Paper ID #14555First Round Evaluation of First Tech Challenge (FTC) Robotics Club: Doesit Really Prepare Students for beyond College?Dr. Fethiye Ozis, Northern Arizona University Fethiye started working as an instructor in CECMEE at Northern Arizona University in Fall 2014. She has received her Ph.D. in environmental engineering from University of Southern California in 2005. Her doctorate work focused on modeling of bio filters for air pollution control. After graduation, she has been involved in K-12 STEM institutions both as a teacher and administrator. Her research interests include biotechnology for environmental
Paper ID #19422STEAM Education through Music Technology (Evaluation)Dr. Brandon G. Morton, Drexel University Brandon Morton received his Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Drexel University with a focus on Music Information Retrieval. His work focused on the prediction and detection of influence between mu- sicians. Additionally, as a post-doctoral researcher, he is currently interested in the relationship between mobile technology and education. His background in education includes a NSF GAANN Fellowship and a NSF GK-12 Fellowship.Mr. Jeff Gregorio, Drexel University Jeff Gregorio is currently pursuing a PhD in
through an Undergraduate Mentoring Teamand Module Database, ChE Outreach, 48, (1), 33-36.40. Moskal, B., Skokan, C., (2011). Supporting the K-12 Classroom through University Outreach, Journal ofHigher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15 (1), 53-75.41. Sullivan, J., et al, (1999). Beyond the Pipeline: Building a K-12 Engineering Outreach Program, Proceedings ofthe 29th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference – Session 11b5-21, San Juan, Puerto Rico.42. Nadleson, L., Callahan, J., (2011). A Comparison of Two Engineering Outreach Programs for Adolescents,Journal of STEM Education, 12 (1&2), 43-52.43. Groh, J., Scott, R. (2014) Access Engineering: Re-visioning Summer Opportunities for Pre-College Outreach,WEPAN 2014, available at http
Paper ID #16215Supporting K-12 Student Self-Direction with a Maker Family EcosystemJames Robert Larson, Arizona State University I am an undergraduate student in Arizona State’s Electrical Systems Engineering program. This program, which isn’t the same as Electrical Engineering, takes a project-based approach to the curriculum. I am 20 years old and excited to have this opportunity to offer a student’s perspective on the future of engineering education.Dr. Micah Lande, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus Micah Lande, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering and Manufacturing Engineering pro- grams
Paper ID #15700Implementation of a Mobile Makerspace in a K-8 School (Work in Progress)Mr. Brian Patrick O’Connell, Tufts University Center for Engineering Education and Outreach Brian O’Connell received his undergraduate degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst in 2006. He then worked for Kollmorgen Electro/Optical as a mechanical engi- neer developing periscopes and optrontic masts. In 2011, he returned to academia to pursue his Doctorate in Mechanical Engineering at Tufts University in Medford, Mass. He aspires to become a professor of mechanical engineering after graduation
Paper ID #16354Engineering Outreach on Campus: A Comprehensive Survey of 109 Pro-grams at 91 Colleges and Universities (Fundamental)Dr. Eric Iversen, Start Engineering Eric Iversen is the Vice President for Learning and Communications at Start Engineering. He has over 25 years experience in learning activities, encompassing work in non-profit, academic, and for-profit organizations. He was Manager of Public Affairs at ASEE, where he helped start many of the society’s K-12 engineering education activities. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Engineering Outreach on Campus: A
Paper ID #16961Students’ Use of Evidence-Based Reasoning in K-12 Engineering: A CaseStudy (Fundamental)Corey A. Mathis, Purdue University, West Lafayette Corey Mathis is a Ph.D. candidate in Engineering Education at Purdue University. She received her B.S. in biology and her M.E.D. in secondary education from Northern Arizona University and is a former high school science and technology teacher. Her research interest includes improving students learning of science and engineering through integrated STEM curricula.Emilie A. Siverling, Purdue University, West Lafayette Emilie A. Siverling is a Ph.D. Student in Engineering
, engineering design-based approaches, context-richproblem solving strategies, and real-world applications. All of the foci were ideally suited forhelping K-12 students learn the interdisciplinary integrated STEM concepts now called for in theK-12 standards (e.g. Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards - NGSS). Althoughnot traditionally used in STEM subjects (or explored in this paper), astronomy concepts such asblack holes, distances to other stars, and planets in star systems beyond our own, are inspirationalto K-12 students while being explainable at a technical and quantitative level. Quantitativeassessment methods for the LASSI PD included an external evaluator who asked daily surveyquestions of the participants in the yearlong PD
of the following keywords: robotics (or robots), education, and K-12. The threedatabases yielded 229, 14, and 73 studies, respectively, giving a total of 316. Of the initial 316,we were able to eliminate 161 based on a preliminary read through. After scrutinizing theremaining 155 in more detail, we further refined our subset of included articles to a final total of119. Summaries for these 119 were compiled based on seven features (experimental vs. non-experimental, formal vs. informal, learning data, aspects of programming and what platform,sample properties, goals/purpose, and results/findings). Once the summaries were completed, we2identified commonalities in their research methodologies, results, and subsequent findings. Eacharticle was
engineering education will leave students with an incomplete view of engineering (Moore, Tank, Glancy, & Kersten, 2015; Carr, Bennett, & Strobel, 2012). Science education researchers have argued that it is important for students to understand of the nature of science because it expands student understanding beyond scientific inquiry, the primary activity of science (Bartos, Lederman, 2014). In a similar approach, K-12 students should also understand the nature of engineering, not just engineering design (the primary activity of engineering). A better understanding of the nature of engineering would provide a foundation for students to better understand engineering. Literature Although research into the nature of engineering for K-12
Paper ID #16763A Hands-On Approach to Teaching K-12 Students About Microfluidic De-vices (Work in Progress)Prof. Adam T. Melvin, Louisiana State University Adam Melvin obtained a BS in Chemical Engineering and a BA in Chemistry from the University of Arizona, a MS in Chemical Engineering (with a minor in Biotechnology) and a Ph.D. in Chemical En- gineering from North Carolina State University under the direction of Jason Haugh. He was an NIH postdoctoral fellow at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the Departments of Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering under the direction of Nancy Allbritton. In August of
sunglasses with ahole the same size as an eye-dropper. As a result of this project, the novel design currently has aprovisional patent. While students practiced their technical communication skills during theirpresentations, they also expressed their thoughts about the camp. A local news channel filmedparts of this symposium and interviewed some of the students. One camper said, "Sometimesyou feel like you are the only visually impaired person out there, but there’s a lot of people outthere who are also trying to do the same stuff and have the same interests as you”7. Clearly, theeffects of the camp extended beyond the academic instruction by creating a community of youngaspiring engineers. As a result of connections made through this camp, one of
had choices in the design challenge assignments, the level to which thechallenge responsibility was predetermined by the teacher or instructional resources,3 and theinclusion of general engineering design cycle stages as outlined by Nadelson and colleagues,3Our goal was to determine the extent of and relationship among levels of engineeringresponsibility, attention to the design cycle, and inclusion of educational innovations inrelationship to how K-12 teachers planned to teach engineering. Prior to discussing our methodsand sharing our results, we lay a bit of groundwork for our report.Educational InnovationsThe needs of the 21st century engineer extend far beyond expertise with applying mathematicsand science to create new tools and
andadministrators are overwhelmed with the day-to-day activities in K-12 education and many arehesitant to take on extracurricular work. Thus, teacher and administrator buy-in is an absolutenecessity if the goal of the project is to impact a large number of students beyond what islogistically possible through afterschool programs and summer camps. Developing thoserelationships takes time and requires sufficient planning. Second, student participation inafterschool and summer activities will decrease among the same cohort of students as a result ofother extracurricular activities and jobs taking precedence as students increase in age. This maylimit the number of students that a program can reach. The teachers noted that some aspects ofthe program could be
demanded (Menary, 2007),the design challenge presented to students, such as design only, or design-to-make, ultimatelyresults in differences in specific processes identified. As Table 3 illustrates, the design challengepresented to students varied across research studies. Kelley (2008) and Welch and Lim (2000)use cognitive processes that extend beyond reasoning skills and include building, modeling,measuring. Using the same coding scheme as Kelley (2008), Strimel’s (2014) examination ofstudents in interaction with an engineering problem extended through the designing of a solutionto the making and evaluation of final solutions to include processes of experimentation andtesting. Yet, when a verbal protocol analysis is employed for analyzing a
Paper ID #18162Engineering Undergraduates Concurrently Seeking K-12 STEM Teacher Li-censure: Fuels the Soul or Too Many Barriers?Dr. Malinda S. Zarske, University of Colorado, Boulder Malinda Zarske is a faculty member with the Engineering Plus program at the University of Colorado Boulder. A former high school and middle school science and math teacher, she has advanced degrees in teaching secondary science from the Johns Hopkins University and in civil engineering from CU-Boulder. Dr. Zarske teaches undergraduate product design courses through Engineering Plus as well as STEM education courses for pre-service teachers
Learning Sciences, University of New Mexico. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Progress toward lofty goals: a meta-synthesis of the state of research on K-12 engineering education (Fundamental)AbstractThis paper synthesizes literature on formal and informal engineering education in K-12 settings.We focus on outcomes related to (1) developing interest and/or identities in engineering,including in (2) engineering careers, (3) recruitment of increased numbers of students, (4)learning and achievement of science, technology, and mathematics content/practices, (5) learningand achievement of engineering content/practices, (6) understanding the nature of engineering,and (7) broadening
Paper ID #16151Integrating STEM and Literacy through Engineering Design: Evaluationof Professional Development for Middle School Math and Science Teachers(Program/Curriculum Evaluation)Prof. Reagan Curtis, West Virginia University Reagan Curtis, Ph.D., is Professor of Educational Psychology and chair of the Department of Learning Sciences and Human Development at West Virginia University. He pursues a diverse research agenda in- cluding areas of interest in (a) the development of mathematical and scientific knowledge across the lifes- pan, (b) online delivery methods and pedagogical approaches to university instruction, and
most software development now takes place. These stereotypes are especially harmful toyoung students, who may feel disinclined to pursue a career that carries such a negativeconnotation. We investigate a current and successful program –the Software Factory approachwith existing undergraduates, and apply it to K-12 students. The goals of this exploratory casestudy were to counteract negative stereotypes by 1. Having K-12 students work in a team that resembled a small professional software development group, and 2. Having students work in the Software Factory –an especially designed physical space created to promote a realistic open and modern work environment. This case study aimed to address both goals through a summer
, community and non-engineering studentparticipation by attracting creative people to learn technical skills alongside the electricalengineering students who typically attend soldering workshops. This series of solderingworkshops brought together engineering, music, and design ideas to inspire and engage a widerange of people. The synthesizer that participants built was designed to transcend a skill buildingactivity through an interdisciplinary approach to making. Large attendance and continuingdemand for touch synthesizer workshop sessions illustrate how a new approach to engineeringeducation focusing on an interdisciplinary perspective can create a more holistic idea of thepurpose of students' education and inspire learners to passionately engage
for years 9 through 12 that was primarilyplanned and hosted by female undergraduate students. With 38 attendees, student mentors andfaculty prepared a series of workshops, seminars and activities designed to educate and inspiregirls to consider potential career paths in cybersecurity. Due to the success of this project, weare planning a bigger and more significant event for the summer of 2016 along with asupplemental series of workshops for STEM teachers at middle and high-schools.In this paper we discuss the methods and implementation of our 2015 summer camp. We look atthe perceived strengths and weaknesses of our approach to identify successful aspects andrecommend improvements for the coming year. By including data from entry and exit
Integrated STEM Instructional Leadership (PreK-6) Post-Baccalaureate Certificate Program at TU. She currently serves as the Chair of the Pre-College Engineering Education Division of ASEE, and is a member of the ASEE Board of Directors Committee on P12 Engineering Education.Ms. Elizabeth A. Parry, North Carolina State University Elizabeth (Liz) Parry Elizabeth Parry is an engineer and consultant in K-12 Integrated STEM through Engineering Curriculum, Coaching and Professional Development and a Coordinator and Instructor of Introduction to Engineering at the College of Engineering at North Carolina State University. For the past sixteen years, she has worked extensively with students from kindergarten to graduate school
students andprovide a program allowing them to further explore engineering roles and experience universityprograms. The desired study outcomes for the discipline-specific lessons in E-GIRL are asfollows: identify and distinguish among various engineering disciplines, excite female studentsto pursue engineering majors and higher education, introduce participants to opportunities thedifferent engineering majors provide, and introduce key topics from six engineering disciplinesto give students a more complete understanding of engineering.Participant demographics Thirty-seven participants were accepted into E-GIRL. Participant ages ranged between 15and 17, corresponding to 9th through 11th grades in high school. The ethnic backgrounds
completethis sequence the opportunity to earn college credit. The PLTW Gateway curriculum targetsstudents in Grades 6-8 and the PLTW Launch curriculum targets K-5 students. See the PLTWwebsite for current program titles. They now simply use PLTW Engineering, PLTW Gateway,and PLTW Launch.This study investigates the efficacy of PLTW efforts through a systematic literature reviewprocess. Specifically, we explored the following research questions: • To what extent has PLTW been an area of scholarly investigation and what has been the nature of these investigations? • What primary strengths and weaknesses of PLTW does this literature identify? • What gaps in PLTW literature exist and what future research is needed?After an initial data
University Dr. Burley is a professor of educational psychology. His research focus includes college access, diversity, and resilience in youth. Recently he has served as the evaluator for multiple STEM projects.Mr. Terrance Denard Youngblood, Texas Tech University Terrance D. Youngblood is a doctoral student in Educational Psychology at Texas Tech University, spe- cializing in the effective evaluation and assessment of educational outreach programs and workforce de- velopment.Mr. Casey Michael Williams, Texas Tech University I am currently a second year PhD student in educational psychology. I spent 2 years teaching environ- mental science, chemistry and biology to high school students in Kansas City through Teach For
greater user feedback control than current systems. He is enthusiastic about inspiring students to pursue careers in STEM fields, with a focus on advanced manufacturing.Ms. Elizabeth S. Herkenham, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Ms. Herkenham is the K-13 Education Outreach Director of the School of Engineering (SoE) at Rensse- laer Polytechnic Institute. Her responsibilities include managing the Pre-College educational programs for the NSF-funded Lighting Enabled Systems & Applications Engineering Research Center (LESA ERC), CURENT ERC, and faculty-driven Broader Impact initiatives. Under Ms. Herkenham’s leadership, the RPI Engineering Ambassadors undergraduate program was established in Spring 2011. This unique
Paper ID #14726The Engineering Design Log: A Digital Design Journal Facilitating Learningand Assessment (RTP)Dr. Roxanne Moore, Georgia Institute of Technology Roxanne Moore is currently a Research Engineer at Georgia Tech with appointments in the school of Mechanical Engineering and the Center for Education Integrating Mathematics, Science, and Computing (CEISMC). She is involved with engineering education innovations from K-12 up to the collegiate level. She received her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Georgia Tech in 2012.Dr. Meltem Alemdar, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Meltem Alemdar is Assistant Director
Paper ID #17078A Hierarchical Linear Modeling Approach to Understanding the Role of Eth-nicity and Socioeconomic Status on Precollege Engineering Conceptions Re-search to PracticeDeLean Tolbert, Purdue University, West Lafayette DeLean Tolbert is an Engineering Education doctoral candidate at Purdue University. She earned a B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Michigan–Dearborn and a M.S. in Industrial Engineering from the University of Michigan. Through her dissertation, DeLean investigates the ways that Black boys develop Engineer of 2020 attributes in their precollege out-of-school time lived experiences
Universidad Aut´onoma de Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Paper ID #14709 Received a BA in Media Advertising at UTEP and is currently enrolled as a Master of Interdisciplinary Studies with an emphasis on the use of art and technology in teaching and learning. Randy works on re- search and development of applying the creative process to workshops, trainings and student engagement. Currently doing extensive research and deployment of emerging technologies to redefine the classroom, mentoring and excellence through student interaction.Hector Erick Lugo Nevarez
for the WISE K-12 Outreach Committee. Meera joined the University of Calgary in 2015.Prof. Qiao Sun, University of Calgary Qiao Sun is a professor in the Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Calgary. She is also the Associate Dean (Diversity and Equity) at the Schulich School of Engineer- ing. She obtained her BSc in Power Machinery Engineering and MSc in Mechanical Engineering from Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 1982 and 1986 respectively, and PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Victoria in 1996. She has taught engineering courses such as engineering mechanics, numerical analysis, control systems and advanced robotics. Her teaching excellence has been