Mathematics Humanities Study of the human- Study of the natural Study of mathematical Study of human mind made world world constructs and perception Engineering design Scientific inquiry Mathematical analysis Rhetoric and criticism Iterative design process, Hypothesis testing Theorems, proofs, Eclectic methods, optimum solution and evaluation rational constructs comparative values Artifact produced Theory confirmed Theorem validated Opinion rationalized Engineering, the noun, uniquely connects all three disciplines. In creating
modeling in engineering education: Designing experiences for all students (pp. 17–35). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.21. C Lesh, R., & Yoon, C. (2004). Evolving Communities of Mind - In Which Development Involves Several Interacting and Simultaneously Developing Strands. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 205–226. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_722. Moore, T. J. (2008). Model-eliciting activities: A case-based approach for getting students interested in material science and engineering. Journal of Materials Education, 30(5-6), 295–310. Page
Paper ID #6687Teachers’ attention to student thinking during the engineering design pro-cess: A case study of three elementary classroomsAmber Kendall, Tufts Center for Engineering Education and Outreach Amber Kendall is a doctoral student in Science Education and a graduate research assistant with the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach. She graduated from North Carolina State University as a Park Scholar with a B.A. in Physics. Her passion for STEM education is long-standing, but she was inspired to pursue her graduate degree after three years teaching physics to high-school freshman. Beside engineering-design
: Common core standards elements that align with engineeringDefining engineering for K-12 in North CarolinaThe North Carolina writing team, consisting of members from two research intensiveengineering universities, industry and government, used the historical information from each ofthe documents discussed in the previous section. An effort was make to specifically defineengineering as a separate area as distinct from technology, especially since technology tends tobe misunderstood as consisting of solely instructional technology in North Carolina. Thisresulted in the identification of four core areas of engineering: engineering habits of mind,engineering design, systems thinking and problem solving. The appendix to this paperenumerates these four
students and teachers through the fields of chemistry, human ecology, gifted education, and central administration. She has facilitated programming in Science Olympiad, USFIRST, Engineering & Science Summer Institute (ESSI), Odyssey of the Mind, and STEM activities with local school districts. Dr. Roberts enjoys working with K-12 teachers and providing information relevant to career exploration.Prof. Tom C. Roberts P.E., FASEE, FNSPE, Kansas State University Roberts has more than 35 years experience in planning, organizational development, and leadership train- ing programs. He worked for Black & Veatch for sixteen years, formed Upward Consulting in 1989 and has served as a learning organization and process
Paper ID #7356Engineering Design Process Knoweldge: Comparison between Teachers Newto Engineering and More Experienced TeachersMs. Ming-Chien Hsu, Purdue University, West Lafayette Ming-Chien Hsu is a doctoral candidate of Engineering Education at Purdue University with research in- terest in students’ transformative learning experiences. Hsu’s past experience in electrical engineering and her current pursuit in engineering education prompt her interest in exploring how learning experiences, e.g. design and interdisciplinary experiences, foster epistemological, interpersonal, and intrapersonal de- velopment.Dr. Monica E
materials14. Providing robotics platforms to thosebudgets would increase drastically increase them. The Hemisson costs $250 per kit withoutsoftware7 and the Amigobot sells with its software suite for $3,095. The LEGO MindstormsNXT retails for $279.95 with the software sold separately10. Also without software, TETRIXretails for $871.95 for the basic kit11 and the most inexpensive VEX Robotics Design System kitcosts $399.9923. The iRobot Create is the least expensive example at $129.99 each9.PaperBotsWith those costs and the available funds for them in mind, a new educational technology wasdesigned. PaperBots utilizes the available classroom materials, such as paper and other officeand craft materials, to provide engineering activities in the classroom
Paper ID #6448Pre-Service Teachers’ Engineering Design Practices in an Integrated Engi-neering and Literacy ExperienceDr. Kristen Bethke Wendell, University of Massachusetts Boston Dr. Wendell is an assistant professor in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction Center of Science and Mathematics in Context. Page 23.973.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Pre-Service Teachers’ Engineering Design Practices in an Integrated Engineering and Literacy
gradelevel “Launcher” lessons involve about 50 hours of STEM exposure. Each EYE Module requiresa combination of 6 to 8 hours of class time and 1) addresses an engineering design challengearound issues related to National Academy of Engineering’s (NAE) Grand Challenges forEngineering8; 2) fosters the development of an “engineering habit of mind;” 3) integratestechnology and other resources to engage and meet the needs of diverse middle grades students,and 4) deepens understanding of mathematics and science content, with an emphasis onmathematics. The Modules are not a complete engineering, technology or STEM curriculum;rather they are a supplement to and support the existing mathematics and science curriculum.They are a set of comprehensive and
ofAE.Unfortunately, we do not have a control group with which to compare our results. Thus, we musttemper our conclusions with this in mind. There is evidence that the DBI pilot curriculumincreased students’ innovation when dealing with engineering content. Their attitudes about therelationship between engineering design and innovation were higher than their beliefs about therelationship between engineering design and efficiency. Perhaps a refinement in the curriculumand greater teacher experience with using a DBI curriculum could enhance students’development of AE. The UTeachEngineering group is currently revising the curriculum based onteacher feedback and results from this and other related studies
Paper ID #7425Engineering Solar Energy in the Fourth Grade Science ClassroomMs. Christina Hobson Foster, Arizona State University Foster is a Ph.D. student in Engineering Education dedicated to improving the status of engineering edu- cation in K-12. His research focus is on identifying ways to motivate K-12 students to learn engineering and on ways to develop systems thinking, a necessary habit of mind for engineers of the 21st century. Currently he is in his third year of studies and is focused on the QESST educational research program with the goal of evaluating and developing resources for renewable energy instruction
design processThe purpose of the summer workshop was to expose the teacher-participants to a curriculum thatemphasized 21st Century Skills such as creativity, problem solving, and communication5. Theparticipants (teachers) were to then carry applicable components of this curriculum back to theirown classrooms. Engineering design is the framework upon which this curriculum was built. Thereason for this is that the purpose of engineering as a profession is to tackle large, complexproblems and there is a systematic approach for doing such6-8. As part of the project, the intentwas to take the essence of the engineering design process and provide it as a tool to supportteachers in enabling more open-minded, creative problem solving in their
the computer engineering knowledge iswidely used in our everyday lives, most middle school and high school students still don’t knowabout it. If no one from university level introduces the program and fills in the gap, there is noway for the next generation youngsters to choose CPEG as their majors. Nowadays moststudents already have a dominated program in their mind before they become high school seniors.From university recruit point of view, STEM programs must find ways to attract them at an earlystage.In summary, this collaborated weather balloon project not only breaks the technical barriers formiddle school teachers, but also provides university professors a unique opportunity to teach themiddle school students what is Computer
post-teaching survey, asked participants toanswer on a Likert scale with regard to level of agreement (e.g., strongly agree, stronglydisagree) or frequency (e.g., sometimes, never). For example, teachers were asked to expresstheir level of agreement regarding the statement, “I see myself as developing competence in asubject (engineering) for which (prior to the project) I was not trained.” They were asked toshare the frequency with which they “… communicate with other teachers (including co-teachers) about aspects of the unit.” Five questions on the pre-teaching survey were open-response questions. One suchquestion was: “What kinds of words come to mind when you think of the engineeringprofession? (Please include a "brainstormed" list
Paper ID #7249Girls Go Beyond Blackboards towards Positive Attitudes about EngineeringDr. Christina Kay White, University of Texas, Austin Dr. Christina White completed her Doctoral degree from Teachers College, Columbia University where she studied engineering education. She is the director of the National Academy of Engineering Longhorn Grand Challenges Scholars & K12 Partners Program at The University of Texas at Austin. Dr. White is also the director of an outreach program called Design, Technology, & Engineering for All Children (DTEACh) which has reached more than 1000 teachers and 85,000 students. She is
new, the development of a new solution that is eithernew or an improvement on an existing solution. The claim is not to make every student an engineer. Noris it to make every teacher an engineer. But the goal is to improve students’ ability to think critically andunderstand how to solve problems that do not necessarily have a right answer. The development ofstudents’ ability to think critically is most prevalent when students are learning how to think and analyzeproblems [6, 17, 18]. There is such focus on standardize tests and getting the right answer, that studentslose sight of what school and education should be about. Hand-on activities that pose an open-endedchallenge force the mind to think, not only about the answer, but the process on
perspectives and skills in the creation of discrete curriculummodules. These modules act as exemplary “hands-on – minds-on” engineering projects as modellessons that enrich the learning experience of the entire range of secondary students.The overall goals of the program were to: engage middle and high school students in doingmathematics and science through engineering projects that strengthen their understanding of coreconcepts in math and science; inspire and enrich learning for the diverse population of middleand high school students found in urban classrooms; create and sustain a vibrant learningcommunity of teachers, graduate students, undergraduate students and university faculty whowork together to develop exemplary curriculum modules; foster a
Carolina State University, Department of STEM EducationAbstract The purpose of this study was to develop a framework for assessing students workingthrough an engineering design challenge. Using a case study approach to theory building wecollected artifacts from a pre-service teachers in a second level Engineering Design Thinkingcourse. The students produced artifacts in the form of conceptual models, graphical models,mathematical models and finally working models. Student-generated mind maps, designjournals, final design products and their accompanying documentation, and peer checkingprocedures were also collected and triangulated with the modeling artifacts for the purpose ofthis study. The result was a working framework that helps eliminate
to continue in post-secondaryeducation. Private and university sponsored programs offer few opportunities for the students todo some hands-on and minds-on activities. A limited number of schools across the countryencourage students to participate in extra-curricular activities (e.g., science fairs, clubs andOlympiads). These informal learning settings allow the students to spend time for practical work.Nevertheless, the K-12 students in Turkey are not sufficiently engaged in engineering activities Page 23.98.4or design challenges.We studied an informal learning setting in which two engineering professors, three graduatestudents, and four
conversations. Science Education, 94 (3), 478-505. 13. Barseghian, T. (2011, March 10). Where does informal learning fit in? [Blog post]. Mind/Shift, 3/10/11. Retrieved March 21, 2011 at http://mindshift.kqed.org/2011/03/where-doesinformal-learning-fit-in/ 14. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 15. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press. 16. Tate, E., and Linn, M.C. (2005). How does identity shape the experiences of women of color engineering students? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(5-6), 483-493. 17. Shaffer, D. W. (2004). Epistemic Frames and
, and analysis. The engineering “habits of mind” refer tothe values, attitudes and thinking skills associated with engineering and these include: (1)systems thinking, (2) creativity, (3) optimism, (4) collaboration, (5) communication, and (6)attention to ethical considerations2. While reviewing various instructional models, Brophy et al.8 Page 23.1234.3suggested that in the younger grades, P-12 engineering education could use hands-on activities todevelop a qualitative sense for material properties, spatial reasoning, physics, mechanics, numbersense, and general problem-solving strategies. Then, as students advance, the lessons could buildupon
understand adolescents’ approaches to engineering designprocesses while approaching authentic problems. By first understanding adolescents’ approachesto these problems, researchers can identify ways in which they might more fully supportadolescents in developing the habits of mind practiced by professional engineers. Although ahandful of previous studies have studied adolescents’ cognitive activity during engineeringdesign processes, many of these studies have focused on time allocation rather than offering aqualitative description of what adolescents do at each stage of the process.6,7 Moreover, mostresearch on novices’ design activity (which studies undergraduates rather than adolescents) hasexamined their work on pre-determined design challenges
Paper ID #7813Engineering Related Activities Using Digital Fabrication in an InstructionalTechnology Course For Preservice Elementary TeachersDr. Daniel Tillman, The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) Page 23.517.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Engineering Related Activities Using Digital Fabrication in an Instructional Technology Course For Preservice Elementary TeachersAbstractThis study focused on ways in which an instructional technology course featuringengineering
Paper ID #6591Integrating K-12 Engineering and Science: Balancing Inquiry, Design, Stan-dards and Classroom RealitiesDr. Marion Usselman, Georgia Institute of Technology Marion Usselman is Associate Director for Federal Outreach and Research for Georgia Tech’s Center for Education Integrating Science, Mathematics and Computing (CEISMC). She has been with CEISMC since 1996 developing and managing university-K-12 educational partnership programs and assisting Georgia Tech faculty in creating K-12 educational outreach initiatives. Before coming to CEISMC, Mar- ion earned her Ph.D. in Biophysics from the Johns Hopkins
Purdue University. NSF and several private foundations fund his research. His research and teaching focuses on policy of P-12 engineering, how to support teachers and students’ academic achievements through engineering learning, the measurement and support of change of ”habits of mind,” particularly in regards to sustain- ability and the use of cyber-infrastructure to sensitively and resourcefully provide access to and support learning. Page 23.838.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 K-8 Teachers’ Responses to Their First Professional Development
participate because they have a service learning/communityparticipation requirement for renewing their scholarship or because they too want to give back.MethodsWeek after week, elementary students explore basic principles of engineering through fun,hands-on projects that spark their imaginations and engage their minds. The young students workin teams to create engineering projects that integrate age and development-appropriate scienceand mathematics. These “design, build, test, and evaluate” experiences help them gain anunderstanding of the pervasiveness of engineering in their world as well as an awareness of howengineering benefits humanity and our planet.And, diversifying the engineering workforce is a priority for the TEAMS initiative; the
). Quantitative estimation: One, two, or three abilities? Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(4), 259–280.17 Reys, R. E., Rybolt, J. F., Bestgen, B. J., & Wyatt, J. W. (1982). Processes Used by Good Computational Estimators. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13(3), 183–201. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/74855518 Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.19 Hsi, S., Linn, M. C., & Bell, J. E. (1997). The Role of Spatial Reasoning in Engineering and the Design of Spatial Instruction. Journal of Engineering Education, 82(2), 151–158.20 Sorby, S. A. (2009). Educational research in
learning in open-ended problem solving such as Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs).Dr. Johannes Strobel, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Johannes Strobel is the director of INSPIRE, the Institute for P-12 Engineering Research and Learn- ing, and assistant professor of engineering education, learning design, and technology at Purdue Univer- sity. NSF and several private foundations fund his research. His research and teaching focus on the policy of P-12 engineering, the support for teachers and students’ academic achievements through engineering learning. Dr. Strobel also focuses on the measurement and support for changing ”habits of mind” par- ticularly in regards to sustainability and the use of cyber
,” Proceedings of the 1997 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Milwaukee, WI.[17] Elger, D., Beller, B., Beyerlein, S., and Williams, B., 2003, “Performance Criteria for Quality in Problem Solving,” Proceedings of the 2003 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Nashville, TN.[18] Smith, K., 1996, “Cooperative learning: Making “Groupwork” Work,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 67, pp. 71-82.[19] Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., and Cocking, R. R., 1999, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School, National Academy of Science, Washington, DC.[20] National Academy of Engineering, 2004, The Engineers of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
while guidingstudents through hands-on design projects. These projects focus on an engineering designpedagogy that provides students an opportunity to engage with CAD and digital fabricationtechnologies in the classroom to create, build, and refine their designs. WISEngineering’sprojects immerse students in engineering habits of mind such as systems thinking, creativity,optimism, and collaboration, in conjunction with standards-based mathematics and scienceconcepts.The Community Center Challenge (CC) project, formerly referred to as the Community BuildingChallenge (CBC), is a two-week long WISEngineering instructional module that asks students todesign and construct a model for a new community center while facilitating instruction ofCommon Core