Sensors in High School Living Environment Labs: A GK-12 Project1. Introduction In a series of recent op-ed pieces in The New York Times and in his latest book The WorldIs Flat,1 Thomas Friedman points to an urgent need to develop a strong and technologicallytrained workforce to ensure the American leadership in scientific discovery and technologicalinnovation. This call to action has been joined by business and government advisory groups suchas the American Electronics Association,2 the National Innovation Initiative,3 and the NationalAcademy of Engineering;4 and reflected in the remarks delivered by industry captains such asBill Gates at the 2005 National Education Summit on High Schools.5 In a recent letter6 to
, rural, and minority communities. Family Math and Family Science offerpublications and program delivery in both English and Spanish to assist in reaching diverseaudiences.In its report Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving Public Understanding ofEngineering9, the National Academy of Engineering concluded the public image ofengineering needed to reflect the optimism and aspirations of students and needed to beinclusive. Some common misconceptions include: (1) engineering work is a sedentary deskjob, (2) engineering is strongly linked to math and science, but not to other vital aspects, suchas creativity, teamwork, and communication, and (3) engineers are not seen as directly helpingpeople. NAE observed that many kids want a well
. They found that the provision of active learning opportunities in TPD made teachers’ useof new classroom practices increase. Fisher, Lapp, Flood, and Moore (2006)21 described a CPDinitiative that guided teachers’ instruction by linking teaching and assessment. After this CPD,teachers improved their knowledge, skills, and dispositions, and they were able to apply whatthey learned from the CPD to improve their students’ learning. Taitelbaum, Mamlok‐Naaman,Carmeli, and Hofstein (2008)22 reported that teachers became more reflective and aware of theirteaching practices after they participated in a CPD program. de Vries, van de Grift, and Jansen(2012)23 explored the link between teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching and theirparticipation
, sketches, and an explanation of its suitability to the desert environment. We evaluated the effectiveness of the curricula developed through the RET programbased on the following research question: Does the use of this challenge-based instructionincrease the motivational impact of teaching units? We developed the hypothesis that studentswould find science and engineering more exciting, interesting, and applicable to their daily livesbecause of their teacher’s participation in the RET program. This would be reflected in higherstudent motivational levels during the instruction of the RET teacher’s research-based module ascompared to a control teacher’s instruction.Student Motivation Survey In order to gauge student motivation, an
appreciate the EDP and the thinking framework it provides, we use aninnovative approach in Day 1 of Week 1 by giving the teachers a design challenge before wediscuss the EDP with them. We asked teachers to design a 3-legged chair that is stable and safeand that can carry the maximum amount of weight. We divide the teachers into teams of 3.After they finish and test their designs, we ask them to reflect on their experience and use theirreflection to discuss the EDP and its value. Such experience and discussion help them in theirdesign activities of Day 4 and 5. Figure 1 shows some teacher activities during the designchallenge. Page 22.824.5
STEM professionals.The 2006 report, Investing in America’s Future 12 , discussed the need to develop collaborationsbetween engineers and K-12 educators to provide authentic opportunities to build scientific andtechnological knowledge. RU RET-E aimed to provide such an opportunity by immersingteachers in engineering research during the six week summer program. Approximately 80% ofteachers’ time was spent in the research component.A review of adult learning theories5,6 suggests recognizing adult learners as experiencedindividuals who have valued knowledge, utilizing experience as a learning tool, promotinglearning through reflection and inquiry, and providing situated learning contexts. As such, RURET-E provides opportunity for teachers to share
states thatalthough there were more than 56 million pre-K-12 students enrolled in U.S. public and privateschools in 2008, no more than 6 million students have had any kind of formal K-12 engineeringeducation since the early 1990s.2 The famous quote attributed to Albert Einstein, that thedefinition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results, appearsquite relevant to this problem. Continuing the status quo in developing America’s futuretechnical workforce will not result in the increased human resource talent pool that is needed tosustain and grow the U.S. economy and that reflects the diversity of the U.S. population.At CIESE, we have waged a multi-front campaign since 2004 to infuse engineering into
implement reflects themany ways engineer take designs from ideas to reality. Many engineers do build designs using abroad array of techniques. Perhaps one of the biggest differences between engineeringdisciplines is the specialized methods and technologies they use to implement designs. Howeversome engineers implement ideas through manipulation of information, such as designingcomputer software or producing plans. Here the real value is the information in the blueprint orcode, not the medium (paper or magnetic disk) that contains the information. Another option forimplementing a design is to contract another company to build it. In this case the engineer workswith the company to ensure the work is done properly.The fourth step of the engineering
– What makes a 3-D shape a 3-D shape?, Page 23.1375.75.3- Reflecting on your design, and 7.5 – Which 3-D figures roll the best?. Step 3.3 is designedto get students to articulate their understandings of 3-D objects in terms of geometric shapecharacteristics. Step 5.3 asks students to contemplate their proposed design for the communitycenter by prompting a discussion of shape nets and reflection on students’ designs. Step 7.5requires students to determine, from a list of 3-D shapes, which will roll best, and provide ajustification. These steps have been evaluated using the Knowledge Integration Framework2; asapplied to this work, this framework
, of the teachers who participatedin the program. It was felt that to ensure their success, the professional development modelshould be split into spring and summer sessions to allow the teachers enough time to study,reflect, and develop an implementation plan. The spring sessions were delivered over sixconsecutive all-day Saturday seminars and were designed to provide requisite math and physicsknowledge, learn about engineering and the engineering design process, and build camaraderie.The summer sessions were delivered over an intensive one week schedule and were used to trainthe teachers on the use and implementation of the engineering design challenge. A summary ofthe main activities and objectives for the spring and summer sessions are
participants and used to structurethe training. This lack of recognition of the method is an unexpected finding, deserving offurther investigation. The results of the study also revealed that the teachers who took theDTEACh training workshop three or more years before the survey showed very similarresponses to teachers who attended the workshop more recently, thus indicating that use oftechniques presented in the training workshop is not diminishing significantly with time.IntroductionActive Learning is an approach developed to improve learning, and typically consists oftechniques requiring students (as the name implies) to be actively engaged in learning throughspecially designed activities, followed by reflection upon what they have done1. This
levels of learning,beyond basic technology instruction3, 4. The goals would be to: 1, Help teachers learn the features and operation of the LEGO® Mindstorms® and NXT-G programming system 2, Help teachers apply the tool for robotics projects and data logging applications 3, Reflect with teachers daily on the applicability of the technology to specific classroom requirements 4, Reflect with teachers daily on the requirements imposed by the North Carolina (NC) standard course of study 5, Brainstorm with teachers the best practices to integrate the technology with not just robotics competitions, but also in math, science, and other areas and, 6 Have senior undergraduates in engineering technology and education take a
theirstudents. Each class had between 21 and 31 students; a total of 76 students participated in theclassroom activities. The survey, developed by the teacher candidates, reflected their desire tofocus on a few math learning objectives in relation to the work of engineers. Pre-survey resultsshowed that overall students could identify the tasks an engineer performs, but did notunderstand the tools they would use to do their work. About half of the students surveyedunderstood that to become an engineer one needed college education. Most students did nothave a good understanding of proportion or what a scale drawing was.With an understanding of the students’ knowledge lessons were structured as 50 minute modulesthat strove to: 1) develop the elementary
assigns performance expectations for eachDCI at each grade level: elementary school (ES), middle school (MS), and high school (HS). Theperformance expectations are the way in which the Framework [5] proposes to integrate SEPinto the classroom. Even though the NGSS are science standards, the Framework makes it clear thatengineering and technology practices “... are featured alongside the natural sciences for two criticalreasons: (1) to reflect the importance of understanding the humanbuilt world and (2) to recognize thevalue of better integrating the teaching and learning of science, engineering, and technology.”2 So theNGSS reflects this integration and places engineering and engineering design as central to learningscience in K12
were conducted in between eachtraining day. The PLC activities were highly structured and closely tied to the training days. ThePLC session provided an environment to meet together and reflect on what they learned duringthe training sessions, and to share/learn to implement ideas from the training into theirclassrooms. Each PLC session required that teachers handed in some documents to theresearch/teaching team, such as lesson plans and samples of students’ artifacts and homework toshare their ideas and reflections about STEM integration with other teachers. The second PLCdocuments particularly focused on integrating engineering into science or mathematics teaching.Therefore, we provide some examples of teachers’ lesson plans and reflections
, with an eye toward improving how they work. • Willing to allow observers: It’s necessary to see how the lesson works in a variety of classes. Our teacher partners must be willing to have us watch the lesson. Partly, we are observing where the materials could better support the lesson. But equally as important, teachers who are very skilled at their profession often improve a lesson as they teach. They can ask just the right question, find an explanation that better resonates with the children, or as they are reflecting think of better ways to structure the activity. They contribute all this expertise to the building of better lessons.Characteristics of Good Partnerships for Development and Testing
and ApplicationIt is interesting to note that words such as manage, integrate, safety, and professionalism aresecondary themes that arose from the questionnaire responses. In addition, the misconceptionthat “marine, technology, and military engineering” are Engineering disciplines reflects thecommon misuse of the word “engineering”. Technologists’ education in marine, factory, anddefense instrumentation is a common form of vocational training in NL, such that teachers mayknow of technologists as “engineers” and thus define their knowledge of what Engineering is viainteraction with these members of their community.The primary research gathered focused the development of the hands-on laboratory kit usingmaterials science to demonstrate
living, and unique culture.In order to train and cultivate the local workforce in Hawaii, education programs are needed atall levels along the workforce pipeline, from K-12 to post-secondary certification programs tohigher education degree programs. These education programs must also target the populationsunderrepresented in engineering and technology fields. In response to this need, in 2008, WITestablished the GeoTech for Hawaii Schools statewide initiative to specifically target the K-12public schools, helping them to integrate the use of GIS, GPS, and Remote Sensing.Hawaii Public School DemographicsHawaii public schools are reflective of the diversity of the island chain‟s population. Less thanfifteen percent of Hawaii‟s K-12 student
the liberal arts. A number of yearsago an abstract for a paper espousing the use of liberal experiences to further engineering studiesbegan with “Variety's the spice of life that gives it its flavor." These lines in "The Task, I" byWilliam Cowper (English poet 1731-1800) reflect an attitude that must he fostered in the mindsof engineers. No man is an island, and no field of study can divorce itself from the activities,interests. and positive reinforcement of divergent areas of instruction. Many activities in theDepartment of Mechanical Engineering at Michigan State University have been pursued to fosterliberal activities within engineering from poetry writing to novel production. It was thought andhas been shown to have a positive effect upon
a comparison point in the post-implementation interview for thecultural production of smart in an engineering context.The post-implementation teacher interview consisted of a similar line of questioning to get at theteachers’ and students’ experiences with the engineering curriculum. We asked teachers abouttheir perceptions of students’ successes and difficulties during the unit in light of student learningand engagement. Teachers were asked to reflect on any surprises or unexpected outcomes duringimplementation. Additionally, we wanted to understand teachers’ perceptions of possible uniqueaffordances of the engineering unit regarding students’ performances, engagement, and learning.Thus, we asked them to make comparisons of typical student
legislated equality for women in work,education and law. The activism of the second wave of feminism produced the majority ofcurriculum feminization and raised concerns about the effect of feminized curriculum on boys.The third wave, also called post-feminism, is a time of confusion for most girls and women whobelieve they live in a society of equality but experience sexism in many obvious and hiddenways. British Columbian curriculum documents no longer mention feminist requirements butfocus on aboriginal and racial diversity, reflecting the post-feminist culture that women are equaland sexism no longer needs mentioning. The post-feminist constructs of Girl Power andSuccessful Girls9,10 send the message that girls can do and have anything, yet
prior to any participation.In order to assess the effectiveness of the YESS program, surveys were distributed tocapture self-reported data from the students regarding demographic information,parent/guardian occupations, interest levels in relevant fields, level of understanding inkey content area, measures of confidence in math and science, and expectations for theprogram.Following the alteration of the program in 2004, student attendance began to grow. Theaverage number of students in attendance for each seminar more than doubled from 2003to 2004 and the number of interested teacher and parents in attendance was also on therise. Comments attained from a number of the attendees reflected that the introduction ofthe hands-on activities to
AC 2009-2090: TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES:TEACHERS' BELIEFS AND PRACTICES IN PERSPECTIVEMark Sanders, Virginia TechThomas Sherman, Virginia TechHyuksoo Kwon, Virginia TechJames Pembridge, Virginia Tech Page 14.1170.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Technology Education in the United States: Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices in PerspectiveSince changing its name in 1985, the field/school subject known as Technology Education hasworked to transform its curriculum and teaching practice from one dominated by craft andindustry-related technologies, to “a curriculum to reflect technology.”1 Over the past threedecades
enjoyable additions to the seminars. The Board of Directors expressed theirdelight with the improved attendance and format of the YESS program and asked the co-leadersof the 2004 YESS program to lead the 2005 YESS program again with this revised hand-onapproach. A full description of the 2004 YESS program was highlighted in the HistoricalElectronics Museum, Reflections newsletter5.The 2005 program was similar to the 2004 program and was designed to have the high schoolstudents learn how to go from brainstorming to designing, building, and testing. The over-arching project, performed in teams, was to design a mousetrap vehicle which had to meetvarious design criteria, which include maximizing distance traveled, pulling capability, speedover a
a means for pre-service elementary teachers tolearn how to make connections between science and engineering concepts. In the present study,the emphasis will be on understanding the connections through the developed and implementedinstructional strategies and teacher reflections on the experiences during the elementary sciencemethods course. The following questions guide this study: How does the collaboration between engineering students and pre-service teachers impact the subject matter knowledge needed to design and implement instruction for science and engineering? What are the affordances and constraints that pre-service teachers’ identify as impacting the process of designing and implementing
defined these skills as the ability to apply prior knowledge to a newsituation, organize concepts, resolve disagreements, generate new ideas, engage in inquiryprocess and synthesize information. For instance, Evelyn described how she fosters problemsolving in her classroom: “One of the traits of people who have been very successful in theirlives... they have been able to problem solve and look at situations from different angles and trydifferent solutions. And in the classroom, one of the things that I try to get the students to do is,when they find themselves stuck to the point where they don’t know how to proceed or they don’tsee that they can go any further…, getting them to reflect on steps – you know, what do I know sofar, what is it that we
awarded Georgia Tech a contract to develop online professional development (PD)courses for STEM teachers. Electronic professional development (ePDN) courses are designed tomodel best practices in teacher PD by incorporating inquiry-based learning and by promoting thetypes of active interaction and reflection by participants that normally occur in effective face-to-face professional development sessions. In this study, the collaborative online courses and theirimpact on teachers’ professional development are described. Additionally, a case study approachwas employed to examine the effectiveness of online PD courses in classrooms and schools.Each teacher experience after completing the robotics course was presented as a case, and eachcase was used
Coyne9employed mathematical models to support bioengineering students engaged in physiology tobetter understand issues of ergonomics and body movement. Models are also created as complexvisualizations used to analyze specific properties and behaviors of materials. Adhikari10 created avirtual modeling environment to analyze specific asphalt properties using 2D and 3D discreet Page 22.1075.2elemental modeling process. These examples reflect sophisticated modeling techniques that areappropriate in pre-engineering and college engineering courses. In several of these examplesstudents are engaged in multiple drawing iterations prior to physically or virtually
elaborated on topics whereappropriate, to include informal questioning concerning issues that were deemed important, butnot reported in the group share activity. The activity culminated with students reflecting on theirlearning experience with descriptive notes and drawings in their engineering notebooks.1. Many, Many Microbes. This activity began with facilitators distributing two photographs ofmicrobes to each team of four students and rotating the sets of pictures to another group until allteams have seen all sets of photos. Through a whole group discussion, students brainstormedtopics such as living vs. non-living, characteristics of microbes, where they live, what they eat
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