problem solving using Scratch,” Math. Think. Learn., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 278–305, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1080/10986065.2022.2105567.[29] R. McLellan and B. Nicholl, “‘If I was going to design a chair, the last thing I would look at is a chair’: product analysis and the causes of fixation in students’ design work 11–16 years,” Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 71–92, Feb. 2011, doi: 10.1007/s10798-009-9107-7.[30] K. Dorst, “On the problem of design problems - problem solving and design expertise,” J. Des. Res., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 185–196, 2004, doi: https://doi.org/10.1504/JDR.2004.009841.[31] M. Cassotti, A. Camarda, N. Poirel, O. Houdé, and M. Agogué, “Fixation effect in creative ideas generation: opposite
and distribution of registration flyers to interested students and parents ismanaged by the partnering schools and youth organizations and is typically done directly with thestudents by teachers or through established electronic communication systems used by theorganization.Figure 2: A) Map of Florida counties denoting 2024 GGEE summer program locations. B) The number of enrolledstudents from 2022 to 2024.2.0 Purpose & Study AimsThe overarching goal of the GGEE summer program was to provide an opportunity for middleschool children to gain experience with computer science through real-world applications, learn tosolve real-world problems using computational thinking practices, engage in practices that mirrorthe real-world work of
classrooms settings: a) teaching STEM learners about 3Dprinting;b) teaching practitioners about 3D printing; c) as a support tool during teaching; d) producing artifacts that aidlearning; and e) supporting outreach efforts. Evidence of 3D printing-based teaching techniques can bediscovered in each of these six areas, and recommendations for further research and policy are given.Keywords: Project based learning, Design Concepts, 3D Printing Makerspace Development,Support Pre-College STEM Education, Engineering, Engineering TechnologyIntroductionSTEM education has been challenged with identifying the next generation of learners to advance technologyand development. In this study, we have identified key performance measures to align pre-college
of educationalpartnerships that can inspire future efforts to enhance STEM learning and build well-educated,creative, and resilient communities. These programs create a stronger community of futureinnovators!AcknowledgmentThis educational program is based upon work partially supported by funding from the Ohio CodeScholars and gift funding to THE Ohio State University from the Two Sigma Faculty ResearchAward.References[1] B. Fralick, J. Kearn and S. Thompson, “How middle schoolers draw engineers and scientists,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 18, 60- 73, 2009.[2] M. Liu, F.K. Chiang, “Middle school students’ perceptions of engineers: a case study of Beijing students,” Int J Technol Des Educ 30, 479–506, 2020.[3] J. Rodrigues
b Background Conor, high school Engineering teacher at a private high school, and holds a mechanical teacher from Southwest engineering degree. Gabe, high school teacher Teacher of project-based engineering classes that incorporates both from mid-Atlantic STEM/STEAM and global competency and serves as a coordinator for multiple student groups. Greg, high school teacher Emerging young STEM teacher who has a strong interest in broadening from mid-Atlantic participation in STEM education curriculum. Tabitha, high school Participated in the engineering program during high school and
Elementary Student Teams’ Design Failure Experiences and Factors that Affect their Opportunities to Learn from Failure (Fundamental)AbstractThe research literature has established that (a) learning from design failure and engaging indiagnostic troubleshooting are fundamental epistemic practices of engineering education, and (b)the ways in which teachers and students prepare for and respond to design failure is varied andcomplex. There is ample space for additional contributions to this literature, particularly withrespect to how teams of students in K–12 classrooms negotiate failure experiences. Thisqualitative study examines 21 design teams across 8 classrooms in 8 elementary schools in theeastern United
. 23.1196.1-23.1196.14. Accessed: Jul. 03, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.proquest.com/publiccontent/docview/2317889206?pq- origsite=primo&parentSessionId=1eQSpjZ2YY4OaaUr4gjnBa35sdfs0xsvAyRcYFGcRmw%3D[24] E. A. Siverling, E. Suazo‐Flores, C. A. Mathis, and T. J. Moore, “Students’ use of STEM content in design justifications during engineering design‐based STEM integration,” Sch. Sci. Math., vol. 119, no. 8, pp. 457–474, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1111/ssm.12373.[25] N. M. Alozie, E. B. Moje, and J. S. Krajcik, “An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project-based science,” Sci. Educ., p. n/a-n/a, 2009, doi: 10.1002/sce.20365.[26] D. S. Pimentel and K. L. McNEILL, “Conducting Talk
optimization in educational research,” in 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2025.[18] OpenAI, “OpenAI Platform API Reference,” Create chat completion. Accessed: Jan. 05, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://platform.openai.com/docs/api-reference/chat/create[19] B. Atil, A. Chittams, L. Fu, F. Ture, L. Xu, and B. Baldwin, “LLM Stability: A detailed analysis with some surprises,” ArXiv, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.04667.[20] M. Vaccaro, M. Friday, and A. Zaghi, “Evaluating the capability of large language models to personalize science texts for diverse middle-school-age learners,” arXiv [Preprint], 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.05204.[21] A. V. Maltese, C. S. Melki, and H
perspectives.Insights on engagement from participant reflections: This section presents the set of five themes that we noticed from the participants’ captionsacross all activities. We noticed that memorable takeaways were related to experiences,emotional engagements, skill learning, knowledge or factual gain, and awareness about topicsrelated to the semiconductor industry. Table 5 presents a brief description of the theme andillustrates it with a sample reflection from the participants.Participant lighting up an Participant operating the BBC A team making a stakeholder LED from Activity 1 micro:bit from Activity 2 map from Activity 3 Photograph (a) Photograph (b) Photograph (c
Engineers (Evaluation) AbstractThis Evaluation paper describes the preliminary findings for the first two years of a 3-year projectinvolving high school science teachers at a metropolitan-based university. The project’spredominant focus relates to energy, as a unifying theme across scientific and engineeringdomains. The project’s overarching goals were to: (a) deepen high school teachers’ understandingof engineering principles, practices and design, (b) support the development of STEM-integratedcurriculum aligned with the Next Generation Science Standards, and (c) to enhance ongoingcollaboration and interchange among university faculty, local schools, and industry
interactions with faculty.The experience gained from this program will help us to be more prepared and creative inorganizing a similar program this year. We believe these experiences would also benefit othereducators and researchers with the common goal of increasing the number of professionals in theSTEM fields.References:[1] Anwar, S., Bascou, N. A., Menekse, M., & Kardgar, A. “A Systematic Review of Studies on Educational Robotics”. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 9(2), Article 2. 2019.[2] Nugent, G., Bruker, B., Grandgenett, N. and Welch, G., "Robotics camps, clubs, and competitions: Results from a US robotics project". Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Volume 75, Part B, pp. 686-691, January 2016.[3
, and Philip M. Sadler. 2015. Establishing an explanatory model for mathematics identity. Child development 86, 4: 1048–1062.11. Katherine P. Dabney, Robert H. Tai, John T. Almarode, Jaimie L. Miller-Friedmann, Gerhard Sonnert, Philip M. Sadler, and Zahra Hazari. 2012. Out-of-School Time Science Activities and Their Association with Career Interest in STEM. International Journal of Science Education, Part B 2, 1: 63–79.12. William Easley, Foad Hamidi, Wayne G. Lutters, and Amy Hurst. 2018. Shifting expectations. Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction 2, CSCW: 1–23.13. Jennifer A. Fredricks, Neil Naftzger, Charles Smith, and Allison Riley. 2017. Measuring Youth Participation, Program Quality, and Social and
autism spectrum disorders during the transition to adulthood. J. Autism. Dev. Disord. 41 (5), 566–574. doi:10.1007/s10803-010-1070-312. Kouo, J. L., Hogan, A. E., Morton, S., & Gregorio, J. (2021). Supporting students with an autism spectrum disorder in engineering: K-12 and beyond. Journal of Science Education for Students with Disabilities. 24(11).13. Ehsan, H., & Cardella, M. E. (2019). Investigating Children with Autism’s Engagement in Engineering Practices: Problem Scoping (Fundamental). Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 15027–15043.14. Steinbrenner, J. R., Hume, K., Odom, S. L., Morin, K. L., Nowell, S. W., Tomaszewski, B., Szendrey, S., McIntyre, N. S., Yücesoy-Özkan, S., & Savage, M
Curriculum”. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 35.15678–15686.[9] A. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, K. Glazewski, M. Jeon, C. Hmelo-Silver, B. Mott, S. Lee, and J. Lester. 2021. “How Do Elementary Students Conceptualize Artificial Intelligence?”. In Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Virtual Event, USA) (SIGCSE ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1261. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3439642[10] S. Anwar, N. A. Bascou, M. Menekse, and A. Kardgar. 2019. “A systematic review of studies on educational robotics”. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER) 9, 2 (2019), 2.[11] A. Álvarez and
inelectrical engineering through altruism at the middle school level,” in 2013 IEEE GlobalHumanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), 2013, pp. 108–111.[6] D. McGreevy, S. Hoops, and B. Morris, "Tending to the K-12 Talent Pipeline," inPES T&D 2012, 2012, pp. 1-2.[7] J. Naukkarinen, K. Korpinen, and P. Silventoinen, “Upper secondary schoolstudents’ gendered interests in electronics and electrical engineering,” Research inScience & Technological Education, vol. 41, pp. 1412–1432, 2023.[8] M. Estrada, A. Woodcock, P. R. Hernandez, and P. W. Schultz, "Toward a Modelof Social Influence that Explains Minority Student Integration into the ScientificCommunity," Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 206-222, Feb.2011, doi
; Shephard, K. (2022). Engineering faculty views on sustainability and education research: Survey results and analyses. International Journal of Engineering Education, 38(3), 611-620.Gottschall, J. (2012). The storytelling animal: How stories make us human. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 6Johri, A., & Olds, B. M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00007.xKorte, R. (2013). The formulation of engineering identities: Storytelling as philosophical inquiry
Educator, vol. 51 (2016): pp. 277-296. DOI:10.1080/08878730.2016.1192709[15] Cakiroglu, J., Capa-Aydin, Y., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. “Science teaching efficacy beliefs”. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (2012): (pp. 449 – 461). New York City, NY: Springer.[16] L. Wheeler, S. Navy, J. Maeng, and B. Whitworth, "Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)," J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 1285-1305, 2019.[17] Braun, V. and Clarke, V. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology” 3, no. 2 (2006): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa, Available at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1191
at the K-12level. In addition, suggestions collected from the tool will be implemented and could also lead tofuture studies.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.EEC-2120746. We also would like to acknowledge the support of MathWorks® in our effort todevelop this tool.References[1] N. Nevaranta, P. Jaatinen, K. Gräsbeck, and O. Pyrhönen, “Interactive Learning Material for Control Engineering Education Using Matlab Live Scripts,” in 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), Jul. 2019, pp. 1150–1154. doi: 10.1109/INDIN41052.2019.8972282.[2] N. Leger and B. Berhane, “Work in Progress: A Literature Review On Computational &
trainingSchool A 1 .2 1 Have an existing teacher teach one class section of computer science, rather than another existing math, lab science, or elective class.School B 9 1.4 2 Hire one teacher; re-assign an existing teacherSchool C 4 .8 1 Hire a teacher predominantly to teach foundational computer science, and also one extra elective (higher level computer science, digital art, music production, etc)Total 12
supportduring our data collection. We also thank all the participants for their contributions. Additionally,we are deeply appreciative of Dr.Brian Gravel's guidance and support throughout this work.ReferenceBeck, K., et al. (2001) The Agile Manifesto. Agile Alliance. http://agilemanifesto.org/Brennan, R., Tonkal, M., & Rogers, C. B. (2023). Implementing systems engineering with elementary school students. In 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 2023.Chou, C. C., Block, L., & Jesness, R. (2012). A case study of mobile learning pilot project in K-12 schools. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.0502.02International Council on System Engineering (INCOSE). (n.d
a change in behavior (Standard B) • presenting an important topic (i.e. sustainability) that should be applied across all professions and subjects (Standard C) • engaging participants in providing feedback on how the activity could be made more effective for various age groups and how it should be integrated into curriculum (Standard D) • providing participants with an active-learning activity proven to be effective in engineering education (Standard E).The activity is aligned with the three dimensions of science learning as defined by NextGeneration Science Standards (NGSS) [14]. The activity is focused on 1. Science andEngineering Practices by introducing the movement to go beyond traditional
. Card. Electrophysiol., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 199–207, Sep. 2010, doi: 10.1007/s10840-010-9496-2.[15]Q. Chen, J. Bao, and Y. Zang, “The knowledge, attitude, and intention to use internet-based mental health services: A serial mediation model,” Internet Interv., vol. 37, p. 100755, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2024.100755.[16]M. B. Miles, A. M. Huberman, and J. M. Saldana “Qualitative Data Analysis”.[17]E. A. Eschenbach, M. Virnoche, E. M. Cashman, S. M. Lord, and M. M. Camacho, “Proven practices that can reduce stereotype threat in engineering education: A literature review,” in 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings, Madrid, Spain: IEEE, Oct. 2014, pp. 1–9. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2014.7044011
, Eds., Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2009, pp. 2229–2246. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5281-1_147.[6] DESE, Office for Career, Vocational, and Technical Education, “Chapter 74 manual for Vocational Technical Cooperative Education.” Mass. Gov., Dec. 13, 2010. Accessed: Mar. 03, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.doe.mass.edu/ccte/cvte/programs/coop_ed/manual.doc[7] C. Imperatore and A. Hyslop, “Quality CTE Program of Study Framework.” ACTE, Oct. 2018.[8] C. M. Cunningham and G. J. Kelly, “Epistemic Practices of Engineering for Education,” Science Education, vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 486–505, 2017, doi: 10.1002/sce.21271.[9] S. B. Nolen, E. L. Michor, and M. D. Koretsky, “Engineers, figuring it out
—Quality educationand Goal 9—Industry, innovation, and infrastructure. Retrieved from https://sdgs.un.org/goals [14] Ng, E., & Tan, B. (2018). Achieving state-of-the-art ICT connectivity in developingcountries: The Azerbaijan model of technology leapfrogging. E J Info Sys Dev Countries.https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12027 [15] Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.Jossey-Bass. [16] Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SagePublications. [17] Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among fiveapproaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications. [18] Poth, C. (2018). Innovation in the research process: A guide to
STEM Instruction We used Roehrig and colleagues’ (2021) interdisciplinary STEM and Antink-Meyer andBrown’s (2019) NOEK frameworks as a lens by which to examine teachers’ VNOEK in thisstudy. We use Roehrig’s (2021) work to define and clarify our positioning of the teacherparticipants as STEM teachers familiar with using engineering design to teach their disciplines.We use Antink-Meyer and Brown’s (2019) work as it was previously the catalyst for developingthe validated VNOEK survey instrument (Antink-Meyer & Brown, 2020; Brown & Antink-Meyer) used in this study. Roehrig (et al., 2021) define interdisciplinary STEM instruction as having corecomponents: (a) engineering design as an integrator; (b) real-world problems; (c
-renewableenergy, (vii) Energy conversion and storage devices, and (viii) Materials and nanotechnologyrelated to renewable energy applications. (b) Does your school have any courses or moduleswhose main focus is energy or renewable energy education? (c) Does your school currently teachenergy or renewable energy education using: Classroom Lectures/Guest Lectures/A section of amodule/A full course/Advanced level courses /Hands-on activities/Student camps/Documentaries/videos? (d) Region-specific ACT score in Science for 2018-2019 including thestate average and Benchmark score for college readiness in science. The data was obtained fromthe Nebraska Department of Education (NDE) [30].Figure 3b highlights responses on whether schools offer dedicated courses or
Paper ID #46992Pre-College Microelectronics Curriculum Units Developed Using an IntegratedMicroelectronics Framework (Resource Exchange)Prof. Tamara J Moore, Purdue University at West Lafayette (PWL) (COE) Tamara J. Moore, Ph.D., is a Professor of Engineering Education and University Faculty Scholar at Purdue University, as well as the Executive Co-Director of the INSPIRE Research Institute for Precollege Engineering. Dr. Moore’s research is focused on the integration of STEM concepts in K-12 and postsecondary classrooms in order to help students make connections among the STEM disciplines and achieve deep understanding
teacher’s personalteaching efficacy and beliefs in engineering. It was adapted to survey STEM efficacy and to betteralign with the experiences in the summer program. Teachers were asked to use the following 4-point scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, and Strongly Agree to rate how much they agreewith the following questions about teaching efficacy and beliefs: A. I am continually improving my STEM teaching practice. B. I am confident that I can teach STEM effectively. C. I understand STEM concepts well enough to be effective in teaching STEM. D. I am confident that I can answer students’ questions about STEM. E. When a student has difficulty understanding a STEM concept, I am confident that I know how to help the student
high schoolstudents participating in a new engineering summer program. Through employing severalresearch-supported strategies to promote engagement and build interest [4] with authenticengineering content, the goal of this program is to create situational interest and provideopportunities for students to explore individual interest. Situational interest, if supported, candevelop into long-term pursuit of STEM domains in college and/or careers.We explored situational interest through the following questions: 1. How do high school students' interest levels change from beginning to end of a weeklong engineering camp in: a. Triggered Situational Interest (engagement)? b. Maintained Situational Interest-Feeling (enjoyment
students (grades 3-6) in PISEC across the two semesters.The student body at Site A is 83.4% Hispanic/Latino, 12.5% white, and 80% economicallydisadvantaged. Site B is a middle school that enrolled 26 unique students (grades 6-8) in PISECacross the two semesters. The student body at Site B is 52.5% Hispanic/Latino, 40.5% white, and53% economically disadvantaged. Site C is a middle school that only ran PISEC in the secondsemester; they enrolled 10 students (grade 7). The student body at Site C is 63.9%Hispanic/Latino, 31.2% white, and 76% economically disadvantaged. Due to current schooldistrict policies, we are unable to collect demographic information from students and families.We report the demographics of the schools and are confident that the