预见变化:科学教育改革时代教师工程观探析

Q1 Social Sciences
Tesha Sengupta-Irving, Janet Mercado
{"title":"预见变化:科学教育改革时代教师工程观探析","authors":"Tesha Sengupta-Irving, Janet Mercado","doi":"10.7771/2157-9288.1138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Author(s): Sengupta-Irving, T; Mercado, J | Abstract: © 2017, Purdue University Press. All rights reserved. While integrating engineering into science education is not new in the United States, technology and engineering have not been well emphasized in the preparation and professional development of science teachers. Recent science education reforms integrate science and engineering throughout K–12 education, making it imperative to explore the conceptions teachers hold of engineering as a discipline, and as an approach to teaching. This analysis draws on focus group interviews with practicing secondary teachers (n = 12) conducted during a professional development seminar. The goals of the seminar were to present engineering as a heterogeneity of practices and inquiries organized to solve human problems; and, to model design-build-test pedagogy as a new approach to teaching. Outcomes show teachers’ conceptions of engineering as a discipline are that it redefines failure as necessary for success, and that it can more directly link school learning to serving society. Teachers also anticipated that design-build-test pedagogy would disrupt procedural learning in science, and likely invert which students achieve and why. These outcomes are discussed in light of reform goals, particularly as regards issues of equity. Implications for science teacher educators are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":37951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research","volume":"7 1","pages":"108-122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anticipating change: An exploratory analysis of teachers’ conceptions of engineering in an era of science education reform\",\"authors\":\"Tesha Sengupta-Irving, Janet Mercado\",\"doi\":\"10.7771/2157-9288.1138\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Author(s): Sengupta-Irving, T; Mercado, J | Abstract: © 2017, Purdue University Press. All rights reserved. While integrating engineering into science education is not new in the United States, technology and engineering have not been well emphasized in the preparation and professional development of science teachers. Recent science education reforms integrate science and engineering throughout K–12 education, making it imperative to explore the conceptions teachers hold of engineering as a discipline, and as an approach to teaching. This analysis draws on focus group interviews with practicing secondary teachers (n = 12) conducted during a professional development seminar. The goals of the seminar were to present engineering as a heterogeneity of practices and inquiries organized to solve human problems; and, to model design-build-test pedagogy as a new approach to teaching. Outcomes show teachers’ conceptions of engineering as a discipline are that it redefines failure as necessary for success, and that it can more directly link school learning to serving society. Teachers also anticipated that design-build-test pedagogy would disrupt procedural learning in science, and likely invert which students achieve and why. These outcomes are discussed in light of reform goals, particularly as regards issues of equity. Implications for science teacher educators are also discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"108-122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1138\",\"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/10.7771/2157-9288.1138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

作者:Sengupta Irving,T;Mercado,J|摘要:©2017,普渡大学出版社。保留所有权利。虽然将工程融入科学教育在美国并不新鲜,但在科学教师的准备和专业发展中,技术和工程并没有得到很好的重视。最近的科学教育改革将科学和工程整合到整个K-12教育中,这使得探索教师将工程作为一门学科和一种教学方法的概念变得至关重要。这项分析借鉴了在专业发展研讨会期间对实习中学教师(n=12)进行的焦点小组访谈。研讨会的目标是将工程视为解决人类问题的实践和调查的异质性;并将模式设计构建测试教学法作为一种新的教学方法。结果表明,教师们对工程学科的概念是,它将失败重新定义为成功的必要条件,并可以更直接地将学校学习与服务社会联系起来。教师们还预计,设计-构建-测试教学法会扰乱科学中的程序性学习,并可能颠倒学生的成绩和原因。这些成果是根据改革目标,特别是在公平问题上进行讨论的。还讨论了对科学教师教育工作者的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Anticipating change: An exploratory analysis of teachers’ conceptions of engineering in an era of science education reform
Author(s): Sengupta-Irving, T; Mercado, J | Abstract: © 2017, Purdue University Press. All rights reserved. While integrating engineering into science education is not new in the United States, technology and engineering have not been well emphasized in the preparation and professional development of science teachers. Recent science education reforms integrate science and engineering throughout K–12 education, making it imperative to explore the conceptions teachers hold of engineering as a discipline, and as an approach to teaching. This analysis draws on focus group interviews with practicing secondary teachers (n = 12) conducted during a professional development seminar. The goals of the seminar were to present engineering as a heterogeneity of practices and inquiries organized to solve human problems; and, to model design-build-test pedagogy as a new approach to teaching. Outcomes show teachers’ conceptions of engineering as a discipline are that it redefines failure as necessary for success, and that it can more directly link school learning to serving society. Teachers also anticipated that design-build-test pedagogy would disrupt procedural learning in science, and likely invert which students achieve and why. These outcomes are discussed in light of reform goals, particularly as regards issues of equity. Implications for science teacher educators are also discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
32 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信