following research questions. 1. What patterns of language constitute reflective decision-making by elementary students during engineering design? 2. What linguistic resources for engaging in reflective decision-making do elementary school students bring to engineering design? 3. How do paper-based and digital engineering notebook tools support engineering processes (via students’ reflective decision-making) and products (students’ tangible design constructions)?In this paper specifically, we highlight work with teacher researchers in identifying the practicesand linguistic patterns associated with reflective decision-making in engineering planning anddesign. In this first phase of the
implementation and instructional practice, as defined byNational Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), in support of quality classroomindicators for the promotion of student learning. Randomly selected middle school and highschool technology, engineering, and design educators in five states (IL, KY, OH, NC, and VA)served as participants by: 1) completing the T2I2 online professional development materials, 2)submitting artifacts/evidences of practice, 3) administering a student STEM pre-assessment, 4)implementing a single consistent unit of instruction, 5) administering a student STEM post-assessment. Pilot Year 1 (2012-2013 academic year) teacher outcome data, as measured byNBPTS criterion referenced metrics, is analyzed and reported in
supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1220305. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Page 24.1188.2Science Foundation.IntroductionWith the new Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) [1], elementary teachers are called forthe first time to teach engineering to their students. For the teachers themselves, as well as thoseworking to provide curriculum and professional development to elementary school teachers inengineering, this is both an opportunity and a challenge. Adoption of engineering curricula
of equivalent male-only programs prompted additionalresearch comparing 1) changes in students’ attitudes toward STEM, 2) increases in studentlearning and content knowledge, 3) classroom climate and students' interactions in theclassroom, and 4) students’ perceptions of engineers using the Draw an Engineer Test.Results showed significant increases in students’ content knowledge in all programs from thebeginning to the end of the programs. And although marked differences were found among thedifferent gender grouped programs in terms of classroom climate and student interactions in theclassroom, there were no significant differences between the males and females nor where thereany differences between single-gender and mixed gender programs in
three core objectives: (1) provideengineering research experiences and enhance understanding of the nature of engineering; (2)scaffold teacher development of inquiry-based engineering classroom activities; and (3) improveteacher (and indirectly their students) knowledge about careers in engineering.The E3 program is designed to bring high school science and mathematics teachers to the TexasA&M University campus for a four-week summer residential experience where the teachers arementored by engineering faculty. During the program, teachers are involved in: (1) hands-onparticipation with current engineering research, (2) activities to broaden their awareness ofengineering career opportunities for their students, and (3) development of an
elementary teachersto teach engineering, we are asking three key research questions. During community-basedengineering experiences, what is the evolution of novice urban elementary teachers’: 1. Understanding of engineering practices? 2. Abilities of engineering design? 3. Abilities to identify and respond productively to students’ engineering ideas and Page 24.1255.2 practices?To answer the research questions, we are employing a mixed methods study design. Data sourcesinclude video recording of the novice teachers during community-based engineering tasks, theCreative Engineering Design Assessment (Charyton et al, 2011
education providers in promoting engineering to children aged 4-11 years.MethodologyFocusing on three strands of engineering education activity; pedagogy, practice and policy,the longitudinal study has two primary aims the first of which is to analyse the issues aroundintroducing engineering to children between the ages of 4 and 11 years. The study also aimsto develop a primary level engineering education pedagogy that may be adopted and adaptedby UK schools.The first stage of the study which was conducted from 2009-2012[1] found that the majority ofengineering education on offer at primary level within the UK is based around a series ofdisconnected ‘STEM initiatives’ most of which follow a “competition format” centred aroundextra-curricular
assessed for their gains in the areas of K-12 STEMteaching, learning, and educational scholarship, as well as their mastery of relevant technicalcontent necessary for successful micro-controller design, build, application, and instruction toothers.Second phase findings from actual lesson plan application in the three K-12 classroom cohortswill be presented in later dissemination efforts, however a preview of preliminary results will be Page 24.1286.2presented along with complete Phase 1 findings.IntroductionScience, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) K-12 outreach serves to increase theexposure, awareness, and literacy of K-12 students
design process (Figure 1) individuals should be able to: 1. Identify a significant challenge and specify a set of requirements that a successful engineering response to the challenge (i.e., a solution) should achieve, 2. Imagine a diverse set of possible solutions to the challenge and use systematic processes to select the most promising solution, 3. Define the solution using scientific knowledge, mathematical techniques, and technology tools and evaluate it via one or more prototypes, 4. Report the findings of the evaluation and conclude whether the prototyped solution can be expected to achieve the previously specified requirements, and 5. Reflect upon the process and recommend iteration or
mathematics and science contentfor all middle grades students as they develop solutions to problems of relevance in the worldtoday. Engineering is defined “to mean any engagement in a systematic practice of design toachieve solutions to particular human problems.” 1 As part of a current National ScienceFoundation award, a longitudinal comparison study of the impact of the EYE Modules isunderway and will be completed in 2014. In addition to early indications of the Modules’ impacton students and teachers, one impressive result is the impact of the Modules on the large, diverseschool district, Mobile County Public School System (MCPSS; 65,000 students, 100 schools,70% poverty, 50% African American). As a result of our efforts, the MCPSS has reformed
Meet the Common Core Standards:Examples from a Workshop for Middle School STEMDr. Patricia A. Carlson, Professor and PRISM Director, Email: carlsonp@rose-hulman.edu Dr. Erin Phelps, Matt Davidson, Bob Jackson, and Ryan SmithWhat’s Available at the Station: This collaboration includes Vigo County School Corporation (Terre Haute, IN)and Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology’s PRISM Project (http://rose-prism.org). A package of materials provides(1) an overview for the integrated curriculum approach, (2) synopses of the three workshops given by engineeringprofessors, and (3) examples of lessons – based on engineering concepts – developed by 6th – 8th grade teachers.Visitors to the exhibit table will be greeted by members of the PRISM team, a
funded to study science teacher learning using anengineering-concept driven professional development program. This is particularly timely withthe recent publication of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)1 and the inclusion of anengineering dimension in science. The project research team has been investigating how toinfuse engineering concepts into science given the time, resource, and curricular constraints ofschool environments. Specific implementation issues have been identified as important asteachers incorporate engineering infused lessons into their instruction. One key issue is thatteachers new to engineering are often not clear on what they are being asked to do. Therefore, itis critical to create a common understanding of what
not in land locked states, or are too expensive to implement. We have addresses these issues inour state by remanufacturing and re-sourcing the parts used by SeaPerch , making it more affordable forschools, and by developing a curriculum that promotes STEM by explicitly having learning objectives thathighlight STEM complements such as: functions, variables, arrays, and Booleans, computational thinking,basic circuitry, hydrodynamics to name a few.Study The following is a technical breakdown of the program, as it exists at present. Last year weimplemented our ROV efforts at 10 schools with approximately 300 students. Our efforts included 1.)Purchasing and providing each school the sufficient ROV kits to cover the number of students who
areallowed to experiment withdifferent numbers of turns in theirspeaker coils and different typesof plates to make qualitativeassessments of how these changesaffect the fidelity of the sound.Included in the project handout is Figure 1: Setup for Speaker Building Activityan equation relating the number ofcoil turns to the field strength, anda more advanced class warrants a discussion of the trade-off between increasing field strengthwith more turns and increasing the coil’s impedance.By learning about the principles behind speakers and their construction, students should gain abetter understanding of electromagnetism as well as an awareness of how much this technologyaffects their lives. Experimenting with different materials and coil turns
also authentic ways to includemost of the science and engineering practices (Dimension 1) included in the framework.Engaging students in a holistic, inquiry and project-based climate change module, where student-centered activities are thematically tied to the solution of an overarching problem, may be a moreeffective learning strategy than a more traditional lecture-based approach where information isfed to students without requiring them to actively investigate and formulate their own analysis ofthe extent, causes and responses to our changing climate.Developing Climate Change Project ModulesEducational resources currently available to support climate topics in the classroom can be
programmable controllers has shown promise in promoting creativity and the familiarmaterials help cultivate a more comfortable and productive experience17. A testing group wasassembled to assess if the first version of the PaperBots robotics kit functions as suggested bysuch findings and this paper examines the results of that case. Page 23.956.3PaperBots robotics kitThe first version of the PaperBots robotic module was custom shield for a Teensy, an Arduinobased microcontroller., and a reference image for the module is provided in figure 1. The shieldwas designed for single motor control as well as simple interface to the microcontroller usingrelatively
- tion, and computer applications of civil and environmental engineering. She is active in pre-college engi- neering outreach and improving non-motorized transportation infrastructure. Page 23.965.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Physics on the Ropes Course University of Wisconsin-PlattevilleIntroductionThere is still a large gender gap in the science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields.In 2009, 17.7% of full-time, first-year engineering undergraduates were women.1 For example,in 2007 women earned
some of the ambiguity forstudents producing deliverables for a design challenge and provides the instructor with apractical approach to assessing student work. In addition to offering a new pedagogical approachto engineering design thinking, the following research offers empirical evidence of studentcognition as they go through an engineering design process. Finally, we provide definitions andstudent generated examples of the four modeling artifacts to include; conceptual models,graphical models, mathematical models and working models.The Need The case for infusing engineering ‒ specifically engineering design ‒ into K-12 settings hasbeen made by educators and policy makers 1-3 . Yet determining how engineering design will beoperationalized
: Page 23.973.3 1. What are the engineering design practices that pre-service teachers use when they participate in a collaborative engineering design task based on children’s literature? 2. Over the course of the design task, to what extent are the design practices distributed among pre-service teachers collaborating in the same group? 3. Over the course of the design task, what patterns occur in how the pre-service teachers move from one design practice to another?Study DesignThe study participants were 26 graduate students enrolled in an elementary science teachingmethods course. On three different occasions, these pre-service teachers worked in small groupson engineering design experiences that were based on problems
collaboration software to increase engineering-design orientedinstructional skills of teachers. T2I2 has completed the initial development phase of thefull scale research and development project resulting in a professional development cyberinfrastructure for technology, engineering and design educators – a dynamic, interactiveand collaborative online system for improving the quality of teaching in engineering anddesign education classrooms. Through the use of techniques and protocols, such as Ajax,DHTM, CSS, XML and PHP, the T2I2 project team has constructed a system thatprovides: 1) the content knowledge needed to implement inquiry-based instruction, 2)data analysis tools to evaluate learning needs and monitor inquiry-based learning, and 3)running
solving. An MEA is an activity that is “thought-revealing and model-eliciting” [1] and has been adapted for other areas such as engineering from college toprecollege. MEAs are realistic open-ended problem solving activities designed to encouragestudents to collaboratively create and improve mathematical models or algorithm. Theinstructional frame also provides a mean for educators to better understand students’ thinking.MEAs involve students in communicating, working in team, critical thinking and problemsolving, which are all necessary skills in engineering education.A number of student team responses were analyzed to design the application in order toaccommodate possible solution processes that may be employed by students so students donot feel
MIGmathematics course and the AAET course. As shown in Tables 1 and 2 below, the units of thecourse for both the MIG course and the AAET course center around the solar power-basedfarming project, where possible, based on the standards of the course. Page 23.1006.3Table 1Mathematics of Industry and Government (MIG) and Appropriate and Alternative EnergyTechnologies (AAET) Project Units (First Semester) Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4MIG EQ: How do EQ: How is energy EQ: How is EQ: How is network sustainability measures optimally distributed optimality used to
then ranked in order from most to least points and receive points towards their overallcircuit score according to their ranked position. For example, Smith Elementary Team 1 has thehighest score in the elementary division. That team is awarded 1,000 points. Jones ElementarySchool Team 3 has the second highest score in the elementary division and is awarded 990points. This point allotment continues for all the teams in that division and is replicated for theteams in the middle school and high school divisions. The points earned by each teamthroughout the four competitions accrue. The team with the most points in each division at theend of competition 4 is named the grand champion of that division. Grand champions earn atechnology award for
in middle and high schools. The teachers have learned about the engineering designand characterization concepts of carbon nanofiber (CNF) for biosensors applications through theactive participation in the engineering research labs. Glucose biosensors have been shown tohave increased effectiveness when their designs incorporate nanoparticles and nanostructures 1, 2.Based on the research results the teachers develop lecture modules which they implement in theirclasses in the following school year.Training and Professional Development:Relevance of the research to K-12 Education: In this project the teachers have investigated andcharacterized CNF. The research problems, analytical method as well as the characterizationprocedure are related to
-educated women have increased their share ofthe overall workforce”1. The gender gap in STEM employment is not an anomaly; it reflects thedisparity in the relative numbers of men and women pursuing STEM education, of which the K-12 years, particularly high school, are this paper’s focus.Female high-school students are more likely to aspire to attend college than are their malecounterparts, and young women enroll in college, persist, and graduate from it at higher rates aswell2. So why does this STEM-specific gap exist? This paper employs the tools of “genderanalysis” to address this question.Gender analysis provides a framework for thorough analysis of the differences between women’sand men’s “gender roles, activities, needs, and opportunities in a
meaningful STEM experiences. In one study evaluating the impact ofthe FIRST®1 program, researchers found students had a quality experience that built teamworkand communication skills while students also developed problem solving and time management Page 23.1083.2techniques6. Additionally in the study, researchers saw an increase in students participating in theFIRST® program who went on to pursue college degrees in a science or engineering field, withmany of them indicating an interest in pursuing higher level degrees of Masters and Doctorates6.These students also showed an aptitude for community involvement and improvement6.Informal learning
data comparison of the pre and post-conference surveys. In summary,attendees increased their connections at the TT&C. Teachers thought of ways to utilize their newconnections in their profession (such as teacher-industry and teacher-university collaborations)and use these connections to help enact STEM into their courses. Participants took STEMintegration tools and ideas from the TT&C. Having attended the TT&C the participants weremore confident in enacting STEM into their classrooms and within their schools.IntroductionK-12 students shy away from engineering fields simply because they have a limitedunderstanding of engineering 1. A primary cause and barrier to improvement is that many K-12teachers have just as limited an
,Technology, Engineering and Mathematics”: (1) Defined outcomes; (2) Sustained commitment;(3) Personalization; (4) Challenging content; and (5) Engaged adults.III. SENSE ITA. Overview of the SENSE IT projectUsing SENSE IT materials, students build, calibrate and test a set of sensors and circuits in orderto measure water quality parameters (temperature, conductivity, turbidity and depth). Whendeciding what kind of sensors the students would build, care was taken to create sensor designsthat were accurate enough for students to make meaningful measurements, but also simpleenough that high school students could understand what they were building and how it worked