questions • Learners evaluate their explanations in light of alternative explanations, particularly reflecting scientific understanding • Learners communicate and justify their proposed explanations. Research also suggests that the quality of the teaching workforce is the single mostimportant factor in predicting student achievement.15 Robert Marzano has conducted anextensive review of the research studies involving factors that impact student achievement andconducted meta-analyses of those studies to determine the effect size of the factors on studentachievement16. He describes three types of factors that impact student achievement: school-level factors, student-level factors and teacher-level factors. What factors can SWEPT/RETs
currently found in major standards documents as well as what may be missing." (2) In 2008, Brophy et al. reflected the direction of the engineering community whencreating the widely cited report, “Advancing Engineering Education in P-12 Classrooms,” byoutlining a path for further integration of engineering into the science, technology, engineering,and math (STEM) curricula. The report summarized efforts in P-12 engineering being made atthe time then and took a look forward to the prospects of the spread of engineering education. Inaddition to its own call for the creation of standards, the Brophy report discusses efforts by theAmerican Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) at promoting standards-based instructionin P-12 engineering (11
spends an entire introductory lesson planning the labwork for the rest of the week. Teachers and students use the verbalizations and gestures ofprojection, along with representations, objects, and the environment itself, both to reflect upon ahistory of a concept as it unfolds in their classroom, and to plan for future manifestations of theconcept in different modal engagements. Ecological shifts – common as they appear to be –make it challenging for participants to preserve a sense of the cohesion and continuity of themathematical ideas. Projections serve to construct connections over time and help to establishthat sense of cohesion for students.A third transition process is coordination, which involves the juxtaposition and linking ofdifferent
example, nature hasendowed bats, dolphins, and whales with the remarkable ability of echolocation to determinetheir distance to various objects through the reflection of high frequency acoustic signals. Batsare nocturnal and consequently work under very low light conditions. By using echolocation,they have the advantage of being able to detect their surroundings even in the dark. Like bats, Page 23.329.6whales and dolphins also operate in low light conditions due to their inability to follow normalsleep cycles like most mammalian species on land because of their need to consciously breathe.Specifically, dolphins and whales stay underwater for long
with caution.On the post-survey, when compared to non-PIEE teachers, PIEE teachers gave statisticallysignificantly higher ratings to their abilities to do each of the following: Design learning activities to teach students about engineering Teach students about issues related to engineering Help students do each of the following: o Identify an engineering problem that reflects a need for shelter, storage, or convenience o Understand how to identify relevant design features (e.g., size, shape, weight) for building a prototype of a solution to a given problem o Learn how to identify appropriate materials based on specific properties and characteristics, given a
using two plane-wave (for waveguide-based interconnection) or twospherical beams (for free-space optical interconnection). Since the hologram’s strength dependson exposure time, material characterization is performed to obtain the optimum exposures.Application of Polymers for Optical Data Transfer: One method to construct optical data transferpathways to connect circuit boards is to construct the pathways from polymers. The polymerscan be made into optical wave guides so digital information can be transmitted by small lasersembedded into the circuits in computer applications to replace copper connections. Optical waveguides use the principle of total internal reflection to provide a pathway for the light from thelaser. The materials used have
ideas to use inthe real-world. The multi-disciplinary and collaborative nature of engineering is stressed. Thesecond part is designed to help parents better understanding of the work involved in the differentfields of engineering, the high school preparation needed to pursue engineering education, what atypical undergraduate engineering curriculum looks like, and the role of graduate education intoday’s global world workforce. Dr. Johnson also reflected on his undergraduate experiences inthe E3 programs and the strategies for success in college. He stressed collaborative learning andthe need for the students to take ownership of their education.In the third parent workshop session, Dr. Kimya Moyo, a Mathematics instructor fromWoodward Career
learnedprogramming skills. Kai’s experience with Lego Robotics is an example of this. When askedwhat he learned from participating in an informal learning experience, Kai responded, “Well Idid learn how to program Lego Robots.”Some of the children are learning very hands-on, practical skills as they engage in engineeringthrough informal experiences, while others are wrestling with conceptual ideas. Alexander isactive in 4-H, and he has done many projects in electricity. Marcus has a great interest inphysics, and learns most of his engineering ideas from his participation at local universityoutreach programs and his interaction with tutors and experts. In Table 3, we share two examplesof what students or parents reflect on as their learning, and include an
reflection as science teachers take on engineering asrecommended by the NGSS. This study suggests that identifying engineering epistemologies willbe an important part of engineering integration in science classes; recognizing conflicts betweenteachers’ priorities and the goals of reform curriculum could help to improve the frequency ofteacher use of engineering. Literature Review In this literature review I build a rationale for my study by reviewing the purpose ofadoption of engineering by science educators including the NGSS reform initiative backgroundand its purposes; engineering education and the role of engineering design in the NGSS; andteacher reform implementation including science
atechnologically literate person is one who recognizes technology, understands the differencebetween science and technology, knows some basic concepts about technology, understands thegoals and trade-offs implicit in the engineering design process, recognizes how technology hasinfluenced society through the ages, and as well recognizes how society has also shapedtechnological advances, understands that using technology entails risks, and that all technologyhas both benefits and costs. A technologically literate person understands that technologies areneither inherently good nor evil, and that the values of a culture or society are reflected in thetechnologies that the culture or society embraces. A technologically literate person should havesome hands-on
given the fact that the team participants were teachers who had previous commitments during the summer break period. Regardless of this limitation, however, and to the credit of the team participants, the quality of the finished seventh grade boxes was first-rate. In no way should this delay in development reflect negatively on the development team, and while the classroom evaluation time was limited to the end of the 2007 spring semester, sufficient resources remained in the seventh grade boxes to enable another year of evaluation during the 2007-2008 LCSD#1 school year. o Recommendation: As long as the box resources exist, the seventh grade boxes should continued to be evaluated in the classroom one more
enriching their Academic Improvement skills and ability to excel intheir senior year of high school. CARE contributed to 86% educational growth and 35% academic performanceimprovement among those students who scored lowest on the pre-test compared to 25% improvement among thosethat scored highest in the pre-test. Project CARE resulted in a systemic change in the way students are given accessto an engineering career. The lessons learned in the course of the three program years are also discussed in details.1. INTRODUCTIONThe face of American society continues to change as we experience national demographic shifts in our ethnicpopulations. The Department of Labor statistics reflect that African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, American-Indians, and
, surveys from the firstyear did not include questions concerning RAMP-UP’s impact on the fellows’ career plans. Thefellows’ responses to open-ended questions on these surveys indicated an unanticipatedinfluence. To capture this and other unforeseen results, we adapted the survey questions. Thesechanges are reflected in variations in question content, structure, and rating scale. This paperfocuses on the development of the fellows as quantified by pre- and post-surveys; through theuse of these surveys, we quantify and support our claims as well as those of previous research.Due to the inclusion of undergraduates and to the growth of the program over the first threeyears, the RAMP-UP sample size is quite large compared to currently published work
and were also aligned with the state curriculum standards.Guided reflections, team presentations of STEM Curriculum, and developed prototypes providedevidence associated with the objectives. Local System Change (LSC), Mathematics TeachingEfficacy and Beliefs Instrument (MTEBI) and Science Teaching Efficacy and Beliefs Instrument(STEBI) surveys were administered to the in-service teachers prior to the program. Follow-upsurveys were administered to the 2012 cohort and will be administered to the in-service teachersduring the 2013 academic year to identify changes in attitudes, beliefs and practices. Classroomobservations of participants delivering developed STEM content provided details regardingtransference to K-12 classrooms. A focus group
meet or addresscriteria equally as well. Children (and adults) often champion their own ideas, withoutadequately considering designs of others or without conducting “objective” analyses.To encourage students to analyze their various solutions objectively and determine which bestmeets the challenge’s criteria, EiE design challenges aim to have students collect both qualitativeand quantitative data during testing. Materials ask students to reflect upon the needs of the designand assess how well each solution meets it. Thus, instead of children’s preconceptions,popularity, or perceived “smartness” driving decisions, more objective and impartial data areavailable to be considered.EiE strives for quantifiable tests: presenting results as a number
logs and self-report surveys have also been used as methods for obtaining information about theenacted instruction6,7,8.The assessed curriculum refers to the specific content that is tested and can differdrastically from the intended and enacted curricula. Tests are drafted by the federalgovernment (thought instruments like NAEP, for example), individual states, districts,and the teachers themselves. The learned curriculum captures the actual changes inknowledge by the individual students, which reflects the notion that students can andoften do learn more and less than offered in the instructional context.In earlier studies, we analyzed the enacted curriculum of the first Project Lead the Way™foundations course, Introduction to Engineering
, 2teachers learned physical science content of forces, motion, and electricity through lectures, hands-onactivities, field trips, Internet based projects, collaborative work, reflections, model-based inquiry, andthe engineering design process administered by the faculty and staff of the engineering and teacher-education colleges. Teachers engaged in two Engineering is Elementary (EiE) modules over focusedon the engineering design process.Proven Success in the ClassroomBased on our pre- and post- tests administered to teachers and students in treatment and comparisongroups in year 1, participating teachers showed science and engineering gains of almost 3 timesgreater than teachers in the comparison group. Students of teachers in the treatment group
. Page 22.1082.3Table 1: Characteristics of Mentoring Relationships (based on Jacobi6)Acceptance/support/EncouragementAdvice/guidanceBypass bureaucracy/access to resourcesChallenge/opportunityClarify values/clarify goalsCoachingInformationProtectionRole modelSocial status/reflected creditSocialization/”host and guide”Sponsorship/advocacyStimulate acquisition of knowledgeTraining/InstructionVisibility/exposureA commonly measured outcome, particularly of studies of peer mentoring, was increasedknowledge or academic performance in the tutoring content area7,8. In addition to benefitsgained from developing a relationship while mentoring, the act of studying and organizingknowledge with the expectation of teaching can also lead to measurable gains
helper madeit much easier for her to manage teaching the unit for the first time, and she structured herclass time around when the helper would be available in order to maximize her assistancewith the LEGOTM materials.Student journals. Another tool introduced by the experimental curriculum was the useof student Engineer’s Journals, which provided opportunities for students to share theirprior knowledge about a topic at the beginning of a lesson, record data frominvestigations during the lesson, reflect upon new ideas at the end of a lesson, and planfor their execution of the design challenge. Beyond helping students organize their work,teachers found the journals helpful for organizing instruction. For example: I mean for me [the journal
motivation. The students who enter the STEMAcademy reflect the diverse demographics of the area, which is a goal of the program.4The STEM Academy engages its students in challenging math, science, foreign language,computer science, and engineering design curricula. The structure of these high schoolengineering design courses is intended to develop the skills to be successful in a first-yearengineering program at the college level. Four years of fundamental engineering design coursesare required to earn a STEM Academy certificate at Skyline High School; each course isdesigned in collaboration with the University of Colorado Boulder’s College of Engineering andApplied Science.Students begin their engineering sequence with the Explorations in STEM
betterunderstand the challenges facing the creation of inclusive and effective educationalopportunities. In engineering, four interrelated factors have been noted as barriers to thepersistence of academically talented students that face financial limitations, as is the case formany of our multicultural students20, 21, 22: ● Lack of Engagement/Sense of Belonging ● Underdeveloped Professional Work Ethic & Goal Setting Page 26.1751.5 ● Insufficient Opportunities to Gain Practical Competence & Reflect on Learning ● Working for PayTalented young women, as well as multicultural students, too frequently pursue careers in otherfields or
accounting for this success? What are someof the challenges that we continue to face? This paper will discuss accomplishments andchallenges faced by institutions seeking to outreach to underrepresented constituencies.IntroductionThe under representation of women in the field of engineering is not a new phenomenon toresearch. The imbalance of men and women appears most dramatically in computer science,information technology and engineering [1]. In the case of Massachusetts, “with respect togender, the state reflects the national trends with 58% of young adults in college comprised ofwomen. However, on a national scale only 12% of students choosing to major in computerscience/IT were women, while in the state of Massachusetts this was 9%” [2]. “In
high school NCJETS summer camps. Prior to the workshops, workshop materials willbe revised to reflect the feedback and results generated for the recently completed 2007 workshop. As aproof-of-concept project, the TECT project will be evaluated to determine its potential effectiveness andlong-term viability. If the workshop proves effective, strategies for expanding the project and developingits sustainability after NSF funding has expired will be explored. However, pending the results, webelieve the integrated mix of diversity awareness based teacher and counselor professional developmenttraining and the summer engineering camps will provide a necessary foundation to increase the numberand diversity of students entering STEM related
students took over the projects.As noted above, time had been spent during the summer institutes discussing issues surroundinggroup work and this was reflected in the organization of the curriculum in the classroom. Whenasked if their experience with group work during the summer institute had led them to make anychanges in how they organized or facilitated their students' group work, nine of the ten teachersreported that they had done at least one (and generally most) of the following: reduced the size ofthe groups in the early challenges to allow for more students to engage in hands-on work;assigned roles so that all students had work to do; chose the group members carefully to balancepersonalities and academic strengths; and intervened quickly
knowledge in specific science topics andengineering. This paper will focus on the data collected from teachers regarding thesecond goal of this project, which is improving the teachers’ notions of scientific inquiry.Future papers will focus on findings that will address the other goals.Each year of the PISA program focuses on a different science discipline withcorresponding technology and engineering lessons. The first year was devoted to life andenvironmental sciences, earth and space sciences this year, and physical sciences nextyear.During the two-week summer institute held in 2008, teachers learned earth and spacescience content through lectures, hands-on activities, field trips, webquests, collaborativework, reflections, model-based inquiry
that the teachers planned to implement reflect the process of construct-centered design of lesson planning?These questions were addressed within the framework of previous research in lesson planningand professional development within the context of a summer professional development institute.ContextThis study was conducted based on lessons developed by teachers as the culminating project of atwo-week professional development institute in nanoengineering, science, and technology Page 14.1122.6conducted by the NCLT at Purdue University. Participants were teachers from all disciplines ofscience as well as high school engineering teachers
provide two sub-scores, which are randomly embedded in theinstrument. Thirteen of the statements yield scores for the Personal Science Teaching Efficacy(PSTE) subscale, which reflect science teachers’ confidence in their ability to teach science. Theremaining ten statements yield scores for Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy (STOE)subscale, which reflect science teachers’ beliefs that student learning can be influenced byeffective teaching. Participants used a five-point Likert-type scale to respond to each of the 23statements by selecting one of the following responses: strongly agree (5), agree (4), areuncertain (3), disagree (2), or strongly disagree (1). Negatively worded statements were scoredby reversing the numeric values. The possible
Semantics Belief Statements). In order to “clean up” the databefore analysis, the values of the survey were made consistent. In order to encourage participantsto reflect on each pair in the STEM Semantics Survey, some values are switched. For example, a7 might be a very positive reflection of science in one question (ex. “Fascinating”), but a verynegative one (ex. “Unappealing”) in the next item. Therefore, all of the values were firstconverted so that very positive = 1, and negative = 7. For each statement, a lower score wouldtherefore correspond to a higher level of interest in the subject area. The survey wasadministered immediately at the beginning of the engineering activity and was the last actionitem in the program. This testing sequence
engineering practices.3 To better understand students’ nascent abilities tosolve open-ended problems, we conducted a series of interviews before students engaged in anewly-developed engineering unit. In this paper, we describe our analysis of these interviews,specifically with respect to how students enact NGSS practices as they pursue design solutions toopen-ended problems.BackgroundThe new NGSS standards identify that students in grades 3-5 should show competency inspecific engineering practices:3 • 3-5-ETS 1-1. Define a simple design problem reflecting a need or a want that includes specified criteria for success and constraints on materials, time, or cost. • 3-5-ETS 1-2. Generate and compare multiple possible solutions to a problem
Treatment Can cCan hoose choose to do tomdo any many different differentkinds of kinds of jobs jobs 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Figure 1. Percent of students in 2012-2013 who agreed that each statement reflects what engineers do.As can be seen in Figure 2, these differences based on school were not evident in the 2013-2014cohort. Works Work with with others others to to solve