April 2011 1

The Independent Project

Sam Levin
theindependentproject@gmail.com
www.theindependentproject.org


Introduction

The Independent Project is an alternative student driven school-within-a-school
that was started at Monument Mountain Regional High School by a student.
The idea for The Independent Project came about from that students own
experience of high school, and his observations of the experiences of his peers. The two
main things he felt were missing from many high school classrooms were engagement
and mastery. He also felt that even students who were engaged were often learning
material that was not very intellectually valuable. They were learning lots of information,
but very little about how to obtain information on their own, or even create new
information. His intent was to design a school in which students would be fully engaged
in and passionate about what they were learning, would have the experience of truly
mastering something, or developing expertise in something, and would be learning how
to learn. He felt that the most important ingredient to a school like that would be that it
was student-driven. Research by Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi on engagement suggested that
if students have more control over what they are learning, they will be more engaged,
excited, and committed to their studies. He also felt that it was important for the school to
be focused on methods rather than specific topics, having students work like actual
scientists, mathematicians, or writers.
Eight students were accepted into the pilot program of the school, which ran for
one semester and is now complete. The school, dubbed The Independent Project, is now
in the stage of redesign and replication.
The purpose of this White Paper is to provide a detailed description of The
Independent Project, and in doing so, hopefully serve as a resource for students, teachers,
and schools trying to implement similar programs in their own schools. Every
Independent Project will look a little different. However, some elements are necessary
and inflexible. Throughout the document there will be a distinction between those two
kinds of elements.


The Program

The Students

The Independent Project was made up of one tenth grader, five eleventh graders,
and two twelfth graders. The students represented the whole gamut: from students who
were failing many of their classes (and one IEP student), to students with straight As at
the top of their class.


April 2011 2
The Structure

The Independent Project ran for one semester. The semester was broken up into
four parts: Orientation, The Sciences, The Arts, and The Collective Endeavor.



Week 1: Orientation

The pilot showed that the orientation is necessary because switching from ten to
twelve years of one type of education to a completely new style of education required
some adjusting. Orientation consisted of various activities, challenges and small projects
designed with three goals in mind: beginning to develop the group dynamics, exploring
the nature of education and the purpose of The Independent Project, and beginning to
practice and form the fundamental skills that would be valuable in the program (such as
inquiry, exploration, creativity). In addition, the week served as a time for students to
decide on the focus of their Individual Endeavors.
The specific activities or exercises could and should be different for different
programs, but the key goals behind those exercises should stay the same. The following
game will serve as an example. One person had to find out a fact about another person
(e.g. the name of their dog) without letting the other person know what piece of
information they were trying to get at. In other words, the goal of the person being asked
was to figure out what the question-asker was trying to learn, and the goal of the
question-asker was to ask questions that would lead to the answer he sought, without
revealing his actual question. When the game was finished, the group talked about the art
of asking a question, and discussed the way questions are handled in the traditional
schooling system versus what role they would play in The Independent Project. The
exercise started to develop group dynamics by engaging the students with each other in a
fun and competitive way; it allowed students to talk about their previous educational
experience and the purpose of The Independent Project; and it allowed students to
practice one of the skills (inquiry) that would be honed and developed during the program


Weeks 2-9, Morning Work: The Sciences

The Independent Project divided its morning academic work into categories,
dubbed the Sciences and the Arts, that were departures from the groupings used in
traditional settings. These groupings were based on the intellectual approach and
practices required by each discipline. Specifically, a science is about asking questions and
an art is something you practice. Thus, the first half of the program was dedicated to
natural and social sciences, which covered the traditional disciplines of Science and
History, while the second half of the program was dedicated to the mathematical and
literary arts, which covered the traditional disciplines of Math and English. This
categorization helped frame the way the students approached each discipline, and helped
distance the work from any stigma a student might have previously held about a certain
subject.
April 2011 3
The Sciences lasted for eight weeks. On Mondays, each student had to develop
his or her natural science and social science questions for the week. Each person either
would already have two questions in mind (in which case the group would help refine
and hone the questions, by giving feedback on their depth, specificity, and carefulness,
and by talking about how effective the questions might be in allowing for thorough
research), or would have an area of interest to focus on, and the group would help
him/her develop a good question.
Students would spend the rest of Monday morning, and then Tuesday,
Wednesday, and Thursday mornings researching their questions; sometimes through
books or the Internet, sometimes by talking to experts, and sometimes through their own
experimentation and collection of data. On Friday each student taught the group about
their question, their findings, their methods, etc., and the group gave feedback (about the
effectiveness of the question, the thoroughness of the sources and methods, and what they
could have done differently).

An example will illustrate the process. One Monday, a student came in with the
natural science question, How are plants from different parts of the mountain different
from each other? In refining this question, the group discussed using the word
different which holds a hidden expectation in it (versus compare), the general nature
of different parts of the mountain (vs. more specific adjectives), the word plants (vs.
focusing on one species or one part of the plant) and the word how (vs. what or
why). By the end of the discussion, the students refined question was How do plant
cells from the top of Monument Mountain compare to plant cells from the bottom?
After refining her question, the student hiked the mountain and collected leaf
samples from various species at the top and bottom of the mountain. On Tuesday, the
student looked at the samples under the microscope, and created slide drawings. On
Wednesday and Thursday, the student researched the plants and studied the drawings,
and developed a theory about the differences. On Friday, she presented the drawings and
her theory about the differences between the cells and why those differences might have
arisen, and talked about the experience of collecting her own samples and learning how
to create slides for a microscope.

Weeks 10-16, Morning Work: The Arts

After eight weeks of the sciences, the students switched to the Arts, which
included the Literary Arts and the Mathematical Arts, and lasted seven weeks.
For the Literary Arts, each week a student picked a novel that everyone in the
group had to read. On Fridays, the group would make tea (this was a liberty of having a
small group. It is certainly not necessary, but it helped make people who hadnt ever
partaken in a book discussion feel more comfortable) and spend anywhere from thirty
minutes to an hour talking about the book. In addition, each student had to write a
response to the story. The response could be anything: an analysis, a piece of fiction
written in the style of the author, an alternate ending to the story, etc. On Fridays, after
the book discussion, each student had to read a part or all of their written response, which
ranged from one to six pages in length. The group gave feedback on each persons
April 2011 4
writing (its carefulness, the language, how their writing was evolving, what they could
have done differently, etc.).
The students read seven novels and one play: The House On Mango Street by
Sandra Cisneros, Sirens of Titan by Kurt Vonnegut, Charlottes Web by E.B. White, As I
Lay Dying by William Faulkner, Tales of Weirrd by Ralph Steadman, Travels In The
Scriptorium by Paul Auster, Exit Sign by Sam Levin, and The Importance of Being
Earnest by Oscar Wilde.

For the Mathematical Arts, the group spent the first week reading Flatland by
Edwin Abbot, and talking about why math should be considered an art.
For the following six weeks, each week every student (or sometimes small groups
of students) picked a mathematical topic to focus on. Topics included infinity, the math
of poker, predicate calculus, and random mathematics. On Fridays, each student (or
students) taught the others about the math that they had learned that week.
For example, one week a student chose to develop a formula to represent
population spread of elephants. She studied random mathematics, and found a formula
for random dispersal that she then manipulated so that it could be used to describe
elephants. Throughout the week, she consulted a mathematician in the school who
understood random mathematics. On Friday, she taught the basics of random walks
equations, and then talked about how she made decisions about variables for her elephant
equation.

Weeks 2-16, Afternoon Work: Individual Endeavors

The Individual Endeavor could be any endeavor that takes roughly one semester
to complete (e.g. building a boat, writing a novel, conducting an in-depth science
experiment). The only requirement for the endeavor was that the student was excited
about it. Students worked on their endeavors every afternoon for fifteen weeks, leaving
the building if necessary, and finding a mentor (inside or outside of the school) if desired.
It was up to each student to make his or her own schedule and plan of action, although
every few weeks the group would have a discussion about the endeavors (where people
were stuck, how they were struggling or succeeding, what surprised them, etc.).
As an example, one student in The Independent Project had an endeavor of
making a short film. First he had to define making, which he defined as writing,
scoring, filming, directing, acting in, and editing a short film. He spent the first month or
so writing the script of the film and then storyboarding the script. He spent the next
month starting to gather footage and score the film. For the last few months of the
program, he gathered actors for his scenes, finished filming and scoring the film, and
finally edited the film to his satisfaction.

At the end of the Individual Endeavor/Academics section of the program, students
had to make two presentations of their Individual Endeavors. The first was to the group,
after which the group gave serious feedback and criticism about the endeavors
themselves and the presentations, and the second was to a public audience (about eighty
people).
April 2011 5
Each presentation included a Q+A, but aside from that there were no guidelines.
There were performances, readings, screenings, cooking, and lectures. The public,
performative, and celebratory (it came at the culmination of the endeavors and academic
work) nature of the night served as a bar to raise the quality of the endeavors even higher
than they might have been otherwise, and provided a context within which to frame some
of the more abstract endeavors. For example, the student whose endeavor was to write a
novel had a very clear goal: write a novel. However the student whose endeavor was to
learn how to cook might have lost focus and direction, had he not had to work towards a
final presentation, which was to cook a meal for eighty people.
Weeks 17-19: The Collective Endeavor

For the last three weeks, the group spent all day every day working on the
Collective Endeavor. The group had the option to pick any serious community or world
issue (such as water, hunger, or energy), and then they had to create a solution or a part of
a solution to the issue.
The group elected Education, and decided to make a short documentary talking
about some of the problems of the current education system, and then proposing The
Independent Project model as one potential solution. They then put the film on YouTube.
The film received over 10,000 hits in a month, and led to numerous teachers, principals,
and students contacting them about starting an Independent Project, or a similar program,
in their own schools.
There is no set mold for what makes a good Collective Endeavor and what does
not, but the chosen endeavor should have a tangible impact and should teach the students
about social activism. Some helpful questions for students, facilitators and advisors to ask
are:
Is the endeavor going to have a local or global impact?
Will it solve a problem that is specific to our community (e.g. a shortage of public
libraries) or a problem that may exist in our community but also exists other
places (e.g. a shortage of family farms)?
Are we designing something (like a proposal or a theoretical solution) or actually
implementing something (like a program or a garden or a watershed)?

The Independent Project students recognized that as a Collective Endeavor,
making a film about themselves could have been a very weak project, and the group
talked about this danger before embarking on the endeavor. One of the main purposes of
the Collective Endeavor is for the students to do something socially valuable, and a self-
centric documentary ran the risk of having very little impact. However, because their goal
was not to create a film about themselves, but to change the education system using a
film about themselves, they decided it could be successful.

Roles

Student Facilitator

The student who founded The Independent Project served as the facilitator.
However, in future Independent Projects some aspects of the student facilitators role
April 2011 6
could be diffused among the group members, while other aspects could be assumed by
the Faculty Advisor. The role of the student facilitator was two-fold.
First, his role was as that of a cheerleader (this is the part that could be organically
diffused among the group members). He helped encourage, motivate, and inspire the
students in the group much like a captain of a sports team urges on his teammates (this is
a good analogy because the student facilitator took part in the program). He helped
manage group dynamics through times of struggle, and continually checked in with each
individual student.
The second and more significant part of his role is the part that could be assumed
by the faculty advisor and/or faculty advisory committee (see below). His second role
was to maintain the intellectual caliber and rigor of the work that went on in The
Independent Project. This meant pushing people to develop their science questions to be
richer and more careful, and giving feedback on Fridays to encourage people to be more
thoughtful, to use the scientific method, to use a variety of resources, to be creative in
their thinking, and to be open to new ideas.
Any person or persons could assume this role, as long as he/she/they have a
strong intellectual grasp of science, math, history, and reading and writing. The program
will not be successful if there is not someone who values intellectual rigor regularly
giving feedback on the work that goes on.
However, it is important to note that the facilitator is not directing the work as a
conventional teacher might. His role is not to present information to the students or tell
them what to learn. His role is to give feedback that will help the students grow in their
ability to ask good questions, carry out good science, discuss books, write well, and value
knowledge, learning and teaching.

Faculty Advisor

The Independent Project had one main faculty advisor, who is a guidance
counselor at Monument Mountain Regional High School. The advisors first role was to
be connected to the facilitator at all times (this would not be relevant if the role of the
facilitator was distributed), and to help manage the social atmosphere of the group.
Much like a good mentor, the advisor needed to read situations in the group, and
then provide the words, emotions, and/or actions that he thought would allow the group
to do their best work. The advisor was there to help the group find, refine, or develop the
skills necessary to cultivate an environment conducive to learning, sharing, and growing.
He needed to check in consistently with the students to see how they were doing, help
them if they were struggling, challenge them if they were coasting, and commend them
when they were succeeding. The more constructive feedback the advisor can give to the
participants about teaching, learning, and relationship building, the more effective the
group will be.
There were a handful of logistics the advisor to The Independent Project was
responsible for. The advisor carefully considered obstacles such as classroom space,
availability of money for books, etc. to determine whether or not to leave them to the
students to deal with. If trying to overcome a specific hurdle would help any or all of the
students learn, grow, or become better people, then he would allow them to do it (with
support if needed). If the task at hand didnt carry that potential, then he would do it for
April 2011 7
them so that they could focus on other aspects of their learning.
For example, the faculty advisor took care of finding a space for The Independent
Project home base over the summer, so that they were not starting out the year stressing
about where they would be able to work. But he allowed them to figure out how to pay
for the books they needed (they applied for a grant) because it was a chance for them to
experience fundraising and getting the materials they needed to carry out their work
(much like a scientist might have to acquire funds for equipment and materials).
There are a few things that it was critical that the advisor avoided doing. The
advisor was not there to answer all the questions. He was not there to make things better
each time things became difficult. He was not a focal point and he was not a leader. The
advisor should be a strong, yet often invisible presence in the group.
His ultimate goal would be to assist the team in building an environment each day
that provided the best opportunity for discovery, investigation, questioning, sharing,
teaching, learning, and relationship-building.

Advisory Committee

In addition to the Faculty Advisor, there was also a Faculty Advisory Committee.
This was made up of one Science teacher, one Math teacher, and one History teacher
(The Independent Project could not get an English teacher for the first year).
These teachers were not in the classroom with The Independent Project students,
and there was no set time for them to work with the students (nor did they ever lecture to
the group). Rather, the role of these teachers was to provide expertise and guidance in
their fields of study when the students sought them out.
During the session in the Sciences, the students reported their natural science
question to the science teacher, and their social science question to the history teacher.
Each teacher gave feedback on the question, and sometimes suggested resources (books,
websites, studies, people). Occasionally these teachers would check in with some of the
students about their questions, and help talk them through obstacles. However, it was
difficult for them to provide assistance as regularly as they (and the students) wished due
to their schedule within the traditional system.
In addition, these teachers sometimes sat in on Friday teachings to give feedback,
and once a month the students gave them a thorough update as to what they had been
working on and how things were going.
In future editions of the Independent Project the teachers on the Advisory
Committee may have more time set aside to provide resources, support, and expertise for
the students (see section on Future Improvements/Changes).

Parents

Parents played several minor roles in The Independent Project. First, parents had
to consent to their child being part of the program. All parents in the district received a
short letter explaining The Independent Project. Parents of children who applied were
invited to a meeting held at the school, where the Student Facilitator and Faculty Advisor
answered questions. On Parent-Teacher Conference night, parents (and students) were
invited to meet and talk about how the program was going. Parents received a letter
April 2011 8
towards the end of the program inviting them to the final presentations of the Individual
Endeavors, and giving them a formal update on the program. Upon completion of the
semester, parents received a letter inviting them to set up a meeting with the Student
Facilitator and Faculty Advisor to give feedback and ask questions. That was the only
formal interaction between the program and the parents; however, almost all of the
parents said that they were very aware of what was going on in the program because the
kids were talking about school at home much more than they ever had in the past.

Logistics

Process for Getting the Program Approved

There were two steps in the process for getting The Independent Project approved
to run as a pilot for one semester. The first step was to propose the program to the
Curriculum Steering Committee (CSC), made up of faculty members from each
department and the school principal. The proposal included the rationale for creating the
Independent Project, the outline of the structure of the program, and a description of the
methods for evaluation. The Faculty Advisor and Student Facilitator presented to the
CSC twice (the second time to answer questions and concerns that were raised in the first
meeting). The CSCs approval of the program was a recommendation to the School
Board, which is made up of elected officials. With the recommendation of the CSC and
two presentations from the student facilitator and faculty advisor (an oral version of the
written proposal to the CSC), the School Board approved the pilot as well.
Although other schools may not have as receptive an administration as Monument
Mountain Region High School does, this White Paper and the example of the pilot
Independent Project should make it easier for the other proposed programs to get
approved.

Credits

Because The Independent Project ran as a pilot program, the students received
one semesters worth of elective credits (for Monument Mountain Regional High School
in 2010 that equated to 3.5 credits). The students did not receive core credits for their
work in Science, History, Math, or English.
In Massachusetts, students are required to take four years of English, so the
students who took part in the pilot Independent Project will have to take two English
classes one semester.
The school is currently discussing changing that for future editions of The
Independent Project. If those changes go through, the student would receive a half credit
each in Math, Science, History, and English, and 1.5 elective credits (or, if the program
becomes a full year program, one credit in each core area and three elective credits).

State Testing

In Massachusetts, where the pilot of The Independent Project was carried out,
students have to pass Science, English, and Math state achievement tests, which students
April 2011 9
usually take either in their freshman or sophomore years. Because only one student in
The Independent Project was an underclassman, preparing for required standardized tests
was not a huge concern for the pilot. The one sophomore was not required to do any
specific preparation for the MCAS during The Independent Project. Schools in other
states with different standardized tests would have to figure out how they wanted to deal
with preparing their students. However, it is strongly recommended to avoid exam
preparations as part of the program; it could only detract from the experience and the
amount of learning that occurs (this could be one argument for making the program half-
year and dealing with preparations second semester).

Students Applying to College or University

The Independent Project appeared on the students transcripts (along with 3.5
elective credits for the fall semester) with no details beyond the title. However, the
description of the program came through to colleges and universities in a combination of
the students personal essays, the student advisors letters of recommendation, and for
some students in the Additional Information section on the Common App. The school
will also send a letter signed by the principal and superintendent briefly describing the
program and verifying its legitimacy and level of rigor.
As with any class or activity a student participates in, The Independent Project
could be viewed as a positive thing by colleges (if the student did wonderful work that
they or their advisor/teachers can talk about) or a negative thing (if they did not invest
themselves in the program).
There were only two seniors in the first edition of The Independent Project, and
they were accepted at Bennington College, Bard College, Oxford University, and Yale
University.

Logistics within the School

The Independent Projects home base, or classroom, was the coachs office in the
girls locker room. The students spent time during orientation week changing the room to
make it more suited to learning (they made a library with books from home, brought in
chairs, painted the walls, etc.)
The students were free to move about the building as long as they did not disrupt
other classes. The students spent a lot of their time in the library, and were free to come
and go as they pleased as long as the library was open. The students were also able to
leave the building for their Individual Endeavor (a site visit or an internship) or their
academics (collecting data or visiting a college library), as long as the group and faculty
advisor knew where they were going and the students signed out in the main office.
However, students rarely left the building.
Two students left one day a week (one for a music lesson and one for an
internship at a restaurant), but other than that departures were infrequent.




April 2011 10
Transition back into regular system

At the end of the semester, students transitioned back into regular classes. Some
of these classes were full year courses, and some were semesterized courses. For the full
year courses, students talked to the teachers about the work they were doing in The
Independent Project, and made individualized plans with those teachers about how to
make the transition go smoothly. Students were not required to follow the curriculum of
those full year courses during The Independent Project. However, three students elected
to take full year English courses because the courses really interested them. Those
students left the Independent Project for one period each day to take the traditional
classes. This is effective only if the students take those courses out of pure interest. If
students were to take courses outside of the Independent Project because they felt they
had to, it would detract from the experience of being fully immersed in the alternative
form of education. The required homework from the traditional classes could lead
students to neglect responsibilities for the Independent Project that they would have
otherwise taken on, and to immerse themselves in the work less fully.
Overall the transitions went very smoothly. In the spring semester after The
Independent Project, many of the students are receiving the best grades they have
received in high school. Although students have sometimes been frustrated with the
superficiality of the material in certain traditional classrooms, or with the lack of room
for exploration and inquiry, they have found that The Independent Project has helped
them seek out the aspects of their courses or the material that were interesting (or could
be made interesting), and it has given them the tools to create interesting intellectual
opportunities for themselves within the confines of the course. For example, two students
started a discussion in their traditional English class about student autonomy, and as a
result the teacher has decided to allow the students to choose the books that the class will
read. The sense of ownership of their education has stayed with the students long after the
program ended. Although some students have continued to struggle academically,
feedback from parents has suggested that they are pursuing more interests outside of
school than they were before The Independent Project.

Application Process

The Independent Project was open to eleventh and twelfth graders (although one
tenth grader was accepted into the program), and to be in the program students had to
respond to an application (either in written or oral form) made up of three parts:
-If you could spend six months doing something, working on, or learning
something what would it be? Describe what you have in mind.
-List all the uses for a stick.
-Describe a conversation you had that surprised you OR describe a situation in
which you had to work with other people that went really poorly, and why.

The purpose of the application was two-fold: a tool for the facilitator and faculty
advisor (who made the final decisions about the applications), and an exercise for the
applicants. For the faculty advisor and student facilitator, the application helped to
ensure that the students were really serious about wanting to be part of the program, and
April 2011 11
at least had some sense that they would want to work on one thing for an extended period
of time. For the applicants, the purpose of the application was to get them to start
thinking about what they might like their Individual Endeavor to be, start thinking outside
of the box, and start thinking about what it means to work in a group.

The founder and facilitator of The Independent Project feels very strongly that
there is no set mold of student who could succeed in The Independent Project and part
of the application process was to ensure that the pilot group of The Independent Project
represented the full range of academic accomplishment. The program is designed to be,
and has thus far been, successful for any type of student. Although the program was self-
selected, one of the students felt initially that it was a stupid idea, and was pushed by a
guidance counselor into applying. That is not to say no one will fail; any program or
system will contain failure. In fact, in the pilot of the Independent Project one student
struggled to complete the work, and did not receive full credit for the program (although
the Faculty Advisor and Student Facilitator believe that it was the best way to reveal
issues that might have otherwise been covered up, and to allow the student to face them).
In addition, other students that match the type of student that struggled to complete the
work succeeded. There have not been enough models of The Independent Project to
determine if there is a type of student who will fail and why.
The goal, then, is to not make The Independent Project so that no one fails, but to
make it so fewer people fail than in the current system, and to make success in The
Independent Project carry more intellectual meaning than success often does in the
current system.

Evaluation

Students in The Independent Project were graded on a pass/fail basis, and the
faculty advisor and the student facilitator decided those grades. However, those grades
were used out of necessity; the real meat of the evaluation came in other forms
throughout the semester.
These evaluations came in three forms: peer evaluation, self evaluation, and
teaching-based evaluation.
The formal peer evaluation happened on Mondays and Fridays. On Mondays
during the sciences, students would evaluate each others questions, and in doing so,
evaluate each students growth in the field of inquiry. Each Monday students questions
were more carefully thought out and more cleverly constructed. On Fridays, throughout
the academic work period, students orally evaluated each others academic work for that
week, and in doing so, evaluated each students methods. This could have meant
evaluating use of resources, use of the scientific method, ability to consider something
from many angles, writing style choices, effort, and various other aspects of the work.
In addition to the formal peer evaluation, peer evaluation was also happening
informally all the time throughout the week, especially as the semester progressed and
people became more comfortable with each other and the structure of the program. This
took the form of gentle nudging to work harder, offhand suggestions like maybe you
should talk to an expert in addition to reading those books, or random conversations
April 2011 12
about interpretation of a novel or a mathematical concept. By the end of the semester, this
informal evaluation was even more abundant than the formal evaluation.
The self-evaluation took the form of journals and portfolios. Students were
required to keep a personal journal about the entire experience: their individual endeavor,
the academic work, the group dynamics, etc. In these journals students often reflected on
their effort from day to day or week to week, the nature of their questions, and their
development and change as the semester progressed. The personal journals, which were
not read by the rest of the group (unless someone wanted to share) allowed the students to
reflect honestly on their own work without worrying about anyone else judging what they
were thinking and writing. These journals took many forms; there were audio journals,
written journals, and some journals that contained photographs or art.
Students were also required to keep a portfolio of their academic work. They were
required to write down their question or math topic for the week, the sources they used,
and at least one important idea they gained that week (it could be question-specific, like
an idea about how elephants communicate, or it could be more general, like an idea about
what its like to conduct an experiment or a thought about the nature of mathematical
logic). In addition to those requirements, some students took notes and wrote more
lengthy reflections. These portfolios, which were shared with the group, served to record
what each student was doing week to week, and to help students think about and reflect
on their academic work week to week.
The final form of evaluation, teaching-based evaluation, was simply a result of the
students having to teach every Friday about their work. This simple requirement not only
pushed students to learn their material well (you can only teach something well if you
really own it), but it also forced them to organize their work and what they learned so that
it could be taught. Sometimes, in teaching their material, the students would realize what
they hadnt learned, or maybe realize that something they thought they had mastered they
had only barely grasped. In addition, the act of teaching itself helped engrain the work in
the students minds.
It is important to recognize that all of the assessment (other than the final pass/fail
decision) that occurred in The Independent Project was formative, rather than summative.
In other words, students were assessed and evaluated not for the purpose of obtaining a
judgment (in the form of a grade or a description) but for the purpose of improving their
work for the next time around. These forms of evaluation were effective because the
purpose of the evaluation wasnt the evaluation itself, but what it would lead to. This took
the emphasis and pressure off of the evaluation, and put it on the process and the work. In
this way the need for summative assessment was nullified; the formative assessments
became what they intended to be. They led to more learning, and improved the students
work.
Some of the many changes that were observed in the students academic work as
the semester progressed were:
Students used a greater variety of resources.
Students questions became more carefully constructed.
Students became better at reflecting on their own work and articulating what they
needed to change.
Students asked more questions, and were more readily aware of how to answer
the questions they had.
April 2011 13
Students became better at managing their time.
Students became more thoughtful: they considered ideas from multiple
perspectives, they evaluated their sources (and the methods those sources used),
they thought about and discussed more aspects of an authors writing, etc.

The list goes on, but it is important to note that the more the assessment is
formative, the less it needs to be summative.




Odds and Ends

There were a few other parts to the program that were valuable but could be
modified or eliminated in other models.
Each day began with a check-in. No matter what else was going on that day,
students were required to be there for the first twenty to thirty minutes of the day. Each
student checked-in on how he/she was doing, what was going on outside of school,
how work was going, etc. Although the format of check-in could be modified, it is critical
to have at least one time every day where the whole group is together. Fostering a
personal connection between the students in the group allows students to push each other
harder (the more comfortable they are with each other the more comfortable they are at
giving criticism and the more likely they are to receive criticism), makes them want to
push each other more (because they care about each others success), and allows for more
cooperation and communication. On a day-to-day basis, it also helps the group function if
everyone has a sense of how everyone else is doing on any given day (you know when
someone could use a boost, should be left alone, etc.).
The students also created what they called The Encoded Story Wall of Time.
Every week of the semester had a vertical section on one wall of the room. Each Friday,
every student added something to the wall (sometimes it was an object, sometimes they
drew, wrote, or painted directly on the wall) to represent their work that week. By the end
of the semester, the group had a visual map of the students work life. This was valuable
because it pushed students to think of creative ways to represent their work (for example
the student who studied the plants on the mountain pinned a cluster of pine needles to the
wall for that week). It also served as an abstract reminder that all of the work was at once
individual and collective in its nature.
One week at the beginning of the session in the Arts, the Student Facilitator and
Faculty Advisor agreed that the groups energy seemed lackluster, and there seemed to be
some tension among group members. They decided to spend one morning hiking up a
nearby mountain, and at the top of the mountain the Faculty Advisor facilitated a
discussion about how the program was going, what people personal goals were for the
rest of the semester, and improvements they felt they could make as a whole. The group
was energized by the surprise change in pace for a Monday morning, and by the
discussion (reflecting and reassessing goals). Again, this might not be necessary for every
group, and its form may change, but it is very important for the Facilitator and/or Faculty
April 2011 14
Advisor to be aware of the mood of the group and to be willing to make adjustments
accordingly.

Future Improvements/Changes

There are five major changes that will be made to future editions of The
Independent Project.
The first change is that eventually the program should be a full year program.
Because of the nature of the program, the quality of the work will continue to increase the
more time the students are immersed in it. This will also avoid an unnecessary and
complicated transition back into the standard system. The first semester would still look
the same (it would not just be expanded to be a full year). There are multiple options for
what the second semester would look like. One option is to ask students to carry out two
or three week-long academic endeavors in the mornings (like a study on Kafkas fiction,
or a more extensive science experiment) that would meld the various academic
disciplines. The second semester would also have a much longer period (four to six
weeks) dedicated to the collective endeavor. There might be requirements for the second
semester endeavor such as it having to be in a different field of work than the first
endeavor.
The second change is to restructure the Mathematical Arts. The founder and
student facilitator of The Independent Project felt that the students did not learn as much
in the Mathematical Arts as they did in the other disciplines, and that what they did learn
was somewhat superficial (certain specific skills or mathematical information). The
valuable change that occurred in the practice of the Mathematical Arts was that students
who had always hated math opened up to appreciating it and engaging themselves in it,
but there was not much intellectual gain. Thus, rather than having students pick
mathematical topics, in future editions of the program students will study the core of
mathematics: the art of logic. They will pick logical challenges (either from a database or
from their own research) and tackle those problems. The logical challenges can be of any
nature for the first few weeks, but for the last few weeks they will have to be strictly
mathematical in nature. Students will discuss and debate these logical quandaries twice a
week, and on Friday they will present formal proofs for their logical answers to the
challenges. Ideally, by studying and practicing logic, rather than topics, students will
form a strong base that will help them approach any mathematical problem (or any other
logical problem) that they face in the future. In this way, they will be thinking and
working like mathematicians, rather than studying the work of mathematicians.
The third major change is to put more emphasis on the concept of giving criticism
during orientation. Over the course of the semester, the students developed their ability to
give criticism tremendously. The difference between their feedback at the end of the first
week and end of the last week was phenomenal. However, considering how essential the
aspect of criticism is to the success of the program, in future editions students will spend
time during orientation practicing giving criticism to each other and talking about the
concepts behind valuable criticism. This way, although the students will still grow in
their abilities throughout their semester, they will start out from a more advanced
position.
April 2011 15
The fourth major change is to have more expertise available to the students.
Expertise in a person cannot be replaced by any number of books or online sources.
Although there was some of this available through the Faculty Advisory Committee in
the pilot, ideally the teachers would be available for some amount of time every day.
These teachers could suggest resources, give feedback on the students questions,
methods, and ideas, and possibly use their own work as a model. In an ideal situation,
although this may not be possible in every school, these teachers would be doing their
own scientific research, mathematical proofs, or writing (depending on their area of
expertise) that they could use to model good work for the students. The more expertise
these teachers have, the more beneficial they will be to the students and the program. If
there is any specific area where the school or the teachers feel they lack expertise, the
students can reach out to experts or professionals in the community.
The final improvement to the Independent Project is to increase the amount of
communication and interaction with the rest of the school. There were only a few
instances during the semester in which students or teachers who were not part of the
Independent Project came to observe or participate in a conversation in the project. In
future editions, hopefully Independent Project students will go into classrooms to teach;
classes, individual students, or teachers will come to the Independent Project to observe
or participate; and there will be regular discussions between people inside and outside of
the project. The more interaction and communication there is between the Independent
Project and the rest of the school, the more of a positive impact the program will have on
the school, and the more the students in the program can benefit from the expertise
available in the building.



Conclusion

The pilot of The Independent Project was extremely successful. A wide range of
academically successful students were heavily productive, and the work they produced
was of a high intellectual caliber. The students learned how to conduct research and use
the scientific method, how to think mathematically, how to read and discuss novels, and
how to write in response to reading. They learned how to organize their time and
structure their workday, and how to reflect on and monitor their own work. They also
each mastered something, and in doing so learned how to master something. They
learned how to communicate their learning, and how to criticize and push their peers.
Ultimately, the students learned how to learn, learned how to teach, and learned how to
work.
It is important to remember that there are classrooms that are engaging and
intellectually rich. Those classrooms may always serve a valuable role in schools.
However, no matter how good they are, by definition they are adult-led, and thus do not
offer the same benefits that the Independent Project offers.
It is equally important to recognize that the Independent Project is not a perfect
model. There were kinks and bumps in the road. There were moments of struggle and
turmoil between the group members. In the school where the Independent Project was
founded there was some strong support from faculty and administration (specifically
April 2011 16
from the school board, superintendent, principal, and Faculty Advisory Members).
However there was also, and still is, a significant amount of resistance, especially from
faculty. This will inevitably occur in any school trying to adopt this model. It is a
dramatic change, and change always brings with it resistance and turmoil. However,
disagreement and debate is healthy: it leads to improvement. And hopefully this White
Paper, and the example of the pilot Independent Project, will serve to ease some of the
resistance that arises.
Since the release of the student-made film about the Independent Project, over
eighty schools in twenty states, plus schools from five other countries on four continents,
have contacted the students of the Independent Project. This program will look different
in every one of those schools that decides to adopt it, and every group of students will
add its own twists and alterations. And this is not the only solution to the problems with
the current education system. It is just one of many possible changes that can be made to
improve schools. But, ultimately, the potential of The Independent Project model is to
revolutionize the education system, making students the authors of their own learning.