DOCSLIB.ORG

Defining the Role of Technology and Engineering in STEM Education

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Defining the Role of Technology and Engineering in STEM Education [Pre-Publication Copy: 05-12-2020] Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy: Defining the Role of Technology and Engineering in STEM Education A joint project of the International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA) and the Council on Technology and Engineering Teacher Education (CTETE) 2020 Dedication William E. Dugger, Jr. 1937-2018 The inspiration for Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy (STEL) was Dr. William E. Dugger, Jr., who led the Technology for All Americans Project in the 1990s, publishing Standards for Technological Literacy (STL) in 2000, and tirelessly traveling around the globe to explain and promote STL. Due to his persistence, the technological literacy standards were adopted by states, districts, provinces, classroom teachers, textbook companies, test developers, other professional associations, and many other ITEEA stakeholders. He was a friend and colleague to us all. Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy is dedicated to his memory. ii STEL Final Pre-Publication Draft 5-12-2020 Table of Contents Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... ii Preface ........................................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1 - The Need for Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy ........................ 1 Defining Literacy ........................................................................................................................ 1 Technological and Engineering Literacy for All ........................................................................ 1 Teaching and Learning about Technology and Engineering ...................................................... 2 Technological and Engineering Studies as a Disciplinary Integrator ......................................... 4 Chapter 2 - Overview of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy ......................... 6 General Structure of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy ........................... 6 Features of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy .......................................... 7 Basic Structure of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy ............................... 8 Core Disciplinary Standards ....................................................................................................... 9 Format of the Core Standards ............................................................................................... 10 Benchmarks........................................................................................................................... 10 Technology and Engineering Practices ..................................................................................... 11 Technology and Engineering Contexts ..................................................................................... 12 Primary Users of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy .............................. 12 Recommendations for Using Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy ............ 13 Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy and STEM Collaborations ................ 13 Chapter 3 - Core Disciplinary Standards ...................................................................................... 15 Standard 1: Nature and Characteristics of Technology and Engineering ................................. 16 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 17 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 18 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 20 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 21 Standard 2: Core Concepts of Technology and Engineering .................................................... 23 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 24 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 25 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 27 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 28 Standard 3: Integration of Knowledge, Technologies, and Practices ....................................... 31 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 32 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 33 iii STEL Final Pre-Publication Draft 5-12-2020 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 33 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 34 Standard 4: Impacts of Technology .......................................................................................... 36 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 37 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 38 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 39 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 40 Standard 5: Influence of Society on Technological Development ........................................... 43 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 43 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 44 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 45 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 46 Standard 6: History of Technology ........................................................................................... 47 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 48 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 48 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 49 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 50 Standard 7: Design in Technology and Engineering Education ............................................... 52 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 53 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 55 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 56 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 57 Standard 8: Applying, Maintaining, and Assessing Technological Products and Systems ...... 59 Grades PreK-2 ....................................................................................................................... 59 Grades 3-5 ............................................................................................................................. 60 Grades 6-8 ............................................................................................................................. 62 Grades 9-12 ........................................................................................................................... 63 Chapter 4 - Technology and Engineering Practices ...................................................................... 65 Guiding Principles for Teaching Technology and Engineering Practices ................................ 66 Technology and Engineering Practices 1 (TEP-1): Systems Thinking .................................... 68 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 68 Examples of Systems Thinking in Technology and Engineering ......................................... 68 Technology and Engineering Practices 2 (TEP-2): Creativity ................................................. 70 Overview ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Engineering Futures 2035 Engineering Education Programs, Priorities & Pedagogies
    Engineering Futures 2035 Engineering Education Programs, Priorities & Pedagogies __________________________________________________________________________________________ Caroline Crosthwaite February 2021 Executive Summary The 2019 scoping study ‘Engineering Futures 2035’ commissioned by the Australian Council of Engineering Deans (ACED) investigated drivers of change, the anticipated nature of future professional engineering work, and engineering education programs that will be needed to produce fit-for-purpose graduates. Engineers of the future will require greater abilities to find and define problems before finding solutions. Both problem definition and solution will require a deeper ability to communicate and empathise with a broader range of stakeholders than has been required in the past. A greater focus on the human dimensions of engineering work and increasing complexity is also anticipated. Further details of the anticipated changes in the nature of professional engineering work and the capabilities that will be expected of future engineering graduates are provided in Section 1. The purpose of this report is to follow up on the ACED scoping study recommendation number 2 by presenting a critique of applicable developments in engineering education, referencing national and international best practice, and emerging educational models within the higher education sector. This includes identifying exemplary engineering education programs, program models, curriculum contexts and pedagogies that have the potential to support the delivery of the T-shaped engineering graduate and the greater breadth of graduate outcomes that will be required in future. Given the large engineering student numbers at many Australian universities, scalability, and possible barriers to widespread implementation of desirable changes are of particular interest. Consultation with national and international engineering educators and scholars collected views on program architectures, curriculum and pedagogies that will be instrumental in delivering on future graduate expectations.
    [Show full text]
  • STS Departments, Programs, and Centers Worldwide
    STS Departments, Programs, and Centers Worldwide This is an admittedly incomplete list of STS departments, programs, and centers worldwide. If you know of additional academic units that belong on this list, please send the information to Trina Garrison at [email protected]. This document was last updated in April 2015. Other lists are available at http://www.stswiki.org/index.php?title=Worldwide_directory_of_STS_programs http://stsnext20.org/stsworld/sts-programs/ http://hssonline.org/resources/graduate-programs-in-history-of-science-and-related-studies/ Austria • University of Vienna, Department of Social Studies of Science http://sciencestudies.univie.ac.at/en/teaching/master-sts/ Based on high-quality research, our aim is to foster critical reflexive debate concerning the developments of science, technology and society with scientists and students from all disciplines, but also with wider publics. Our research is mainly organized in third party financed projects, often based on interdisciplinary teamwork and aims at comparative analysis. Beyond this we offer our expertise and know-how in particular to practitioners working at the crossroad of science, technology and society. • Institute for Advanced Studies on Science, Technology and Society (IAS-STS) http://www.ifz.tugraz.at/ias/IAS-STS/The-Institute IAS-STS is, broadly speaking, an Institute for the enhancement of Science and Technology Studies. The IAS-STS was found to give around a dozen international researchers each year - for up to nine months - the opportunity to explore the issues published in our annually changing fellowship programme. Within the frame of this fellowship programme the IAS-STS promotes the interdisciplinary investigation of the links and interaction between science, technology and society as well as research on the development and implementation of socially and environmentally sound, sustainable technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Contribution of Qualitative Research Towards the Issues Affecting Female Undergraduate Engineering Students
    The Contribution of Qualitative Research towards the issues affecting Female Undergraduate Engineering Students Louise Duggan 29/5/2015 Department of Engineering, Letterkenny Institute of Technology, Port Rd., Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, Ireland [email protected] Abstract This article explores the use of qualitative research methods towards our understanding of the issues affecting female undergraduate engineers. As outlined in this article female engineering students face many challenges during their undergraduate studies. Qualitative research methods provide an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the issues affecting female undergraduate engineering students. Qualitative research provides an opportunity to gain rich data that simply would not be possible using quantitative methods. This article critically appraises three qualitative articles discussing the issues affecting the female undergraduate engineer and highlights the contribution that each article makes towards our overall understanding of the undergraduate female engineering experience. This article concludes that qualitative research methods provide invaluable data and has the potential to uncover new phenomenon. Keywords qualitative research, female, undergraduate, engineering Introduction Qualitative research is primarily concerned with understanding phenomena in depth and in its natural environment. Denzin and Lincoln (2005) define qualitative research as ‘a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible’ (p 3). The very nature of this definition emphasizes the importance of the setting or the context of the phenomenon under investigation. Similarly, Hatch (2002) describes some of the recurring characteristics of qualitative research, particularly the natural environment, prolonged contact, emphasis on meaning, inductive data analysis and emergent design.
    [Show full text]
  • B11504973.Pdf
    http://www.nap.edu/catalog/4919.html We ship printed books within 1 business day; personal PDFs are available immediately. Engineering Within Ecological Constraints Peter Schulze, Editor; National Academy of Engineering ISBN: 0-309-59647-5, 224 pages, 6 x 9, (1996) This PDF is available from the National Academies Press at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/4919.html Visit the National Academies Press online, the authoritative source for all books from the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine, and the National Research Council: • Download hundreds of free books in PDF • Read thousands of books online for free • Explore our innovative research tools – try the “Research Dashboard” now! • Sign up to be notified when new books are published • Purchase printed books and selected PDF files Thank you for downloading this PDF. If you have comments, questions or just want more information about the books published by the National Academies Press, you may contact our customer service department toll- free at 888-624-8373, visit us online, or send an email to [email protected]. This book plus thousands more are available at http://www.nap.edu. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF File are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Distribution, posting, or copying is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press. Request reprint permission for this book. i e h t be ion. om r ibut f r t cannot r at not o f EnginEngineeringeeringEngineering WithinWithinWithin however, version ng, i t paper book, at ive EcolEcologicalogicalEcological ConstraintsConstraintsConstraints at rm o riginal horit ic f o e h t he aut t om r as ing-specif t ion ed f Edited by Peter C.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Title
    The dialectic between expert knowledge and professional discretion: accreditation, social control and the limits of instrumental logic The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Seron, Carroll, and Susan S. Silbey. “The Dialectic Between Expert Knowledge and Professional Discretion: Accreditation, Social Control and the Limits of Instrumental Logic.” Engineering Studies 1.2 (2009): 101–127. Web. 27 Apr. 2012. © 2009 Taylor & Francis As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19378620902902351 Publisher Informa UK (Taylor & Francis) Version Author's final manuscript Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70473 Terms of Use Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use. The Dialectic between Expertise Knowledge and Professional Discretion: Accreditation, Social Control and the Limits of Instrumental Logic1 Carroll Seron Susan S. Silbey Engineering Studies, Volume 1. No. 2, July 2009, pp. 101-127 Abstract Cycles of reform have been a constant feature of engineering education. This paper suggests that these cycles are endemic because engineering begins with a particularly instrumental conception of responsible preparation. The instrumental logic of engineering repeatedly undermines educational reforms seeking to cultivate the capacities for discretionary interpretation and judgment at the root of professional practice. Using interviews with faculty
    [Show full text]
  • Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy
    Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy The Role of Technology and Engineering in STEM Education A joint project of International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA) and its Council on Technology and Engineering Teacher Education (CTETE) 2020. This project is supported by the Technical Foundation of America and the National Science Foundation, award #ATE – 1904261. Any opinions and findings expressed in this material are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. ISBN: 978-1-887101-11-0 International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. (2020). Standards for technological and engineering literacy: The role of technology and engineering in STEM education. www.iteea.org/STEL.aspx Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy The Role of Technology and Engineering in STEM Education Table of Dedication . vii CONTENTS Preface . viii Chapter 1 The Need for Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy Defining Literacy . 2. Technological and Engineering Literacy for All . .2 . Teaching and Learning about Technology and Engineering . 4 Technological and Engineering Studies as a Disciplinary Integrator . 5. Chapter 2 Overview of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy General Structure of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy . 9. Features of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy . 9. Basic Structure of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy . 11. Core Disciplinary Standards. 12 . Format of the Core Standards. 13. Benchmarks . 13 Technology and Engineering Practices. 14. Technology and Engineering Contexts . .15 . Primary Users of Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy . .16 . Recommendations for Using Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy . .16 . Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy and STEM Collaborations . 17 Chapter 3 Core Disciplinary Standards Standard 1: Nature and Characteristics of Technology and Engineering .
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Control and Academic Performance in Engineering Nora Honken, University of Cincinnati, USA Patricia a Ralston, University of Louisville, USA Thomas R
    American Journal of Engineering Education – December 2016 Volume 7, Number 2 Self-Control And Academic Performance In Engineering Nora Honken, University of Cincinnati, USA Patricia A Ralston, University of Louisville, USA Thomas R. Tretter, University of Louisville, USA ABSTRACT Self-control has been related to positive student outcomes including academic performance of college students. Because of the critical nature of the first semester academic performance for engineering students in terms of retention and persistence in pursuing an engineering degree, this study investigated the relationship between freshmen engineering students’ scores on the Brief Self-Control Scale and first semester GPA. To identify the unique explanatory contribution of self-control beyond incoming academic performance differences, the effect of ACT Composite scores was statistically removed from the sample of three cohorts of freshmen engineering students (n=1295 total). The results showed the measure of self-control explained on average 4.2% of the residual variability in first semester GPA, after accounting for the variability explained by ACT scores. Based on results of this study, self-control predicted between 27%-42% as much of the variance in first semester GPA as did ACT scores, a much-used high stakes measure frequently used for decisions such as program admittance or mathematics course placement. Thus self-control is a nontrivial predictor of academic performance. Based on post hoc analysis, relevant self-control behaviors might manifest themselves in time and study management since there was a significant correlation between self-control scores and scores on the MSLQ time and study management measure. These results have implications for both how much of an impact positive self-control may have on freshmen engineering academic performance, while also offering potential avenues to support students in bolstering aspects of this personality trait through a focus on strengthening time and study management skills.
    [Show full text]
  • SPSP 2020 International Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice
    SPSP 2020 International Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice Abstracts of Research Accepted for Presentation* at SPSP 2020 *Due to the global Covid-19 pandemic, the 8th biennial conference of the Society for the Philosophy of Science in Practice, scheduled to take place at Michigan State University in July 2020, was cancelled. Prior to cancellation, conference submissions had been reviewed and the list of accepted research was finalized. This booklet contains abstracts of all research accepted for presentation at SPSP 2020, except in cases where an author preferred that their abstract not be published. Table of Contents I. About SPSP ...................................................................................................... 3 II. Organising Committees .................................................................................... 4 III. SPSP Statement on the Covid-19 Pandemic.................................................... 5 IV. Abstracts of Symposia ...................................................................................... 6 V. Abstracts of Contributed Talks ........................................................................49 2 I. About SPSP Philosophy of science has traditionally focused on the relation between scientific theories and the world, at the risk of disregarding scientific practice. In social studies of science and technology, the predominant tendency has been to pay attention to scientific practice and its relation to theories, sometimes willfully disregarding the world except
    [Show full text]
  • Doing STS in STEM Spaces: Experiments in Critical Participation
    Engineering Studies ISSN: 1937-8629 (Print) 1940-8374 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/test20 Doing STS in STEM Spaces: Experiments in Critical Participation Emily York To cite this article: Emily York (2018) Doing STS in STEM Spaces: Experiments in Critical Participation, Engineering Studies, 10:1, 66-84, DOI: 10.1080/19378629.2018.1447576 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19378629.2018.1447576 Published online: 14 Mar 2018. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 46 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=test20 ENGINEERING STUDIES, 2018 VOL. 10, NO. 1, 66–84 https://doi.org/10.1080/19378629.2018.1447576 Doing STS in STEM Spaces: Experiments in Critical Participation Emily York School of Integrated Sciences, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY This is a story of critical participation in engineering and applied sci- Received 11 October 2017 ence spaces that examines the challenges and opportunities of STS Accepted 9 February 2018 (Science and Technology Studies) experiments in relation to disci- KEYWORDS plinary identity, institutional values, and the power dynamics at work STS; making and doing; STEM in the experiment. Comparing my experiences as an STS graduate education; cultures of student negotiating access in a research-oriented nanoengineering science and engineering; department geared toward capital formation, and as an assistant critical participation professor in a teaching-oriented applied science department geared toward holistic problem-solving, I highlight the necessity of creat- ing mutual benefit and shared interest for STS approaches to gain traction in these spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • 8491 Engineering Studies
    Engineering Studies 8491 36 weeks Table of Contents Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Course Description ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Task Essentials Table .................................................................................................................................... 3 Curriculum Framework ................................................................................................................................. 5 Examining the Engineering Profession ......................................................................................................... 5 Practicing Engineering Fundamentals .......................................................................................................... 9 Communicating Technical Information ...................................................................................................... 25 Exploring the Physics Concepts of Selected Energy Systems .................................................................... 30 Applying the Engineering Design Process .................................................................................................. 32 Demonstrating College Readiness Skills .................................................................................................... 36 SOL Correlation by Task ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Role of National Laboratories in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Education
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 342 628 SE 052 255 TITLE Role of National Laboratories in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Education. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Energy Research and Development of the Committee on Science, Space, andTechnology. House of Representatives, One HundredFirst Congress, First Session (May 15, 1989). INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, DC.House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. PUB DATE 90 NOTE 405p.; Several reprints contain small print. No. 9C. AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, U.S. Government Printing Cffice, Wasnington, DC 20402. PUT, TYP7: Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090) EDRS PRICE mFo1/pc17 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Elementary Secondary Education; Engineering Education; *Government Role; *Hearings; Higher Education; Inservice Teacher Education; Mathematics Education; Science Education; *Student Recruitment I'DENTIFIERS Congress 101st; *National Laboratory System ABSTRACT The programs developed by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Laboratories to lure an untapped wellof students into scientific fields and to increase the number of qualified scientists coming into the research environmentare described. The witnesses of this hearing are from the Departmentof Energy and the National Labs; the outside organizationswno will develop and administer the programs; teachers who facea lack of resources, materials, and interest on the part of students; other educators; and students who are currently participatingin Department of Energy and Oak Ridge National Laboratory Programs.Witnesses include: (1) Alvin W. Trivelpiece, director, Oak RidgeNational Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; (2) Robert W. Springer,director, Division of Educational Programs, Argonne National Laboratories, Argonne, Illinois; (3) Manuel Perry, human resourcesplanning and development, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California; (4) William F.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Education to Engineering: a Good Move? 10 P
    Technology Education to Engineering: A Good Move? 10 P. John Williams s e i d u t S y g Abstract o literacy in the population (Barlex, 2008). l o n Recent curriculum changes in the educa- Despite the idea that Mathematics and Science h c e tional system of Australia have resulted in education can be improved by combining them T f allowing optional Engineering course work to with Engineering and Technology this has not o l a count for university entrance for students choos- been proved, and the concept of STEM literacy n r u ing to apply to a university. In other educational is a bit befuddling and ill defined. o J systems, Engineering is playing an increasingly e h T important role, either as a stand-alone subject or Much has been written about the synergistic as part of an integrated approach to Science, relationships among Science, Mathematics, and Mathematics, and Technology. These develop- Technology, particularly between Science and ments raise questions about the relationship Technology. A succinct summary of these rela- between Engineering and Technology education, tionships has been provided by Kimbell and some of which are explored in this article. Perry (1991): Science provides explanations of how the Introduction world works, mathematics gives us numbers Curriculum agendas that include a proposed and procedures through which to explore it, link between Technology and other curriculum and languages enable us to communicate areas rarely seem to favor Technology. When within it. But uniquely, design & technolo- Science and Technology are offered in primary gy empowers us to change the made world.
    [Show full text]