cteqdesignprinciplesl2tt2l

8/3/2019 CTEqDesignPrinciplesL2TT2L

1/19

A. Need: Does the program address a compelling and well-defined need?

Self-Rating

Change the Equationrating description

How Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn meets this rating

A A : Statement of need isclear, compelling and

supported by recent, validand targeted data.

Yes. To summarize: Our statement of need provides evidence of the loss and lack ofSTEM professionals locally and nationally. Our historically underrepresented Boston youth

of color represent an untapped potential for rejuvenating the numbers and innovations inSTEM fields.

The pace of STEM school reform is so slow and the achievement gap has proven sostubbornly persistent that we felt it unconscionable to stand by as youth suffer in the

meantime. Research shows a correlation between participation in high quality STEM out-

of-school-time (OST) programs and positive outcomes, including increased STEM interestand academic achievement. In Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn, we have the freedom to

immediately blend cutting edge education tools & pedagogies with youth developmentapproaches historically proven to work well in our communities.

Research also shows that youth of color are already just as interested as their white peers inSTEM fields but they encounterobstacles that prevent them from continuing. Developing apipeline of peers, caring adults and neighborhood centers that can support youth fromelementary school through college is a strategy that provides a web of support that can help

youth overcome these obstacles.

A+ A : Program makes clearthat it adds unique value

in addressing the need

Our unique value is in oursocial innovation approach of creating a critical mass of young people for cultural

change & building STEM education capacity in neighborhood community organizations engaging youth in computational and design thinking throughemergingtools for

learning technology and science, which has not historically happened multi-level role modeling and mentoring from individuals who look like our youth immersing youth in a culture of personal making that builds confidence and

competence addressing fundamental engagement in both science & technology AND the social

aspect of believing in ones capacity to learn and contribute toward a world thatworks for everyone.

A A : Target audiences arewell-defined and closelytied to statement of need.

teenage youth teachers purposefully chosen to represent Boston: equal #s of each

gender, neighborhoods, schools, ethnicity/cultural background, range of formalacademic achievement but all with great intellectual potential

community organization partners purposefully chosen to represent and serve childrenin the Boston neighborhoods most in need of education resources

A+ A : Program candemonstrate that it isreaching the audience in

greatest need of itsservices.

We have had the numbers for nine years. e.g. 2010 -2011: 35 teenage youth teachers, 95% youth of color 500+ children age 8-13, 90% youth of color 20+ community organizations in Boston neighborhoods needing educational resources

3 college mentors, former youth teachers now college Undergrads in STEM fields 40% of our youth teachers returned for 2nd, 3rd or 4th year in program

Principle A: NeedChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric

Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn

A = AccomplishedD = DevelopingU = Undeveloped= Unique Feature


2/19

B. Evaluation: Does the program use rigorous evaluation to continuously

measure and inform progress towards ambitious but measurable goals?Self-

RatingChange the Equation rating

description


A A : Goals are ambitious butfeasible and directly linked to

the statement of need. A cleardescription is provided on howprogress will be measured.

Our program goals, as well as our work with youth, reflect a consistent philosophy of

high expectations and closely address our statement of need. We have developed

clear measures and methods for evaluation that include both formative andsummative assessment.

Formative evaluation is done largely through daily circle-up sessions withparticipants, periodic online progress surveys, and daily teaching reports. Summativeevaluation is through a 50+ multiple choice and short answer survey that was

designed in collaboration with a technology education evaluation professional. We

also conduct interviews with community organization partners and do formal year-end evaluation with staff. Since numbers are very important to our critical mass for

cultural change strategy, we collect numbers on participating youth and communityorganizations, and on contact learning hours.

A A : Clear milestones withviable timelines are presented.

Our success can be demonstrated by our progress in nine years from a program

with a handful of youth teachers working at a single teaching site with a dozenchildren, to a program that now annually works with 30-40 teenage youth teacherswho engage 500+ children with STEM activities at 20+ community organizations. Wealso have seeded a successful Hub program in the Archdale Housing Development.

A+ A : Program regularly usesdata from external or internal

evaluations to identify and act

on opportunities forimprovement

From the start, our program has been designed and substantially refined throughfeedback from youth teachers and community partners, as well as from staff.For example, when youth told us they needed more training to be effective teachers,

we added our spring Saturday learning sessions. We update and create newtechnology and science modules that reflect the interests of youth. Due to youth

feedback, our Project Expo format has moved from formal stage presentations to abrowsing booth set-up. Now, community members can visit projects at their own paceand youth have more opportunities to explain and answer questions about their

projects, as well as to get more genuine feedback and observations.

D D : Program is based onresearch that does not d irectlyapply to the programs

circumstances. Program

designers conduct their ownevaluation in lieu of third party

evaluation.

Our program has a unique and innovative approach and in many ways we aremaking the road by walking. So, much published research does not directly

speak to our efforts. However we maintain ongoing conversations with MITMedia Lab researchers as well as with people whose research projects are

complimentary. Mark Greenlaw of Making the Future, Dr. Chris Emdin of the TeachersCollege Urban Science Initiative and Dr. Anne Marie Thomas of St. Thomas University

(who specializes in engineering and maker education) are a few examples.

We have confidence in our approaches, so our priority has been to invest ourresources and energy in youth. We have largely conducted internal evaluations.

However the Massachusetts Cultural Council and the American Honda Foundation

conducted third party onsite evaluations that gave us high recommendations andresulted in two-year grants from each.

Principle B: EvaluationChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric


A = AccomplishedD = DevelopingU = Undeveloped= Unique feature


3/19

C. Sustainability: Does the program promote replication and scalability?Self-

Rating

Change the Equation

rating description


D+ D: There are plansfor securing futureinternal and externalsupport afterphilanthropic supportends, but they aremore hopeful thanviable

We now have a hybrid model of public/philanthropic sustainability that we want to take tothe next level. We have stable public funding from the MIT School of Architecture andPlanning and 4 different Boston summer jobs programs (BYF, BPIC, ABCD, MLK Summer

Scholars). Year to year, we seek foundation support (from different partners) for the othercosts from 4-8 other sources. The biggest sustainability challenge is in securing reliable

year-round funding for several staffwho have volunteered much of their time until now.

Year-round staff could improve program documentation, refine and add to our STEM content,and allow for networking with other organizations doing similar work. A team of staff andcommunity supporters has been meeting monthly to develop strategies since late last spring.

D D: People withingroups but dont always

communicate thatsupport to all

members/employees.We are often oneamong many sites

supported.

All our partners, including the MIT School of Architecture and Planning, the MIT Media Lab,

the MIT Center for Bits and Atoms, community organizations, and even the Museum of

Science Boston, often applaud and provide ongoing crucial support for our efforts inmany ways. We have found ways to make the relationships mutually beneficial. For example,

the MIT Center for Bits and Atoms and the MIT Lifelong Kindergarten Group have used us asa resource for research and testing out new approaches. Though we are one of many sites,

we believe we have provided MIT students and faculty practical opportunities to learn, applytheir own knowledge, and gain insights into the unique knowledge, challenges andexperiences of our community members and participants.

The greatest demonstration of support is that each year, we get more community

organizations, more youth workers, and more youth who seeking to participate andcollaborate. In 2010, The City of Boston issued resolutions to formally recognize our ongoing

education contributions. The MIT Center for Bits and Atoms communicates their support and

recognition by having our youth present at national and international Fab Lab conferenceseach year. Last year, the National Science Foundation provided funding for our youth to set

up a demonstration Fab Lab at the 2010 Alaska Federated Natives Convention.

A+ A : Projected benefitsto teaching and/orlearning justify the cost

per participant.

Our program exposes youth to STEM content through emerging 21st century ways ofknowing: computational and systems/design thinking. Though these are identified ascritical for the future, very rarely are they taught in schools. We not only expose youth early to

STEM content, we also help youth to think creatively, reason systematically, and work

collaboratively to solve problems. We also address social factors for individuals and thecommunity that have historically made it difficult for our youth to thrive in STEM fields.

If we take into account all the multiplier effects in our program design, then there is no

question that the impact of the program justifies the cost. For instance, one high school youthteacher can personally impact 12-18 elementary and middle school youth. One multiplier

effect in school is that our youth teachers report the surprise and new respect that their highschool teachers show when they have an opportunity to say I can do that! or I know about

that! We have had principals and teachers call here to visit curious about how we have been

able to have such an impact on students who were stubbornly resistant to their in-schoolsupport. Also, another school multiplier effect that surprised us: each year we send youthback to school with new found respect for their teachers. Consistently, youth report, now Iunderstand what teachers go through and how difficult their jobs are and say that, after our

program they behave differently in school and ask their peers to behave differently too.

Principle C: SustainabilityChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




4/19

\

D. Replication and Scalability: Does the program promote replication andscalability?

Self-Rating

Change the Equation ratingdescription


D D:A process for replicating theprogram is offered, but it is not yet

well-documented.

In the first years of the program, our youth teachers produced paper TeachingManuals that built on the best efforts of past years. However, for the past three

years, youth teachers and staff have documented their efforts online using our wiki at:www.learn2teach.pbworks.com. They document projects, activity sheets used in

teaching, lesson/activity teaching plans, and sample activity projects. The wiki alsohas embedded videos including youth-produced documentaries about the program,invention demonstrations, and activity instructions that are hard to describe in words.

There are also photos and diagrams associated with the learning, building andteaching done in the program. The idea is that the wiki also serves as a resource for

other folks who would like to replicate our program. However, at this point, the wiki is

still somewhat ad hoc and in development.

We are working with the MIT Center for Bits and Atoms to replicate our modelacross the International Fab Lab network. Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn has also

been discussed in popularinformal education enterprises such as Make Magazineand TEDKids Brussels, as well as in formal academic efforts such as MIT

dissertations, academic texts, and conferences such as the ACM Embedded andEmbodied Interaction conference.

D D: Program provides informationto other sites, but only on an adhoc basis when requested.

Formally, we have promoted local replication by initiating and seeding a Hub model

that helps community organizations to gradually develop the independent capacity tooffer STEM education. Our Hub in the Archdale Housing Development has beengoing for 3 years and their ideas have helped us innovate the core program as well.

For several years, we have been in conversation with the Boston Public Schoolsabout our model and collaborated most closely with ourlocal McKinley Schools as

they take steps to train high school youth teachers who will use our model in middleschool science and technology classrooms. Securing dependable funding for one ortwo year-long program staff would allow us to develop a more robust approach to

replication and scalability.

A+ A : Program demonstrates that itis adaptable to many new sitesand works with local sites to adapt

to local conditions

Ourcommunity organization partners are tremendously diverse, ranging fromwell-staffed and equipped Boston Centers for Youth and Families with complicatedprogramming schedules; to youth agencies, local housing developments, churches &

neighborhood community centers that struggle to make ends meet and attract youth

programming. We have developed flexible individualized approaches and have agreat track record in adapting schedules, activities and equipment to

accommodate each organizations range of needs. For instance we havetraveling netbooks for those that lack dependable equipment, we install softwarewhen network administrators are scarce, we have a community technologist volunteer

who helps with propping up aging equipment, we arrange field trips to our fab lab,we adapt our activities to blend with education themes, and we provide certificates of

achievement for programs when requested.

Principle D: Replicablity and ScalabilityChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




5/19

E. Outside Factors: Have outside factors or conditions that can accelerate or

thwart the program been identified and addressed?Self-

RatingChange the Equation rating description How Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn meets this rating

A+ A : Program has identified and made concreteplans to take advantage of opportunities suchas matching funds, favorable state or local

policies or existing reform initiatives.

One of the reasons we have been successful in sustaining the program

over nine years is ourstrategy of creating a large network, blendingrevolving AND steady supporters/contributors. We have

established dependable and supportive relationships with four citysummer jobs programs and a higher education institution (MIT). Weve

been successful in getting single year and multi-year foundationsupport along with taking advantage of city and state initiatives.

D D: Program has identified potential challenges

but plans for addressing them are not yet fullydeveloped.

The biggest challenges we face are:

To sustain year-round staff with salaries who can research and

incorporate new approaches to STEM content and improveprogram documentation,

To develop long-range funding strategies that free up more stafftime for programming and less for grant-writing, and

To develop mutually beneficial partnerships with other

local/national STEM education programs.

We have had organizing meetings and taken preliminary but firm steps

in each of these directions, but we need to more fully develop a plan toaddress these challenges.

Principle E: Outside FactorsChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric


A = AccomplishedD = DevelopingU = Undeveloped = Unique feature


6/19

F. Partnerships: Does the program create high-impact partnerships where

beneficial?Self-


A+ A : Recognizing that it lacks certain expertiseor competencies, the program partners withother competent organizations from the outset.

One of our greatest strengths is our partners. From the beginning we

have partnered with MIT and a number of MIT Media Lab ResearchGroups to establish our Fab Lab, as well as to pilot and become early

users of new educational technologies such as Go Go Boards,Scratch, Hyperscore, PICO crickets, and Lilypad Soft Circuits. 8 years

ago, a sustainable energy intern with Americorps developed aHydrogen Fuel Cell unit. Last year, we worked with Dr. Ann MarieThomas at St. Thomas University to develop a way to teach basic

principles of electricity and solar panels to children using hersquishy

circuit approach. Ed Baafi, one of our coordinators, formed aworking group of experts (who have evolved into a companywww.Modk.it) to produce a learning tool that addresses theengineering education needs of our youth. This year our entire youth

teacher cohort participated in and made memorable contributions tothe Museum of Science EurekaFest, a wind power design challenge

event that draws from some of the most innovative high schools across

the US and China. We also have partnered with the Efficacy Institutefor several years to bring cutting edge approaches to learningproficiency to our youth through workshops.

A- A : Program identifies and partners withorganizations that have already done work that

can help it reach its goals or magnify its impact.

We have already successfully done this with the MIT Center for Bits

and Atoms where we work to bring our model to the international

Fab Lab Network. We also bring in strategic speakers like SteveVinter, who is not only a great role model and an education advocate

as an individual; his company Google promotes education volunteerismin the community. We also have been working stepwise for several

years toward the goal of having an in-school application of our modelin our neighborhood McKinley Schools. Developing a Hub model wasa way to expand our program by expanding the capacity of our

partners to offer their own STEM programming more independently.

For future sustainability and increased impact, we have begun

developing relationships we hope will lead into partnering projects withorganizations like the Young Peoples Project (Math OST), Museum of

Science Boston, Science Club for Girls, Making the Future and Sprout.The goal of developing partnerships is to extend our reach and impact.

Principle F: PartnershipsChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




7/19

G. Individual Attention: Does the program ensure individual attention todiverse learners?

Self-Rating



A+ A : Programaccommodates diverse

learners needs throughtailored instruction.

Learners can learn attheir own pace.

Over time, we have developed an approach to designing good activities thataccommodates each learners needs, interests and learning styles (see attached figure).

All of our activities have structure, yet are open-ended enough so that the activity can go on

as long as the learner has ideas. There are usually many ways to build projects, so eachlearner can go about building in a way and at a pace that works for them. Part of teaching

preparation for activities includes what we call improvisation preparation. This meansteachers are ready to teach one well-devised project path but also are prepared with 2-3 sideactivities/improvisations as well, in case learners run into problems or need extra challenges.

For the teenage youth teachers, we use a variety ofmethods --- online surveys, requests forimpromptu demonstrations, and circle up feedback --- to identify areas in which individuals

and the group as a whole need to develop more confidence and competence.

For the youth aged 8-13 who are taught by our youth teachers, we accommodate learnersneeds by having one youth teacher for every 3-4 learners in a session and youth teachers

learn a variety of strategies to engage different kinds of learners in the same activity.

A+ A : Whereappropriate, technologypromotes attention toindividual students

needs, diverse interests

and different learningstyles.

All our activities are designed forpersonalized outcomes. We incorporate art into many

activities (STEM STEAM) to help accommodate different interests and learning styles. For

instance, instead of learning physical programming using only a car equipped with sensors,we also have learning through building interactive kinetic sculptures that spin, move and/orspeak. Besides learning through oral coaching (front of class and one-on-one), we

provide activity sheets that show the general sequence of building in pictures and words. Wealso accommodate those who learn best using an experiential or exploratory tinkeringapproach.

Youth teachers design and make lesson plans for all our activities because they know besthow to engage and interest youth. For example, they know how to incorporate current popularculture into the science and technology content. We have equal numbers of youth teacherswho are young women and young men who are experienced in spotting any gendered needs

of the boys and girls they teach.

Many of the teaching technologies we use such as Scratch and Pico Crickets are speciallydesigned to provide scaffolds for youth in learning science, technology or engineering. Our

newest tool for learning physical programming, Modkit, was specially designed for youth

teachers by program co-coordinator Ed Baafi. It includes built-in scaffolds so youth can beginprogramming on a graphical interface and observe how the graphical interface relates toactual code in a split window. As they gain skill, they can write line code directly themselves.Modkit also scaffolds the ability to build more sophisticated devices quickly to build confidence

in skills and to be able to more easily build what can be imagined.

The South End Technology Center @ Tent City building and computers are accessible towheelchairs. We have participated in access evaluations and have some assistive

technologies that address challenges to sight and hearing.

Principle G: Individual AttentionChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




8/19

Principle G: Individual Attention continued

Self-Rating



A+teens

A-Age 8-13

A : Program ensures

that individualparticipants spend thetime on task they need toaccomplish their learning

goals

As mentioned above, we use a variety of methods to gauge the confidence and

competence of our youth teachers as they learn and adjust the program to accommodatetheir needs. We provide written tutorials and also pair less confident youth teachers

with more confident ones who can both help them get skills and help them developconfidence as teachers. The South End Technology Center @ Tent City has open accesshours outside of youth work hours when they can come in and practice, catch up, or doprojects that interest them in order to get better.

There is less time available for the 8-13 year olds due to the location, community

organization staff, and schedule constraints. However, youth teachers sometimes do avariation on one activity during multiple sessions if they feel a group of children need extra

help getting the ideas or if they show particular enthusiasm for an activity.


9/19


10/19

H. Capacity: Does the program have the capacity to meet its goals?Self-

Rating

Change the Equation

rating description


A+ A : If the organization hasbeen active in STEM learningin the past, it has a track recordof accomplishing STEMeducation goals with itsproposed population.

Yes, we have accomplished getting the numbers of youth and community organizationsinvolved, have established a pipeline from elementary school to college, have improvedour model so we get better every year, and have sustained the necessary resources to

support and grow the program for nine years.

A- A : The organization clearlyarticulates how its staff,

infrastructure, internalexpertise and other

resources would support the

proposed project.

In other parts of this rubric, we have described how creative we have been in developing atremendous infrastructure and network to reach our ambitious goals continuously for nine

years on a shoestring budget. One indication of how engaging and interesting our programis as a STEM community learning laboratory can be seen in the dedication and

expertise of our staff. Each of them has participated as a co-coordinator of the program

(we have a very flat management structure) for 8+ years:Mel King: MIT Emeritus and education innovator with over 60 years experience in every

aspect of youth development from the grassroots, to the legislative, to the academic levels.

Ed Baafi: B.A. Computer Science UMassBoston; current grad student at MIT Media Arts &Science in High/Low Technology Group; Ed Technology innovator and entrepreneur of

Modkit; TEDKids 2011 Fellow Generation D: Digital, Democracy, DIY

Amon Millner. B.S. Computer Science, MS Human Computer Interactions, GA Tech; MS &

Ph. D. Media Arts & Sciences, MIT; part of MIT Scratch design team; ComputingInnovation Scholar 2010-2011, Olin College

Susan Klimczak. BS Electrical Eng. UMdCollegePark; M.S. Env. Ed., Lesley College; MA

and Ed.D Learning & Teaching, Harvard; expertise in experiential ed, teacher ed, informaled in community organizing

Donna Parker. B.S. Therapeutic Recreation UNH, grad coursework Women inEngineering NEU; 10+ years technology education experience; 2011 Boston Tech GoesHome Community Trainer of the Year.

All staff have volunteered most of their time and we are working to find a way to sustain at

least two with a year-round living wage. Program works to buildSTEM educational capacity

in other organizationslocated in neighborhoods

most in need of educationalresources, where manyunderrepresented groups

live.

One of the most interesting things about our program is how we work to bring STEM

programming into the neighborhoods (housing developments, community centers, youth

agencies) where our youth live. Our intention is that the culture of STEM becomes a normalpart of the place where they live.

Instead of expanding by growing our core program, we work to build independent

capacity in our community organization partners. We create hubs or satelliteprograms, seeding equipment and training, and supporting their strategies for developingresources to sustain them. Our Archdale Housing Development Hub is in its third year &serves five of its own community organization partners. Another Hub we tried to seed was

not as successful but the effort was worthwhile because we learned what it takes to run a

Hub and how individualized the seeding plan for a Hub must be. We have communityorganizations poised to become Hubs and we are seeking funding for seeding them.

Principle H: CapacityChange the Equation Design Principles




11/19

I. STEM Content: Is the STEM content challenging and relevant?Self-

Rating

Change the Equation

rating description


A+ Content clearly reflectshigh expectations for allparticipants.

Our content reflects our philosophy of having very high expectations for all our youth. Weexpose youth early to STEM content using emerging tools for learning science, technologyand engineering. We engage youth in computational and systems/design thinking, emerging

21st century ways of knowing that are only rarely being either used or even taught in schools.Our activities involve youth in experimentation, design, computer programming,

electronics, and algorithm-building through project-building.

The STEM modules we teach to elementary, middle and high school youth include: Computer programming through making animations and games Physical programming of inventions that use sensors and actuators Alternative energy that includes introduction to electricity/power, as well as solar,

windpower and hydrogen fuel cell technologies Graphic design of personalized images and objects Digital design and fabrication using our Fab Lab which is equipped with a number of

computer-controlled machines that can turn an idea into a 2D or 3D reality.

D D: Program states thatit is aligned withstandards and schoolactivities but does not

clearly demonstrate the

strength of thatalignment. Some

required resources are

not readily available forparticipants.

The learning in our program aligns most directly within the 2006 Massachusetts Scienceand Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework. Because our project-based learning

emphasizes the relationships among science, technology and engineering, it covers learningwithin the Technology/Engineering Framework. Specifically our program addresses a numberof the state learning standards for: Materials, Tools & Machines; Engineering Design;

Communication Technologies; Manufacturing Technologies; Engineering and PowerTechnologies for grades 5-6, middle and high school. Although we have done the research and

made the connections, we do not necessarily spend a lot of time documenting and improving

our program to closely meet or follow the standards.

What we are trying to do is something beyond simply aligning with what students are learningin schools; we are giving youth experiences with the latest, emerging STEM learningtools, ways of knowing, and college subject matter. Historically, opportunities for this

kind of exposure have not been available socially, or through informal education, in our

communities. Two examples of this are our hydrogen fuel cell technology activity and our FabLab. We began teaching hydrogen fuel cell technology in 2004, before it became a common

media subject. So we were proud that, when the space shuttle was grounded for a faulty fuelcell, we knew that hundreds of Boston youth knew more about fuel cells than many adults,because they had built model hydrogen fuel cell cars. Our Fabrication Laboratory also was

installed in 2004, one of the first outside a university. Even today, Fab Labs are often foundonly at universities and their use is limited to graduate students. We use education tools that

developed from our relationship with the MIT Media Labs Lifelong Kindergarten Group and itsdirector Mitch Resnick was just awarded the 2011 World Technology Award in Education.

We are also doing place-based engineering in which our youth teachers design and buildinventions that meet a need in their community. Our goal is to combine technologies of theearth with technologies of the heart --- believing in ones capacity to learn and contribute to

making the world work for everyone. We believe it important to emphasize that an essential

part of the design process is to focus on making things that contribute to us relating toeach other and the planet in humane, caring and appreciative ways.

Principle I: STEM ContentChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




12/19

Principle I: STEM Content continued

Self-Rating



A+ A: Program focuses on

real world applications ofSTEM where possible

Yes, our youth teachers engage young people in activities that focus on making things

they see and use in their everyday life --- e.g. using computer programming to makeanimation and familiar games, using physical programming to make stoplights, reaction

games, cars that react to sensors, making a model hydrogen fuel cell car etc.

An example from this year: all our youth teachers learned to use the milling machine in ourFab Lab and made their own personal Fabuino, a functional arduino board. Our youth

teachers design and build inventions/projects that solve practical problems they thinkimportant in their community. As they refine their designs, we think with them about how to

make their inventions/projects attractive enough and cost effective enough for people toreally use.

A+ Program promptsparticipants to applySTEM content to new or

unexpected situations.

The creativity of our youth teachers guarantees the application of science and technology in

new and unexpected ways. For instance youth teachers combine physical programming andart by having young people build kinetic sculptures and turn a banana peel into a musical

instrument and they have young people use neon-colored conductive playdoughs to buildsolar-powered electrical circuits that make buzzers buzz and colorful LEDs light up.

Our youth teachers design and build projects that apply STEM content in creative ways.Some examples from youth teacher projects are: building an iBed with resistance sensorsconnected by conductive thread to an alarm that wont stop going off until you physically

leave the bed for some time; making a see-saw into a cooperative game controller using

infrared sensors hooked up to an online computer pong game; an hydroponic garden withfish and plants for an urban apartment; and a solar powered charger mounted behind a parkbench so people can charge their handheld smartphones, ipods and game devices.


13/19

J. 21st - Century Skills: Does the program include a focus on 21stcentury skills?

Self-Rating



A+ teensD+ age 8-13

A : Program explicitlydemonstrates how it builds skills

like critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity and teamwork.

D : Program explicitly aims topromote 21st century skills but itdoes not clearly specify how

We have been explicitly thinking with 21st century skills from quite near thebeginning of the program. Not only do we work with the more widespread list

of 21st century skills, we also include the emerging 21st century skills ofcomputational thinking and systems/design th inking.

In Spring 2011, returning youth teachers actually went through an exercise inwhich they worked to transform 21st century skills into a verified resume rubric

form naming specific skills that correspond to those in Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2Learn. They actually added a few skills they thought important that were not

covered easily by the conventional 21st century skill set. We are thinking of

using a verified resume with future youth teacher cohorts. A verified resume istool used to teach and document 21st century skills and behaviors thatemployers and colleges have identified as valuable. The verified resume cancreate a certification of youths progress that can be used to help them obtain

jobs or apply for college.

Since all learning and teaching activities for youth teachers are personalized andproject-based, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, as well as creativity are

fundamental. They learn the engineering design process and all teaching isinquiry-based.

Youth teacher work in teams to design and build their projects, as well as whenthey teach elementary and middle school youth in community organizations.Workshops and circle up feedback sessions are specifically address groupwork

practices and obstacles. Youth teachers are asked to reflect on their group

process during the final evaluation survey at the end of the program. However,though the elementary and middle school youth sometimes work in pairs onactivities, their learning about teamwork is largely opportunistic and limitedlargely to watching youth teachers model team-teaching.

A+ A : Program promptsparticipants to be innovative andcreate new ideas or products

This is what drives our program. We started Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn withthe observation that our youth love to use and value high technology devices(smart phones, ipods, game devices, wii, etc). We believe they can go beyond

being consumers and become the inventors and innovators of the future. We dothis explicitly by:

exposing all youth to emerging technologies having all youth learn via constructionism how to design and build

personalized projects in 2 hour learning sessions having youth teachers work in teams, spending 3-6 weeks to design and

build an invention that solves a community issue that is important to them

and

demonstrating and sharing their inventions to the community at our ProjectExpo, with an aim toward inspiring others to imagine and build

Principle J: 21stCentury SkillsChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




14/19

K. Inspiration: Does the program inspire interest and engagement in STEM?Self-

Rating

Change the Equation

rating description


A+ A : Program clearlydemonstrates how itcreates excitement and

dispels negativemisconceptions about

STEM

Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn creates excitement through: Youth-designed activities that incorporate high level concepts as well as practical skills

and knowledge while taking advantage of the expertise that youth have about what will

work with other youth Holding learning sessions for youth teachers at the MIT Media Lab where they are

exposed to the latest world class techno-creativity Having youth teachers brainstorm strategies for getting elementary and middle school

youth into STEM & incorporating these strategies into their teaching Having youth teachers meet with scientists who have interesting careers in technology,

engineering and science; e.g. last year we met with Steve Vinter from Google

Participating in Museum of Science EurekaFest windpower design challenge with youth

from across country & world Holding a Project Expo each year for the community where youth teachers get to show

off their accomplishments and see how impressed and interested people are in theirwork.

An important obstacle for our youth is that there are few STEM professionals in their

communities who look like them and speak their language. This means there are few rolemodels and mentors who can nurture an interest in STEM. The lack of caring adult role

models/mentors can send out a message for youth that STEM is not a career for them.

And then there is the reality that peer influence is equally if not more powerful. Many of ouryouth are immersed in negative peer cultures where academic success is not considered to

be cool. But we believe there is a way to harness the positive aspects of peer influence to

engage youth in emerging technology and science by: Having enthusiastic youth teachers as role models who look like them (in terms of

culture, ethnicity, gender) and speak their languages teaching exciting emergingtechnology and science activities to our elementary and middle school youth

Having diverse returning youth teachers serve as role models and mentors for newyouth teachers

Having former youth teachers who are now college undergraduates serve as mentorsfor youth teachers to answer questions and dispel myths about studying STEM

disciplines in college and to help youth figure out strategies for getting around

obstacles.

A+ A : Program clearlyshows how it connects

STEM to participantsown interests and

experiences

Our approach encourages youth to personalize their learning activities and projects to make

them relevant and connected to their own interests and experiences. A few examples of

this: Two Cambodian American youth created a model robotic minesweeper because oftheir experiences of landmines in Cambodia; a group of young women who live with their

grandparents created an automatic pill dispenser with an alarm triggered by missed pills; agroup of young black men who were concerned about experiences with police brutality

fabricated educational t-shirts with LED lights and a website highlighting rights & concerns;a young Somalian Muslim woman personalized her press-fit catapult fabrication design as a

mosque that sends out Koran passages from a scroll flipper.

Principle K: InspirationChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




15/19

Principle K: Inspiration continued

Self-Rating



A- / D+teens

UAge 8-13

A: Program

demonstrates how itcreates excitement aboutcareer opportunities thatrequire STEM

background

D : Programoccasionally connectsSTEM content to real-world careers, but those

connections are notalways clear or

consistent

U: Program makes fewor no connectionsbetween STEM content

and careers that use

STEM knowledge

For youth teachers, our approach is not a lways as clear or consistent as we would like to

be, but every year: We hold weekly spring learning sessions for our new youth teachers at the MIT Media

Lab so that youth can see MIT as a place where they belong and can get exposed tothe world class labs and ideas at the MIT Media Lab

We have occasional STEM professional visitors who give talks and do Q & A w ith the

youth teachers; i.e. last year Steve Vinter from Google and our youth teachers spenta couple of hours learning about each others work

We show occasional videos of scientists and inventors who are doing cool things inour circle-ups

We have college mentors studying STEM fields who do a lot of informal talking withour youth teachers about their own STEM career aspirations

However, we do have evidence that what we are doing is working. According to our 2011Final Evaluation Survey for youth teachers, after the Learn 2 Teach, Teach 2 Learn

Program:

88% were more interested in a career in science and technology

82% were more interested in how science and technology relate to their future career

82% now definitely want to pursue a career in science and technology 56% are more interested in a career that involves teaching

For our elementary and middle school youth, we do not currently have a plan forconnecting our STEM content with careers that use STEM knowledge. Some of this goeson in the activities, but it is an area that we need to think more about.


16/19

L. Inquiry and Hands-On Learning: Is inquiry or hands-on learning

encouraged?Self-


A+ teens

A- age 8-13A : Program promotes inquiry byencouraging participants to pose relevantquestions, seek possible explanations, test

those explanations and draw conclusions

Inquiry is the fundamental approach we take in teaching and

learning activities. We do this through staff role modeling and in ourhow to teach training.

Not only do our youth teachers engage in inquiry during their project-

building, they also use multimedia and web tools to record theirdesign and building process on our wiki at

www.learn2teach.pbworks.com. They also communicate theirinquiry process of design and building to the community through

posters and demonstrations at our annual Project Expo.The elementary and middle school youth taught by our youth

teachers are only engaged in 1 hour lessons and haveconsiderably less opportunity to engage in inquiry than their youth

teachers.

While all our youth teachers use inquiry-based teaching, the rangeof their capacities to effectively do this varies with their experienceas teachers. So inquiry-based teaching is a skill we want tostrengthen even furtherfor our youth teachers. This year we are

planning to develop an activity for the Museum of Science and then

do a workshop on inquiry-based teaching with their education staff

who specialize in inquiry-based learning.A+ all A : Program creates an environment

where educators and participants work

together as active learners.

Erasing the lines between educators and participants is one of themain aims of our program. We want all our participants and staff to

be both learners and teachers. We ask two questions at the end ofevery learning session of elementary through high school youth:what did you learn? & what can you teach someone else? Staff

develop their own projects and passions that they pilot with youth, aswell as share with youth, often asking for assistance from youth and

inviting collaboration.

Principle L: Inquiry and Hands-On LearningChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




17/19

M. Underrepresented Groups: Does the program address the needs ofunderrepresented groups?

Self-Rating



A+ A : Program explicitlyaddresses needs of

groups that areunderrepresented in

STEM fields, such asfemales and people of

color

We have written elsewhere about how our model was designed with a blend of pedagogiesand youth development approaches that explicitly address the needs of our youth of color.

We expose our youth to science, engineering and technology at an early age, becausehistorically this has not happened. We blend STEM content with technologies of the heart

tailored to what we believe youth need to thrive academically; we offer opportunities todevelop a belief in their own capacity for learning, to see day-to-day failures and obstaclesas opportunities, and to make meaningful contributions to community with their STEM skills.

This is important because our youth are up against underperforming schools, peer culturesthat dont reward academic success and a constant barrage of negative media. Our

recruitment is based on a word of mouth strategy as described below to attract youth who

do not respond to posters and emails.

To address the needs of young women, we purposefully work to have a woman of color asone of our co-coordinator staff. Several years ago, we reviewed our teaching/learning

activities to offer options that might appeal equally to both girls and boys -for instance, weadded kinetic sculptures, along with car-based physical programming activities.

To address the needs of our community, we locate housing developments, community

centers, youth agencies and churches located in the Boston neighborhoods most in need ofeducation resources. Each year we set a goal of making significant efforts to include either

a neighborhood (recently Mattapan, Fields Corner and South Boston) or students from aspecific cultural background underrepresented in our program (recently Vietnamese, Whiteworking class, Cape Verdean).

One indication of our success is that increasing numbers of our youth teachers are seekingto return for 2nd, 3rd and 4th years with the program, as well as returning from their

undergraduate studies as college mentors. Last year all our college mentors were returning

youth teachers and we reached what we consider to be the maximum and ideal number ofreturning youth teachers (40% of the 2011 cohort were returning youth teachers, 60% ofcohort were new youth teachers)

A+ A : Program will be ableto demonstrate that it will

successfully reachunderrepresented groupsthrough targeted

recruitment efforts

Reaching underrepresented groups and having an active practice of inclusion in general isour passion. We have a citywide vision: for the last nine years, youth teachers have been

purposefully recruited to represent Bostons neighborhoods, schools, ethnic groups andacademic achievement levels.

We also recruit and reach youth with diverse levels of academic success. We believe that itwould be very easy, yet undesirable, to select youth strictly on formal educational merit. Wespecifically target the inclusion of youth who may be underachievers in a formal educationenvironment, but who show evidence of extraordinary intellectual potential. Many of these

youth will not necessarily read or respond to literature about our program. So, we employ aword of mouth strategy in which a network of over 250 youth workers all over the city who

are willing to talk to one or two youth they feel would benefit from or would benefit theprogram. These youth workers personally hand youth an application, often helping them fillout and deliver the application, as well as helping them to get to the interview.

Principle M: Underrepresented GroupsChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric




18/19

Principle M: Underrepresented Groups continued

Self-Rating



Over our nine years we estimate that 46% of our teenage youth teachers have been young

women and 54% have been young men. Over 90% of our youth teachers and participantshave been youth of color. Over the years, we estimate that our youth teachers have been

60% Black, 28% Latino, 14% Asian, 5% White and 5% Other. Among them, our youthteachers report speaking 8-12 different languages. Last year, 33% reported that they spokea language other than English and 25% reported speaking a language other than Englishmost of the time at home. Program staff serve as

role models who look likethe underrepresented

groups that they serve.

We believe it is key to have staff and college mentors who look like and speak thelanguages of the underrepresented groups that they serve. Too often what our youth knowculturally is not validated in school or in the curriculum. We believe that for youth to retain

new information, they have to have a bridge from their culture. Someone who looks likethem or speaks their language can build a bridge from what they know to science,

technology and engineering knowledge.


19/19

N. Staff and Volunteer Capacity: Does the program ensure the

capacity of program staff or volunteers to promote STEM learning?Self-

RatingChange the Equation rating

description


A+ A : Staff or volunteers knowSTEM subject matter and have

a command of project-basedlearning

Our staff and volunteers are not only passionate about tinkering and building

with science, technology, engineering and math; they are also passionate

about creating a learning space where all are included and all can imagine,design and build. Several of our longtime staff have actually designed and built

emerging computational thinking/learning tools that support our youth(SCRATCH and Modkit). Among the five coordinators of our core program andhub we have 3 with computer science and engineering degrees that range from

undergraduate to doctorate level. We also have three with education degreesthat range from undergraduate to doctorate level. One of our coordinators has

over 15 years experience teaching in experiential community-based learningcommunities.

Daily feedback from our community organization partners recorded on teachingreports describes our youth as professional, energetic, well-prepared, and

great teachers. In terms of STEM knowledge, they also consistently say thatour youth teachers grasp of the material is impressive and that they really

know what they are doing. In terms of their education skills, supervisors sayour youth teachers have good exercises and good facilitation, were activeand social throughout[and] knew what they needed to delegate, present and

inform, have such a positive impact and make it easy [for childrent] tounderstand. They say the children are always so excited, and have fun and

learn something. There is a goal and big idea for each session that youthteachers ask about at a circle up at the end of each session; supervisorsreport that most of the time, children got the goal and big idea and were able

to recap the day.

A+ A : Staff and volunteers knowhow to build strongrelationships with educators,

community members and

program participants they workwith

Because our program was conceived as a merging of community organizingand education, our network of relationships is strong, including:

a recruitment network of over 250 youth workers 25+ community organization partners

a network of 5 summer jobs programs that sponsor youth teachers support from MIT School of Architecture & groups at the MIT Media Lab

a generative and collaborative relationship with our Hub partner at theArchdale Housing Development

A A : Where necessary, programprovides effective professionaldevelopment on subject matter,

project-based teaching and/orskills in building strong

relationships

Most of the staff are highly active learners who are enthusiastic about theirfields and about keeping up with new information and best practices. Informally,we share what we have learned with each other. For new coordinators, we do

professional development through individualized mentoring and apprenticeship.

Since our model is so layered and complex, it often takes a full apprenticeshipyear to train new staff; our goal to maintain several full year staff is very

important because that will allow us to retain new coordinators from year toyear.

Principle N: Staff and Volunteer CapacityChange the Equation Design Principles Rubric



cteqdesignprinciplesl2tt2l

Documents