Activating STEM Learning in Science and Beyond

Grant Proposal

Hanna Grimes

University of West Georgia

Hgrimes1@my.westga.edu
 ABSTRACT
This grant proposal was developed to support a middle schools goal to become a STEM

(Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) certified school by the end of 2018. The initial

focus is to provide professional development and all necessary resources to all 6th, 7th, and 8th grade

science teachers who will become the leaders of the school in this area. To achieve in science, students

must have highly-skilled professional teachers, quality science learning material and adequate class time

dedicated to inquiry learning (Bayer Corporation, 2010). The need for STEM instruction is an answer to

an effort to meet the demands of todays and future jobs. The secondary goal of this proposal is to have

all science and STEM teachers contribute to creating a fully functioning STEM lab/Maker Space, and

choose the best or most appropriate technology available to support their stem lessons. STEM lessons

require many tangible materials and technology resources. The review of literature outlines scholarly

research to prove the importance of STEM instruction. As supported by the literature review, school-wide

standardized test scores, and district goals the middle school could benefit greatly from STEM-based

instruction.

This professional development plan will provide the schools science teachers with a 5-day

workshop in the summer and three follow up sessions in the fall. Each session will lead them closer to

being fully trained in the STEM method of lesson creation and delivery. The program is aligned with the

International Standards for Technology in Education (ISTE), the states Georgia Performance Standards

(GPS), and Teacher Keys Effectiveness System (TKES). Planning will occur within the school with

teachers and staff including business partners and higher education institutions. A program evaluation will

be conducted through a selected outside expert. In house, we will conduct quantitative and qualitative

assessments including pre and post-test, student assessments, observations, and surveys. A comparison

will be made of the schools performance on the Georgia Milestones Assessment and Iowa Assessment

in 2015-2017 and 2017- 2018 school years.

1
 INTRODUCTION

In order to meet the demands of our current and future workforce and to help our country become

more globally competitive in the field of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), we must

begin exposing our students to less passive ways of learning. Sitting in classrooms, listening to lectures,

taking notes, completing assignments, and testing memory are all methods of the past. Studies have

shown that students do not thrive in this type of environment where the tasks are unrelated and have no

practical meaning to their own lives (Slough, 2013). Many schools in America are addressing this issue by

utilizing inquiry based strategies where students are taught to explore the world through a process that is

systematic and investigative (Kasza, 2017). Inquiry, along with real-world experience, hands-on learning

and a more collaborative environment are all building blocks of STEM education. In STEM, students are

taught to use the engineering design process an organized method of approaching and solving

problems that is widely used by professional engineers all over the world. The steps to the engineering

design process include 1. Defining the problem 2. Planning solutions 3. Making a model 4. Testing the

model and 5. Reflection and redesign if necessary. In order to fully implement this type of learning,

teachers must be adequately trained through intensive and highly-focused professional development.

The following grant proposal is designed to provide a detailed plan of the initiative to implement

STEM based learning at Barber Middle School in Acworth, Georgia. The plan will demonstrate the need

for this system by first, reviewing the last two to three years of standardized test scores. Next, the

content/pedagogical and technology goals and their detailed objectives will be outlined. This will be

followed by an overview of the plan of operations, including the schedule and timeline. The evaluation

plan will follow describing the roles of the external evaluator, the data collection strategies and the

processes as compared to the outcome. Last, potential partnerships will be outlined followed by a budget

summary delineating the cost of the proposal to implement this professional development program.

2
 DEMONSTRATED NEED OVERVIEW

Cobb County School District (CCSD) is a proponent for innovative teaching and learning. Yearly,

through programs such as EdSPLOST and other federal and state funding sources, the county spends

millions of dollars towards the purchase of new technology and upkeep of the current technology.

According to the districts Strategic Plan 2016-2019, two focus priorities are to identify local school

innovations through system flexibility to increase student achievement and to divisionally support local

school innovations identified through system flexibility for increasing student achievement (CCSD District

Strategic Plan, 2016). The countys STEM program is promoted under this focus area. The countys

Department of STEM and Innovation, led by director, Sally Creel, is working to help teachers and schools

obtain STEM certification locally, through the state of Georgia and through AdvancED, an internationally

mark of quality for STEM schools and programs. Currently, only 18 out of 114 Cobb County schools are

STEM certified. Additionally, only 4 of the 18 schools are middle schools (STEM Cobb, 2017). Our

schools, in total must catch up.

DEMONSTRATED NEED- SUPPORTING DATA

Murray F. Barber Middle School (BMS), is a Title I school in the northern most part of the county.

According to Table 1, the school has a very diverse population being that only 30.4% of the student

population is white and the other 69.6% is black or of other descent. To support the districts innovation

goal, for the past two years, Barber has developed and implemented the Barber Academy which is a

blended learning proposal for interdisciplinary teaching and learning for a targeted group of students who

are under performing. The Barber Academy is run by two teachers with a focus on technology-based

learning. One of the teachers, Saundra Watts, obtained her National STEM certification in May of this

year. Saundra Watts is the first teacher at Barber to receive this certification. Four other BMS teachers

are currently working on completing the course work. The majority of BMSs teachers are highly-qualified

in the area wherein they teach and/or hold advanced degrees. This school year, there will only be two

first-year teachers. Only one of the 7 science teachers employed have been in the education field less

than five years.

3
 As indicated in Tables 1 and 2, BMS has quite a diverse population and is a Title I school,

meaning that the school receives federal funding because a certain percentage of the population live at or

below poverty level. In the school year 2014-2015, 55.6% of the students were listed as economically

disadvantaged and the trend seemed to increase from 2011 to 2015. A side effect of having met this

criteria is often attendance and behavioral issues, low grades and low test scores. At the heart of BMSs

Strategic Plan is the focus to provide specialized instruction to the students who are at or below grade-

level and to provide differentiated instruction to meet the diverse needs of all learners.

Table 1: Barber Middle School Enrollment Projections for 2017-2018 School Year

Grade Level # of

Students

6th 304

7th 296

8th 303

Ethnicity/Race # of % of

Students Students

Hispanic 168 18.6

American Indian 3 .3

Asian 37 4.1

Black 367 40.6

Pacific Islander 1 .1

White 275 30.4

Two or more races 52 5.7

Source:http://www.cobbk12.org/centraloffice/accountability/testscores/2014-

15/2015-Milestones-EOG-Middle-School-Testing-Brief-Cobb.pdf

4
Table 2:

Tables 3 and 4 show BMSs scores for the Georgia Milestones End of Grade Tests in science for

2014 to 2016. As the data indicates, BMS usually scores just below or a few points above the countys

average. There are always considerably less students in the proficient and distinguished ranges. A

proficient score indicates the student is ready to handle the course work in the next grade level.

Developing means they are close to being ready. With that being said, in 2016, only 31% of 8th graders

tested as definitely ready to enter high school. However, in Table 5, which shows the results of the Iowa

Test of Basic Skills in Science, a national test, BMS seventh graders scored at grade level and just seven

tenths below the countys score. Unfortunately, BMS and Cobb County are still well below the national

ranking. Barber only ranked higher than 43% of the rest of the nation.

Table 3: BMSs Georgia Milestones Scores in Science for 2014-2015

Grade # Students of % Proficient in % Proficient in Types of

Level Tested Levels 3 and 4 Levels 2-4 Learners
BMS vs. County BMS vs. County
6 287 41.8 46.2 74.2 73.5 2-Developing
7 330 30.9 42.0 67.3 70.8 3- Proficient
8 307 32.9 39.7 70.4 69.5 4- Distinguished

5
 Table 4: BMSs Georgia Milestones Scores in Science for 2015-2016

Grade Level # Students % Proficient in % Proficient in Types of

of Tested Levels 3 and 4 Levels 2-4 Learners
BMS vs. County BMS vs. County
6 303 43.6 46.9 71.0 73.7 2-Developing
7 295 38.0 45.7 65.4 72.1 3- Proficient
8 256 31.2 28.0 70.3 64.1 4- Distinguished

Table 5: BMSs 2017 Iowa Test of Basic Skills Science Scores for 7th Grade

School National Percentile Ranking Grade Equivalent

Cobb 62 8.0
BMS 57 7.7
Source: Cobb County School District http://www.cobbk12.org/centraloffice/accountability/testscores/2014-

15/2015-Milestones-EOG-Middle-School-Testing-Brief-Cobb.pdf

DEMONSTRATED NEED LITERATURE SYNTHESIS

Peer reviewed research studies commiserate the need for the implementation of high quality

STEM programs in our schools. The Bayer Corporations Compendium of Best Practice K -12 STEM

Education Programs (2010) proves that students who have access to highly-skilled professional teachers,

quality materials, and adequate time dedicated to learning science despite their age, gender, cultural

background, disability or motivation can excel in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math.

Another study by Kasza and Slater (2017) shows that teaching through STEM showed an increase in the

rate of graduation and retention. The development of a program for BMS teachers is essential in order to

provide them with the resources, knowledge and skills to create meaningful, interdisciplinary STEM

lessons. Many colleges and universities with teacher certification programs do not have programs that

provide teacher candidates early field experiences that allows them to practice inquiry-focused teaching

in the beginning of their teacher certification program (Dailey, Bunn, and Cotabish, 2015). Allowing this

exposure could help the candidate to include this method of teaching in his or her repertoire from the very

beginning of their career.

The professional development program will provide a deeper understanding of the subject matter

in order to facilitate student learning. According to Avery (2013), if teachers are being asked to inspire or

encourage students to pursue a career in any of the STEM fields, they first must be aware of what

6
engineers are and what they do. This can happen through PD. Although a direct correlation between

teaching STEM and rising test scores cannot be found, students are still strengthened in the areas of

problem solving, communication, collaboration, work ethics, integrity, written communication,

comprehension, problem-solving skills, and interpersonal skills (Kasza and Slater, 2017). STEM, when

taught with an inter-disciplinary approach, can help students improve in all areas of their education.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OVERVIEW

The goals and objectives of this professional development plan are based in content, pedagogy,

and technology and are designed to sharpen the teachers who attend so that they will feel confident in

the STEM method of instruction in order to develop and implement these types of lesson in their

classrooms. This PD will provide them with a tool kit enabling them to feel ready and comfortable with

the concept. Avery (2013) and other researchers recommend that teachers fully embrace the concept of

the engineering design process and its analytical nature. Additionally, the teachers should be immersed in

an authentic design project so that he or she can fully understand the thinking process as they expect of

their students (Asunda and Mativo, 2017).

GOALS

The goals that follow are rooted in direct correlation to BMSs demonstrated need. The goals are

SMART goals which are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bounded and are promoting

effective pedagogy and technology integration in order to help BMS science teacher deepen their content

knowledge. This will help improve their teaching practices and will most importantly, facilitate student

learning. Those at the Bayer Corporation (2010) assert that goals must be clearly identified and the

success of the program must be measured against them.

The content and pedagogy goal for this professional development program is that by the end of

the school year, all of Barbers 6th, 7th, and 8th grade science teachers will be able to define STEM,

design and effectively deliver an instructional experience that involves the characteristics of a strong

STEM-based lesson once per quarter. As most STEM lessons involve the rigorous and often cyclical

engineering design process, adequate time must be given for completion. Some projects may only last

7
two to three days, but most will span for longer periods of time. Thus the reason for only requiring

teachers to implement this type of lesson once every 6-8 weeks.

The science teachers will also be required to collaborate with at least one other teacher of a

different subject area for these STEM based lessons. According to Asunda and Mativo (2015), rather

than focusing on learning in isolated curriculum areas, an integrated program is based on developing

experiences around a particular theme that is relevant to students learning, giving them opportunities to

be active learners who research, interpret, communicate, and process learning both to others and

themselves. These standard-based lessons must be aligned with the Common Core State Standards or

the Next Generation Science Standards.

The technology integration goal requires that by the end of the second semester, all science and

STEM teachers will have contributed to creating a fully functioning STEM lab/Maker Space and be able to

choose the best and most appropriate technology available to effectively support their STEM lessons.

OBJECTIVES

Each of the following objectives directly align with the two over-arching goals set forth in the

above section. These objects are also written in the SMART format that include measurable and

quantifiable outcomes. Each objective answers the five W questions: what, why, who, where, and which.

Content Goal Objectives

Objective 1: Teachers will participate in a problem-based STEM activity, identify and outline the thought

process behind the engineering design approach.

Objective 2: Teachers will be able to understand and identify what makes an exceptional STEM

lesson/activity and compile a list of at least 5 science standards that will easily lend themselves to STEM

integration.

Objective 3: After being given several online sites to explore, teachers will search those sites among

others, to find, discuss and list 5 possible STEM lesson for their grade level.

8
Objective 4: Teachers will identify a lesson they will develop and identify one other subject area to

collaborate with for the STEM lesson.

Technology Goal Objectives

Objective 1: Teachers will be able to incorporate at least 3 technology items from the STEM lab/Maker

Space or other technology resources within the school or online.

Objective 2: Teachers will be able to create list of 5 businesses and individuals with whom we have the

potential to foster partnerships to fund our STEM initiative and to offer their field expertise.

PLAN OF OPERATIONS OVERVIEW

Douglas Reeves wrote that to be effective, professional collaboration requires time, practice, and

accountability (2009, p. 46). This grant requires the selected teachers attend a 5 day workshop during

the summer break and attend 3 follow-up sessions during the school year. Additionally, teachers at BMS,

classroom teachers are given approximately 1.5 to 2 hours worth of planning each day. Two of those

planning sessions are slated for collaborative planning and one is left open for professional development.

Teachers are also required to meet with their professional learning communities (PLCs). So in all,

teachers are given the time and have been involved in discussions and professional development on how

to collaborate within those groups. Reeves asserts that every collaboration meeting must have defined

results with specific and measurable adult actions, just as we require from our students in the form of

lesson objectives each day (2009, p. 47). We understand that people are more apt to continue doing an

activity if they feel successful at it. Meeting measurable goals at the end of collaboration meetings will

make those meetings feel like less of a chore (Avery, 2013). The Plan of Operations presented here also

employs measurable goals and objectives and includes detailed descriptions of the daily activities.

One of the greatest challenges to providing professional development during the school year is

that teachers are often overwhelmed with lesson creation and grading. Having the majority of the days

during the summer months, when teachers are typically off from school, will hopefully increase the

workshop participants excitement about learning since they will have time to focus on what they are

learning. (Levin and Schrum, 2012).

9
PLAN OF OPERATIONS SCHEDULE

The schedule for the professional development workshop called Activating STEM Learning in

Science and Beyond at BMS will span across eight days. The first five days will be held in the schools

large computer lab and each day will be six hours in length, including a lunch break. The last three days

will be held on Saturdays during the school year, two in the fall and one in the spring. The fall workshops

will span six hours in length, while the final spring workshop will only last three hours. Each day will begin

at 8:00 a.m. and end at 2:00 p.m. and will have a specific schedule of activities as listed below, including

ongoing evaluations in the beginning, middle, and end of each session. The workshop will begin and end

as outlined in the Plan of Operations Timeline.

Table 6: Activating STEM Learning in Science and Beyond at BMS

Goal #1 (Content): By the end of the school year, all 6th, 7th, and 8th grade science teachers will be able to

define STEM, design and effectively deliver an instructional experience that involves the characteristics of

a strong STEM-based lesson once per quarter.

Day Objective Activity

Day 1 Teachers will be able to Group the teachers together according to the grade level they

6 hrs understand and identify teach. Allow 15-20 minutes to complete an engineering design

Summer what makes a good challenge like the Pipe Cleaner Structure. While working,

STEM lesson/activity and instruct them to think like a middle school and pay attention to

compile a list of science the processes needed to complete this challenge. Consider

standards that could what it would look like in your classroom. Discuss their findings.

easily lend themselves to Display, distribute and discuss the PBS Design Squad

STEM integration. Teachers Guide (http://www-

tc.pbskids.org/designsquad/pdf/parentseducators/DS_TG_full.p

df ). Discuss and list the attributes of a good STEM

lesson/activity. Discuss the Engineer Design Process. Allow the

groups time to search the web for other challenges or lessons

that would fit their curriculum.

10
Day 2 After being given several Teachers should revisit their list of attributes of a good STEM

6 hrs online sites to explore, lesson from last session. Teachers, in their grade levels, should

Summer teachers will search those search their curriculum standards and identify at least one

sites to find, discuss and standard per semester that may lend itself well to hosting a

list possible STEM lesson STEM activity. Provide teachers with a list of informative

for their grade level. websites to begin their quest to find activities/lessons which

they could use all or part of in their classroom. Allow the rest of

the session for this exploration and then share findings the last

10 minutes.

Day 3 Teachers will identify a Watch an online video, like this one

6 hrs lesson they will develop https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcma79mVAYw , of

Summer and identify one other students completing a STEM activity using the Engineer Design

subject area to Process. Teachers should discuss the information from

collaborate with for the different subject areas needed by the students to complete the

STEM lesson. challenge. Teachers should consider and discuss, within their

grade level groups, the subject areas they could possibly

Teachers will be able to
collaborate with to help the students complete the lesson/
identify and add at least 3
activity. Teachers should then choose one lesson to fully plan
pieces of technology,
out and make note of how other subject areas could support
websites or software
the lesson in their classrooms. Teachers should email the
accessible at school that
teachers with whom theyd like to collaborate and send them a
will effectively support the
copy of the lesson idea. Teachers should also list all the
STEM lesson created
materials needed for the lesson and identify at least 3

innovative technology applications or hardware that will support

the lesson.

11
Goal #2 (Technology Integration): By the end of the second semester, all science and STEM

teachers will have contributed to creating a fully functioning STEM lab/Maker Space and be able

to choose the best and most appropriate technology available to effectively support their STEM

lessons.

Day 4 Identify and list the items Skype with other educators who have a fully functioning STEM

6 hrs and supplies needed for lab or Maker Space and who work in STEM certified schools.

Summer the STEM lab/Maker Talk about their process to get up and running, standards of

Space, along with their use within the school and how to acquire financial support from

prices and potential parents, businesses, and community. Teachers should begin

standards-based creating a list of the items and prices needed to stock the

lessons/activities with space and a list of ideas to help us reach STEM certification.

which they will be used.

Day 5 Each workshop With the help of the school Principal, create a form letter or

6 hrs participant will identify at email to be sent to parents, businesses, and surrounding

Summer least 5 businesses, community about our STEM initiative and the need for their

educational institutions, support. Attach a list of basic supplies needed, in addition to

or individuals with whom the larger technology equipment, furniture and classroom

we have the potential to visitors.

foster partnerships to

fund our STEM initiative

and/or to offer information

their field expertise.

Continue developing the

Workshop facilitators will offer insight and ideas as necessary
STEM lessons from the
to the collaborating teachers while they sure up their lessons.
previous days.

12
 Day 6 Learn how to use the Invite a representative from the Z-Space company to come in

6 hrs technical items (3-D and give a demonstration to the entire staff highlighting specific

Fall printer, Z-Space uses in the classroom.

computer, green screen,

Workshop participants will identify ways in which they can use
camera, and editing
the technology to support future STEM lessons.
software).

Day 7 Learn how to use the Invite a representative from the 3-D printer company to come in

6hrs. technical items (3-D and give a demonstration to the entire staff highlighting specific

Fall printer, Z-Space uses in the classroom.

computer, green screen, Workshop participants will identify ways in which they can use

camera, and editing the technology to support future STEM lessons.

software).

Day 8 Learn how to use the The media specialist will demonstrate how to use the camera

3 hrs. technical items (3-D and iPad with green screen and editing software or iPad app.

Spring printer, Z-Space

Workshop participants will identify ways in which they can use
computer, green screen,
the technology to support future STEM lessons.
camera, and editing

software).

PLAN OF OPERATIONS TIMELINE

This grant proposal will adhere to a strict timeline as outlined below in Table 7. The proposal will

be submitted on October 27th. Notification of funding will occur in February of 2018. Once notified, the

13
program facilitation will be refined and participants will be recruited. All participants, including facilitators

must confirm their attendance by May 5th. The summer workshops will commence June 4th and end June

8th. All participants must attend each workshop in full in order to be compensated. Once school begins,

there will be three Saturday workshops on August 11th, September 15th, and April 14th. A description of

each activity is found in Table 6.

At each point of the timeline, some sort of evaluation will occur. Ongoing evaluation of the

program is a must so that all participants and facilitators alike, can reflect upon our findings and correct

any misunderstandings before moving on to the next piece. Since there are only 8 face-to-face sessions,

time is valuable and timely reflection and readjustment must occur in order for the grant to be carried out

in its fullness.

Table 7: Plan of Operations Timeline

February 27, 2018 June 4-8, 2018 April 14, 2019

Proposal Program Fall Program
Submission Funding Refinement Program Implementation Spring Program
Notification Recruitment Implementation Implementation
(Summer) Program Evaluatio
February 2018- August 11 &
October 22, 2017
May 2018 September 15, 2018

EVALUATION PLAN OVERVIEW

The evaluation of a professional development program is just as important as the design of it.

Evaluation is necessary at all stages of the professional development program. Pre and post assessment

using a Likert scale to determine how comfortable teachers are in their understanding of the STEM

approach and their comfort level perceived knowledge after going through the program will be

implemented. This evaluation will be distributed using Office 365 Forms. Additionally, at the conclusion of

each session, participants will receive a ticket-out-the-door type questionnaire using Office 365 Forms

asking for 2-3 pieces of information learned and acquiring about their current needs from the program.

This allows for adjustments to be made daily to reflect their responses. At the beginning of each session,

14
questions will be addressed and either answer the question at that time or point out where in the program

the question will be answered.

According to the website, STEM by Design, there are 8 stem criteria for authentic stem programs.

They are:

1. An engineering design process is used to integrate science, mathematics, and

technology. 2. Science and math content is standards based, grade-appropriate, and applied. 3.

Students focus on solving real-world problems, or engineering challenges. 4. Students regularly

work in teams to plan, design, and create prototypes and products, then test and evaluate these

and plan how to improve. 5. Students use a variety of communication approaches to describe

their challenge and justify their results. 6. Teachers facilitate inquiry-based, student-centered

learning that features hands-on investigation. 7. Failure is regarded as a natural part of the design

process, and an essential step toward creating an improved or successful solution. 8. Students

are introduced to STEM careers and/or life applications. (Jolly, 2017, 4 )

These criterion are used to create a quantitative assessment form that teachers will fill out each

time they create a STEM lesson or activity.

In collaboration with the administrative team and academic coach, while observing the teachers

lesson and plans, the evaluators will be asked to also indicate if the lesson was STEM related. They will

also use the criteria as delineated by Jolly to help them identify STEM activities. This information will be

discussed between the teacher and the observer in their post-observation meeting. The media specialist

will be asked to be a part of the lesson collaborations and facilitations. This will give me her an intimate

view into the planning and delivery and will enable her to collect observational data.

According to the article written by Minor, Desimone, Lee and Hochberg (2016), teachers need to

be pre-assessed of their prior knowledge and experience, just like an effective classroom teacher does,

and then have the professional development differentiated according to the individual teachers needs.

EVALUATION PLAN EXTERNAL EVALUATOR

15
 An external evaluator is necessary to judge our STEM program without any bias. Dr. Sally Creel,

leader of the STEM & Innovation team in the Cobb Division of Teaching & Learning, will serve in this role.

Dr. Creel has served the last 22 years as an educator working with other administrators, teachers and K

12 students. She is also a professional development consultant for several organizations including the

Georgia DOE, National Science Teachers Association, Kennesaw State University, Teacher Created

Materials, and various Math Science Partnership (MSP) grants.

As an external evaluator, Dr. Creels role would consist of data collection and analysis and

submitting a final evaluation report based on the goals and the objectives as set forth in the program

outline. She will also be tasked with evaluating the program midway, after the completion of the summer

sessions. The goal of the data is to help improve the quality of professional development at BMS.

EVALUATION PLAN DATA AND COLLECTION STRATEGIES

Data concerning the effectiveness of the program will be collected throughout so that adjustments

can be made in a timely manner. According to Greenstein (2012), learning outcomes should be assessed

in relation to targets, goals and standards. We will assess the learning outcomes in this professional

development plan in relation to our goals and objectives. The data will be collected using four methods of

measure: surveys, interviews, student work artifacts, and observation. A pre-test assessing participants

knowledge of the content before attending the workshops will be administered a week before the first

session. The first sessions content will be adjusted based on the responses. A post-test with the same

information, will be administered on the last day of the program. The goal is to have a 100% passing rate.

Each workshop will commence with the participants completing a ticket out the door. This quick

assessment will simply ask the participant to write one thing they learned and one thing they still need

from the facilitators.

Table 8: Data Collection Schedule

Objectives Strategy A: Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy

Observation B: C: D: E:
(Daily) Pre/Post Ticket- Artifacts/ Interview
Test out-the- Lesson (Mid-
(1st and door Plans program
Last (Daily) (Daily) and end
session)

16
 of
program)
Teachers will participate in a X X X X X
problem-based STEM activity,
identify and outline the thought
process behind the engineering
design approach.
Teachers will be able to X X
understand and identify what
makes an exceptional STEM
lesson/activity and compile a list
of at least 5 science standards
that will easily lend themselves
to STEM integration.

Teachers will identify a lesson x X X x

they will develop and identify
one other subject area to
collaborate with for the STEM
lesson
Teachers will be able to x x x
incorporate at least 3 technology
items from the STEM lab/Maker
Space or other technology
resources within the school or
online.

Teachers will be able to create x x

list of 5 businesses and
individuals with whom we have
the potential to foster
partnerships to fund our STEM
initiative and to offer their field
expertise

PARTNERSHIPS

Engaging in partnerships with individuals, organizations, and the community is very important in

implementing a grant program. Having these partnerships show that there is in-house as well as outside

support for the initiative.

Our county has a well-established Library Media department that not only supervises the library

media specialists, but also purchases and loans out STEM related technology that media specialists can

check out and test to see if its something wed like to purchase with our local school budget. Technology

like iPad Pros, cameras, Little Bits, Makey Makey, and Lego sets are just a few examples of what we

could borrow.

17
 The Technology Integration Specialist for our region of the county will also be a great resource.

This person could provide additional support for the STEM teachers in building and implementing

lessons. The Technology Integration Specialists in our county are there to assist teachers with using

technology to differentiate instruction, provide rigorous, relevant, and engaging learning experiences for

all students, and effectively assessing student learning for student success.

Kennesaw State University is only 20 minutes away and many of our staff are alumni. KSU has a

strong Teacher Education program and also offers many programs including specialists degrees in

Educational Technology. There are also several staff members who have a huge presence and following

on social media because of their vast knowledge of current educational technology trends. A partnership

with KSU could provide a wealth of resources in terms of lesson creation, implementation and possibly

technology resources.

Last, I would contact some of the engineering companies in the area. A few that are only minutes

away from the campus are Gaskins Engineering, Croy Engineering, and Long Engineering. These

companies could possibly contribute financially and through classroom visits.

PARTNERSHIPS PARTICIPANT RECRUITMENT

Recruitment of participants will also require advance notice and a clear plan presented. Our

principal will play a central role in recruitment since she is the leader of the school and essentially the

entire program. The school principal, along with other administrators and I will address the possible

participants ensuring them that our STEM will be supported school-wide throughout the year. They will be

told exactly what will be expected of them, the dates, and the compensation. Transparency is the key

here.

CONCLUSION

This professional development programs goal is to help usher in the STEM methodology of

teaching at Barber Middle School which will hopefully lead to us achieving STEM certification by the end

of 2019. The science teachers are taking the lead in this initiative, however, all subject areas will benefit

18
since inter-disciplinary collaboration is strongly encouraged. The program is designed to professionally

develop up to 10 science teachers during a 5-day summer program and 3 days of follow up during the fall

and spring. Participants will be evaluated using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Also, student

artifacts and activities in class will be observed and evaluated. With the successful implementation of this

program, we hope to educate our students with the rigor and relevance the STEM design can achieve.

We are aiming to help transform our students to become innovators, creators, entrepreneurs, and global

change makers and encompass the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in todays work force.

19
APPENDIX

20
Appendix A: Budget Summary

21
22
23
Appendix B: Budget Narrative

The budget for this grant proposal is as seen below. All funds allocated for this project will be used based

upon the best judgement of the director and writer of the grant.

A. Personnel: $14,500

The personnel involved in this grant will be highly qualified individuals who will be actively involved with

building the curriculum, creating and implementing assessments, recruiting participants, and facilitating

instruction.

B. Fringe: $850

Fringe are benefits which are a percentage of total personnel costs. This will cover any health care and

retirement for the Project Director and External Evaluator.

C. Participant Cost: $5,000

Each participant will receive a stipend totaling $500 for completing the 5 day workshop. This will behave

as an incentive to attend the workshop.

D. Support Personnel Cost: None

The workshop activities will be implemented by the personnel listed above.

E. Travel Cost: $2,317

Four participants and I will present at the annual Georgia Educational Technology Consortium in Atlanta.

The grant will pay for registration, food and mileage. We will present on how to bring STEM learning into

the middle school classroom: our process and our product.

F. Additional Costs: $675

All participants, including directors, facilitators, and participants will have lunch provided for them all five

days of the workshop. The costs for each box lunch is $9 per person. During this time, all involved will be

suggested to continue the conversations and collaboration about each days findings and discoveries.

G. Evaluation Cost: $3500

24
The external evaluator will be paid a stipend of $3500 for evaluating the workshop planning and delivery

and monitor and assess the validity of the program.

H. Supplies: $1052.45

Each person involved in the workshop will be provided four books: 2 for children and 2 for teacher lesson

planning. Everyone will also receive a binder complete with copies of daily presentations and other ideas.

This will serve as their STEM Toolbox. Participants will be prompted to add to it as they see fit.

I. Indirect Cost: $1,217.62

The indirect cost is calculated by subtracting the external evaluators cost and the participants stipend

from the total amount of the grant, then taking 8% of whats left. This is typical of a grant of this type.

These costs are for items that are not readily identifiable when writing the grant.

25
Appendix C: Capacity

This workshop will require support from people who are experts in their field and have a passion

for teaching new ideas. These people are sure to have very hectic schedules already, so early

solicitation/notification is imperative. Their commitment to the program will be secured by May 2018,

before the implementation of the summer program.

The team would include several specialized positions, each will have a different role within the

team structure. The first position, Project Director, will be filled by Hanna Grimes, Media Specialists. My

responsibilities will include managing the program from beginning to end, providing leadership to all

involved and ensuring the grant is following the guidelines as set forth, creating the content and activities

for the workshop, and creating and implementing assessments of participant understanding and work.

The next position within the team structure is the Assistant Project Director. This will be filled by the

Instructional Coach at my school, Latasha Arnold. Her job responsibilities include assisting the Project

Director in all of her duties such as creating the curriculum, assisting in recruiting participants, and

assisting with lesson delivery during the workshops. Additionally, I would hire two workshop facilitators

whose responsibilities would mainly be facilitating the activities, helping participants create lesson plans,

and assessment through observation. Two county Technology Integration Specialists, Joy Gains and

Cristin Kennedy will be solicited for these positions. Last, an external evaluator, Dr. Sally Creel,

supervisor of the countys Innovation and STEM team, would be employed to evaluate the entire

program. This group of individuals and their vast knowledge of STEM and innovative teaching practices

are a sure fit for the success of this program.

26
REFERENCES

Asunda, P. A., & Mativo, J. (2017). Integrated STEM: A new primer for teaching technology

education. Technology & Engineering Teacher, 76(5), 14-19.

Asunda, P. A., & Mativo, J. (2015). Integrated STEM: A new primer for teaching technology

education. Technology & Engineering Teacher, 75(4), 8-13.

Avery, Z. K., & Reeve, E. M. (2013). Developing Effective STEM Professional Development

Programs. Journal of Technology Education, 25(1), 55-69.

Bayer Corporation. (2010). Planting the seeds for a diverse U.S. STEM pipeline: A compendium of best

practice K-12 STEM education programs. https://eie.org/sites/default/files/bayer_compendium.pdf p. 10

Carfora, J. M., & Blessinger, P. (2015). Inquiry-based learning for science, technology, engineering, and

math (STEM) programs : A conceptual and practical resource for educators. United Kingdom: Emerald

Group Publishing Limited.

Dailey, D., Bunn, G., & Cotabish, A. (2015). Answering the call to improve STEM education: A STEM

teacher preparation program. Journal of The National Association For Alternative Certification, 10(2), 3-

16.

Dow, M. J., & Thompson, K. W. (2017). Co-teaching across STEM disciplines in the ESSA Era of School

Librarians as Teachers. Teacher Librarian, 44(4), 16-20.

Gonzales, A., Jones, D., & Ruiz, A. (2014). Toward achievement in the "Knowledge Economy" of the 21st

century: Preparing students through T-STEM academies. Research in Higher Education Journal, 25.

Jolly, A. (2016, October). The 8 criteria for authentic STEM programs. Retrieved from https://www.stem-
by-design.com/the-8-criteria-for-authentic-stem-programs/
Kasza, P., & Slater, T. F. (2017). A survey of best practices and key learning objectives for successful

secondary school STEM academy settings. Contemporary Issues In Education Research, 10(1), 53-66.

Levin, B. B., & Schrum, L. (2012). Leading technology-rich schools: Award-winning models for

success. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

27
Minor, E. C., Desimone, L., Lee, J. C., & Hochberg, E. D. (2016). Insights on how to shape teacher

learning policy: The role of teacher content knowledge in explaining differential effects of professional

development. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(60/61), 1. doi:10.14507/epaa.24.2365

Mizell, S., & Brown, S. (2016). The current status of STEM education research 2013-2015. Journal of

STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 17(4), 52-56.

Reeves, D. B. (2009). Leading change in your school: How to conquer myths, build commitment, and get

results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Slough, S. W., & Milam, J. O. (2013). Theoretical Framework for the Design of STEM Project-Based

Learning. In R. M. Capraro, M. M. Capraro, & J. R. Morgan (Eds.), STEM Project-Based Learning (pp.

1527). Sense Publishers. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6209-143-6_3

Southern Regional Education Board. (2012). Focusing on Challenging Content

http://www.cobbk12.org/IE2/ExhibitF_MiddleSchoolPlans.pdf

28