Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 275–292 | Cite as

Effects of Engineering Design-Based Science on Elementary School Science Students’ Engineering Identity Development across Gender and Grade

  • Brenda M. CapobiancoEmail author
  • Ji H. Yu
  • Brian F. French
Article

Abstract

The integration of engineering concepts and practices into elementary science education has become an emerging concern for science educators and practitioners, alike. Moreover, how children, specifically preadolescents (grades 1–5), engage in engineering design-based learning activities may help science educators and researchers learn more about children’s earliest identification with engineering. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which engineering identity differed among preadolescents across gender and grade, when exposing students to engineering design-based science learning activities. Five hundred fifty preadolescent participants completed the Engineering Identity Development Scale (EIDS), a recently developed measure with validity evidence that characterizes children’s conceptions of engineering and potential career aspirations. Data analyses of variance among four factors (i.e., gender, grade, and group) indicated that elementary school students who engaged in the engineering design-based science learning activities demonstrated greater improvements on the EIDS subscales compared to those in the comparison group. Specifically, students in the lower grade levels showed substantial increases, while students in the higher grade levels showed decreases. Girls, regardless of grade level and participation in the engineering learning activities, showed higher scores in the academic subscale compared to boys. These findings suggest that the integration of engineering practices in the science classroom as early as grade one shows potential in fostering and sustaining student interest, participation, and self-concept in engineering and science.

Keywords

Identity Engineering Gender Elementary 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project is supported by the National Science Foundation, Award # 0734091. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

References

  1. Achieve, Inc. (2013). The next generation science standards. Retrieved from https://www.nextgenscience.org/.Google Scholar
  2. Andree, M., & Hansson, L. (2013). Marketing the “broad line”: invitations to STEM education in a Swedish recruitment campaign. International Journal of Science Education, 35(1), 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beneson, G. (2001). The unrealized potential of everyday technology as a context for learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 730–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boaler, J., & Greeno, J. G. (2000). Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematics worlds. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 171–200). Westport: Ablex.Google Scholar
  6. Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Embodying science: a feminist perspective on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 282–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brickhouse, N. W., & Potter, J. T. (2001). Young women’s scientific identity formation in an urban context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 965–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, B. A., Reveles, J. M., & Kelly, G. J. (2005). Scientific literacy and discursive identity: a theoretical framework for understanding science learning. Science Education, 89, 779–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Capobianco, B. M. (2006). Undergraduate women engineering their professional identities. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12(2), 1–24.Google Scholar
  12. Capobianco, B. M., Diefes-Dux, H., Mena, I., & Weller, J. (2011). Elementary school children’s conceptions of an engineer. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 304–328.Google Scholar
  13. Capobianco, B. M., French, B., & Diefes-Dux, H. (2012). Engineering identity development among pre-adolescent learners. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 1–22.Google Scholar
  14. Carlone, H. B. (2003). Innovative science within and against a culture of “achievement”. Science Education, 87, 307–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carlone, H. B. (2004). The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: girls’ access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 392–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Council, N. R. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  17. Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical students of design activity. In C. Eastman, M. McCracken, & W. Newstetter (Eds.), Design knowledge and learning (pp. 79–103). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  18. Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: an overview. Design Studies, 25, 427–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: youth and crisis. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  20. Fortus, D., Dershimer, C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fraser, S., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M., & Robinson, C. (Eds.). (2004). Doing research with children and young people. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Gysbers, N. C. (1996). Meeting the career needs of children and adolescents. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 21, 87–98.Google Scholar
  23. Hall, C., Dickerson, J., Batts, D., Kauffmann, P., & Bosse, M. (2011). Are we missing opportunities to encourage interest in STEM fields? Journal of Technology Education, 145, 229–245.Google Scholar
  24. Hartung, P. J., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2005). Child vocational development: a review and reconsideration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 385–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Indiana Department of Education. (2013). Indiana academic science standards. Retrieved from https://learningconnection.doe.in.gov/Standards/About.aspx?art=11
  26. Kolodner, J. L., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., & Puntambekar, S. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle school science classroom: putting learning by design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., & Fredricks, J. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3–4), 313–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kroger, J. (2007). Identity development: adolescence through adulthood. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: bases for an accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Massachusetts Department of Education. (2013). Massachusetts science and technology/engineering curriculum frameworks. Retrieved from: http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/
  32. McFarlane, A. E. (1997). Information technology and authentic learning. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meeus, W., Iedema, J., Helsen, M., & Vollebergh, W. (1999). Patterns of adolescent identity development: review of literature and longitudinal analysis. Developmental Review, 19, 419–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Minnesota Department of Education. (2013). Minnesota K12 academic standards. Retrieved from: http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/EdExc/StanCurri/index.html
  35. Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2005). Primary horizons: starting out in science. London: The Wellcome Trust.Google Scholar
  36. National Academy of Engineering & National Research Council. (2009). In L. Katehi, G. Pearson, & M. Feder (Eds.), Engineering in K–12 education: understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  37. Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: a focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441.467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Pell, T., & Jarvis, T. (2001). Developing attitude to science scales for use with children of ages from five to eleven years. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 847–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roth, W. M. (1997). Interactional structures during a grade 4-5 open-design engineering unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(3), 273–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roth, W. M. (1998). Designing communities. Dordecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Selinger, M. (2001). Setting authentic tasks using the Internet. In M. Leask (Ed.), Issues in teaching using ICT. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  44. Solomon, J. (1980). Teaching children in the laboratory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  46. Tonso, K. (2006). Student engineers and engineer identity: campus engineer identities as figured world. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 1(2), 273–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tonso, K. (2007). On the outskirts of engineering: learning, identity, gender, and power via engineering practice. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  48. Trice, A. D., Hughes, M. A., Odom, C., Woods, K., & McClellan, N. C. (1995). The origins of children’s career aspirations: IV. Testing hypotheses from four theories. The Career Development Quarterly, 43, 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wigfield, A., Battle, A., Keller, L. B., & Eccles, J. S. (2001). Sex differences in motivation, self- concept, career aspiration, and career choice: implications for cognitive development. In A. McGillicuddy-DeLisi & R. De Lisi (Eds.), Biology, society, and behavior: the development of sex differences in cognition: advances in applied developmental psychology (pp. 279–294). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brenda M. Capobianco
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ji H. Yu
    • 1
  • Brian F. French
    • 2
  1. 1.Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Washington State UniversityPullmanUSA

Personalised recommendations