USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM TO AMELIORATE THE SOCIO ECONOMIC STATUS (SES) ACHIEVEMENT GAP by Timothy Owen A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION with emphasis in CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, Utah September 26, 2022 Approved __________________________________ Stephanie Speicher, Ph.D. ___________________________________ Natalie Williams, Ph.D. ___________________________________ Charles Kavanagh, M.Ed. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 2 Acknowledgements Neither this project, nor the Utah Mountain School would exist without Charles Kavanagh and Chris Wright. These two educators were driving forces in creating an experimental program that would serve the students who needed it most. The rest of the Utah Mountain School Board, Karren Pyfer, Michael Jolley, Betty Sawyer, and Jon Stein constitute an enormous wealth of knowledge, experience, and passion that continue to benefit the community in profound ways. Rabecca Cisneros with the Utah State Charter School Board provided guidance and support essential to completing this project. The majority of the original ideas for curriculum and program of instruction presented in this paper came out of my time in the Weber State University MEd program. By taking these courses, from the inspirational faculty of WSU while teaching full time, I was able to workshop many of the concepts, with the guidance of my professors, that appear in the curriculum and program of instruction section of the UMS Charter application. Special thanks to Professor Natalie Williams, who inspired me to become a teacher in the first place, and who taught me the enormous rewards in working with students with disabilities. Special thanks also go to Professor Pyles, who taught me that the way to be a good teacher is to never stop striving to be a great student. Finally, Professor Stephanie Speicher has my deepest gratitude for supporting UMS from the beginning, and for providing a temperamental student with all the guidance and support needed to complete this project. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 3 Table of Contents List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... 5 List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... 6 Nature of the Problem ........................................................................................................ 7 Review of the Literature ...................................................................................................... 8 The SES Achievement Gap .......................................................................................... 8 Mechanisms of the SES Achievement Gap ............................................................. 9 Consequences of the SES Achievement Gap ......................................................... 13 Failure of the Traditional Classroom to Bridge the SES Achievement Gap ........ 13 Student-to-Teacher Ratios ................................................................................... 14 Teacher Retention ............................................................................................... 15 Parent Education ................................................................................................. 15 Special Education Model .................................................................................... 16 Exploring the Outdoor Classroom as an Intervention to Ameliorate the SES Gap 17 Facets of the Outdoor Classroom ........................................................................ 17 Physical Activity ................................................................................................. 17 Using Green Spaces to Mitigate the Effects of Chronic and Acute Stress ......... 18 Increasing Community Involvement and School Climate .................................. 19 Teacher Retention ............................................................................................... 20 Summary .................................................................................................................... 20 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 20 Methods ............................................................................................................................. 22 Research Design .......................................................................................................... 22 Elements of the Proposed Curriculum and Program of Instruction ....................... 23 The Classroom Environment ............................................................................... 23 Daily Structure .................................................................................................... 25 Lesson Planning ................................................................................................... 26 Overview Of Curriculum Design ........................................................................ 28 Procedures and Participants ......................................................................................... 47 Development ........................................................................................................ 47 Reviewers and Steps of the Process ..................................................................... 48 Utah State Charter School Board Reader Feedback ............................................ 48 USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 4 Utah Mountain School Internal Review .............................................................. 53 Experts’ Responses ............................................................................................. 54 Review by the Utah State Charter School Board ................................................. 57 Limitations .................................................................................................................. 60 Conclusions and Discussion .............................................................................................. 61 References ......................................................................................................................... 63 USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 5 List of Tables Table 1: Proposed Daily Schedule ................................................................................... 26 USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 6 List of Figures Figure 1: Proposed Design for the Utah Mountain School ............................................... 24 Figure 2: Six-Week Module Schedule .............................................................................. 28 Figure 3: Potential Grade Level Schedule ......................................................................... 29 Figure 4: Elective Enrichment Dance Lesson Plan ........................................................... 32 Figure 5: Lesson Plans for Visual Arts, Earth Sciences, and ELA ................................... 34 Figure 6: Examples of Turning Standards into Cross Curricular Capstone Projects ........ 38 Figure 7: Student Self-Reflection Rubric .......................................................................... 42 Figure 8: Teacher Rubric ................................................................................................... 43 Figure 9: Community Rubric ............................................................................................. 44 Figure 10: Suggested Knowledge Checks ......................................................................... 46 Figure 11: Flowchart for Each 6-Week Module ................................................................ 47 USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 7 Nature of the Problem Throughout the American education system, there is a pervasive achievement gap based on socioeconomic status (Western & Petit, 2010). This achievement gap persists even when covariates such as race, gender, and English Language Learner (ELL) status are excluded (Tomporowski et al., 2008). While the socioeconomic status (SES) achievement gap is well documented as it pertains to results on standardized testing (Berkowitz et al., 2017), a more useful standard may be adult achievement. Adults who were raised in high-poverty neighborhoods show relatively poor outcomes in lifelong earnings and attitudes towards the institution of education (Lloyd & Hertzman, 2010). Lloyd and Hertzman (2010) found that childhood poverty often has a permanent negative correlation with cognitive functioning, problem solving, and language. More than a simple achievement problem, poverty in the developing brain appears almost identical to many forms of brain damage (Evans et al., 2009). The revelation that lifelong deficits in cognitive ability can be tied to specific stressors associated with a high-poverty upbringing creates a correlational link between childhood poverty and adult achievement gaps (Luby, 2015). Three factors appeared most explanatory of the role of poverty in negative educational outcomes: a deficit in attention due to chronic stress; a lack of culturally appropriate role modeling; and negative attitudes toward the institution of education (Goodman et al., 2012). While systemic and policy-based initiatives could be explored with the goal of ameliorating two of these factors, the prevalence of stress-related attention deficits, and the impact of those deficits on potential achievement, can be directly correlated to the effects of concentrated poverty (Kuo, 2001). The emergence of USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 8 a clear picture of the effects of poverty on academic and lifelong achievement comes as the single teacher, indoor-classroom model dominates the educational landscape. Over the past ten years, rather than exploring novel delivery methods to meet this specific problem, educational policies have led to fewer creative interventions and an educational landscape more homogeneous than ever (Tierney, 2015), with the classroom becoming an instrument to perpetuate the SES achievement gap. Review of the Literature The SES Achievement Gap In the United States, there is a pervasive gap in both academic and future life achievement between high and low socioeconomic status students (Carpiano et al., 2009). This gap is visible in academic achievement scores, assessment results, and school completion rates of low-SES students, and in the earnings and incarceration rates of adults raised in poverty. In terms of academic achievement, this gap does not end when individuals reach 18 years of age; it persists into adulthood and initiates a cycle of poverty which can continue for generations. SES is a demographic characteristic that is consistently correlated to academic achievement, even when controlling for ancillary factors (Berkowitz et al., 2017). Carpiano et al. (2009) used multilevel analysis to decipher which demographic characteristics most consistently indicated low achievement. Low SES was correlated to low academic achievement even when controlling for factors such as parental support, class size, teacher efficacy, and other measures. In fact, Luby (2015) found that the negative impacts of exposure to poverty in early childhood can follow students USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 9 throughout their educational career, even if the student’s circumstances change for the better. Mechanisms of the SES Achievement Gap Chronic Stress. Stress associated with living in poverty can come from many different sources. Primary and secondary stress sources such as parental stress, food insecurity, transportation worries, and neighborhood violence can impact a student’s ability to maintain selective attention, retain information, and persevere through challenging situations (Brown et al., 2016). In a longitudinal study, Roscigno et al. (2006) found that chronic stress associated with poverty created anxiety-like symptoms which interfered with the ability of students to acquire both academic skills and higher-level thinking skills such as executive functioning. Kuo (2001) found that, out of all the impacts of poverty-induced stress on students, the negative impact on selective attention was most explanatory of the academic achievement gap. Selective attention refers to the ability to track a concept, idea, or activity over time, regardless of changing conditions or circumstances, and it is a factor highly related to school success (Kuo, 2001). Chronic poverty-induced stress leads to difficulty completing tasks, focusing, retaining information, and problem solving (Tine, 2014). In addition to the deleterious impacts of daily poverty-induced stress, students in high poverty neighborhoods have a significantly higher chance of experiencing traumatic stress (stress attributed to acute events such as exposure to domestic violence, verbal, and physical abuse, etc.) than their affluent peers (Goodman et al., 2012). While selective attention deficits associated with chronic stress affect a far more significant proportion of USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 10 low-SES students, outcomes associated with traumatic stress tend to have a more marked and permanent effect on achievement (Farah et al., 2006). Both chronic and acute traumatic stress can create difficulties in the classroom. Students experiencing chronic high levels of poverty-induced stress often cannot develop executive functioning skills and tend to exhibit memory and language capabilities significantly below their age-level high-SES peers (Farah et al., 2006). In addition to the problems with executive function and language ability, poverty-related chronic stress can often be seen in lower-than-average processing speeds, anxiety, and depression in adolescence (Weeks et al., 2013). Perhaps most troublesome of all, without targeted interventions, the effects of chronic and acute stress on the formation of neural pathways during childhood is often irreversible and can in fact appear as a form of brain damage (Luby, 2010). Attitudes Toward School. Regardless of race, geographic location, or other factors, low SES has a negative impact on student attitudes toward school (Lai et al., 2015). While it may be impossible to prove a causal link between low socioeconomic status and attitudes toward school, self-report data do show a strong correlation (Lai et al., 2015). In a meta-analysis of 78 studies, Berkowitz et al. (2017) found a positive correlation between SES and school climate and found evidence of a feedback loop between school climate, attitudes toward school and academic achievement that is more prevalent in low-SES districts than in affluent districts. While more study is needed to clarify the relationship between attitudes toward school and academic achievement, it has been well established that poor attitudes toward school have a negative impact on attendance and high school completion rates (Lai et al., USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 11 2015). Not only do students from low-SES environments typically demonstrate more negative attitudes toward school, but the effect of their attitudes toward school also seems to have more of an impact on school performance and completion than their high-SES peers (Lai et al., 2015). While low-SES student attitudes toward school could be partially explained by a lack of teachers from similar backgrounds, as discussed below, this correlation seems to weaken when race is excluded (Gershenson et al., 2016). School and classroom climate, toward which students in low-SES environments demonstrate a more consistently negative attitude, may be more explanatory of attitudes toward school in general among low-SES students (Berkowitz et al., 2017). Lack of Academic Role Models. According to Vygotsky’s (1978) social learning theory, we learn from observing those around us as well as what we are explicitly taught. All social learning, however, is not equal; students are much more likely to absorb information if they are receiving it from people whom they resemble demographically (Gershenson et al., 2016). While it is known that the percentage of Black and Hispanic teachers in public schools is lower than that of the student population, it is becoming evident that the same is true for teachers who came from low- SES environments (Berkowitz et al., 2017). Because low-SES students are significantly less likely to graduate secondary school and attend college, the low-SES community is underrepresented in teacher populations (Western & Pettit, 2010). The paucity of low-SES or former low-SES teachers presents a dual threat to low-SES student achievement. Firstly, teachers who do not themselves have a history of exposure to poverty tend to hold lower expectations of USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 12 low-SES students, which leads to lower effort, resilience, and growth (Western & Pettit, 2010). The second threat posed by a lack of low or formerly low-SES teachers is the perceived inability of students themselves, who are unable to find a reason for hope or inspiration in classroom teachers who do not resemble them. Lack of Community Role Models. As discussed, residents of high poverty neighborhoods often have lower levels of education than those in affluent neighborhoods. Researchers have sought to find a link between that and the fact that parent and community involvement through volunteerism in the classroom also tends to be lower than in high-SES schools (Berkowitz et al., 2017). Over a period of seven years, an Australia study using a pedagogical framework of Connecting-Owning-Responding- Empowering, or CORE examined the relationship between non-academic community involvement in the classroom and academic outcomes with the goal of determining whether the ability of residents in low-SES neighborhoods to participate in experiential school learning in non-academic capacities had an impact on low-SES student achievement (Zyngier, 2017). The CORE pedagogy proposed that creating learning projects that utilized non-academic experts in the community, such as contractors, carpenters, electricians and other skilled trades, would lead to increased learning outcomes for low-SES students because it would allow community role modeling and support. Using observations of student engagement, pre- and post-study student interviews, and student academic testing data, the researcher found that community involvement can increase through project-based learning and that student attitudes, as well as achievement outcomes, had a positive correlation to community involvement (Zyngier, 2017). While the scope of this review is USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 13 the effect of various covariates on student achievement, the implications for increases in community involvement in low-SES schools hold the potential to transform communities. Consequences of the SES Achievement Gap Consequences of the SES achievement gap for the individual often persist into adulthood (Chetty et al., 2011). Students raised in low-SES environments have a far lower school completion rate, lower lifelong earnings, an increase in debilitating psychological disorders and face an increased likelihood of incarceration (Western & Petit, 2010). These diminished outcomes are especially troublesome because they perpetuate some of the achievement gap’s most pernicious factors: low parental education levels and involvement, poor attitudes toward school, and a smaller than ideal pool of teacher candidates from low-SES environments. The neurocognitive effects of poverty-related stress can lead to disastrous outcomes. For example, the single most significant predictor of future incarceration among students is not race or IQ, but SES (Western & Petit, 2010). The mechanisms behind this statistic are composed of three factors: low rates of high school graduation, poor problem-solving skills, and lack of executive decision-making ability. Evans et al. (2009) estimated that almost 70% of those incarcerated in U.S. prisons could be characterized as having been raised in poverty. In fact, the frequency with which low- SES students grow up in broken households because of incarceration is one of the driving forces behind generational debt, and the SES achievement gap itself (Nichols & Loper, 2012). While poverty can have a stunting influence on the individual, the aggregate effect is to create systemic obstacles to learning in poor neighborhoods (Anderson et al., 2014). Failure of the Traditional Classroom to Bridge the SES Achievement Gap USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 14 For this study, the “traditional classroom” will be defined as follows: A fixed location classroom, primarily indoors, with one or two constant teachers, and a static group of students. Given that the challenges associated with children from high poverty areas differ from those experienced by students in high-SES environments, it would follow that schools with high proportions of low-SES students would look fundamentally different. While there are interventions which could be implemented in low-SES districts that would allow traditional instruction to be more effective, districts and teachers rarely utilize them. Three conventional model interventions which could show promise have proven cost-effective for low-SES districts: Low student-to-teacher ratios, highly qualified teachers, and parent education. Student-to-Teacher Ratios. Recently, experts have dismissed the idea that large class sizes are contributors to the SES gap (Watson et al., 2016). Detractors claim that, overall, class sizes are smaller in low-SES schools than in more affluent schools. While there may be some veracity in this argument, there is evidence that class size can be an important factor in the success of low-SES students. Project Star placed 11,571 students, primarily from low-SES backgrounds, in classrooms with different attributes from kindergarten to third grade. Using administrative data to ascertain outcomes later in life, the project coordinators came to several conclusions, one of which being that students from low-SES households (<the 33rd percentile) showed the best improvement when placed in a classroom with a class size between 12–17 (Chetty et al., 2011). While one of the aims of Title One funding is to increase resources available to schools with high-SES populations in order to reduce class sizes, increase teacher quality and attend to other needs unique to the low-SES student population, data from the IES USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 15 show that wealthy districts generally either equal or outspend the per-pupil expenditures of low-SES districts (NCES, 2013). This conclusion does not consider informal streams of spending such as PTO contributions, private tutoring, and other support mechanisms that may not be available for students in low-SES environments. According to the IES, teacher salary comprises 84% of Title One funding (NCES, 2013). These data demonstrate that while decreasing the student: teacher ratio is important to those in charge of spending in low-SES districts, the funding is inadequate to provide consistently small classrooms. Teacher Retention. Along with class size, providing low-SES students with high-quality instructors can be a highly effective intervention in low-SES environments, and can be traced to increased lifelong learning, as well as lower incidences of teen pregnancy (Chetty et al., 2014). While teachers in low-SES environments frequently have more support and scaffolding to succeed than in higher-SES settings, teacher retention in high poverty urban schools remains relatively low (Borman & Dowling, 2008). Many teachers cite school culture, student attitudes and the presence of violence as factors in their desire to leave after only a short time (Simon & Johnson, 2015). While increasing funding to low-SES school districts with the goal of delivering a traditional curriculum with higher fidelity, differentiation, and support could be an option worth exploring, it is not a solution examined within this literature review. Parent Education. One way to use the traditional classroom model while ameliorating the SES gap would be to invest in parent/guardian education and training. The EPPSE-13 study is a longitudinal, mixed-methods study with n = 3,000 children from age 3 to 16 through which researchers explored which factors in the home USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 16 environment of low-SES students are most important to their academic success (Siraj- Blatchford et al., 2008). Findings from this study indicated that while parent education level was important, certain types of parental involvement were almost as consequential. Particularly noteworthy were parental decisions and teaching concerning self-discipline, finding and utilizing support mechanisms, and student placement (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2008). While lack of educational attainment among low-SES parents is not a problem with a single possible intervention, Siraj-Blatchford (2008) suggested interventions that include educating parents on resources available to their students, how to support study habits, and other non-academic ways in which they could have a positive impact on their child’s educational outcomes. Interventions focused on parental efficacy would not necessarily be tied to any changes in structure in the classroom. Special Education Model. In today’s public education model, targeted interventions are available to students who are found to have a disability under IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). Under the eligibility of OHI (Other Health Impairment), students with attention deficits have access to a wide variety of targeted interventions, including small class settings, push-in support, and progress tracking. Students from low-SES environments often manifest attention deficits similar to those of students who have been diagnosed with ADHD (Tine, 2014). These selective attention deficits may not fit the diagnostic criteria for ADHD but can still lead to difficulty functioning in the general education environment. Unlike most children classified under OHI as having ADHD, interventions for students demonstrating anxiety, attention USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 17 deficits, and learned helplessness associated with childhood poverty require specific and unique interventions (Brown et al., 2016). Students from low-SES environments, which typically contain a disproportionately high number of minority students, are already overrepresented in the Special Education environment. In a recent meta-analysis of studies on the representation of minority and low-SES students in Special Education, researchers found that previous claims of overrepresentation among minority students may be unfounded, while there is significant evidence for disproportionate representation among low-SES students (Kincaid & Sullivan, 2016). If the current classroom model is allowing for an overrepresentation of low-SES students receiving Special Education services, we can infer that the current predominant classroom model is not functioning for those students. Exploring the Outdoor Classroom as an Intervention to Ameliorate the SES Gap Facets of the Outdoor Classroom Physical Activity. While there is potential, even in the most traditional classroom, for increasing student engagement, e.g., scaffolding and differentiating instruction, and adapting instruction to student assessment data, the traditional secondary school model of single-subject classrooms offers little opportunity for utilizing exercise to ameliorate the achievement gap. Acute (15-minute) aerobic exercise at least once every hour has been shown to almost single-handedly close the SES achievement gap (Time, 2014). In most traditional indoor classrooms, however, engaging students in aerobic exercise would mean leaving the classroom and interrupting instruction. In the outdoor environment, opportunities for physical activity are myriad. The most persuasive argument for moving class outdoors may be the space itself. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 18 Neurologists recently linked the p300 brainwave to increased decision-making efficiency and improved working memory (Shin, 2010). In that study, rats were given a task to perform using auditory and visual stimulus. First, the rats were asked to perform a task in a chamber; then, they were asked to complete a similar task while simultaneously exercising. During exercise, increases in p300 activity were even more pronounced than researchers had hypothesized (Shin, 2010). The most fundamental argument in favor of exploring the outdoor classroom is access to space and, with it, the integration of curriculum with exercise which has been shown to decrease stress, improve selective attention measures, and now, increase working memory and efficiency of decision making (Shin, 2010). Using Green Spaces to Mitigate the Effects of Chronic and Acute Stress. Multiple studies and meta-analyses have found elevated levels of generalized stress and anxiety in students from high poverty areas (Kuo, 2001); however, much of the research into chronic stress and productivity has been focused on the workplace. In the late 1990s, there was a surge in research related to using an outdoor setting to mitigate the effects of stressful work environments. Short breaks in a green environment were found to reduce levels of stress throughout the day (Larsen et al., 1998). Ulrich et al. (1991) found breaks from activity in outdoor green settings to have a positive correlation to feelings of well-being, ability to focus, and overall productivity. While there is very little debate as to whether green spaces can reduce stress, increase feelings of well-being, and increase focus and attention (Hartig et al., 2003; Ulrich et al., 1991), recent studies exploring the optimal format of these spaces have yielded encouraging results for proponents of the outdoor classroom. One perceived USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 19 weakness of the outdoor classroom could be that most outdoor classrooms would lack the genuinely wild feeling that we tend to associate with restorative nature. However, one recent study in which feelings of well-being were measured after being shown images of manicured green spaces found the opposite (Twedt et al., 2016). Those researchers found that the more intentionally designed a green space was, the more it encouraged feelings of well-being and stress release. The results from this study would indicate that if carefully planned, outdoor classrooms, even in small, urban spaces, could have a substantial influence on students’ feelings of well-being, thus counteracting poverty-induced stress. Increasing Community Involvement and School Climate. Parental involvement in a low-SES students’ education can lead to increases in student achievement outcomes, even if the education level of the parent is low (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2008). However, parental involvement in the traditional school setting is often difficult because of lack of parental educational attainment (Epstein, 2001). One of the main impediments to parental involvement, particularly in low-SES environments, is a parent’s belief that they are unable to help their child academically (Hornby & Lafaele, 2011). The outdoor classroom provides, not only space, but also a more flexible environment in which curricular projects could take many forms. Students could learn biology through gardening, for example. Students could explore the outdoors by writing poetry. Tasks such as these hold the potential for effective curriculum delivery while also encouraging parental and community involvement with the non-academic elements of curriculum-based outdoor projects. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 20 Parental and community involvement could also have a positive effect on school attitudes. We know that students’ attitudes toward school become more positive when they have teachers who resemble them (Gershenson et al., 2016). While increasing the number of teachers in the classroom who come from low-SES environments is a noble aim, the outdoor classroom may provide a more immediate pathway to the same goal by encouraging parental and community classroom involvement. Teacher Retention. In extensive surveys of provisional teachers in high poverty Urban environments respondents frequently expressed frustration at their inability to deal with the violence, emotional volatility, and special needs of students living in poverty (Simon & Johnson, 2015). Creating a curriculum based on the specific needs of low-SES students could give teachers a feeling of empowerment, confidence, and support. Summary The academic achievement gap is pervasive, regardless of the existence of covariates (Goodman et al., 2012; Roscigno et al., 2006; Carpiano et al., 2009). This shortfall can be largely attributed to selective attention deficits created by both chronic and acute poverty-induced stress, school climate, and a lack of parental/community involvement (Tine, 2014; Berkowitz et al., 2017; Kuo, 2001). One emerging intervention which shows promise in combating the negative effects of poverty is access to greenspaces. Green classrooms could serve to decrease chronic stress by encouraging frequent exercise, combat selective attention deficits through exposure to nature, and increase community involvement through access to project-based learning. Purpose USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 21 Deficits in attention due to chronic stress, a lack of culturally appropriate role modeling, and negative attitudes toward the institution of education are three factors which are linked to the SES achievement gap (Gershenson et al., 2016; Goodman et al., 2011; 2012; Kuo, 2001; Lai, et al., 2015; Luby, 2015; Nichols & Loper, 2012). A variety of approaches have shown promise in combating the achievement gap; however, the very nature of the problem indicates the need to explore solutions which are inexpensive and easily accessible. One such solution could be the outdoor classroom. Because of its effectiveness in overcoming poverty-induced stress, a lack of parental/community involvement, and negative attitudes toward school, there is a growing body of research which indicates that elements of the outdoor classroom could be explored to ameliorate the achievement gap. The Utah Mountain school was the vision of three Charter school educators who had witnessed the persistent SES achievement gap over the course of their careers. The original founders approached local school districts to explore a partnership, but eventually applied to the Utah State School Charter Board for authorization. As stated in 2018, the mission of the Utah State Charter School Board (USCSB), “Advancing choice, innovation, and student success through rigorous authorizing and supportive oversight,” convinced the UMS founders that it was the appropriate body through which to seek authorization. After submitting a proposal in July of 2018, Utah Mountain School was invited to submit a full application for review and questioning. This document will explore the curriculum/program of instruction section of the application. The aim of this curriculum project is to chronicle and explain the development of the Utah Mountain school’s foundational philosophies and practices so that other cities USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 22 might explore this to ameliorate the SES achievement gap. The intention is to address selective attention deficits stemming from chronic and acute poverty-induced stress through the use of aerobic exercise conducted in an area of green spaces. Parental and community involvement currently lacking can be increased by developing projects in an outdoor setting that encourage community/parental engagement as well as specific roles community members could play in the completion of those projects. As to attitudes toward school itself, the curriculum will build in frequent opportunities for team building, inclusivity activities, and guided reflection to create a positive “classroom” climate. Methods Research Design After receiving IRB approval to begin the project on August 15, 2018, Timothy Owen and Chris Wright began the process of preparing a formal USCSB application and initiating a review process for the curriculum. Between May and December of 2018, Timothy Owen and Chris Wright, with input from other educational experts, used research-validated strategies to create an outline of a program of study and curriculum development model. These programs were directed toward combating the SES achievement gap in Ogden, UT. The purpose of creating this curriculum and program of study outline was twofold: (1) To create and validate a curriculum development and program of instruction framework which would provide a strong foundation for a new school; and (2) to give the Utah State Charter School Board a sufficient overview of the proposed program of instruction so that this entity would approve UMS as a public charter school. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 23 The Utah Mountain school was proposed in response to the SES achievement gap in Ogden Utah. While this achievement gap has many causes, there is a credible argument that it stems largely from poverty-induced stress, which causes attention deficits that negatively impact student abilities to succeed (Anderson et al., 2014; Kuo, 2001). Based on school report card data from 2016, the achievement gap in Ogden matches the nationwide trend (USBE, 2019). The purpose of this review of literature and curriculum project is to provide entities with similar aspirations an example to draw on that includes research-based practices which would help ameliorate a specific societal malady and examples of how this system could look in practice. Elements of the Proposed Curriculum and Program of Instruction The Classroom Environment. Manicured green spaces have shown the greatest ability of any outdoor environment to alleviate symptoms of chronic stress (Twedt et al., 2016). In order to meet its purpose, the school design for Utah Mountain School must include access to spaces that support diverse forms of exercise, exposure to manicured green spaces, and opportunities for project-based learning that can be tied to standards. Acknowledging that urban schools seldom have the luxury of excess space, particular attention will be given to designing areas that can be utilized for multiple purposes. For example, a courtyard area that accesses a STEM or Humanities village could also be used as a location for aerobic exercise. Figure 1 shows a rendering of a possible campus. The design of the campus will be crucial to the ability to implement the curriculum and program of instruction because it requires an area in which green spaces can be manufactured, core/remedial instruction can take place all year, and which has easy access both to a PBL space and field space for USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 24 acute aerobic exercise. Of the four main interventions presented in the UMS curriculum, two (access to green space and acute aerobic exercise) are dependent on having the appropriate facility. In order to facilitate outdoor education and the maintenance of manicured green spaces even in inclement weather, geodesic domes will be utilized which not only will always allow for visual access to the outdoors, but will provide subjects for lessons in earth sciences, physics, mathematics, and other core courses. The arrangement of these domes will create a visual and kinesthetic transition for students between the more cross-curricular, free-form, project-based learning space and the more traditional core instruction spaces. Figure 1 Proposed Design for the Utah Mountain School Note. From T. Owen, C. Wright, C. Kavanagh, K. Pyfer, M. Jolley, & J. Stoddard. (2019). The Utah Mountain School Charter Application, p. 19. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 25 Daily Structure. As an intervention, acute exercise of at least 15 minutes duration every hour has shown the potential to eradicate the SES achievement gap by increasing working memory, executive functioning, cognitive flexibility, cognitive resilience, and overall cognitive ability in pre-adolescent and adolescent children (Chen et al., 2016; Chuang et al., 2015; Drollette et al., 2014; Ludyga et al., 2017; Shin, 2010; Tine, 2014; Tine & Butler, 2012; Tomporowski et al., 2008). Acute aerobic exercise has been shown as an effective intervention even when the activity has nothing to do with academic goals (Owen et al., 2019). Table 1 shows a proposed daily schedule that would allow for acute aerobic exercise breaks for all students every hour as well as reflecting the diverse array of activities that could be used. The daily schedule will also allow for an advisory period both at the beginning and end of the day. The “Advisory” period will provide an opportunity for students to engage in a culturally competent SEL curriculum, while also bringing accountability to each student. Advisory will help students connect the academic curriculum and standards they are learning with their own lives and communities. Because low-SES students tend to exhibit deficiencies in executive functioning, resiliency, and problem solving, this time at the beginning and end of the day will be crucial in helping them learn how to be in control of themselves and their learning (Brown et al., 2016; Evans et al., 2009). USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 26 Table 1 Proposed Daily Schedule Time Class Duration 7th Grade 8th Grade 8:00 – 8:30 Advisory 30 minutes Advisory – Focus 8:35 – 8:50 Movement Break 15 minutes Ex: Soccer Ex: Basketball 8:50 – 9:45 Block 1 55 minutes Math Science 9:50 – 10:05 Movement Break 15 minutes Ex: Tag Ex: Hiit Workouts 10:05 – 11:00 Block 2 55 minutes ELA History 11:05 – 11:20 Movement Break 15 minutes Ex: Ultimate Frisbee Ex: Capture the Flag 11:20 – 12:15 Block 3 55 minutes Electives Electives 12:15 – 12:45 Lunch 30 minutes Lunch 12:50 – 1:45 Block 4 55 minutes Science Math 1:50 – 2:05 Movement Break 15 minutes Ex: Rugby Ex: Pickleball 2:05 – 3:00 Block 5 55 minutes History ELA 3:00 – 3:10 Advisory 10 minutes Advisory – Reflection Note. From T. Owen, C. Wright, C. Kavanagh, K. Pyfer, M. Jolley, & J. Stoddard. (2019). The Utah Mountain School Charter Application, p. 19. Lesson Planning. The sample curriculum and program of instruction section of the Utah Mountain School charter application includes information on the process of curriculum planning to be implemented. One of the primary factors considered when developing the UMS curriculum was the prevalence of teacher attrition in low-SES districts. In a comprehensive meta-analysis, Borman & Dowling (2008), found that USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 27 teachers in districts highly represented by low-SES students were 5% more likely to leave the profession early, which constituted one of the leading factors in teacher attrition. This finding compounds the fact that a quarter of beginning teachers in the U.S. report experiencing significant stress, a leading factor in early teacher attrition (Fitchett et al., 2018) In any district, a beginning teacher has to create or adapt a curriculum to fit their individual students, create daily lesson plans or schedules, develop student feedback systems, create and execute a classroom management strategy, interact with parents, faculty, and administration, comply with EYE (Early Year Enhancement) requirements, and assume various extra school-related duties. In districts with high populations of low- SES students, beginning teachers will also have to document and process a variety of behavioral issues, integrate SEL into their curriculum, and deal with stressful situations daily in the classroom. In order to mitigate teacher attrition in low-SES districts, the Utah Mountain School will hire a curriculum development team to create a basic curriculum, tailored to the expected population, which will be classroom ready. The goal of this project will be to lessen potential stressors for beginning teachers by having “ready to teach” lessons. Lesson planning will begin with rubrics created for unit (capstone) projects; these will reflect unpacked objectives that have been deemed essential. While projects will vary, the core standards that they are testing will not. Overview of Curriculum Design. The UMS model will divide each 18-week semester into three six-week modules. Weeks one to three will be designed to introduce students to essential core standards; during weeks four to five, students will develop and USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 28 demonstrate mastery; and during week six, students will either engage in high interest “extensions,” or remediation. The repetitive nature of the program of instruction was designed to help low-SES students as well as students with disabilities by building in a strong and organized structure. The proposed schedule can be seen in Figure 2 below. Figure 2 Six-Week Module Schedule Utah Mountain School – Six-Week Module Schedule (Module Mountain) Weeks 1–3 (Base Camp Learning) Weeks 4–5 (Summit Approach Learning) Week 6 (Peak Learning) Students are introduced to the module’s objectives and will explore the subject matter through small group instruction, as well as a wide variety of mediums and experiences. During PBL-Time students will participate in elective enrichment to reinforce learning objective. After weeks of core instruction and elective enrichment, students will choose their Capstone Projects with a specific elective concentration and will begin working with both elective teachers in charge and core subject teachers will float to support students as needed. Remediation: Students who do not pass their Capstone Projects will be placed in remediation status. Students will have this week to revise and resubmit their projects. Intensives: Students who pass their Capstone Project will be allowed to select and participate in an intensive of their choosing. Note. From T. Owen, C. Wright, C. Kavanagh, K. Pyfer, M. Jolley, & J. Stoddard. (2019). The Utah Mountain School Charter Application, p. 19. Weeks 1–3: Explicit Instruction and Elective Enhancements. The curriculum design team will develop lesson plans for elective teachers during the three-week USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 29 exploration phase that constitutes the first half of each module (see Figure 2). Elective teachers will be utilizing their area of instruction to reinforce core curriculum ideas. Cross-curricular cooperation will be as essential during this time as it is during unit projects. During this elective enrichment period, students will be receiving a great deal of core curriculum instruction. Figure 3 shows a potential grade level schedule based on 8 cohorts consisting of 200 students each. Half of each student's day would involve explicit instruction in STEM and Humanities while, two days a week, the second half would be designated for hands-on learning in STEM and Humanities subjects. This focus on core subjects, while still giving students the opportunity to explore different elective disciplines, will ensure that students have an adequate base of core curriculum knowledge to undertake Project-Based Learning during weeks 4 and 5. Figure 3 Potential Grade Level Schedule Note. From T. Owen, C. Wright, C. Kavanagh, K. Pyfer, M. Jolley, & J. Stoddard. (2019). The Utah Mountain School Charter Application, p. 19. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 30 Figure 4 provides a lesson plan that could be used in a dance class for students who have probably never had dance before. Through elective enrichments, students will explore difficult core subjects through as many different lenses as possible, while also giving them a quick introduction to different elective disciplines that could be explored further during capstone projects. For this example, a traditionally difficult standard is introduced to students: What is a theme; how to identify a theme; and how to utilize a theme to create an original piece. Note that while this lesson does require an elective teacher to possess a basic understanding of an ELA concept, it can be created to be as supportive to the teacher as the curriculum team deems necessary. During the “I do” portion of instruction, for example, the five stimulus examples and five example themes could be built into a PowerPoint so that all the teachers must do is lead students through the material. It is also important to note that this 120-minute lesson would be taught a total of 8 times over the course of three weeks to eight different groups of students. This lesson repetition will minimize prep time while allowing elective teachers to hone and fine-tune each lesson. In fact, over the course of three weeks, elective teachers would be responsible for preparing and teaching two lessons to each cohort from two grade levels, reducing the level of stress for elective and especially new elective teachers. Figure 5 explores a lesson that supports three different standards: one each from visual arts, earth sciences, and ELA. This lesson could be completed inside or outdoors and could be run using found materials. This sample lesson contains three of the UMS cornerstone interventions: culturally competent lessons, access to outdoor spaces, and project-based learning. Additionally, this lesson combines standards from multiple USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 31 domains to create an engaging, accessible, and exciting experience for students, in an effort to increase positive attitudes toward school. While both sample lessons employ well-established educational strategies that are not unique to the Utah Mountain School, each allows for elements of the school’s mission and vision to be reflected in the elective enhancement portion of the program of instruction. The dance lesson, for example (seen in Figure 4), could easily be taught outside wherever a flat, smooth surface is found. The visual arts lesson could be taught in the outdoor classroom using found materials, which could lead to informal knowledge checks of the biology of the campus’ natural environment. Finally, these lessons provide different learners with multiple opportunities to access difficult core curriculum subjects by allowing students to look at them from many different angles. Each of these lessons could be tailored to school SEL and cultural competency goals as well. For example, students could look for how a theme shows up in their community and create their dance around that experience. A similar strategy could be employed with the lesson shown in Figure 5, leading to the inclusion of diverse student interests and the opportunity for students to use core standards-based learning objectives to express and explore their own experiences. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 32 Figure 4 Elective Enrichment Dance Lesson Plan Elective Enrichment Dance Lesson Plan Instructor Name: Unknown Date Submitted: 5/25/20 Class Location: Outdoor Dance Space LESSON BASICS Meaningful Topic: What is a theme or central idea, why are they important, and how are they used both for positive and negative reasons. Student Types/Group: ☐ABE ☐ESL ☐HS Equiv Prep ☐Career Aware ☐College Prep ☐SPOKES ☐Computer Lit ☐Other: Click here to enter text. Length of Lesson: 120 minutes Standard(s): Reading LS2 Determine a theme or central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text. Dance: Standard 7-8.D.CR.2: Generate movements from a variety of stimuli to develop content for an original dance study or composition. Depth of Knowledge: X 1. Recall and Reproduction X 2. Skills and Concepts X 3. Short-term Strategic Thinking - 4. Extended Thinking Essential Question: How can themes both change and stay the same? Objective(s): SWBA to define theme and central idea for a peer both verbally and in writing SWBA to identify a theme or central idea in a variety of mediums SWBA to create a short dance that explores the same theme Required Materials/Equipment/Technology/Community Resources: A number of different stimuli (poems, micro stories, prints of paintings, etc.) depending on how many groups are required. Prior Knowledge/ Connections: Click here to enter text. Have students tell each other what a theme is and identify several past examples. Required Vocabulary: Click here to enter text. Theme Central idea evidence analyze development Instructional Methods: ☐Large Group ☐Small Group ☐Cooperative Learning ☐Project-based ☐Independent Study ☐Computer-assisted ☐One-on-One ☐Individualized ☐Guest Speaker ☐Field Trip ☐Other. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 33 ACTIVITY PLAN 1. Warm-up/Review/Connections: Students will follow a dance warm-up routine, will be told why the warm-ups are so important, and will brainstorm with students a couple possible themes based on the warm-up. 2. Introduction to Content/Explanation: Students will be shown the learning objectives and asked to put them into their own words. Freeform conversation on examples of things that change but also stay the same, i.e. people, cities, natural elements. 3. Presentation/Model the Learning Process: Teacher goes through a quick PowerPoint with 5 different stimuli and comes up with a theme for each. The teacher then models two modern dance moves that students will be able to use. 4. Scaffolded/Guided Concrete Practice: Students will be divided into groups around the outdoor dance space. The two core dance moves will be taught again and the whole class will be given a theme by the teacher. Groups will have 5 minutes to use the two dance moves and any other movement they wish to create a 20 second dance that explores the given theme. This will be repeated twice. 5. Communicative/Collaborative Concrete Practice and Grouping Strategies: Each group will locate themselves at one of the stations. Teacher will give explicit instructions and wait for questions. Each group will have five minutes to: 1. Read or discuss the piece 2. Come up with a theme explored by the piece 3. Upon approval of the theme by the teacher… 4. Choreograph a 30 second dance, that uses the two dance moves shown and any other movement needed to reflect the chosen theme. 5. Move to the next station. 6. Independent Concrete Practice/Application: Each group will choose one of their 30-second dances, show the whole class the stimulus material, and perform the dance. 7. Assessment: Exit ticket: For each of the other group’s dances, students will have to guess what the theme might be and explain why they think this. 8. Wrap-up/Concluding Activity: Group circle reflection about the themes explored, difficulties in creating art from a theme, etc. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 34 Figure 5 Lesson Plans for Visual Arts, Earth Sciences, and ELA COMPREHENSIVE LESSON PLAN TEMPLATE Instructor Name: Unknown Date Submitted: 5/25 Class Location: Outdoor visual arts classroom LESSON BASICS Meaningful Topic: How are the forces that shape the earth similar to or different from forces that change the earth? Student Types/Group: ☐ABE ☐ESL ☐HS Equiv Prep ☐Career Aware ☐College Prep ☐SPOKES ☐Computer Lit ☐Other: Length of Lesson: 120 minutes Standard(s): Reading LS2 Determine a theme or central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text. Earth Sciences Standard 7.2.2 Construct an explanation based on evidence for how processes have changed Earth’s surface at varying time and spatial scales. Examples of processes that occur at varying time scales could include slow plate motions or rapid landslides. Examples of processes that occur at varying spatial scales could include uplift of a mountain range or deposition of fine sediments. (ESS2.A, ESS2.C) RL Standard 4 Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative and connotative meanings; analyze the impact of rhymes and other repetitions of sounds (e.g., alliteration) on a specific verse or stanza of a poem or section of a story or drama. Standard 7–8.V.R.2: Explain how a person’s aesthetic choices are influenced by culture and environment. Depth of Knowledge: ☐1. Recall and Reproduction ☐2. Skills and Concepts ☐3. Short-term Strategic Thinking ☐4. Extended Thinking Essential Question: How are the forces that created the landscapes we see similar or different to the forces that are creating who you are? Objective(s): SWBAT Name and describe various processes which change the earth’s features and Decide which processes were most likely responsible for which features SWBAT Give a simple definition for metaphor and apply a real world, literal process, as a metaphor for something in their life SWBAT Explain how the choices they made when creating art (colors, styles, textures, etc.) came from their life and experience. Required Materials/Equipment/Technology/Community Resources: Some kind of colored material like Playdo, dyed soil, etc. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 35 3d models of how landscapes changed over time Prior Knowledge/ Connections: Review science curriculum about forces (erosion, tectonic shifting, etc.) that have created our world. Look at 3-d models as a class. Required Vocabulary: Analogy Metaphor Instructional Methods: ☐Large Group ☐Small Group ☐Cooperative Learning ☐Project-based ☐Independent Study ☐Computer-assisted ☐One-on-One Tutorial ☐Individualized ☐Guest Speaker ☐Field Trip ☐Other: ACTIVITY PLAN 1. Warm-up/Review/Connections: Think/pair/share to gauge student ability to identify or create examples of metaphor. 2. Introduction to Content/Explanation: Using direct instruction, review the forces that change a landscape over time. The whole class participates in creating real life analogies/definitions. Examples: Pressure creating magma could be parents fighting at home; Weathering-could be violence in the neighborhood. 3. Presentation/Model the Learning Process: 1. Review what a metaphor is, give some examples of metaphor. 2. Have students brainstorm and come up with every different force that leads to structural change on the earth. Walk the class through what each of these forces and changes might represent in a person’s life. 4. Scaffolded/Guided Concrete Practice: Students will go between stations in a field. Each station will have a 3D diagram of a landform created by a natural process. Students will self-select which stations to visit. Students will read a short excerpt about this process and decide as a group what this process and the result might be a metaphor for. Students write their metaphor on poster paper. 5. Communicative/Collaborative Concrete Practice and Grouping Strategies: Individual students will take Sharpies and put their initials next to metaphors that apply to their lives, or to the lives of friends or family. 6. Independent Concrete Practice/Application: – Have students choose a medium based on how they wish to express themselves (mediums will be in stations). – Have students create a model of the force they chose to study, superimposed with the force in their life that it might represent as a metaphor. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 36 7. Assessment: Using a new theme or central idea, write a paragraph describing one main theme in “ “, describe how the theme changes from one part of the book to another, citing examples.” 8. Wrap-up/Concluding Activity: Group circle reflection. Capstone Projects (Weeks 4–5). There is a large body of research suggesting that community involvement is crucial to the performance of low-SES students and that such participation is often thwarted by a lack of parental and community educational attainment (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2008; Epstein, 2001; Hornby & Lafaele, 2011). Student attitudes towards school also relate negatively to lower socioeconomic status (Berkowitz et al., 2017; Lai et al., 2015). Capstone projects are therefore critical to tying core standards to high-interest activities that resonate with the communities in which students reside. These projects will reflect a much larger cross-section of community abilities than are typically represented, drastically increasing the opportunities for community involvement. The final products created through capstone projects will serve as summative assessments and will allow students to demonstrate, not just what they know, but what they can do with that knowledge. Holmes & Hwang (2014) state that, “PBL is beneficial for low socioeconomic status (SES) students because the cooperative learning environment tends to provide cognitive and social support.” The sample curriculum and program of study submitted with the charter application includes examples of three different elements of capstone projects: examples of cross-curricular capstone projects; examples of rubrics used to assess mastery of standards through capstone projects; and information on strategies and procedures should students fail to demonstrate mastery of core learning objectives. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 37 Examples of Cross-Curricular Projects. Unit projects will offer students a chance to develop and demonstrate their mastery of both core curriculum and elective standards. Cross-curricular capstone projects give students a chance to turn raw knowledge into application, increasing the chances for transfer and long-term retention (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). The examples below illustrate what capstone projects that integrate two or more sets of core curriculum standards with one set of elective standards could look like. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 38 Figure 6 Examples of Turning Standards into Cross-Curricular Capstone Projects ELA Standards W1A-I will be able to introduce a claim and organize evidence W1B-I will use accurate, credible sources W1D-I will use Science Standards 7.3.1-I will plan and carry out an investigation that proves that the basic structure of all living things are cells 7.3.2-I will explain what a cell does and what each part of a cell does 7.3.3-I will explain why different body systems have more or less organization Students find an organism in the field and write a hypothesis for how cells function in that organism, supported by quality sources. They will contrast their organism with a system in their body and decide which has more organization. They will look for and organize evidence of the structure of cells in their chosen organism, then... Dance Using the written report, Students choreograph and perform a dance that shows how a cell functions, including each different part, and including the life cycle of a cell Music Using the written report as a guide, students will select and perform short snippets (10 seconds or less) of 7 different songs which represent CTE Using the written report as an example, students will re-imagine their neighborhood as a cell (assigning each part of a cell to a part of their neighborhood and use AutoCAD to create a model of their cellular neighborhood. Subject/ standards Capstone project examples Cross- Curricular Integration USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 39 Figure 6 (continued) Examples of Turning Standards into Cross-Curricular Capstone Projects ELA Learning Targets I will be able to name and describe a theme or central idea I will be able to summarize important elements of the text I will be able to describe how characters, setting, and plot change each other Mathematics Standards Understand that statistics can be used to gain information about a population by examining a sample of the population; Use data from a random sample to draw inferences about a population with an unknown characteristic of interest. Informally assess the degree of visual overlap of two numerical data distributions with similar variabilities, measuring the difference between the centers by expressing it as a multiple of a measure of variability. Students study “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn” and create a graphic representation of the important plot, character, and setting points of the book. They propose several different main themes throughout the book. They then create a similar organizer for their neighborhood. Finally, they will create simple, single variable equations to describe the results of their surveys. Art Using the statistics found through surveys, students will create visual representations of the reasons behind individual struggle in their community Music Using the written report as a guide, students will select and perform short snippets (10 seconds or less) of 7 different songs which represent different parts of a cell CTE Using the written report as an example, students will re-imagine their neighborhood as a cell (assigning each part of a cell to a part of their neighborhood and use AutoCAD to create a model of their cellular neighborhood. Subject/ standards Capstone project examples Cross- Curricular Integration USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 40 In one example shown in Figure 6, completing a capstone project would require mastery of specific earth science and ELA standards, as well as a strong grasp of skills associated with the selected elective. While these projects will provide students the opportunity to integrate many different domains into a task- or problem-based response, demonstration of mastery for each specific learning target will be assessed using a set of rubrics, which can then be kept in a student’s portfolio in order to track their mastery of essential concepts. Rubrics. While project-based learning can be more engaging and fun than traditional lessons, it can also be used to hold students and teachers accountable for mastering core standards (Habók & Nagy, 2016). The submitted curriculum emphasizes the use of rubrics both in the development of curriculum, and in the evaluation of student mastery of core and elective concepts and skills. In order to increase student ownership of learning, as well as community involvement, each domain area assessed in a capstone project will require three rubrics to be completed: One will be completed by the teacher credentialed in that specific domain; the second will be completed by the student; and the third will be completed by a parent, adult sibling, family friend, or other community member. The three different sets of rubrics will serve three very different purposes. The teacher rubrics will be used to assess whether a student requires remediation in one or more areas. The student rubric will be used to increase student ownership of learning and to allow them to connect core standards with high interest activities (capstone projects). The purpose of the community rubric is three-fold: (1) to give parents, guardians, or other community members a way to be consistently and substantively involved in their child’s USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 41 acquisition of skills and knowledge; (2) to build in a layer of accountability that goes beyond the school walls; and (3) to give students the challenge of not only demonstrating knowledge and skills, but to be able to explain or reteach these. Below, in Figures 7–9, are examples of all three types of rubrics which could be used upon completion of capstone projects. Note that rubrics do not relate to the quality of the project itself, but rather, how well students demonstrated mastery of core skills and concepts through a project. These examples were all created in reference to a specific subject. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 42 Figure 7 Student Self-Reflection Rubric Humanities 7 Semester 1 – Unit 1 – Writing Based on Standards W7-1 (a, b, c) and W7 Student Self-Reflection Rubric (Example) Learning targets 1 (Still Working) 2 (Basic) 3 (Intermediate) 4 (Advanced) Explain why I was able to choose evidence that was highly credible and proved my point. I did not use evidence at all in formulating my project or the written part of it. I did use evidence sometimes, but it was usually not very strong, credible, or cited correctly. I used evidence in my project that was almost always credible, proved my point, and was cited correctly. I used evidence in my project that was always credible, proved my point, and was cited correctly. I was able to summarize something complex. My summary was not concise or accurate. I missed most of the important elements of the system I was summarizing, and my grammar was usually not correct. The summary I based my project on was not often concise or accurate. I missed many important elements of the system I was summarizing, and my grammar contained many errors. The summary I based my project on was mostly concise and accurate, I included almost all the important parts of the system I was summarizing, and my summary was mostly grammatically correct. The Summary I based my project on was concise, accurate, included all the important parts of the system I was summarizing, and was grammatically correct. I used a formal style that was different from how I normally write and text. Does not reference text evidence. Provides no or incorrect explanation/ analysis of how text details support opinion. I cited some evidence from the text. But did not provide any explanation/anal ysis of how this text details support my claim. I cited evidence from the text by using either direct quote(s) or paraphrases. I provided some explanation/analysis. I cited evidence from the text by using both direct quotes and paraphrases. I provided insightful explanation/ana lysis of how text details support opinion. Additional Comments: Total Points: USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 43 Figure 8 Teacher Rubric Secondary Choir, Level One Semester 1 – Unit 1 Based on Standards Teacher Rubric (Example) Learning targets 1 (Still Working) 2 (Basic) 3 (Intermediate) 4 (Advanced) Explain why Student was able to Listen to and discuss a variety of musical styles and ideas with guidance. I did not explore different styles of music when selecting my pieces. I did explore two different styles. I explored a variety of musical styles, but only utilized one or two of them. I explored many different varieties of musical styles and used many of them in my final project. Standard L1.MC.CR.3: With guidance, improvise/generat e rhythmic, melodic, and harmonic ideas and phrases. I do not have a strong handle on inferences (making a prediction, interpreting information or drawing a conclusion) from text. I made attempts to make a prediction or draw a conclusion about the text, but had some inaccuracies. I developed predictions, interpretations, and/or conclusions about the text. I identified meanings, clues, and/or details that are not explicitly stated. I was able to create original pieces based off one or more of my selected pieces. During the performance, the student showed a mastery of the following techniques: – Vowels and Diction –Intonation –Breathing and Posture –Flow Phonation Student did not display any of these techniques. Student displayed these techniques sporadically and often incorrectly. Student displayed these techniques most of the time, and achieved mastery some of the time. Student displayed mastery all these techniques almost all the time. Additional Comments: Total Points: USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 44 Figure 9 Community Rubric Earth Sciences Semester 1 – Unit 1 – Writing Based on Standards W7-1 (albic) and W7 Community Rubric (Example) Learning targets 1 (Still Working) 2 (Basic) 3 (Intermediate) 4 (Advanced) Explain why My student asked a tough question and made a detailed plan on how they were going to figure out the answer. My student didn’t really come up with a question or a plan. My student came up with a question, but didn’t really plan out how they were going to answer it. My student came up with a question and a plan to answer it, but the plan wasn’t detailed enough. My student came up with a question, and made a detailed and appropriate plan to figure out the answer. My student could explain to me, using their project, what a cell is, the different parts of a cell, and how they all work together. My student really couldn’t explain anything about a cell. My student knew some things, but couldn’t really explain how everything fit together. My student could kind of explain what a cell is, the different parts of a cell, and how they work together. My student could explain exactly what a cell is, what the different parts are, and how they work together. My student was able to explain why some body systems have more organization and some less. My student didn’t really know anything about this. It seemed, from my student’s project, that they knew a little bit about this, but they couldn’t really explain the details to me. My student’s explanation of their project showed me that they mostly knew why some body systems have more or less organization. By explaining their project, my student showed that they knew exactly why some body systems have more organization and some have less. Additional Comments: Total Points: USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 45 Remediation or Extensions (Week 6). Figure 11 shows a basic flowchart for each 6-week module. Each module will begin with background knowledge checks, which will be application-based, as shown in Figure 10. Because low-SES students tend to have more negative attitudes toward school, it is important that even pre-tests be engaging and interesting (Anderson et al., 2014; Berkowitz et al., 2017; Lai et al., 2015). At the completion of week 5, students will either pass the standards-based rubrics, and move on to a weeklong “intensive” or fail that rubric and receive remediated instruction during that time. In week 6, students who show mastery of a majority of the standards being assessed will have the opportunity to transfer the skills they obtained during the first five weeks in a real life, non-graded activity. Examples would include: - Seventh grade students who were studying the composition of the earth’s layers could go on a week-long dig. - Students whose projects involved music could participate in a sound recording extension. Students who studied geometry could choose a cross-country skiing extension during which time they could practice using things like slope angle to assess avalanche risk, and practice avalanche avoidance techniques. - Students who studied agricultural sciences could analyze, prep, and amend soil in one of the domes, then plant seedlings that would be likely to thrive; this would be done in a location closer to the campus. While extensions should be at least loosely affiliated with core academic and elective subjects, they are truly meant to give low-SES students, for whom school does not often USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 46 appear to connect to real world activities and skills, the opportunity to make those connections, increase transfer, and improve overall attitudes toward school. Figure 10 Suggested Knowledge Checks Note. From T. Owen, C. Wright, C. Kavanagh, K. Pyfer, M. Jolley, & J. Stoddard. (2019). The Utah Mountain School Charter Application, p. 19. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 47 Figure 11 Flowchart for Each 6-Week Module Note. From T. Owen, C. Wright, C. Kavanagh, K. Pyfer, M. Jolley, & J. Stoddard. (2019). The Utah Mountain School Charter Application, p. 19. Procedures and Participants Development The curriculum framework and program of instruction were initially created by Timothy Owen, then underwent revision and amendment by Christopher Wright and Charles Kavanagh. The curriculum and program of instruction were developed to the extent needed for a curriculum development team to create an appropriate curriculum, and a school director to implement it. What was presented in the Charter School Application represents a fraction of all materials created, and the material presented in the USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 48 above section, even less. Included was sufficient basic information about the proposed framework and examples of lesson plans, unit maps, capstone projects, rubrics, and other curriculum material to give evaluators an adequate overview of the curriculum and program of instruction so that they can evaluate its potential effectiveness for low-SES students. Reviewers and Steps of the Process This curriculum was reviewed in three stages in order to ensure validity and value. The readers for the Utah State Charter School Board evaluated the curriculum and program of study for its coherence and ability to be successfully implemented. The Utah Mountain School planning staff, with the cooperation of experts in the field, used reader feedback to find ways to justify the value of the curriculum, or to make changes that led to significant improvements. The final review, conducted by the Utah State Charter School Board, assessed the value of the curriculum and program of instruction to the educational community. Utah State Charter School Board Reader Feedback On December 17, 2018, official readers contracted by the Utah State School Charter Board conducted a close read of the UMS charter application and wrote comments which were meant to steer the State School Charter board’s decision to approve or not to approve the charter (USCSB, 2018). The comments were also meant to give the UMS board of directors a chance to prepare rebuttals to areas mentioned by readers as potentially deficient. The reader feedback covered each section of the charter application, however, for the purpose of this review, only the sections involving the proposed program of instruction and Exhibit A will be considered. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 49 Program of Instruction Feedback Seven areas were reviewed for the curriculum section of the reader comments: the school’s philosophical approach to educating students (partially met); description of a complete and coherent educational program (partially met); clear criteria for promotion to the next level (partially met); provide evidence that the method of instruction aligns with the school’s vision (partially met); provide evidence or research to support that the method of instruction will lead to positive student outcomes (partially met); provide a method for assessing student outcomes (not met) and; include a viable plan for how the school will provide for and ensure that the needs of Special and educationally disadvantaged students are met (partially met). In the one area that was marked as not met, readers stated, “the readers did not understand how the capstone projects measure or assess understanding of the original standard listed.” This comment indicated the need to justify project-based learning as both an effective curriculum delivery model and as a model capable of assessing mastery of core curriculum and concepts. The UMS curriculum proposal included detailed and specific information on how standards would be unpacked into learning targets, and how these learning targets would form the basis of rubric categories. The UMS board agreed that part of the confusion could be the inclusion of self-reflection rubrics and community rubrics as it would be difficult, if not impossible, to assess mastery if each of these rubrics was given equal weight. It would be important, the founding board agreed, to highlight that teacher rubrics would be weighted much more heavily than the other two in formulating estimations of mastery by a student of a particular learning target. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 50 Readers did not agree that project-based learning would be feasible with the population UMS was expecting, commenting that “[t]he research regarding project-based learning is dependent on the students having a strong foundational knowledge base – the program of instruction does not support this idea” (Utah State Charter School Board, 2018). UMS board members could not find peer-reviewed studies providing empirical evidence that this was true. Certainly, building background knowledge, pre-teaching, and explicitly teaching prerequisite knowledge are all indicated strategies in PBL; however, we did not find research suggesting that students with lower-than-average prior achievement were poor candidates for PBL. The comment concerning building background knowledge in order for PBL to be effective did lead board members to prepare to highlight two elements of the UMS curriculum and program of instruction that spoke directly to this concern: (1) The cohort system would make it possible to explicitly remediate students with severe deficits before the PBL portion of the module began; and (2) through elective enrichments, difficult core concepts will have been taught many different ways by many different teachers before asking students to begin to develop and demonstrate mastery. Readers seemed dubious as to the effectiveness of acute aerobic exercise, stating, “research for the acute aerobics, although published, was one study, targeting college students and only included 85 subjects.” In fact, five studies supporting acute aerobic exercise as an intervention were cited in the Charter application, none of which included participants who were college students. The UMS board assumed that this misunderstanding came from a cursory glance at readily available literature and used this USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 51 feedback to create a citation list, including 10 recent studies citing acute aerobic exercise as an effective intervention for attention deficits in children. USCSB readers took issue with the program of instruction as presented by stating, “the section partially meets the standard for approval because the program does not appear to be complete. For example, the students will only receive about 30 hours of direct math instruction (compared to 160 hours typically).” This assertion illuminated the fact that the charter application did not state explicitly the number of hours of instruction would be given in each subject. In fact, using the schedule provided in the application, students would receive 265 minutes of explicit instruction in both STEAM and Humanities each week (Monday-Thursday) for a total of 160 hours of explicit instruction of each, not including extra instructional time as needed on Fridays, and discounting the addition of any project-based learning toward STEAM and Humanities hours. Curriculum Feedback Readers gave feedback on four areas specific to the proposed curriculum: present a viable plan for development of the curricula for core academic areas and ensuring alignment with the Utah Core Standards (met); describe the framework for the development of the curricula for core subjects and identify sound research, experience or theoretical base, and foundational materials that will guide curriculum development (met); provide evidence or research to support that the developed curriculum will lead to positive student outcomes (not met); and a viable plan of how the needs of special populations are met(partially met). The readers’ primary concern with the curriculum itself was the lack of specific information on administrative support for classroom management strategies and the lack USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 52 of a framework for dealing with behavioral issues. Tyre and Feuerborn (2017) found that most teachers who are resistant to school-wide behavior intervention programs worry about the way the framework has been created, and the adoption of a new program where similar top-down programs may have failed in the past. While the Utah Mountain School Board does have members who are considered experts in the fields of PBIS, MTSS, Hierarchy of Discipline, and other similar areas, research indicates that if teachers are involved in formulating these systems, they will be more likely to adhere to them (Tyre & Feuerborn, 2017). Developing a specific system of rewards and consequences, as well as procedures for discipline, will therefore be left up to the Utah Mountain School director, staff, and faculty. Readers did rightly notice that there was no system of teacher support or coaching in the charter application. UMS board members would have to be prepared to answer to this when defending their application. The cohort schedule and staffing projections were created in concert so that experienced teachers would have twice the prep time of other teachers. These “master teachers” would include at least one from each department and would use their extra prep period to support newer teachers in their classrooms. Readers also noticed that there was no specific program delineated in the application to serve students with physical disabilities. This was also an omission which UMS board members would need to be ready to defend. Funding for special education is dependent on how time intensive services are; “A” students, who receive between 1–59 minutes of specialized instruction per week, are funded at a different level than “C” students, who require extensive services. Creating a system for adaptive physical education will be dependent on staffing, which in turn is dependent on funding, facilities, USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 53 and other factors which cannot be predicted. For these reasons, a specific plan for how to include students with physical disabilities in an extremely active curriculum will be left to the school director and Special Education staff when a better estimation of funding can be made. The one category which was marked as “not met” by readers was that the curriculum would lead to positive student outcomes. This seems to be connected to the comment in the program of instruction section of reader comments that questions the presence of research validating the use of acute aerobic exercise as an intervention targeted for low-SES students. The body of research validating the use of acute aerobic exercise, access to green spaces, project-based learning, and a culturally competent curriculum, is well established and growing by the day. Utah Mountain School Internal Review Review by members of the Utah Mountain school planning committee took place on December 15th and 23, 2019. The purpose of these reviews was to utilize the ideas of the experts on the UMS board as well as expert advisors to the board in considering the reader comments in preparation for the charter application interview on January 16, 2019. The participants in this segment of the review process were: 1. Christopher Wright and Timothy Owen, the two central architects of the UMS curriculum structure. 2. Britney Jolley, Megan Everette, Karren Pyfer, and Janey Stoddard: experts in teaching children with disabilities and children from low-SES backgrounds 3. Charles Kavanagh and Michael Jolley, experts in finances and construction. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 54 The format for these discussions was an informal round table discussion aimed at answering the following questions: 1. How well does the proposed curriculum meet the preliminary charter of the Utah Mountain school? 2. Does the curriculum include interventions known to work in closing the SES achievement gap? 3. Does the curriculum serve the needs of low-SES students in a way that no traditional curriculum could? 4. How can board members respond to reader criticism of the UMS program of instruction and sample curriculum? Experts’ Responses How well does the proposed curriculum meet the preliminary charter of the Utah Mountain school? The UMS charter is designed to bridge the academic and lifetime achievement gap in Ogden, Utah. Brittany Jolley shared that she did not see enough of an emphasis on remediation in the charter school application. In her work with the Ogden School District, Brittany reported that intensive remediation is often needed district wide in order to ensure that most students are able to access the general education curriculum. Mrs. Jolley’s criticism echoed that of the Utah State Charter School Board readers and indicated the need to more specifically disseminate the intended program of assessment and remediation. In response to this criticism, UMS prepared to highlight the cohort system when defending the application in person. In the three weeks leading up to capstone projects, students will be grouped and tracked based on ability level in any given subject. All students will spend ½ of a morning in reading/writing and mathematics USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 55 every other day; however, students needing extra remediation will be scheduled for additional ½ morning sessions. Students will remain in these cohorts until they test within two standard deviations of the mean, at which time they will be reassigned to the appropriate cohort. By offering a “double dip” cohort, very low performing students will receive the assistance they need, while always having a pathway out to more varied and entertaining classes. Does the curriculum include interventions known to work in closing the SES achievement gap? Karren Pyfer noted that many expeditionary learning models fail to begin with standards. She explained that while planning experiences in line with the ethos of a school is important, it is essential for a publicly funded school to be able to show student growth using the same metrics as all other public schools. Therefore, the UMS model differentiates itself from other EL charter models by beginning curriculum planning through unpacking standards into student-friendly learning targets. Brittany Jolley mentioned that low-SES students may be entering junior high with a significantly limited academic vocabulary; hence, creating learning targets in a language that can be understood by all students will be essential to creating a powerful learning environment. Further, she observed that students would need to believe that each learning target had some application to their life and experience; otherwise, it would be nearly impossible to garner student buy-in. Brittany Jolley cautioned that there is an overwhelming sentiment that project-based learning requires significant background knowledge which has led to a perception, as the charter school board readers demonstrated, that project-based learning cannot be done with students who struggle academically. Recent research by Duke et al. (2019) USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 56 refuted this belief after finding that low-SES students in Baltimore made significantly greater gains while being instructed using PBL as opposed to a control group that was taught using more traditional methods. In addition, Zyngier (2017) determined via a qualitative study that low-SES students found meaning in academic ideas during PBL that they did not during more traditional instruction. Liu et al. (2020) found that low-SES students struggled more with tasks that involved reading and writing than purely scientific or mathematical tasks. This would explain the perception that project-based learning is more difficult for those students. Rather than using this information to conclude that PBL is inappropriate for low-SES students due to deficits in and difficulty with the prerequisite skills, it could indicate that systems and procedures need to be in place to facilitate PBL. Because of the feedback from Brittany Jolley, the curriculum section of the charter was amended to include additional explanations as to why PBL was so important for low-SES students. Further, rubrics were included in the curriculum which would serve as the grading model for capstone projects. Included in the curriculum, based on this comment, were rubrics for teachers, students, and community members to grade each capstone project. The inclusion of community rubrics reinforces the point that in order for project-based learning to be effective with our target demographic, UMS will have to elicit community support. Does the UMS curriculum serve low-SES students in a way that no other curriculum could? Michael Jolley stated that the UMS curriculum addresses the issue of expense by integrating physical activity into the daily schedule. Pulling students out to participate in acute aerobic exercise would be cost prohibitive if staff needed to supervise, not only the USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 57 activities, but also the transitions to and from. Developing a schedule with built-in activity breaks means that every teacher can supervise exercise breaks, so that additional para-professional support will not be needed. Michael Jolley also commented that a charter such as this could only be implemented on-campus or in nearby open spaces. This requirement for space, in the midst of a real estate boom, he pointed out, could make a school with the UMS charter impossible due to real estate and construction costs. Using Michael Jolley’s feedback, the market research section of the charter application was amended to include information about city parks near likely school sites. Janey Stoddard stated that, while the research elicits overwhelming support of acute aerobic exercise as an intervention, many low-SES students might refuse, which could be a reason to doubt the UMS curriculum model. Low-SES teens are less likely to exercise than high-SES peers, however, this is mostly true with older adolescents and not junior high-age students (Hanson & Chen, 2007). Because of Ms. Stoddard’s feedback, examples of acute aerobic exercise were included which would appeal to a broad range of students. Table 1, taken from the curriculum section of the UMS charter application, shows this amendment. Chris Wright noted that if low-SES student attitudes toward education were already significantly lower than high-SES peers, any difference in program that made a school appear different from that norm, would have to be seen as positive. Review by the Utah State Charter School Board On January 16, 2019, the UMS board of directors along with Janey Stoddard (advisor to the board) sat in front of the Utah State Charter School Board (USCSB) to USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 58 defend the charter application, which, if accepted, would become the Utah Mountain School charter (Owen et al., 2019). Because many of the questions posed by the readers addressed the proposed curriculum overview prepared by Tim Owen with the assistance of Chris Wright, Charles Kavanagh, and Karren Pyfer, the board prepared especially for these questions. Questions from board members can be seen below. Has a program like this ever been attempted before, and is there research to prove its effectiveness? Board member Owen summarized the research presented in the literature review portion of this document and mentioned that, not only does acute aerobic exercise decrease attention deficits associated with chronic poverty-induced stress, it also shows promise in combating attention deficits that are due many causes, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), anxiety and mood disorders (Chen et al., 2016; Chuang et al., 2015; Drollette et al., 2014; Ludyga et al., 2017; Shin, 2010; Tine, 2014; Tine & Butler, 2012; Tomporowski et al., 2008). A concern was voiced that a curriculum and program of instruction relying on green spaces might be impossible in the winter in Utah. UMS board member Owen defined “green space” used for the purpose of decreasing symptoms of stress and anxiety, as any space which consists primarily of elements found in nature such as trees, bushes, soil, etc. Because multiple studies (Larsen et al., 1998; Twedt et al., 2016; Ulrich et al., 1991) have found that manicured green spaces may have a greater relationship to stress reduction than completely natural spaces, this definition of outdoor classrooms will include manicured and engineered green spaces. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 59 While there has not been adequate study on whether or not the color of “green spaces” is an important indicator of effectiveness, there have been multiple studies which cite some effective characteristics of outdoor spaces. Cherrie et al. (2019) found that simply lessening the intake of traffic-related pollution by spending time in an urban park led to increased outcomes in cognitive processing. Werner et al. (2015) found that the absence of traffic and other city noise increased emotional well-being in children. Multiple studies have concluded that children were more likely to exercise in natural, outdoor environments, the benefits of which have been discussed above (Cherrie et al., 2019). Based on these findings, the UMS founders were confident that green spaces defined as natural environments not dominated by the color green would be appropriate for the goal of achieving a reduction in chronic poverty-induced stress through the outdoor classroom. With this definition of “green space,” natural and manicured outdoor environments should prove effective in Utah in every season USCSB member Tonks asked about the structure of the school being a junior high only; what the purpose of this is, and if we were worried that a stand-alone junior high would lead to enrollment problems. Chris Wright pointed out that the biggest change between elementary and junior high school is accountability. Going from having one teacher and being in one room all day to multiple teachers and classroom settings means that there is not one person to track student progress and to hold students accountable. The inclusion in the program of instruction, he went on to explain, of a twice daily advisory, was meant to make the transition from one accountability model to another less disruptive. Students would check in with their advisory teacher in the morning, make goals for the day, and evaluate USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 60 whether those goals had been met or exceeded with the same teacher and peer group at the end of the day. The UCSB pointed out that, historically, charter schools have had very limited success with low-SES and Hispanic students and wondered if the founding board of UMS is aware of this. UMS board members responded that, because many members of the founding board had taught for years in schools with high ELL populations, we were aware of the challenges associated with connecting with this population. The founding board stated that they would combat this difficulty by hiring as diverse and multilingual a faculty as possible and acknowledged that a culturally competent program of instruction only helps once students are enrolled in the school. Limitations This project was not meant to present a comprehensive, complete, or ready-to-use curriculum. Rather, it was intended to serve as a guide for the formulation of curriculum and program of study for the Utah Mountain School. While this “guide” may be useful to similar schools in the future, extensive study of its effectiveness will need to be conducted once implemented. While this curriculum and program of study could be implemented in urban environments, it does require a certain amount of open space. If, for example, a new school in an inner-city environment that could offer only a very small amount of outdoor space were to attempt to implement this program, it is doubtful that it would be successful. Finally, as with any program that deviates from standard practices, any school attempting to implement this curriculum and program of study would need to have access to an experienced multi-discipline curriculum development team, as well as a faculty USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 61 consisting entirely of highly effective teachers, who could use this program as a starting point and adapt as needed to meet the needs of their particular student population and community. Conclusions and Discussion On January 16, 2018, the Utah State Charter School Board authorized the Utah Mountain School by a vote of 7-0. The board applauded the expertise of the UMS board of directors, the reflective practices apparent in the formation of the charter, and the enthusiasm of the educators involved in the project. Upon approval, UMS spent a year attempting to find a physical location that would allow the charter to be implemented, while maintaining financial health. After an exhaustive search, the Utah Mountain School board of directors applied for, and was granted, a year’s delay in opening. During the search for a suitable location for the school, the board vetted over 100 properties and entered negotiations on five. Ultimately, UMS voted to assume the building that had housed another charter school, Capstone Academy, in Pleasant View, UT. This represented a final attempt to bring the school to life, though it posed many challenges, especially in meeting enrollment requirements with a location distant from population centers. Complicating recruitment efforts was the COVID-19 pandemic, which in early 2021, was cited by many prospective parents as a reason not to commit to a school for the 2021–2022 school year. By the time the building was established enough to publish the address and offer tours, the window to meet state enrollment standards for funding was severely truncated. Despite the efforts of the board and director, the school did not meet enrollment benchmarks and was allowed to lose funding in May of 2022. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 62 While a standalone school rooted in the concepts of the outdoor classroom, aerobic exercise, and access to green spaces didn’t come to fruition, the COVID-19 pandemic has thrust the idea of the outdoor classroom into the public sphere. The failure of the Utah Mountain School demonstrated the difficulties of implementing the model as a standalone charter school because the price of commercial real estate creates an unreasonable funding demand for a public institution. However, Ogden, UT and many communities like it already have vast underutilized green spaces. Orion Junior High in Harrisville, UT, for example, sits on almost 40 acres of land, most of which is unused for the majority of the day. If the outdoor classroom model outlined in this project were to be implemented in existing public schools, the obstacles in funding and securing adequate space would be eliminated. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 63 References Anderson, S., Leventhal, T., & Dupéré, V. (2014). Exposure to neighborhood affluence and poverty in childhood and adolescence and academic achievement and behavior. Applied Developmental Science, 18(3), 123–138. doi: 10/gd59hw Berkowitz, R., Moore, H., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (2017). A research synthesis of the associations between socioeconomic background, inequality, school climate, and academic achievement. Review Of Educational Research, 87(2), 425–469. doi: 10/gfj8hg Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409. doi: 10/c2w2p4 Brown, E. D., Seyler, M. D., Knorr, A. M., Garnett, M. L., & Laurenceau, J. (2016). Daily poverty-related stress and coping: associations with child learned helplessness. Family Relations, 65(4), 591–602. doi: 10.1111/fare.12217 Carpiano, R. M., Lloyd, J. E., & Hertzman, C. (2009). Concentrated affluence, concentrated disadvantage, and children's readiness for school: A population-based, multi-level investigation. Social Science & Medicine, 69(3), 420–432. doi: 10/ct4x5c Chen, A-G., Zhu, L-N., Yan, J., & Yin, H-C. (2016). Neural basis of working memory enhancement after acute aerobic exercise: fMRI study of preadolescent children. Frontiers in Psychology. Retrieved from https://link-gale-com. hal.weber.edu/apps/doc/A470945441/AONE?u=ogde72764&sid=AONE&x id=67f0ccca USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 64 Cherrie, M., Shortt, N. K., Ward Thompson, C., Deary, I. J., & Pearce, J. R. (2019). Association between the activity space exposure to parks in childhood and adolescence and cognitive aging in later life. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(4), 632. doi: 10/dzfz can Chetty, R., Friedman, J., Hilger, N., Saez, E., Schanzenbach, D. W., & Yagan, D. (2011). How does your kindergarten classroom affect your earnings? Evidence from project STAR. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1593–1660. doi: 10/fh966h Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2018). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633–2679. doi: 10/gdj8rn Drollette, E. S., Scudder, M. R., Raine, L. B., Moore, R. D., Saliba, B. J., Pontifex, M. B., & Hillman, C. H. (2014). Acute exercise facilitates brain function and cognition in children who need it most: An ERP study of individual differences in inhibitory control capacity. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(C), 53–64. doi: 10/cn47 Duke, N. K., Halvorsen, A.‐L., Strachan, S. L., Kim, J., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2019). Putting PBL to the test: The impact of project‐based learning on second‐graders’ social studies and literacy learning and motivation in low‐SES school settings. Manuscript submitted for publication. Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Westview Press. USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 65 Evans, G., Schamberg, M., & McEwen, B. (2009). Childhood poverty, chronic stress, and adult working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(16), 6545–6549. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40482133 Farah, M. J., Shera, D. M., Savage, J. H., Betancourt, L., Giannetta, J. M., Brodsky, N. L., Malmud, E. K., & Hurt, H. (2006). Childhood poverty: Specific associations with neurocognitive development. Brain Research, 1110(1), 166–174. doi: 10/fv2dn8 Fitchett, P. G., McCarthy, C. J., Lambert, R. G., & Boyle, L. (2018). An examination of US first-year teachers’ risk for occupational stress: Associations with professional preparation and occupational health. Teachers and Teaching, 24, 99–118. doi: 10/dzf2 Gershenson, S., Holt, S. B., & Papageorge, N. W. (2016). Who believes in me? The effect of student–teacher demographic match on teacher expectations. Economics of Education Review, 52, 209–224. doi: 10/f8sc6d Goodman, R. D., Miller, M. D., & West-Olatunji, C. A. (2011; 2012;). a. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 4(3), 252–259. doi: 10/c3p6px Habók, A., & Nagy, J. (2016). In-service teachers' perceptions of project-based learning. SpringerPlus, 5(83), 1–14. doi: 10/dzf4 Hanson, M. D., & Chen, E. (2007). Socioeconomic status and health behaviors in adolescence: A review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 30(26), 263–285. doi: 10/cnwtnh USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 66 Hartig, T., Evans, G. W., Jamner, L. D., Davis, D. S., & Gärling, T. (2003). Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(2), 109–123. doi: 10/c6f455 Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2001). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235–266. doi: 10/d2xtfd Holmes, V. L.& Hwang, Y. (2016). Exploring the effects of project-based learning in secondary mathematics education. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(5), 449–463. doi: 10/dzf5 Hornby, G. & Lafaele, R. (2011). Barriers to parental involvement in education: An explanatory model. Educational Review, 63(1), 37–52. doi: 10/c35dk4 Kincaid, A. P., & Sullivan, A. L. (2016). Parsing the relations of race and socioeconomic status in special education disproportionality. Remedial and Special Education, 38(3), 159–170. doi:10/f99cdr Kuo, F. E. (2001). Coping with poverty: Impacts of environment and attention in the inner city. Environment and Behavior, 33(1), 5–34. doi: 10/dh5qgm Lai, S., Stevens, C., Martinez, J., & Ye, R. (2015). A cross-national study of students' attitudes toward school. Pastoral Care in Education, 33(1), 33–46. doi: 10/dzjh Chuang, L-Y., Tsai, Y-J., Chang, Y-K., Huang, C-J., & Hung, T-M. (2015). Effects of acute aerobic exercise on response preparation in a Go/No go task in children with ADHD: An ERP study. 运动与健康科学：英文版, 4(1), 82–88. doi: 10/f7dd4z Larsen, L., Adams, J., Deal, B., Kweon, B. S., & Tyler, E. (1998). Plants in the workplace. Environment and Behavior, 30(3), 261–281. doi:10/fbhsp2 can USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 67 Liu, J., Peng, P. & Luo, L. (2020). The relation between family socioeconomic status and academic achievement in China: A Meta-analysis. Educ Psychol Rev 32, 49–76. doi:10/dzd4 Lloyd, J. E. V., & Hertzman, C. (2010). How neighborhoods matter for rural and urban children's language and cognitive development at kindergarten and Grade 4. Journal of Community Psychology, 38(3), 293–313. doi: 10/bvtd95 Luby, J. L. (2015). Poverty's most insidious damage: The developing brain. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(9), 810. Ludyga, S., Brand, S., Gerber, M., Weber, P., Brotzmann, M., Habibifar, F., & Pühse, U. (2017). An event-related potential investigation of the acute effects of aerobic and coordinative exercise on inhibitory control in children with ADHD. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 28, 21–28. doi: 10/gddpbq NCES Blog Editor. (nd). Financing education: National, state, and local funding and spending for public schools in 2013. U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. Nichols, E., & Loper, E.B. (2012). Incarceration in the household: Academic outcomes of adolescents with an incarcerated household member. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(11), 1455–1471. doi: 10/f4cm94 Owen, T., Wright, C., Jolley, M., Kavanagh, C., Pyfer, K., & Stoddard, J. (2019). Utah Mountain School Charter Application. Retrieved from https://vahara-o2- public.s3.amazonaws.com/media/25178/UMS-Complete-Charter.pdf Roscigno, V. J., Tomaskovic-Devey, D., & Crowley, M. (2006). Education and the inequalities of place. Social Forces, 84(4), 2121–2145. doi: 10/bb3crc USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 68 Roscigno, V. J., Tomaskovic-Devey, D., & Crowley, M. (2006). Poverty’s most insidious damage. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(9), 810. doi: 10/dzjj Shin, J. (2010). The interrelationship between movement and cognition: Theta rhythm and the P300 event-related potential. Hippocampus, 21(7), 744–752. doi: 10/dvk53h Simon, N., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1–36. Retrieved from https://projectngt.gse.harvard.edu/publications/teacher-turnover-high-poverty-schools- what-we-know-and-can-do Siraj-Blatchford, I., Mayo, A., Melhuish, E., Taggart, B., Sammons, P., & Sylva, K. (2008). Performing against the odds: Developmental trajectories of children in the EPPSE 3–16 Study – Brief. PsycEXTRA Dataset. doi: 10/dzjk Tierney, W. G. (2015). Rethinking education and poverty. Johns Hopkins University Press. Tine, M. (2014). Acute aerobic exercise: An intervention for the selective visual attention and reading comprehension of low-income adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(575), 1–10. doi: 10/f57wqv Tine, M. T., & Butler, A. G. (2012). Acute aerobic exercise impacts selective attention: An exceptional boost in lower-income children. Educational Psychology, 32(7), 821–834. doi: 10/dzjm Tomporowski, P. D., Davis, C. L., Miller, P. H., & Naglieri, J. A. (2008). Exercise and children’s intelligence, cognition, and academic achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 111–131. doi: 10/fjr3z3 USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 69 Twedt, E., Rainey, R. M., & Proffitt, D. R. (2016). Designed natural spaces: Informal Gardens are perceived to be more restorative than formal gardens. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(88), 1–10. doi: 10/gfc4rw Tyre, A., & Feuerborn, L. (2017). The minority report: The concerns of staff opposed to schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports in their schools. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 27, 145–172. doi: 10/dzjn Ulrich, R. S. , Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fioriteo, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11, 201–230. doi: 10/csp47k Utah State Board of Education. (2019). School report cards. Retrieved from https://utahschoolgrades.schools.utah.gov/ Utah State Charter School Board. (2018, January 16). January meeting. Streaming Service. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsYRXpbU3nM&t=10365s Utah State Charter School Board. (2019). Mission and vision. Retrieved from https://www.utahscsb.org/mission-vision Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. Watson, K., Handal, B., & Maher, M., (2016). The influence of class size upon numeracy and literacy performance. Quality Assurance in Education, 24(4), 507– 527. doi: 10/dzgn Werner, C. D., Linting, M., Vermeer, H. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2015). Noise in center-based child care: Associations with quality of care and child emotional USING THE OUTDOOR CLASSROOM 70 wellbeing. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 190–201. doi: 10/f7g957 can Western, B., & Pettit, B. (2010). Incarceration & social inequality. Daedalus, 139(3), 8– 19. doi: 10/crv3b7 Zyngier, D. (2017). How experiential learning in an informal setting promotes class equity and social and economic justice for children from “communities at promise”: An Australian perspective. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft, 63(1), 9–28. doi: 10/dzjp