benefits?Offering mixed gender programs and all-female programs meant that approximately 70% of thestudents accepted into our summer enrichment programs were female. This and a markedincrease in applications from 4th and 5th grade boys prompted the addition of two all-maleprograms during the summer of 2012. The programs were identical to the fourth and fifth gradeFEMME programs and the 4th and 5th grade mixed-gender programs. Each of the programsaccepted 23 to 25 students; across all six programs there were 141 students.EvaluationA semi-qualitative and objective evaluation was planned to examine differences in classroomclimate, changes in students’ attitudes toward STEM, increases in content knowledge andchanges in students’ perceptions of what
. Currently PaperBotsprovides lesson plans and the associated templates allowing for teachers to print them up and thestudents to make items like cams and articulated joints from paper. These initial lessons provideactivities about design and mechanisms with no more cost than that of some cardstock and brassfasteners for the cam activity and similarly for the others16.Those existing lessons only require already available classroom materials but are limited inscope. The PaperBots robotics kit is specifically designed for use with classroom materials toaugment those activities with inexpensive electronics and a microcontroller to allow for studentconstruction of robots. The combination of these inexpensive materials, mechanical components,and
the University of Georgia. Her professional career has been dedicated to non-profit organizations in the form of events planning, development, grant writing, and coordinating educational activities for K-12 students. Page 23.1083.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 STEM Applications: Integrating Informal Learning with the Formal Learning EnvironmentAbstractMany times only a select group of students are able to participate in after school activities due tovarious reasons. Because only a few students are able to participate from a given class
were some similarities across all sites. Only 10 percent or less of the students at any sitereported that school was “Hard” or “Very hard” and almost all at each site planned on some formof post-secondary education. STEM subjects were listed among the subjects liked most at all thesites and math and English Language Arts among the subjects liked least, and over 80 percent ofthe participants at all the sites agreed or strongly agreed that they liked science. Most of theparticipants at all the sites reported that they had studied forces and motion, but only a few atthree of the four sites reported that they had studied buoyancy.But there were also additional differences that make comparisons of the two environmentsproblematic. The first was the
received PD), or by co-planning or co-teaching with classroom teachers.18 Enrichment teachers were typically wellsuited to be resources for the engineering portions of the STE units based upon many of theircollective prior experiences with engineering design challenges in after school activities likeDestination Imagination, FIRST Lego League and the state’s Engineering Challengecompetition. Furthermore, enrichment teachers’ focus on engaging students in higher levelquestioning and critical thinking was consonant with the skills needed to move through theengineering design process.Research Questions and Null Hypotheses This study aimed to investigate pilot year teachers’ perspectives on their identities – aselementary teachers, broadly, and
grantsand the P-12 Research Seminar Series), graduate research assistants, undergraduate researchassistants, and faculty scholars.The second, education/learning, includes the two week-long INSPIRE Summer Academieshosted at the university (one for local teachers, one for national teachers), academic year teacherprofessional development opportunities, and the Bechtel Fellows Program. The Bechtel FellowsProgram allows highly qualified teachers to work with the INSPIRE team during the summer.These teachers arrive prior to the summer academies and helped with the planning, curriculumdevelopment and refinement, and implementation of the summer academies.The final method by which INSPIRE hopes to achieve their goals is by engagement/outreach.This is done
planned to incorporate the materials provided by EoF in their classroominstruction, with just over 40% asserting that they intended to undertake a complete restructuringof their course materials.Post Survey Results: Approximately 64% (just over 200 participants) completed the generalEOF post-workshop survey. In the post survey, approximately 110 participants answered “most”or “all” to the question: “Did you work with scientists, mathematicians, or engineers during yourtraining session?” Approximately 130 answered “mostly” or “all” to the question: “Do you planto teach the subject matter presented here in your classes?” About 180 students answered“agree” or “strongly agree” to the question: “This course presented materials to supportengineering
would build up faster than it could dissipate, leading to melting.In addition to learning large scale engineering concepts, students learned the basics ofbiomolecular engineering. They were taught the fundamentals of how researchers study genesand biomolecular systems. The students were taught about polymerase chain reaction (PCR),and how researchers are able to exploit the unique properties of a DNA polymerase, an enzymethat synthesizes DNA, isolated from a thermophilic organism for biological research.In addition, for the YESS 2009 year, we plan to extend the engineering applications in thelaboratory by allowing students to make the soldering iron-variable voltage dial devices used.4. AssessmentThe neuroscience curriculum was designed to
over and over to see if your idea works. You build something then check, modify if needed, then check again. Page 14.215.12 ≠ ≠ Research, brainstorm, solution, rejection, final solution, build it.As noted previously, many students had written that one of the aspects of the Build IT projectthat they liked best was the testing. All these responses suggest that the students were engagingin iterative design without being aware of it or being able to put a name to it.The final survey also repeated the question about career plans. Although the medical professionsremained the highest category among middle school students, they declined
thesediscussions were designed to find out how the camp had affected participants’ career plans, theirinterest in math and science, and their math and science abilities. In addition, the questions askedstudents to comment on what they had expected to get out of FESC and what knowledge theyhad gained about engineering and engineering-related careers from participating in the camp.The focus-group discussions were recorded by a scribe who, like the moderator, was unfamiliarto the participants. A tape recorder was used to record these discussions as well. Page 14.1363.3On the final day of the 2006 program, the students were also invited to complete an
. Page 14.99.6Three well-known engineering-affiliated organizations, representing an independent agency, anational manufacturer, and an accreditation bureau, offer a listing of preferred attributes ofengineers:The National Academy of Engineering developed a list of specific attributes of engineers that arekey to the success of the engineering profession: strong analytical skills, practical ingenuity (skillin planning, combining and adapting), creativity, good communication, master of business andmanagement, leadership, possess high ethical standards, strong sense of professionalism,dynamism, agility, resilience, flexibility, and lifelong learners19.The Boeing Company, manufacturer of commercial jetliners and military aircraft combined, is along
(integrating science, math, technology, writing andcommunication) and approaches the investigation and application of new automobiletechnologies and transportation fuels within a societal and global context. Table 2 summarizesthe general outline of the course, which follows a standard engineering problem solvingapproach. In any given year, the specific details have varied within this framework. The entiremodule is designed to extend over a total of 16 to 20, 40-minute class periods. Detailed unit andlesson plans for this module are available.14ParticipantsStudents enrolled in an advanced placement environmental science (APES) class at a high schoolin rural St. Lawrence County, NY have been study participants for all three years. This nonregents-based
taught this course. As the main goal of this year was todevelop and mature the curriculum, a formal outcome assessment procedure was not yetimplemented. In order to quantitatively evaluate the outcome of this program in the followingyears, a combination of objective and subjective assessment tools is proposed.Students will be surveyed on their opinions and knowledge of robotics, engineering and STEM,both pre-camp and post-camp. A comparison of pre-camp vs. post-camp survey results will beused to gather data on the change of student perception as well as their learning outcomes. Inaddition, systematic interviews and classroom observations can be planned throughout theprogram. Results from such interviews and observations can help determine the
plan, to determine the usefulness of data in solving a problem, and toidentify additional research needed.When we initially began administering these assessments, we did not collect identifyinginformation on the students. Because of this, we were not able to identify for how long studentshad been participating in the EYE program. While the findings from this cohort may be dilutedby participating school students having varying levels of EYE Module participation, we believethey are still informative.Students who were in the 2012-2013 8th grade cohort had the opportunity to complete the RiverTrash and Biofuel assessments. Although we were not able to limit our analyses to matchedstudents, as we have in every other area, we are able to see some
-design their robots through this collaborative, iterative process. The design missions areintentionally scaffolded to increase in complexity, building students’ understanding andconfidence. The curriculum is divided into a series of four missions that gradually lead to theproduction of a fully functional robot. In each mission, students plan, design, build, test anditeratively improve a robot that possesses a specific subset of the capabilities of the final robot,always building on their knowledge and experience gained from the prior missions.ParticipantsIn the third year of implementation, 87 teacher/educators (29 teachers and 58 educators) engagedin project-sponsored professional development. Educators who participated in pairs wereexpected to
indicated by Zoe’s description, engineers not only worked building stuff or in constructionbut they also were described as males wearing hard hats and “bright” jackets. Her description ofan engineer was similar to that described by other participants. Nonetheless, her descriptionchanged and during her final interview she indicated that engineers “would probably set up aplan first, or set up a layout of what they are going to do, like their ideas, and then probably gofrom there.”Throughout the duration of the study, the participants had an opportunity to learn about theengineering design model. Zoe changed her perception of what engineers do and describedengineers as individuals that created a plan to provide solutions to problems. Her description
Engineering Education, 2007 The Tsunami Model Eliciting Activity: Implementation and Assessment of an Interdisciplinary Activity in a Pre-Engineering CourseAbstractThis paper describes an interdisciplinary pre-engineering activity which was designed andimplemented in a seventh grade pre-engineering course. The activity was designed forimplementation in combination with Social Studies and Science classes. The activity is a ModelEliciting Activity (MEA) where students develop a model to specify requirements and costs foremergency housing after a large scale natural disaster – in this case, the 2004 tsunami. Theactivity and implementation plan are described in detail. The activity was tied to Indiana
unique feature ofthe MSU smart robot is its user-upgradeable capability and itslarger number of programmable motor and sensor ports (than forexample the RIS). The user can even upgrade the microcontroller, Figure 11 Microcontroller basedwhich is not possible for any robot in its price class. A wall-climber, robots; miniaturization.completed in Summer 2005, is shown in Fig. 12. Plans for itscommercialization are under way (the target price is $200). Other examples of MILS and RILS are shown in Figures 13-15. Anenvironmental monitor, shown in Figure 13, is based on a PIC 16F876microcontroller and can measure air temperature, density, pressurechange and speed. This monitor was designed, tested and packaged bythe TASEM teams. A module
school training. She plans to complete the Ph.D. in May 2006.David Giblin, University of Connecticut David Giblin earned his BSE degree in mechanical engineering in 2002 from the University of Connecticut, Storrs. Since then, he has been active in the Galileo Program at the University of Connecticut supported by the NSF Fellowship (under contract NSF-0139307). Currently a PhD student in mechanical engineering at the University of Connecticut, his research area is in robotic manipulation theories and environment mapping strategies.David M. Moss, University of Connecticut David M. Moss is an Associate Professor of Education in the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut. His
learning of mathematical and science concepts.Although there was no comparison group, students who participated in the curriculum showed Page 23.797.5significant growth in both science and engineering. In another design based science curriculum, Klein and Sherwood9 followed schools over three years to see if mathematics and science scoresrose. They found that students in the experimental group which used the design based sciencecurriculum demonstrated statistically larger increases on assessments of both science knowledgeand concepts.Informed engineering design pedagogy Effective use of engineering design pedagogy requires careful planning
academicbackground, however, more data needs to be collected to show the effect of such division. Infuture work, we hope to develop guidelines to effectively tailor robotic training workshops basedon advance knowledge of teachers’ self-efficacy so that their learning experience can beenhanced and they can attain greater skills. Moreover, we plan to assess the efficacy of longerduration workshops on teachers’ learning and ability to implement LEGO Mindstorms activitiesin their classroom.Acknowledgements This work is supported in part by the GK-12 Fellows Program of National ScienceFoundation under grant DGE-0741714: Applying Mechatronics to Promote Science (AMPS). Inaddition, it is supported in part by the Central Brooklyn STEM Initiative (CBSI
which participants gain experience communicating technical information by describing their design solutions, thinking and planning processes, teamwork, and how they used the engineering principles.This approach is developed within a project-based learning (PBL) framework. PBL is acurriculum development and instructional approach, emphasizing student-centered instructionand the execution of projects as the focal learning activity. PBL has been shown to substantiallyimprove long-term retention and “deep understanding,” i.e., the ability to extrapolate knowledgeto subsequent learning experiences and new situations.22 Many studies have demonstrated theefficacy of PBL in science and mathematics, including grades K-12, as well as in legal
., et. al., Self-Definition of Women Experiencing a Nontraditional Graduate Fellowship Program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching v. 43 no. 8 (October 2006) p. 852-73.22. Mumba, F., et. al., Mathematics and Science Teaching Fellows' Instructional Planning for K-12 Classrooms. Science Educator v. 16 no. 2 (Fall 2007) p. 38-43.23. Lyons, J., and Thompson, S. (2007). Comparison of outcomes for engineering and science GK-12 fellows. Proceedings of the 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii, June 24-27, 2007.24. Spence, A., and Medoff, J. (2007). Impact of a GK-12 program on the development of university students academic and professional skills. Proceedings of the 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition
science topic at the same rate as their peers.Ideally, I would use as many of these challenges into my lesson plans. When walking into aclassroom that is using the engineering design process, students are arrange in groups of four,assigned job titles, testing materials, making discoveries,( what works or doesn’t work), sharingideas, keeping an engineering journal like real engineers or scientist, designing a prototype andcompeting in a challenge within other teams.”We coined the term, adaptive instruction, to describe teachers adapting their teaching approachesto meet the various ability levels (cognitive and skills) and different modalities of the learners intheir class. Responses from eight teachers were included in this category. Adaptive
% 50.0% 25.0% 8.3% 0 (0.87) engineering program.During the initial offering of the pre-engineering program several things became clear: Project-based activities in conjunction with traditional presentation of material were an effective way to present topics and engage the participants in the learning experience. With careful planning, instruction on topics could be more fully integrated into the project activities. Participants expressed both an interest in this approach and the utility of the approach. Program materials should be modified to accomplish this. Participants responded well and were highly engaged when connections could be drawn
dabble in science toward solving a myriadSimilarities not understood or not questions and problems; whereas engineering design focuses on theidentified, Differences understood products that solve these explored problems.” “I think it's the numerous iterations that need to take place that make them similar. Initial plans sometimes don't work as intended. Students need to be able to analyze the data, intentionally makeSimilarities understood, Differences changes, and test to see if they get a better product. The
. The ITEA recommends a minimum of 3,000 square feet for a middle school lab in their 2010 Facilities Planning Guide. With an estimated 20,000 labs used by 30,000 teachers, the math works out to about $12.5 billion of existing Technology Education labs, not including the value of the remarkable array of expensive equipment found within each of those 20,000 labs.9 Project Lead the Way estimates almost $100,000 to equip their middle school “Gateway to Technology” lab, and about 25% more than that to equip a PLTW high school lab.10 Warner, W. E. Gary, J. E., Gerbracht, C. J., Gilbert, H. G., Lisack, J. P, Kleintjes, P. L., Phillips, K. (1947, 1965). A curriculum to reflect technology. Reprint of a paper presented at the
technologyand software, the lessons promoted team-oriented and research-like environment. Specific mathconcepts and skills addressed by the lessons address NYS Learning Standards shown in TablesII, V, VIII.9 Detailed lesson plans and corresponding evaluation instruments can be obtained byaccessing the GK-12 project website.10 The aim of the assessment activities was to measure the effectiveness of the three LEGO-based lessons using pre- and post-lesson surveys. The design of specific assessment instrumentsand their implementation was discussed with a science education expert and the respective gradeand subject teachers to be timely, responsive, appropriate, and effective for the intended students.The questions asked in the pre- and post-lesson
results.This feedback has been incorporated into future plans for the COSMOS program as describedfurther below.In order to assess whether the main program goals were met, which were to spark interest in theearthquake engineering and geophysics topics presented, and encourage students to pursue math-and science- related majors at public, in-state universities, an additional survey was administeredvia email 6 months after the program.The survey asked the students how interested they were in science and math before and afterparticipating in the program. Most were interested before and their interest grew as a result of theprogram. The survey also asked how interested the students were in earthquake engineering andseismology before and after participating
one participant of the LEAD-SEI program stated that “this opportunityallowed him to decide that he wants to be a biomedical engineer”. Another participant statedthat “My experience this year really convinced me that I can actually do engineering and I mostdefinitely plan to study it in college, specifically chemical engineering, which I had not evenconsidered before”. These statements alone suggest that these summer enrichment programs arehelping to create a diversified STEM workforce for the future.Bibliography1. Blumenthal, P. and Grothus, U. "Developing Global Competence in Engineering Students: U.S. and German Approaches," Online Journal for Global Engineering Education: 3(2) 1-12, 2008