June 15, 2014
June 15, 2014
June 18, 2014
K-12 & Pre-College Engineering
24.461.1 - 24.461.14
Effects of Continuous Teacher Professional Development in Engineering on Elementary Teachers (research-to-practice)As the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) embraces engineering as practices interactingwith science, technology, and society, engineering becomes one of the key disciplines for K-12education for future generations1. To prepare teachers to teach K-12 engineering, continuoussupport for teachers through teacher professional development (TPD) is necessary. In the past 20years, many teachers have experienced TPD in engineering2. However, it has been a one-timeopportunity for most teachers.TPD is designed to change teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions; such changes areexpected to influence teachers’ classroom practices and result in improved student learning3,4. Asone-time TPD is not enough to achieve desired teacher change (for various reasons5), there is aneed to provide continuing support for teachers through follow-on TPD4. Thus, continuousprofessional development (CPD) is considered essential for furthering teachers’ contentknowledge, improving teacher practice, and making teachers successful in their teaching6. This isparticularly true for engineering which is a new content area for most teachers. While theimportance of CPD is well documented in the literature, few studies have investigated theoutcomes of CPD in K-12 engineering education. This study examines how CPD withengineering impacts elementary teachers differently from their first to their second TPDparticipation.As part of a five-year longitudinal project, an institute at a Midwestern public university offereda one-week introductory engineering TPD program each summer and a three-day follow-on TPDprogram the following year for grades 2-4 teachers in a south-central United States schooldistrict 7. Since the follow-on TPD is one kind of CPD, we examined changes in teachers’ beliefsand attitudes from their first to their second TPD participation to understand how engineeringCPD makes a difference to them. The research questions are: (a) how did the most importantthings that teachers learned from the engineering TPD change from their first to second TPDexperience?; and (b) how did the meaningful aspects of the engineering TPD for teachers changefrom their first to second experience?From 2008 to 2011, 157 elementary teachers received engineering TPD for the first time; 98teachers returned the following year after teaching engineering in their classrooms. After eachTPD, teachers responded to a survey consisting of seven open-ended questions concerning theirevaluation of the engineering TPD7. To analyze their responses, an inductive approach was taken.The preliminary results revealed apparent shifts in teachers’ perceptions of engineering TPDbetween their first and second engineering TPD. While teachers perceived the most importantlearning from their first TPD related to new content knowledge, they considered practical aspectsof integrating engineering into their curriculum as the most important after their second TPD. Inaddition, teachers valued peer interactions as a meaningful aspect of engineering TPD more intheir second TPD than in their first TPD. While teachers’ engineering experience is limited to theprogram offered by the institute, the results reveal the effects of the engineering CPD from theteachers’ point of view.Bibliography1. NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.2. Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (Eds.). (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects (Committee on K-12 Engineering Education, National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.3. Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15, 5-12.4. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 8, 381-391.5. Loucks-Horsley, S., Harding, C. K., Arbuckle, M. A., Murray, L. B., Dubea, C., & Williams, M. K. (1987). Continuing to learn: A guidebook for teacher development. Andover, MA: Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast & Islands.6. Bredeson, P. V. (2000). Teacher learning as work and at work: exploring the content and contexts of teacher professional development. Journal of In-Service Education, 26, 63-72.7. Author et al. (2013). Proceedings of 2013 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.
Yoon, S. Y., & Kong, Y., & Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Strobel, J. (2014, June), Effects of Continuous Teacher Professional Development in Engineering on Elementary Teachers Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--20352
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2014 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015