The Journal of Technology Studies 14 such apassive environment isnoteffective and educationalresearch indicatesthat Contemporary notes withinaclassroomlecture setting. ically inadidactic manner, learn thatis,taking hands-on andcollaborative methodology. Arif Sirinterlikci,LindaZane,andAleeaL.Sirinterlikci ThroughActive Learning Toy DesignandDevelopment uetesuet’attentionbecauseitin ture thestudents’ ActiveSTEM fields. isoneway learning tocap- peers,ona K-12 studentswithinternational that,when Ithasbeenreported comparing fields. provide thefoundationforrisingstarsinsuch ened forK-12education,sincesuchstudents isparticularly height- 2006).Concern Service, Research mathematics (STEM)(Congressional areas ofscience,technology, engineering,and the educationof American studentswithinthe Active Learning and Development throughActive Learning Toy Design this work. the students’ w education. Collectionoftw today’s climateofincreasedattentiononSTEM thought processes—aneffort thatisneededin moted higherlevel, divergent, andcreative environmentengaging andfunlearning thatpro- these designs. The experience generatedan followed throughby makingprototypestorealize with marketing surveys andconception,then process todesignandrealizetoys. They started Students followed theproductdevelopment TOYchallenge National Toy DesignCompetition. inthe experiences duringtheirparticipation isaboutstudentlearning presented inthisarticle design anddevelopmentThe casestudy field. andmiddleschoolstudentsinthetoyelementary based onactive pedagogy learning by engaging Abstract ing themto done toenergize thisgenerationofy Americans would thatsomethingmustbe agree Sciences, 2007). The stakes arehigh,andmost they areinschool(National Academy of mathematics andscienceassessmentsthelonger age morepoorlyAmerican studentsfare on ork isincludedwithinthisstudytodepictboth In traditional formal education,studentstyp- In traditionalformal Increased public attentionisbeing paidto presentsaninitiativeThis article thatis w ard positi w ork andtheirperceptionsto ve attitudes inrelationto o years ofstudent outh—dra v olves w v ard er- w- dent) (Grabinger&Dunlap,2000). student, student-to-teacher, andstudent-to-stu- ious interactionsarewelcomed (e.g.,teacher-to- anddirectionalapproachwheremultifaceted var- the process(Bruner, 1961). Active isa learning processtoimprovein thelearning theresultsof methodologyinstructional thatengages students dents (Prince,2004). Active isan learning results inlimitedretentionofknowledge by stu- Improving Undergraduate Education, tested, e directly (Glasgow, process ofthelearning become acriticalpart cation, self-managementandself-motivation roleintheiredu- As thestudentstake agreater them take responsibilityfortheirown education. how the goalistochannelstudentsthinkabout students andfaculty. According totheauthor, ofboth an attitude-alteringapproachonthepart activities,set oflearning ratheritismore but (1995) statedthatactive isnotsolely learning a indi whereby teams continuetotackleproblems that resultfromateam’sSuch benefits perseverance, tude to skills, anemphasisonteamwork, apositive atti- communication skills,higher-level thinking tasks withinteamenvironments develop good Students engaged insuccessfulactivelearning and respondingtoorsolvingaproblem. ing), interactingwithotherpeopleandmaterials, multiple senses(e.g.,hearing,seeing,andfeel- relieving stress. Active involves learning using and outsideteams;high-level thinking;and ing, generating,andsolving;interactingwithin using multiplesensesanddoing;problem defin- Active learning’s criticalcomponentsinclude students tobe engaged inhigher orderthinking ofproblem ask critical importance solving,but & (Grabinger with lesspressureandfearof failure fellow studentsalsogeneratesanenvironment Dunlap, 2000). viduals oftenabandon. In Through active knowledge learning, is Other academic sources agree withthe Other academicsourcesagree and what andthushaving they arelearning, w or revised b The Seven Principlesin Action: ard thesubject,andmotivation tolearn. xperienced, constructed, actedupon, 1996; Hatfield,1995). y the learner (Holzer the learner A team thatincludes Hatfield 1994). , The Journal of Technology Studies 15 the y urban and the e engage students in the engage ve learningve methodology indirectly This refers to any learning activity in learning activity refers to any This els of interest in and understanding of en area, and this then can be strength- hich the learner actually does something: does the learnerhich actually mation on the initiativ ersity (RMU), located in sub In the fall of 2005, Robert Morris The following case study was used to inves- case study was The following Adopting an acti giv writing a research proposal and conducting research proposal and writing a (e.g., completing a project the research, an engineering and developing designing structure),or piece of critiquing an argument making an oral presentation. writing, and in and role-playing case studies Analyzing also can be employed, simulation activities butthese doing process. Doing. w ted a unique means of collaboration. geoning competition was sponsored b geoning competition was y • OYchallenge National Competition. National OYchallenge ur Pittsburgh, PA, and its neighbor Moon Area and its neighbor Moon PA, Pittsburgh, Elementary Challenge (Gifted) Program School star local Elementary students from two school transportedelementary to RMU were schools hours for two noon, to work at Monday every introduced These students were on their projects. Design Toy National TOYchallenge to the Competition at RMU; they the given were or games toys challenge to design and develop At the time, the as entries to the competition. b Sigma Xi International Science Honor Society, Company, Toy Airlines, and Hasbro Southwest Ride Science. Sally by organized and it was T Univ ened by the active learning activities. the active ened by learning active the relationship between tigate National Competition. and the “TOYchallenge” in involvement The authors questioned whether the competition increased the student partici- pants’ lev scientific inquiry and engineering-related background section provides The next processes. infor competition. TOYchallenge does not necessarily require the replacement of does not necessarily structured or eliminate teaching methods highly and Clark Sweller, the lecture format. Kirschner, data of empirical 50 years (2006) suggested that learning do not support very early using active suggest that formalThey in the learning process. to and structured methods are needed early or background a strong basis within establish an ident acilitate form of dialogue e This is more than lis- ools used to f about a topic of interest This concerns a learner y el uctor, which is one-way which uctor, feel. T feel. more activ y A This occurs whenever a student This occurs whenever the This might be observing a teacher, atches or listens to another person w ork. Students write about what they ork. Students write about what Problem-based, experiential, and inquiry- experiential, Problem-based, tioners or experts either inside or outside of can include “pair- activities Additional class. learning groups, and collaborative shares,” such as teams, student debates, and student- sessions. led review occurs when teachers create small-groupoccurs when dis- also can involve They cussions on a topic. situations with practi- students in dialogue thinking reflectiv Dialogue with Self. Dialogue or w Observing. either w interaction. learn, how they learn they it, and the role this learn, how life, and per- in their own plays knowledge Dialogue with Others. Dialogue such reflective thinking may include journals thinking may such reflective and learning portfolios. tening to an instr doing something related to the subject being studied. listening to musicians, or observing natural, social, or cultural phenomena. haps ho • • • tasks as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, synthesis, as analysis, tasks of education. levels at higher especially to SilbermanAccording the students (1996), to study need They most of the work. should do learn. they what and apply problems, ideas, solve fun, supportive, Learning should be fast-paced, seeing it, Hearing something, and engaging. it with others questioning it, and discussing students to learn the subject matter more allow Students need to manipulate their thoroughly. learning, figure come themselves, things out by tryup with examples, out skills, and complete on the informationassignments that depend they or should acquire. acquired either have based learning forms are the most often cited of & Clark, Sweller, learning (Kirschner, active learn- 2006). Similar concepts (such as discovery students learning), whereby ing and cooperative solving under project teams on problem in work management structures, self-conf lead to and become team feel accountable students who It does members (Grabinger & Dunlap, 2000). or at which the methodology not matter what it should address at least one it is applied, level concepts: or more of the following The Journal of Technology Studies 16 included (SallyRideScience Categories for the2006and2007competitions within which towork. g fromexisting commercialtoysinclude parts or cannot bereentered prize inacompetitionincluding TOYchallenge game thathaspreviously beenrecognized witha to maintainoriginalityofdesign:(a) of the$200. The following were rules enforced presentationinexcess preparation forthefinal rations stage. An additional$50couldbeusedin money toward prepa- purchasesduring the final not spendtheinitial$150,itcouldrollover that constraint. Ifateamdid within a$200budget b forthenationalround were expected to fied entries. with theirpreliminary Teams thatquali- list, includingsignedreceipts,andsubmittedit cost figure.Teams kept anitemizedexpenditure or donatedhadtobeincludedwithinthetotal round. to thepreliminary Any itemspurchased during theinitialdevelopment processthatled elimination round.Eachteamwas allowed $150 which asthepreliminary proposal form, served opers submittedtheiroriginaldesignideasina could submitonly onedesign. The young devel- could belongtoonly oneteam,andeachteam memberswerethe group girls.Eachperson careers amongyoung women, atleast50%of andinterestinSTEM inquiry of scientific 6 who was 18orolder. A teamcouldinclude3to Science, n.d.). Teams were coachedby anadult and develop toys andgames (Sally Ride 5-8,offeredgrades themthechancetodesign and thedesignprocess”(Sall a ti competition “asachanceforteamsofimagina- tion web page: by thecompetitionorganizationthe competi- on n.d.). The following designsteps were presented ames, (c) A teamcanonly chooseonecategory uild theworking prototypeoftheirdesigns ve kidstocreateanew toy orgame. Toys are great waygreat aboutscience,engineering, tolearn members. In order to encourage greater levelsmembers. Inordertoencouragegreater • • The TOYchallenge, forstudentteamsfrom The TOYchallenge organization saw this • Get OutandPlay: of allages. to Toysthat Teach: designed forthewhole family toenjoy. Games for the Family: promoted outdooractivities. ys thatcanbeusedinteachingpeople (b) , the competitorsdesigned The to aeoythat category a n.d.): , y an exciting game y Ride Science, or game cannot n o or toy Any T the preliminar (c) Developing ideas,(d) Creatingadrawing for follo Ride Science,n.d.). siteincludesthe The current improved ascomparedtotheoriginalone(Sally design process,which isslightly different and include abriefreferenceontheengineering proposal andincludesthefollowing content: 6 should beencouragedinK-12classrooms. inquiry,cates theprocessofscientific which Redesign. This engineeringdesignprocessrepli- esting andEvaluation, (f)Communication,(g) pages. Itissimilartoanengineeringdesign • • The mostrecent TOYchallenge web sources • • • • • Brainstorming • • • • was report limitedto entry The preliminary wing steps (a) Brainstorming, (b)Research, wing steps(a)Brainstorming, pa Section 3: Your Team (nomore than_ than _page) Section 1: Your Toy orGame(nomore than _page) Section 2:How Doesit Work? (nomore chosen Prototyping torealizethedesignidea entry Preparing thepreliminary prototyping Preparing working drawings for it done you todoandhow aretrying you willget Planning by recordinginthelogbook what Picking adesignideafromalternatives mation aboutthepossible designs Conducting researchtogather moreinfor- toy/game, thecategory, anditsobjective ofthe thedefinition Determining • • • • • • • • Who isthetarget market foryour What istheobjectofyour toy/game? What isthenameofyour creation? didyouWhat category choose? Where areyou from? ties andcomplete your creation? How did you divide uptheresponsibili- your idea? How didyou work together todevelop specific. Explain how your toy/game works. Be toy/game, andwhy? g e) y and prototype for finals, (e) and prototypeforfinals, The Journal of Technology Studies 17 which could which ver, Mastercam ver, group wanted to group wanted ame. Theyame. also we “3D Animal “3D Animal Rescue.” Animal Rescue “MUSIC MANIA,” “MUSIC 3D 1. Models of game pieces e After the preliminary round, the 3D Animal the 3D After the preliminary round, Two entries were submitted to the 2006 submitted were entries Two inalized the rules for their g making the solid models. Ho because it can be used as the main program was to generate ways used in simple and effective files. builtSTL (Stereolithography) Parts were in the RMU Rapid Prototyping (RP) Laboratory under the supervision of the lead author. were pieces after they Students painted the game made solid models of the game pieces and mod- made solid models of the game els of animals to be included as a part of the 3D The students used 1). design scheme (Figure tools in AutoCAD and Mastercam software both submit a game that included less action but that included less action submit a game focused on male- the boys more learning, while Because the teams contained activities. favored chosen. their ideas were more girls, most of qualifiedRescue board game for the East Coast Xi held at Sigma was Nationals, which Headquarters in Raleigh, North Carolina. In the order to prepare for the national competition, process. the product development team followed and Students studied the details of their proposal f double as two separate games. During the deci- separate games. as two double groups, process for both sion-making gender the when evident This was a major role. played girls in the The other groupThe other a music-based board submitted entitled game TOYchallenge Competition. One group One Competition. submit- TOYchallenge called game ted a board Figure 2. Prototypes of game pieces Prototypes 2. Figure being painted. Figur (Solid Model/STL Model). y ere hich oted for the y v At the first meeting, Thus, students w . aints ming, and then the es and friends) were compiled. Based on es and friends) were Most favorite toy/game that the participant toy/game Most favorite own/owned ipant likes the most ipant likes Gender of the participant Section 4: Your Design Process (no more (no Process Design Your 4: Section 2 pages) than Your of Photos/Sketches Section 5: than 2 pages) more (no Toy/Game Round Entry Preliminary Section 6: 1 page) than (no more Budget Type of TOYchallenge category the partic- TOYchallenge of Type Age of the participant lem statement). The object included the lem statement). After the determination of the category – • • • • • • • process. Development concept of constr Toys that Teach – student groups group (a large Teach that Toys associated with each elementary school) was brainstorming activities conducted layered 2 given 2000). Students were (Birch & Clegg, minutes to think about the topic and then read the group; to as the process was their answers encouraged to consider oth- were they repeated, ers’The stu- ideas and to combine these ideas. concepts through dents discussed alternative brainstor “best” design. The original design ideas includ- “best” design. group) (within the respective ed each student’s and its object vision of the design (a sketch) (prob presented details of the designs. Students were the told that some of the design components ma temporal, not be realized within the physical, and financial w restraints of the project, the results of these surveys, they chose their chose they the results of these surveys, collected process, they In the categories. game participants: data from the survey the following students were given the necessary forms; given also students were on the com- a presentation the lead author gave by be followed would petition. Mini-lessons on an as-needed complementary workshops directed to develop also were The students basis. based on the product devel- or toys their games and imagina- in a creative opment methodology of categories After studying the various way. tive the cate- discussed competition, students briefly not select did they gories of interest. However, their final until the results of their categories their surveyed they (in which Survey Marketing relativ helped them to refine their concepts. The Journal of Technology Studies 18 Figure 5.Final product. game. Figur Figure 3.Board gamefabrication. the lastrequiredanimal,heorshepushed pital (Figure 4). As thewinningplayer rescued the lightsonatwinningplayer’s animalhos- realize oneoftheirmostcreative ideas—turning basicelectricalcircuitsto nents, studentsbuilt sions. InadditiontotheCADandRPcompo- meetingses- and game boardatoneofthefinal Figure 3. completedthegame cards The group author. processisillustratedin The construction by ofthelead thestudentsundersupervision game board. These two componentswere built to useawooden game box thatcoupledasa painting thegame pieces.Studentsalsodecided machine. Figure 2shows members group bybuilt theSLA(Stereolithography) RP e 4. Electricaldesignforthe befor ISLAND,” beingtestedbytheteam sized outdoorboard game,“PALM Figur laboratories and theequipment. had limitedaccess toboththeengineering author was stillinvolved. Thus, theteamalso evenEngineering Department, thoughthe lead after in thesecondyear theinitiative becamean board. Similartotheprocessfollowed inthe makeshift purses,agiantpalmtree,andthe “PALM ISLAND,” that couldbeplayed outdoors.Itwas named qualifying projectwas alife-sizedboardgame schoolschedules. The secondyear’sstudents’ dence duetoothergiftedactivities occupying hours activity attheleadandthirdauthor’s resi- andapresentationboard. t-shirts, members’ thelogbook,ed oftheprojectbudget, team presentationconsist- items requiredforthefinal any didnotearn awards.though thegroup The members gave asuccessfulpresentation,even shown inFigure 5. the hospital. The completedgame boardis hospital intoaslotthatilluminatedthelightsat work and theirfriendstestedthegame tomake sureit pleted thede f irst year’s competition,afterthestudentscom- Student responses. The 2007projectwas conductedasanafter- At the2006EastNationalFinals, two group -hours activity heldoutsidetheRMU ed andwas readytouse(Figure 6). e e 6. Secondyear the competition v elopment process,thesestudents and itincludedcoconuts, As mentionedpreviously, ’s design: Life- The Journal of Technology Studies 19 aried y en numerous and v v le using the engineering design score of 1 indicated “Strongl process second set of questions focused on the of questions focused second set A 1. Comfortable using technology 2. Comfortab 3. Comfortable building things Better results were obtained from the Better results were A At a time when many educators are consid- many At a time when as 5. alue for each of the following three questions alue for each of the following xperiences within STEM fields (National Disagree,” and a score of 5 indicated “Strongly Disagree,” 8, the students’ As one can see in Figure Agree.” and build- of comfort technology in using level high, and their comfort extremely ing things was aver- with the engineering design process was age. second set of questions. The maximum point The maximum second set of questions. v w development process and students’ process development attitudes questions was This set of learning. active toward global, and to ascertainintended to be more the students’ of the process holistic attitudes toward surmised and design. It was development toy that although students’ in singular involvement push them into a STEM the process might not in the process of involved being actively career, feelings inquiry might promote initial positive foundational scientific procedures. toward of feelings and levels Introductory positive comfort with scientific processes, utilizing is the first step learning methodology, active becoming scientifically students literate. toward students did not anticipate entering into the field into the entering anticipate did not students section are the survey results of The adult. as an 7. in Figure displayed e ering ways to strengthen America’s scientific America’s to strengthen ering ways foundations, it is imperative and technological that students be gi Conclusions Figure 8. Students’ view of engineering 8. Figure and being hands- design process on/actively engaged - average values. y Agree,” whereas y Disagree.” Most age think engineering y might pursue a career in engineering. stories to share about their work. stories to share about in college. projects. Most people m is cool. To the contrary, the students moderately the students moderately the contrary, To After the successful completion of the proj- of completion the successful After interesting have 1. Engineers probably 2. Engineering is boring. be fun to be an engineer. 3. It would engineering classes 4. I think I will take 5. I alone on work 6. Engineers usually 7. was of each response Maximum point value point represented “Strongl points, representing “Strongl Figure 7. Students’ view of engineer- 7. Figure ing – average values. students indicated that they were neutral toward were students indicated that they This could be a result the engineering discipline. or the to engineering tools of less exposure groupall-girls’ being an team. disagreed as being boring. with engineering attitude positive This could reflect a somewhat if the the engineering process, even toward 1 ects and presenting them at the 2007 Nationals, at the 2007 them presenting ects and experience. about the surveys students answered surveys based on the original were The surveys organization. TOYchallenge the by developed the students’ tried to gauge These questions per- the engineering fieldceptions of a result of (as process mirror- design and development the toy product design and develop- ing the engineering designed questions were These ment process). learning to learn in active if time spent engaged or myths dispelled any development and toy STEM careers, notions regarding preconceived The first survey engineering in particular. questions: following section contained the 7 The Journal of Technology Studies 20 instr caused theseattitudes, observations by the tain whether TOYchallenge experiences actually ing things. Although itisnotpossible toascer levelsfort withutilizingtechnology andbuild- com- showed positive attitudestoward students’ asanadult.Survey responsesalso ing thefield ing process,albeittheirlackofinterestinpursu- reflected positi addition, someofthestudentsurvey responses scientif was ahighly effective meansofpromotingthe requiredbyhands-on learning thecompetition years, itbecame evident totheauthorsthat TOYchallenge competitionfortwo consecutive that thestudentscanrelateto. used inthesecaseswere toys andgames, items design anddevelopment process. The products dev hands-on experience in engineeringdesignand ofactive thatis,gaining learning, benefits TO detailing theprocessesinvolved inthe inanauthenticmanner.inquiry This casestudy, lear method ofdynamically engaging studentsinthe isessential. inquiry approaches thatpromotecollaborative scientific identifyingeducational and technological fields, aging thenext generation ofleadersinscientific leaders truly believe inmotivating andencour- 2006).Ifnational (Marx&Harris, STEM fields experiences thatwillinspire futureleadersin students arelackinginthetypesofscientific the discretionofclassroomteacher. Many the sidelines,oftenleaving to suchinstruction scores, NCLBlegislation haspushedscienceto readingandmathematics increase students’ Left Behind Act of2001 bound resurgence inpopularity, schooldistrictsremain 2009). priority forthenext decade(The White House, campaign—an effort tomake STEMeducationa United States,launchedthe andtechnologicalinquiry innovation inthe an effort tofocusmoreattentiononscientific inNovemberOffice 2009.PresidentObama,in withamandatefromtheOvaldent, starting Academy ofSciences,2007). This focusisevi- Ychallenge competition,e elopment, especially regarding theproduct ning process,anditpromotesscientif uctors provided anecdotal evidence that After guidingthestudentsthrough Active representsaneffective learning a Although STEMeducationisfacing by by thestandardssetforth the ic methodwithyoungIn learners. ve attitudes to (NCLB). Inaneffort to Educate toInnovate w xemplif ard theengineer- ied the No Child ic - According toDuffy andCunningham,theprob as promotedby Duffy andCunningham(1996). similar totheproblem-basedprocess, learning a and self-managementself-motivation played (Edelson, 1998). fromseeingthisinaction the studentsbenefited endeavors rely onthecollaborative process,and (Edelson, Pea, &Gomez,1995).Scientific level ofcollaborationandcommunication processwasconstruction enhancedby thehigh Itbecameevidentfailure. thattheknowledge- its core,alsoinducedlesspressureandfearof team environment, withanenjoyable projectat projects, andnegotiate tosettledifferences. The municate theirthoughts,work collaboratively on dents were able toassumedifferent roles,com- interactions. Byusingcooperative stu- learning, student-to-student student, andmostimportant, as evidenced by student-to-teacher, teacher-to- process alsowas interactive andcollaborative, students enjoyed theprocess. The active learning collaborative problems, andthey encouraged to beboth occurs when studentsareprovidedauthentic authentic, real-lifeproblems. True learning manage theirown inordertosolve learning tivist whereby methodoflearning, students aconstruc- lem-based modelbestexemplifies f creative Such learning wasSuch learning evident throughoutthetw ty of scientific pursuits. Byapplying kno ty ofscientific execution, they but alsowitnessed thepracticali- ences inmarketing, productde the studentsnotonl sequentially througheachphase oftheprocess, of theworking prototypestages.Bymoving survey, totherealization toideation,andfinally development process--fromtheinitialmarketing apply what throughouttheproduct they learned frombeingable to The studentsalsobenefited usedby inquiry inSTEMfields. experts entific solving problems, replicatingtheprocessofsci high-lev process. They explored a set ofideas,andused es), andquestionedduringthedevelopment saw, spoke, wrote(inlogbooks), drew (sketch- observation skills. The studentsheard, students’ by inquiry heighteningthe promoted scientific competition. y acilitator who provides thenecessar ears ofinvolvement withthe TOYchallenge critical roleformostofthestudents. This is The studentstookcharge of theirprojects, The acti el thinkinginmakingdecisionsand solutions, undertheguidanceofa elear ve and self-directedinordertof ning experiences also g y ained valuable experi- v elopment, and resources. y wledge ind o - - The Journal of Technology Studies 21 Township, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania. Township, , Moon Linda Zane is an Assistant Professor of Assistant Professor Linda Zane is an Mrs. Aleea L. Sirinterlikci is a Masters is a Masters Aleea L. Sirinterlikci Mrs. Dr. Such experiences promote scientific promote Such experiences inquiry Associate is an Arif Sirinterlikci Dr. Early Childhood Education at Slippery Rock Childhood Education Early University, Pennsylvania. at Robert student in Instructional Leadership of Education and School Morris University Pennsylvania. Township, Social Sciences, Moon He is a Member-at-large of Epsilon Pi Tau. of Epsilon Pi He is a Member-at-large commitment (Edelson, 1998). They forged They 1998). (Edelson, commitment brain- collectively the uncertaintythrough by discovering by storming solutions to problems, through marketing of the public the needs agreeing upon collaboratively and by surveys, step of the Each to their problems. solutions character- the second essential process required self- The students were istic—commitment. with through followed directed learners, who final to realize its each discovery outcome. that no construction in a way and knowledge learning active or lecture could; an textbook and engaging, is challenging, methodology belief that all students enlightening. It is our benefitwould to scientific from exposure learning and it inquiry model, through an active includes is our hope that future STEM education the resources and training to promote authentic, hands-on learning within all K-12 classrooms. of and Director of Engineering Professor at Robert Morris Engineering Laboratories Mathematics, of Engineering, School University and Science vi- students, the e s learning could be ve icial to science educators promote scientific thought and y the conclusion of their active learning of their active the conclusion At of STEM Due to the heightened awareness This case study reflects a group of students xperience, the students successfully exchanged the students successfully xperience, to real-world problems and settings, the students the and settings, problems to real-world the benefits experience to able an of were learningauthentic experience—learning that is 1998). useful (Edelson, concrete and e self- were and others, ideas with themselves their learning, and self-directed in reflective and of observation, enhanced their powers to fruitionbrought their ideas excellent via an engineers and accomplished what They product. in their professional product designers do of a successful and useful lives—realization immersed the students were product. In addition, steps, both technical and in the process and its enact had to understand and They not technical. budget management princi- constraints, project on ples, and the implications of their designs production. education among the nation’ learning sci- dence put forth within for active a strong ence education is compelling. Building will foundation for students in science education hope) encourage students to pursue careers (we in STEM fields, returning the competi- thereby United States within the of the advantage tive The aforemen- areas of science and technology. tioned processes of acti who demonstrated two essential attitudes that demonstrated two who are characteristic of scientists—uncertainty and attitudes in an engaging and authentic manner. attitudes in an engaging extremely benef because the The Journal of Technology Studies 22 Silberman, M.(1996). Silberman, Sally RideScience.(n.d.). Prince, M.(2004).Doesactive work? learning A review oftheresearch. The White House.(2009). National Marx, R. ishe,P. Kirschner, Grabinger, R.S.,&Dunlap, J. C.(2000).Richenvironments foractive InD. learning: A definition. Glasgow, N. A. (1996). Holzer, S.M.(1994,Spring). From constructivism toactive learning. Hatfield, S.R.(1995). Edelson, D. C.,Pea, R.D., &Gomez,L.(1995).Constructivism inthecollaboratory. InB. G. Wilson Edelson, D. throughtheadaptationofscientific C.(1998).Realisingauthenticsciencelearning Duffy, T. M.,&Cunningham,D. J. (1996).Constructivism: Implicationsforthedesignanddelivery (2006). ResearchService. Congressional Bruner, J. S.(1961). The actofdiscovery. Birch, P., &Clegg, B. (2000). References excellence-science-technology-en. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-launches-educate-innovate-campaign- http://www.sallyridescience.com/toychallenge/. http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Prince_AL.pdf. Education, 93 in science, technology, engineering, andmath(STEM) education. Hall. America for abrightereconomic future. teaching. inquiry-based not work: An analysis ofconstructivist, discovery, ofthefailure problem-based, experiential, and March 5,2009,fromhttp://www.succeednow.org/innovators/innovator_2/innovator002.html. Squires, G.Conole,&Jacobs(Eds.), CA: CorwinPress. NJ: Educational Technology Publications. challenges, andrisks. MA: Ank Cardiff: University of Wales Press. (Ed.), 331). Dordrecht,Netherlands:Kluwer Academic. practice. InK. Tobin &B. Fraser (Eds.), technology InD.of instruction. H.Jonassen(Ed.), education issuesandlegislative options. Prentice Hall. Constructivist learningenvironments: Casestudiesininstructionaldesign. Academy ofSciences.(2007). W ., & Harris, C.J ., &Harris, er Publishing Company. A., Sw (pp. 170-198).New York: Simon&SchusterMacmillan. (3), 223-231.Retrieved October13,2008from le,J eller, Active learning:101strategies toteach any subject. The seven principlesin action:Improving undergraduate education. Doing science:Innovative curriculumfor thelife sciences. The ElementarySchool Journal 106 Educational Psychologist 41 ., &Clark,R.E.(2006). Why does minimalguidanceduringinstruction President Obamalaunches “Educate toInnovate” campaignfor excellence Toy Challenge. . (2006). NoChildLeftBehindandscienceeducation:Oppor Imagination engineering: A toolkitfor business creativity. Rising above thegathering storm:Energizing andemploying Science, technology, engineering, andmathematics(STEM) Handbook ofresearch for educationalcommunicationsand Harvard EducationalReview, 31 Retrieved June12,2007from W The changing faceoflearning technology W International handbookofscienceeducation ashington, DC:National Academies Press. ashington, DC: ofCongress. The Library (2), 75-86. (5), 467-477. Retrieved 5,2010from January The Innovator, 2 J ournal ofEngineering 21-32. , Des Moines,IA:Prentice- Thousand Oaks, Englewood Cliffs, (pp. 8-38). Retrieved . (pp. 317- New York: tunities, Bolton,