demographics, features of thelearning environment, nature of the learning activity, and the manner in which researchersindexed their findings. After one last read-through, we further refined the thematic headings tomost accurately reflect their respective studies, in addition to combining redundant themes—ultimately leading to the maturation and finalization of the six themes that constitute the basis ofour review.6(The forthcoming subsections present specific exemplary studies that are representative of theirrespective theme. For summaries of the cited articles and additional exemplary studies, refer toAppendix B).Theme 1: Substantiating the General Benefits of Educational Robots (N=17) To understand research pertaining to educational robots
, Engineering Education1. Introduction – Research to Practice PaperEngineering education, and especially computer science (CS) within that realm, is embeddedwithin science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), but K12 classroom practicesdo not often reflect CS content due in part to teacher skill levels and an efficacy gap. CS can takeon many meanings, but at its core, it is the science of problem solving in a computationalcontext, and CS as a skill is challenging (Burrows, Borowczak, Slater, & Haynes, 2012). MostCS university programs prepare software engineers, and as such the subjects are entwined. Thedistinction between engineering and CS can be blurry if only examining the theory of CS insteadof the practical applications. This
leadingthem to construct and organize patterns of ideas (logico-mathematical knowledge) and throughsocial experiences (social-conventional knowledge; Piaget, Henriques, & Ascher, 1992). Theactivities utilizing design in engineering education serve as a potential context for providing thekinds of experiences Piaget alluded to in his research, as these experiences allow the learner toactively engage in his or her own learning process, reflect on the use of existing structures ofknowledge, and benefit from scaffolded learning in an environment that values participation andinteraction among students, teachers, and other resources (deMiranda, 2004; Loewenberg Ball,2010).Engineering Problem Solving & Design as Context Curricular units and
redesign. The practice of engineering requires the application of Apply Science, Engineering, science, mathematics, and engineering knowledge and Mathematics Knowledge engineering education at the K-12 level should emphasize (SEM) this interdisciplinary nature. Students should be independent and reflective thinkers Engineering Thinking capable of seeking out new knowledge and learning from
Incorporation of Incorporation of Incorporates some Engineering engineering practices engineering some engineering opportunity for Practices are evident and practices are evident practices are evident students to carry Engages students in include opportunities and include and include out an investigation authentic and for students to: opportunities for opportunities for meaningful 1. Ask questions (for students to: students to: scenarios that reflect science) and defining 1. Ask questions (for 1. Ask questions (for the practice of problems (for
pursue engineering. Figure 4 details the responses students provided. Somestudents selected multiple categories, and Figure 4 depicts the percentage each category wasselected by 37 participants. Here, it is again clear that altruistic tendencies are a majorcontributing factor to the female students’ desire to pursue engineering, in agreement withprevious literature. It also appears that students’ interests played a major role in their decision topursue engineering. This finding may reflect students’ desire to choose careers that arepersonally meaningful, which has also been demonstrated in literature as a relevant factor infemale students’ career decisions.14 Figure 4: Percentage of participants’ motivation to become
their experience.Summary and “Next STEPS”The reconstruction of the STEPS program was essential to recruit underrepresented students. Thenew format was well received and shows great promise. Key lessons learned in delivering thenew curriculum and key lessons learned in extending the population participating in the informalengineering outreach program will be incorporated in successive offerings of the program. Therevamped 2015 STEPS offering follows a 2014 STEPS offering in which the content anddelivery of STEPS was significantly updated to reflect current pre-college science andengineering education research. Specifically, engineering design, engineering practices,engineering habits of mind, and best practices for engineering career exploration
can be processed inonly one of two ways (addition and subtraction) at the most fundamental level, regardless ofthe device that processes it, be it electronic or biological. If so, we can infer that no matterhow a computing device processes information structurally, the duality in basic computationwill most likely manifest itself at higher-level device-dependent processes as well. Anotherreason for similarities may be that the design and use of electronic computing devices areimposed by biological computing agents that control them. As a result, the mind’s use ofelectronic computing devices should reflect how it does its own computing. This may be whymodeling is common to both electronic and biological computing because the thinkingprocess
, including high ceilingswith hard, reflective floors creating a flutter echo, a long hallway or stairwell that producesreverberations with a gradual decay, and finally an anechoic sound recording booth.Following the walk, students return to the main classroom and attempt to recreate the differentenvironments they explored using a multi-tap delay effect built into AudioWorks. Three othereffects in AudioWorks are also briefly introduced: harmonic distortion, low and high-pass filters,and amplitude modulation. For this activity, students are encouraged to bring their own electricinstruments and use the iPad running AudioWorks as an effects processor, which provides aunique opportunity to visually relate the sound of various effects to how they modify
movement and stopping of two LEGO robot cars (local and express).The colored paper pieces help identify the locations where the robots stop temporarily.Throughout the two lessons, the following general assumptions are made: (i) the robots are well-designed and the programs are accurate; (ii) the students possess basic skills to operate the LEGOrobots, e.g., commanding the robots by pressing buttons; (iii) the students are able to use theactivity sheets and the selected activities truly reflect the lesson topics; (iv) the students areinterested to perform hands-on activities in teams; (v) the lesson topics and the activities align withthe CCSSM and the NGSS; etc.Statistics of the teachers and students who participated in the robotics-focused
, adjustments were made to the questionnaires and later to the learningoutcomes to reflect the content of each camp theme..The structure and basic nature of the questions used in our questionnaires were initially based onour learning outcomes, feedback offered by our experts, and the research literature. Prior to the2013 camp, initial (pre-) and concluding (post-) questionnaires were piloted among a focus groupof five youths representing the age range of camp participants. The two goals of this focus groupwere to ensure that questions were not too easy or too challenging for the intended age group andto determine whether the students understood what was being asked of them. The focus grouprevealed valuable information regarding survey instructions
-reporting in the categories of “not at all” and “not verywell”. These observed differences reflect existing findings in the fear of failure literature. Table 4. Chi-Square Analysis of Fear of Failure Test: How well can you cope with doing poorly on a test? Column Very Row Not at all Not very well Neutral Somewhat Well Male Obs 25 138 194 295 210 Exp 30.3 145.9 196.2 287.9 201.7 Column % 2.90