Search for: All records

We are investigating factors that influence elementary teachers’ professional learning (PL) in science and engineering. The intervention and ongoing supports are offered at a distance to participants teaching grades 3-5 in rural school districts. Overarching research objectives include examining: (1) the impacts of online science and engineering PL; (2) the effectiveness of modest supports on the sustainability of PL outcomes; and (3) the changes to teachers’ engineering instructional practices. 

Engineering Structured Poster Session: During these 75-minute concurrent sessions, up to 12 presenting projects will share information about their work related to engineering education with each other and with attendees interested in the topic. Following brief introductions, interactive poster presentation and viewing occured in two rounds, and the session concluded with facilitated discussion across all projects. 

Teachers in rural schools have consistently faced challenges in accessing high-quality professional learning (PL). Approximately 150 rural teachers in four states received intensive, online summer PL paired with a variety of Modest Supports throughout the following school year. We used Picciano’s multi-modal online educational model in characterizing the online summer PL and to evaluate the effectiveness of the Modest Supports. End-of-year surveys and interviews with teachers asked about their experiences with and perceptions of the Modest Supports. Initial descriptive statistics and thematic analysis found that teachers reported using the collaborative Modest Supports much more frequently than others and that they were more helpful and created a sense of community within the project while also supporting their NGSS learning and implementation. 

Many professional learning (PL) opportunities with inservice teachers often focus on enhancing their understanding of the nature of engineering and the work of engineers. However, few studies connect inservice teachers’ conceptualizations of science and engineering and how these inform their classroom practice. Therefore, this study explores inservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of teaching science and engineering and how they connect their understandings of these disciplines to classroom practice. We examined the breakout discussions of 11 inservice elementary teachers regarding five vignettes of science and engineering classroom activities in a completely online PL experience. We employed the Attending-Interpreting-Responding (AIR) Teacher Noticing Framework and followed a six-step thematic analysis process by Braun and Clark (2012). These steps included collaborative sense-making sessions to discuss the descriptive coding (Saldaña, 2021) generated during independent coding sessions. Our analysis revealed several consistent key (mis)conceptions about teaching science and engineering. Teachers often characterized engineering classroom activities as tasks where students should be building and solving a problem, while they characterized science as involving observation and learning content knowledge about a topic. When describing a vignette as engineering, teachers often used the words goal, problem, and purpose interchangeably. Additionally, we uncovered teachers’ misconceptions about science that do not align with the nature of science or science and engineering practices. This gap in how teachers make sense of classroom science and engineering tasks versus how they conceptualize science and engineering disciplines highlights a significant need to address in teacher education. 

Despite the intent to advance engineering education with the NGSS, teachers across all grade levels lack confidence in their engineering content knowledge and pedagogy (Hammack & Ivey, 2019). This dilemma is exacerbated by a lack of quality NGSS-aligned curricular materials that integrate science and engineering at the elementary grades— currently, only one elementary unit reviewed by Achieve has received an NGSS Design Badge that includes engineering (NextGenScience, 2020), and these materials are especially unavailable in schools serving high-needs students (Banilower, 2019). Implementation research now acknowledges that contexts and conditions can, and often do, affect the enactment of innovations and that “improving education requires processes for changing individuals, organizations, and systems” (Century & Cassata, 2016, p. 172). Due to geographic location and, often, smaller collegial networks of teachers who teach science, and engineering, rural schools encounter acute challenges in recruiting and retaining teachers (Arnold et al., 2005) and providing content-specific Professional Learning (PL) (Harmon & Smith, 2007). The goal of this NSF DRK12 multi-institution project is to longitudinally investigate the impacts, sustainability, and costs of NGSS implementation, especially in rural contexts. Our approach differs from most interventions in that it is tailored to rural educators in grades 3–5 and offers curriculum-agnostic, fully online PL that supports teachers in utilizing resources and phenomena found in their local contexts to develop and implement engaging, NGSS-aligned engineering instruction. Our intervention began with a five-day (i.e., weeklong) online PL experience in the summer of 2023 for grades 3–5 teachers in each of four western states. Examples of PL sessions provided include: (1) an overview of three-dimensional learning and phenomena-based instruction; (2) a deep dive into the NGSS Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs); (3) instructional practices that encourage equitable student participation and epistemic agency; and (4) building understanding and comfort with NGSS-aligned engineering and design-based instruction for the elementary grades. The initial intensive PL experience had immediate positive impacts on grades 3–5 teachers’ attitudes and efficacy for teaching engineering. We are now exploring how modest supports influence the sustainability of these changes. Over the 2023-2024 academic year, we are providing teachers with a menu of modest supports including: three 90-minute-long online PL meetings each semester, materials for teaching a locally focused engineering design task, and access to a variety of electronic supports (e.g., Google Classroom Site, shared resources). The fall semester online meetings have focused on supporting teachers to identify connections to science and engineering in their school’s community and how to develop NGSS-aligned engineering design tasks that connect to their local communities. Teachers will be implementing their engineering lessons during December 2023 and January 2024. 

Cdc42, a conserved regulator of cell polarity, is activated by two GEFs, Gef1 and Scd1, in fission yeast. Why the cell needs two GEFs is unclear, given that they are partially redundant and activate the same GTPase. Using the GEF localization pattern during cytokinesis as a paradigm, we report a novel interplay between Gef1 and Scd1 that spatially modulates Cdc42. We find that Gef1 promotes Scd1 localization to the division site during cytokinesis through the recruitment of the scaffold Scd2 via a Cdc42 feedforward pathway. Similarly, in interphase Gef1 promotes Scd1 recruitment at the new end to enable the transition from monopolar to bipolar growth. Reciprocally, Scd1 restricts Gef1 localization to prevent ectopic Cdc42 activation during cytokinesis to promote cell separation, and to maintain cell shape during interphase. Our findings reveal an elegant regulatory pattern in which Gef1 primes Cdc42 activation at new sites to initiate Scd1-dependent polarized growth, while Scd1 restricts Gef1 to sites of polarization. We propose that crosstalk between GEFs is a conserved mechanism that orchestrates Cdc42 activation during complex cellular processes.