AC 2012-3792: SYSTEMIC INTERVENTION: CONNECTING FORMALAND INFORMAL EDUCATION EXPERIENCES FOR ENGAGING FE-MALE STUDENTS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN ENGINEERINGDr. Merredith D. Portsmore, Tufts University Merredith Portsmore is a Research Assistant Professor in education at Tufts University, as well as the Director of Outreach Programs for Tufts Center for Engineering Education and Outreach. Portsmore has the unique honor of being a ”Quadruple Jumbo,” having received all her four of her degrees from Tufts (B.A. English, B.S. mechanical engineering, M.A. education, and Ph.D. in engineering educa- tion). Her research interests focus on how children engage in constructing solutions to engineering design problems. Her
Page 24.1321.6used as a guide for engineering design work in elementary, middle school, high school, college,and professional realms. While a student in elementary school might be expected only toachieve scores of 1 for work related to each element of the design process, a graduating engineerfrom college, might be expected to demonstrate consistent scores of 4 across the elements. Thus,much work remains to be completed before the EDPPSR is a fully functional assessment rubric.Yet, investments of effort in continued development appear worthwhile given the far reachingimplications of the work.AcknowledgementsThis work has been supported by a number of NSF awards and by the Kern Family Foundation.Bibliography1. Draxler, B. (2013). E is for
Hispanic, 76% economicallydisadvantaged, and 7% with limited English proficiency. Even with a concerted effort for equalgender participation, females are underrepresented, making up just 30% of participants,corresponding with the ongoing shortage of women in STEM fields. A full summary of CentralTexas enrollment, Cave Creek students, and Beyond Blackboards participants is included inAppendix B. Access to economic opportunities is derived from education and technical skills,yet because Cave Creek parents do not have these backgrounds, students are generally notexposed to engineering. Consequently, Cave Creek students are an ideal target population forinvestigating methods to increase diversity in engineering to improve U.S. competitiveness.Purpose
. 1618. 1996. [32] C. DelgadoGaitan, The power of community: Mobilizing for family and schooling. Landham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2001. [33] W.A. Smih, P.G. Altbach, and K. Lometey, The racial crisis in American higher education: continuing challenges for the twentyfirst century. Rev. ed SUNY series, Frontiers in Education. Albany, NY: Statue University of New York Press. 2002. [34] E. Allworth, and B. Hesketh, "Constructoriented biodata: Capturing changerelated and contextually relevant future performance". International Journal of Selection and Assessment 7: p. 97 111. 1999. [35] E.D. Pulakos, et al. "Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance
), 160-185.9. [9] Huber, R.A. and G.A. Burton. 1995. What do students think scientist look like? School Science and Mathematics, 95(7), 371-376.10. [10] Matthew, B. 1996. Drawing scientists. Gender and Education, 8(12), 231- 243.11. [11] Sumrall, W. J. 1995. Reasons for perceived images of scientists by race and gender of students in grades 1-7. School Science and Mathematics, 95(2), 83-90.12. [12] Thompson, S.L. and Lyons, J. 2005. A Study Examining Change in Underrepresented Student Views of Engineering as a Result of Working with Engineers in the Elementary Classroom. Paper presented at American Society of Engineering Education in 2005 conference. Available on-line at http://www.asee.org/about/events/conferences
. Applin, T. J. Kaiser, “Design of a Microelectronic Manufacturing Laboratory,” Proceedings ASEE AnnualConference, June 18-21, 2006, Chicago, Illinois.3. T. J. Kaiser, A. Lingley, M. Leone, B. Pierson, “MEMS Fabrication as a Multidisciplinary Laboratory,”Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, June 24-27, 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii. Page 15.745.15 13
. Group B (red), sum of partially disagree (PD) and totally disagree (TD) answers.Pearson Correlation TestsPearson correlation coefficient values range from +1 to -1. Pearson correlation tests were Page 24.665.7applied to the survey results, demonstrating that there is limited correlation since all valueswere very close to zero, in which a zero value indicates no association between each of thetwo variables. Results demonstrate positive and negative correlations according to theparticipants‟ gender, school, course and age, and results are shown in figure 6. The numbersfrom 1 to 47 refer to the survey items.The colors in Pearson
ahands-on project that was tied to real-world problems. In fact, it was notable how many of theircomments about the benefits included the phrase “hands on.”C. Student RatingsIn their post-implementation surveys, the students were also asked to rate SENSE IT in terms ofhow much they felt they had learned and how much they felt they had enjoyed it, in their caseusing a rating scale from A to F, including + and -. The high school students’ ratings were highfor both (85 percent gave an A or B for enjoyment and about 75 percent gave it an A or B forlearning), but the middle school students’ ratings were higher (over 98 percent gave it an A or Bor learning and 80 percent for enjoyment). Males at both levels were slightly more enthusiasticthan
courses andto meet their students’ academic levels. It seems clear that the strength of the curriculum was thatit could be—and was—integrated into a wide range of courses with a wide range of students—from upper level high school students to middle school students, from academically advancedstudents to academically challenged students, from Advanced Placement courses to courses forthose students who could not qualify for higher level science.c) Impact on studentsThe students were also asked to rate SENSE IT in terms of how much they felt they had learnedand how much they felt they had enjoyed it. Eighty-five percent of students gave it an A or B forlearning and 70 percent gave it an A or B for enjoyment. High school males were more likely togive
experiences fromthe summer Academy and the lesson plans developed therein, so as to help inform and attractother teachers to such opportunities. The plans are to post on-line the lesson plans developed by Page 26.1605.2participants in the Academy. This would make them available for worldwide access and helpbroaden the program’s reach and impacts.Review of relevant literature Research has identified five core features of best-practices for teacher professionaldevelopment Academies. These include: (a) content focus, (b) active learning, (c) coherence, (d)duration, and (e) collective participation. Content focus is defined by pedagogy and
towards science, technology, and engineeringdisciplines. References: 1. Willner and B. Willner, “Biomolecule-Based Nanomaterials and Nanostructures”, Nano Lett., vol. 10, pp.3805–3815, 2010. 2. B. Islam et al., “A Mediator Free Amperometric Bienzymatic Glucose Biosensor Using Vertically Aligned Carbon Nanofibers (VACNFs)”, IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 11, pp. 2798-2804, 2011 3. D.A. Skoog et al., Principles of Instrumental Analysis, Saunders College Publishing, 849 p., 1998. 4. A.A. Rowe et al., ‘CheapStat: An Open-Source, ‘‘Do-It-Yourself’’ Potentiostat for Analytical and Educational Applications’, PLoS ONE, vol. 6, issue 9, e23783, 2011. 5. A.V. Gopinath & D. Russell, “An Inexpensive Field-Portable Programmable
of Engineering Education, Vol. 93, No. 2, Apr 2004, pp. 117–128. 5. Jeffers, A. T., Safferman, A. G., and Safferman, T. I., “Understanding K-12 engineering outreach pro- grams,” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, Vol. 130, No. 2, Apr 2004, pp. 95–108. 6. Moreno, N., “Science Education Outreach: How K-12 School Partnerships Benefit Higher Education,” Faseb Journal, Vol. 18, No. 8, May 2004, pp. C115–C115. 7. Moskal, B. M., Skokan, C., Kosbar, L., Dean, A., Westland, C., Barker, H., Nguyen, Q. N., and Tafoya, J., “K-12 Outreach: Identifying the Broader Impacts of Four Outreach Projects,” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 96, No. 3, Jul 2007, pp. 173–189. 8. Wankat, P. C., “Survey of K-12
students forexams), (b) school factors (leadership, class schedules, other concurrent reform initiatives, andsupportive network), and (c) teachers’ level of content and pedagogical knowledge.6-9 Thesections that follow will discuss each of these factors in more detail and explain how each factorinfluences teachers’ implementation of pedagogical reforms, specifically focusing on inquiry-based practices.Teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning have been found to be influential in theimplementation of reforms.6-9 In a study that investigated the implementation of an inquiry-based chemistry curriculum in a large urban district, it was suggested that teachers’ beliefs aboutteaching and learning, as well as the presence of a supportive network at
; Storksdieck, M. (2005). Using the Contextual Model of Learning to Understand Visitor Learning From a Science Center Exhibition. Science Education. 89, 744-778.3. Barriault, C. & Pearson, D. (2010). Assessing Exhibits for Learning in Science Centers: A Practical Tool. Visitor Studies. 90-106.4. Shepardson, D. P. et al. (2007). What Is a Watershed? Implications of Student Conceptions for Environmental Science Education and the National Science Standards. Science Education. 89, 554-578.5. Anderson, C. W., Covitt, B. A., Gunckel, K. L. (2009). Students’ Developing Understanding of Water in Environmental Systems. The Journal of Environmental Education. 40, 37-51
careers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 1036-1058.[8] Espinosa, L. (2011). Pipelines and pathways: Women of color in undergraduate STEM majors and the college experiences that contribute to persistence. Institute for Higher Education Policy - Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 209-240.[9] McCombs, B. (2015). Developing Responsible and Autonomous Learners: A Key to Motivating Students. American Psychological Association. Retrieved April 2, 2015 from: http://www.apa.org/education/k12/learners.aspx.[10] Akos, P., Lambie, G. W., Milsom, A., & Gilbert, K. (2007). Early adolescents’’ aspirations and academic tracking: An exploratory investigation. Professional School Counseling, 11(1), 57-64.[11] The
. (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1993).4. Krapp, A., Hidi, S. & Renninger, K. A. in Role Interes. Learn. Dev. (Renninger, K. A.) (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992).5. Moore, T. J. et al. A Framework for Quality K-12 Engineering Education: Research and Development. J. Pre-College Eng. Educ. Res. 4, (2014).6. Miaoulis, I. in Holist. Eng. Educ. beyond Technol. (Grasso, D. & Burkins, M. B.) 37–51 (New York : Springer, 2010).7. Cunningham, C. M. & Lachapelle, C. P. in Eng. pre-college settings Synth. Res. policy, Pract. (Purzer, S., Strobel, J. & Cardella, M. E.) 117– (Purdue University Press, 2014).8. Foor, C. E., Walden, S. E. & Trytten, D. A. ‘I wish that I belonged
, engagement, and achievementin science, mathematics, engineering, and technology and further, to (b) promote a culture ofinventiveness and creativity that calls upon students to demonstrate 21st century workforce skillsand to apply science and mathematics toward the solution of relevant, real-world problems.Specifically, partnership goals were to (a) improve participating teachers’ content knowledge inlife and environmental sciences and technology (information technology and engineering), and(b) improve teachers’ pedagogical knowledge in creating and adopting science inquiry andengineering lessons, and (c) improve the content knowledge of students in Grades 3-5 in life,earth and physical sciences and technology.Program ContentEach year of the three
% Title I? Enrichment Teachers in Teachers in school setting Minority teachers Pilot Pilot students* A Medium Rural No 10% 1** 1 1 B Medium Rural No 5% 1 3 2 C Small Rural No 15% 1** 1 1 D Medium Small city Yes 60% 1 2 3 E Large Suburban No
AC 2010-514: TRACKING MIDDLE SCHOOL PERCEPTIONS OF ENGINEERINGDURING AN INQUIRY BASED ENGINEERING SCIENCE AND DESIGNCURRICULUMJade Mitchell-Blackwood, Drexel University Jade Mitchell-Blackwood is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering at Drexel University. She will complete her Ph.D. in 2010. Jade is a 2nd year NSF GK-12 Fellow. She has also received support from the U.S. Dept. of Education GAANN Fellowship Program and the National GEM Consortium. Her research focus is in the area of quantitative microbial risk assessment, specifically using analytical models to inform risk based decisions about pathogens in the environment. She has been the
. degree in Metallurgical Engineering from the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology in 2007. She received her Ph.D. in Materials Science and Engineering in 2012 from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, studying mechanochemical reactions of a spiropy- ran mechanophore in polymeric materials under shear loading. She is currently an Assistant Professor in the Mechanical Engineering department at the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology where her research interests include novel manufacturing and characterization techniques of polymer and com- posite structures and the incorporation of multifunctionality by inducing desired responses to mechanical loading.Dr. Marius D Ellingsen, South Dakota School
%). What is Technology? 100.0 90.0 80.0 % Choosing 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 ee Bo p rd n Sh e we ay nd in g Fa e s e B i ge B a use ns
interest in applyingfor the program; (b) a pre-program survey; (c) a post-program exit survey; (d) an instructionalunit written by the participant during participation in the RET program; (e) a post-programsurvey given two months after the program; (f) an in-depth interview six-months after theprogram; and (g) a classroom observation completed by our research team six-months after thecompletion of the RET program. In an effort to establish rigor and credibility for the study,parameters such as triangulation of data source and multiple researcher analysis was employed asdescribed by Darke, et al29.Data Collected Page 13.699.7A variety of artifacts
Paper ID #11352Elementary Teachers’ Reported Responses to Student Design FailuresDr. Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Towson University Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is Associate Professor of Science Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy & Geosciences at Towson University. She has a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering, worked briefly as a process engineer, and taught high school physics and pre-engineering. She has taught engineering and science to children in multiple informal settings. As a pre-service teacher educator, she includes engineering in her elementary and early childhood science methods
AC 2008-16: DISCOVERY PROJECT – IMPROVING SEVENTH GRADECRITICAL THINKING SKILLSPaul Crips, Laramie Middle School Paul M. Crips received his B.S. degree from the University of Wyoming in 1978 in Industrial Technology. He received a M.S. degree from the University of Wyoming in 2001 in Natural Science. Crips has spent the last 28 years as a teacher of junior high school aged students teaching both industrial technology and science. His most recent assignment is teaching seventh graders physical science, which includes classical physics and biological adaptation. Crips is an Amateur Radio operator holding an Extra Class FCC license (KI7TS). He is the advisor of two after school clubs
15 20 Students (Sorted by increasing Pre-Test Scores ) Students (Sorted by Increasing Pre-test scores) (a) (b) 2005 CARE I Basic Algebra 100 90 Pre- and Post-Test Scores (%) 80 70
relates to wearables and engineering. Based on participant feedback, a modifiedcurriculum is being written in hopes of more successfully meeting these goals in future versionsof the camp.Bibliography 1. Buechley, Leah, Kylie A. Peppler, Michael Eisenberg, and Yasmin B. Kafai. Textile Messages: Dispatches From the World of E-Textiles and Education. New York: Peter Lang, 2013. Print. 2. Buechley, Leah, Mike Eisenberg, Jaime Catchen, and Ali Crockett. 2008. “The LilyPad Arduino: Using Computational Textiles to Investigate Engagement, Aesthetics, and Diversity in Computer Science Education.” In SIGCHI: Proceeding of the Twenty-sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
,” Journal of Engineering Education, 90 (4), 557-563, 2001.3. Glenn, John, Chairman. “Before it’s too Late: A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century,” submitted to the U.S. Secretary of Education, September 27, 2000.4. Arkansas Department of Education. “Pioneering School Improvement in Challenging Environments: Guidelines for Developing the Strategic Plan for Education Renewal Zones.” 2003.5. Arkansas Department of Education. “No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Public Law 107-110, Title II, Part B, Mathematics and Science Partnership Program, Request for Proposals, 2006 - 2007 Awards, April, 2006.6. Gabriele, Gary A. “The Future of NSF Engineering Education
Paper ID #6515Bringing Soil Mechanics to Elementary SchoolsMr. Eduardo Alfonso Suescun-Florez, Polytechnic Institute of New York University Eduardo Suescun-Florez received a B.S. degree in Civil Engineering from La Salle University, Bogota, Colombia in 2000. Upon graduation, he co-founded Geotecnia de Colombia LLC., and worked as an engineering consultant for public and private agencies in Colombia and South America. Most recently he worked as external engineering consultant for the World Bank in Washington, D.C. After obtaining his M.S. degree in Civil Engineering at the University of Texas at Arlington in 2010, he
Economy of the 21st Century, Rising above the gatheringstorm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. The National Academies Press:Washington, D.C., 2005.3. Melsa, J. L., The Winds of Change, ASEE Banquet Keynote Speech. In American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2007.4. Raizen, S. B., Technology education in the classroom: Understanding the designed world. Jossey-BassPublishers: San Francisco, CA, 1995.5. Brophy, S.; Klein, S.; Portsmore, M.; Rogers, C., Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms.Journal of Engineering Education 2008, 97, (3), 369-387.6. Mehalik, M. M.; Doppelt, Y.; Schunn, C. D., Middle-school science through design-based
designs that advance educational theories byoffering more specific statements about the factors involved in implementation and theirimplications for generalizability8,10,11,12.Our methodology and approach is similar to design experiments, most notably in that (a) ourdesigns are tested in the operational environment and we readily acknowledge that enactments ofcurriculum are driven by contextual factors that cannot be eliminated and should, instead, beunderstood in order to provide meaningful data, and (b) we use multiple sources of data to iterateour design changes over multiple implementations.In SLIDER and the RT3 REC projects, successive curriculum redesigns are based on multiplesources of data and feedback: task analysis and research on