C. A. Mathis, Emilie A. Siverling, Aran W. Glancy, T. Moore
{"title":"STEM整合课程中教师运用论证支持工程学习","authors":"C. A. Mathis, Emilie A. Siverling, Aran W. Glancy, T. Moore","doi":"10.7771/2157-9288.1163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the fundamental practices identified in Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) is argumentation, which has been researched in P-12 science education for the previous two decades but has yet to be studied within the context of P-12 engineering education. This research explores how elementary and middle school science teachers incorporated argumentation into engineering designbased STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) integration curricular units they developed during a professional development program. To gain a better understanding of how teachers included argumentation in their curricula, a multiple case study approach was conducted using four STEM integration units. While evidence of argumentation was found in each curriculum, the degree to which it appeared in each case varied. The strongest potential for argumentation occurred when students were required to explain and justify their final engineering design solutions to the client; certain guiding questions and discussions also promoted argumentation, depending on their structure. Additionally, argumentation was found to support engineering concepts such as the process of design, engineering thinking, communication in engineering contexts, and the application of science, mathematics, and engineering content. These findings support the idea that argumentation can be integrated into P-12 engineering education contexts in order to support students’ STEM learning.","PeriodicalId":37951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research","volume":"7 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teachers’ Incorporation of Argumentation to Support Engineering Learning in STEM Integration Curricula\",\"authors\":\"C. A. Mathis, Emilie A. Siverling, Aran W. Glancy, T. Moore\",\"doi\":\"10.7771/2157-9288.1163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the fundamental practices identified in Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) is argumentation, which has been researched in P-12 science education for the previous two decades but has yet to be studied within the context of P-12 engineering education. This research explores how elementary and middle school science teachers incorporated argumentation into engineering designbased STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) integration curricular units they developed during a professional development program. To gain a better understanding of how teachers included argumentation in their curricula, a multiple case study approach was conducted using four STEM integration units. While evidence of argumentation was found in each curriculum, the degree to which it appeared in each case varied. The strongest potential for argumentation occurred when students were required to explain and justify their final engineering design solutions to the client; certain guiding questions and discussions also promoted argumentation, depending on their structure. Additionally, argumentation was found to support engineering concepts such as the process of design, engineering thinking, communication in engineering contexts, and the application of science, mathematics, and engineering content. These findings support the idea that argumentation can be integrated into P-12 engineering education contexts in order to support students’ STEM learning.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"27\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1163\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Teachers’ Incorporation of Argumentation to Support Engineering Learning in STEM Integration Curricula
One of the fundamental practices identified in Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) is argumentation, which has been researched in P-12 science education for the previous two decades but has yet to be studied within the context of P-12 engineering education. This research explores how elementary and middle school science teachers incorporated argumentation into engineering designbased STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) integration curricular units they developed during a professional development program. To gain a better understanding of how teachers included argumentation in their curricula, a multiple case study approach was conducted using four STEM integration units. While evidence of argumentation was found in each curriculum, the degree to which it appeared in each case varied. The strongest potential for argumentation occurred when students were required to explain and justify their final engineering design solutions to the client; certain guiding questions and discussions also promoted argumentation, depending on their structure. Additionally, argumentation was found to support engineering concepts such as the process of design, engineering thinking, communication in engineering contexts, and the application of science, mathematics, and engineering content. These findings support the idea that argumentation can be integrated into P-12 engineering education contexts in order to support students’ STEM learning.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER) is issued electronically twice a year and serves as a forum and community space for the publication of research and evaluation reports on areas of pre-college STEM education, particularly in engineering. J-PEER targets scholars and practitioners in the new and expanding field of pre-college engineering education. This journal invites authors to submit their original and unpublished work in the form of (1) research papers or (2) shorter practitioner reports in numerous areas of STEM education, with a special emphasis on cross-disciplinary approaches incorporating engineering. J-PEER publishes a wide range of topics, including but not limited to: research articles on elementary and secondary students’ learning; curricular and extracurricular approaches to teaching engineering in elementary and secondary school; professional development of teachers and other school professionals; comparative approaches to curriculum and professional development in engineering education; parents’ attitudes toward engineering; and the learning of engineering in informal settings.