Student Videos as a Tool for Elementary Teacher Development in Teaching Engineering: What Do Teachers Notice? (Research to Practice)

McCormick, Mary; Wendell, Kristen B.; O’Connell, Brian

doi:10.18260/1-2--23060

Cited by 6 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a growing number of United States elementary schools offer formal engineering learning experiences in response to the Next Generation Science Standards and other calls for increased STEM education (National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council, 2014), teachers often notice that engineering affords an opportunity to work toward important goals they already have for children: to become better decision makers, collaborators, and problem solvers (McCormick, Wendell, & O'Connell, 2014). Published guidelines for quality precollege engineering education (Moore et al, 2014) can help elementary educators choose and implement an effective engineering curriculum, but questions remain about what classroom norms, differentiation strategies, and other tailored scaffolds -beyond curriculum materials -will best help their particular students succeed in the decision-making and collaboration aspects of engineering design.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflective Decision‐Making in Elementary Students' Engineering Design

Wendell

Wright

Paugh

2017

J of Engineering Edu

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A key feature of engineering design is collaborative, deliberate decision making that takes into account information about design options. K-12 students need opportunities for this kind of decision making if they are to meet the learning standards for engineering set out in the Next Generation Science Standards.Purpose This qualitative study sought to propose and operationalize a definition of reflective decision-making among elementary students. We investigated how urban elementary students enact reflective decision-making in a formal engineering design curriculum. MethodWe used naturalistic inquiry methodology and video recorded seven Engineering is Elementary design challenges in four classrooms. Students worked in small teams, and we focused on their planning and redesign phases. Maximum variation sampling, constant comparative analysis, and microethnographic accounts demonstrated the diversity of resources students utilized in their decision making. ResultsIn student discourse, we found evidence for six reflective decision-making elements: articulating multiple solutions, evaluating pros and cons, intentionally selecting a solution, retelling the performance of a solution, analyzing a solution according to evidence, and purposefully choosing improvements. The discourse patterns used to enact these elements both supported and interfered with students' achievement of design goals.Conclusions Our results suggest that during engineering design tasks, young learners working in small teams can respond productively to opportunities to engage in sophisticated discourse. However, further work is needed on tools and strategies that support reflective decision-making by all students during engineering design in elementary school.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflective Decision‐Making in Elementary Students' Engineering Design

Wendell

Wright

Paugh

2017

J of Engineering Edu

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The findings from this study describe one group of elementary PSTs' attention, analysis, and response to student thinking with engineering DCIs offering a window into their professional noticing of students' thinking (Sherin, 2001) during their first experience teaching an integrated science/engineering STEM unit. These findings build upon the research on PSTs' preparation for engineering design (Dalvi & Wendell, 2017;McCormick et al, 2014;Wendell, 2014). The analysis of the data suggests a number of factors affecting PSTs' professional noticing of students' engineering thinking and their promotion of the NGSS engineering DCIs that teacher educators can consider when developing their STEM methods courses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…Studies have indicated that elementary teachers tend to be unfamiliar with design, engineering, and technology; hold overly broad views about the work of engineers; and have conceptions that do not necessarily align with the NGSS definitions of engineering disciplinary core ideas and practices (Cunningham, Lachapelle, & Lindgren-Streicher, 2006;Hammack & Ivy, 2017;Hsu, Purzer, & Cardella, 2011). Furthermore, research has indicated that there is variability in elementary teachers' perceptions of how to teach engineering design and how to respond to students' design ideas (Capobianco, Diefes-Dux, & Mena, 2011;McCormick et al, 2014;Wendell, Swenson, & Dalvi, 2016). Teachers may adopt a conventional teacherdirected approach whereby students use a step-by-step linear process to problem-solving and teachers instruct students in science concepts to apply to the engineering problem, and/or teachers may operate from a student-constructivist frame of learning encouraging student sense-making of the design process to figure things out.…”

Section: Engineering Design In Elementary Gradesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This emphasis on student ownership of the design process necessitates that PSTs be able to notice students' ideas and practices in order to be responsive to student thinking as well as promote students' analysis and reasoning about design decisions (Dalvi & Wendell, 2017;Levin, Hammer, & Coffey, 2009). Yet, research has indicated that novice teachers tend to focus more on content delivery and social conflicts within the class than on student conceptions (McCormick, Wendell, & O'Connell, 2014). Specifically, from research with three groups of participants (elementary education PSTs, engineering majors, and STEM educators specializing in STEM curricula/teacher workshops) who examined a video of fourth-grade students solving an engineering problem, Dalvi and Wendell (2017) found that PSTs noticed students' science/engineering thinking less often than engineers or STEM educators.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Untitled

2020

JSTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and recent efforts in STEM education have highlighted a multidisciplinary vision of teachers' integrating science education and engineering design problem-solving for student learning and critical thinking development. However, elementary pre-service teachers (PSTs) typically are unfamiliar with engineering design. Since research is limited on elementary PSTs' ability to notice student thinking for engineering problem-solving, the purpose of this exploratory study was to identify patterns in PSTs' written reflections from their fourth-grade practicum teaching experience with an integrated science/engineering STEM unit. We adapted Barnhart and van Es's (2015) teacher noticing coding scheme to examine PSTs' level of focus (low, basic, or strong) in their professional noticing (attending, analyzing, and responding) of students' thinking and engineering disciplinary core ideas. The results indicated that PSTs' reflections focused more on attending to students' engineering ideas than on analyzing and responding to students' thinking. For NGSS engineering disciplinary core ideas, the PSTs reflected the least on defining and delimiting the engineering problem, focusing more on students' idea generation to solve the problem and students' thinking to optimize their design with less emphasis on evaluating design ideas. These findings suggest possible areas of emphasis for teacher educators to prepare elementary PSTs in developing their ability to attend to, analyze, and respond to students' engineering thinking when integrating engineering design with science education.

show abstract

“…Research on teacher noticing in engineering education is in its early stages relative to mathematics and science education [23][24][25][26][27]. We located five studies about teacher noticing in engineering education.…”

Section: Noticing In Engineering Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preservice Teachers Noticing About Discussions to Support Students in Revising their Design Ideas (RTP)

Lottero-Perdue,

Figueroa,

Mikeska

et al.

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

She has integrated engineering into courses for PreK-8 teacher candidates, developed and directed a graduate STEM program for PreK-6 teachers, and partnered with teachers to implement PreK-8 engineering learning experiences. She has authored numerous engineering-focused teacher practitioner articles, chapters, and research articles, and presents her research regularly through American Society for Engineering Education Pre-College Engineering Education Division, a division she has chaired. Her current research includes investigating how K-5 students experience design failure and engage in redesign; how simulated classroom environments can be used to help pre-service and in-service teachers practice facilitating argumentation discussions in science and engineering; and how close analysis of student work samples and classroom discussion transcripts can support pre-service teachers' learning to notice.

show abstract

Student Videos as a Tool for Elementary Teacher Development in Teaching Engineering: What Do Teachers Notice? (Research to Practice)

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Reflective Decision‐Making in Elementary Students' Engineering Design

Reflective Decision‐Making in Elementary Students' Engineering Design

Untitled

Preservice Teachers Noticing About Discussions to Support Students in Revising their Design Ideas (RTP)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About