INSPIRE-PURDUE.ORG/3RDP-12SUMMIT
P-12 ENGINEERING &
DESIGN EDUCATION
RESEARCH SUMMIT
Characterizing engineering and design
thinking in pre-college settings
AUGUST 11-13, 2016
1
TITLE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summit........................................................................................................................................................... 4
Welcome......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Helpful Information........................................................................................................................................ 6
Map of Museum of Science and Industry......................................................................................................... 7
SummitataGlance.......................................................................................................................................... 8
Session Guide.................................................................................................................................................. 9
Summit Sponsors............................................................................................................................................ 10
Thursday at a Glance........................................................................................................................................ 13
Friday at a Glance............................................................................................................................................ 14
FridaySessionSummaries................................................................................................................................ 16
Saturday at a Glance........................................................................................................................................ 40
Saturday Session Summaries........................................................................................................................... 42
Reflection&NextSteps.................................................................................................................................... 54
New Contacts.................................................................................................................................................. 55
BlankNotesPages............................................................................................................................................ 56
3
SUMMIT
The P-12 Engineering and Design Education Research Summit is designed to be a“catalyst for combining
argumentation and collaboration that would enhance research in P-12 engineering and design education.”The
interdisciplinary conference aims to link research, teaching, policy and engineering practice.
THEME
The theme for the summit is characterizing engineering and design thinking in pre-college settings. We also invite
scholarly submissions on other pre-college engineering and design education topics, including computational
thinking.
OBJECTIVES
Bring together researchers, educators and policy makers who (1) Identify already with the growing community of
P-12 engineering education research and/or (2) work in closely related movements in other STEM areas as well as
non-STEM disciplines.
Set out to (a) develop a shared understanding of what engineering and design thinking look like when practiced by
P-12 learners and other actors in P-12 education, (b) highlight goals for P-12 engineering and design education, (c)
develop shared ways of talking about and describing P-12 engineering and design education, (d) identify practices
that promote engineering and design learning in P-12 settings and (e) share state-of-the art research on P-12
engineering and design education.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE
Meltem Almedar, Georgia Institute of Technology
Monica Cardella, Purdue University
Chandan Dasgupta, Purdue University
Muhsin Menekse, Purdue University
Şenay Purzer, Purdue University
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
Sean Brophy, Purdue University
Monica Cardella, Purdue University
Elizabeth Gajdzik, Purdue University
Michael Ryan, Georgia Institute of Technology
Şenay Purzer, Purdue University
Marion Usselman, Georgia Institute of Technology
4
WELCOME
We hope that as you come to the 3rd P-12 Engineering and Design Education Research Summit you are ready. So often
we focus on preparing PowerPoint slides, handouts, and talks so that we are ready for the conference. We book flights,
reserve hotel rooms, arrange ground transportation and make sure we have our business cards so we are ready for the
conference. But to take full advantage of this Summit, we hope that you are ready to reflect; to share; to meet new
people; to consider new research questions and approaches; to give and receive feedback; to learn.
As we prepared for this Summit, we worked to design an experience that would push our community forward in our
collective research on pre-college engineering and design education. This year we focus on characterizing engineering
and design thinking in pre-college settings. A shared understanding of what engineering thinking and design
thinking look like provide a foundation for our work to develop assessment tools and approaches; our work to develop
curricula, exhibits, and other resources; and our work to equip teachers and other educators (including parents!) in
developing engineering and design thinking amongst pre-college students.
We have designed the program to provide you with opportunities to learn in both formal and informal settings, to
have conversations as well as to listen and reflect. In addition to the opportunity to engage in discussions around
specific research projects during our four paper Sessions, you will have the opportunity to learn about Resources
that have been developed to support pre-college engineering and design. You will have time to explore informal
engineering learning experiences at the Museum of Science and Industry Friday morning, and across the three days
you will hear presentations from experts on assessment; on design thinking; and on funding your new research ideas.
We also realize we cannot anticipate all of the conversations that may emerge during the Summit. So we created
spaces for these conversations: the Friday Structured Discussion time, Friday Dinner Clubs, and the other meals and
snack breaks. We’re excited to dive into the Summit with you.
5
HELPFUL INFORMATION
MEETING SITES Friday, August 12-Saturday, August 13
Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago
Thursday, August 11 5700 S Lake Shore Dr
Hyatt Regency Chicago, IL 60637
151 East Wacker Drive (773) 684-1414
Chicago, IL 60601 msichicago.org
Tel: (312) 565-1234
Fax: (312) 239-4795
chicago.regency.hyatt.com
PARKING Museum of Science and Industry Garage
Located on the corner of 57th St. and S. Cornell Ave.
Hyatt Regency Chicago Parking Garage General Public: $22.00; Member - Individual: $22.00;
Overnight rate: $65.00/Valet Member - Individual Premium: $14.00; Member -
Hourly Valet: 0-3 hours: $37.00; 3-6 hours: $47.00; Household/ Household Premium: FREE
6-24 hours: $65.00
Illinois Center Garage
Located at 111 East Wacker Dr.
0-20 minutes: $11.00; 21-41 minutes: $16.00; 41
minutes-1hour: $20.00; 1-2 hours: $24.00; 2-12 hours:
$29; 12-18 hours: $35.00; 18-24 hours: $44.00 Note:
Rates subject to change without notice.
SHUTTLE BUS SERVICE
There is a conference shuttle bus that will make one trip to and from the museum each day. The shuttle will pick up
participants out front of the East Tower of the Hyatt Regency.
LUGGAGE CHECK If you are leaving from the museum:
Luggage can be stored at the museum coat check at
If you are leaving from the Hyatt Regency: no cost.
Luggage can be stored at the Bell Desk located on
the blue level of the East Tower.
CONTACTS Elizabeth Gajdzik
Assistant Director, INSPIRE
Ethan Kingery (254) 733-1927
Purdue Conference Coordinator [email protected]
(219) 781-9359
[email protected]
6
Wing AMUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY Wing B
FLOOR PLANLittle TheaterLittle Theater
West Pavilion
7
SUMMIT AT A GLANCE
THURSDAY, AUGUST 11TH, 2016
4:00 PM Registration opens Plaza Ballroom
Plaza Ballroom
5:00 PM Hors d’oeuvres and drinks Plaza Ballroom
6:00 PM - 8:00 PM Dinner and keynote speaker Hyatt Regency
Outside East Tower
FRIDAY, AUGUST 12TH, 2016
Little Theater
6:30 AM - 8:00 AM Breakfast (on own at American Craft Kitchen & Bar) Wing A & B
West Pavilion
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM Load shuttle (departs promptly at 8:15 AM)
West Pavilion
9:00 AM - 9:25 AM Welcome & overview of Digital Library (engineering clips) Wing A & B
West Pavilion
9:30 AM - 10:45 AM Session 1 (2 parallel sessions) Wing A & B, Little
10:45 AM - 11:00 AM Break 1 (drinks provided) Theater
10:45 AM - 12:00 PM Explore the museum West Pavilion
12:00 PM - 1:25 PM Lunch and keynote speaker TBD
1:30 PM - 2:45 PM Session 2 ( 2 parallel sessions) Hyatt Regency
Outside East Tower
2:45 PM - 3:00 PM Break 2 (drinks and snacks provided)
Little Theater
3:00 PM - 4:15 PM Structured discussion - Participant initiated (parallel Wing A & B
sessions) West Pavilion
Wing A & B
4:15 PM - 5:00 PM Materials and resources for supporting STEM learning in West Pavilion
formal and informal spaces (resource exchange)
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM Load shuttle (departs promptly at 5:15 PM)
7:00 PM Optional: Dinner club (3 restaurant choices)
SATURDAY, AUGUST 13TH, 2016
6:30 AM - 8:00 AM Breakfast (on own)
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM Load shuttle (departs promptly at 8:15 AM)
9:00 AM - 9:10 AM Welcome back & overview of day 2
9:15 AM - 10:30 AM Session 3 (2 parallel sessions)
10:30 AM - 10:45 AM Break (drinks provided)
10:45 AM - 12:00 PM Session 4 (2 parallel sessions)
12:00 PM - 1:30 PM Lunch with guest speaker and final reflection
1:30 PM - 1:45 PM Load shuttle (departs promptly at 1:45 PM)
8
SESSION GUIDE
SESSION FORMATS
Prepared Sessions
Each presenter will speak for 10 minutes. This will be followed by a 5 minute question and answer time where
attendees can ask specific questions to the presenter.
The remaining time after all three presenters have shared should be used to engage in further discussion about the
work presented. This could happen in a variety of formats (i.e. a group discussion across all of the papers or small
group discussions about individual topics/papers).
Structured Discussion
Add questions or topics you would like to discuss with attendees on the provided boards. They will be located in
the Plaza Ballroom on Thursday evening and in the West Pavilion until noon on Friday. The topics selected will be
shared prior to the conclusion of lunch on Friday.
REMINDERS
• Please remember that you must wear your Summit name badge at all times! Your name badge gains you
admission to the sessions, the museum, and the shuttle bus.
• As a courtesy to other participants and presenters, please turn off the sound on all electronic devices or reset
them to the vibrate mode. Please answer telephone calls outside the session rooms.
• Tweet with the hashtag #P12EDERS and take your conference experience online.
9
SUMMIT SPONSORS
INSPIRE
Research Institute for Pre-College Engineering
INSPIRE Research Institute for Pre-College Engineering
INSPIRE is a research institute in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University focusing on
pre-college engineering education research and integration with science, technology, mathematics, and
literacy.
Our research informs the development of curricula, assessment instruments, teacher and parent education,
museum exhibits, afterschool programs, and STEM education policy within the full spectrum of P-12
engineering education
STRATEGIC FOCUS AREAS
• Integrating engineering with science, technology, mathematics, language arts, and computational
thinking
• Characterizing engineering thinking for pre-college settings
• Promoting the participation of underrepresented populations in engineering
OUR EXPERTISE
• Designing and conducting research around engineering learning in STEM classrooms, museums,
afterschool programs, and other everyday settings that impact pre-college learners
• Developing models and theories of engineering thinking and learning
• Translating complex engineering and design principles into inclusive educational resources appropriate
for diverse learners that align with state and national standards, and develop key 21st century skills
• Creating assessment and evaluation strategies and professional development activities for engineering
thinking and learning for teachers, researchers, and others
• Engaging in educational advocacy and policy development
Learn more about INSPIRE at inspire-purdue.org.
10
SUMMIT SPONSORS
Purdue University
Purdue University is a vast laboratory for discovery. The university is known not only for science, technology,
engineering, and math programs, but also for our imagination, ingenuity, and innovation. It’s a place where
those who seek an education come to make their ideas real — especially when those transformative
discoveries lead to scientific, technological, social, or humanitarian impact.
Founded in 1869 in West Lafayette, Indiana, the university proudly serves its state as well as the nation and
the world. Academically, Purdue’s role as a major research institution is supported by top-ranking disciplines in
pharmacy, business, engineering, and agriculture. More than 39,000 students are enrolled here. All 50 states
and 130 countries are represented. Add about 950 student organizations and Big Ten Boilermaker athletics, and
you get a college atmosphere that’s without rival.
Learn more about Purdue University at purdue.edu.
The School of Engineering Education (ENE), Purdue University
The School of Engineering Education is recognized globally as the leading academic unit of its type — the first
engineering department in the world whose research is centered on an evidence-based approach to improving
the education of engineers. Our mission is to“transform engineering education based on scholarship and
research”about how people learn by rethinking the boundaries of engineering and the purpose of engineering
education. All our programs — First-Year Engineering, Interdisciplinary Engineering, and the PhD
in Engineering Education — are designed to place students, and student learning, first. At the graduate
level, our first-to-the-world PhD Program in Engineering Education is producing agents of change who are
transforming engineering education in the many universities and government sectors across the nation where
they now work.
Learn more about our mission and innovative research at purdue.edu/ene.
11
SUMMIT SPONSORS
Center for Advancing Teaching and Learning in STEM (CATALYST)
CATALYST is a joint effort of the College of Education and College of Science at Purdue University, re-launched in
2012 to meet the regional, national, and global challenges of the 21st century in STEM education.
CATALYST is an interdisciplinary research-oriented unit focused on building and supporting a community of
educational professionals who are dedicated to advancing K- 12 STEM (science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics) teaching and learning through research. To accomplish this we have three major goals:
• Conduct theoretically grounded research that contributes to our understanding and advancement of
K-12 STEM education;
• Develop partnerships and research collaborations with other institutions, businesses, and agencies that
support the advancement of K-12 STEM teaching and learning; and
• Inform policy and public support of STEM teaching and learning at the local, national, and global levels.
Learn more about CATALYST at creseme.education.purdue.edu.
Purdue Polytechnic Institute
The Purdue Polytechnic Institute is one of 10 academic colleges at Purdue University administering
undergraduate and graduate degrees in six broad disciplines: aviation, computing and graphics, construction
management, engineering technologies, technology education and technology management. The Polytechnic
learning experience is designed to produce graduates who not only have deep technical knowledge and
applied skills in their chosen discipline, but also possess problem solving, critical thinking, communications,
and leadership skills sought by industries and communities. The Purdue Polytechnic offers select programs in
nine Indiana communities in addition to the main campus at West Lafayette, Indiana. In August 2017, the first
Purdue Polytechnic High School located in downtown Indianapolis, Indiana will open with 150 ninth grade
students. The rigorous STEM curricula and learning environment are built on strong industry relationships, an
innovative partnership with Purdue University, and be unlike any educational experience offered in Indiana,
and potentially, the nation.
Learn more about the Purdue Polytechnic Institute at polytechnic.purdue.edu.
12
THURSDAY AT A GLANCE
THURSDAY, AUGUST 11TH, 2016 Hyatt Regency
4:00 PM Registration opens Outside Plaza Ballroom
Hyatt Regency Plaza
5:00 PM Hors d’oeuvres and drinks Ballroom
6:00 PM - Dinner and keynote speaker Hyatt Regency Plaza
8:00 PM Ballroom
Measuring What Matters: Challenges and Opportunities in Assessing
STEM Proficiency
James W. Pellegrino
Keynote Speaker
Measuring What Matters: Challenges and Opportunities in Assessing STEM Proficiency
James W. Pellegrino
James W. Pellegrino is Liberal Arts and Sciences Distinguished Professor and
Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He also
serves as Co-director of UIC’s interdisciplinary Learning Sciences Research Institute.
His research and development interests focus on children’s and adult’s thinking and
learning and the implications of cognitive research and theory for assessment and
instructional practice. He has published over 300 books, chapters and articles in the
areas of cognition, instruction and assessment. His current research is funded by the
National Science Foundation and the Institute of Education Sciences. He has served
as head of several National Academy of Sciences study committees, including chair
of the Study Committee for the Evaluation of the National and State Assessments
of Educational Progress, co-chair of the Committee on Learning Research and Educational Practice, and co-chair
of the Committee on the Foundations of Assessment which issued the report Knowing What Students Know: The
Science and Design of Educational Assessment. Most recently he served as a member of the Committee on Science
Learning: Games, Simulations and Education, as a member of the Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New
Science Education Standards, as chair of the Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, and
co-chair of the Committee on Developing Assessments of Science Proficiency in K-12. He is a past member of the
Board on Testing and Assessment of the National Research Council, a lifetime National Associate of the National
Academy of Sciences, a lifetime member of the National Academy of Education and the American Academy of Arts
and Sciences. He currently serves on the Technical Advisory Committees (TAC) of several states and organizations
such as the College Board and the National Center on Education and the Economy, as well as the TACs of the SBAC,
PARCC, DLM, and NCSC consortia of states funded under the USDOE Race to the Top assessment initiative.
13
FRIDAY AT A GLANCE
FRIDAY, AUGUST 12TH, 2016
6:30 AM - Breakfast (on own at American Craft Kitchen & Bar) Hyatt
8:00 AM Regency
Hyatt East
8:00 AM - Load shuttle (departs promptly at 8:15 AM) Tower
8:15 AM
Little
9:00 AM - Welcome & overview of Digital Library (engineering clips) Theater
9:25 AM
Wing A
Session 1 (2 parallel sessions)
Wing B
1-A: Observing and Assessing Design Learning
1. A Framework for Developing Engineering Design Classroom Assessment West
Kerrie Douglas & Şenay Purzer, INSPIRE, Purdue University Pavilion
2. Viewing Group Dynamics Through Student Generated Documentation in an
Elementary Engineering Classroom West
Susan Bitetti, Tufts University Pavilion
3. Observing Space in a Digital Makerspace Summer Camp
Euridice Oware & C. Aaron Price, Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago
9:30 AM - 1-B: STEM Integration and Computational Thinking
10:45 AM 1. STEM Integration within Middle School Engineering, Science and Mathematics: An
Example from the Real World Trenches
Marion C. Usselman, Meltem Alemdar, Jeff Rosen & Mike Ryan, Georgia Institute of
Technology
2. Evidence-Based Reasoning in STEM Integration Curricula
Corey A. Mathis, California State University, Bakersfield; Emilie A. Siverling, Purdue
University; Kyle Whipple, University of Minnesota; Tamara J. Moore, Purdue University; &
Siddika Selcen Guzey, Purdue University
3. Promoting Computational Thinking Using Apps
Hoda Ehsan, Purdue; Chanel Beebe, Purdue University; & Monica Cardella, Purdue
University
10:45 AM - Break 1 (drinks provided)
11:00 AM
10:45 AM - Explore the museum
12:00 PM
Lunch and keynote speaker
12:00 PM - Encounters with Design Thinking: Recollections of People and Ideas Across Five
1:25 PM Decades
David Radcliffe
14
FRIDAY AT A GLANCE
1:30 PM - Session 2 ( 2 parallel sessions) Wing A
2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing B
2:45 PM - 1. Exploring the Language Demands of Engineering Design in an Elementary Science
3:00 PM Classroom West
Justin R. McFadden, University of Louisville Pavilion
3:00 PM - 2. Promoting Middle School Students’Understanding of Multiple Representations in Little
4:15 PM an Engineering Design Activity Theater
Chandan Dasgupta & Alejandra J. Magana, Purdue Polytechnic Institute, Purdue Wing A
4:15 PM - University Wing B
5:00 PM 3. Designing a Digital Notebooking Tool to Support Disciplinary Discourse in West
5:00 PM - Elementary Engineering Pavilion
5:15 PM Chelsea J. Andrews & Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University
TBD
2-B: Models of Pre-College Engagement: Motivations and Approaches
1. Hope for Pre-College Education: A Systematic Literature Review
Brittany P. Mihalec-Adkins, Kerrie A. Douglas & Şenay Purzer, Purdue University
2. IRISE Illinois: envisioning a more sustainable model of engineering outreach
Sharlene M. Denos, Barbara Hug, Elif Ertekin & Joseph Muskin, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
3. K-12 Curriculum Design: A Case Study in Problem-Solution Co-Evolution
Marion Usselman, Michael Helms & Mike Ryan, Georgia Institute of Technology
Break 2 (drinks and snacks provided)
Structured discussion - Participant initiated (3 parallel sessions)
1. Fostering responsive teaching in engineering design using video cases with
elementary teachers
Jessica Watkins & Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University
2. To be Proposed
3. To be Proposed
Materials and resources for supporting STEM learning in formal and informal spaces
(resource exchange)
Load shuttle (departs promptly at 5:15 PM)
7:00 PM Optional: Dinner club (3 restaurant choices)
15
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 1 9:30 AM-10:45 AM
1-A: Observing and Assessing Design Learning Wing A
1. A Framework for Developing Engineering Design Classroom Assessment
Kerrie Douglas & Şenay Purzer, INSPIRE, Purdue University
Abstract
High-quality assessment of engineering in precollege education poses many challenges to researchers and
educators alike. The purpose of this presentation is to provide a work-in-progress framework for developing a
framework for creating engineering design classroom assessments. The framework is designed as a roadmap for
curriculum writers, teachers, and assessment developers who have interest in designing instructionally sensitive
assessments for classroom use.
Topics for Discussion
1. What aspects of this assessment framework are either under or overrepresented? Do you have feedback
concerning the framework as a guide to researchers and educators for creating integrated STEM assessment?
2. What type of tasks allow young learners to demonstrate engineer learning and are also practical for
classroom teacher use?
16
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 1 9:30 AM-10:45 AM
1-A: Observing and Assessing Design Learning Wing A
2. Viewing Group Dynamics Through Student Generated Documentation in an Elementary Engineering
Classroom
Susan Bitetti, Tufts University
Abstract
As schools have placed greater emphasis on the implementation of project-based learning units over the past
decade, the understanding of how students function as a design group becomes increasingly relevant. Design is
a very social process which draws from both oral and written discourse (Geisler, 2000), and therefore the use of
different artifacts as mediators throughout the design process has become a focus in recent literature. Artifacts
of documentation throughout an engineering design task can be leveraged as a communication tool between
group members (Geisler, 2000) and can also be a scaffold for encouraging systematic reflection (Zubizaretta,
2004). However, there remains a gap in understanding how elementary school students engage in the practice of
documentation, particularly in an engineering design task, and how this documentation manifests within the group
context. In examining documentation artifacts from three different groups in a fifth grade engineering classroom,
we seek to characterize practices and usage of student documentation within these group settings.
What do we mean by student documentation in this particular context? Documentation Station
• Individual student sketches prompted at the start of the project
• Photographs taken at the“documentation station”(see image below
depicting the documentation station)
• Scrapbook pages made on the last day by each group for a class
“Engineers’ Scrapbook”
M & R’s Sketch M’s Documentation Station Photo
Survey Responses
If you used the Documentation Station, did it help you during your project? How?
• “ I personally didn’t really use it but one of my group members used it a lot and she found herself breaking down the
project in her mind and understanding the invention better”- S
If you didn’t use the Documentation Station, why?
• “Well, Rachel and I were working on fixing the actual invention and improving it while Michele was working on
documenting what we did”- S
• “Because we needed a lot of time to work on our project”- R
17
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 1 9:30 AM-10:45 AM
1-A: Observing and Assessing Design Learning Wing A
3. Observing Space in a Digital Makerspace Summer Camp
Euridice Oware & C. Aaron Price, Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago
Abstract
Fabrication laboratories (Fab Labs) are digital makerspaces used to design and manufacture products by creating
digital drawings with computer software and producing them with digital machines such as 3D printers, laser
cutters, and vinyl cutters. This study addresses the research question:“How do participants in a one-week digital
Fab Lab summer camp program interact in the various physical spaces within the lab?”During each day at four Fab
Lab summer camps (N=20 days), an observation rubric was used for multiple 30 minute periods of data collection
(Figure 1). The rubric documented participant interactions in three ways: 1) participant roles, 2) attendees engaged,
and 3) type of interaction, which included physical, verbal, technical, and interspace categories. The observation
protocols provide a systematic manner of investigating and documenting how and with whom participants
“engage”in hands-on experiences in a Fab Lab. We will discuss early results from the data and insights from and
recommendations for using this type of rubric.
Figure 1. Example observation rubric for the laser cutter station
Questions for Discussion
1. What types of observation protocols have others used for similar research in the past?
2. What do others think about using live observation rubrics vs. coding video in makerspaces?
18
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 1 9:30 AM-10:45 AM
1-B: STEM Integration and Computational Thinking Wing B
1. STEM Integration within Middle School Engineering, Science and Mathematics: An Example from the
Real World Trenches
Marion C. Usselman, Meltem Alemdar, Jeff Rosen & Mike Ryan, Georgia Institute of Technology
Abstract
The Advanced Manufacturing and Prototyping Integrated to Unlock Potential (AMP-IT-UP) project is an NSF-sponsored
Math and Science Partnership that is designing, implementing and assessing curriculum units and modules for
middle school engineering, science and mathematics classrooms that integrate common themes across all the
STEM-focused classes at grades 6-8. Through multiple rounds of iterative testing and redesign, AMP-IT-UP has
defined a framework for integration that integrates across STEM practices, rather than disciplinary core ideas. The
project has produced curriculum materials that are implementable in authentic and challenging environments, are
educative for teachers, and that should enable the research team to begin to assess effects of STEM integration on
student outcomes.
Topics for Discussion
1. STEM integration in middle and high schools with high teacher and student turnover, and high chaos
levels—How much can we expect?
2. Assessing the effect of STEM integration on student outcomes.
19
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 1 9:30 AM-10:45 AM
1-B: STEM Integration and Computational Thinking Wing B
2. Evidence-Based Reasoning in STEM Integration Curricula
Corey A. Mathis, California State University, Bakersfield; Emilie A. Siverling, Purdue University; Kyle Whipple, University
of Minnesota; Tamara J. Moore, Purdue University; & Siddika Selcen Guzey, Purdue University
Abstract
Engaging in argument from evidence is a practice that is important to both science and engineering. Though
argumentation has been studied in a science context in K-12 education, far less work has been done in K-12
engineering or STEM integration settings. A case study approach was used to gain a better understanding of how
three student teams naturally used engineering evidence-based reasoning (EBR) within the engineering lessons of
STEM integration units. This purpose had two specific foci to explore: in what steps of an engineering design process
did students use EBR, and in what ways did students use EBR.
Figure 1. Instances of evidence-based reasoning generated by students
in different steps of an engineering process of design.
Table 1. Ways in which students used evidence-based reasoning
Way EBR was used # of instances Descriptions (Students were...)
Clarifying with Team 56 Asking or answering questions to understand ideas or positions
Idea Generation 51 Generating or introducing new ideas for design
Solution Selection 26 Choosing an aspect of a design to move forward with
Negotiating 25 Contemplating multiple options, may not result in a decision
Clarifying with Teacher 17 Explaining reasoning in response to teacher asking questions
Summarizing/Reflecting 17 Restating any part of the problem or solution (not for clarification purposes)
Instructions with Reason 8 Providing directions to a teammate with rationale
Strategizing Score 3 Directly considering the criteria on a design evaluation rubric to justify design decision
Representation 2 Explaining a representation of a design (not about the design itself)
Other 9 Descriptions not yet generated
Topics for Discussion
1. What are other aspects of evidence-based reasoning that we should explore?
2. What seems the most (and least) interesting about the EBR research’s current direction and results?
3. What other methods could we use to explore evidence-based reasoning?
20
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 1 9:30 AM-10:45 AM
1-B: STEM Integration and Computational Thinking Wing B
3. Promoting Computational Thinking Using Apps
Hoda Ehsan, Purdue; Chanel Beebe, Purdue University; & Monica Cardella, Purdue University
Additional Collaborators: Brianna Brinkman, Sean Brophy, Annwesa Dasgupta, Elizabeth Gajdzik, Morgan Hynes, Muhsin Menekse,
Tamara Moore, Şenay Purzer, M. Terri Sanger, Kristina Tank
Abstract
Increasing demand for curricula and programming that supports computational thinking in K-2 settings motivates
our research team to investigate how computational thinking can be understood, observed, and supported for
this age group. In this study, our research team developed definitions of computational thinking competencies by
conducting a literature review of existing computational thinking competency descriptions. These definitions were
synthesized into an index of computational thinking competencies that can be seen in K-2 settings. This index has
been used to code existing applications that claim to develop computational thinking and/or coding skills for this
age group. The Guiding Codebook and Computational Thinking Index that result from this process can serve as a
guide for researchers, administrators, teachers and parents seeking to understand and promote computational
thinking for this age group.
Subset of CT Competencies considered in our project
CT Competencies INSPIRE Definitions
Abstraction Identifying and utilizing the structure of concepts/main ideas.
Algorithms and Procedures Following, identifying, using, and creating an ordered set of instructions. (i.e., through
selection, iteration and recursion)
Automation Assigning appropriate set of tasks to be done repetitively by computers
Data Collection Gathering information pertinent to solve a problem
Data Analysis Making sense of data by identifying trends
Data Representation Organizing and depicting data in appropriate ways to demonstrate relationships among data
points via representations such as graphs, charts, words or images
Debugging/Trouble Shooting Identifying and addressing problems that inhibit progress toward task completion
Problem Decomposition Breaking down data, processes or problems into smaller and more manageable components to
solve a problem
Parallelization Simultaneously processing smaller tasks to more efficiently reach a goal
Topics for Discussion
1. What are the opportunities for integrating computational thinking with science, engineering and
mathematics?
2. What are appropriate ways for using tablets and apps in K-2 classrooms, homeschool environments, and
informal settings?
21
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
KEYNOTE SPEAKER 12:00 PM-1:45 PM
West Pavilion
Encounters with Design Thinking: Recollections of People and Ideas Across Five Decades
David Radcliffe
David F. Radcliffe is the Kamyar Haghighi Head of the School of Engineering Education
at Purdue University, a position he has held since 2010 and the Epistemology Professor
of Engineering Education. Dr. Radcliffe received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in mechanical
engineering from the University of Queensland, Australia and a Ph.D. in bioengineering
from Strathclyde University in Scotland. His research interests center on the nature
of engineering as a profession; how it is perceived and practiced, how it is learned
especially outside the classroom, and how an engineering identity is shaped. Within this
overall theme he has conducted research on the practice of engineering design thinking
in a variety of industry settings, the creation and sharing of design knowledge in large
and small firms; the design and evaluation of learning environments, and on ways to
foster distributed communities of research practice in engineering education.
Prior to joining Purdue in 2007, he taught and researched at various universities in Australia, UK and USA including
the University of Queensland, Melbourne University, Adelaide University, Bath University and Stanford. Between
1999 and 2007, Dr. Radcliffe led three strategic industry-university learning partnerships. He was the Inaugural
National Teaching Fellow in Australia, the first Australian Boeing Welliver Fellow, founded the Catalyst Research
Centre for Society and Technology, led the Australasian Virtual Engineering Library project, created the Advanced
Engineering Capability Network and co-led the national project on the design of Next Generation Learning Spaces.
Dr. Radcliffe is a Fellow, Institution of Engineers Australia; a Chartered Professional Engineer, Fellow of the American
Society of Engineering Education (ASEE); Fellow of the European Society of Engineering Education (SEFI), and Past
President, Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AaeE).
22
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 2 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing A
1. Exploring the Language Demands of Engineering Design in an Elementary Science Classroom
Justin R. McFadden, University of Louisville
Abstract
The integration of engineering and science content standards is a defining feature of the Next Generation Science
Standards [NGSS] (NGSS Lead States, 2013). The language demands and associated supports needed to scaffold
student discourse during engineering design challenges are a notable area to focus on, given the importance of
promoting academically productive discourse in elementary science classrooms. Exploring the emergence of this
integration on the micro-level, via a case study, is appropriate and valuable (Bloom et al., 2004). In the present
study, a single 4th grade teacher and four of his students took on a novel engineering design challenge. Discourse
analysis (Gee, 2001) and elements of adequate description (McDermott, Gospodinoff, & Aron, 1978) allowed for
unique interpretations of student and teacher discourses in action during the design, construction, and redesign
of a mining extraction tool. Results from this study indicate that engineering design, and the associated sharing of
student ideas during prototyping stage, is a complex and complicated task for students to meaningfully engage in if
not properly supported.
Topics for Discussion
1. Given that students have limited opportunities to participate in‘engineering’thinking and talking outside of
the classroom, what can be done to support them inside the classroom?
2. How can we better enable teachers to connect the‘activity’of engineering-focused learning opportunities
with meaningful student-student dialogue?
23
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 2 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing A
2. Promoting Middle School Students’ Understanding of Multiple Representations in an Engineering
Design Activity
Chandan Dasgupta & Alejandra J. Magana, Purdue Polytechnic Institute, Purdue University
Abstract
Middle school students find it challenging to process multiple representations and take informed design decisions
while they are solving an engineering design challenge. Primarily, they face trouble (a) integrating information
presented via different representations like energy-use graphs and cost charts, (b) converting the information into
actionable decisions, and (c) assessing the impact of their decision and iteratively building an optimal design. Our
work aims at understanding these challenges and developing prompts to help students overcome these challenges
in the context of SmartCAD, a computer-aided design (CAD) platform that embeds powerful simulations to
provide formative feedback to students while they are working on solving an engineering design challenge such
as constructing an energy efficient home within a limited budget. We have designed a curriculum unit for middle
school students based on the Learning by Design framework that integrates verbal and written prompts in the form
of a design journal and whole-class discussions and provides reflection opportunities for the students. This paper
will present preliminary findings from a two-week long study that was recently concluded with sixth, seventh and
eight grade students and answer the research questions- How do students make sense of SmartCAD’s multiple
representations? How does this change over time?
24
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 2 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing A
3. Designing a Digital Notebooking Tool to Support Disciplinary Discourse in Elementary Engineering
Chelsea J. Andrews & Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University
Abstract
Engineering design is a social practice with disciplinary ways of knowing, doing, talking, reading, and writing
– disciplinary language and literacy practices or disciplinary Discourses. To better understand the more and less
productive ways that adults and tools can support elementary students in taking up these practices, our multi-year
design based research program investigates discourse demands, resources, and supports, including the digital
engineering notebook tool described in this study. In this qualitative case study, we were guided by the research
question: in what ways do multimedia“notebook cards”support students in participating in the language and
literacy practices of collaborative engineering design? We found that the engineering notebooks supported student
work at multiple levels of sophistication: at a base level, the notebooks became a digital artifact that provided
a concrete record of groups’work on the design task, which productively mediated interactions between group
members and between students and adults; at the disciplinary Discourse level, there is tentative evidence that
creating and reflecting on the notebooks, along with other classroom and lesson supports, led to a deepening of
students’awareness of the iterative nature of engineering design. This preliminary study provides a starting point in
articulating and describing the kinds of supports, both tools and teacher moves, that can help elementary students
take up these disciplinary Discourses in a productive way.
Examples of three of the seven types of“notebook cards”available in the digital engineering notebook tool, which is
currently implemented with PowerPoint using master slides:
Topics for Discussion
1. What disciplinary language and literacy practices/disciplinary Discourses of engineering are most essential to
develop at the elementary level?
2. How explicit should instruction on disciplinary Discourses be at the elementary level?
25
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 2 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing A
1. Hope for Pre-College Education: A Systematic Literature Review
Brittany P. Mihalec-Adkins, Kerrie A. Douglas & Şenay Purzer, Purdue University
Abstract
Promoting the success of minority students in math, science, and engineering has been a prominent concern among
educators, yet the presence of minority students in STEM programs remains low. As interventions are developed,
it is important to examine psychological constructs that can be fostered and promote success in these students.
The construct of hope has been found to promote positive outcomes in a variety of settings, but this research has
not been synthesized in the realm of education. This review aims to both explore how hope has been studied in
education, and synthesize what researchers have concluded about hope and academic outcomes. Authors conducted
a systematic review of empirical publications that were: related to hope in educational settings, conducted
between 1991 and 2016, peer-reviewed, and available in English. A total of 74 publications were included in the
entire review, however only the 40 papers that examined hope at the pre-college level are included in this paper.
Analysis of these 40 papers revealed that hope has been studied in elementary through high school, using a
variety of instruments, and with several specific populations (e.g., African-American students, gifted students, and
students with learning disabilities). Eighteen studies found significant relationships between hope and academic
achievement or other academically-relevant variables. Collectively, the findings promote hope as a powerful
predictor of positive academic outcomes, even above other achievement-related constructs, and makes a strong case
for promoting hope in students.
Topics for Discussion
1. How can this synthesis of Hope inform precollege engineering?
2. How can Hope be integrated into precollege engineering research?
26
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 2 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing A
2. IRISE Illinois: Envisioning a More Sustainable Model of Engineering Outreach
Sharlene M. Denos, Barbara Hug, Elif Ertekin & Joseph Muskin, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Abstract
We describe a graduate level course on engineering outreach and its corresponding outreach programs targeting
diverse urban middle schools students and teachers.
Using a culturally responsive teaching framework this course and outreach pairs engineering graduate students
with graduate students in the social sciences to mentor teams of diverse middle school students in community-
based engineering design projects. The projects are chosen and directed by the middle school students and address
persistent structural inequalities in the students’own communities from a technical and cultural perspective. Mixed
research methods are used to monitor middle school students’expectations for success in engineering design tasks
as well as their subjective value of such tasks over the course of their participation in this three-year program.
Topics for Discussion
We anticipate that the strength of relationships between graduate students and students/teachers will be key to our
program’s success. In light of this, we would appreciate feedback on the following:
1. What is the best way to determine the extent to which middle school students’expectations regarding
their own success in engineering design tasks and their subjective value of those tasks are influenced by
relationships with university graduate students?
2. How can we best measure the impact of the above relationships on university graduate students, teachers,
and other community members involved?
27
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 2 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
2-A: Language and Representations in Students’ Design Work Wing A
3. K-12 Curriculum Design: A Case Study in Problem-Solution Co-Evolution
Marion Usselman, Michael Helms & Mike Ryan, Georgia Institute of Technology
Abstract
Curriculum developers must design curricular bridges that enable students to cross from where they started,
i.e. from their entering level of understanding of disciplinary concepts, skills and practices, to the desired state
of understanding determined by course learning goals and standards. The iterative curriculum design and
implementation process itself, when conducted collaboratively with the school practitioners, provides increasingly
greater understanding over time about the nature of the setting’s constraints, leading to changes in the design
solution, and also changes in the problem space itself, as teachers and students become more familiar with the
evolving intervention. This curriculum design process is consistent with a cognitive model of design referred to as
Problem-Solution Co-Evolution in which the problem space and the design solution space co-evolve over time,
with one constantly affecting the other.
Graphic from:
Maher, M.L., & Tang, H.H. (2002)
Co-evolution as a computational and cognitive model of design. Research in Engineering Design. Published online.
Topics for Discussion
1. Assessing the impacts of a curriculum that is constantly co-evolving along with the conditions of the
classroom.
2. Maintaining the integrity of critical components dictated by the theoretical foundation that defined the
original design parameters.
28
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
STRUCTURED DISCUSSION 3:00 PM - 4:15 PM
Little Theater
1. Fostering responsive teaching in engineering design using video cases with elementary teachers
Jessica Watkins & Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University
Abstract
A central goal for engineering education is to engage students in designing their own novel solutions to complex,
ill-defined problems. To support this engagement, teachers need to be prepared to listen, make sense of, and
respond to students’new ideas and approaches. In our work, we use video cases to give teachers practice in noticing
and interpreting student thinking in engineering design and to help them consider possible pedagogical moves
ased on their interpretations. In this session, we will look at video clips from elementary classrooms to closely
examine students’thinking and to open up discussions about formative assessment and responsive teaching in
engineering design.
STRUCTURED DISCUSSION 3:00 PM - 4:15 PM
2 & 3. To Be Proposed Wing A and B
29
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
1. Frameworks for Supporting Teachers’ Planning and Implementation of Design Activities
Catherine Langman, Illinois Institute of Technology; Stephanie R. Whitney, DePaul University; & Judith S. Zawojewski,
Illinois Institute of Technology
Abstract
The goal of this instructional planning resource is to help grades 3-12 teachers grapple with the distinctive planning
needed to implement activities that engage students in design and engineering practices. Five implementation
principles are presented as frameworks in the form of simple charts. Teachers can use these charts when selecting an
activity, planning for additional supports needed for the students and environment specific to the teacher’s setting,
and implementing the activity. Teachers and students are, therefore, engaged in designing the activity while
students are engaged in designing and engineering practices, helping teachers understand what it takes to help
their students undertake design tasks. This resource is illustrated as applied to model-eliciting activities (MEAs),
which are a special class of problem in which students express, test, and revise (i.e., design) a mathematical model
in response to a problem situated in a real world context. Though the frameworks and principles were initially
developed using a deep exploration of MEAs, their use can be generalized to other open design tasks for students.
Topics for Discussion
1. What are some ways that instructional planning and implementation can be viewed as design?
2. An Interdisciplinary Module about Growing and Measuring Blood Vessel Networks
Catherine Langman & Judith S. Zawojewski, Illinois Institute of Technology
Abstract
This resource is a three-part interdisciplinary module and accompanying instructor notes intended for high school
students that features a model-eliciting activity. First, students learn about the work of tissue engineers and the
important role of angiogenesis in tissue engineering through short readings. Then, students learn more about the
importance of interconnectedness and density of blood vessel networks by playing a game in which they create
blood vessel networks. Finally, students work in small groups to design a mathematical model that describes the
interconnectedness and density of any blood vessel network in order to evaluate and compare sample images of
blood vessel networks provided to the students.
Topics for Discussion
1. What is the advantage to using an interdisciplinary module to help students learn about angiogenesis and
engage in mathematical modeling?
2. In what ways does learning the science help students to design mathematical models, and conversely, in
what ways does modeling the science help student to learn about the science?
30
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
3. Socio-scientific Issues Teaching and Learning Supports Computational Thinking and Engineering
Education
Amanda N. Peel, University of Missouri & Troy Sadler, University of Missouri
Abstract
The overarching goal of the [RI]2 approach is to foster development of scientific literacy and identities that make
it possible for students to engage in informed and productive ways in the negotiation and resolution of critical
societal and personal issues with substantive connections to science. Developing these forms of scientific literacy
and identities take place over extended periods of time and draw on learner experiences in and out of school. These
long-term processes will be affected by more proximal learning outcomes that can be realized within the course of
single units of instruction.
Essential Learning Outcomes Discretionary Learning Outcomes
• Awareness and understanding of the focal issue. • Competencies in media literacy.
• Understanding of science ideas. • Understanding of epistemology of science.
• Competencies for science practices. • Competencies for engineering design.
• Competencies for socio-scientific reasoning. • Interest in science and careers in STEM.
31
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
4. Design Thinking Teacher Resources: Empowering Innovative K-12 Learners
Deborah Parizek, Henry Ford Learning Institute
Abstract
In addition to the pressure of having students perform well on traditional standards of achievement, today’s pre-
college educators must equip and empower learners with critical 21st century skills. In this roundtable, participants
will explore Design Thinking as a learning strategy for students as young as kindergarten. Through a discussion
lead by an educator with more than 25 years of experience, the group will explore an array of high quality, teacher
resources that help deepen students’understanding of core content in a way that is aligned with Next Generation
Science Standards, places them at the center of the learning process, and develops essential mindsets, skills and
dispositions for creativity and innovation. The materials presented -- such as sample HFLI Teachers’Instructional
Guides for Design Thinking Challenges, a framework for community participation, and a Foundations of Innovation
course – reflect expertise that is highly empathetic to the daily struggles schools, teachers and administrators face,
and represent more than eight years of Design Thinking implementation experience at a network of urban Henry
Ford Academies.
5. Informal and Formal Materials and Resources from the Engineering is Elementary Project
Cathy P. Lachapelle, Museum Of Science
Abstract
I propose to share a variety of curriculum materials from our Formal and Informal projects:
• EiE (a curriculum for elementary schools): I will bring a sample activity for attendees to manipulate, as well as
sample designs, teacher guides, videos, and brochures
• Engineering Adventures (an Out-of-School-Time (OST) curriculum for kids ages 8-11): I will bring sample
designs, educator guides, and brochures
• Engineering Everywhere (an OST curriculum for kids ages 11-14): I will bring sample designs, manipulatives,
educator guides, and brochures
• Wee Engineer! (a curriculum for preschool and kindergarten students): I will bring sample designs and
materials for attendees to manipulate
Attendees will have the opportunity to examine our materials, explore our website and video presentations,
and take brochures for further information and follow-up. I will be on-hand to answer questions and engage in
discussion.
32
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
6. Novel Engineering: Integrating Engineering and Literacy
Merredith D. Portsmore, Tufts University; Jessica Watkins, Tufts University; & Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University
Abstract
Novel Engineering (novelengineering.org) an NSF-funded project at Tufts University Center for Engineering
Education and Outreach, engages Kindergarten-8th grade students and educators in engineering, using books as
a context for client-centered, open-ended design challenges. Students build solutions, using a range of found and
recycled materials, to help characters with problems they’ve identified in their reading that meet the constraints
and requirements found in the book. The project prepares educators to use the fiction and non-fiction texts that
they already use in their literacy instruction as the starting point for engineering problems through professional
development, a web resource, and numerous support materials.
At the curriculum exchange, we will share a sample teacher-created lesson unit for using the book The Mixed
Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankenweiler as well as examples of student work. The book tells the story of two
siblings, Claudia and Jamie, who run away from their home to hide in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New
York where they need to stay hidden and solve a mystery. The book has been used in several classrooms for the
Novel Engineering project with students making devices to scoop money from fountains without getting wet,
communication systems to allow the siblings to send messages, and designs that distract guards to allow for quick
escapes in sticky situations. The project will also share links to resources to learn more about the approach and
workshop opportunities.
7. Engineering Notebooks for Middle School
Kerrie Anna Douglas, Purdue University; Tamara Moore, Purdue University; & Robin Adams, Purdue University
Abstract
In this presentation, we will share foundational, or core engineering design competencies, for middle school
engineering assessment and engineering notebooks as an aid for classroom assessment. Core engineering design
competencies were defined based on definitions set out in Next Generation Science Standards, design education
research literature, and indicators of quality integrated STEM (Moore, Glancy, Tank, Kersten, Smith, & Stohlmann,
2014). From these competencies, researchers with expertise in assessment, STEM integration, and design worked to
develop specific, measureable learning objectives. Next, prompts were developed as formative assessment tools to
provide students with opportunities to demonstrate their design process and learning. The prompts are organized
by design process and collectively, form into the Engineering Notebook for Middle School. Teachers can use the
notebook to quickly assess student competencies and provide feedback for continued learning. Identified core
competencies, learning objectives, Engineering Notebook for Middle School, and a mapping to show alignment will
be provided.
33
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
8. PictureSTEM: Integrating STEM+C and Literacy in Meaningful Ways
Tamara J. Moore, Purdue University; Kristina Tank, Iowa State University; & Elizabeth Gajdzik, Purdue University
Abstract
The Picture STEM Project (picturestem.org) has developed an instructional module at each grade level, K-2, which
employs engineering and literacy contexts to integrate science, technology, mathematics and computational
thinking (STEM+C) content instruction in meaningful and significant ways. These transformative new models use
picture books and an engineering design challenge to provide students with authentic, contextual activities that
engage learners in specific STEM+C content as well as integrate concepts across disciplinary boundaries. These
curricular units have gone through an extensive design research cycle to ensure a quality product.
Unit Designing Paper Baskets Designing Hamster Habitats Designing Toy Box Organizers
Overview Max and Lola are going to display Perri’s Pet Palace wants to offer its Talia’s Toy Box Company has received
their rock collection at a local nature customers an enlarged hamster complaints from parents about how
Engineering center. They want to give people habitat that meets all of the basic messy toy boxes can get and how
& Technology who visit their display a basket to needs of a hamster. In this unit, hard it is for their children to find
Connections help them collect their own rocks; students learn about animal’s basic their toys without dumping out all
however, they will not be able to needs and how a habitat provides of the toys. In this unit, students
Literacy Connections make enough for everyone. In this for these needs. Students also investigate standard units of
unit, students explore patterns and learn spatial reasoning through measure and sort objects according
Mathematics investigate the strength of paper exploration of 2D and 3D shapes to their physical properties before
Connections before designing a paper basket plan (tangrams and solids) before applying them to design a toy box
Science Connections to be given to Max and Lola’s visitors applying them to design a prototype organizer.
Computational of a hamster habitat cage and
Create a basket design plan, follow exercise trail. Create a toy box organizer design
Thinking the engineering design process plan, follow the engineering design
Connections Create a habitat design plan, follow process
Identify beginning and ending the engineering design process
sounds of words, blend three Use story structure to identify key
phoneme words, summarize Use information to create a topic details, compare and contrast story
informational and narrative text, map, make connections, monitor details , identify the main purpose of
name rhyming words comprehension through questioning, a text, name cause effect events from
use interesting words, identify a story, summarize narrative text
Identify and create patterns, count important details to summarize text
and write numbers up to 50 Learn about standard and non-
Identify characteristics of basic standard units, use tools to measure
Investigate properties of paper and shapes, compose and decompose length
water, test paper strength, conduct objects
fair tests Sort and describe materials by
Learn about animals, habitats and physical properties, conduct fair tests
Recognize patterns, develop basic needs, compare designed and
abstraction and debug errors in natural systems, conduct fair tests Follow and develop algorithms for
patterns thinking about sequencing of events
Follow and develop algorithms for and accomplishing tasks
thinking about sequencing of events
and accomplishing tasks
34
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
9. Instructional Shake Table for Engineering and Physical Science Learning
Sean Brophy, Purdue University
Abstract
The Instructional Shake Table provides a wide range of education and outreach learning experiences to raise
awareness of what engineers and scientists do to research and develop earthquake resistant structures. The table
supports Design-Build-Test-Refine Challenges to engage learners in the authentic practice of engineering and
scientific inquiry. This unit is being used in K-16 classrooms. Learn more at nees.org/resources/7623.
10. Teaching Computational Thinking via Flowchart Programming and Physical Implementation of an
Exergame
Alka R. Harriger & Bradley C. Harriger, Purdue University
11. TeacherKit Sustainable Engineering Design Unit
Carolin Frank, University of Leipzig
35
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
12. Hands On Standards STEM in Action
Karen Achtemeier, ETA hand2mind
Abstract
Hands-On Standards STEM in Action is an integrated science, technology, engineering and mathematics program
focused on developing PreK-5th grade students’critical thinking and
problem-solving skills through age-appropriate collaborative
engineering design challenges. The suite of modules is designed to
meet Next Generation Science Standards and mathematics and ELA
Common Core State Standards in an approachable, time-efficient
format. All STEM kits were developed in partnership with Texas A&M
University and/or Purdue University.
How It Works
Hands-On Standards STEM in Action addresses national and state standards with teacher-friendly modules that
follow the Engineering Design Process. The STEM projects in this series strikes the perfect balance of rigor and
ease-of-use.
• Addresses the three dimensions of NGSS (Next Generation Science Standards) and engages learners in the
Engineering Design Process
• Covers common topics in Earth, Life, and Physical Sciences
• Allows for flexibility: classroom, labs, centers, or extended day
• Requires little prep time or professional development
• Fits educators’schedules with appropriate instructional blocks of time
Learn more about Hands-On STEM in Action at hand2mind.com/brands/stem-in-action.
36
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
13. Make an Engineer
Chanel Beebe, Avneet Hira, Morgan Hynes, Umair Sarwar, Nicholas Jublet, Richard Brookes, & Salsibal Salah, Purdue
University
Abstract
Keeping in line with the theme of the summit of“characterizing engineering and design thinking in pre-college
settings”, the Make an Engineer activity is aimed at informing and broadening perceptions of engineering.
Participants are acquainted with different skills and problems pertaining to engineering, and also have the
opportunity to tell their own personally crafted story of engineering.
The activity entails participants building an engineer with body pieces that represent different habits of mind,
engineering challenges, disciplines of engineering, and their personal interests. Following which they write a brief
story about who their engineer is and the problems he/she solves. Prior to this, this work was piloted at the Make It
session at the ASEE Annual Conference, 2016.
This work embodies our philosophy of the humanistic side of engineering, wherein we undertake research and
outreach to broaden the participation in engineering by broadening the contexts in which it is practiced. By being
acquainted with the different skills and problems, participants’perceptions of who an engineer is and what he/
she does, are broadened. Thereafter, by telling their personally crafted story of engineering, they define and own a
unique engineering personality. Further still, the hands-on and individualistic nature of this activity make it a good
learning activity for people from diverse backgrounds and interests.
Excerpt of the Make An Engineer Process
Step 1: Select a Step 2: Select a Body Piece Step 3: Select Leg Step 4: Select Arm
Head Piece Pieces Pieces
Improving Poverty Mechanical Music
Systems Hunger Engineering Sports
thinking Health and Well Being Chemical Dance
Visualizing Inclusive and Engineering Poetry
Adapting Equitable Education Electrical Drama
Creative Gender Equality Engineering Debate
Problem Water and Sanitation Computer Engineering
Solving Quality Science Technology
Problem Reliable and Engineering Art
finding Sustainable Energy Material Recreational
Full and Productive Science Activities
employment Engineering Fashion
Sustainable Industrial Photography
Industrialization Engineering Construction/
Step 5: Tell Your Story!
Topics for Discussion
1. How could this activity be woven into existing curricula?
2. How could the story cards be adjusted to lead to a more rich discussion?
37
FRIDAY PRESENTATIONS
MATERIALS AND RESOURCES FOR SUPPORTING 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM
STEM LEARNING IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SPACES West Pavilion
14. Resources for Introducing Engineering at Home
Elizabeth Gajdzik & Monica Cardella, Purdue University
Abstract
A Parent’s Guide to Introducing Engineering at Home (inspire-purdue.org/parent-materials)
The research-based guide shares why parents should help their kids learn about engineering, what their kids can
learn about engineering, and how engineers help their children learn about engineering.
Purdue University Engineering Gift Guide (inspire-purdue.org/EngineeringGiftGuide)
Toys, games and books can support children’s early development of knowledge and skills related to engineering as
well as science and mathematics. Research has shown many of the toys, games and books that support engineering
learning are more often purchased for boys than for girls. Through the Engineering Gift Guide, the INSPIRE Research
Institute for Pre-College Engineering at Purdue University is raising public awareness of the many toys, games and
books that promote engineering learning and are fun for both boys and girls.
38
39
SATURDAY AT A GLANCE
SATURDAY, AUGUST 13TH, 2016
6:30 AM - Breakfast (on own at American Craft Kitchen & Bar) Hyatt Regency
8:00 AM Hyatt East
Tower
8:00 AM - Load shuttle (departs promptly at 8:15 AM) Little
8:15 AM Theater
9:00 AM - Welcome back & overview of day 2 Wing A
9:10 AM
Wing B
Session 3 (2 parallel sessions)
West
3-A: Promoting Design Learning Pavilion
1. Architectural Design Learning in a Lego-based Museum Exhibit
C. Aaron Price, Gloria Segovia & Euridice Oware, Museum of Science and Industry,
Chicago
2. Data-based Conjectures for Supporting Responsive Teaching in Engineering
Design with Elementary Teachers
Jessica Watkins, Mary E. McCormick, Elissa Milto, Merredith Portsmore & Kathleen
Spencer, Tufts University
3. The Effects of Project Lead the Way on Students’Design Thinking
Justin Hess, Brandon Sorge & Charles Feldhaus, IUPUI
9:15 AM - 3-B: Examining the Impact
10:30 AM 1. A Framework for Evaluating Quality in Classroom Assessment for STEM4LIFE
Senay Purzer, Annwesa Dasgupta, Elizabeth A. Gajdzik & Tamara J. Moore, Purdue
University; & Kristina M. Tank, Iowa State University
2. The Development of STEM Innovation and Engineering Design Courses, and
Its impact on Middle School Students’Achievement and Non-Cognitive Skills
Related
Meltem Alemdar, Jeff Rosen, Roxanne Moore, Jeremy Lingle & Sunni Newton,
Georgia Institute of Technology; & Stefanie Wind, University of Alabama -
Tuscaloosa
3. The Effects of Treatment and Demographics on Science and Engineering
Outcomes for Elementary Engineering Students
Cathy P. Lachapelle, Museum Of Science; Yoonkyung Oh, The Pennsylvania State
University; Muhammad F. Shams, Museum Of Science; & Christine M. Cunningham,
Museum Of Science
10:30 AM - Break (drinks provided)
10:45 AM
40
SATURDAY SESSIONS
10:45 AM - Session 4 (2 parallel sessions) Wing A
12:00 PM
4-A: Leveraging Students’ Interests and Everyday Practices Wing B
12:00 PM - 1. Leveraging Students’Everyday Engineering Practices in the Science Classroom
1:30 PM Veronica A. McGowan & Philip Bell, University of Washington West
1:30 PM - 2. Think 2 S.C.O.R.E (Sports Curriculum on Repurposing Engineering) Pavilion
1:45 PM James Holly Jr, Purdue University
3. Materials and Resources for Supporting STEM Learning in Formal and Informal
Spaces
Morgan Hynes, Avneet Hira & Chanel Beebe, Purdue University
4-B: Science + Engineering Integration
1. Effects of Integrating Biotechnology Engineering in a Middle Level Science
Program on Research and Design Solutions Related to DNA and Membranes
Kimberly Staples, Kansas State University & Fulece C. Hughes
2. Integrating (NGSS) Engineering Into a Middle School PBL-Based Science: A
Report from Real Classrooms
Mike Ryan, Jessica Gale & Marion Usselman, Georgia Institute of Technology
3. More than a Vehicle to Learning Science: The Role of Design in P-12 Education
Molly Goldstein, Şenay Purzer & Robin Adams, Purdue University
Lunch with guest speaker and final reflection
K-12 Engineering Education Research Opportunities and the National Science
Foundation
Margret Hjalmarson, Program Director
There is a range of opportunities at the National Science Foundation for support
for K-12 engineering education research projects. This presentation will describe
opportunities that exist in formal and informal settings for engineering
education with K-12 students and teachers. The presentation will also include
discussion of current challenges in education research in K-12 settings.
Load shuttle (departs promptly at 1:45 PM)
41
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 3 9:15 AM-10:30 AM
3-A: Promoting Design Learning Wing A
1. Architectural Design Learning in a Lego-based Museum Exhibit
C. Aaron Price, Gloria Segovia & Euridice Oware, Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago
Abstract
Brick by Brick is a new, temporary exhibition at the Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago aimed at presenting
the architectural design process to guests through Lego-based sculpture and interactive exhibits. The Museum has
begun a study to answer the question:“What is the impact of visiting the exhibit on guest awareness of roles and
identities of engineers, designers and builders? How is this impact affected by their participation patterns within
the exhibit?”The study will involve pre/post-tests, observation rubrics and interviews of children aged 10-15.
Topics for Discussion
1. What existing instruments and frameworks exist around architectural design?
2. Can the“Draw an Engineer”assessment be applied to architecture?
42
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 3 9:15 AM-10:30 AM
3-A: Promoting Design Learning Wing A
2. Data-based Conjectures for Supporting Responsive Teaching in Engineering Design with
Elementary Teachers
Jessica Watkins, Mary E. McCormick, Elissa Milto, Merredith Portsmore & Kathleen Spencer, Tufts University
Abstract
In this paper, we examine how elementary teachers enter into responsive teaching, an approach from math and
science education in which teachers base their pedagogical moves on what they notice their students are doing
and saying. In contrast to strictly adhering to pre-set curricula or guided projects, in responsive teaching teachers
elicit and listen to students’thinking, make disciplinary connections within their ideas and approaches, and adjust
their teaching to help students pursue and refine their thinking. In engineering design, this approach is essential
for supporting students’engagement; it allows teachers to notice novel solutions and approaches, help students
adapt to emergent constraints and failures, and set new objectives in response to students’designing. Drawing on
three years of data from elementary teachers’professional development, we present five data-based conjectures
on teachers’productive resources for responsive teaching and what pedagogical structures can support this
approach in elementary classrooms.
Table outlining conjectures
Component Data-based conjecture
of RT
Eliciting 1. Teachers recognize engineering design tasks as opportunities to generate and pursue ideas.
2. Share-outs support teacher noticing and attending to student ideas early in the design process.
Interpreting 3. Teachers’attention to engineering design process can be both a tool and a barrier for interpreting
students’ work.
4. Care for students’social development could be a productive entry for making disciplinary
interpretations of students’thinking
Responding 5. Recognizing the need to balance multiple objectives may help teachers respond to students’work.
Topics for Discussion
1. What are key aspects of engineering that we want teachers to notice in their students’work?
2. How can we support teachers in flexibly responding to student thinking in engineering design?
43
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 3 9:15 AM-10:30 AM
3-A: Promoting Design Learning Wing A
3. The Effects of Project Lead the Way on Students’ Design Thinking
Justin Hess, Brandon Sorge & Charles Feldhaus, IUPUI
Abstract
Project Lead the Way (PLTW) is a non-profit organization offering project-based STEM education curricula for K-12
students. As of 2015, PLTW was by far the largest pre-engineering program implemented throughout the United
States with a presence in over 6500 schools. Through a review of empirical work on PLTW, this study investigates
how participating in PLTW has influenced high school students’design thinking. Our synthesis points to a need for
more work in this domain, namely, qualitative efforts for understanding how PLTW participation contributes to the
design strategies utilized by PLTW students.
Topics for Discussion
1. What quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods strategies are the best means of understanding students’
design thinking in pre-engineering contexts?
2. What longitudinal work in the space of pre-engineering design thinking exists, and to what extent do these
studies complement the pedagogies used by engineering curriculum?
44
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 3 9:15 AM-10:30 AM
3-B: Examining the Impact Wing B
1. A Framework for Evaluating Quality in Classroom Assessment for STEM4LIFE
Senay Purzer, Annwesa Dasgupta, Elizabeth A. Gajdzik & Tamara J. Moore, Purdue University; & Kristina M. Tank, Iowa
State University
Abstract
Engineering education and integrated STEM in pre-college classrooms create holistic and meaningful experiences
for students promoting long-lasting learning of STEM concepts and practices. One of the critical challenges in such
rich learning environments is capturing student learning. A framework is necessary to connect integrated learning
objectives and state standards that typically layout competencies based on disciplines. The purpose of this paper
is to describe the development of the“Framework for Evaluating Quality in Classroom Assessment for Integrated
STEM4LIFE”and its uses for promoting integrated learning through quality assessment practices.
Figure 1. Framework for Assessing STEM4LIFE
Topics for Discussion
1. What are other potential quality aspects of assessment that the framework should include?
2. What are other potential key indicators of assessment for each of the quality aspects?
3. What are other methods that could be used for evaluating the quality aspects?
45
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 3 9:15 AM-10:30 AM
3-B: Examining the Impact Wing B
2. The Development of STEM Innovation and Engineering Design Courses, and Its impact on Middle
School Students’ Achievement and Non-Cognitive Skills Related
Meltem Alemdar, Jeff Rosen, Roxanne Moore, Jeremy Lingle & Sunni Newton, Georgia Institute of Technology; &
Stefanie Wind, University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa
Abstract
The NSF Math/Science Partnership project, AMP-IT-UP, has created three STEM Innovation and Design courses
for grades 6-8 Engineering and Technology classrooms. Each 18-week course incorporates the practices of
experimental design, data visualization, and making decisions based on evidence, as well as 21st century skills,
entrepreneurial skills, and grade-level appropriate math, science, and engineering disciplinary content. The
courses deliver a project-based inquiry pedagogical experience and incorporate both skill and content activities
that develop and strengthen the practices. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of these courses
on middle school students’achievement in engineering design, 21st-century skills, and interest in engineering.
Specifically, the Engineering Design Process (EDP) conceptual model is used as a framework for the curriculum to
explore impacts on the outcome variables. This paper describes the development, implementation, and results
from these courses developed for students in 6th, 7th, and 8th grade and implemented in middle schools.
Topics for Discussion
1. How to develop/adapt a curriculum in STEM integration for the Engineering & Technology classroom when
the math and science content level of the students vary greatly.
2. Assessing the impacts of a curriculum in engineering and technology classrooms.
46
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 3 9:15 AM-10:30 AM
3-B: Examining the Impact Wing B
3. The Effects of Treatment and Demographics on Science and Engineering Outcomes for Elementary
Engineering Students
Cathy P. Lachapelle, Museum Of Science; Yoonkyung Oh, The Pennsylvania State University; Muhammad F. Shams,
Museum Of Science; & Christine M. Cunningham, Museum Of Science
Abstract
We conducted an efficacy study of the Engineering is Elementary (EiE) curriculum. We evaluate the causal effects
of the EiE curriculum intervention using data from a large-scale randomized-controlled efficacy trial (”Evaluating
the Efficacy of Elementary Engineering [E4 Project]) with treatment assignment at the level of school. We collected
data from 235 teachers in 148 schools. For this initial foray into modeling treatment effects on student outcomes,
we have found significant or marginally significant effects of EiE on 5 out of 7 science assessment outcomes, and
1 of 5 engineering assessment outcomes. On 3 science assessments, racial/ethnic minority students participating
in EiE improved more than both white students using EiE and the control group. Both treatment groups learned
the same science content but those using EiE had improved science outcomes, which we attribute to the fact
that the EiE curriculum was designed to apply science concepts. Pretest and student race/ethnicity were the
strongest predictors of posttest scores, suggesting the need for strong science and engineering interventions for
underrepresented minority students.
Unit Assessment Outcome Estimate (SE) Effect Size
Package Plantse 0.01 (0.07) 0.01
Package Designe 0.33 (0.19) 0.14
Plant Structuress 0.37 (0.23) 0.20
Needs for Plantss 0.18 (0.08)* 0.18
Note. **p<.01, *p<.05, p<.10; “e” superscript indicates engineering domain and
“s” superscript indicates science domain
Topics for Discussion
1. How can an engineering curriculum be designed to successfully support the learning of science and/or
mathematics?
2. How can important performance goals in engineering be measured for a large-scale study?
47
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 4 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
4-A: Leveraging Students’ Interests and Everyday Practices Wing A
1. Leveraging Students’ Everyday Engineering Practices in the Science Classroom
Veronica A. McGowan & Philip Bell, University of Washington
Abstract
The Next Generation Science Standards promote engineering as a pathway to broadening STEM participation for
students from non-dominant groups, noting that engineering gives students the opportunity to deepen their
science knowledge by engaging them in problem-solving practices around locally-relevant issues. However,
this perspective does not take into account that most elementary school teachers use already designed kits and
curricula to ground their science and engineering instruction. These designed units are intended for scale rather
than context, and rarely incorporate the everyday knowledge, expertise, and practices, known as“community
funds of knowledge”that each student brings with them to the classroom. During a two-year ethnographic study,
we used iterative design-based research methods to construct equitable approaches to engineering instruction
for the elementary science classroom that used students’everyday knowledge and experiences to support science
learning through design. Our research found that students engaged in authentic engineering practices throughout
the many contexts of their lives, and that these experiences could be leveraged to foster student understanding of
key science concepts in the classroom.
Data Overview & Methods
Data Description Methods
Research-Practice Partnership
Participants 28 diverse 5th grade students, teacher, researcher, and local experts Ethnography, Design-Based Research
Grounded Theory & Interaction Analysis
Settings Urban classroom, 2 field trips, 5 class speakers, 10 engineering design projects Grounded Theory & Verbal Analysis
Grounded Theory & Verbal Analysis
Video 100 + hours of instruction, including small group engineering design work
Grounded Theory & Verbal Analysis
Field Notes 100+ ethnographic field notes
Artifacts Self-docs, student journals, reflections, final projects, pictures, surveys
Interviews 12 focal group interviews with design teams and situated interviews during small
group design work
Topics for Discussion
1. How would you describe or define an epistemology of engineering? Is engineering an applied science, a
synthetic design-based field, or trandsisciplinary?
2. How do differing views on the nature of engineering impact instructional designs for learners, and what
types of knowledge get privileged in these learning spaces?
48
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 4 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
4-A: Leveraging Students’ Interests and Everyday Practices Wing A
2. Think 2 S.C.O.R.E (Sports Curriculum on Repurposing Engineering)
James Holly Jr, Purdue University
Abstract
Education should prepare each child with the skills needed to decide intelligibly how to engage life’s activities;
however, urban youth experience many hardships that serve as hindrances to their civic development (Ginwright,
2011; Rubin, 2007; Shiller, 2013). Specifically, the poor performance of Black male students in traditional learning
environments has been long researched and documented; unfortunately, not many, if any at all, modifications
have been made in the way they are educated (Floyd, 1996; Kirkland, 2008; Nasir & Hand, 2008). The preceding
contexts inspired the design of a course (in development) that investigates how K-12 Engineering Education
(ENE) can enhance the thinking strategies and learning abilities of Black middle-school males (BMSMs) from low
socioeconomic status (LSES) backgrounds. The instructor’s approach consists of focusing on the learning process
by featuring an integrated curriculum, including both academic and athletic components that exploit the natural
connections between the game of basketball and engineering thinking.
Engineering Thinking Across Diverse Contexts
eHOM Engineering Basketball Civic Engagement Ginwright
(2011)
Systems Thinking Seeing interconnections, Dribbling, passing, shooting, defense, • Define the problem Healing
Optimism predicting outcomes thinking (strategy) • Explore disjuncture Hope
Creativity •
Ethics Maintaining hope, Turnovers, missed shots/assignments, • Readily-available Care
persevering through fatigue, bad/losing games • good
Collaboration Embracing
Communication failure(s) Crossovers, slam dunks, offensive/defensive • imagination
schemes • Empowerment
Using imagination for •
novel solutions Sportsmanship Compassion,
empathy
Eliminate (or reduce) Teamwork Committed action
harm to people, Healthy
environment Play-calling, help-defense relationships
Respectful, productive
interaction for a unified
purpose
Learn, understand values
of all parties
Topics for Discussion
1. As a stakeholder in K-12 Engineering Education, do you consider the concept of this course to be engineering
teaching? Why or why not?
2. What other ways can K-12 Engineering Education be utilized to improve the achievement of students that
have historically“underperformed”in the traditional learning setting?
49
SATURDAY PRESENTATIONS
SESSION 4 1:30 PM-2:45 PM
4-A: Leveraging Students’ Interests and Everyday Practices Wing A
3. Make an Engineer
Chanel Beebe, Avneet Hira, Morgan Hynes, Umair Sarwar, Nicholas Jublet, Richard Brookes, & Salsibal Salah, Purdue
University
Abstract
Keeping in line with the theme of the summit of“characterizing engineering and design thinking in pre-college
settings”, the Make an Engineer activity is aimed at informing and broadening perceptions of engineering.
Participants are acquainted with different skills and problems pertaining to engineering, and also have the
opportunity to tell their own personally crafted story of engineering.
The activity entails participants building an engineer with body pieces that represent different habits of mind,
engineering challenges, disciplines of engineering, and their personal interests. Following which they write a brief
story about who their engineer is and the problems he/she solves. Prior to this, this work was piloted at the Make
It session at the ASEE Annual Conference, 2016.
This work embodies our philosophy of the humanistic side of engineering, wherein we undertake research and
outreach to broaden the participation in engineering by broadening the contexts in which it is practiced. By being
acquainted with the different skills and problems, participants’perceptions of who an engineer is and what he/
she does, are broadened. Thereafter, by telling their personally crafted story of engineering, they define and own a
unique engineering personality. Further still, the hands-on and individualistic nature of this activity make it a good
learning activity for people from diverse backgrounds and interests.
Excerpt of the Make An Engineer Process
Step 1: Select a Step 2: Select a Body Piece Step 3: Select Leg Step 4: Select Arm
Head Piece Pieces Pieces
Improving Poverty Mechanical Music
Systems Hunger Engineering Sports
thinking Health and Well Being Chemical Dance
Visualizing Inclusive and Engineering Poetry
Adapting Equitable Education Electrical Drama
Creative Gender Equality Engineering Debate
Problem Water and Sanitation Computer Engineering
Solving Quality Science Technology
Problem Reliable and Engineering Art
finding Sustainable Energy Material Recreational
Full and Productive Science Activities
employment Engineering Fashion
Sustainable Industrial Photography
Industrialization Engineering Construction/
Step 5: Tell Your Story!
Topics for Discussion
1. How could this activity be woven into existing curricula?
2. How could the story cards be adjusted to lead to a more rich discussion?
50
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
The program for the 3rd P-12 Engineering and Design Education Research Summit. The Summit will take place August 11-13, 2016 in Chicago, IL at the Hyatt Regency and Museum of Science and Industry
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search