Fostering Adaptive Expertise:  Design Based Instruction in High School Engineering

Pat Ko; Stephanie Baker Peacock; Taylor Martin; Jennifer Rudolph; Noel Hector Ramos

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Publication Date: June 23, 2013
Start Date: June 23, 2013
End Date: June 26, 2013
ISSN: 2153-5965
Conference Session: ...by Design
Tagged Division: K-12 & Pre-College Engineering
Page Count: 15
Page Numbers: 23.612.1 - 23.612.15
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--19626
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/19626
Download Count: 412

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Pat Ko University of Texas, Austin orcid.org/0000-0002-4732-2790

visit author page

Pat Ko is a doctoral student in STEM Education at the University of Texas at Austin. His interests include K-12 engineering programs, computational thinking and educational robotics.

visit author page

author page

Born in El Paso, Tex., Noel Ramos attended Department of Defense Dependent Schools (DoDDS) in Heidelberg and Kaiserslautern, Germany for his primary and secondary education. He then graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with a B.S. in Physics and a M.A. in STEM education. In 2012, Ramos earned the N.B.T.C. in A.Y.A. Mathematics. He currently works as a mathematics and engineering teacher for the DoDDS Mediterranean district.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a surge in demand for high school engineering classes. For example, Texas wants to have at least one trained engineering teacher in each of its 2000+ high schools. Since “engineering” includes many specializations such as mechanical, electrical, and chemical engineering, numerous experts agree that at the high school level, engineering should focus on design, allowing the course to draw from all of these fields. With the growing view of design engineering as creative work on novel problems, it is useful to frame engineering education in terms of adaptive expertise. Adaptive experts work both efficiently (use core knowledge to solve common problems quickly and accurately) and innovatively (think fluidly to solve new problems). Traditional lecturing tends toward increasing efficiency, but not necessarily innovation. In contrast, challenge-‐based instruction (CBI) has been shown to improve both efficiency and innovation in undergraduate engineering students. This work centers on a new high school engineering curriculum that has adapted CBI for engineering design, called design-‐based instruction (DBI), to increase student innovation. The subjects of the study are students in seven schools that implemented the pilot high school engineering curriculum during the 2010-‐2011 school year. The schools span several districts in urban and suburban settings and include both high and low socio-‐economic populations. Data was collected from over 100 consented students in the course. The pilot curriculum consisted of four major units: 1) Energy: Students learned about various methods of energy generation, and they designed, built, tested, and optimized wind turbine blades. 2) Reverse Engineering: Using a hair dryer as an example, students performed a needs analysis, wrote performance metrics, and predicted the inner workings of the dryer. 3) Robotics: Students used LEGO MINDSTORMS© to perform various tasks while learning mechanical engineering concepts and basic programming. 4) Final design project: Students worked on a multi-‐week capstone group project concluding with a class presentation. For each of the first three units, students were given pre and posttests consisting of questions that attempt to illicit innovative thinking from the students, typically requiring them to think at a broader level of abstraction. Example items include asking students to explain outcomes, to imagine situations, and to use their judgment. In addition, we surveyed the participants about their beliefs on innovation and efficiency in engineering design at the beginning and end of the course. We used repeated measures ANOVAs in our analysis. Students’ scores increased significantly from pre to posttest on both the energy and robotics units. The improvement on the reverse engineering test was insignificant. Students’ beliefs about innovation and efficiency did not change significantly over time, but they related engineering design to innovation significantly more than to efficiency. This pilot engineering course exhibits the promise of DBI to improve innovation in high school students over a single academic year. The curriculum writers will be tuning the curriculum to increase the impact of DBI on student design knowledge and beliefs.

Citation
Format

Ko, P., & Peacock, S. B., & Martin, T., & Rudolph, J., & Ramos, N. H. (2013, June), Fostering Adaptive Expertise: Design Based Instruction in High School Engineering Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia. 10.18260/1-2--19626

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -               In  recent  years,  there  has  been  a  surge  in  demand  for  high  school  engineering  classes.  For  example,  Texas  wants  to  have  at  least  one  trained  engineering  teacher  in  each  of  its  2000+  high  schools.  Since  “engineering”  includes  many  specializations  such  as  mechanical,  electrical,  and  chemical  engineering,  numerous  experts  agree  that  at  the  high  school  level,  engineering  should  focus  on  design,  allowing  the  course  to  draw  from  all  of  these  fields.                With  the  growing  view  of  design  engineering  as  creative  work  on  novel  problems,  it  is  useful  to  frame  engineering  education  in  terms  of  adaptive  expertise.  Adaptive  experts  work  both  efficiently  (use  core  knowledge  to  solve  common  problems  quickly  and  accurately)  and  innovatively  (think  fluidly  to  solve  new  problems).    Traditional  lecturing  tends  toward  increasing  efficiency,  but  not  necessarily  innovation.  In  contrast,  challenge-‐based  instruction  (CBI)  has  been  shown  to  improve  both  efficiency  and  innovation  in  undergraduate  engineering  students.  This  work  centers  on  a  new  high  school  engineering  curriculum  that  has  adapted  CBI  for  engineering  design,  called  design-‐based  instruction  (DBI),  to  increase  student  innovation.                The  subjects  of  the  study  are  students  in  seven  schools  that  implemented  the  pilot  high  school  engineering  curriculum  during  the  2010-‐2011  school  year.  The  schools  span  several  districts  in  urban  and  suburban  settings  and  include  both  high  and  low  socio-‐economic  populations.  Data  was  collected  from  over  100  consented  students  in  the  course.                The  pilot  curriculum  consisted  of  four  major  units:                1) Energy:  Students  learned  about  various  methods  of  energy  generation,                       and  they  designed,  built,  tested,  and  optimized  wind  turbine  blades.                2) Reverse  Engineering:  Using  a  hair  dryer  as  an  example,  students                       performed  a  needs  analysis,  wrote  performance  metrics,  and  predicted                       the  inner  workings  of  the  dryer.                3) Robotics:  Students  used  LEGO  MINDSTORMS©  to  perform  various  tasks                       while  learning  mechanical  engineering  concepts  and  basic  programming.                4) Final  design  project:  Students  worked  on  a  multi-‐week  capstone  group                       project  concluding  with  a  class  presentation.                                For  each  of  the  first  three  units,  students  were  given  pre  and  posttests  consisting  of  questions  that  attempt  to  illicit  innovative  thinking  from  the  students,  typically  requiring  them  to  think  at  a  broader  level  of  abstraction.  Example  items  include  asking  students  to  explain  outcomes,  to  imagine  situations,  and  to  use  their  judgment.  In  addition,  we  surveyed  the  participants  about  their  beliefs  on  innovation  and  efficiency  in  engineering  design  at  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  course.                We  used  repeated  measures  ANOVAs  in  our  analysis.  Students’  scores  increased  significantly  from  pre  to  posttest  on  both  the  energy  and  robotics  units.  The  improvement  on  the  reverse  engineering  test  was  insignificant.  Students’  beliefs  about  innovation  and  efficiency  did  not  change  significantly  over  time,  but  they  related  engineering  design  to  innovation  significantly  more  than  to  efficiency.              This  pilot  engineering  course  exhibits  the  promise  of  DBI  to  improve  innovation  in  high  school  students  over  a  single  academic  year.  The  curriculum  writers  will  be  tuning  the  curriculum  to  increase  the  impact  of  DBI  on  student  design  knowledge  and  beliefs.    
AU  - Pat Ko
AU  - Stephanie Baker Peacock
AU  - Taylor Martin
AU  - Jennifer Rudolph
AU  - Noel Hector Ramos
CY  - Atlanta, Georgia
DA  - 2013/06/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Fostering Adaptive Expertise:  Design Based Instruction in High School Engineering
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/19626
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--19626
ER  -