experience (in which our undergraduate students teachSTEM activities in elementary after school programs in diverse communities) influence theirideas about: (1) STEM, (2) teaching elementary students about STEM, and (3) teaching diversepopulations of students?, and B) Were there differences in these ideas depending upon theelementary school site where the service learning practicum took place? The undergraduates’experiences and developing perspectives are examined through written reflections and fieldobservations throughout the semester. Instructors' field notes from the service learningexperience are used as a data source of triangulation. In general, results from this study indicatethat undergraduate students’ ideas about STEM and STEM teaching
. Thomas’ research and teaching endeavors are focused on advanced materials for alternative energy sources, sustainable environments, aerospace, and bio-applications from the micro to the nano scale. Her research investigates the fabrication of inorganic and organic thin films and nanofibers for device integration. Thomas’ research group specializes in characterizing, modeling, and integrating materials that demonstrate high levels of biocompatibility, thermal reflectivity, mechanical robustness, and environmental sustainability, such as carbides, sol-gel coatings, high temperature oxides, and sev- eral polymers. Her research is interdisciplinary in nature and fosters collaborations with Chemical and Biomedical
paired with a “student ambassador”. For Cohort1 Scholars (recruited for Fall 2018), student ambassadors consisted of academically successfuljuniors and seniors who were also leaders of professional societies. These Cohort 1 Scholars will,in turn, serve as student ambassadors for Cohort 2 Scholars (to be recruited for Fall 2019). Underthe mentorship of student ambassadors, the Scholars take part in a variety of daily activitiesincluding a moderated reflection session at the end of each day.The program is structured as follows: It takes place during the summer prior to entering college. It spans two full weeks, from Sunday through the second Saturday. Each Scholar is paired with a student ambassador throughout the course of the program
knowledgeparticipants (middle school students) brought to a two-week STEM summer enrichmentprogram. The study, which is a small piece of a much larger research endeavor, primarily reliedon data collected from interviews with eight individual pod leaders. The results of this studyindicated that elicitation strategies are sometimes hindered by programmatic features–primarilythe time constraints and subsequent lack of time for reflection–of summer enrichment programs.IntroductionThe renewed focus in STEM education has led to the increased number of summer enrichmentprograms across the United States. These programs and other out of school experiences areintended to increase student awareness about and interest in STEM while bringing more studentsinto STEM fields
Engineering Ambassadors reflected on student learning andtheir own practice after each presentation. The EAs responded individually to a six-questionopen-ended survey (Appendix C). Responses that were general in nature are displayed in Figure3.Figure 3. Engineering Ambassadors’ General Reflections on Lesson PresentationsBriefly describe Which part(s) Which part(s) Which part(s) What will you What your lesson of the lesson of your lesson of your lesson do to make that knowledge went really will you do the will you change? and/or skill well? same? change
roller coaster fora local amusement park in 60 minutes. Their interaction was videotaped and pictures of theirdesigns were captured. We have analyzed the video data video analysis approach based on thecodebook we developed by reviewing literature on problem scoping. The instances that we haveseen in mom-child interactions and conversation provided evidence that the child with autismwas capable of engaging in all three actions of problem scoping. The behaviors we haveobserved were mostly associated to Problem Framing and Information Gathering. However, wehave seen some evidence of Reflection. We believe, that the findings of this study laysfoundation for future studies on children with autism and engineering design, and how toeffectively engage
behavior. Structure and The way an object is shaped or structured determines many of its Function properties and functions. Stability and For both designed and natural systems, conditions that affect stability Change and factors that control rates of change are critical elements to consider and understand. Table 1 NGSS Crosscutting ConceptsHow crosscutting concepts are implemented and assessed alongside core ideas and practicesraises exciting opportunities to deepen student motivation and learning. Rich resources includingNSF funded, University of Washington’s online STEMteachingtools.org provide a frameworkfor asking deep reflection questions [3
student engagementsurvey also asked students to reflect on what they learned in the course, and asked them to reflecton how the course could be improved.Skills assessmentStudent performance was evaluated through a pre and post exam in mathematics, several quizzesand a final exam in the course, and through assignments and presentations. In addition, studentsself-evaluated themselves at the beginning and end of the course on a list of skills that werecovered. Students rated their confidence in each skill on a 4-point scale at the beginning and endof the course. The average score for skills in each category is shown in Figure 1 for both the2017 and 2018 cohort of students. At the beginning of the course, students felt the mostconfident in chemistry
engineeringdesign process. For example, Wendell, Wright, and Paugh [4] describe the reflective decision-making practices observed in 2nd through 5th grade classrooms as students completed designactivities within the Engineering is Elementary curricula. Previous research on the middleschool curriculum described in this paper [5] utilizes longitudinal interview data to documentprogressions in how individual students describe their work with the stages of the engineeringdesign process over the course of several exposures to the curriculum.Researchers have also investigated how integrated STEM curricula promote the transfer ofknowledge from one STEM subject or context to another, ultimately enhancing student learning[6], [7], [8]. Because STEM integration
undergraduate engineering student, and an undergraduate teacher educationstudent. The STEM Stories afterschool program began in September and ran through April. Itmet twice a week for two hours each day at the school.EVALUATIONThe evaluation was approved by the UD’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). The evaluationincluded pre- and post- survey data, attendance data, and reading scores.Participants: Fifty-five grade 2 and 3 students registered for the afterschool program.Attendance records reflect that six students attended between 66% and 100% of the time; fourstudents attended between 51 and 65% of the time, eight students attended between 31 and 50%of the time, and 37 students attended between 0 – 30% of the time. The school has a 54 %minority
answers, whether correct or not. Logistically, the educator follows the guide sequence in general but often limits time forsense making or reflection. For instance, he frequently minimizes or skips sections of theactivities that require whole group discussion, writing, or reflection; thus each activity runs about15 to 20 minutes under the suggested time. He infrequently emphasizes the activity’s purposewith the whole group (Table 4). His use of questioning strategies with the small groups appearsto support development of engineering habits of mind and sense making. The educator often usesquality pedagogical strategies that support youth, such as open-ended questioning (Table 4).Overall the educator facilitates a youth-directed experience
consulting with nonprofits, museums, and summer programs. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Creation of an Engineering Epistemic Frame for K-12 Students (Fundamental)AbstractIn implementation of K-12 engineering education standards, in addition to the professionaldevelopment teachers need to be trained to prepare students for future engineering careers,assessments must evolve to reflect the various aspects of engineering. A previous researchproject investigated documentation methods using a variety of media with rising high schooljuniors in a summer session of a college preparatory program [1]. That study revealed thatalthough students had design
more likely to create drawings of white, male engineers who areworking alone than drawings of women, minorities, or people working in groups [13]-[17]. DAEstudies also indicate that children often have a narrow view of the work of engineers, oftendrawing them as laborers who build and fix things [14]-[18].The development and use of a Draw-An-Engineering-Teacher Test could provide pre and in-service teachers with the opportunity to capture their mental images and reflect on what theybelieve engineering does or would look like in their classrooms. These depictions could aideeducation faculty and professional development providers in identifying these potentialmisconceptions and give participants the opportunity to reflect upon how they can
engineering outreach. They have a strong commitment toconducting lifelong STEM learning, as well as an audience that spans from pre-school through adult.Engineers and engineering societies looking to expand their outreach activities should explore and growthis partnership opportunity. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number DRL-1657593. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
model, numerous learning style models have beenproposed such as those found in [10], [11], and [12]. All models classify students according toscales that are defined based on the way learners receive and process information. The FSLMincorporates some elements of the Myers-Briggs [12] model and Kolb’s [11] experientiallearning model. The main reasoning for its selection in the DLMS evaluation is that it focuses onaspects of learning that are significant in engineering education.The FSLM consists of four dimensions, each with two contrasting learning styles. These fourdimensions (and their associated contrasting learning styles) are: Processing (Active/Reflective);Perception (Sensing/Intuitive); Input (Visual/Verbal); and Understanding
the teachers and theuniversity students related to engineering habits of mind, awareness of engineering as aprofessional field, and development of self-efficacy related to engineering topics.Data Collected: Consistent with a mixed methods approach [28], we collected multiple sources ofdata to evaluate our RET program, including a STEM teaching efficacy instrument, video andobservation of classroom lessons, engineering-based lesson plans, laboratory notebooks, and anend-of-summer reflection survey.STEM teaching and learning outcomes were measured by the MISO T-STEM instrument, whichwas intended to characterize participant attitudes on entering the program and identify areas ofgrowth due to program participation. The T-STEM (Teacher Efficacy
grounded in the work of Crismond and Adams [94], who developed the InformedDesign Teaching and Learning Matrix based on a meta-literature review. The matrix includesnine design strategies that are fundamental to informed engineering design and include:understanding the challenge, building knowledge, generating ideas, representing ideas, weighingoptions and making decisions, conducting experiments, troubleshooting, revising or iterating,and reflecting on the process. In addition to identifying these strategies, the authors describelearning progressions to highlight the range of design behaviors that develop from beginningdesigners to informed designers.The design strategies in the Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix are intended to beused
like the nineties and in December drop.” (Student TH3_7) SD- The student has a sequential explanation “Well I change the roof a lot because it was, the way that can be across different disciplines. it works, at first, I had the roof panels on the wrong However, there is no evidence she/he side of the house, and then I had to move them that considered concepts from other disciplines around a bit. I also tried to make it (the roof) flatter during their trade-off decisions. and other roof designs to see the way the sun reflected more
would help focus students on seeing themselves as engineers andhave their ideas, rather than the LEGO bricks, drive the creation of the scene. We also added abrief time at the end of the activity to talk about what an engineer is and does, the variety ofscenes created and how that reflects the variety of engineers, and how students’ interests can fitwith the many different types of engineers. This shift moved the activity more into the realm ofan intervention rather than just data collection alone. The revised version of the activity was usedin the remaining nine classrooms. When they completed their scene, we encouraged students tocreate a brief video using a GoPro camera to describe what their engineer was doing. However,time constraints
join a small committee of teachersworking to redesign the science curriculum resources for the city.Data Collection and AnalysisTo track the evolution of Vanessa and Dani’s choices for teaching engineering, we invited bothto be interviewed periodically as they implemented engineering units, which ranged in lengthfrom one class session to several months. The first author conducted three interviews withVanessa and five with Dani, using the same protocol each time. Each interview began with theteacher describing her most recent units, often with pictures of student work and binders oflesson plans. The second part of each interview asked teachers to explain their instructional andpedagogical choices, reflect on why they persisted in teaching
related to technical systems being designed toaddress a human problem, but also knowledge of social systems in which the designedtechnology will be implemented and of the interdependencies between the technical and socialsystems1. This recognition is reflected across the K-12 Next Generation Science Standards2under the cross-cutting concept “Influence of Science, Engineering, and Technology on Societyand the Natural World”, and specifically in at least two middle (MS) and high school (HS)Engineering, Technology and the Application of Science Standards (ETS): ● The uses of technologies and any limitations on their use are driven by individual or societal needs, desires, and values; by the findings of scientific research; and by
demonstrate better science attitudes andinterest while maintaining performance in state tests [27]. This model of curriculum developmentalso encourages teachers to take ownership of the content, reflect on the rationale for theirpractices, and invest in greater self-learning, all of which lead to the creation of educativecurriculum materials [24]. Educative curriculum materials refer to curriculum that promotesteacher learning in addition to student learning by supporting and developing skills forinstructional decision making.With regard to the development of NGSS-aligned curriculum, researchers have suggested a 10-step process [28]. It consists of: (i) selection of PEs related to a given topic or DCI; (ii) review ofthe PEs to establish the scope of
of constructs likely tobe impacted by grades 6-12 science interventions. See Table 2. We also asked questions aboutwhether students found S&E fair projects to be “transformative experiences”[11] which areexpected to reflect deeper engagement with science. We shortened the scales for time, selectingthe four most representative items from each scale. We also rephrased each question to ask aboutthe fair project.ResultsWe analyzed the demographic characteristics reported by these students and contrasted thosewho did and did not complete science fair projects. Overall, teachers with younger students(especially 6th grade) seemed more likely to require all students to complete a project, whileteachers with older students (especially 12th grade
implementation of UDL focuses on integrating the three principles across four criticalinstructional elements: Clear Goals, Intentional Planning for Learner Variability, FlexibleMethods and Materials, and Timely Progress Monitoring [5]. These critical elements areimplemented using an instructional design model that includes five steps: (1) Establish ClearOutcomes, (2) Anticipate Learner Variability, (3) Establish Clear Assessment and MeasurementPlans, (4) Design the Instructional Experience, and (5) Reflect and Develop NewUnderstandings. UDL makes use of a variety of technology-enhanced, evidence-based, strategiesand instructional resources to enhance instruction for all students.Preliminary Outcomes of RET and Train the Trainer Model of SupportsEarly
situated. Forexample, researchers of DLI in history have found that historians engage in literacy practicessuch as contextualizing, sourcing, and corroborating [11], [12] when reading and evaluatingprimary source documents. We conceptualize engineering literacy practices in layers, where thediscipline-specific practices (e.g. genres) are on the bottom layer while the more generalengineering literacy practices (e.g. situated social activities) are on the top layer. Figure 1demonstrates this vision of layered literacy practices. We envision that engineers working in aspecific sub-discipline of engineering work with textual genres that closely reflect the work donein their discipline. These genres then inform the frameworks they use to analyze and
them the upper hand with industry recruiters.Competitions sanctioned by SAE International (formerly the Society of Automotive Engineers)generally occur at the end of the school year (May/June), thereby making the summer months acritical time for student teams to reflect on their previous designs and to start proposinginnovations for the subsequent season. The Formula SAE (FSAE) team at The Cooper Union inNew York City has used this time to immerse high school students in this real-world activity intheir college’s summer STEM program.This 6-week intensive summer program is separated into two main modules. The first modulefocuses on teaching students the fundamentals of engineering experimentation that culminate inoral presentations detailing
discussions with participants. Interviews and focus groupswere digitally recorded and transcribed. A reflective analysis process was used to analyze andinterpret interviews and focus groups.Test of Students’ Science KnowledgeA student science content knowledge assessment aligned to the instructional goals of the researchcourse was developed and administered at the onset and conclusion of each part of the course.S-STEM SurveyThe S-STEM Student Survey measures student self-efficacy related to STEM content, interest inpursuing STEM careers, and the degree to which students implement 21st century learning skills.The survey was administered in a pre/post format at the beginning and end of each project year.FindingsResults are organized by evaluation
experiential learning [9], yet the learning was superficial and disconnected. Tobegin to deepen campers learning, the camp was revised in 2017 to reflect the aforementionedpedagogical objectives of the advisory committee.By transforming the week into an investigation into how to power a metropolis, campers wouldlearn to apply knowledge of different generators, and electrical circuits to build a model city.This design process would provide campers with what Scardamealia and Beretter [10] describeas knowledge building opportunities. The campers would collectively inquire into energyengineering to complete a common goal and synthesize ideas. This paper documents the changein camp structure, describes the programming associated with the modified 2017 camp
statistically significant interactions at the scale level, although several occur at theitem level. As expected from research regarding female engineers and technologists, they haveabove median measures of traits representative of both masculine and feminine genderorientations. They exhibit below median levels of explicit sexism as measured by the SATWscale, but above median levels of implicit sexism as measured by the implicit associations tests(IATs).Higher levels of implicit sexism are also reflected in the SATW items that drew the greatestdisagreement as measured by the Net Support Percentage (NSP), i.e., the percent of responsesthat were not 4s or 5s. Selecting “3 – Neither Agree nor Disagree” on particularly embeddedideas is a typical approach of
0 II Preparation Preparation for first use 2 III Mechanical Use Use w/o reflection 1 IV A Routine Reliable use with few changes 4 IV B Refinement Continual adaption & improvement 3 V Integration Collaboration w/ others to improve 3 VI Renewal Large improvement & reevaluation 0Teacher’s Creative AchievementsCreative achievement was found to be low with the sample of RET teachers in the first cohort.The second cohort included much more lifetime creative acheivement and recognition, with twoteachers scoring over ten on the instrument. While the overall