BWF Student Science Enrichment Program Directors'

2001 ANNUAL MEETING

Burroughs Wellcome Fund hosted the annual meetings of Student Science Enrichment Program (SSEP) Directors on Tuesday, January 16, 2001, at 21 T. W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The primary objectives of this meeting are to serve as a venue for program directors to network among themselves and to participate in an educational exchange.

Tuesday, January 16, 2001 The SSEP Directors' meeting began with a continental breakfast and poster session of the 1998 and 1999 award recipients. The meeting was well attended by 24 program directors, seven advisory committee members, three BWF Board of Directors, and four BWF staff. Queta Bond, BWF president, welcomed the group and shared information on our five-year evaluation process called "terrain mapping."

Group Activities: Sam Houston, advisory committee member, facilitated a session on "Identifying Attributes of Successful Programs." The objective of the session was to share findings of characteristics of SSEP model programs. Jan Donley, education evaluation consultant, presented the findings of the evaluation team hired to assess the attitude and participation of students in hands-on science enrichment activities supported by the SSEP. The meeting participants were separated into five groups to discuss the following areas identified as components of model enrichment programs. A copy of the characteristics identified by groups is attached (Appendix A). SSEP Directors were assigned to serve as table discussion leaders.

• Student Presentations-Bennett College
• Student Populations-Wake Forest University
• Instructional Skills-Durham Academy
• Recruitment Issues-Imagination Station
• Program Impact-NC Museum of Life and Science

The group is very interested in capacity building, so the afternoon session with the following table topics provided an opportunity to discuss areas of development. Shirley Malcolm, advisory committee member, facilitated this session. Each table discussed the assigned topics and shared three best practices and two resources with the full group (Appendix B). Again, SSEP Directors were assigned to lead table discussions.

• Program Structure: Maximizing Hands-on Activities-North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences
• Grant Writing Tips-American Chemical Society, NC Local Section
• Interactive Learning: Science/Mathematics/TechnologyÑNCSU Science House
• Working with Scientists in Your Programs-UNC-CH
• Utilizing Technology to Teach Science-Shodor Education Foundation

A. Instructional Skills - Evaluation data showed that both scientists and experienced teachers are critical to a science enrichment program.

• In considering instructional materials for programs, contemplate the interests and learning levels of your student population, seek student input, and identify teachers who can inspire and facilitate learning for this population.
• Identify teachers who think "scientifically," and scientists who are interested in education, respect what teachers can offer, and who have pedagogy experience.
• Identify interested parents who are scientists, local organizations with scientists on staff, and other scientific organizations such as the local chapter of Sigma Xi and the National Sciences Resources Center in Washington.
• Seek long-term collaborations through pre-planning with teachers and students.
• Maintain ongoing communications with students, teachers, and scientists.
• Use the following domains to help you recruit scientists:
1. Do they have the same understanding of how students learn?
2. Do they have the same understanding of content?
3. What do they know about teaching?
4. What do they know about assessment? (i.e. Are the children learning?)

B. Program Impact - Evaluation data shows that many students who participate in SSEP activities may choose a career in mathematics, science, computer science, or engineering as a long-term goal. Our data also shows that the "dose" (summer versus year round) of SSEP activities has an impact.

• Both long-term (academic and school year) programs and intensive summer programs are effective. The best programs might be those that have both components.
• Intensive summer programs should offer a minimum of three days of activities, however, longer is better. It takes around three weeks to build a community.
• Academic year or year round programs can use email connections or community service activities on Saturdays to maintain contact with students.
• At-risk youth might benefit most from follow-up activities.
• Best idea for continued contact — Permanent Email Addresses.
• Directors should maintain a student/teacher ratio of 12:1 or less.
• Involve parents. Parents may not like science, but they are known to provide valuable encouragement and participation.
• Evaluation should be a key component of any hands-on enrichment program. Many use pre- and post-program surveys to assess students’ attitude and knowledge.
• Utilize the evaluation data provided by the BWF evaluation consultants to improve or expand program activities.
• Students should be encouraged to move from one BWF supported program to another. Reference the Student Science Enrichment Program web site for descriptions of programs, http://ssep.bwfund.org.

C. Recruitment Issues - Evaluation data shows that SSEP activities with small applicant pools that recruited and admitted students based solely on their minority status tended to have difficulties with behavior, attendance, and attrition. Programs with at least three times as many applicants as participants cited no such problems.

• Recruit students beyond your geographical boundaries using distance-learning opportunities or have multiple sites for program activities.
• Include teacher recommendations, application forms, parent nominations, and a combination of other things such as interviews in the application process.
• Parent involvement is key in connecting with students, especially at the middle school level. School counselors and science teachers have much to offer as well, and counselors have access to a large number of students.
• Base the number of students to recruit for programs on several factors such as size of facility, whether students can fit into a 15-passenger van for transporting, and number of instructors.
• Require new recruits to sign a contract as a commitment between the student, parent, and the program.
• Honor all applicants…chosen or not chosen. Keep interest in science alive for all.
• Maintain high expectations of students, which may decrease discipline problems, and of instructors to give students the needed time and attention.
• Design programs to attract continuing student involvement and offer rewards for work well done.

D. Student Populations - Evaluation data shows that SSEP activities served students who fell into two groups, gifted students and general population students.

• Decide what aptitude and interest a student should have to participate in programs.
• Talk to teachers, counselors, parents, and other adults to identify gifted students.
• List attributes of what you mean by gifted rather than asking for "gifted" students. In many cases, the school system may not recognize students as gifted when indeed they may be.
• Targeting a broad group of students will attract those we determined to be general population students.
• Seek students who may not have other opportunities for hands-on enrichment activities to broaden the base.
• Use other organizations such as churches, scouts, and boys/girls clubs to reach general population and gifted students.
• Align program structure with targeted student population.
• Maintain flexibility in program activities to accommodate other issues such as reading, time management, planning, and prioritizing.

E. Student Presentations - Evaluation data shows that projects that enable students to explain their knowledge of science to others engender positive comments from students.

• Presentations are important for various reasons. Students have the opportunity to share what they have learned and the community has the opportunity to appreciate their work.
• Communication skills should be addressed from day one. Use audio and other equipment to teach these skills to help students develop a positive outlook about presenting.
• Schedule dress rehearsals for presentations and seek feedback from peers.
• Invite government officials, superintendent, business leaders, scientists, parents, media, university leaders, BWF representative, and other mentors to student presentations.
• Have students draft an invitational list of friends and family whom they would want to hear their presentations.
• Consider the SSEP Annual Directors’ meeting as an appropriate venue for student presentations.

The Program Directors divided into small groups to discuss assigned topics and to identify three best practices and two resources they would like to share with the group.

1. Develop a relationship with granting organization. Grant writing is like "dating," minimize the blind dates.
2. Develop a strategic plan and adapt it to the funding source (Be sure to identify what you want first — don’t plan your program around someone else’s funding priorities).
3. Identify resources and write multiple grants.

1. Attend funding organization-sponsored workshops — "Meet the parents."
2. Have BWF offer a panel of fund-raising experts at annual meeting.

1. Follow directions in application process.
2. Find funders with missions that match the mission of your organization
3. In some cases, you may want to invite students to present to potential funders
4. Call to find out why proposals are declined. Maintain a good relationship with the funder even if your proposal is not funded.
5. Try community foundations, like the Triangle Community Foundation, to find potential individual donors who have established donor-advised or trust funds with their organization.
6. Do not hesitate to make a cold call on a foundation. Some "blind dates" are known to work out well.
7. Put proposal-writing tips on SSEP web site.

1. Incorporate interdisciplinary (science, mathematics, and technology) focused activities to engage inquiry-based learning. This should include inquiry-based learning opportunities for teacher development.
2. Have students interact with various technologies available to program.
3. Make program activities appropriate and relevance to real world applications.

1. Data collection devices (CBL, GPS …).
2. World Wide Web, distance learning, simulated experiments.

1. Hands-on does not imply minds-on. Define hands-on and minds-on and incorporate both into program.
2. Use full learning cycle. Hands-on does not stand-alone.
3. Clarify and unify expectations. Choose what is developmentally appropriate for student population and include a variety of methods.

1. National Sciences Resources Center in Washington, DC.
2. National Academy Press.
3. Burroughs Wellcome Fund SSEP awardees.
4. **Use existing resources!!!

1. Use same tools, techniques, technologies that are used in the practice of science to learn and teach science: authentic vs. appropriate.
2. Do not equate "technology" with computer–microscopes, telescopes, CBL probes, and cameras are examples of other technologically advanced tools that are used.
3. Use technology to present and publish student findings. This will not only prepare them for a science career, but may extend their participation in these types of programs.

1. http://ssep.bwfund.org
2. Colleges, universities, professional societies, and corporations.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) net link has benchmarks and school-based modules.

1. Humanizing science: Expose students to hobbies of scientists (i.e. painting, music, writing, etc.)
2. Advocate for changes in the public’s perception of scientists in the modern era
3. Promote the multi-dimensional aspects of science: in business (managing a non-profit that supports science or grant writing); in family life (meeting scientists’ families to make them more human); and in social life (marketing the value of science and how it affects human health and well-being).

1. Books/movies that inspire students by showing scientists in a favorable light (see item D).
2. Academic institutions/business/government agencies

1. Broaden the definition of scientists, such as dental hygienist, surveyors, etc.
2. Some scientists volunteer to be online to chat with students.

1. Books

• Magic Bullet
• Futuristic Thinking
• Life in the Treetop, Meg Lowman
• Any Jane Goodall Books
• Savages
• Burning Season
• Ships Whisper
• A Friend of Nature
• The Rocket Boys
• NSTA — Students on Research
• Ravens in Winter, Heinrich
• Tyrannosaurus Rex and the Crater of Doom, Alvarez
• A Brief History of Time
• What about Time? — Paul Davies
• Any of Ferynman’s Works

1. Movies

• Apollo 13
• Back to the Future
• Contact
• Star Trek
• Jurassic Park
• October Sky
• Outbreak
• Lorenzo’s Oil
• Dustin Hoffman film about the Ebola virus
• Ron Howard Film about illness of his child related to feed of his dairy herd

• Pasteur (Black and white movie biography — may not be real title)

• Breakthrough: New Faces of Science (video)
• The Medicine Man

1. Other Websites

• www.enc.org
• Expanding your Horizons — discussion forum for middle school girls to interact with female scientists (www.science-house.org/student/eyh/)
• Research Triangle Park Math and Science Technology Partnership — A database of scientists, mathematicians, etc. that are willing to work with students and schools
• Women of NASA
• Mentorships Available — www.dwp.org
• North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics Education Future Centers www.efc.ncssm.edu

1. Institutions

• Lake Singletary State Park (David Colburne)
• Pine Knoll Shores Aquarium (Mike Bamberger)
• Forest Rangers (Joe Johnson)
• Soil Scientists for North Carolina (John Ray, Willie Spruill)
• Story Water Services
• NASA Education Division (Washington, DC)
• Glaxo SmithKline (RTP)
• National Park Service

1. Other resources

• List of NCSU scientists who have visited schools with topics and age appropriateness (email Jenny Herbert at jenny_herbert@ncsu.edu)
• Graduate Students

Last Modified: