individual engineering topic attended andthe effectiveness of their lead engineering advisor. The initial surveys included 20 parallelstatements with responses of strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree, and strongly disagree.The evaluations asked the teachers to anonymously rate the workshops by providing the sessionand professors name and followed the same format with 12 survey questions and 3 short answerresponses, for example “What aspect(s) of the workshop did you most appreciate or enjoy?” and“What do you need more of to be able to do the work discussed in today’s workshop?” Based on the work done, teachers were then asked to draft their individual lesson plansand continue to work with their specific engineering professor towards a
segmented using a conversation analysis coding system thatdistinguishes turns-at-talk between two individuals.33 Conversation Analysis (CA) is aqualitative method derived from ethnomethodology and discourse analysis and established in the1960’s by social scientists Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson to distinguishsocial interaction during discourse. It allows researchers to describe, analyze and understand talkthrough a series of organizational structure and linguistic notation.33 Specific notation for CAtranscripts were developed by Gail Jefferson to show linguistic emphasis. Additional focusincludes the use of adjacency pairs that delineate conditional relevance (e.g., first turn-at-talk ofadjacency pair makes the later turn
the facility to select, by the teacher, the 2-input gate under study and the method to excite the logic gate inputs. It was desired to make the learning tool fun with an innovative method, to change the gate input logic level, which would mimic a “magic show”. Figure 1 shows the typical usage of the device. As seen in Figure 1, top-left image, the light falling on two photo-resistors is translated, using an electronic circuit, into logic 0, which is then applied to the gate-under-test housed in a separate digital circuit unit. Blocking the light, by using hands, one can apply logic 1 to either one or both, the gate input/s. Depending on the gate-under-test, the LED matrix will light up for one of the four possible
is supported by National Science Foundation under grant number 1426989.References[1] Ziaeefard, S., N. Mahmoudian, M. Rastgaar and M. Miller, “Engaging Students in STEM Learning through Co-Robotic Hands-On Activities (Evaluation),” Proc. ASEE Annual Conf. and Exp., 2016.
thestudents cooperated to learn how the best conduct the experiment.3. Incremental and continual improvement: Each of the five pilots in his/her class section wasgiven the opportunity to fly the drone for at least two trials. The pilots increased their flyingspeed average from 4.3 ft/s to 4.7 ft/s from the first to the second trial. Furthermore, the standarddeviation of the time recorded decreased from 2.4 seconds to 1.2 seconds, showing incrementalimprovement of accuracy. This can be attributed to both a refinement of piloting skills and betteraccuracy of time data collection by paying closer attention to starting and stopping the watch.Those who observed the experiment and sought out error sources continually improved byidentifying patterns
of Louisville Dr. Patricia A. S. Ralston is Professor and Chair of the Department of Engineering Fundamentals at the University of Louisville. She received her B.S., MEng, and PhD degrees in chemical engineering from the University of Louisville. Dr. Ralston teaches undergraduate engineering mathematics and is currently involved in educational research on the effective use of technology in engineering education, the incorpo- ration of critical thinking in undergraduate engineering education, and retention of engineering students. She leads a research group whose goal is to foster active interdisciplinary research which investigates learning and motivation and whose findings will inform the development of
instruction: Results from classroom observations, teacher reports, and student surveys".sJournal of Research in Science Teaching. 51 (2): 219-249.Duschl, Richard A., Heidi A. Schweingruber, and Andrew W. Shouse. 2007. Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Forbes, Cory T., Mandy Biggers, and Laura Zangori. 2013. "Investigating Essential Characteristics of Scientific Practices in Elementary Science Learning Environments: The Practices of Science Observation Protocol (P-SOP)".-School Science and Mathematics.l113 (4): 180-190.Garet, Michael S., Andrew C. Porter, Laura Desimone, Beatrice F. Birman, and Kwang Suk Yoon. 2002. "What Makes
Develop Communicate Possible Solutions Solutions Test and Select Best Evaluate Possible Solution(s) Solution(s) Construct PrototypeFigure 2: Design Process Model Utilized with Participating TeachersProgram EvaluationThe evaluation of Project TESAL is guided by participatory program evaluation theory, whichactively involves program stakeholders in evaluation efforts as stakeholders bring essentialexpertise and perspective on program functioning and are in a position to utilize
familiesFurther DiscussionThis paper sheds light on protective factors, as well as risk factors that may impact the academicsuccess in STEM for American Indian youth. It also provides insight into some complicated, yetcritical, relationships that impact both teacher and student persistence in schools in Indiancountry. Further research on pre-service and in-service teacher development that highlights andleverages the strengths of the American Indian culture in an effort to engage youth and theirfamilies in academic endeavors should be conducted. References[1] KewalRamani, A., Gilbertson, L., Fox, M., and Provasnik, S. (2007). Status and Trends in theEducation of Racial and Ethnic Minorities (NCES 2007-039
Hundigopal , Xiaoxin You, Increasing high school girls' self confidence and awareness of CS through a positive summer experience, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.36 n.1, March 20047 Rogers, S., S. Harris, I. Fidan, and D. McNeel, "Art2STEM: Building a STEM Workforce at the Middle School Level," ASEE Annual Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2011.8 Inna Pivkina , Enrico Pontelli , Rachel Jensen , Jessica Haebe, Young women in computing: lessons learned from an educational & outreach program, Proceedings of the 40th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, March 04-07, 2009, Chattanooga, TN, USA9 Tyler-Wood, Tandra, et al. "Bringing up girls in science (BUGS): The effectiveness of an afterschool
-analysis of properties of variables from the theory of planned behavior. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 159-156.Lapan, R. , Shaughnessy, P., & Boggs,K. (1996). Efficacy expectations and vocational interests as mediators between sex and choice of math/science college majors: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 277-291.Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. Career choice and development, 4, 255-311.Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Schmidt, J., Brenner, B., Lyons, H., & Treistman, D. (2003). Relation of contextual supports and barriers to choice behavior in engineering majors: Test of alternative social cognitive models. Journal of
prototype a wooden car that is designed in SolidWorks. Energy Efficiency, renewable energy, energy usage and sustainability Week 2 Design Project(s): Solar oven design, windmill design Electronics and Energy usage Week 3 Design Projects: Arduino circuits and Makey Makey controllers Week 4 Open-Ended Design projects based on energy and & sustainability
, beliefs, and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 381–414.11. Biggers, M., & Haefner, L. A. (2015, April). Integrating Elementary Science and Engineering Curriculum. Presentation at National Association of Research of Science Teaching Annual Conference, Chicago, IL.12. Century, J., Rudnick, M., & Freeman, C. (2010). A framework for measuring fidelity of implementation: A foundation for shared language and accumulation of knowledge. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(2), 199–218. 13. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246. 14. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
Identity Formation, Research in Science Education, vol. 43, issue 5, p.1979-2007 (October, 2013).17. Schultz, L.A., Barriers for Wilmot High School Female Students not Enrolling in the Mechanical Design Technology Program at Gateway Technical College, Thesis, University of Wisconsin, http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2011/2011schultzl.pdf (2011).18. Tully, D., Jacobs, B., Effects of Single-Gender Mathematics Classrooms on Self-Perception of Mathematical Ability and Post-Secondary Engineering Paths: An Australian Case Study, European Journal of Engineering Education, 35:4, 455-467 (2010).19. Wee, S.; Cordova-Wentling, R.M.; Korte, R.F.; Larson, S.M.; Loui, M.C., Why Many Smart Women Leave Engineering: A
students learned, students alsoreported that they learned many others specific things. Terms explicitly used included“patience,” “time management,” “responsibility,” “leadership,” “accountability,” and“discipline.” Some of these responses are included in the table below with a student response toprovide an example in their words. Response Student quote Creativity “Sometimes you have to think outside of the box to come up with the best solution” Brainstorming “It’s better to brainstorm ideas in a group because other[s] offer a new perspective in functionality and creative aspects that you
resources. Engineering self-efficacy is emerging as a usefultheory in evaluating the confidence of students to pursue engineering related professions and theconfidence of teachers to teach engineering related content. In particular, Faber et al. [5] andYoon et al. [18] developed the Student Attitudes toward STEM (S-STEM) survey and TeachingEngineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS) survey, respectively. Such surveys used in conjunctionwith outreach activities may help allocate time and resources to more influential activities. In summary, the literature provides valuable information about engineering education inK-12, including typical types of program offerings, what has been most effective, andsuggestions for assessment to help evaluate the
PD (professional development) experience took place in December. I created a unit to team teach with our 8th grade science teacher, Holly. She was very excited about the experience. I shared the lesson plans with her and secured all necessary materials for the unit. I taught the first class and then we team taught the next 2 classes and then she taught the last class on her own. She felt confident by the 4th class. My second PD experience took place in May. I shared BD (another rural teacher in program)’s MagLev unit with Holly… I told her I would help her in anyway except I could not be there to teach the unit… We are planning on meeting this summer to plan a life science unit and maybe more
minimize the weight of their BMS by thinking critically about where it isnecessary to use more or less adhesive.Dynamic behavior predictions and shaking table testing follow the construction of each team’sBMS. Students calculate the mass and stiffness to determine the natural frequency of their BMS.The mass is recorded using a scale, and the stiffness is calculated using the empirical Equation 1. + / 5 = Stiffness = K = + 325 + 900[unitsare ] (Eq. 1) ,,- 01 16 >where, B = total length of added braces (in); G = total number of gusset plates; S = total
see from the above sample card, learning blocks have various states listed. Below is thelist of state and level each block can show: Learning Block states Not Started – Designates that a camper has not yet started any challenges within this block Draft- Camper has submitted a first draft design of a challenge at the specified level Completed (Green Check) – Camper has finished the challenge(s) and has shown mastery of block at the specified level; this status will change to Draft of the next higher level once a new challenge is started and a draft is submitted for it Learning Block Levels Young Explorer – Most basic level deals with demonstrating basic content knowledge
. References1. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education StandardsNational Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices,crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.2. Pellegrino, J. W., Wilson, M. R., Koenig, J. A., & Beatty, A. S. (2014). DevelopingAssessments for the Next Generation Science Standards. Washington, DC: National AcademiesPress.3. Tekkumru-Kisa, M., Stein, M. K., & Schunn, C. (2015). A framework of analyzing cognitivedemand and content - practices integration: Task analysis guide in science. Journal of Researchin Science Teaching, 52(5), 659-685. doi: 10.1002/tea.212084. National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). The
energy demandburden as they are available through more defined communications, rather than have to operateat pre-determined values. The complexity of these levels was meant to match the expertise of the high school studentsattending the lessons. Smart Grid and Micro-Grid were both highly collaborative lessons withinteraction amongst all parties to promote self-discovery of the system in discussion.Assessment The Young Scholar’s group knowledge and experience gains were observed in several areasincluding science self-efficacy, science understanding, sense of inclusion, and energy beliefs,knowledge, and behavior. (Assessing Women and Men in Engineering (AWE). (n.d.),DeWaters,J. Quaqish, B.,Graham, M., & Powers, S. (2013). Riggs, I.M
and other lessons learned will be incorporated to improvethe next iteration of the Arduino summer camp scheduled for June, 2016.Bibliography1. Jeffers, A., Safferman, A., and Safferman, S. (2004) “Understanding K-12 EngineeringOutreach Programs,” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., ASCE 130(2):95-1082. URL: http://www.iteea.org/Resources1507/56194.aspx [cited 27 Jan 2016]3. URL: https://www.pltw.org/ [cited 29 Jan 2016]4. URL: http://www.soe.vt.edu/istemed/ [cited 29 Jan 2016]5. URL: http://outreach.mit.edu [cited 29 Jan 2016]6. URL: http://www.arduino.cc [cited 30 Jan 2016]7. URL: http://sparkfun.com [cited 30 Jan 2016]
Administration. Chairman of the Board of the GCC - Computer Graphics Center since 2005. Pr´o-Rector of University of Minho between 2006 and 2009. President of the National College of Informatics (Order of Engineers) since 2010.Prof. Victor F. A. Barros Ing.-Paed IGIP, Science and Education Research Council Prof. Victor Freitas de Azeredo Barros, Ing.-Paed IGIP is Executive Secretary of Science and Education Research Council. He is Researcher at AlgoritmiCentre/University of Minho; University of S˜ao Paulo; Mackenzie University; Pontifical Catholic University of Goias; Goi´as Federal Institute; Amap´a Federal Institute and Catarinense Federal Institute. He is Editor-in-Chief of the Brazilian Journal ”Cadernos de Educac¸a
Education Agenda, An Update of State Actions. National Governors Association 2004;667-668. 7. Science, Technology, Engineering and Math, Available from: http://www.ed.gov/stem 8. Engineer your world. Available from: http://www.engineeryourworld.org/ 9. Project Lead The Way. Available from: https://www.pltw.org/ 10. Engineering is Elementary. Available from: http://www.eie.org/ 11. Engineering by Design. Available from: http://www.iteea.org/EbD/ebd.htm 12. Future City. Available from: http://futurecity.org/ 13. ASME vision 2030’s Recommendations for Mechanical Engineering Education. Allan T Kirkpatrick and Scott Danielson. ASEE 2012. 14. ABET. Available from: http://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation
., Lamm, A. J., & Galindo-Gonzalez, S. (2012). CTE students and science achievement: Does type of coursework and occupational cluster matter? Career and Technical Education Research, 37(1), 3-20. doi: 10.5328/cter37.1.36. Griffith, J., & Wade, J. (2001). The relation of high school career and work-oriented education to postsecondary employment and college performance: A six-year longitudinal study of public high school graduates. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 26, 328-365. doi: 10.5328/JVER26.3.3287. Association for Career and Technical Education [ACTE] (2009). CTE’s role in science, technology, engineering & math. Alexandria, VA: ACTE. Retrieved from https://www.acteonline.org/WorkArea
Society for Engineering Education, 2015).7. Hira, A., Joslyn, C. H. & Hynes, M. M. Classroom makerspaces: Identifying the opportunities and challenges. in IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings 1677–1681 (2014).8. Sheridan, K. et al. Learning in the making: A comparative case study of three makerspaces. Harv. Educ. Rev. 84, 505–531 (2014).9. History. Maker Ed (2015). at 10. Halverson, E. & Sheridan, K. The maker movement in education. Harv. Educ. Rev. 84, 495–504 (2014).11. Morocz, R. et al. University Maker Spaces: Discovery, Optimization and Measurement of Impacts. 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo. (2015).12. Peppler, K., Maltese, A., Keune, A., Chang, S. & Regalla, L. The maker ed open
discounting.Some 75,000 of the nearly 79,000 total resulted from one program’s participation in a state fair, a * The precision of these figures is surely misleading. Some reported figures were round numbers, while others appearedto be more exactly counted totals. Totals are best understood as approximations, for all that the figures are carried out tothe 10’s and 1’s digits. Furthermore, the categories are likely not understood in the same way by all respondents.“Community members” in one figure might well include participants reported as “parents,” for example, in another. redoubtable example of engineering outreach
learning.” Journal of Staff Development 17.4: 34-38, (1996).9. Guskey, T.R. and Yoon, K.S. “What works in professional development?” Phi Delta Kappan 90.07: 495-500, (2009).10. Joyce, B. and Showers, B. Student Achievement through Staff Development. New York, NY: Longman, (1983).11. Katehi, L., Pearson, G., and Feder, M. Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, (2009).12. Loucks-Horsley, S., et al. Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics. Corwin Press, (2009).13. Sparks, D. and Loucks-Horsley, S. “Five models of staff development for teachers