Innovative Teaching + Learning: Disrupting the K-12 Classroom by Eric Walters

Innovative Teaching + Learning: Disrupting the K-12 Classroom

Making and Learning Institute Marymount School of New York

ÂŠ Marymount School of New York, 2018 Marymount School of New York 1026 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10028 USA Email: making@marymountnyc.org Website: making.marymountnyc.org Notice of Rights All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher. For information on getting permission for reprints and excerpts, contact making@marymountnyc.org

Cover Design by Eric Walters Edited by Jennifer Cyranski and Eric Walters

Table of Contents Introduction

Computer Science Education: Lessons from Industry And Academia

Artistic Material for Digital Fabrication

Making Coding Stick: From Turtle Art Programming To Vinyl Decals

Making as Assessment and Assessing Making

Discovery, Agency & Activism: The 11th Grade Trip

Take Two! Two Years of Kindergarten and Two Introductory Years of Blogging

Analyzing Visual Algorithms: Your Weekend Weather

Untangling the Strands of Assessment

Contact the Authors

Introduction Welcome to Innovative Teaching + Learning: Disrupting the K-12 Classroom! In their book, Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns, Clayton Christensen, Michael Horn, and Curtis Johnson present a compelling vision of changes underway in K-12 education as new technologies are adopted and learning is increasingly personalized. The authors describe disruptive innovation as an innovation that transforms an existing sector – bringing convenience, simplicity, accessibility, and affordability to a product or service that previously was complex, inaccessible, and expensive. As noted in the book’s abstract, “According to recent studies in neuroscience, the way we learn doesn't always match up with the way we are taught. If we hope to stay competitive—academically, economically, and technologically—we need to rethink our understanding of intelligence, reevaluate our educational system, and reinvigorate our commitment to learning. In other words, we need ‘disruptive innovation.’” As Publisher’s Weekly further suggests, “The idea is that an audience in need will benefit from even a faulty opportunity to fulfill that need; in education, the demand for individual instruction could be met through infinitely customizable online computer-based instruction. The authors, all professionals in education, present a solution to the ills of standardized education that's visionary but far-fetched.” However, contributors to this publication would argue that these disruptions are already occurring. Schools are looking at a new model of teaching and learning, a model that addresses the needs of all learners but also seeks to push the boundaries of the traditional classroom experience. We thank the following schools: Marlborough School (Los Angeles, CA); Greenwich Academy (Greenwich, CT); Marymount High School (Los Angeles, CA); Milwaukee Jewish Day School (Milwaukee, WI); LREI (New York, NY); Lycée Français de New York (New York, NY); Teachers College, Columbia University (New York, NY); Poly Prep Country Day School (Brooklyn, NY); and Columbia Grammar and Preparatory School (New York, NY). We also thank the participants who attended the workshop “Innovative Learning – Innovative Assessments” at the 2017 STEM Think Tank and Conference at Harpeth Hall School in Nashville, TN and at the 2017 Design and Maker Class Colloquium at the Windward School 3

in Los Angeles, CA. Special thanks to Jennifer Cyranski, Director of Communications at Marymount School of New York, for thoughtfully reviewing the publication in advance.

Eric A. Walters Director of STEM Education Marymount School of New York

Don Buckley Co-Founder Tools at Schools

Computer Science Education: Lessons from Industry and Academia Darren Kessner Marlborough School Los Angeles, CA Abstract The computer is the single most important tool created by humans, the Swiss army knife of the 21st century. This tool is now used in nearly every human activity, by artists, scientists, doctors, entrepreneurs, lawyers, financial analysts, and more. In this chapter, I discuss computer science education from my perspective as a software developer, having written software in both industry and academia. In particular, I discuss the primary goals of computer science education from this perspective, and I describe the current landscape of software development in industry and academia. I also summarize lessons from industry and academia that can (and I feel should) be brought to the classroom. Next I discuss the computer science curriculum I have been developing over the past few years at Marlborough School, an all-girls independent school (grades 712) in Los Angeles. Finally, I present my recommendations to schools and school boards for developing a strong computer science program. The goal of computer science education Over the last thirty years, we have seen a technological revolution, beginning with the mass production of personal computers, followed by the creation of the internet, and more recently, the handheld internet-connected computing devices that have rapidly become ubiquitous. On the software side, each of these programmable technologies has spurred the development of new operating systems, programming languages, and software engineering techniques. This rapid rate of technological progress creates a unique set of challenges for the computer science educator. First, many of the programming languages in use today did not exist a generation ago when today's teachers were in school. In addition, programming languages continue to develop and evolve over time, often on a time scale of a few months to a year for the release of a new version, so educators are aiming at a moving target. Third, the expansion of technology has made it challenging for the computer science educator to keep up with the latest 5

developments. This expansion has led to specialization, which creates another set of challenges. For example, the languages and technologies underlying web development are very different from those used in mobile development. Finally, the languages and technologies that students learn how to use today will likely not exist or, at the very least, look much different from what will be in use ten years from now. In light of these challenges, how should the computer science educator proceed? Why bother teaching students about something that will be obsolete before they finish college? What is the goal of computer science education? Clearly, computer science is more than just programming languages and technology. In fact, academic computer scientists draw a strong distinction between computer science (theory) and software engineering or software development (practice). At the middle and high school level, this distinction is not useful or important. However, what is important is the development of the thought processes and skills needed to create software. Software allows one to create something from nothing. The software landscape There is a bewildering array of programming languages for the educator to choose from. Block-based languages (Scratch, Snap, Lego Mindstorms) are a great first introduction to programming. These simple languages can only take the student so far though, so what's next? Software development today can be broadly split into two categories: application development and web development. Application development includes desktop applications, mobile apps, scientific or data analysis applications, graphics applications and video games, and even operating systems. These applications generally use an object-oriented language in the C/C++ family (which includes C, C++, Objective-C, C#, and Java). For example, the desktop applications Microsoft Word and Adobe Photoshop are written primarily in C++. Apps on iOS have used Objective-C and its successor Swift (developed by Apple), while apps on Android use Java. Scientific applications generally use C++ or Java, though Python (not in the C/C++ family, but certainly influenced by it) is very popular also. Video games are generally written in C++ or C# (developed by Microsoft). Operating systems themselves (Windows, OSX, Linux) are written in C++ or object-oriented C. In addition, micro-controllers such as Arduino are programmed in C. So clearly a strong case can be made for introducing students to an object-oriented C/C++ family language such as Java, which is the language used in the AP Computer Science A exam.

On the other hand, much of the buzz in the software world these days is in web development, which is based on a completely separate set of languages and skills: HTML, CSS, and Javascript (very different from Java, despite the name). Web development has some advantages that the educator should definitely consider: 1) Many tutorials and lessons are available online, which means that no extra software need be installed on student computers. 2) Student projects can easily be shared. There are relatively recent developments that muddy the waters. First, Javascript is increasingly being used for application development (e.g. the Atom and Brackets text editors). Second, the WebAssembly project is bringing all other languages, including those in the C/C++ family, to the web. The Python programming language doesn't fit neatly into the two broad categories above, but should definitely be considered by the educator. It is one of the easiest languages to read and learn to write. It is extremely useful for real scientific and data analysis applications. Python is also used in web development and can be used to program the Raspberry Pi mini-computer. It is open source, and there are lots of tutorials available online. In addition to specific languages, there are several skills used by professionals in the software industry that are useful in the computer science classroom: 1) Modularization: software applications quickly grow to be too big to hold in a single programmer's mind at any one time, so it is important to learn to break problems into components or modules. This begins with procedural and object-oriented programming and continues with larger software components. 2) Pair programming: this is a technique in software development where two programmers work at a single computer; this can facilitate consideration of multiple alternatives when solving a problem, as well as increase correctness of the code. 3) Test-driven development: a common practice in software development where unit tests are written to test every component of the software (and the tests are generally written before the component is actually implemented); this greatly increases confidence in the correctness of the software. This is especially important (though not as common as it should be) in academic software development, where programmers don't have the benefit of a quality assurance (QA) team. 4) The ability to learn new concepts or skills on demand: Software languages are constantly changing, so the successful software developer learns to adapt quickly and learn new skills as needed. Finally, the educator should consider the choice of how "open" languages and technologies are. Educators should be cautious about using a language or technology whose development is primarily controlled by a single corporation (e.g. Swift from Apple, C# from Microsoft, Go from Google) for two main reasons. First, a corporation can easily drop support for a language or technology, leaving the software developer in a bind. Second, corporations have a financial interest in keeping software developers locked into their particular ecosystem. Promoting a proprietary language or technology is a powerful way to do this, as it makes it difficult for software developers to switch to a different platform. Standardized and/or open source languages (e.g. C++, Java, Python, Processing,

HTML/CSS/Javascript) will generally have a longer "shelf life" and skills learned in these languages will generally be more translatable to new situations. Learning computer science There are many different aspects to the study of computer science. First, one learns a computer language in much the same way that one learns a natural language. Students can begin by learning some common phrases and seeing how to communicate with their computer. In order to progress, the student must then study the grammar of the language a little more closely. As the student acquires command of the language's syntactical structures, the student also develops the ability to express new ideas in the language, much as a language student progresses from learning grammar to expressing ideas in an essay. As the student studies further, she learns language conventions, idioms, and alternative ways to express ideas. On the other hand, some aspects of computer science are very mathematical in nature. For example, at some point the computer science student needs to learn how to encode numbers in binary and hexadecimal, and it is helpful to have some knowledge of discrete mathematics. The student will also need to understand logic and truth tables, so that they can understand how logical operators behave. If the student is learning computer graphics, a solid foundation in coordinate geometry is necessary, and to go further, knowledge of trigonometry, parametric equations, and linear algebra is very helpful. In addition, thinking about algorithms (computational thinking) is a very mathematical skill, though not one found in standard math classes. The process of writing software is also similar to the iterative process involved in any engineering / design project. The software developer must first understand the intended audience. She then brainstorms to generate some ideas, and then picks one or more ideas to prototype. After evaluating the prototype(s), she decides what changes to make and creates the next version. During this process, the software developer faces the same issues as any engineer, including time and resource constraints. Because of these constraints, there may be times when the developer must create workarounds that aren't the most elegant, but get the job done. Finally, learning to write software is much like learning to work in any creative medium (e.g. visual arts, performing arts, athletic activities). When preparing for a future performance or competition, much of the performer/athlete's time is spent doing drills and learning basic skills to practice for the main event. As she learns how to use the tools of her art, the artist develops her ability to create. In addition, much as an athlete or performer, the student programmer will make the most progress by working on her skills regularly (preferably daily).

There are some programming concepts that are common to most computer languages, and the beginning computer science student will generally follow the following progression in understanding of these key concepts: • • • • •

data types and variables control structures (conditionals and loops) encapsulation (functions / procedures) object oriented programming (OOP) advanced constructs (functional programming, components / application programming interfaces (APIs))

Computer science curriculum The biggest decision for the computer science educator is which languages or technologies will serve as the foundation for the curriculum. As I discussed above ("The software landscape"), one could focus on application development or web development, or even create an entire curriculum based on Python. At Marlborough School, some practical considerations guided our curriculum choices: •

The availability of Processing, a simplified version of Java focusing on computer graphics programming, open source and free from MIT Media Lab.

•

The AP Computer Science A exam uses the Java language.

•

FIRST Technical Challenge (FTC) robots are controlled by Android phones, which are programmed in Java.

Because of these considerations, our curriculum focuses on application development: we use Processing in our introductory computer science courses, and Java in our Robotics, AP Computer Science, and more advanced courses. Processing offers a very gentle introduction into text-based programming, while allowing students to progress to more difficult topics, such as classes and objects, arrays and lists, or even recursion. Processing also offers an easy entry into the world of interactive computer graphics: drawing shapes in a coordinate system, handling user interaction, specifying colors by RGB channels, image processing, and access to a simplified OpenGL (a graphics industry standard) interface. Processing is also open source, and you can use the Processing libraries from Java programs, making it a good tool for AP Computer Science A as well. At the same time, our robotics teams participate in the FIRST Technical Challenge, and their robots are controlled by Android phones, which are programmed in Java, so we are seeing a lot of synergy between our robotics and computer science programs.

At its core, our computer science curriculum is very traditional, emphasizing object-oriented programming in the C/C++ family of languages. On other hand, the Processing language was developed only recently, and the Android platform is a new place to apply Java programming. Arduino is another new application of an old language (C) and is easy to move into from Processing/Java. We introduce some web development (HTML/CSS/Javascript) in the introductory course, and some students end up working on projects in this area. In addition, we use Python in several math courses, as well as occasionally in the computer science courses. Python is good for data analysis projects and also for playing with the Raspberry Pi mini-computer. Of course, one could envision a very similar curriculum with similar topics, but based completely on Javascript or based completely on Python. However, I do see an additional benefit to giving students experience with the C/C++ family. I feel that students gain a much better sense of the history of computer science, as well as the future of computer science, knowing that the code they are writing for computer graphics applications, or for programming a microcontroller, or for moving a robot, looks just like the code underlying the operating systems running on their computer or device. While the languages and technologies will look different ten years from now, anyone writing software will still need to think about code readability and maintainability, modularization, and testing. And they will still need to think about their software from the point of view of their users and their collaborators. So while it can feel daunting for the educator to choose which languages or technologies to focus on, I feel it's important to emphasize skills and concepts that will be useful to them no matter what language or technology they are working with. Above everything else, I feel the most important thing is to open up doors for students, and to show them that they can create something from nothing. Recommendations From my experience of teaching coding in the classroom, I have found that when exposed to computing in elementary school, students quickly outgrow block-based programming and are ready for text-based programming in middle school. And growing up as digital natives, these students already know how to navigate their computers and devices better than most adults. As educators, we should seize this opportunity to offer five-six years of instruction in computer science at the middle and high school level. However, this will take significant investment from teachers, schools, and school boards. For some perspective on the amount of investment that will be required, consider a typical mathematics teacher. In general, a typical math teacher will have studied math every year through high school, plus four years (or more) in college, in addition to any credential program that they complete. In other words, a typical math teacher will have been doing math for nearly twenty years before even stepping foot in a classroom.

Now compare this to the situation in computer science. Schools have two options for finding a computer science teacher with equivalent expertise: 1) hire a teacher with several years of professional software development experience, or 2) invest in computer science training for current teachers. There has been a nationwide effort to increase funding for the second option, to train new computer science teachers. This effort has led to the creation of the AP Computer Science Principles exam, and many high schools around the country offered a new AP Computer Science Principles course in the 2016-17 school year. This is an introductory course aimed at making computer science more accessible to a diverse range of students. There has been an ongoing effort to train teachers to teach AP CS Principles, and the primary barrier has been that new teachers are generally fearful that they will be walking into a classroom where students may know more about the subject than they do. Understandably, much of the focus of teacher training has been to reassure new teachers that it is okay not to be a subject expert and to lead the class as an active learner. Clearly, the current situation in computer science education is not ideal. We would not ask a math teacher to walk into a classroom with students who know the subject better than they do, and we would not expect that the students will learn as much as if they had a teacher who is an expert in the subject. Furthermore, all of these efforts have been directed toward training teachers to teach the first introductory course in computer science. What do we offer our students after this first year? If we are serious about offering quality computer science education to our middle and high school students, teachers, schools, and school boards must all invest more. Computer science teachers need to invest a significant amount of time and effort just to keep up with new developments in programming languages, software, and hardware. School administrators need to recognize this need and provide computer science teachers with enough time and resources to do this. And school boards need to allocate enough funds to provide continuing education and training for computer science teachers. Students around the country are ready and willing to learn computer science, and there is a great need for more computer science classes at the middle and high school level. As educators, we would be remiss not to fulfill this need. Links •

Processing open source language and development environment: https://processing.org/

•

Python open source language: https://www.python.org/

•

Arduino open source hardware and software platform: https://www.arduino.cc/

•

Raspberry Pi Foundation: https://www.raspberrypi.org/

Artistic Material for Digital Fabrication Erin Riley Greenwich Academy Greenwich, CT Abstract Having digital fabrication capabilities in schools invites the combination of art material know-how with new tools for making. This chapter is a visual library of material options that we have experimented with in the Engineering and Design Lab that parallel process in the art room and provide our artists, designers, and makers an artistic material vocabulary for projects. Casting and Forming The 3D printer is an exciting tool for creating 3D forms but can feel limited, material-wise, if the primary output is plastic. Often, 3D printing is a first step, with casting used to explore more choices for materials. In our lab, we make silicone molds for casting. Silicone is an incredible materialâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;it can withstand heat and its flexibility makes it easier to remove rigid positives. After making your positive 3D shape, consider making a silicone mold to cast your shape in a variety of materials listed here: Hot glue: Hot glue is a great material for casting. It has the added benefit of drying quickly. Its translucency makes it suitable for embedding LED lights, adding glitter, or any additional materials for color and texture. Wax: We have been using soy wax chips, melting them in a double boiler, with good results. They make nice candles, or for sculpture applications, additional materials can be added. After casting, wax can be reworked by scraping and carving. Left: Studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mixed material totem

Concrete: Concrete is a beautiful material for casting. I found students were amazed by the property differences of cast concrete. The heavy and solid form contrasts well with PLA/ABS.

Cast hot glue

Wax

Concrete

Plaster

CelluClay

Chocolate

Plaster: Plaster is another traditional art material for sculpture that works well with digital fabrication. Like wax, after casting, plaster can continue to be shaped by sanding and carving. Plaster takes to wet media well—we have found it to be a terrific surface for marbling. CelluClay: CelluClay, a brand of papier-mâché pulp, is material that can be used for casting that’s non-toxic and kid-friendly. We mix it up in a plastic bag with water for a mess-free container. The corner of the bag can be snipped off and the mushy pulp squished into the mold.

Chocolate: What’s not to love? Use food grade Smooth-Sil 940 silicone and a double boiler set up for your chocolate. 3D Surface Treatments Another way to use art materials to expand the variety of visual expression is through surface treatments of 3D form. The 3D printer outputs in plastic, usually PLA or ABS. In our lab, we use variety of materials listed here for surface treatments: Pour paint: After giving your 3D-printed piece a light priming coat with gesso, you can drip, drizzle, and pour acrylic paint over forms. This technique requires a good deal of drying time but the results are exciting. 3D Doodler: Using ABS, which has a higher temperature over PLA, the extruded material welds lines into the surface of forms. This tool can be used to create textile-like textures, contour lines, or designs. Metal Leaf: Metal leaf is a simple process of pressing extremely thin metal films onto a prepared surface with adhesive. This transforms a 3D surface into a shiny, metallic one. 3DDoodler Totem

Spray paint: After gessoing surfaces, spray paint works well for a surface treatment. We use matte, gloss, and “stone effects” varieties over the top of 3D shapes.

2D Surface Treatments Certain materials and processes lend themselves to 2D applications in digital fabrication. In our lab, we use those listed here for surface treatments: Marbling wood: Âź inch plywood is a great material for marbling and laser cutting. The marbling can be done after the parts are cut or before. For marbling we use a carrageenan solution with Higgins waterproof inks.

Cyanotype fabric: We use laundered lightweight cotton for cyanotype printing. The chemicals from the Photographersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Formulary Liquid Cyanotype Printing Kit, which comes with a Solution A and B, are mixed up in a 1:1 volume and applied to the fabric in a dark room. Once dry, the fabric can be exposed to UV light using a variety of materials and stencils from your digital fabrication lab. Screen-printing: Cut vinyl makes a terrific stencil for screen-printing. Either mask a traditional screen or an embroidery hoop with stretched silk. There are lots of options with silkscreen including ink on a t-shirt, or paper, or even glaze onto leather hard clay. Embossing clay: If you are working in ceramics, laser cut paper or poster board makes an embossment tool for leather hard clay. For handmade tiles, roll paper design gently into the surface to create image negative. Etching metal: Maker educator, Casey Shea, introduced me to a metal etching process using a vinyl cut stencil and a battery and salt water to speed up the oxidation process. We use this technique for an etching metal tins, aluminum, and copper. To prevent rust on Altoids tins, we buff the surface with a thin layer of wax.

Light Light is a favorite design element to incorporate into art projects. Whether the light source is from LEDs, circuit stickers, or microcontroller-driven neo-pixels, often a light chamber or material for diffusion is in order. Listed are some ideas for materials that pair well with light. Glue and embedded objects: Regular white glue dries to a filmy white translucency. Glue is slow drying, but during warm months, when poured glue can be left in the sun to dry, this makes a great technique for creating light windows. Cover one side of a laser-cut window with packing tape, making sure the edges are sealed. If you want to embed objects in your glue, you can add them directly into the window and pour glue over the top up to the edge of the material. Once completely dry, the packing tape can carefully be pulled off the back to reveal the glue window. Packing Tape: Packing tape is a great material for forming shapes and the crinkly nature diffuses light beautifully. Packing tape can also be used as a casting material when original form is covered first with plastic film.

Laser Cutting Paper: Inspired by Jennifer Jacobs Codeable Objects library in Processing, we have been juxtaposing opaque laser cut design work with translucent paper, to provide shadow contrast in projects. Standard railroad board and colorful rice paper pair well together as do marble paper and tissues. Spray paint raster layer: An alternative to colored acrylic is to prepare clear acrylic with spray paint. When the spray paint layer is rastered away, it can be used in light applications. Fusing In an effort to reuse scraps and move towards a more sustainable lab practice, we are always looking for ways to upcycle materials. Here are some examples of heating low melting point plastics to form and fuse materials. PLA glass: Scraps and thin PLA prints can be heated in the toaster oven at 400°F. PLA can act like paint; it can be sticky and viscous when heated to melting temperature and then used for flat design, or can be shaped into 3D forms when warm. Plastic bag fusing: LDPE, a common plastic used in many bags (recycle symbol "2"), is fusible with a household iron. We cut and stack the bags, sandwiching them between papers, and slowly run the iron across the paper. It’s important to let the plastic cool before removing. This plastic “fabric” sews beautifully! 3D printing on fabric scraps: I learned about this technique from artist and educator, Trisha Barton, who did this activity with her students. She used very thin meshy material like tulle as a base layer for 3D printing. The holes capture the material, and the heated bed fuses it to the fabric.

Drawing and Painting Studio practice of drawing and painting can take a new turn with digital fabrication and creative technologies. A few processes we have been working with are listed here: Dry, wet digital media: Changing scale can provide a fresh eye into the world of art materials. Using a webcam microscope that has been fitted with sealed glass we have been drawing, painting and pushing around materials to capture microfilms and microstills. This is an opportunity to explore the science of materials such as: oil and water resist, salt effects, paper towel bleeds, and marbling solution ink floats. CNC Drawing: Recently I was inspired by the work Jaymes Dec was doing in the Marymount lab where he was using the vinyl cutter as a plotter. Every single machine in the digital fabrication has the potential to be a drawing tool. This is an interesting challenge for students. The 3D printer can be used to print â&#x20AC;&#x153;thinsâ&#x20AC;? or shallow reliefs, the laser cutter can draw a score line, the CNC router can be outfitted with a sharpie or used for relief cuts on material. The 2D mark-making possibilities are endless.

Out of focus/In-focus and power scoring: Adjusting the focus and power on the laser when scoring can offer another way to express line weight. An out-offocus laser creates a thick, dark, line and in-focus creates the sharpest, most precise line. These variables can be used in an artistic way for your laser cutting projects. Concentrated scoring: Scoring high-density shapes can create an interesting mark vocabulary that can mimic stippling.

Other There are other processes we use in the lab that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t neatly fit into categories but offer interesting material options. Baked goods: Freshly baked gingerbread cuts and scores beautifully in the laser cutter. If your cut doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t go all the way through, it can easily be separated with an x-acto blade. Flexible sheets: Printing very thin materials in flexible filament has been a favorite for our students interested in costume design. These sheets can be integrated and sewn into fabrics.

Super thin: Originally an exercise in learning about slicing software, we have been testing the limits of how thin and fine we can make 3D prints. These â&#x20AC;&#x153;thinsâ&#x20AC;? pair nicely with PLA scraps and melting. Spoil board rubbings: As the CNC bed builds up a history on the spoil board, we capture that history with rubbings. This is a great activity before resurfacing the bed. Bending light on flatbed scanner: Sandwiching a vinyl sticker between plates of glass on a flatbed scanner can create beautiful light bending effects when backlit with a strong flood light.

Making Coding Stick: From Turtle Art Programming to Vinyl Decals Chesna Flora, Adam Romary, and Adena Dershowitz Lycée Français de New York New York, NY Abstract Students make judgements at an early age about their talents and interests. The Lycée Français de New York, a PreK-12 bilingual and international independent school, encourages young students to explore computer science through multiple entry points. To bridge computer science and math with art, and to connect abstract concepts with hands-on products, fourth-grade students investigated answers to the question, "How can we make artwork using programming?" Students used the Turtle Art application (based on the LOGO programming language) to create designs through block-based code. Students then worked in the Lycée makerspace to use the vinyl cutter to create stickers. The Lycée exhibited each sticker alongside each student's code, and the Lycée community appreciated the opportunity to observe both the products and the process involved to create the stickers. Giving a concrete purpose to student work provided energy and practical motivation for the application of math and computer science concepts. Introduction and Context The Lycée Français de New York is a pre-K through 12th-grade bilingual, international school on the Upper East Side of Manhattan that combines American and French curricula in one program. Each year at the Lycée, over 1300 students discover, explore, and create from teams of French and American teachers who bring their unique approaches and backgrounds in teaching and learning, along with their languages, into the classroom every day. In 2013, the Lycée established the Digital Learning Department with the mission to enrich and equip teaching and learning through the use of technology. The digital learning team is made up of a primary school integrator, a secondary school integrator, a maker integrator, a media integrator, a computer science teacher, and a department head. The department enriches learning through co-teaching and coaching teachers to apply technology in all academic subject areas. To equip students for an ever-changing, technologically dependent world, digital learning

integrators teach digital citizenship, computer science, making, and media skills in grades 3-12. In elementary grades 3-5, students explore computer programming processes and concepts, and they code in block-based ("drag and drop") programming languages. At this level, the study of computer science fosters problem-solving skills, develops digital literacy, and practices persistence and focus through iterative debugging processes. Logo and Turtle Art Seymour Papert and his MIT colleagues developed the LOGO programming language in 1967 1 . The language was designed specifically for education, and during the 1970s, it was piloted in schools all over the world. Most versions of LOGO incorporate the turtle as the figure to be programmed, the "computercontrolled cybernetic animal" or "constructed computational 'object-to-thinkwith'"2. Children can concretely see how a computer interprets commands through the responses of the turtle. LOGO is still widely used as a first computer programming language in schools. Turtle Art is a LOGO-inspired application for creating images. Through the process of artmaking, students can explore computational and geometrical principles through a block-based interface. Using this interface, children can delve into concepts deeply without focusing on technical precision in spelling or syntax. Project Overview The sticker project was implemented throughout the fourth grade with five homeroom classes of 20 to 21 students. The one-hour lessons took place in the classrooms and Makerspace. They were led by the digital learning integrator and were supported by their French homeroom teacher. While in the Makerspace, the maker integrator also assisted. Students used a MacBook Pro from a shared laptop cart and saved their files to their folder on the desktop. This project is in its second iteration. In the first year, it was implemented with Turtle Art only. This new version was designed to follow a project-based learning model in which we asked the challenging question, “How can we create artwork using programming?”. In order to answer this question students needed to learn basic programming skills, new mathematical concepts, and the aesthetic merits of various designs.

Lesson Progression and Objectives 1

Logo Foundation. “Logo History.” Logo History, Logo Foundation, 2015, el.media.mit.edu/logo-foundation/what_is_logo/history.html. 2 Papert, Seymour. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. 2nd ed., Basicbooks, 1993.

While some students had previous experiences with computer programming in earlier grades and after-school clubs, most began at the same level. The lessons were structured to give the students a general overview of computer programming before starting to code. Proper definition of terms was very important as students tended to misuse words such as “code” and “bug”. Students acquired vocabulary such as “loops” and “algorithms” and to understand the importance of logic, command order, and efficiency. We also briefly spoke about functions and how to use them to increase efficiency. Introduction to computer programming Lesson 1 - to clarify the idea of "coding" - to understand how computer programming is important in today's world

Lesson 2

- Review computer programing vocabulary - Further their understanding of algorithms and variables

Lesson 3 - Understand variables and conditions in different scenarios

Lesson 4

- Create a logical algorithm based on a real life scenario - Evaluate student learning

Additional math concepts were also necessary for students to use Turtle Art. At this age, students are familiar with a few different types of triangles and sometimes their interior angles, but in order to write their program, they also needed to understand how to create the triangle using an exterior angle. Other mathematical concepts that were necessary to go over were the Cartesian plane and the X- and Y-axis so that students could use the “setxy” command. Finally, to create circles they reviewed concepts of radius and diameter.

The artistic component was one of the most appealing to the students and motivated those who were less enthusiastic about computer programming. While 26

the final project had artistic constraints, students were given time to explore what was possible with Turtle Art programming using different pen sizes, colors, and the “repeat” and “setxy” commands to make different patterns.

Introduction to Turtle Art - Understand the idea of commands and algorithms Lesson 5 - Put together commands in order to create specific shapes - Use the repeat command in order to make algorithms more efficient - Understand the angle and radius for creating circles

- Start to understand the concept of the x/y axis and how to use the setxy command in Turtle Art Lesson 6 - Understand how to modify the colors - How to use the random command to change colors and locations - Understand the angles necessary to make an equilateral triangle - Understand the similarities between an algorithm for a square and for an Lesson 7 equilateral triangle - Experiment with other types of triangles - Learn about other commands available with the purpose of creating an algorithm that will draw something aesthetically pleasing: pen up/down & Lesson 8 size/color/shade, heading, help cursor, creating a "stack", and fill screen/start & end fill.

Before starting the final project, students were shown examples of vinyl cut Turtle Art designs so that they would have a better understanding of how the machine worked and what it produced. This also helped to motivate them to learn specific coding skills to personalize their designs.

Designing for the vinyl cutter Lessons 9 & 10 - Understand the limitations of creating a design with the purpose of being sent to the vinyl cutter

- Create a final product Lesson 11 - Understand how to save artwork and code in a "friendly" format - Know how to upload and share file on Google Drive

Lesson 12 Understand how to transfer a vinyl cut design to another surface

Vinyl Cutter Benefits and Process The vinyl cutter is a relatively inexpensive machine that cuts stickers from a material consisting of a colored adhesive plastic film mounted to a paper backing, similar to contact paper. The sticker is easy to display on a water bottle, binder, or bedroom wall. It is a durable product, generated by students' own original code, which serves as both a reminder of the skills they’ve learned and as a motivator for future projects. While choice of color is limited to the vinyl material on hand, the available colors are often more bold and intense than ink and include styles that a printer cannot produce, such as metallic and holographic. In order to send the students’ algorithms and designs to the vinyl cutter, every student saved their Turtle Art design (with its algorithm) as a .png file. They then uploaded their file to a shared folder on Google Drive. Their files were converted to .svg format using an online converter, re-uploaded to Google Drive, and then shared with the Maker Integrator. The individual .svg files were loaded together into the cutting software, “Sure Cuts a Lot.” This software allows the user to size and place designs on the roll. The maker integrator elected to scale the designs to about 15 cm across. It took about an hour to cut twenty students’ stickers with our USCutter SC-631 machine. During cutting, a tiny blade moves over the vinyl and slices only through the colored film, leaving the paper backing intact. Integrators then cut each student’s work from the larger roll. Students came to the Makerspace and received their designs.

Preparing for Exhibition

Vinyl stickers are very thin and flexible and require a special technique to place them smoothly. The first step is peel and discard vinyl from the negative space. This process is called weeding. Care was taken so that the adhesive from waste vinyl did not stick to the design as it was being removed. Students used sewing pins to help lift smaller pieces. An added benefit is the practice with manual dexterity that students experienced when removing the negative space from their cut. A second type of adhesive film, transfer tape, was placed over each design, and used to lift the sticker from the backing. When lifted, the adhesive side of the vinyl film was exposed, and students moved the stickers to white cardstock. The transfer tape served as extra support and allowed students to position and smooth the stickers relatively easily. Finally, they cut out printed versions of their algorithms and pasted them to cardstock, displaying how they programmed the computer to make their art. They signed their name on their cardstock as one would a piece of art. The work of all students was displayed in a main hallway outside of the cafeteria, and students received an additional sticker copy for personal use.

Reflection and Future Directions

Students were motivated by their work being displayed in a public space, and due to time constraints, it was not possible to formally invite the entire grade and parents to the exhibition. Widening the audience would be an important step not only to increase the visibility of the product and therefore the stakes of the project, but also to give the students time to look at and reflect upon their work. Most studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Turtle Art algorithms produced radially symmetric designs using a single string of repeated code. An extension would be to have students build variables or multiple functions into their code to construct more diverse patterns. Students could also be challenged to create designs for specific purposes, such as a picture frame or signage. Upon reflection, the adaptations from the first year added significantly to student motivation, collaboration between faculty, and quality of student products. The involved faculty look forward to implementing further changes in the coming year.

Making as Assessment and Assessing Making Angi Chau, Heather Allen Pang, and Karen Strobel Castilleja School Palo Alto, CA Abstract There is currently great momentum in the K-12 education community to incorporate making into the daily lives of students. In fact, we believe these types of hands-on learning experiences exemplify authentic assessment tasks since students have the opportunity to demonstrate their learning and understanding through highly engaging and meaningful activities. However, maker activities are infrequently assessed, and we believe there is a need to better understand how to take advantage of these assessment opportunities. In this chapter, we aim to help everyone reimagine the design of making activities and assessment tasks as part of the same design cycle. Introduction As maker spaces and programs are becoming more common in schools across the country, teachers, parents, and policy makers want evidence to show how and why maker education is valuable for students. It is easy to observe the ways in which making projects engage students in creative, hands-on tasks since such projects are almost by their very definition highly engaging. However, if educators only think of these activities as a way to achieve high student engagement, then we risk maker-centered learning being seen by the wider education community as another â&#x20AC;&#x153;add-onâ&#x20AC;? experience and thus, isolating it solely into optional, elective, or afterschool settings. Instead, we believe that making activities, and hands-on projects in general, present richly authentic learning opportunities for students and, as such, deserve a place in every classroom. In this chapter, we walk through one example of a making project that was originally designed for a specific set of learning goals and highlight some simple, yet critical steps for embedding assessment opportunities within this one activity. We further show how this same making activity can actually serve as the foundation upon which adaptations can be designed for assessing a variety of learning goals. Through our example, we will illustrate how maker-centered learning experiences can exemplify authentic assessment tasks that present students with opportunities to demonstrate their learning and understanding as they engage in meaningful and relevant activities. Moreover, we will highlight the 31

power of explicitly including assessment planning as part of the project design process. Narrowing the Focus At Castilleja School, an independent, all-girls school for grades 6-12 in California, students in Heather Pangâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 8th grade history classes are challenged to build a telegraph from a specific set of parts. At first glance, it is easy to see how this making project allows the students to experience the technology of a particular historical period and develop historical empathy, which was why Heather started designing this project during the Constructing Modern Knowledge summer institute back in 2014. When Heather returned the following school year with her prototype in hand, we began working together to dig deeper into questions about why students in a history class should take the time to build a telegraph in the first place.

When planning projects, many of us tend to focus most of our time and energy on planning the logistics of a project in terms of materials, time, space, workflow, and classroom instructions. While these details are of course crucial (the project wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be able to run without them!), to truly take advantage of this project as an authentic performance assessment opportunity, we need to determine which learning goals we want to target before we get too far along in the planning of the logistical details. Building a telegraph has the potential to teach students about life during a specific historical period, as well as physics principles related to electromagnetism and circuitry. In addition to knowledge of history or physics, building a telegraph requires skills such as problem solving and collaboration and can give insight into studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; mindsets such as their curiosity or their ability to take initiative and engage as self-directed learners. While building a telegraph, students can potentially demonstrate any and all of these examples of knowledge, skills, or mindsets. In our experience, it is more manageable to focus on one or two learning goals as you continue through the process of designing the activity and assessment. Building a telegraph is an example of a core idea for a hands-on project 32

that can be tweaked and adjusted to allow students to both work on and demonstrate progress towards a specific learning goal. In the following sections, we will provide specific examples of how to design the telegraph project in different ways to promote and assess different learning goals. Assessing Content Knowledge through Making The “Build a Telegraph” project was originally designed to be integrated into a history curriculum, and our initial task focused on assessing the historical content that Heather prioritized for this particular unit. The experience of building a telegraph should help students gain historical empathy, contribute to their understanding of the historical significance of this particular invention, and allow them to consider how technological inventions can influence the course of history in a larger sense. While many educators can easily imagine how these goals are likely achieved as students are actively engaging with the project, Heather wanted more concrete evidence, in the form of assessments, to give her a sense of whether and how each student in the class was meeting these goals. As our team pondered this challenge, we thought back to our own learning moments and realized that personal reflection not only plays a significant role in the process of learning, but also is in itself a form of evidence of our own learning. And if reflection can be built into the project, then it also becomes a way to “signal” to students what lens we want them to take during the hands-on activity. Using this idea as a springboard, we designed a series of reflection/journaling prompts that students were asked to respond to before, during, and after the activity. These prompts were written with the express purpose of guiding students toward further developing their understanding of historical knowledge, as well as providing the teacher (Heather in this case) concrete evidence of student learning. We combined the materials for building the telegraph, the reflection prompts, and a curated set of historical documents relevant to responding to the prompts into the “kit” for this project. In addition, since Heather’s learning goals did not involve students necessarily understanding the science behind how telegraph works and we would rather they spend the time and effort in learning about its historical significance, we included within the “kit” basic building instructions and the ability to examine a working model.

After successfully prototyping this project in history class, we then wondered whether the same core making project could be adapted for a different set of learning goals. Specifically, what would we need to change about the project and accompanying workflow if we wanted to use “Build a Telegraph” in an engineering or physics class? To answer this question, we again first outlined a concrete set of learning goals relevant to engineering and physics. For example, in this context, we would be more interested in assessing and gathering evidence that shows students’ understanding of how telegraphs work as well as what physics principles are at work within this piece of technology. With these learning goals in mind, we then designed a separate set of reflection prompts that could be used in an engineering/physics classroom for this project. And because the acts of “figuring it out” and “testing out hypotheses” are crucial to understanding the science behind telegraphs, we decided that in this context, students should not have access to building instructions or a working model.

Assessing Skills and Mindset through Making Once our team went through the exercise of adapting the same core making activity to assess two very different types of content knowledge (history versus physics), we decided we can actually take this process even further. Can the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Build a Telegraphâ&#x20AC;? project be adapted to assess studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; collaboration skills, for example? Or their problem-solving skills? As in the scenarios mentioned in the previous sections, once we decided on the specific single skill we were interested in assessing during this activity, it was actually not too difficult to design tweaks to the telegraph-building project that could help us assess and gather evidence of what we are looking for. If we want to assess collaboration skills through this project, we could design a set of self- and peer-assessment reflection prompts and a group observation rubric for the teacher to use during the activity. We can even adapt the making activity such that only one person in a group is allowed to interact with a working example to emphasize the learning goal that everyone can contribute to the shared group goal in different ways in effective collaborations.

Leveraging Making Projects as Assessment Tools As you can see from the examples above, using the same process of narrowing to a single focus, reflection prompts and workflow adaptations can be designed for nearly any content, skill, and/or mindset that an educator would be interested in assessing, including curiosity (ask students to reflect on what they wondered about while building the telegraph) and initiative (design observation rubrics for teachers to observe studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; self-directed learning during the activity). Ultimately, when using making projects as assessment instruments, the major decision educators have to make is what learning goals they are focusing on in this particular project. Just as students cannot learn everything in one project, keep in mind that we should not expect to assess a laundry list of learning goals through a single project. For educators of younger students, who often are the only (or one of very few) teachers of those particular students (and are thus responsible for teaching all the subjects), it is extremely critical to identify the specific learning goals you are focusing on and, at least in the first iteration of the project, narrow these goals to fit within one subject area. Educators of older students (middle school and above) may have an easier time with this decision, since classes become subject-specific in the older grades; but here again, we highly encourage narrowing the focus to only a few learning goals to start. We are excited by the rise in popularity of maker-centered learning in formal education settings because these hands-on learning experiences are not only

deeply engaging to students, but they also exemplify authentic assessment tasks. By reimagining the design of making activities and assessment tools as part of the same design cycle, educators can gather concrete evidence of student learning that do not feel like â&#x20AC;&#x153;add-onsâ&#x20AC;? to these rich experiences.

Discovery, Agency & Activism: The 11th Grade Trip Allison Isbell, Chris Keimig, and Mark Silberberg LREI New York, NY Introduction In the spring of 2015, as an outgrowth of the Little Red School House & Elisabeth Irwinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (LREI) strategic plan, LREI Director Phil Kassen posed two important questions to the high school faculty: How might we create a weeklong overnight trip for our eleventh graders that is mission aligned, open to all, and embedded in the curriculum? What if the entire junior class traveled to the city of Detroit and used the city as a lens to explore and learn about the challenges and opportunities of the modern urban city in transition?

LREI students in the 1950s visiting coal mines in Pennsylvania

While these were both questions of the moment, they were born out of LREI’s longstanding use of the field trip as an important tool for creating experience and opportunities for learning. As articulated by Agnes De Lima in 1942 in The Little Red School House: They need challenging tasks . . . . They are cramped by the four walls of the classroom and eager to explore the world beyond . . . . They enjoy the unexpected; it offers a test of their ability to deal with a situation. From our earliest days, trips have been an essential part of our school program; the curriculum is built around the children’s explorations of the world. We have referred also to the necessity on the teacher’s part of careful planning for these trips and the development of a technique which will insure safety, avoid strain and fatigue, and make certain that the children get all there is to be got from the excursion. No trip must be taken without long preparation. (pp. 95-96 & 153) And as LREI Teacher Norman Studer also observes in The Little Red School House: The usual trips for [high school] pupils have been to libraries and museums, worthy enough places but nevertheless repositories of embalmed culture. They do not afford the intellectual and emotional stimulation that comes from contact with the living book of man’s everyday life. . . . The Little Red School House has attempted to tear down the walls of the classroom and bring the adolescent child into direct contact with the community. . . . The most important outcome of all comes in terms of personality growth directly traceable to these trips. Children notoriously lacking in serious interests suddenly become interested in social problems. A feeling of kinship with people totally different began to develop. Their trips not only caused them to have an understanding of people but gave them the stimulus to do something about it. (pp. 158-160)

Photo 02

In response to Phil’s call to action, a planning team of interested high school faculty members was formed. The group enthusiastically jumped into the work of exploring Detroit as a destination, and also began to explore other possible cities. During this process, team members noted that the inquiry they were engaged in as a team was precisely the work with which students might be productively engaged as a foundational component of the trip experience. That is, the adults should not debate the potential for learning in various cities, reach consensus on a destination, prepare an itinerary and learning goals, and then present this to the students as a fait accompli. This must be the work of the students carried out with the support of their teachers. The group agreed, but also understood that going down this path invited a much higher degree of risk. Would the students be up for the task? Would they be able to meet the very real deadlines to ensure that there would in fact be a trip? High School Academic Dean Allison Isbell was not fazed by these challenges. “This junior class is unbelievably strong, with many outstanding students and leaders,” Allison shared. “We knew they would have compelling ideas.”

Pivoting towards this new idea of a student-designed trip experience, the team devised a series of “Trip Labs” for the fall. These labs created time and space for the 11th graders to give voice to the important social issues that they saw as impacting their world and our nation’s cities. Then through a process involving brainstorming, research, debate, presentation, and consensus building, the students were called on to arrive at a set of organizing issues around which trips to one or more cities would be designed. Underlying this process was a project mission statement developed by trip coordinators Allison Isbell and Chris Keimig that stated: Understanding one’s relationship to–and capacity to have an impact on– the most pressing challenges facing our society is a necessarily dynamic process. Thus, the best places to engage in this work are in places that are themselves dynamic–places that are in transition, that are working to change, adapt, and transform themselves for survival in a changing world. It is our purpose and mission at LREI to graduate citizens who are ready to engage in shaping their own communities, who believe in their capacity to affect change for the future, and who know that they can and should be a part of that process. We believe the time spent observing, learning about, and working alongside communities in transition is essential to cultivating these qualities in our students.

Later in the fall, the eleventh-grade class gathered in the high school auditorium where eighteen pairs of students presented topics to their classmates. As the presentations unfolded, some students preferred their peers’ ideas and, in real time, dismissed their own. Then, employing flexible thinking, groups partnered with each other and created coalition-building opportunities around common goals. Eighteen teams were narrowed to ten, and then, through a survey process, to a final six, each to become the core focus of a trip comprised of 10-12 students. The six framing issues were: ● ● ● ● ● ●

Refugee resettlement Sustainability and climate change Farm workers’ rights Educational equity Mass incarceration and criminal justice Urban revitalization

With the issues identified, each team was then tasked with the challenge of developing an essential question to guide their trip and with researching three cities where their issue and its associated opportunities and challenges might be productively explored. Of their three cities, one had to be within driving distance

and inquiry in all of their proposed destinations had to connect to both the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mission and the tripâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mission. Each team then presented their ideas to a panel of administrators who after weighing a variety of factors determined the destination city for each group. The final destinations were:

Chicago, Illinois: Issues in Criminal Justice Essential Question: In what ways has our criminal justice system served as a conduit for mass incarceration in Chicago and beyond? How are governmental and community organizations successfully disrupting this pipeline?

Detroit, Michigan: Equity in Education Essential Question: How can we reimagine schools and teaching in order to ensure that the needs of all learners are being met, and all learners have the tools they need to succeed? Detroit, Michigan: Urban Revitalization Essential Question: What role are cultural institutions, urban agriculture, and new businesses playing in renewing and developing the urban fiber of Detroit? Hurricane Island, Maine: Sustainability Essential Question: How is scallop and lobster sustainability in the Bay of Maine affected by climate change? Immokalee, Florida: Justice for Farm Workers Essential Question: How can we reimagine modern agriculture in order to protect the rights, dignity, and access to opportunity for the workers growing our food?

Louisville, Kentucky: Refugee Resettlement Essential Question: What role can the U.S. play in relieving and aiding humanitarian crises across the globe? How can U.S. cities most effectively absorb and support refugee communities? During their weekly Trip Lab period, students and teachers then began the complex task of reaching out to potential partners in their destination cities and developing an itinerary for the trip. In addition, each student took a history elective seminar that addressed the larger themes connected to the trip in some way. Finally, in the early hours of an April morning, students and their teachermentors left via planes and vans for their various destinations and a week filled with learning. While each group explored different issues connected to different experiences, students discovered a number of shared themes that emerged upon their return from these diverse experiences. Stephanie (Justice for Farm Workers): On the Monday when we got back from the trips, everyone was talking about the trips and even the people who werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t really excited about the trips before we left were super excited. They were sharing a bunch of different stories and anecdotes about things that they learned, things that they saw and things that were unjust. I think that it really brought out hidden things for people. It made our classroom experiences so much richer because we werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t just talking about English; we were making things connections to the trips. We were connecting the material we were learning with the experiences that we had. It was really able to integrate itself into our curriculum.

Tyrell (Equity in Education): I’ve been going to LREI for 13 years and the trip definitely fulfilled the mission of the school — what we talk about and what we try to do. After the trip, I started an X-Block class called “Let’s Do Something for Social Justice.” The trip really motivated me to want to do something — to help make a change in the educational system. It was the best trip that I’ve been on and the most educational. Going into the trip I was like, “I’m going to change somebody’s life.” And then they told me that it was place-based learning and I said, “I don’t really know what that means.” But I realized after the first day that I had learned so much. I didn’t use Google once. I learned so much from just being there — experiencing it first hand. It was so great. Following on the success of this first iteration, Allison, Chris, and the trip mentors debriefed the experience in order to identify opportunities on which to build and challenge areas that required some redesign. In the fall of 2016, we embarked on a new series of Trip Labs that led to the following trip destinations and essential questions: ● Austin, Texas: Sexual Health Legislation Essential Question: How are various stakeholders using sexual health legislation to affect access to reproductive justice and sex education and to eliminate sexual assault in their communities? How can our legislative process be harnessed to create positive sexual health outcomes for all citizens? ● Charleston, South Carolina: Climate Change in Coastal Communities Essential Question: How is sea level rise affecting the city of Charleston and how are stakeholders participating in the process of designing a resiliency plan that ensures protection for all citizens of Charleston? ● Baltimore, Maryland & Washington, D.C.: Education Justice Essential Question: What are the ways in which schools and activist groups mobilize students to respond to injustice in the education system? What are the differences between public, charter, and private schools in relation to these initiatives?

● Window Rock, Arizona: Environmental Justice for Native American Peoples Essential Question: How are stakeholders in Native American communities working to address a decades-long history of environmental racism and resource extraction that has left water sources polluted and communities isolated? ● Omaha, Nebraska: Farming and Food in America Essential Question: What are the different models of food production in America specifically as illustrated in Nebraska? How are Nebraska farms making the transition to sustainable practice, and what is the impact of this transition on local environments and food production? ● Seattle, Washington: Police and Community Essential Question: How can police departments and communities work together to create a more equitable, accountable, and integrated model for policing that protects the rights of all citizens and upholds democratic ideals?

In reflecting on their experiences, this year’s cohort of students described powerful moments from their trips that had affected them—moments that challenged their assumptions, complicated their worldviews, and ignited their desire to act. Students described experiences and learning that would never have been possible within the walls of a classroom.

Dalton, who traveled to Navajo Nation, summed this up for the group. “You can read as many articles as you want,” he said to his classmates their first morning back, “but there are some things you can never really understand until you go there and see them for yourself.” On her last night in Seattle, as the group shared their final meal together and unpacked the experiences they had had throughout the week, Gisell remarked to her group, “I feel like we’re getting to see this issue from every different perspective and through a bunch of different lenses, and it’s way more complicated than I thought.”

It is precisely this appreciation of the nuance and complexity of these issues—the relationships between the various stakeholders, systems, and institutions that impede change or make it possible—that is at the heart of the trip experience. This LREI experiment in place-based studies could turn into a progressive education model for other secondary schools as well as colleges and universities. Allison remarks, “This process confirms that progressive pedagogy is alive and thriving in the hands of our students.” Chris continues, “This is the most progressive thing I’ve ever done as a teacher, and that our students have ever done. We took a real risk, and the payoff is going to be life-changing.”

Take Two! Two Years of Kindergarten: Two Introductory Years of Blogging Jill Voras and Rona Wolfe Milwaukee Jewish Day School Milwaukee, WI Introduction The essential question at MJDS is “Who owns the learning and what does it look like each and every day?” At Milwaukee Jewish Day School, our students truly own their learning. Our teachers have a flexible mindset and a commitment to creating a culture and a developmentally appropriate structure that allows this ownership to occur. Blogging at MJDS In both our junior (JK) and senior (SK) kindergarten classrooms, this ownership is seen through blogging, an extension of our reading and writing curriculum. Our youngest students blog regularly. Blogging allows our four- and five-year- olds the opportunity to gain a new definition of writing. Informal, diary-type posts define the beginning of our blogging experience. Blogs also introduce our students to the skills of documentation and reflection. When kindergarten students document their learning, they are applying their beginning understanding of sequencing as well as verbal and written storytelling. They are also using their imaginations and illustrations to enhance meaning. When they reflect on their learning, they become accountable, they think about their thinking (metacognition) and share their strengths and challenges with an authentic audience. In our junior kindergarten classroom, blogging begins with an opportunity for reflection and sharing our school experiences. Just as illustrating is the beginning of developmentally appropriate early writing experiences (for example, in our writing journals), blogging helps our youngest students think about an experience or lesson, reflect on it, and then choose important information to share with others. We choose pictures of events, draw our own illustrations, or dictate stories to share with our readers. What a powerful experience for a four-year-old child to be able to choose what is important to write about and then communicate those ideas with others. This demonstrates an important ownership of learning. As one JK student announced excitedly on the way back from a class trip, “I know

exactly what I want to blog about when we get back to school!â&#x20AC;? This process not only guides us in early writing skills, but also becomes a key component in communicating with families who are new to the school and new to the benefits, both academically and social/emotionally, of this type of learning process. In senior kindergarten, blogging is viewed not only as a reflection, but also as a space for documentation of student work. Students start to take ownership of their learning as they begin to choose what they will put on their pages. Students enjoy being able to monitor their growth and progress by looking back at pieces from the beginning of the year. They begin to understand that learning is a process. This holds true for reading and writing as well. A senior kindergarten student asked the other day, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Are we in the Immersion Stage of writing right now?â&#x20AC;? In addition, our kindergarten students anxiously await responses to their blog posts from their teachers, parents, grandparents, and other students at MJDS. They understand the relationship between sharing their writing and receiving feedback from others. The writing process, in a workshop model of teaching, as well as research in best practices in teaching and learning, focuses on the importance of feedback from peers, teachers, and the outside world. Blogging is one of the first opportunities for four- and five-year-olds to receive such feedback. Blogs also allow our students to share their knowledge, feelings, and ideas as they begin their life-long journey as readers and writers. We help our students take control of their own ideas and learning processes. Presently, blogging is the key tool that allows our JK and SK students to own their learning.

Analyzing Visual Algorithms: Your Weekend Weather Atmospheric Science Class, Class of 2018 Marymount School of New York New York, NY Abstract Weather forecasting is mainly concerned with the prediction of weather conditions in the future. There are a variety of approaches to weather forecasting, from simple observations of the sky to highly complex computerized mathematical models. While some may poke fun at weather forecasting, algorithms offer a key tool in the analysis of current weather data. In this chapter, the use of algorithms as a tool for forecasting will be discussed. While the government and private sectors may provide forecasts for public information and for profit, respectively, students in the senior elective Atmospheric Science use algorithms to research, write, film, and produce a weekend weather forecast. The forecasting project serves as a mechanism by which students apply the forecasting skills they learn in class to real-world scenarios and as a means by which students receive authentic feedback on their work. This chapter outlines this innovative project. Introduction Marymount School of New York is an independent, all-girls, N-XII school in New York City. At Marymount, we firmly believe that students learn best by doing. Through active, experiential learning, students get their hands dirty in the pursuit of knowledge. Projects draw connections across the curriculum. This interdisciplinary work is largely student led with guidance and support from teachers and specialists. Using new technologies alongside more traditional tools, students imagine and build, engineer and design, prototype and make. Through their work, students learn logical reasoning, algorithmic thinking, and creative problem solving — all concepts and skills that are valuable well beyond the classroom. But perhaps more importantly, the challenges of trial and error lead to the joy of creation and the development of resilience and perseverance in our students. Moreover, Marymount’s mission asks us to educate young women who “question, risk, and grow; care, serve, and lead; and who are prepared to challenge, shape, and change the world.”

The senior elective Atmospheric Science was introduced in 2003. Specifically geared towards students who opted not to purse Advanced Placement courses in the sciences, Atmospheric Science was designed to be project based, with students using real-time and historical weather data as a basis for their learning. The course description states the following: This college-level, project-based course presents the principles of meteorology with a focus on weather forecasting and climatology. Topics include atmospheric structure, radiation and energy imbalances, air pressure, humidity and atmospheric moisture, atmospheric stability, precipitation and cloud formation, circulation systems, severe weather, ocean currents and ocean transport, and climate change. Relying on their previous scientific knowledge and using real-time weather data, students develop a deeper understanding of the processes that govern atmospheric motion. Students gain membership in the Marymount Chapter of the American Meteorological Society and may earn four college credits through the Earth Science Outreach Program (ESOP) through SUNY Oneonta. Algorithms and Predictions In his article, “What’s the Deal with Algorithms” (Slate; February 2, 2016), Jacob Brogan defines an algorithm as “a set of guidelines that describe how to perform a task.” In his book The Master Algorithm, author Pedro Domingos writes, “An algorithm is a sequence of instructions telling a computer what to do.” Moreover, “when you ask a digital assistant, like Siri or Cortana, a question, algorithmic operations inform both its sense of what you’ve asked and the information provided in response.” (Brogan. Slate; February 2, 2016). Using that broad definition, the development of a weather forecast uses a human algorithm that requires the analysis of real-time data and numerical model data to inform “what you have asked” (what are the current weather conditions?) and “the information provided in response” (what will the weather be for the next three days). Predictions are part of our daily existence. Baseball aficionados will predict the divisional champions and World Series champions. Political pundits will predict election winners, from the national level all the way down to individual voting precincts. Financial advisors predict trends in the stock market as well as the performance of individual stocks. Rarely, though, are these predictions evaluated.

The same is true in the science laboratory. Students may predict the results of an experiment, in verifying a specific law or relationship. Often, though, it can be easy to overlook the validity of the initial prediction. According to Project 2061, science presumes that things and events in the universe occur in consistent patterns that are comprehensible through careful, systematic study. Scientists believe that through the use of intellect, and with the aid of instruments that extend the sense, people can discover patterns in all of nature. (Source: Project 2061) In a sense, student scientists, and scientists in general, are uncovering natural algorithms. Moreover, as suggested by Ed Stermer, â&#x20AC;&#x153;all science is based on the assumption that the natural world behaves in a consistent and predictable manner. The overall goal of science is to discover underlying patterns in the natural world and use this knowledge to make predictions about what should and should not be expected to happen given certain facts or instances.â&#x20AC;? (Source: Ed Stermer Scientific Cycle) Perhaps the best-known algorithm is the scientific method. Students use the scientific method in a linear fashion to ask and answer scientific questions by making observations and doing experiments. The common steps of the scientific method are listed below and shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The scientific method as a linear process. (Source: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-biology)

But consider the following: What if the discovery process is more cyclical in nature and further considers evaluating a prediction as opposed to verifying a hypothesis? How do we apply the scientific method to inquiry-based learning, where the outcome is not pre-determined? What algorithm should we use in this case? Understanding Science at the University of California at Berkeley suggests viewing the scientific method as an interactive learning cycle, as shown in Figure 2. Consider this to be a circular algorithm:

Figure 2. The interactive learning cycle. (Source: https://undsci.berkeley.edu/)

How does this model manifest itself in the classroom? Learning activities usually focus on exploration and discovery – leveraging a student’s own curiosity as a prompt to ask them to ask questions, share data and ideas. This is done in conjunction with testing ideas, gathering data, interpreting that data, and developing explanations. Often, in laboratory experiments and other learning activities, students are required to merely verify pre-existing relationships. However, inquiry-based activities require students to verify or evaluate predictions. This key element of the learning process often goes unaddressed. Moreover, as Alan November notes in Who Owns the Learning, it is also important that students need to become publishers of their work. This addresses the Community Analysis and Feedback strand in the lower right corner of the interactive scientific method cycle. Students become better learners when they learn to evaluate and incorporate analysis and feedback into the learning process. Applying the Algorithm Model in the Classroom The long-running project Your Weekend Weather was developed for the Atmospheric Science course in order for students to model the use of algorithms and also to use the skills and concepts learned in class in a meaningful way. In this project, students research, write, and produce a short weekend weather video forecast for the Marymount school community. The project addresses the strands of revisiting predictions and community analysis and feedback from the interactive scientific model cycle. The project has the following essential questions: 1. 2. 3. 4.

What patterns exist in nature? How do we determine, research, and predict natural occurrences? How is scientific data created, communicated, and analyzed? How can you “sell” your presentation?

The project has the following learning objectives. As a result of this project, students will: 1. Learn about the importance of making accurate predictions about the weather. 2. Engage in appropriate, accurate, and authentic research practices. 3. Independently create videos while developing videography skills and techniques. 4. Showcase and broadcast their work on YouTube. 5. Respond to positive and productive peer reviews and critiques. 6. Evaluate forecasting predictions.

The project addresses the following general science education standards: 1. Scientific inquiry progresses through a continuous process of questioning, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. 2. Scientific inquiry requires researchers to formulate a testable hypothesis and demonstrate logical connections between scientific concepts. 3. Scientific inquiry requires the sharing of findings and ideas for critical review by colleagues and other scientists. 4. Scientific literacy includes the ability to search for and assess the relevance and credibility of scientific information found in various electronic media. Constructing Knowledge Before students begin producing their weekend weather forecasts, they construct their own understanding of weather maps, weather data, and numerical models. These learning activities are summarized in the table below. Table 1. Weather Forecasting â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Constructing Knowledge Learning Activity Analyzing Surface Weather Maps Analyzing Satellite Images Analyzing Radar Images Analyzing Upper Air Maps Analyzing Numerical Models Analyzing Forecast Discussions Evaluating Your Prediction

Data Resource AMS DataStreme

Link

National Weather Service

https://www.weather.gov/satellite

National Weather Service AMS DataStreme

https://www.weather.gov/Radar

NOAA Met Development Lab National Weather Service

http://www.nws.noaa.gov/mdl/synop/

National Weather Service

https://www.weather.gov

http://www.ametsoc.org/amsedu/dstreme

https://www.weather.gov

Your Weekend Weather Framework The research and forecast writing component of this project is completed outside of class, with filming taking place at the end of class on Thursday or Friday. The class is divided into forecasting teams of two students, and each team is assigned a specific week to complete their forecast.

Forecasting Team Implementation Steps Outside of class, forecasting teams research current weather data as well as numerical model predications using the links shown in Table 1. They are required to complete the forecast sheet shown in Table 2. Table 2. Forecasting Guide Forecasting Guidance Sheet Forecast Date: The information below must be completed in one sitting. Record the date and time of your data acquisition and analysis. Date: Time: Present Weather Conditions Go to weather.gov and enter 10028 in the search box. Temperature Dewpoint Wind Direction Wind Speed Cloud Cover Precipitation Air Pressure Time of Data Collection At the bottom of the page, select Forecast Discussion. Read the Synopsis at the top and the information for your forecast period. Write a two to three sentence summary. Do not just copy and paste the information. Radar Discussion Return to weather.gov and click on Radar â&#x2020;&#x2019; National Radar Sites â&#x2020;&#x2019; Northeast Loop. The animated radar allows you to see in which direction and how fast precipitation is moving. You are only concerned about precipitation in the eastern half of the United States. Is there precipitation moving towards New York City (or away from it)? How fast is it moving? Write a one to two sentence summary. Include a screen capture of the radar.

Surface Map Analysis Return to weather.gov and click on Forecast Maps â&#x2020;&#x2019; Animated Forecast Maps. This will give you an animation of surface features for the next seven days. You only care about tomorrow and the next day. Are there any areas of high (good weather) or low (inclement weather) pressure moving toward New York City? Are there any warm fronts (NYC gets warmer) or cold fronts (NYC gets colder) passing through New York City during the forecast period? Write a one or two sentence summary and include a screen capture of your surface map. Numerical Model Analysis Access the models for New York City by going to: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/mdl/synop/products/bullform.all.php and selecting KNYC. Pick your days carefully! GFS Variable Friday Saturday Sunday Max Temp Min Temp Q 12 Average P 12 Average Cloud Average NAM Variable Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Max Temp Min Temp Q 12 Average P 12 Average Cloud Average Prediction Day

Max Temperature + Precipitation

Friday Saturday Sunday

Now go back to weather.gov and compare your forecast to the National Weather Service. Screen capture their forecast. The visual one is fine. Comment on any discrepancies between your forecast and the National Weather Service forecast. 2. The forecasting team reviews their forecast with their teacher and justifies their three-day forecast using the data curated on the forecasting guidance sheet. 3. Students then write their forecast in either Microsoft Word or Google Docs, using the general guidelines shown in Table 3. Table 3. Script Writing Guidelines. Writing Your Forecast Your written forecast needs to be simple. Complete this in Word. You will need to print this out before you come to class. You will also need to send Mr. Walters your forecast so it can be uploaded to the Teleprompter. Opening paragraph: A general overview of the weekend weather. Highlight any interesting weather features. Then add the required Sr. Kathleen Fagan line: Here is your detailed forecast for the weekend of … Then include a forecast statement for each day. For example, “Friday will be mostly sunny and cold with a high near 22.” You do not need to give low temperatures. Your final line needs to be “Have a nice weekend!” 4. The script is then uploaded into the iPad App, Teleprompter Pro. 5. The forecasts are recorded in our makeshift Media Lab. The students use a Canon Vixia HF G40 Camcorder, although any videocamera or iPad camera would work as well.

6. After taping concludes, depending on time constraints, either the students (or teacher) edit their video in iMovie. The final forecast is uploaded to the Marymount Weekend Weather YouTube Channel. An email is announcement is sent to the Marymount School community. We average approximately fifty hits per week and members of the school community report that the forecasts are shared with friends and family. Evaluating Predictions Students quickly learn the social (and sometimes economic) impact of weather forecasting. If their forecast is spot-on, accolades quickly flow in. If their forecast is off (i.e., Saturday is rainy when their forecast calls for sunny skies), the students hear about it. Students are required to evaluate the accuracy of their forecast, using the guidelines shown in Table 4 below. The team verifies the high temperature and precipitation for each day of their forecast. The team also looks at archival weather maps for the weekend as a way to identify sources of error for their forecast. Their final summary is submitted for assessment. This assessment is based on the completeness of their analysis, not (necessarily) the accuracy of their forecasts. Table 4. Forecast Verification At the end of your forecast period, use the climate information on weather.gov to verify your forecast.

Forecast Day

Predicted Maximum Temperature and Precipitation

Actual Maximum Temperature and Precipitation

Analysis Compare your predicted maximum temperature and precipitation with the actual maximum temperature and precipitation. Discuss any variations between the two. Was your forecast close or did you miss considerably? Be sure to comment on any reasons for any errors.

The Forecasting Algorithm in Images 1. The Research Process

Students use current weather information from a variety of sources to develop their forecasts.

2. The Recording Process

Students write their three-day forecast and then upload it to the Teleprompter App on the iPad.

One student controls the â&#x20AC;&#x153;cue cards.â&#x20AC;?

Her forecasting team partner serves as on-air talent. 63

3. The Editing Process

Students edit their forecast using iMovie. 4. The Final Product

The final video features custom-designed opening and closing credits.

The forecast is posted on the class YouTube Channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/mmtweekendweather) and shared with the Marymount community. 65

About the Authors This chapter was co-authored by members of the Class of 2018 Atmospheric Science class, including Christina Corbisiero, Shannan Denihan, Maguy Djambourn, Alexa Faillace, Aubrey Franzoi, Jacqueline Lenane, Olivia Miller, and Amayah Spence.

Understanding the Strands of Assessment Eric A. Walters, Editor Marymount School of New York Abstract All teachers would argue that assessment is integral to the instructional process and the development of assessments with lesson-planning improves learning outcomes. Effective assessments give instructors the evidence they need to make sound pedagogical decisions. In this chapter, we will review the work of two groups of educators who met at two different conferences during the summer of 2017 to look at assessment in project-based learning environments through a new lens. Introduction According to MIT News, “Maker education – an open-ended, process-driven, youth-centered learning approach – has grown in popularity in K-12 education over the past decade. However, one of the greatest challenges of implementing making in schools is the question of how to assess collaborative, interdisciplinary, and iterative making practices and outcomes.” Moreover, “the assessment science community has been innovating embedded assessments in rich digital learning environments,” according to Yoon Jeon Kim, the co-principal investigator of the National Science Foundation (NSF) grant awarded to the Teaching Systems Lab at MIT. “We can apply this knowledge to envision what seamlessly integrated assessment in maker-centered learning can look like in schools and facilitate educators’ assessment capacities beyond the simple use of rubrics. Our project will be sensitive to the maker education advocates’ concerns regarding assessment by innovatively thinking about assessment in this context without losing the richness and complexity that characterize learning in a maker classroom.” “K-12 education today is at a critical crossroads,” says Superintendent Pamela R. Moran of the Albemarle County Public Schools. “One path, steeped in traditional teaching to the test methods, narrows career choices. The other takes us in a different direction by connecting learning to the life skills that prepare students for success regardless of career choice. We need to be able to accurately measure the quality and relevance of student learning.” (Source: http://news.mit.edu/2017/mit-teaching-systems-lab-wins-nsf-grantto-address-assessments-in-maker-education-1219) 67

This same assessment challenge is found in project-based and challenge-based learning. As noted by John Lamer, Editor in Chief, BIE (Buck Institute for Education) PBL Blog, “Assessment is one of the aspects of PBL we hear the most concerns about. Teachers, administrators, and sometimes parents ask questions such as: Is everything assessed in the culminating presentation or final product in a project? How do we know what individual students have learned if everything’s done as a team? How do we assess success skills like critical thinking, problem solving, and collaboration? How do we reconcile assessment in PBL with grading and other traditional practices and measures of achievement?” Lamer suggests, “We answer these questions by beginning with a reassurance that you can still use many traditional assessment practices during a project … teachers don’t need to throw away what they already know how to do and start from scratch when they start using PBL.” Kelly Reseigh, Professional Development Coordinator for the Douglas County School District in Castle Rock, Colorado, and National Faculty member of BIE, further emphasizes “the more active role of students in the process. Kids need to know where they’re at both in relation to standards and personally what their goals are.” Michelle Spencer, BIE National Faculty member, adds, “Students are hungry for feedback. Assessment can be celebratory and show growth.” Since projects tend to be lengthy, “students need to know where they are in the process. It’s not like traditional practice, when students are assessed on a lesson-by-lesson or assignment-and-test basis don’t need to keep track of where they are in relation to the requirements of completing a project over a longer period of time.” (Source: https://www.bie.org/blog/gold_standard_pbl_assessing_student_learning)

BIE outlines several best practices in PBL, as shown in the table below.

The Conferences Seeking clarity for teachers on assessment, the author submitted session proposals on teaching, learning, and assessment to two notable conferences: The STEM Think Tank and Conference at Harpeth Hall in Nashville, Tennessee and the Design and Maker Class Colloquium at the Windward School in Los Angeles. Conference descriptions and workshop proposals are outlined below. STEM Think Tank and Conference The STEM Think Tank and Conference brings together national leaders in K12 education for girls and young women (independent, public, charter, and parochial); university K12 outreach coordinators and researchers; university STEM faculty; informal educators; and members of industry. The conference theme allows participants to discuss and learn more from each of these groups, translating lessons across the lives of females. The Think Tank and Conference is funded in part by the E.E. Ford Foundation, through the Center for STEM

Education for Girls http://stemefg.org)

Harpeth

Hall.

(Conference

information

at:

Session Proposal: STEM Think Tank and Conference Title: Innovative Learning – Innovative Assessments Description: Ask any teacher to assess a student’s understanding and application of basic or advanced skills and concepts, and that teacher can quickly write a traditional formative or summative assessment. But as teaching and learning becomes project-based, and as that learning shifts to include soft skills such as time management, collaboration, design, and ideation, assessment needs to take on new forms. Yet many teachers struggle to find and develop effective assessment strategies beyond the standard rubric. So how do we assess these soft skills? Or should we? In this think tank session, participants will debate, dissect, and discuss existing as well as forward-thinking methodologies for both the assessment of soft skills and project work. Participants will produce a white paper with guidelines and suggestions for educators. Because this topic can provide significant challenges for many educators, the discussion will continue at the Windward School Design and Maker Class Colloquium in August, so that, by the end of the summer, both groups will have contributed to one white paper. Design and Maker Class Colloquium This two-day professional development event is designed for all teachers, administrators, and informal educators - the event is catered towards educators from all disciplines, levels of experience, and learning environments from informal to classroom. Participants will get hands-on training and experience with design techniques, traditional tools and materials of making from experts in the area, and hear from cutting-edge practitioners about what is possible in the world of design and making in both general and specific ways. (Conference information at: https://www.windwardschool.org/page/design2017) Session Proposal: Design and Maker Class Colloquium Title: Untangling the Strands of Assessment: How Do We Measure Soft Skills in Project-Based Learning Description: Ask any teacher to assess a student’s understanding and application of advanced science skills and concepts, and we can quickly write a formative or summative assessment. But asking a teacher to assess a student’s ability to manage project time, to collaborate, to design, or to ideate provides a unique challenge. As design thinking, project-based learning and other innovative learning experiences take hold in our curriculum, the need for effective assessment strategies offers a key challenge. How do we assess these soft skills? Or should we? In this think tank session, participants will debate, dissect existing methodologies for soft skills assessments. Our goal will be to produce a document with guidelines and suggestions for educators. Because this topic is so broad, the discussion will follow a previous discussion at the STEM Think Tank and Conference at Harpeth Hall in Nashville, so that, by the end of the summer, both groups will have contributed to one document.

Note: The workshop participants were not provided with materials on projectbased learning and associated assessment strategies in advance. It was important that participants arrive at each session with fresh eyes and by bringing their own experiences to the discussion. The Workshop 1. Participants were given several examples of innovative STEM projects, including the Atmospheric Science Superstorm Sandy Memorial Design Project and the Honors Physics Final Project: ThunderGolf! 2. The discussion then moved to how the primary author assessed these projects by using a standard rubric and by asking students to write a personal reflection. A sample rubric is shown below in Figure 1. A sample personal reflection is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 1. Sample Rubric for Honors Physics ThunderGolf! Project.

Figure 2. Sample student reflection for Honors Physics ThunderGolf! Project. The conversation in each workshop then moved to brainstorming and discussion of soft skills, talents, competencies, and assessments. 3. Workshop Discussion Question #1: What soft skills, talents, or competencies should we be assessing? What soft skills, talents, or competencies do you assess? No content please! Participants brainstormed answers to these questions by writing their thoughts on Post-It Notes and placing them on the wall. Working collaboratively, participants grouped these ideas by theme under approximately five categories. Participants reached consensus on the soft skills, talents, or competencies that should be assessed.

4. Workshop Discussion Question #2: How should soft skills, talents, or competencies be assessed? How do you assess soft skills, talents or competencies? No rubrics please! Participants brainstormed answers to these questions by writing their thoughts on Post-It Notes and placing them on the wall. Working collaboratively, participants grouped these ideas by theme under approximately five categories. Participants reached consensus on how soft skills, talents, or competencies should be assessed. Workshop Discussion Reaching consensus among workshop participants proved to be a challenge. Assessment is a broad topic, dependent on the grade level, discipline, and curriculum. But in the discussion following the brainstorming, several overarching themes emerged at each session. Summaries of these discussions are outlined below: Skills and Competencies: STEM Think Tank and Conference • Planning and execution • Perseverance • Grit • Collaboration • Teamwork Skills and Competencies: Design and Maker Class Colloquium • Grit • Interpersonal/intrapersonal skills • Executive functioning skills • Intrapersonal skills • Outcome and process Assessment: STEM Think Tank and Conference • Documentation of the learning process • Regular feedback • Peer evaluation • Self-evaluation • Teacher evaluation

Assessment: Design and Maker Class Colloquium • Conversations • Reflections • Robust Feedback • Portfolio • Other (including presentation of work, direct observation) Overall, each group developed a relatively similar list of skills, competencies, and assessments. Both groups were in agreement that the individual teacher would focus on how to implement these strategies in the classroom. Yet skills and competencies such as grit and determination are difficult to evaluate. In conclusion, the workshop groups recommended that the following skills and competencies should be regularly evaluated and assessed: •

Project planning is key, and, in some ways, supersedes all other skills and competencies. As such, a solid understanding and ongoing reinforcement of the project-based learning process is key to sustaining project work until its completion. Students need to be given a project timeline, due dates, checkin points, and expected outcomes in order for project-based learning to be successful. However, the project requirements should not be so prescribed that the opportunity for student voice and choice gets lost.

•

Grit and perseverance are skills that are easy to identify, difficult to teach, and challenging to reinforce. However, these skills are often solely reinforced with a comment about determination. Students often hear the message but often do not process that message.

•

Understanding and maximizing the group dynamic, reflected in interpersonal skills and intrapersonal skills is often a skill that is challenging to develop and grow. Team members bring different learning styles, different work habits, and different habits of mind to a collaborative work environment.

•

Executive functioning skills, including paying attention; organizing and planning; initiating tasks and staying focused on them; regulating emotions; and self-monitoring, if often the most challenging. Every student executive functions differently. As such, comments such as “he doesn’t contribute anything” or “she does all the work” come to the attention of the teacher.

•

The outcome, and how students present the results of their work, is also critically important. Having every group or every student share their work in a way that is easily assessed using a rubric does not allow students to represent their knowledge, understanding, or research in a way that is meaningful to them. Moreover, students with a preferred learning style do not learn how to represent their work in a variety of ways or in ways that best represent that work. It is important to give students the freedom to present their work and conclusion in a method that best reflects that work.

In summary, the workshop groups recommended that the aforementioned skills and competencies should be evaluated and assessed as follows: •

Documentation of the learning process is critical. This may be accomplished using a blog; an App such as Seesaw; or in a Google Doc. Using a Google Doc, for example, offers groups and individual learners the opportunity to plan out their entire project timeline. Teachers can then use this document to check in on each group’s progress. Documentation may take the form of text, code, images, or video.

•

Regular and robust feedback is equally as crucial. This feedback may come from peers or teachers. Teachers may review the existing documentation and comment within the Doc or App or at the end of various blog posts. This feedback provides an opportunity for teachers to identify “grit and perseverance.” For students, it is helpful (and, some may argue, necessary) to give them a set of guidelines to help frame their comments. Using the terms “I like,” “I wish,” “What if?” (IL/IW/WI) is a simple tool to provide open feedback and helps encourage constructive feedback.

•

Feedback should not be limited to the digital realm. Conversations (teacher-student, teacher-group, or group-group) help encourage an open dialogue in the classroom. Having students publicly describe their work provides an opportunity to build confidence and public speaking skills. However, students are often reticent to publicly comment on the work of their peers. Using a Google Form allows for anonymous feedback; that feedback can be incorporated into the project documentation. Overall, though, all feedback should be incorporated into the project documentation.

•

Students should regularly identify challenges they face and how their group resolved those challenges. This is a back-door way of assessing grit and determination but it also allows students to reflect on how they tackle challenges in the work flow.

•

Students should receive authentic feedback from their peers, their teachers, and professionals in the field during end of project presentations. More often than not, students stand at the front of the class, sharing a Powerpoint, while teachers sit off to the side with a rubric. Rubrics are all well and good for setting expectations for the final project, but evaluators often do not score student work at the lower end of the spectrum. Vary the types of presentations (i.e., gallery walks, live “press conferences,” webinars, pre-recorded videos) and vary the types of assessments. IL/IW/WI works well, but allow the evaluators to ask probing questions that get to the heart of the project and to the quality and validity of the work presented. Let the presenters and evaluators engage in a dialogue about the work; encourage evaluators to challenge the presenters and require the presenters to defend their conclusions.

But How Do I Get a Grade? One of the most frequently asked questions at standards-based grading workshops is “How do I give my students as grade?” It is challenging to assign a grade to many of the skills and competencies discussed by the workshop participants. For example, how might a teacher assign a grade for creativity? Creativity is “in the eyes of the beholder,” and, therefore, is subjective. Some participants argued that this approach to assessment is based in mastery learning. Bloom suggested that, “although students vary widely in their learning rates and modalities, if teachers could provide the necessary time and appropriate learning conditions, nearly all students could reach a high level of achievement.” Bloom further noted that, “traditional practice was to organize curriculum content into units and then check on students’ progress at the end of each unit. These checks on learning progress would be much more valuable if they were used as part of the teaching and learning process to provide feedback on students’ individual learning difficulties and then to prescribe specific remediation activities.” (Source: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educationalleadership/oct10/vol68/num02/Lessons-of-Mastery-Learning.aspx Based on this definition, workshop participants did not believe that project-based learning sought to assess mastery. Instead, they reached the conclusion that the documentation of learning and representation of knowledge was being evaluated.

The workshop participants recommended the following as a general assessment strategy: 1. Students should be provided with a list of project requirements and tasks to be completed. 2. Students should be evaluated on the successful completion of these requirements and tasks. 3. Students should be provided with a rubric that will be used to evaluate the quality of the work completed. 4. Students will be evaluated on the quality of the work using that rubric. 5. Students will write an individual and group reflection. 6. Teachers will provide a written evaluation of the development of student’s soft skills and competencies based on the feedback provided during the project. In conclusion, the workshop participants generally agreed that students should be assessed on the quality of their work and evaluated on the development of their skills and competencies. Acknowledgements The editor of this chapter would like to thank the following: • • • • •

Dr. Stacy Klein-Gardner, former Director of the Center for STEM Education for Girls and coordinator of the STEM Think Tank and Conference at Harpeth Hall, Nashville, TN Dorothy Lee, Windward School, CREATE Studio Director and coordinator of the Design and Maker Class Colloquium at Windward School James Bologna, Director of Technology, Co-Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning, Dean of Science and Technology Outreach, Windward School Session Attendees at the 2017 STEM Think Tank and Conference Session Attendees at the 2017 Design and Maker Class Colloquium

Contact the Authors Computer Science Education: Lessons from Industry and Academia Darren Kessner, darren.kessner@marlborough.org Artistic Material for Digital Fabrication Erin Riley, eriley@greenwichacademy.org Making Coding Stick: From Turtle Art Programming to Vinyl Decals Chesna Flora, cflora@lfny.org Adam Romary, aromary@lfny.org Adena Dershowitz, adershowitz@lfny.org Making as Assessment and Assessing Making Angi Chau, achau@castilleja.org Heather Allen Pang, hpang@castilleja.org Karen Strobel, kstrobel@castilleja.org Discovery, Agency & Activism: The 11th Grade Trip Allison Isbell, aisbell@lrei.org Chris Keimig, ckeimig@lrei.org Mark Silberberg, milberberg@lrei.org Take Two! Two Years of Kindergarten and Two Introductory Years of Blogging Jill Voras, jvoras@mjds.org Rona Wolfe, rwolfe@mjds.org Untangling the Strands of Assessment Eric A Walters, editor, eric.walters@marymountnyc.org

Making and Learning Institute @ Marymount Coordinators Eric Walters: eric.walters@marymountnyc.org Don Buckley: donbuckley@gmail.com

Making and Learning Institute Marymount School of New York Sponsored in part by a grant from the E.E. Ford Foundation, the Making and Learning Institute offers a new paradigm in professional development. Instead of self-contained, teacher-centered workshops, you will be immersed in innovative teaching practices, maker culture, design thinking, and digital learning. Innovative Teaching + Learning: Disrupting the K-12 Classroom

Email us: making@marymountnyc.org Connect with us: making.marymountnyc.org