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
theirown ability to teach engineering content. Or a teacher may provide different kinds of verbalsupport for students to engage with certain engineering practices based on their perceptions ofstudents’ abilities to engage in engineering practices in different classroom contexts (Lilly et al.,2020). Teachers’ beliefs can then affect the effectiveness of teachers’ implementation ofinterdisciplinary curricula and the opportunities that students have to engage in certaininterdisciplinary practices (Askew et al., 1997). In classroom practice, teachers draw upon their own privately-held PCK&S to make bothplanned and in-the-moment instructional moves. PCK&S is a kind of reflection in action (Schön,1983) where teachers monitor student
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
the concluding session rank the students andthe student groups are presented with cash awards reflective of their ranking.Graduation, Awards, and Final Remarks Session The NSTI program ends with a graduation ceremony and closing remarks meeting. In this meeting,Dr. Yusuf Mehta, CREATES’ Director, concludes the program by providing the students and ceremonyattendees with final remarks on the program’s success and lessons learned. It is also an opportunity forstudents to discuss their experience with the program administrators and their parents.LONG-TERM IMPACT ON CAREER CHOICES OF COHORTSOutreach Findings To evaluate the extent to which the goals of the program were achieved, parents of NSTI programgraduates were contacted by
‘COSMOSEducational Toolkit’.Initially, several teachers stated that the lecture and lab phase (weeks 1-2) of the program couldhave been shorter, rather than full-day activities because there was a lot of material to absorb. Inaddition, teachers also noted that they especially enjoyed the lecture topics that coincided directlywith lab experiments, as this gave them a sense of how-to best design lessons for their own studentsby being able to actively take on a learner’s perspective. These comments were made immediatelyafter the first 2-weeks of the PD program. At the end of the PD program teachers reflected andstated that the rigorous lecture and lab phase supported their conceptualization of wirelesscommunications in order to best create lessons in the
, critical thinking, and the use of technology [24,25]. PBL engages students in realinquiry [23] that begins with the students posing question, generating hypothesis, seekingresources to find answers, framing new questions, exploring and testing ideas, and formulatingconclusions [24]. Formalizing a process for feedback and revision [24] during a project makeslearning meaningful since it emphasizes that creating high-quality products [23] and performancesis an important purpose of the endeavor. Students answer questions and reflect on how to completethe project, next steps they need to take, and what they gain in terms of knowledge, skills, andpride. The role of a teacher is vital for the implementation of PBL in classroom environment. AsFigure 5(a
,challenges, question and answer sessions, etc. An online feedback and reflection system was alsoimplemented to solicit feedback from the middle school teachers at the end of each day.Table 1: Statistics of the participating teachers. School/teacher information Number Participating schools total 13 Participating teachers total 23 Participating math teachers total/male/female 10/4/6 Participating science teachers total/male/female 13/7/6Table 2: Statistics of the facilitation team
goals by providing participants with opportunities to: 1) think reflectively andcritically about their current teacher practices; 2) improve understanding of advanced placementand state standards; 3) fully engage in an authentic PBL and engineering design experience onwater treatment and sustainability; and 4) learn about current NEWT research being conducted atRice University, Arizona State University, Yale University, and University of Texas-El Paso.Pilot Program Recruitment and ParticipantsNEET participants were selected from local districts that had high underrepresented minoritystudent populations. Of the 47 applications received, 25 teachers were selected for the pilotNEET program. Teachers had a wide range of teaching experience from 1
associated with a pedagogy-focused RET experience that includes curriculumdesign activities, the importance of building in metacognition and reflective practice to the RETprogram, and the challenges of RET programs integrating teachers into existing research labs andprojects. As another example, Silverstein, Dubner, Miller, Glied, and Loike [4] found thatteachers’ participation in a RET program positively impacted the teachers’ skills in sciencecommunication and improved their students’ achievement in science. The RET program featuredin this study integrated research experiences with weekly professional development sessions. Research Experience for Teacher programs that are situated within engineering researchcenters have the potential to
Technology to pitch their inventions to judges and audience members in astatewide competition.The goal of this research is to understand the experiences of teachers and students within theprogram and the ways they benefit from participating. Initial research efforts have focusedprimarily on teachers’ experiences implementing the program. Through survey, focus group,and interview data collected over the past several years, teachers have also provided theirperspectives about how the program has impacted their students. Across several academic years,teachers’ survey data reflects a high level of agreement that participation has had a positiveimpact on their students’ communication and teamwork skills, enthusiasm for learning aboutengineering and
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
paper where weexplore how 53 kindergartners tested their first try design attempts, were prompted to engage infailure analysis when their designs failed, and planned their second designs.BackgroundThe Epistemic Practice of Persisting and Learning from FailureOne way to investigate preschool through grade 12 (P-12) students’ engagement in engineeringis through the frame of epistemic practices of engineering. These epistemic practices representthe ways of knowing and doing that are reflective of professional engineering practice andappropriate for P-12 students. Epistemic practices may also be regarded as ways of doing that arecentral to the development of an engineering identity. Cunningham and Kelly identified sixteenepistemic practices of
; interactions with city construction-in-progress teams(engineers, managers) and city leaders (councilman) and staff.Friday: Field trip to university’s aviation and flight control center adjacent to the suburbanairport. Final presentations and check out.Each day, students had classroom time to work in small teams and individually. The aim of theseclassroom sessions was to help participants reflect on their transportation related experiences andinteractions with experts to further develop and articulate their understanding of localtransportation and construction industry and related careers (West, 2018). All meals, breakfast,lunch, and dinner, and snacks were provided.Data Collection and MethodsA pre-post survey was developed (NAE, 2008, 2013) to elicit
other teachers as they taught in ways designed to foreground students’ funds ofknowledge and home languages. For over one year, they participated in ongoing professionaldevelopment in which they reflected on student work or transcripts of their own teaching anddiscussed and identified ways for better supporting Latinx students who were receiving ESLservices. MethodsFor the trimester reported in this comparative case study, we observed each teacher daily for aminimum of four instructional units. These instructional units were each comprised of oneengineering design challenge and ranged from a few days to a few months in duration. Thisstudy also draws from four interviews per teacher, which were designed
Davis et al., utilizing a 7-point scale in each ofthe 15 sections. The sections, illustrated in Figure 2, reflected the various stages of the designprocess, as well as administrative/project management components of engineering design. Inaddition to assigning each section a point value, instructors can choose from a number of generalcomments or input custom comments. This wide range of scores allows instructors to track studentprogress in each section throughout the 3-course sequence, addressing the criteria of applicabilityacross a wide range of students. By widening the scale and broadening expectations as studentsprogress from course to course, many stages of development can be accounted for [10]. Hence, toreflect increasing expectations
the needto increase the number of URM graduate students, and also reflects the importance of includingour URM undergraduate students in the program. White Asian/PI Latinx Black 14 Number of Participants 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2.5 (Sp'19
self-reflection withopen and closed questions is required as part of the program assessment. As part of the formativeprocess, the program evaluator summarizes evaluation results, student progress, observations,and participation data to build an assessment report of the summer activity. Accordingly, the nextsection describes the assessment instruments and results for the various pre-college programcomponents.Evaluation StrategiesAn integral part of the pre-college program is the documentation and tracking of studentparticipants. As outlined in Figure 1, information from schools and participants is stored in theCenter’s management system, designed to record the participant’s involvement, including visitsto schools and summer program
, active/reflective, and sequential/global.Complementary teaching styles can be matched to each of the learning styles, and the traditional“chalk and talk” style can in no way encompass all of them. Several institutions found that amixed-mode approach which balances active learning and passive learning is best for teachingstudents, especially in early stages of development [4]. Thus, in order to teach STEM topics toall students, supplementary teaching tools should be utilized.There are some assignable causes linked to the lack of engagement and success in STEMclassrooms. Many times teachers themselves do not have adequate training to teach STEMtopics. This problem was illustrated in a study done in 2007 that revealed the United Statesranked 41 out
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
0.05 isconsidered significant.Table 5. Parameter estimates β and their exponentiated values, and P-values for the effect ofsession, gender, and language spoken at home. Effects Estimate Exp.Estimate P.value Significance (Intercept) 0.45 1.61 3.2×10−3 Yes Gender 0.48 1.6 0.16×10−3 Yes Session Pre −0.61 0.54 0.81×10−5 Yes Session WB 0.26 1.3 0.97×10−3 Yes Language 0.41 1.5 6.4×10−3 YesTable 5 shows the parameter estimates and their exponentiated values, which reflects the
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
example diagram of this bi-factor CFA model is depicted in Figure 1.This general factor needs to be parsed out when evaluating the structural validity of the sixsubstantive scales because an acquiescence factor (response bias or general attitude) has beenwidely reported in psychological research with self-report measures (Paulhus & Vazire, 2007).Some respondents have a general tendency to endorse all the items highly across measurementscales, whereas others have a general tendency to provide lower ratings across the board. It iswell documented that self-ratings of many psychological constructs reflect this general factor,including personality (e.g., Messick & Jackson, 1961), interests (e.g., Tracey, 2012), and affectand perceptions at
, concept generation,concept selection, design argumentation, design testing, evaluation argumentation, reportdevelopment, and reflection and discussion. Essentially the entire process each EDT involvesactive student engagement in science and engineering practices. Depending on teacherimplementation (e.g., number of design iterations), each EDT takes 300-400 minutes tocomplete.Table 2: EDT stages. EDT Stage General Components Introducing the problem Provide design challenge Identify needs and constraints Concept generation Research the problem
. He said, “…because I was always afraid I’d be, like, no, I’m going to becalled stupid and stuff like that.” But Troy found that he enjoyed the small group size at camp,and the friendly students as people he could relate to. When asked about the theme of the camp,he primarily focused on teamwork and cooperation. He appreciated the groupwork and time spenton sharing and reflecting at the start of each day’s session.Content AwarenessTroy was very excited to talk about rockets. He displayed a high level of understanding aboutrockets and NASA’s missions. His musings included the following comments expressed in ananimated matter: “Most of the rockets right now at this era are meant to go to the space station torefill fuel, or to resupply it, or to
Bennett, New York Hall of Science Ms. Bennett currently serves as Director of Creative Pedagogy at the New York Hall of Science, respon- sible for developing and implementing new initiatives that reflect NYSCI’s core pedagogical approach known as DESIGN, MAKE, PLAY —a child-centered approach to STEM learning that inspires curiosity and playful exploration, builds confidence with new skills and tools, and fosters creative problem solving and divergent thinking. Drawing on 30 years of experience in informal and formal education, she helps translate this approach into practice by creating professional development experiences for our young mu- seum facilitators and K-12 educators, developing apps to stimulate STEM
https://www.facebook.com/EducacionMML/videos/674893209771107 b) Live broadcast. The Live broadcast is done through the social networks of the Municipality of Lima-Peru. While the facilitator presents the activity, the group members read the chat and comment/respond /interact with the participants (Figure 2). Figure 2. Live transmission example https://www.facebook.com/EducacionMML/videos/253309426000090c) Closure of activity. After participating in the activity, the group members share their reflections and attend to the participants' questions and communications through the Facebook Live chat (Figure 3). Figure 3. Close of the live transmission with the members of the
model of what is occurring in different classrooms or different schools for a diverse set of schools. Modeling those systems, they can then look at the attributes of the teachers, school, school district, and figure out what enhances or detracts from the successful deployment of EarSketch from a sustainability stand point, sustaining the project beyond the grant.This team member understands that modeling helps to develop theories about bothimplementation (P3) and sustainability (P4.) This is reflective of the initial goals ofthe modeling effort set forth in the proposal development, where the intent was toidentify barriers and enablers to intervention sustainability.Some of the members of the team articulated a more
when solving the engineering problem. Studies withpublished pre-posttest results generally show positive learning gains in science content (e.g.,[11], [14]) and practices (e.g., [15], [16]) as a result of implementing these types of curricula.However, studies that provide an in-depth look at students’ engineering design decisions havemixed results with regards to the amount and quality of students’ application of science andmathematics to the engineering challenge (e.g., [17]–[20]). Some research has shown thatstudents have difficultly justifying their design solutions with science and/or mathematics [18],though guided reflection and evaluation about benefits and trade-offs helped them thinkscientifically [17]. Other research demonstrated that
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