LIGOG03000400L

1
Proposal to establish an educational outreach
center at the LIGO Livingston Observatory

• Mark Coles
• LLO
• Jan. 22, 2003

2
LIGO Livingston Partners

• LIGO staff
• Caltech
• Jill Andrews, Asst to the Provost for Educational
  Outreach
• Southern University Baton Rouge (SUBR)
• Mildred Smalley, Vice Chancellor for Research, as
  co-PI
• Louisiana Systemic Initiative
• Kerry Davidson, Louisiana Board of Regents as
  co-PI
• Exploratorium, San Francisco
• Rob Semper, Assoc. Dir. Is point of contact
• LLO Local Educators Network
• Educators/administrators representing state,
  district, local and private schools in LA and
  Miss., and Delta RSI

3
Our concept is innovative

• We propose creation of a science center, in
  association with a scientific research facility,
  that partners with formal educators to emphasize
  fundamental physical science concepts

4
What we plan to do

• Construct a 10,000 square foot center, parking,
  and access road on the LIGO site
• Furnish the site with 5000 square feet of exhibit
  space, a classroom, teacher work room, and other
  support facilities.
• Install approximately 40 hands-on exhibits,
  developed by the Exploratorium, which reinforce
  basic science concepts essential to LIGO and
  emphasized in the Louisiana State Science
  Framework.

5
What we plan to do (ctd.)

• In collaboration with the Exploratoriums Center
  for Teaching and Learning, SUBR faculty will
  adapt Exploratorium programs in museum-based
  interactive learning to teach pre-service and
  in-service teachers in the region.
• Through SUBR, create training programs and
  supports for prospective science teachers to
  serve as docents within the proposed center.
• With LIGO and SUBR partners, create in-service
  programs for high school teachers to promote
  inquiry-based learning and collaborative research
  activities within their classrooms and on-site.

6
What we plan to do (ctd.)

• Partner with LA GEAR UP to enable teachers and
  students in rural, low income communities to
  participate in the programs of the proposed
  center.

7
We propose a sustainable program producing
lasting, measurable results

• Better prepared prospective teachers
• Provide pre-service teachers with superior
  training in physical science (exposure to
  research-based best practices), as evidenced
  through measurable assessments of teacher
  knowledge.
• Strengthened science education curricula at SUBR,
  consistent with the redesign of teacher education
  programs in the State of Louisiana,
• Upgraded science laboratory in the College of
  Education to support pre-service teacher
  preparation and in-service training,

8
Expected results (ctd)

• Higher quality classroom teaching
• Provide in-service teachers with exhibit-based
  teaching skills and inquiry-based activities in
  the classroom to teach research skills to
  students,
• Development of science master teachers to
  facilitate school-based science learning
  communities,
• Creation of formal collaborative programs with
  LaSIP LA GEAR UP science component to build
  scientific literacy in underserved populations,
• Creation and dissemination of digital products
  such as virtual field trips, laboratory
  activities and hands-on exercises,
• Science tool kits complimentary to LIGO science
  exhibits,

9
Expected results (ctd)

• Better prepared students
• Creation of a program to train science content
  leaders in introducing research methodology into
  the classroom and provide assistance to train
  their peers in structured learning communities
  This will result in collaborative research
  between students, teachers, and LIGO scientists.
• Strengthen technical skills in K-12 students with
  differentiated emphasis on Pk-5, 6-8, 9-12

10
LIGOs Unique Contribution

• LIGO scientific staff, supported by outreach
  center funds, work directly with SUBR educators,
  teachers, and students
• Creation of programs to show in-service teachers
  what scientists do, and implement collaborative
  research activities in the classroom
• Work directly with students, as part of
  collaborative research activities and on-site
  programs at the outreach center, to strengthen
  students pre-college technical preparation
• Provide scientific support to pre-service
  teachers working as docents in the outreach
  center to reinforce their implementation of
  exhibit based teaching methods
• Create distance learning materials and teacher
  tool-kits relating to LIGO and goals of the
  center.

11
Tentative work plan

• Year 1
• Staff training with Exploratorium
• Delivery of 12 exhibits to temporary outreach
  space at LLO
• Curriculum development for pre-service and
  in-service training
• Docent training
• Upgrade SUBR teaching labs
• Land acquisition and civil design

12
Work plan (ctd)

• Year 2
• Beta test of pre-service and in-service programs,
  curriculum innovations, materials, and research
  activities involving teachers and students
• Civil construction
• Procurement of 26 additional exhibits (38 total)

13
Work plan (ctd)

• Year 3
• Initial operation of the center
• Full implementation of in-service and pre-service
  programs
• Full engagement with GEAR UP schools

14
Management Plan

• Directorate consists of PI and co-PIs
• Executive Committee of Site Heads, Dean of
  College of Education at SUBR, and Jill Andrews at
  Caltech
• Use LIGO/Caltech resources for accounting,
  purchasing, and other administrative support

15
Budget LIGO LLO Only

• Building 1.3 M
• Road 0.5 M
• Exhibits 750K
• Exploratorium training 50 K
• Labor TBD
• TOTAL 2.6 M Labor
• Additional costs for SUBR and LaSIP

16
In kind LIGO contributions during start-up and
operation

• LIGO labor supported from Operations budget 1
  FTE additional small support from existing LLO
  staff
• Center infrastructure supported from LIGO Ops
  budget (HVAC, electrical, maintenance, etc.)
  40K/yr
• RET and REU programs to support participants

17
Not to be shown at the meeting Questions

• We have had a lot of discussion about the value
  of a mobile unit
• Initial costs and operating costs are high
• How to sustain labor and vehicle costs
• How should the Exploratorium be represented on
  the proposal? Is it considered a sole source
  procurement if not a partner to the proposal?
• Are the 2 M of civil construction costs
  supportable?
• Overall program size is now 2.6M (LIGO) 3M
  (SUBR) 300K (LaSIP)
• LaSIP costs are mostly transportation, and extend
  past year 3. Can we expend some funds beyond year
  3?
• SUBR is exploring possibility to provide
  transportation of students and teachers to site
  need to confirm what is possible.
• We would like to assess a modest charge to
  visitors (2 per student) to defray some
  operating costs. Is this acceptable?