Paper ID #32896Teachers Navigating Educational Systems: Reflections on the Value ofFunds of Knowledge (Fundamental)Dr. Joel Alejandro Mejia, University of San Diego Dr. Joel Alejandro (Alex) Mejia is an assistant professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at the University of San Diego. His research has contributed to the integration of critical theoretical frame- works and Chicano Cultural Studies to investigate and analyze existing deficit models in engineering education. Dr. Mejia’s work also examines how asset-based models impact the validation and recognition of students and communities of color as holders
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
professional developmentprogram positioned the importance of the inclusion of engineering content and encouragedteachers to explore community-based, collaborative activities that identified and spoke to societalneeds and social impacts through engineering integration. Data collected from two of the coursesin this project, Enhancing Mathematics with STEM and Engineering in the K-12 Classroom,included participant reflections, focus groups, microteaching lesson plans, and field notes.Through a case study approach and grounded theory analysis, themes of self-efficacy, activelearning supports, and social justice teaching emerged. The following discussion on teachers’engineering and STEM self-efficacy, teachers’ integration of engineering to address
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
LearningIntroductionThis paper describes a case-based, mixed-methods study of how K-12 teachers support andscaffold student learning in a Problem-based Learning (PBL) engineering lesson. The studyexamined how K-12 engineering teachers planned to support student learning using scaffolding,how they implemented scaffolds during PBL engineering activities, and how they reflected upontheir PBL engineering lesson implementation.PBL in engineering educationEngineering practice and other design-focused fields involve solving complex problems, often incollaborative teams. Generally, these engineering problems do not have a single solution andrequire multifaceted skillsets from many domains. However, engineering students often findthemselves unprepared to manage messy
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
empiricalstudy of art classrooms as a way to describe “the kinds of thinking developed by the arts [thatare] important in and of themselves, as important as the thinking developed in more traditionallyacademic subjects.” According to Hetland et al. [4], the eight Studio Habits of Mind include:Developing Craft, Engaging and Persisting, Envisioning, Expressing, Observing, Reflecting,Stretching and Exploring, and Understanding Art Worlds.Hetland et al. [4] define the eight Studio Habits of Mind in the following ways: Develop Craft- Technique: Learning to use tools (e.g. viewfinders, brushes), materials (e.g. charcoal, paint); learning artistic conventions (e.g. perspective, color mixing) Studio practice: Learning to care for tools
designs fail the test; groups testing iterate and continue testing, trying to improve their designs. Day 7: What can we learn by looking across all our design attempts? Reflection Groups reflect on their design attempts; teacher facilitates a whole class discussion comparing across designs. Day 8: How do engineers share their ideas through speaking and writing? Design Groups share their designs and design process with other students and members of the conference school and greater community. DESIGN BRIEF Goal: Design, build, test, and iterate on a retaining structure that keeps sand away from the model train tracks, allows the sand to support the weight of a model building, and stays up when
learned how to sketch basic process flowsheets, made bath bombs (soap fizzies) [9, 11],measured their lung capacity after blowing bubbles from soap solutions, calculated their carbonfootprint and were asked to reflect on a cow’s breath as well as an industrial plant and theenvironmental effects of energy use for bioplastic manufacturing.Given the relevance and scope of the plastics crisis, we spent the majority of the class exploringhow plastics contribute to waste and what strategies exist to alleviate this problem. Studentslearned how bioplastics are made from renewable biomass such as vegetable fats, oils, corn-starch,milk and other bio resources. They explored biodegradability and what components in cornstarchand milk could make effective
often team-based and develops based on peer, colleague, and client feedback.attempted to address in this study. This is a validation study of an open-ended questionnaire, theViews about the Nature of Engineering Knowledge (VNOEK) Questionnaire, which was Elements of this framework reflect other NOE descriptions in the literature [9] [14] and it is alsodesigned to gather K-16 teachers’ views about the NOEK. The questionnaire was created as part supportive of those other articulations. However, it is not identical, and we needed an instrumentof
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
contributed to the youths’ negative attitudes and provided recommendationson how to improve future assessments in this context by making them more relevant andappealing to youth participants. Youth in the professional training program explained that theypreferred a variety of assessment tools, including engaging assessments for re-enforcingtechnical skills and personally meaningful assessments for self-reflection. In addition to theseresults, we present a set of lessons learned that can be applied to the selection and developmentof assessment tools and procedures for youth in similar programs in the future.2. Related WorkMany researchers have underlined key elements in maker courses for success, such as self-directed learning, collaboration with
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
gaining experience working with populations of a different age group than their standardclassroom teaching. Additionally, regular feedback and reflection during training and campsensure that teachers have input into what they need in order to be successful for camp, and intowhat activities are enacted during the camps (see below). The program is also sustained, withcamp-specific workshops following general engineering workshops, followed by several weeksof practice.Perhaps most importantly, and what sets it apart from most out-of-school professionaldevelopment experiences, is being contextualized in the summer camp environment. This hassimilarities to a classroom in the typical population of students and schedule similar to a schoolday, but also
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
townsuffering from a natural disaster. Built into the curriculum are numerous opportunities for youthto reflect on the relevance of program activities to their interests and their lives, which priorresearch has suggested help to increase youth interest and persistence in STEM. Here, we reporton the field trial of this program, and examine the efficacy of the program for increasing youthmotivation and aspirations in STEM, enhancing their abilities to engage in engineering designpractices, and for developing their capacity to use UAVs to address scientific and engineeringproblems. We also report on the changes the program had on youth perceptions of UAV/Drones:from considering UAVs as “toys” to realizing they can be used as “tools” to support science
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
result of its inclusionand elevated importance in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) [1]. Within thenascent field of pre-college engineering education, the ways in which elementary engineeringexperiences may support the formation of engineering identities in young children are not wellunderstood [2]. What is known about formative experiences in engineering is that participationtends to be gendered [3], with girls and boys engaging in and reflecting on engineering activitiesin different ways. This paper focuses on identity, as developing a strong engineering identity, orsense of belonging in engineering, is essential to pursuing and persisting in the field.Participation in engineering outreach programs is widely seen as an opportunity
knowledge aboutengineering and application of their pedagogical knowledge. In the scope of this program,teachers implemented STEM activities with students by using curriculum materials from the PDprogram, and they were asked to provide reflective critiques on their pedagogical practices.Analysis was based on video-recorded lessons, and teachers’ reflective critiques indicated thatteachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and practices improved; however, they mostly adheredto the curriculum without modifying it for their classroom. This result suggests that the teacherswere able to apply what they had learned in the PD, but were unable to synthesize newcurriculum.Teacher PDs where authentic engineering design challenges have been shown to have
Consumer Affairs, Journal of Marketing Management, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, and Marketing Education Review.Dr. Gbetonmasse B. Somasse, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Gbetonmasse Somasse is a faculty member in the Department of Social Science and Policy Studies at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute where he also directs the Cape Town Project Center. He holds a Ph.D. in economics and a Master in statistics. His research interests are in applied econometrics, development economics, program evaluation, and higher education. In higher education, he is interested in student motivation, experiential learning, and critical reflection to promote active and more intentional learning. Previously, Somasse was a
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
grades of zero (i.e., incomplete assignments, D), misseddays of classroom instruction (E), and missed days of Discovery (F) by student between schools.N=77 and 53 for Schools A and B, respectively. P-values reflect nonparametric U-tests between schools.Aggregate assessment of classroom performance from both schools presented consistent meanfinal course grades (excluding the 10-15% Discovery portion) of 67% (Figure 2A); given thissimilarity it was determined that further comparative analysis between school cohorts wasjustified. However, performance on Discovery variables was significantly different (p < 0.0001)between school cohorts; School A students averaged 67% (remarkably consistent to their
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
engineering devices were considered throughout the unit, and students were required to reflect on these questions as they presented their sensory substitution device to the school community. The concepts of circuitry were introduced through handson experiences using Snap Circuits Ⓡand breadboards, as well as online animations and videos. Students learned about connecting and programming the Arduino microcontroller through a series of scaffolded activities which included some offline learning and modifying of existing code. Students then discussed the different aspects of the engineering design process and used a design notebook to document their ideas, questions, and modifications while building a model of their sensory substitution device
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
their playground equipment models and test their designs with miniature wheelchairs. All initial designs have room for improvement; groups iterate and continue testing, trying to improve their designs. Day 8: Design Challenge - Peer Feedback How can we improve our designs by giving and receiving peer feedback? Student groups self-evaluate their own design and design process, then pair up with other groups to offer feedback, help troubleshoot, and brainstorm solutions to common issues. Day 9: Design Challenge - Final Test & Review What can we learn by looking across all our design attempts? Groups reflect on their design attempts, and the teacher facilitates a whole class discussion comparing across designs. Student groups complete their
representation reflecting the designer’s interpretation of the current situationand desired situation. Consequently, problem framing is an essential part of the engineeringdesign process. Also, engineering design situations often involve multiple, conflicting views andstandpoints, which requires engineers to consider various contexts including both technical andnon-technical issues in structuring and representing a design problem for the situation. Jonassenet al. (2006) illustrate that an engineering design problem involves a variety of goals andconstraints that sometimes contradict each other and include not only technical but also non-technical factors. In terms of the non-technical goals and constraints, they state that engineeringdesign