report: dayton regional stem school knowledge capture project

7/31/2019 REPORT: Dayton Regional STEM School Knowledge Capture Project

1/36


2/36

2010DaytonRegionalSTEMSchool


3/36

SocialScienceObservation&

EthnographicKnowledgeCapture

of

9thGradeGlobalClimateChangeProject

Spring2010

SuzanneFranco&NimishaPatel,WrightStateUniversity

&

MariaCohen&MonicaHunter,PASTFoundation


4/36

TABLEOFCONTENTS

I.ProjectOverview...................................... ............................................ ............................................ ....... 1

II.ProjectWorkdayObservations

A. Observations:Collaboration&Inquiry...................................... .................................... 2B. Observations:Persistence ......................................... ............................................ .............. 5C. Observations:Compassion&Compromise............................................. ..................... 6

III.EthnographicDialogueObservations

A. Collaboration..................................... ............................................. ........................................... 7B. Persistence ......................................... ............................................. .........................................11C. Inquiry........................................................................................................................................13

IV.Conclusions&Recommendations

A. QuantitativeObservationsConclusions ............................................ ...........................16B. EthnographicDialogueConclusions ............................................ ..................................17C. NexusofObservationsandEthnographicKnowledgeCapture .........................17D. PostProjectBrainstormandRecommendationsforFutureResearch...........20

V.Appedices

ATallysheetusedbyobservers............................................................................................22

B.Figures1-11..............................................................................................................................23

C.Figures12-22............................................................................................................................29


5/36


6/36

DaytonRegionalSTEMSchoolKnowledgeCaptureProject 2

II.PROJECTWORKDAYOBSERVATIONS

StudentsandfacultymembersfromWrightStateUniversity(WSU)observedDayton

RegionalSTEMSchool(DRSS)studentsduringthreeofthefinalfourdaysoftheirspring

projectdevelopmentonGlobalClimateChange(GCC).Groupswereobservedforeleven

(11)specificquantifiablebehaviorsonehouroneachofthethreedaysinorderto

capturethelongitudinalprocessesoftheprojectdevelopment.Theobservers,drawn

fromWSUandlocaleducationalinstitutions,variedacrossthethreedays,butthe

behavioralobservationslistedonthetallysheetdidnot.Thetallysheet(AppendixA)

wasutilizedtorecordtheactivitiesofboththeteachersandthestudents.Thenumber

ofgroupsobserveddependedonthenumberofobserversavailableandthenumberof

groupsworkingontheirprojects.Typically,eachobserverfocusedon2-3groups.

PASTandWSUresearchersdevelopedthetallysheetcollaboratively.Thepurposewas

toprovideobserversaformonwhichtorecordfrequenciesofbehaviorsthat

demonstratedthequalitiesbeingstudied:Collaboration,PersistenceandInquiry.The

collaborativenatureofthedevelopmentenabledbothqualitativeandquantitative

perspectivestobeimbuedintheobservations.Asnotedintheintroductionthethree

qualitiesunderinvestigationarepartofthefive[5}habitsidentifiedasintegraltogood

educationattheDaytonRegionalSTEMSchoolandprimaryinthesuccessofproject-

basedlearning.Priortotheopeningoftheschool,DRSSfacultyandadministration

developeddefinitionsofthesethreequalitiesandhavepublishedthemattheentrance

totheschool.Additionalrefinementstothetallysheetwereaddedafterdiscussionwith

STEMhighschoolteachersaboutpossiblemanifestationsofthesethreequalitiesduring

theprojectimplementationinMay.

Duringeachofthethreedaysofobservations,studentsattendedstructuredclassesinthemornings;theyworkedontheirprojectsafterlunch.Thus,allobservationstook

placeduringtheafternoon.Eachobserverreviewedthetallysheetwiththesitemanager

andwasdirectedtoaspecificgroup(s)forobservation.Afteronehourofobservations,

observerssubmittedtheirtallysheet;ifneeded,theyweredirectedtoanothergroupto

observe.Theobservationswerenon-participatoryandstudentsandteacherswere

informedthattheobserverswouldnotbeconversingwithgroupsduringtheirtimewith

thegroup.

IIA.OBSERVATIONS:COLLABORATIONANDINQUIRY

Table1:FrequencyCountsforObservedBehaviors,Days1-3forAllGroupspresentstheelevenbehaviorsobservedwithingroupsoneachofthethreedaysofobservation.The

letter'T'precedingabehaviorindicatesabehaviorobservedofateacher,whileanS

indicatesabehaviorobservedofastudent.Thegroupnumbersarerandom

representingthenumberofgroupsobservedeachday,notaspecificgroup(N=18,Day

1;N=15,Day2;andN=9,Day3).Theelevenobservedbehaviorsarealsovisually

representedin(AppendixB;Figures1-11).Onlytwogroups,randomlyassignedas


7/36

Type of Behavior

Question 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 TOTALS

Day 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 2 3 2 7 13 0 1 9 0 1 42

Day 2 9 6 9 15 11 0 13 5 3 0 10 22 12 0 19 134

Day 3 8 4 3 9 13 9 12 0 10 68

244

Question 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 24 18 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 2 5 0 2 3 0 0 59

Day 2 11 10 3 6 2 0 1 0 1 0 8 0 0 0 12 54

Day 3 0 0 4 11 10 6 2 2 10 45

158

Question 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 2 0 6 0 0 4 0 2 3 0 0 21

Day 2 6 3 4 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 6 0 5 33

Day 3 8 5 2 5 14 2 1 1 8 46

100

Question 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 23 3 9 2 9 28 5 2 1 14 9 11 23 24 1 6 16 17 48 32 319

Day 2 25 6 13 6 14 14 12 9 9 0 21 3 20 0 28 180

Day 3 1 3 4 5 26 14 3 40 17 113612

Question 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 23 49 0 9 9 3 3 0 4 7 2 20 33 14 11 20 1 1 209

Day 2 27 23 9 2 22 8 19 38 5 0 26 22 18 0 73 292

Day 3 1 2 7 17 3 4 5 1 2 90 2 3 227

728

Question 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 0 0 0 6 0 3 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 6 3 0 0 0 28

Day 2 10 6 15 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 10 5 0 0 52

Day 3 2 1 8 1 8 0 0 20 3 43

123

Question 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

Day 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

Day 3 6 3 0 2 13 0 0 33 6 6394

Question 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 125 83 1 6 6 4 3 14 11 9 5 68 62 14 36 90 76 54 667

Day 2 28 27 20 172 76 90 141 145 12 0 86 20 41 0 224 1082

Day 3 28 19 12 11 20 36 128 39 23 316

2065

Question 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 89 68 0 3 5 5 1 0 0 4 7 31 18 5 5 16 37 16 310

Day 2 6 0 10 51 59 0 98 16 6 0 14 8 48 0 160 476

Day 3 16 1 0 0 0 3 16 2 86 48 181

967

Question 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 0 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 14 1 1 0 0 0 34

Day 2 10 0 18 0 0 0 0 8 1 0 6 3 19 0 0 65

Day 3 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 3 26 41140

Question 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18

Day 1 0 1 0 6 2 1 0 0 0 7 0 5 7 1 2 0 0 0 32

Day 2 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 14 0 12 0 0 45

Day 3 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 21 27 55

132

S-Willingtocompromisefor

goodofgroup.

S-Usingtheirhands

T-Interactswithstudentsby

askingquesonsofdesigns,

demonstraonandpredicon

T-anydeclaravestatementis

followedimmediatelybya

quesontomakethestudent

think,considerandexpound

T-Allowstudentsmeto

synthesize,experiment,failand

consideralternaves

S-Askingquesonamongpeers

andteamaswellasTeacher

S-Verifyingunderstandingsor

conclusionswitheachother

S-Documenng

experimentaon

TABLE 1: FREQUENCY COUNTS FOR OBSERVED BEHAVIORS, DAYS 1-3 FOR ALL GROUPS

S-Willingtomakemulple

draQsofPOLtoachievesuccess

S-Focusedonthetaskathand

(eitherworkingindividuallyor

asagroup)

S-Demonstratescompassion

andhonestyininteracons

Number of Groups Observed


8/36


GroupAandGroupB,wereobservedallthreedaysbythesameobservers,andFigures

12-22(AppendixC)representthechangesinbehaviorofthesetwogroupsoverthe

courseoftheproject.

Color-codinginyellow(Day1),green(Day2)andorange(Day3)remainconsistentfor

Table1andforFigures1-11,allowingforeaseofcomparisonbetweendays.Datareveal

thatmanyofthebehaviorscharacterizingpersistence,collaboration,andinquiry

werenotobservedinallgroupsonthefirstdayofobservation.However,suchbehaviors

werefrequentlyobservedduringthethirddayofobservations,supportingthefactthat

groupbehaviorovertheprojectdevelopmenttimelinechangedastheprojectsneared

completion.

Thestudentbehaviorsmostfrequentlyobservedoverthethreedayswere:

1. Q4:Askingquestionsamongpeersandteamaswellasteacher;and,2. Q5:Verifyingunderstandingsorconclusionswitheachother.

Oneachofthethreedays,observersindicatedthateverygroupaskedquestionsamong

themselvesandoftheirteacherwiththeexceptionoftwogroupsonDay2(Figure4).

Furthermore,onthefirsttwodays,allbuttwogroupswereobservedverifying

understandingsorconclusionswitheachother(Figure5);thisbehaviorwasobserved

byallofthegroupsonthethirdday.Thesebehaviorsrepresentbothcollaborationand

inquiry.

Observersalsonoted

thatcollaboration

andinquirycouldnot

bereadilysiloed

whenobserving

groupinteraction.

Therefore,questions

1,4,and5were

comparedoverthe

courseofthethreedays(Figures23).

Thepurposeofthis

analysiswasto

furtherexplorethe

relationshipbetween

thesebehaviorsto

Day1=18Groups

Observed

Day2=15Groups

Observed

Day3=9Groups

Observed

Figure23.InquiryandCollaborationcomparison


9/36


determineifobserverscoulddetectwhencollaborationbegantooccur,andiftherewas

alaginoneortheotherfacetsbeingobserved.Theobserversnotedthefollowing

actions:

Q1:NotehowmanytimesTeacher[T]interactswithstudentsbyaskingquestionsof

designs,demonstrationandprediction. Q4:NotehowmanytimesStudent[S]asksquestionamongpeersandteamaswellas

Teacher.

Q5:NotehowmanytimesStudent[S]verifiesunderstandingsorconclusionswith

eachother.

ThedatapresentedinFigures24-26showsthatstudentsaskedfarmorequestionson

Day1thanonDay3(Figures24-26).Thissupportsthefindingthatcollaboration

behaviorsdecreasedastheprojectnearedcompletion.ByDay3,studentsweremore

involvedwithinquiry,asevidencedbythehighnumberofverificationbehaviors

observed(Figures24-26)Theincidencesnotedforteacher-askedquestions(Figures24-

26)triplesinfrequencyfromDay1toDay2,andgoesbackdownduringDay3.Thisis

evidencethatthestudentsbecamemoreinvolvedininquiryrelatedbehaviorsas

projectsnearedcompletion.

Thethreeteacherbehaviorsobservedreflectedinquirymethodsofinstruction(Figures

1-3).OnDay1,approximatelyhalfofthegroupshadteacherswhoengagedinthese

methods(someofthegroupshadthesameteacher).Bythethirdday,allofthegroups

hadteacherswhoengagedintheseinquirymethods.Thus,astheprojectswerebeing

finalizedtheteachersusedinquirymethodsmorefrequentlyinresponsetostudent

questions.

IIB.PERSISTENCE

Observationsindicatedthatstudentpersistenceincreasedoverthethree-dayperiod.

Onebehaviorreflectingthiswasfocusingonthetask,eitherasindividualsorasagroup

(Figure8).Thefrequencyofthisbehaviorincreasedsignificantlybetweendayoneand

daytwo.Twootherbehaviorsrepresentingpersistencealsoincreasedoverthethree

days:documentingexperimentation(Figure6)andwillingnesstogeneratemultiple

drafts(Figure7).Thesebehaviorswereobservedinsomeofthegroupsduringdayone,

andwereobservedinallbutthreegroupsondaythree,whilestudentswerefinalizing

theirprojects

Tofurtherstudytheemergenceofcollaboration,persistenceandinquiry,twogroups

aredetailedinFigures12-22.Bothgroupshaduniqueobserverscompletethetally

sheetsduringthethreedaysofobservation.Morespecifically,GroupAhadthesame

observerforthreedays;GroupBhadadifferentobserverwhocompletedthetallysheet

forthreedays.Therationaleforincludingthisanalysiswastoremoveanyobservation

biasesthatmayhavebeenintroducedbyhavingdifferentobserversforgroupseachof


10/36


thethreedays.Morespecifically,itispossiblethatsomeobserversinterpreted

behaviorsdifferentlythanothers.Withthepotentialbiasremoved,theanalysiswas

initiatedtoidentifyanytrendsrelatedtothenumbersofincidencesofthethree

qualitiesoverthethreedays.

ForGroupB,incidencesofinquiry(Figures12-16)andpersistence(Figure18)increasedfromDay1toDay2.However,theDay3observationtimewaslimitedto10minutes

insteadofonehourduetothearrivalofaguestspeaker.Theobserverremarkedthathe

recordedmoreinquiryactivityintenminutesduringthe3rddaythanhedidduringone

houronDay3forothergroups.Hepredictedthatifthegrouphadnotstoppedwhenthe

guestspeakerarrived,thefinalnumbersofincidencesofinquirywouldhavebeenfar

greaterthanduringDay2.Collaboration(Figures20-22)decreasedoverthetwodays.

Theobserverpredictedthatthenumberofincidencesforcollaborationwouldhavebeen

alownumber.

ThesametrendscanbeseenfromDay1toDay3forGroupA.Inquiryincidences

increasedoverthethreedays(Figures12-16).Persistenceincreasedinonearea(Figure

18),buthadnochangefortheotherbehaviorsassociatedwithpersistence(Figures17

and19).CollaborationincidencesdecreasedbyDay3(Figures20,21,and22).There

werenoanomaliesduringtheobservationsforthisgroup.

Thesefindingssupportthebeliefthatthereisalagintheemergenceandfocusof

inquiry-relatedbehaviorsforbothteachersandstudents.

IIC.COMPASSIONANDCOMPROMISE

ThefinaltwoobservationsofthesetofelevenbehaviorsrepresentexactvocabularytakenfromtheDRSSdefinitionsofcollaboration,inquiryandpersistence.

Q10:Student[S]demonstratescompassionandhonestyininteractions.

Q11:Student[S]willingtocompromiseforgoodofgroup.

Althoughthetermscompassionandcompromisevaryinmeaningacrossage,

ethnicityandeconomicstatus,noneoftheobserversaskedtohavethetermsfurther

defined.InanalysisofthedatawenotedthesharpincreaseinthetwobehaviorsonDay

3(Figures10and11).Thequestionarose,didthisriserepresenttheacclimationofthe

observers,ortheriseinthebehavior.SincetheobserversonDay3werepredominantly

newobservers,wedeterminedthattheincreaserepresentsanincreaseinthetwobehaviorsamongstudents.Attheendoftheproject,theteamswereworkingagainst

thedeadlinetofinishtheirpresentations,andthedrivetofinishseemstohave

stimulatedmoreactsofcompassionandmorecompromise.


11/36


III.ETHNOGRAPHICDIALOGUEOBSERVATIONS

ThefollowingsectionsareorganizedbyeachDRSSqualitycaptured,beginningwiththe

explorationofcollaboration,whichwasthemostfullyexploredofthethreeduringthe

studentandteacherdialogues,particularlyintermsofteachermodelingofDRSS

qualities.Persistenceandinquirywereinevidenceincommentsmadebyteachers

andstudentsaswell,thoughinquirywasnotasovertlydiscussedaswascollaboration

andpersistence.Theseexplorationsincorporatedescriptionsofteacherbehaviorand

studentbehaviorasdescribedbybothteachersandstudents.Eachsubsectionisdivided

byexamplesofthequalitiesexhibitedduringtheGCCprojects,followedbyexamplesof

setbacks,ifany,inthatparticularsubset,followedbyreflectionsofteachersand

studentsonwaystobetterenhancecollaboration,persistenceandinquiryatDRSSin

futureprojects.Perspectivesofteachersgatheredduringtheteacherdialogueare

indicatedbytfollowedbyanumber,e.g.t31;perspectivesofstudentsareindicated

bysfollowedbyanumber,e.g.s121.Therearenumerousexamplesbelowwhereperspectivesaresharedbyteachersandstudents.

IIIA.COLLABORATION

DRSSdefinitionofCollaboration:Studentworksindependentlyandascontributing

membersofateam,acceptingandreactingtoimproveoneselfbasedonfeedback

andcritique,anddemonstratescompassionandhonestyinallinteractionswith

others.

Thissectionpresentsstatementsbyteachersandby

studentsthatreflectideasaboutwaysinwhichcollaborationoccurredandincludethreesubthemes:

ProjectDesign,ProjectStructure,andGroupDynamics

CollaborationamongtheteachersatDRSSwasstrongly

inevidence,especiallywhereteachersworkedtogether

todesigntheGCCprojects,andtoprovidefeedbackfor

studentpresentations.Teachersindicatedthat

collaborationamongthemselveswasarealstrengthof

theprojectandatrueintegrationoftheirindividual

strengths(t10).Teachersalsonotedthatfutureprojects

wouldbenefitfromincreasedattentiontoconsistency,

coordination,communicationandtime.

DuringtheGCCprojects:

Teachersconsultedeachotherwhenoutsidetheircontentareacomfortzone(t10,t25)

Teachersworkedwithstudentsinallofthegroupsduringclasstime(t48)

Teachersnoted

thatfutureprojectswould

benefitfrom

increased

attentionto

consistency,

coordination,

communication

andtime.


12/36


TeachersworkedwithpeopleoutsideofDRSS(t23,t40,t43)

Setbacks:

Groupsassignedtonon-educatorcoacheswhowereoutsidetheircomfortzoneandinovertheirheadswerenotasproductiveasthoseassignedtoteacher-

coaches(t31,t43)

Forfutureprojects:

Teachersdevelopallprojectsbeforetheyareassignedtonon-educatorcoachestoensureprojectshaveclearguidelines,andentailenoughactivitiesand

challengesforthestudentstospantheallottedtimeframe(t29,t30,t32)

o Non-educatorcoachesreceiveadequatetrainingincontentareasandclearguidelinesinhowtoworkwithDRSSstudentgroups(t43)

Teacherscommunicatemoreeffectivelytocoordinateincentivesandbreaktimetopromoteperceptionofequalityamongstudents(t50,t51,t52,t53)

Teachersreceiveadequatetimetocarryprojecttocompletion,includingtimeforallgroupstosharetheirprojectswiththeentireschool(t44,t45)

Explorethepossibilityoforganizingteamsbyadvisorygroupswithadvisory-selectedprojects,followingthephilosophyofourschool(t43)

Collaborationamongstudentswasstrongestwhereeffectiveprojectdesigninitiated

engagement,wasstructuredtoprovideaflexibleframework,andattentionwaspaidto

fosteringpositivegroupdynamics.DRSSstudentsworkedtogethersuccessfullyto

createpresentations,PowerPoints,audits,buildingdesigns,andactivitiesforchildrenin

classroomsandattheGreenFair.

ProjectDesigninitiatedengagementandprovidednumerousoptions,givingstudentsasenseoffreedomofchoicewhenpossible.

DuringtheGCCprojects:

Mostprojectsweredesignedtofostercollaboration(t11,s1) Studentswentouttothecommunity(t3,s10,s11) Teachersbeganworkingwithstudentgroupsduringcontentstageofproject(t1,

t13)

Studentsbegantoworkwitheachotherduringcontentstageofproject(t1,t14,s39)

Teachersmodeledcollaboration(t10,t25)

Projectwasexpandable,sostudentscoulddivideworkequitably(t24,s6,s39,s60,s131)

Setbacks:

Studentswhoweredoneearlydistractedthosegroupsstillworking(t29,t30) Studentsingroupswhogottheirlastchoiceofprojectsfeltforced,groupdidnot

jell(t35)

Somegroupsweretoolargeforeffectivecollaboration,noteveryonehadenough


13/36


todo(t30,s138)

Someprojectswerenotdesignedtospurcollaboration(s136) Non-educatorcoacheswereineffectual(s178,s179)

Forfutureprojects:

Studentsaregivenadegreeofchoiceandinput,aswellasawiderangeofprojectsfromwhichtochoose(t5,t35,t37,t40,t49)

Studentshaveacleargoalattheoutsetoftheproject(t25,t26) Projectinvolvesenoughtasksforstudentstodivideequallyforthedurationof

theworktime(t20,t21,t23,t24,t29,t30)

Moreconsistencyincommunitybuildingactivitiesacrossthestudentbody(t29,t52,t53,s182,s183,s184)

ProjectStructureprovidedstudentgroupswithaflexibleframeworkonwhichtobuild

theirprojectsindividuallyandasateam.

DuringtheGCCproject:

Structuredworktimesetupstudentsforcollaboration(t1,t23,t47,t48,s66,s89) Teachersworkedwithstudentstohelpthemrecognizeeachothersstrengths,

andcapitalizeonthosestrengths(t24,t46,t47,t49)

Teachersprovidedongoingsupervisionsostudentsknewwhattheyweredoing(s134)

Teachersprovidedfluidguidelinesandtemplates,leavingstructurewithenoughroomforstudentcreativity(t4,t22,t23,t46,s34,s39,s135)

o Studentsdecidedasagrouptodeviatefromthetemplates(t49,s60) Studentsfelttheyhadfreedomtoworkhowtheywantedto(s39,s45,s46,s49,

s94,s104,s186) Somecoacheswerecoolandtreatedstudentslikeadults,letthemhangout

(s87,s123,s128)

o Coachestookstudentsouttoeat(s93,s101,s173) Studentsengagedincommunitybuildingbysharingfood(s12,s23)

Setbacks:

Studentswereangeredbyinconsistenciesinfoodsharingactivities(s182,s183,s184)

Groupswerefrustratedbylackofguidancefromteacher(t18,s125) Studentswereworkingindividuallywithoutplanningordiscussion(t18,t25,t26,

s133,s167)

Forfutureprojects:

Teachersprovidestructureandguidanceonhowtoworktogetherandhowtoshareinformation(t18,t28)

GroupDynamics,ifnotattendedto,canderailcollaboration.Groupdynamics

describedbelowsustainedcollaborationamongstudentsforthedurationoftheir


14/36


projects.


Groupmemberstookdirectionwellandwerewell-prepared(s58,s70,s131,s132,s172)

Studentsperceivedequalityamonggroupmembers(s131,s160,s162,s164,s168,s170)

o Groupwasrightsizetodividework(t20,s110) Therewerenoarguments(s1,s50,s59)

o Whenargumentsbrokeout,peopleweretransferredtoothergroups(s42)

o Studentsworkedtogetherwell(s55,s56,s170)o Groupmemberslikedeachotherandgotalongwell(s107,s108,s131)o Membersofthegroupsharedthesame

viewpointonGlobalClimateChange

(s172)

Studentsfeltconfidentandcomfortablewiththeirroleswithinthegroup(t24,s170)

Constructivecriticismwasactedonbygroupmember(s141)

Studentsweregiventheopportunitytoworkwithpeopletheydontnormallyworkwith(s174)

Groupmemberswerecompliant,witheveryonetakingresponsibilityfordoingtheirtasks

o Non-contributorsinspiredcollaborationintherestofthegroup(s49,s52)

oGroupmembersdevisedandcarriedoutstrategiestodealwithnon-contributors

(s137,s139)

Setbacks:

Insomegroupstherewasaperceptionofinequalityamonggroupmemberso Somestudentsworkedindividually(t21,s48,s51,s106)o Groupmemberswerefrustratedbyslackers(s53,s133,s137,s143,

s144,s145,s146,s161)

Somegroupsweretoolarge,andtherewasnotenoughwork(s109,s138)

Forfutureprojects: Ahealthybalancebetweenfriendsandnon-friends(t37) ThoughtfulplacementofIEPstudents(t19,t21) Membersperceivetheyhaveachoiceofprojects(t35) Groupsizeissmallenoughtogiveeveryoneopportunitiestoparticipate(s109,

s138)

Collaboration

amongstudents

wasstrongest

whereeffective

projectdesign

initiated

engagementand

providedaflexible

frameworkwithin

positivegroup

dynamics.


15/36


IIIB.PERSISTENCE

DRSSdefinitionofPersistence:Studentsustainsaproblemsolvingprocessover

timewhileremainingfocusedandproducingmultipledrafts,muchasaskilled

artisan,toachievesuccess.

Thissectionpresentsstatementsbyteachersandbystudentsthatreflectwaysinwhich

persistenceoccurredandincludethreesubthemes:ProjectDesign,ProjectStructure,

andGroupDynamics

TeachersmodeledpersistenceastheyguidedtheirstudentsthroughtheGCCproject

towardtheirculminatingpresentationsoflearning,devisingandemployingstrategiesto

motivatestudentsasneeded(t46,t47).Studentgroups,onthewhole,didagoodjobof

presentingthemselvestothepublic(t22,t23).Groupsovercamenumerouschallenges,

includingsetbacksincollaboration,boredom,andattimesalackofinquiry,butastheir

teacherswouldsaytheypulleditoff(t21,t23,t39)whenitcametimetopresent.

Persistenceinstudentswasfosteredbygoodprojectdesign,whichincluded

incorporatingincentivestoencourageahighlevelofstudentfocusandinvolvement.

TheGCCunitwasdesignedandstructuredwithanadequatetimeframeallowingfor

multiplepresentations,feedbackandrevisions.Groupdynamicscameintoplayaswell,

wherestudentspersevereddespitebeinginabadgroup(s106).

ProjectDesignprovidedthestudentwithaclearlydefinedculminatingevent,with

incentivestomotivateandsustainstudentengagement.


Projecthadacleargoal(t26,t27,s61)o Studentsunderstoodwhattheyneededtodotoreachthatgoal(t22,t23,

t47,s134,s135)

o Studentshadchoiceofprojects,andvarietywithinthoseprojects(t2,t5)o Mostgoalswereactualized(s69)

Studentsappliedtechniquesandstrategieslearnedthroughouttheschoolyear(t8,t12)

Designincorporatedelementsinspiringparticipation o Goingoutsideofschool(s10,s22,s88,s90)o Workingwithdifferentpeople(s11,s174)o Workingwithfriends(s18,s20,s21)o Creatingactivitiestodowithchildren(s7,s14,s60)o Doinghands-onwork(s15,s130)o Workingwithtechnology(s95)o Makinganimpact

Onenergyusage(s69) Teachingchildrenaboutrecycling(s14)

Teachersaddedotherincentivesincludingbreaks,foodsharing,andgoingoutto


16/36


eat(t50,s12,s91,s93,s101,s173)

Teachersprovidedadequatesupervision,withabalancewherestudentsarekeptontrack,yetperceivefreedomtoworkwhenandwheretheylike(t46,s94,s103,

s104,s123,s128)

Setbacks: Somegoalswerenotactualized,andstudentslostmomentum(t42,t44,s59,s65,

s74,s111,s130,s157)

Projectsdidnothaveaclearlydefinedgoal(s67,s74,s75) Studentsdidnotperceivechoiceinprojectassignments(s114,s116) Studentswhowerefinishedwithworkdistractedthosestillworking(t29,t42) Studentswerefacedwithperformanceanxiety,andworriedthatpresentation

wouldbetoounsophisticatedfortheintendedaudienceofprofessionalsand

experts(s66,s72,s83,s153,s155,s158)

Forfutureprojects:

Projectsaredescribedclearlyattheoutseto Changesindesignmidwayareclearlydefinedwithappropriateguidelines

Groupsaregivenprojectslargeenoughtodivideamongmembers;complexenoughtorequireallthetimeallotted;andinterestingenoughtoengagestudents

throughoutthecourseoftheproject(t29,t30)

Goaliscontained,sostudentsremainfocused(t26) Structureprojectpresentationssotheyhappenedatthesametime(t42)

ProjectStructureprovidedaprogressionofactivities,guidingstudentsthroughthe

processofcreatingapresentationoflearning.


Teachersprovidedframeworkwithdailygoals(t23,s67,s134)

o Studentstooktheirowninitiativewithdailygoals(t22,t23)

Studentsingroupfocusedondoingthework(s59)

o Studentsdidresearch(s71) Groupsengagedinmultiplepractice

presentationstoavarietyofaudiencesand

revisedpresentationsbasedonfeedback(t22,t23,t25,t48,t51,s43,s45,s56,s58,

s67,s168,s169,s170)

Studentscreatedmultipleprototypesandmodels(s106) Studentsperseveredwithprojectworkdespiteperceivedinequitiesandlackof

guidance(t18,t21,t29,t39,s50,s125,s126,s145)

Studentscopedwithchangesinprojectdesignand/orgoalmidwaythrough(s49,s79,s85)

Thecreationofmultiple

prototypesand

presentationswitha

focusonrevisingand

reevaluatingfostered

persistenceamong

students.


17/36


Studentsworkedtocompletiondespitelackofinterestand/orchoiceinproject(t39)

Setbacks:

Inconsistenciesinworkconditionsdisruptedstudentfocusanddecreasedmotivation(t51,t52,t53,s44)

Inconsistencieswithincentivesprovidedbycoachesfosteredsenseofapathyandinjustice(s178,s183,s184,s185)

Separationofstudentgroupswasenforced,instillingsenseofcaptivityanddecreasingmotivationandfocus(t29,s43,s44,s47,s50,s55,s56,s105,s122,

s124,s126,s127,s180,s187,s188,s189)

Somestudentswerehamperedbyalackofguidance(s125,s178,s179) Somestudentswerefrustratedbyhavingtoadheretorigidguidelines(s153)

Forthefuture:

Studentsareprovidedwithconsistentandequitableincentives(t51,t52,t53)o Foodsharingatschoolo Goingoffcampustoeato Fieldtripso Breaksandopportunitiestosocializeo Independence

GroupDynamics,whenoff-kilter,providesabackdropforpersistenceinstudents.

Persistencewasevidentamongstudentswherecollaborationwaslacking.Giventhat

skewedgroupdynamicsareinthemselvessetbacks,thefollowingonlyaddresses

occurrencesduringtheproject.


Studentscontinuedtoworkwhenothersinthegroupwereperceivedtobeslackingoff(s42,s48,s49,s106,s143,s145,s146)

Whereastudenthaddifficultyfocusingontheproject,otherstudentsfeltthisthrewthegroupoffstride,buttheypulleditoff(t21,s49)

Groupswherestudentswereworkingindividuallyorcouldnotagreeonprojectideaspulledtogetherovercourseofproject(t25,s53)

IIIC.INQUIRY

DRSSdefinitionofInquiry:Studentisinquisitive,notonlyaskingquestions,but

actinguponthosequestionsinanefforttodiscovertheanswers,accepting

confusion,uncertaintyandtheriskoffailureaspartoftheprocess.

TeachersdemonstratedinquirywhileresearchingGCCprojects(t33,t43),andbytheir

choiceofthecontroversialtopicofGlobalClimateChangeintheprojectdesigninandof

itselfspurredinquiryinDRSSstudents.Withintheteacherandstudentdialogues,the


18/36


qualityofinquirywasimpliedfromdescriptionsofstudentengagementinthecontent

areaclasses,learningtopresent,aswellasthebrainstormingactivitiesdoneby

projectteams.Inquirywasactivatedintheearlieststageoftheprojects,duringcontent

areainstruction,andcontinuedthroughprojectdevelopmentandbeyondpresentations

oflearning,whenstudentsparticipatedinpost-projectreflections.


Contentareacurriculumfueledconversation(t8,t16,t17)o Studentsweregivenbothsidesofacontroversialsubjectandopportunity

tosee,argueandanalyzebothperspectives(t7,s26,s27,s28,s96,s97,

s166)

o StudentsimmediatelyengagedoneanotherwithconvictioninthetopicandbegandiscussingGCCacrossthecurriculum(t7,t8,t14)

o Studentsengagedindebatein-class,duringlunchandbetweenclasses(t15,s120)

o Confusiongeneratedbyclassmatedebateswasaccepted(t14,t15,s166) Brainstormingactivitiesbeganbeforeprojectworkwasformallyinitiated(t13,

t15)

Cross-curriculartiesweremadeovert(t6,s99)o Studentsquestionedcross-curricularelements(s86,s100)

Studentsworkedbeyondelementssuggestedbyteachers(s60)o Studentstooktheirowninitiative(t22)

Studentsaccepteduncertaintygeneratedbymid-projectchanges(s49,s79) Studentsengagedinhands-onactivities(s15) StudentslearnedallaspectsofGCC,data,analyzing,andhowtopresent,in

additiontoconductingresearchandusingtools(t9,s25,s26,s45,s71,s95,s102,

s133)o Studentsquestionedthemselves

afterclassfeedback(t48)

Studentsreflectedin-classonprojectpossibilitiesandshort-comings(t40,s64,

s165)

o Projectdesignorstructurewasquestioned(s62,s67,s129,s153)

Setbacks:

Somestudentshadlittleornointerestintheprojectstheywereassignedanddidnotengage(t35,s25)

StudentshadlittleornointerestinGCCasatopic(s119,s190) Somestudentswereirritatedbythelevelofdebateandshutdown(s28,s120,

s166)

Somestudentswereunabletomakecross-curricularconnections o StudentscouldnotconnectprojecttoGCC(s33,s57,s84)

Somestudentsthoughttheprojectpointlessbecausetheywerenotreceiving

Brainstormingand

debateengaged

studentsandhelped

themunderstandthe

needformid-project

changestotheir

designs.


19/36


grades(s147,s1490,s150)

Inquirywasstifledbypresenceofoutsidegroupduringenergyaudit(s65)

Forthefuture:

ProvideaclearexplanationofthepurposeofServiceLearning Continuetoofferadegreeofchoicetostudents,asinvolvementinchoice

promotesengagement

o Providingorinspiringamultitudeofdifferentactivitieswithineachproject(t24)

o Incorporatingactivitiesthatemploystudentsindividualtalentsandacknowledgeindividuallimitations(t19,t24)


20/36


IVA.QUANTITATIVEOBSERVATIONSCONCLUSIONS

Thequantifiedanalysisofthethreedaysofobservationsprovidedimportantinsightintothepaceandpresenceofinquiry,collaborationandpersistence.StudentsandTeachers

exhibitedallthreequalitiesas

wellascompromiseand

compassionoverthecourseofthe

project.Theobserverswereable

tocapturethisinformationonthe

tallysheetsandprovidevaluable

datathatreflectswheneachof

thesequalitiesreachedits

greatestpotentialwithintheteam

dynamic.Forexample,intheearlypartoftheprojectstudents

askedfewerquestions(Figure24)

butastheprojectproceededthey

begantoaskmorequestionsand

collaboratemorereachingthe

heightofcollaborationday3

(Figure25)astheprojectsand

presentationpreparationdrewto

aclose.Persistencelikeinquiry

andcollaborationalsogrewwith

thestudentsengagementinthe

project(Figure26).

Insomeinstancessuchasthe

divisionofinquiryand

collaboration,observersfoundit

almostimpossibletoseparatethe

twoinformingusthatwehadto

takeadifferenttactinanalyzing

specifictraitssuchasinquiryand

collaboration.Inthecaseof

teamworkitbecomesnecessarytoanalyzethewhencollaboration

andinquiryoccur.Futurestudies

ofindividualsthatwork

separatelyonprojectswould

provideanexcellentcomparison

forgaugingifinquiryoccurs

IV.CONCLUSIONS&POSTBRAINSTORMFORFUTURERESEARCH

Figures24-26.Thesethreegraphsrepresentmodifiednumbers

sothatalldayscanbecomparedequally.


21/36


22/36


implementationstrategies.FocusonthreeDRSSstudentattributescollaboration,

persistenceandinquiry-alsolinksthisstudyofclassroominstructionandlearningwith

theunderlyingphilosophyandlong-termgoalsoftheschoolitself.Whilethisstudy

offersasnap-shotofasingleproject,theinformationgainedcanhelptoincrease

understandingofeffective,newformalteachingandlearningapproachesthatcanhelp

tofostertheseattributesinstudents,andcanalsocontributetodevelopmentofintegrated,hands-onlearningexperiencesthatareessentialtoSTEMeducation.

Welearnedfromthequantitativestudythatmorecollaborationwasobservedinthe

earlystagesoftheGCCproject,andthatovertimestudentsshiftedintheiractivities

towardinquiryandpersistenceasprojectsreachedcompletion.Teachersandstudents

bothsharedtheviewthatcollaborationwasanearlystrengthoftheGCCProject.

Teacherscommentedthatinteractionamongteachersduringtheplanninganddesign

phaseoftheProjectwasstrengthenedthroughacollaborativeapproach,andwasalso

evidentduringcontentinstructionpriortogroupprojectactivities,whenteachersnoted

thattheyworkedtogethertoassisteachotherwithinstructionoutsideoftheircomfort

zone.Teachersandstudentssharedintheirviewsthatstudentswerealsoeagerto

engageindiscussionanddebateonGCCissues,exploringcontroversialaspects,and

linkingissuesinacross-curricularcontextduringthecontentinstructionphaseofthe

project.Studentsfeltthattheprojectstructureandguidanceoftheteacherindeveloping

ateamapproachwerealsoessentialtosuccessfulcollaboration,inspiredbyteachers

whomodeledbehaviors(e.g.,co-teaching)thatstudentscouldalsoexplore.Students

alsofeltthatteacherswhocouldeffectivelyhelpstudentstoseethestrengthsofothers

increatingtheirteamproject,alsohelpedtostructuretheearlystagesoftheprojectin

waysthatofferedstudentstheopportunitytocollaboratetocontributeandengagefully

intheproject.

Drawbacksnotedbystudentsconcernedinconsistencyofincentivesacrossthegroups,

thatcontributedtoalossofmotivationforsome,leadingtostudentswhowere

consideredslackersintheirlackofengagementwiththeteam.Teachersalsosensed

therangeofincentivesthatemergedduringtheproject(e.g.,foodsharing,goingoutto

eat,meetingpeopleinthecommunity)contributedtounderlyingfeelingsofinequity

acrossgroupsthatcanbeimprovedthroughbettercoordinationandcommunicationin

thefuture.Teachersalsonotedthatstudentprojectsmustbestructuredinwaysthat

willallowtheprojecttogrowthroughstudentcreativity,tobuildteamskillsandalso

assurethatallstudentscanfullyparticipateandcontributetotheproject,withstudents

alsocommentingthatgroupsthatweretoolargestruggledtofullyengageallstudents.

WhereweseepersistenceincreasingamongthegroupsduringthecourseoftheGCC

Projectinthequantitativestudy,teachersandstudentsalsonotedthatpersistencewas

moreevidentamonggroupswherecollaborationwaslacking,suggestingthatthelink

betweenthosetwoactivitiesisnotonlyafunctionoftimeasaprojectnearscompletion,

butcanalsobeafunctionofthesocialconstructionofteamrelations.Studentsnoted

thatfrustrationwithslackerscontributedtoteamstrategiestoovercomelackof

engagementbysomestudentstoassuretheirprojectwouldbereadyforpresentation


23/36


bytheendoftheweek.Forsomestudents,thisalsomeantworkingindividuallyto

overcomeperceivedlackofstructureorlackofguidance,inordertoachieveproject

completiongoals.Forotherstudents,freedomtoworkattheirownpacetoexplore

projectoptionsgavestudentsanimportantincentivetoworkcreativelytoachieve

projectgoals.

Additionally,studentsandteachersbothnotedtheimportanceofthestructureofthe

projectinprovidingdailygoalsforstudentstofocusonthathelpedtopacetheproject,

withsomestudentsnotingthatstudentswhocompletedworkearlyweredistracting

tothosewhowerestillfocusedonprojectdevelopment.Projectstructuremustalso

realisticallyprovideguidancetowarddevelopingachievableprojectmilestones,leading

afewteacherstoconcludethatsomestudentsexperiencedlossofmotivationwhenthey

failedtoachievealloftheirgoals.

Bothteachersandstudentsfeltthatarangeoffactorscontributedtosuccessfulproject

outcomessupportedbyinquiryleadingtostrategiesforexplorationandvalidationof

projectdesign.Thisincludedfeedbackfromtrialpresentationsasgroupsworkedto

projectcompletionandfinalpreparationforstudentpresentationsintheschoolandin

thecommunity.However,theperceptionbyteachersaswellasstudentsthatinquiry

wasmoreevidentinearlyphasesoftheprojectextendsthetimeframefromtheformal

observationperiodofthequantitativestudytoencompasstheearlierpreparationphase

duringcontentinstructioninwhichbothteachersandstudentsacknowledgedthe

importanceoftheholisticGCCProjectapproach.

TeachersfeltthattheinitialselectionoftheGCCtopicwouldinitselfrequireboth

teachersandstudentstoengageinresearchactivities,toexploreideasandparticipate

activelyindebateoncontroversialaspectsoftheissues.Thisprovidedstudentstheopportunitytoconsiderpotentialshort-comingsofagivenview,tofurtheranalyze

potentialprojectdirectionspriortotheactualteamprojectprocess,aswellasto

experienceaprocessofbecominginformedonanewtopicinpreparationtoinform

othersintheircommunityincludingfellowstudents,youngerstudents,and

professionalsandotheradultexpertsinfieldsthatrelatetoGCCissues.Studentsalso

sharedinthisview,notingtheopportunitytolearnaboutGCCissues,identifying

relevantdatatosupporttheirprojects,analysisofdata,andfinally,howtopresenttheir

project,allcontributedtobuildingasetofskillsandtoolstosupporttheweek-longGCC

Project.

Theconnectionsbetweenwhatwasobservedandwhatwasexperiencedprovideimportantinsightsthatcontributetoourabilitytodescribewhathasoccurredinformed

byexplanationsofwhatoccurredfromfirst-handknowledgeandexperienceofthe

teachersandstudentswhoengagedintheGCCProject.Inconstructingthesetwo

studieswehavelearnednotonlyabouthowthisprojectwasstructuredand

implemented,buthavealsogainedinourunderstandingofwaysthatcanimproveand

strengthenfutureprojects.Theseideasareexploredinthefinalsectionofthisreport.


24/36


IVD.POSTBRAINSTORMFORFUTURERESEARCH

Oneofthemostpowerfulaspectsofcollaborativeresearchistheabilitytolook

objectivelyattheprocessandrecommendfuturechangestoit.Thisisespeciallytrue

whencollaboratorsfromtwodifferentdiscplinesareinterestedandexcitedaboutthe

nexusofdatacollectedforthesameproject.IntheDRSSstudytheprocessesofquantitativeeducationalresearchandanthropologicalethnographicmethodsare

merged.Thesetwoprocessesexactdifferenttypesofinformationbutwhencombined

haveproducedarichreservoirofinformationandinsight.Sincethisisthefirsttime

thatthePASTanthropologistshaveworkedwithWrightStateseducatorswelearneda

lotandthefollowingrecommendationsreflectgenuineinterestandcommitmentto

seeingthesetypesofinterdisciplinarystudiesprogressandbuildinthefuture.

DataCollectionRecommendations:

1. Ashortpodcastbegiventoallobserverspriortothestudyoutliningneeds,goalsandetiquette.

2. Observersberemindeddailybytheresearchsitemanagereachdaythattheyarenottoengagewiththegroupsorteachersinanyway.Observersarenot

participant/observersinthisresearch

3. Atimeframebepartoftheobservations.Byobservingbehaviorsevery1-2minutesinsuresthatthetallysheetsareagoodindicatorofhowoftenabehavior

isobserved.

4. Eachteammemberwearabadgethatindicateswhichteamtheybelongto.Thiswillallowobserverstotrackthefluidityofteamworkoverthecourseofthe

project,aswellasinterandintrateamdynamics

5. Futureobservationsincludewhatstudentbehaviorsarelikeoutsideoftheprojectneeds(eg.Studentsnotengagedinprojectincommonareas).


25/36


V.APPENDICES

A. TallySheetusedbyObserversB. Figures1-11AllObservationsbyquestionanddayC. Figures12-22DuckHouseandEnergyUseObservationsbyquestionandday


26/36


V.APPENDIXA:OBSERVATIONTALLYSHEET

GroupName:

TimeofObservation:

Whereobserved

:

Observer:

Activitiestolookforto

documentpersistence,inquiryandcollabo

ration

(Whathappenswhenshouldnotlookthesameineachteamoronseparatedays)

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

TEACHER

1.T-interactswithstudentsbyaskingquestionsof

design

,demonstrationandprediction

2.T-anydeclarativestatementisfollowed

immediatelybyaquestiontomakethestudent

think,

considerandexpound

3.T-allo

wstudentstimetosynthesize,experiment,

failan

dconsideralternatives

STUDENT

4.S-Askingquestionamongpeersandteamas

wellasTeacher

5.S-Ve

rifyingunderstandingsorconclusionswith

eacho

ther

6.S-Do

cumentingexperimentation

7.S-WillingtomakemultipledraftsofPOLto

achiev

esuccess

8.S-Focusedonthetaskathand(eitherworking

indepe

ndentlyorasagroup)

9.S-Usingtheirhands

10.S-De

monstratescompassionandhonestyin

interactions

11.S-Willingtocompromiseforgoodofgroup


27/36


V.APPENDIXB:FIGURES1-11

Figures1-11representtheunmodifiedobservationnumbersrecordedeachdayoverthe

courseofthreedays(seeTable1).Thedaysareconsistentlycolor-coded(Yellow=Day

1,Green=Day2andOrange=Day3).EachfigureistitledbytheobservationrecordedandarepresentedinthesameorderasappearsonthetallysheetandintheTable1.

Figure1.T-Interactswithstudentsbyaskingquestionsofdesigns,demonstrationand

prediction.Color-coded:Yellow=Day1,Green=Day2andOrange=Day3


28/36


Figure2.T-anydeclarativestatementisfollowedimmediatelybyaquestiontomake

thestudentthink,considerandexpound.Color-coded:Yellow=Day1,Green=Day2and

Orange=Day3

Figure3.T-Allowstudentstimetosynthesize,experiment,failandconsideralternatives


29/36


Figure4.S-AskingquestionamongpeersandteamaswellasTeacherColor-coded:

Yellow=Day1,Green=Day2andOrange=Day3

Figure5.S-Verifyingunderstandingsorconclusionswitheachother


30/36


Figure6.S-DocumentingexperimentationColor-coded:Yellow=Day1,Green=Day2and

Orange=Day3

Figure7.S-WillingtomakemultipledraftsofPOLtoachievesuccess


31/36


Figure8.S-Focusedonthetaskathand(eitherworkingindividuallyorasa

group)Color-coded:Yellow=Day1,Green=Day2andOrange=Day3

Figure9.S-Usingtheirhands


32/36


Figure10.S-DemonstratescompassionandhonestyininteractionsColor-coded:Yellow=

Day1,Green=Day2andOrange=Day3

Figure11.S-Willingtocompromiseforgoodofgroup


33/36


V.APPENDIXC:FIGURES12-22

Figures12-22representtwoteams(DuckHouseandEnergyUse)whowereobserved

allthreedaysbythesameobservers.Thegraphsareidenticalinpresentationandorder

asFigures1-11andreflectmuchthesameconclusions.Theimportanceofseparatingthemoutistoshowcasetheconsistencyofobservationovertimeincomparisonwith

theobservationsofallgroups,whichrepresentvariationsinobservationandvariation

inobservers.

Figure12.T-Interacts

withstudents

byasking

questionsof

designs,

demonstration

andprediction

Figure13.T-any

declarative

statementis

followed

immediatelyby

aquestionto

makethe

studentthink,

considerandexpound


34/36


Figure14.T-Allowstudents

timetosynthesize,

experiment,fail

andconsider

alternatives

Figure15.

S-Askingquestionamongpeersand

teamaswellas

Teacher

Figure16.S-Verifying

understandingsor

conclusionswith

eachother


35/36


Figure17.S-Documenting

experimentation

Figure18.S-Willingtomake

multipledraftsof

POLtoachieve

success

Figure19.S-Focusedonthe

taskathand

(eitherworking

individuallyoras

agroup)


36/36

Figure20.S-Usingtheir

hands

Figure21.S-Demonstratescompassionand

honestyin

interactions

Figure22.S-Willingto

compromisefor

goodofgroup

report: dayton regional stem school knowledge capture project

Documents