descending order of the highestincidence of EEF content standards found, the regions were ranked as follows: 1) New England,2) Mid-Atlantic, 3) Great Lakes, 4) Southwest, 5) Southeast, 6) Pacific, 7) Midwest, and 8)Mountain. Also shown in Figure 1 is the breadth of the EEF content standards in each region. Thebreadth of engineering content is defined as the total number of engineering content standardsidentified in each state in the region divided by the number of states in that region. Thiscomputation constructs a state average for each region that was used for regional comparison.For this analysis, the regions are ranked as follows: 1) New England, 2) Mid-Atlantic, 3) GreatLakes, 4) Southwest, 5) Southeast, 6) Pacific, 7) Midwest and 8
classes. However, one studentwas absent throughout, and four either missed the pre- or post-test administration of the STEMSemantics Survey, so their data was not analyzed. All participating students (n=57) were 13-14years old. Classes were indirectly tracked by ability, because advanced and remedial LanguageArts and Math classes impact enrollment in these science classes. Therefore, section 1 tended tohave advanced students (n=23), while sections 2 (n=17) and 3 (n=17) had balanced and remedialpopulations, respectively. The classes were at a suburban school in a small Mid-Atlantic city.33 males and 24 females participated.Research Design Students participated in a science unit on electricity, taught by their normal instructor,and
International Conference on Multimedia in Physics Teaching and Learning,Wroclaw, Poland, Sept. 2007.13. Escalada, L., Grabhorn, R., and Zollman, D., “Applications of Interactive Digital Video in a Physics Classroom.” Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5(1), 1996, 73-97.14. Palazzo, D., and Schools, C., “Video Analysis: The Next Physics Laboratory?”ASEE Mid-Atlantic, West Point, March 2008.15. Beichner, R. “Impact of Video Motion Analysis on Kinematics Graph Interpretation Skills.” American Journal of Physics, 1996. Page 22.1117.13
/ciese/pisa5. McGrath, E., Schultz, D., ”Engineering our Future New Jersey: Partnerships, the Critical Element” presented at ASEE Mid-Atlantic Conference, NJIT, April 13-14, 20076. American Diploma Project. Achieve.org. (n.d.). [Online]. Available: http://www.achieve.org/7. Kimmel, H., Carpinelli, J., Rockland, R., “Bringing Engineering into K-12 Schools: A Problem Looking for Solutions?” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education, Coimbra, Portugal, September 3-7, 2007.8. Technology Educators Association of New Jersey. (2007). Teach technology education in NJ. [Online]. Available at: http://www.teanj.org/teachtechnj/TechTech-update.pdf
examines three K-12 engineering enrichment programs and their influence on college enrollment and graduationrates for past participants of the programs. The programs, conducted by a large public universityin the mid-Atlantic, target women and underrepresented minorities and draw most of theprogram participants from the surrounding economically disadvantaged counties. The firstprogram is week-long summer day camp targeting middle school students. The second is a year-long program hosting two events each semester targeting minority sophomores and seniors. Thethird is a 2-week overnight summer camp for junior and senior women. To assess the long-termimpact of these programs on interest in engineering, we performed telephone surveys of
engineering modules on studentlearning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 301-310.10 Cantrell, et. al. (2006).11 Riskowski et al. (2009).12 McGrath, E., Sayres, J., Lowes, S., Lin, P. (2008). Underwater LEGO Robotics as the Vehicle to Engage Studentsin STEM: The BUILD IT Project’s First Year of Classroom Implementation. American Society for EngineeringEducation Mid-Atlantic, Hoboken, NJ, October 2008.13 Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J. S., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based scienceand student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41(10), 1081-1110.14 Klein, S., and Geist, M. (2006). The Effect of a Bioengineering Unit Across High School Contexts: An
, 2008.6 Macalalag, A. Brockway, D., McKay, M., and McGrath, E. (2008) Partnership to Improve Student Achievement in Engineering and Science Education: Lessons Learned in Year One. Paper presented at Mid-Atlantic regional ASEE Conference. Available online at http://www.stevens.edu/asee/fileadmin/asee/pdf/macalalag_final.pdf7 Ibid 5.8 Ibid 6.9 New Jersey Department of Education. (2008) NJ Department of Education District Factor Groups (DFG) for School Districts. Retrieved online March 17, 2009 at http://www.state.nj.us/education/finance/sf/dfg.shtml10 New Jersey Department of Education. (2008) Department of Education Data: 2007-2008 Enrollment. Retrieved online March 17, 2009 at http://www.state.nj.us/education/data/enr/enr08/11
: Project for Mechanical Engineering Undergraduate Students. Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, San Antonio, TX, June 10-13, 2012. 9. Fleischer, A., Wemhoff, A., O’Brien, J., Ural, A., Alaways, L. (2010). Development and Execution of a Successful Mechanical Engineering Outreach Program for Middle School Girls. Proceedings of the Fall 2010 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, Villanova, PA, October 15-16. 10. Deckard, C., Quarfoot, D. (2014).Analysis of a Short-term STEM intervention Targeting Middle School Girls and their Parents (Research-to-practice). Proceedings of the 2014 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, June 15-18, 2014
service as a program manager for USMC science and technology programs, Science Advisor to the Commanding General, Fleet Marine Forces Atlantic, and Head, NAVSEA Combat Systems Safety and Engineering Division. Page 12.1425.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Evaluating a Collaborative Middle School Outreach Program-- The Strategy, the Results, and the ChallengesAbstractA Navy funded outreach program directed at increasing the interest of middle school students inpursuing careers in science and engineering has been subjected to a comprehensive mixed modeevaluation process
and time required to do the project; and theirperceptions of academic and 21st century achievements gained by their students through theproject.In the “bead and thread” analogy, the bead is the underwater robotics curriculum and the threadsare the specific science and engineering design concepts introduced in the curriculum. Page 22.877.5This paper will focus on teacher perceptions of the benefits and challenges on implementing thiscurriculum and, in the final section, relate this project to the existing literature on these benefitsand constraints. Previous papers have reported on the program’s professional developmentmodel for teachers; the
. Page 15.1138.5MethodParticipantsStudents in an after-school Boys and Girls Club at a middle school in a mid-Atlantic state wereasked to participate in the project. The club coordinator explained the project to the students andprovided them with information and parental consent forms to take home to their parents.Students whose parents completed the consent forms were given permission to participate in theproject.Of the eight students who participated in the project, five students were boys and three weregirls. All of the students were White/Caucasian. Their ages ranged from 11 to 14, with four 11year olds (all sixth graders), one 12 year old (a sixth grader), two 13 year olds (a seventh graderand an eighth grader), and one 14 year old (an
). Biology teachers’ perceptions of subject matter structureand its relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 301-325.17 Sanders, L.R., Borko, H., & Lockard, J.D. (1993). Secondary Science Teachers’ Knowledge Base WhenTeaching Science Courses in and out of Their Area of Certification. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 30(7), 723-736.18 Macalalag. Jr, A., Brockway, D., McKay, M., McGrath, E.. (2008). Partnership to Improve StudentAchievement in Engineering and Science Education: Lessons Learned in Year One.. Paper Presented at theAmerican Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Mid-Atlantic Section Conference, October 2008,Hoboken, N.J.19 Hotaling, L., McGrath, B., McKay, M., Shields, C
discussed in a separate section below).Overall, half of the 34 teachers who responded to the survey implemented ten or more of the 27activities that they learned during the summer 2008 workshop. Twenty-five percent did 15 or moreactivities. All but one of the activities introduced in the workshops was used by over half of theteachers. These were two model-based inquiry lessons (phases of the Moon and Earth’s seasons) andtwo engineering lessons (designing walls and creating windmills). Almost all of the teachers who hadused an activity reported successful implementation. Moreover, almost all of the teachers who used anactivity reported that they would use it again next year. Finally, almost all teachers felt that the PISAactivities had helped them
social and societalconnections with engineering and science—the place of engineering and science in developmentof knowledge and technology, the roles of engineers and scientists in driving theory-building andtechnological change, and the effects of these disciplines on all aspects of modern life—increasesinterest and motivation of students to drive their own learning and achievement [2].In this section we introduce three design principles that contribute to greater interest andmotivation for all students, but particularly groups who are underrepresented in engineering: (1)using narratives to develop and motivate students’ understanding of the place of engineering inthe world; (2) demonstrating how engineering helps people, animals, and/or
oftheir designs. Page 23.876.3The studio model places emphasis on: (a) a content-rich curriculum that links youth to theirenvironment, (b) support and scaffolded discussions with mentors (site leaders and facilitators),and (c) an online network that supports the creation and maintenance of relationships amongprogram participants. The informal character of this program allows youth the freedom toexplore and self-identify with STEM topics.MethodParticipantsYouth in three after-school programs at middle schools in a rural, impoverished, mountainousregion of a mid-Atlantic state were asked to participate in the project. The site leaders explainedthe