Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Representation of Science and Engineering Practices and Design Skills in Engineering Design-Integrated Science Units Developed by Pre-service Teachers

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education volume 21, pages 439–461 (2023)Cite this article

Abstract

The current US science education reforms call for integrating engineering design in science instruction requires teachers to develop and teach engineering design-integrated science (EDIS) lessons. However, very few teachers have received training in engineering and how to integrate engineering design into science lessons. In response to this challenge, our teacher education program has been training secondary pre-service science teachers in engineering design and how to develop EDIS instructional materials. Thus, this study reports on the representation of science and engineering practices and engineering design skills in the EDIS instructional units developed by participant pre-service teachers, in aggregate and by science discipline and by different sections within the units. Results show that all science and engineering practices and design skills were included in the units. However, engineering practices and design skills were covered more than science practices in the EDIS instructional units. Pre-service teachers did not treat engineering design as an add-on or culminating activity. Instead, they planned the units to teach science through engineering design process, which was consistent to the model of our intervention, and the Next Generation Science Standards. We conclude that instruction on engineering design process and how to integrate it in science instruction through intensive professional development activities can enhance pre-service science teachers’ abilities to develop EDIS instructional units, even for science subjects like life science.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  • Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., & Weis, A. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Horizon Research Inc.

  • Burghardt, M. D., & Hacker, M. (2004). Informed design: A contemporary approach to design pedagogy as the core process in technology. Technology Teacher, 64(1), 6–8.

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12078

  • Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1992). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 363–401). Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.

  • Crotty, E. A., Guzey, S. S., Roehrig, G. H., Glancy, A. W., Ring-Whalen, E. A., & Moore, T. J. (2017). Approaches to integrating engineering in STEM units and student achievement gains. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 7(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1148

  • Cunningham, C. M., & Carlsen, W. S. (2014). Teaching engineering practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9380-5

  • Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2018). Understanding science teachers’ implementations of integrated STEM curricular units through a phenomenological multiple case study. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0101-z

  • Guzey, S. S., Harwell, M., Moreno, M., Peralta, Y., & Moore, T. J. (2017). The impact of design-based STEM integration curricula on student achievement in engineering, science, and mathematics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9673-x

  • Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up STEM: An analysis of teacher developed engineering design-based STEM integration curricular materials. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6(1), 11–29. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1129

  • Guzey, S. S., Tank, K., Wang, H. H., Roehrig, G., & Moore, T. (2014). A high-quality professional development for teachers of grades 3–6 for implementing engineering into classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 114(3), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12061

  • Haag, S., & Megowan, C. (2015). Next generation science standards: A national mixed-methods study on teacher readiness. School Science and Mathematics, 115(8), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12145

  • 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, 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9142-4

  • Huizinga, T., Handelzalts, A., Nieveen, N., & Voogt, J. M. (2014). Teacher involvement in curriculum design: Need for support to enhance teachers’ design expertise. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(1), 33–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2013.834077

  • Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (Eds.). (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12635

  • Judson, E., Ernzen, J., Krause, S., Middleton, J. A., & Culbertson, R. J. (2016). How engineering standards are interpreted and translated for middle school. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1121

  • Maeng, J. L., Whitworth, B. A., Gonczi, A. L., Navy, S. L., & Wheeler, L. B. (2017). Elementary science teachers’ integration of engineering design into science instruction: Results from a randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1529–1548. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1340688

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290

  • Peterman, K., Daugherty, J., Custer, R., & Ross, M. (2017). Analyzing the integration of engineering in science lessons with the Engineering Infused Lesson Rubric. International Journal of Science Education, 39(14), 1913–2193. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1359431

  • Schnittka, C., & Richards, L. (2016). POWERED by the Sun: Teaching the science of energy, force, and motion through an engineering design challenge. The Science Teacher, 83(3), 25–32.

  • Schnittka, C., & Bell, R. (2011). Engineering design and conceptual change in science: Addressing thermal energy and heat transfer in eighth grade. International Journal of Science Education, 33(13), 1861–1887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.529177

  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., McClelland, J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2011). Yearlong impressions of a middle school STEM integration program. Middle School Journal, 43(1), 32–40.

  • Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2009). Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches to research. The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods (2nd ed., pp. 283–317).

  • Voogt, J., Westbroek, H., Handelzalts, A., Walraven, A., McKenney, S., Pieters, J., & De Vries, B. (2011). Teacher learning in collaborative curriculum design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(8), 1235–1244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.003

  • YaĹźar, Ĺž, 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00893.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge all participant pre-service teachers for attending the intervention and developing the EDIS units we analyzed for this study.

Funding

This research was supported by two National Science Foundation award numbers DUE 1439858 and EEC 1636443. The funding enabled researchers to do the intervention on engineering design and collect data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Curriculum, Instruction and Special Education, University of Virginia, 417 Emmet Street, P.O Box 400273, Charlottesville, VA, 22904, USA

    Frackson Mumba, Alexis Rutt & Vivien Mweene Chabalengula

Authors
  1. Frackson Mumba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexis Rutt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vivien Mweene Chabalengula
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frackson Mumba.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 67 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mumba, F., Rutt, A. & Chabalengula, V.M. Representation of Science and Engineering Practices and Design Skills in Engineering Design-Integrated Science Units Developed by Pre-service Teachers. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 21, 439–461 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10266-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10266-6

Keywords

search

Navigation