Place-based learning efforts can be seen in one or two subjects (e.g. 9th grade U.S. History, 5th grade science) or a school club (e.g., Future Business Leaders of America). Place-based projects involve one or two segments of the student population (e.g., advanced classes, designated student leaders).

Place-based learning efforts Include several subjects, and several grade/age levels (e.g., students in grades 6-8 contribute to an oral history project). Place-based projects involve, separately or together, several segments of the student body (e.g., advanced students, English language learners).

Place-based learning efforts include many classes, subjects, and grade/age levels. There are an increasing number of projects that cross subject areas, bring together students of different ages, and allow older students to mentor younger ones. The work is close to engaging most of the student body, with students of diverse abilities and interests fully included.

Place-based learning has become an integral part of the curriculum; this shows through several structures, e.g., place-based learning is explicitly linked to state standards. Students are able to participate in at least one community-connected project each year. Some projects have become an institutionalized part of the curriculum. Student projects that draw upon or contribute to the community are now required for graduation.

Among the handful of teachers involved, there are modest changes in how they teach, their expectations for what students should know and be able to do, and the opportunities they provide students.

A small but dedicated core of teachers has taken place-based work to heart, leading to substantial changes in how they approach teaching and learning, and in the opportunities they provide students. Another group of teachers is showing more interest in trying out such “community-connected” learning, aware of its likely impact on their teaching.

The majority of teachers are familiar with place-based work and appreciate its impact on teaching and expectations for students. Most welcome the challenges of connecting classroom and community, as well as pushing and supporting students in new ways. They talk of how their teaching style is changing and of their enlarged sense of what students can do.

A professional community has developed that actively supports teachers in this work. Among involved teachers, informal sharing—of ideas and resources—is commonplace. Willingness and capacity to engage in project-based learning now enters into evaluation of teachers. The sustainability of the work no longer depends on a handful of committed faculty.

To date, the work mostly involves small doses of local content within traditional classes (e.g., students write about a series of field trips to local “sites”) or projects of modest scope (e.g., once a week, students collect water samples in assigned teams and put the results on a chart in the classroom).

The opportunities and demands for students are increasing. In small but real ways, students are being asked to raise and apply new knowledge and to develop and practice new skills. Their ideas and input are being solicited more, and the responsibilities they are taking on are gaining heft.

There are an ever growing number of examples of students raising and applying new knowledge in their project work; acting as researchers, historians, advocates, resource persons; contributing to the design and conduct of projects. Their potential as leaders on community issues is being tapped. Students who never thought of themselves as leaders are stepping forward.

Systems are in place to ensure students have the opportunities and supports for sustained project work—including the time, adult mentoring, and resources required. There are formal and informal mechanisms for students to define problems of interest and then pursue them with others. Assessments of student learning honor and reflect their growth as problem solvers, citizens, and leaders.

Community participation in the work involves a few organizations and individuals, representing a small subset of community perspectives and interests. Community members’ roles are largely “traditional” (e.g., guest speaker, classroom volunteer).

Community participation is beginning to spread, with several new groups and individuals joining and new interests appearing. Some community partners are starting to see themselves as real collaborators. A few have stepped forward to serve as teachers and mentors, partners in shaping projects, critical sources of time and expertise.

Community participation has grown to the point that you cannot quickly list all the community partners. The list is increasingly diverse and also includes unexpected partners (e.g., the local grain co-op). More and more community colleagues are emerging as active collaborators, assuming diverse roles from making resources available, to mentoring and teaching, to being learners themselves.

Community partners in the work reflect the full diversity of the community. The depth and breadth of their commitment is palpable, showing up in the work itself, but also in written reflections, newspaper commentaries, speeches at public forums, compelling support letters to funders. It is not unusual to hear a community member talk about how much they themselves are learning from the work and their personal stake in the outcome.

The main priorities are getting students out of the classroom (e.g., visits to a nursing home) and drawing the community in (e.g., through a heritage fair). Providing a learning experience for students, while not divorced from community benefits, is the major goal.

One or two projects are now underway with potential to address a community issue of shared importance or to add to the community’s sense of itself. Both the school and community are prepared to give the time, resources, and sustained effort required to impact the issue(s) of concern.

There are now several strong examples of students’ work having a real impact on the community (e.g., a wellness center used by the community has been established by students). If asked, community members or agencies would describe themselves as beneficiaries of significant service or deeds.

It has become standard operating procedure to design projects with community needs and interests in the forefront. There are formal and informal mechanisms for gathering and prioritizing community concerns, paired with discussions on how students can play a large role in addressing these concerns. Community partners, students, and teachers periodically celebrate what they have accomplished together.

Opportunities for teachers to develop skills in connecting student learning with the community are few, infrequent, and of short duration. Teacher schedules provide little or no time for planning by themselves or with others during the school day.

Opportunities for teachers to gain skills in place-based work are growing in number, although so far they are reaching only a small core of teachers. Time for on-the-job planning has increased but remains insufficient.

Both the quantity and the quality of relevant professional development opportunities have increased. Roughly half the faculty have benefited from such training. Giving teachers time to plan, individually and in teams, has become a priority.

Relevant professional development is available to all faculty, backed up by institutional incentives to participate. Teachers often partner in developing these trainings, which include skill building, informal coaching, and intensive institutes. The school schedule includes time for teachers to plan regularly as individuals, in school-based teams, and with community members.

School policies and practices regarding course requirements, scheduling, budgeting, and personnel, among others, present ongoing obstacles to the work. No adjustments to teaching schedules or personnel have been made to support community-connected learning.

Some of the barriers to the work are beginning to recede: e.g., a teacher won release time during the day to organize place-based work; the school is moving to alternative scheduling. Still, the institutional obstacles outnumber the supports, and the institutional commitment is cautious.

New policies and practices are emerging that actively support the work: e.g., a school schedule that designates an afternoon per week for community projects; a half-time program coordinator; a requirement that students perform community work.

School policies and practices consistently promote the work. Institutional commitment is reflected in matters big— mission statements, budgets, schedules, course requirements, recruitment and hiring, evaluation—and matters small—the greetings community members receive when they enter the school.

While local community organizations and agencies are becoming more aware of how they can participate in the work, none has taken formal steps to orient their activities to include the school and students.

There are now several instances of community groups or agencies accommodating students into their work or structure: e.g., the highway department has agreed to allow students access to accident data for a project on highway safety.

There are many examples of community agencies adopting policies and structures to better include the school and students; e.g., the town’s strategic planning commission has set aside two seats for students; the local facility for the elderly has created a special course to help students deal with dementia.

Including young people in the work of adults has become part of the community consciousness. It is not unusual for community organizations and agencies to adjust their policies or develop new structures to include the school and students in their work. There are a dozen good examples of this.

The school does not yet see itself playing a role in the wider community beyond the education of young people—nor does the community expect it: e.g., there are few mechanisms in place for the school to contribute to continued learning by adult citizens.

The school is beginning to see itself as a resource to the wider community—and to be looked upon as such: e.g., the school’s computer lab is open at night so that local residents can use it and get help from tech-savvy student volunteers; community groups are invited to call the school when they need an extra (student) hand and occasionally do.

The schools’ role as a resource in the community is gathering steam: e.g., there are several continuing education opportunities now available. Instances of community groups turning to the school for help (e.g., with a specific project or event) are increasing.

The school has assumed a valued position in the community as a resource for adult learning and practical assistance: e.g., the school not only offers a number of evening computer courses, but also lends out its tech-savviest students as a community service. There is a formal program whereby community groups can request and receive student help. A few community programs now work out of the school.

The work has neither prompted the reallocation of existing local or district resources nor attracted new outside revenue. Sustainability is a serious and unaddressed question.

The work has prompted a small reallocation of existing local resources and/or attracted small sums of outside revenue. The need to develop resources to sustain the work is gaining attention.

The work is netting increased support from existing local resources, as well as attracting outside funds. In-kind resources are growing, too. At least some of the funding is renewable.

Local and outside resources are sufficient to sustain and grow the work. In some instances, place-based learning projects have become a budget line item. In-kind resources are ample.

Students, teachers, or community members have few mechanisms or opportunities to share their efforts with others from different places. The work ha not yet gained serious attention elsewhere.

Mechanisms for sharing the work are starting to emerge: e.g. teachers have presented their work at regional meetings for teachers and principals; students have attended local and regional conferences to present their work.

The number of presentations about the work by faculty, community members, and students—at local, regional, and national meetings—is growing (e.g., half a dozen in the past year). Folks elsewhere are starting to inquire about the work, and efforts to share the work on the web and/or in print are underway.

There is a serious effort—and supporting resources—to spread the work. Students, teachers, and community members regularly share their experiences at regional or national meetings. There are print and online presentations of the work broadly available. Site visits from interested parties are welcomed. Evidence that the work is having an impact beyond local borders is accumulating.