No abstract

Background: Design and science inquiry are intertwined during engineering practice. In this study, we examined the relationship between design behaviors and scientific explanations. Data on student design processes were collected as students engaged in a project on designing energy-efficient buildings on a blank square city block surrounded by existing buildings using a computer-aided design program, Energy3D, with built-in solar energy simulation capabilities. We used criterion sampling to select two highly reflective students among 63 high school students. Results: The main data sources were design replays (automatic playback of student design sequences within the CAD software) and electronic notes taken by the students. We identified evidence of informed design such as problem framing, idea fluency, and balancing benefits and trade-offs. Opportunities for meaningful science learning through engineering design occurred when students attempted to balance design benefits and trade-offs. Conclusions: The results suggest that design projects used in classrooms should emphasize trade-off analysis and include time and resources for supporting trade-off decisions through experimentation and reflection. Future research should explore ways to visualize patterns of design behavior based on large samples of students.

BACKGROUNDWhile much research has been conducted to study the effect of teaming on student learning and attitudes, few studies have explored the nature of team discourse and how these discussions support or hinder student learning and self-efficacy. PURPOSE (HYPOTHESIS)This study investigated the relationship between verbal exchanges, self-efficacy, and individual student achievement. Results are discussed through the lenses of two frameworks: Bandura's social cognitive theory and Vygotsky's social constructivist theory. DESIGN/METHODTwenty-two first-year engineering students participated in this study. The verbal exchanges of these students were recorded and then coded into 35 discourse moves and six discourse actions. Data on students' pre and post self-efficacy were also collected. Correlations between discourse actions, self-efficacy scores, and individual student achievement were computed. RESULTSStudents engaged in six types of discourse actions: task-oriented, response-oriented, learning-oriented, support-oriented, challenge-oriented, and disruptive. Results indicated no direct correlation between support-oriented discourse (verbal persuasions) and achievement. However, there was a moderate positive correlation between post self-efficacy and the extent to which a student engaged in support-oriented discourse. Engaging in challenge-oriented or learning-oriented discourse did not reveal correlations with self-efficacy or achievement. CONCLUSIONSFinding that self-efficacy and achievement are related confirms Bandura's self-efficacy theory. Furthermore, the low self-efficacy of under-performers was evident in their grades, as well as in the conversations of team members. However, contrary to theory, supportive comments (verbal persuasions) received were not correlated with self-efficacy. The scarcity of challenge-oriented discourse (argumentation) is a concern and should be addressed in future research.

Background Practicing engineers must continuously renew their knowledge and skills in order to remain competitive in the field. Yet, recent studies have found very little improvement in engineering graduates' lifelong learning skills. Research on information literacy, a critical component of lifelong learning, in technical fields is limited. Purpose/Hypothesis This study sought to evaluate the information skills of first‐year engineering students. Specifically, it investigated the extent to which students gather information from a variety of sources and from high‐quality sources, use gathered information to support an argument, and document information sources. Design/Method This study used content analysis of memos written by teams of engineering students. A random sample of 40 memos, selected from a pool of 263, was coded using InfoSEAD, a structured coding protocol developed for this study. Results Overall, 82% of the sources used were Web resources, of which 12% were of high quality. From the information threads that could be traced to the original source, 68% were relevant and used appropriately. Due to documentation errors in the memos, 28% of the sources cited could not be classified, and 57% of the information threads identified could not be traced to the original source. Conclusions Student teams mostly relied on Web resources, but their documentation skills were weak. When students did successfully document information, it was generally done appropriately.

BACKGROUNDInstrument development is an iterative process that requires continuous efforts to ensure the psychometric soundness of the assessment tools. Previous research has provided validity evidence for the design, engineering, and technology (DET) survey in assessing K-12 teachers' familiarity with and perceptions of engineering. PURPOSEThe purpose of this study was to re-examine the psychometric soundness of the DET survey with a new data set collected from elementary teachers representing a national population. In addition, details regarding how to appropriately conduct confirmatory (CFA) and exploratory (EFA) factor analyses and item analysis were presented. DESIGN/METHODThe DET survey was administered to 405 elementary teachers (second through sixth grades) between 2006 and 2010. First, a CFA was conducted to test the factor structure based on a theoretical model. Second, an EFA was used to explore and refine the factor structure. Finally, item analysis was used to evaluate individual item performance and estimate internal reliability. RESULTSWhile the CFA conducted using the new sample reported unsatisfactory fit indices to the previous DET model, the EFA proposed a refined four-factor solution explaining 74% of the total variance. The item analysis revealed problems with several items that possibly contributed to the CFA results. CONCLUSIONSThe DET is a useful instrument with sufficient reliability and moderate validity evidence. However, we recommend revisions of its scale and several items. We also recommend future research with middle and high school teachers as well as with teachers in different cultural contexts and countries.

Background As engineers solve problems that are ill‐structured and require collaboration, a common goal of engineering programs is to develop students' competencies for solving such problems in teams, often using cornerstone design experiences. Purpose With the goal of designing effective learning environments, this study identifies qualitatively different ways that engineering students experienced ill‐structured problems while working in teams. Design/Method This phenomenographic study employs interview data from 27 first‐year engineering students. Iterative data analysis resulted in categories of student experiences and their logical relationships. Results Seven categories describing collaborative, ill‐structured problem‐solving experiences emerged: completion, transition, iteration, organization, collaboration, reasoning, and growth. These categories are organized in an outcome space along dimensions we call reaction to ambiguity and use of multiple perspectives that can be used to frame students' perspectives from less comprehensive to more comprehensive. Conclusions First‐year engineering students experience team‐based, ill‐structured problem solving in a variety of ways. The resulting outcome space is of practical use to educators who teach courses involving collaborative, ill‐structured problem solving.

No abstract

Many pedagogical innovations aim to integrate engineering design and science learning. However, students frequently show little attempt or have difficulties in connecting their design projects with the underlying science. Drawing upon the Cultural‐Historical Activity Theory, we argue that the design tools available in a learning environment implicitly shape knowledge development as they mediate students’ design actions. To explore the roles of tools in design‐science integrated learning environments, this study investigated how secondary students’ tool‐mediated design actions were linked with their science learning in a tool‐rich design environment with minimal explicit guidance. Eighty‐three ninth‐grade students completed an energy‐efficient home design challenge in a simulated environment for engineering design supported by rich design tools. Results showed that students substantially improved their knowledge as a result of designing with the tools. Further, their learning gains were positively associated with three types of design actions—representation, analysis, and reflection—measured by the cumulative counts of relevant computer logs. In addition, these design actions were linked with learning gains in ways that were consistent with their theoretical impacts on knowledge development. These findings suggest that, instead of being passive components in a learning environment, tools considerably shape design processes, and learning paths. As such, tools offer possibilities to help bridge the design‐science gap. © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 9999:1049–1096, 2017