Thank you for your comment.  Yes, the hands-on nature has excited not only the students but the teachers as well.

Thank you for the comment and support of these efforts and all you do for the students.  I am very familiar with the robotics programs for students and have seen how those types of programs can engage and encourage student learning.  The one side of these programs to tackle is attracting students that may not inherently feel they are right for such program.  With our AMP-IT-UP program we are trying to bring some experiences to the instructional classroom so students might find that hidden ability or interest.

Hi Loius. I am the co-PI for research and evaluation for the project. There are nine math modules, one focused on each practice (practices are data visualization, experimental design, and data-driven decision making) at grade levels 6, 7, and 8. All modules are implemented in 4 middle schools that we work with. The methodology for assessing this complex instructional effort includes classroom observations, online implementation (teacher enactment of the curriculum) surveys, and online teacher discussions about their experiences implementing the modules. We also developed a pre and post assessment for each module, which provides assessment of student learning. Overall, the results indicate positive teacher experiences as well as significant increases in student learning in most modules (which obviously these results change depending on the implementation factors). Lastly, we have a 'dosage model', we get the state test scores from the district, and we have the whole district student data by the teacher, which also allow us to make a case about the impact on learning depending on when and how many modules that students were exposed to. As part of our research, we are also interested in teachers’ instructional change. It is actually one of the main focus of the research for the modules.  We are in the process of writing a paper that describes the methodology assessing the modules. 

Melted, thanks a lot for the detailed response. Looks like a carefully designed evaluation process for a complex project. I'll be very interested in seeing the results as this moves forward and the paper gets written.

The modules have been designed so that they collect data and then participate in class share/discussion to further/validate the findings and expand the understanding.  For example, in the Manufacturing Quality Control module in 7th grade we focus on student understanding of sampling and random sample for decision making.  In this module, the student's perform an independent data collection of hex nuts and find their individual error rate.  Then they share their rate with a group and when they combine each members numbers they find that the error rate changes with a larger sample size.  Then the data knowledge concludes with each group sharing their results to generate a class wide error rate before continuing to explore error rates of multiple sample time during a production day.  This type of small group/ individual knowledge to lend to the whole is carried through all of the modules that we have developed.

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the praise and question. In response, the modules have a STEM integration progression from Experimental Design to Data Analysis to Data Driven Decision Making. While students discuss and make decisions throughout a progression (i.e. in the Packaging Challenge they decide on a packaging procedure based on both speed and consistency using a histogram to guide them), hence there is consideration and critique of each others reasoning in every module. As well, the Data Driven Decision Making module requires them to apply a decision matrix that includes data analysis, and we intentionally develop the module so that there is more than one correct decision. Hence a rationale must be given for their decision based on the matrix and individual, group, and class discussion on selected solutions with related rationale occur.