engineering education. Computational thinking is broaderthan programming and coding. Some describe computational thinking as crucial to engineeringproblem solving and critical to engineering habits of mind like systems thinking. However, fewstudies have explored how computational thinking is exhibited by children, and CTcompetencies for children have not been consistently defined. Hence developing andimplementing effective CT-related activities for children can be difficult. Therefore, exploringwhat computational thinking looks like for children is critical.Children can engage in, and learn to engage in computational thinking in both formal andinformal settings. In this study, we are interested in exploring what computational thinking mightlook like
habits of mind. Thesehabits of mind describe how values, attitudes, and thinking skills are linked to engineering.Computational thinking has also previously been linked to engineering beyond simplyprogramming by Wing in 2006. Wing defined computational thinking as the overlap betweenmathematical thinking and engineering thinking.In 2011, The Computational Thinking Teacher Resources developed as the result of acollaboration between the Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) and the InternationalSociety for Technology and Education (ISTE). This collaboration produced a list ofcharacteristics that define and describe computational thinking and its qualities. In 2012, Googlealso released a list of computational thinking competencies and they
Paper ID #20592Classroom Instructors’ Perceptions of Site Leadership and Interest Outcomeswithin a Summer Engineering Program (Evaluation)Ms. Trina L Fletcher, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Trina Fletcher is currently a doctoral candidate within the School of Engineering Education at Purdue Uni- versity. Her research focus includes informal STEM education, professional development, African Amer- icans in STEM and single-sex versus coeducation learning environments. Prior to Purdue and NSBE, she spent time in industry holding technical and operations-based roles and has experience with outreach
solution based on strengths and weaknesses anddecide whether their solution is good enough to meet the criteria and stay within the constraintsor if they need to use the feedback to redesign their solution. Our research looks at the intersections of solution generation and argumentation (i.e.,EBR). With the above frameworks in mind, we undertook our research on the question: Whatinitiates the need for middle school students to use evidence-based reasoning while they aregenerating a solution to an engineering design problem in a STEM integration unit?MethodologyThis research follows the naturalistic inquiry methodology25,26 with lenses of STEM integrationframework21, A Framework for Quality K-12 Engineering24, and Toulmin’s Argument
studying these curricula, we noticed that studentscan be “hands on but not minds on”, in the process of solving the tasks. In particular, GuidedContent and Guided Practice tasks are lacking in the assessments. This implies that in realitystudents have limited opportunities to reflect or make inferences, given these items. In order tosolve problems in the context of applying engineering design in the science classroom, thestudents will need to have the opportunities to use the guided information to solve the problems,rather than being asked to simply record the observations or perform calculations. The intersection of TAGS and POD clearly demonstrated a lack of higher-level cognitivedemands in several important areas. For example, Evaluate
Paper ID #18477Building Trust in Robots in Robotics-Focused STEM Education under TPACKFramework in Middle SchoolsDr. S. M. Mizanoor Rahman, New York University Mizanoor Rahman received Ph.D. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Mie University at Tsu, Japan in 2011. He then worked as a research fellow at the National University of Singapore (NUS), a re- searcher at Vrije University of Brussels (Belgium) and a postdoctoral associate at Clemson University, USA. He is currently working as a postdoctoral associate at the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, NYU Tandon School of Engineering, NY, USA. His research
Paper ID #19767Making Meaning through Art-Integrated EngineeringDr. Kerry Dixon, Ohio State University Kerry Dixon is a specialist in interdisciplinary education, with particular focus on integrating visual art into science, technology, engineering and math. Formerly a member of the curatorial staff at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Kerry has also directed two education nonprofit organizations. As director of those organizations, she partnered with The Ohio State University on the creation of a national model for preparing future secondary teachers with a specialization in urban education. In that role, she
Paper ID #19872Elementary Student Engagement with Digital Engineering Notebook Cards(Fundamental)Kristen B. Wendell Ph.D., Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Ed- ucation at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college-level en- gineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school experience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of
Paper ID #20518Essential Components Found in K-12 Engineering Activities Devised by En-gineering EducatorsDr. Laura Bottomley, North Carolina State University Dr. Laura Bottomley, Teaching Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering and Elementary Education, is also the Director of Women in Engineering and The Engineering Place at NC State University. She has been working in the field of engineering education for over 20 years. She is dedicated to conveying the joint messages that engineering is a set of fields that can use all types of minds and every person needs to be literate in engineering and technology. She is
: “Yes, I like having college students because they have fresh minds on the subject because they were just recently taught about this, and they were able to understand our problems because they once had them too.” and “I think the college students added a perspective of how we would be using engineering in the future. They told us of some of their experiences and they were very nice.”Art BotsIn 2015, campers completed a circuitry project adapted from The Tinkering Studio.11 Aftercompleting this lesson, it was intended that students would have met the following learningobjective: “Students will be able to demonstrate using relevant vocabulary (closed circuit, opencircuit, power source, electricity, positive
Essential Teamwork and Leadership skills The engineering design process Civil Engineering Mechanical Engineering Electrical EngineeringEven though students were introduced to all types of engineering, they only did hands-on, minds-on activities on three major engineering disciplines: civil, mechanical, and electrical through acomprehensive project that combined the three.PreparationEngineering is quite a broad field so the instructor had to be very careful on how to introduce itto the students and how to make students interested in the subject as well as keep them engagedduring the program since they had to spend about 6.5 hrs every day from Monday to Friday inthe classroom. To achieve this, a balance among concepts, hands-on
STEMcareers [16, 17, 18]. Program teachers offer varied, hands-on projects in their engineeringclassrooms that are practical, but also community minded, artful, or even musical. This approachto an introduction to engineering course is theorized to attract the creative problem solver neededto succeed in the field of engineering. See Appendix A for the ENGR 102 HS teachingobjectives and learning outcomes. While the focus of this paper is gender and student self-efficacy, much more information about ENGR 102 HS in comparison to other dual creditprograms, the quality of instruction and the logistics of the EPICS High community serviceprogram and the GC DELI online units can be found in previous work by the authors [1, 15, 19,20, 21].During a given
Paper ID #18114High School Extracurricular Activities and Camps Related to Engineering,Math and Science: Do They Help Retention and Performance in Engineer-ing? (Fundamental)Dr. Nora Honken, University of Cincinnati Nora is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering Education Department at The University of Cincin- nati. She holds a PhD in Educational Leadership and Organizational Development for the University of Louisville, a MS in Industrial Engineering from Arizona State University and a BS in Industrial Engineer- ing from Virginia Tech. She also has extensive industrial experience.Dr. Patricia A. Ralston, University
Medicine (IM) voice the needfor professional development programs to develop teachers’ knowledge and skills for integratingengineering into instruction 5. Therefore, providing professional development for in-serviceteachers has the potential to improve teachers’ engineering knowledge and increase studentinterest in engineering. Previous studies underscored the importance of teacher guidance for students inimproving students’ views of engineering and choosing STEM fields for their future career path6,7 . Bearing in mind that teachers lack knowledge about engineering and how to integrate it intotheir lessons 8,9, researchers have created professional development (PD) programs to improveteachers’ knowledge. For example, in one study, a two
FrameworkLearning environments are complex and have many different dimensions. Evidence-basedlearning environments and curricula, designed with authentic learning experiences andworkforce outcomes in mind, utilize contemporary educational theories of learning. Assessmentof specific outcomes across multiple diverse learning environments can be meaningfully done byintegrating theoretical frameworks aligned with the specific aims. Two leading theories framethe development of assessment and evaluation tools utilized in this study: Kolb’s ExperientialLearning Theory and Lent, Brown, and Hackett’s Social Cognitive Career Theory.Assessing Application of Engineering Design ApproachesThe AWIM curriculum emphasizes the importance of active learning experiences
applications, including surface enhanced Raman scattering and anti-fouling surfaces. He also develops nanotechnol- ogy based lessons that integrate the STEM disciplines and develops human centered design projects that engage students in engineering. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 The Effects of Design Thinking Methods on Pre-Service PK-12 Engineering and STEM Teacher Capabilities, Confidence and Motivation in Creativity (Work in Progress)Rationale and BackgroundCreativity is an essential habit of mind for engineers and inherent in the engineering designprocess.1 Creative thinking in design is a focus of engineering education and K-12 engineeringand technology
students’scientific and engineering habits of mind.10,20 We often call these scientific thinking (ST) andengineering thinking (ET) skills.10, 20, 27, 32 The above list indicates that there is indeed a greatdeal of similarities between the practices of scientists and engineers. Other than #1 and #6,they are basically the same. In particular, both include construction of modeling as well asuse of simulation tools to test scientific theories and predict outcomes of engineering designs.While the national framework has been informed by learning theories that students learnbetter if they are engaged in activities closely resembling the way scientists and engineersthink and work, implementing constructivist ST and ET activities in the classroom remains achallenge
Engineering Undergraduates Concurrently Seeking K-12 STEM Teacher Licensure: Fuels the Soul or Too Many Barriers?IntroductionThe benefits of infusing K-12 education with engineering—specifically engineering design anddesign habits of mind—is well established; engineering design is a powerful vehicle for scienceand math education [1]. Engineering education research suggests that students who are exposedto engineering topics during their elementary and secondary years are more motivated to enrolland succeed in advanced science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses inmiddle and high school, as well as eventually pursue engineering and other STEM careers [1, 2].Moreover, students who enter undergraduate engineering programs
teacher professional development to enhance student learning of STEM contentwhile generating interest in STEM careers (Kelley & Knowles, 2016). TRAILS seeks to increaseSTEM self-efficacy within science and technology teachers and advance students’ learning ofSTEM content at schools in rural settings. TRAILS uses engineering design as a STEM subjectintegrator, providing an authentic learning context to promote 21st century skills, and motivatestudents to pursue STEM careers. The TRAILS model blends scientific inquiry and engineeringdesign to teach common STEM practices and STEM habits of mind. TRAILS leverages the useof innovative tools such as additive manufacturing technology, 3D scanning technology, andparametric modeling software, allowing
Paper ID #20067A Preliminary Evaluation of the Tulane Science Scholars Summer Programthrough Quantitative and Qualitative Self-assessment (Work in Progress)Katherine Nicole Elfer, Tulane University Kate Elfer is a Ph.D. Candidate in Biomedical Engineering at Tulane University. She received an internal fellowship for community engagement and works year-round to promote STEM education. She is also on the board of two New Orleans STEM Education non-profits. After graduation, she will seek positions that allow her to continue mentoring and teaching STEM at all education levels. c American Society for
engineering education, the UTeachEngineering program,instituted by the University of Texas at Austin, Marshall and Berland20 explain that one of thechief commitments of the UTeachEngineering program is that of a commitment to engineeringpractice for its own sake. They offer this rationale for this philosophy: For example, this work posits that that [sic] a primary goal of pre-college engineering education is for students to develop a command of the engineering design process and engineering habits of mind and that traditional math and science content goals are secondary to this in an engineering class. This is an important commitment. […] Our contention is that they cannot be a side-note in traditional math and science
discussions related to engineeringdesign, especially when these teachers are working with large populations of English learners.The purpose of this exploratory study was therefore to identify the discourse moves that twomiddle school teachers used to foster dialogic exchanges between their students, many of whomwere English learners, as they engaged in engineering design activities. Related LiteratureMany teachers engage in discourse that is monologic—or to use van de Weghe’s phrase, theyplay the game of “What’s on my mind?” (p. 88). Decades of research has indicated thatmonologic patterns—most notably, the I-R-E patterns—dominate classroom discourse regardlessof academic discipline.1, 8 Nystrand and colleagues
materials andmanufacturing trends is a prescription essential to man (woman) power transformation. Teamreflections support program revisions which include civic minded components of research ethicsand engineering for the good of society, as well as the benefits of community-based learningteams for workforce development of the next generation of STEM professionals.IntroductionAdvanced manufacturing and materials science education is directly related to pre-collegeengineering education in that it involves the implementation and integration of new technologyto improve products and/or processes, with the relevant technology described as ‘advanced,’‘innovative,’ or ‘cutting edge’, into innovative teaching strategies and robust learningmaterials.1,2 A
engineering practice (r=-0.11, n=99, p=0.914).However, there was a significant correlation between group female percentage and theachievement in biology knowledge of all students (both girls and boys) (r=0.162, n=185,p=0.027), although there was no significant correlation between group female percentage andall students’ achievement in engineering practice (r=0.088, n=185, p=0.233).How to interpret all these achievement results in relation to the female and male students’levels of engagement? Would they be more influenced by behavioral, emotional, or cognitiveengagement? What were the specific factors that were related to the students’ changing levelsof engagement? We will continue with our data analysis with these questions in mind andreport more
1991.Ms. Marie Anne Aloia, Bayonne High School Marie is an alternate route teacher with an educational background in math, physics, chemical engineering and computer science. As the first girl in her family to go to college, and maybe to prove the point, she earned two bachelor’s degrees, one from Montclair State University by day, and 8 years later, one from New Jersey Institute of Technology, by night, while working full time by day at Exxon Research and Engineering. While a traditional female career, like teaching, was the last thing on her mind, she was drawn to educational outreach because she herself had received so little career advice. She eventually ran the educational outreach program at Exxon. After 25
Paper ID #20188Measuring Changes in High School Science Teacher Practice: Results of aMaterials Science-focused Professional Development ProgramDr. Alison K. Polasik, The Ohio State University Alison K Polasik received a B.S.E. degree in Materials Science and Engineering from Arizona State Uni- versity in 2002, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from The Ohio State University in 2005 and 2014, respec- tively. She is an assistant professor of practice in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at OSU. Dr. Polasik’s research interests include modeling of microstructure-property relationships in metals, assessment of
engineering design alongside content physics.This study, part of a larger participant observation dissertation study of engineering integration inhigh-school physics, investigated how a physics teacher, “Leslie,” integrated engineering designinto a projectile motion lesson to address the question of how a physics teacher’s existingresources, or bits of knowledge and reasoning, help the teacher be productive in teachingengineering design in physics class. Some of Leslie’s inquiry facilitation commitments andhabits of mind such as requiring student reasoning, not giving away steps or answers, requiringgood data, giving up teacher authority, providing rich contexts, constructivist and socialconstructivist mindsets, and a growth model of learning
), engineering is now an integral part of K12 STEM education. Inparticular, engineering education is expected to “(1) focus on design and problem solving; (2)incorporate appropriate science, technology and mathematics (STEM) concepts; and (3)‘promote engineering habits of mind. (Sanders, 2009; NRC, 2012)” This has led to thedevelopment of new strategies and practices to integrate engineering curricula into traditionalK12 science classrooms (Berland). However, there are few studies that evaluate theeffectiveness of these innovative approaches to K12 STEM education to fully understand theirimpact on understanding of STEM concepts.In order to comply with the recent reform focused on integrating engineering into moretraditional science classrooms, teachers
Paper ID #17801Implementation and Evaluation of an Engineering-Focused Outreach Pro-gram to Improve STEM Literacy (Evaluation)Dr. Kuldeep S. Rawat, Elizabeth City State University KULDEEP S. RAWAT is currently the Chair of Department of Technology and Director of Aviation Sci- ence program at Elizabeth City State University (ECSU).He has earned an M.S. in Computer Science, 2001, an M.S. in Computer Engineering, 2003; and, a Ph.D. in Computer Engineering, 2005, from the Center for Advanced Computer Studies (CACS) at University of Louisiana-Lafayette. He serves as the Site Director for NASA MUREP Aerospace Academy program at
conducted a search for “handicapped doors.” Severalphotographs of wheelchair-accessible doors appeared on his iPad screen. He tapped on an imageof a door that appeared to be the most similar to the design that his group had in mind. When hetapped on the image, the website on which the image appeared was displayed on the screen. Hescrolled down the website skimmed it for information on the door’s costs. This exampledemonstrates how participants tended to use visual strategies, rather than written strategies, tofind information. Miguel could have typed “cost of average handicapped door” in a regularGoogle search engine, but instead he preferred to use a visual strategy that would result inimages rather than in words