<aside> đź“ť This memo is intended as a rough draft outlining an initiative (name TBD) targeting rigor in project-based learning. Where appropriate, sections are introduced by a brief summary like this one, indicated with a đź“ť. The memo is intended to promote discussion and support the articulation of a concrete, near-term starting point for iteration; it is not intended for circulation.
Those interested can find the notes from the first XQ workshop (20 August 2019) on this topic here, compiled by Monica Martinez.
</aside>
Schools in general and project-based learning in particular have struggled to unify rigor and engagement. A wide variety of forms of effort (ranging from research to school designs to consultancies and more) have attempted to address this issue and by-and-large failed to do so. XQ, both for the benefit of schools within its portfolio and in order to move the field [and conversation] forward, seeks to launch an initiative which will solve this problem. This memo proposes conceptualizing of this initiative as a multi-pronged, multi-year endeavor in analogy to the Human Genome Project, recognizing that many of the questions and problems entailed by this problem are thorny and unsolved.
Given that the structure and audience of this initiative still require further articulation, this memo further proposes that the best (perhaps only?) path to accomplishing this rigorously is to prototype the full cycle of transformation (from interested teacher to transformed teacher, class, or school) that unifying rigor and engagement in schools requires. We propose the structure of Investigations (projects and programs acting as exemplary experiences of and ingredients for project-based learning) and Development Kits (multifaceted packages of tools, materials, and experiences to support designers and implementors of Investigations) as a deliverable for this work. And concretely, this memo proposes beginning with (a) work in computational geometry, targeting output the scale of a traditional yearlong curriculum in Algebra I, Geometry, and Pre-calculus, and (b) more nascent prototypes across other parts of the curriculum. The hope is that taken together, these projects—developed by a tightly-knit, multidisciplinary team—can substantially inform and concretize the design of the broader initiative.
This memo attempts to lay out the reasoning, context, and conversations which have informed the proposal, as well as highlighting important strategic questions for the initiative's working group to tackle.
School struggles to combine rigor and engagement. Project-based learning may offer a vehicle for reconciling these (while supporting other priorities like youth voice, authentic work, 21st century skills, and so on). Unfortunately, project-based learning has struggled with rigor historically. Even amongst XQ schools working to leverage project-based learning, rigor and consistency remain elusive.
XQ seeks to convene a multidisciplinary team to inaugurate an effort to solve this problem. This memo summarizes some of the essential points of the conversation to date, highlighting what Powderhouse feel are some of the most important constraints, priorities, and context.
With this in hand, this memo also proposes the initiative be conceived of as an ambitious, multi-pronged and multi-year effort in analogy to the Human Genome Project. Except that this initiative (name TBD) would aim to sequence and synthesize world-class project-based learning experiences across the curriculum and demonstrate viable, replicable approaches to school transformation to support these. We believe this is at least a 5–7 year initiative. A typical textbook might take 1–3 years and $5–10M to author at an outfit like Pearson specifically structured to and practiced in that work. This work is conceptually, practically, and technically much more ambitious, and should be designed acknowledging this.
Just as the Human Genome Project involved multiple, substantial, constituent questions of science, engineering, and policy, so too will this initiative. Unlike the Human Genome Project, this initiative does not yet know the exact form of its output—will it be a collection of projects? Training programs? Software? Case studies? All of the above?
Specifically, this memo proposes beginning these efforts focused on developing units around computational geometry, an area and strand of academic work which would effectively position this initiative to eventually compete with traditional courses like Algebra 1, Geometry, Physics, and Trigonometry. This portfolio would then be expanded to include units across the curriculum as the initiative gets its footing. This memo proposes beginning with a single focus, exploring the full stack of considerations in this work (ranging from project development to documentation to evaluation to teacher training to marketing) as iteratively as possible so as to inform the broader strategy and evolution of the initiative.
To achieve this, this memo proposes a structure of Investigations and Development Kits. Investigations are thematically unified collections of projects, productions (collaborative projects), and programs (seminars in which participants develop projects). Development Kits include stories, case studies, supporting research, design materials, professional development experiences, and similar. Development Kits aim to support the design and implementation of specific Investigations in the field, and to support the capacity building of schools seeking to emulate this work in their own context.
This structure aims to ensure this initiative maintains both the design room to understand how to reliably prototype the most ambitious, high-quality project-based learning while simultaneously developing supporting tools, materials, and experiences to aide in the dissemination of such work. These strands involve many related questions which need to be explored in parallel.
The initiative needs to be structured so as to accommodate this. This memo elaborates on some of the design considerations in structuring such an initiative, concretely suggesting we begin with:
…iterating on the development of these first Investigations and Development Kits in short-run cycles involving XQ, XQ partners, and other experts in the design, feedback, and development.
Over the next year, this team would aim to deliver: