Thanks for the question Julie. We have not found a way to quantify this particular impact of the project, but we hear it so often from our participating teachers that we thought it was important to mention in our video. There seems to be a fairly widespread perception among our teachers that these hands-on, engineering design activities often allow students who may not ordinarily excel in the classroom to shine. How are you thinking about trying to capture this phenomenon?

One middle school in our network had a STEM track in which any student could voluntarily enroll (not just for gifted students), as well as a traditional track. They tracked fewer disciplinary incidents for students in the STEM track. I was curious if others found a way to quantify student engagement as that is always something we are debating in our project.

Our project co-leader Brenda Capobianco was working with teachers in a local school on engineering in the elementary grades and did research on elementary students’ conceptions of engineers. We drew inspiration from prior work on design-based learning at higher grade levels from researchers such as Janet Kolodner and David Fortus as well as project-based science learning (e.g. Joe Krajcik and colleagues). Our state, Indiana, adopted elementary science standards incorporating engineering prior to NGSS. These influences led us to develop a focus on using engineering to address science learning in the elementary grades.

Thanks! Great work and I reiterate liking the real-world connections.

We intentionally created design challenges that we hoped would appeal to girls as well as boys. We tried to avoid stereotypical engineering activities (e.g. toothpick bridges, robots) that might appeal more to boys. In the example in this video, the task involves helping kids with a dog which involves an ethic of care that we think appeals to girls (as well as boys). While our research questions are not focused specifically on gender, we do have the data to explore the question, and we appreciate your suggestion to look at the gender issue.

Roger – I think SLED was the first MSP project, and remains one of just a few nationally, that focuses on the integration of engineering design at the elementary grade levels. Our project has had three main thrusts: (1) development of design-based curricular units that address science and sometimes math learning, (2) professional development of in-service and pre-service teachers, and (3) collection of evidence of impact. We have developed more than 30 design-based units and reached many teachers and students in Indiana. There are other curricular materials for engineering in the elementary grades. The Boston Museum of Science EiE curriculum is probably the best known. I think what distinguishes SLED’s materials from some other elementary engineering activities is an overt focus on linking to science concepts. As one of the teachers in the video noted, our materials really help teachers meet science standards; it is more than just having kids just build things. You can access our design materials at https://stemedhub.org/groups/sled.

Hi James, thank you for this additional information.

Lauren – my co-presenter, Brenda, responded but created a new post rather than linking to your question. Her response is below.

Matthew – there is quite a bit already available related to engineering design at the middle and high school levels. The Project Lead The Way curriculum, for example, is very popular in our state. In fact, several of our partner school districts already participate in Project Lead The Way, and the administrators like the fact that SLED can help develop knowledge and skills in younger students that can carry over to PLTW. With the new NGSS standards, there is also more attention being paid to the notion of integrated STEM, where different STEM disciplines can be addressed together, often through the vehicle of authentic problems. At Purdue, we are working on a supplemental teacher license (i.e. endorsement) program focused on preparing teachers to teach integrated STEM.

James, I am curious. Is the endorsement you mentioned recognized by Indiana’s Department of Education? If so, can you please provide more information?

Julie – Not yet. The planned endorsement is still in development, and the goal is to get it approved by the state as a supplemental licensure area (Indiana does not have endorsements) at both the elementary and secondary levels. Our colleague Lynn Bryan is spearheading this effort, and I’m sure she would be happy to provide more information.

Jason – yes we have. Although the focus of our efforts is primarily science learning, math is integrated into many of our activities as well. We often use data collection and analysis to test the designs that students create. Teachers often integrate mini-economy elements in design challenges as well by attaching costs to various construction materials so that students are encouraged to solve the design problem as inexpensively as possible. Finally, a few of our activities have a more overt math focus. We have one called Reindeer Habitat that has a biological focus but also requires students to design a habitat by mapping various geometric shapes onto a given space to create a zoo habitat for reindeer.

I have checked out your other resources and I must say they are excellent. I look forward to using them in my 5th grade classroom. Thank you for making them available!

Jason – glad that you are interested in using them. We are nearing the end of our project, so will not be producing any new curricular units, but we are planning to make some updates/modifications to some of our units based on feedback from teachers. We are also planning to add some information (e.g., guides, videos) for teachers like you, who are interested in using SLED materials but have not had the benefit of participating in the face-to-face professional development we have done with our teachers.