Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Academy of engineering   discussion of the implementation study, mary visher-shelley rappaport
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Academy of engineering discussion of the implementation study, mary visher-shelley rappaport

291
views

Published on

Published in: Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
291
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • The four pillars were not introduced until the last year of our study will not discuss all parts of components
  • 13 AOEs
  • Note that not all categories are discussed
  • Consider mentioning as context that the goals of recruitment were to a) ernoll 75 students in each grade, target students of color and girls, and enroll all students who were interested regardless of past academic achievement or behavior
  • Students’ varying math levels was the most often mentioned challenge to scheduling students into cohortsCompeting activities and course offerings (too many electives were offered)
  • Using both ConnectEd units and home-grown ideas, teachers are assigning long-term, team-based, interdisciplinary projects such as designing, making - and sometimes blowing up - bridges, ramps, a Trojan horse and a NASA room with a radio telescope.
  • Note that most AOEs do not yet have rising seniors
  • Transcript

    • 1. Academy of Engineering: Discussion of the Implementation Study
      Institute for Staff Development
      Philadelphia
      July 11 – 13, 2009
    • 2. Agenda
      Selected findings about the four components of the AOE Academy model from MDRC’s AOE implementation study of Cohort 1
      Components of the AOE model
      Academy Development
      Curriculum
      Advisory Boards
      Work-based Learning Programs
      Panel Discussion
      Q & A
    • 3. Overview
      Goals of the study
      Document the experiences of Cohort 1
      Assess the effectiveness of partner supports
    • 4. Overview
      Timeframe: 2007-2010
      Recruitment
      YOP
      Implementation of the AOE Model
      Data Sources
      Site visits
      Phone interviews
      Observations of conferences and workshops
      Document analysis
    • 5. Overview
      Cohort 1 AOEs
      A.J. Moore
      Burton
      Construction Trades, Engineering and Architecture
      East
      Evergreen
      Frederick Douglass
      Harmony
      Madison
      Morse
      Northwest
      Patrick Henry
      Spruce
      University High
    • 6. Academy Development
      Recruitment
      Cohort Scheduling
      Staffing
    • 7. Student Recruitment
      Almost all AOEs enrolled 60 or more students in the freshman class.
      Most of the AOEs served a large number of underrepresented minorities.  
      A majority of AOEs struggled to achieve gender balance.
      A minority of AOEs used selective admissions criteria including minimum GPA and test scores and good citizenship.
    • 8. Recruitment Challenges
      Attracting female students to the engineering field
      District admissions policies
      District recruitment policies
      Reputation of the host high school
      Difficulty in reaching out to middle schools
    • 9. Cohort Scheduling
      A majority of AOEs did not cohort their students
      A few AOEs placed students in cohorts for a maximum of two classes or for three or more classes not including their PLTW class
      A small minority of AOEs cohorted their students for three or more classes including their PLTW class
    • 10. Cohort Scheduling Challenges
      Students’ varying math levels
      Competing activities and course offerings
      Small numbers of students per grade level
      Keeping class sizes even in and out of the AOE
      Students seeing the same faces all the time
      Affording teachers dedicated to the AOE
    • 11. Curriculum
      PLTW
      Student Supports
      Instructional Practices
    • 12. PLTW
      All PLTW teachers completed the PLTW training and with few exceptions rate it as the most “intense” and “best training out there”
      Students seemed engaged with the PLTW curriculum. They loved “seeing the math come alive”, the hands-on projects, and software.
      Many teachers struggled to complete the PLTW curriculum in one year
      A majority of AOEs faced software or equipment issues at one time or another
    • 13. PLTW Challenges
      Students’ math backgrounds
      Downloading the software
      Cost of updating software and purchasing new equipment
      Purchasing or shipping delays
    • 14. Curriculum Integration
      Interest in integrated projects ran high in most AOEs; students in several AOEs were working on contextually rich and meaningfully integrated projects.
      PD on curriculum integration was wanted and appreciated - staff at one school had a ConnectEd coach and were planning on creating their own integrated project with support from the coach
      About half of the AOEs had begun using ConnectEd units and several more were working on getting their teachers trained to use ConnectEd.
    • 15. Curriculum Integration Challenges
      Priority given to meeting state standards and preparing for state exams
      Students not in pure cohorts
      No common planning time
      Core teacher buy-in/comfort working ‘outside of subject area’
    • 16. Advisory Boards
      Membership
      Structure
      Roles and Responsibilities
    • 17. Advisory Boards
      The majority of AOEs reported strong, active advisory boards composed of both business and higher education partners
      Board contributions to AOEs mentioned : guest speakers, job shadows, curriculum guidance, support for events, mentoring and other support for students, recruitment support and internships
      Some AOEs were working with district level advisory boards
    • 18. Advisory Board Challenges
      Getting national business connections to translate into committed business partners on local boards
      Defining the roles and responsibilities of Board members
      Finding the right balance between number of meetings and Board effectiveness
      Engaging all members of Board; not just a few
    • 19. Work-Based Learning Programs
      Internship Preparation
      Internship Participation
      Internship Assessment
    • 20. Work-based Learning Programs
      A majority of AOEs were actively thinking about or preparing for internships:
      Guest speakers
      Job shadows
      Career Fairs
      Mock interviews
      Resume preparation
      Some AOEs with upperclassmen were already offering internships and at least one AOE is now piloting internships with sophomores
    • 21. Work-based Learning Program Challenges
      Economic times
      Age requirements, insurance issues and other logistical roadblocks
      Transportation
      Student motivation
    • 22. Panel Discussion:
      Success Stories from the Field
    • 23. Panel Discussion
      What factors led to successful implementation of the components of the AOE model?
      What obstacles, if any, did AOEs have to overcome for successful implementation of the AOE model?
      What challenges are you currently facing now that you are in your second year of implementation and what advice do you have for those cohorts who started after you?
    • 24. Contact Information
      Mary G. Visher, Ph.D.
      Senior Research Associate
      MDRC
      475 14th St.
      Oakland, CA 94612-1900
      510.844.2247
      mary.visher@mdrc.org
       
      Shelley Rappaport
      Research Associate
      MDRC
      16 East 34th Street
      New York, NY 10016-4326
      212.340.8893
      shelley.rappaport@mdrc.org