中学工程标准如何解读和翻译

Q1 Social Sciences
E. Judson, John Ernzen, S. Krause, J. Middleton, R. Culbertson
{"title":"中学工程标准如何解读和翻译","authors":"E. Judson, John Ernzen, S. Krause, J. Middleton, R. Culbertson","doi":"10.7771/2157-9288.1121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this exploratory study we examined the alignment of Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) middle school engineering design standards with lesson ideas from middle school teachers, science education faculty, and engineering faculty (4–6 members per group). Respondents were prompted to provide plain language interpretations of two middle school Engineering Design performance expectations and to provide examples of how the performance expectations could be applied in middle school classrooms. Participants indicated the challenges and benefits of implementing these performance expectations and indicated personal experiences that helped them to interpret the performance expectations. Quality of lessons differed depending on the performance expectation being addressed. Generally, respondents were better able to generate ideas that addressed the paradigm of students ‘‘analyz[ing] data from tests to determine similarities and differences among several design solutions’’ than having students ‘‘define the criteria and constraints of a design problem.’’ A notable finding was the scarcity of quality engineering lesson ideas. The greatest proportion of lessons were categorized as Vague and/or Overly Broad. It appears that NGSS engineering design standards can too easily be decoded in an excessively expansive manner, thus resulting in indefinite ideas that are difficult to translate into classroom practice.","PeriodicalId":37951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research","volume":"6 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Engineering Standards are Interpreted and Translated for Middle School\",\"authors\":\"E. Judson, John Ernzen, S. Krause, J. Middleton, R. Culbertson\",\"doi\":\"10.7771/2157-9288.1121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this exploratory study we examined the alignment of Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) middle school engineering design standards with lesson ideas from middle school teachers, science education faculty, and engineering faculty (4–6 members per group). Respondents were prompted to provide plain language interpretations of two middle school Engineering Design performance expectations and to provide examples of how the performance expectations could be applied in middle school classrooms. Participants indicated the challenges and benefits of implementing these performance expectations and indicated personal experiences that helped them to interpret the performance expectations. Quality of lessons differed depending on the performance expectation being addressed. Generally, respondents were better able to generate ideas that addressed the paradigm of students ‘‘analyz[ing] data from tests to determine similarities and differences among several design solutions’’ than having students ‘‘define the criteria and constraints of a design problem.’’ A notable finding was the scarcity of quality engineering lesson ideas. The greatest proportion of lessons were categorized as Vague and/or Overly Broad. It appears that NGSS engineering design standards can too easily be decoded in an excessively expansive manner, thus resulting in indefinite ideas that are difficult to translate into classroom practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1121\",\"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/10.7771/2157-9288.1121","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: 21

摘要

在这项探索性研究中,我们考察了下一代科学标准(NGSS)中学工程设计标准与中学教师、科学教育教师和工程教师(每组4-6人)的课程理念的一致性。受访者被要求提供两种中学工程设计绩效期望的简单语言解释,并提供如何将绩效期望应用于中学课堂的例子。参与者指出了实现这些绩效期望的挑战和好处,并指出了帮助他们解释绩效期望的个人经历。课程的质量取决于所处理的绩效期望。一般来说,受访者能够更好地提出解决学生“从测试中分析数据以确定几个设计方案之间的异同”的范例的想法,而不是让学生“定义设计问题的标准和约束”。“一个值得注意的发现是,缺乏高质量的工程课程理念。最大比例的课程被归类为模糊和/或过于宽泛。看来,NGSS工程设计标准太容易以过于宽泛的方式进行解码,从而导致难以转化为课堂实践的不确定概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Engineering Standards are Interpreted and Translated for Middle School
In this exploratory study we examined the alignment of Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) middle school engineering design standards with lesson ideas from middle school teachers, science education faculty, and engineering faculty (4–6 members per group). Respondents were prompted to provide plain language interpretations of two middle school Engineering Design performance expectations and to provide examples of how the performance expectations could be applied in middle school classrooms. Participants indicated the challenges and benefits of implementing these performance expectations and indicated personal experiences that helped them to interpret the performance expectations. Quality of lessons differed depending on the performance expectation being addressed. Generally, respondents were better able to generate ideas that addressed the paradigm of students ‘‘analyz[ing] data from tests to determine similarities and differences among several design solutions’’ than having students ‘‘define the criteria and constraints of a design problem.’’ A notable finding was the scarcity of quality engineering lesson ideas. The greatest proportion of lessons were categorized as Vague and/or Overly Broad. It appears that NGSS engineering design standards can too easily be decoded in an excessively expansive manner, thus resulting in indefinite ideas that are difficult to translate into classroom practice.
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