the information the DEAMS prompts asked for. The descriptor“Target” was chosen because responses at this level represent the level of understanding thatshould be a target for novice educators to reach. DEAMS-R is used to score the instrumentholistically, taking into account the image, speech bubbles, and written response. Work of an Engineer. An Unacceptable response for this criterion either (a) indicates amistaken conception of engineers (perhaps a mechanic or construction worker), (b) is vague orunable to be determined, or (c) includes work from a classroom rather than the work of anengineer. An Emerging response includes work that an engineer might engage in (e.g., design orimprove things) but there is no context or reference to a
Understand scaling and creation of shapes in the Code + Chords software Mission: Code + Chords aims to combine art and technology to Standards Applied: engage many types of learners. It hopes to encourage students that love coding to engage with music and visual NGSS: ETS1.B: Developing Possible Solutions art and vice versa! Interdisciplinary exploration through NGSS: ETS1.c: Optimizing the Design Solution Code + Chords is a tool to support student engagement and build student confidence and excitement in STEAM fields to promote a life-long love for learning. Materials/resources Laptops/Computers
participants to determine how well the DAETT instrumentcaptured what the participants intended to share. Results of these think alouds will be available toshare during the ASEE annual meeting. Next steps in the DAETT development include creatinga pilot score sheet that can be used to assign quantitative values to individual drawings;partnering with additional institutions to gather instrument data on a more diverse group ofparticipants; and analyzing post-course drawings to identify any changes that occurred over thecourse of the semester.References[1] C. L. Mason, J. B. Kahle, J.B., and A. L. Gardner, “Draw-A-Scientist test: Future implications,” School Science and Mathematics, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 193-198, May-June 1991.[2] M. Knight
Instruction," ed: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2016.[6] J. Scull, M. Phillips, U. Sharma, and K. Garnier, "Innovations in teacher education at the time of COVID19: an Australian perspective," Journal of Education for Teaching, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 497-506, 2020/08/07 2020, doi: 10.1080/02607476.2020.1802701.[7] B. Berry, "Teaching, learning, and caring in the post-COVID era," PHI DELTA KAPPAN, vol. 102, no. 1, pp. 14-17, 2020, doi: 10.1177/0031721720956840.[8] S. Lawrence-Lightfoot, "Reflections on Portraiture: A Dialogue Between Art and Science," Qualitative inquiry, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 3-15, 2005, doi: 10.1177/1077800404270955.[9] F. W. English, "A Critical Appraisal of Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot's
. Forthe brevity of this paper, a longer description of each model, its final projects, and incentives areprovided in Appendix B. A summary of the major differences between the models is provided inTable 2 with a more detailed explanation of the rationale between iterations provided inAppendix B. While there are differences across the cohorts, all cohorts shared four majorcomponents: (1) college credit, (2) AP calculus support, (3) college advice, and (4) industrypanelists.Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Students Participating in the Project by Cohort Cohort 1 Cohort 2 Cohort 3 2013-2014 2014-2015 2017-2018Racial/Ethnic Category
represented in research into the STEM gender gapand is inextricably tied to the creation of science identity [20]. Self efficacy strongly predictsacademic performance, choice of college degree, and persistence along that career path [1], [6],[21].MethodsThis study aimed to collect qualitative data on high school junior and senior girls related to thedevelopment of their STEM identities. I explored the lived experiences of these girls as theydefied gender stereotypes and created a STEM-specific identity, through interviews, focusgroups and observations in a fine-grained, qualitative analysis. Participants who satisfied each ofthe following criteria were sought: a) an 11th-12th grade girl, who b) was actively participating ina STEM club and c
. (a) 2016 Participants (b) 2017 ParticipantsFigure 1. Group picture of STEM_SEP workshop participantsProgram staff included 11 faculty members and three student assistants: two undergraduates andone graduate student. Each session instructor met with the student assistants for two-four hoursprior to the workshop to train the assistants to ensure adequate was available.Pre- and Post- AssessmentAfter reviewing the participant evaluations and discussions from the first year’s workshop, wedecided to administer a pre- and post-program learning assessment. Several factors went into thedesign of this tool. It needed to be “short and sweet” since we did not want it to feel like a test tothe participants. The
for students with focus disorders that researchers at UC Santa Barbara developed acurriculum allowing middle schoolers with ADHD to design and fabricate their own customhand-held fidgets as a STEAEM activity [36].For the SFCA high school project described here, each student was given the necessary rawmaterials and challenged to assemble a finished device. Toward this end, they were taught by theinstructor how to modify the pieces using the classroom’s fabrication capabilities into the finalproduct.Each pencil-top fidget assembly was built from three basic components purchased fromMcMaster-Carr: 1) a nylon bolt, 2) a metal lock nut, and 3) a 1” x 1” x 1/4" aluminum blank; seeFigure 2. Appendix B gives the part numbers, description, and current
asking questions, defining problems, brainstorming, developing andtesting models or prototypes, analyzing and revising models, using mathematics andcomputational thinking, and communicating solutions to problems. Some benefits of teachingthe engineering design process (EDP) include helping students understand and improve theirworld, developing their problem solving skills and dispositions, and increasing motivation andengagement in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects [5].However, teachers mentioned the following challenges in terms of implementing EDP in theirclassrooms: (a) not having extra time to engage students in the design process, (b) limitedresources and materials, (c) ways to facilitate student’s varied
research. Teachers have brought up the value of being ableto speak to these issues in supporting the concept of resiliency in their own students. As wecontinue to improve and refine the program, we are interested in gathering stronger data toexplore how these concepts are transferred to classrooms and if they indeed promote increasedlearning and interest in bioengineering.REFERENCES[1] "NGSS: Developing the Standards." https://www.nextgenscience.org/developing- standards/developing-standards (accessed April 6, 2020).[2] M. S. Garet, A. C. Porter, L. Desimone, B. F. Birman, and K. S. Yoon, "What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers," American educational research journal, vol
select a math operation (either addition or subtraction).Next, they could enter the second number in a similar fashion. Immediately after that, they placedthe robot at 0 on the number line. Then, the robot would start to move and stop at the pointcorresponding to the answer of the math equation entered by the students. For example, input of4 ‒ 6 would make the robot stop at ‒2. Figure 2(a) shows a student implementing the lesson in theclassroom. (a) (b) Figure 2: (a) The number line lesson and (b) LCM lesson being implemented with robots in classrooms.3.2. LCM: The least common multiple (LCM) is another fundamental mathematical concept
workshop A pilot teacher training workshop was facilitated via video conferencing. The teacherworkshop was led by developers of the curriculum. The workshop lasted for 8 hours over 4 dayswith assignments between each session. Prior to the workshop, the toolkit and all prototypingmaterials weremailed to theteacher. Outside ofthe workshop, Mr.Bergandine spent~10 hourspreparing totranslate theworkshop to Figure 2. Teacher presenting (a) clay and (b) cardboard prototypes in the actuator design lesson of the teacher workshop.students. Hereported that this would be a typical amount of time for him spent preparing new material for hisclasses. The teacher participant reviewed all lessons and completed the toolkit
. High -status members who self-assigned their position in the team’shierarchy often took the initial actions to begin the engineering project. These individuals’actions included developing strategies to complete the project, organizing or distributing tasks, ortaking individual actions without consulting other team members.In this example, the team was discussing their ideas for incorporating the change request intotheir design with the Instructor (I). This team included three boys and one girl. In the exchangeswith the team members, Student A treated all students the same regardless of their gender. I: How can you find the shopping cart? Student A (high-status member): Umm… Student B: I don’t know. Student A: By
engineering design self-efficacy (EDSE) scale[5] within the context of pre-college engineering education.Self-efficacy refers to individuals’ belief in their capabilities to perform a domain-specific task[6]. According to Bandura’s self-efficacy theory [6], self-efficacy plays a significant role inguiding human action and change by having mediating influence on individuals’ interest inparticular tasks, persistence in the face of obstacles, choice of behavioral activities, and taskperformance [6]. Bandura hypothesized that self-efficacy within specific domains can bedeveloped by four primary sources of information: (a) performance accomplishment or masteryexperiences (i.e., previous successes and failures on similar tasks), (b) verbal or social
. Engineering is Elementary (2010). Available on-line at http://www.mos.org/eie/.10. Ellis, G.W., Rudnitsky, A., and Moriarty, M. (2010). Theoretic stories: Creating deeper learning in introductory engineering courses. International Journal of Engineering Education. Vol 26, No. 5.11. Ellis, G.W, Rudnitsky, A., Moriarty, M.A., and Mikic, B. (2011). Applying Knowledge Building in an Engineering Class: A Pilot Study. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(5), 1–13.12. Ellis, G.W., and Thornton, K. (2011). Preparing Engineers for Innovation and Collaboration in the Knowledge Economy. International Journal of Engineering Education 2(1).13. Ellis, G.W., Rudnitsky, A., McGinnis-Cavanaugh, B., Huff, I., Ellis, S.K. (2015, June). Designing
);”. This will give them a larger window to see shapes in.ASEE Resource Exchange8. Ask students to go to line 3 and type in “rect(15,15,200,200);” This will give them ashape to fill with color. If students know how to code this or other fillable shapes, theycan code that shape into line three instead.9. Explain to students that we want to fill the shape with color, so to do so we need togo to line 2 and first type “fill”. Then, tell students that we need to give the computer theRGB values (in that order) for their favorite color or hue from their color worksheet. To doso, students should type “fill(R,G,B);”. For example, my Processing screen might look likethissize(500,500);fill(200,50,4);rect(200,200,15,15);Every student should have a shape on
impact their future educational and career plans substantially [19, 20]. Thus, educatorsmust increase the frequency of opportunities and depth of experiences for elementary agestudents to develop their engineering identities.MethodsThe research questions for this study were the following: 1) What are the impacts of teaching the engineering design process online via zoom conference on development of children’s ability to use engineering discourse? a. Are students able to master the steps of the engineering design process? b. How do students learn to receive and implement feedback from their peers and the teacher over zoom? How is teamwork affected as compared to in-person experiences? 2) If and
minutes toone hour); however, interviews with youth in earlier iterations also revealed that they were notmotivated to iterate as they perceived their designs as “good enough.” In this implementation, wefound youth actively engaging in adding new constraints to their designs after testing them outand changing their designs to optimize them. For instance, when surveying the Disastervilletown, youth had to attach a camera to the UAV in such a way that they get the best footage of thetown. Youth kept checking the best camera angle, the most feasible camera position and eachtime they tested their design by flying the UAV over Disasterville until they were satisfied withthe video footage. Figure 4: (a) Design of a simple skyhook, (b) design of a
approved IRB protocol, de-identified data were segmented, coded, and thencodes were recombined during multiple successive coding passes to develop themes that describecommon threads relating student experiences in the program. The findings provide insights intohow students (a) engaged with the outreach program tasks, (b) developed relationships with othermembers of their assigned teams and program mentors, (c) worked through the engineeringdesign process, and (d) worked to achieve stated program goals and outcomes. The findings ofthis study are important for developing deeper understandings about how high school agestudents experience intensive engineering outreach programs that are designed to introduce themto real-world engineering design and
. 5FOR DISCUSSION: A. What can you share about your experience partnering with business and industry in the K-12 classroom to expose students to STEM fields and/or careers in STEM? What did you learn from the experience? What would you do differently next time? B. What other types of information would help you design a culturally relevant classroom lesson to promote careers in STEM? Activity Presenter: Karen Gilbert, SMILE Research Team, karengilbert@vt.edu PEERS Project Director: Holly Lesko, hlesko@vt.edu PEERS Team: Dr. Jake Grohs (PI), Dr. Holly Matusovich (Co-PI), Dr. Gary Kirk (Co- PI), Dr. Cheryl Carrico, Dr. Andrew Gillen, Justine Brantley, Tawni Paradise, Malle Rae Schilling
Paper ID #22105Misconceptions and the Notional Machine in Very Young Programming Learn-ers (RTP)Prof. Tony Andrew Lowe, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Tony Lowe is a PhD student in Engineering Education at Purdue University. He has a BSEE from Rose- Hulman Institute of Technology and a MSIT from Capella. To pass the time between classes he works for Anthem as a software architect and teaches as an adjunct at CTU Online. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018Misconceptions and the Notional Machine in Very YoungProgramming Learners (RTP)AbstractThis study looks at very
Paper ID #32893An Adaptable Interactive Activity on Optics and ResolutionMel White, Cornell University Mel White is a PhD Candidate in Electrical and Computer Engineering at Cornell University, advised by Alyosha Molnar. Her research interests include novel sensors for computational imaging, optics, IC design, and signal processing. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 A Hands-On Activity on Image Resolution and Engineering Design Description MaterialsThis activity is designed to
impact of a university makerspace,” International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1-18, 202.[12] R. M. Carbonell, M. E. Andrews, A. Boklage, & M. Borrego, “Innovation, Design, and Self-Efficacy: The Impact of Makerspaces,” in ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Tampa, 2019, Florida. https://peer. asee. org/32965.[13 ] M. Wilson and B. Wilson, Teaching Children to Draw: A Guide for Teachers and Parents. Prentice Hall, Inc., 1982, pp. 64-67.
curriculum unit. Even though all 5 first-grade teachers participated in the larger project, the goal of thisstudy was to look at first grade students decision making while engaged in a specific engineeringdesign challenge as part of the larger STEM+C curriculum unit and therefore it was important tohave students engaged in similar tasks and approaches within the same curriculum.Consequently, this led to a focusing on three of the five teachers and their focus students, due tothe extent to which the three selected teachers adhered closely to the curriculum and resulting inmore consistency across the classrooms.The three teachers were Miriam in classroom A, Moirain classroom B, and Kristen in Classroom C. The focus students from each the three
inunderstanding and generating complex information and ideas. ReferencesBritner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middleschool students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 485-499.Cannady, M. A., Greenwald, E., & Harris, K. N. (2014). Problematizing the STEMpipeline metaphor: Is the STEM pipeline metaphor serving our students and the STEMworkforce? Science Education, 98, 443-460.Cervetti, G. N., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D., & Goldschmidt, P. G. (2012). Theimpact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 631-658.Chen, Y.-C., Hand, B., & McDowell, L. (2013
. This data will be generated from alongitudinal study of CEM education and its effects on the construction industry. Thelongitudinal study can also include the history of CEM education course offerings. References[1] The Associated General Contractors of America. (2014). Preparing the next generation ofskilled construction workers: A workforce development plan for the 21st century.[2] Gajjar, D., & Sullivan, K. (2019). Study of Construction Industry Workforce: MeasuringEmployee Satisfaction for Construction Career Insight. 8.[3] Bigelow, B. F., Zarate, V., Soto, J., Arenas, J., & Perrenoud, A. (2017). Attracting andRetaining Tradespeople, an Evaluation of Influencers on Construction Workers in
for each iteration per group) – see appendix A • Handouts with options for (a) semi-truck transportation; (b) routes from prefabrication factory to construction site; and (c) site hoisting equipment for on-site assembly. Handouts (a) and (b) are for the second iteration, and hand out (c) is for the third iteration (one hand-out per group).Summary of activity procedures: Students are given a short presentation on prefabrication and modular construction andthen asked to work in pairs during the activity. If a mixed age group is present for the activity, itis suggested to pair students so that older students work with younger students to help themthrough the process. • Initial prompt: with site plan and
Arkansas. She received her Ph.D, M.S., and B.S. in civil engineering from Texas A&M University. Her research interests include geotechnical engineering, and the use of 3d printed models to aid learning in K-12 and college classrooms.Dr. Jyotishka Datta, University of Arkansas Jyotishka Datta is an Assistant Professor of Statistics at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville since August 2016. He was an NSF postdoctoral fellow at Duke University and Statistical and Applied Math- ematical Sciences Institute (SAMSI) working with Dr. David B. Dunson (Statistical Science) and Dr. Sandeep S. Dave (School of Medicine). He received my Ph.D. in Statistics from Purdue University in 2014 under the guidance of Prof
; Hynes, M. M. (2015). Broadening participation in engineering: Making in the K-12 classroom following an interest-based framework. Proceedings - ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.23633Jones, B. D. (2009). Motivating students to engage in learning: The MUSIC model of academic motivation. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(2), 272–285. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ911601&site=ehost- live%5Cnhttp://www.investigacion- psicopedagogica.org/revista/new/english/ContadorArticulo.php?499Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2006). On conceptualizing and assessing social cognitive constructs in career research: A
relationship between students’ interests and the practices and cultures of engineering. Her current work at the FACE lab is on teaching strategies for K-12 STEM educators integrating engineering design and the development of engineering skills of K-12 learners.Prof. Rong Su, University of Iowa Dr. Rong Su is an Assistant Professor of Management and Entrepreneurship at the Henry B. Tippie College of Business, University of Iowa. She received her Ph.D. degree in Organizational Psychology with a minor in Quantitative Psychology from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and previously served on the faculty in the Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University. Her research centers on the role of individual