CAN was developed with the following four overarching goals

• To develop highly effective arts educators, building their capacity to address ED&I and SEL in their standards-based arts instruction through sustained, intensive, and job-embedded blended professional learning.

• To develop a local and national cadre of teacher leaders in the arts by building their content knowledge and leadership skills in order to expand the impact of arts learning for students and their communities.

• To develop accessible arts-based instructional materials, strategies, and tools to disseminate nationally to the field.

• To create a model for developing, deepening, and maintaining effective partnerships among school communities, LEAs, and national arts education associations.

Metis Associates served as the external evaluator for the CAN project across the four grant years. In order to assess the project’s progress toward these goals, the evaluation team implemented pre- (prior to participation) and post- (end-of-year) surveys for CAN facilitators, annual surveys for CAN teacher participants, review of teacher portfolios, focus groups with facilitators, and observations of professional learning activities. 

Results

Overall, the grant was successful in meeting its four goals, as shown in the study’s findings.

Facilitator ED&I Self-Efficacy and Use: 

On the pre- and post-surveys, facilitators were asked a series of questions about their confidence with and use of practices such as: building on their students assets, using examples in their instruction that provide students with representations of themselves, and building community in the classroom, among others. Overall, the participating facilitators demonstrated statistically significant improvements in both their self-efficacy with and use of these ED&I strategies following their participation in CAN in each year of the grant, as shown in the graphs below.

Performance Measure 1.1 was addressed using data from the locally developed Facilitator Survey, which was designed to determine changes in facilitators’ perceived self-efficacy for implementing culturally responsive instruction and SEL practices (e.g., How would you rate your current knowledge of culturally responsive teaching practices? How would you rate your current knowledge of SEL practices?) and plans to implement ED&I and SEL principles in their arts-based instruction (e.g., How often do you plan your lessons and units around issues of SEL?), using a scale of 1 (lowest) to 9 (highest). 

Individual items on the Facilitator Surveys were combined to create pre and post outcome scores in each of the following domains: 1) ED&I Self-Efficacy (three items); 2) ED&I Use (five items); 3) SEL Self-Efficacy (three items); and 4) SEL Use (one item)

Facilitator SEL Self-Efficacy and Use 

Facilitators were also asked on the pre- and post survey a series of questions about their confidence with and use of SEL practices in their instruction. For example, facilitators were asked questions about their understanding the basics of SEL: the extent to which they are able to authentically incorporate SEL; and the extent to which they implement engaging activities for students that focus on identity, belonging, and agency, among others. Overall, the participating facilitators demonstrated statistically significant improvements in both their self-efficacy with and use of these SEL strategies following their participation in CAN in each year of the grant, as shown in the graphs below.

Student ED&I Skills

As a result of the work that the arts teachers engaged in through CAN, it was expected that students would also strengthen their ED&I and SEL skills. CAN arts teachers completed rubrics for their students each year (2023-2025) based on work students engaged in, assessing them on the following capacities: understanding societal, historical, and cultural context of artworks; understanding identity, culture, and beliefs through intentional expression; and understanding their own and their peers’ artwork and processes. Arts teachers aggregated these results for their students in their action research portfolios. Overall, students performed most strongly in understanding identity, culture, and beliefs through intentional expression. While understanding of their own and their peers’ artwork and processes did vary across the years, their skills in understanding societal, historical, and cultural contexts of art demonstrated the greater areas for growth across the project. 

Progress toward Performance Measure 1.2 was addressed using a locally developed rubric. The rubric was designed by NYCPS arts educators to support teachers in reflecting on a student performance/assignment on three criteria: artistic expression of their own and/or others’ identities, cultural backgrounds, and beliefs; understanding of the societal, historical, and cultural context of artworks; and understanding of their peers’ artworks and processes, using three performance levels (Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3, with Level 3 being the highest). 

Below are excerpts of the Level 3 performance descriptions for each criteria:

1. Artistic expression - The student’s artwork demonstrates a personal connection to a current or historical event that is related to their own identity, culture, and experience.

2. Understanding of their peers’ artworks and processes - Through reflection and critique, the student shows an understanding of the artist’s intention and responds to both process and product using appropriate artistic language to give actionable feedback.

3. Understanding of the societal, historical, and cultural context of artworks - The student communicates the story of a master/reference artwork based on the societal, historical and/or cultural context that influenced the artist.

Student SEL Skills 

Arts teachers also administered SEL surveys to their students prior to and following art units and reported the aggregate results in their action research portfolios. The questions centered on students’ feelings of belonging in art class, their engagement, their understanding of themselves, and their feelings of agency. Overall, there were improvements from pre- to post-survey in all cases, with a couple of exceptions in the 2025 school year, as shown in the graphs below

Performance Measure 1.3 was addressed using data from the locally developed Student SEL Survey, which was designed to assess students’ perceived engagement (e.g., I get excited when I know it is time for [art form]), sense of self/identity (e.g., I am always learning more about myself when I [do art form]), agency (e.g., I can make my own choices about my [art form]), and sense of belonging (e.g., I feel like I can be myself in [art form] class), using a scale of 1 (No! Not at all) to 4 (Yes! Very much!). These arts educators administered the survey to students at the beginning of a unit and again towards the end of the unit.

Individual items on the Student SEL Survey were combined to create pre and post outcome scores in each of the following domains: engagement (two items), identity (three items), agency (three items), and belonging (six items).

Each year, the participating arts teachers who engaged in the PLC completed surveys about the leadership skills of their facilitators. Specifically, they rated the effectiveness of their PLC facilitators on their skill level in setting the stage, tone, and pace of the meetings; encouraging depth; checking in with participants; and debriefing/reflecting. In each year of the project, 90% or more of the arts teachers rated their facilitators as effective in all of these leadership capacities.

Performance Measures 2.2a and 2.2b were addressed by using items from the locally developed PLC Participant Survey. The survey asked respondents to rate their PLC leader’s effectiveness as a facilitator in several areas (i.e., setting the stage, tone, and pace of meetings; encouraging depth; checking in with participants; and debriefing/reflecting) using a scale of 1 (Not at all skilled) to 10 (Highly skilled). A rating of 7 or greater was considered “effective.”

Check out our Teacher's Reflection on CAN's Impact 

Learn More about our research team - Metis Associates