The project introduces out-of-classroom work in the form of highly structured learning activities where little deviation is possible. The roles of community members are similarly proscribed.

The project includes some open-ended activities. When the project reaches its conclusion, it may be repeated with a different group of students connecting with pretty much the same community people or institutions, with positive, yet predictable results. If problems or questions arise along the way, they are not given much attention or they are treated as diversions from the "real" work.

The work and its processes are open to new ideas, questions, and problems, showing a good degree of flexibility. However, participants have not yet figured out how to work through the most contentious issues in an effective way.

The work has led to the development or enhancement of a process that welcomes and encourages questions, multiple solutions, and increasing complexity. It may generate uncertainty, "mess," conflict, or chaos, but as the work unfolds, passion and shared vision eventually guide the group to "aha!" experiences and positive results. New problems ultimately become resources.

A few adults who already know each other are talking about drawing other people into the project. Communication is limited to a small number of adults who are beginning to trust each other.

The project has expanded slightly beyond its original participants, though the group is still pretty much limited to the usual players. There is no significant access for youth. One person may have considerably more responsibility and control than the rest. The process has built in one or two ways for participants to talk about the work and whether they are meeting their goals. Communication is opening up, but there are still trust issues to be worked out.

The work provides more than one way for people (including youth) to enter. New groups have gotten involved, but not all groups with a stake in the work are engaged yet. Responsibility for the project is spread out over several people. Communication is generally open, but certain groups are not yet comfortable with each other. There is enough trust and common vision that the work doesn't blow up when conflict arises, but some of the tougher issues can't be resolved yet.

The work provides many ways for people from all sorts of groups, ages, and institutions to enter. Every group with a legitimate stake in the work is represented, and responsibility and control of the work rests with a broad group of people. Communication is open, honest, and ultimately respectful. Special attention is paid so that those who are often not heard are included. Trust levels are high.

A few people recognize the need for more flexible roles, usually starting with student roles. However, with a few exceptions, roles are static, defined, and familiar. (For example: Teachers teach. Students learn. Parents provide snacks. Community members pay taxes.)

The project allows for adults to take on new roles like learner or teacher, secondarily to students taking on new roles. A few adults are taking advantage of these opportunities, but there is no concrete assistance available to them as they struggle with new identities.

The project deliberately creates opportunities for increasing numbers of adults to take on new roles, such as learner, teacher, or leader. There are efforts to provide support to adults who are taking on new roles.

The project involves frequent and deliberate exchanging of roles between teachers, community resource people, students, and "just regular folks" in the community. New "experts" are identified, reclaiming lost community knowledge. There is substantial built-in support for adults to take on and become skilled in new roles.

The "usual suspects" provide leadership to the project.

As the project unfolds, one or two individuals who had not previously been part of the leadership are taking on minor leadership responsibilities. However, control of the project remains in the hands of the originators.

New leadership has emerged as a result of the work. There is significant movement toward shared leadership of the project. The relationships of established and new leaders are still being worked out, with new leaders still finding their way and established leaders trying to make room for them.

The work has resulted in the emergence of new leadership, which has established itself with a fair degree of confidence. Leadership operates on a shared, flexible model, and there are ongoing efforts to identify and cultivate new leaders. Established leaders routinely create space for new leaders to take on responsibility and real power.

The project builds on already existing relationships to achieve its purposes.

In addition to strengthening established relationships, the project has brought together individuals who previously did not know each other well; tentative new relationships are forming.

As a result of the work, new relationships have formed between individuals and groups of people who previously didn't have much of a relationship. The relationships sustain the immediate project; it is not yet clear whether these relationships will extend past the boundaries of the specific project.

As a result of the work, new relationships that are strong and sustainable have developed between individuals, groups, and institutions. The relationships transcend the specific project that initially brought them together.

A few school folks are exploring new ways of thinking about assessment, perhaps for the purposes of documenting student work on the project. However, the main school concern is with grades, tests and meeting district or state standards. Community members have only a distant role in framing or supporting what is taught in school

Different types of student assessments that reflect the project's value have become an established part of the project. Student learning is the sole focus of accountability talk. Community folks do not yet feel empowered or qualified to play a role in establishing standards or assessing them.

A range of methods are being used to evaluate both student learning and the impact of the project in the community. And school folks, including youth, have roles in setting and assessing standards. Some training is in place to support community people in taking on evaluator roles. There may be occasional problems arising from insufficient respect for the roles and expertise of different groups.

Community folks have the training, tools, and power to make meaningful assessments; they do so from a position of respect for school folks. School and community develop a shared, living model that is used to evaluate the work and learning. The community takes on increased responsibility for the education of young people. To a similar degree, the school has become accountable to the community, which has an important role in setting educational standards.