case study: st. thomas more high school - nc3t · pdf filecase study: st. thomas more high...

FOR INTERNAL REVIEW-DO NOT DISTRIBUTE

The STEM Schools Project: Saint Thomas More High School 1 | P a g e

CASE STUDY:

ST. THOMAS MORE HIGH SCHOOL

The STEM Schools Project: Saint Thomas More High School Page | 1

about the case studyabout the case studyabout the case studyabout the case study

This case study is one of a series of case studies produced for

The STEM Schools Project. The purpose of the STEM

Schools Project is to document promising practices in high

schools and middle schools that are providing students a

STEM-rich experience, drawing upon a high quality

implementation of Project Lead The Way's Pathway To

Engineering and/or Biomedical Sciences programs.

The Meeder Consulting Group conducted the site visits, wrote

the case studies and final report, and is managing all aspects

of The STEM Schools Project.

The project is funded through generous support from the

Kern Family Foundation based in Waukesha, Wisconsin

(www.kffdn.org).

From information collected during each of the nine site visits,

the authors prepared detailed, reader-friendly reports

describing the schools’ accomplishments, approach to STEM

learning, and school improvement strategies. The case

studies organize material into three overarching themes

related to how schools use PLTW to spur STEM-related

learning emerged:

� Create an Exceptional PLTW Implementation,

� Develop a School-wide STEM Culture, and

� Implement Related School Improvement

Strategies.

In addition to the case studies, a Final Report will be released

that synthesizes key findings from all the case studies and

places them in the larger context of STEM education reform.

For more information about the STEM Schools Project, visit

www.meederconsulting.com


.

Part iPart iPart iPart i. introduction and . introduction and . introduction and . introduction and

ooooverviewverviewverviewverview

Summary

Located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Saint Thomas More is a private high school that

offers both the Project Lead the Way Biomedical Sciences (BMS) program and the

Pathway to Engineering (PTE) program. Approximately 50 percent of the student

population enrolls in a PLTW course. The impact of PLTW on the instructional

culture is growing. Several of the math and science instructors at the school

already implement the project- and inquiry-based instructional approach used in

PLTW. Individually, some teachers have taken the initiative to develop cross-

curricular learning units. Both through its implementation of PLTW and its

commitment to providing all students with innovative and rich learning

experiences, Saint Thomas More is making strides in creating a culture of learning

that values Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM).

Profile of Saint Thomas More High School

Saint Thomas More High School (STM) is a private, Catholic high school that sits

on 16 acres of land in urban Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The school building has a

history dating back 140 years to when it housed St. Francis Minor Seminary.

Founded in 1972 as an all-boy, private high school, STM became a coed high

school in 1989.

The STM leadership team includes Dr. Mark Joerres, who is the chief

administrator/principal, Joe Heinecke, an assistant principal/dean of students,

Mary Burke, who is the curriculum coordinator/academic dean, a director of

finance, a recruitment and retention manager, an athletic director, and a director of

instructional technology. There are 31 faculty members on staff, all of whom have

bachelor of education degrees and nearly half of whom have master’s degrees.

As of the 2011–2012 school year, 438 students attend grades nine through 12.

Approximately 59 percent of STM students are white, 28 percent are Hispanic, 5

percent are American Indian/Alaskan, 4 percent are black, and 3 percent are Asian.

Being a private school, STM does not report the percentage of students who

receive Free and Reduced Lunch or special education services. However, STM

does track the percentage of students who have been awarded needs-based

scholarships. For the 2011–2012 school year, approximately 68 percent of students

received needs-based scholarships.


Synopsis of Project Lead the Way Implementation

In the 2004–2005 school year, STM’s leaders implemented the PLTW PTE program

and made a significant commitment to provide ongoing resources to the program.

Additional funding was secured through several sources, including grants and

donations from the Kern Family Foundation, Badger Meter, Nucor Cold Finish

Group, and anonymous donors. In March 2011, STM received a $32,692 grant from

the Greater Milwaukee Foundation to provide funding for teacher training, PLTW

participation fees, and equipment purchases necessary to add third- and fourth-

year courses to the BMS program. Other funding sources used are Wisconsin

State PLTW appropriation money, student fees ($20 per student), and student

tuition.

In 2004, the first STM instructor, Ben Rezutek, received training to teach the

Introduction to Engineering Design (IED) course. Another teacher who received the

initial training left STM after one year, so a new teacher needed to be trained to fill

the gap. In the second summer of training (2005), Sharon Tomski was trained in

IED and Mr. Rezutek was also trained in Principles of Engineering.

Initially (in 2004–2005), STM offered two sections of IED in which 33 students

enrolled. In 2006, STM became the first PLTW-certified high school in Milwaukee.

In the fall of 2009, the school became the first Catholic high school in Wisconsin to

offer the PLTW BMS program. In 2011, STM became the first high school in

Wisconsin to receive PLTW certification for both its BMS and PTE programs.

As of the 2011–2012 school year, 225 out of the total student body of 438 students

are enrolled in PLTW. There are 139 students in the PTE program and 86 students

in the BMS program. Thus, more than 50 percent of the student body is enrolled in

at least one PLTW course. About 25 percent of students in the 2011 senior class

took Human Body Systems (the second BMS program course) or the Engineering

Design and Development course.

The table below provides a glance at the timing of and extent of PLTW

implementation at STM.


Project Lead the Way Enrollment

PLTW Programs

Offered Number of Students Enrolled

2004-

2005

2005-

2006

2006-

2007

2007-

2008

2008-

2009

2009-

2010

2010-

2011

2011-

2012

Pathway to

Engineering (PTE) 33 57 82 115 149 140 129 128

Biomedical

Sciences (BMS) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 39 72 84

Source: Saint Thomas More High School, November 2011.

The STEM Continuum Model

The working theory of the STEM Schools Project is that there is a natural

continuum of integration and connection of STEM education occurring in schools

that use Project Lead the Way’s Gateway to Technology (middle schools) or PTE

and/or BMS programs (high schools). In some schools, PTE and BMS are offered

as sequences of courses that offer an excellent learning experience to students,

but the courses stand alone and do not connect to other courses that fall under the

STEM umbrella. In some schools, teachers—on a case-by-case basis and through

individual initiative—inculcate some of the project-based and inquiry-based

approaches of PLTW courses into the math and science courses that they teach.

Alternatively, they may informally collaborate with colleagues in other content

areas to create a smattering of integrated or linked curriculum units. Further along

the continuum are schools that are actively and intentionally creating integrated

and connected learning between STEM courses, and in some cases with other

courses such as English Language Arts and the Social Sciences. In these schools,

teachers are actively and consistently collaborating with the support of

administrative team members.

The STEM continuum includes the following groupings of strategies:

• Create an Exceptional PLTW Implementation,

• Develop a School-wide STEM Culture, and

• Implement Related School Improvement Strategies.

The remainder of this case study is organized around these groupings, although

not every strategy in the continuum will be observed in every case study. If the

strategy was not observed during the site visit or subsequent interviews, this fact

is noted but should not be construed to reflect negatively on the school that is

profiled.


Part Part Part Part ii. ii. ii. ii. StrategiesStrategiesStrategiesStrategies

1.1.1.1. create an exceptional pltwcreate an exceptional pltwcreate an exceptional pltwcreate an exceptional pltw

implementatiimplementatiimplementatiimplementationononon

1.1 Building Readiness and Support for PLTW Implementation

When enrollment at STM was declining in the early 2000s, the school leadership

team sought to find a niche in the private school market that would distinguish

STM from other Catholic schools.

At the time, the dean of engineering at Marquette University told STM’s board

president (a personal friend) about the PLTW program and how it might a good fit

for STM. The faculty at the time already had developed a solid infrastructure in

math, science, and drafting technology courses. The board and school leadership

team discussed the possibility of implementing PLTW and decided it would be a

natural fit for the school. Concurrent with this decision, in 2003, PLTW was first

introduced in Wisconsin, and the school’s president at the time applied for funding

through the Kern Foundation.

Administrative Transitions

Since PLTW was implemented in 2004, STM has undergone transitions in both its

administrative and instructional staff. In 2008, Dr. Mark Joerres became the

principal. Since the beginning of his tenure at STM, Dr. Joerres has strongly

supported PLTW and also played a pivotal role in the implementation of the PLTW

BMS program.

Math and Science Course-taking

When STM first implemented PLTW, the leadership team did not make immediate

plans to implement additional advanced math or science courses. However, within

two years, STM began offering Advanced Algebra for freshmen in an effort to

challenge high-achieving students, many of whom were enrolled in the PLTW

Engineering Program.


Math and Science Achievement

STM has conducted an analysis of student achievement using data from the past

four years. Based upon this internally conducted analysis, STM concluded that

students who enroll in at least two PLTW courses score slightly higher on their

ACT composite tests than students who enroll in fewer PLTW courses and who

had the same incoming test scores when they first enrolled at STM. (See Appendix

for STM’s explanation of the analysis)

1.2 Select and Support a Strong PLTW Instructional Team

The STM leadership team first considered the math and science teachers for the

initial PLTW training because of the relevance of their content areas to PLTW

content. As of the 2011–2012 school year, only one of the instructors first trained

for the PLTW engineering courses, Mr. Rezutek, remains on staff. After the first

year of PLTW implementation, one of the PLTW instructors left STM. As a result,

the leadership team hired Sharon Tomski, who was already a part-time teacher at

STM, to teach the PLTW engineering courses. Ms. Tomski’s degree and

background in chemical engineering were major factors in her selection. She

received PLTW training and became an Introduction to Engineering Design

instructor. As the program expanded, Ms. Tomski transitioned to teaching all of

the PLTW engineering courses.

Darlene Langhoff, a long-time Biology teacher at STM, received training for the

first three BMS courses.

In addition to having a background in math and/or science, Ms. Tomski notes that

PLTW instructors also should have an “interest and/or experience in project-based

learning, and enthusiasm for teaching the classes.”

As he talks today with training and numerous years of teaching STEM courses

under his belt, Mr. Rezutek supports the notion that PLTW teachers should possess

both the content background and the motivation to implement innovative

instructional practices. He stated that he was teaching all math classes before and

“I was looking for something that would challenge me as a learner.”

1.3 Set Goals for Program Enrollment

Although STM continues to have a large number of students enrolled in PLTW

courses, the leadership team does not set a target enrollment goal for the PLTW

courses. However, STM does use several strategies to make it easier for students

to enroll in PLTW courses. For example, when students first enroll at STM as

freshmen, they meet with an advisor to develop a four-year education plan. If at

this time students express an interest in PLTW, they are put on a math, science,

and PLTW track for their four-year high school experience.


Given students’ full course schedules, STM offers several course-taking

alternatives to free up time for students to take PLTW courses. In 2008, the

leadership team decided to expand to an eight-periods-a-day class schedule. In

addition, students may enroll in “zero hour classes,” which are classes offered

before school so that they do not interfere with students’ daily course schedules.

Students may also take advantage of summer classes, such as in P.E., to meet

some of their course requirements.

1.4 Reach Out to Prospective PLTW Students

To recruit students from the greater Milwaukee area to STM, the leadership team

uses several outreach and marketing methods. Because PLTW is communicated in

all promotion materials as a major feature of student opportunity at STM, outreach

for the school and outreach for PLTW are essentially one and the same.

While the leadership team initially focused these efforts on area Catholic feeder

schools, Dr. Joerres realized that a more expanded approach was necessary when

several of those feeder schools closed. Currently, STM has a partnership and

working relationship with more than 40–50 elementary and middle schools.

Approximately 75 percent of the schools are private parochial schools, and the

remainder are charter or public schools in the Milwaukee area.

STM’s leadership team includes Recruitment and Retention Coordinator Maria

Azarian, who visits these schools in the greater Milwaukee area throughout the

recruitment process. These visits typically are concentrated during the fall because

by December, the private schools are administering entrance exams. Depending

on the visit, she will present to a group of students in a classroom setting or at an

evening event where multiple high schools are invited to share and distribute their

promotional materials as parents walk about for informal conversations. About 80

percent of the visits are to give classroom presentations. During classroom

presentations, current PLTW students, who are often from the feeder school at

which they are presenting, share about their experiences with both the BMS and

PTE programs. Various faculty and staff also participate in recruitment visits as

their schedules permit. At least 10 minutes of the presentation is dedicated to the

explanation and promotion of both programs.

To bolster the marketing and recruitment effort, STM developed specific marketing

tools and materials that present the core sequence for PLTW programs. During the

school visits, evening events, and open houses, PLTW brochures are distributed to

students and families. As questions arise about the PLTW programs, the

recruitment coordinator will discuss the features and benefits of each. Admission

packets (which are both mailed and distributed at recruitment presentations)

include PLTW promotional materials.


In addition to the presentations at feeder schools, STM recruitment strategies

include the use of digital billboards (donor funded), signage on the back of public

buses, and radio ads (one paid and one public service announcement), all of which

highlight the two PLTW pathways and the cutting-edge, school-wide technology

offered to STM students.

1.5 Reach Out to Local Businesses to Gain and Sustain Support

The school leadership team and PLTW teachers work diligently to keep their

business and postsecondary institutions involved in the implementation of their

PLTW programs.

The STM leadership team and PLTW instructors focus on developing partnerships

with businesses that employ engineers or other engineering-related staff, as well

as those in the biomedical science industry. Both PLTW programs have created a

“Business Partnership Team” that meets quarterly to discuss the needs of the

PLTW students and what is occurring in the PLTW courses. Specific companies

and community-based organizations that have invested their time and resources to

support the PLTW programs at STM are Advance Screw, American Acrylics,

Badger Meter, Collins Engineers, CG Schmidt, Electro Kinetic Technologies,

GRAEF, Habitat for Humanity, Harley-Davidson, Hispanic Chamber of Commerce,

IBM, Johnson Controls, Rockwell Automation, Nucor, and Wheaton Franciscan

Healthcare.

The involvement of the business partners varies from serving on the STM Board of

Directors, being mentors to the students in the PLTW programs, judging the senior

capstone projects, providing field trips and tours to students, being guest speakers

in the PLTW classes, providing equipment and other resources, and serving on the

PLTW Business Partnership Team.

During an interview with several of the business partners, one partner stated, “We

are surprised that the Biomedical Program took off like it did.” Furthermore, he

said, “Some of the board members who went to medical school said that many of

the concepts they are teaching in the PLTW Biomedical Program here they did not

get until their third year of medical school.” When asked why they are involved as

a business/community partner, responses included, “I didn’t have this kind of

opportunity when I was in high school and I want to be involved now” and “I’m

big on kids and firmly believe that education is the way to solve the problems of

poverty.”

In the PTE capstone course, Engineering Design and Development, students need

to reach out to business partners and mentors to get input and ideas for their

project. For example, a team was making a device to continuously measure and

display bike tire pressure. The team members consulted with their mentor from


Badger Meter and calculated what kind of pressure sensor they needed. The

sensor cost more than their budget for the entire project. To address this problem,

the students called the manufacturer and explained the project, and the company

donated the sensor. Then they needed an adapter to fit the sensor on the tire stem.

They walked to a local manufacturer, Advance Screw, and consulted with a

machinist. The machinist made the adapter, donating the materials and his time to

the project. The teacher stated, “Throughout the process, I could see the students

grow in terms of their knowledge and confidence.”

2222. develop a school. develop a school. develop a school. develop a school----wide stem wide stem wide stem wide stem

cultureculturecultureculture

2.1 Establish Shared Guiding Principles for STEM Learning

Under this strategy of establishing shared guiding principles for STEM Learning

are three related, but distinct sub-strategies: Define STEM Education, Define

STEM Literacy, and Develop District-Wide Vision for STEM Learning.

2.1.1 Define STEM Education

Although STM certainly provides many of its students with exposure and

experience in STEM, the leadership team views STM as first and foremost a

traditional, college prep secondary school. At this time, the leadership team has

not defined STEM education. To guide the direction of the school, STM leadership

looks to the ACT College Readiness Standards and national content standards.

2.1.2 Define STEM Literacy

STM has not yet defined STEM literacy, but STEM literacy practices of problem

solving, managing resources, data collection and analysis, research skills, team

and project-based learning, and cooperative learning are used in and across the

STEM fields of study.

2.1.3 Develop District-wide Vision for STEM Learning

This piece of the STEM continuum model is not relevant because STM is a private

school.

2.2 Implement Innovative STEM Curriculum and Instruction

Under this strategy of implementing innovative STEM curriculum and instruction,

there are two related, but distinct sub-strategies: Integrate STEM-Rich Instruction,

and Implement Inquiry-based and Project-based Learning Strategies.


2.2.1 Integrate STEM-rich Instruction across Math, Science, and Other Applied STEM Programs

Much of the integration that occurs across math, science, and PLTW courses is

supported by the school leadership team, but it is still early in the implementation

process.

In 2009, STM introduced the BMS program. While attending summer training for

the program, the instructor realized that the content of STM’s biology course was

unnecessarily duplicative and much too traditional in style. Therefore, she initiated

the development of a special biology course, Biomedical Science Biology, which

was specifically designed to be taught concurrently with the PLTW Principles of

Biomedical Science (PBS) course. The customized biology course reinforces what

is taught in PBS so that what the student learns in the biology course can be

directly applied to what the student is learning in the PBS course. For example,

when the students learn about the characteristics of bacteria cells in biology, they

can see how that applies to the selection of antibiotics in PBS. Another added

benefit of the two courses being taught concurrently is that some of the content

needed in PBS can be covered in biology. As the PLTW instructor stated, “Instead

of teaching the basics of DNA structure in PBS, we can teach that in biology and in

PBS we have more time to work on the projects related to the structure.”

Science–Math Collaboration

Math instructor Mary Spiegel spoke about coordinating the teaching of “best-fit

lines” (the line that best represents the trend of a data set) with a science teacher,

Nadine Barabas. This collaboration began when Spiegel and Barabas co-taught a

summer course, learned more about one another’s courses, and began to observe

shared content and opportunities for collaboration. In one instance, the two

teachers work together so that students perform calculations on data sets in the

math class that had been generated and collected in a science class a month or

two beforehand. Students are reminded that the data they are manipulating are

the same data they previously generated; this helps them see the direct relevance

of the data and also to understand that real-world data are not as perfect or

consistent as data drawn from textbooks.

Similarly, the two teachers collaborated on the instruction related to conversions

between advanced algebra and science related to “dimensional analysis,” a

concept that is covered in both their courses, albeit with slightly different

terminology and procedures. The science teacher taught the dimensional analysis

and the math teacher created a problem whereby the students would use data

they had previously generated. Although scientists use the term “dimensional


analysis” and algebra uses the term “conversion,” the two concepts are

essentially the same. To make the shared concept more consistent, the math class

adopted the same terminology as the science course.

STM’s other science teachers are relatively recent hires and have matriculated

through education preparation programs that emphasize using inquiry and real-

world applications as the preferable teaching and learning approach for science.

The Foundations of Science Class and the Biomedical Biology course directly

embed the PLTW teaching approach, and there is also the informal science/math

collaboration between Ms. Spiegel and Ms. Barabas.

2.2.2 Implement Inquiry-based and Project-based Learning Strategies

STM is in many ways a traditional, secondary-level, content-based teaching and

learning environment. However, Curriculum Coordinator Mary Burke recognizes

the PLTW’s learning strategies of inquiry and problem solving in this small school

environment promote a culture that encourages experimentation in other

disciplines. Teachers in social science, theology, and English are experimenting

with formative and varied assessments and peer and cooperative learning

structures. In the fall of 2011, PLTW instructors facilitated a teacher development

session on project-based learning in a cross-content discussion and sharing of

instructional ideas.

Primarily, it is the PLTW instructors who most consistently apply inquiry-based

and project-based learning strategies in non-PLTW courses. One PLTW teacher

stated, “My best days are when I don’t have to say anything at all and my students

are motivated learners.” Furthermore, he said his experience as a PLTW teacher

helps him refer to practical applications when teaching math.

Although the school’s professional development program is introducing the

project-based instructional approach to other courses, the science department has

already adopted the approach extensively, and project-based learning has also

made a modest impact on the math department.

After identifying that the incoming freshmen had received various levels of science

preparation from an array of feeder schools with no standard curriculum, the

teachers realized a need to bring all students up to a baseline of knowledge that

would allow those students to be successful in the later science courses. Science

and PLTW instructor Darlene Langhoff observed the teaching approach used in

PLTW engineering courses, and those methods (having students work on projects

and having students learn to be learners) “made sense to her.” In 2007, she

decided to begin modifying the school’s science curriculum to have a similar

approach. As chair of the science department at the time, Ms. Langhoff revamped

the freshman science curriculum and added a new course, Foundations of Science.


This course allows the department to teach skills, both lab and math, while

embedding the content. It is designed for nonstudents (who are not enrolled in

PLTW’s BMS program) to strengthen their core skills and prepare them to

successfully participate in 10th grade biology. A prime example is developing the

skill of writing lab reports using the same format that is used in upper-level

science courses such as chemistry and physics. In PLTW’s second year of

implementation, the administration noted the following differences in

performance: science math skills improved, constructing and interpreting graphs

improved, and lab reports marginally improved. These improvements are

subjective and based on past experience with the incoming chemistry students.

Other, non-PLTW instructors are beginning to experiment with more student-

centered and engaging instructional styles. One freshman science teacher took the

lead to help her colleagues redesign their classes so that the classes go from

taking a “fact-finding” approach to being designed so that students are able to

“apply” knowledge. She wants “to be doing less in my classroom and have

students doing more. I am giving them focused hints to get to the answer.”

The administration at STM is supporting the application of the PLTW instructional

style to other disciplines. Joe Heinecke, assistant principal, noted that as STM

leadership interviewed teachers for vacant science and math positions, the

leadership specifically sought teachers with a project-based learning approach to

teaching. Furthermore, he stated that they have several teachers who are second-

career teachers—these teachers have worked in the real world and have those

experiences to bring into the classroom. Examples include science teachers

coming to education from both the medical technology field and engineering,

including two former engineers.

2.3 Engage Math, Science, and PLTW Teachers in Collaborative Planning and Instruction

Currently, math teachers and engineering teachers do not specifically sit and

jointly compare the curriculum to look for what math exists in the PTE coursework.

Thus, beyond significant efforts to help students improve their achievement in

math courses, there does not appear to be a specific effort to use project-based

learning in the school’s math classes or to create linkages between STM math

coursework and the PTE and/or BMS courses. One PLTW teacher stated,

“Academic courses stand alone, but we make sure we are all teaching it the same

way in science and engineering.”


3333. implement related school . implement related school . implement related school . implement related school

improvement strategiesimprovement strategiesimprovement strategiesimprovement strategies

3.1 Provide Academic Support and Intervention to Enhance Student Learning

Intensive Math Instruction

In response to a drop in ACT scores in the lower levels of math, STM created a

new math course, Fundamentals of Algebra, for both freshman and sophomore

students. This course provides extra support to struggling students and prepares

them for success in their next math course, Geometry. Distinguishing features of

the design are small classes taught over two years (one semester of pre-algebra

and three semesters of algebra). It was designed to replace pre-algebra for

students who were not ready for a high school algebra course. 2011–2012 is the

first year this new course is being taught, and the administration is hopeful that

the implementation of this course will allow students to reach a level of proficiency

that prepares them to proceed with Geometry in 11th grade and Algebra II in 12th

grade. The new course is also designed to cover all the key content that is tested in

the ACT exam. Students who begin the Fundamentals of Algebra in 10th grade will

not be able to take Algebra II until their senior year. These students will be

encouraged to take the ACT test in both fall and spring of their senior year so that

their second test can better reflect the content they have learned in the second half

of the Algebra II course.

Summer Academy

In the summer of 2011, STM instituted a Summer Academy (a five- to six-week

program with a focus on math and reading that is paid for by federal Title I monies

available for students at private schools). The intention of the program is to give

students a “step-up” to starting their freshman year. Students attending the

Summer Academy attended both English and math classes in a four-hour block of

time. English instruction is focused on reading and writing skills development, and

math instruction reinforces students’ math skills including fractions, finding area

and perimeter, and problem-solving techniques.

A Focus on Mathematical Reasoning

Within the math department, there is a strong commitment to helping students

know and understand mathematical processes, facts, and principles. Instructors

promote the ability within each student to effectively “use” mathematical thought

by fostering an environment that promotes curiosity, initiative, and confidence in

students. One math teacher stated, “I do projects where students have to apply the

concepts after they are taught.” Another math teacher offers a “problem of the


week,” which includes a writing prompt that asks students to “explain” their

reasoning. This is a standard practice so that students develop their ability to

“communicate mathematically.” She also explained that when she was teaching

logarithms, she sought out STM’s physics and chemistry teachers and asked them

for formulas that they use in their courses that could also be used in the math

class.

Big Buddy Program

STM has a plethora of retention activities. One of the most promising activities is

the STM Big Buddy program. Big buddies act as positive role models and provide

the new students with opportunities to meet fellow classmates and become

acclimated to the school campus before the school year begins.

Engaging Students Through a Family-like Culture

The overall mission at STM is “to love, educate, and serve young people in the

Spirit of Jesus Christ.” The school proposes to educate students in a safe, caring,

college-preparatory environment with an emphasis on Catholic faith, academic

excellence, and innovation. The small size of the school allows the administration

and teachers to really get to know the students and create a family-like

atmosphere. One of the board members and parent of four STM graduates

confirmed this when asked about what two things really stand out at STM. She

stated that the “size of the school helps to build confidence” and “academics are

very rigorous.”

Students at STM are aware of the family-like atmosphere and the benefits

associated with attending a small school. When asked “what do you like about this

high school?” sophomore PLTW students gave the following responses: “the

computers,” “the textbooks being online,” “the family atmosphere,” and “the

religious ties we have with one another which helps us to get along.” When asked

the same question (what do you like about this high school?), junior PLTW

students responded similarly, “smaller school,” “teachers know me and know

something about me,” “college-prep school that really prepares us,” and “the

teachers want us to succeed.”

Offering Extensive Extracurricular Activities

Even though STM is a small school with only 438 students, it offers more than 20

different extracurricular activities that help students develop their leadership and

social skills. Joe Heinecke, assistant principal, stated that “it is easy for students to

find a niche; if it is not available they start it.” The STEM-focused extracurricular

activities include an Engineering Club, Green Club, MORE Robotics (compete in

First Robotics competitions), and Technology Honor Society.


3.2 Prepare Students for Postsecondary and Career Success

Under this strategy of preparing students for postsecondary and career success, there are two related, but distinct sub-strategies: Offer Career Development and College Planning, and Offer Opportunity to Earn College Credit.

3.2.1 Offer Career Development and College Planning

STM indicates in its public documents that “Ninety-nine percent of our graduates

go on to further their studies in either a two-year or four-year institute of higher

education.” The STM leadership notes the college prep curriculum students

receive as a key component to supporting their successful transition to

postsecondary education opportunities.

STM also hosts a Senior Planning Day during which students participate in three

different information sessions that are tailored to help them with their post-high

school planning. One of the sessions addresses how to find scholarships, another

session focuses on what college life is like, and the third session covers how to

choose a college major.

STM students also receive support in the college application and financial aid

process continuously throughout the school year. The school hosts a college

application night, a financial aid night, parents’ night, college fairs, and other

college and financial aid workshops that are advertised to parents. In addition, the

counselor meets individually with every senior to help with the college planning

and application process.

To further support student access to postsecondary education, the STM leadership

team and PLTW instructors have working relationships with two postsecondary

institutions, Marquette University and Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE).

Marquette University, a Jesuit university in Milwaukee, provides campus tours and

opportunities for STM students to meet and interview the engineering professors.

STM also collaborates with Marquette University to conduct a resume and college

essay workshop with juniors. In addition to training the PLTW teachers, MSOE

offers student tours and student camps and exposes the students to industry-

practicing professionals. Individual instructors also have taken the initiative to

establish mentoring relationships with local postsecondary institutions such as

Marquette and the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design.

At this time, students do not participate in extensive career awareness and

planning activities. In their sophomore year, students participate in career

awareness and planning activities. Students take interest and value inventories

and explore both college and career opportunities. The culmination of the

exploration results in a related research paper in English classes.


3.2.2 Offer Opportunity to Earn College Credit

Nationally, PLTW has over 35 college and university partners that offer students

credit for completing certain PLTW courses in high school. In Wisconsin, these

partners include Marquette University and Milwaukee School of Engineering, both

of which are STM’s postsecondary partners in Wisconsin. Students receive college

credit if they score at least 70 percent on the national PLTW final exam, keep a

portfolio of their work, and score at least 85 percent in the class. Milwaukee School

of Engineering awards three college credits (one for each PLTW course taken and

passed with the exception of the Engineering Design and Development course).

Since 2005, STM students in the engineering PLTW program have passed 332

courses, thus earning a total of 996 college credits on a quarter system or 664

college credits on a semester system. Furthermore, 120 semester credits have

been earned by students in the BMS program. Dr. Joerres stressed the potential

earnings of PLTW students at STM when he said, “We’ve seen how the PLTW

program draws more students to engineering and technology courses and gets

them thinking about college and their career. We are extremely proud to be PLTW

certified and ecstatic that our students are able to receive college credits for certain

PLTW classes.”

Outside of the PTLW courses, STM does not currently offer students the

opportunity to earn dual credit while in high school.

STM does offer several AP courses. In 2010–2011, 75 percent of students received

a 3 or higher on at least one AP exam.

Students also may earn the Microsoft Office Suite Certification through the

school’s business/technology program.

3.3 Focus on Professional Development, Growth, and Collaboration

Under the leadership of the curriculum coordinator, Saint Thomas More has a

Learning Support Team made up of teacher representatives from various

departments that plans for teacher development time. For the past two years, the

team has set a very clear focus on differentiation of instruction as a goal for

teacher development. The differentiation focus led to work with an outside

consultant during the 2010–2011 school year with funding through Title I. The

consultant met with the full staff in two sessions during the school year and

returned to meet with both departments and individual staff members in several

coaching conversations to promote differentiation in learning strategies. The

current school year’s teacher development time continues with the differentiation

focus. Currently, 29 teaching staff members are in professional reading book

groups. Texts include Tomlinson’s Differentiated Instruction; Tomlison and


McTighe’s Integrating Differentiated Instruction + Understanding by Design; and

Marzano et al.’s Classroom Instruction that Works.

Teacher development sessions are scheduled for two full days per semester. In

addition, the teaching faculty has two designated hour-long meeting times each

month on late-start Wednesdays. Curriculum development and collaboration is the

set focus for one of the monthly sessions. Over the past three years, departments

have articulated curriculum through vertical planning and the review of ACT

College Readiness Standards and national content standards.

There is a strong collaborative environment among the various departments.

Curriculum Coordinator Mary Burke joined STM part time last year after 34 years

as a teacher and administrator in public education. She finds the teaching staff

“exceptional in their abilities to engage students in meaningful learning. As a

private school staff, they have a deep sense of offering students at STM rigorous

curriculum experiences that will prepare students to achieve both within STM and

in university settings.”

3.4 Use Data to Make Instructional Decisions

The school leadership team drives a

focus on using data to make

instructional decisions and to support

student achievement.

STM uses the ACT suite of College and

Career Readiness assessments to

target where students need

remediation and help guide their

career and college interests. Students

take the EXPLORE in the ninth grade,

the PLAN in the 10th grade, the Practice

ACT in the 11th grade, and the ACT in

the 12th grade (refer to the data chart in

the Data section). The school pays for

all students to take the EXPLORE,

PLAN, and Practice ACT, and students

who wish to take the ACT are required

to pay this cost for themselves.

All core content subjects hold the ACT

College Readiness Standards as the

guiding standards for curriculum

ACT College & Career Readiness

EXPLORE, PLAN, and the ACT

measure students’ progressive

development of knowledge and

skills in the same academic areas

(English, math, reading, and

science) from grade 8 through

grade 12. Therefore, the scores

from these assessments can help

educators monitor students’

academic growth over time.

ACT College Readiness

Standards

The College Readiness

Standards are intended to help

students, parents, and educators

understand the meaning of the

scores earned on ACT’s three

curriculum-based assessments.


articulation and planning. Each department reviews the item analysis from the

series of ACT exams to better address the strengths and weaknesses in the course

offerings. Each department meets on a monthly basis, with curriculum

development planning as a meeting focus. Furthermore, the English department

has adopted a common assessment tool for all writing assignments and is in the

planning stages of collaborating with science, social studies, and theology to

adopt the same analytic model for assessment. Math and science teachers meet to

articulate and reinforce teaching of the math skills needed for the freshman-level

biology course. Math teachers and the lead PLTW engineering teacher track

students’ math skills with the EXPLORE, PLAN, and ACT test results (EXPLORE and

PLAN are 9th and 10th grade tests and are created to align directly to the 11th grade

ACT test).

The collaboration efforts of the various academic departments at STM inspired the

leadership at STM to think of other possibilities. Joe Heinecke, assistant principal,

organized a school-wide “data analysis team” to track test scores and diagnostic

data to improve instruction. This group meets every other week to analyze various

sources of data and make recommendations to departments and administration so

that they can make better-informed decisions.

3.5 Other Notable Features

Robotics

In March 2011, the MORE Robotics team won the prestigious Chairman’s Award

and the Autodesk Excellence in Design Award at the Sixth Annual FIRST (For

Inspiration and Recognition of Science Technology) Robotics Wisconsin Regional

Competition. The Chairman’s Award honors the team that best presents a model

for other teams to emulate and that embodies the goals and purpose of FIRST.

This marked the third time that MORE Robotics has won the Chairman’s Award. A

junior student in the PLTW Digital Electronics course talked about the quality of the

robotics team at STM and stated, “The PLTW students have an advantage and the

courses we take really helps us in our competitions.”

One-to-One Computing

In 2007, STM became a one-to-one computer campus, and the school, whose

motto is “Inspired by Christ. Driven by Innovation,” promotes this feature in its

outreach and recruiting. Every classroom is equipped with wireless networking,

and every student receives a laptop for the year. Students have access to “student

printers” located in the hallways. They can send documents from their laptop to a

printer and immediately access what they print. Nearly all of the textbooks are E-

books, which are accessible to students and teachers through their assigned

laptops. E-books provide the students with an interactive learning tool that

includes audio, animation, study guides, and practice tests. Furthermore, students


have the capability to connect with other students and teachers across the country

or the world. A sophomore student in the Principles of Engineering class spoke of

a “virtual project” that his class did with students from another school where they

had to design a desk organizer or emergency kit for a car using the software

program called Inventor.

Science classrooms have virtual microscopes (an online tool that is used to teach

students how to focus a slide following a specific series of steps) and real

microscopes side by side. One science teacher talked about how much the

students’ use of the laptops adds to virtual labs, allowing students to conduct web

quests and Internet searches at any time. Instructors interactively teach their

classes using Smart Boards while students participate via their laptops.

One PLTW instructor reported that students have embraced technology in

presenting their ideas and research. They use online resources such as “Prezi” to

make creative presentations and “Animoto” to display photos depicting visual

design principles and elements. Furthermore, they make electronic portfolios to

record and show their design ideas and use Skype to communicate with their

mentors.

Part iiiPart iiiPart iiiPart iii. . . . data and next stepsdata and next stepsdata and next stepsdata and next steps

Performance Data

The charts below show the average score of students on the ACT and PLAN

assessments in math, reading and science and the graduation rate from 2008 to

2010. (All data was provided by Saint Thomas More. Charts showing data for all

students and PLTW students are not intended to indicate a correlation between

enrollment in PLTW and student achievement.)


Average Score of All Students and PLTW Students on Science ACT

23 22 2224 23 22

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012Graduating Class

Ave

rag

e S

core

All students

PLTW Students

*Results for Class of 2012 are of September 2011.*ACT scores are out of 36.

Average Score of All Students and PLTW Students on Math ACT

21 22 2123 22 22

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012

Graduating Class

Ave

rag

e S

core

All Students

PLTW Students


Average Score of All Students and PLTW Students on Reading ACT

23 22 2223 24 23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012Graduating Class

Ave

rag

e S

core

All students

PLTW Students



Average Score of All Students and PLTW Students on Math PLAN Assessment

19 18 1820 19 19

05

1015202530


Graduating Class

Ave

rag

e S

core

All Students

PLTW Students

*PLAN scores are out of 32.

Average Score of All Students and PLTW Students on Reading PLAN Assessment

19 18 1920 19 20

05

1015202530


Graduating Class

Ave

rag

e S

core

All Students

PLTW Students


Average Score of All Students and PLTW Students on Science PLAN Assessment

20 19 1921 20 20

05

1015202530


Graduating Class

Ave

rag

e S

core

All Students

PLTW Students



Saint Thomas More’s Next Steps

As STM moves forward, Dr. Joerres and his leadership team are working to

achieve the following goals in the near future:

� Introduce new courses in the biomedical and science areas. Biomedical

Interventions will become the fourth course in the BMS program sequence.

Anatomy and physiology courses will be offered to meet the needs of

students interested in other science credit opportunities.

� Continue to develop collaborative planning sessions between the STEM

instructors and mathematics instructors on content, concepts, and skills to

enhance student achievement.

� Create opportunities for STM teachers in all content areas to discuss and

plan for project-based learning.

� Raise funds to purchase a 3D printer to produce solid objects using

computer-aided design software in PLTW engineering courses.

� Develop an action plan to secure new funding sources and partnerships

within the greater Milwaukee area.

# # #

Saint Thomas More Graduation Rate, 2008-2010

97 94 9894 96 97

0

20

40

60

80

100

2008 2009 2010Year

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

tud

ents

G

rad

uat

ing

AllStudents(%)

PLTWStudents(%)


The site visit was conducted on September 22–23, 2011. This case study was

written by Hans Meeder, Leah Felcher and Nichole Jackson of the Meeder

Consulting Group. Site visit coordination and follow up was provided by Mary

Burke, Curriculum Coordinator and Academic Dean at Saint Thomas More.

Published June 2012. All case studies and affiliated reports for the STEM Schools

Project can be found at http://www.meederconsulting.com. © 2012, Meeder

Consulting Group, LLC.

Appendix

An Internal Analysis of Math and Science Achievement1

STM has reviewed student achievement data on 291 students over the past four years to determine if there is a correlation between student enrollment in PLTW and student test scores on the ACT. Placement test scores for all students (including PLTW students) ranged from 1 to 98 and from 7 to 98 for PLTW students. In comparing student performance on their placement test scores to their ACT scores, STM compared those students who took two or more PLTW classes to those students who took no or only one PLTW class. (STM notes that those students who scored higher on the placement test would be expected to score higher on the ACT, but the school still wanted to see whether there was a correlation between enrolling in PLTW courses and performance on the ACT. Based on this analysis, STM found that if students took at least two PLTW scores, their ACT composite scores were 0.899 points higher (on average) than non-PLTW students with the same incoming test scores. The Math ACT score was 1.05 points higher and the science ACT score was 1.45 points higher.

1 All data analysis was reported by Saint Thomas More. Meeder Consulting did not verify

this analysis.

case study: st. thomas more high school - nc3t · pdf filecase study: st. thomas more high...

Documents