Abstract
The Next Generation Science Standards present a way for engineering lessons to be formally integrated into elementary classrooms at a national level in the United States. Professional development programs are an important method for preparing teachers to enact the new engineering practices in their science classrooms. To better understand what contextual factors help a professional development program have a sustained effect on the implementation of engineering, we closely examined two elementary schools within the same school district that participated in the same professional development program but had very different outcomes in their lasting implementation of engineering. Using the case study method, we corroborate quantitative and qualitative sources of data measuring students’ learning and attitudes; teachers’ learning, attitudes, and implementation fidelity; perceived teacher community; and administrative support. Our analysis revealed that although the professional development program had district-level administrative support, there was considerable variation between schools in how teachers’ perceived school level support. In addition, teachers at the sustaining school collaborated and co-taught with one another. Our findings support previous literature on the role of administrative support and teacher learning communities. We discuss practical ways that professional development programs can seek to foster a context which is supportive of sustaining curriculum change for engineering.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archibald, S., Coggshall, J. G., Croft, A., & Goe, L. (2011). High-quality professional development for all teachers: Effectively allocating resources. Research & Policy Brief. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Banilower, E. R., Heck, D. J., & Weiss, I. R. (2007). Can professional development make the vision of the standards a reality? The impact of the National Science Foundation’s local systemic change through teacher enhancement initiative. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(3), 375–395.
Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 369–387.
Capobianco, B. M., French, B. F., & Diefes-Dux, H. A. (2012). Engineering identity development among pre-adolescent learners. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 698–716. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb01125.x.
Carr, R. L., Bennett, L. D., & Strobel, J. (2012). Engineering in the K-12 STEM standards of the 50 US states: An analysis of presence and extent. Journal of Engineering Education, 101, 539–564.
Conover, W. H., & Iman, R. L. (1982). Analysis of covariance using the rank transformation. Biometrics, 38, 715–724.
Cunningham, C. M. (2009). Engineering is elementary. The Bridge, 30(3), 11–17.
Cunningham, C. M., DeCristofano, C., Hester, K., Higgins, M., Knight, M., Lachapelle, C. P., et al. (2006a). A work in process: Improving a play dough process: Solids and liquids and chemical engineering for elementary students. Boston: Museum of Science.
Cunningham, C. M., DeCristofano, C., Hester, K., Higgins, M., Lachapelle, C. P., Sargianis, K., et al. (2006b). Thinking inside the box: Designing plant packages: Plants and package engineering for elementary students. Boston: Museum of Science.
Cunningham, C. M., Hester, K., Higgins, M., Sargianis, K., Lachapelle, C. P., DeCristofano, C., et al. (2005). Marvelous machines: Making work easier: Simple machines and industrial engineering for elementary students. Boston: Museum of Science.
Custer, R. L., & Daugherty, J. (2009). Professional development for teachers of engineering: Research and related activities. The Bridge, 39(3), 18.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46–53.
Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 327–350.
Dyehouse, M., Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Capobianco, B. (2011). Measuring the effects of integrating engineering into the elementary school curriculum on students’ science and engineering design content knowledge. In Proceedings of the 118th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Guskey, T. R. (2003). What makes professional development effective? Phi Delta Kappan, 84(10), 748–750.
Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development. Phi Delta Lappan, 90(7), 495–500.
Hailey, C., Erekson, T., Becker, K., & Thomas, M. (2005). National center for engineering and technology education. The Technology Teacher, 64(5), 23.
Macalalag, A., Lowes, S., Guo, K., Tirthali, D., Mckay, M., & McGrath, E. (2010). Teacher professional development in grades 3–5: Fostering teachers’ and students’ content knowledge in science and engineering. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY.
Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 71–85. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x.
Moore, T. J., Glancy, A. W., Tank, K. M., Kersten, J. A., Smith, K. A., & Stohlmann, M. S. (2014). A framework for quality k-12 engineering education: Research and development. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 4(1), 2.
National Assessment Governing Board. (2013). 2014 Abridged technology and engineering literacy framework for the 2014 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Retrieved from http://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/publications/frameworks/tel-abridged-2014.pdf
National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (n.d.). Search for schools and colleges. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. http://www.nces.gov.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Achieve, Inc. on behalf of the twenty-six states and partners that collaborated on the NGSS. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Rheinheimer, D. C., & Penfield, D. A. (2001). The effects of type I error rate and power of the ANCOVA F test and selected alternatives under nonnormality and variance heterogeneity. The Journal of Experimental Education, 69(4), 373–391.
Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883–907.
Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158.
Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning. Retrieved from http://www.iiep.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Research_Challenges_and_Trends/133010e.pdf
Yaşar, Ş., Baker, D., Robinson-Kurpius, S., Krause, S., & Roberts, C. (2006). Development of a survey to assess K-12 teachers’ perceptions of engineers and familiarity with teaching design, engineering, and technology. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(3), 205–216.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Inc.
Yoon, S. Y., Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Strobel, J. (2013). First-year effects of an engineering professional development program on elementary teachers. American Journal of Engineering Education, 4(1), 67–84.
Yoon, S. Y., Dyehouse, M., Lucietto, A., Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Capobianco, B. M. (2014). The effects of integrated science, technology, and engineering education on elementary students’ knowledge and identity development. School Science and Mathematics, 114(8), 380–391.
Zarske, M., Sullivan, J., Carlson, L., & Yowell, J. (2004). Teachers teaching teachers: Linking K-12 engineering curricula with teacher professional development. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Acknowledgments
This work was made possible by a Grant from the National Science Foundation (DRL 0822261). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Douglas, K.A., Rynearson, A., Yoon, S.Y. et al. Two elementary schools’ developing potential for sustainability of engineering education. Int J Technol Des Educ 26, 309–334 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9313-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9313-4