creative endeavors, partialknowledge students have about new content, and negotiation of social roles, responsibilities andpositions all present communication challenges as students engage in design projects8. Moreover,complications abound because the various contingencies are interdependent (e.g., knowledge ofcontent constrains solution options). Effective engineering design learning depends onstructuring a predictable environment in which students feel safe to explore and create withinbounded constraints. Incorporating classroom structures to facilitate productive peer-to-peercommunication is one part of creating such an environment.Research in learning and motivation presents multiple perspectives for educators and researchersto draw from as
their robot, their first assignment was to write a program to allow therobot to move forward for one meter, turn 180 degrees and then move forward for another meter.By gradually introducing new programming techniques, the level of programming difficulty wasincreased. During the 3rd week of the course, the students were introduced to functions whichmade repetitive code more efficient and programmer-friendly. By this time, the moreexperienced programmers were actively helping the less experienced. Peer work always workshand-in-hand with teacher instruction. In the 4th week, before students would begin their finalprojects, the final objective was to program the remote controller. The course was designed thisway to ensure that students would not
Standards (NGSS)foregrounds the importance of collaboration in science and engineering practices by integratingcommunication as a fundamental criterion at all levels of K-12 education: “Engineers need to beable to express their ideas, orally and in writing, with the use of tables, graphs, drawings, ormodels and by engaging in extended discussions with peers.” 13 Such communication practicesare necessary for generating design solutions and for planning and carrying out collaborativeinvestigations.Previous studies indicate that young learners encounter communication challenges related totask, relational, and identity issues when collaborating on engineering design projects.14, 15 Otherresearch has identified effective scaffolding to support middle
thinking to structure theirengagement with ideas and knowledge.4,7,8 The intent is to engage learners’ imaginations in theirpursuit of understanding and thus engender the kind of caring about learning necessary fordeveloping deep understanding. In the IE approach, instruction is designed to support adevelopmental sequence of five different stages of understanding that enable learners to makesense of the world in different ways. Learners progress to new stages by mastering the cognitivetools associated with each stage of understanding. (Cognitive tools are mental devices developedby our ancestors to help make sense of the world and to operate more effectively in it.)The most important cognitive tool is narrative. Egan writes, “Narrative
that’s certainly how we do things at home. So he’s been home since then. – Nelson’s mom When I was a young adult I was in a church where people were primarily home schooling. And I was in it long enough to see the long-term results. And what I saw was the flexibility that we had, and I liked the product. I was there are enough that I could see the kids grow into high school and I thought, “Ah, these kids are very well rounded. They’re not very peer-dependent.” What we wanted to get away from was the peer issues. – Alexander’s mom …if I’d wanted to enroll him in kindergarten the following year when he would have turned five in August, the cut off was August 1st, for the age. So he would have
and feedbackfrom the pilot course. According to Harriman5, the key to effective curriculum is makingsure that the needs of the student, the instruction, and the delivery mechanism are allcongruent with one another. Before being able to meet the needs of the students, theinstructor must know what those needs are. Because there are many various learning styles,the curriculum has implemented one of the more popular style surveys VARK (Visual, Aural,Reading & Writing, Kinesthetic). VARK is sometimes criticized for lacking empiricalsupport but continues to remain popular in education6.The curriculum has also incorporated the Community of Enquiry Framework7 by whichpresents the concept that students participating in community engagement can
Ph.D in Computer Science from the University of California, Davis. Dr. Haungs spe- cializes in game design, web development, and cloud computing. He is the developer of PolyXpress (http://mhaungs.github.io/PolyXpress) – a system that allows for the writing and sharing of location-based stories. Dr. Haungs has also been actively involved in curriculum development and undergraduate edu- cation. Through industry sponsorship, he has led several K-12 outreach programs to inform and inspire both students and teachers about opportunities in computer science. Recently, Dr. Haungs took on the position of Co-Director of the Liberal Arts and Engineering Studies (LAES) program. LAES is a new, multidiscisplinary degree offered
, larger-scale, quantitative scientific studies. Brown4points out that criteria against which to measure success of interventions or guide iterations ineducational DBR should consist of development of traits which the school system is chargedwith teaching, e.g., problem solving, critical thinking, and reflective learning.In this paper, we test the hypothesis that the flexibility and hands-on nature of a roboticsplatform will support different audio, visual, verbal (read/write), and kinesthetic learningstyles,5,6 offering teachers more versatility within lesson plans while effectively teaching STEMconcepts to students. Despite a lack of agreement7 within the education research communityregarding categories or, in some cases, the existence of
and come up with potential designs that would then be presented to their peers at variousstages for feedback and critique. In one week students identified an idea, researched existing andpotential solutions, developed a design, built a prototype and presented their solution. Theprocess included competencies such as ideation and brain storming, team forming and roleassignment, project planning, critical thinking, evaluation and reflection, constructive critique,verbal and written skills, visual sketching, engineering design, prototyping and debugging,entrepreneurship, and innovation. The students were given the opportunity to work in a group orindividually. Even if students chose to work individually, they were required to participate in the
in Science" camps (survey respondents ranged from 8 to 32 per camp with median = 21); • 9 "Solar System Adventures" camps (survey respondents ranged from 13 to 25 per camp with median=19); • 7 "Engineering" camps (survey respondents ranged from 12 to 25 per camp with median =23); Page 26.9.7 • 1 "Robotics" camp (survey respondents were 15 girls); and • 7 "Rocketry" camps (survey respondents ranged from 9 to 28 per camp with median =21). NASA Theme Activities Students Identified As Their "Favorite”Camp Name Number writing a description Number of different Most popular
thestudents to explore an area they find interesting in greater depth than the time constraints of theactivities allow. This gives students the opportunity to experiment and come up with ideas of theirown to implement. Utilizing information, skills, and engineering vocabulary acquired in theactivities, each student interactively designs a final project which is presented and demonstratedfor their peers, parents, and instructors. A point of emphasis is for students to explicitly discusskey decisions and incremental developments throughout the week with regard to the iterativeengineering design process: planning, analysis and design, testing, and evaluation.Projects fall under one of four main categories, and within each group, students are encouraged
practices prevalent in high school and introductory university physics and math courses, and developing recommendations to increase gender diversity in engineering education and the engineering profession. Kathy is an elected Councillor for APEGBC (the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia), has served on several educational and governance committees at Camosun College, and is a qualified restorative justice facilitator, peer coach and liturgical musician. Page 26.1734.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Where are the women
before theproject, but used no gendered terms after the project, or included the term “she” when referringto engineers. For example, Sara described an engineer with the following words: I feel like she would try any material she thinks would work. She would also test it out a lot. She would write a lot of notes, so when other people look at her experiments or when she tries to show it to someone, she could show she did trial and error. And be like “This is why this is the best one I did, this is why I think it’s a better material to use.”Sara changed her perception of engineering as being male-oriented to a field were females arealso active participants. Her perception of engineering included activities where women
, research posters, and research articles. YSP participants were challenged to read journal articles, collaboratively write a scientific article based on a group experiment (making ice cream without an ice cream maker), as well as prepare an abstract, poster, and talk focused on their own research project. In addition to the weekly communication course, participants from all of the Center’s summer research programs—including YSP students—attended a weekly seminar series. Topics varied slightly from year to year. For example, the summer 2014 seminar series included the following topics: responsible conduct of research, ethics of animal research, neuroethics, industry, communicating to lay audiences, and applying to graduate school. In 2014, a new