: EMPATHIZE WITH THE USERSDevelop user-centered criteria: Define the problem based on users’perspectives. Capture users’ information, suggestions, values, andfeelings. Reflect on the potential impact of the criteria and outcomes. Develop user-centered criteria based on users’ needs, desires, and values.Plan: Generate multiple ideas with fluency and flexibility. Discuss teamperspectives and strengths. Generate various design ideas and recognize students' strengths in their design work. Collaboratively select a team design.Create: Build a prototype DAY 4: TEST WITH USERS Test: Present your design to users and gather feedback. Utilize
through project or problem-basedlearning (PBL). Most of this section of the rubric draws from the “Ensuring Equity in PBLReflection Tool”[14]. This part of the rubric examines the degree to which students are allowedto exert agency and participate in team-learning environments that reflect real-world contextsand social impacts. The rubric encourages activities that engage every student, ensuring that alleducational experiences are hands-on and relevant to students' lived experiences andsocioeconomic backgrounds.Each of these sections contains specific items, totaling 27, which describe behaviors andpractices ranging from those that perpetuate inequity to those that foster an inclusive atmosphere.For example, under the "Head" section, item 1
draw upon disciplinary-specific or epistemic ways of knowing,designing, decision-making, collaboration, and communication within their social andcultural context [5]. These are reflected in their use of specific tools and approaches whileproblem-solving, modelling, prototyping, evaluating, and sharing design solutions [5], [12],[13]. Many engineers use notebooks or design journals to document their knowledgeconstruction and reflections as they engage in the engineering design process andcommunicate with various audiences [9], [13], [14]. Engineers learn how to use thesenotebooks through a process of apprenticeship within their professional community ofpractice and practical experience [5], [9], [12], [13], [15]. As such, the notebook can
practices, 5)provided coaching and expert support, 6) offered opportunities for feedback and reflection, and7) was of sustained duration [6].As specialists in renewable energy and data science, engineering faculty and graduate students aswell as industry advisors provided a content focus and model for effective practices inresearching specific STEM content areas. This was accomplished by giving teacher-participantshands-on active learning opportunities to explore the research process. Boz [5] found this type ofsupport was key to professional development that led teachers from theory to actualimplementation of practice. Education specialists provided coaching, support, and feedback forthe creation of content modules. Collaboration and sustained
majors, referred to in the project and hereafter asdesigners. The designers’ perspectives, as examples of students who had chosen a STEM careerpathway, was of interest. They had gained access to STEM as a field of study and the researcherswere interested in whether their own pathways would be reflected in the activities they weredesigning. The other stakeholder group involved in the planning year was a group of teacherswho would become the afterschool facilitators of the STEM program. Those individuals valuedSTEM and students’ access to it. As a group that provided input and feedback on the activitiesthat were being developed, the researchers were interested in how their experiences andperspectives may or may not be reflected in the afterschool
manufacturing, visits to local companies usingsemiconductors in their production lines, tours of local higher education fabrication andexperimental lab facilities, and designing and prototyping various microelectronic systems. Theprogram and participant experience were evaluated based on understanding students’ change intheir sense of belonging and self-efficacy, career aspiration, and knowledge and skills associatedwith the semiconductor ecosystem. Data collection involved pre-post survey results, students’daily evaluations of the program activities and reflections, and focus group responses.The analysis, employing inductive coding of responses and related pairs analysis on pre- andpost-survey sections, revealed positive outcomes. These findings
not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.
space to support the adoption of evidence-based strategies, transfer of methodologies and tools,critical self-reflection of teaching practices, adoption of improved pedagogy by new instructors,and learning of innovative teaching techniques by more established instructors [3], [4]. Althoughmulti-lecturer courses bring these advantages to students and instructors, they can be difficult toplan, execute, and assess. Some of the challenges reported are consistent messaging, classhousekeeping, overlapping roles, the dominance of one discipline, loss of individual autonomy,and poor logistics [2], [5].This paper discusses a team-taught engineering course for pre-college students. Over the pastfour years, a team of three to five graduate student
further detail below. The data exploredwithin this case study included observations of the classroom teacher while teaching the e4usacurriculum, instructional materials, and reflections following instruction. Engaging in this case studyenriches the understanding of engineering pedagogy and supports the practices of other educatorsaiming to remove barriers and support SWDs in engineering education.Teacher Selection and School Site and The case study took place at a school that provides extensive educational and support servicesto children and adolescents who have autism, trauma disorder, and multiple disabilities. It is also one ofthe e4usa partner high schools that offer a pre-college engineering program to SWDs. Mr. Sagunoversees the
, communication, critical thinking, and problem-solving within thecontext of robotic competitions.Furthermore, diverse themes in annual robotic competitions facilitate project-based learning(PBL) opportunities tailored to children of varying ages. PBL can serve as an effective vehicle tofacilitate student-driven knowledge acquisition, skill practice, and reflective inquiry. Thecombination of PBL and hands-on robotic competition empowers a promising direction that cango beyond traditional educational models, making STEM fields accessible and appealing to K-12students. It has been reported that students who gain technical skills in high school are betterprepared for both the job market and higher education opportunities [15-17]. Additionally, whenstudents
therelease of the Framework for P-12 Engineering Learning (FPEL) developed in partnership withthe American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE & AE3, 2020) provide differentapproaches to the inclusion of engineering in K-12 settings. In order to provide more clarity onthe learning goals for engineering education, this paper uses a directed content analysis design toidentify the alignment of research and practitioner articles to the learning goals promoted in theNGSS (2013) and FPEL (2020). With a focus on formal middle school classrooms in the UnitedStates, this study addresses the following research questions: 1) What are the trends in articlesbeing published?; 2) How are the FPEL learning goals reflected in the literature?; 3) How are
within and across school districts. PD sessions includedtime for teachers to develop lesson plans, explore resources, and reflect on their learning.We used a mixed methods research design to investigate the impact of the PD program onteacher self-efficacy and classroom pedagogy with a focus on cultural relevance and engineeringdesign. Quantitative pre/post data was collected using three survey instruments: TeachingEngineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS), Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy Scale(CRTSE), and Culturally Congruent Instruction Survey (CCIS). Qualitative data includedvideotaped classroom observations, individual teacher interviews after each design task, andteacher focus groups and written reflections during the summer and
autoethnography isto challenge the subject-object distinction by putting the researcher's perspective on thephenomenon being researched. The auto-ethnographic framework also allows for analysis of thevaried interactions between factors that have influenced her interest in engineering. Additionally,a qualitative technique with an auto-ethnographic framework allows the researcher to lookdeeply into the participant's experiences, motives, and reflections. Auto-ethnography is a suitableapproach to self-reflect, bringing valuable personal views into her experience. In support of thisapproach, she relates her experience actively engaging in hands-on experiments, problem-solving, and collaborative projects. These experiences contributed significantly to her
promote youth’s understanding andengagement in environmental sustainability, social justice, and decision-making in an AI-enabledfuture. However, the traditional approach to defining engineering that has guided engineeringpractices is insufficient because it fails to embrace these realities. Therefore, the need for a newframework that reflects these realities is overwhelming. This paper introduces a new theoreticalframework called socially transformative engineering that not only captures these missingelements but also values and incorporates the diverse perspectives and experiences of students. Inparticular, this framework draws upon the legitimation code theory and justice-centeredpedagogies and builds on three tenets (reasoning fluency
% campus during the project (*Note: Due to scheduling conflicts, • The curriculum was delivered to 11th graders were assessed one year following module sessions) students in 60-minute weekly module sessions • Students reflected positively about o Continuous active learning and their experiences and highlighted how collaboration among and with much they learned about AQ students with virtual guidanceLearning Objectives and Modules Focused on AQModule Session 4LO 4. Developing Competencies with Air Quality Monitors1. Reviewed Module 3 Activity
intentionally focuses on thestudent teaching semester as elementary PSTs can readily enact their engineering design-basedlessons in an elementary classroom and reflect on these teaching experiences. Indeed, theenactment of engineering design learning opportunities in field-based experiences is also evidentin some studies where engineering is emphasized in specific methods courses [7], [9]. Thesefield-based experiences, whether they occur during student teaching or in conjunction withmethods coursework, provide future elementary teachers with the opportunity to plan, teach, andreflect on their implementation of engineering design lessons. With the exception of a few studies [15], [16], elementary PSTs overwhelminglyexperience engineering design
; andindividual and team mentorship. The current project aims to impact teens’ perceptions ofengineering, their engineering identity, and their confidence and competence in engineering and21st century workplace skills. These outcomes were measured through a combination ofquantitative and qualitative methods, including pre-/post- surveys and audio reflections bystudents, interviews with site leaders, and culminating focus group discussions. Early findingssuggest positive changes in the intended outcomes, across sites, including broader perceptionsabout engineering and a growing overlap in identity between participants and engineers,increased confidence and competency in engineering and technical skills, and gains related tointerpersonal skills and other
Disability Black Rachel Master’s Services Joy 8 F Coral 11 F Product White Cori Bachelor’s Marketing Charlie 7 MData SourceThe data source for this study were videos from each family engaged with the kits, as well asshorter clips where families described and/or reflected on their progress, prototype, andexperience. Each family self-recorded and shared videos with the research team
Tools/Materials: NGSS-aligned quantum- Fundamental concepts Increase in infused science Teachers’ reflective in quantum quantum curriculum. feedback information science understanding are teachable and engaging within formal Participant + Task science learning Structures
research projects. We also explorewhether a dual advising structure with a research mentor and a communication teaching assistantenhances student’s self-efficacy in computing. For both of these questions, we define key variablesto quantify student mastery and their computational thinking using qualitative student feedbackand student reflection using GPT-3. We provide a reproducible blueprint for using large languagemodels in this task to assess student learning in other contexts as well. We also correlate our resultswith a pre- and post-course Likert survey to find significant factors that affect student self-efficacyand belonging in AI.With our course design and dual advising mentoring model, we find that students showed a sig-nificant
underscores the program's commitment to advancing STEAMeducation by empowering educators to inspire the next generation of innovators and problem-solvers in their classrooms and communities.Mobile Roadshow InitiativeThe AIR Program at Pittsburg State University is pioneering a mobile roadshow initiative toenhance access to its transformative workshops. Recognizing barriers to STEAM education, theprogram aims to bring robotics opportunities directly to underserved communities [3].This initiative offers condensed versions of the Summer Youth Workshops in a portable format,making STEAM learning more accessible to communities facing resource limitations orlogistical challenges. Beta-tested in October 2022, the roadshow concept reflects the
education from teachers' perspectives. Moreover, the articles focused onlyon K-12 education were peer-reviewed articles and should be available in full text. We includedthose studies published between 2020 and 2024. This publication range was chosen to reflect themost current AI applications and practices being used in educational contexts and to capture thelatest related best practices. We then established exclusion criteria to omit any study that failed tomeet inclusion benchmarks. These included studies that were non-empirical, outside thespecified timeframe, and not written in English. Each selected study was initially evaluated forits relevance to the topic through reading the titles and abstracts, ensuring it met the qualitystandards
the ever-increasing role of computing reflects those disparities. One facet of thesolution is to broaden the computing education research corpus to include experiences of allstudents, particularly those from marginalized groups, and to adopt best practices for high-qualityresearch.Research Question: What gaps related to participants in computing education research studiesexist? How might these contribute to the lack of equity in high school computing?Methodology: Using a curated data set of research articles focused on K-12 computing education,we analyzed articles that included high school students as study participants (n = 231) todetermine which dimensions of high quality and/or equity-enabling research were included.Results: The yearly
needing to navigate the complexities ofmanaging different classroom experiences for all of their students—in other words, exhibitingadaptive expertise. This skillset allows teachers to adjust their instruction and respond tounexpected situations during their teaching. As previously mentioned, three indicators ofadaptive expertise in teaching include: flexibility, deep-level understanding, and deliberatepractice [16]. Flexibility in teaching shows adaptive expertise in that teachers are not beholden totheir lesson plans exactly as written; they are responsive to the needs of students during thelearning experience [19]. These teachers show a willingness to experiment, play, changedirection, problem solve, and refine based on their own reflection
students throughthe use of the EDP provides evidence of its viability as a framework for learning science. MethodologyIntroductionThis section presents the methods and procedures to answer the question, “How well can theengineering design process facilitate learning of science by middle school students?”. This is acase study of two teams from a middle school classroom that use the engineering design processas a framework for learning scientific principles. The students’ goals are to plan, design, andevaluate a decision tree process to recover, sort, and identify minerals from a lake following atrain derailment spilling the cargo of minerals. Students’ solutions reflect the increase of theirteam’s
lesson to students’previous knowledge and “building up” to the material before new connections are made.Elicitation also serves to inform the instructor as to what the students understand about the topicbefore it is taught. This is best done with an introductory activity that has students discuss anopen-ended question or scenario that results in them explaining their current understanding ofconcepts and definitions in their own words. Instructors can actively participate in this section byencouraging students to reflect on past experiences or previous related topics, allowing studentsto create their own relationships and models for real world concepts, establishing a concretefoundation for the lesson.In the pedagogical model employed
, then build a modified version to fit the user-defined need. Dissectiontook place at a fabrication shop and students had access to tool kits. During the dissection activity,each group was asked to create a Bill of Materials (BOM) and correctly reassemble the projector.In addition, a reverse interview activity was organized. students and instructors took turns beinginterviewed for their assigned personas, and each group collected data accordingly. The userpersona and the reverse interview activity served as the design problem formulation for eachstudent group.During the Synthesize space, groups were asked to consolidate their interview data. Each groupparticipated in a reflection session to consider the challenges each user persona faced and
, intentional,personal, and reflective. The course contains 8 total units, with several potential pathways toteach these units across the course of either a single semester or two semesters. In the firstintroductory units, students engage in multiple engineering challenges that are supported by theirteacher and address specific skills and mindsets that form a basis for future design work that isdone more independently to address problems in their own community. Within the curriculum,there are four threads: Discover Engineering, Engineering in Society, Engineering ProfessionalSkills, and Engineering Design.Past attempts at AP engineering In 2003, a group of engineering education leaders led by Dr. Leigh Abts approached theCollege Board with the
et al., 2017, p. 11) Model Definition Integrated disciplines Teachers often used models with components that reflected the intersection of STEM teaching (e.g., Venn diagrams) Science as context Teachers portrayed STEM education as teaching scientific principles using technology, engineering, and mathematics as needed Engineering design The iterative process of engineering design is frequently process as context referred to by teachers as the technological means through which students acquire knowledge of scientific and mathematical concepts Science and
better understand whole–class testing or try to fill ingaps left by the three main data sources in design summaries, yet we did not need to do so often.Together, the table group video, journals, and interviews both (a) overlapped, triangulating oneanother as data sources especially in response to RQ2 and RQ3; and (b) offered unique insights(e.g., interviews were more reflective while group videos were in the moment). There were casesin which data sources conflicted (e.g., one design plan written in a journal but another enacted);we noted those conflicts in the design summaries. Even when we primarily drew from one datasource (e.g., interviews for RQ1) in answering a research question, we could interpret evidencefrom that data source in the