Minken, Z., & Macalalag, A. Z., & Naylor, N. (2020, June), What Will You Do to Help Elementary Students Who Struggle in the Engineering Design Process? Analysis of Teachers’ Reflections  Paper presented at 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual On line . 10.18260/1-2--35505

\bibitem{asee_peer_35505}
  Minken, Z., \& Macalalag, A. Z., \& Naylor, N. (2020, June), \emph{What Will You Do to Help Elementary Students Who Struggle in the Engineering Design Process? Analysis of Teachers’ Reflections}
  Paper presented at 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual On line .
  10.18260/1-2--35505

Zachary Minken, Augusto Z. Macalalag Jr., and Najah Naylor.  "What Will You Do to Help Elementary Students Who Struggle in the Engineering Design Process? Analysis of Teachers’ Reflections".  2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual On line , 2020, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2020.  https://strategy.asee.org/35505 Internet.  07 Jun, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_35505}
  Zachary Minken, Augusto Z. Macalalag Jr., and Najah Naylor.
  "What Will You Do to Help Elementary Students Who Struggle in the Engineering Design Process? Analysis of Teachers’ Reflections".
  \emph{2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual On line , 2020, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2020.
  https://strategy.asee.org/35505 Internet.  07 Jun, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_35505
author = "Zachary Minken, Augusto Z. Macalalag Jr., and Najah Naylor"
title = "What Will You Do to Help Elementary Students Who Struggle in the Engineering Design Process? Analysis of Teachers’ Reflections"
booktitle = "2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access"
year = "2020"
month = "June"
address = "Virtual On line "
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://strategy.asee.org/35505}
number = {10.18260/1-2--35505}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - Teaching through the engineering design process (EDP) requires not only teachers’ knowledge about it, but also be able to identify conceptual challenges of students and to address them in their lessons.  However, helping teachers develop their pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) towards teaching the EDP is challenging to do, particularly for those with limited experiences and repertoire in the domain.  Our study was conducted during the 3-credit teaching methods course for 15 weeks (3 hours per week, 45 hours total) in a small liberal arts university in the northeastern United States.  Participants in this study included 17 practicing elementary school teachers: 13 had seven or more years of teaching experience, while four had six or fewer years of teaching; the majority (70%) had degrees in early childhood and elementary education.  

Throughout the course, teachers learned the EDP (ask, imagine, plan, create, and improve) by using and implementing the Engineering is Elementary (EiE) modules (www.eie.org).  Our study was guided by the following research questions: (a) To what extent, if any, do teachers’ knowledge of the EDP change before and after the course?, (b) What are the changes, if any, on their identification of students’ challenges before and after the course?, and (c)  In what ways, if any,  do teachers’ pedagogical moves to scaffold students’ learning experiences of the EDP change at the end of the course?

We developed and administered identical pre-and post-tests on the first and last day of the course. We reported our analysis of open-ended questions on PCK of teaching EDP.  The scenario used was adapted from the Museum of Science in Boston’s Everest Trek module.  Participants were asked to consider a scenario which tasked them with designing and creating a coat capable of protecting a team of adventurers from the harsh weather conditions of Mt. Everest at all times of year, where the temperature ranges from -76oF to -2oF.  We asked teachers to reflect on components of EDP, how to help struggling students, and how to create a grading scheme. 

Our preliminary findings show that, when we asked our teachers to list and describe the steps they would take to design and create a type of coat for their team members, our teachers made positive changes from pre- to post-tests in terms of incorporating components of EDP with respect to brainstorming (imagining possible solutions), planning, and prototyping (creating and improving).  We found no differences with respect to asking or defining the problem from pre- to post-test. When asked to give advice to students based on scenarios where students skipped EDP steps or struggled to come to a consensus, we found that teachers gave students advice that evidenced an understanding of EDP and scientific practices, such as conducting investigations, testing and controlling for particular variables, and encouraging students to make arguments from evidence.  Finally, teachers responded that they would evaluate student performance with regard to this scenario by considering process versus product oriented grading, use of rubrics (e.g. EDP, iteration, and effectiveness of design), and teamwork.






 


AU  - Zachary Minken
AU  - Augusto Z. Macalalag Jr.
AU  - Najah Naylor
CY  - Virtual On line 
DA  - 2020/06/22
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - What Will You Do to Help Elementary Students Who Struggle in the Engineering Design Process? Analysis of Teachers’ Reflections
UR  - https://strategy.asee.org/35505
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--35505
ER  -