DiscoverE hired Concord Evaluation Group (CEG) to conduct an independent evaluation of the Future City program. Future City has been operating since 1992. According to DiscoverE, the Future City program is “a national, project-based learning experience where students in 6th, 7th, and 8th grade imagine, design, and build cities of the future. Students work as a team with an educator and engineer mentor to plan cities using SimCityTM software; research and write solutions to an engineering problem; build tabletop scale models with recycled materials; and present their ideas before judges at
Future City, operating since 1992, is “a national, project-based learning experience where students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade imagine, design, and build cities of the future. Students work as a team with an educator and engineer mentor to plan cities using SimCityTM software, research and write solutions to an engineering problem, build tabletop scale models with recycled materials, and present their ideas before judges at regional competitions in January. Regional winners represent their region at the National Finals in Washington, DC in February.
Future City’s cross-curricular
In 2018, the Croucher Foundation conducted its third annual mapping exercise for the out-of-school STEM learning ecosystem in Hong Kong.
The study reveals a rich and vibrant ecosystem for out-of-school STEM in Hong Kong with over 3,000 discrete activities covering a very wide range of science disciplines. This third report indicates extremely rapid growth in available out-of-school STEM activities compared to 2016 and an even larger increase in the number of organisations offering out-of-school STEM activities in Hong Kong.
STEM educators are eager to foster long term collaboration with each other, and with schools. At the same time, good working practice by schools, teachers, STEM educators and institutions that involves and engages local communities was discovered, showing the diversified modes of connection which could enhance the sustainability of STEM ecosystem.
We trust that this three-year study with its associated digital maps, provides a useful resource for schools, teachers, students, parents, STEM educators and education policy makers in Hong Kong.
The PEAR Institute: Partnerships in Education and Resilience at McLean Hospital and Harvard Medical School conducted a year-long study of the Tulsa Regional STEM Alliance (TRSA). Funded by the Overdeck Family Foundation, STEM Next Opportunity Fund, and the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation, this study is the first of its kind among 68 national and international STEM Ecosystems.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Kristin Lewis-WarnerPatricia AllenGil Noam
This workshop series, convened by the Kavli, Rita Allen, Packard and Moore Foundations, was intended to view the entire system of people who support scientists’ engagement and communication efforts in order to explore how this system can be most effective and sustainable. The discussions examined where this system is thriving, the limits people within the system face and what can be done to ensure their efforts are commensurate with the demand for quality communication and engagement support.
Conducted over four closely scheduled workshops in late 2017 and early 2018, the convenings brought
Many scientists want to connect with the public, but their efforts to do so are not always easy or effective. Visionary programs and institutions are leading the way identifying the support needed to enable scientists’ connections with the public. However, the current appetite by -- and demand for -- scientists to do this exceeds the capacity of those who facilitate quality communication and engagement efforts. More can be done to ensure that those who support scientists are networked, sharing best practices, and supported by a reliable infrastructure.
This workshop series, convened by the Kavli, Rita Allen, Packard and Moore Foundations, was intended to view the entire system of people who support scientists’ engagement and communication efforts in order to explore how this system can be most effective and sustainable. The discussions examined where this system is thriving, the limits people within the system face and what can be done to ensure their efforts are commensurate with the demand for quality communication and engagement support.
Conducted over four closely scheduled workshops in late 2017 and early 2018, the convenings brought together leaders in different parts of the field who bridge scientists and the public and led to the emergence of a number of key priority areas. While the initial intention was to also hold a plenary event to provide a more holistic view of scientists’ support system in order to collectively discern directions to advance the field, we feel a more efficient way forward right now is to focus our efforts and resources on building community and advancing these priority areas.
Our invitation-only workshops brought together scientists, academic leaders, engagement professionals, researchers, communication trainers, and foundation leaders. For each workshop, we also commissioned a “landscape overview”, to better understand the high-level state of each community. Workshops included:
Workshop I: Communication and engagement training programs - Dec. 4-5, 2017 at SUNY Global Center/Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science in New York
Workshop II: Associations, societies and other professional organizations - Feb. 28 - March 1, 2018 at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, MD
Workshop III: Academic institutions - March 27-28, 2018 at UC San Diego
Workshop IV: Science engagement facilitators (museums, science festivals, connectors) - May 2-3, 2018 at Monterey Bay Aquarium
TBD - Workshop V: Plenary event
The goal of the workshops was to explore how to ensure scientists’ communication and engagement support is effective and sustained. In doing so, we hoped to 1) deepen our understanding of how scientists are currently supported in these areas, 2) map the broader support system to expose the opportunities and obstacles that play a role in achieving this goal, and 3) identify strategic and practical next steps that move us closer to this goal. This initiative also aimed to forge and strengthen networks across communities and institutions – and in so doing, take a view of the entire system to explore how everyone can better ensure their efforts are impactful, mutually supportive, and connected to a greater whole.
Included in the links below are summaries from each workshop.
This position paper, co-authored Center for Childhood Creativity's Director Elizabeth Rood and Director of Research Helen Hadani, details the importance of exposing children ages 0-8 to science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) experiences. The review of more than 150 empirical studies led Rood and Hadani to conclude that, despite what has been previously thought, modern research supports the understanding that children are capable of abstract thinking and STEM-learning from infancy, beginning before their first birthday.
The Roots of STEM Success, authored in support of classroom
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Helen Shwe HadaniElizabeth RoodAmy EisenmannRuthe FousheeGarrett JaegerGina JaegerJoanna KauffmannKatie KennedyLisa Regalla
In partnership with the Center for Research on Lifelong STEM Learning, we completed year one of a multi-year study on the impact of the Curiosity Machine model on students. There is a specific focus on linking dosage to impact. The constructs that were explored were:
* STEM identities (e.g., how students think of themselves in science)
* “Possible selves” (see STEM as a component of their own career or future learning pathways, e.g., course taking in STEM areas)
* Self-efficacy (e.g., beliefs in their abilities in STEM subject areas, self-perception of confidence in STEM)
* Interest in
The Society for Science and the Public’s Advocate Grant Program provides selected Advocates with funding, resources, and information. Advocates include classroom teachers, school and district administrators, university professors, and informal science educators in community-based programs. The role of the Advocate is to support three or more underserved middle or high school students in the process of advancing from conducting a scientific research or engineering design project to entering a scientific competition. Advocates receive a stipend of $3,000; opportunities to meet and interact with
The development of character is a valued objective for many kinds of educational programs that take place both in and outside of school. Educators and administrators who develop and run programs that seek to develop character recognize that the established approaches for doing so have much in common, and they are eager to learn about promising practices used in other settings, evidence of effectiveness, and ways to measure the effectiveness of their own approaches.
In July 2016, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop to review research and practice