Exploring How Contextual Factors Influence the Implementation of Middle School Engineering Curricula (Fundamental)

Gale, Jessica; Baptiste_Porter, Dyanne; Alemdar, Meltem; Choi, Jasmine; Newton, Sunni; Rehmat, Abeera; Moore, Roxanne

doi:10.18260/1-2--47416

Through the semester-long engineering curricula, middle school students complete a series of contextualized challenges that integrate foundational mathematics and science, introduce advanced manufacturing tools (CAD, 3-D printing), and engage students in the engineering design process. Funded by a National Science Foundation (NSF) DRK12 grant, our project is in the process of scaling the curricula in a large urban school district. Over the previous two years, the project has enlisted two cohorts of engineering teachers to implement the curricula in nine middle schools. In addition to understanding whether and how the critical components of the curricula are implemented in diverse school settings, our research team’s fidelity of implementation research investigates contextual factors that help explain why teachers and students engaged with the curricula the way they do. For this line of inquiry, we draw upon the Factor Framework (Century and Cassata, 2014; Century et al. 2012), which provides a comprehensive set of potential factors known to influence implementation of educational innovations. The framework organizes these implementation factors into five categories: characteristics of the innovation, characteristics of individual users, characteristics of the organization, elements of the environment, and networks. After consulting this framework to identify potential factors likely to influence the implementation, we analyzed teacher interview and classroom observation data collected over the course of three semesters of implementation to describe the degree to which various contextual factors either facilitated or limited implementation. Our data indicate three categories of factors influencing implementation: characteristics of the curriculum, characteristics of users (teachers and students), and characteristics of organizations (district, schools). Characteristics of the curriculum that facilitated implementation included features of the curricula and professional development including the perceived effectiveness of the curricula, the adaptability of the curricula, and the degree to which professional learning sessions provided adequate preparation for implementation. Characteristics of teachers identified as facilitating implementation included pedagogical content knowledge, self-efficacy, resourcefulness, and organizational and time management skills. Teachers reported that student interest in the curriculum challenges and STEM, more generally, was another facilitating factor whereas, to varying degrees, disruptive student behavior and students’ lack of foundational mathematics skills were reported as limiting factors. Teachers highlighted specific technological challenges, such as software licensing issues, as limiting factors. Otherwise, we found that teachers generally had sufficient resources to implement the curricula including adequate physical space, technological tools, and supplies. Across teachers and schools, we found that, overall, supportive school and district leadership facilitated implementation. In spite of an overall high level of support in participating schools, we did identify school and district policies with implications for implementation including school-wide scheduling and disciplinary policies that limited instructional time, policies for assigning and moving students among elective courses, and district-wide expectations for assessment and teaching certain additional engineering activities. We believe the findings of this study will be of interest to other researchers and practitioners exploring how engineering education innovations unfold in diverse classrooms and the array of factors that may account for variations in implementation patterns.

More Like this