thelevel they were comfortable with—beginning by expressing their ideas in gesture ordemonstration and then adding spoken or written language as they learned or needed it. The experiences of investigating, planning, building, testing, and refining bring learning beyond linguistic barriers. There are many points of entry in a unit of study. The learning in a unit involving engineering moves beyond simple labeling and completing sentence frames. It is dynamic learning and often can be used to reach a student at their exact language acquisition level. The EL teacher and I loved doing EiE together because it was a chance for students to use academic language in authentic situations. The parts of the lesson where materials are tested
researchquestion: How and to what extent do upper-elementary teachers verbally support students’engagement with engineering practices across diverse classroom contexts in an NGSS-alignedintegrated science unit? Classroom audio data was collected daily and coded to analyze supportthrough different purposes of teacher talk. Results reveal the purpose of teachers’ talk oftenvaried between the class sections depending on the instructional activity and indicate thatteachers utilized a variety of supports toward students’ engagement in different engineeringpractices. In one class, with a large percentage of students with individualized educational plans,teachers provided more epistemic talk about the engineering practices to contextualize theparticular
formulate their own questions and seek answers, leading to testing and validation of creative ideas. Provide feedback and encourage revision, make learning purposeful, and produce high- quality products. Reflect on types of skills students developed and plan for the scope of future activities. Figure 4: The PBL cycle (a) (b) Figure 5: The PBL implementation (a) teacher as facilitator and (b) feedback from others6. Research ProcedureThis paper is devoted to analyzing the outcomes of the robotics PD workshop vis-à-visteachers. Teachers had expertise in math or science. Their demographic and disciplineinformation is given in
to inform their students about engineering andentrepreneurship, both for improving content knowledge and for increasing studentunderstanding of potential career paths in these domains and promoting student interest insuch career paths. Teachers discussed specific experiences related to identifying andunderstanding consumer needs and creating and marketing a product to satisfy theseneeds. As a result of participating in IC, students gained a variety of technical andbusiness-related skills they likely would not have gained elsewhere, including how tobuild a website, how to build an app, how to write a business plan, how to make a movie,how to talk in front of people, how to pitch something, how to convince people to buysomething. One of
and team spirit, and the demonstration of values of “Gracious Professionalism®”and “Coopertition®” (the ability to both work with and compete against the same individuals andteams) in working both within the team and with competitor teams at the competition. As such,the programs are designed to promote both interest in STEM and a broader set of 21st century lifeand workplace skills and values, including critical thinking, problem-solving, teamwork,communications, and project planning and management.In 2016-17, FIRST reported that over 460,000 young people participated in its programs on morethan 52,000 teams and competing in more than 2,600 events worldwide. As such, it representsone of the largest after school STEM initiatives in the United
solutions and plan their designs. Then, they create and testtheir designs and make improvements based on the test results. Finally, engineers communicatetheir findings to others. Youth learn that these practices are frequently used non-sequentiallyduring the process of engineering design. While focusing on engineering design, youthexperience age-appropriate science content, emphasizing planetary science. Study context The study took place in four OST programs for middle-school students (grades 6-8)across the U.S. Three programs were afterschool clubs and one was a week-long summer campsponsored by a community group. The programs were purposively selected using the followingcriteria: educators and a majority of youth were willing to be
“candybomber” deliver candy to children [26]—and develop and evaluate a plan for testing theparachutes. In keeping with the Next Generation Science Standards, which emphasize “planningand carrying out fair tests in which variables are controlled and failure points are considered,” (3-5 ETS1-3) [27], the elementary students could create a testing plan (a genre). Using think-aloudsand discussion prompts, the teacher could model for students how to evaluate that genre usingthe discipline-specific evaluative frameworks generated from this study. For example, theelementary students might consider statements such as, “I believe the results from this test wouldbe repeatable (or not) when the candy bomber dropped the parachutes because…” “I believe
includes engineering in her elementary and early childhood science methods courses and developed and taught an engineering methods course for middle school teachers. She also developed a graduate-level engineering education course for PreK-6 teachers. Dr. Lottero has provided professional learning experiences in multiple schools and school systems in Maryland. She has co-authored numerous engineering-focused articles for the teacher practitioner journal, Science and Children, and presents her research regularly through the American Society for Engineering Education. Her current research includes investigating how K-5 students plan, fail, and productively persist, and how simulated classroom environments can be used to
Tolerance curriculum, Association of American Colleges andUniversity VALUE rubrics and the Stanford d-school design process [12] [18] [19]. Existinglesson plans were revised to allow for greater exploration of empathy in engineering disciplinesand engineering design while maintaining the creative, innovative and cross cutting scienceconnections that were built into the lesson plans. The appropriateness of teamwork andcollaboration is reinforced throughout the program as students are encouraged to work in groupsor discuss their thought process in pairs. These pair-and-share and teamwork opportunities helpstudents understand their own and others engineering design, prototyping, testing andimprovement as they considered the people, stakeholders, who
of Cali- fornia, Irvine, and Santa Barbara City College. He has worked in informal STEM education at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History and MOXI, The Wolf Museum of Exploration + Innovation. As MOXI’s first Director of Education, Skinner created the philosophical vision for the department, mapped out a five-year strategic plan, and built up an education staff of five full-time employees, 20 part-time employees, and over 100 volunteers. He planned, budgeted, and implemented a full slate of informal and formal education programs; collaborating with teachers and school administrators, university depart- ments, science and technology companies, community organizations, and donors. At MOXI, Skinner’s
participation was virtually identical between student cohorts (Figure 3A). However,School B students were more than twice as likely as School A students to declare a positiveimpact on their predisposition when asked about the impact Discovery had on STEM pursuits(Figure 3B). It is important to note this may simply be indicative of students already perceivingfurther STEM courses in their future regardless of Discovery participation (i.e., selection of “NoImpact”), reflected in consistent indication of plans to take fewer courses after participating inDiscovery. School B students were also about 20% more likely to indicate interest in furtherparticipation in a future offering of Discovery (Figure 3C), despite also indicating a much higherperceived
light and touch then move on to attachingthe circuits to buggies which will then move either toward or away from the stimulus. Studentsshould be allowed to design their own circuits and execute their plan with some direction fromthe instructor.Learning Outcomes • Define and describe the nervous system • Identify the basic components of a neuron • Describe how neurons function within the body • Explain and understand how neurons communicate • Apply knowledge of the nervous system and neurons to an electronic circuit • Identify the major components of a circuit and the similarities to the nervous system • Recognize the differences between neurons and NeuroBytes • Troubleshoot the circuit by working in teams and understanding how
Thursday. Faculty Figure 1: Map of RET Teacher Participants To Date (green in nested VA map is Appalachia)mentors for the RET site come from four different colleges (Engineering, Science, Agriculture &Life Science and Natural Resources & Environment) and share a common interest in waterresearch. An annotated process flow is presented in Figure 2. The red chevrons show the overallschedule by week, with major milestones called out, while the blue chevrons represent therepeating daily plan which occurs each of the six weeks. Figure 2: RET Summer Schedule FlowThe first day is dedicated to orientation, where the RET teachers are introduced to the site, learnabout the study conducted here, and are offered consent
rural school in theNortheast attempted to optimize a truss structure.Description of the Optimization Project Many freely available K-12 engineering lesson plans instruct students to design and builda structure with a constrained amount of material that is either as strong as possible [11] or as tallas possible while able to hold a weight [12]. However, neither of these goals resemble the workof engineers [13]. Builds like this would be wasteful in terms of resources, so many civilengineering firms employ engineers specifically to minimize material, time, and cost while stilladhering to the specifications of the structure. The goal for students in this activity was to minimize cost, weight, and deflection of atruss cantilever
technology education was to teach “problem-solving” as opposed to skill development, theemphasis found in earlier studies [8]. Sanders [36] identified “modular technology education”and “technological problem-solving” as the preferred method to instruction over the project-from-plans method. The demographic shifts reported in the survey [36] noted a 10 percentfemale faculty count, “ten times the percentage reported two decades ago” and “one third oftechnology education students enrolled are female, about fifteen times the percentage of the early1960s.” Minority ethnic enrollment, approximately one fourth of those in technology education,similarly showed growth, up 18% reported since 1979 and students with special needs numberedapproximately 23% of
levels to include for each item. Afterseveral discussions about the feasibility of creating discrete, measurable levels that could beobserved without additional classroom materials (e.g., lesson plans, student work, interviewswith teachers), we decided on five levels with a 0-4 scale, similar to the RTOP [18]. Items wereassigned to small teams to continue refining the wording of each item and its observable levels.Part of this process included a critical examination of the items, which sometimes resulted inremoving an item completely or recognizing that we could further collapse items. This continuedwork occasionally included the splitting of a single item into two items, as some ideas were “toobig” or unwieldy to address in a single item. In
conclusion, this work in progress paper presented the design and implementation of an age-appropriateafter-school program for middle school students. Our experiential learning-based approach providedstudents with a unique opportunity to learn fundamental concepts about advanced manufacturing in anengaging way. This pilot offering served a small, but diverse cohort from the Worcester public schooldistrict. Plans for subsequent offerings are in place to extend its reach to more students, in underrepresentedcommunities.AcknowledgementsThe authors acknowledge the support of the WPI students and manufacturing lab instructors for theirassistance in facilitating the program sessions. The authors also acknowledge the following WPI personnel– Sue Sontgerath
5Evaluating multiple MSOL Proposing and evaluating multiple solutionssolutions against each otherConsidering materials and MTRL Testing, exploring properties of materials,their properties and connecting these to design problemSystems Thinking SYST Considering how component parts of a system work together and over timeDeveloping models and MODL Developing a plan before building or testingprototypes a prototype before scaling up; includes
; Considerations The E-CADEMY program, has shown promise in exposing diverse middle and highschool students to engineering careers and practices while increasing their interest andconfidence in pursuing engineering as a future profession. Given the age of the program, there isno data on success rate of students matriculating through higher education, although over half ofthe graduating seniors to date have chosen an engineering career path by applying to anengineering program at a post-secondary institution. Post-secondary data collection is a part offuture study plans. Key considerations from the first four years of this program include ensuring keypartnerships are established with organizations like the National Society of Black Engineering
experimentalperiod [16]. ER may play a role in engaging students with disabilities to further allow foracademic developments through robotics concepts and activities.Application of ER in a program for students with Down syndrome also yielded positive results[18]. As seen previously, the use of robotics was able to capture the attention of these studentsand enabled them to learn in a cooperative environment. Moreover, assessments suggested thatstudents with Down syndrome exhibited improvements in cognitive functions such as visuo-spatial working memory and mental planning after completing a robotics challenge [18]. Whilerecent work indicates that robotics is a viable tool to assist special needs students in overcomingtheir leaning and developmental
, and smallteams of youth often complete and present projects. Figure 1 shows a typical DHF course setting.Figure 1: Typical setting for DHF’s courses: Classes take place in a large, open-plan spacewhere youth work on self-directed projects and learn about design thinking, digital fabricationand computer science.Key components of many DHF courses, including Maker Foundations, are digital fabrication,circuitry, coding and web development. The fabrication modules consist of 3D modeling andprinting, as well as, laser cutting exercises and the use of a variety of materials including metaland wood. The fabricated objects are often combined with interactive electronic components,such as Makey Makey’s and Arduinos. A typical youth project might
learning was takingplace, or at the end of the lecture/lab session, students were prompted to reflect on each lecture oractivity they were exposed to. Their feedback helped us to revise our scheduling and plan for thenext lecture/hands-on activity and make changes as necessary. To get a better understanding onthe students’ expectations and their learning goals, we asked the students about their favoritesubject areas and academic as well as career goals.Program’s Assessment (provided by the program’s Administration)All faculty submit an assessment (self-efficacy, self-reflection, creativity and innovation,collaboration/teamwork, problem solving/critical thinking, etc.) on every student on their roster.Students complete a faculty evaluation and
Engineering, Dr. Barrella holds a Master of City and Regional Planning (Transportation) from Georgia Institute of Technology and a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Bucknell University. Dr. Barrella has investi- gated best practices in engineering education since 2003 (at Bucknell University) and began collaborating on sustainable engineering design research while at Georgia Tech. Prior to joining the WFU faculty, she led the junior capstone design sequence at James Madison University, was the inaugural director of the NAE Grand Challenges Program at JMU, and developed first-year coursework and interdisciplinary electives. American c Society for Engineering
] developed a Draw an Engineer Test (DAET) where elementary andsecondary youth provided written and drawn responses to a set of questions regarding theirpreconceptions about engineers. Their responses were found to be generally simplistic, forexample, engineers were commonly depicted as workers who constructed buildings or repairedcar engines, though older participants more frequently mentioned engineering design tasks. Themost common stereotypical actions youth perceive engineers to do are to design, plan, and orperform physical labor. Common images included tools, cars and computers. Consistent findingswere reported by a number of subsequent investigations using similar data collection methods(e.g. [1], [9]–[12]). Further, youth displayed signs of
?Project Documents and ArtifactsProgram documents and artifacts were used to help inform evaluation efforts and to ensure thedata collection instruments developed were closely tied to the program design and goals. Theywere also used to assess whether it was aligned to the priorities of the funding agency.Research Course Development and Implementation, Summer Research Experience ObservationsNon-intrusive site observations occurred during the research course development process. Theseobservations were conducted during select planning meetings. Informal visits were made duringthe research course and summer research experience. Detailed field notes were gathered andanalyzed to provide requisite answers for the evaluation questions.Focus Groups and
. IMEET Prize Challenge Field Layout and students testing their robots on the playfieldFigure 2. 3D CAD wheel model (left) and the robot with 3D printed wheel(right) in action on“rocky” terrain during the prize challengeSimilarly, a drone is required to fly for scouting and beacon-dropping mission. To complete thismission, students need to design and 3D print the drone frame and drop-off mechanism that theycan attach to the drone. On Day 9, the student teams compete in the judging round. On the lastday of the camp, student teams present their work before their parents, instructors, and otherguests.Evaluation Plan & Preliminary ResultsThe main goal of the IMEET Program is to educate and inspire the next generation of STEMstudents and educators
, huge advantage for where we are geographically, even within our own county. Kids are institution of naturally advantaged because of our proximity to [university 1], and even kids in this region higher are advantaged by their proximity to [university 1] and [university 2]. Having a community education college that's 20 minutes away is another huge benefit. (HSB Principal) Funding or Where I see barriers is not so much in the policies but in the physical plan of the building. program (HSC Principal) availability But there's some students that don't want to travel because they enjoy being here with their friends all day. Losing those two credits can be a powerful thing because a lot of
like engineers.AcknowledgementsSupport for this work is provided by the National Science Foundation under Award No. EEC1664228. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] National Science Board. (2016). Science and engineering indicators 2016. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (NSB-2016-1).[2] Tai, R. T., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. T. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143-1144.[3] Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation, and aspirations in science
under Grant No.DRL-1657519. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions are recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation .References[1] E. Iversen, “Engineering Outreach on Campus,” Washington, DC, 2015.[2] C. Gartland, “Student ambassadors: ‘role-models’, learning practices and identities,” Br. J. Sociol. Educ., no. September, pp. 1–20, 2014.[3] A. V. Maltese and R. H. Tai, “Eyeballs in the fridge: Sources of early interest in science,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., 2010.[4] R. H. Tai, C. Q. Liu, A. V. Maltese, and X. Fan, “Planning early for careers in science,” Science. 2006.[5] M. B. Ormerod and D. Duckworth, “Pupils
STEM Curation at Museums Zoology Mathematics: Rules and Reasoning Archaeology Environmental Science Paleoanthropology Entertainment Engineering and Design Chemistry Mechanical Engineering: Solar Energy Radiation Science and Engineering Renewable Energy Forensic Science Civil Engineering: Planning Entertainment Engineering and Design Engineering EntrepreneurshipTable 4. Speaker composition by gender during the four semesters of SISTEM. Fall 2016 Spring 2017 Fall