STEM2 Hub Outcomes 2022-23

Challenging the Status Quo Through

In-School STEM Learning

Report on 2022-2023 Data Collection

October 25, 2023

PEAR Institute

Grace Davis Dr. Dawn McDaniel

Challenging the Status Quo Through In-School STEM Learning in Putnam County, FL Report on 2022-2023 Data Collection October 25, 2023 Grace Davis and Dr. Dawn McDaniel Background Employment opportunities in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) in the United States are expected to rise between 2021 and 2031 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2022). However, there is a shortage of STEM-ready professionals across America and companies are finding it difficult to meet STEM workforce needs (Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2020). To prepare students to successfully move from the classroom into STEM careers, two key factors are proficiency and interest in STEM (Beier & Rittmayer, 2009; Business-Higher Education Forum, 2011). Yet, interest in STEM tends to decrease across students as they get older and many students struggle to reach proficiency, with 60% of students failing to meet mathematical proficiency in fourth grade and 64% of students failing to meet science proficiency (NAEP, 2019a, 2019b; Wieselmann et al., 2020). Students from socioeconomically disadvantaged communities are particularly susceptible to these issues and overwhelmingly attend under-resourced schools with less experienced teachers and fewer STEM coursework opportunities (Lynch et al., 2019; Tyson et al., 2007). Early exposure to STEM and access to STEM courses, particularly those that emphasize hands-on learning, are important for increasing STEM interest and proficiency (littleBits & YouGov, 2018; NAEP, 2019b). However, only 18% of fourth graders report engaging in scientific inquiry-related classroom activities on a weekly basis (NAEP, 2019b). By coupling increased frequency of authentic STEM learning opportunities with teacher professional development, schools may be able to disrupt these trends and bolster student STEM outcomes (Lynch et al., 2019).

Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub

STEM2 Hub is a nonprofit organization that builds cross-community systems to ensure all students have access to high-quality STEM learning experiences to “ accelerate the growth of STEM2 Hub education and careers.” Through engaging the local

Figure 1 . Students participating in a coding challenge.

community and cultivating high-impact cross-sector relationships with schools, education-focused organizations (e.g., LEGO Education, Woz Education, Code.org), industry partners (e.g., Microsoft), out-of-school time providers and government, STEM2 Hub empowers educators and students to explore STEM career pathways, pursue critical 21st-century workforce skills, and cultivate a sense of belonging in STEM. STEM2 Hub regularly reaches over 100,000 students through supporting in- school and out-of-school programming in coding, robotics, computer science, mathematics, real-world STEM problem-solving and more. With an integrated approach that focuses on educator professional development along with scaffolded and progressively-aligned student learning, STEM2 Hub works with school district leaders to systematically align curriculum across all schools.

With a particular focus on computational thinking and the intersection between coding and math, STEM2 Hub collaborates to build strong teachers, engaging programs, and interested students. STEM2 Hub develops resources that weave together in-school and after-school learning through competitions, camps, and afterschool programs with a goal of nurturing a deeper understanding of in-school STEM learning and promoting STEM career exploration. Through collaborating to offer STEM learning opportunities in a variety of contexts, STEM2 Hub strives to equip students from all backgrounds with experiences to build resiliency and workforce readiness so that all students have access to the skills and knowledge needed to building tomorrow’s workforce and strong and thriving communities.

Putnam County School District

Putnam County School District serves a high proportion of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds (94.7%) and students attending these schools tend to report lower Math and Science proficiency rates compared to statewide Florida rates (Florida Department of Education, 2022). Previously, more than half of Putnam County Schools ranked in the bottom 3% of schools in Florida (Richardson, 2023). However, the current Superintendent of Putnam County Schools, Dr. Richard Surrency, has worked diligently to improve students’ academic success and in consequence, Putnam ’s high school graduation rates have increased from 55% in 2015 to 93% in 2021 (Richardson, 2023). This dramatic improvement can be largely attributed to the implementation of STEM education (Richardson, 2023). In 2017, STEM2 Hub partnered with Putnam County School District to help them gain a better understanding of the STEM learning landscape among students. Based on findings from a student STEM outcomes assessment among 6 th graders, Putnam County redesigned their STEM curriculum, increased exposure to STEM for all students , and strengthened the “culture of collaboration” among educators (Richardson, 2023). Now, Pre-K students are regularly exposed to STEM learning activities like building with Legos, K-5 th grade students engage in one STEM class per week focused on STEM topics like coding, 6 th grade students participate in a daily STEM course and have STEM integrated into their other classes, and 7 th -12 th students choose STEM elective courses to participate in such as Aerospace and Drone Technologies, Robotics, Cybersecurity, Computer Science, and Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning many of which lead to industry certifications (Richardson, 2023).

Data Collection

The current data collection efforts were used to monitor outcomes from the Putnam County STEM initiative and provide insight into effective strategies that schools and districts can use to systematically increase equitable access to STEM. In December 2022 through February 2023, Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub collected data from Putnam County School students and educators using PEAR’s Common Instrument Suite – Student Survey (CIS-S) and Common Instrument Suite – Educator Survey (CIS-E). Data was collected from 1,317 students in fourth through twelfth grades across 11 Putnam County Schools, as well as 44 educators across 8 Putnam County Schools. The CIS-S is a 56-item youth self-report measure of six STEM attitudes (STEM activities, career interest and knowledge, engagement, enjoyment, and identity) and four social-emotional skills (critical thinking, perseverance, relationships with peers, and relationships with adults (Allen et al., 2020; Noam et al., 2020; Sneider & Noam, 2019). Reliabilities for these scales were high, ranging from 0.80 to 0.93 (Allen et al., 2019). Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.” The CIS-S was administered mid-school year in a Retrospective Pretest-Posttest (RPP) format. In this format, students rate each item from two frames of reference: before starting their STEM course (retro-pre) and the day of their survey (retro-post). Two versions of the survey were administered to students. Older students in sixth grade and above took the full CIS-S which consisted of all 10 scales. Younger students in fourth through fifth grades took a shortened version of the CIS-S which consisted of six scales: the four social-emotional skills and two STEM attitudes (STEM engagement and identity).

The CIS-E is an educator self-report survey that asks educators about several aspects of being a STEM educator. In addition to program context (e.g., where STEM activities are taking place), educators are asked to rate their perceptions of their own STEM identities on a 4- point Likert scale from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree,” the ease of implementing practices aligned with high-quality programming on a 4- point Likert scale from “Very Hard” to “Very Easy,” and their perceptions of change in their students’ STEM confidence, STEM skills, and social-emotional skills on a 4-point Likert scale fro m “Not at All Confident/Skilled” to “Very Confident/Skilled.” Reliabilities for these scales are also high, ranging from 0.74 to 0.94 (Allen et al., 2019; Price, 2018).

Table 1. Student Demographics (n = 1,317)

Common Instrument Suite Survey Findings Student Demographics Between December 2022 and February 2023, 1,317 Putnam County students in grades 4-12 completed the CIS-S RPP. Table 1 reports the demographics of these students. The vast majority of student data (81%) was collected from seven Putnam County Elementary Schools (grades K-6). The remaining data (20%) was collected from four Putnam County Junior-Senior High Schools (grades 7-12). Nearly half of the students in the sample were boys (47%), over two-fifths were girls (44%), and the remainder preferred not to answer (9%). Two- fifths of students were in fourth grade (21%), a little over a quarter were in fifth grade (26%), a third were in sixth grade (33%), and the remaining two-fifths were in seventh through twelfth grade (20%). The distribution of students’ racial and ethnic identities revealed that about a quarter of students identified as White, Caucasian (non-Hispanic) (25%) and approximately two-fifths preferred not to answer (21%). The other major racial identities represented were African-American, Black (15%), Multi-Race (14%), unlisted (14%), and Latino or Hispanic (7%). The remaining students (6%) identified as American Indian, Native-American (4%), Asian, Asian-American (2%), Caribbean Islander (<1%), Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (<1%), and Middle Eastern or Arab (<1%). The majority of students (87%) spoke English as their primary language at home. Student Overall Outcomes To examine the results from the six STEM-related attitudes and four 21 st -century skills, we computed difference scores for each scale. These scores were calculated by subtracting each retro-pre mean from its retro-post mean. Then, these difference scores were analyzed to see if they differed significantly from zero, which indicates no change from retro-pre to retro-post. If the p -value of a given scale was below 0.05, its mean difference is considered statistically significant, meaning that the change is unlikely to be a result of chance.

Sample size (%)

Variable

School Browning Pearce Elem.

182 (14%) 117 (9%) 225 (17%) 91 (7%) 104 (8%) 240 (18%) 107 (8%)

James A. Long Elem. Kelley Smith Elem.

Melrose Elem. Ochwilla Elem.

Robert H. Jenkins Elem. William D. Moseley Elem. Crescent City Jr.-Sr. High Interlachen Jr.-Sr. High

73 (6%) 66 (5%) 26 (2%) 86 (7%)

Palatka Jr.-Sr. High

QI Roberts Jr.-Sr. High

Gender

Female

577 (44%) 618 (47%) 122 (9%) 282 (21%) 345 (26%) 437 (33%) 251 (20%)

Male

Prefer not to answer

Grade

Fourth

Fifth Sixth

Seventh – Twelfth

Race/Ethnicity African-American, Black American Indian, Native- American

198 (15%)

53 (4%)

Asian, Asian-American

20 (2%) 88 (7%)

Latino or Hispanic

White, Caucasian (non- Hispanic)

335 (25%)

Multi-Race Not listed

179 (14%) 155 (12%) 282 (21%)

Prefer not to answer Primary Language English

1,146 (87%)

Non-English

90 (7%) 81 (6%)

Prefer not to answer

Across the entire student sample, analysis revealed statistically significant positive change ( p ’s < 0.0 01) on all 10 scales ( Figure 2 ). To examine the magnitude of this change, we computed effect sizes for all scales using Cohen’s d : critical thinking ( d = 0.34), perseverance ( d = 0.34), relationships with adults ( d = 0.19), relationships with peers ( d = 0.24), STEM engagement ( d = 0.37), STEM identity ( d = 0.23), STEM activities ( d = 0.26), STEM career interest ( d = 0.40), STEM career knowledge ( d = 0.58), STEM enjoyment ( d = 0.34). The effect size for STEM career

knowledge is considered medium, whereas the effect sizes for the other nine scales are considered small effects (Cohen, 2009). Similarly, when we examined overall outcomes for only students in 4 th -6 th grade (i.e., elementary school students), analysis revealed statistically significant positive change ( p ’s < 0.001) on all 10 scales with medium effects on STEM career knowledge and small effects on the other nine scales. Figure 2. Student-Reported Change in CIS-S Outcomes (n = 1,317), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022- 2023

Relationships with Peers* Relationships with Adults* Perseverance* Critical Thinking*

0.18

0.20

All Grades (n = 1317)

0.10

0.15

STEM Activities* STEM Identity* STEM Engagement*

0.17

0.13

0.15

STEM Enjoyment* STEM Career Knowledge* STEM Career Interest*

0.25

Grades 6+ (n = 690)

0.39

0.21

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

Student Outcomes by Gender and Race/Ethnicity Additional analyses were computed to investigate potential gender and race/ethnicity differences in CIS-S outcomes. Across female and male students, there were significant differences on 5 of the 10 scales ( p ’s < 0.05) ( Figure 3 ). These scales were STEM engagement, critical thinking, perseverance, relationships with adults, and relationships with peers. On all scales with significant differences, females reported more positive change than males. To further explore the relationship between gender and outcomes, we conducted a moderation analysis to examine how gender impacts the strength of the relationship between retro-pre and retro-post scores for each scale. Findings revealed that among female and male students, gender had a significant effect on the relationship between retro-pre and retro-post scores on 4 of the 10 scales ( p ’s < 0.05) . These scales were STEM career knowledge, STEM career interest, relationships with adults, and relationships with peers. Figure 3. Significant Differences in CIS-S Outcomes by Gender (n = 1,195), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022-2023

0.23

Critical Thinking*

0.16

0.26

Perseverance*

0.16

Relationships with Adults*

0.08

0.21

Relationships with Peers*

0.13

0.22

STEM Engagement*

0.15

0.00

0.25

0.50

Female (n = 577)

Male (n = 618)

In addition to outcome differences across gender, we analyzed outcome differences by race/ethnicity, specifically between students of color and White, Caucasian students. Across these two race/ethnicity categories, there were significant differences on 2 of the 10 scales ( p ’s< 0.05): STEM identity and critical thinking ( Figure 4 ). On both STEM identity and critical thinking scales, White, Caucasian (non-Hispanic) students reported greater increases than students of color. Figure 4. Significant Differences in CIS-S Outcomes by Race/Ethnicity (n = 880), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022-2023

0.11

STEM Identity*

0.21

0.15

Critical Thinking*

0.25

0.00

0.25

0.50

Students of Color (n = 545) White, Caucasian (non-Hispanic) (n = 335)

Student Outcomes by Grade Across grade groups (4 th -6 th , 7 th -8 th , 9 th -12 th ), there were significant differences on 7 of the 10 scales ( p ’s < 0.05). There scales were STEM activities, STEM career interest, STEM career knowledge, STEM engagement, STEM enjoyment, STEM identity, and perseverance. Analyses were also conducted to examine differences between 6 th grade students and students in other grades to better understand the impact of STEM dosage on CIS-S outcomes. Between 6 th grade students and students in all other grades, there were significant differences on all 10 scales ( p ’s < 0.05) such that 6 th grade students reported greater increases from retro-pre to retro-post on all scales compared to students in other grades. Between 6 th grade students and 4 th -5 th grade students, there were significant differences on 5 of the 6 CIS-S scales ( p ’s < 0.05) ( Figure 5 ). These scales were STEM engagement, STEM identity, critical thinking, perseverance, and relationships with adults. Across all scales with significant differences, 6 th grade students reported greater increases than 4 th -5 th grade students. Between female students in 6 th grade and female students in 4 th -5 th grade, there were no significant differences on any of the 6 scales. Between male students in 6 th grade and male students in 4 th -5 th grade, there were significant difference on 4 of the 6 scales ( p ’s < 0.05). These scales were STEM identity, critical thinking, perseverance, and relationships with adults. Across all scales with significant differences, 6 th grade male students reported greater increases than 4 th -5 th grade male students.

Figure 5. Significant Differences in CIS-S Outcomes between 4 th -5 th and 6 th grade students (n = 1,064), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022-2023

0.15

Critical Thinking*

0.26

0.19

Perseverance*

0.27

0.08

Relationships with Adults*

0.17

STEM Engagement*

0.23

0.10

STEM Identity*

0.23

0.00

0.25

0.50

4th - 5th grades (n = 627)

6th grade (n = 437)

Lastly, we examined differences in outcomes between 6 th grade students, 7 th grade students, and 8 th grade students to better understand the longer-term effects of daily doses of STEM in 6 th grade. Across 6 th , 7 th , and 8 th grade students, there were significant differences on 8 of the 10 scales ( p ’s < 0.05) ( Figure 6 ). These scales were STEM activities, STEM career interest, STEM career knowledge, STEM engagement, STEM enjoyment, STEM identity, critical thinking, and perseverance. Post hoc analyses revealed that across all statistically significant outcomes other than perseverance, 6 th grade students reported significantly greater increases than 7 th grade students. Figure 6. Student-Reported Change in CIS-S Outcomes between 6 th , 7 th , and 8 th grade students (n = 588), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022-2023

0.26

Critical Thinking*

0.11

0.13

0.27

Perseverance*

0.12

0.16

0.17

Relationships with Adults

0.07

0.19

Relationships with Peers

0.14

0.08

0.23

STEM Engagement*

0.06

0.22

0.23

STEM Identity*

0.05

0.13

0.23

STEM Activities*

0.03

0.08

0.31

STEM Career Interest*

0.09

0.31

0.48

STEM Career Knowledge*

0.21

0.35

0.28

STEM Enjoyment*

0.04

0.27

0.00

0.25

0.50

6th grade (n = 437) 7th grade (n = 86) 8th grade (n = 65)

Educator Perceptions Between December 2022 and February 2023, 44 educators, representing 8 different Putnam County Schools completed the CIS-E survey. The primary role held by these educators was overwhelmingly Elementary (K-6) Classroom Teacher (68%), followed by not listed (14%), 6 th Grade STEM Teacher (9%), K-5 STEM Resource Teacher (5%), and Secondary (7-12) Classroom Teacher (2%). The gender distribution of these educators skewed toward women (77%), with men comprising 20% of the sample. The largest race/ethnicity categories represented among these educators were White, Caucasian (83%) followed by Latino or Hispanic (7%) and prefer not to answer (7%). Two-thirds of educators (66%) held b achelor’s degrees and over a quarter held m aster’s degrees (27%). The largest percentage of educators (36%) had between 1 and 4 years of experience leading in-school STEM activities followed by no experience (16%) and 5 to 9 years (16%). Lastly, 68% of educators had either no experience or less than 1 year of experience leading out-of-school STEM activities. When asked about their training and professional development, 68% of educators reported having no professional development within the last year. Of the 30% who reported receiving professional development within the last year, 46% said that they are “very comfortable” and 31% said they are “somewhat comfortable” instructing in the content area in which they received professional development. The remaining 23% reported feeling “very uncomfortable” instructing in the professional development content area. When asked “What kind of STEM training/support would you like to receive?” educators suggested “More Woz Ed trainings,” “teaching biomimicry, more training with micro bits and data science,” “new innovation workshops” and “cyber security.” Additionally, multiple educators expressed a general interest in more professional development opportunities focused on expanding STEM k nowledge or “Anything pertaining to K - 5.” In addition to collecting data about educator characteristics, the CIS-E asks educators about their own STEM identities. On a scale of 1 to 4, educators’ average STEM identity was 2.75. Educators whose primary role was STEM-specific (i.e., 6 th grade STEM teachers and K-5 STEM resource teachers) reported significantly higher ( p ’s < 0.05) average STEM identity scores than educators whose primary role was not STEM-specific (i.e., Elementary (K- 6) Classroom Teacher and Secondary (7-12) Classroom Teacher). Additionally, educators who received professional development within the last year reported significantly higher ( p ’s < 0.05) average STEM identity scores than educators who did not receive professional development within the last year. Attitudes toward teaching STEM over time were also assessed with the CIS-E. Overall, educators reported significant positive change ( p ’s < 0.05) in their attitudes towards leading STEM (i.e., feeling more comfortable, confident, interested in, and capable of teaching STEM at the time of the survey compared to a year prior). Between educators who received professional development within the last year and those who did not, there were no significant differences in feeling comfortable, confident, interested in, and capable of teaching STEM at the time of the survey compared to a year ago. However, while not statistically significant, educators who received professional development do seem to report more positive change than those who did not receive professional development ( p ’s > 0.05) ( Figure 7 ). Between educators whose role was STEM-specific and those whose role was not STEM specific, there were significant differences ( p ’s < 0.05) in feelings of comfort teaching STEM such that STEM- specific teachers reported greater increases in comfort than non-STEM-specific teachers.

Figure 7. Average Difference Scores in E ducators’ Attitudes Toward Leading STEM by Professional Development (n = 43), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022-2023

0.54

Comfortable

0.23

0.46

Interested

0.23

0.54

Confident

0.20

0.54

Capable

0.30

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

PD (n = 13)

No PD (n = 30)

Educators also self- assessed their ability to use teaching practices aligned with PEAR’s Dimensions of Success, a framework for assessing high-quality STEM learning experiences, on a 4- point scale from “Very Hard” to “Very Easy” (Shah et al., 2018). The two DoS-aligned practices with the highest ratings (i.e., teachers had the easiest time using these teaching practices) included “ ensuring activities are inclusive of students from all backgrounds ” and “ensuring all students actively participate in STEM activities.” Lastly, educators were asked to rate their perceptions of students’ confidence and skills at two time points: before their participation in the STEM course and at the time of the survey. Analyses revealed statistically significant positive change in educator perception of students’ confidence across all STEM domains, as well growth in students’ skills rel ated to STEM, computer science, and 21 st -century learning ( Figure 8 ).

Figure 8. Average Difference Scores in E ducators’ Perceptions of S tudents’ Confidence Levels and Skills (n = 44), Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, 2022-2023

Engineering* Technology* Science*

0.71

0.62

0.59

Critical Thinking* Computer Science* Math* Engineering* Technology* Science* Computer Science* Math*

0.54

0.63

0.64

0.57 0.57

0.63 0.63

0.68

Relationships with Peers* Relationships with Adults* Perseverance*

0.79

0.63

0.59

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

Summary Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub’s student and educator data demonstrate how participation in in-school, progressively-aligned STEM courses in Putnam County Schools increases students’ STEM -related attitudes and 21 st - century skills. Students reported significant positive change on all 10 STEM and 21 st -century outcomes, with the greatest positive change in STEM career knowledge and STEM career interest. Based on common effect size benchmarks, Putnam County STEM courses had a medium effect on career knowledge (Cohen, 2009). To contextualize this finding, the effect sizes of Putnam County student STEM career knowledge and STEM career interest were larger than the overall weighted average effect size found in a meta-analysis examining the impact of STEM programs on mathematics achievement (Siregar et al., 2019). Although Putnam County in-school STEM courses target all aspects of STEM, this comparison still highlights the magnitude of Putnam County STEM course impact. Across multiple STEM and 21 st -Century outcomes, analyses revealed outcome differences by gender and race/ethnicity groups. Specifically, females experienced significantly more positive change than males. Greater change in females may be partially explained by females reporting lower “baseline” (retro-pre) scores at the beginning of their STEM courses and therefore, having a greater threshold for change. Additionally, gender impacted the strength of the relationship between retro-pre and retro-post scores on a number of outcomes. Outcome differences between White, Caucasian (non-Hispanic) students and students of color may also be partially explained by White students reporting lower baseline scores on many outcomes. Across all 10 STEM and 21 st -century outcomes, students in 6 th grade reported significantly greater positive change than students in other grades. Similarly, when we examined findings for 6 th grade vs. 4 th -5 th grade students, 6 th grade students reported significantly more positive change on both STEM outcomes assessed (STEM engagement and identity) and three of the four 21 st -century skills (critical thinking, perseverance, and relationships with adults). Previous research found that more frequent engagement in scientific inquiry-based learning resulted in greater science proficiency (NAEP, 2019b). Because 6 th graders participate in STEM as a core course that meets daily and students in other grades receive less frequent dosages of STEM learning, these differential outcomes may be explained by differences in dosage. Educators reported significant increases in comfort, interest, confidence, and capability leading STEM activities at the time of the survey compared to a year ago. While educators who received professional development reported greater increases in attitudes toward teaching STEM over time than educators who did not receive professional development, those differences did not reach the level of statistical significance. Previous research has found that the effectiveness of professional development may be influenced by a variety of contextual factors (e.g., duration, format, alignment with curriculum, teacher practices and beliefs) (Lynch et al., 2019). To better understand the current finding, more information on the dosage, duration, and content of professional development received would be helpful, as well as a larger sample size to differentiate between the impact of STEM professional development on STEM-specific educators and non-STEM-specific educators. Educators also reported increases in perceived student confidence in STEM, skills in STEM, and 21 st -century skills, mirroring student-reported increases in all 10 STEM and 21 st -century outcomes. Alignment between educator and student perspectives strengthens evidence of in-school STEM course impact and provides a more comprehensive understanding of the features of the learning environment that may be contributing to positive outcomes. There were a few limitations to this year’s data collection efforts. Sample sizes across grades were vastly differerent with this sample overwhelmingly representing elementary school students. Also, because of the small sample size of 6 th grade STEM teachers, opportunities for analyzing outcomes for these teachers were limited. Future research should focus on collecting additional 6 th grade STEM teacher data as well as linking educators with students to

better understand the experience of STEM learning within given classrooms. Because the first full year of Pathway STEM model implementation was 2021-2022, 8 th -12 th grade students in the current sample were not exposed to the Pathway STEM model during their younger years, making authentic comparisons across grades difficult. Finally, to further understand the STEM learning landscape of 7 th -12 th graders, we recommend conducting an assessment of the supply of STEM courses for 7 th -12 th graders in relation to the demand and examining differences between 7 th - 12 th grade students who choose to take STEM as an elective and those who do not. The Putnam County initiative to strengthen STEM learning and increase opportunities for high-quality STEM engagement is having a profound impact on student STEM and 21 st -century outcomes. Through engaging students in STEM learning during the school day and supporting educators with professional development, Putnam County and Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub are systematically increasing equitable access to STEM for all students , “ challenging the status quo,” and serving as an example of how school systems can play a key role in creating a strong STEM pipeline and future STEM workforce.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to TIES for supporting this report. Thank you to Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub administrators and facilitators, and the families and young people who participated by completing surveys. We also thank the team at PEAR Inc. for their work in data collection, management, analysis, and reporting.

Learn More • Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub website • PEAR ’s website to learn more about our STEM tools and services

References

Allen, P. J., Chang, R., Gorrall, B. K., Waggenspack, L., Fukuda,

littleBits, & YouGov. (2018). Early Exposure to STEM and Its

E., Little, T. D., & Noam, G. G. (2019). From quality

Impact on the Future of Work .

to outcomes: A national study of afterschool STEM

Lynch, K., Hill, H. C., Gonzalez, K., & Pollard, C. (2019).

programming. International Journal of STEM Education ,

Strengthening STEM Instruction in Schools: Learning

6 (1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0191-2

From Research. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain

Allen, P. J., Lewis-Warner, K., & Noam, G. G. (2020).

Sciences , 6 (2), 236 – 242.

Partnerships to transform STEM learning: A case study

https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219864385

of a STEM learning ecosystem. Afterschool Matters , 31 ,

NAEP. (2019a). The Nation’s Report Card: 2019 Mathematics State

30 – 41.

Snapshot Report .

Beier, M. E., & Rittmayer, A., D. (2009). Literature Overview:

https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publica

Motivational factors in STEM: Interest and Self-

tions/stt2019/pdf/2020013np4.pdf

Concept. Applying Research to Practice (ARP) Resources .

NAEP. (2019b). The Nation’s Report Card: Results from the 2019

http://aweonline.org/arp_selfconcept_overview_1222

Science Assessment at grades 4, 8, and 12 .

08_002.pdf

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/science/supportin

Business-Higher Education Forum. (2011). Creating the workforce

g_files/2019_infographic_science.pdf

of the future: The STEM interest and proficiency challenge

Noam, G. G., Allen, P. J., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2020).

[Research Brief].

The Common Instrument: An assessment to measure

https://www.bhef.com/sites/default/files/BHEF_201

and communicate youth science engagement in out-of-

1_stem_inerest_proficiency.pdf

school time. International Journal of Science Education, Part

Cohen, J. (2009). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2.

B , 10 (4), 295 – 318.

ed., reprint). Psychology Press.

https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2020.1840644

Florida Department of Education. (2022). Putnam School District

Price, L. R. (2018). Common Instrument Suite — Retrospective sample

Report Card .

(pp. 1 – 44) [Technical Report]. Texas State University:

https://edudata.fldoe.org/ReportCards/Schools.html?

Methodology, Measurement, and Statistical Analysis

school=0000&district=54

(MMSA).

Florida Regional STEM2 Hub. (2020). STEM2 Hub Annual

Richardson, R. (2023). Putnam County School District-The Little

Report 2019-2020 .

STEAM Engine that Could | Woz ED K12 .

https://online.flippingbook.com/view/709278294/

https://wozed.com/newsletter/putnam-county-

school-district-the-little-steam-engine-that-could/

Shah, A. M., Wylie, C., Gitomer, D., & Noam, G. (2018).

science-learning/connected-science-learning-july-

Improving STEM program quality in out-of-school-

september-2019/common-instrument-suite

time: Tool development and validation. Science

Tyson, W., Lee, R., Borman, K. M., & Hanson, M. A. (2007).

Education , 102 (2), 238 – 259.

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics

https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21327

(STEM) pathways: High school science and math

Siregar, N. C., Rosli, R., Maat, S. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2019).

coursework and postsecondary degree attainment.

The Effect of Science, Technology, Engineering and

Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk , 12 (3), 243 –

Mathematics (STEM) Program on Students’

270.

Achievement in Mathematics: A Meta-Analysis.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022). Employment in STEM

International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education ,

occupations . https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/stem-

1 (1). https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5885

employment.htm

Sneider, C., & Noam, G. G. (2019). The Common Instrument

Wieselmann, J. R., Roehrig, G. H., & Kim, J. N. (2020). Who

Suite: A means for assessing student attitudes in STEM

succeeds in STEM? Elementary girls’ attitudes and

classrooms and out-of-school environments. Connected

beliefs about self and STEM. School Science and

Science Learning , 11 . https://www.nsta.org/connected-

Mathematics , 120 (5), 297 – 308.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12407

A d e n d u m Promising Practice: Putnam County School District Articulated STEM Program with Daily STEM Class in Grade 6

Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub - Milestones

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024 Continue Scaling and

In-School Programs Media & STEM Resources HS Computer Science

Code.org Partnership INTEL Math Results

WOZ Ed Partnership Duval STIC Opens First CS Festival

Putnam PEAR Study 14 STEM Pathway Schools (Duval, Putnam, Clay)

Building Capacity Baker STEM Plan

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

Putnam Daily STEM Integration Duval Curriculum Maps

STEM2 Hub Launched; State of STEM

Established District Partnerships Robotics in Afterschool

Microsoft Hacking STEM Capacity Building Robotics in School Day

Established STEM Connection to Student Achievement Math & Reading

Our Mission: We convene, inspire, and invest in the STEM2 field by providing the essential missing elements to accelerate the growth of STEM2 education and careers.

For Information, Contact: Kathleen Schofield, Executive Director Northeast Florida Regional STEM2 Hub, Inc.

kathleen@stem2hub.org or visit www.stem2hub.org

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18-19 Page 20-21 Page 22

Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker