, and developing and using models. CT within the literature is framed as a set ofpractices to engage in problem-solving implying that, within K-12 settings, CT can serve as adisciplinary body of knowledge in its own right, and as a set of epistemic practices for problem-solving and meaning making in general.This framing is echoed in student discourse and practices around CT and engineering design(Ardito et al., 2020; Tofel-Grehl, Searle, & Ball, 2022; Yang, Baek, & Swanson, 2020). Ardito etal. (2020) for instance found that students used CT as epistemic practices to problem-solve andmake meaning of engineering challenges in robotics, often reflecting on this in their journals.Yang, Baek, & Swanson (2020), pulling from observations
design as a result of feedback), and reflection (reflecting on design aspects ordesign decisions). The study also examined parent facilitation techniques during the engineeringexperiences and the ways in which older children demonstrated moments of agency duringinteractions with a parent at an interactive engineering exhibit [29].Moving beyond the designed informal learning context [30] of the museum, more recent work aspart of the Head Start on Engineering (HSE) Project and Research Exploring ActivityCharacteristics and Heuristics for Early Childhood Engineering (REACH-ECE) Project has goneon to explore how families engage in engineering across a number of different settings, includingcommunity programs, early education programs, and the home
, and one preferred not to answer.They represented 19 states or US territories and 28 unique universities.Each liaison typically supported one high school, though some supported two or three. Afterobtaining IRB approval, the e4usa research team used a protocol for focus groups with universityliaisons to encourage reflection and discussion. Questions asked included, ● What, if any, prior existing relationships did you and/or your university have with your partner school(s) prior to your involvement with the e4usa course? ● What support resources provided by e4usa have been most helpful to you? In what ways have these resources been helpful? ● Do you have any suggestions for how to increase liaison participation?This
exercise gave thestudents an opportunity to examine their current understanding of sustainable building practices. The groupnext traveled to the MorningStar solar home, a net-zero home built for the 2007 Solar Decathlon. A memberof the AE faculty who helped create the home for the competition guided the campers through the homeand explained the team’s considerations when designing the net-zone house. Campers learned about theenergy efficiency standards in passive house designs and how they can be implemented in today's buildingenvironments.Lighting The lighting design portion of the summer camp consisted of a short interactive lecture using visualdemonstrations with Top Hat to facilitate discussion, reflection and engagement with the
math, “I would have consideredit was mathematical, and that is something that I would have attributed to what we did today[referencing the exhibit activities], but stepping back and really thinking about it, that's exactlywhat it is. It is probability” (P6). In contrast, reflecting on what they and their child experienced,the parent asserted, “I feel like it's kind of engineering on a smaller scale, figuring out whatdifferent buttons do to make something happen on a screen. Or a different combination ofbuttons to make it do something different” (P5). When describing their experiences, manyparents referred back to the CT activities that were part of the exhibit and then related them tothings they were most familiar with, such as using a
topics, problems, or issues are organized, represented, and adapted to the diverseinterests and abilities of learners, and presented for instruction” [24, p. 8]. Shulman [24] furtherexplained that PCK aids in differentiating expert teachers in a subject area from subject areaexperts. Consequently, for a teacher to become an expert teacher in a subject matter, the teachershould first comprehend the subject area knowledge with a degree of flexibility and adaptabilitythat enables them to transform that knowledge into “forms that are pedagogically powerful andyet, adaptive to the variations in ability and background presented to the students” [24, p.15].However, the transition from personal beliefs about content to reflecting on how to organize
opportunities. IntroductionThe United States (U.S.) has seen an increased emphasis on providing computational thinking(CT) learning opportunities for every P-12 student. The increased emphasis is reflected by theinclusion of CT in the Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy (STEL) [2] and theNext Generation Science Standards (NGSS) [1]. These standards promote the integration of CTwithin authentic, design-based engineering and science contexts. While the benefits ofintegrating CT and engineering practices are clear, there is still much to learn about the methodsused to integrate CT within authentic engineering design challenges. One strategy, physicalcomputing (the design, programming, and
assignments to help them with motor control and ultrasonic sensor work.But there was still a need to teach them how to create a code that others could read and follow.To achieve repeatable code, comments in the code matter greatly, and the mentors wish they hademphasized this importance more, especially when working in a group where others will readand use your code. Next year the mentors will explain to the apprentices how to comment theircode effectively for others to use.Upon reflection, it would have been helpful to have conflict resolution training for the mentors tobetter help the apprentice teams that were having interpersonal issues. Most issues were easy tohandle but there were some more complex issues. The mentors did have weekly meetings
programs and the workplace. BackgroundIn 2014, the inclusion of engineering content and practices at the same substantive level asscientific inquiry in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) [9-11] raised concerns fromengineering educators [12-14]. Concerns reflected the limited preparation that engineeringeducators believed many P-12 science educators had to teach engineering concepts in great depth[12-16]. The NGSS also prompted concerns from both P-12 science and engineering educatorsregarding increased potential safety hazards and resulting risks that science educators wouldneed to be prepared to address when tasked with delivering hands-on, design-based engineeringinstruction [1,4,5,11,14,17
, interviews, journals, and reflections with theirperceptions of the robot kits both before and after the integration. The results indicated that”...exploring with and using the robot kits, and activities, helped the teachers build theirconfidence and knowledge to introduce young students to computational thinking. The studyidentified that teacher professional development (PD) needs to focus explicitly on how to teachdevelopmentally appropriate robotics based STEM activities that further promote computationalconcepts, practices, and perspectives.” [33, p. 1]In another study focused on integrating CS with robotics, Sullivan and Bers integrated KIWIrobotics kits into a preschool through second-grade curriculum [34]. PreK-2 students (n=60)participated in
are working to find viable solutions.As they do, it is imperative that the results be translated into learning opportunities for the futuregenerations of environmental leaders: K-12 students [1], [2]. Partnerships between researchersand K-12 teachers have proven highly beneficial in increasing student learning [1], [2].The Framework for K-12 Science Education [3] and the Next Generation Science Standards(NGSS) [4] place emphasis on the integration of engineering principles and practices into K-12science education. Unlike previous science education standards, engineering was included in theNGSS for two reasons: to reflect the importance of understanding the human-built world and torecognize the value of better integrating the teaching and
. The numbers of participants (total and for girls) are listed in Table 1, below. Because wefocus on the fourth and fifth grade girls who participated and because we do not have largeenough numbers to disaggregate by race or ethnicity, we do not report race or ethnicityinformation of the participants in this study. However, we want to note that the students whoparticipated in the research reflected the gender and race distributions of their schools and schooldistricts. Across the three years of this study, the student populations of the larger study and inthe focal schools were 2% American Indian or Alaskan Native, 8% Asian, 15% Black or AfricanAmerican, 21% Hispanic or Latinx, 0% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 49% White, and 5
following research question: What kinds of roles andbehaviors do caregivers enact that support their child’s learning and engagement in engineeringactivities at home? We anticipated that caregivers’ roles and behaviors would be influenced bythe home context and reflect caregivers’ trying to balance responsibilities of being aparent/caregiver with their expectations of what it means to support or teach their child about adiscipline with which they may be unfamiliar (e.g., engineering).MethodsStudy ContextThe current study was conducted as part of an NSF-funded project to (1) engage kids and theircaregivers in engineering, (2) increase the awareness of kids and caregivers as to whatengineering is, and (3) increase kids’ interest in engineering. We
population in order to collaboratively anditeratively develop solutions [1]. It provides individuals with a flexible structure for navigatingill-structured challenges [21] and generating creative and meaningful solutions [22]. When usingHCD, individuals focus on humans in the design journey by emphasizing with and understandingstakeholders, collaborating with them to explore and define problems [23], [24]. They alsoengage the stakeholders in iterative cycles of prototyping, testing, and reflecting to develop andsustain solutions [1]. HCD practices include documenting biases and assumptions, interviewing,identifying themes, communicating ideas, creating low-fidelity prototypes, and developing plansto bring final designs to the market [25], [26
. There are so many different areas of engineering. All require knowledge or background in humanities, math, science. 3. It’s ok to fail 1. Integrating undergraduate programs 2. Scholarships 3. Watching spectific (sic) messages/interactions better to studentsCounselor Surprises about Engineerings 1. Frog reflection 2. Spider dress 3. tube in activity 1. Art instillation as engineering 2. Technology as any human made thing 3. Solution is not always a design 1. Shoes - mechanical eng., textile, biomechanics 2. M&Ms - Industrial Eng. 3. Psych & Engineering - Industrial Eng. 4. Phones contain conflict minerals where other countries fight to have 5. If you prepare for failure you won’t be surprised
progress on implementation and ask questions of the project team andeach other. The check-ins served to obtain implementation data and foster a learning communityamong teachers. These informal discussions were recorded and summarized within one week ofeach discussion in order to share teacher feedback related to critical components, adaptations,and challenges with the project team. At the end of the first semester of implementation,researchers conducted semi-structured, in-person interviews, lasting 45 - 60 minutes. Theseinterviews were guided by a protocol including questions and follow-up prompts aligned to eachcritical component along with questions designed to elicit reflections on factors influencingimplementation. These interviews were
occurred in spring andfall of 2022. During these conversations, administrators were asked to reflect on theimplementation of the e4usa program at their school, their personal experiences with thisprocess, and barriers or suggestions in expanding this program both locally and more broadly.The transcripts of these interviews and focus groups were analyzed using descriptive coding [1]by two researchers. During this process the codes were categorized and then emergent themeswere identified. The findings indicate that administrators have a range of personal experiencewith implementing this engineering program, and that often these experiences were reported as abenefit to the entire school. For instance, administrators often referred to connections made
. Figure 4: Multiple regression model for the longitudinal study of student grades in math and science and enrollment in high-level courses.Following the pilot programThe following areas of refinement have been identified after reflection and feedback: recruitmentof schools and districts should begin around September and October to allow time for schools toapply for funding. Training should include more hands-on opportunities to work through theactivities together. Balance the ratio of male to female students in the program by working withstudent peers and female teachers for recruitment. Sustainably expand the program to morelocations by cost-sharing with schools and training local teachers to run the programs. Sustainengagement
libraries toincorporate the STEM-kits as an extension of their existing programs.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1759259 (Indiana University) and Grant No. 1759314 (Binghamton University). Any opinions,findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] K. Rosa, K. LibGuides: Number of Libraries in the United States: Home, 2019. Retrieved from https://libguides.ala.org/numberoflibraries[2] V.R.Lee, “Libraries Will Be Essential to the Smart and Connected Communities of the Future,” in Reconceptualizing Libraries: Perspectives
leverage this information to support efforts to diversifythe engineering field.AcknowledgementsThis study was supported by the Battelle Engineering, Technology and Human Affairs (BETHA)endowment. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the BETHA endowment. Many thanks tothe Girl Scout staff members, volunteers, troop leaders, parents, and girls who made this researchpossible.References[1] Betty A. Sproule and H. F. Mathis, “Recruiting and keeping women engineering students: An agenda for action,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 745–748.[2] S. L. Blaisdell and M. Anderson-Rowland, “A Pipeline To Recruit Women Into
better understanding of the engineering design process.Tags: pre-college, engineering, engineering design process, innovation, creativity, high schoolINTRODUCTIONFor decades, the US has identified a shortage of engineering professionals. The nationaldiscussion on the shortage of engineers in the market started as early as 1959, with empiricalevidence of the need for more engineers and scientists to meet the demands of the growingcountry [3]. The conversation initially focused on increasing the workforce to compete withother countries [4]. Recently, the conversation shifted toward the need for skilled engineers whobring new ideas and perspectives to the profession. Reflecting this trend, stakeholders, includingNAE [5], NSPE [6], and ASEE [7], are
R. Koestner, “Examining how parent and teacher enthusiasm influences motivation and achievement in STEM,” The Journal of Educational Research, vol. 113, no. 4, pp. 275–282, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1080/00220671.2020.1806015.[7] D. Reider, K. Knestis, and J. Malyn-Smith, “Workforce Education Models for K-12 STEM Education Programs: Reflections on, and Implications for, the NSF ITEST Program,” J Sci Educ Technol, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 847–858, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s10956-016-9632-6.[8] K. Perez, “Influence of Subject Taught (STEM), Title I, and Grade Level of Instruction for Components in an Effective Professional Development Design,” Ph.D., Florida Atlantic University, United States -- Florida, 2018. Accessed: Feb. 13
organizations. However,participation in the STEM workforce still does not reflect population demographics.The research literature provides an evidence-base that early STEM experiences canimpact K-12 students intention to enroll in STEM degree programs. Over the last twodecades pre-college engineering programs and pathways have been developed toprepare K-12 students for engineering degree programs at the post-secondary level. Asecondary goal of these pathways was to broaden interest in engineering professionsand diversify the engineering pipeline. Pre-college programs that provide a positiveSTEM experience may increase the pipeline and diversity of students interested inpursuing STEM at the postsecondary level. The Project Lead the Way Program(PLTW) is
SHPE’s Virtual STEM Labs: Engaging and inspiring Hispanic youth to pursue STEM degrees and careers.Background/MotivationSolving the world’s most pressing and complex issues, including the recent pandemic, climateand environmental challenges, and sustainable economic development, is dependent on scientificinnovation. This need is reflected in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics(STEM) occupation growth which has increased 79% since 1990 and is projected to grow by10.8 percent by 2031 [1]. To meet these labor market demands, the United States hasconsistently invested over $500 million dollars in STEM education specifically since 2019 withan emphasis on programs that increase participation of
literature, problem solving, timemanagement, etc…) and 2) to ramp up research project (learn more about the topic, begin initialexperiments, etc…).As students entering Research I: Engineering may be at different phases of the project, phases oflearning material, and previous exposure to specific learning material, goals and progress areassessed individually through a series of assessments shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Assessments for Research I: Engineering that target time and project management. Each level decreases in frequency (daily, weekly, monthly) but increases in weighting.A “WID/WIN” stands for “What I Did / What I Need” and is a daily reflection that answers fourquestions: 1) What did I do today? 2) What will I do tonight to progress
, 2023 Determining the Efficacy of K-12 and Higher Education Partnerships (Evaluation)Abstract Engineering students and professionals in the United States do not reflect the country’sdemographics. Women and minority students remain largely underrepresented. To help diversifythe STEM pipeline, it is essential students are exposed to and engaged in STEM active learningexperiences in K-12. This is especially effective when post-secondary institutions partner withK-12 schools. Establishing the partnership can be challenging as the institutions must havecongruous objectives, determine who is responsible for what, and define success similarly. Toaddress this set of issues, a program partnership rubric was
reflects findings from Botelho et al., who suggest that the educational use of a computersimulation is the emphasis on exploring by running the simulation numerous times. This allowsstudents to examine various scenarios and assumptions as part of the “theory-buildingprocess”[13]. This then allows the students to gain some hands-on experience at the comfort oftheir computer, with the flexibility of running the model as many times as needed. It also allowsthem to take note of their iterations as part of their scientific inquiry (See Appendix A Fig 2.).Additionally, an interesting finding was that teachers reported that some students interacted withthe MATLAB live scripts interface as a “game” and showed some level of excitement using it.This is
responsive classroom, a key component is student assessment and feedback. The curriculumdeveloper integrated proven teaching strategies to ensure the camp instructor allowed students to reflect,assess understanding of concepts at checkpoints, and obtain feedback. Formative and summativeassessments were used throughout the program to assess student knowledge and comprehension. Examplesof formative assessments incorporated in each lesson included low-stakes quizzes, student polls, and exittickets. Participants also engaged in open-ended discussions with peers to help increase comprehension oflearned concepts and encourage critical thinking.At the end of the program, summative assessments given to participants included a cumulative activity anda final