Part Two: Systems Thinking and Stakeholder Data - The Engine for STEM Program Evolution

The initial foundational work—the philosophy, the department, the common pedagogy, and the current-state audit (part 1)—yielded a clear diagnosis: a multitude of complex, interconnected projects needed to be addressed across multiple grade levels. The transition from identifying needs to executing solutions is where many initiatives fail. This phase required not just a tool, but a strategic mindset shift toward systems thinking, coupled with the critical infusion of external and internal data.

Our goal was two-fold: centralize and manage the complexity, and validate our internal redesign needs with external best practices and community aspirations.

Centralizing Complexity: Implementing a Project Management System

With projects ranging from standards alignment and course redesigns to professional development planning, managing them effectively across K-12 required a unified platform. I decided to implement Coda, a powerful project management tool, to serve as the department's centralized hub.

This decision was tactical: Coda's flexibility allowed us to track the diverse nature of our projects (curriculum docs, standards databases, meeting notes, action items) while ensuring seamless collaboration across divisions. With essential support from our Elementary Tech Coordinator, Ben Summerton, we consolidated the department’s assets into a single, streamlined workflow. The days of siloed spreadsheets and fragmented documents were over. This single source of truth ensures everyone remains aligned, tasks are tracked transparently, and critical deadlines are met.

The Strategic Lens: Introducing Systems Thinking

A list of projects, even in a centralized platform, can still feel overwhelming and disconnected. To ensure the department understood how all these moving parts contributed to a single, overarching goal, I introduced the systems thinking approach.

The department was guided through a powerful mental exercise: zooming in and zooming out.

• Zoom In: Focus on what is happening in an individual project (e.g., redesigning the Robotics I course).

• Zoom Out: Examine how that individual project impacts, and is impacted by, the other projects (e.g., how the Robotics I redesign impacts the prerequisite structure for Computer Science II, or the Tech & Design pathway).

This led to answering key questions designed to foster a "big picture" mindset:

• How do these projects interact with each other to achieve the overall goal of a cohesive K-12 STEM pathway?

• How does one project of the system impact other projects? Are there specific examples where this interdependence is evident?

• What are some potential consequences of neglecting the interconnectedness of these projects?

Developing this mindset is crucial in education. A change in the middle school’s coding curriculum, for example, will ripple through the high school’s CS program. By analyzing these connections and potential consequences upfront, our department is now better equipped to make holistic decisions that optimize the overall success of the entire program, not just individual parts.

Data as a Roadmap: External and Internal Validation

Internal systems were streamlined, but to move toward our "ideal state," we needed external validation and community aspiration data. Our data collection focused on three critical areas:

Peer School Best Practices, Real-World Application Insights, and Stakeholder Aspirations.

1. International School Survey (Peer Data)

To gather quantitative and qualitative data on best practices, our Middle School Math Specialist and STEM Lead, Melissa Trainor, designed a comprehensive survey for other international schools. This survey explored program scope, collaboration strategies, scheduling models, and course offerings. The data collected from 22 international schools was invaluable. It served as an external benchmark, providing a practical roadmap for improving our own program, confirming our internal needs, and highlighting innovative approaches we had not yet considered.

2. School Visits (Real-World Application)

Data is not just numbers; it’s observation and lived experience. We conducted three strategic school visits, each chosen for their focus on cutting-edge, authentic application:

• Taipei American School's Tech Cube: A facility designed to function like labs and creative spaces found in modern industry, emphasizing open, flexible spaces for authentic projects.

• The United World College South East Asia (UWCSEA) IDEAS Hub: A space focused on creative problem solving and design thinking, equipped for everything from woodworking and prototyping to textiles and coding.

• ITE College Central: A post-secondary institution with industry partnerships and unique training facilities (including a real Boeing 737), offering a powerful view into the necessary foundational skills for post-secondary technical careers.

These visits provided tangible evidence for the types of learning environments and industry connections we needed to prioritize.

3. Parent Coffee (Stakeholder Aspirations)

Curriculum is a partnership. To fully understand the aspirations of our community, we held a dedicated Parent Coffee listening session. This wasn’t a presentation, but a facilitated conversation focused on the future of STEM education:

• What are their visions for their children's success in a changing world?

• What approaches do they brainstorm for preparation?

• What would an ideal STEM program look like?

The session was powerful, gathering essential community buy-in and defining a shared vision that fostered a collaborative spirit, turning parental hopes into program requirements.

The Implications: Distilling Data into Strategic Themes

With all the data—from the curriculum review, the school visits, the peer survey, and the parent coffee—I created a comprehensive summary of key themes that must drive our move toward the "ideal state." These themes are the mandate for our program's future:

Strategic Theme	Core Implications for STEM Program
Industry Partnerships	Must establish connections for internships and real-world project-based learning.
Real-World Applications	Mandatory integration of practical problem-solving contexts into the curriculum.
Inclusive STEM Program	Required accessible entry points, diverse course offerings, and flexible scheduling for all students.
Strong STEM Pathways	Strengthen K-12 vertical alignment, explore Project-Based Learning continuity, and streamline after-school programs.
Relevant & Flexible Curriculum	Content must continuously reflect industry trends and equip students with in-demand skills (e.g., AI, advanced design).
Supporting STEM Integration	Teachers need increased resources, manageable implementation plans, and targeted PD for successful integration into core subjects.
Investing in STEM Teachers	Prioritize attracting, retaining, and providing continuous professional development to enhance STEM teaching skills.
Strong Leadership Commitment	Essential for providing clear direction, necessary resources, and ongoing support for all initiatives.

Conclusion: From Data Collection to Informed Action

This phase moved us from foundational diagnosis to data-informed prescription. By implementing a centralized project management system (Coda) and adopting a systems thinking approach, we created the structural integrity needed to manage complexity. Critically, by collecting external best-practice data (surveys, visits) and internal aspiration data (Parent Coffee), we ensured that the resulting plan would be relevant, innovative, and deeply supported by the community.

These eight strategic themes are the non-negotiable guiding pillars for the execution phase. They define the "ideal state" and provide the criteria against which all course redesigns and new course proposals must be measured. The subsequent phase of work is to translate these themes into tangible, revised, and new student pathways.