An official website of the United States government
Engineering outreach programs have the potential to significantly influence precollege youth; university-led engineering programs reach approximately 600,000 K-12 students each year in the United States. Despite the prevalence of these outreach programs, little is known about the nature of the discursive interactions between outreach ambassadors and participating youths and the ways in which these interactions support youths’ progress in engineering. Understanding the ways in which outreach ambassadors support youth to learn engineering is critical to furthering the effectiveness of these programs and contributes to greater understanding about how to support engineering in K-12 settings. Often, these programs are facilitated by undergraduate and graduate engineering ambassadors who themselves are developing as engineers and educators. In the context of an engineering outreach program for elementary students, this study examines the teaching moves of outreach ambassadors, adds to the understanding of their teaching moves, and offers preliminary conjectures about the impact of these moves on students. This study asks: What kinds of discursive teaching moves do outreach ambassadors enact when interacting with elementary student design teams? In the focal outreach program, pairs of university students facilitated engineering design challenges in elementary classrooms for one hour each week throughout the school year. We selectively sampled and analyzed four such sessions in four fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms. We used discourse analysis and a lens of ambitious teaching to classify the teaching moves employed during interactions between ambassadors and small groups of students who were engaged in engineering design challenges. We identified a range of moves, including ambitious, inclusive, and conservative teaching moves, across the four sessions. From class to class, we observed variation in distribution of each category of teaching move and we hypothesize that activity design and outreach ambassador orientations toward teaching influence this variation. Particularly promising for engineering teaching and learning, we observed ambassadors making bids to elicit student ideas, pressing for evidence-based explanations, and revoicing students’ design ideas. These moves are characteristic of ambitious instruction and have the potential to support students to engage in reflective decision-making and to guide students toward productive, more expert engineering design practices. Our analysis suggests that engineering outreach ambassadors notice and respond to students’ ideas, engaging in ambitious teaching practices which can be expected to support elementary students in making progress in engineering design. This analysis of outreach ambassadors’ discursive interactions with elementary student design teams adds to the growing conversation of ambitious instruction in engineering.
more »
« less
Board 110: Work in Progress: Elementary Students’ Disciplinary Talk in a Classroom with an Explicit Engineering Decision-making Scaffold
While engineering grows as a part of elementary education, important questions arise about the skills and practices we ask of students. Both collaboration and decision making are complex and critical to the engineering design process, but come with social and emotional work that can be difficult for elementary students to navigate. Productive engagement in collaborative teams has been seen to be highly variable; for some teams, interpersonal conflicts move the design process forward, while for others they stall the process. In this work in progress, we are investigating the research question, what is the nature of students’ disciplinary talk during scaffolded decision making? We explore this research question via a case study of one student group in a 4th-grade classroom enrolled in an outreach program run by a private university in a Northeastern city. This program sends pairs of university students into local elementary schools to facilitate engineering in the classroom for one hour per week. This is the only engineering instruction the elementary students receive and the engineering curriculum is planned by the university students. For the implementation examined in this study, the curriculum was designed by two researchers to scaffold collaborative groupwork and decision making. The instruction was provided by an undergraduate and one of the researchers, a graduate student. The scaffolds designed for this semester of outreach include a set of groupwork norms and a decision matrix. The groupwork norms were introduced on the first day of instruction; the instructors read them aloud, proposed groupwork scenarios to facilitate a whole class discussion about whether or not the norms were followed and how the students could act to follow the norms, and provided time for students to practice the norms in their engineering design groups for the first project. For the rest of the semester, an anchor chart of the norms was displayed in the classroom and referenced to encourage consensus. The researchers designed the decision matrix scaffold to encourage design decisions between multiple prototypes based on problem criteria and test results. Instructors modeled the use of this decision matrix on the third day of instruction, and students utilized the matrix in both design projects of the semester. Data sources for this descriptive study include students’ written artifacts, photos of their design constructions, and video records of whole-class and team discourse. We employ qualitative case study and microethnographic analysis techniques to explore the influence of the intentional discourse scaffolds on students’ collaborative and decision-making practices. Our analysis allowed us to characterize the linguistic resources (including the decision matrix) that the students used to complete four social acts during decision making: design evaluation, disagreeing with a teammate, arguing for a novel idea, and sympathizing with a design. This research has implications for the design of instructional scaffolds for engineering curricula at the elementary school level, whether taking place in an outreach program or in regular classroom instruction.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1657509
- PAR ID:
- 10483922
- Publisher / Repository:
- ASEE Conferences
- Date Published:
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- pre-college engineering education, engineering curricula
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Tampa, Florida
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract BackgroundDespite the prevalence and potential of K–12 engineering outreach programs, the moment‐to‐moment dynamics of outreach educators' facilitation of engineering learning experiences are understudied. There is a need to identify outreach educators' teaching moves and to explore the implications of these moves. Purpose/HypothesisWe offer a preliminary framework for characterizing engineering outreach educators' teaching moves in relation to principles of ambitious instruction. This study describes outreach educators' teaching moves and identifies learning opportunities afforded by these moves. Design/MethodThrough discourse analysis of video recordings of a university‐led engineering outreach program, we identified teaching moves of novice engineering outreach educators in interaction with elementary student design teams. We considered 18 outreach educators' teaching moves through a lens of ambitious instruction. ResultsIn small group interactions, outreach educators used ambitious, conservative, and inclusive teaching moves. These novice educators utilized talk moves that centered students' ideas and agency. Ambitious moves included two novel teaching moves: design check‐ins and revoicing tangible manifestations of students' ideas. Ambitious moves offered students opportunities to engage in engineering design. Conservative moves provided opportunities for students to make technical and affective progress, and to experience engineering norms. ConclusionsOur work is formative in describing engineering outreach educators' teaching moves and points to outreach educators' capability in using ambitious moves. Ambitious engineering instruction may be a useful framework for designing engineering outreach to support students' participation and progress in engineering design. Additionally, conservative teaching moves, typically considered constraining, may support productive student affect and engagement in engineering design.more » « less
-
A major driver in K-12 engineering education has been university-based outreach initiatives. In the U.S, there are an estimated 600,000 K-12 students participating in university-led engineering outreach annually (Iversen, 2014-2015). Reaching students as young as elementary school is important as students form their interest and impressions in engineering and other STEM disciplines early (Galton in Ormerod & Duckworth, 1975, p. 39; Maltese & Tai, 2010; Tai, Qiu,Liu, Maltese, & Fan, 2006) and those interests often decline in middle school (Murphy & Beggs, 2003; Neathery, 1997; Ormerod & Duckworth, 1975; Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003. University engineering students are often positioned as role models for the K-12 students they work with. However, to date, little research has been done on how students select role models and how to optimize the interactions between young students and university students to increase the likelihood that they will be taken as role models This paper will show preliminary data and analysis from an NSF-funded research project that is examining the dynamics between undergraduate university students providing outreach and elementary school student participants. The paper will focus on a case-study of a single 4th grade classroom and how different dynamics related to sharing personal information, engineering identity, and other interests interact with elementary school students identifying undergraduate engineering students as role models. Potential codes for larger qualitative studies will be shared as well as preliminary quantitative results from surveys instruments (EIDS, Draw an Engineer).more » « less
-
Ethics education has been recognized as increasingly important to engineering over the past two decades, although disagreement exists concerning how ethics can and should be taught in the classroom. With active learning strategies becoming a preferred method of instruction, a collaboration of authors from four universities (University of Pittsburgh, University of Connecticut, Rowan University and New Jersey Institute of Technology) are investigating how game-based or playful learning with strongly situated components can influence first-year engineering students’ ethical knowledge, awareness, and decision making. This paper offers an overview and results of the progress to date of this three year, NSF Improving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE) grant that aims to (1) characterize the ethical awareness and decision making of first-year engineering students, (2) develop game-based learning interventions focused on ethical decision making, and (3) determine how (and why) game-based approaches affect students’ ethical awareness in engineering and the advantages of such approaches over non game-based approaches. Now in its second year, the authors have conducted a preliminary analysis of first-year students' ethical knowledge and organization via a concept mapping approach and have measured students' ethical reasoning using the Defining Issues Test 2 (DIT2) and Engineering Ethics Reasoning Instrument (EERI). Further, the authors have developed a suite of ethics-driven games that have been implemented across three of the universities, engaging over 400 first-year engineering students. Evaluation data has also been gathered for further game development and to assess initial student engagement and learning. Year 1 has provided insight into where first-year engineering students “are at” in terms of ethical knowledge and reasoning when they come to college, and how game-based instruction can be effective in the development of these students into moral agents who understand the consequences of their decisions. Further results from this investigation will provide the engineering education community with a set of impactful and research-based playful learning pedagogy and assessment that will help students confront social and ethical dilemmas in their professional lives.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Teacher education is facing challenges given the recent incorporation of engineering practices and core ideas into the Next Generation Science Standards and state standards of learning. To help teachers meet these standards in their future classrooms, education courses for preservice teachers [PSTs] must provide opportunities to increase science and engineering knowledge, and the associated pedagogies. To address this need, Ed+gineering, an NSF-funded multidisciplinary service-learning project, was implemented to study ways in which PSTs are prepared to meet this challenge. This study provides the models and supporting data for four unique methods of infusion of engineering skills and practices into an elementary science methods course. The four models differ in mode of course delivery, integration of a group project (with or without partnering undergraduate engineering students), and final product (e.g., no product, video, interactive presentation, live lesson delivery). In three of the models, teams of 4-6 undergraduates collaborated to design and deliver (when applicable) lessons for elementary students. This multiple semester, mixed-methods research study, explored the ways in which four unique instructional models, with varied levels of engineering instruction enhancement, influenced PSTs’ science knowledge and pedagogical understanding. Both quantitative (e.g., science content knowledge assessment) and qualitative (e.g., student written reflections) data were used to assess science knowledge gains and pedagogical understanding. Findings suggest that the PSTs learned science content and were often able to explain particular science/ engineering concepts following the interventions. PSTs in more enhanced levels of intervention also shared ways in which their lessons reflected their students’ cultures through culturally responsive pedagogical strategies and how important engineering integration is to the elementary classroom, particularly through hands-on, inquiry-based instruction.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--32188
