Page 26.1629.8 Design Activity (pp. 319-341). Chichester: Wiley.2. Cross, N., & Cross, A. C. (1998). Expertise in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, 10(3), 141- 149.3. Dannels, D. P., Anson, C. M., Bullard, L., & Peretti, S. (2003). Challenges in learning communication skills in chemical engineering. Communication Education, 52(1), 50-56.4. Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103-120.5. Otto, K. N. & Wood, K. L. (2000). Product design techniques in reverse engineering and new product development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.6
and analysis will be included in the ASEEannual conference.Acknowledgements The funding provided by the National Science Foundation DRK-12 program is gratefullyacknowledged, as well as the participation of area middle school and high school students and Page 25.760.11teachers.References 1. Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing Engineering Education in P-12 Classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 369-387. 2. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J.L. (2005). Toward Implementing Distributed Scaffolding: Helping Students Learn Science from Design. Journal of Research in
unique outreach program specially designed for sixth grade students. Page 22.954.3The program incorporated hands-on activities from all the engineering majors offered at PennState Erie, The Behrend College into a fun interactive day within a limited amount of time.Penn State Erie, The Behrend College (Penn State Behrend) a stand-alone college of the PennState University has 4,700 students and is located in Pennsylvania. Penn State Behrend‟s first K-12 women and minority outreach event, Minority College Experience/Women in Science andEngineering (MCE/WISE), was launched in 1988 with 20+ incoming high school seniorsparticipating. The students
expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Stanford IRB approval was obtained forthis work under submitted protocol 17011.[1] "National Science Education Standards," N. R. Council, Ed.: National Academies Press, 1996, p. 262.[2] P. Grossman, C. Compton, D. Igra, and M. Ronfeldt, "Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective," Teachers College Record, vol. 111, pp. 2055-2100, 2009.[3] H. Wenglinsky, "How Teaching Matters: Bringing the Classroom Back into Discussions of Teacher Quality," Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service2000.[4] S. C. Silverstein, J. Dubner, J. Miller, S. Glied, and J. D. Loike, "Teachers
the design and production ofvarious goods and services.” 3Geospatial Education Needed to Fuel the Workforce Demand in HawaiiIn alignment with national trends, the number of job opportunities in Hawaii that require trainingor experience in geospatial technologies has dramatically increased in the last decade.Employers of all types are looking for skilled GIS technicians, remote sensing analysts, andgeospatial engineers. However, the local workforce is not able to meet this demand. Manyemployers end up recruiting and relocating hires from outside of the state. In addition to theextra expense this entails, employers also experience turnover in hires without island ties due todifficulties in adjusting to the island‟s isolation, high cost of
edition (Longman, New York, 2001). Page 15.96.7Appendix Items remembered before ISE experienceRemembering 1) It’s the one universal force that attracts objects together 2) Gravity is the force of attraction between two masses 3) Gravity is the force that keeps us on earth 4) Gravity – 9.81 5) Gravity is a force that “grounds” us 6) Gravity is 9.81 m/s 7) Gravity holds things down on earth 8) Gravity is -9.81 m/s 9) Gravity always equals 9.81 m/s 10) Gravity is on Earth and it holds us down
students and teachers. In A. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000. [2] Machi, E., Improving U.S. Competitiveness with K-12 STEM Education and Training, Heritage Special Report, SR-57, Heritage Foundation, 2009. [3] Riojas, M., Lysecky, S., & Rozenblit, J., Educational Technologies for Precollege Engineering Education. IEEE transactions on learning technologies, 5 (1), 20-37, 2012. [4] American Society for Quality, Engineering Image Problem Could Fuel Shortage, ASQ Survey: Career Not on Radar for Kids or Parents, Jan. 2009. [5] Douglas, J., Iversen, E., and Kalyandurg, C., “Engineering in the K-12 Classroom
interview technique has the potential to become a useful tool for workingwith very young children, especially now that engineering education is advancingresearch with younger participants. The puppet methodology allows a child to feelcomfortable in an interview, allowing for more detailed answers, with a bit of addedeffort. However, more empirical evidence is needed to ascertain the usefulness of thismethodology.AcknowledgementWe would like to thank the Theater Department at the Science Museum of Minnesota fortheir help and guidance.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant No. (HRD-1136253). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author(s
. Econ. Can. d’économique 45, 1188–1219 (2012). 6. Briskin, L. & Coulter, R. P. Introduction Feminist Pedagogy: Challenging the normative. Can. J.Educ. 17, 247–263 (1992). 7. Cherubini, L., Hodson, J., Manley-Casimir, M. & Muir, C. ’ Closing the Gap“ at the Peril ofWidening the Void: Implications of the Ontario Ministry of Education”s policy for Aboriginal education. Can. J.Educ. 33, 329–356 (2010). 8. Gaskell, J. Gender matters from school to work. Resour. Fem. Res. 23, 49–50 (1994). 9. Pomerantz, S., Raby, R. & Stefanik, A. Girls Run the World? Caught between Sexism andPostfeminism in School. Gend. Soc. 27, 185–207 (2013
topics and “new engineer” workforce skills—that we are seeking toprovide for students through the Build IT curriculum. Page 14.215.14AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grantnumber ESI-0624709. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.Bibliography1 Jonassen, D. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools. Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.2 Chambers, J. & Carbonaro, M. (2003). Designing, Developing, and
Sciences, 1(2), pp. 201-238.10. Vattam, S., and Kolodner, J. L. (2006). Design-Based Science Learning: Important Challenges and How Technology Can Make a Difference. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Bloomington, IN.11. Wittrock, M. C. (1991). Generative Teaching of Comprehension. The Elementary School Journal, 92(2), 169- 184.12. Hotaling, L., McGrath, B., McKay, M., Shields, C., Lowes, S., and Cunningham, C. M., (2007). Engineering Our Future New Jersey. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, Chicago, IL.13. McKay, M., and McGrath, B. (2007). Real-World Problem-Solving Using Real-Time Data
education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 185–189.7. Roehrig, G. H., Wang, H., Moore, T. J., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the “E” enough? Investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31–44.8. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T., & Roehrig, G. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 28–34.9. Morrison, J. S. (2006). Attributes of STEM education: The student, the academy, the classroom. TIES STEM Education Monograph Series, (August).10. Brophy, S., Klein, S. S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008
“Technology Education/Pre-engineering education” (TE/PreEE)program and has its roots in industrial arts education dating back to the 1930s. More detaileddescriptions of each of these programs have been previously reported.[1-3] Both programsrequire substantial coursework in all four elements of STEM, as well as integrated-STEM(i.e.- how to use multiple STEM elements together in K-12 curriculum/activities). Studentsin both programs also acquire substantial experience in integrating non-STEM subjects withSTEM subjects. In 2006 our department completed a redesign of our “TechnologyEducation” curriculum to integrate more M&S into our Technology & Engineering (T&E)courses, resulting in our current “pre-engineering” curriculum. Even though this
interdependence between teachers and the SLIDER Fellows and how is power distributed in the teacher-fellow relationship? • How does the relationship between teachers and Fellows, particularly related to interdependence and power, impact teachers’ instructional practices? Page 22.1470.4Research DesignTo study the relationship between Fellows and their partner teacher(s), we relied on case studydesign, described by Yin (2003) as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporaryphenomenon within a real-life context, especially when the boundaries between the phenomenonand context are not clearly evident” (p. 13). In this study, it was
that integrating many differentmathematics ideas in one concrete context is challenging. Further supports, such as using thedesign context as a capstone activity or incorporating structured transfer activities, may berequired to effectively enable students’ mastery of the more general mathematical ideas. In ourfuture work, we intend to consider more case studies of the curriculum in-action withimprovements to the implementation based on these findings, in addition to conductingcomparative analyses of the curriculum relative to alternative approaches. This will help us tofurther elaborate on the conditions necessary for designing effective K-12 engineering curricula.Bibliography1. W. H. Schmidt, C. C. McKnight, and S. A. Raizen, A Splintered
testing of candidate assessment items is accomplished using cognitive interviews. Oncea number of questions have been brainstormed for a particular assessment, the questions areprinted (one to a page) and tested with students. Each interviewer takes a number of thequestions (no more than can be tested in 20 minutes with a student) and sits one-on-one with astudent to test the questions.During a cognitive interview, the interviewer first reassures the student that the purpose of theinterview is to see if the questions are good ones, not to test the student. Whether or not thestudent knows the answer to a question, we ask that s/he let us know what s/he thinks thequestion is asking, and whether any words or phrases are particularly confusing. The
coursework and time on SAT scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 866-875.6. Capraro, R. M. & Slough, S. W. (2008). Project-based learning: An integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics approach. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.7. College Board (2011). Program summary report 2011. Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/AP-Program-Summary-Report.pdf8. Dick, T. P. & Rallis, S. F. (1991). Factors and influences on high school students' career choices, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(4), 281-292.9. Ferry, N. M. (2006). Factors influencing career choices of adolescents and young adults in rural Pennsylvania, Journal of Extension, 44(3
conclusion addresses strategies for further enhancing engineering educationopportunities as Island Energy Inquiry program expands.Developing Energy Related Engineering Skills in the Education to Workforce Pipeline The state of Hawaii is the most dependent state in the nation on the importation of fossilfuel. Ninety percent of the state‟s energy is imported. Energy sustainability for this remoteisland chain will require reducing our reliance on imported fossil fuels and a significant increasein reliance on renewable energy sources in the islands such as wind, solar, geothermal, and waveenergy. In 2008, Hawaii made a public/private commitment to achieve 70% clean energy by2030. An estimated thirty percent of this involves increasing energy
schedule Page 15.644.13Bibliography1 National Academy of Sciences. (2006). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, DC: Author.2 National Science Board. 2008. Science and Engineering Indicators 2008, NSF 07-308. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics.3 National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2007, NSF 07-315 (Arlington, VA; February 2007). Available from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/.4 Zweben, S. (2005). 2003-2004 Taulbee Survey: Record
teaching practices anda five-minute video commentary of their classroom implementation of the topics (if applicable)according to the National Board aligned prompt(s) in each unit (see Appendix A for an examplerequirement and prompt). For more information on the T2I2 professional development materials,please refer to Ernst, Clark, DeLuca, & Bottomley, 20138.Pilot teachers may exercise a great deal of freedom when using the T2I2 system. First, there is noset order for how teachers go through the content. Even though Learning Objects are grouped byUnit, they do not have to be read in any particular arrangement. This allows teachers to chooseareas that interest them the most to read first. Second, although teachers must submit all of theirUnit
PlayDoh container lidstaped to the motor hubs to act as wheels. Thelight sensor is mounted to the back of thevehicle with the aforementioned piece ofcardstock leaning against it to shade it. Once thelight sensor was exposed to light, it began tomove forward. On the front of the vehicle was afeature designed to insert itself into a receptacleon the next robot. Page 23.956.6 Fig. 3. Group 1's robot. (Photo by author) Fig. 4. Group 2's robot. (Photo by author)The fifth group’s robot was a drag sled, shown Fig. 5. Group 4's Robot. (Photo by author)in figure 7. In the receptacle feature on
that girls were not interested in long lectures.They were, however, very interested in hands-on activities and being able to communicate andbond with the female college students. It was also found that girls were most interested inspeakers who talked about their profession in the context of how it makes the world a betterplace, how it enhances the quality of their family life and how they manage family and work.Parents were very interested in opportunities available for their child to explore STEM fields,financial considerations for college, and the parent role in their child’s STEM education.Months prior to the event, the lead from SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific would meet with thestudent organization(s) from the hosting university (e.g. San
second-grade class taught by Ms. Smith, students justified the criteria theychose for a good design by referring to the context set by the story. The students were workingon choosing a site for a model Tarpul, a kind of gondola used to cross rivers in Nepal. In thestory and context for the Evaluating a Landscape EiE unit, Suman is a boy who is concernedabout the siting of a Tarpul near his home, because his grandmother is sometimes ill and needs tobe transported across the river to the nearest clinic. Ms. S: Who has tested site H? Go back to that page for a second. Look on your test page where you wrote how many weights you tested. All of you tested site H. Can you tell me how many weights you got [into the model Tarpul]? When you tested H
AC 2010-1218: TEACHING INQUIRY-BASED STEM IN THE ELEMENTARYGRADES USING MANIPULATIVES: A SYSTEMIC SOLUTION REPORTLouis Nadelson, Boise State University Louis S. Nadelson is an Assistant Professor in the College of Education at Boise State University. His research agenda is conducted within the context of STEM education and includes aspects of conceptual change, inquiry, and pre-service and in-service teacher education. He has published research ranging from teacher professional development to the impact of inquiry on STEM learning. Dr. Nadelson earned a B.S. degree in Biological and Physics Science from Colorado State University, a B.A. with concentrations in computing, mathematics and
qb23,wmm24,emg26,kusic,fromme,af63@drexel.eduAbstract Since the 1960’s, Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI) has been promoted as the new standardfor teaching and learning. Schools were provided with computers and internet connections atan astounding rate in the 1990’s, but there was no correlated increase in student performance.1Investigation into this problem has revealed that computer technology is simply used to augmenttraditional ‘instructionist’ teaching strategies,1,2 and this type of integration does not parallel thecurrent real-time problem solving domain that is driven by technology. Therefore, the integration of technology to reinforce science, technology, engineering andmathematics (STEM) education must not simply augment the
. National Science Foundation, NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows In K-12 Education (GK-12) http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5472 (accessed March 8, 2006).2. J. Lyons, M. Banich, J. Brader and C. Ebert, (2002). “Formative Assessment of the University of SouthCarolina’s Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education Program,” Proceedings of the 2002 American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada, June 16-19, 2002.3. J. Lyons, J. Brader and C. Ebert, (2003). “GK-12 Enhances Teaching Skills of Engineering Graduate Students,”Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Nashville, Tennessee,June 22-26, 2003.4. J. Lyons and S. Fisher, (2004). “Effects of Elementary- and Middle
students to 4. Re-tell the performance of a possible solution. 5. Analyze possible solution(s) according to several types of evidence, including results of physical tests, data from scientific investigations, information from external sources, and critique by other children or adults. 6. Purposefully choose how to move forward to improve the proposed solution.Table 1. Alignment of proposed definition of reflective decision-making in engineering withsupporting research and elementary engineering curriculum learning tasksElements of reflective decision- How engineering design practitioners Related learning tasks in the EiEmaking exhibit the element curriculumDuring initial
] Papert, S., Mindstorms: Children, Computers, And Powerful Ideas, Basic Books, New York, NY, 1993. [2] Appel, K., Gastineau, J., Bakken, C., and Vernier, D., Physics with Computers, Vernier Software and Technology, Beaverton, OR, 2003. [3] Church, W., Ford, T., Perova, N., and Rogers, C., “Physics with Robotics Using LEGO MINDSTORMS in High School Education,” Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Spring Symposium, Palo Alto, CA, 2010. [4] Erwin, B., Cyr, M., and Rogers, C., “Lego Engineer and RoboLab: Teaching Engineering with LabView from Kindergarten to Graduate School,” International Journal of Engineering Education, 16(3): 181-192, 2000. [5] Mataric, M.J., Koenig, N., and
solving,” in The Nature of Intelligence, L. B. Resnick, Ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 231-236, 1976.[11] Flavell, J. H., “Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry,” American Psychology, vol. 34, pp. 907-911, 1979.[12] Paris, S. G. and Winograd, P., “Metacognition in academic learning and instruction,” in Dimension of Thinking and Cognitive Instruction, B. F. Jones, Ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 15-44, 1990.[13] Lawanto, O. and Johnson, S. D. (in print), “Metacognition in an engineering design project,” International Journal of Engineering Education, 2011.[14] Butler, D. L. and Cartier, S. C., “Learning in varying activities: An explanatory framework and a new
statisticalstrength, and allow for conclusions for additional majors. Finally, if it can be determined thatcertain features/components of applied curriculum are more effective in remediating anxietythen these features could be more effectively integrated into “non-STEM” teacher preparationprograms.References(1) Rise above the Gathering Storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching Category 5 (2010), National Academic Press. (Washington,D.C.)(2) Vinson, B. (2001), A Comparison of Preservice Teachers' Mathematics Anxiety Before and After a MethodsClass Emphasizing Manipulatives, Early Childhood Education Journal, 29 (2).(3) Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for Research in MathematicsEducation, 21, 33-46.(4) Beilock, S