. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Developing Teaching Internships for Science and Engineering Undergraduate Students and Project Team Reflection (Evaluation)AbstractThe National Science Foundation implemented the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Programto encourage science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) majors to transition intoK-12 education. One of the aims for grants awarded through this program is to increase thenumber of current STEM undergraduate majors who are exposed to the teaching profession andwho then apply to secondary science or mathematics education certification programs. Thispaper provides an overview of a paid
that was meant to be passed onto younger generations of Americans. Yet, despite its decades-old practice and the burgeoning body of literature on bestpractices for it, research detailing just how common the service-learning pedagogy is in the K-12landscape is scarce. Furthermore, a literature search reveals that the contexts in which service-learning curricula are integrated are few and typically a component of staple subjects likeEnglish Language Arts, history/social studies, and science. However, recent efforts to improveK-12 STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) curriculum, like the NGSS’s three-dimensional philosophy of core ideas, cross-cutting concepts, and science and engineeringpractices, signifies a new canopy of
is both for the high-tech and low tech applications. In addition to teaching courses such as energy systems, mechanics, mechatronics, and production, he investigates best ways to expand cutting edge technologies to the workforce.Dr. Roger B. Hill, University of Georgia Roger B. Hill is a professor in the College of Education at the University of Georgia in the USA, and his research agenda focuses on affective characteristics necessary for success in current and future occupa- tions. He has integrated this line of research with instructional responsibilities related to engineering and technology education and computer information systems.Dr. Theodore J. Kopcha, University of Georgia Dr. Kopcha studies the impact of
a society where science, engineering, and technology permeateall aspects of our lives. While aspects of technology and engineering have appeared in some K-12 science classrooms and, to a limited extent, in prior national science standards, the NGSSpresent a true integration of science, engineering and technology (Sneider and Purzer, 2014).This is a new approach to teaching science that will require new curriculum materials,professional development and other supports for teachers, and new assessments (Penuel, Harris,& DeBarger, 2015). Teachers who are generalists as well as those certified in science typically have very littleknowledge of and experience with engineering content or practices (Cunningham, 2009; Custer& Daugherty
School of Science and Technology, where she also created and taught a year-long, design-based engineering course for seniors. Forbes earned her PhD in civil engineering, with an engineering education research focus.Dr. Jacquelyn F. Sullivan, University of Colorado, Boulder Jacquelyn Sullivan has led the multi-university TeachEngineering digital library project, now serving over 3.3M unique users (mostly teachers) annually, since its inception. She is founding co-director of the design-focused Engineering Plus degree program and CU Teach Engineering initiative in the University of Colorado Boulder’s College of Engineering and Applied Science. With the intent of transforming en- gineering to broaden participation
failure. In addition, the study explores howstrategies, perspectives, messages and fail word use may be changed after two years ofengineering instruction. Although the use of fail words is still an uncomfortable term in education, it is,increasingly, a part of the popular lexicon. This is driven in large part by the STEM (science,technology, engineering and mathematics) focus brought about by the Department of Educationand its Race to the Top program in 2009, which prioritized STEM teaching and learning.3 Inaddition, the “maker” movement has grown rapidly, bringing the idea of iteration and trial anderror to the general public.4 However, failure in these contexts is largely attributed to genericdescriptions such as “design,” “iteration
Paper ID #20188Measuring Changes in High School Science Teacher Practice: Results of aMaterials Science-focused Professional Development ProgramDr. Alison K. Polasik, The Ohio State University Alison K Polasik received a B.S.E. degree in Materials Science and Engineering from Arizona State Uni- versity in 2002, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from The Ohio State University in 2005 and 2014, respec- tively. She is an assistant professor of practice in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at OSU. Dr. Polasik’s research interests include modeling of microstructure-property relationships in metals, assessment of
involved with district-wide initiatives including technology integration, Just In Time Assessments, curriculum pacing guides, and implementation of a research based, hands-on science and engineering curriculum. Mia has also worked closely with FOSS as a professional development facilitator. She also worked with Project WET at the University of Arizona Maricopa County Cooperative Extension as a curriculum developer and professional development faciltator. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Investigating Peer Observers' Perspectives on Middle School Engineering Designers' Communication Challenges (Work in Progress) Author 1, Institution
Schools in Trinidad and TobagoIntroductionSince its independence in 1962, Trinidad and Tobago has striven to increase the standard ofeducation locally and regionally in the Caribbean. In 2012, the literacy rate in the country was99.58% which is the highest in the Caribbean and one of the highest in the world1. Additionally,primary and secondary education is free for all students and tertiary education is highlysubsidized for all qualified students at local and regional institutions. Despite these efforts tofocus on education, Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education isnot considered an important area of focus at the primary or secondary level, especiallyTechnology and Engineering. There is a
programs.Mrs. Jean M. Trusedell, EPICS Jean Trusedell is a Nationally Board Certified Teacher with extensive experience working with K-12 Educators and students. She is working with the EPICS (Engineering Projects in Community Service) Program at Purdue University to create curriculum that can be used with students throughout the country to integrate best classroom practices with engineering principles. Previously, she was the Science and Technology Coach for MSD of Decatur Township in Indianapolis, IN.Dr. William ”Bill” C. Oakes, Purdue University, West Lafayette William (Bill) Oakes is the Director of the EPICS Program and one of the founding faculty members of the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He
implications andfuture work.Literature ReviewThe Normality of Failure within Engineering Engineers design and analyze technologies via an engineering design process (EDP).EDPs typically include: defining the engineering problem via a problem statement or goal,constraints, and criteria; conducting background research about the problem and how others havetried to solve it; brainstorming multiple possible design ideas; selecting an idea to implement (adesign) and creating a plan for that design; testing the design against criteria; analyzing testresults to see where the design failed and succeeded against design criteria; planningimprovements for the next design; and iterating, i.e., repeating parts of the design process todevelop subsequent, and
15 gives engineering and technology a greater focus. In our approach, Common CoreState Standards for Mathematics 16 content domains (e.g., ratios and proportional relationships,statistics and probability), and standards for mathematical practice (e.g., making sense ofproblems and persevering in solving them, modeling mathematics, choosing appropriate tools)are integrated with science and engineering practices from next generation standards (e.g.,“asking questions/defining problems”, “using mathematics/computational thinking”), as well ascrosscutting concepts focused on “systems/system models” 17. Engineering design projectsprovide extensive opportunities for engaging in practices common to both the CSSM andFramework: defining problems
their comments asthe basis for follow-up questions. Fourth, teachers can ask questions with a high cognitive level,or questions that move beyond basic recall and enable students to engage in bigger questionssuch as why and how something has occurred. Fifth, and most importantly, teachers canencourage students to contribute their own questions to the conversation. Student-generatedquestions had the greatest impact on whether or not a conversation would become dialogic orwould stay monologic. In Nystrand’s research, the presence of just one student question raisedthe rate of a dialogic spell by 200%.Although Nystrand’s study has broad application to Science, Technology, Engineering,Mathematics (STEM) disciplines, it was conducted in history and
to society offer a highly effective vehicle for motivatingstudent interest in engineering and other STEM fields. Additionally current science standards –Next Generation of Science Standards (NGSS)1 - incorporate engineering design into thelearning objectives of science in grades K-12. However few classroom teachers have had thebenefit of exposure to engineering design before beginning their teaching career. Just like theirstudents, early exposure in the undergraduate curriculum that enriches future teachers’knowledge of engineering and technology and its relationship to the world would benefit thesecandidates.Project based learning (PBL) and the engineering design process are a natural pedagogical fit.PBL is focused on knowledge and
teachers to engage as a cohort over the thirteen month period. However, thetarget of 24 teachers was not met although more than 300 teachers were invited to this program.Table 1. K-12 Teacher Participation 1st PD Session 2nd PD Session 3rd PD Session 18 teachers 18 teachers 17 teachersA total of three teachers attended all three full day professional development sessions. Anadditional ten teachers attended two of the three face-to-face sessions.To qualify for participation in this program, teachers had to teach one of the STEM subjects(science, technology, engineering, or mathematics) or had to make a strong proposal why theircontent area supported STEM education. Of the 37
Paper ID #16444Design of an Interactive Multidisciplinary Residential Summer Program forRecruitment of High School Females to EngineeringDr. Paula Ann Monaco, Texas Tech University Dr. Paula Monaco, E.I.T., successfully defended her dissertation research Spring 2016 and will begin a career in the water/wastewater reuse treatment. Paula has led multiple outreach summer programs at TTU and provides support to student organizations within the college of engineering. Her technical research focuses include; anti-fouling and scaling RO technology and pharmaceutical and personal care product screening to predict environmental
0.179 0.035 0.58relative/friendInstrumentality 0.311 0.074 0.260 4.18**Drawing own 0.295 0.089 0.211 3.31**conclusionsr2 = .16; **p < .001Results: How do students envision the lab experiences their teachers had?Our analysis of qualitative responses suggests that while most students possessed understandingof the differences between engineering and science (e.g., science is “the study of the world” or“understanding all things in nature” and engineering is “creating new things to help the world” or“making and building things, especially technology”) many of these students displayed beliefssuggesting that the lab their
between engineering faculty and science, technology, engineering andmath (STEM) educators at the middle and high school level to create lesson plans with anemphasis on engineering for integration into their classrooms. With the increased demand forSTEM education available to all students, the professional development shared with educatorstopics related to engineering that could be incorporated into science, technology, and mathcurriculum. Throughout each session, teachers worked toward their professional developmentthrough the National Science Foundation (NSF). Twenty STEM teachers and twelve engineeringfaculty members were divided into groups and worked collaboratively over the course of oneyear to develop lesson plans incorporating a hands on
research and gender and culture in science education. Her research interests include girls’ participation in science and engineering; teacher’s engagement in action research; and science teachers’ integration of the engineering design process to improve science learning.James D. Lehman, Purdue University Dr. James D. Lehman is a Professor of Learning Design and Technology in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction and the Director of the Discovery Learning Research Center at Purdue University. He is member of the leadership teams of two current NSF-funded projects, Science Learning through Engineer- ing Design (SLED) and Professional Development for Computer Science (PD4CS). He holds a B.S. and M.S. in biology and
engineering design process. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.[3] Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 491–520.[4] Wilson, A. A., Smith, E., & Householder, D. L. (2014). Using disciplinary literacies to enhance adolescents’ engineering design activity. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57, 676-686.[5] NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.[6] National Assessment Governing Board. (2013). Technology and engineering literacy framework for the 2014 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Washington DC: Author
Institute of Technology), Trichy, India. Before starting graduate school, he worked in the au- tomotive industry, specializing in interior trim design, and then in the heavy engineering industry, spe- cializing in structural analysis and knowledge-based engineering. His research interests include design pedagogy, information visualization, and specifically the integration of computer support tools to aid and understand design learning in the classroom.Dr. Nielsen L. Pereira, Purdue University Nielsen Pereira is an Assistant Professor of Gifted, Creative, and Talented Studies at Purdue University. His research interests include the design and assessment of learning in varied gifted and talented education contexts
Paper ID #20073Lessons Learned in K-12 Engineering Outreach and Their Impact on Pro-gram Planning (Evaluation)Dr. J. Chris Carroll, Saint Louis University Dr. Carroll is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering at Saint Louis University. His experimental research interests focus on reinforced and prestressed concrete, while his engineering education research interests focus on experiential learning at both the university and K-12 levels. Dr. Carroll serves as a voting member on ACI Committee S802 - Teaching Methods and Educational Materials and is Chair of the Career Guidance Committee for the ASCE
68% (23) Engineering Technology-Civil Engineer 68% (23) Industrial Engineering 65% (22) Engineering Technology - Electronics Engineering 59% (20) Engineering Technology - Mechanical Engineering 59% (20)What was the best part of the NM PREP program and how can the NM PREP program beimproved?Forty-one percent of the students considered the learning activities to be the best part of theprogram. These activities included individual and group projects, field trips, and hands-onactivities. Therefore, the active learning methods represented nearly half of the students’ favoritefeatures of the NM PREP program
expose all students to activity, project or problem-based learningstrategies1. For high school students, many PLTW initiatives are not embedded, but offered asan elective course, outside of their normal Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM)trajectories. Students in public school settings where PLTW is offered as an elective may findthat these courses conflict and compete with other courses that may hold a personal interest.Though PLTW courses are engaging and expose students to principles in engineering andtechnology, in many educational settings, it is up to the individual student to decide on PLTW asa viable and worthwhile pathway.To assess the impact of PLTW, several states have begun longitudinal tracking of studentsenrolled in
collaborative, inquiry-based instruction.Dr. Jeremy V. Ernst, Virginia Tech Jeremy V. Ernst is an Associate Professor of Integrative STEM Education at Virginia Tech and he is also the Associate Director for the School of Education/Office of Educational Research and Outreach. He is also a Fellow of the Institute for Creativity Arts and Technology at Virginia Tech. Jeremy specializes in research focused on dynamic intervention means for STEM education students categorized as at-risk of dropping out of school. He also has curriculum research and development experiences in technology, engineering, and design education.Dr. Aaron C. Clark, North Carolina State University Aaron C. Clark is a Professor of Technology, Design, and
, engineering, and technology camp in Boise, Idahowas initiated by a science and technology teacher from a local high school who was concernedabout the lack of girls in technology classes. At the time, at Boise State University, femaleenrollment in engineering and computer science comprised only about 12 percent of theundergraduate population. The teacher applied for a grant from a corporate foundation and thenpartnered with the local section of the Society for Women Engineers (SWE), other high schoolstaff, the corporation, and Boise State University. In 2005, the first camp was offered to 41 girls,recruited through the deliberate deployment of marketing strategies to determine themes thatwould interest young women in the region, and to promote the
knowledgeof technology and the engineering design process for linguistically diverse students. The view ofengineering learning taken here emphasizes processes (or antecedents to learning outcomes) aswell as products of instruction (conceptual understanding and achievement). One implication ofthis domain specific approach is that instruction should focus on helping students acquire thecore ideas and ways of thinking central to a particular domain of knowledge. Consistent with thislearning perspective, the extent to which an emphasis on joint negotiation practices (i.e.,academic conversations) during hands-on design and literacy activities increased student learningwas investigated. To answer the research question, a 2 (group: trained and control) by 3
Paper ID #16103Using an Aquifer Simulation to Investigate Relationships between Ground-water, Human Activity, and Drought (P12 Resource Exchange)Samantha Lindgren, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Samantha Lindgren is the Coordinator of STEM Teacher Development at The Office for Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education (MSTE) in the College of Education at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. A former Physics and Environmental Science teacher, she now writes STEM cur- riculum that integrates engineering into science curriculum. She has presented at annual conferences such as American Society for
Paper ID #16920Using Stickers and Copper Tape to Prototype and Explore Electrical Circuits(P12 Resource Exchange)Jana Sebestik, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Jana Sebestik received a B.S. in mathematics and M.Ed. Jana Sebestik is the Assistant Director of STEM Curriculum Design in the Office for Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (MSTE) at the University of Illinois. Before coming to MSTE, Jana spent 34 years as a public school classroom teacher. She currently coordinates education and outreach for four NSF/DOE funded energy and cyber related projects. She helps engineers and research scientists
. She was selected as a National Academy of Education / Spencer Postdoctoral Fellow. Dr. Svihla studies learning in authentic, real world conditions; this includes a two- strand research program focused on (1) authentic assessment, often aided by interactive technology, and (2) design learning, in which she studies engineers designing devices, scientists designing investigations, teachers designing learning experiences and students designing to learn.Jill Marshall, University of Texas, Austin Jill A. Marshall is an associate professor of STEM Education. She studies how people come to understand and engineer the physical world and how teachers can facilitate that process, as well as equity issues in STEM