ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Mapping Engineering Concepts for Secondary Level Education. Final Report. Research in Engineering and Technology Education
Author: Daugherty, Jenny L.
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Engineering Education,Engineering,Faculty Development,Educational Change,Concept Mapping,Expertise,Focus Groups,Qualitative Research

Much of the national attention on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education tends to concentrate on science and mathematics, with its emphasis on standardized test scores. However as the National Academy of Engineering Committee on K-12 Engineering Education stressed, engineering can contribute to the development of an effective and interconnected STEM education system. In addition, engineering can provide authentic learning contexts for science, technology, and mathematics. Numerous K-12 engineering initiatives have emerged across the U.S. developing curriculum and conducting teacher professional development. The focus of pre-college engineering education has largely been on process, with engineering content or concepts playing at best a secondary role. Within teacher professional development this lack of focus on engineering concepts is also evident. One key problem confronting engineering professional development observed by Daugherty (2009) in a multiple case study project is the lack of a well-defined concept base. The findings from the individual case studies were compared and summarized across the study's research questions, which included a focus on identifying the fundamental content knowledge. As evidenced by the case studies, engineering content is not well-defined for secondary level education. The projects' leaders, instructors, and participating teachers discussed engineering in terms of the design process and were unable to articulate the associated content or concepts. This void poses serious problems for curriculum and professional development, as well as for research. In the absence of a conceptual base, materials tend to focus solely on design-based activities, lacking a focus on conceptual learning. In order to address this gap Custer, Daugherty, and Meyer (in press), in a study funded by NCETE, identified thirteen engineering concepts deemed to be core to engineering and appropriate for the secondary level. To further this effort beyond a list of thirteen concepts, the current study, also funded by NCETE, convened a focus group comprised of pre-college engineering education, cognitive science, and/or concept mapping experts to discuss how and in what ways concept mapping could be used in secondary level engineering education. The study's research questions were: (1) How can concept mapping be used to facilitate learning in secondary level engineering education?; (2) How can concept mapping be used to assess learning in secondary level engineering education? (Contains 2 figures and 3 tables.)
Understanding of Student Task Interpretation, Design Planning, and Cognitive Strategies during Engineering Design Activities in Grades 9-12. Final Report. Research in Engineering and Technology Education
Author: Lawanto, Oenardi
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Student Attitudes,Engineering,Instructional Design,Building Design,Robotics,Engineering Education,High School Students,Questionnaires,Qualitative Research,Statistical Analysis,Comparative Analysis,Metacognition,Learning Strategies,Task Analysis,Measures (Individuals),Predictor Variables,Journal Writing

The objective of this study was to describe the task interpretation of students engaged in a design activity and determine the extent to which students translate their understanding of their design task to their planning and cognitive strategies. Twenty-nine students at one Colorado high school participated in this study. Students worked individually in the Architectural Design class (n=7), and in teams in the Robotics Design class (n=22). To capture students' perceptions of their understanding of the task, planning strategies, and cognitive strategies, the Engineering Design Questionnaire (EDQ) was used. The development of the EDQ was guided by Butler and Cartier's Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) model. Besides the EDQ, a Web-based Engineering Design Notebook was developed to facilitate students reporting planning activities and engineering design strategies. Graphical views are used to present quantitative and qualitative analysis of data collected in this study. In addition, the mean scores of design phases (i.e., SRL dimensions) were compared across SRL features (i.e., task interpretation, planning strategies, and cognitive strategies). From the analysis, the findings suggest that the level of understanding of the task were high in problem definition, conceptual design, and preliminary design. In contrast, students were found to be lacking on those three design process components in the area of planning strategies. Students performed well in cognitive strategies except for problem definition. (Contains 18 figures and 10 tables.)
Engineering Design Challenges in High School STEM Courses: A Compilation of Invited Position Papers
Author: Householder, Daniel L., Ed.
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Collected Works - General
Subjects: Engineering,Instructional Design,Technology Education,Science Curriculum,High Schools,STEM Education,Engineering Education,Engineering Technology,Change Strategies,Educational Strategies,Science Course Improvement Projects,Barriers,Integrated Curriculum,Secondary School Science,Educational Principles,Classroom Techniques,Teaching Methods,Problem Solving,Academic Standards,Learning Experience,Educational Practices

Since its initial funding by the National Science Foundation in 2004, the National Center for Engineering and Technology Education (NCETE) has worked to understand the infusion of engineering design experiences into the high school setting. Over the years, an increasing number of educators and professional groups have participated in the expanding initiative seeking to acquaint all students with engineering design. While there is strong support for providing students with engineering design experiences in their high school science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses, the lack of consensus on purposes and strategies has become increasingly apparent as the work continues. In February, 2011, NCETE sought position statements from a small number of engineering educators, cognitive scientists, instructional designers, and professional development providers who have been engaged in long-term efforts to provide students with engineering design experiences in their high school STEM courses. Each of these experienced professionals was asked to provide brief descriptions of principles or guidelines that they consider to be most important in promoting effective infusion of authentic engineering design challenges into STEM courses for all high school students. This publication contains the following papers: (1) Design Problems for Secondary Students (David H. Jonassen); (2) Infusing Engineering Design into High School STEM Courses (Morgan Hynes, Merredith Portsmore, Emily Dare, Elissa Milto, Chris Rogers, and David Hammer); (3) Integrating Engineering Design Challenges into Secondary STEM Education (Ronald L. Carr and Johannes Strobel); (4) Design Principles for High School Engineering Design Challenges: Experiences from High School Science Classrooms (Christian Schunn); (5) Engineering Design Challenges in a Science Curriculum (Arthur Eisenkraft); and (6) A Possible Pathway for High School Science in a STEM World (Cary Sneider). (Individual papers contain figures, references and appendices.)
Design Principles for High School Engineering Design Challenges: Experiences from High School Science Classrooms
Author: Schunn, Christian
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Engineering Education,Engineering Technology,Scientific Principles,Learning Experience,Student Experience,Best Practices,Science Course Improvement Projects,Performance Factors,Achievement Need,Design Preferences,Instructional Design,Science Activities,Secondary School Science,Classroom Techniques

At the University of Pittsburgh, the author and his colleagues have been exploring a range of approaches to design challenges for implementation in high school science classrooms. In general, their approach has always involved students working during class time over the course of many weeks. So, their understanding of what works must be contextualized to that situation (i.e., without significant home support, by students enrolled in traditional classrooms, involving content that is connected to traditional science classrooms). However, their approach has been implemented with thousands of students in over 80 classrooms ranging from 9th grade biology or general science to 11th grade physics, from traditional mainstream science classrooms to elective Biology II or Honors Chemistry, and from high needs urban classrooms to affluent suburban classrooms. In other words, there is some important generality to these experiences. They have also conducted a number of studies on students in these settings, to understand a range of factors that influence student learning and affect outcomes. This white paper provides a brief summary of principles that appear to guide successful experiences for students.
Infusing Engineering Concepts: Teaching Engineering Design
Author: Daugherty, Jenny
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Engineering,Biological Sciences,Physical Sciences,Elementary Secondary Education,Focus Groups,Expertise,Federal Programs,Engineering Education,Curriculum Design,Secondary School Curriculum,Inservice Teacher Education,Science Education,Research Projects,Science Instruction,Design,Partnerships in Education,Program Development,Technology Education

Engineering has gained considerable traction in many K-12 schools. However, there are several obstacles or challenges to an effective approach that leads to student learning. Questions such as where engineering best fits in the curriculum; how to include it authentically and appropriately; toward what educational end; and how best to prepare teachers need to be answered. Integration or infusion appears to be the most viable approach; instead of stand-alone engineering courses squeezing into the already crammed curriculum. An integrative approach whereby engineering is infused into the existing curriculum, within science, technology, mathematics or other courses, appears to be the best approach to expose students to engineering learning. However, little is yet known about how best to infuse engineering concepts into the K-12 curriculum. What does it mean to infuse engineering concepts into high school instruction? This question raises significant issues that need to be addressed in order to integrate appropriate engineering concepts and accomplish important learning outcomes. In order to explore this larger question, an expert focus group meeting was convened to inform the development of a model or descriptions for infusing engineering concepts into high school instruction and to address some of the pertinent questions involved. The focus group meeting is an important input toward a larger project, in which the researcher is a co-Principal Investigator. The Infuse Project was funded by the National Science Foundation to research teacher learning through an innovative approach to professional development that is engineering concept-driven. The project is focused on the infusion of engineering concepts into life science and physical science education. The present study, which is the subject of this report, addressed issues that needed clarification in order to inform the development of the protocol to be used in the major investigations of Project Infuse. (Contains 1 table and 2 footnotes.)
A Possible Pathway for High School Science in a STEM World
Author: Sneider, Cary
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: National Standards,National Competency Tests,Science Education,Engineering,Science Teachers,Science Curriculum,STEM Education,Engineering Education,Technology Education

Today's high school science teachers find themselves in a period of transition. For the past decade there have been calls for replacing a narrow focus on science education--the traditional courses in physics, chemistry, biology, and Earth and space science--with a broader curriculum on STEM (that is, the four allied fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). However, at present there are no guidelines on what that broader curriculum should include or how it should be designed, and the gulf that has separated science and mathematics seems as wide as ever, despite decades of efforts to bridge the two disciplines. &quot;Next Generation National Standards for Science Education&quot; are currently being written, but they will not be released until at least 2013. To meet the challenge this paper suggests that educators look to the &quot;Technology and Engineering Literacy Framework for the 2014 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)&quot; as a source of principles on which to start the process of remodeling the high school science curriculum to better prepare our students to enter the STEM world of the 21st century. Essential knowledge and skills in technology and engineering literacy are appended.
Incorporating Engineering Design Challenges into STEM Courses
Author: Householder, Daniel L., Ed.
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: High Schools,High School Students,Engineering,Design,Integrated Curriculum,STEM Education,Educational Strategies,Self Efficacy,Creativity,Discovery Learning,Problem Based Learning,Teaching Methods,Educational Change,Problem Solving,Systems Approach

Successful strategies for incorporating engineering design challenges into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses in American high schools are presented in this paper. The developers have taken the position that engineering design experiences should be an important component of the high school education of all American youth. In most instances, these experiences in engineering design are infused into instruction programs in standards-based courses in science, technology, or mathematics. This paper is intended to provide guidelines for the development of authentic engineering design challenges, to describe instructional strategies for introducing engineering design experiences to high school students, and to offer suggestions for the assessment of the outcomes of engineering design activities. The information is intended to be useful in planning, organizing, and implementing the infusion of engineering design challenges in high school STEM courses. This paper is an exploration of the available research on the following questions dealing with the implementation of engineering design challenges in high school STEM courses: (1) Does the development of engineering habits of thought and action lead to improvements in problem solving abilities, systems thinking, integration of content, increased interest in engineering, and feelings of self-efficacy about pursuing additional engineering activities?; (2) What is the anatomy of the engineering design process and what are its essential components?; (3) What are the distinguishing characteristics of authentic engineering design challenges?; (4) In what ways do engineering design challenges fit into the national STEM scene and the high school STEM organizational structure?; (5) What are the content, context, and process elements of appropriate engineering design challenges for high school STEM courses?; (6) What instructional practices based upon engineering design challenges are effective in supporting student learning?; and (7) In what ways can teachers design and implement an authentic system for assessing student progress and completion of engineering design challenges? How can the assessment provide support for using engineering principles to solve design challenges in contrast to simple trial and error approaches? (Contains 10 figures.)
Engineering Design Challenges in a Science Curriculum
Author: Eisenkraft, Arthur
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Physics,Engineering,Science Curriculum,Secondary School Curriculum,Science Course Improvement Projects,Instructional Design,Instructional Development,Engineering Education,Engineering Technology,Science Activities,Performance Factors

Create a light and sound show to entertain friends. Design an improved safety device for a car. Develop a 2-3 minute voice-over for a sports clip explaining the physics involved in the sport. Modify the design of a roller coaster to meet the needs of a specific group of riders. Design an appliance package for a family limited by the power and energy of wind generator. Develop a museum exhibit to acquaint visitors with the atom and nucleus and create a product that can be sold at the museum store after visitors leave the exhibit. All of these challenges are part of "Active Physics" (2005), a high school curriculum developed with support from the National Science Foundation (NSF), field tested with thousands of students and presently used across the country. The challenges serve as a framing structure for the required science content. Each chapter (approximately five weeks of instruction) is introduced by way of a chapter challenge. In this brief paper, the author will outline the ways in which the chapter challenge is introduced, revisited and then completed. Included in the discussion will be how the chapter challenges are chosen, how to scaffold students' learning so that they can be successful and the benefits of the chapter challenge. "Active Physics" is neither an engineering course nor a technology course. It uses engineering design as a way in which students can approach their chapter challenge, but engineering design must remain in the background of the physics content and curriculum.
Design Problems for Secondary Students
Author: Jonassen, David H.
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Instructional Design,Problem Solving,Instructional Development,Design Requirements,Teaching Methods,Performance Factors,Barriers,Problem Based Learning,Problem Sets,Secondary School Science,Engineering Education,Engineering Technology,Context Effect

Are there different kinds of design problems? Jonassen (2011) argued that problems vary in terms of structuredness, complexity, and context. On the structuredness and complexity continua, design problems tend to be the most ill-structured and complex. Brown and Chandrasekaran suggest that design problems may vary along a continuum from well-structured to ill-structured, depending upon the context in which they are solved. In formal, school contexts, design problems are often more constrained, allowing many fewer degrees of freedom in their representations, processes, or solutions and are therefore more well-structured. Context also plays an important role in specifying the nature of design problems. In formal classrooms, it is important that problem solutions can be evaluated on stated criteria, because that is a cultural expectation in classroom instruction. For purposes of learning how to design, Jonassen (2011) has argued that design problem solving can be represented as a series of decisions. Those design decisions are based on multiple constraints and constraint operations in the design space. At the beginning of the design process, functional specifications and initial constraints are specified by some sort of needs analysis process. The author's recommendation for supporting engineering design problem solving among high school and university students is to present initial specifications and goals, and then require learners to analyze the problem in order to identify additional constraints. Learners then begin to make design decisions and to construct a model that reflects those decisions. For each decision, students construct arguments supporting their solutions. With each set of design decisions, the mode becomes more elaborate as the problem space becomes more circumscribed. (Contains 1 figure.)
Building a Framework for Engineering Design Experiences in STEM: A Synthesis
Author: Denson, Cameron D.
Date: 2011-00-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Engineering,Design,STEM Education,High School Students,Cognitive Structures,Learning Experience,Sequential Learning,Science Curriculum,High Schools,Position Papers,Technology Education,Developmentally Appropriate Practices,Decision Making

Since the inception of the National Center for Engineering and Technology Education in 2004, educators and researchers have struggled to identify the necessary components of a "good" engineering design challenge for high school students. In reading and analyzing the position papers on engineering design many themes emerged that may begin to form a narrative for engineering design in a high school setting. Before educators can provide a framework for engineering design in STEM courses, four questions need to be answered: (a) To what degree should engineering design challenges be open-ended or well-structured? (b) What are the relationships between engineering design experiences and standards-based instruction in STEM courses? (c) What is an effective sequencing of age-appropriate engineering design challenges? and (d) To what extent should engineering habits of thought and action be employed in resolving the challenges? Collectively, the six position papers (Carr & Strobel, 2011; Eisenkraft, 2011; Hynes et al, 2011; Jonassen, 2011, Schunn, 2011; Sneider, 2011) provide an intriguing foundation for answering these questions and forming a framework for engineering design in high school STEM courses. This synthesis paper discusses the most pervasive themes of the papers and provides a narrative for answering the question, "What are the requirements for a good engineering design challenge?" The following emergent themes provide some guidance to finding answers for that question: (1) engineering design in the science curriculum; (2) assessing the engineering design experience; (3) sequencing the engineering design experiences; and (4) choosing engineering design challenges. By addressing these areas of contention, the education community can begin to lay the curricular and pedagogical groundwork needed to provide successful engineering experiences for high school students.
Team Based Engineering Design Thinking
Author: Mentzer, Nathan
Date: 2012-00-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: High School Students,Engineering,Design,Cognitive Processes,Teamwork,Cooperative Learning,Group Dynamics,Design Requirements,Protocol Analysis,Observation,Time Management,Playgrounds,Interior Design,Interior Space

The objective of this research was to explore design thinking among teams of high school students. This objective is encompassed in the research question driving this inquiry: How do teams of high school students allocate time across stages of design? Design thinking on the professional level typically occurs in a team environment. Many individuals contribute in a variety of ways to facilitate the successful development of a solution to a problem. Teachers often require students to work in groups, but little is known about how the group functions in the context of design and the potential interaction between group performance and authentic design challenges. Few research results are available to guide teachers in developing successful design teams and encouraging them in their efforts. In this study, 17 teams, each comprised of 2-4 high school students, were asked to complete a team based engineering design challenge. Observational protocol analysis was conducted based on a foundation of previous work, including the adoption of previous coding schemes. Differences between groups and individuals were compared. Teams of students were split in two groups; one set of teams received a playground design problem while the other received a hallway design problem. Teams worked up to two hours after school on the design problems and provided the recommendations resulting from their work at the conclusion of the session. (Contains 4 tables.)