Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 1

Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal

FRIT 7232 Visionary Leadership in Instructional Technology

Candice Beattie, Erica Colbert, Alison Geigerman, Helena Wallace, Valerie Morris

Georgia Southern University

March 20, 2016

Abstract
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 2

Electronics Elementary is a rural, community-focused school with approximately 450

students. Located in a southern county, we are surrounded by a strong agricultural influence.

Several parents are employed by Gulfstream Aerospace, local farms, and Georgia Southern

University. Our school has 452 students, with 56% receiving free and reduced lunch.

Demonstrated need

Based on the 2014 CCRPI report for Electronics Elementary, it was determined that the

two greatest areas of need were math and science. Only 56% of the students met “typical or

high” growth in math and 59% in science. (Appendix A) According to the Z-scores for

achievement gap, Electronics students had the largest gap in math and science compared to the

state average in those areas. This data shows that planning, innovation, and more effective

instructional strategies need to be established for students.

By effectively utilizing this grant, we will better develop our students’ 21st century skills

in order to support our coworkers at the middle and high school levels in making our students

college and career ready. This includes enhancing their use of problem solving skills through

team-based projects that utilize a 3D printer. In a workforce where collaboration, technological

skills, and a strong work ethic are a must, we must provide a learning environment focused on

developing and refining these skills. Without this skill development, our students will not be

workforce ready or have the focus to continue learning at a technical college or university.

Students deserve to have the opportunity to use their imagination to achieve their goals and

support others through collaboration.

Goals and Objectives

 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 3

We have already exposed many of our students to coding, game design on Kodu,

photography skills, and to various K’NEX and snap circuit kits. We have seen tremendous

growth in their ability to solve a problem from start to finish. We want to push them even further

and integrate the scientific method as a standard tool to solving math, science, language arts, and

social studies problems.

1. Our goal is to have in-depth, cross-curricular problems that students will solve

throughout the school year. By increasing our classroom learning experiences at

Electronics Elementary with a 3D printer, we will be able to provide even more

tools and exciting resources for students to use to help boost our problem solving

scores.

S.M.A.R.T. goal 1: Students will demonstrate the ability to use problem solving skills with

results created on a 3D printer and will create a final project that will be scored for

evaluation results.

1.1: By May of 2016, 50% of 5th and 4th grade students will have a personal

portfolio with a final project that utilizes 3D technology.

1.2: By December of 2016, 100% of 5th grade and 50% of 4th grade students will

have a personal portfolio with a final project that utilizes 3D technology.

2. Teachers at Electronics Elementary will design and develop curricula targeting important

thinking skills underlying STEM fields (i.e., computational thinking and problem

solving) across all subject matters and grades. The curricula will help teachers create

instruction focusing on identifying and solving problems present in the real world,
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 4

brainstorming possible solutions, conducting experiments, building models and designing

prototypes to solve problems and analyze their results.

S.M.A.R.T. goal 2: By Feb. 2016, 100% of 5th and 4th grade teachers have attended a

mandatory professional training on 3D technology and have completed an online training

module, created by the technology department on “How to plan problem-based cross-

curricular projects using 3D technology.” This will be a self-paced module that will give

each teacher 1 PLU

3. EES will provide teachers with professional development activities in the creation,

implementation, evaluation and revision of STEM curriculum through release time for

professional learning, observations at STEM schools/classrooms and tools needed to

create, design and collaborate on a vibrant STEM curriculum. The professional

development activities will be supported by Georgia Southern University’s Innovation

Studio.

S.M.A.R.T. goal 3: By December 2016, all 4th and 5th grade Math/ Science teachers will

have implemented changes to their curriculum according the Georgia Southern professors

recommendations. These teachers are consistently using project-based lessons with 3D

technology in their classrooms.

Plan of Operations

January 2016

Teachers will meet on January 5th, for a mandatory professional development day. This

date will be used to introduce all teachers to the potential uses and implementations of 3D

technology. Teachers will have a chance to work with the 3D Cube Trio printer. They also will
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 5

be exposed to great strategies to help them create project-based lessons for students to design and

submit.

February - May 2016

● All 4th and 5th grade Math/Science teachers will begin training on 3D technology as part

of the implementation of the STEM curriculum. They will also complete a mandatory

technology module “How to plan problem-based cross-curricular projects using 3D

technology.”

● At the end of Q3 (end of March, date to be announced) this group will meet for a follow

up professional development day, to share student’s artifacts, successful lesson plans and

troubleshoot possible problems with 3D technology in their lessons.

June - July 2016

● Georgia Southern professors will review the Math and Science standards and will

formulate a plan to deliver meaningful content to Math and Science teachers at EES.

August - December 2016

● During pre planning time (first week before schools starts for students) 4th and 5th grade

teachers will meet with the professors from Georgia Southern to implement changes on

their curriculum and develop a school plan based on their recommendations. This plan

will have a specific list of goals or performance indicators that students must show

growth.

● 4th and 5th grade teachers will meet every 9 weeks period on a professional development

days to discuss, compare and analyze the efficiency of their lesson plan and student

progress on their projects using 3D technology.

 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 6

● 2 professional days will be scheduled for the 4th and 5th grade teachers to visit other

STEM curriculum schools. These visits will provide teachers with opportunities to see

the technology that they have been using, applied in other schools and possibly in other

grade levels.

Budget

● $500 Problem-based solving training on Jan. 5th in the morning, includes 2 copies of the

book Thinking Through Project Based Learning: Guiding Deeper Inquiry by Krauss and

Boss

● $1,200 for tables to house the 3D printer and student groups in the Media Center

● $600 3D Cube Trio printer training for entire school on Jan. 5th in the afternoon

● $3,000 Pay for subs for 4th and 5th grade teachers planning days (once every 9 weeks) to

plan and implement the final project for the grant.

● $1,500 This money will cover traveling days and expenses for teachers to visit other

STEM schools.

● $6,000 to pay for GSU professors time for coordinating and strengthening the Math and

Science curriculum, and for collaborating with 4th and 5th grade teachers.

● $4,300 for 1 3D CubePro Trio printer

● $3,960 for 10 each of black, blue, clear, and red PLA cartridges for the 3D printer

Evaluation Plan

It has been exciting to begin talking about the future of our school’s technology growth,

and to see teachers collaborate together to write this grant. We have many tech savvy teachers

that can help troubleshoot and foster innovative thinking among the whole school. We know that

the sky's the limit, and that our students are very capable of taking these tools and producing
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 7

amazing results. We have a wonderful partnership with Georgia Southern University and their

Innovation Studio, located only 15 minutes down the road. Several dedicated professors take the

time to visit our campus and develop skills with our young learners, and we really owe all of the

thanks to them and our administrators for planting the seeds of growth here at our school. They

have been the true farmer's in this agricultural region, and with their support we know that this is

only the starting point for continued growth in our teachers and students.

Objectives Evaluation Methods

S.M.A.R.T. goal 1: Students will demonstrate the ● student survey on technology skills (pre and

ability to use problem solving skills with results post implementation, only given to 5th and

created on a 3D printer and will create a final 4th grade students) Appendix C

project that will be scored for evaluation results. ● 3D final project rubric - Appendix D

● 5th and 4th grade students portfolio, with

1.1: By May of 2016, 50% of 5th and 4th grade
graded rubric and 3D artifact
students will have a personal portfolio with a final

project that utilizes 3D technology.

1.2: By December of 2016, 100% of 5th grade and

50% of 4th grade students will have a personal

portfolio with a final project that utilizes 3D

technology.
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 8

S.M.A.R.T. goal 2: By Feb. 2016, 100% of 5th and ● Pre and post technology survey for teachers

4th grade teachers have attended a mandatory on what they know and how they feel about

professional training on 3D technology and have the technology that they will be

completed an online training module, created by implementing - Appendix B

the technology department on “How to plan ● Sign off sheet for mandatory training

problem-based cross-curricular projects using 3D ● Sign off sheet for mandatory technology

technology.” module

Smart Goal 3: By December 2016, all 4th and 5th ● Collection of 2-3 lesson plans (per age group,

grade Math/ Science teachers will have 4 and 5) with 3D activities as well as

implemented changes to their curriculum according students’ 3D artifacts..

the Georgia Southern professors recommendations. ● TEKS teacher evaluation for implementation

These teachers are consistently using project-based and effectiveness of 3D technology in

lessons with 3D technology in their classrooms. classroom. (Objectives only valid for 5th and

4th grade teachers)

References

Boss, S. (2015, October 19). Reinventing Project-Based Learning. Retrieved 19 Mar. 2016,

from http://reinventingpbl.blogspot.com/

Finley, Todd. "Jaw-Dropping Classroom 3D Printer Creations." Edutopia. The George Lucas

Educational Foundation, 30 June 2015. Retrieved 14 Mar. 2016 from

http://www.edutopia.org/blog/jaw-dropping-classroom-3d-printer-todd-finley
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 9

Rockwell, Johnny T. "3D printers in the classroom: 7 reasons why every school should have a

3D printer." AIRWOLF 3D. Retrieved 15 Mar. 2016 from

http://airwolf3d.com/2013/02/27/school-3d-printers-in-the-classroom/

Schrock, Kathy. "3D Printing in the Classroom." Kathy Schrock's Guide to Everything.

Retrieved 15 Mar. 2016 from http://www.schrockguide.net/3d-printing.html

TeachThought. (2015, December 13). 4 Keys to Designing a Project-Based Classroom. Global

Digital Citizen Foundation. Retrieved 19 Mar. 2016, from

https://globaldigitalcitizen.org/4-keys-to-designing-a-project-based-learning-classroom

Appendices

Appendix A: CCRPI scores for Electronic Elementary

Elementary School Content Area Count of Students Count of Students with

Meeting Typical/High Student Growth Percentiles
Growth (SGPs)

CRCT: English Language Arts 67 101

CRCT: Reading 78 102

CRCT:Mathematics 56 103

CRCT: Sciences 59 104

CRCT: Social Studies 63 104

Total 323 514

Percent meeting Typical/ High Growth .61658

Weighted Performance (.61658)*25

Progress Points Earned 13.4

Data from Appendix A provided by Electronics Elementary.

Appendix B: Teacher Pre/ Post survey

1. What grade level do you teach?
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 10

❏ K
❏ 1st
❏ 2nd
❏ 3rd
❏ 4th
❏ Other _________________

2. How often do the students in your classroom engage in projects that require the use of
technology?
❏ Daily
❏ 1-2 times per week
❏ Once a month
❏ Other __________________

3. What technologies do you use currently in your classroom? (check all applied)
❏ Teacher computer
❏ Smartboard
❏ Ipads
❏ Chromebooks
❏ Students personal devices
❏ Other ___________________________________________

4. What is your level of knowledge on 3D printers?

❏ Do not know what that is
❏ Have heard of 3D printers in articles
❏ I have played around with 3D printers in trainings
❏ I'm an expert in 3D printers

5. How confident do you feel that the use of 3D printers will fit with the standards?
❏ No confidence
❏ Little confidence
❏ Do not know
❏ Some confidence
❏ Very confidence

6. In what age group do you think 3D printers will work the best?
❏ K
❏ 1st
❏ 2nd
❏ 3rd
❏ 4th
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 11

❏ 5th

7. What subject area do you think 3D printers will work the best?
❏ Science
❏ Math
❏ Art
❏ Language arts
❏ Other _______________

8. How much training do you think you need to implement and use a 3D printer in your
classroom?
❏ None
❏ 1 day
❏ 2 to 3 days
❏ 1 week
❏ Other ____________________

9. Other than budget, what do you feel could be an impediment in using a 3D printer in your
classroom?
_______________________________________________________

Appendix C: Student Pre/Post survey (5th and 4th grade only)

1. What grade are you in?
❏ 4th
❏ 5th

2. What technology do you use at home? (mark all the one you use)
❏ Cell phone
❏ Computer/laptop
❏ Ipad/ tablet/ Ipod or music device
❏ Game device (DS, PS1/2/3/4,Wii, WiiU)
❏ Television
❏ Other _______________________

3. How often do you use technology in your classroom?

❏ Never
❏ Every day
❏ Once a week
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 12

❏ Once a month
❏ Other _______________

4. How important it is for you to learn and have access to technology?

❏ I don't know
❏ Not very important
❏ Important
❏ Very important

5. What do you know about 3D printers?

❏ I have never seen one
❏ I have seen one and what it can do
❏ I have used one

6. If you had to complete a project in classroom using a 3D printer, how confident would you
feel?
❏ Not confident at all
❏ Somewhat confident
❏ Very confident

7. How often does your teacher use a 3D printer in the classroom?

❏ We do not have one in our school
❏ Never
❏ Once a week
❏ Once a month
❏ Other ______________________

8. In what class (es) have you use a 3D printer?

❏ Never used it
❏ Science
❏ Math
❏ Art
❏ Language Arts
❏ Other _______________________

Appendix D: Portfolio Project using 3D Technology Rubric

Criteria Needs Improvement Good Excellent Score

1pt 3pts 4pts
 Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 13

Dimensions Portfolio did not The project is 3D but The project is 3D

Is the project a display any 3D some of the dimension and all
3D object and are content showing that are not correct showing dimensions for
the dimensions the student has very that student has a good the project are
correct? limited understanding understanding of the present.
of how to use 3D technology but needs Student shows
technology more practice to become mastery of 3D
better. technology.

Composition Instructions were not All instructions were Project meets all
Does the project followed and project followed but some necessary
meet the does not meet the project outcome is not guidelines and
guidelines as per final outcome. clearly defined. additional
the instructions to elements were
meet a final added.
outcome? Project outcome
very well defined

Design Minimal effort was Good effort on the Excellent

Does the project given to planning and planning and execution planning and
have a logical execution of project on the design of the excursion on the
progression of design. project. design of the
ideas? Does it No logical sequence Logical ideas but the project.
demonstrate effort of ideas sequence is not well Clear and logical
was put into the structured sequence of ideas
overall design?

Interpretation/ Unable to determine There is clear Clear and precise

Analysis the purpose of the interpretation of the interpretation of
Is there clarity in project created by the purpose of the project; the purpose of
the interpretation student however some the artifact
of the project? components may give
way to ambiguity

Execution Student did a very Student did a good job The student did a
Did the project in poor job executing the at executing the project very good job at
all of its project. Very few but not all executing the
components component/ components/guidelines project; all
/guidelines guidelines were were present. components/guid
achieve the followed. Student completed the elines were met.
intended result? Student did not project to achieve the Student went
complete the project intended result above and
or it did not fully beyond to make
display the intended sure the project
result. achieved its
Project-Based Learning and 3D Printing Professional Learning Grant Proposal 14

intended result.

Total /20