Teacher And Student Feedback About Engineering Design In Middle School Science Classrooms: A Pilot Study

In this study, middle school teachers and students provide critical feedback about three designbased science teaching kits so that the curricula can be refined and improved such that student learning and engagement in science and engineering is maximized. The curricula, packaged as kits, focus on a well-defined set of concepts in science. All lesson plans include a final design challenge. The middle school students must use the scientific and mathematical knowledge and methods they have learned to design, build, and test a working artifact to achieve a goal. Teachers felt that improvements could be made with each kit to enhance student engagement and learning, and some teachers enacted changes during their course of teaching with the kit. Teachers perceived that all three kits increased students’ engagement and learning in science. Students enjoyed each of the three kits, thought learning with them was fun, and understood the teachers’ learning objectives. Students thought that the best part of the entire unit was the design and construction of the engineered device. The curricula have the ability to help teachers not only teach required science content, but allow students to master standards-based science content in a science reforms-based manner, through inquiry, active, and situated learning. Introduction: Design-based science Reform efforts in science education emphasize a shift from teacher-centered to student-centered classrooms 1, 2 . Students construct an understanding of the natural world in much the same way that scientists do, through active engagement in the process of inquiry. Effective teachers expose their students to a variety of teaching strategies, engaging their students in different ways. The active process of learning involves both mental and physical activities as students work with their teachers and peers 2 . When engaged in active learning, students make gains not only in content knowledge, but in process skills and attitudes towards science. When teachers use a curriculum based on active learning, their behaviors also become more student centered, with less focus on worksheets and lectures, and more focus on lab work and inquiry 3 . In general, active learning reaches students who possess a wide variety of learning styles, much more so than traditional teaching and learning 4 . In contrast to traditional lecture-style classrooms, active learning takes place when teachers engage students such that that they think about and perform meaningful activities. This can be as simple as pausing several times during a lecture and asking students to clarify their notes with another student. However, thoughtfully designed activities can promote student engagement to a much higher degree, and student engagement is highly correlated with academic success 5 . One type of active learning, problem-based learning, is based on content-specific problems. Problem-based learning (PBL) 6 is a teaching and learning method where problems relevant to the curriculum provide the context and motivation for all the activities that follow. PBL started in the mid 1950s in North American health sciences education and emerged as an ethical and practical way to give beginning medical students practice solving problems in simulated cases before working with living patients. Problem-based learning has been used in over 60 medical schools in addition to schools of business, education, architecture, law, and engineering 7 . Problem-based learning has also been used in K-12 schools. In problem-based learning, the learners are immersed in a particular, practical context, often a student-chosen context. One goal of problem-based learning is to help students develop an intrinsic motivation to learn. Since students are more motivated to learn when they see value in what they are learning, it is important that students or teachers choose problems that are relevant for the students 8 . Theoretical Framework Problem-based learning and other active learning strategies are based on the theoretical framework of social constructivism. Essentially, social constructivists believe that knowledge is created in the context of the situation in which it was developed. Learners construct meaning through active engagement, not passive listening. Learners use and apply their knowledge to carry out investigations and create artifacts that represent their understanding. Learners work within a social context as they use language to express and debate their ideas. Learners engage in authentic tasks that are relevant to the student and connected with their lives outside of the school setting, and the role of the teacher is to help learners construct their knowledge through scaffolding and coaching 9 . The instructional principles of constructivism imply that learning activities are anchored within a larger purpose, that the learner takes ownership for his or her goals in learning, and that the tasks are authentic. The learner does not merely memorize and regurgitate facts, but engages in authentic activities related to the instructional goals. Learners use all sorts of resources and sources of information to support their inquiry. Students take ownership for learning and problem solving, while a teacher encourages and challenges the pupils. Teachers take on the role of consultant or coach, challenging the learners as well as valuing their process of learning. The teacher does not tell the students how to think or what to do 7 . One active teaching and learning methodology that falls under the framework of constructivism is design-based science. Closely related to problem-based science, design activities can be thought of as a type of problem solving. Just as situated learning theory 10, 11 looks at how students learn best situated in the context of authentic activities, design-based science has students learning science through solving authentic problems. Design is to engineering what inquiry is to science 12 . They are both problem-solving activities that use cognitive reasoning, mental models, evaluation, rely on content knowledge, and operate within constraints 13 . Design-based science activities center on student-designed, built, and tested artifacts. If carefully planned to match design activities with science concepts, students can learn and apply scientific principles as they strive to design, build, modify, and test a device (an artifact). Design became a topic of discussion in science education in 1993 when the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) published Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy 1 . The AAAS stated that while design projects are common in the elementary grades, that all students should become familiar with design and technology projects in order to engage in problem-solving in real-world contexts. The National Research Council (NRC) 2 followed suit in 1996 with its own recommendations on how science should be taught. The NRC’s National Science Education Standards included an emphasis on students’ abilities to design solutions to problems in much the same way that inquiry is conducted to answer scientific research questions. The NRC stated that young children should be conducting design activities. “Children can engage in projects that are appropriately challenging for their developmental level ones in which they must design a way to fasten, move, or communicate (p. 135).” This recommendation comes closer to design-based science because the NRC recommended that design tasks should be related to science content standards. Additionally, although an emphasis on technological literacy is present in three major educational reform documents, the Benchmarks for Science Literacy 1 , the National Science Education Standards 2 , and the International Technology Education Association’s Standards for Technological Literacy 12 , there is virtually no emphasis placed on technological literacy in today’s K-12 curricula in the United States. This is in stark contrast to other industrialized countries (e.g. France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom) that put emphasis on technology education 14, 12, 15 . The National Academy of Engineering has a thorough description of a technologically literate person in its book, Technically Speaking: Why All Americans Need to Know More about Technology, written by the Academy’s Committee on Technological Literacy 15 . It states that a technologically literate person is one who recognizes technology, understands the difference between science and technology, knows some basic concepts about technology, understands the goals and trade-offs implicit in the engineering design process, recognizes how technology has influenced society through the ages, and as well recognizes how society has also shaped technological advances, understands that using technology entails risks, and that all technology has both benefits and costs. A technologically literate person understands that technologies are neither inherently good nor evil, and that the values of a culture or society are reflected in the technologies that the culture or society embraces. A technologically literate person should have some hands-on skills with tools and devices so that he or she has the ability to diagnose and fix certain problems such as a flat tire or a tripped circuit breaker, and finally, a technologically literate person should be able to participate in public debates and discussions about technological issues, and cogently communicate his or her ideas about technology. Through design-based science curricula if they are properly written and developed students have the potential to meet both science literacy and technological literacy goals. Students can engage in design-based science at any age, while learning any content area of science. A primary research group investigating design-based science is at the University of Michigan where Design-Based Science (DBS) curriculum units have been create