Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Secondary level engineering professional development: content, pedagogy, and challenges

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The design of this study was a multiple case study conducted to examine the knowledge, pedagogical principles, and challenges involved in providing engineering-oriented professional development for teachers at the secondary school level. A set of criteria was used to identify five representative projects for analysis in the US. A variety of tools and processes were used to gather data including on-site observations, interviews, focus groups and document reviews. Results of the study indicate that engineering professional development tends to be based on work focused on curriculum development and implementation. Given the distinct design orientation of engineering, it is not surprising that the focus of engineering-oriented professional development tends to concentrate on engaging activities, with a primary focus on process rather than content. A key outcome of this study was an observed lack of a clearly formulated and articulated conceptual foundation for secondary level engineering. Regarding pedagogy, the researchers identified a heavy emphasis on modeling and applied learning. At the same time, the researchers observed a lack of emphasis on reflection and analysis of the pedagogical processes and techniques used to shape teachers’ ability to teach engineering to their students. The findings of the study also include concerns raised by teachers as they engage in engineering professional development. These include concerns about technical knowledge, particularly with the use of specialized software applications and other tools, as well as with practical issues such as time, resources, and availability of appropriate curriculum.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET). (2000). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, http://www.abet.org/.

  • Adey, P. (2004). The professional development of teachers: Practice and theory. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L. (2009). Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1090–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buczynski, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 599–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Childress, V., & Rhodes, C. (2008). Engineering student outcomes for grades 9–12. The Technology Teacher, 5(7), 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Childress, V., & Sanders, M. (2007). Core engineering concepts foundational for the study of technology in grades 6–12. In R. Custer (Ed.), Professional development for engineering and technology: A national symposium, February 2007. Retrieved September 03, 2008, http://www.conferences.ilstu.edu/NSA/homepage.html.

  • Crockett, M. D., Chen, C., Namikawa, T., & Zilimu, J. (2009). Exploring discourse-based assessment practice and its role in mathematics professional development. Professional Development in Education, 35(4), 677–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Custer, R. L., & Daugherty, J. L. (2009). Professional development for teachers of engineering: Research and related activities. The Bridge: Linking Engineering and Society, 39(3), 18–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Custer, R. L., Daugherty, J. L., & Meyer, J. P. (under review). Formulating a concept base for secondary level engineering: A review and synthesis. Journal of Technology Education.

  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (Eds.). (2005). A good teacher in every classroom: Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daugherty, J. L. (2009). Engineering professional development design for secondary school teachers: A multiple case study. Journal of Technology Education, 21(1), 5–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dearing, B. M., & Daugherty, M. K. (2004). Delivering engineering content in technology education. The Technology Teacher, 64(3), 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert, E. K., & Crippen, K. J. (2010). Applying a cognitive-affective model of conceptual change to professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(3), 371–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, L. (2002). What is teacher development? Oxford Review of Education, 28(1), 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. G., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldschmidt, P., & Phelps, G. (2010). Does teacher professional development affect content and pedagogical knowledge: How much and for how long? Economics of Education Review, 29, 432–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S. P. (2004). Professional development for school improvement: Empowering learning communities. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. (2003). What makes professional development effective? Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 748–750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, M., de Vries, M., & Rossouw, A. (2009). CCETE project: Concepts and contexts in engineering and technology education. Retrieved November 11, 2009, from http://www.hofstra.edu/pdf/Academics/Colleges/SOEAHS/ctl/CTL_Edu_Initiatives_CCETE_revised.pdf.

  • Harris, K. S., & Rogers, G. E. (2008). Secondary engineering competencies: A Delphi study of engineering faculty. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 45(1), 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Technology Education Association. (2000/2002). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA.

  • Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2004). Enhancing practicing primary school teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14, 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (Eds.). National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • Kazemi, E., Lesseig, K., Mumme, J., Carroll, C., & Kelley-Petersen, M. (2009). Conceptualizing the work of leading mathematical tasks in professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 364–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kipperman, D. (2009). Teaching through technology concepts: Strengthening the position of technology education in the curriculum. In Proceedings of the 22nd pupils attitudes toward technology (PATT) conference, international conference on design and technology education research, Delft, Netherlands, (pp. 279–283).

  • Lewis, T. (2005). Coming to terms with engineering design as content. Journal of Technology Education, 16(2), 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T., Petrina, S., & Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem posing: Adding a creative increment to technological problem solving. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 36(1), 5–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, A. (1994). Teacher development commitment and challenge. In P. P. Grimmett & J. Neufiled (Eds.), Teacher development and the struggle for authenticity: Professional growth and restructuring in the context of change. New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loucks-Horsley, S. (1999). Effective professional development for teachers of mathematics. In Eisenhower National Clearinghouse, Ideas that work: Mathematics professional development. Columbus, OH: Eisenhower National Clearinghouse.

  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K., & Hewson, P. (1996). Principles of effective professional development for mathematics and science education: A synthesis of standards. National Institute for Science Education Brief, 1(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. G. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mawson, B. (2003). Beyond ‘the design process’: An alternative pedagogy for technology education. International Journal of Design Education, 13(2), 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, M. W. (2002). Sites and sources of teachers’ learning. In C. Sugrue & C. Day (Eds.), Developing teachers and teaching practice: International research perspectives (pp. 95–115). London: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, A. (2010). Developing elementary teachers’ understanding of the discourse structure of inquiry-based science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 247–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parise, L. M., & Spillane, J. P. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers’ practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 323–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2007). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peressini, D., Borko, H., Romagnano, L., Knuth, E., & Willis, C. (2004). A conceptual framework for learning to teach secondary mathematics: A situative perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56(1), 67–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittle-Johnson, B. (2006). Promoting transfer: The effects of direct instruction and self-explanation. Child Development, 77(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohaan, E. J., Toconis, R., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2007). Examining teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge with a multiple choice test. In Proceedings of the 18th pupils attitudes toward technology (PATT) conference, international conference on design and technology education research, Glascow, Scotland, (pp. 129–136).

  • Sanders, M. (2001). New paradigm or old wine? The status of technology education practice in the United States. Journal of Technology Education, 12(2), 35–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch, M. (1999). Analyzing the tacit strategies of novice designers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(1), 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicklein, R. C. (2006). Five good reasons for engineering design as the focus for technology education. The Technology Teacher, 65(7), 25–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. J. (2000). Design: The only methodology of technology? Journal of Technology Education, 11(2), 48–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24, 173–209.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Jenny L. Daugherty

  2. Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA

    Rodney L. Custer

Authors
  1. Jenny L. Daugherty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rodney L. Custer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jenny L. Daugherty.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Daugherty, J.L., Custer, R.L. Secondary level engineering professional development: content, pedagogy, and challenges. Int J Technol Des Educ 22, 51–64 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9136-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9136-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation