, Tech. mentor; MB, Tech. mentor; LM, science teacher (teacher attrition, tech reduced). PE C IC Level 1. Curricula take into account students’ interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, experience, and the w a^ that students learn. Organizing Arrangements. Quality Curriculum. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The SHUSD has structures in place for a number of teachers to take part in the design, adaptation, or adoption of curriculum. At the elementary level, science specialists and other teachers who are appointed to various 222 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. committees align curriculum with standards, and select textbooks and other materials for instruction. The participation of mentors and science specialists in the proposal writing process, professional development, and implementation of the projects led to the design o f the docent program and the adoption of NSF supported curricula for use by the science specialists in classrooms. Organizing Arrangements. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster Level High school students are assessed on their products and 1 presentations, and elementary students are graded through embedded assessment based on their work in science notebooks. From Figure C-3. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF A 2 KF facilitates science career seminars. SF A 1 KF and PP facilitate docent designs of projects fp : elementary students. OA A 3 High school students are transported to elementary schools to make presentations on which they are graded. OA A 2 Science specialists and other elementary teachers attend ___ Beckman@Science kit training, which includes ways to assess student work. OA A 1 Docents H ^rganize their projects (performance tasks) during the summer science institute and in the academic year - class. SF A 3 KC works with all aspects of Science Specialists, including assessment - most concerned with district standardized test scores. PEA IC Level 1. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through ^ graphic, oral, and written commun ication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student understanding. 223 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizing A rrangem ents. A ssessm en t. T edesco C an yon H igh School Cluster. The docent program requires students to present to elementary students, and the students are graded on the quality, preparation, and presentation of science lessons to the younger students. Students in the science career seminar program must visit science or technology based businesses and communicate their experiences to their classmates. In the elementary part of the program, students are graded on the basis o f their observations, data collection and organization, and conclusion in their science notebooks. Teachers are trained to assess the work in student notebooks in Beckman@Science workshops and in the summer science institute in the district. Organizing Arrangements. Availability of Resources. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster AR Level Projects in the district are supported by Project Tomorrow, 1 Beckman@Science, the PTA, a district Foundation, and the district itself. From Figure C-6. Availability of Resources. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster 5F AR 3 KC coordinates resources for science. SF AR I KF and PP work with docents in summer an& academic year programs. OA AR 1 Docent program addresses two grades at cluster schools per year (2- 4, 3-5, 1-6). OA AR 2 Summer science institute and kit training address two grades per"/ear (for kit piloting, adoption). SF AR 2 Science specialists and some classroom teapheta in designated grades using NSF supported curricula. PE ARIC Level I.«*— Adequate equipment and materials for student hands-on learning. Media, ^ — technological resources accessible and resources from outside the school are used. 224 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Organizing Arrangements. Availability o f Resources. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Because the district has science specialists, either they or designated teachers at each school are responsible for refurbishing science kits. Ideally, according to the Beckman model, the district would be planning a materials resource center. While a center has not been conceived for the immediate future, funding for materials is not a problem either at the elementary or at the secondary level for the project. Not only are the board and upper level administration supportive, but Project Tomorrow is providing totally for both the materials of the project as well as for part of the salary of the project coordinator. The participation of the director of special projects has guaranteed that there will be no interruption of supplies or needed services for programs. Organizing Arrangements. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SD Level docent and Beckman@Science programs are built around student I discussion and group work as well as interaction with the instructor. From Figure C-7. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF SD 1 KF and PP work with docents in summer and academic year programs. OA SD 1 Docent program addresses two grades at cluster schools per year (2- 4,3-5, 1-6). SF SD 2 Science specialists and some classroom teachers in designated grades using NSRC kits. OA SD 2 Summer science institute and kit training address two grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). PE SD IC Level 1. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. _ Students provide input that guides class direction. 225 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Organizing Arrangements. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. The structure of the docent program ensures that students work together as they co-plan and co-present lessons. The quality of the discussion that is conducted with elementary students would not justify a level 1, but the immediacy and relevance of completing their presentations keeps the docents thoughtfully on task, docents are taught the basics of lesson design and At the elementary level, teachers are trained in facilitation of group work and discussion. They are trained to elicit student ideas and encourage them to pursue the answers to their questions. The strategic plan to bring this type of teaching into the classroom is part of the Beckman@Science program for Orange County districts. Organizing Arrangements. Standards Based Expectations. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SBE Level Programs and their expectation are highly publicized through 1 mailing, at Family Science nights, and in the press. From Figure C-8. Standards Based Expectations. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SF SBE 2 Sci. specialists and some classroom teachers in designated grades using NSRC kits. SF SBE 3 KC and MC provide rationale for student expectations. ^ SF SBE 1 KF and PP work with docents, set expectations. OA SBE 1 docent program addresses two grades at cluster schools per year (2-4, 3-5, 1 -6). PE SBE 1C Level 1. Students self-directed, accept and share responsibility for their own learning accordini to high standards. OA SBE # docent lessons based on district curriculum, state content standards. OA SBE 2 summer sciencerinstitute and kit training address two grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). 2 2 6 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizing Arrangem ents. Standards Based E xp ectations. T edesco Canyon High School Cluster. Standards Based Expectations are a function o f Organizing Arrangements as curriculum is aligned with standards and teachers are instructed to communicate standards to parents through the professional development activities in the district. Standards based on rubrics are used for grading student work, and the rubrics are discussed in parent conferences. Achievement is reported in terms of standards. The occasions in which student work is showcased are established in the district, other than family science nights that are supported by Project Tomorrow. Pampas High School K-12 Cluster Organizing Arrangements. Science for AH. Pampas High School Cluster Level The Reinhardt district has a high percentage of minority students and Limited English Proficient students, and a number of Reinhardt teachers in both districts are committed to providing all students with a quality curriculum and good teaching. Reinhardt science teachers have received training in bilingual instruction and methods for working with other types of special needs students, and a number of them have become trainers for teachers countywide themselves. Equity, access, and attention to the needs of students were written into the proposals of the districts. 227 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From F igure C -20. S cien ce for A ll. Pam pas H igh S ch o o l Cluster OA SfA I Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. OA SfA 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation. SF SfA 3 Elemen-tary emphasis on reading and math — for all students. SF SfA 2 Districts’ ----- demographics represent a wide spectrum o f ethnic and language minorities. SF SfA 1 m Administration, RL, JJ, PT, and other teacher leaders committed to success for all students. O A SfA 3 Districts’ departments support students with special needs, including ethnic and language minorities, At Risk, GATE. PESfAIC Level 1. Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; ali students are’* encouraged to participate fully in science learning. Organizing Arrangements. Science for All. Pampas High School Cluster. Because both the high school and the elementary districts have large proportions of ethnic minorities and disadvantaged students, instructional leaders have provided professional development that addresses the needs of their student populations. One of the writers of the proposal for Project Tomorrow gives workshops on how to help English Language Learners (ELL) through science activities. The elementary district tries to improve reading scores by aligning science activities with the language arts curriculum. While this has resulted in fragmentation in the science curriculum, the district does prioritize the improvement of basic skills for all students. The project-based Beckman program does features that enhance 228 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. reading, writing, and math skills as science concepts are developed, but that program is not yet widely practiced. Federal and state funding in the districts supports programs for special needs students. Organizing Arrangements. Goals and Planning Strategies. Hope High School Cluster G Level Top administrators in the unified district signed o ff on proposals 1 and have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and provide professional development events to move the projects along. From Figure C-23. Goals and Planning Strategies. Hope High School Cluster PE G IC ----- Configuration Level 1: Yearlong and short-term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. SF G 2 Esperanza HS: MS. project coord, and ES began Infusion, Inquiry, and IMMEX prior to beginning project. OA G 1 HS teacher Sfhpowered to direct Renaissance Project. curriculum attended LASER ^ workshop in Washington DC. prior to proposal and funding. Has not had tim e to get ele mentary part o f f the ground in two years; no full time person to coordinate for two years. SF G 2 Havden MS teacher SH working with MS and district on use o f IMMEX for assessment districtwide, across grade levels. Attended LASER. SF G 3 KP is lead teacher and served at* interim project coor-dinator K -6 . OA G 2 Director o f ► curriculum has responsibility for all disciplines K-12. OA G 3 Full time science coordinator not on board for first two years o f project SF G 4 JH with B@S for two years and now full time science coord, for district. 229 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Organizing Arrangements. Goals and Planning Strategies. Hope High School Cluster. The secondary project coordinator and the elementary science coordinator are directly empowered by the director o f curriculum to devise ways to devise plans and to communicate the nature of the projects. The strategic planning for the elementary component was done at the LASER strategic planning institute in Washington D.C. in July 1997. Organizing Arrangements. Quality Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster c Level The curriculum incorporates some inquiry, gives students an 1 opportunity to solve problems in science or to write science problems for others. The elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. From Figure C-24. Quality Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster OA C 2 Beckman @ Science providing assistance for curr. selection. SF C 1 MS, Project coordinator presents at conferences about IMMEX- and Infusion. OA C 1 MS, ES, and other district teachers Writing IMMEX and Infusion curricula. SF C 2 PF, director o f Curriculum, attended LASER at Washington D.C., has buy-in to NSRC curriculum. OA C 3 PF responsible Tor all disciplines and had no time to coordinate science curriculum for two years. SF C 3 JH finished year at Beckman@Science and is now science curriculum coordinator. PE C IC Configuration Level I. Curricula take into account students’ interests, know ledge, + understanding, abilities, and experience. 230 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizing Arrangem ents. Q uality Curriculum . H ope H igh S ch o o l C luster. IMMEX software allows the writing of problem sets for students that give them the opportunity to analyze data and make conclusions. In the process, choices that the students make are tracked so that cognitive maps are constructed for the assessment of student thinking by the teacher and for class discussion. Administration has empowered the project coordinator to manage professional development for IMMEX and Infusion. Purchase of computers for implementation o f IMMEX strategies is a priority at sites and in the district. Infusion is based on the use of techniques to enhance student learning and stimulate critical thinking across the curriculum. With district and site support, the project coordinator has also arranged for professional development for teachers across the district. An organizing arrangement that has had large impact on the progress of the elementary component o f the project is the partnership and support of Beckman@Science. Before there was an elementary science coordinator on board, district teachers were sent to the Beckman Science Materials Center; teachers are now trained in the district and around 75% of teachers have been trained in two years. Organizing Arrangements. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster Level High school students are assessed through their products, which are science problems written into IMMEX software. Software tracks the thinking and conclusions o f student users o f the software, and teachers are trained to interpret the cognitive maps. Students in the elementary program are graded through embedded assessment in students’ science notebooks. 231 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -2 5 . A ssessm en t. H ope H igh S ch ool Cluster OA A 1 Center of IMMEX and Infusion is at Esperanza SF A 2 JH, K .P, SH, MF trained on use o f notebooks T or assessment of students OA A 2 Center of NSRC kit activity now at district; T £% teachers trained in the year of B@S operation. SF A 1 MS and ES orchestrate IMMEX, Infusion, and Inquiry aspects o f ^ secondary programs witii cognitive mapping for assessment. PEA IC Level I. Students demonstrate understanding and skills* through graphic, oral, and written communication and performance tasks; multiple methods used to assess student understanding. Organizing Arrangements. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster. Assessment is built into the three components o f the project. Student thinking is tracked and subject to analysis at UCLA for the IMMEX program. Infusion is based on methodologies to advance students in their ability to think critically; feedback to the teacher is part of the program. Finally, assessment o f student work through science notebooks is integral to the Beckman program. The organizing arrangements include all of the ways that they district and that the sites facilitate the implementation of professional development related to assessment. This includes permitting, supporting and promoting the workshops for IMMEX and Infusion at the high school and middle school levels and for elementary teachers. Organizing Arrangements. Teacher Collegialitv. Hope High School Cluster TC Level Teachers using IMMEX and Infusion talk to each other in 1 workshops, but communication is not always formal. At the elementary level, teachers using Beckman kits are trained together at grade level and will be given formal sessions at grade level to troubleshoot. 232 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -2 6 . T eacher C ollegiality. H ope H igh S ch ool C luster SF TC 3 MS holds Ph.D. in physiology, is AP physics teacher, respected by students, teachers, administrators. OA TC 1 Summer IMMEX, Infusion teacher training. SF TC 2 KP, interim coord., is classroom teacher, helped to build enthusiasm. SF TC 1 JH builds sense o f prestige for teachers working- on project. OA TC 3 B@S kit, notebook training. OA TC 2 Beckman@ Sci. leadership training. PETC IC L evel* Teachers meet regularly to plan sci. continuum, sequence and coordinate instruction. OA TC 4 PF empowers M S, JH, and KP to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. Organizing Arrangements. Teacher CoHegialitv. Hope High School Cluster. Teachers interact as they write IMMEX problem sets in professional development during the summer. Teachers teaching the same NSF supported module are trained together and have the opportunity to share their experiences in follow-up sessions. As a teacher leader, the elementary science coordinator has attached some status to the program, and teachers are proud to be a part. At the secondary level, much of the work of planning the implementation of the IMMEX program is done in the hallways and classrooms of Hope High School. Both the secondary project coordinator and the elementary science coordinator are fully empowered to make decisions and authorized to make necessary expenditures. They are the ones who call meetings, form community groups, and otherwise involve district teachers in meaningful activities K-12. 233 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizing Arrangem ents. S cien ce as Inquiry. H ope H igh S ch ool Cluster SI Level Problems being written for student use of IMMEX software are 1 intended to be inquiry-based. Beckman kits, which are being adopted district wide, are also inquiry-based. From Figure C-27. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster OA SI 3 Beckman @Science kit and notebook training. OA SI 2 Beckman@Science leadership training. OA SI 1 Summer institutes to train teachers on IMMEX, Infusion. SF SI 1 MS, ES, promote inquiry to be included with IMMEX and Infusion of other critical thinking skills. OA SI 4 PF empowers MS, JH, and KP to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. SF SI 1 JH encourages inquiry as science ■ + coordinator, and provides training in inquiry nationally as part of the NSRC faculty. i PE SI IC Level 1. Teachers consistently model and M foster student inquiry' as they interact with students. SF SI 2 KP and other B@S trained teachers vocally embrace inquiry as a preferred approach to teaching science. Organizing Arrangements. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster. The director of curriculum authorizes the coordinators to manage the projects. The structure of the secondary IMMEX program incorporates inquiry strategies; the problem sets that teachers and honors students are writing for elementary students are intended to be inquiry-based. Infusion is a set of materials and strategies 234 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. designed to enhance students’ learning of concepts and critical thinking. The NSF supported curricula are series of hands-on experiments sequentially and coherently designed to develop important concepts in science, and teachers are trained both to ask thought provoking questions and to build on the questions o f students. The organizing arrangements that promote the teaching o f science as inquiry include arrangement of facilities for and use of computers and the IMMEX program and professional development within the district in the use of IMMEX and Infusion materials and methodologies and for the teaching of the elementary science modules. The Beckman@Science program is also used to provide professional development and materials for start-up, as some teachers get training there and check out materials. The structure of the administrative hierarchy along with administrative support includes full empowerment of the secondary and elementary program managers to implement the program. Organizing Arrangements. Availability of Resources. Hope High School Cluster AR Level Computers for the project in the PH USD are system atically being 1 supplied by the school site(s), the district, local businesses, and Project Tomorrow. Kits for elementary science are currently being purchased with money from Beckm an@ Science and the state Instructional Materials Fund (IMF). 2 3 5 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -2 8 . A vailability o f R esources. H ope H igh S ch ool Cluster PE AR IC Level 1. Adequate equipment and materials for student hands-oa— learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school used. SF AR 1 PF, dir. o f Curriculum, very - supportive o f secondaj^t. and elementary projects. SF AR 2 JH, Sci. Coord., was manager o f B@S materials resource cente^- SF AR 3 MS, project coordinator, writes grants^ -ifiar IMMEX and Infusion projects, manages budge for project. OA AR Standard district policies and procedures for purchase ' dfrd storage o f equipment; plans to build science materials resource center Organizing Arrangements. Availability o f Resources. Hope High School Cluster. Standard district policies and procedures are in place as a hierarchy of decision makers and processing of paperwork for purchases and arrangement of events. A key factor in the implementation o f the two projects is the empowerment of the two managers to proceed. Organizing Arrangements. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input Hope High School Cluster Level For the high school programs, student interaction is built in through Infusion. Students who write IMMEX programs also interact with each other and with their instructors. At the elementary level, discussion and student interaction is built into the NSF supported materials; methods for conducting class and small group instruction are provided in training. 2 3 6 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -29. Student D iscu ssion . Interaction, and Input H ope High School Cluster OA SD 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. OA SD 2 Districts’ structure for prof. dev. and evaluation. SF SD 1 MS and ES actively sought out strategies designed to improve students’ thinking. SF SD 2 PF and JH push professional development directed to teaching strategies that promote student thinking. SF SD The 36 teachers that have received B@S training received training in grouf^- work and discussion techniques. PE SD IC Level 1. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. Organizing Arrangements. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Hope High School Cluster. At the secondary level, student discussion, interaction, and input is ensured through the structure of the IMMEX program. Time is given to students who solve the problem sets to explain and discuss their thinking as they look at their cognitive maps. Honors students who write the IMMEX problem sets talk over their projects with each other and with the instructor. Group work and discussion are also part of Infusion strategies. At the elementary level, the training that teachers receive includes how to facilitate student discussion and build on student ideas. The organizing arrangements that support the implementation of the programs include the district hierarchy of decision making and the empowerment 237 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. of program managers. The professional development that they provide enables teachers to facilitate the student discussion, interaction and input. Organizing Arrangements. Standards Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster SBE Level I Family Science nights highlight both the secondary and elementary programs. Project Tomorrow assists with press releases. From Figure C-30. Standards Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster OA SBE 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. SF SBE JH instructs in use o f student rubrics with students. SF SBE 1 Administrative attention to communication o f expected outcom es and communication with parents. O A SBE 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. SF SBE 2 MS and ES: Professional development directed to use o f graphic organizers, transfer o f skills across assignments (high school and middle school), use o f IMMEX software. PE SBE IC Level 1. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectation^. Organizing Arrangements. Standards Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster. The objectives of the curricula are clear. When teachers and students set out to write problem sets, the concepts that are being developed and the 238 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. pathways o f thinking are clear. Skills to be developed with Infusion methodologies are explicit. Rubrics for assessment of student work are given to students so that they know what is expected o f them. At back to school nights and occasional family science nights, the program and expectations for student are mentioned. Valuable feedback for students is provided through the use o f rubrics. Organizing Arrangements. Standards Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster SfA Level The NSF supported curricula are designed to provide quality science 1 to all students. District and project plans are to ultimately provide all teachers o f all subjects and classes with training in the use o f IMMEX and Infusion. From Figure C-3I. Science for All. Hope High School Cluster OA SfA 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. OA SfA 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation. SF SfA 2 Districts’ demo-** graphics: fewer low income students than those o f other project districts. SF SfA 1 MS, Project director committed to introduce IMMEX and Infusion strategies to all teachers in all grades and across disciplines. OA SfA 3 Districts’ departments support students with special needs, including ethnic and language minorities, At Risk, GATE. Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully'* in science learning. 4 PE SfA IC Level Organizing Arrangements. Science for All. Hope High School Cluster. Good instruction in science for all students is part of the designs of both the 2 3 9 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. secondary and elementary programs. While honors and Advanced Placement students write the problem sets, those and other problem sets are used by other students in grades seven through twelve. The methodologies of Infusion are reported by the teachers who use them to be effective with students at all levels. The elementary NSF supported modules and the methods that support them are based on the NSES which strongly advocate science for all students. The organizing arrangements that support science for all students in the district include the special programs that provide funding for science instruction, and the hierarchical structure of the district which includes the empowerment of managers to make decisions and arrangements for the implementation of the project. Organizing Arrangements. Professional Development. Hope High School Cluster PD Level Professional development at the high school, middle school, and 1 elementary levels is centered on the components of the projects. At the elementary level, all teachers K .-6 are being trained in the use of kits. From Figure C-32. Professional Development. Hope High School Cluster PE PD IC L evel 1 . Teachers grow in learning com munity centered cftt~ teaching, learning; structures for teachers to continuously co plan their own prof. dev. SF PD I MS works with UCLA, presents for IMMEX.’ SF PD 2 JH connected .with NSRC. ®A PD 1 MS, ES meet "on the run” to plan professional development for IMMEX and Infusion. OA PD 2 PF responsibl^for prof. dev. in all disciplines. OA PD 2 JH organized prof.1 dev. for elem. sci. 2 4 0 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizing Arrangem ents. Professional D evelopm ent. H op e H igh S ch ool Cluster. Collegiality supports planning at the site for the secondary program, but the project coordinator also interacts professionally with originators of the IMMEX program at UCLA. She is a spokesperson for that program, and provides professional development both within her district and elsewhere. Pauline Ferris and other administrators support her affiliation with IMMEX. The project coordinator has also made personal contact with the originators of the Infusion materials, who provided professional development for the district. The director of curriculum arranged for a team representing the district to write its strategic plan at the LASER institute in July 1997. Since then, the elementary science coordinator has worked closely with Beckman@Science, the NSRC, and the Exploratorium to continue training teacher leaders and classroom teachers. Professional development associated with all parts of the secondary and elementary program are specifically tailored to be of immediate relevance to classrooms. Organizing Arrangements. Administrative Support. Hope High School Cluster G Level Top administrators in the unified district signed o ff on proposals 1 and have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and provide professional development events to move the projects along. 241 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -3 3 . A dm inistrative Support. H ope H igh S ch o o l Cluster SF AS 3 District and site administrators very supportive of MS. OA AS 2 PF responsible for prof. development for all disciplines. OA AS 2 JH organizes professional development for elem. science. SF AS 1 PF orchestrated team going to LASER in Washington DC prior to project. SF AS 2 JH committed to B@S prior to project and prigj. to becoming district science coordinator. PE AS IC Level 1. District and site level administration knowledgeably attends to the implementation of inquiry based, hands- on science. Administration is open to trying new practices that are research based. Organizing Arrangements. Administrative Support. Hope High School Cluster. The PHUSD has a director of curriculum, but prior to the projects did not have a science coordinator at either the secondary or the elementary level. After the 1997 LASER Strategic Planning Institute and a year in which little was accomplished, the position of elementary science coordinator was established. The secondary project coordinator was supported in starting the IMMEX and Infusion programs prior to funding. In themselves, organizing arrangement have facilitated implementation o f the projects because the director of curriculum has made sure that the procedures of the district promote rather than impede the actions of the program managers. Resources that Enhanced Progress in Program Planning and Implementation Tedesco Canyon High School K-12 Cluster Resources connected with Goals and Planning Strategies in the Tedesco Canyon School Cluster G Level Top level administration encouraged the writing of proposals 1 ana was flexible in working with funding group(s) to modify plans. 24 2 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -l. G oals and P lanning Strategies. T ed esco C anyon High School Cluster SF G 4 Rancho SF G 1 District Office: JJE, dir. o f spec, projects; SW, pub. relations coord.; PE G IC L e v ^ 1: Short-term . _ r ,. _ , goals are e v id e if tH ™ ’ dir‘ ° ftech' and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. SF G 2 Tedesco Elem.: KC, prin. & district sci. coord.; MC, sci. spec. & mentor. St. Gregory M S: BM, tech. mentor; MB, tech. mentor; LM, science teacher (teacher attrition, tech reduced). a S F G 3 Tedesco Canyon HS: M M f principal; JJO, dept. chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coord. — Science; LA, proj. coord. — tech.; (tech component reduced). OA G 1 District and site curriculum lead ers empowered to write goals, proposal by supt., asst. supt. R G 1 Proj. Tomorrow funding required results oriented goals in original proposal. R G 2 Initial Project Tomorrow Resources were for meaningful technology to improve students’ learning in science. Due to less money available and due to strong call for hands-on science, non-profit group pulled back funds that were to be spent on technology. Resources. Goals and Planning Strategies. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow spelled out what the Renaissance Projects in funded districts were to accomplish, and required the formulation of goals and objective as part of the proposals that were written. Once funded, the Tedesco Canyon project used mechanisms in the district to publicize the purpose of the secondary project to teachers in professional development sessions and to the community through the public relations efforts of administration and the public relations coordinator for the district. The Beckman program also required inclusion o f a mission statement, 243 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. goals, and objectives in the strategic plan written by the district. That goals of that program are clear to those who have been trained in the NSF supported materials. Resources. Quality Curriculum. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster c Level The high school program actively engages students, and the 1 elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. From Figure C-2. Quality Curriculum. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE CIC Level 1. Curricula take into account students’ interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, experience, and the ways that students learn. SF C 5 Ranc ho St. Gregory M S: BM, tech. mentor; MB, tech. mentor; LM, science teacher. _ SF C 3 Proj. coord.: KF SF C 2 District mentors fHS): JJO, SM, and TG; (M/Elem.): KC, MC. SF C 1 Tedesco Elem.: KC, rincipal & district science coord.; MC, science specialist & mentor SF C 4 Tedesco Canyon: MM, „ rincipal; JJO, dept. chrm. & mentor; KF, proj. coord. OA C 1 Leader ship meetings. OA C 2 Project related meetings OA C 3 Summer institute and academic year seminar planning meetings OA C 4 Sci. Specialists"* m eetings OA C 5 M Framework Committee meetings. OA C 6 Site ■ograms meetings IR C 1 Project To morrow supports docent program, family science nights R C 2 Beckman @ Science funding supports kit-based elementary sci. R C 3 PTAs and foundations support science specialists R C 4 Supt., school board support science programs - (17 full time - science specialists). 2 4 4 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. Q uality C urriculum . T ed esco C anyon H igh School C luster. Project Tomorrow had no influence on the design of the secondary program, but it did carefully consider the attributes of the program(s) in selecting the K-12 cluster for support. The Beckman@Science program, on the other hand, dictated the curriculum that it would support. Resources. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High Schooi Cluster A Level High school students are assessed on their products and 1 presentations, and elementary students are graded through embedded assessment based on their work in science notebooks. From Figure C-3. Assessment. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE A ICLevel | Students demon strate under standing and skills through graphic, oral, and written commun ication and performance tasks; multiple methods used. SF A 4 Science specialists and other elementary teachers attend Beckman@Scien ce kit training, which includes ways to assess w rtrlr IZZ SF A 1 KF an<ih PP facilitate docent designs o f projects for elementary students. D A A 1 docents organize their projects (performance tasks) during the summer science institute and in the academic year class. A SF A 2 KF facilitates science career seminars. SF A 3 KC orchestrates assessment — most concerned with district standardized test scores. R A 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent, Career programs. R A 2 Proj. Tomorrowilir. o f projects provides technical assistance, survey analysis; committee evaluates reports and projects.______________ R A 3 Science specialist support from district budgets and PTAs. R A 4 Notebook training provided through Beckman@Science. 245 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Resources. A ssessm ent Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow included demonstration of results as one of the conditions for continued funding. In the secondary project, docents and participants in the science career seminar program present and are graded by both the teachers and their peers according to established rubrics. Attitudinal surveys are also administered to gauge the opinions of students about their experiences in the programs, and the results of the surveys are used for publicity and solicitation for investment funds by Project Tomorrow. Beckman@Science not only has provided funds for program implementation, it has also given to the elementary program a model for assessing student work through science notebooks. Resources. Teacher Collegialitv. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster TC Level Teachers using IMMEX and Infusion talk to each other in 1 workshops, but communication is not always formal. At the elementary level, teachers using Beckman kits are trained together at grade level and will be given formal sessions at grade level to troubleshoot. From Figure C-4. Teacher Collegialitv. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PETC ic Level 2. Teachers meet occa sionally to coordinate"^ student experience. SF TC 1 mentors: JJO, SM, TG, KC, MC. SF TC 2 Proj. coord.: KF . jSF TC 3 Tedesco Canyon: JJO, dept. chrm. & mentor;. KF, proj. coord. SF TC 4 Science leadership^ relatively closed._________ SF TC 4 Trabuco Elem.: KC, prin., stir coord.; MC, science specialist & mentor; 3 sci. specialists with B@S. OA TC 1 Leader meetings. OA T C 2 Proj. eetings OA TC 3 Sumirwr- stitute and academic yr. mtgs. OA TC 4 Sci. Sjfccr eetings |OA TC 5 Frame work Committee meetings R1 TC 1 Proj. Tomorrow supports programs. 4R TC 2 B@S supports kit-based elem. science. -|R TC 3 PTAs, foun dations support sci. specialists O A TC 6 Site mtgs. R TC 4 Supt., school brd. support science. 2 4 6 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. T eacher C ollegialitv. T edesco C anyon H igh S ch ool Cluster. Project Tomorrow brought teachers together for a common purpose. When funding was uncertain, elementary teachers, middle school and high school science and technology teachers, and administrators came together to reach a common visions in order to write the proposal. While much of what was included was either already in place or in district and site plans, writing the proposal stimulated individual and collective thinking and resulted in consensus. Project also gave very specific guidelines for the proposal document. The Beckman program as a resource did not provide as much money as did Project Tomorrow, but it did provide model curricula and professional development, giving direction to the elementary part of the program. Resources. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SD Level docent and Beckman@Science programs are built around 1 student discussion and group work as well as interaction with the instructor. From Figure C-7. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE SD IC Level L Students discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input thaP " guides class airecvion. . SF SD 1 KF and PP work with docents in summer aca demic yr. SFSD2Sci. special ists, teachers in designated grades using NSRC kits. OA SD 1 docent program addresses two grades at cluster schools per war (2-4,3-5.1-6). R SD 1 Project Tomorrow support of docent program. OA SD 2 sum m qfc sci. institute and kit training address 2-*- R SD 2 B@S support for NSRC kit based sci. grades/'yr ( piioting, adoption). 247 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. Student D iscussion. Interaction, and Input. T edesco Canyon High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow funds the docent program which requires high school students to work together in designing programs for elementary school students. The Beckman program provides for student discussion, interaction, and input through the professional development around the NSF supported curricula. Teachers are given examples and instructed in how to facilitate student groups, lead student discussion in the classroom, and build on student questions and ideas. A wide variety of sources are used by the Beckman program, including the directors and coordinators of Project SHHD of Pasadena in partnership with the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), the Exploratorium in San Francisco, the NSRC in Washington D.C., and scientist partners elsewhere in the community. Resources. Standards Based Expectation. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster SBE Level Programs and their expectation are highly publicized through 1 mailing, at Family Science nights, and in the press. From Figure C-8. Standards Based Expectations. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster PE SBE IC Level 1. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. SF SBE 1 k F a n th PP work with docents. SF SBE 2 Sci. ** specialists, tea chers in desig nated grades using NSRC kits. |OA SBE 4 KC and MC provide [rationale for student expectations. OA SBE 1 Docent ^ program addresses two grades at cluster schools per year. _____ OA SBE 2 summer si inst., kit training address two grades per year (for kit piloting, adoptjgnl_ OA SBE 3 docent lessons, district curriculum aligned with standards. R SBE 1 Proj. Tomorrow support. R SBE 2 B@S upport for NSRC kit based program. R SBE 3 District and community support science programs; standards and accountabilitv. 248 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. Standards B ased E xpectations. T ed esco C an yon H igh S ch ool Cluster. Project Tomorrow emphasized from the start that the organization wanted to see results in terms of students achievement or attitudes. At the high school, students are graded with rubrics on their performance and are given attitudinal surveys that are analyzed by the director of programs and projects of Project Tomorrow. Results are used in the publicity o f the organization as it solicits investors. Pampas High School K-12 Cluster Resources. Science for All. Pampas High School Cluster Level The Reinhardt district has a high percentage o f minority students and Limited English Proficient students, and a number o f Reinhardt teachers in both districts are committed to providing all students with a quality curriculum and good teaching. Reinhardt science teachers have received training in bilingual instruction and methods for working with other types o f special needs students, and a number o f them have become trainers for teachers countywide themselves. Equity, access, and attention to the needs o f students were written into the proposals o f the districts. 24 9 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -20. S c ien ce for A ll. Pam pas H igh S ch ool Cluster R SfA 2 Federal programs for special needs Students. OA SfA 1 Districts’ curriculum leader ship structures. SF SfA 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math for all students. R SfA 1 Proj. Tomorrow supports STANCE K-12. OA SfA 2 Districts’ professional devel opment directions, evaluation. R SfA 2 Beckman@Sci- ence emphasis on National Science Education Standards. SF SfA 2 Districts’ demographics represent spectrum o f ethnic and language minorities. SF SfA 1 Administration, RL, JJ, PT, other teacher leaders committed to success for all students. OA SfA 3 Districts’ Departments support students with special needs, including ethnic and language minorities, At Risk, GATE. PE SfA IC ▼ Level 1. ^ _ __ Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in scierJte learning. Resources. Science for All. Pampas High School Cluster. Because the student population includes a large number o f second language learners, Reinhardt receives a relatively large amount of federal funding. The district has several digital high schools and therefore is receiving financial help for the purchase of technology equipment. Project Tomorrow provided $10,000 in seed money for a planning year, but the district did not get funded for the $50,000 that was to follow. Beckman@Science withdrew its offer to provide $200,000 over four years because the elementary district did not demonstrate adequate commitment or involvement. Project Tomorrow also affected the social factors of the project, because the project coordinator was not encouraged to remain in the position 250 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. H ope H igh S ch o o l K -12 Cluster R esou rces. G oals and Planning Strategies. H ope H igh S ch ool Cluster Level Top administrators in the unified district signed o ff on proposals and have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and provide professional development events to move the projects along. From Figure C-23. Goals and Planning Strategies. Hope High School Cluster PEG IC Configuration Level 1: Year long and short term goals are evident and ways to reach the goals are formulated and clear to program participants. SF G 4 JH with B@.S for two years and now full time Science Coord, for district. SF G 3 KP is lead teacher and served at interim project coor dinator K-6. SF G 2 Esperanza HS: MS, Proj. coord, and ES “[began Infusion, Inquiry, IMMEX prior to funding. SF G 1 District: PF, dir. of curriculum attended LASER workshop before proposal and funding. Elementary part o f project slow to start; no full time person to coordinate for two years. SF G 2 Hayden MS teacher SH working with MS and district on use o f IMMEX for assessment districtwide, across grade levels. Attended LASER. OA G 1 HS teacher empow ered to direct Renaissance Project. A G 2 Directo o f curriculum has responsibility for all dis-ciplines K-12. OA G 3 Full tiijie Science Coor dinator not on board for first two years o f projeci f- R G 1 Project jTom orrow Funding supports secondary part o f proposal. R G 3 Beckman@Sci- ence supports teacher training in NSRC kits and kits for teachers to pilot. 251 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. G oals and P lanning Strategies. H ope H igh S ch ool C luster. Incorporating IMMEX and Infusion strategies into the proposal that won the support of Project Tomorrow was not difficult, as Inquiry and building student understanding were requirements for selection by the non-profit group as well as inherent in the programs. Project Tomorrow insisted on goals and objectives that were compatible with the programs and the result was the statement and formalization of expected outcomes. Beckman@Science also required the statement of goals and objectives in a strategic plan for the reform o f science. Resources. Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster The curriculum incorporates some inquiry, gives students an c Level opportunity to solve problems in science or to write science 1 problems for others. The elementary program is based on NSF supported curricula. From Figure C-24. Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster OA C 2 B@S provides Assistance in curr. dev., selection SF C 2 PF, dir. of curr., at LASER in Washington D.C.^" For NSRC curr. ^ SF C 1 MS, Proj. coord, presents at conferences (IM M EX, Infusion). R C 1 Proj. Tomorrow supports IMMEX, Infusion. OA C 1 MS, ES, - other district teachers' writing IMMEX, Infusion. OA C 3 PF Responsible for all disciplines and had no time to coord, sci. curr. for tw o years. R C 2 B@S pro vides training, technical assistance, kits to piloting teachers. SF C 3 JH finished year at Beckman@Science and is now science curriculum coordinator. PE C IC Configuration Level I. Curricula take into account students’ inter ests, knowledge,- understanding. 252 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Resources. Curriculum. Hope High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow did not specify the IMMEX and Infusion programs as a condition for funding, but the non-profit organization does acknowledge and publicize the value o f the programs and financially support their implementation. Beckman@Science financially supports only the NSF recommended curricula, which encompass three vendors: Full Option Science System (FOSS), Insights, and Science and Technology for Children (STC). Beckman also provides training in use o f the curricula for novices and for teachers who are experienced in their use. The Beckman program widely disseminates information about the curricula countywide in cooperation with the NSRC. Resources. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster Leve High school students are assessed through their products, which are science problems written into IMMEX software. Software tracks the thinking and conclusions o f student users o f the software, and teachers are trained to interpret the cognitive maps. Students in the elementary program are graded through embedded assessm ent in students’ science notebooks. 253 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -2 5 . A ssessm ent. H ope H igh Sch ool Cluster PETC IC Level 1. Teachers meet regu larly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to se quence and coordinate instruction. SF TC 1 JH re spected by teachers, builds sense o f m prestige for teachers working on elemen. project. SF TC 2 KP, interim coord., is classroom teacher and helped to build enthusiasm for the elementary ■ * project. SF TC 3 MS holds Ph.D. in physiology, is AP physics teacher, and has respect o f students, teachers, and administrators. OA TC 1 Summer institutes to train teachers on IMMEX, Infusion."* OA TC 2 Beckman@Sc ience Leadership training. it R TC 1 Project Tomorrow pro vides support to tOTWEX, Infu sion programs. OA TC 3 Beckman@Science kit and notebook training. OA TC 4 PF empowers MS, JH, and KP to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. R T C 2 Beckman@ Science works closely with iTH, provides technical assistance, training, and kits to piloting teachers. Resources. Assessment. Hope High School Cluster. Beckman@Science provides training in assessment through student work in science notebooks, and the approach is a condition of support. Beckman also sends selected science coordinators and K-6 teacher leader participants to the Exploratorium for training in assessment practices. Assessment samplers with rationale and rubrics for use in analysis and grading of student work have been provided by Merck and Company, Incorporated to district teacher leaders. 254 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. A ssessm en t. H ope H igh S ch o o l C luster Level Teachers using IMMEX and Infusion talk to each other in workshops, but communication is not always formal. At the elementary level, teachers using Beckman kits are trained together at grade level and will be given formal sessions at grade level to troubleshoot. From Figure C-26. Teacher Collegialitv. Hope High School Cluster PETC IC Level 1. ^ Teachers m eif" regu-lariy across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. SF TC 3 MS holds Ph.D. in physiology, is AP physics teacher, has respect o f students, teachers, and administrators* SF TC 1 JH is respected by teachers, and builds a sense o f prestige for teachers working on elementary project. SF TC 2 KP, interim coor dinator, is classroom teacher and helped to build enthusiasm for the elementary project. OA TC 1 Summer in stitutes to train teachers on IMMEX, In fusion. OA TC 2 Beckman@Scien ce Leader-ship training. OA TC 3 Beckman@Scien ce kit and notebook training. _ L R TC 1 Project Tomorrow provides sup port to IMMEX, Infusion programs. RTC 2 Beckman@Sci. works closely ith JH, provides technical assistance, training, and kits to piloting teachers. OA TC 4 PF empowers MS, JH, and |KP to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. Resources. Teacher Collegialitv. Hope High School Cluster. Persons associated with Project Tomorrow refer to the organization as “convener”. Thirty seven districts announced their intent to apply for funding, though only twelve 2 5 5 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. actually submitted proposals. In the process o f writing proposals, teachers came together to write mission statements, goals and objectives, a plan to improve science teaching and learning, and to construct a timeline. A very focused effort ensued, wherein there were many discussions about the value of science in a child’s education, how the teaching of science could be improved, and how the results of changes made could be evaluated in terms of student achievement. In the case of the Hope High School K-12 cluster, the programs were already in an early stage of implementation; but funding by Project Tomorrow enabled the district to progress. Project Tomorrow also disseminates information about the program to other districts. Beckman@Science has also provided a focal point for discussion, particularly about the need to provide all students with hands-on science, opportunity to communicate their findings and conclusions based on classroom experiences in science, and means of assessing student understanding through student work. Resources. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster SI Level In theory, problems being written for student use o f IM MEX 1 software are inquiry-based. Beckman kits, which are being adopted district wide, are also inquiry-based. 256 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -2 7 . Scien ce as Inquiry. H ope H igh School Cluster PE SI IC Level I. Teachers consistently model and foster student inquiry as they interact with students. SI 1 Project Tomorrow provides support to IMMEX, Infusion programs. SF SI I MS, ES, promote inquiry to be included with IMMEX and Infusion o f other critical thinking skills. SF SI 1 JH encourages inquiry as science coordinator, and provides training in inquiry nationally as part o f the NSRC faculty. SF SI 2 KP and other B@ S trained teachers vocally embrace inquiry as a preferred approach to teaching science. R SI 2 Beckman@Science f works closely with JH, proves technical assistance, training, and kits to piloting teachers. OA SI 2 Beckman@Science leadership training. OA SI 3 Beckman ^ S c ie n c e kit and notebook training. OA SI 4 PF empowers MS, JH, and KP to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. Resources. Science as Inquiry. Hope High School Cluster. The Request for Proposals (RFP) publicized by Project Tomorrow required definition of how districts would ensure exemplary teaching of science. In the case of the Hope High School K-12 cluster, IMMEX problem sets are designed to elicit habits of inquiry in students using the program. Beckman@Science provided teacher leaders in the district with training in the methods o f inquiry teaching at a novice level . Beckman also provided the elementary science coordinator with advanced training 2 5 7 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. in professional development for inquiry teaching at the Exploratorium in San Francisco, California. Resources. Availability of Resources. Hope High School Cluster AR Level Computers for the project in the PHUSD are systematically being 1 supplied by the school site(s), the district, local businesses, and Project Tomorrow. Kits for elementary science are currently being purchased with money from Beckman@ Science and the state instructional materials fund (IMF). From Figure C-30 Availability of Resources. Hope High School Cluster SF AR 1 PF, director o f curriculum, supportive o f - projects. R AR 2 B@S provides training and kits for pilots. SF AR 2 JH, science coordinator, was manager o f B@S materials resource center. R AR 1 Projec Tomorrow supports K-12 efforts to innovate and coordinate with seed money for project. SF AR 3 MS, project coordinator, writes grants for IMMEX and Infusion projects, manages budge for project.___________________________ OA AR Standard district policies for purchase and stor-age o f equipment; plans to build science materials resource center. ‘[ PE AR IC Level 1. Adequate equipment, materials for student hands- on learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school used. 258 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. A vailab ility o f R esou rces. H ope H igh S ch ool C luster. Project Tomorrow did not fund the Hope High School K-12 cluster project on the first round. After the first two districts were funded, Project Tomorrow realized that it could not provide ongoing support to all Orange County schools in the amounts that it had previously considered. The revised RFP solicited applications for support in districts in the amount of $10,000 to be followed in a second year of funding at $50,000. The Hope High School cluster met expectations in the first year and qualified for the larger amount in the second year. The money is used to pay the coordinator for her release time to manage the secondary project, for the cost of professional development in IMMEX and Infusions, and related expenses. Project Tomorrow partners are providing some computers to the project, but the district is continuing to increase the availability of technology to the project. Beckman@Science provided materials and training without cost to elementary teachers in the district, which helped the elementary program get started. Beckman continues to work with PHUSD teachers in training and leadership development. Progress in the implementation of the secondary and the elementary projects has been made possible within a reasonable time frame because of the focused and supplementary resources provided by both Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. 259 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. Student D iscu ssio n . Interaction, and Input. H op e H igh S ch ool C luster Level For the high school programs, student interaction is built in through Infusion. Students who write IMMEX programs also interact with each other and with their instructors. At the elementary level, discussion and student interaction is built into the NSF supported materials; methods for conducting class and small group instruction are provided in training. From Figure C-29 Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Hope High School Cluster PE SD IC Level I. Students regu larly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom set ting. Students provide input that guides class direction. SF SD 1 MS and ▼ ES actively sought out strategies designed to improve students’ thinking. OA SD 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. SF SD 2 PF and JH push profes- ^ sional development directed to teaching strategies that promote student discussion. OA SD 2 Districts’ structure for professional M development and evaluation. R SD Project Tomorrow supports Infu sion, IMMEX, SRC curricula. R SD 2 Beckman @ Science train— |- ing addresses methods to stimulate student discussion. SF SD The 36 teachers that have received B@ S training received training in group work and discussion techniques. Resources. Student Discussion. Interaction, and Input. Hope High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow districts to explain their visions o f exemplar}' science teaching, and students learning to work cooperatively in groups was described in 260 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. the proposal of the Hope High School K-12 cluster. As honors students (and teachers) write the IMMEX problem sets, they work together in brainstorming scenarios and critiquing the overall software program designs. Infusion methodologies also include group work and discussion. Beckman@Science provides teacher leaders in the district with training in the methods facilitating student discussion, and interaction as well as how to build on students’ questions and ideas. Resources. Standards Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster SBE Level Family Science nights highlight both the secondary and elementary 1 programs. Project Tomorrow assists with press releases. From Figure C-30 Student Based Expectations. Hope High School Cluster PE SB E IC Level 1. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. SF SBE 1 Administrative? attention to communica tion o f expected outcomes and communication with * * parents.________________ SF SBE 2 MS and ES: Professional development directed ^ use o f graphic organ izers, transfer o f skills across assignments (high school and middle school), use o f IMMEX software. SF SBE JH instructs in-< use o f rubrics with students. OA SBE 1 Districts’ curriculum leader ship structures. OA SBE 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. R SBE I Project Tomorrow supports TK- 12 - Infusion and Inquiry. R SBE 2 Beckman@ Science emphasis on National Science Education Standards. 261 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. Standards B ased E xp ectations. H ope H igh S ch ool C luster. From the start, Project Tomorrow has stated that supported projects must demonstrate results. The director of programs and projects collects data on student achievement and attitudes as well as information and the results of research on student learning in science. Beckman@Science also requires two reports per year on the status of projects. Implementation of the project is documented, and information on the impact of the program methodologies and curricula is synthesized both for participants and for investors. Statements of expectations for students in the classroom affect student behaviors most directly. These include the rubrics that are used for peer and self-assessment at the secondary level and those that are used to assess student work in science notebooks at the elementary level. Resources. Science for All. Hope High School Cluster SfA Level The NSF supported curricula are designed to provide quality science 1 to all students. District and project plans are to ultimately provide all teachers o f all subjects and classes with training in the use o f IMMEX and Infusion. From Figure C-31 Science for All. Hope High School Cluster PE SfA IC Level Teachers recog nize, respond " to " student diver sity; all students encouraged to participate fully in sci/ learning. SF SfA 1 MS, proj. dir., committed to introduce IMMEX, Infusion strategies to all teachers, all grades/disciplines. SF SfA 2 Districts’ demo- graphics show few low income students. OA SfA 1 Districts’ curriculum leadershl OA SfA 2 Districts’ prof. dev. directions^ evaluation. OA SfA 3 Districts’ departments support* students with special needs. R SfA 1 Proj. Tomorrow supports ' TK-12. R SfA 2 Beckman @Science emphasis on — jNat’I Sci. Ed. Standards. 262 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Resources. Science for All. Hope High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow supports professional development in IMMEX and Infusion for the Esperanza High School cluster. While the secondary science coordinator teaches Advanced Placement physics, she is including the teachers of all high school and middle school students in the professional development on the use o f IMMEX and Infusion methodologies. It is planned that students will use the software to solve problems. For elementary students, the software will be used to assess student thinking about the NSRC kits. Beckman@Science is based on the National Science Education Standards, and therefore insists on the provision of excellent curricula and teaching to all students. The demographics of those that are served are reported by districts in their status reports. Resources. Professional Development. Hope High School Cluster PD Level Professional development at the high school, middle school, and 1 elementary levels is centered on the components o f the projects. At the elementary level, all teachers K-6 are being trained in the use o f kits. From Figure C-32 Professional Development. Hope High School Cluster PE PDIC Level 1 . Teachers grow as part o f learning com-munity centered on teaching and learning; struc tures for teachers to continuously co-plan their owifr" prof. development. SF PD 1 MS works with UCLA for IMMEX. SF PD 2 JH maintains contacts with nat’l prof. developers. OA PD 1 MS, ES meet “on the run” to pla^ prof. dev. for IMMEX. -|OA PD 2 PF respon sible for all prof. d < OA PD 2 JH organ izes elem. sci. prof. dev. R PD 1 Proj. Tomorrow supports prof. development. R PD 2 Beckman @Science provides ofessional development in kit- PD3 Eisenhower funds for sci. prof dev. 263 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. R esources. P rofessional D evelop m en t. H ope H igh S c h o o l Cluster. Project Tomorrow supports professional development in the IMMEX and infusion programs. The most influential outside group with regard to the professional development being provided to secondary teachers is the IMMEX program at UCLA. Project Tomorrow is impressed with the program and eager to showcase it for investors and potential investors. Project Tomorrow also disseminates information about the program to all schools and districts in Orange County. Beckman@Science provided the leadership training to district teacher leaders including the elementary science coordinator; these individuals provide the professional development in science at the elementary level. The science coordinator is a member o f the faculty of the National Science Resources Center and will be the facilitator o f a LASER Strategic Planning Institute in the near future. She does training in her district that is modeled on that training and that which she has received through the Exploratorium. Resources. Administrative Support. Hope High School Cluster Level Top administrators in the unified district signed o ff on proposals and have been helping project coordinators use district procedures to purchase, start courses, and proviac professional development events to m ove the projects along. 2 6 4 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. From Figure C -33. A dm inistrative Support. Hope H ig h S ch ool Cluster OA AS 2 PF responsible for prof. development for all disciplines. R AS 1 Proj. Tomorrow budget for professional development. OA AS 2 JH organizes profes sional develop ment for elem. science. SF AS 3 District and site administrators ' very supportive of MS. SF AS 1 PF orchestrated team going to LASER in ^ Washington DC prior to Project. SF AS 2 JH com mitted to B@S prior"* to project and prior to becoming District Science Coord. R AS 2 Beck- man@Science provides professional _ development in kit-based elementary science, district direction. PE AS IC Level 1. District and site level administration knowledgeably attends to the implementation o f inquiry based, hands-on science. Administration is open to trying new practices that are research based. Resources. Administrative Support. Hope High School Cluster. Project Tomorrow did not significantly influence administrative support for either project, but it is providing resources for the project. The project coordinator works very well with the Project Tomorrow staff, and the funding organization showcases the progress of the district on the IMMEX and Infusion projects. Not only is the district administration supportive of science and the alliances with Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science, it is specifically supportive of the programs that are part o f the project. The overall availability of resources in the district makes it possible for district and site administration to financially support the programs, and both Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science supplement the resources that are available to projects. 265 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. CHAPTER V Discussion and Implications Introduction Processes of planning and implementation were analyzed in three K-12 school clusters in four districts: the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster in the Shasta Unified School District, the Pampas High School cluster in the Reinhardt Union and Reinhardt City (elementary) School Districts, and the Hope High School cluster in the Pleasant Hills School District. The projects were selected for support by Project Tomorrow, a group of businesses and educators in Orange County, California, because of their likelihood of developing excellent science programs. Clusters of K-12 schools were invited to write proposals for changing the teaching of science to improve student achievement and attitude. The quality of school programs were not evaluated primarily in classrooms, although classroom observations were made. Rather, the goals, structure, and progress of programs recorded in observations, interviews, and documents were compared with criteria of excellence. The study focused on eleven program elements (PE) that were extracted from the National Science Education Standards (NSES), Science for All Americans (Project 2061), and other science reform documents. 266 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. T h e elem ents are: Planning (G) Quality Curricula (C) Assessment Strategies (A) Teacher collegiality (TC) Science as Inquiry (SI) Availability of resources (AR) (PD) • Administrative Support (A expectations (SBE) • Science for all (SFA) • Professional development • Standards based • Student Discussion, Interaction and Input (SD) Innovation Configuration (IC) charts were constructed to display ideal practice o f the program elements. Graded approximations to each descriptor of excellence on the charts enabled the investigator to gauge program quality and measure the progress o f implementation. Once levels of practice for the program elements were assigned to the three clusters, Stream Analysis charts were used to record and connect factors that were related to the levels of practice. A Stream Analysis chart for Study of Planning and Implementation of Quality Science Programs is shown in Figure 5-1. It is divided into columns (streams), which represent the categories o f factors in this study. The first stream on all charts is the IC level o f a program element. Related factors are categorized and listed in the three remaining columns under categories o f Social Factors, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources. To determine the details of program planning and implementation, the investigator attended meetings and events of the projects, interviewed project 2 6 7 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Figure 5-1 Stream Analysis Chart for Study of Planning and Implementation of Quality Science Programs Social Factors Program Element Organizing Arrangements Resources Relationships Program Element Levels o f Innovation Configurations and Contributing Factors Program Element and Innovation Configuration Level Program Element related to assignment o f Innovation Configuration Level Organizational Arrangements that affect Program Elements, their Innovation Configuration Levels, Social Factors, and Resources Persons wh<) influence or are affected by Program Elements and their Innovation Configurations— Levels, Organizing Arrangements, and Resources*- Resources that support programs, support persons who influence programs and their outcomes, and the organizing arrangements that make programs possible. (Adapted from Porras, 1987). 268 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. personnel, made classroom observations of the program in practice, and examined project and program documents. Information from notes taken and interview response summaries were recorded in the stream charts. Stream charts enable clarification of the effects of specific factors on levels of practice, and sets of factors can also be analyzed in their systemic context. In the charts, systems and subsystems may be identified as factors are connected to other factors in the same and in other streams. In Stream Analysis, it is possible to recognize or to strategize conditions that are conducive to progress. Any set of factors perceived as relevant can be entered in the charts and used for diagnosis. Stream analysis permits recognition of patterns that point to the importance of specific factors for program success and can also be used as a tool to track actions and their consequences. In this investigation, patterns of relationships among program elements and contributing factors emerged in multiple contexts, in sets of factors, and subsets. In some cases, there was a repetition of statements and connections among factors and the achievement of levels of practice across program elements within the same school cluster. There were also commonalities seen in relationships among contributing factors and the IC levels of practice of program elements across districts. The commonalities and differences are explored in this chapter. Summaries, discussions, and conclusions that follow are based on the patterns that appear in the Stream Diagnostic charts (Appendix Cl which are summarized in Chapter Four. Levels o f practice of program elements for the three 269 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. projects are displayed in Table 4-3, which permits a comparison of configurations. Tables 4-4 through 4-8 display the factors that influence high and low levels of practice in the projects. A higher level o f practice was assigned if a program element was close to ideal in the project and there was a plan to provide the quality program for all students. While a program element in and o f itself may have been at a nearly ideal level, it would be given a lower ranking if it could only reach a small subset of students. Factors were extracted from the stream charts and reconstructed to reveal those which had direct bearing on the progress of the K-12 school clusters in this study. The graphic representation of relationships demonstrates the importance of a balanced and synchronized function of all components, including administrative commitment, teacher participation, and favorable logistical aspects. Essential to the progress of a project are the selection of an existing program with exemplary program elements and mechanisms for program managers to access to district personnel and procedures that are necessary for implementation. A review of the case histories of clusters also reveals the impact of a cooperative relationship between the funding organization and a project, professional development that is directly related to a new program, and availability of resources and support for exemplary program elements. 2 7 0 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Factors that Influenced Progress in Program Planning and Implementation Teacher Participation Teachers who do not have an opportunity to directly participate and contribute in a project are not enthusiastic supporters of programs or of associated professional development. Robertson (1994) emphasized the need to involve a range of personnel in decision-making. Hall and Hord (1987) state that whole-staff or team meetings are necessary for successful reform efforts. The Coalition of Essential Schools has found that it is important for a whole faculty to be involved in developing vision, understanding mission and purpose, and planning for implementation. In the SHUSD, the teachers who have been responsible for program planning and professional development have remained largely the same for close to a decade. Three high school district teachers plan and teach the summer science institute. Out of approximately 700 K-6 teachers, there are 17 science specialists who teach all of the science at the upper elementary level. Other district teachers have participated in professional development at nearby universities and other, but they are not included in district leadership. Teachers who are not involved perceive that they have no opportunity to contribute meaningfully. The level of participation in the Pampas High School cluster project is not relevant, as discussion of a possible program has not occurred outside of the planning group. In PHUSD, professional development for all district teachers to 271 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. implement the IMMEX and Infusion programs has been scheduled on the timeline of the district’s plan. Project Tomorrow characterizes itself as “convener”. In the process of writing proposals, teachers came to consensus on mission statements, goals and objectives, and plans to improve science teaching and learning. Throughout the county there were many discussions about the value of science education K-12, improving science teaching and learning, and how to evaluate the results of efforts within the project. Project Tomorrow disseminates information about programs throughout the county to both business and education. Beckman@Science also provides a focal point for discussion, particularly about the need to provide all students with hands-on science, communication o f findings and conclusions based on classroom teaching experience, and how to assess student understanding in student work. Pressure To Raise Test Scores Curricula have been developed that are based on learning research and that build on information obtained in carefully controlled field testing (Nelson, 1999; Cozzens, 1996). However, the districts that were part of this study have some individuals or groups in their communities that advocate back-to-basics or traditional teaching. In the Shasta Hills Unified School District (SHUSD), political pressures encourage use of textbooks over hands-on science along with preparation to take standardized tests. The district science coordinator claims that parental 272 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. pressure necessitates purchase of textbooks and direct teaching of content. GATE parents insist on the availability of GATE and honors level classes. At the elementary level, only the science specialists and a small number o f first grade teachers have been trained in research-based methodologies such as inquiry- teaching, assessment of student work, and facilitation o f group questioning and discussion. Evidence that inquiry-based teaching instruction improves student achievement of content and skills has been accruing over the last several decades. Kyle, Shymansky, and Alport (1982) found that students who experienced the inquiry-based science curricula of the 60s performed better on achievement measures than did students who had traditional courses that focused on content over process. Attitudes were more positive and higher order thinking skills were demonstrated to a greater degree. Students’ performance in reading, mathematics, and communication skills was also better. The data were interpreted to validate the innovative curricula, but some investigators point out that there were differences in the levels of students being compared; only the top 20 percent of students were tracked into courses where the curricula were used (Grant, 1997). Logistical Aspects that Limit Enrollment It is not possible to implement a program districtwide that relies heavily on transportation. In the SHUSD, not all district students will be part o f the docent program because o f the difficulty in transporting large numbers of students off site. 273 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. The program also requires the buy-in and participation o f elementary classroom teachers who must prepare their students for docent visits and set aside class time for the lessons. Implementation o f IMMEX in the PHUSD is problematic in that it requires the availability of computers to all classes that would use the program. While this is a challenge, there is a schedule to provide computers districtwide for that purpose. Science for All Students The American Association for the Advancement o f Science (AAAS) in its publication Science for All Americans explains to policy makers, educators, and other stakeholders that the country’s technological and economic future depends somewhat on the scientific literacy of its citizens. Districts generally try to balance the needs of gifted and talented students and those of average, at-risk, and special education students as well as English language learners and students with other special needs. Small programs that serve limited populations are not cost effective if they cannot serve enough students to have significant impact. At the high school level in the SHUSD, students who are not gifted and talented do not qualify for the high school program and are not recruited. The docent program is designed for successful students who are able to write, plan, and make presentations to adults and to children. In PHUSD, the secondary science coordinator includes the teachers of all high school and middle school students in the professional development on the use o f IMMEX and Infusion methodologies. While only 274 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. honors level students are to write the problem sets for the IMMEX software, all students are able to use the software to solve problems once they are written. Infusion methodologies are suitable for all students, as are the NSF supported materials that are advocated by the director of curriculum and the elementary science coordinator. Implementation o f Program at All Grade Levels There is a continuum of science concepts that are age appropriate for children in kindergarten through twelfth grade. If developmental steps are not taken in science, there will be gaps in student understanding. The National Science Resource Center (NSRC) states in its publication Science for All Children (1997) that a proven way to achieve the goal of scientific literacy is to begin to teach science in elementary school, as early as kindergarten. In the SHUSD, science specialists are trained in use of the inquiry-based science modules, but the specialist program does not serve students in kindergarten through grades three and students in grades four through six receive only 51 minutes of instruction from a specialist each week. To the credit o f the elementary science coordinator, she is including more teachers and new grade levels as new NSF modules are added incrementally. There is movement towards recognition of the value of the NSF curricula, so it is possible that the cluster will merit a Level 1 within the next year or two. The district’s position on the purchase of state adopted textbooks versus hands-on science is not finalized and could go either way. The PHUSD project is being 275 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. implemented districtwide and at all grade levels, and the Reinhardt project is not far enough along to know what grade levels might eventually be included. Ensuring Commitment of Top Administration. The importance o f administrative support to the success of an innovation has been stated from many points of view in numerous documents and articles. When district and site administrators are committed to the goals and structure of a program, they are more likely to facilitate its implementation (McLaughlin, 1992). Administration is frequently able to find the resources that are needed to support programs (Dana, T.M. et al, 1997). Administrators control the professional development opportunities that are available to teachers needs (Hall and Hord, 1987), so it is important for them to prioritize professional development that is directly related to program implementation. According to the National Science Education Standards (NSES) (1995), administrators need to actively solicit the involvement of community stakeholders, ensure that progress is made over time, assess the effectiveness o f actions taken, and smooth the way for program managers. This is further discussed in the next section, Program Managers are Knowledgeable about Exemplary Practice. In its study of reform, SRI International (1995) suggested that districts in which the central office takes an active role in support of reforms are more likely to - develop sustainable programs. Among other things, a central office can provide supportive organizational structures. In this study, it became very clear that in the 276 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. specific areas where there was progress, a central office person either handled the details or made the mechanics o f district fully available to project managers. The commitment o f administration in the SHUSD and the PHUSD is complete and without reservations, and the two clusters are thriving. When the leadership group of the Pampas High School cluster project began meeting, it failed to secure the unqualified support of top administration in the elementary district. A teacher from the elementary district participated in writing the proposal and attended an elementary Strategic Planning Institute affiliated with Beckman@Science; however, the project coordinator, a high school teacher, has not been able to get the administration of the elementary district to participate. The elementary teacher essentially gave up and stopped participating because she could not get her district involved. The district science coordinator, a principal, has not made meaningful contact with the administration of the elementary district either. He and the superintendent of the high school district sit on the Project Tomorrow board, and the superintendent was instrumental in the school districts’ decision to write a proposal for Project Tomorrow. The high profile of the district on the board, however, has not helped to get the elementary district involved. That district is not willing to abandon its plan to connect science lessons to the language arts curriculum. 2 7 7 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. C oordinator K n ow led ge and A ccess to D istrict P rotocols and Procedures. The project o f the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster is largely successful because district level administration has empowered coordinators to accomplish the tasks necessary to make the program happen. The administrative structure and the participation of the director of special projects in project implementation has made the processes and procedures of the district office available to the project coordinator without qualification. The director works with the science coordinator and the project coordinator to facilitate approvals and expedite procedures. The Pampas High School cluster project has been largely unsuccessful at least in part due to the inability of the project coordinator to make anything happen in the district. No one has made it possible for him to access the procedures of the districts in order to include elementary teachers. He and district administrators involved with the project have also not made any progress within their own district. Adoption or Adaptation of an Existing Good Program. In the Tedesco Canyon High School project, the high school docent curriculum is based on the elementary district standards. The structure of the program is patterned after a pre-existing program in which high school students work with younger children at the district’s field studies facility/ The elementary science coordinator and the elementary field studies mentor work with Beckman@Science to enhance the district curricula with the NSF supported modules. 278 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. In the Pampas High School K-12 cluster, there is no project related science program at the secondary level. Teachers at individual schools collaborate in program planning, but there have been no project related changes. The superintendent and the science coordinator o f the high school district have not been able to spur a development of a substantive, coherent project related program at the high school level. In PHUSD, the secondary project coordinator adopted the IMMEX and Infusion programs several years before the opportunity to apply for support through Project Tomorrow came about. She contacted and worked with the originators of the programs and orchestrated professional development for other teachers in her district. A few at a time, district teachers were beginning to implement the programs. The project coordinator wrote the proposal for Project Tomorrow to secure additional support for the programs. The district’s director of curriculum had also taken a team o f five to the LASER strategic planning institute in Washington D.C. prior to the Beckman@Science opportunity to apply for funding came about. At that institute, a strategic plan for the institution of the NSF supported curricula was written and since the fall of 1999, a full time science coordinator has been managing the implementation of the elementary component of the project. In the PHUSD, persons responsible for the direction of project related curriculum chose to adopt and adapt research based and somewhat proven curricula 279 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. and methodologies. The director of curriculum took a team of five people to the LASER strategic planning institute in Washington D.C. in July o f 1997, spearheading adoption of the NSF supported curricula prior to its introduction in Orange County through the Beckman project. The project coordinator discovered the IMMEX and Infusion programs at an National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) convention. No programs have been selected for implementation in Reinhardt. Plan for Program Implementation. Although it was modified considerably, the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster project outlined its goals, objectives, and timeline in a detailed way that has helped the district find its way in the midst of changes and challenges. For the Pampas High School cluster project, Project Tomorrow would have supported adaptations o f the plan originally proposed, but meaningful revisions were not made. There is no solid plan for the project either in the high school or in the elementary district. The PHUSD has two very well defined plans that it follows: the proposal written for Project Tomorrow, and the incentive grant proposal written for Beckman@Science, and the two are complementary and coordinated. Both Project Tomorrow and Beckman are satisfied with the district’s progress in implementation of their plans. 280 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. District or Inter-District Mechanisms for Planning and Working Across Grade Levels. In Reinhardt in the early 1990s, the California Science Project worked with an elementary science coordinator to establish an interdistrict science professional development day. After two years, the administration of the elementary district discontinued its participation, and a group of teachers developed a science program that is very different from that which is based on the NSF supported curricula. The elementary district has also been absent when K-12 standards have been discussed by the project planning group. There are no impediments to teachers working K-12 in the two unified districts that are a part o f this study. Exemplary Science Program Elements are Built Into Programs. The two funding agencies that provide the support for the projects in this study have demonstrated knowledge of exemplary practice. Project Tomorrow mentions inquiry teaching and the value of performance assessment as it demonstrates the SHUSD docent program to potential investors. The docent program of the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster project builds in student discussion and interaction, as the students have to work in teams to research, design, and present the elementary lessons. The project coordinator tries to teach the high school students how to do inquiry teaching with the elementary students, but the teaching cannot equal that which occurs in the classrooms where the NSF supported curricula are being used by teachers who have received training. 281 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Project Tomorrow did select the plan o f the Pampas High School, which intended to require students to demonstrate understanding of science concepts in individual and group presentations and in electronic portfolios that would show growth over time. The elementary' project that would be supported by Beckman@Science includes student assessment through their writing in science notebooks, but the district has not taken advantage of the resources that would put that program in place. On the positive side, the key feature o f the IMMEX program of the Esperanza High School cluster project in the PHUSD is the tracking of student thinking as they solve the science problem sets o f the software program. The results o f student input are sent to the University of California, Los Angeles where they are analyzed, graphically represented, and returned to teachers and students for use in class discussion and for the assessment of student thinking. While the usefulness o f the software for assessing the thinking of elementary students has not been conclusively demonstrated, there is data supporting its use. Regarding group work, students work independently on problems posed in the IMMEX software, but students who write the problem sets work in teams to design and critique problems. Infusion methodologies include group work and discussion. The PHUSD has also adopted and is implementing the research based curricula supported by the NSF. Teachers who have been trained in the Beckman program have received training in inquiry teaching, how to ask good questions, respond to student questions, direct discussions, and facilitate students working in groups. 282 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Flexibility when Logistical and Climatic Changes Occur. When Project Tomorrow revealed that it was unable to support technology on a large scale, the director of technology was disappointed. He was, however, careful not to cause hard feelings between the district and Project Tomorrow. Writing a Memorandum of Understanding that would satisfy both business and education was difficult for the group, but the willingness of the director of special projects to work with Project Tomorrow in the process made that task one that was possible to carry out. The director also works steadily with the project coordinator to make the resources of the district available to the project and to troubleshoot procedural difficulties. The coordinator herself had little experience with the protocols and procedures at the district office, and could not have easily accomplished what she has without the assistance of the director. In the Pampas High School cluster, districts and Project Tomorrow failed to make adjustments when the funding group was unable to provide funding for "meaningful technology” to improve science education. While Reinhardt has digital high schools, there has been no coordination of technology resources to support a project related science program. The planning group had planned to include all district technology training as part of the project; this became irrelevant when Project Tomorrow withdrew its offer of support for building technology to improve science education. In general, the goal was to improve student learning in science through the use of technology. While the district and the initial schools 283 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. involved were aware o f possibilities, teacher enthusiasm about the projects dissipated as programs and opportunities did not materialize. In PHUSD, there has not been a conflict of goals with the district and the two funding organizations. Project Tomorrow had revised its goals and its RFP by the time that the district came on board, and the elementary part of the project has been congruent with the intent of Beckman@.Science and the NSRC from the beginning. Coincidence o f Timing. The Reinhardt Elementary District had just coordinated science activities with the sequence of the language arts curriculum, changing the sequence of student science experiences with no consideration for coherence of concepts. Detailed documents had been written, duplicated, and distributed. A plan was written for professional development in the approach, and a timeline was constructed for phase-in. The K-12 project and Beckman@Science offer of support for NSF supported modules came at the beginning of an implementation phase of the new program for the district. To change the program before another new program had even been tested possibly seemed unthinkable. On a positive note, the executive director of Beckman@Science discovered that PHUSD had attended the LASER institute in Washington D.C. and invited the district to apply for an incentive grant. The science coordinator of the district convenes district leaders to work on curriculum and to plan professional 284 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. development, so a K-12 leadership cadre was in place when it became possible to write the proposal for Project Tomorrow. The Beckman director also arranged for a PHUSD teacher to work at the Beckman Materials Resource Center, where Orange County teachers first accessed training and materials. The teacher is now the elementary science coordinator of the district; her ongoing contact with Beckman keeps the district in good standing with that program. Fidelity To Intended Depth of Coverage. Sequence, and Methodologies In the SHUSD, The science specialists have been trained in the NSF supported curricula; they teach the kits that are part of the Beckman@Science program, but the materials are somewhat abbreviated and adapted because specialists only provide 51 minutes of science instruction per week. While the district science coordinator has included additional grade levels in the science program, there is no indication that science will every be taught more than 51 minutes per week or that all grade levels will be included. In Reinhardt, the issue is not relevant as there is no program with specific orientation to coverage, sequence, or methods. The PHUSD has been faithful to the intent of Beckman@Science at the elementary level. The secondary coordinator has experimented with IMMEX in that she facilitates the writing of problem sets by honors students and teachers. Their work is being evaluated by program managers at UCLA. 285 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. O rganizational A rrangem ents that Ensure Participation o f A ll K -12 T eachers in Project Related Professional Development. In the SHUSD, essential organizational arrangements include the meetings among administration and teacher leaders to design and strategize implementation of the project related programs. They include the meetings of the elementary science coordinator with the high school mentors who plan the summer science institute and follow-up sessions, the meetings o f the elementary science coordinator with the 17 science specialists who deliver science lessons to all students in grades 4-6, and the meetings of the administrators and teachers who are responsible for the high school docent and science career seminar program. The summer science institute is taught at a secondary' or community college level for K.-6 teachers, and is loosely related by content to the kits that teachers are using according to the district science standards. In the Pampas High School cluster, staff at sites interact collegially, but not all sites are part of the project at either the secondary or the elementary level. Grades K-6 are located in the Reinhardt City Elementary District, and Grades 7-12 in the Reinhardt Union High School District; there are no formal mechanisms in place for the two districts to coordinate what they teach. For two years, the high school and the elementary districts collaborated for the event through the California Science Project, but the elementary district stopped participating. Teacher interaction is not focused to improve science teaching in a coherent way in either district. 286 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. The project coordinator tried to support involvement o f elementary teachers with project funds, but no one would make arrangements for expenditures across district lines. Teachers co-plan in project related meetings. The organizing arrangements limit implementation across the districts, as no one has initiated a way to bring the project together in the two districts. The planning group waits for the two central offices approve actions and expenditures, and the project has been stalled for two years. In the PHUSD, both the secondary and elementary programs are intended to be implemented both districtwide and at all grade levels. Availability of Resources. In the SHUSD, the science specialist program costs the district over a million dollars a year, but it reaches all students in grades four through six, and the NSF supported curricula are being phased in slowly at grades one and two. A foundation and the local PTA supplement district resources in the support of the science specialist program, but what the specialists are now doing is a direct result of the support of Beckman@Science. Programs in their current configuration would not be in place were it not for the support of Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. The Pampas High School cluster project essentially lost its financial support for any program as the planning group has been unable to demonstrate progress. The Hope High School cluster project in the PHUSD has been able to combine the 287 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. resources of the district, Project Tomorrow, and Beckman@Science to make considerable progress in the implementation of its secondary and elementary plans. Balanced and Synchronized Function o f All Components. Resources, social factors, and organizing arrangements are systemically interrelated. The strength of one component may bring about improvements in the others, but weakness in one area may completely negate positive aspects in the planning and implementation of projects. Program Managers are Knowledgeable about Exemplary Practice. The understanding of exemplary program elements is essential, but it does not guarantee success of the project. In the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster, the project manager has a master’s degree in science education and works closely with the Science Education Programs program at the University of California, Irvine (UCI). In the Pampas High School cluster, the science coordinator and teachers that are a part o f the planning group for the K-12 project have some knowledge of the advantages of and the ways to conduct inquiry teaching and student discussion. The science coordinator teaches science methods at a university as adjunct faculty. The project coordinator has participated in several university science programs including the California Science Project. Five members of the team attended the LASER institute, where teacher-directed student discussion was a focus. In the elementary district, there is a small contingent o f teachers in the large district that are publicizing the benefits of the methodologies associated with that program. The project coordinator of the Hope High School cluster has a Ph.D. in physiology 288 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. and works closely with faculty at UCLA. The elementary science coordinator works closely with Beckman@Science and has received excellent professional development in both inquiry and assessment at the Exploratorium at San Francisco, California. Project Based Support For Exemplary Program Elements. Project Tomorrow does not directly influence the design o f the secondary programs, but it does consider the attributes of the program(s) in selecting K-12 clusters for support. The Beckman@Science program, on the other hand, dictates specific curricula that it will support. In the process of designing its Request for Proposals, Project Tomorrow consulted with leaders in science education in the design of criteria. Exemplary program elements were part of the requirements of the RFP. In the SFIUSD, structures were in place for teachers to work together before funding by Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science. The project does entail meaningful planning and implementation that would not occur were it not for the two funding groups. Project Tomorrow financially maintains the docent and science career seminar program and Beckman@Science trains teachers in exemplary practice. The two resources impact what happens in the science workshops of the district. Without the docent and the Beckman programs, there would not be the renewed focus on science as inquiry. While the docent program serves gifted and talented students only, the intent of the Beckman program is to include all students and has brought hands-on science to more students that would otherwise have had it. 289 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Cooperative Relationships between Funding Agency and Project. The relationship of administrative support and resources is bi-directional. In three of the four districts, administration has courted both Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science because of the available funding and also because of the prestige of being selected by each of the agencies. At the same time, the existence of funding has bolstered administrative support for programs. Central office personnel are careful to satisfy the demands of Project Tomorrow, which support the project. The project coordinator of the Tedesco Canyon High School cluster project sits on the Project Tomorrow board of directors and acts as a liaison between the funding group and district administration. Significantly, participation of the district’s director of public relations at a social level has enhanced the regard of Project Tomorrow for the of the district. In spite of the elimination of the technology component of the project, the director of technology has been careful not to cause irreversible hard feelings between the district and Project Tomorrow. On the other hand, the project coordinator of the Pampas High School cluster project has no relationship to the Project Tomorrow board, no working relationship with Beckman@Science, no status or power in his district, and no avenue to work with teachers in the elementary district. He has had advocate to make his efforts fruitful. District administration in PHUSD is supportive of science and the alliances with Project Tomorrow and Beckman@Science, and they are very supportive the project related programs. Administration has purchased computers to be used with 290 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. the IMMEX program and provides professional development days that are devoted to the content and methodologies the project. The district has not only established the position o f elementary science coordinator, they have also hired a full time clerk to manage the materials for the program. Space for storage of the kits has also been provided, and will be expanded as the program grows. There is no controversy in the district or the community as to whether hands-on, inquiry-based science is the best way to provide science to students in the district Professional Development is Directly Related to Program and Exemplary Program Elements. In the Pampas High School cluster project, the professional development meant to satisfy Project Tomorrow has been “Educator Awareness” events conducted by Beckman-Coulter, at which scientist employees explained skills that are needed in the workplace to participating teachers. The events are totally unrelated to the purposes of the projects. On the other hand, Beckman@Science provides training to teachers in the use of NSF supported curricula. Professional development through Beckman includes kit-training; methods of facilitating student inquiry, group work, and discussion; and assessment practice. Teachers in the Reinhardt High School District express appreciation for the day of professional development in science that they are given each year. Teachers indicate their interests, and teacher leaders present workshops in their areas of expertise. The workshops are, however, neither coordinated nor coherent and are not directed to any goals that are project related. 291 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. In PHUSD, coordinators of both the secondary and elementary components of the project are experienced professional developers who give presentations and workshops in areas related to the curricula and teaching strategies o f their programs. The secondary coordinator is affiliated with UCLA, assists in both training and research for IMMEX. and presents the programs at national and regional events such as the NSTA conventions. The elementary science coordinator is a member o f the faculty o f the National Science Resources Center (NSRC) and will facilitate a LASER Strategic Planning Institute in the near future. The training that she provides modeled on the training that she has received through the Beckman projects and through the Exploratorium. Student Expectations Are Clear In Rubrics Designed To Assess Student Work. In the Beckman@Science program, rubrics are designed to rate students on the questions that they ask, on the collection and organization of data from their investigations, and their conclusions. The persons who designed programs in all three projects did build in ways for students to be accountable, but they are practiced in only two o f the three. In the secondary and elementary projects of the PHUSD, students are familiar with rubric criteria before they do their work. The rubrics are based on process skills and on content that are standards based according to the California State Content Standards. At the secondary level, content is based on district standards. Rubrics are used and there is some self- assessment by students as they use the IMMEX software. Rubrics for assessing 292 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. student work are used by teachers who have been trained by Beckman in all Orange County districts. In SHUSD, the docent program requires students to present to elementary students, and the students are graded on the quality, preparation, and presentation of science lessons to the younger students. Students are graded according to rubrics, and rubrics are used for self-assessment and peer review. Students in the science career seminar program must visit science or technology based businesses and communicate their experiences to their classmates. In the elementary part of the program, students are graded on the basis of their observations, data collection and organization, and conclusion in their science notebooks. Teachers are trained to assess the work in student notebooks in Beckman@Science workshops and in the summer science institute in the district. Focus on Results. Project Tomorrow included demonstration of results as one o f the conditions for continued funding. In the Tedesco Canyon High School project, docents and participants in the science career seminar program present and are graded by both the teachers and their peers according to established rubrics. Attitudinal surveys are also administered to gauge the opinions of students about their experiences in the programs, and the results of the surveys are used for publicity and solicitation for investment funds by Project Tomorrow. The director of programs and projects collects data on student achievement and attitudes as well as information and the results of research on student learning in science. Statements of expectations for students in the classroom affect student behaviors 293 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. most directly. These include the rubrics that are used for peer and self-assessment at the secondary level and those that are used to assess student work in science notebooks at the elementary level. Implications of the Findings A review of the findings discussed above lead to some tentative recommendations for districts wanting to undertake reform of the science education programs in their districts. These may be framed in terms of Dos and Don’ts. Table 5-2 restates the factors that contribute or detract from better levels of practice as suggestions for policy and procedure in making needed reforms. The results and conclusions may not be generalizable beyond the three K-12 clusters, but the outcomes of planning and implementation in the schools that were studied in this investigation were affected by the contributing factors that were graphically represented on the stream charts under the following conditions: S itu a tio n o f s e c o n d a r y a n d e le m e n ta r y p ie c e s in tw o d iffe re n t d is tr ic ts (non u n ifie d d istric ts). It cannot be said that this organizational factor would prevent project success in all cases, but in that of the Pampas High School cluster Renaissance Project, it was not possible to launch the project because decision makers representing the elementary district neither participated in planning nor expressed support for those who did. 294 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. T ab le 5-1 S u ggestion s for Planning and Im plem entation o f S cien ce Program s Do Don’t — evaluate district priorities and determine whether or not top administration has an agenda that conflicts with the program that is proposed. — start a new program if administration has not indicated a willingness to support it with material and procedural resources. — build on a program with a specific structure and curriculum that has been field tested and known to work. — Do not attempt to implement a new and untested program district-wide or trust that overly general goals and objectives can be achieved. — determine early what are sources of the needed support that the project will require. Brainstorm all possible needs, material and procedural — assume that an inter-district project will work unless clear ways for coordinators to access administrative approval, clerical help, and material resources across district lines. — provide professional development that is related to implementation of the program. — try to implement a new program while providing professional development for other purposes. — devise ways that all teachers can be included in the planning and/or implementation of at least parts of the project. — exclude segments of the teacher population in a district from the process of planning and implementation. — build a program for all students — exclude students with special needs from the program. keep the Board of Trustees, administration, and district teachers informed. — create a situation in which some people feel “out of the loop.” -- give teachers structured opportunities to interact around teaching and learning and to be of support to each other. — start a new program unless needed resources for start-up exist and are immediately accessible in earliest phases. — consider whether or not a course of study is designed to interest and engage students. -- incorporate desirable components of a program “hit and miss”. The recommendations in Table 5-2 are derived from the summaries and syntheses of the factors associated with progress or lack of progress in the implementation of districts plans to reform science programs. 295 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. A n e x is tin g p r o g r a m f o r a d o p tio n o r a d a p ta tio n . Many grants or proposals read as if there are structures in place, whereas much that is written remains hypothetical until there is a concrete plan in place together with the commitment of personnel and resources to implement the plan. The absence of a full time project coordinator can slow the execution of a good plan as seen in the delay o f the implementation of the elementary program in the PHUSD. However, the project coordinator of the secondary component of the project in the PHUSD was in the classroom full time; she was nevertheless able to get a start on the planning and implementation of IMMEX and Infusion as a result o f her interest in the programs for her own use in the classroom. The programs practiced are well structured for use in the classroom; their dissemination and practice beyond the classroom of the individual teacher who introduced the program has been made possible by the strong support of site and district administration and by Project Tomorrow that is providing resources and publicity for the program. P r o je c t D e sig n th a t b u ild s on p r o g r a m e le m e n ts . Programs meet the criteria regarding active learning on the part of students have requirements for students that are active in nature, and students are assessed on the basis of their products, projects, and presentations. In the Tedesco Canyon cluster, docents present lessons that they have written and students in the science careers classes must make presentations about their field experiences. In the PHUSD, student 296 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. software writers produce IMMEX programs and other projects are assigned across the curriculum that incorporate the methodologies in which teachers are being trained in Infusion. In the Beckman@Science supported program, elementary students have a variety of experiences that include hands-on activities with real materials and actual phenomena, interactive discussions with their teacher, their small groups, and their class; and the opportunity to refine their thinking and communication skills in the science notebooks that are also used for embedded instruction. A lig n m e n t o f a d m in is tr a tiv e p r io r itie s a n d g o a ls o f p r o je c t. The science coordinator in the Shasta district is concerned about test scores and constant calls from the parents of Gifted and Talented children; she is reluctant to fully embrace a program that relies heavily on an inquiry method of teaching. Another example of conflicting priorities is seen in the Reinhardt School District, where the Board of Trustees and the administration in the Reinhardt City (elementary) School District is so concerned about low scores on the State standardized tests. The district is minimizing emphasis on all teaching that is not categorized as language arts or math, and as a result, the new science program in that district is artificially sequenced according to the language arts curriculum and is therefore incoherent. The programs are being built in the PHUSD have integrity and support in their own right, and they are being integrated effectively. 297 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Questions for Further Study While this study has clarified some o f the factors that have had an affect on the success of the three K-12 school clusters of the study sample, the following questions remain: 1) Are there instances of well-coordinated programs in science across district lines? What are the factors that enable bureaucracies and teachers to work well together? A general survey needs to be done to locate successful inter-district programs. Once these have been located, there needs to be an exploration of the factors that have enabled the districts to complement each other through their existing structures, or that have been introduced to eliminate impediments and allow separate systems to function in concert. 2) What are the types of transactions that present difficulties for coordinators in unified and in non-unified districts? Who are the persons who have finally solved procedural problems in districts and what were their roles? An instrument that specifically targets incidents and procedures that have presented problems for coordinators in the existing protocols of their systems might be constructed. Once the types of paperwork or procedures that have presented snags are recognized, a next step would be to determine what persons were able to overcome the difficulties and how they were able to solve the problems. 3) What are the available programs that have been field tested and known to improve student attitudes and learning in science at the secondary, middle, and elementary levels? 298 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. In the two K-12 school clusters that were successful overall in their processes of planning and implementation, five programs pre-existed either in the districts or elsewhere. The docent program was built on the field studies program of the SHUSD; and the science careers seminar o f that district was incorporated into and used the resources of the district’s work experience program. The project coordinator of the PHUSD discovered IMMEX and Infusion at an NSTA conference and contacted the originators of the program; she and her district are now integral parts of those programs as they do research and conduct professional development in a national setting. The districts that have adopted the NSF supported curricula are affiliated with Beckman@Science and the NSRC. The research on the relationships among specific curricula, methods of teaching, and student achievement is becoming more refined. As the data are published, it is important for districts and schools to become aware of their options for improving student attitudes and achievement as their incorporate excellent science programs into their systems. Concluding Thoughts Some reform efforts focus on awareness and building consensus in the community, yet may not address a program that is available to students. Such activities are in many cases necessary for accomplishing program goals according to plan, or to the specification o f the plan itself. By themselves, however, such activities have no direct value in terms of student achievement. Activities that fall into this category include K-12 articulation, alignment with standards, meetings 299 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. where alternative programs are discussed that do not end with action items directly related to a program, and writing plans that will rely on persons who are not a part of the planning process. Program proposals that suggest only these activities are unlikely to get beyond the talking stage. A program in and of itself may become fully operational and demonstrate all of the quality criteria, yet never be disseminated within and across districts. For genuine systemic reform, those with the authority and the means to do so must coordinate and arrange events for the inauguration of programs beyond their points of origin. Excellent programs may start small, but to have meaningful impact in the context of systemic change, there must be some way to provide for the coordination of their expansion. 4) What are the types of transactions that present difficulties for coordinators in unified and in non-unified districts? Who are the persons who have finally solved procedural problems in districts and what were their roles? An instrument that specifically targets incidents and procedures that have presented problems for coordinators in the existing protocols of their systems might be constructed. Once the types of paperwork or procedures that have presented snags are recognized, a next step would be to determine what persons were able to overcome the difficulties and how they were able to solve the problems. 5) What are the available programs that have been field tested and known to improve student attitudes and learning in science at the secondary, middle, and elementary levels? 300 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. In the two K-12 school clusters that were successful overall in their processes of planning and implementation, five programs pre-existed either in the districts or elsewhere. The docent program was built on the field studies program of the SHUSD; and the science careers seminar of that district was incorporated into and used the resources of the district’s work experience program. The project coordinator of the PHUSD discovered IMMEX and Infusion at an NSTA conference and contacted the originators of the program; she and her district are now integral parts of those programs as they do research and conduct professional development in a national setting. The districts that have adopted the NSF supported curricula are affiliated with Beckman@Science and the NSRC. The research on the relationships among specific curricula, methods of teaching, and student achievement is becoming more refined. As the data are published, it is important for districts and schools to become aware of their options for improving student attitudes and achievement as their incorporate excellent science programs into their systems. Using a method o f analysis that displays and integrates the numerous components of a project or program enables managers to balance numerous and sometimes contradictory anecdotes and observations that may inform the actual status of a program. The use of Stream Analysis in this study led to insights regarding factors that strongly influence or determine levels of practice of program elements. Patterns of connections reappear in instances of success or failure to meet the criteria of quality science programs. Summarization of patterns 301 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. documents the impact of specific social and organizational factors, resources, and the importance of relationships among components. Understanding systems of interrelated factors on the part o f policymakers, top administration, and project managers can make a difference in whether or the goals of projects undertaken to improve science education are realized. 3 0 2 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. REFERENCES Aikenhead, G. (1994). Consequences to Learning Science Through STS: A Research Perspective. In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.). STS Education International Perspectives on Reform, pp. 169-186. New York: Teachers College Press. Aldridge, B.G. (1989, January). Essential changes in secondary science: scope, sequence, and coordination. NSTA Reports! pp. 1, 4-5. Washington D.C.: National Science Teachers Association. Alfonso, R.J. (April 1986). The Unseen Supervisor: Organization and Culture as Determinants of Teacher Behavior. Paper presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. American Association for the Advancement o f Science. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. American Association for the Advancement o f Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Ashforth, B.E. and Humphrey, R.H. (February' 1995). Emotion in the workplace: a reappraisal. Human Relations-. (48) 2, 97. Bennis, W.G., Benne, K.D., & Chin, R. (Eds.). (1985). The Planning of Change (4th Edition). Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Bennis, W.G., Benne, K.D., and Chin, R. 1989. The Planning of Change. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Berliner, D. (1994). Expertise: The wonder o f exemplary performances. In J.N. Mangieri & C. C. Block (Eds.), Creating powerful thinking in teachers and students: Diverse perspectives. Ft. Worth, Tex.: Harcourt Brace College. Booth-Butterfield, S. (1996). Reinforcement Theory. Persuasion Theory and Research. Retrieved December 27, 1997 from the World Wide Web at http://www.as.wvu.edu/~sbb/comm221/chapters/rf.htm. Boyd, V. (1992). School Context: Bridge or Barrier to Change? Washington D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. 3 0 3 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook on research on teachers (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Bybee, R. (1997). The Sputnik Era: Why Is This Educational Reform Different From All Other Reforms? Commissioned Paper for Reflecting on Sputnik: Linking the Past, Present, and Future of Educational Reform. Washington D.C.: Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education of the National Research Council. Retrieved December 20, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.nas.edu/sputnik/bybee3.htm Caine, R.N. & Caine, G. (1994). Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for the Supervision of Curriculum Development. Caffarella, E. (October, 1999). Planning and Change in Education. Retrieved April 17, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.edtech.univnorthco.edu/Ed_Caffarella/ELPS666F99/6660CT 5/index.htm Champagne, A.B., & Klopfer, L.E. (1982). A causal model of students’ achievement in a college physics course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 19. 299-309. Chin, R. and Benne, K.D. (1969). General Strategies for Effecting Changes in Human Systems. In Bennis, W.G., Benne, K.D., and Chin, R. (Eds.). (1985). The Planning of Change. (4th Ed.), pp. 22-45. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Chin, R. and Benne, K.D. 1989. "Planned Change in Historical Perspective.” The Planning of Change. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Cozzens, M.B. (March 1996). A Review Of The IMP Program. Past. Present, and Future. Supporting text for the National Science Foundation Instructional Materials Development. Retrieved March 10, 1998 from TERC database TEECH, on the World Wide Web: http://teech.terc.edu/papers/papers/cozzens.htm Dana, T. M. et al. (March 1997). Theoretical bases for reform o f science teacher education. Elementary School Journal. 97(4), 419-433). Darling-Hammond, L. (February 1998). Strengthening the Teaching Profession. Educational Leadership. 55(5). Darling-Hammond, L. (March 1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership. 53(6). 4-10. 304 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Darling-Hammond, L., and M. W. McLaughlin. (1995). "Policies That Support Professional Development in an Era of Reform." Phi Delta Kappan. 76(8) 597-604. Deal, T.E. and Kennedy, A.A. (1982). Corporate Cultures. New York: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. New York: Teachers College Press. DeBoer, G.E. (1997). What We Have Learned and Where We Are Headed: Lessons from the Sputnik Era. Commissioned Paper for Reflecting on Sputnik: Linking the Past, Present, and Future of Educational Reform. Washington D.C.: Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education of the National Research Council. Retrieved December 20, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.nas.edu/sputnik/deboer.htm. Ernst, E. (November 1996). NSRC’s Curriculum Review Project. Lecture presented at the Conference, Using the NSES to Guide the Evaluation. Selection, and Adaptation of Instructional Materials. Retrieved March 11, 1999 from TERC database TEECH, on the World Wide Web: http://teech.terc.edu/lectures. Exploratorium (1998). Retrieved October 21, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.exploratorium.net/IFI/aoout/index.html. Fiedler, F.E. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59-112). New York: Academic Press. Flinders, D. (1989). Voices From The Classroom. Monograph. Eugene, Oregon: University Publications. Fullan, M. (1993). Change Forces. Bristol, Pennsylvania: The Falmer Press. Gartner, A. & Riessman, F. (August 1993). Peer-Tutoring: Toward a New Model. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 362506) General Education Provisions Act and the Federal Advisory Committee. (1981). Charter— National Commission on Excellence in Education. Washington D.C.: United States Printing Office. Goodlad, J. I. (November 1996). Sustaining and extending educational renewal. Phi Delta Kappan 18 (5), 228-234. 305 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Grant, C.M. (1997). Professional Development in a Technological Age: New Definitions. Old Challenges. New Resources. Retrieved January 10, 1998 from TERC database TEECH, on the World Wide Web: http ://ra.terc .edu/al liance/TEMPL ATE/al liance_resources/reform/tech- infusion/prof_dev/prof_dev_frame.html. Hall, G.E. and Hord, S.M. (1987). Change in Schools. Facilitating the Process. New York: State o f New York Press. Hord, S. (1997). Professional Learning Communities: Communities of Continuous Inquiry and Improvement. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Washington, D.C.: Office o f Educational Research and Improvement. Retrieved July 2, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://vvvwv.sedl.org/siss/plc/plc.html. Hord, S. M., Rutherford, William L., Huling-Austin, Leslie and Hall, G. E. (1987). Taking charge o f change. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Johnson, E.G. (1998). Linking the National Assessment of Educational Progress with the Third International Mathematics and Science Study for Eighth Grade: A Research Report. (Publication No. NCES 98-499). Washington, DC: GPO. Joyce, B. and Showers, B. (1980, February). Improving Inservice Training: The Messages of Research. Educational Leadership. 37(5). 379-382. Showers, B., Joyce, B., & Bennett, B. (1987). Synthesis of research on staff development: A framework for future study and a state-of-the-art analysis. Educational Leadership. 45(3). 77-87. Klopfer, L.E., & Cooley, W.W. (1963). “The History of Science” Cases for high school in the development of student understanding o f science and scientists. Journal o f Research in Science Teaching. 1(1), 33-47. Kyle, W.C. Jr. (1984). Curriculum Development Projects of the 1960s. In D. Holdzkom & P.B. Lutz (Eds.). Research Within Reach: Science Education. A Research-Guided Response to the Concerns o f Educators. Washington D.C., National Science Teachers Association. Kyle, W.C., Jr.; Shymansky, J.A.; and Alport, J.M. (1982). Alphabet soup science: A second look at the NSF-funded science curricula. The Science Teacher. 49(8). 49-53. 3 0 6 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Lane, N. (February 1998). An Action Strategy for Improving Achievement in Mathematics and Science. Arlington, VA: The National Science Foundation. Lapp, D. (September/October 1994). "Checklist for Improving Science Education in Your School," PTA Today. Leithwocd, K.A. (1992) Transformational leadership: Where does it stand? Education Digest. 58 (3) 17-21. Lederman, N.G., Gess-Newsome, J., & Latz, M.S. (1994). The nature and development of preservice science teachers" conceptions of subject matter and pedagogy. Journal o f research in science teaching. 31(2). 129- 146. Lieberman, A., (1986). Collaborative research: Working with, not working on. Educational Leadership 43(5). 28-32. Levine, J.M., Resnick, L.B., Higgins, E.T. (1993). Social foundations of cognition. Annual Review of Psychology. 44. 585-613. Little, J. et al. (1987). Staff Development in California: Public and Personal Investments Program Patterns, and Policy Choices. Sacramento: a joint publication of Far West Laboratory and Policy Analysis For California Education (PACE). Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: a sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics. Newberry Park, California: Sage Publications. Loucks-Horsley, S., Harding, C. K., Arbuckle, M. A., Murray, L. B., Dubea, C., Williams, M. K. (1987). Continuing to learn: A guidebook for teacher development. Andover, MA: Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast & Islands. Loucks-Horsley, S. (1996). The TIMSS Talk. Retrieved November 17, 1998 from TERC database TEECH, on the World Wide Web: http://teech.terc.edu/lectures/lectures/louckshorsely_timss_nsta96.htm. Lowery, L. (1998). The Biological Basis of Thinking and Learning. Retrieved December 12, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.lhs.berkeley.edu/FOSS/FOSS.BBTL.doc.html. 307 R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission. Marsh, D. and Jordan-Marsh, M.A. (1996, Spring). Addressing Teachers’ Personal Concerns About Innovation Through Staff Development. ERS Spectrum. Arlington, Virginia: Educational Research Service. McLaughlin, M.W. (1992) How district communities do and do not foster teacher pride. Educational Leadership. 50 (1). 33-35. McLaughlin, M.W., & Marsh, D.D. (1978). Staff development and school change. Teachers College Record. 80 (1), 69-94. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America's future. New York: NCTAF. ERIC ED 395 931. National Network of Eisenhower Regional Consortia and National Clearinghouse. Promising Practices in Mathematics and Science Education-1995. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved February 22, 1998 from the World Wide Web http://www.enc.org/reform/joumals/ENC2670/2670int.html. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy o f Sciences. Nelson, G.D. (October, 1999). Science Literacy for All in the 21st Century. Educational Leadership (57). NSTA. (1990). An NSTA Position Statement: Science/Technology/Societv: A New Effort for Providing Appropriate Science for All. Retrieved September 10,1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.nsta.org/handbook/sts.asp. Nutt, P. (July 28, 1998). Study Shows Managers Don’t Use Effective Decision-Making Tactics. The Ohio State University Research News. Retrieved November 10, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.acs.ohio- state.edu/units/research/archive/decis.html. Nutt, P. (1981). Planning Structures and Processes. In W.G. Bennis, K.D. Benne, and R. Chin (Eds.) The Planning o f Change (4th ed.). pp. 198-215. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. 3 0 8 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Odden, A. and Marsh, D. (1990). Local Response to the 1980s State Education Reforms: New Patterns of Local and State Interaction. In Murphy, J. (Ed.) The Educational Reform Movement o f the 1980s. Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corporation. Office o f Educational Research and Improvement. (1998). Draft 1999-2000 Blue Ribbon Schools Program Middle School and Secondary School Nomination Requirements. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on November 20, 1998 at http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/BlueRibbon Schools/about.html. Organ, D.W. & Lingl, A. Personality, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Social Psychology. 135(3) 339-350. Ost, D.H. and Yager, R.E. 1993. "Biology, STS & the Next Steps in Program Design & Curriculum Development," The American Biology Teacher, 55 (5), 282-287. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newberry Park, California: Sage Publications. Parke, H.M. and Coble, C.R. (1997). Teachers Designing Curriculum as Professional Development: A Model for Transformational Science Teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 34(8), 773-789. Porras, J. (1987). Stream Analysis : A Powerful Wav to Diagnose and Manage Organizational Change. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Project Tomorrow. (1996). Prospectus. Anaheim: Odetics, Inc. Public Agenda. (1999). Retrieved from the World Wide Web on April 5, 1999 at http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/factfiles. Robertson, P. et al (1994). School-Based Management. Educational Administration Quarterly. 30, 375-404. Rothman, R. (March 1993). Study Urges ’ Learning Communities' To Address the Isolation of Teachers. Education Week (12) 25. Schein, E.H. (1998). Kurt Lewin's Change Theory in the Field and in the Classroom: Notes Toward a Model of Managed Learning. Retrieved from the World Wide Web at http://leaming.mit.edU/res/wp/10006.htmI#one. 3 0 9 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Schmidt, W.H., McKnight, C.C., & Raizen, S. (1997). A Splintered Vision: An Investigation of Science and Mathematics Education Executive Summary. U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Science Study. Michigan State University. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on November 29, 1999 at http://ustimss.msu.edu. Science Curriculum Framework and Criteria Committee. (1990). California State Science Framework. Sacramento: California State Board of Education. Senge, P.M. (1990a). The Fifth Discipline. New York: Currency Doubleday. Senge, P.M. (1990b). The Leader's New Work: Building Learning Organization. [Sloan Management Review Article]. Retrieved November 25, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://courses.bus.ualberta.ca/oa- central/articles/senge.htm. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., & Shavelson, R.J. (1996). Rhetoric and reality in science performance assessments: An update. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 33 (, 1045-1063. Shavelson, R., Gao, X., and Baxter, G. (1993). Sampling Variability of Performance Assessments. CSE Technical Report 361. Shavelson, R.J. & Ruiz-Primo, M.A. (1998). On the Assessment of Science Achievement Conceptual Underpinnings for the Design Of Performance Assessments: Report of Year 2 Activities. CSE Technical Report 491. Shulman, L. (1987). "Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform." Harvard Educational Review 57(1), 1-22. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher. 15(2), 4-14. Solomon, J. (1994). Knowledge, Values and the Public Choice of Science Knowledge. In J. Soloman & G. Aikenhead (Eds.). STS Education International Perspectives on Reform, pp. 99-110. New York: Teachers College Press. Sprang, M. 1997. TK-12: A program to transfer thinking, communication and technology applications across the science curriculum and into the workplace through education in grades K-12. Unpublished manuscript, Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District and Project Tomorrow, Orange County, California. 310 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. SRI International (1995). School-Based Reform— Lessons From A National Study- 1995. A congressionally mandated national study of Effective Schools Programs and other school-based reforms. Retrieved November 11, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://inet.ed.gov/pubs/Reform. Steffy, B.E. and Wolfe, M.P. (1998). The Life Cycle of the Career Teacher: Maintaining Excellence for a Lifetime. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) of the U.S. Department o f Education. Retrieved June 3, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.temple.edu/LSS/pub98-16.htm Stigler, J. and Hiebert, J. (1997). The TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study. United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved July 3, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://nces.ed.gov/timss/video/findingl4.htm. Stigler, J. and Stevenson, H.W. (Spring 1991). How Asian Teachers Polish Each Lesson to Perfection. American Educator, pp. 12-47. A Summary of Facing the Consequences: Using TIMSS for a closer look at United States Mathematics and Science Education. Boston: Kluwer Publications. 1998. Taagepera, M., Carroll, K., Sarapuu, T., Rannikmae, and Adojaan, K. A Comparative Study of the Role of Teachers in Science Education Reform in Estonia and the United States. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Irvine, Science Education Programs and University o f Tartu, Science Didactics Department in Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Estonia. U. S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI). (1995). Promising Practices in Mathematics and Science Education-1995. Retrieved November 9, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://www.enc.org/reform/joumals/ENC2670/2670int.htm. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: Jon Wiley & Sons. Welch, W.W., & Rothman, A.I. (1968). The success of recruited students in a new physics course. Science Education. 52(3). 270-273. Wenning, C.J. (1999). Inquiry Practices as Subject Matter for Future Physics Teachers. Retrieved November 9, 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://www.phy.iistu.edu/ptefiles/301 content/inquiry/inqfuture.html. 311 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Zigarmi, P., Betz, L. and Jensen, D. (April 1977). Teachers Preferences in and Perceptions of Inservice Education. Education Leadership. 34. 545-551. Zucker, AA, Shields, P., Adelman, N. Humphrey, D. (April 1997). Reflections on State Efforts to Improve tv ialhematics and Science Education in Light ofFindines from TIMSS. Washington D.C.: The National Education Goals PaneL Retrieved January 3,1999 from the Worldwide Web: http://www.negp.gov/NEGP/Reports/zucker.htmI. 3 1 2 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A P P E N D IX A IN N O V A T IO N C O N F IG U R A T IO N M A T R IX E le m e n ts o f Q u a lity S c ie n c e P ro g ra m s a n d IC L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e P ro g ra m E le m e n t L ev el 1 L ev el 2 L ev el 3 L ev el 4 P la n n in g : G o a ls an d S tra te g ie s (G ) (N S E S T e a c h in g S ta n d a rd A ) Y e a rlo n g a n d sh o rt te rm g o a ls are e v id e n t a n d w a y s to re a c h th e g o a ls are fo rm u la te d a n d c le a r to p ro g ra m p a rtic ip a n ts G o a ls a re in p la c e ; w a y s to re a c h g o a ls m ay n o t b e fu lly c le a r to p ro g ra m p a rtic ip a n ts. G o a ls a re w ritte n a n d a rtic u la te d ; p a rtic ip a n ts are e ith e r u n a w a re o f the g o a ls o r larg ely ig n o re th ^ m in d ay - to -d a y a c tio n . N o lo n g o r sh o rt te rm s g o als. Q u a lity c u rric u la (C ) (N S E S T e a c h in g S ta n d a rd A ) - C C u rric u la ta k e in to a c c o u n t s tu d e n ts ’ in te re sts, k n o w le d g e , u n d e rsta n d in g , a b ilitie s , a n d e x p e rie n c e . C u rric u la sla n te d to s tu d e n t in te re sts; c u rric u la a p p ro p ria te fo r m o s t stu d e n ts. C u rric u la a p p ro p ria te fo r so m e s tu d e n ts; a tte m p ts to m a k e m a te ria ls in te re stin g are m in im a l o r artific ia l. C u rric u la la c k in g in re le v a n c e a n d n o t d e v e lo p m e n ta lly a p p ro p ria te fo r m an y stu d e n ts. u > t — '* w Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. E le m e n ts o f Q u a lity S c ie n c e P ro g ra m s a n d IC L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e , c o n tin u e d P ro g ra m E le m e n t L ev el 1 L e v e l 2 L ev el 3 L ev el 4 A ssessm en t S trateg ies (A ) (N S E S T each in g S tan d ard s A , C ) S tu d en ts d e m o n stra te co n cep tu al u n d e r stan d in g , p ro c e ss skills th ro u g h g rap h ic, o ral, and w ritten c o m m u n ication an d p e rfo rm an ce tasks; m u ltip le m eth o d s used to a s sess u n d erstan d in g . A ssessm en t d ata are used in reflectio n on teach in g p ractices; teach ers d iscu ss assessm en t resu lts and w ays to im p ro v e lessons an d teach in g strateg ies to a c c o m m o d ate g re a te r stu d en t un d erstan d in g . T each ers reg u larly guide stu d en ts in self- assessm en t te c h niques, use o f ru b rics, track in g p ro g ress, etc. S tu d en ts o ccasio n ally have o p p o rtu n ities to d em o n strate c o n c e p tual u n d erstan d in g and p ro cess sk ills th ro u g h g rap h ic, o ral, or w ritten c o m m u n ication an d /o r p e rfo r m an ce tasks. A sse ss m en ts likely to be m u ltip le ch o ice, fill in the b lank, o r o th er trad itio n al p ap er an d pen cil, vocab u lary - based tests. A ssessm en t d ata used by individual teach ers o r sm all g ro u p s o f teach ers to reflect on lessons an d teach in g strategies. T each ers o ccasio n ally g u id e stu d en ts in self- assessm en t tech n iq u es. S tu d en ts rarely have o p p o rtu n ities to d em o n strate c o n c e p tual u n d erstan d in g or p ro cess sk ills th ro u g h grap h ic, o ral, o r w rit ten co m m u n icatio n a n d /o r p erfo rm an ce tasks. A ssessm en ts likely to be m ultip le ch o ice, fill in the blank, o r o th e r tra d i tional p ap er and pen cil, vo cab u lary - based tests. T each ers look at re sults o f stu d en t assessm en t, in a general sen se relate to teaching. T each ers provide feed b ack to stu d en ts based on assessm en t results. S tudent assessm en t does not en ab le d em o n stratio n o f conceptual un d erstan d in g or pro cess sk ills through graphic, o ral, or w ritten co m m u n icatio n a n d /o r p erfo rm an ce tasks. A ssessm en ts are m u ltip le ch o ice, fill in the b lank, o r o th er trad itio n al p ap er and p encil, vocab u lary - based tests. T each ers do not use assessm en t to inform teach in g an d learning. T each ers do not p rovide assessm en t results feed b ack to students. £ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Elements of Quality Science Programs and IC Levels of Practice, continued Program Element Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Teachers collegiality (TC) (NSES Teaching Standard A, C) Teachers meet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. Teachers observe each other teach and follow up with discussion of their individual and collaborative roles in the science program, teaching methods, students’ responses, and troubleshooting strategies. Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to articulate a science curriculum; some adjustments are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. Teachers observe each other and discuss teaching and learning once or twice in an academic year. Teachers meet to discuss curriculum across disciplines and/or grade levels; little or no connection is made to adjustment of instruction. Teachers discuss teaching and learning in collaborative settings once or twice in an academic year; they do not observe each other in the classroom. Teachers do not meet to plan or coordinate. Teachers are isolated in their practice and rarely discuss teaching and learning. Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. E le m e n ts o f Q u a lity S c ie n c e P ro g ra m s a n d IC L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e , c o n tin u e d L e v e l 1 L ev el 2 L ev el 3 L evel 4 S c ie n c e a s In q u iry (S I) (N S E S T e a c h in g S ta n d a rd B ) T e a c h e rs c o n siste n tly m o d e l an d fo ste r s tu d e n t in q u iry as th ey in te ra c t w ith stu d e n ts T e a c h e rs m o d el sc ie n tific a ttitu d e s a n d p ro c e ss, in c lu d in g sk e p tic ism ; a s k in g q u e s tio n s th at re q u ire d a ta c o lle c tio n ; o p e n n e ss to n e w id e a s an d re v is io n s o f id eas, e tc. S tu d e n ts a re p ro v id e d w ith e x p e rie n c e s th a t p ro m o te sc ie n tific a ttitu d e s. T e a c h e rs in te rm itte n tly m o d e l in q u iry an d e n c o u ra g e s tu d e n t in q u iry . T e a c h e rs d is c u s s sc ie n tific a ttitu d e s an d p ro c e ss, in c lu d in g sk e p tic is m , a s k in g q u e s tio n s th at re q u ire d a ta c o lle c tio n , o p e n n e ss to n e w id eas. T e a c h e rs e n c o u ra g e s tu d e n t q u e stio n s, b u t o fte n d ire c tly a n sw e r q u e s tio n s ra th e r th an p ro v id e o p p o rtu n itie s fo r stu d e n ts to fin d a n sw e rs th e m se lv e s. T e a c h e rs d isc u ss sc ie n tific a ttitu d e s a n d p ro c e ss in a w ay th a t is in c o m p le te , p o ssib ly su p e rfic ia l. In stru c tio n is te a c h e r c e n te re d . T e a c h e rs d o n o t d is c u s s th e n a tu re o f sc ie n c e o r sc ie n tific a ttitu d e s w ith stu d e n ts. UJ t — » Os Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Elements of Quality Science Programs and IC Levels of Practice, continued Program Element Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Availability of resources (AR) (NSES Teaching Standard D) Adequate equipment and materials for student hands-on learning. Media and technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school are used. Equipment and materials are available for use in the science program, although they are lacking in some aspects; media and technology resources are also present but lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not access resources outside the school. Equipment and materials are available but lacking; teachers and students unlikely to access resources outside the school. Equipment and materials are poor and mostly non existent; little or no support for science program outside the school. Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Elements of Quality Science Programs and 1C Levels of Practice, continued Program Element Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Student discussion, interaction, input (SI) (NSES Teaching Standard B, D) Teachers regularly orchestrate discourse among students about scientific ideas. Students regularly work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. Teachers occasionally orchestrate discourse among students about scientific ideas. Students occasionally work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas; students provide input that is used by the teacher in planning direction of the class. Student discussion of scientific ideas is short, trivial, and/or lacking in substance or accuracy. Students rarely work in groups or discuss scientific ideas; although teacher listens to student ideas, but class is largely teacher directed. Students do not work in groups or influence direction of the class. u > 00 Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Elements of Quality Science Programs and IC Levels of Practice, continued Program Element Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Standards based expectations (E) (NSES Teaching Standard B) Students are self directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. Students are held to standards and are aware of expectations. Students may not be fully aware of standards and expectations. Standards are unclear, and students may be minimally aware of what is expected of them. Science for all (SfA) (NSES Teaching Standard B). Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. Opportunities for engaging in quality science learning experiences available to most students. Opportunities to take science beyond state or district requirements are available to most students. Tracking in place; not all students are able to take science beyond state or district requirements. u» I — * vO Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. E le m e n ts o f Q u a lity S c ie n c e P ro g ra m s a n d 1C L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e , c o n tin u e d P ro g ra m E le m e n t L ev el 1 L ev el 2 L ev el 3 L ev el 4 P rofessional D ev elo p m en t (P D ) (N S E S T e a c h in g S tan d ard F) T e a c h e rs’ C o n ten t K n o w led g e an d p ed ag o g ical c o n te n t k n o w led g e T each ers g ro w to g eth er as part o f a su p p o rtiv e learning c o m m u n ity th at is cen tered on teach in g an d learning; stru ctu res are in place for tea c h e rs to co n tin u o u sly co -p lan th eir o w n professio n al d ev elo p m en t. S tru ctu res in place to g u aran tee te a c h e r g row th in science c o n ten t k n o w led g e. S tru ctu res in p lace to g u aran tee teach er grow th in the m eth o d o lo g ies o f teach in g inquiry based, han d s-o n science. A lth o u g h teach ers o c c asio n ally p articip ate in p lan n in g p ro fessio n al d e v elo p m en t an d needs a ssessm en ts are used, o p p o rtu n ities fo r teach er g ro w th are largely o rch estrated by leadership. T e a c h e r g row th in scien ce co n ten t k n o w led g e is m o n ito red an d en co u rag ed . N o sp ecific stru ctu re ex ists to p ro m o te it. T e a c h e r g ro w th in the m e th o d o lo g ies o f scien ce in stru ctio n is m o n ito red and en co u rag ed . N o strong stru ctu re ex ists to p ro m o te it. N eed s assessm en ts p ro v id e for teach er input an d are o ccasio n ally referenced in the p lan n in g o f p rofessio n al d ev elo p m en t. T e a c h e r g row th in scien ce co n ten t is hit or m iss. T e a c h e r g row th in the m eth o d o lo g ies o f scien ce in struction is hit o r m iss. S chool o r d istric t m an d ates o n e-size- fits-all p ro fessio n al d ev elo p m en t. T e a c h e r g ro w th in scien ce c o n te n t is not ad d ressed . T e a c h e r g ro w th in the m eth o d o lo g ies o f scien ce in stru ctio n is not ad d ressed . u > to o Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Elements of Quality Science Programs and IC Levels of Practice, continued Program Element Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Administrative Support (AS) District and site level administration knowledgeably attends to the implementation of inquiry based, hands- on science. Administration is open to trying new practices that are research based. District and/or site level administration acknowledges need to implement inquiry based, hands-on science. Administration may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research based. District and/or site level administration equivocal about the teaching of science. District and/or site level administration is unconcerned about whether or not science is taught. u> to Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDIX B Project Personnel Consulted and Schedule of Interactions with Projects Part 1 Project Personnel (initials of personnel included in Schedule of Interactions) JJ Jack Jenkins Project coordinator, Pampas HS cluster; teacher at Pampas HS KF Kathy Fischer Project coordinator, Tedesco Hill HS cluster; teacher at Tedesco Canyon RL Robert Langsdorf Science coordinator, Reinhardt Union HS District; principal, Pampas HS ZM Zoie Mastroani Teacher, Reinhardt Elementary SD PT Patricia Tanaka Teacher, Pampas HS HH Heidi Helms Corporate communications, Beckman-Coulter KC Karen Chalmers Science coordinator, Shasta Hills USD, principal at Tedesco Elementary School MC Marie Clark Field studies mentor and teacher at Tedesco Elementary School JP Jackie Peterson Elementary teacher, Pleasant Hills SD; Beckman@Science teacher leader PF Patsy Foote Director of curriculum, PHUSD MS Martha Singer Project coordinator, PHUSD; teacher at Hope HS. JF Julie Fuentes Teacher on special assignment, Beckntan@Science, 1999-2000 RJ Rita Jones Director of programs and projects, Project Tomorrow MF Mark Fainter Elementary teacher, PYULSD Beckman@Science teacher leader u > to to Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix B, Part 1 Project Personnel (initials of personnel included in Schedule of Interactions) - continued CF Cindy Flores Elementary science specialist, Shasta Hills SD; Beckman@Science teacher leader BY Bonnie Young Elementary science specialist, SHUSD; Beckman@Science teacher leader AY Andie Younts Elementary science specialist, SHUSD; Beckman@Science teacher leader JG Joseph Gordon Teacher, Reinhardt Union HS District u > to u > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix B, Part 2 Schedule of Interactions Date Cluster Activity, location Contact Information 3/12/97 Pampas Observe class and after school computer class of planning team member at Pampas. JJ Active teaching strategies used in Pampas HS 4/98 Tedesco Observation of docent presentation; interview docents at Project Tomorrow Partners' Meeting KF, docents Structure of docent presentations to elementary students; benefit to docents as designers and presenters. 5/27/98 Pampas Interview at Pampas JJ History of project, nature of project(s), social factors, organizing arrangements, resources. 8/98 Pampas Observation of planning meeting in Pampas HS Cluster RL, JJ, PT, ZM, HH Planned activities and direction of Pampas High School Cluster 8/25/98 Tedesco Observe summer science institute, Tedesco Field Studies Center. KF, KC, MC, mentors Nature of summer sc ience institute and role in shaping program. 8/25/98 Tedesco Observe docent class KF, students Activities of docents 10/21/98 Pampas Attendance, presentation, project business partner HH Structure of Project Component 10/26/98 Tedesco Interview at Tedesco Field Studies Center KF Structure of Tedescc Canyon High School Cluster plan. 10/26/98 Tedesco Interview at Tedesco Field Studies Center KC Shasta Hills Unified SD Professional Development framework u> to Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix B. Part 2 Schedule of Interactions - continued 1/21/99 Hope Curriculum selection planning meeting with Beckman@Science KP, Beckman lead teacher History of lead teachers pilot testing of NSRC modules. 1/28, 1/29/99 Tedesco, Hope Beckman@Science advisory committee, Discovery Science Center PF, KP, KC, KF Status reports on for implementation of NSRC curricula. 2/99 Hope Interview, dinner in Costa Mesa KP Project status 2/99 Pampas Interview during visit to Pasadena Unified School District ZM Project status and difficulties 5/27/99 Hope Interview at Hope and observation of students projects, lab set-up MS History of project, nature of project(s), social factors, organizing arrangements, resources. 6/10/99 Tedesco Observe meeting of science specialists, Shasta District Office. KC, MC and science specialists District direction regarding kits, standards, possible textbook series, professional development. 6/16/99 Pampas Observe workshop given by planning team member at Westminster. PT Methodologies used in Pampas HS classes; a workshop given in Pampas HS cluster. 6/19/99 Pampas Phone interview JR Changes in district administrative direction and priorities in the last ten years. U J to Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. P a rt 2 S c h e d u le o f In te ra c tio n s - c o n tin u e d A ll In te rv ie w , P ro je c t T o m o rro w d ire c to r o f p ro g ra m s a t w e e k ly m e e tin g s in th e W e s tm in s te r S c h o o l D istric t. L S In fo rm a tio n fro m d o c u m e n ts an d e x p e rie n c e o f P ro je c t T o m o rro w . 7 /1 9 - 7 /2 4 T e d e sc o , P a m p a s O b s e rv e L A S E R S tra te g ic P la n n in g In stitu te , P a lo A lto (P a rtic ip a n t o b se rv e r). K F , K C , M C , R L , JJ, Z M , H H L o n g ra n g e p la n s o f c lu ste rs 7 /2 6 /9 9 H o p e In te rv ie w , a t B e c k m a n @ S c ie n c e le a d e rsh ip in stitu te , S a n ta A n a H o p e c lu ste r te a c h e rs K P , M F A c tiv itie s a n d d ire c tio n o f H o p e H ig h S c h o o l C lu ste r, P le a sa n t H ills S c h o o l D istrict. 7 /2 7 /9 9 T e d e s c o In te rv ie w , at B e c k m a n @ S c ie n c e le a d e rsh ip in stitu te , S a n ta A n a S h a sta sc ie n c e sp e c ia lists C V , B Y , a n d A Y A c tiv itie s o f S h a sta sc ie n c e sp e c ia lists 7 /9 9 P a m p a s In te rv ie w a t O ra n g e C o u n ty D e p a rtm e n t o f E d u c a tio n JS P ro fe ssio n a l D e v e lo p m e n t in A U S D . 8 /8 /9 9 P a m p a s P h o n e in te rv ie w P T U p d a te o n p ro je c t a c tiv itie s 8 /2 2 /9 9 P a m p a s P h o n e in te rv ie w JJ U p d a te o n p ro je c t a c tiv itie s 1 0 /99 H o p e P ro je c t T o m o rro w P a rtn e rs m e e tin g at O d e tic s M S , P ro je c t stu d e n ts D e m o n stra tio n o f IM M E X stu d e n t a u th o re d p ro je c t. u > IO as Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A P P E N D IX C S tre a m C h a rts (H e a v ie r lin e s in d ic a te L ev el o f P ra c tic e o f P ro g ra m E le m e n t) F ig u re C - l S tre a m D ia g n o stic C h a rt: P ro g ra m E le m e n t (P E ) In n o v a tio n C o n fig u ra tio n (IC ) L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e an d C o n trib u tin g F a c to rs P la n n in g : G o a ls a n d S tra te g ie s , T e d e sc o C a n y o n C lu s te r P ro g ra m E le m e n t: P la n n in g : G o a ls a n d S tra te g ie s S o cial F acto rs O rg a n iz in g A rran g em en ts R eso u rces SF G 2 T edesco E lem .: KC, principal & district Science C oord.; M C, science ^ specialist & m entor. * R G I Project Tom orrow funding required results oriented goals in original proposal. ___ OA G 1 D istrict and site curriculum leaders em pow ered to w rite goals and proposal by supt. and asst. supt. SF G 1 D istrict O ffice: JJE, dir. o f special projects; SW , ■public relations coord.; N N * dir. o f technology. SF G 4 R ancho St. G reg o ry M S : BM , tech. m entor; M B, tech. m entor; LM , science teacher (teacher attrition, tech reduced). SF G 3 T edesco C anvoi?H S : M M , Prin.; JJO , dept, clirm. & m entor; KF, proj. coord. - Science; LA, proj. coord. - T ech. » . PE G IC Level I : Short term goals are evident and w ays to reach the goals are form ulated and clear to program participants. R G 2 Initial Project Tom orrow resources w ere for m eaningful technology to im prove students’ learning in science. Due to less m oney available and due to strong call for hands-on science, funding group pulled back funds that w ere to be spent on technology. G 1 T echnology center :d goals revised to focus on im proving science: “ ... goal o f the Shasta H ills U nified School D istrict R enaissance Project is to develop stu d en ts’ passion for learning in the areas o f science and technology and to create independent inquisitive students w hq, are able to m eet the rigors o f post-graduate options” . u > Is) Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. F ig u re C -2 S tre a m D ia g n o stic C h a rt: P ro g ra m E le m e n t (P E ) In n o v a tio n C o n fig u ra tio n (lC )L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e a n d C o n trib u tin g F a c to rs Q u a lity C u rric u la T e d e sc o C a n y o n C lu s te r P ro g ra m E le m e n t: Q u a lity C u rric u la C 1 C urricular units for docents are selected by HS students and m atched w ith —jgrade level districts curricula. S o cial F acto rs PE C 1C Level 1. C urricula take into account students’ interests, know ledge, under standing, abilities, exper ience, how students learn. C 3 C urricular units for fam ily science night (quarterly w ith recognition for teachers and students). C 2 C urricular units for elem . students based on C alif. Sci. C ontent Stan dards, kit based per N SF supported curricula. SF C 2 D istrict m entors (H S): JJO , SM , and TG ; ftW /Elem .): KC, M C O rg a n iz in g A rra n g e m e n ts S E C 3 Proj. coord.: KF SF C 1 Tedesco Elem .: KC, principal & d istrict; MC, sci. specialist, mentor. SF C 4 T edesco C anyon: M M , principal; J.IO, Dept. C hrm . & m entor; KF, proj. coord. SF C 5 R ancho St. G regory M S : BM , tech. m entor; MB,, tech. m entor; LM , science teacher (teacher attrition, tech reduced). OAC1K-12 Leadership m eetings. OA C 2 Project related m eetings. OA C 3 Sum m er institute and a c a d e m y year sem inar planning m eetings. OA C 4 Science specialists m eetings. O A C 5 F ram ew o rk ' om m ittee m eetings. O A C 6 Site pro- Igrams m eetings. R eso u rces R C 1 Project Tom orrow supports docent program , fam ily science nights. R . C 2 Beckm an @ Science funding supports kit-based dfitnentary science. R C 3 PTA s and foundations support science specialists R C 4 Supt., school board support ten ce program s - (17 full tim e science specialists). u > to 00 Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. F ig u re C -3 S tre a m D ia g n o stic C h a rt: P ro g ra m E le m e n t (P E ) In n o v a tio n C o n fig u ra tio n (IC )L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e a n d C o n trib u tin g F a c to rs A s s e s s m e n t T e d e sc o C a n y o n C lu ste r P ro g ram E lem en t: A s s e s s m e n t S o cial F acto rs O rg a n iz in g A rra n g e m e n ts R esources A 2 Q uestionnaires assess student attitudes. A 3 Students give reports in sem inars in science careers class. SF A 2 K F facilitates Science C areer •* - Sem inars. R A 4 N otebook training provided through Beckman @Science. R A 3 Science specialist support Trom district budgets and P fA s. R A 1 Project Tom orrow supports docent, career program s. * A 4 Elem entary studtjuls. assessed through theip*— thinking expressed in science notebooks. — SF A 1 KF and PP facilitate docent designs . o f projects for elem entary students. A 1 Docents design hands- on demos, assemble + equipment, give directions, lead discussions. O A A 2 H igh school students are transported to elem entary schools to m ake presentations on w hich they are graded. R A 2 Proj. Tom orrow program s & projects dir. gives technical assistance & survey analysis; com m ittee evaluates reports and projects. O A A 3 Science specialists and other elem entary teachers attend B eckm an@ Sci kit training, w hich -includes w ays to assess student work. OA A 1 D ocents f organize their projects (perform ance tasks) during the sum m er science institute and in the academ ic year class. SF A 3 KC w orks w ith all aspects o f science specialists, including assessm ent - m ost concerned w ith " district standardized test scores. PE A 1C Level 1. Students dem onstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written com m un ication and performance tasks; multiple methods to assess students. u > to v o Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. F ig u re C -4 S tre a m D ia g n o stic C h a rt: P ro g ra m E le m e n t (P E ) In n o v a tio n C o n fig u ra tio n f(IC )L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e a n d C o n trib u tin g F a c to rs T e a c h e rs ’ C o lle g ia litv T e d e sc o C a n y o n C lu s te r P ro g ra m E lem en t: T e a c h e rs ’ C o lle g ia lity S o cial F acto rs O rg a n iz in g A rra n g e m e n ts R eso u rces PE TC IC Level 2. Teachers meet occasionally throughout the school year to articulate a science curriculum; some adjustm ents are made to better sequence and coordinate student experiences. TC 1 T eachers in Project T om orrow schools co-plan w ith coordinator and ea^li other quarterly. TC 2 Science m entors co plan sum m er science institute. 1 C 3 Science specialists co-plan y ith district science coordinators quarterly; Beckman © Science teachers with OC teachers monthly. - f SF TC 1 District inentors_(HS): JJO , SM, and TG; (M/Ele'm.): KC, MC. I SF TC 2 Proj. coord.; KF. SF T C 3 T edesco C anyon: JJO , dept. chrm . & m entor; KF, project coordinator. SF TC 4 Tedesco Canyon KC, principal & district science coord.; MC, science specialist A mentor; three science specialists work together in district and at Beckman@ Science. SF TC 5 Science leadership is relatively closed; not all teachers" network with leaders. O A TC 1 L eadership m eetings. O A TC 2 Project related m eetings. OA TC 3 Summer institute, academic yr .seminar planning meetings. O A TC 4 Science specialists m eetings O A TC 5 Fram e w ork C om m ittee m eetings. OA TC 6 Site p rogram s m eetings. R1 TC 1 Project Tomorrow supports docent program, family sci. nights. R TC 2 B eckm an ..© S c ie n c e funding supports kit-based elem entary science. R TC 3 PTAs and "fo u ndations support science specialists. R TC 4 Supt., school board support science programs. u > U ) o Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-5 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC) Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Science as Inquiry Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Science as Inquiry Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SI IC Level 3. T eachers encourage student questions, but jjften directly answ er questions rather than provide opportunities for students to find out answ ers them selves. SI 1 D ocents design elem entary dem onstrations, but content and ideas are provided by teacher- coordinator. SI 2 T eachers trained by-« B eckm an@ S cience are learning inquiry skills and piloting N SR C kits. SF SI 1 K F guides docent activities. SF SI 2 C om m unity pressures em phasis on state test scores, A P and SA T scores. SF SI 3 KC em phasizes textbook inform ation, test taking skills for state standards assessm ents and for accountability to G A T E parents. SF SI 4 Sci. specialists, other classroom teachers being trained in inquiry at Beckm an@ Science. OA SI I D ocent program addresses tw o grades at cluster schools per year. (2-4, 3-5, 1-6) O A SI 2 Sum m er science institute and kit training address tw o grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). OA SI 2 D istrict relies on science specialist Program .. R SI 1 Project T om orrow support o f docent program R S I 2 Beckm an@ Sci- ence em phasis on inquiry teaching through N SF supported kits/m odules. U J u > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-6 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Availability of Resources Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Availability of Resources Social Factors PE AR 1C Level 1. A dequate equipm ent and m aterials for student hands-on learning. M edia, technological resources accessible and resources from outside the school are used. A R 1 D ocents construct kits for elem entary students + A R 2 N SR C kits and current adopted m aterials handled by teacher at each site. Organizing Arrangements SF A R 1 KF and PP w ork w ith docents in sum m er and academ ic year program s SF AR 2 Science specialists and som e classroom teachers in designated grades using N SF supported curricula. SF A R 3 KC coord in ates resources for science. OA AR 1 D ocent program addresses tw o grades at c lu s t^ schools per year. (2- 4 ,3 -5 ,1 -6 ) OA A R 2 sum m er science institute and kit training address tw o grades per year L (for kit piloting, adoption). Resources R AR 1 Project T om orrow support o f docent program R AR 2 B eckm an@ Science support for N SR C kit based program R AR 3 D istrict and com m unity support science program s U > K > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-7 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Student Interaction and Input Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Student Discussion, Interaction and Input_________________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements R SD 1 Project T om orrow support o f docent program . SD SI1 1 KF and PP w ork with docents in sum m er and academ ic year program s. R SD 2 B eckm an@ Science support for N SR C kit — based program OA SD 1 D ocent program addresses tw o grades at cluster schools per year (2- 4, 3-5, 1-6). SD 1 Docents discuss science concepts, process with teacher and each other. Their ideas determ ine the class direction. O A SD 2 sum m er science institute and kit train in g '4 address tw o grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). SD SI1 2 Science specialists and som e classroom teachers in designated grades using N SR C kits PE SD IC Level 1. Students regularly work in groups, discuss scientific ideas with each other and with the teacher in a classroom setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. SD 2 Students using N SR C kits discuss science concepts w ith teachers and each other and com m unicate results and conclusions in science note books. N otebooks used for classroom .com m unications. u > u > u > Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-8 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Standards Based Expectations Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Standards Based Expectations_______ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources R SBE 1 Project Tomorrow support o f docent program. SF SBE 1 KF and PP work with docents in * summer and academic year programs. OA SBE 1 D ocent program addresses tw o grades at cluster schools per year (2-4, 3-5, 1 -6)." R SBE 3 District and community support science programs; buy into standards and accountability. R SBE 2 Beckman@ Science support for NSRC kit based program. OA SBE 2 summer science institute and kit training address two grades per year (for kit piloting, adoption). OA SBE 4 KC and MC work with science specialists and provide rationale for student expectations. SF SBE 2 Science specialists and some classroom teachers in designated grades using NSRC kits. SBE 2 Students using NSRC kits and notebooks have + rubrics that clarify expectations. OA SBE 3 D ocent lessons based on district ’ curriculum , w hich is aligned w ith the C alif. Sci. C ontent Standards. SBE 1 Docents are responsible for the design o f elementary science activhiesr kit assembly, and organization o f presentations. PE SBE IC Level 1. Students are self-directed and accept and share responsibility for their own learning according to high standards and expectations. u > u > 4 ^ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-9 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Science for All Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Science for All Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources OA SfA I District science coordinator is also GATE coordinator. OA SfA 2 Transportation needed for docent program_ _ SfA 1 N SRC curricula and inquiry teaching with use o f notebooks intended to m axim ize learning in science for all students in district. SfA 2 Emphasis on teaching to State Science Content Standards with textbooks to improve test scores and to satisfy parents. OA SfA 3 Science specialist program for grades 4-6 only. R SfA 1 Project Tomorrow support o f docent program. SF SfA 2 Community pressures emphasis on test scores, honors classes for students. OA SfA 2 Docent program available to students who are successful school.. SF SfA 4 HS program "showcases successful students, does not recruit students with special needs. SF SfA 3 KC is GATE coordinator and insures availability o f honors classes for district’s students. SF SfA 1 KC, Director of curriculum, and school board place emphasis on State Test Scores. R SfA 2 Beckman@ Sci- ence emphasis on inquiry teaching and use o f notebooks with all students. PE SfA IC Level 3. Tracking in place; not all students are able to take science beyond state or district requirements. u > u > L h Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-10 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Professional Development Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Professional Development Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PD 1 Docents co-teach with regular classroom teachers. Topics and skills addressed in summer science institutes and academic year seminars. R3 PD 3 Supt., school board support science programs - (mentors, science specialists). R4 PD 4 UC1 summer science institute, California Science Project. OA PD 4 Regular mentor meetings. OA PD 3 NSRC kit training. OA PD 2 Quarterly sci. specialists meetings. m R2 PD 2 Beckman @Sci. funding supports kit- based elementary science. OA PD 5 Districtwide, school science professional development day(s). R 1 PD I Project Tomorrow supports docent program and science career seminar programs. OA PD 1 summer science institute and academic year seminars (district- ^ wide opportunities). PD 2 Sci. specialists model and co-teach with^ regular classroom tea chers; receive kit training through Beckman@ Sci. SF PD 1 KF (Project Coordinator) linked with CSU F M asters’ Program, with NSF, mentor linked with Calif. Science Project and UCI. SF PD 2 KC and MC work with science specialists, m entors, and Framework Committee. They design professional development r and present with mentors and science specialists. ^ SF PD 3 JJ, SM, TG, KC, and MC planning the prof. developm ent in science for all teachers for over ten years. KF recently with leadership since involvement with Project Tomorrow. PE PD 1C Level 2. Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessm ents are used, opportunities for teacher growth are largely orchestrated by leadership. u > u > o\ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-l 1 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Administrative Support Tedesco Canyon Cluster Program Element: Administrative Support (AS) Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources O A AS 2 KF em pow ered to interact w ith Project * Tom orrow . OA AS 4 R elationship o f KC to dir. o f ed. Services and asst. supt. unclear. R AS 1 Project T om orrow Support o f R enaissance Project. OA AS 3 KC interacts with Beckman @ Science. R AS 2 Beckm an @ Science support o f N SR C kit based science. SF AS 2 KC and MC interact with Becknian@ Science,-*— advocate for district. OA AS 1 KC, sci. curr. coord, is principal and determines structure science in district. R AS 3 Supt., school board, com m unity support o f science program s and science specialists. SF AS 4 KC sets activities o f science specialists and Science mentors. SF AS 3 KC coord, o f G A TE program influenced by com m unity concern about test scores, advocates content standards based in stru ctio n .^- -R-AS 4 Problem s with docent program include: recruitm ent, transportation, storage, part tim e coord. SF AS 1 JJO, dir. o f special projects; SW, coord, public relations; NN, dir. o f technology; KF, proj. coord, interact with Project Tomorrow, advocate for district. PE AS 1C Level 2. District and/or site level administration acknowledges and supports inquiry based hands-on science, may at the same time be wedded to a particular model and not open to new practices that are research based. n AS 1 (Support o f rationale o f project) - Som e inquiry' * teaching, alternative assessm ent; district em phasis on test scores drives Science C ontent Standards based teaching. Support o f logistics, m aterials and personnel is excellent, i.e., handbook developed for career com ponent. u > U > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-12 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC) Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Planning: Goals and Strategies Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Planning: Goals and Strategies______ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE G IC Level 2: G oals are in place; w ays to reach goals m ay not be fully clear to program ^ participants. G 1 T echnology centered goals persist and are adapted for the im provem ent o f science. G 2 G oals for elem entary science are based on Beckm an strategic plan. W idespread elem entary district participation not evident. SF G 1 Supt. and district on Board o f PT. SF G 3 R iverdale Jr. H igh: .liS M , principal; LP, Dept. C hrm . m eet w ith team . SF G 2 P H S : RL, principal, dist. science coord., JJ is teacher, proj. coord. PT is teacher on team . OA G I Site A dm inistrators have dual responsibilities. SF G 4 ZM , elem . team m em ber, on P I' Brd., B eckm an trained. JJ* B eckm an trained, science facilitator. JR form er facilitator, B eckm an teacher leader. SF G 5 E lem entary district adm inistrators do not prioritize science. O A G 2 N o n -u n ifiei districts determ ines little focused coordination K-12. R G 1 Project Tom orrow funding required results oriented goals in original proposal. R G 2 Initial Project T o- '' m orrow R esources w ere for m eaningful technology to im prove students’ learning in science. Due to less m oney available and due to strong call for hands-on science, funding group pulled back funds that w ere to be spent on — technology. R G 3 B eckm an@ Science funding supports kit- based and provided __ strategic planning u > u > 00 Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-13 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Quality Curricula Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Quality Curricula Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources C IC Level 3. Curricula appropriate for some students; attempts to make materials interesting are minimal or artificial. C 1 Reinhardt team begins with elementary to build, .while improving learning in sci. with technology in HS. C 2 A few NSRC units being piloted. C 3 C urricular units for Fam ily S cience N ight (done u n c e ). C 4 HS, M S com ponents "Based on technology. SF C 1 R einhardt LASER* team includes RL, JJ, ZM , LP, and HH. SF C 2 N o interdistrict curriculum connection after early 1990s as part o f C alifornia Science Project. SF C 3 LR facilitated design o f literature-linked sci. curriculum out-side o | B eckm an/N SR C context. SF C 4 N SR C piloting elem entary teachers not connected by project or adm inistration; piloting teachers not in contact w ithin district. OA C 1 Proj. related meetings. OA C 2 T echn o lo g y classes for teachers, HS and MS. OA C 3 Annual science prof. development day, leadership planning team. OA C 4 N o established mechanism for handling interdistrict projects, finances, other. R C 1 Project T om orrow supports inter-district team with know n focus on LASER, N SR C kits, technology for HS, M S R C 2 Elementary district prioritizes support for language arts and math, not science. R C 3 Beckman@ Science funding supports elem. sci. R C 4 High School district supports science as much as possible with lim ited resources. u > U J S O Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-14 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Assessment Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Assessment Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE A IC Level 2. Students occasionally have opportunities to dem onstrate understanding and process skills through graphic, oral, o r w ritten com -m unication and/or perform ance tasks. A ssessm ents likely to be traditional. A 1 HS and MS school using PowerPoint to make .-Lpresentations in science. A 2 Q uestionnaires assess student attitudes - A 3 Electronic portfolios part o f plan for high school and middle school initially. «*- SF A I RL in charge o f dissem ination o f HS district policy, testing in science (professional development)! A A 1 Practices o f portfolios, performance ^ .esting, not districtwide (HS). SF A 2 JJ, PT, LP, and ZM discuss methods o f assessment: electronic portfolios passed from grade to grade across schools and districts. O A A 2 Piloting teachers o f N SR C teachers do not m eet w ithin elem entary district i coordinate use o f notebooks. R A 1 Project -Tomorrow support o f tech assessm ent m ethods. R A 4 Project T om orrow D irector o f Projects provides technical assistance for survey analysis; com m ittee evaluates reports, projects. R A 2 N otebook raining provided through Beckman@Science. u > -f c . o Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-15 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (lC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Teacher’s Collegiality Pampas High School Cluster u > Program Element: Teachers’ Collegiality Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources P E TC IC Level 2. T eachers m eet regularly across disciplines and/or -^ g ra d e levels to plan a sci ence continuum , sequence and coordinate instruction. TC 1 T eachers in Project T om orrow schools co-plan w ith coordinator and each other, but not for current or team taught program s. <+- TC 2 N on-project teachers at sites coordinate occasionally. TC 3 Beckm an@ Science ^ lead teachers (2) co-plan with other county B@S lead teachers. SF TC I RL is w idelj^- respected by teachers, who speak well o f working with him in district professional development, etc. - coordinates professional development in science with teacher leaders. SF TC 2 JJ receives i r stipend (no release time) to meet with e le m e n ta l and jr. high teachers at Jr. High and elementary teachers. OA TC 1 Project related J_meetings O A TC 2 Planning for “ Sum m er Institute” and Satur d ay w orkshops. OA TC 3 Planning for annual sci. prof. dev. day. O A TC 4 Site program s planning m eetings OA TC 5 Piloting teachers do not coord, within dist. R TC 1 Project T om orrow supports initial interdistrict collaboration. R TC 2 Beckm an @ Science funding supports kit-based elem entary sci. Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-16 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (lC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Science as Inquiry Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Science as Inquiry (SI)__________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SI 1C Level 3. T eachers encourage student questions, but often directly answ er questions rath er than provide opportunities for students to find out answ ers them selves. SI 2 Project related science based on studetv research, presentations, and use o f technology. SI 1 T eachers piloting N SR C kits being trained in inquiry teaching. SF SI 1 Som e adm inistrative know ledge o f research based m ethodologies; support o f technology. SF SI 2 Professional developm ent is not ^ focused on inquiry at high school o r m iddle school. SF SI 3 Elementary emphasis on reading and math - not science. SF SI 2 JF, LR are Beckman @ Science teacher leaders, work with teachers independent o f district. OA SI 1 District curriculum leadership structure. OA SI 2 Districts’ professional development directions and evaluation. . R SI 1 Project T om orrow supports STA N C E K-12 efforts to im prove science teaching. R S I 2 B eckm an@ Science em phasis on inquiry teaching. u > ro Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-17 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQ Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Availability of Resources Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Availability of Resources (AR)______________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE AR IC Level 2. Equipment and materials are available for use in science program, although lacking in some aspects; m edia and technology resources are also present but lacking to some degree. Teachers and students may or may not access resources outside the school. AR 1 Schools are getting wired and online. AR 2 N o current plan to establish science ^ resource center for elementary teachers. SF AR 2 Strong administrative support for technology in high school district. SF AR 1 No administrative buy in for science program improvement in elementary district. OA AR 1 Standard district policies for purchase and storage o f equipment. OA AR 2 No arrangements for expenditures across district lines RAR1 Project Tomorrow supports K-12 efforts to innovate and coordinate with seed money for project. R AR 2 Beckman@ Science provides kits for pilots. R AR 3 Federal funding available to Anaheim district. R AR 4 Supportive business partnerships. C.J Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-18 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Student Discussion, Interaction, and Input Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Student Discussion, Interaction and Input (SD)_____________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SD IC Level 2. Students occasionally work in groups where they discuss scientific ideas; students provide input that is used by the teacher in planning direction o f the class. SD 1 Project related science includes active engagem ent^ o f students and centered on student discussion in group- * projects. SD 2 Teachers piloting NSRC kits use methods to solicit _[student input and stimulate student discussion. SF SD 1 A dm inistrative attention to research based m ethodologies; support o f* "building technology. SF SD 2 Professional developm ent directed to use o f technology to improve science teaching and learning. sl- SD 3 Elem en tary emphasis on reading and math ■ not science. OA SD I D istricts’ curriculum leader ship structures. OA SD 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation, and professional development. R SD 1 Project -Tomorrow supports STANCE K-12 efforts to improve science teaching. R SD 2 Beckinan@ Science emphasis on student- centered instruction. Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-19 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Standards Based Expectations Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Standards Based Expectations (SBE) Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SB E 1C Level 2. Students are held to standards and are aw are o f expectations. SB E 1 Project related science includes ^ attention to student ^ outcom es. C om m unication o f these to students <■ uncertain. SBE 2 T eachers piloting ■NSRC that are based on criteria derived from the N ational S cience Education Standards (N SE S). SF SB E 1 Interdistrict effort to align curricu lum K-12 according to C alifornia Science C ontent Standards; participation m inim al. SF SBE 2 Project coordinator is high school teacher and unable to influence direction in elem entary district. SF SBE 3 Elem en tary em phasis on ^ reading and math - not science. O A SB E 1 D istricts’ curriculum leadership structures. O A SBE 2 D istricts’ professional developm ent directions, evaluation, and professional developm ent. R SB E I Project T om orrow supports STA N C E K-12 efforts to im prove science teaching. R SBE 2 B eckm an@ Science em phasis on N ational Science Education Standards. O J U i Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-20 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Science for All Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Science for All Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SfA 1C Level 1. Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. SfA 1 Project related science includes attention to student diversity. SfA 2 NSRC 'm aterials built around National Science Education Standards and Science For All. SF SfA 1 Administration, RL, JJ, PT, and other teacher leaders committed to success for all students. SF SfA 2 D istricts’ demographics re p re s e n t a vftcle spectrum o f ethnic and language minorities. SF SfA 3 Elem en tary em phasis on reading and m ath - for all students. OA SfA 1 D istricts’ curriculum leadership structures. OA SfA 2 D istricts’ professional development directions, evaluation. OA SfA 3 D istricts’ Departments support students with special needs, including ethnic and language minorities, At Risk, GATE. R SfA 1 Project Tomorrow supports STANCE K-12 efforts to improve science teaching. R SfA 2 Substantial federal support for programs in both districts that address students with special needs. R SfA 2 Beckman@ Science emphasis on National Science Education "Standards. G J a \ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-21 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Professional Development Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Professional Development Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE PD 1C Level 2. Although teachers occasionally participate in planning professional development and needs assessments are used, prof. development largely orchestrated by leadership. PD 1 Teachers are given a selection o f workshop sessions to attend to match their needs. . PD 3 B ecknian@ Sciencc Lead T eachers attend N SR C kit training. PD 2 Some teachers attend institutes and workshops outside o f district. SF PD 1 RL coordinates professional development in science with teacher leaders and sits on Project Tomorrow board; JJ is point person with Project Tomorrow for project including report and design o f professional development. SF PD 2 JJ receives stipend (no release time) to meet with elementary and jr. high teachers to plan project activities and professional dev. SF PD 3 HH o f Beckman-Coulter organizes Educator Awareness events. OA PD 1 Project related events: Educator Awareness. OA PD 2 Mtgs. to plan “Summer Institute” and, Saturday workshops. OA PD 3 Committee and meetings to plan annual [science professional ^ development day. OA PD 4 Site programs planning meetings. OA PD 5 Piloting teachers o f NSRC — teachers do not meet within elementary district to coordinate.___________ R PD 1 Project Tomorrow supports budget that includes professional development. R PD 2 Beckman@ Science provides professional development in kit- based elementary science which is part o f interdistrict plan. R PD 3 Eisenhower funds are used to provide teachers with professional development opportunities in science. u > -o Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-22 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (lC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Administrative Support Pampas High School Cluster Program Element: Administrative Support (AS) Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE AS 1C Level 2. District and/or site level administration acknowledges and supports need to implement inquiry based, hands-on science. A d ministration may be wedded to a particular model and not open to research-based practice. R AS 2 B eckm an @ Science provides training — and kits for pilot (elem entary).______________ AS 1 Some inquiry teaching, alternative assessment; district emphasis on test scores drives Science Content Standards based teaching. SF AS 4 LR, ZM, and other '' elementary teachers supported in Beckman training; not now a district direction. R AS 'l Proj. Tomorrow Support o f Renaissance Project. OA AS 2 JJ is empowered by RL to interact with + Project Tomorrow. SF AS 2 RL, JJ, ZM , and HH attended LA SER and interact w ith B eckm an@ Science. R AS 3 Superintendent, school board, and com m unity support o f science program s (B eckm an-C oulter). OA AS 3 No official representation from elementary district to Beckman@ Science. OA AS 1 RL, District Science Coordinator is principal and is empowered to deter-mine structure o f science in district. SF AS 3 RL coordinates sci-enc: curriculum in Secondary districi1 LR facilitated curriculum developm ent in elementary district. n AS 2 Minimal buy-in at elementary district for making changes in science. Emphasis on improving test scores through focus on language arts and math. SF AS 1 JB, Supt. sits on PT board; RL, principal and District Science Coordinator on PT Board; ZM, elementary teacher on PT board; HH, business partner on PT Board. u > 4 ^ 00 Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-23 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC) Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Planning: Goals and Strategies Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Planning: Goals and Strategies______ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources SF G 4 JF with B@ S for two ^ . years, now full time Sci.Coord. •*h SF G 3 KP, lead teacher, served as interim proj. coordinator K.-6. „ OA G 3 Full time " Science Coor-dinator not on board for first two years o f project. R G I Project Tomorrow Funding supports secondary program. OA G 2 Director o f i r Curriculum has responsibility for all disciplines K-12. OA G 1 HS teacher em pow ered to direct R enaissance Project. R G 3 Beckman@ ■*- Science supports teacher training in NSRC kits and kits for teachers to pilot. SF C i 2 Hope H S: MS, Project Coord, and ES began Infusion, Inquiry, and 1MMEX prior to beginning project. (x + Goals that include inquiry and Infusion are communicated for ' all parts o f the D istrict’s two related projects. SF G 2 MS teacher SH working with district on use o f IMMEX for assessment district-wide, across grade levels. Attended LASER. PE G IC Configuration Level 1: Yearlong & short-term goals evident; ways to reach goals formulated and clear to program participants. SF G 1 District: PF, Dir. o f Curr. attended LASER in W ashington DC. prior to proposal and funding. Elementary component slow to start; no full time person at beginning. u > VO Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-24 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Quality Curricula Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Quality Curricula Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources O A C 2 Beckm an @ Science providing assistance for curriculum selection SF C I MS, Project Coordinator presents at Conferences about IMMEX and Infusion. C 2 A NSRC m aterials^, are inquiry based, hands- on, field tested, research based. R C 1 Project Tom orrow supports IM M EX and Infusions w ith seed money. O A C 1 M S, ES, and other district teachers w riting IM M EX and Infusion curricula. SF C 2 PF, Director o f Curriculum, attended LASER at W ashington D.C., has buy-in to N SRC curriculum. C 1 IM M EX, and L _ Infusion focus on relevance and developing critical thinking. Teachers trained. SF C 3 JF finished year a t* B eckm an@ Science and is now Science C urriculum C oordinator. OA C 3 PF responsible for all disciplines and had no time to coordinate science curriculum for two years. PE C I C Level 1. ^ Curricula take into account students’ interests, knowledge, understanding, abilities, and experience. R C 2 B eckm an@ Science provides training, technical assistance, kits to piloting teachers. u > o Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-25 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC) Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Assessment Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Assessment (A) Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE A IC Level 1. Students demonstrate understanding and skills through graphic, oral, and written com m un ication and perform ance tasks; multiple m ethods used to assess student understanding. A 1 Students at high school and middle school*- writing and/or using IM MEX problem sets, other alternative assessment and technologies. A 2 Q uestionnaires assess student attitudes. SF A 1 MS and ES orchestrate IMMEX, Infusion, and Inquiry aspects* o f secondary programs with cognitive mapping for assessment. OA A 1 Center o f IMMEX and Infusion is at ► Esperanza. SF A 2 JF, KP, SH, MF trained on use o f notebooks for assessment o f students. A 3 Elementary students assessed through their thinking expressed in science notebooks. ^ OA A 2 Center o f NSRC kit activity now at district; 36 teachers trained in the year o f B@S operation. R A I Project Tomorrow support o f Esperanza US project. R A 2 Notebook training provided through Beckman@ Science. JH is trainer. R A 4 Project Tomorrow director o f projects provides technical assistance for survey analysis; committee evaluates report, program. u > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-26 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (lC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Teachers Collegiality Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Teachers’ Collegiality_____________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources P E T C IC Level 1. T eachers m eet regularly across disciplines and/or grade levels to plan a science continuum and to sequence and coordinate instruction. TC I JF, B eckm an@ Science Lead and piloting teachers meet moth w ithin and outside o f district to co-plan, get training, m ake curricular decisions. TC 2 M S and ES co-plan _ progression o f IM M EX aqfi Infusion projects. SF T C 1 JF is respected by teachers, and builds a sense o f prestige for teachers -4 - w orking on the (elem entary) project. SF TC 2 KP, interim coordinator, is classroom teacher and helped to build enthusiasm for the elem entary project. SF TC 3 M S holds Ph.D. in physiology, is A P physics ‘ “tfeacher, and has respect o f students, teachers, and adm inistrators. OA TC 1 Sum m er institutes to train teachers on IM M EX , Infusion. OA TC 2 Beck nan@ Science leadership training. OA TC 3 Beckman @ Science kit and notebook training. OA TC 4 PF em pow ers M S, JF, and KP to organize science teaching an learning; facilitate teacher involvem ent. R TC 1 Project Tom orrow provides h support to IM M EX , Infusion program s. R TC 2 Beckman@ Science works closely with JH, provides technical assistance, training, and kits to piloting teachers. C/1 Is) Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-27 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Science As Inquiry Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Science As Inquiry__________________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SI 1C Level 1. Teachers consistently model and foster student inquiry as they interact^ with students. SI 1 MS and ES work side by side and drive IMMEX and Infusion programs. ^ SI 3 Beckman @ Science Lead Teachers co plan with each other, other teachers, and other B@S Lead Teachers. SF SI 1 MS, ES, promote inquiry to be included with IMMEX and Infusion o f other -critical thinking skills. SF SI 1 JF encourages inquiry as science coordinator, and provides training in inquiry nationally as part o f the NSRC faculty. SF SI 2 KP and other B@S trained teachers vocally embrace inquiry as a preferred approach to teaching science. OA SI 1 Summer institutes to train teachers on IM M EX, Infusion. OA SI 2 Beckman@ Science Leadership training. OA SI 3 Beckman @ Science kit and notebook training. OA SI 4 PF empowers MS, JF, and K P to organize science teaching and learning; facilitate teacher involvement. R SI 1 Project Tomorrow provides support to IMMEX, H "Infusion programs. R S I 2 Beckman@ Science works closely with JH, provides technical assistance, training, and kits to piloting teachers. u > U ) u > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-28 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration HOLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Availability of Resources Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Availability of Resources Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources AR 2 Plans underway for science materials resource center in district. AR 3 Strong connection to Becknian@Science and its materials resource center AR 1 Computers being added as possible for project implementation. IMMEX ^ strongly supported. SF AR 2 JF, Science Coordinator, was Manager of B@S Materials ^ Resource Center. R AR 2 Beckman@Science provides training and kits for pilots. SF AR I PF, director of curriculum, very supportive of secondary and elementary projects. SF AR 3 MS, proj. coord., writes grants for IMMEX and Infusion projects, manages budget for project. OA AR Standard district policies for purchase and storage of equipment; plans to build science materials resource center. R AR 1 Project Tomorrow supports K-12 efforts to innovate and coordinate with seed money for project. PE AR 1C Level 1. Adequafe equipment and mater-ials for student hands-on learning. Media, technological resources are accessible and resources from outside the school used. U J U l 4 ^ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-29 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IC)Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Student Discussion, Interaction, and Input Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Student Discussion, Interaction, and Input__________________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SD 1C Level 1. Students regularly work in groups w here they d iscu ss scientific ideas w ith each other and w ith the teacher in a class room setting. Students provide input that guides class direction. SD 2 Infusion m ethodologies include use o f student interaction and input. SD 3 N SR C m odules and B@ S trainings include strategies for soliciting and using student input and interactions. SF SD 1 MS and ES actively sought out strategies designed to im prove students’ thinking. SF SD 2 PF and JF push professional devel- M opm ent directed to teaching strategies that prom ote student thinking. SF SD T he 36 teachers that have received B@ S training received training* in group w ork and discussion techniques. O A SD 1 D istricts’ curriculum leadership structures. O A SD 2 D istricts’ structure for professional developm ent and evaluation. R SD Project T om orrow supports Infusion, IM M EX , and N SR C curricula (Inquiry). R SD 2 B eckm an@ Science I training addresses m ethods o f stim ulate student discussion. U J < ~ / \ U i Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-30 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (1C) Levels of Practice and Contributing Factors Standards Based Expectations Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Standards Based Expectations Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources PE SB E IC Level 1. Students self-directed, accept and share respon sibility for th eir learning according to high stan dards and expectations. SB E 1 W ith IM M EX students w ork indepen- dently to w rite or to use softw are. T hey are expec ted to produce a product or to reach conclusions. W ith Infusion, students transfer process across instances and contexts w ith em phasis on content. SB E 2 B@ S teachers use rubrics to com m unicate ^Ttrdent expectations. SF SB E 1 A dm inistrative attention to com m unica tion o f expected o utcom es^ and com m unication w ith parents. SF SBE 2 M S and ES: Professional developm ent directed to use o f graphic organizers, transfer o f skills across assignm ents (high school and m iddle school), use o f IM M EX softw are. SF SB E JF herself instructs in use o f student rubrics w ith students. OA SBE 1 D istricts’ curriculum leader ship structures. O A SBE 2 D istricts’ professional developm ent directions, evaluation, and professional developm ent. R SBE 1 Project T om orrow supports T K - 1 2 - Infusion and Inquiry. R SBE 2 B eckm an@ Science em phasis on N ational Science Education Standards. u » L/l < 3 \ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. F ig u re C - 3 1 S tre a m D ia g n o stic C h a rt: P ro g ra m E le m e n t (P E ) In n o v a tio n C o n fig u ra tio n (IC )L e v e ls o f P ra c tic e an d C o n trib u tin g F a c to rs S c ie n c e F o r A ll H o p e H ig h S c h o o l C lu ste r P ro g ra m E le m e n t: S c ie n c e fo r A ll S o c ia l F a c to rs O rg a n iz in g A rra n g e m e n ts R e so u rc e s OA SfA 1 Districts’ curriculum leadership structures. SfA 2 Teachers of all levels and students have prof. development for teaching Infusion. R SfA 1 Project Tomorrow supports TK-12 - Infusion and Inquiry. SF SfA 2 Districts’ demographics show fewer low income students than those of other project districts. SF SfA 3 JH advocates and directs implementation of NSF modules which are based on Science for All. OA SfA 2 Districts’ professional development directions, evaluation. SfA 3 NSRC materials built around National Science Education Standards and Science for All. R SfA 2 Beckman@Science emphasis on National Science Education Standards. SF SfA 1 MS, Project Director committed to introduce IMMEX antf* Infusion strategies to all teachers in all grades and across disciplines. OA SfA 3 Districts’ Departments support students with special needs, including ethnic and language* minorities. At Risk, GATE. PE SfA 1C Level 1 Teachers recognize and respond to student diversity; all students are encouraged to participate fully in science learning. u > Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-32 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Professional Development Hope High School Cluster Program Element: Professional Development______________ Social Factors Organizing Arrangements Resources OA PD 2 PF responsible for professional development for all disciplines. OA PD 2 JH organizes profes-sional development for * elementary science. PD 4 Som e teachers attend institutes and w orkshops outside o f district. PD 3 B eckm an@ Science Lead T eachers attend N SR C kit training. M R PD 1 Project Tomorrow supports budget that includes professional development. SF PD I MS works with UCLA and gives presentations for IMMEX. PD 1 High School, m iddle school teachers receive prof. dev. in IM M EX and Infusion - a few at a tim e. SF PD 2 JH maintains contacts with N a tio n ^ science professional development group; presents for NSRC. R PD 3 Eisenhower funds are used to provide teachers with professional development opportunities in science. OA PD 1 MS, ES meet “on the run” and as ^ needed to plan professional development for IMMEX and Infusion. R PD 2 Beckman@ Science provides professional development in kit-based elementary science which is district direction. PE PD IC Level 1. T eachers grow together as part o f a supportive learning com m unity that is centered on teaching and learning; structures are in place for teachers to continuously co plan their ow n professional developm ent. O J U l 00 Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure C-33 Stream Diagnostic Chart: Program Element (PE) Innovation Configuration (IQLevels of Practice and Contributing Factors Administrative Support Hope High School Cluster Organizing Arrangements Program Element: Administrative Support (AS) Social Factors Resources SF AS 3 D istrict and site adm inistrators very supportive o f MS. R AS I Project T om or row supports budget that includes profes sional developm ent. O A AS 2 PF responsible for professional developm ent for all disciplines. O A AS 2 JH organizes profes sional developm ent for elem entary science. SF A S 1 PF orchestrated team going to LA SER in W ashington DC prior to Project. SF A S 2 JH com m itted to B@ S prior to project and prior to becom ing D istrict Science C oordinator. R AS 2 Beck- m an@ Science provides professional develop m ent in kit-based ele m entary science w hich is district direction. AS 1 Structural and personnel changes m ade in district to accom m odate hands-on science, m aterials, and professional developm ent. PE AS 1C Level I . D istrict and site level adm inistration know ledgeably attends to the im plem entation o f inquiry based, hands-on science. A dm inistration is open to trying new practices that are research based. O J C/1 so A P P E N D IX D Documents Reviewed in Study o Agenda and handouts for Shasta Hills Unified School District science specialists all day meeting and workshop o Agenda of Project Tomorrow Board of Directors Retreat o Reinhardt City School District Schedule of Educational Technology Staff Development Schedule, 1999-2000 o Reinhardt Collaborative Strategic Plan for Beckman@Science o Annual Report of Shasta Hills Unified School District for Beckman@Science Advisory Board, 1999 o Beckman@Science, 1998-99 District Data o Courses of Study for Shasta Hills (secondary) o Hope High School Renaissance Project Proposal, 1996 o Hope High School Renaissance Project Proposal, 1997 o Hope Renaissance Project, Project Tomorrow Budget and update, 1998-99 o Hope Renaissance Project, Project Tomorrow Budget, 1998-99, #1 o ETI District Data Collection Forms o ETI Evaluation Report, 1998-99, Beckman@Science o Evaluations Summary of Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project Family Science Night (4) o Flyer and summary packet of professional development events in science for the Reinhardt City School District, 1999-2000 o Flyer for Family Science Night o f the Pampas High School Renaissance Project 360 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. o Letter from Director o f Curriculum of Pleasant Hills School District to Executive Director o f Project Tomorrow with Project Overview o Letter from Marketing Consultant to Executive Director of Project Tomorrow o Letter from Programs and Projects Committee to Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project with commendations and recommendations, 4/8/98 o Letter from Programs and Projects Committee to Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project with commendations and recommendations, #s 1,2 o Letter from Project Tomorrow Executive Director to principal of Pampas High School and science coordinator of Reinhardt Union High School District o Letters from Project Tomorrow Executive Director to Hope High School Renaissance project coordinator, # ’s 1, 2 o List and location of Reinhardt City School District Science Teacher Leaders, 1999-2000 o Map and Schedule for tour of Reilly Elementary School, Shasta Hills Unified School District o Memo from Director o f Curriculum o f Pleasant Hills School District to personnel of district o Memo from Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects to Hope High School Renaissance project coordinator o Memo from Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects to project coordinators #1 o Memo from Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects to project coordinators #2 o Memo from Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects to principal of Pampas High School and science coordinator of Reinhardt Union High School District 361 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. o Memo from Project Tomorrow Executive Assistant to Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project coordinator o Memo from Project Tomorrow Executive Director to Hope High School Renaissance Project coordinator o Memo with questions from Project Tomorrow Director o f Programs and Projecis to Pampas High School Renaissance Project coordinator o Memo with questions from Project Tomorrow Director o f Programs and Projects to Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project coordinator o Memos from Project Tomorrow Director o f Programs and Projects to Pampas High School Renaissance Project coordinator, #s 1,2, 3, 4, 5,6 o Memos from Project Tomorrow Director o f Programs and Projects to Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project coordinator, #s 1, 2, 3 o Memos from Pampas High School project coordinator to Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects, #s 1, 2 o Packet o f docent and Family Science Night Lessons, Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project (with quarterly update), 12/15/98 o Packet of docent and Family Science Night Lessons, Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project (with quarterly update), 3/15/99 o Quarterly Report to Project Tomorrow, Pampas High School Renaissance Project, 1/15/99 o Quarterly Report to Project Tomorrow. Pampas High School Renaissance Project, 5/15/99 o Quarterly Report to Project Tomorrow, Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster, 3/15/98-6/15/98 o Quarterly Report to Project Tomorrow, Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster, 6/15/98 - 9/15/98 o Quarterly Report to Project Tomorrow, Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster, 9/15/98-12/15/98 3 6 2 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. o Report to Project Tom orrow, T edesco C anyon H igh S ch ool Cluster, 3/2/98 o Shasta Hills Unified School District Project Tomorrow Projected Budget. 1998-99 o Sample docent lessons, Trabuco High School Renaissance Project o Pampas Collaborative Project Tomorrow Projected Budget, 1998-99 o Pampas High School Renaissance Project Proposal o Pampas High School Renaissance Project Proposed for Summer Technology Workshop o Status Report o f Projects from Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects to Programs and Projects Committee Members, 4/21/99 o Status Report of Projects from Project Tomorrow Director of Programs and Projects to Programs and Projects Committee Members, 6/16/99 o Summaries of Pampas High School Cluster Project Tomorrow for visiting investors, #s 1, 2 o Summaries of Tedesco Canyon Cluster Project Tomorrow for visiting investors, #s 1, 2, 3 o Summary of Hope High School Cluster Project Tomorrow for visiting investors o Summary of Project Tomorrow for Partners Meeting o Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project Proposal o Tedesco Canyon Renaissance Project, Project Process Documentation, 8/14/98 o Update/Report to Project Tomorrow. Tedesco Canyon High School Cluster, 2/15/98 o Written student evaluations of docent program in Tedesco Canyon High School Renaissance Project 363 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A P P E N D IX E INITIAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS 1. What are the goals and intended outcomes of the project plan? 2. Who in the project wrote the goals, devised the project plan, structured project activities, directly implements the activities of the project, evaluates the outcomes, and participates in plan revision? What are the roles and what are the actions of these persons? 3. Have certain persons emerged as decision-makers? Who are the recognized leaders and who are the persons making substantial contributions behind the scenes? What contributions do they make? In what ways have specific persons determined the direction and affected the immediate outcomes of the project? 4. Do those who implement or who are responsible for carrying out program tasks have say in the direction that the program is taking? 5. What are the intended and unintended outcomes o f the project? 6. What changes in the plan have occurred? Why were there reconsiderations, and how did the processes of reformulation proceed? 7. How are project outcomes being evaluated? Are student assessment data being used? Are the evaluations and assessments being used in reconsideration and reformulation of program? 364 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of the relationship between student achievement and mathematics program congruence in select secondary schools of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles

PDF

Early career teachers' views of their elementary science teaching methods courses: The relationship between preservice preparation and the realities of the first years of teaching

PDF

An evaluation of the use of microcomputer-based laboratory instruction on middle school students' concept attainment and attitudes towards computer -based instruction

PDF

How has the requirement to implement content standards affected the instructional program in schools and classrooms?

PDF

Environmental education in community -based coastal resource management: A case study of Olango Island, Philippines

PDF

An investigation of the impact of selected prereading activities on student content learning through laboratory activities

PDF

An analysis of the use of data to increase student achievement in public schools

PDF

Districtwide instructional improvement: A case study of an elementary school in the Beach Promenade Unified School District

PDF

Factors influencing teachers' and administrators' identification of diverse students for gifted programs in Title I schools

PDF

A cross-site analysis of the extent of implementation of the California mathematics and science frameworks.

PDF

Districtwide instructional improvement: A case study of a high school in the Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

A history of the development of the California Science Content Standards: 1990--2005

PDF

Districtwide instructional improvement: A case study of a high school in the media unified school district

PDF

Examining the factors that predict the academic success of minority students in the remedial mathematics pipeline in an urban community college

PDF

California's new social promotion and retention policies and their impact on an ethnically diverse, high -poverty, high-performance elementary school

PDF

Education for change in a changing Nigerian Igbo society: Impacts of traditional African and western education on the upbringing of Igbo children

PDF

Analysis of Saudi Arabian middle and high school science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science

PDF

Connecting districts and schools to improve teaching and learning: A case study of district efforts in the Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

How effective schools use data to improve student achievement

PDF

A qualitative examination of the nature and impact of three California minority engineering programs

Asset Metadata

Creator Carroll, Karen Marie (author)

Core Title An analysis of program planning in schools with emerging excellence in science instructional design

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, curriculum and instruction,education, sciences,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor McComas, William (committee chair), [illegible] (committee member), Marsh, David D. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-73767

Unique identifier UC11338711

Identifier 3018062.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-73767 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3018062.pdf

Dmrecord 73767

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Carroll, Karen Marie

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA