8462 Snell Spain Yancy Project3

Integrating STEM Learning into Third Grade Classrooms in Chatham County
Grant Proposal By: Melissa Snell, Kimberly Spain & Tamison Yancy
July 11th, 2016
Contact Information:
Melissa Snell
MKY Consulting
msnell2@my.westga.edu
706-817-0620
Kimberly Spain
MKY Consulting
kspain1@my.westga.edu
912-592-7661
Tamison Yancy
MKY Consulting
tyancy1@my.westga.edu
770-903-5333
Integrating STEM Learning into Title 1 Upper Elementary Classrooms in Chatham County
Abstract
1
This purpose of this proposal is for MKY Consulting to provide professional development to third
grade teachers in Chatham County in the areas of math and science. Melissa Snell, Kimberly Spain, and
Tamison Yancy, from MKY Consulting, will act as the directors and facilitators for the professional
development. They can be contacted at 706-817-0620 for any questions pertaining to this proposal. The
facilitators will partner with Savannah Chatham County Public Schools (SCCPS), STEM Academy at
Bartlett Middle School, where the training will be held, and Wendy Marshal, the instruction technology
director in SCCPS. Patrick Dean, the STEM 360 Director at Savannah State University will also assist.
This training will help participants acquire the necessary skills to meet the needs of 21 st century
students in math and science while using STEM based learning (Courts & Tucker, 2012; Howard, 2008;
Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Karp & Maloney, 2013; Kervin, Verenikina, Jones & Beath,
2013; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin & Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013;
McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014). In looking at the data of Chatham County
Elementary Schools, students performance in science and mathematics continues to be below the state
standards (GaDOE, 2013; GaDOE, 2014; GaDOE, 2015; GaDOE, 2016). Therefore, there is a great need
of a change in teaching pedagogy, as well as, an intervention to enhance participants understanding of
how to incorporate STEM learning activities into math and science events in their classrooms.
This program, Integrating STEM Learning into Elementary Classrooms in Chatham County, will
provide teachers with the technological skills, insights, knowledge, and training required to help students
prepare and prosper in the 21st century. This instruction will teach its participants how to effectively
integrate technology into mathematics and science. The primary educational goal is to build STEM,
student-centric teaching practices in third grade science and math classrooms in Chatham County. The
training will use the available technology within the schools and a free online resource, Code.org. A
secondary goal is to increase knowledge of 21st Century teaching pedagogies in third grade science and
math teachers in Chatham County. Teachers will engage in Code.org Course 2 activities, research article
discussions, watch videos of implementations, as well as collaborate with other teachers in their district to
add STEM based activities to their yearlong plans and curriculum maps (Code.org, 2016). The program
will begin in July 2017, and end in March 2018.

To measure the success of this program, qualitative and quantitative data will be collected
through daily surveys, observations, anecdotal notes, and focus group discussions. Data will be collected
and analyzed by an external evaluation group called Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants
2
(Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants, 2014). Improving methodologies that the third grade math
and science teachers use will help foster a sense of self-efficacy and build their self-confidence in the
classroom. Teachers must feel competent and possess content knowledge in order to successfully
change their teaching strategies to better meet the demands of the 21 st Century student (Lehman, Kim &
Harris, 2014; Kervin, Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013; Sahin & Ayar, 2014; Sikma & Osborne, 2014,
Weckbacher & Okamoto, 2014). By focusing on educating teachers, the program, Integrating STEM
Learning into Elementary Classrooms in Chatham County will provide authentic learning experiences in
science and math from a student point of view to give participants a sense of self-efficacy when engaging
in these experiences. Throughout the next seven sections of this document, an explanation will be
provided about a demonstrated need, goals and objectives, plan of operations, evaluation plan,
meaningful partners, and a timeline for providing an effective professional development with STEM based
learning activities.
Introduction
Chatham County is the northernmost of Georgia's coastal counties on the east coast. Savannah-
Chatham County Public Schools (SCCPS) houses around 38,000 students within the thirty-three
elementary, nine middle, and ten high schools. Educators in each of these schools are working to provide
educational experiences that will guarantee that all students flourish. However, when comparing Chatham
County elementary schools scores to those of the state of Georgia, students in Chatham County are
falling below the states proficiency levels in both mathematics and science (GaDOE, 2013; GaDOE,
2014; GaDOE, 2015). Furthermore, after taking an even closer look at the most recent standardized
testing scores of 2015, the data reveals six Title I schools with the greatest need for improvement in
mathematics and science (GaDOE, 2016).
3
While trying to provide chances of a better quality of education, each of these schools created
Title I School Improvement Teams. The teams reviewed their data scores and set goals to show
improvement. According to these schools School Improvement Plans, they have set aspirations to
increase the number of students that are showing proficiency in mathematics and science. Using their
Measures of Academic Progress assessments, as many as half of their students are not scoring at
proficient levels in math (Savannah Chatham County Public Schools, 2015).
In efforts to produce students that are leaders and workers in the 21 st century, there is an
immediate need for an intensive intervention to improve students knowledge and understanding in the
areas of mathematics and science (Courts & Tucker, 2012; Howard, 2008; Hudson, English, Dawes, King,
& Baker, 2015; Karp & Maloney, 2013; Kervin, Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013; Lawless & Pellegrino,
2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin & Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Reeves,
2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014;). According to SCCPS, they propose to provide professional development to
third grade teachers in these six schools. Additionally, they have identified a need for providing more
student-centric activities that would provide a variety of programs, learning experiences, and instructional
methods to promote success for schools, teachers, and students. Student-centric activities are activities
that revolve around the needs of students today, giving students real-world problems to solve, activities
that involve choice, and multiple ways of solving them. These activities are anticipated to deal with the
distinct learning needs, interests, and hopes of students. This new type of learning offers opportunities for
implementing more technology into each subject area to further promote success (Howard, 2008;
Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Karp & Maloney, 2013; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin
& Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014).
Code.org offers students the opportunity to learn computer science through free coding lessons.
Coding, or the programming that is behind computer programs today, has potential to influence math and
sciences because it teaches a repetitive approach to solving problems and testing ideas. This
professional learning opportunity with Code.org will help support and coach teachers to bring computer
science to their classrooms in a sustainable manner (Code.org, 2016). Computer science skills are a
combination of math, science, and technology skills, also referred to as STEM learning, and they are
4
critical to student success in the future global economy (Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015;
Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Sahin & Ayar, 2014; Van Oveschelde, 2013).
Demonstrated Need
The incompetence to effectively provide more student-centered learning combined with
integrating technology, has contributed to a higher number of students not meeting proficiency standards
in the areas of mathematics and science. Students of the 21 st century need math and science skills to
succeed in their future careers. Teaching students problem solving skills through authentic learning
experiences using science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) are critical to their future success.
STEM jobs are escalating but there are not enough people to satisfy them (Hudson, English, Dawes,
King, & Baker, 2015; Lehman, Kim, & Harris, 2014;McMullin and Reeve, 2014; Sahin and Ayar, 2014; Van
Oveschelde, 2013). Additionally, teachers inability to effectively integrate technology that enhances
opportunities for students to explore and gain problem-solving skills is related to the need for superior
professional development with a common vision (Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Kervin,
Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin &
Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013; Reeves, 2009; Sikma & Osborne, 2014; Weckbacher & Okamoto, 2014). Some
teachers are not interested in science and mathematics; and therefore are not confident in their skills to
provide lessons needed for the 21st century (Adams, Miller, Saul, & Pegg, 2014). For that reason,
providing professional development that has visualization and technology integration is crucial (Hudson,
English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015).

When the content mastery achievement scores from Chatham Elementary Schools are compared
with the state averages over the past few years, Chatham Elementary Schools have similar achievement
rates in reading and ELA, but lower scores in math and science (GaDOE 2013; GaDOE, 2014; GaDOE,
2015; GaDOE, 2016). In order to increase scores, students need quality opportunities to learn and
master math and science standards (Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Lehman, Kim &
Harris, 2014; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Sahin & Ayar, 2014; Van Oveschelde, 2013). Teachers are the
bridges that help students acquire the skills needed to flourish in the content areas. As a result, teachers
must have a true understanding of the subject matter in order to integrate technology, science, and
mathematics (Stohlmann, Moore, and Roehrig, 2012).
5
Graphs and Tables 1, 2 & 3: Comparison of Chatham County Students Meeting or Exceeding the
Standards as Compared to the State of Georgia
2012 Content Mastery Achievement
State
Chatham
91
ELA 89 93 92
Reading 84
Math77 80 71
Science
Table 1: 2012 Percentage of Students Meeting or Exceeding Scores
ELA Reading Math Science

State 91 93 84 80
Chatham County 89 92 77 71
Difference 2 1 7 9
State
Chatham
90
ELA 88 94 93
Reading 85
Math78 81 73
Science
6

State 90 94 85 81
Difference 2 1 7 8

100
90
80
70
60
50 State
% of Students Meet or Exceed Standards 40 Chatham
30
20
10
0
9088 9594 8578 8174
Subject

State 90 95 85 81
Difference 2 1 7 7
Using the data from the content mastery achievement scores of 2012, 2013, and 2014, helps
demonstrate a trend that math and science are two content areas that Chatham Elementary students
consistently show low achievement levels on state tests. These low achievement scores indicate that the
schools efforts for improvement should be aimed at math and science. Furthermore, after analyzing the
2015 Georgia Milestone End of Grade Assessment the data divulges that there are six Title 1 Elementary
Schools that seem to be in the most need of assistance (GaDOE, 2016).
7
Table 4: 2015 Spring Georgia Milestone End of Grade Assessment Grade 3
East Broad Elementary, Bartow Elementary (name has been changed to Brock), Spencer
Elementary, Thunderbolt Elementary, Butler Elementary, and Hodge Elementary are six Chatham County
schools that have been identified as low-achieving schools. Looking at the data of their third grade
students, the information reveals that these elementary schools have 0% distinguished learners in
mathematics, and few in science. According to the 2015 Spring Milestone Test, more than half of the third
graders from these six elementary schools are tagged as beginning learners in the areas of math and
science. It is clear from this data that these elementary students in these six schools are not meeting the
expected state standards as needed (GaDOE, 2016). While the data from 2012, 2013, and 2014 are
based on a different test than 2015, the scores from 2012-2014 all indicate that these elementary schools
in Chatham County are performing lower that the state averages. The 2015 data is not compared with
the data from 2012-2014, but instead used to determine six target elementary schools within the district.
Using this data it is determine that an intervention is needed for these students to have the necessary
math and science skills to succeed beyond primary school.

Teachers are under extreme pressure to help their students succeed. They are often given
multiple tasks and not enough resources to complete them. Teachers need time to focus on learning new
teaching strategies, time to apply these strategies in the classroom, and then time to collect data from
students and to reflect on how these strategies are affecting student achievement (Reeves, 2009).
When staff members from these schools were informally interviewed about issues at their schools, a
majority of teachers expressed a need for further training to enhance their ability of providing more
problem-solving and thought-provoking skills that are needed for mastery of the rigorous content. In
addition, they stated that they had a hard time teaching their students because of constant behavior
issues. Their students are not engaged in school and have a difficult time staying seated and quiet.
When several teachers were asked about STEM learning, the teachers were intrigued, but felt
that it was something that took a lot of money and time to implement. The few teachers spoken to admit
that they would be interested in professional development about STEM learning and how a project based
8
approach using these content areas could improve the math and science abilities of their students. They
also believe that others in their schools would be interested in this as well. The data from the bar graphs
and charts in this grant proposal indicate that there is a great need for STEM professional development in
Chatham Elementary Schools. Research has proven that students that participate in STEM related
activities score higher than students that have not been exposed to this type of learning (Cotabish,
Hughes, and Robinson, 2013; Hughes, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Lehman, Kim and Harris,
2014).
The teachers at the proposed schools for this grant noted in informal conversations that they
struggle providing lessons and activities that engage students and diminish behavior problems. STEM
student-centric activities such as the courses and programs offered through Code.org are engaging for
students. They involve students getting up and out of their seats, and they require active participation.
Students are motivated to problem solve and see their results displayed as they create games and solve
problems within this online program. In the Code.org games many will be completed in small groups to
encourage collaborative learning. The activities are real-world based and authentic, making them
applicable to state math and science standards.
Each elementary school involved in this professional development has access to a variety of
technology tools. Code.org courses and lessons will work on all types of devices, including the desktops,
laptops, tablets, and netbooks that the schools own. Teachers can take full classes to one of their labs or
have several devices within their room. It is extremely easy for students to share devices. Each school
also had a BYOD program and Code.org programs will work on student devices as well. This makes this
program extremely easy for teachers to use with the resources they already have. Other supplies for the
training used will be low-cost as Code.org is a free resource (Code.org, 2016).
The teacher to student ratio at each of these schools is very good, which will allow ample time for
teachers to assist students in Code.org as they progress at their own rate. Code.org provides twenty-
hour courses for learning computer science. The courses are separated by age groups. There are a total
of four courses. Due to the diversity of courses, differentiated lessons could be provided to meet the
needs of all learners. Typically, Course 2 is available for students that already know how to read
(Code.org, 2016). Consequently, during the professional development, teachers will have the opportunity
9
to complete Course 2 over the summer and will obtain first-hand knowledge of the games, lessons,
activities, and projects involved in this course. This will help ensure that all teachers have a strong sense
of self-efficacy when facilitating the lessons with their students. According to Abdelraheem (2004),
Gustafson (2004), Osika et al. (2009), Sahin (2008), and Zayim et al. (2006) An instructors belief in
his/her technical competency is an important factor in the adoption of instructional technologies (as cited
in Reid, 2012, p. 399).
A part of this project will rely on collaboration amongst peers in the group with the thought that
this will in-turn lead to good collaboration practices within the classroom. Collaboration is an important
feature of professional development and it provides accountability of knowledge (Reeves, 2009).
Teachers involved in this training will need to be given the time for collaboration to guarantee that all
teachers are successful with the program. During collaboration times, barriers that exist will be dealt with
and teachers will assist one another using their own classroom experiences. Trainers from the sessions
will be available for assistance throughout the year via email and phone conferences to assist with
troubleshooting.
Adding in new innovations to a school is not a task that will be completed overnight. This training
process included a week of intense training followed up by several sessions throughout the school year.
Before the training begins, the facilitators for the training will send out surveys to teachers and
administrators at each school to determine any other barriers that might exist that have not been noted.
Creating a meaningful partnership with each school will ensure that all teachers involved understand the
vision behind the project and are open to pedagogical changes within the classroom. Facilitators will use
their knowledge, the background of each school, and the participating teachers to ensure a professional
development that works to actively engage teachers in meaningful and relevant activities for their
individual contexts, promote peer collaboration and community building, and have a clearly articulated
and common vision for student achievement (as cited in Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007, p.579).
Goals and Objectives

The goals and objectives of this grant proposal are to deepen the STEM content knowledge of
teachers through improved teaching practices in math and science classes. Helping teachers experiment
with authentic learning experiences in science and math from a student point of view will give them a
10
sense of self-efficacy when engaging in these experiences in their own classroom (Lehman, Kim & Harris,
2014; Kervin, Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013; Sahin & Ayar, 2014; Sikma & Osborne, 2014;
Weckbacher & Okamoto, 2014). Having pedagogically sound objectives for this professional development
as well as a shared vision is critical to its success (Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Kervin,
Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin &
Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013; Reeves, 2009; Sikma & Osborne, 2014; Weckbacher & Okamoto, 2014). The
goal and objectives listed below are specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and time-bounded to
ensure the programs success.
GOALS:
1. To build STEM student-centric teaching practices in third grade science and math classrooms in
Chatham County using available technology and free online resources.
Process Objectives:
A. Participants will demonstrate their understanding of Code.org lessons and how to integrate
these student-centric activities into math and science classes during summer training
sessions as assessed by instructor observations and teacher yearlong plan documents.

B. Participants will engage in Code.org activities as a student during the summer training,
successfully completing Course 2 in the online program.

C. Participants will actively discuss and collaborate with other peers during summer training to
further their knowledge and application ideas for Code.org activities into their own
classrooms assessed by daily surveys and observations.

D. Participants will actively use Code.org activities in their classrooms weekly throughout the
school year and reflect on this process as assessed in Professional Learning Community
meetings throughout the year and journaling activities.
Outcome Objective:
E. Participants will model STEM student-centric teaching in their classrooms using Code.org
throughout the 2016-2017 school year, meeting state standards in math and science while
engaging students in active learning.
2. To increase knowledge of 21st Century teaching pedagogies in third grade science and math teachers
in Chatham County.
Process Objectives:
11
F. Participants will be exposed to the most recent peer-reviewed literature and will discuss this
in collaborative group sessions during summer training sessions as assessed by surveys,
reflection responses and small group interviews.

G. Participants will apply new teaching pedagogies during the school year as assessed by
lesson plans, journaling and small group interviews during fall and spring sessions.
Outcome Objective:
H. Participants will serve as model teachers in their schools using 21 st century teaching
pedagogies in their math and science classes throughout the school year.
Table 5 below lists the Common Core Math and Georgia Performance Standards for science that
will be addressed during the professional development sessions (GaDOE, 2008; GaDOE, 2015). These
are the standards used in the math and science third grade classrooms in Chatham County.
Table 5. Standards Addressed in Professional Development
Grade Level Subject Common Core or GPS Standard

3 math MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4
To represent and interpret data using place value.
3 math MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, MGSE3.OA.3
To represent and solve problems using multiplication and division.
3 math MGSE3.OA.8 S, MGSE3.OA.9 I
To solve problems involving the four operations, and identify and explain
patterns in arithmetic.
3 math MGSE3.G.1, MGSE3.G.2
To reason with shapes and their attributes.
3 science S3CS1. Students will be aware of the importance of curiosity, honesty,
openness, and skepticism in science and will exhibit these traits in their
own efforts to understand
how the world works.
3 science S3CS2. Students will have the computation and estimation skills necessary
for analyzing data
and following scientific explanations.
3 science S3CS4. Students will use ideas of system, model, change, and scale in
exploring scientific and technological matters.
3 science S3CS5. Students will communicate scientific ideas and activities clearly.
3 science S3CS8. Students will understand important features of the process of
scientific inquiry.
Table 6 below shows how the alignments between the professional development objectives, third
grade math and science standards, and the proposed activities for the proposed professional
development.
Table 6 Alignments Between Standards, Objectives, and Proposed Activities
12
Objectives Standards Activities
A. Participants will demonstrate MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, Participants will add all activities
their understanding of MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, from Course 2 in Code.org to
Code.org lessons and how to MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, their yearlong lesson plans.
integrate these student- MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1,
centric activities into math MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2,
and science classes during S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8
summer training sessions as
assessed by instructor
observations and teacher
yearlong plan documents.
B. Participants will engage in MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, All participants will complete all
Code.org activities as a MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, stages of Course 2 in Code.org
student during the summer MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, during the 5 day summer
training, successfully MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1, sessions.
completing Course 2 in the MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2,
online program. S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8
C. Participants will actively MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, Professional development
discuss and collaborate with MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, sessions will include ample time
other peers during summer MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, for peer discussions on how to
training to further their MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1, integrate activities into third
knowledge and application MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2, grade classes using the
ideas for Code.org activities S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8 appropriate technology.
into their own classrooms
assessed by daily surveys
and observations.
D. Participants will actively use MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, Participants will create
Code.org activities in their MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, Professional Learning
classrooms weekly MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, Communities between the six
throughout the school year MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1, schools and will meet during the
and reflect on this process as MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2, year to collaborate and reflect.
assessed in Professional S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8 Notes from these meetings will
Learning Community be shared at the fall and spring
meetings throughout the year training sessions.
and journaling activities.
E. Participants will model STEM MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, The summer and follow-up
student-centric teaching in MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, sessions will give teacher
their classrooms using MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, multiple opportunities to use
Code.org throughout the MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1, STEM based learning while
2016-2017 school year, MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2, meetings science and math
meeting state standards in S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8 standards using Code.org.
math and science while
engaging students in active
learning.
F. Participants will be exposed S3CS1, S3CS8 Each day of the summer session
to the most recent peer- peer-reviewed articles will be
reviewed literature and will reviewed and discussed on
discuss this in collaborative topics such as: TPACK, STEM
group sessions during Learning, Coding and
summer training sessions as Professional Learning
assessed by surveys, Communities.
reflection responses and
small group interviews.
G. Participants will apply new MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, Facilitators will review lesson
teaching pedagogies during MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, plans and journals of participants
13
the school year as assessed MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, during the fall and spring
by lesson plans, journaling MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1, sessions to ensure that they are
and small group interviews MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2, applying the new pedagogies in
during fall and spring S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8 their classrooms.
sessions.
H. Participants will serve as MGSE3.MD.3 D, MGSE3.MD.4, Participants will be asked to
model teachers in their MGSE3.OA.1 I, MGSE3.OA.2, videotape lessons using 21st
schools using 21st century MGSE3.OA.3, MGSE3.OA.8 S, century teaching pedagogies
teaching pedagogies in their MGSE3.OA.9 I, MGSE3.G.1, during the year and share these
math and science classes MGSE3.G.2, S3CS1, S3CS2, with all participants during the
throughout the school year. S3CS4, S3CS5, S3CS8 last session in the spring.
Table 6 clearly demonstrates how the objectives and standards are directly linked to activities in
this professional development. All activities have been designed for the teachers to use technology in
their classroom while meeting science and math standards. Teachers will learn new ways to engage their
students while meeting the standards required by the state and county. The objectives are measurable
and will provide the needed data to assess their impact.
Plan of Operations
Technology literacy alone is not enough. Teachers are often taught how to use a certain
technology, but not how the technology can be used to teach their students in a student-centric and
effective way. Teachers not only need to have technology skills, but also professional development on
how to embed these skills into the standards that they teach in math and science classes (Courts &
Tucker, 2012; Howard, 2008; Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Karp & Maloney, 2013;
Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin & Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013; McMullin &
Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014)

Barriers that often exist in schools today prevent teachers from learning how to properly integrate
technology into their classes. These barriers can be lack of resources, lack of a shared vision,
professional development without follow-up sessions, lack of understanding of teaching pedagogies
needed to be successful with technology integration, and lack of confidence teaching math and science
using technology (Howard, 2008; Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Kervin, Verenikina,
Jones & Beath, 2013; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin & Schrum, 2012;
Liu, 2013; Reeves, 2009; Reid, 2012). During informal conversations with elementary teachers from
Chatham area schools, many are not comfortable with computer science programs and the thought of
using coding to meet math and science standards in their classrooms, yet they know that successful use
of these programs can lead to job security in the future. Not only do teachers comprehend this, but also
14
students as early as late elementary school have been shown to understand that STEM jobs are a
lucrative career and have much potential for students to be successful in the world in the future (Hudson,
English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Sahin &
Ayar, 2014; Van Overschelde, 2013).
This professional development program has taken into consideration the barriers that exist at
Chatham schools such as: The need for a shared common vision, guidance of appropriate teaching
pedagogies needed for 21st century STEM learning, the need for hands-on professional development
trainings that will give all teachers a firm understanding of what STEM learning is, and how they can
successfully use it in their own classrooms to teach math and science standards. The Common Core
Math Standards and Georgia Performance Standards from table 5 will be met during this training. The
correlation between standards, activities, and objectives from the training can be found in table 6. This
training will last 50 hours and result in five PLUs for teachers that participate in all sessions and activities.
Twelve third grade teachers, two from each of the six schools targeted in Chatham County will attend.
The hope is that after the training, the participants can model and assist the others in their perspective
schools and grades, thus influencing many more teachers in Chatham County.
The first section of the training will take place during one week in the summer for seven hours
each day. The last three sessions will take place during the school year, with two in the fall and one in the
spring. These sessions will be on Saturdays for five hours each. During each session there will be a
working lunch and teachers will eat will continuing with the training. A light lunch will be provided each
day for participants as well as coffee, snacks and water.
Summer Workshops
During the summer workshop, teachers will be exposed to Code.org through the eyes of
students. They will complete Course 2 and the corresponding activities. Some items will be done alone
and others in collaborative groups. Discussions along the way about why STEM learning is important and
how it fits into a student-centric teaching pedagogy will be discussed. Correlations between Code.org
activities and Common Core Math standards and Georgia Performance Standards for Science be will be
reviewed. Teachers will review their own yearlong teaching plans and curriculum maps, and will work
15
together to see how they can fit in Code.org activities into their lesson plans. Discussions about common
classroom barriers to technology will be discussed as well as how to overcome these barriers.
As teachers build their own self-efficacy about STEM learning during the training, discussions will
progress to how these teachers can mentor peer teachers at their own schools. Each classroom teacher
will leave the summer week training with Course 2 accomplished in Code.org, a new understanding for
STEM learning, lessons plans that incorporate STEM activities, and many great ideas to create engaging
lessons for their students. These teachers will also create their own Professional Learning Community
that will meet throughout the year and support one another through the implementation of these lessons
and corresponding activities. See Table 7 for the sample schedule for the summer training days.
Table 7. Schedule of Activities for Summer Training Days
Time Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

8:00 Welcome Team Briefing Team Briefing Team Briefing Team Briefing
Objectives A, F, Objectives A, F, Objectives A, F, Objectives A, F, Objectives A, F,
G: G: G: G: G:
What is What is STEM Why is coding How does it all What is a
8:30
TPACK? learning? such a big relate to the Professional
9:30
deal? math and Learning
science I need Community?
to teach?
Objective B: Objective B: Objective B: Objective B: Objective B:
Code.Org Code.Org Code.Org Code.Org Code.Org
9:30
Activities: Activities: Activities: Activities: Activities:
11:30
Course 2 Course 2 Course 2 Course 2 Course 2
Stage 1-3 Stage 4-7 Stage 8-11 Stage 12-15 Stage 16-19
Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives Objectives
A & C: A & C: A & C: A & C: A & C:
11:30
Working Lunch Working Lunch Working Lunch Working Lunch Working Lunch
12:30
Collaboration Collaboration Collaboration Collaboration Collaboration
Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities
A, E, F, G: A, E, F, G: A, E, F, G: A, E, F, G: A, E, F, G:
Example Example Example Example Example
12:30 Classroom Classroom Classroom Classroom Classroom
1:00 Videos using Videos using Videos using Videos about Videos about
TPACK STEM learning Coding STEM learning Professional
and GA Learning
Standards Communities
A, C, D: A, C, D: A, C, D: A, C, D: A, C, D:
1:00 Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum
2:30 Mapping and Mapping and Mapping and Mapping and Mapping and
Common Common Common Common Common
Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning
2:30 Objective C: Objective C: Objective C: Objective C: Objective C:
3:00 Reflection and Reflection and Reflection and Reflection and Reflection and
16
Discussion Discussion Discussion Discussion Discussion
Day 1 Summer Session:
The focus today will be on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
framework. Teachers will read and discuss recent peer-reviewed articles about how content, technology
and appropriate teaching pedagogy are related. This will be related to why teachers need to look at a
new type of teaching pedagogy, as well as how this can be done using STEM based learning to meet
appropriate math and science standards. Code.org accounts will be created for each teacher ahead of
time, and they will be shown how to login to this account today. Teachers will complete stages 1-3 in
Code.org Course 2. This begins with a graph paper programming exercise, and then moves to real life
algorithms and simple coding mazes. After lunch, short teaching videos on TPACK will be shown and
discussed. Teachers will then have time to discuss implementation ideas and work on their yearlong
lesson plans and curriculum maps. At the end of the day there will be a wrap-up session to review the
day, ask questions, and all participants will be required to fill out an online survey. This survey can be
found in Appendix D, table 12. The facilitators will have all participants in the same Code.org classroom,
and they will monitor progress of participants in Course 2 at the completion of this session.
The focus today will be on STEM learning. Teachers will read and discuss recent peer-reviewed
articles about how STEM learning is being used successfully in elementary classrooms around the world,
as well as common barriers associated with similar implementations. Discussions will conclude with
remarks on how Chatham County third grade teachers can use STEM based learning to meet appropriate
math and science standards in their own classrooms. Teachers will complete stages 4-7 in Code.org
Course 2. The lessons for this day are: 12 maze puzzles, an artist sequence where participants design
their own puzzles, a getting loopy unplugged activity where loops or repeats are discussed (unplugged
means it does not require any technology), and several maze loop puzzles. After lunch, short teaching
videos on STEM learning in elementary schools will be shown and discussed. Teachers will then have
time to discuss implementation ideas and work on their yearlong lesson plans and curriculum maps. At
the end of the day there will be a wrap-up session to review the day, ask questions, and all participants
will be required to fill out an online survey. This survey can be found in Appendix D, table 12. The
17
facilitators will have all participants in the same Code.org classroom, and they will monitor progress of
participants in Course 2 at the completion of this session.
The focus today will be on what coding is and why it is important. Teachers will read and discuss
recent peer-reviewed articles about how coding is being used successfully in elementary classrooms
around the world, as well as common barriers associated with teaching coding in elementary classrooms.
Discussions will conclude with remarks on how Chatham County third grade teachers can use coding and
Code.org activities to meet appropriate math and science standards in their own classrooms. Teachers
will complete stages 8-11 in Code.org Course 2. The lessons for this day are: Bee loop puzzles using
repeating variables, an unplugged relay activity on how to create programs, and several debugging
puzzles where teachers have to find the problems in certain coding puzzles. After lunch, short teaching
videos on Coding in Elementary Schools will be shown and discussed. Teachers will then have time to
discuss implementation ideas and work on their yearlong lesson plans and curriculum maps. At the end of
the day there will be a wrap-up session to review the day, ask questions, and all participants will be
required to fill out an online survey. The facilitators will have all participants in the same Code.org
classroom, and they will monitor progress of participants in Course 2 at the completion of this session.
The facilitators will complete a Participant Observation Sheet for each participant after day 3. Examples of
these data collection instruments can be found in Appendix D.
Day 4 Summer Session
The focus today will be the correlation between coding, STEM learning and the math and science
standards that must be taught. Teachers will read and discuss recent peer-reviewed articles about how
math and science standards can be met using technology based programs such as coding. Discussions
will conclude with remarks on how Chatham County third grade teachers can integrate technology
activities with math and science standards in their own classrooms. Teachers will complete stages 12-15
in Code.org Course 2. The lessons for this day are: Conditionals such as if, then puzzles, an unplugged
activity on binary code, as well as an unplugged activity on algorithms. After lunch, short videos showing
teachers using STEM and Coding activities to meet standards will be shown and discussed. Teachers will
18
then have time to discuss implementation ideas and work on their yearlong lesson plans and curriculum
maps. At the end of the day there will be a wrap-up session to review the day, ask questions, and all
participants will be required to fill out an online survey. This survey can be found in Appendix D, table 12.
The facilitators will have all participants in the same Code.org classroom, and they will monitor progress
of participants in Course 2 at the completion of this session. By the end of the next session, all parts of
Course 2 should be completed.
Day 5 Summer Session
The focus today will be what a Professional Learning Community (PLC) is and how it can help
teachers collaborate and work together to incorporate STEM learning to teach math and science
standards. Teachers will read and discuss recent peer-reviewed articles about how PLCs can be used to
bring about change in schools and stimulate discussions about 21st century teaching pedagogies.
Discussions will conclude with remarks on how Chatham County third grade teachers can create PLCs in
their schools and county. Teachers will complete Course 2 in Code.org finishing stages 16-19. The
lessons for this day are: How to create games using code, how to use all the coding skills learned to
create a story, an unplugged lesson on digital footprints, as well as how to use nested loops and
sequencing when creating coding algorithms. After lunch, short videos showing PLC groups around the
country will be shown and discussed. Teachers will then have time to discuss implementation ideas and
work on their yearlong lesson plans and curriculum maps. At the end of the day there will be a wrap-up
session to review the entire summer training sessions, ask questions, and clarify expectations for the
schools year and future training sessions. The participants will be expected to log usage of coding and
STEM activities within their classroom during the year in the form of a journal, video lessons once a
month, and all participants will be required to participate in PLC groups monthly. At the end of this day
participants will fill out an online survey. This survey can be found in Appendix D, table 12. The facilitators
will have all participants in the same Code.org classroom, and they will monitor progress of participants in
Course 2. At the completion of this session all of Course 2 should be finished. The facilitators will
complete a Participant Observation Sheet for each participant after day 5 and yearlong lesson plans will
be collected from each participant. Examples of these data collection instruments can be found in
Appendix D.
19
Other Summer Training Notes
Lunch will be brought in each day from Subway so that teachers can eat in collaborative groups,
and there will be discussion questions for them to debate from the topic discussed earlier that morning.
Coffee, tea, and water will be available at all times. Small snacks such as crackers and granola bars will
be supplies for those that wish to snack at any point in time. The Code.org Course 2 activities will be
done in a variety of ways, and this will depend on time limitations each day. The unplugged activities will
be done in small groups of 4. Some of the puzzles will be done in partners and others will be done alone.
Teachers, like students work at different paces, and the teachers will be expected to finish any incomplete
puzzles at home each night. Fast finishers will be allowed to experiment with Course 3 activities as well
as the other Code Studio activities found on the Code.org website. The day will end with reflection and
discussion time. Teachers will be required to answer an online survey at the end of each day giving their
thoughts on the day and providing some insight into what they gained from the sessions. These surveys
will help to guide the sessions each day and may contribute to schedule changes should different needs
or wants arise from the participants.
Follow Up Sessions
After the summer session, there will be two sessions in the fall and one in the spring. These
sessions will take place on the second Saturday in September, January, and March, and each one will
last 5 hours. The schedule for these sessions will be determined after the summer training has
concluded, but ample time will be given for teachers to share their successes and failures using Code.org
and STEM based learning with their third grade students. Each participant will be required to keep a
journal with this information throughout the year and they will share it during these meetings. This will be
done on the STEM Lesson Journaling Form. Curriculum maps will be addressed and revisited to make
changes as needed. If time allows, teachers will receive advance training on Code.org and venture into
Course 3. On the last day of training, E2C2, an outside service will come to meet with small focus groups
and perform a program assessment of the training. A Participant Observation Sheets will be completed
on each participant at the end of day 8, as well as yearlong lessons plans will be collected on this day as
well. The facilitators will login to their Code.org classroom and verify that all participants have completed
20
Code.org Course 2. Teachers will share STEM Videotape forms on days 6,7, and 8 and STEM mentor
forms on day 8. Examples of these are found in Appendix D.

The professional development planned in this grant proposal seeks to meet all of the course
objectives over a 50 hour time period. Teachers will complete training in March 2017 with 5 PLUs for the
state of Georgia. All teachers that complete the training and associated activities will receive a $500
stipend for the training at the end of the training. These teachers will leave training with an understanding
of the pedagogy related to student-centric learning and a knowledge of how to apply it using STEM
related learning in their classrooms with Code.org. Having a better knowledge of best pedagogical
practice for engaging students has been linked to increased student motivation and achievement, which is
the desired outcome for all teachers and schools (Courts & Tucker, 2012; Howard, 2008; Hudson,
English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Karp & Maloney, 2013; Kervin, Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013;
Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin & Schrum, 2012; Liu, 2013; McMullin &
Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014).

Evaluation Plan
The external evaluator for this professional development will be Effective Evaluation and Change
Consultants (E2C2) from Mableton, Georgia. E2C2 is made of a group of advanced degree professionals
who work collaboratively with educational institutions, federal agencies, and healthcare facilities. E2C2
previously worked with the University of West Georgia to evaluate different Teacher Quality Projects
under the advisement of Dr. Kim Huett and were highly recommended for this similar project evaluation.
E2C2 will be responsible for the dispensation of the data collection, as well as, analyzing the data and
preparing a final report on the effectiveness of this program (Effective Evaluation and Change
Consultants, 2014).
This program includes an inclusive evaluation plan developed to establish success in meeting
assertive goals for improving teaching and learning in the areas of mathematics and science. To evaluate
the programs execution, daily observations and anecdotal notes will be conducted throughout the
learning model by the facilitators. At the end of each daily session the participants will reply to an online
survey to give qualitative data on their opinions of the effectiveness of the program. They will rate survey
questions as: a) if they enjoyed the training day b) did they gain knowledge throughout the day c) do they
feel like they can apply what they have learned. In addition to rating questions with a score of 1 to 10,
participants will answer open-ended questions to ask for suggestions, along with, determine their
21
knowledge gained. These surveys will provide insight to the success of that days session, as well as,
contribute to a possible schedule change for the following day.

After the five training days in the summer, participants will have an additional two in the fall.
During these two sessions, teachers will reflect on their successes and failures that they have
experiences using Code.org. They will share their previous experiences that they have recorded in their
journal entries since the summer session. Observation notes will be kept on participants responses by
the facilitators.
On the last day training in March, E2C2, an external evaluator, will come to meet with small focus
groups. In addition to reviewing the online surveys and anecdotal notes from each daily session, in
addition to, documentation from the journal entries, E2C2 may formulate their own evaluation questions to
determine if the programs goals and objectives have been met. The processes and outcomes of this
project will lead to the final evaluation and fulfillment of all course objectives.
Table 8: Visual Representation of Evaluation Plan
Facilitator Observations
The facilitators will take anecdotal notes daily and fill-out a Participation Observation Sheet on
days 3, 5, and 8 of the professional development sessions. These notes will include questions and
concerns from the participants. The facilitators will write down the responses of the participants during
the active discussions and collaborative sessions. The anecdotal notes will help the facilitators to guide
the next session do to conversations and observations of the participants during each session. The
22
participation observation survey will be filled out by the facilitators on these days to inform them of the
participants participation in the discussion and collaboration sections of the professional development
sessions. The data collected will be used to evaluate Objectives A and C.

Workshop Effectiveness Survey
The Workshop Effectiveness Survey will be given to the participants daily at the end of each
session. This survey will ask the participants to rate the session on a scale from 1 to 10. A rating of a 1
means that they did not like the session and a rating of a 10 means they loved the session. There are six
questions on this survey. The questions ask the participants about their feelings, questions, concerns,
and suggestions. This survey will help the facilitators reflect on the session for that day and guide the
next session. The data collected will be used to evaluate Objectives A and C.
Year Long Lesson Plans

The participants will create a yearlong lesson plan following the Code.org lessons that align to the
counties standards and curriculum map for math and science. This document will be a tentative guide for
the participants. The lesson plans will be reviewed on the first 2 Saturday Follow-up sessions to see if the
participants have to adjust the lessons to fit their needs. The data collected will be used to evaluate
Objectives A and C.
Code.org Teacher Progress Report
The participants will have Code.org logins created for them and each teacher will be placed in
one Code.org classroom that is monitored by the facilitators. This online progress report will be checked
daily by the facilitators to monitor each participants progress in Course 2. The facilitators will be able to
see what puzzles and activities each participant has completed as well as logistics about each puzzle,
such as how many steps it took each participant to complete each coding puzzle. The data collected from
this progress report will be used to evaluate Objective B.

STEM PLC Meeting Form
The PLC Meeting Form is a survey to be completed by the participants on each of the 3 Follow-
up Saturday sessions. This survey asks the participants to write down the problems discussed during the
follow-up sessions, the successes shared, and any questions that they may have of the facilitators. This
will allow for the facilitators to respond to the participants questions and concerns based on the weekly
lessons they are completing in their classrooms. The data collected will be used to evaluate Objective D.
STEM Lesson Journaling Form
The STEM Lesson Journaling Form is a survey to be completed by the participants each week
based on the STEM lessons used in their classrooms. The survey asks the participants to share the
23
ways that they have integrated the STEM activities into their math and/or science lesson each week. The
survey also asks the participants to describe the challenges and the successes when integrating the
STEM activities. The final question wants to know the attitudes of the students when completing the
STEM activities. The data collected from this survey will be used to evaluate Objectives D, E, and F.
STEM Videotaping Form
The participants will videotape 2 STEM activities. The first videotaped lesson will occur before
the 1st Saturday Follow-up and the second videotaped lesson will occur before the 2 nd Saturday Follow-up
session. After the teachers videotape their STEM activity, they will evaluate their lesson using the STEM
videotape form. The form asks the teachers to write the standards of the lesson being taught. They are
then asked to share the weaknesses and the strengths of the lesson. After viewing the lesson, the
teachers are to share what they would have done differently if they had the opportunity to reteach the
lesson. Teachers are asked at the end of the form if they would like to share their video with the other
teachers during a follow-up session. This form will allow for teachers to self-evaluate and share with their
peers their strengths and weaknesses when integrating their STEM activities. The data collected from this
form will be used to evaluate Objectives E, F, and G.

STEM Mentor Form
The STEM Mentor Form is a survey that will be filled out on the last day of the professional
development sessions. After this professional development, teachers will have to share and mentor
teachers in their schools on integrating STEM activities in math and/or science. This survey asks the
teacher how comfortable they feel mentoring other teachers in their school. They are asked to rate their
ability to mentor on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 meaning the teacher is not ready and 10 meaning that the
teacher is ready to mentor. The final question asks the participants if they need any help or resources
from the facilitators to help them mentor other teachers. The data collected from this survey will be used
to evaluate Objective G.
E2C2 Focus Interviews
Effective Evaluations and Change Consultants (E2C2) will interview the focus group on the last
day of the professional development sessions. E2C2 will create an assessment plan to evaluate the
program to collect data and analyze the information for the facilitators. The consultants will ask the
teachers multiple questions in regards to the STEM activities and the implementation into their math
and/or science lessons. The data collected for E2C2 will be used to evaluate the Objective F.
24
Table 9 Data Collection Procedures by Program Objective
Evaluation Criteria Data Collection Instrument Data Collection Times
A. Participants will demonstrate Facilitator Observations Days 3, 5 and 8

their understanding of Code.org Year-Long Lesson Plans Days 5 & 8
lessons and how to integrate Workshop Effectiveness Everyday of training
these student-centric activities Surveys
into math and science classes
during summer training sessions
as assessed by instructor
observations and teacher
yearlong plan documents.
B. Participants will engage in Code.org Course 2 Teacher Progress checked after each
Code.org activities as a student Progress Report session, entire Course 2
during the summer training, must be complete by 5th
successfully completing Course 2 session
in the online program.
C. Participants will actively Facilitator Observations Days 3, 5 and 8

discuss and collaborate with Year-Long Lesson Plans Days 5 & 8
other peers during summer Workshop Effectiveness Everyday of training
training to further their knowledge Surveys
and application ideas for
Code.org activities into their own
classrooms assessed by daily
surveys, observations and lesson
plans.
D. Participants will actively use STEM PLC Meeting Form Day 6, 7, & 8
Code.org activities in their STEM Lesson Plan Form Day 6, 7, & 8
classrooms weekly throughout
the school year and reflect on
this process as assessed in
Professional Learning
Community meetings throughout
the year and journaling activities.
E. Participants will model STEM STEM Lesson Plan Form Day 6, 7, & 8
student-centric teaching in their STEM Videotape Form Day 6, 7, & 8
classrooms using Code.org
throughout the 2016-2017 school
year, meeting state standards in
math and science while engaging
students in active learning.
F. Participants will apply new STEM Lesson Plan Form Day 6, 7, & 8
teaching pedagogies during the STEM Videotape Form Day 6, 7, & 8
school year as assessed by E2C2 Focus Interviews Day 8
lesson plans, journaling and
small group interviews during fall
and spring sessions.
25
G. Participants will serve as STEM Videotape Form Day 6, 7, & 8
model teachers in their schools STEM Mentor Form Day 8
using 21st century teaching
pedagogies in their math and
science classes throughout the
school year.
Partnerships
Six Title I elementary schools in Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools (SCCPS) are in need
for an intense intervention to improve students knowledge and understanding in the areas of math and
science. These needs will require a meaningful partnership among the teachers from these six schools,
specifically 3rd grade teachers that teach math and science. The superintendent and six principals from
the Title I schools agree that their schools need to improve their performance in math and science in the
third grade. The teachers are ready to start working on implementing STEM activities that incorporate
math and science standards. They are also ready and willing to integrate more technology into their
classrooms. Each school has access to plenty of devices for this integration and students are allowed to
Bring Their Own Devices as well.
This professional development will be held at The STEM Academy at Bartlett Middle School with
the support of the school administration. This will allow for the teachers to use the STEM resources that
already exist at the STEM Academy to help with the implementation. The Savannah-Chatham Manager
of Instructional Technology/Media, Wendy Marshall, will be on hand to help with technical support for the
professional development sessions. Wendy Marshall will support the use of technology in the school for
the professional development and any issues that may occur relating to technology. She will ensure that
teachers will have the needed devices during the year to complete the activities. Patrick Dean, Activity
Director-Project Assistant for STEM 360 at Savannah State University, will be a resource for developing
STEM activities that are relevant to 3rd grade teachers. He will be a great resource for integrating the
appropriate technology for STEM activities into the third grade math and science classrooms.
Teacher Recruitment
The participants for the STEM and technology integration professional development will be 3 rd
grade teachers from Butler, East Broad Street, Hodge, Otis J. Brock (name changed from Bartow
originally), Spencer, and Thunderbolt Elementary. An email will be sent to all six principals for their
26
cooperation in teacher recruitment. The STEM and technology integration professional development is
looking for two teachers from each of the six schools. At least one of the teachers should be the Grade
Chair or Academic Coach for the third grade at their school. The other teacher should be a teacher that is
strong in technology and is able to teach and assist the other teachers on the grade level when the
program in fully implemented. The email to the principals will also include the following information: The
times and dates of the professional development sessions and the stipend amount the teachers will
receive. Teachers will also be told that in order to receive the stipend, they must attend all of the
professional development sessions. The professional development session will be for a total of twelve
math and science 3rd grade teachers. The first two teachers from each school that meet the above
requirements will be selected to participate and will be sent registration information.
Timeline
Table 10. Timeline of Professional Development Training
Timeline of Professional Development Sessions

Professional Development Monday, July 25, 2017
5-Day Summer Session Code.org Friday, July 28, 2017
Teachers will report to The STEM Academy at Bartlett Middle
School for five consecutive days from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm.
Teachers will receive a stipend of $500.00 at the end of the
professional development in March.
Professional Development - 1st Saturday Session Saturday, September 9,
This will be the first Saturday follow-up session 2017
School from 8:00am 1:00pm.
Teachers will discuss the pros and cons of using code.org with
their students
Teachers will share their journaling and look at the curriculum
map to make adjustments to the lessons if needed
Professional Development - 2nd Saturday Session Saturday, January 13, 2018
This will be the second Saturday follow-up session
Teachers will discuss the changes they have made since the
last Saturday discussion. They will share their success stories
and any data that they have collected.
Teachers will share their journaling and look at the curriculum
map to make adjustments to the lessons if needed.
Professional Development 3rd and final Saturday Session Saturday, March 10, 2018
This will be the final Saturday session of the professional
development
27
Teachers will discuss their successes and challenges of the
professional development as a whole.
They will provide data collected from using code.org
E2C2 Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants will
perform a program assessment of the training.
Teachers who have completed all 8 days of the professional
development will have their names submitted to Board of
Education to receive their $500.00 stipend.
Conclusion
This program will focus on providing professional development that supports technology
integration in order to offer teachers in Savannah-Chatham County with the technological abilities,
insights, understanding, and preparation required to help students be equipped for thriving in the 21 st
century. The purpose of this project is to increase knowledge of new teaching pedagogies and build
STEM student-centric teaching practices in third grade math and science. The professional development
will consist of five days during the summer with three follow-up days within the school year. The
participants will actively engage in Code.org activities to demonstrate their understanding of the lessons
and how to integrate the student-centric activities into their math and science classes. They will
collaborate with their peers to further their knowledge and application ideas of Code.org activities into
their own classrooms. Additionally, they will create lessons to utilize Code.org in order to meet the
standards of math and science.

By implementing this program and improving methodologies teachers use in mathematics and
science, teachers will be able to deliver more authentic learning experiences that are necessary to
engage students and foster their success as proven in many research articles. (Courts & Tucker, 2012;
Howard, 2008; Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Karp & Maloney, 2013; Kervin, Verenikina,
Jones & Beath, 2013; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; Levin & Schrum, 2012;
Liu, 2013; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014). STEM jobs increase each year
and there are not enough people to fill these jobs (Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015;
Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; McMullin & Reeve, 2014; Sahin & Ayar, 2014; Van Overschelde, 2013).
The success of students in future careers in the STEM field is dependent on appropriate teaching
throughout their schooling, beginning in elementary school and this training inspires to do just that
(Hudson, English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015; Lehman, Kim & Harris, 2014; McMullin & Reeve, 2014;
Sahin & Ayar, 2014; Van Oveschelde, 2013).
28
If this proposal is chosen and funding is given, MKY Consulting will collaborate with SCCPS,
Stem 360, and E2C2 to ensure that all goals and objectives of the training are met. Data from focus
group interviews, qualitative and quantitative surveys, teacher reflections, videos and lesson plans will be
reviewed by MKY Consulting throughout the training and E2C2 at the end of training to ensure that all
goals and objectives are met. At the conclusion of this training the twelve participants will be confident in
appropriate teaching pedagogies to use to effectively integrate STEM activities into third grade math and
science classes.
References
Adams, A., Miller, B., Saul, M., & Pegg, J. (2014). Supporting elementary pre-service teachers to teach
STEM through place-based teaching and learning experiences. Electronic Journal of Science
Education, 18(5), 1-22.

Code.org. (2016) Course 2. Retrieved from https://studio.code.org/s/course2
Cotabish, A., Dailey, D., Robinson, A., & Hughes, G. (2013). The effects of a STEM intervention on
elementary students' science knowledge and skills. School Science & Mathematics, 113(5), 215-
226.
Courts, B. & Tucker, J. (2012). Using technology to create a dynamic classroom experience. Journal of
College Teaching & Learning. 9(2), 121-127.
Douglas, K., & Strobel, J. (2015). Hopes and goals survey for use in STEM elementary
education. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 25(2), 245-259.
Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants. (2014). Retrieved from
http://www.effectiveevaluation.com/
Georgia Department of Education. (2008). Georgia performance standards in science. Retrieved from
http://www.georgiastandards.org/
Georgia Department of Education. (2013). GA 2012 Content Mastery Performance. Retrieved from
http://www.gadoe.org/
Georgia Department of Education. (2015). Common core performance standards in math. Retrieved from
http://www.georgiastandards.org/
Georgia Department of Education. (2016). GA 2015 Milestone Scores. Retrieved from
Howard, B. C., (2008). Common features and design principles found in exemplary educational
technologies. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education,
4(4). 31-52.
Hudson, P., English, L., Dawes, L., King, D., & Baker, S. (2015). Exploring links between
29
pedagogical knowledge practices and student outcomes in STEM education for primary schools.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(6), 134-151.

Kervin, L., Verenikina, I., Jones, P., & Beath, O. (2013). Investigating synergies between literacy,
technology and classroom practice. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 36(3), 135-147.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J.W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology
into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and
answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575-614.

Lehman, J. D., Kim, W., & Harris, C. (2014). Collaborations in a community of practice working to
integrate engineering design in elementary science education. Journal of STEM Education:
Innovations and Research, 15(3), 21-28.

Levin, B. & Schrum, L. (2012). Leading technology-rich schools: Award-winning models for
success. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Reeves, D. (2009). Leading change in your school: How to conquer myths, build commitment,
and get results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Reid, P. (2012). Categories for barriers to adoption of instructional technologies. Education and
Information Technologies, 19(2), 383-407.
Savannah Chatham County Public Schools. (2015). School Improvement Plan. Retrieved from
http://www.savannah.chatham.k12.ga.us/
Sikma, L., & Osborne, M. (2014). Conflicts in developing an elementary STEM magnet school. Theory
into Practice, 53(1), 4-10.
Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM
education. Journal Of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 28-34.

Weckbacher, L. M., & Okamoto, Y. (2015). Discovering "space" in the elementary classroom. Journal of
Education and Learning, 4(1), 35-40.
30
Appendix A: Budget Summary
Table 11: Budget Summary
31
32
33
Appendix B: Budget Narrative
The proposal is aligned with Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics initiatives in the
State of Georgia and funding is requested for a year.

Personnel and Fringe Benefits $13,750 (TQ Funds)
MKY Consulting has taken the lead in developing the ideas for this grant proposal with input from
various stakeholders at the University of West Georgia and Chatham County School System.
Representatives from partner elementary schools (East Broad, Butler, Hodge, Spencer, Thunderbolt, and
Brock) were consulted on teachers needs related to the effective teaching of math and science standards
identified in third grade curricula. Responsibilities for the project will include recruiting 12 participants for
the summer workshop (2 from each school) and serving as lead facilitators during the five full day
sessions (35 hours) in summer and two half-day sessions in the fall and one half day session in the spring
(15 hours).
Grant funding will be $13,750 for the one director, Melissa Snell and two co-directors, Kimberly
Spain and Tamison Yancy. Melissa Snell will be paid $4,000 in regular funds as well as $1,000 fringe.
Kimberly Spain and Tamison Yancy will be paid $3,500 in regular funds as well as $875.00 in fringe. This
is using 25% for fringe for all three consultants. This will be paid at the conclusion of the training in the
fall. These consultants will also be the facilitators during all training sessions. The director will be
responsible for handling all matters with the grant, registration, purchasing of all equipment and food and
communication with the participants, hosting site, and with E2C2 Evaluation Company. The director will
take on any personnel roles so that no additional personnel will be used.

The director and co-directors will be paid flat fees. They will not get any extra money for travel
expenses for the summer, fall, and spring training sessions. They will also be the facilitators and will plan
and facilitate all training sessions. The directors/facilitators are included in the count for lunch for each
training day. They will be responsible to bring their own technology to facilitate the training.
Participant Cost $9,216.00 (TQ Funds)
Each participant will be awarded a $500 stipend as well as 5 PLUs. This is $50 per day with the
entire $500 paid at the end of the last session. No partial pay or substitute pay will be given. If any
participants drop out, that money will be re-allocated to the remaining participants. A total stipend of $500
X 12 = $6,000.00. All participants will attend five full-days in summer (7 hours each), two
full days of follow-up sessions (in fall/5 hours each) and one final presentation and wrap-up session (in
spring/5 hours) on Saturdays during the fall and spring. Dates for these sessions will be communicated to
34
participating teachers during recruitment. This arrangement eliminates inconvenience/cost associated
with substitute teachers.

Travel $0 (TQ Funds)
Facilitators (directors) will be responsible for their own travel expenses. A local school will be
chosen as the training site and all participants will be responsible for their own transportation to and from
this local site. E2C2 will be required to use the set payment fee of $4,000 to include their travel fees for
the last session to perform the focus groups. All other program evaluations will be done online or at their
local office.
Additional Costs $25,323 (TQ Funds)
Providing boxed lunches will be economical and a considerable time saver for both facilitators
and participating teachers. Grant funding will be $1,080 = Boxed Lunch/Snacks/Drinks @ $9 for 12
teachers + 3 team members X 8 days. Subway will provide these boxed lunches at $6 a box. The
remaining $3 will be used to purchase water bottles and light snacks at Costco. The school site has
offered to provide coffee and tea for all participants.

Evaluation Costs $4,000 (TQ Funds)
E2C2, a private consultation service, will serve as the external consultant to this grant project.
They will take the lead in the administration and analysis of assessments and evaluation of this
professional development program. E2C2 will facilitate data collection at the beginning of the summer
workshop, during the summer workshop, and after the first follow-up session during the academic year.
This data will be collected via online Google Forms. E2C2 will analyze this via the Internet during the
initial phases of the training. The initial data collection will serve as baseline and is designed to measure
participants' attitudes and comfort levels regarding the teaching of content knowledge for STEM subjects,
use of student-centric teaching approaches, integration of technology into classroom instruction, and
implementation of STEM based classroom activities. The surveys will also measure barriers and issues
that the teachers encounter.

Data collection will continue throughout all training dates using survey questionnaires that will
provide participants a chance to further communicate in-depth items covered during the workshop. E2C2
will travel to the workshop site for the last day of training in the spring to conduct focus groups. They will
analyze collected data and prepare the final evaluation report. The cost of development and execution of
the data collection process is included in the amount charged to the grant and the writing of the evaluation
report.
Supplies $0 (TQ Funds)
The local school has offered up copying services for any copies that need to be made for
35
teachers during the training. There will not be any additional fees for custodial services or other utility
fees, as other administrators will be present in the school during the training and this training will not incur
any additional costs in this area. All communication to participant will take place via email so as not to
incur any postage fees.
TOTAL BUDGET $26,816.40 (TQ Funds) including indirect costs
Appendix C: Capacity
The project proposal will require a team of individuals that must work together to reach their goal of
providing teachers the appropriate resources to increase student achievement in mathematics and
science. The individuals have agreed to participant in the development and delivery of the professional
development session for twelve 3rd grade teacher participants.
Project Director/Facilitator: Melissa Snell
Mrs. Snell is the Director of Instructional Technology at Lake Oconee Academy. She has worked
in this position for three years. Before becoming the Director of Instructional Technology, she was an
elementary school teacher for 10 years. She taught 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade classes in the states of
Alabama and Georgia. She is able to relate to the teachers because she has been in their shoes. She is
also familiar with the content that is needed for the 3 rd grade students to be successful in mathematics
and science. Mrs. Snell has had full-day training workshops on Code.org. She is very confident and
knowledgeable about Code.org. She will be able to answer teacher questions and troubleshoot if there is
a problem when using the site for the professional development sessions. She also provides training to
local schools on using Google Apps for Education, Code.org, and integrating technology into classrooms.
She has a wealth of knowledge and resources for integrating technology into the classroom, since she
has facilitated professional development session in the past.
Mrs. Snell is the Project Lead the Way Lead Teacher for Lake Oconee Academy. She facilitates
all professional development sessions in her school and is able to conduct teacher evaluations for TKES.
She is also a Digital Citizenship Certified Teacher by Common Sense. Melissa Snell is currently enrolled
at the University of West Georgia in which she will graduate with a Specialist Degree in Instructional
Technology in December 2016. Mrs. Snell is extremely organized and works well with scheduling. She is
36
very professional and easy to approach when conducting professional development sessions. She is a
very upbeat and fun to work with which provides for a stress free environment.
Co-Project Director/Facilitator: Kimberly Spain
Kimberly Spain is a third-grade elementary education teacher at Indian Creek Elementary School
(ICE) in Douglas, GA. This is going to be her 24th year in education. She has previously taught all
subjects in 1st, 3rd, and 5th grades. This year she will be teaching third-grade English Language Arts. She
is currently attending the University of West Georgia and pursuing a Specialist degree in Instructional
Technology. She is currently in her fourth semester and is graduating in December 2016. Ms. Spain will
provide a wealth of knowledge in regards to third-grade content. She will be extremely helpful to new
teachers do to her experiences in education.
Ms. Spain possesses great leadership skills as demonstrated in her previous positions held
during her teaching career. She has served as Student Support Team Chairperson, Grade Level Lead
Teacher, Literacy Team Representative, Leadership Team Representative, Gifted Committee Member,
SWAT Team Member, and Bulletin Board Committee. As a Leadership Team Representative, she has
assisted in gathering data and writing the Striving Readers Grant. In addition, she helped revise ICEs
mission, vision, and goals for SIP. Ms. Spain has also served on the third-grade ELA Unit Refinement
Team and assisted in creating assessments for the county. In 2009, She was a nominee for ICE Teacher
of the Year.
Ms. Spain has participated in numerous professional training sessions such as Stories and More I
and II, RiverDeep, GOFAR, United Streaming, ActivBoard Training, System 44, Reading First for
Teachers, Comprehensive Reading Strategies, Differentiation Workshops, and many more. She is a hard
worker and works well with deadlines. She has a positive attitude and is able to problem solve when
needed.
Co-Project Director/Facilitator: Tamison Yancy
Tamison Yancy is a fourth-grade special education/EIP teacher at Corley Elementary in Gwinnett
County. Ms. Yancy has worked in education for 10 years. She was a regular education teacher for 8
years and this is her second year as a special education teacher. She has taught 3 rd and 4th grade
classes in the state of Delaware and Georgia. Ms. Yancy is attending the University of West Georgia in
37
Carrollton, GA. She is working on her Specialist in Instructional Technology and is graduating May 2017.
Ms. Yancy has had multiple professional development sessions on how to provide differentiated
instruction to students with disabilities. She is able to modify assignments and projects based on the
needs of students. Her knowledge of differentiated instruction will help the teachers of Savannah-
Chatham County Public schools because many of their students are working below grade level and may
need assistance when integrating technology.
Ms. Yancys school, Corley Elementary, is at the beginning stages of implementing STEM. She
was part of the pilot program and is able to provide the teachers with some insight to on what worked well
in her school and what didnt work well. Ms. Yancy also piloted Projected-Based Learning (PBL) for a
collaborative 4th grade class. Ms. Yancy had to modify the PBL units for her special education students in
order for them to be successful, as well as, learning the content being taught. Ms. Yancy is a hard worker
and is willing to do what it takes to get the work done correctly. She is very personable and easy to
approach. She enjoys working with others collaboratively.
Technology Manager: Wendy Marshall
Wendy Marshall is Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools Manger of Instructional
Technology/Media. She oversees the instructional technology and media use for the Savannah-Chatham
County Public Schools. She will be our technology support for the weeklong summer professional
development sessions. Since technology will needed to implement this grant, she will make sure that the
all devices to be used are set-up properly and they are able to access the wireless Internet at The STEM
Academy at Bartlett Middle School. Ms. Marshall will also be at the school for the professional
development session to help troubleshoot any problems that may occur with the technology use within the
building. She will ensure that teachers have the devices that they need to participate in the training as
well as complete needed lessons during the school year. Ms. Marshall will not receive any money for her
time because she is a 12-month employee.
Facility Coordinators: The STEM Academy at Bartlett Middle School Administration Team
The STEM Academy at Bartlett Middle School will be used for the five summer professional
development sessions. The principal, Mr. Peter Ulrich, and his administrative team will be in the building
to help with any needs that the facilitators or teachers may need. The members of the administrative
38
team will unlock and lock the building and remain in the building to maintain safety. The administrative
team will not receive any money for their time because they are 12-month employees.
Project Evaluator: E2C2 Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants
E2C2 Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants will be hired to evaluate and assess the
professional development program of Integrating STEM and technology into 3 rd grade Title I Elementary
School classrooms in Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools. The co-owners, Donjanea Williams
and Travis Williams, have worked collaboratively with many educational institutions, such as the
University of West Georgia. They are very knowledgeable in grant writing. Their program evaluation
services include defining goals and objectives, determine whether the program is meeting it goals, serving
as program facilitators and identifying areas in which the program can be improved. E2C2 Effective
Evaluation and Change Consultants are able to create an evaluation method based on the information
provide in the grant, design the appropriate data collection instruments, collect the data, and analyze the
information collected. The consultants also provide an in-depth summary of their findings based on the
data collected (Effective Evaluation and Change Consultants).
Appendix D: Data Collection Instruments
Table 12. Workshop Effectiveness Survey
39
Table 13. Participant Observation Sheet
40
41
Table 14. STEM PLC Meeting Form
42
Table 15. STEM Lesson Journaling Form
43
Table 16. STEM Videotape Form
44
Table 17. STEM Mentor Form
45

8462 Snell Spain Yancy Project3

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

8462 Snell Spain Yancy Project3

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Integrating STEM Learning into Third Grade Classrooms in Chatham County

July 11th, 2016

of a change in teaching pedagogy, as well as, an intervention to enhance participants understanding of

will begin in July 2017, and end in March 2018.

mathematics and science (GaDOE, 2016).

proficient levels in math (Savannah Chatham County Public Schools, 2015).

English, Dawes, King, & Baker, 2015).

mathematics (Stohlmann, Moore, and Roehrig, 2012).

Standards as Compared to the State of Georgia

2012 Content Mastery Achievement

Table 1: 2012 Percentage of Students Meeting or Exceeding Scores

ELA Reading Math Science

2013 Content Mastery Achievement

ELA Reading Math Science

2014 Content Mastery Achievement

Table 3: 2014 Percentage of Students Meeting or Exceeding Scores

ELA Reading Math Science

Schools that seem to be in the most need of assistance (GaDOE, 2016).

math and science skills to succeed beyond primary school.

applicable to state math and science standards.

training used will be low-cost as Code.org is a free resource (Code.org, 2016).

in Reid, 2012, p. 399).

feature of professional development and it provides accountability of knowledge (Reeves, 2009).

Goals and Objectives

ensure the programs success.

Chatham County using available technology and free online resources.

sessions as assessed by instructor observations and teacher yearlong plan documents.

successfully completing Course 2 in the online program.

classrooms assessed by daily surveys and observations.

meetings throughout the year and journaling activities.

engaging students in active learning.

in collaborative group sessions during summer training sessions as assessed by surveys,

reflection responses and small group interviews.

Table 5. Standards Addressed in Professional Development

Grade Level Subject Common Core or GPS Standard

Table 6 Alignments Between Standards, Objectives, and Proposed Activities

and will provide the needed data to assess their impact.

Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014)

professional development without follow-up sessions, lack of understanding of teaching pedagogies

Ayar, 2014; Van Overschelde, 2013).

day for participants as well as coffee, snacks and water.

Table 7. Schedule of Activities for Summer Training Days

Time Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

Day 1 Summer Session:

Day 2 Summer Session:

participants in Course 2 at the completion of this session.

Day 3 Summer Session:

these data collection instruments can be found in Appendix D.

Day 4 Summer Session

Course 2 should be completed.

Day 5 Summer Session

or wants arise from the participants.

forms on day 8. Examples of these are found in Appendix D.

Reeve, 2014; Reeves, 2009; Sahin & Ayar, 2014).

contribute to a possible schedule change for the following day.

Table 8: Visual Representation of Evaluation Plan

sessions. The data collected will be used to evaluate Objectives A and C.

Year Long Lesson Plans

this progress report will be used to evaluate Objective B.

form will be used to evaluate Objectives E, F, and G.

Evaluation Criteria Data Collection Instrument Data Collection Times

A. Participants will demonstrate Facilitator Observations Days 3, 5 and 8

C. Participants will actively Facilitator Observations Days 3, 5 and 8