What will you do to help elementary students who struggle in the engineering design process? Analysis of teachers' reflections. (fundamental)

Abstract

The next generation of STEM workers and leaders requires knowledge and skills in order to effectively contribute and compete in the global workforce [1], [2]. More importantly, the sustainability of our planet requires citizens who can work collaboratively to think critically, make ethical and moral decisions, and solve problems [3]. The science and engineering practices described by the Next Generation Science Standards [4] can provide a framework for teachers to engage their students in asking questions, defining problems, brainstorming, developing and testing models or prototypes, analyzing and revising models, using mathematics and computational thinking, and communicating solutions to problems. Some benefits of teaching the engineering design process (EDP) include helping students understand and improve their world, developing their problem solving skills and dispositions, and increasing motivation and engagement in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects [5]. However, teachers mentioned the following challenges in terms of implementing EDP in their classrooms: (a) not having extra time to engage students in the design process, (b) limited resources and materials, (c) ways to facilitate student's varied ideas and designs, (d) ability to grade non-traditional assignments, and (e) helping students who are struggling with their design/project [5], [6]. Moreover, in the study conducted by Porter et al. [7], they found that planning open-ended design challenges pertinent to the curriculum is difficult for teachers, particularly those who are inexperienced in teaching EDP. Hsu, Purzer, and Cardella [8] conducted a separate study with 192 elementary classroom teachers that suggested a need to improve teachers' familiarity with EDP. In this study, Hsu et al. found that, while most teachers mentioned the importance of engineering and technology, they were relatively unfamiliar with these concepts. Additionally, moderately experienced teachers showed stereotypical views of engineering [8]. In particular, the study conducted by Cunningham et al. [9] found that teachers tended to define technology as tools, machines, computers and electronics before attending workshops focused on the EDP. After the workshops, however, they were more likely to define technology as a solution to a problem and as something that is designed or invented. The participating teachers also improved their knowledge of engineering from building and constructing to a systematic and iterative process of solving a problem [9]. In our graduate methods course, we engaged teachers in teaching and learning the EDP by supporting them to develop or adapt a unit to incorporate science inquiry and EDP practices that utilized STEM curricula and resources. Our study was guided by the following research questions: 1. To what extent, if any, do teachers' knowledge of the EDP change before and after the course? 2. In what ways, if any, do teachers' pedagogical moves to scaffold students' learning experiences of the EDP change at the end of the course?