Jialing Wu is a first-year PhD student in Engineering Education at the Ohio State University. She earned her M.Ed. in International Education Policy and Management at Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, and also holds a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from China. Her research interests encompass computational social science, international engineering education, pre-college engineering in Engineering Education Research (EER).Dr. Stacy S Klein-Gardner, Vanderbilt University Dr. Stacy Klein-Gardner serves as an Adjunct Professor of Biomedical Engineering at Vanderbilt University. She is the co-PI and co-Director of the NSF-funded Engineering For Us All (e4usa) project and now the Executive Director of
-impact applications in education and healthcare. His technical expertise includes machine learning, web development, and cloud technologies, with hands-on experience deploying tools using PyTorch, Hugging Face, PostgreSQL, and AWS. Meet has also contributed to award-winning projects such as Connections AI, a machine learning solution for puzzle solving, and has led data optimization efforts for large-scale industrial challengesDr. Michael S Rugh, Texas A&M University Dr. Michael S. Rugh is an Associate Research Scientist at the LIVE Lab at Texas A and M University and Director of STEM Education Research for the Aggie Research Program. He leads interdisciplinary research teams investigating game-based learning and
of theNational Science Foundation.References[1] A. Sullivan and Z. Beers, "Early exposure to computational thinking concepts in K-12education," Journal of STEM Education, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 45-52, 2018[2] T. A. Signorella, R. Frieze, and J. Hershey, "Single-sex versus mixed-sex classes and genderschemata in children and adolescents: A longitudinal comparison," Journal of EducationalPsychology, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 386-394, 1993[3] S. Metz, "Attracting the engineering of 2020 today," Journal of Engineering Education, vol.96, no. 3, pp. 1-4, 2007[4] C. Steele, "A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance,"American Psychologist, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 613-629, 1997[5] P. Davies, J. Spencer, and C. Steele
= 104 n = 48 and Robotics education in formal and informal education Records centered around Records excluded for not being Robotics Education journal articles n = 56 n=7 Comparison: Traditional Records excluded for: curricula v/s AI, Robotics 1. Not being relevant or Eligibility enriched
feedback and suggestions. Every newacademic year, teachers had access to an improved version of the curriculum, materials and guideas compared to the prior year. As previously noted, the results focus on the latest teacher feedbackfrom 2023-24, offering the most current insights.CurriculumFig. 1 shows curriculum rating by the teachers. With the v5.0 in 2024 the largest percentage ofteachers rated the curriculum as “very good” (43.3% in 2024, 31.7% in 2023, and 38.2% in 2022).That same year the percentage of teachers who rated the curriculum “excellent” dropped slightlybut both 2024 and 2023 were significantly higher than 2022’s rating (33.3% in 2024 vs. 34.1% in2023 vs. 20.6% in 2022). While the percentage rating for “fair” remained fairly
marginalizedcommunities. Through our four-year collaboration, we have demonstrated how creative, hands-on activities incorporating art and design can expand young students' perceptions of engineeringand help them envision themselves as future engineers. By leveraging the enthusiasm andexpertise of university faculty, undergraduate mentors, and elementary school teachers, we havedeveloped sustainable programming that integrates into the elementary classroom while inspiringboth students and educators alike. Through this relationship, we have documented key pragmaticlessons to help bring two educational communities together.References1. A. Master, S. Cheryan, A. Moscatelli, & A. N. Meltzoff, “Programming experience promotes higher stem motivation among
List[1] T. Swartz, A. Palermo, S. Masur, J. Aberg, “The Science and Value of Diversity: Closing the Gaps in Our Understanding of Inclusion and Diversity,” The Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 220, Issue Supplement_2, pp. S33–S41, Sep 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiz174[2] M. Haddad, T. Jenkins, B. Solivan, A. Williams, “Enhancing Diversity in STEMM,” in Frontiers in Education, Lincoln, Nebraska, vol. 6, 2021. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.755758 DOI=10.3389/feduc.2021.755758.[3] Whitehouse, “Best Practices for Diversity and Inclusion in STEM Education and Research: A Guide by and for Federal Agencies,” Biden White House Archives. Accessed: Mar. 22
Center for EducationResearch. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these institutions. References[1] T. J. Moore, A. C. Johnston, and A. W. Glancy, “STEM Integration,” in Handbook of Research on STEM Education, 1st ed., C. C. Johnson, M. J. Mohr-Schroeder, T. J. Moore, and L. D. English, Eds., New York: Routledge, 2020, pp. 3–16. doi: 10.4324/9780429021381-2.[2] K. E. Dugan, E. A. Mosyjowski, S. R. Daly, and L. R. Lattuca, “Systems thinking assessments in engineering: A systematic literature review,” Syst Res Behav Sci, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 840–866, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1002/sres
- 9830.2012.tb01127.x.[6] National Research Council, “Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects.” Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.17226/12635[7] Y.-H. Chien, C.-Y. Liu, S.-C. Chan, and Y.-S. Chang, “Engineering design learning for high school and college first-year students in a STEM battlebot design project,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 10, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1186/s40594-023-00403-0.[8] J. Watkins, K. Spencer, and D. Hammer, “Examining Young Students’ Problem Scoping in Engineering Design,” J. Pre-Coll. Eng. Educ. Res., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 43–53, 2014, doi: https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1082.[9] N. Crilly and C
-grade classes at two different schools in a small urban city in the Northeast United States,which we call Pepperville. Mr. J taught the course at school A and Mr. S taught the curriculum atSchool B. Mr. J and Mr. S, both white male teachers, have students from ethnically andlinguistically diverse backgrounds. Most of the students spoke English, and many spoke,understood, or were learning another language. At the end of the curriculum, learners made avideo journalism artifact for specific audiences about climate tech in Pepperville. Both siteshosted a screening day to view the students’ final journalism artifacts, which, for the Spring 2024implementation,were journalism videos. This paper focuses on data from two of Mr. J’s classes.In our
#2300433 Design Challenge: Airborne Transport ANALYZING NATURAL INSPIRATIONS (SAMPLE ANSWERS) DESIGN CHALLENGE CONSTRAINTS MATERIALS: TOOLS: TIME: Construction paper, cardboard, Hole punchers, 30 minutes to tissue paper, tracing paper, paper scissors, hot glue build, test, and clips, craft sticks, pipe cleaners, guns, glue sticks, iterate florist wire, tape, balloons, rubber ruler, tape measurebands, foil, paper cups, thumb tack Share your prototypesSHARE-OUT Compare prototype(s) to the original inspiration from nature Tell what you learned about their strengths and
,” The Journal of rheumatology, vol. 21, no. 3, p. 454—461, 3 1994. [Online]. Available: http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/8006888[2] T. Audino, A. Pautasso, V. Bellavia, V. Carta, A. Ferrari, F. Verna, C. Grattarola, B. Iulini, M. D. Pintore, M. Bardelli, and et al., “Ticks infesting humans and associated pathogens: A cross-sectional study in a 3-year period (2017–2019) in northwest italy,” Parasites & Vectors, vol. 14, no. 1, 3 2021.[3] Unity Technologies, “Unity real-time development platform — 3d, 2d vr &; ar engine,” [online]. [Online]. Available: https://unity.com/[4] D. S. D¨uzkaya, G. Bozkurt, S. Ulupınar, G. Uysal, S. Uc¸ar, and M. Uysalol, “The effect of a cartoon and an information video about intravenous
/0013189X033008003.[2] M. S. Garet et. al., "What makes professional development effective?: Results from a national sample of teachers," American educational research journal, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 915-945, 2001, doi: 10.3102/00028312038004915.[3] A. Kodey, J. Bedard, J. Nipper, N. Post, S. Lovett, and A. Negreros. "The US Needs More Engineers. What’s the Solution?" https://www.bcg.com/publications/2023/addressing-the-engineering-talent-shortage (accessed 1/14/25.[4] D. Collins, J. D. Olson, M. Kotche, E. Taylor, and J. Mendez, "Transforming Science Teacher Practice through an Intentional Summer Research Opportunity: A Case Study of two Urban Science Educators," presented at the American Educational Research
: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:[PR Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley,(eds.: Cambridge University Press, 2022, p. 503.[3] NSF, "STEM Education for the Future," 2020, Available: https://www.nsf.gov/edu/Materials/STEM%20Education%20for%20the%20Future%20- %202020%20Visioning%20Report.pdf.[4] NSF, "Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering " in "National Center for Science and Engineering
materialare those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of NASA.References[1] A. T. Jeffers, A. G. Safferman, and S. I. Safferman, “Understanding K–12 Engineering Outreach Programs,” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., vol. 130, no. 2, pp. 95–108, Apr. 2004, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2004)130:2(95). 6[2] L. M. Ihrig, E. Lane, D. Mahatmya, and S. G. Assouline, “STEM Excellence and Leadership Program: Increasing the Level of STEM Challenge and Engagement for High-Achieving Students in Economically Disadvantaged Rural Communities,” J. Educ. Gift., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 24–42, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1177/0162353217745158.[3
., & Gannon, P. (2024). Technology-rich engineering experiences in Indigenous and rural schools. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(4), 1090-1108.Bryan, L., & Guzey, S. S. (2020). K-12 STEM education: An overview of perspectives and considerations. Hellenic Journal of STEM Education, 1(1), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.51724/hjstemed.v1i1.5Calabrese Barton, A., Schenkel, K., & Tan, E. (2021). Collaboratively engineering for justice in sixth grade STEM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(7), 1010-1040. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21691Caratozzolo, P., Alvarez-Delgado, A., & Hosseini, S. (2020, October). Perspectives on the use of serious
inelectrical engineering through altruism at the middle school level,” in 2013 IEEE GlobalHumanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), 2013, pp. 108–111.[6] D. McGreevy, S. Hoops, and B. Morris, "Tending to the K-12 Talent Pipeline," inPES T&D 2012, 2012, pp. 1-2.[7] J. Naukkarinen, K. Korpinen, and P. Silventoinen, “Upper secondary schoolstudents’ gendered interests in electronics and electrical engineering,” Research inScience & Technological Education, vol. 41, pp. 1412–1432, 2023.[8] M. Estrada, A. Woodcock, P. R. Hernandez, and P. W. Schultz, "Toward a Modelof Social Influence that Explains Minority Student Integration into the ScientificCommunity," Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 206-222, Feb.2011, doi
. The views and opinions of authors expressedherein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.References[1] J. Olson, Small-to-Big Physics: An Engineering Physics Model for Broadening Participation in Nuclear Science and Engineering. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 2022.[2] B. J. Guzzetti, T. E. Snyder, G. V. Glass, and W. S. Gamas, "Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education," Reading Research Quarterly, pp. 117-159, 1993.[3] S. H. Creem‐Regehr and B. R. Kunz, "Perception and action," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, vol. 1, no. 6, pp
assisted in the various collaborative activities. Forboth offerings, the middle school students completed validated and reliable pre- and post-surveysadapted from the Student Attitudes Toward STEM (S-STEM) Survey and the Group Work SkillsQuestionnaire Manual. The S-STEM survey assessed STEM interests, while the Group WorkSkills Questionnaire Manual Survey evaluated collaboration. Preliminary results from aWilcoxon Signed-Rank test indicated positive significance that the 2024 ECE summer campsessions led to greater enjoyment for campers than the 2023 offering. Daily reflection surveyswere also administered to understand the comparison of cohorts and the impact of individualactivities students participated in each day. Results were analyzed to
Project Curriculum Module (Curriculum Exchange)," in 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2014, pp. 24.928. 1-24.928. 2.[14] R. A. Moore et al., "Creating Biologically Inspired Design Units for High School Engineering Courses," in 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 13-16 Oct. 2021, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637238.[15] H. Ehsan and A. P. Rehmat, "Unleashing the Power of Differentiation and Inclusivity: Designing a Multidisciplinary Exhibit for Children," The Science Teacher, vol. 91, no. 6, pp. 32-40, 2024/11/01 2024, doi: 10.1080/00368555.2024.2407392.[16] H. Ehsan, J. P. Quintana-Cifuentes, S. Purzer, and A. P. Rehmat, "Engineering design and children: A
, and that they are specific to our college’s program content andgoals. Yet, the results of the present study can be informative to the assessment and value ofsimilar programs to student success in college.ReferencesArof, K. Z. M., Ismail, S., & Saleh, A. L. (2018). Contractor’s performance appraisal system inthe Malaysian construction industry: Current practice, perception andunderstanding. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(3.9), 46–51.Ashley, M., Cooper, K. M., Cala, J. M., & Brownell, S. E. (2017). Building better bridges intoSTEM: A synthesis of 25 years of literature on STEM summer Bridge programs. CBE—LifeSciences Education, 16(1), es3.Baker, R. W., & Siryk, B. (1984). Measuring adjustment to college
based on stakeholders’ needs. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53(5), 2078-2111.4. Bellman, S., Burgstahler, S., & Chudler, E. H. (2018). Broadening participation by including more individuals with disabilities in STEM: Promising practices from an engineering research center. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(5), 645-656.5. Bolder Advocacy (n.d.). Advocacy Capacity Tool (ACT). https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/5251306/ACT6. Burke, Goldman, S. E., Hart, M. S., & Hodapp, R. M. (2016). Evaluating the Efficacy of a Special Education Advocacy Training Program: Evaluating the Efficacy of Advocacy Training. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 13(4), 269–276. https://doi.org/10.1111
five approaches, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, 2013. [5] S. A. Roller, S. A. Lampley, M. L. Dillihunt, M. P. J. Benfield, S. E. Gholston, M. W. Turner, and A. M. Davis, “Development and Initial Validation of the Student Interest and Choice in STEM (SIC-STEM) Survey 2.0 Instrument for Assessment of the Social Cognitive Career Theory Constructs,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 646–657, Sep. 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09843-7 [6] S. A. Roller, S. A. Lampley, M. L. Dillihunt, M. P. Benfield, and M. W. Turner, “Student attitudes toward STEM: A revised instrument of social cognitive career theory constructs
ability to succeed inengineering tasks, is a crucial predictor of whether students remain engaged in engineeringeducation or pursue engineering as a college major. This is especially critical in rural settings,where access to engineering education or career development opportunities may be limited. Toaddress this, the mixed methods study implemented a 3D printing experience centered on engagingstudents in hands-on making and tinkering activities. The quantitative component employed adesign one-group pre- and post-test design using a modified version of Mamaril et al.’s (2016)engineering self-efficacy survey to assess students’ self-efficacy levels before and after theirparticipation in the 3D printing activities. The qualitative inquiry focused
educationinitiatives target increasingly younger audiences, facilitating an early and smooth transition fromblocks to text becomes particularly important.While Scratch excels at nurturing computational thinking and creative skills, it was not designedto facilitate the transition to text-based programming. The relationship between block-based andtext-based environments remains an active area of research [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], with K¨ollinget al. identifying specific barriers in transitioning between the two [14].Key Transition ChallengesBuilding on K¨olling et al.’s framework for analyzing block-to-text transitions, we examine severalkey challenges specifically in the context of moving from Scratch to text-based programming.First, while Scratch provides
-Clarke, “Demystifying computational thinking,”Educational Research Review, vol. 22, pp. 142–158, 2017.[6] K–12 Computer Science Framework, 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.k12cs.org.[7] S. Yeni, N. Grgurina, M. Saeli, F. Hermans, J. Tolboom, and E. Barendsen, “Interdisciplinaryintegration of computational thinking in K-12 education: A systematic review,” Informatics inEducation, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 223–278, 2024.[8] D. Weintrop, E. Beheshti, M. Horn, K. Orton, K. Jona, L. Trouille, and U. Wilensky,“Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms,” Journal of ScienceEducation and Technology, vol. 25, pp. 127–147, 2016.[9] D. Bernstein, G. Puttick, K. Wendell, et al., “Designing biomimetic robots: Iterativedevelopment
/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510 [7] Yue, M., Jong, M. S.-Y., & Dai, Y. (2022). Pedagogical design of K-12 artificialintelligence education: A systematic review. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315620 [8] Williams, R., Park, H. W., Oh, L., & Breazeal, C. (2019). PopBots: Designing anartificial intelligence curriculum for early childhood education. Proceedings of the AAAIConference on Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019729 [9] Yi, H., Liu, T., & Lan, G. (2024). The key artificial intelligence technologies in earlychildhood education: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-023-10637-7 [10] Castro-Schez, J., Morcillo, C., Albusac, J
in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaCappelli, C. J., Boice, K. L., & Alemdar, M. (2019). Evaluating University-Based Summer STEM Programs: Challenges, Successes, and Lessons Learned. Journal of STEM Outreach, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.15695/jstem/v2i1.13Friedman, A. D., Melendez, C. R., Bush, A. A., Lai, S. K., & McLaughlin, J. E. (2017). The Young Innovators Program at the Eshelman Institute for Innovation: A case study examining the role of a professional pharmacy school in enhancing STEM pursuits among secondary school students. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0081-4Hora, M. T., Wolfgram, M., Huerta, A
five iSTEM rubrics andfive edTPA rubrics to assess the quality and effectiveness of our lessons. The rubrics included:iSTEM rubrics (1. STEM Literacy, 2. 21st Century, 3. STEM Workforce Readiness, 4. STEMInterests, Engagement, and Identity, 5. Ability to Make STEM Connections, edTPA rubrics (6.Learning Environment, 7. Engaging Students in Learning, 8. Deepening Student Learning, 9.Subject-Specific Pedagogy: The Work Artifact(s), 10. Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness).During the practice lesson delivery, we video-recorded ourselves for comprehensive self andpeer evaluations. The evaluation template, shown in Table 2, consisted of fixed prompts (boldand italicized) to which we provided structured responses (plain text). Table 2