Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Facilitating Preservice Elementary Science Teachers’ Shift from Learner to Teacher of Engineering Design-Based Science Teaching

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The role of engineering in science and mathematics education continues to emerge as a contributing factor to improving STEM education. Efforts across different countries include the integration of engineering in K-12 curriculum, after school programs, and inservice teacher professional development. Only recently have science teacher educators begun to introduce engineering in science teacher preparation programs. By incorporating novel curriculum and design-related experiences, we can begin to explore how preservice teachers not only learn about engineering, but more importantly, learn how to teach science using engineering design. In this study, we explore different ways 45 elementary preservice science teachers characterize and construct new understandings about engineering design-based science teaching. Data were gathered via self-interviews and reflective narratives. Data analysis entailed systematic and consistent open coding across transcripts. Document analysis served as a means of triangulation, reinforcing and reaffirming claims corroborated through the analysis of interview data. Using the teacher as learner framework, we contend that preservice teachers, when engaged in an engineering design-based methods course, demonstrate positive shifts from being learners to teachers of science by embodying the participatory, performative, and experiential nature of engineering design. To support preservice teacher development, we propose that teacher education programs incorporate engineering design-based learning experiences throughout teacher preparation rather than in a single semester or year. This means integrating more and earlier opportunities for preservice teachers to develop and apply their understandings of engineering design and design teaching, potentially leading to earlier shifts and increased design-based pedagogical understandings.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, R. S., Daly, S. R., Mann, L. M., & Dall’Alba, G. (2011). Being a professional: Three lenses into design thinking, acting, and being. Design Studies, 32(6), 588–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.004.

  • Antink-Meyer, A., & Meyer, D. Z. (2016). Science teachers’ misconceptions in science and engineering distinctions: Reflections on modern research examples. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(6), 625–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9478-z.

  • Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an understanding of science teaching practice. Research in Science Education, 33, 1–25.

  • Appleton, K. (2006). Science pedagogical content knowledge and elementary school teachers. In K. Appleton (Ed.), Elementary science teacher education: International perspectives on contemporary issues and practice (pp. 31–54). Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Mosborg, S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2007.tb00945.x.

  • Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109348479.

  • Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, 1(1), 25–55.

  • Bernard, H. R., Wutich, A., & Ryan, G. W. (2017). Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches. Sage Publications, Inc.

  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.

  • Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00985.x.

  • Capobianco, B. M. (2019). Elementary preservice teachers’ shifts from learners to teachers: A transformative model for elementary science teacher preparation. Paper presented at the Indiana STEM Education Conference, Purdue University.

  • Capobianco, B. M., & Radloff, J. (2020). Preservice elementary science teachers’ shift from learner to teacher of engineering design-based science teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Science Teacher EducationSan Antonio, TX, United States.

  • Capobianco, B. M., & Rupp, M. (2014). STEM teachers’ planned and enacted attempts at implementing engineering design-based instruction. School Science and Mathematics, 114(6), 258–270.

  • Capobianco, B. M., Nyquist, C., & Tyrie, N. (2013). Shedding light on engineering design. Science and Children, 50(5), 58–64.

  • Capobianco, B. M., DeLisi, J., & Radloff, J. (2018). Characterizing elementary teachers’ enactment of high-leverage practices through engineering design-based science instruction. Science Education, 102(2), 342–376. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21325.

  • Cloutier, S. E. (2016). Learning about teaching science: Improving teachers’ practice through collaborative professional learning (Publication No. 3831) [Doctoral dissertation, Western University, Ontario]. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/3831.

  • Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications, Inc.

  • Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797.

  • Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427–441.

  • Culver, D. E. (2012). A qualitative assessment of preservice elementary teachers' formative perceptions regarding engineering and K-12 engineering education (Publication No. 12888) [Graduate thesis, Iowa State University]. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/12888.

  • Cunningham, C. M., Lachapelle, C. P., & Davis, M. E. (2018). Engineering concepts, practices, and trajectories for early childhood education. In L. English & T. Moore (Eds.), Early engineering learning (pp. 135–174). Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8621-2_8.

  • Dalvi, T., Silva Mangiante, E., & Wendell, K. (2021). Identifying pre-service teachers’ conceptions about the NGSS practices using a curriculum critique and revision (CCR) task. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1791465.

  • English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x.

  • Fan, S. C., Yu, K. C., & Lin, K. Y. (2020). A framework for implementing an engineering-focused STEM curriculum. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10129-y.

  • Ford, M. J. (2015). Educational implications of choosing “practice” to describe science in the next generation science standards. Science Education, 99(6), 1041–1948. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21188.

  • Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20040.

  • French, D. A., & Burrows, A. C. (2018). Evidence of science and engineering practices in preservice secondary science teachers’ instructional planning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(6), 536–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9742-4.

  • Guzey, S. S., & Aranda, M. (2017). Student participation in engineering practices and discourse: An exploratory case study. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(4), 585–606. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20176.

  • Hammack, R., & Ivey, T. (2017). Examining elementary teachers’ engineering self-efficacy and engineering teacher efficacy. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1–2), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12205.

  • Hsu, M. C., Purzer, S., & Cardella, M. E. (2011). Elementary teachers’ views about teaching design, engineering, and technology. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1(2), 5. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314639.

  • Hynes, M. M. (2012). Middle-school teachers’ understanding and teaching of the engineering design process: A look at subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(3), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9142-4.

  • Jao, L. (2017). Shifting pre-service teachers’ beliefs about mathematics teaching: The contextual situation of a mathematics methods course. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(5), 895–914. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9719-9.

  • Johnson, C. C., Peters-Burton, E. E., & Moore, T. J. (2015). STEM road map: A framework for integrated STEM Education. Routledge.

  • Johri, A., & Olds, B. M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00007.x.

  • Kang, E. J., Donovan, C., & McCarthy, M. J. (2018). Exploring elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and confidence in implementing the NGSS science and engineering practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(1), 9–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1415616.

  • Kaya, E., Newley, A., Yesilyurt, E., & Deniz, H. (2019). Improving preservice elementary teachers’ engineering teaching efficacy beliefs with 3D design and printing. Journal of College Science Teaching, 48(5), 76–83.

  • Kim, D., & Bolger, M. (2017). Analysis of Korean elementary pre-service teachers’ changing attitudes about integrated STEAM pedagogy through developing lesson plans. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(4), 587–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9709-3.

  • Kim, E., Oliver, J. S., & Kim, Y. A. (2019). Engineering design and the development of knowledge for teaching among preservice science teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 119(1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12313.

  • Knight, M., & Cunningham, C. (2004). Draw an Engineer Test (DAET): Development of a tool to investigate students’ ideas about engineers and engineering. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Retrieved from https://peer.asee.org/12831.

  • Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

  • Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2013). Design expertise. Routledge.

  • Lead States, N. G. S. S. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academy Press.

  • Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation.

  • Lesseig, K., Firestone, J., Morrison, J., Slavit, D., & Holmlund, T. (2019). An analysis of cultural influences on STEM schools: Similarities and differences across K-12 contexts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(3), 449–466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9875-6.

  • Loughran, J. J. (2013). Science teacher as learner. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1057–1080). Routledge.

  • Martin, T., Baker Peacock, S., Ko, P., & Rudolph, J. J. (2015). Changes in teachers’ adaptive expertise in an engineering professional development course. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 5(2), 4. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1050.

  • Mathewson Mitchell, D., & Reid, J. A. (2017). (Re) turning to practice in teacher education: Embodied knowledge in learning to teach. Teachers and Teaching, 23(1), 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1203775.

  • McFadden, J., & Roehrig, G. (2019). Engineering design in the elementary science classroom: Supporting student discourse during an engineering design challenge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(2), 231–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9444-5.

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.) The Sage Publications, Inc.

  • Nadelson, L. S., Pfiester, J., Callahan, J., & Pyke, P. (2015). Who is doing the engineering, the student or the teacher? The development and use of a rubric to categorize level of design for the elementary classroom. Journal of Technology Education, 26(2), 22–45.

  • National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. The National Academies Press.

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for k-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academy Press.

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academy Press.

  • Pahl, G., & Beitz, W. (2013). Engineering design: A systematic approach. Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Perkins Coppola, M. (2019). Preparing preservice elementary teachers to teach engineering: Impact on self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. School Science andMathematics, 119(3), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12327.

  • Radloff, J. D., & Capobianco, B. M. (2019). Investigating elementary teachers’ tensions and mitigating strategies related to integrating engineering design-based science instruction. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9844-x.

  • Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429.

  • Riley, D. (2008). Engineering and social justice. Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology, and Society, 3(1), 1–152. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00117ED1V01Y200805ETS007.

  • Rogers, M. A. P., Cross, D. I., Gresalfi, M. S., Trauth-Nare, A. E., & Buck, G. A. (2011). First year implementation of a project-based learning approach: The need for addressing teachers’ orientations in the era of reform. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(4), 893–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9248-x.

  • Rose, M. A., Carter, V., Brown, J., & Shumway, S. (2017). Status of elementary teacher development: Preparing elementary teachers to deliver technology and engineering experiences. Journal of Technology Education, 28(2), 2–18.

  • Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

  • Science Learning through Engineering Design. (2011). Design Resources. https://stemedhub.org/groups/sled/design_resources.

  • Silva Mangiante, E. M., & Moore, A. (2020). Elementary pre-service teachers’ reflections on integrated science/engineering design lessons: Attending, analyzing, and responding to students’ thinking. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 54(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE54.1/GXXR8897.

  • Stuart, C., & Thurlow, D. (2000). Making it their own: Preservice teachers’ experiences, beliefs, and classroom practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(2), 113–121.

  • Suchman, L. (2000). Embodied practices of engineering work. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7(1–2), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2000.9677645.

  • Sumen, O. O., & Calisici, H. (2016). The associating abilities of pre-service teachers’ science education program acquisitions with engineering according to stem education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(33), 117–123.

  • Sun, Y., & Strobel, J. (2014). From knowing-about to knowing-to: Development of engineering pedagogical content knowledge by elementary teachers through perceived learning and implementing difficulties. American Journal of Engineering Education (AJEE), 5(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.19030/ajee.v5i1.8610.

  • Thompson, J., Hagenah, S., Kang, H., Stroupe, D., Braaten, M., Colley, C., & Windschitl, M. (2016). Rigor and responsiveness in classroom activity. Teachers College Record, 118(5), 1–45.

  • Utley, J., Ivey, T., Hammack, R., & High, K. (2019). Enhancing engineering education in the elementary school. School Science and Mathematics, 119(4), 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12332.

  • Wallace, J. (2003). Introduction: Learning about teacher learning: Reflections of a science educator. In J. Wallace & J. Loughran (Eds.), Leadership and professional development in science education (pp. 6–21). Routledge.

  • Wallace, J., & Loughran, J. (2012). Science teacher learning. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 295–306). Springer.

  • Webb, D. L., & LoFaro, K. P. (2020). Sources of engineering teaching self-efficacy in a STEAM methods course for elementary preservice teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 120(4), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12403.

  • Wendell, K. B. (2014). Design practices of preservice elementary teachers in an integrated engineering and literature experience. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 4(2), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1085.

  • Wendell, K. B., & Rogers, C. (2013). Engineering design-based science, science content performance, and science attitudes in elementary school. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 513–540. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20026.

  • Wendell, K. B., Wright, C. G., & Paugh, P. (2017). Reflective decision-making in elementary students’ engineering design. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(3), 356–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20173.

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96(5), 878–903. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.2102.

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation #1626197. 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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Purdue University, 100 North University Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Brenda M. Capobianco & Jenna Clingerman

  2. Childhood/Early Childhood Education Department, SUNY Cortland, Cortland, NY, 13045, USA

    Jeffrey Radloff

Authors
  1. Brenda M. Capobianco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey Radloff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jenna Clingerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brenda M. Capobianco.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 15.9 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Capobianco, B.M., Radloff, J. & Clingerman, J. Facilitating Preservice Elementary Science Teachers’ Shift from Learner to Teacher of Engineering Design-Based Science Teaching. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 20, 747–767 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10193-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10193-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation