Several techniques have been used to provide hands-on educational experiences to online learners, including remote labs, simulation software, and virtual labs, which offer a more structured environment, including simulations and scheduled asynchronous access to physical resources. This exploratory study investigated how these methods can be used from the learner's perspective to enhance the online learning experience by improving its effectiveness and maintaining students’ satisfaction while keeping the same level of standards and outcomes as face-to-face courses. Current and former online learners from several community and four-year colleges were surveyed to evaluate their experiences for utilizing different networking lab techniques. An analysis of survey results highlights the importance of lab accessibility to learner satisfaction and evaluates the interaction between learner experience and preference for networking labs. These results are used to recommend the best implementation practices and to guide future studies in online networking labs. Introduction Hands-on experience with network equipment is an essential aspect of learning computer networks, and historically it has been the mode of preparing professionals for careers in this field. It reinforces the conceptual framework of this discipline and provides the real-world experience demanded by employers in these professions (Nurul, 2006). The evolution of online learning and economic constraints have prompted the development of remote computer network laboratories and network simulation programs that closely mimic the operation of corporate computer networks (Lawson & Stackpole, 2006; Wong, Wolf, Gorinsky, & Turner, 2007) . To effectively prepare learners to transfer their learning in these environments to the enterprise, it is essential to compare the traditional network learning environment and the remote and virtual “simulated” environments. In particular, the impact of using an online learning context in conjunction with these lab scenarios must be explored because of the expanding number of online networking programs. Research exists that explores these relationships from the learner outcome perspective, but does not clearly indicate what aspects of the lab environments or learner characteristics might be related to these outcomes (Lawson & Stackpole, 2006). Because the online educational context can provide a flexible environment to accommodate individual learning characteristics, discovering these characteristics and the affect they have on learning will enable the development and maturation of more effective network labs. Background From the early days of distance learning, commonly referred to as Distance Education, and current online educational environments (elearning), teaching technical courses remotely has been a challenge. Educational institutions tried different aspects of teaching remote courses using hybrid methods, including video demonstrations, offline network labo
{"title":"Networking Labs in the Online Environment: Indicators for Success.","authors":"Hilmi A. Lahoud, Jack P. Krichen","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.4","url":null,"abstract":"Several techniques have been used to provide hands-on educational experiences to online learners, including remote labs, simulation software, and virtual labs, which offer a more structured environment, including simulations and scheduled asynchronous access to physical resources. This exploratory study investigated how these methods can be used from the learner's perspective to enhance the online learning experience by improving its effectiveness and maintaining students’ satisfaction while keeping the same level of standards and outcomes as face-to-face courses. Current and former online learners from several community and four-year colleges were surveyed to evaluate their experiences for utilizing different networking lab techniques. An analysis of survey results highlights the importance of lab accessibility to learner satisfaction and evaluates the interaction between learner experience and preference for networking labs. These results are used to recommend the best implementation practices and to guide future studies in online networking labs. Introduction Hands-on experience with network equipment is an essential aspect of learning computer networks, and historically it has been the mode of preparing professionals for careers in this field. It reinforces the conceptual framework of this discipline and provides the real-world experience demanded by employers in these professions (Nurul, 2006). The evolution of online learning and economic constraints have prompted the development of remote computer network laboratories and network simulation programs that closely mimic the operation of corporate computer networks (Lawson & Stackpole, 2006; Wong, Wolf, Gorinsky, & Turner, 2007) . To effectively prepare learners to transfer their learning in these environments to the enterprise, it is essential to compare the traditional network learning environment and the remote and virtual “simulated” environments. In particular, the impact of using an online learning context in conjunction with these lab scenarios must be explored because of the expanding number of online networking programs. Research exists that explores these relationships from the learner outcome perspective, but does not clearly indicate what aspects of the lab environments or learner characteristics might be related to these outcomes (Lawson & Stackpole, 2006). Because the online educational context can provide a flexible environment to accommodate individual learning characteristics, discovering these characteristics and the affect they have on learning will enable the development and maturation of more effective network labs. Background From the early days of distance learning, commonly referred to as Distance Education, and current online educational environments (elearning), teaching technical courses remotely has been a challenge. Educational institutions tried different aspects of teaching remote courses using hybrid methods, including video demonstrations, offline network labo","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122057224","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
C. Merrill, K. Devine, Joshua W. Brown, Ryan Brown
In the summer of 2009, a professional development partnership was established between the Peoria Public School District (PPSD), a local education agency (LEA), and Illinois State University (ISU) to improve geometric and trigonometric knowledge and skill for high school mathematics teachers as part of the Illinois Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP) grant, which was funded by the Federal Department of Education. The MSP is aimed at improving the content knowledge of mathematics teachers regarding the implementation of threedimensional (3-D) solid modeling in the mathematics classroom; the ultimate goal is to improve students’ learning in mathematics. The premise for this professional development grant can be found in the literature that suggests that there is a significant positive relationship between spatial visualization abilities and mathematical performance. Also, the literature implies that spatial ability and visual imagery play vital roles in mathematical thinking. Further, the professional development program maintains that spatial visualization and reasoning are core skills that all students should develop. Eight mathematics teachers from the PPSD and the LEA’s Mathematics Coordinator completed over 80 hours of professional development geared toward the improvement of teaching mathematics; they used 3-D solid modeling software (SolidWorks, 2009) during the summer and fall semesters of 2009 and during the spring 2010 semester, these teachers conducted action research projects based on their professional development. Formative and summative evaluation techniques were developed and
{"title":"Improving Geometric and Trigonometric Knowledge and Skill for High School Mathematics Teachers: A Professional Development Partnership.","authors":"C. Merrill, K. Devine, Joshua W. Brown, Ryan Brown","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.3","url":null,"abstract":"In the summer of 2009, a professional development partnership was established between the Peoria Public School District (PPSD), a local education agency (LEA), and Illinois State University (ISU) to improve geometric and trigonometric knowledge and skill for high school mathematics teachers as part of the Illinois Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP) grant, which was funded by the Federal Department of Education. The MSP is aimed at improving the content knowledge of mathematics teachers regarding the implementation of threedimensional (3-D) solid modeling in the mathematics classroom; the ultimate goal is to improve students’ learning in mathematics. The premise for this professional development grant can be found in the literature that suggests that there is a significant positive relationship between spatial visualization abilities and mathematical performance. Also, the literature implies that spatial ability and visual imagery play vital roles in mathematical thinking. Further, the professional development program maintains that spatial visualization and reasoning are core skills that all students should develop. Eight mathematics teachers from the PPSD and the LEA’s Mathematics Coordinator completed over 80 hours of professional development geared toward the improvement of teaching mathematics; they used 3-D solid modeling software (SolidWorks, 2009) during the summer and fall semesters of 2009 and during the spring 2010 semester, these teachers conducted action research projects based on their professional development. Formative and summative evaluation techniques were developed and","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132111152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The use of biotechnology in food and agricultural applications has increased greatly during the past decade and is considered by many to be a controversial topic. Drawing upon a previous national study, a new survey was conducted of U.S. and international college students at a large, land-grant, Research University to determine factors that may affect opinions about genetically modified (GM) food products. Factors examined included nationality, discipline area of study, perceptions of safety, and awareness and levels of acceptance regarding GM food. Results indicated students born outside the United States had more negative opinions about genetically modified foods than did Americanborn students. Students who were studying a physical science-based curriculum had a more positive opinion of GM food than did students studying a curriculum that was not based in the physical science. In addition, students who reported a higher level of acceptance of genetically modified foods felt more positively about the safety of the technology. Introduction The use of biotechnology in food and agriculture has increased greatly during the past decade (Comstock, 2001; Knight, 2006). Global use of genetically modified (GM) plants has increased rapidly since their commercial introduction in 1996. Desirable traits (e.g., insect and herbicide resistance and improved nutritional content) have resulted in a large increase in the number of hectares planted globally. The prevalence of GM crops has increased every year since their introduction, and this will continue (James, 2008). Consumer opinions are important to the success of technological innovation in the marketplace. The purpose of this study was to examine college students’ opinions in the areas of awareness, acceptance, and safety of GM foods with regard to nationality and field of study. The survey model is based upon a national survey concerning biotechnology. Genetic modification of foods is one of many examples of the gap between scientists and nonscientists (Chappell & Hartz, 1998). Accordingly, Hoban (2001) stated that consumer awareness and understanding of biotechnology innovation has grown slowly. Despite the increased use of GM food products, GM technology is not well understood in the United States. Several recent surveys demonstrate this lack of understanding by the American public (Falk et al., 2002; Hallman & Hebden, 2005; Hallman, Hebden, Cuite, Aquino, & Lang, 2004). Although 60 to 70% of food products sold at supermarkets include ingredients using genetic modification, many consumers remain unaware of their use (Byrne, 2006). A lack of understanding among the public may lead to uncertainty about the safety of GM food products (Byrne, 2006, Hoban, 2001; Shanahan, 2003). Consumer opinion of GM food safety also differs by nationality (Knight, 2006). Research reveals that U.S. consumers are the least concerned about GM food safety issues whereas European and Asian consumers report more concern (Chern,
在过去十年中，生物技术在食品和农业中的应用大大增加，许多人认为这是一个有争议的话题。在先前的一项全国性研究的基础上，一项新的调查在一所大型赠地研究型大学对美国和国际大学生进行，以确定可能影响人们对转基因食品看法的因素。审查的因素包括国籍、研究学科领域、对安全的看法以及对转基因食品的认识和接受程度。结果表明，在美国以外出生的学生比在美国出生的学生对转基因食品有更多的负面看法。学习以物理科学为基础的课程的学生比学习非物理科学课程的学生对转基因食品的看法更为积极。此外，接受转基因食品程度较高的学生对转基因技术的安全性持更积极的态度。在过去十年中，生物技术在粮食和农业方面的使用大大增加(Comstock, 2001;骑士,2006)。自1996年转基因植物商业化引进以来，全球转基因植物的使用迅速增加。理想的性状(例如，抗虫抗除草剂和改善营养成分)导致全球种植面积的大幅增加。自从引进转基因作物以来，其流行率每年都在增加，而且这种情况将继续下去(James, 2008)。消费者的意见对技术创新在市场上的成功至关重要。本研究的目的是考察大学生在转基因食品的认识、接受和安全性方面的意见，涉及国籍和学习领域。调查模型是基于一项关于生物技术的全国性调查。转基因食品是科学家和非科学家之间存在差距的众多例子之一(Chappell & Hartz, 1998)。因此，Hoban(2001)指出，消费者对生物技术创新的认识和理解增长缓慢。尽管转基因食品的使用越来越多，但转基因技术在美国并没有得到很好的理解。最近的几项调查表明，美国公众对此缺乏了解(Falk et al.， 2002;Hallman & Hebden, 2005;Hallman, Hebden, Cuite, Aquino， & Lang, 2004)。尽管在超市出售的食品中有60%到70%含有转基因成分，但许多消费者仍然不知道它们的用途(Byrne, 2006)。公众缺乏了解可能导致对转基因食品安全性的不确定(Byrne, 2006; Hoban, 2001;沙纳,2003)。消费者对转基因食品安全的看法也因国籍而异(Knight, 2006)。研究表明，美国消费者最不关心转基因食品安全问题，而欧洲和亚洲消费者则更关心(Chern, Rickertsen, Tsubio， & Fu, 2003;Fritz & Fischer, 2007;皮尤倡议，2005)。即使经过十多年的辩论，南美和中国政府的支持也越来越多，欧盟和环境组织，如地球之友，继续拒绝种植和使用转基因作物(Weise, 2010)。大学生是普通大众的一个亚群体，也是对转基因食品意见感兴趣的一个领域。在美国，大学生可能混杂在不同的民族中，这是先前提到的对转基因食品安全认知的一个因素。大学生可能比一般人群更年轻，受教育程度更高，可能对农业生物技术有更大的认识(Finke & Kim, 2003)。以科学为基础的课程作业、实验室工作以及教授和讲师的信念可能有助于提高意识，而这些信念可能会在学生的主要学习领域得到加强。作为年轻人，学生们可能还没有对这个主题形成强烈的看法，他们可能对农业生物技术的不同观点更开放(Wingenbach, Rutherford， & Dunsford 2003)。本文对影响大学生对转基因食品的认识和看法的因素进行了调查研究，作者:Chad M. Laux, Gretchen a . Mosher和Steven a . Freeman
{"title":"Factors Affecting College Students' Knowledge and Opinions of Genetically Modified Foods","authors":"C. Laux, G. Mosher, S. Freeman","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.1","url":null,"abstract":"The use of biotechnology in food and agricultural applications has increased greatly during the past decade and is considered by many to be a controversial topic. Drawing upon a previous national study, a new survey was conducted of U.S. and international college students at a large, land-grant, Research University to determine factors that may affect opinions about genetically modified (GM) food products. Factors examined included nationality, discipline area of study, perceptions of safety, and awareness and levels of acceptance regarding GM food. Results indicated students born outside the United States had more negative opinions about genetically modified foods than did Americanborn students. Students who were studying a physical science-based curriculum had a more positive opinion of GM food than did students studying a curriculum that was not based in the physical science. In addition, students who reported a higher level of acceptance of genetically modified foods felt more positively about the safety of the technology. Introduction The use of biotechnology in food and agriculture has increased greatly during the past decade (Comstock, 2001; Knight, 2006). Global use of genetically modified (GM) plants has increased rapidly since their commercial introduction in 1996. Desirable traits (e.g., insect and herbicide resistance and improved nutritional content) have resulted in a large increase in the number of hectares planted globally. The prevalence of GM crops has increased every year since their introduction, and this will continue (James, 2008). Consumer opinions are important to the success of technological innovation in the marketplace. The purpose of this study was to examine college students’ opinions in the areas of awareness, acceptance, and safety of GM foods with regard to nationality and field of study. The survey model is based upon a national survey concerning biotechnology. Genetic modification of foods is one of many examples of the gap between scientists and nonscientists (Chappell & Hartz, 1998). Accordingly, Hoban (2001) stated that consumer awareness and understanding of biotechnology innovation has grown slowly. Despite the increased use of GM food products, GM technology is not well understood in the United States. Several recent surveys demonstrate this lack of understanding by the American public (Falk et al., 2002; Hallman & Hebden, 2005; Hallman, Hebden, Cuite, Aquino, & Lang, 2004). Although 60 to 70% of food products sold at supermarkets include ingredients using genetic modification, many consumers remain unaware of their use (Byrne, 2006). A lack of understanding among the public may lead to uncertainty about the safety of GM food products (Byrne, 2006, Hoban, 2001; Shanahan, 2003). Consumer opinion of GM food safety also differs by nationality (Knight, 2006). Research reveals that U.S. consumers are the least concerned about GM food safety issues whereas European and Asian consumers report more concern (Chern, ","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117009781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
David Nickolich, Charles Feldhaus, Sam Cotton, Andrew J. Barrett, Jim Smallwood
The purpose of this study was to measure perceived professional and personal life satisfaction of Indiana Workplace Specialist I (WS I) faculty and their mentors. Workplace Specialist I teachers are all first-year career and technical education (CTE) faculty who must complete the WS I training program to be eligible for the Workplace Specialist II teaching license. These new teachers bring significant professional skills and experience to the secondary classroom; however, none had completed traditional teachers college training before they were licensed. WS I faculty are assigned mentors during the first year of training. Mentors must have at least five years of kindergarten-12 (K-12) teaching experience, and typically they are CTE faculty members. During a WS I / Mentor training workshop, 84 first-year WS I faculty and 68 mentors were asked to take the Life Satisfaction Index for the Third Age (LSITA) in an effort to determine perceived overall life satisfaction; 105 total people participated in the study. Of these 105, 45 mentors perceived life satisfaction as higher than did the 60 first-year WS I CTE teachers. The results of the statistical analyses revealed statistical significance at the 0.1 level (0.068). When analyzing only participants (both mentors and WS I teachers who were 50 years of age or older, the results of the statistical analyses revealed a statistical significance at the 0.05 level (0.023) between the perceived life satisfaction results of the 10 first-year WS I faculty and the 28 mentors. Mentors who were 50 years of age or older had a higher level of perceived life satisfaction than did the first-year WS I faculty members of the same age group.
本研究的目的是测量印第安纳州职场专家I (WS I)教师及其导师的职业和个人生活满意度。职场专家I教师都是一年级的职业和技术教育(CTE)教师，他们必须完成职场专家I培训计划，才有资格获得职场专家II教学许可证。这些新教师为中学课堂带来了重要的专业技能和经验;然而，在他们获得执照之前，没有人完成过传统的师范学院培训。在第一年的培训中，WS I的教师会被分配导师。导师必须有至少五年的幼儿园-12 (K-12)教学经验，通常他们是CTE教员。在WS I /导师培训研讨会上，84名一年级WS I教师和68名导师被要求参加第三年龄的生活满意度指数(LSITA)，以确定感知的总体生活满意度;共有105人参与了这项研究。在这105名导师中，45名导师的生活满意度高于60名第一年的WS I CTE教师。统计分析结果显示，在0.1水平(0.068)上具有统计学显著性。当仅分析参与者(导师和50岁及以上的WS I教师)时，统计分析结果显示，10名WS I一年级教师与28名导师的感知生活满意度结果在0.05水平(0.023)上具有统计学意义。50岁或50岁以上的导师比同年龄段的WS I一年级教师有更高的生活满意度。
{"title":"Perceived Life Satisfaction of Workplace Specialist I Faculty and Mentors Participating in a First-Year STEM Teacher Training Project.","authors":"David Nickolich, Charles Feldhaus, Sam Cotton, Andrew J. Barrett, Jim Smallwood","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i2.a.5","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study was to measure perceived professional and personal life satisfaction of Indiana Workplace Specialist I (WS I) faculty and their mentors. Workplace Specialist I teachers are all first-year career and technical education (CTE) faculty who must complete the WS I training program to be eligible for the Workplace Specialist II teaching license. These new teachers bring significant professional skills and experience to the secondary classroom; however, none had completed traditional teachers college training before they were licensed. WS I faculty are assigned mentors during the first year of training. Mentors must have at least five years of kindergarten-12 (K-12) teaching experience, and typically they are CTE faculty members. During a WS I / Mentor training workshop, 84 first-year WS I faculty and 68 mentors were asked to take the Life Satisfaction Index for the Third Age (LSITA) in an effort to determine perceived overall life satisfaction; 105 total people participated in the study. Of these 105, 45 mentors perceived life satisfaction as higher than did the 60 first-year WS I CTE teachers. The results of the statistical analyses revealed statistical significance at the 0.1 level (0.068). When analyzing only participants (both mentors and WS I teachers who were 50 years of age or older, the results of the statistical analyses revealed a statistical significance at the 0.05 level (0.023) between the perceived life satisfaction results of the 10 first-year WS I faculty and the 28 mentors. Mentors who were 50 years of age or older had a higher level of perceived life satisfaction than did the first-year WS I faculty members of the same age group.","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128351917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent curriculum changes in the educational system of Australia have resulted in allowing optional Engineering course work to count for university entrance for students choosing to apply to a university. In other educational systems, Engineering is playing an increasingly important role, either as a stand-alone subject or as part of an integrated approach to Science, Mathematics, and Technology. These developments raise questions about the relationship between Engineering and Technology education, some of which are explored in this article. Introduction Curriculum agendas that include a proposed link between Technology and other curriculum areas rarely seem to favor Technology. When Science and Technology are offered in primary schools, science is prioritized, and consequently technology is not delivered well (Williams, 2001). This is a function of both primary school facilities and primary teacher training. Science and Technology offerings in secondary schools tend to be quite academic rather than practical (Williams, 1996). Numerous Science, Technology, and Mathematics (STM, SMT, or TSM) projects that have been developed around the world produce interestingly integrated curriculum ideas and projects, but these have rarely translated into embedded state or national curriculum approaches. This is partly because the school and curriculum emphasis on Science, Technology, and Mathematics is not equivalent across these areas. Even the earliest integrated approaches involving these subjects promoted reform in Science and Mathematics (LaPorte & Sanders, 1993) rather than the goals of Technology. Recently, Engineering, has been brought into the mix as a number of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) projects have been developed, most significantly, in terms of numbers and influence, both in the United Kingdom and the United States. Again, the agenda for this type of amalgamation is not being driven by a desire to progress the goals of technology education; rather, it is being driven by a desire to improve Science and Mathematics education in order to increase the flow of STEM people into the workforce and to improve STEM literacy in the population (Barlex, 2008). Despite the idea that Mathematics and Science education can be improved by combining them with Engineering and Technology this has not been proved, and the concept of STEM literacy is a bit befuddling and ill defined. Much has been written about the synergistic relationships among Science, Mathematics, and Technology, particularly between Science and Technology. A succinct summary of these relationships has been provided by Kimbell and Perry (1991): Science provides explanations of how the world works, mathematics gives us numbers and procedures through which to explore it, and languages enable us to communicate within it. But uniquely, design & technology empowers us to change the made world. (p. 3) Allied with the STEM approach is a Technology education revisionary movement towar
{"title":"Technology Education to Engineering: A Good Move?.","authors":"P. Williams","doi":"10.21061/JOTS.V36I2.A.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/JOTS.V36I2.A.2","url":null,"abstract":"Recent curriculum changes in the educational system of Australia have resulted in allowing optional Engineering course work to count for university entrance for students choosing to apply to a university. In other educational systems, Engineering is playing an increasingly important role, either as a stand-alone subject or as part of an integrated approach to Science, Mathematics, and Technology. These developments raise questions about the relationship between Engineering and Technology education, some of which are explored in this article. Introduction Curriculum agendas that include a proposed link between Technology and other curriculum areas rarely seem to favor Technology. When Science and Technology are offered in primary schools, science is prioritized, and consequently technology is not delivered well (Williams, 2001). This is a function of both primary school facilities and primary teacher training. Science and Technology offerings in secondary schools tend to be quite academic rather than practical (Williams, 1996). Numerous Science, Technology, and Mathematics (STM, SMT, or TSM) projects that have been developed around the world produce interestingly integrated curriculum ideas and projects, but these have rarely translated into embedded state or national curriculum approaches. This is partly because the school and curriculum emphasis on Science, Technology, and Mathematics is not equivalent across these areas. Even the earliest integrated approaches involving these subjects promoted reform in Science and Mathematics (LaPorte & Sanders, 1993) rather than the goals of Technology. Recently, Engineering, has been brought into the mix as a number of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) projects have been developed, most significantly, in terms of numbers and influence, both in the United Kingdom and the United States. Again, the agenda for this type of amalgamation is not being driven by a desire to progress the goals of technology education; rather, it is being driven by a desire to improve Science and Mathematics education in order to increase the flow of STEM people into the workforce and to improve STEM literacy in the population (Barlex, 2008). Despite the idea that Mathematics and Science education can be improved by combining them with Engineering and Technology this has not been proved, and the concept of STEM literacy is a bit befuddling and ill defined. Much has been written about the synergistic relationships among Science, Mathematics, and Technology, particularly between Science and Technology. A succinct summary of these relationships has been provided by Kimbell and Perry (1991): Science provides explanations of how the world works, mathematics gives us numbers and procedures through which to explore it, and languages enable us to communicate within it. But uniquely, design & technology empowers us to change the made world. (p. 3) Allied with the STEM approach is a Technology education revisionary movement towar","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121155853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
V. Dave, Dawn G. Blasko, K. Holliday-Darr, J. Kremer, R. Edwards, Melanie Ford, Lucy Lenhardt, Barbara Hido
Although the number of women majoring in engineering and engineering technology has increased in the last few decades, percentages lag behind those in other STEM disciplines. Young women often have misperceptions about the nature of engineering, and that leads to lack of interest. Engineering is often seen as men’s work. They do not understand how engineers can have a positive impact on society (Hersh, 2000). Math Options Summer Camp, a program that has been conducted during the past two summers, addresses these issues. The week-long camp was designed for girls entering ninth and tenth grade when they still have time to add math and science courses to their schedules. Unlike other summer STEM initiatives, this camp focused on the use of technology: an integrated jean bag project was used to introduce campers to different areas of engineering (electrical, mechanical, and plastics) in hands-on lab-based modules. In this article the camp is described and data on campers’ assessments of their experiences is provided. Workshop evaluations showed that the campers particularly enjoyed using technology in the labs and came away from the camp with a broader understanding of STEM careers. Introduction The demand for workers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) is predicted to grow twice as fast as the overall rate of growth for workers in all occupations over the next five years in the United States (National Science Board, 2008). The question is: will there be enough people qualified to meet these demands? The National Center for Education Statistics predicts that the growth of undergraduate enrollments in the STEM fields over the next five years will only attribute to half of the demand for workers (U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences NCES, 2008). It is evident that something needs to be done to encourage young adults to enter these fields in order to prevent the United States from facing a severe shortage of engineers and scientists in the near future. One way of addressing the issue is to solve the problem of underrepresentation of women in many of the STEM fields. Table 1 shows the results of a 20-year study by the National Science Foundation (NSF, 2008). Women receiving undergraduate degrees are well represented in science, but they have a long way to go in technology, math, and engineering. Although the number of women in STEM fields is increasing overall, the numbers for math (26.8%), computer science (26.8%), and engineering (19.5%) are still woefully low. It is quite obvious that steps need to be taken to significantly increase the number of women in engineering and technology. Many factors contribute to the lack of women in the STEM fields, particularly in engineering and technology. One factor is that some girls find the requirements for higher level math and science to be intimidating while in middle school. This may result in a loss of confidence in their ability to do well in these areas
尽管在过去几十年里，主修工程和工程技术的女性人数有所增加，但这一比例仍落后于其他STEM学科。年轻女性常常对工程学的本质有误解，这导致她们对工程学缺乏兴趣。工程常常被看作是男人的工作。他们不明白工程师如何对社会产生积极的影响(赫什，2000)。数学选择夏令营，一个在过去两个夏天进行的项目，解决了这些问题。这个为期一周的夏令营是为九年级和十年级的女孩设计的，因为她们还有时间在课程表上增加数学和科学课程。与其他暑期STEM项目不同的是，这个夏令营专注于技术的使用:一个集成的牛仔包项目被用来向露营者介绍不同的工程领域(电气、机械和塑料)，以动手实验为基础的模块。在这篇文章中描述了营地，并提供了营员对他们经历的评估数据。讲习班评估显示，营员们特别喜欢在实验室中使用技术，并且对STEM职业有了更广泛的了解。在科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)领域对工人的需求预计将在未来五年内以两倍于美国所有职业工人总体增长率的速度增长(国家科学委员会，2008年)。问题是:是否有足够的合格人才来满足这些需求?美国国家教育统计中心预测，在未来五年内，STEM领域的本科入学人数的增长将只占劳动力需求的一半(美国教育部教育科学研究所NCES, 2008)。很明显，为了防止美国在不久的将来面临工程师和科学家的严重短缺，需要做些什么来鼓励年轻人进入这些领域。解决这个问题的一种方法是解决女性在许多STEM领域代表性不足的问题。表1显示了美国国家科学基金会(NSF, 2008)一项20年研究的结果。获得本科学位的女性在科学领域很有代表性，但她们在技术、数学和工程领域还有很长的路要走。尽管STEM领域的女性人数总体上在增加，但数学(26.8%)、计算机科学(26.8%)和工程(19.5%)领域的女性人数仍然低得可怜。很明显，需要采取步骤，大幅度增加工程和技术领域的妇女人数。许多因素导致STEM领域缺乏女性，特别是在工程和技术领域。其中一个因素是，一些女孩在中学时发现更高水平的数学和科学要求令人生畏。这可能会导致他们对自己在这些领域做得很好的能力失去信心，从而导致他们对将工程作为职业选择缺乏兴趣。工程，一直是男性主导的职业，它经常被视为一个男性化的职业(休斯，2002)。年轻女孩通常更喜欢从事一种可能导致她们帮助别人的职业，她们可能会发现很难从那个角度看待工程(Hersh, 2000)。研究还表明，女孩在这个问题上的意识可以通过让她们接触成功的女性榜样来提高(Haemmerlie & Montgomery, 1991;Plant, Baylor, Doerr， & Rosenberg-Kima, 2009)，并通过证明工程对社会有积极影响。reenjeaneering STEM教育:数学夏令营Vibhuti Dave, Dawn Blasko, Kathryn Holliday-Darr, Jennifer Trich Kremer, Robert Edwards, Melanie Ford, Lucy Lenhardt和Barbara Hido女性占STEM专业本科学位获得者的百分比。干细胞主要1986 1996 2006生物、农业科学45.5 50.2 59.8地球、大气、海洋科学22.3 33.3 41.2数学,计算机科学38.8 33.9 26.8工程物理科学29.8 37.0 42.4 14.5 17.9 19.5 T h e J o rn u l o f Te c h n o lo g y图d ie年代全国高校正在寻找方法增加供应的合格的高中学生。针对女性和其他代表性不足的群体，已经创建和开发了各种STEM外展项目。许多这样的节目都是一天;重点是向年轻女性和/或其他几个年龄组中代表性不足的群体介绍STEM学科。通常，这些课程包括介绍和闭幕环节，以及几个小组活动，这些活动通常是动手练习环节。
{"title":"Re-enJEANeering STEM Education: Math Options Summer Camp","authors":"V. Dave, Dawn G. Blasko, K. Holliday-Darr, J. Kremer, R. Edwards, Melanie Ford, Lucy Lenhardt, Barbara Hido","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.5","url":null,"abstract":"Although the number of women majoring in engineering and engineering technology has increased in the last few decades, percentages lag behind those in other STEM disciplines. Young women often have misperceptions about the nature of engineering, and that leads to lack of interest. Engineering is often seen as men’s work. They do not understand how engineers can have a positive impact on society (Hersh, 2000). Math Options Summer Camp, a program that has been conducted during the past two summers, addresses these issues. The week-long camp was designed for girls entering ninth and tenth grade when they still have time to add math and science courses to their schedules. Unlike other summer STEM initiatives, this camp focused on the use of technology: an integrated jean bag project was used to introduce campers to different areas of engineering (electrical, mechanical, and plastics) in hands-on lab-based modules. In this article the camp is described and data on campers’ assessments of their experiences is provided. Workshop evaluations showed that the campers particularly enjoyed using technology in the labs and came away from the camp with a broader understanding of STEM careers. Introduction The demand for workers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) is predicted to grow twice as fast as the overall rate of growth for workers in all occupations over the next five years in the United States (National Science Board, 2008). The question is: will there be enough people qualified to meet these demands? The National Center for Education Statistics predicts that the growth of undergraduate enrollments in the STEM fields over the next five years will only attribute to half of the demand for workers (U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences NCES, 2008). It is evident that something needs to be done to encourage young adults to enter these fields in order to prevent the United States from facing a severe shortage of engineers and scientists in the near future. One way of addressing the issue is to solve the problem of underrepresentation of women in many of the STEM fields. Table 1 shows the results of a 20-year study by the National Science Foundation (NSF, 2008). Women receiving undergraduate degrees are well represented in science, but they have a long way to go in technology, math, and engineering. Although the number of women in STEM fields is increasing overall, the numbers for math (26.8%), computer science (26.8%), and engineering (19.5%) are still woefully low. It is quite obvious that steps need to be taken to significantly increase the number of women in engineering and technology. Many factors contribute to the lack of women in the STEM fields, particularly in engineering and technology. One factor is that some girls find the requirements for higher level math and science to be intimidating while in middle school. This may result in a loss of confidence in their ability to do well in these areas","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117175088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Few career paths are as dynamic, exciting, and engaging to potential Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) students as those in motorsports. Secondary school students, looking forward to their initial driver’s licenses and their first cars, are captivated by the speed and color of the sport. Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), which offers the first Bachelor’s Degree in Motorsports Engineering in the United States, has found motorsports to be an excellent mechanism for attracting STEM students, of both genders, regardless of demographic background. This article will discuss how this connection has been used to promote STEM growth. Introduction IUPUI has developed a program involving both Motorsports Engineering (Hylton, 2008) and Motorsports Engineering Technology (Hylton, 2007). With the rapid growth of academic motorsports programs, and the demonstrated interest by secondary school students who are investigating potential collegiate programs, it became clear that use of the technologies involved in motorsports was an excellent mechanism for engaging these students in STEM education. Concepts related to driving a race car or working on one were initially developed as components of broader pre-engineering curriculum modules associated with a summer camp (Campbell & Hylton, 2005) for students from low socioeconomic status and minority households. The concept of the friction circle, as shown in Figure 1, was introduced as a means of determining the limits of a car’s ability to travel around a corner at speed. The circle represents the limit of traction force that a race tire can supply. The tire’s capabilities can be used to supply forward acceleration, braking deceleration, lateral acceleration during cornering, or a combination of these. However, there is a limit to the traction force available from the tire, which results from its friction coefficient and the portion of the vehicle load that it is carrying. This limit is represented by the circumference of the circle. The vector combination of the forces on the tire cannot exceed the overall limit of the tire’s capabilities. Thus when the fore-aft (acceleration or deceleration) and lateral (sideways) force vectors are combined, the resultant must stay within the circle. Covertly, the objective of introducing the friction circle into the classroom module was to demonstrate the concept of vector math and to instruct students on how to use it. By using the theme of motorsports as a conveyance of STEM topics, the material was readily accepted by the students and they rose to the challenge. Motorsports Concepts In Curriculum In another example, students were challenged to develop an understanding of forces, couples, and moment arms. A torque wrench, like that used by the mechanics on a racecar, was utilized. This gave the students an opportunity to see how work was completed on the university’s racecar. In addition, it provided the opportunity for students to see how
对于潜在的科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)专业的学生来说，很少有职业道路像赛车运动那样充满活力、令人兴奋和吸引人。中学生们期待着他们的第一个驾驶执照和他们的第一辆车，被这项运动的速度和颜色所吸引。印第安纳大学普渡大学印第安纳波利斯分校(IUPUI)提供了美国第一个赛车运动工程学士学位，发现赛车运动是吸引STEM学生的绝佳机制，无论男女，无论人口背景如何。本文将讨论如何利用这种联系来促进STEM的发展。IUPUI开发了一个涉及赛车运动工程(Hylton, 2008)和赛车运动工程技术(Hylton, 2007)的项目。随着学术赛车运动项目的快速发展，以及正在研究潜在大学项目的中学生表现出的兴趣，很明显，使用赛车运动中涉及的技术是让这些学生参与STEM教育的绝佳机制。与驾驶赛车或在其中工作相关的概念最初是作为与夏令营相关的更广泛的工程前课程模块的组成部分(Campbell & Hylton, 2005)，面向社会经济地位较低和少数民族家庭的学生。如图1所示，引入了摩擦圈的概念，作为确定汽车高速转弯能力极限的一种手段。圆圈代表比赛轮胎所能提供的牵引力的极限。轮胎的功能可以用来提供向前加速、制动减速、转弯时的横向加速，或者这些功能的组合。然而，轮胎的牵引力是有限的，这是由它的摩擦系数和它所承载的车辆载荷的一部分决定的。这个极限由圆的周长表示。作用在轮胎上的力的矢量组合不能超过轮胎能力的总极限。因此，当前后(加速或减速)和横向(侧向)力矢量相结合时，合力必须保持在圆内。将摩擦圆引入课堂模块的目的是为了展示矢量数学的概念，并指导学生如何使用它。通过使用赛车运动的主题作为STEM主题的载体，这些材料很容易被学生接受，他们接受了挑战。课程中的赛车运动概念在另一个例子中，学生们面临的挑战是发展对力、对偶和力臂的理解。使用了一个扭矩扳手，就像机械师在赛车上使用的那样。这让学生们有机会看到大学赛车的工作是如何完成的。此外，它还为学生提供了一个机会，让他们看到一个力的施加角和产生的力臂是如何影响一个给定的力的施加量所产生的扭矩的。许多赛车队使用的纯机械千斤顶也被纳入了这些课堂模块中。也为女学生,难以实现,有时候男生身体强壮,这表明(帮助)即使是最小的T h e J o rn u l o f Te c h n o lo g y图d ie年代使用赛车设计概念进一步遏制教育
{"title":"Using Motorsports Design Concepts to Further STEM Education","authors":"P. Hylton","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.2","url":null,"abstract":"Few career paths are as dynamic, exciting, and engaging to potential Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) students as those in motorsports. Secondary school students, looking forward to their initial driver’s licenses and their first cars, are captivated by the speed and color of the sport. Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), which offers the first Bachelor’s Degree in Motorsports Engineering in the United States, has found motorsports to be an excellent mechanism for attracting STEM students, of both genders, regardless of demographic background. This article will discuss how this connection has been used to promote STEM growth. Introduction IUPUI has developed a program involving both Motorsports Engineering (Hylton, 2008) and Motorsports Engineering Technology (Hylton, 2007). With the rapid growth of academic motorsports programs, and the demonstrated interest by secondary school students who are investigating potential collegiate programs, it became clear that use of the technologies involved in motorsports was an excellent mechanism for engaging these students in STEM education. Concepts related to driving a race car or working on one were initially developed as components of broader pre-engineering curriculum modules associated with a summer camp (Campbell & Hylton, 2005) for students from low socioeconomic status and minority households. The concept of the friction circle, as shown in Figure 1, was introduced as a means of determining the limits of a car’s ability to travel around a corner at speed. The circle represents the limit of traction force that a race tire can supply. The tire’s capabilities can be used to supply forward acceleration, braking deceleration, lateral acceleration during cornering, or a combination of these. However, there is a limit to the traction force available from the tire, which results from its friction coefficient and the portion of the vehicle load that it is carrying. This limit is represented by the circumference of the circle. The vector combination of the forces on the tire cannot exceed the overall limit of the tire’s capabilities. Thus when the fore-aft (acceleration or deceleration) and lateral (sideways) force vectors are combined, the resultant must stay within the circle. Covertly, the objective of introducing the friction circle into the classroom module was to demonstrate the concept of vector math and to instruct students on how to use it. By using the theme of motorsports as a conveyance of STEM topics, the material was readily accepted by the students and they rose to the challenge. Motorsports Concepts In Curriculum In another example, students were challenged to develop an understanding of forces, couples, and moment arms. A torque wrench, like that used by the mechanics on a racecar, was utilized. This gave the students an opportunity to see how work was completed on the university’s racecar. In addition, it provided the opportunity for students to see how","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129616078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The intent of this study was to develop an instrument to measure the current level of attitude that students’ exhibit toward STEM education. The Concerns-Based Adoption Model, Taxonomy of Education Objectives – Handbook II, and other pertinent instruments were utilized as sources of inspiration for the instrument. The selected items were submitted to a panel of experts representative of STEM education. Initial pilot testing refined the instrument through principal components analysis and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. The identified principal components aligned well with reviewed instruments. Reliability coefficients were strong for each of the principal components. Results of the combined analyses led to revisions of the instrument prior to a larger comparative study – a known-group comparison. A self-identified STEM-based high school program and a conventional college-preparatory program were compared. Principal components analysis and Cronbach’s alpha procedures were again applied to the data collected. The two samples were compared using three distinct independent variables – educational location, grade level, and gender. Each independent variable was analyzed for each principal component. MANOVA procedures were utilized. Male students indicated a statistically significant more positive attitude toward STEM when compared to the female students for the independent variable of gender. The statistical significance was demonstrated specifically for the content areas of technology and engineering. The results of the data analysis supported the proposed hypothesis. Based upon extensive review of the varied data analysis procedures implemented, the students’ attitudes towards the STEM instrument demonstrated positive examples of validity and reliability. Introduction In 1983, A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education [NCEE], 1983) established the resurgence for the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) movement in education. The time is long past when American's destiny was assured simply by an abundance of natural resources and inexhaustible human enthusiasm, and by our relative isolation from the malignant problems of older civilizations. The world is indeed one global village. We live among determined, well-educated, and strongly motivated competitors. We compete with them for international standing and markets, not only with products but also with the ideas of our laboratories and neighborhood workshops. America's position in the world may once have been reasonably secure with only a few exceptionally well-trained men and women. It is no longer. (p. 10) The influence of this report and its recommendations are echoed in the feverish development of national standards produced by academic organizations such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the National Research Council (NRC), and the International Technology Education
本研究的目的是开发一种工具来衡量学生对STEM教育的当前态度水平。《基于关注的采用模式》、《教育目标分类学手册II》和其他相关文书被用作该文书的灵感来源。选出的项目将提交给STEM教育代表专家小组。最初的试点测试通过主成分分析和Cronbach 's alpha系数改进了仪器。所确定的主要成分与审查的仪器很好地吻合。每个主成分的信度系数都很强。综合分析的结果导致在更大的比较研究之前对仪器进行修订-已知组比较。一个自我认定的基于stem的高中课程和一个传统的大学预科课程进行了比较。主成分分析和Cronbach’s alpha程序再次应用于收集的数据。两个样本使用三个不同的自变量进行比较——教育地点、年级水平和性别。对每个自变量进行主成分分析。采用方差分析方法。在性别自变量上，男生对STEM的积极态度显著高于女生。在技术和工程的内容领域特别证明了统计显著性。数据分析的结果支持提出的假设。基于对实施的各种数据分析程序的广泛审查，学生对STEM工具的态度展示了有效性和可靠性的积极例子。1983年，国家教育卓越委员会(National Commission on Excellence In Education [NCEE]， 1983)确立了科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)运动在教育领域的复兴。美国的命运仅仅依靠丰富的自然资源和取之不尽的人类热情，以及我们相对隔绝于古老文明的恶性问题，这样的时代早已过去。世界的确是一个地球村。我们生活在意志坚定、受过良好教育、动机强烈的竞争对手之中。我们与他们竞争国际地位和市场，不仅用产品，而且用我们的实验室和社区车间的想法。美国在世界上的地位可能一度相当稳固，仅靠少数训练有素的男女军人。现在已经不是这样了。该报告及其建议的影响在学术组织如全国数学教师委员会(NCTM)、美国科学促进会(AAAS)、国家研究委员会(NRC)和国际技术教育协会(ITEA)所制定的国家标准的狂热发展中得到了回应。在这个过程中，我们可以追溯STEM的历史。NCTM (2000)， AAAS (1989)， NRC(1996)和ITEA(2000)文件都建议将各自的学科结合或整合，以提高学生的学习和STEM准备。自从标准全面出台以来，这个拟议的学科整合已经采取了多种形式。项目、模块、打包课程，甚至特许学校都与STEM教育项目应该代表的拟议模式保持一致。学术竞争力委员会([ACC]， 2007)的一份报告表明，美国有多达105个政府资助的STEM教育项目，从幼儿园到研究生教育。行政协调会的报告还收集了与STEM教育项目相关的成本信息。整体而言，估计显示政府在2006财政年度的总开支将超过31.2亿元。《学生对STEM的态度:为高中STEM项目开发一种工具》的作者Mark Patrick Mahoney 24
{"title":"Students' Attitudes toward STEM: Development of an Instrument for High School STEM-Based Programs.","authors":"M. Mahoney","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.4","url":null,"abstract":"The intent of this study was to develop an instrument to measure the current level of attitude that students’ exhibit toward STEM education. The Concerns-Based Adoption Model, Taxonomy of Education Objectives – Handbook II, and other pertinent instruments were utilized as sources of inspiration for the instrument. The selected items were submitted to a panel of experts representative of STEM education. Initial pilot testing refined the instrument through principal components analysis and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. The identified principal components aligned well with reviewed instruments. Reliability coefficients were strong for each of the principal components. Results of the combined analyses led to revisions of the instrument prior to a larger comparative study – a known-group comparison. A self-identified STEM-based high school program and a conventional college-preparatory program were compared. Principal components analysis and Cronbach’s alpha procedures were again applied to the data collected. The two samples were compared using three distinct independent variables – educational location, grade level, and gender. Each independent variable was analyzed for each principal component. MANOVA procedures were utilized. Male students indicated a statistically significant more positive attitude toward STEM when compared to the female students for the independent variable of gender. The statistical significance was demonstrated specifically for the content areas of technology and engineering. The results of the data analysis supported the proposed hypothesis. Based upon extensive review of the varied data analysis procedures implemented, the students’ attitudes towards the STEM instrument demonstrated positive examples of validity and reliability. Introduction In 1983, A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education [NCEE], 1983) established the resurgence for the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) movement in education. The time is long past when American's destiny was assured simply by an abundance of natural resources and inexhaustible human enthusiasm, and by our relative isolation from the malignant problems of older civilizations. The world is indeed one global village. We live among determined, well-educated, and strongly motivated competitors. We compete with them for international standing and markets, not only with products but also with the ideas of our laboratories and neighborhood workshops. America's position in the world may once have been reasonably secure with only a few exceptionally well-trained men and women. It is no longer. (p. 10) The influence of this report and its recommendations are echoed in the feverish development of national standards produced by academic organizations such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the National Research Council (NRC), and the International Technology Education ","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127412689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There are a number of examples in technology education history of multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts linking technology education with other disciplines; however, there has never been a time in technology education where multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts are not only promising but also may be essential for the prosperity of technology education. One important example of blurred boundaries caused by a multidisciplinary effort from our recent past was the Math, Science, and Technology (MST) movement in the early 1990s. The MST movement had an important impact on technology education, and a strong case can be made that the MST efforts of the 1990s paved the way for the recent STEM education initiatives. However, in this article, the author will seek to make the case that no previous multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts within technology education’s history has such potential to impact the field greater than the recent Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) movement. Here, the terms multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary will be defined, a recent history of such efforts in technology education will be reviewed, how funding can and has blurred the mission of technology education will be explored, and the opportunities for technology education regarding STEM education will be presented.
{"title":"Staking the claim for the 'T\" in STEM","authors":"T. Kelley","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.1","url":null,"abstract":"There are a number of examples in technology education history of multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts linking technology education with other disciplines; however, there has never been a time in technology education where multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts are not only promising but also may be essential for the prosperity of technology education. One important example of blurred boundaries caused by a multidisciplinary effort from our recent past was the Math, Science, and Technology (MST) movement in the early 1990s. The MST movement had an important impact on technology education, and a strong case can be made that the MST efforts of the 1990s paved the way for the recent STEM education initiatives. However, in this article, the author will seek to make the case that no previous multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts within technology education’s history has such potential to impact the field greater than the recent Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) movement. Here, the terms multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary will be defined, a recent history of such efforts in technology education will be reviewed, how funding can and has blurred the mission of technology education will be explored, and the opportunities for technology education regarding STEM education will be presented.","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130551917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A brief examination and comparison of mathematics and technology education provides the background for a discussion of integration. In particular, members of each field have responded to the increasing pressures to better prepare students for the technologically rich, globally competitive future. Approaches based within each discipline are varied across curriculum and instructional strategies. However, when examining the disciplines’ historical paths, there are important similarities to consider in determining how best to affect student learning in both mathematics and technology education. The authors contend that engineering design is the appropriate contextual area for integrating mathematics in technology education. Trajectories of Mathematics and Technology Education Pointing To Engineering Design The national learning standards associated with mathematics and technology education indicate a relationship between the disciplines of mathematics and technology education. Mathematics is referred to 30 times in the Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology (International Technology Education Association (ITEA), 2000/2002) and technology is used over 20 times in the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (2000). For example, standard three in the Standards for Technological Literacy states that “students will develop an understanding of the relationships among technologies and the connections between technology and other fields of study” (ITEA, 200/2002, p. 44). The Connections standard in the Principles and Standards for School Mathematics states that students will recognize and apply mathematics in contexts outside of mathematics, and the Problem Solving standard reads that students will solve problems that arise in mathematics and in other contexts. Both disciplines clearly include one another, at least in general terms. Their incorporation or relationship with each other appears to center on use. For example, upon review of these standards documents alone, the scope or purpose of technology in mathematics would appear to be that of instructional technology. Mathematics educators are primarily concerned with using technology to aid in instruction (e.g., computers, calculators, software) and facilitate student learning. Technology educators, on the other hand, are focused on how to use mathematics to understand, use, and design different technologies. Just as mathematics educators appear to see technology as a tool in service to solving mathematical problems, technology educators appear to see mathematics as a tool in service to solving technological problems (Merrill, Reese, & Daugherty, 2010). However, does a closer relationship exist between the two disciplines beside the onedimensional emphasis on use found in the standards? If a closer relationship were to exist, what might integrate the two disciplines? These two questions are the primary focus of this ar
{"title":"Trajectories of Mathematics and Technology Education Pointing to Engineering Design.","authors":"J. Daugherty, G. Reese, C. Merrill","doi":"10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.6","url":null,"abstract":"A brief examination and comparison of mathematics and technology education provides the background for a discussion of integration. In particular, members of each field have responded to the increasing pressures to better prepare students for the technologically rich, globally competitive future. Approaches based within each discipline are varied across curriculum and instructional strategies. However, when examining the disciplines’ historical paths, there are important similarities to consider in determining how best to affect student learning in both mathematics and technology education. The authors contend that engineering design is the appropriate contextual area for integrating mathematics in technology education. Trajectories of Mathematics and Technology Education Pointing To Engineering Design The national learning standards associated with mathematics and technology education indicate a relationship between the disciplines of mathematics and technology education. Mathematics is referred to 30 times in the Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology (International Technology Education Association (ITEA), 2000/2002) and technology is used over 20 times in the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (2000). For example, standard three in the Standards for Technological Literacy states that “students will develop an understanding of the relationships among technologies and the connections between technology and other fields of study” (ITEA, 200/2002, p. 44). The Connections standard in the Principles and Standards for School Mathematics states that students will recognize and apply mathematics in contexts outside of mathematics, and the Problem Solving standard reads that students will solve problems that arise in mathematics and in other contexts. Both disciplines clearly include one another, at least in general terms. Their incorporation or relationship with each other appears to center on use. For example, upon review of these standards documents alone, the scope or purpose of technology in mathematics would appear to be that of instructional technology. Mathematics educators are primarily concerned with using technology to aid in instruction (e.g., computers, calculators, software) and facilitate student learning. Technology educators, on the other hand, are focused on how to use mathematics to understand, use, and design different technologies. Just as mathematics educators appear to see technology as a tool in service to solving mathematical problems, technology educators appear to see mathematics as a tool in service to solving technological problems (Merrill, Reese, & Daugherty, 2010). However, does a closer relationship exist between the two disciplines beside the onedimensional emphasis on use found in the standards? If a closer relationship were to exist, what might integrate the two disciplines? These two questions are the primary focus of this ar","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"10 20","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120842678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：