: EMPATHIZE WITH THE USERSDevelop user-centered criteria: Define the problem based on users’perspectives. Capture users’ information, suggestions, values, andfeelings. Reflect on the potential impact of the criteria and outcomes. Develop user-centered criteria based on users’ needs, desires, and values.Plan: Generate multiple ideas with fluency and flexibility. Discuss teamperspectives and strengths. Generate various design ideas and recognize students' strengths in their design work. Collaboratively select a team design.Create: Build a prototype DAY 4: TEST WITH USERS Test: Present your design to users and gather feedback. Utilize
that accurately reflect the practice ofThe framework of 5 criteria becomes a system engineering without proper engineeringby which K-12 educators can evaluate the training can be difficult, potentiallyquality of an engineering activity. Educators miscommunicating engineering concepts toare introduced to and trained in using the students. Expensive third-party kits or "fun"framework during a professional development activities like Rube-Goldberg machines canworkshop. They work through qualityengineering activities and then rate other limit budgets and prioritize complexity overactivities that fit their subject or
introduce each engineering practice and lead educators through a brief (<30 min) series of questions and reflections on the individual practices. Learning Blasts and Video-Learning Modules both include videos of youth engaging in engineering, as tools for educator reflection. Learning Activities In this section of the website, users will find vetted, high-quality, engaging, and authentic engineering activities for youth. These activities are selected to support youth engagement in engineering practices and can be readily adapted to
number of studies also found that high school students who participatedin Project Lead the Way, robotics club, or STEM activity experiences had no significant impacton retention [4] - [8]. Due to the complex and multifaceted nature of education, researchers arestill exploring the correlations and causation between various pedagogies and their impacts onstudent retention rates. For senior high school students, cultural norms and other external factorscan influence their motivation and habits [9] - [11]. Research studies have demonstrated thatinterventions such as goal setting, self-reflection, and providing feedback are effective inenhancing student motivation and academic achievement. At the highest level, these factorsinclude the preparedness
through project or problem-basedlearning (PBL). Most of this section of the rubric draws from the “Ensuring Equity in PBLReflection Tool”[14]. This part of the rubric examines the degree to which students are allowedto exert agency and participate in team-learning environments that reflect real-world contextsand social impacts. The rubric encourages activities that engage every student, ensuring that alleducational experiences are hands-on and relevant to students' lived experiences andsocioeconomic backgrounds.Each of these sections contains specific items, totaling 27, which describe behaviors andpractices ranging from those that perpetuate inequity to those that foster an inclusive atmosphere.For example, under the "Head" section, item 1
draw upon disciplinary-specific or epistemic ways of knowing,designing, decision-making, collaboration, and communication within their social andcultural context [5]. These are reflected in their use of specific tools and approaches whileproblem-solving, modelling, prototyping, evaluating, and sharing design solutions [5], [12],[13]. Many engineers use notebooks or design journals to document their knowledgeconstruction and reflections as they engage in the engineering design process andcommunicate with various audiences [9], [13], [14]. Engineers learn how to use thesenotebooks through a process of apprenticeship within their professional community ofpractice and practical experience [5], [9], [12], [13], [15]. As such, the notebook can
-based assessments, presentations, and reflections. Thesesections were distilled using a combination of classroom experience and research. Eachof these elements is powerful on its own but added together they create opportunitiesfor students to build self-efficacy, belonging, and inclusion. These qualities then lead toclassrooms that can foster students who can find resilience and joy in diversity andcreate equitable spaces. The framework I developed is visualized in Figure 1 below. Iwill describe each of these elements and the research that went into them.Before the Framework: While doing research around actionable science DEIB strategies, I encounteredand studied social-emotional learning (SEL). While the tenants of following theframework
CSEdResearch.org 1 adrienne@buffalo.edu, 2 monica@csedresearch.orgAbstractWe recently hosted a workshop that brought together 12 K-8 teachers who teach computer science(CS) and/or computational thinking and 12 CS education researchers. Since there is a known gapbetween practices that researchers study and practices that teachers implement in a learningenvironment, the purpose of our full-day workshop was to create a meaningful space for teachersand researchers to meet and explore each others’ perspectives. The dialogue was framed aroundteachers’ classroom experiences with researchers reflecting on how they could improve theirresearch practice. The workshop, held during the 2022 CS Teachers Association (CSTA)conference
in engineering practices?Educational Intervention and Study Context Data for this study were collected as a part of a funded research project that seeks tounderstand how rural elementary classroom teachers learn engineering content and practicesthrough professional learning experiences and how a subset of them take those experiences intotheir classroom. Over the course of three years, teachers from rural school districts serving theepistemic practices of engineering [4] through participation in classroom engineering activities,reflecting on them using both their “student hat” (as a learner) and “teachers hat” (as a teacher)[32], and through learning the specific engineering units they will teach. In this case, we use theYouth
practices, 5)provided coaching and expert support, 6) offered opportunities for feedback and reflection, and7) was of sustained duration [6].As specialists in renewable energy and data science, engineering faculty and graduate students aswell as industry advisors provided a content focus and model for effective practices inresearching specific STEM content areas. This was accomplished by giving teacher-participantshands-on active learning opportunities to explore the research process. Boz [5] found this type ofsupport was key to professional development that led teachers from theory to actualimplementation of practice. Education specialists provided coaching, support, and feedback forthe creation of content modules. Collaboration and sustained
majors, referred to in the project and hereafter asdesigners. The designers’ perspectives, as examples of students who had chosen a STEM careerpathway, was of interest. They had gained access to STEM as a field of study and the researcherswere interested in whether their own pathways would be reflected in the activities they weredesigning. The other stakeholder group involved in the planning year was a group of teacherswho would become the afterschool facilitators of the STEM program. Those individuals valuedSTEM and students’ access to it. As a group that provided input and feedback on the activitiesthat were being developed, the researchers were interested in how their experiences andperspectives may or may not be reflected in the afterschool
forexpanding students’ higher order thinking, potential for lifelong learning, and sense of agency intheir learning experiences. HoM is defined as a set of learned or internalized dispositions thatinform an individual's behaviors when confronted with challenges. This study addressed tworesearch questions: (1) Which HoM were articulated by children as they reflected upon theirparticipation in a home-based engineering program? (2) What patterns of the children’svocabulary align with the HoM framework? Observational methods were used to examine youngchildren’s reflections upon the process of completing low-stakes engineering projects in theirhome. The participants were 23 children ranging from kindergarten to eighth grade. After theyengaged in the ill
thecommunity, especially the needs of those who are under-served. It is reciprocal, valuespartnership, and recognizes the expertise brought by the community partner. It also includesreflection, which has been shown to enhance learning across academic subjects [14]. S-L isintegrated by educators in a way designed to meet needs and goals identified by the communitywhile being intricately linked with learning objectives and outcomes. Before, during, and aftertheir service, students also engage in structured reflection to help them gain further insight intocourse or program content, a broader appreciation of their academic disciplines, and a greatersense of civic responsibility.S-L relationships are mutually beneficialWhen properly implemented, service
and aparent of two. His research focuses on how youth develop and maintain interest in STEMeducation across formal and informal learning contexts. As a parent, educator, and researcher hehas experienced multiple moments of failure in all of those roles and tried to make sense of theintersection of theories around learning through failure, experiences in supporting learnersthrough failure and seeing his children and other kids and parents experience failure, particularlyin STEM. These experiences and extensive self-reflection influenced his input on the design ofthis intervention and the interpretation of data produced.ResultsGuided by our research questions ‘How was failure perceived by participating families?’ and‘What was the subsequent
shown that learning activities that reinforce concepts help students understand thecontent they previously struggled to master [12]. This approach also improves theirunderstanding of concepts, the principles that link concepts, and the linking of concepts andprinciples to conditions and procedures for application [13]. It is critical to allow students torelate concepts to their application by providing realistic scenarios for students to solve usingtheir knowledge of STEM. Integrated STEM activities can foster self-regulated/self-directedlearning in several ways. One is by prompting students for explanations via guiding questions,which help students reflect upon and integrate the knowledge they require to solve the problem[14]. For the
manufacturing, visits to local companies usingsemiconductors in their production lines, tours of local higher education fabrication andexperimental lab facilities, and designing and prototyping various microelectronic systems. Theprogram and participant experience were evaluated based on understanding students’ change intheir sense of belonging and self-efficacy, career aspiration, and knowledge and skills associatedwith the semiconductor ecosystem. Data collection involved pre-post survey results, students’daily evaluations of the program activities and reflections, and focus group responses.The analysis, employing inductive coding of responses and related pairs analysis on pre- andpost-survey sections, revealed positive outcomes. These findings
school students withopportunities to reflect on their physical and mental well-being?Conceptual Framework Funds of Knowledge. The concept of funds of knowledge emerged from the work ofVelez-Ibañez and Greenberg [4] who described the strategic and cultural resources and skillsutilized by Mexican American families in the U.S. Southwest. They described how these“specific strategic bodies of information” [4, p. 314], were utilized to ensure and maintain thewell-being of their families. For instance, they described families and their knowledge of folkmedicine to provide medical care for their families due to the lack of doctors and thediscrimination faced by Mexican Americans in rural areas in the Southwest. Eventually, Molland colleagues [5
not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.
space to support the adoption of evidence-based strategies, transfer of methodologies and tools,critical self-reflection of teaching practices, adoption of improved pedagogy by new instructors,and learning of innovative teaching techniques by more established instructors [3], [4]. Althoughmulti-lecturer courses bring these advantages to students and instructors, they can be difficult toplan, execute, and assess. Some of the challenges reported are consistent messaging, classhousekeeping, overlapping roles, the dominance of one discipline, loss of individual autonomy,and poor logistics [2], [5].This paper discusses a team-taught engineering course for pre-college students. Over the pastfour years, a team of three to five graduate student
further detail below. The data exploredwithin this case study included observations of the classroom teacher while teaching the e4usacurriculum, instructional materials, and reflections following instruction. Engaging in this case studyenriches the understanding of engineering pedagogy and supports the practices of other educatorsaiming to remove barriers and support SWDs in engineering education.Teacher Selection and School Site and The case study took place at a school that provides extensive educational and support servicesto children and adolescents who have autism, trauma disorder, and multiple disabilities. It is also one ofthe e4usa partner high schools that offer a pre-college engineering program to SWDs. Mr. Sagunoversees the
, communication, critical thinking, and problem-solving within thecontext of robotic competitions.Furthermore, diverse themes in annual robotic competitions facilitate project-based learning(PBL) opportunities tailored to children of varying ages. PBL can serve as an effective vehicle tofacilitate student-driven knowledge acquisition, skill practice, and reflective inquiry. Thecombination of PBL and hands-on robotic competition empowers a promising direction that cango beyond traditional educational models, making STEM fields accessible and appealing to K-12students. It has been reported that students who gain technical skills in high school are betterprepared for both the job market and higher education opportunities [15-17]. Additionally, whenstudents
therelease of the Framework for P-12 Engineering Learning (FPEL) developed in partnership withthe American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE & AE3, 2020) provide differentapproaches to the inclusion of engineering in K-12 settings. In order to provide more clarity onthe learning goals for engineering education, this paper uses a directed content analysis design toidentify the alignment of research and practitioner articles to the learning goals promoted in theNGSS (2013) and FPEL (2020). With a focus on formal middle school classrooms in the UnitedStates, this study addresses the following research questions: 1) What are the trends in articlesbeing published?; 2) How are the FPEL learning goals reflected in the literature?; 3) How are
specific place where students are personallyattached and live within the context [8], [14]. Many underrepresented students encounterdisconnects between formal instruction and their home experiences as the content often used inclassrooms does not reflect their community-based experiences. PBE addresses this challenge asit seeks to overcome this dissonance by leveraging learning from local surroundings [14]. InPBE, students are provided opportunities to explore local environments, phenomena, history, andeconomy in place. Teachers in rural school settings can use these place-based elements to createa meaningful STEM learning context for underserved populations [9], [10], [8]. The impact ofimplementing PBE in STEM activities can be powerful. Unique
within and across school districts. PD sessions includedtime for teachers to develop lesson plans, explore resources, and reflect on their learning.We used a mixed methods research design to investigate the impact of the PD program onteacher self-efficacy and classroom pedagogy with a focus on cultural relevance and engineeringdesign. Quantitative pre/post data was collected using three survey instruments: TeachingEngineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS), Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy Scale(CRTSE), and Culturally Congruent Instruction Survey (CCIS). Qualitative data includedvideotaped classroom observations, individual teacher interviews after each design task, andteacher focus groups and written reflections during the summer and
contexts [3]. Thesecontinual changes make T&E education unique from many content areas in that it is rapidlyevolving to provide students with the latest design thinking skills, technical skills, and manyother competencies. The name changes reflect a shift in the focus of the field to keep up withemerging societal needs and educational initiatives. While early manual arts and industrial artsprograms primarily focused on developing technical skills in students (predominantly males), thefield shifted toward a focus on the application of skills related to various technologies andimplementing design-based thinking to help all students become more technologically andengineering literate citizens and consumers. These name changes reflect the
Advisor to the leadership at Sisters in STEM. Sreyoshi frequently collaborates on several National Science Foundation projects in the engineering education realm, researching engineering career trajectories, student motivation, and learning. Sreyoshi has been recognized as a Fellow at the Academy for Teaching Excellence at Virginia Tech (VTGrATE) and a Fellow at the Global Perspectives Program (GPP) and was inducted to the Yale Bouchet Honor Society during her time at Virginia Tech. She has also been honored as an Engaged Ad- vocate in 2022 and an Emerging Leader in Technology (New ELiTE) in 2021 by the Society of Women Engineers. Views expressed in this paper are the author’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those
integration of the otherdomains as well as for the skills and knowledge associated with those domains. Thus, we usedthe characteristics of engagement were comprised by Cunningham and Kelly’s (2017) epistemicpractices of engineering in this study because they are reflective of the nature of engineering,specific to the habits of mind reflected in the Framework for P12 Engineering Learning, butgeneral enough to be more likely to arise in the interviews. The three groups of stakeholderswhose views were examined in this study are not engineers and it was unlikely that theirreflections on STEM engagement would be specific enough for the Framework (2020) to be themost meaningful descriptors of their views. For example, it was unlikely that the community
autoethnography isto challenge the subject-object distinction by putting the researcher's perspective on thephenomenon being researched. The auto-ethnographic framework also allows for analysis of thevaried interactions between factors that have influenced her interest in engineering. Additionally,a qualitative technique with an auto-ethnographic framework allows the researcher to lookdeeply into the participant's experiences, motives, and reflections. Auto-ethnography is a suitableapproach to self-reflect, bringing valuable personal views into her experience. In support of thisapproach, she relates her experience actively engaging in hands-on experiments, problem-solving, and collaborative projects. These experiences contributed significantly to her
promote youth’s understanding andengagement in environmental sustainability, social justice, and decision-making in an AI-enabledfuture. However, the traditional approach to defining engineering that has guided engineeringpractices is insufficient because it fails to embrace these realities. Therefore, the need for a newframework that reflects these realities is overwhelming. This paper introduces a new theoreticalframework called socially transformative engineering that not only captures these missingelements but also values and incorporates the diverse perspectives and experiences of students. Inparticular, this framework draws upon the legitimation code theory and justice-centeredpedagogies and builds on three tenets (reasoning fluency
? environmental impacts (high CO2 emissions).EXAMPLE REFLECTION QUESTIONS Choose one of the “Impacts” that occurred. If we were to have to build a plane again in the future, knowing what we know now from this experience, what mitigation plans or changes might you implement to reduce the risk and impact of these occurrences? (HS-ETS1-3) Engineering is an inherently creative process. In what ways did you utilize your creativity in the activity? (NOE) A pre-designed plane can constrain creativity. What might be other barriers to creativity that engineers face? (NOE) As a new challenge arose, what kinds of changes did you have to make to your originally planned process? How did you decide what risks were acceptable? (Tradeoffs; HS-ETS1-3) Read