AC 2009-918: TEACHING ENGINEERING IN SINGLE-GENDERMIDDLE-SCHOOL CLASSROOMSJoy Watson, University of South CarolinaJed Lyons, University of South Carolina Page 14.1134.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Teaching Engineering in Single Gender Middle School Classrooms AbstractStudents in middle school are often given pre-planned laboratory experiments which providelittle or no opportunity to develop creativity or problem solving skills. This paper describes aninvestigation of middle school students’ reactions to an open-ended engineering design problem,specifically to create a machine to move a Cheerio™ or a plastic egg seventy centimeters. If theproblem was solved
laboratories to facilitate project basedlearning is compelling since, once the software has been developed, the cost to transfer it isrelatively small, consisting mostly of developing teaching materials and teacher expertise. Thesoftware design allows the application itself to be used without modification. No matter thecourse employing the Virtual CVD Laboratory, students run the reactor, take thicknessmeasurements, and analyze their data. At the high school level, the Virtual CVD Laboratory canbe used to make instruction more meaningful for students by making it more authentic andrealistic. Through project based learning and the excitement of hands-on activities, students areengaged and encouraged to use higher cognitive skills. This authentic
-week summer residential course that brings togetherextraordinarily talented high school students from underrepresented minority groups to study atthe California Institute of Technology. The YESS program is intended for students who exhibitan interest in engineering and science, and wish to engage in collaborative learning. During thethree-week program, students take science courses and are exposed to laboratory tours, facultylectures, and college admissions workshops.The neuroscience course for the 2008 YESS program was an intensive survey of many differentfields, and used lectures, demonstrations and laboratory activities to teach topics such as brainanatomy, Drosophila melanogaster pain perception, electrophysiology, recombinant
Measure- This is a 6-point Likert type scale provided to both the teachers and the undergraduate students that measures multidisciplinarity, power of research experience and leadership. It is aligned to the National Academy of Engineering’s Grand Challenges and the NAE’s Engineers for 2020.≠ Rubric for Laboratory Presentations and Lessons- This rubric, also aligned to Engineer’s for 2020, assesses the teachers’ and REU students’ research presentation (and in the case of the teachers, their lesson plan quality.ResultsThis paper presents results of the RET and REU program in two areas: the participant teachersand their perceived impact on the students that they teach. At this point in the data analyses, dueto the fact that the
to introduce teachers to the modules and the inquiry and design teaching processinstruction is provided by the College of William and Mary. DoD S&Es have recently beenadded to the program to work as mentors in the classroom beside the teachers in a fashion similarto the VDP. It is planned to disseminate the MWM in nine states during FY08-09, using Army,Air Force, and Navy laboratories as hubs for kit distribution and local partnerships.Assessing the Effectiveness of the Curricular-Change ProgramsDue to the significant investment in funds in the curricular-change programs, vigorous andcomprehensive assessment programs are essential in both determining their effectiveness and inidentifying and guiding needed improvements.VDPAssessments of
students are female, 35% are non-White/Caucasian, 22% are special needs students, and about 14% have been designated as“gifted.” He spends about 25% of this teaching in lecture/demonstration, with the rest of itsupervising students working in the classroom or laboratory components of the TechnologyEducation course. He believes that 67.7% of his instruction “engages students in problem-solving activities” and believes that nearly half (48.7%) of that instruction “engages students inlearning mathematics or science.”We found significant differences between Middle School Technology Education and HighSchool Technology Education. Table 1 identifies some of these differences.Table 1: Differences between Middle School and High School Technology Education
the re-integration of interests and the science of engineering which led to a better understanding of engineering disciplines. Repeatedly, the teachers stated that, in particular, the field trips, the tours of the E3 faculty mentor labs, and the weekly dinner/lectures raised their awareness of the various engineering disciplines. 100% of the 2008 post-program survey responders indicated that the E3 experience will allow them to promote the field of engineering to their students. 2. Is there evidence that by participating in an engineering research laboratory and developing a classroom project based on that research, the E3 teachers gained a deeper understanding of their teaching subject (e.g
DiversityThe XXX community of volunteer scientists, teachers, and students has a diverse range Page 14.569.2of teaching and educational opportunities and needs. The ____ School District (XXXX)and other local schools serve a diverse population that includes groups typicallyunderrepresented in science and engineering (Table 1) and that vary widely in classroomneeds. Teachers represent the full spectrum of grades K-12, both genders about equally,and a broad range of experience from fairly novice to veteran teachers. Scientist-volunteers include graduate students, post docs, and occasionally staff or alumni, andthey vary in the grade-level, subject area, and
AC 2009-1372: A SURVEY OF MIDDLE-SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ATTITUDESTOWARD ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTSJed Lyons, University of South Carolina Jed Lyons is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and the Faculty Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence at the University of South Carolina. His passion is developing laboratory experiments and other hands-on active learning experiences for pre-college, undergraduate and graduate students.Bethany Fralick, University of South Carolina Bethany Fralick is a graduate student in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of South Carolina, conducting research on engineering education.Jennifer Kearn, University of South Carolina Jennifer
students to engineering. Ms. Gilmore has extensive industrial experience in the telecommunications and manufacturing areas, and since 2003 has used her industry background to foster industrial partnerships at the university and to develop and teach courses in circuits, telecommunications, and robotics.Bing Chen, University of Nebraska, Lincoln Dr. Bing Chen is chairman of the Department of Computer and Electronics Engineering on the Omaha campus of the College of Engineering, University of Nebraska - Lincoln at the Peter Kiewit Institute. He is the Principal Investigator on three NSF grants involving levels K-16 in educational robotics. His primary interest involves providing a continuous
AC 2009-1247: A MIDDLE-SCHOOL PROJECT FOR SCIENCE AND MATHENHANCEMENT THROUGH ENGINEERINGKaren High, Oklahoma State University KAREN HIGH earned her B.S. from the University of Michigan in 1985 and her M.S. in 1988 and Ph.D. in 1991 from the Pennsylvania State University. Dr. High is an Associate Professor in the School of Chemical Engineering at Oklahoma State University where she has been since 1991. Her main technical research interests are Sustainable Process Design, Industrial Catalysis, and Multicriteria Decision Making. Her engineering education activities include enhancing mathematics, communication skills, critical thinking and creativity in engineering students and teaching science
30 4.53 4.67 4.37 Page 14.1363.4 Up, Up, & Away 27 4.52 4.44 2.93 Airplane Design 28 4.50 4.54 4.64 Nestlé: Scale-Up Design 16 4.44 4.56 4.38 Cholera 27 4.30 4.30 3.74 Parallel Sorting 29 4.14 4.31 3.59 High Voltage Laboratory Tour 28 4.11 4.29 4.25 Engineering Drawing 29 4.10
to enrich teaching and learning. She works in all aspects of education including design and development, faculty training, learner support, and evaluation. Contact k.schmidt@mail.utexas.eduRichard Crawford, University of Texas, Austin Dr. RICHARD H. CRAWFORD is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin and is the Temple Foundation Endowed Faculty Fellow No. 3. He is also Director of the Design Projects Program in the Department of Mechanical Engineering. He received his BSME from Louisiana State University in 1982, and his MSME in 1985 and Ph.D. in 1989, both from Purdue University. He teaches courses in mechanical engineering design and geometric
-mail: dkueker@vivayic.comPam Newberry, Project Lead the Way The Director of Strategic Curriculum Initiatives for Project Lead The Way, Inc. Prior to joining Project Lead The Way, Inc., in July 2002, she served as the Associate Director for the International Technology Education Association?s Technology for All Americans Project for five years. She taught technology education and mathematics for 10 years. During that time, she was an Albert Einstein Fellow in 1996 and received the Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics Teaching in 1994. Address: 177 Stone Meadow Lane, Wytheville, VA 24382 Telephone: (276) 228-6502 E-mail: pampltw@embarqmail.com
AC 2009-823: PATHWAY PROGRAMS FOR UNDERREPRESENTED ETHNICSTUDENTS FROM PRECOLLEGE TO THE COLLEGE OF ENGINEERINGAnant Kukreti, University of Cincinnati ANANT R. KUKRETI, Ph.D., is an Associate Dean for Engineering Education Research and Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Cincinnati (UC), Cincinnati Ohio, USA. He joined UC on 8/15/00 and before that worked 22 years at University of Oklahoma. He teaches structural engineering, with research in experimental and finite element analysis of structures. He has won five major university teaching awards, two Professorships, two national ASEE teaching awards, and is internationally recognized in his primary research
staff greatly contributed to the success ofthe program so far. CIESE staff also maintains a PISA website that features recommendedresources and highlights of the school year. Recommended strategies for classroom visits are acombination of co-teaching, modeling, and observation/feedback. Moreover, it can not beemphasized enough, that encouraging the teachers and helping them get past any barriers was theheart of the mentoring and ultimately the success of the program.References1. Engineering is Elementary. http://www.mos.org/eie/20_unit.php. Accessed February 4, 2009. Page 14.275.5Page 14.275.6Page 14.275.7Page 14.275.8Page 14.275.9Page
. Relationship of technology and engineering to mathematics and science 6. Gender and technology and engineering 7. Connection of technology and engineering to problem solving 8. Problem solving confidence and capability Page 14.207.2Having determined the measurement criteria, instrument statements were needed. Previousengineering and technology surveys were studied to find example statements for similarcriteria.2-4 Statements addressing our unique set of criteria were then drafted and presented to apanel of experts having over 50 years of combined teaching experience in engineering andtechnology at the middle school through college level. The
joined the Statistics faculty at Cal Poly. She is an active participant in research involving a broad range of engineering and educational projects.Shirley Magnusson, California Polytechnic State University Shirley J. Magnusson is a Professor of Science and Mathematics Teaching Education in the College of Education at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She holds an M.S. and Ph.D. in science education from the University of Iowa and the University of Maryland, respectively. She is nationally known for the development and study of student learning from novel text-based materials for use in inquiry-based instruction that were modeled after the notebooks of