Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Engineering Concepts, Practices, and Trajectories for Early Childhood Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Early Engineering Learning

Part of the book series: Early Mathematics Learning and Development ((EMLD))

Abstract

In this chapter, we examine what age-appropriate engineering should entail for children at the preschool (ages 3–4), kindergarten (ages 5–6), and primary (ages 7–8) grade levels. We propose a set of design parameters that develop foundational engineering concepts and practices in children as they participate in engineering activity and design. At the core, these include understanding engineering as a design process and a focus on materials and their properties. As children engage in engineering, they should work to determine the problem they need to solve, think about criteria for successful designs, and explore which materials are best suited for their needs. They should also conduct tests and reflect upon the results to analyze how well their design worked to solve the problem while meeting criteria. Additionally, engineering education for young learners should foster children’s creative thinking, observational skills, and persistence. For each engineering curriculum design parameter, we describe how it can be implemented appropriately for children at each age band (3 and 4, 5 and 6, 7 and 8) based on our experience with children in classrooms.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This challenge is based on a challenge developed and used by the Discovery Center at the Museum of Science , Boston, in their “Make with Me” space.

  2. 2.

    This activity is a modification of a lesson in the Engineering is Elementary “Catching the Wind: Designing Windmills” unit.

References

  • Allen, L., & Kelly, B. B. (Eds.). (2015). Transforming the workforce for children birth through age 8: A unifying foundation. Washington DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/read/19401/chapter/1.

  • Atman, C. J., Yasuhara, K., Adams, R. S., Barker, T. J., Turns, J., & Rhone, E. (2008). Breadth in problem scoping: A comparison of freshman and senior engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(2), 234–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australia. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, & Council of Australian Governments. (2009). Belonging, being & becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Canberra: A.C.T: Dept. of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bairaktarova, D., Evangelou, D., Bagiati, A., & Dobbs-Oates, J. (2012). The role of classroom artifacts in developmental engineering. Presented at the Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., et al. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 271–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Barron, B., Pea, R. D., Meltzoff, A., Kuhl, P., Bell, P., … Sabelli, N. H. (2006). Foundations and opportunities for an interdisciplinary science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 19–34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, J. (1983). Conceptualizing student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(3), 200–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, S. P., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971–1002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R. J. (2007). Women and minorities in STEM: A primer. In R. J. Burke & M. C. Mattis (Eds.), Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Upping the numbers (pp. 3–27). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Buxton, C. A. (2010). Social problem solving through science: An approach to critical, place-based, science teaching and learning. Equity & Excellence in Education, 43(1), 120–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Developmental milestones. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/actearly/milestones/index.html.

  • Christine, M. C., & Gregory, J. K., (2017) Epistemic Practices of Engineering for Education. Science Education, 101(3), 486–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R., & Andrews, J. (2010). Researching primary engineering education: UK perspectives, an exploratory study. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(5), 585–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2012a). Common core state standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. USA: Common Core Standards Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2012b). Common core state standards for mathematics. USA: Common Core State Standards Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. USA: NAEYC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copple, C., Bredekamp, S., Koralek, D. G., & Charner, K. (Eds.). (2013). Developmentally Appropriate Practice: Focus on Preschoolers. USA: NAEYC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copple, C., Bredekamp, S., Koralek, D. G., & Charner, K. (Eds.). (2014). Developmentally Appropriate Practice: Focus on Kindergartners. USA: NAEYC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, C. M. (2018). Engineering in elementary STEM education: Curriculum design, instruction, learning, and assessment. New York, NY: Teacher College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, C. M., & Carlsen, W. S. (2014). Precollege engineering education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, C. M., & Hester, K. (2007). Engineering is elementary: An engineering and technology curriculum for children. In ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Honolulu, HI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, C. M., & Lachapelle, C. P. (2014). Designing engineering experiences to engage all students. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 117–140). Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, C. M., & Kelly, G. K. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering in education. Science Education, 101, 486–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. E., Cunningham, C. M., & Lachapelle, C. P. (2017). They can’t spell “engineering” but they can do it: Designing an engineering curriculum for the preschool classroom. Zero to Three Journal, 37(5), 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Education. (2014, March 31). Statutory framework for the early years foundation stage. Department for Education. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/335504/EYFS_framework_from_1_September_2014__with_clarification_note.pdf.

  • Department for Education and Skills. (2006). Primary framework for literacy and mathematics. London: Department for Education and Skills. Retrieved from http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/pdfs/2006-primary-national-strategy.pdf.

  • Diaz, D., & King, P. (2007). Adapting a post-secondary STEM instructional model to K-5 mathematics instruction. In ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Honolulu, HI. https://peer.asee.org/3054.

  • Diefes-Dux, H. A. (2014). In-service teacher professional development in engineering education: Early years. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 233–258). Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elias, C. L., & Berk, L. E. (2002). Self-regulation in young children: Is there a role for sociodramatic play? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17(2), 216–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006(02)00146-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, A. S. (2006). The intentional teacher: Choosing the best strategies for young children’s learning. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farkas, G., & Beron, K. (2004). The detailed age trajectory of oral vocabulary knowledge: Differences by class and race. Social Science Research, 33(3), 464–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French, L. A., & Woodring, S. D. (2014). Science education in the early years. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 179–196). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of The learning sciences (pp. 79–96). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henricks, T. (2008). The nature of play: An overview. American Journal of Play, 1(2), 157–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertel, J. D., Cunningham, C. M., & Kelly, G. K. (2017). The roles of engineering notebooks in shaping elementary engineering student discourse and practice. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 1194–1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1317864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. M., & Anning, A. (2001). Primary teachers’ and students’ understanding of school situated design in Canada and England. Research in Science Education, 31(1), 117(19).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. L. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=CGIaNc3F1MgC&dq=%22Hutchins%22+%22Cognition+in+the+Wild%22+.

  • Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2015). Emotions, learning, and the brain: Exploring the educational implications of affective neuroscience (Vol. 1). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jirout, J., & Zimmerman, C. (2015). Development of science process skills in the early childhood years. In K. C. Trundle, & M. Saçkes (Eds.), Research in early childhood science education (pp. 143–165). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401795043.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, I., Lake, V. E., & Lin, M. (2008). Early childhood science process skills: Social and developmental considerations. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on science and technology in early childhood education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S. (2007). The application of historical narrative in science learning: the Atlantic cable story. Science & Education, 16(3–5), 335–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L. (2002). Facilitating the learning of design practices: Lessons learned from an inquiry into science education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L. (2006). Case-based reasoning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 225–242). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., & Ryan, M. (2004). Promoting deep science learning through case-based reasoning: Rituals and practices in Learning by Design™ classrooms. In N. M. Seel & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Curriculum, plans, and processes in instructional design: International perspectives (pp. 89–89). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from internal-pdf://Kolodneretal2004promotingdeepscilearning-2158936832/Kolodneretal 2004promotingdeepscilearning.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L., Gray, J., & Fasse, B. B. (2003). Promoting transfer through case-based reasoning: Rituals and practices in learning by design classrooms. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 3(2), 119–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (2006). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317–334). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachapelle, C. P., & Cunningham, C. M. (2010). Assessing elementary students’ understanding of engineering and technology concepts. In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Louisville, KY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachapelle, C. P., & Cunningham, C. M. (2014). Engineering in elementary schools. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 61–88). Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lachapelle, C. P., Cunningham, C. M., Jocz, J., Kay, A. E., Phadnis, P., Wertheimer, J., et al. (2011). Engineering is Elementary: An evaluation of years 4 through 6 field testing. Boston, MA: Museum of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning : Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macalalag, A., Brockway, D., McKay, M., & McGrath, E. (2008). Partnership to improve student achievement in engineering and science education: Lessons learned in year one. In American Society for Engineering Education Mid-Atlantic Conference. Hoboken, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massachusetts Department of Early Education and Care. (2015, June). Massachusetts standards for preschool and kindergarten: Social and emotional learning, and approaches to play and learning. Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/edu/birth-grade-12/early-education-and-care/curriculum-and-learning/pre-school-and-kindergarten-standards.html.

  • Miller, P. H., Blessing, J. S., & Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender differences in high-school students’ views about science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 363–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC]. (2005). NAEYC early childhood program standards and accreditation criteria: The mark of quality in early childhood education. NAEYC. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/Position%20Statement%20EC%20Standards.pdf.

  • National Association for the Education of Young Children, & National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NAEYC & NCTM]. (2010). Early childhood mathematics: Promoting good beginnings. NAEYC. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/psmath.pdf.

  • National Institutes of Health. (2014, May 14). Developmental milestones record - 3 years. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002014.htm.

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K–8. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13158.

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (2002, July). NSTA position statement: Elementary school science. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/elementary.aspx.

  • National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (2014, January). NSTA position statement: Early childhood science education. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/earlychildhood.aspx.

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/.

  • Oh, Y., Lachapelle, C. P., Shams, M. F., Hertel, J. D., & Cunningham, C. M. (2016). Evaluating the efficacy of Engineering is Elementary for student learning of engineering and science concepts. Washington, D.C.: Presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S. (2005). 12 Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (p. 285). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, G. (2004). Collaboration conundrum. Journal of Technology Education, 15(2), 66–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penner, D. E., Giles, N. D., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1997). Building functional models: Designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 125–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J., Gruber, H. E., & Vonèche, J. J. (1977). The Essential Piaget. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J. S., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., … Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, C., & Portsmore, M. (2004). Bringing engineering to elementary school. Journal of STEM Education, 5(3–4), 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (2001). Learning science through technological design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 768–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, P. M., Coyle, H. P., & Schwartz, M. (2000). Engineering competitions in the middle school classroom: Key elements in developing effective design challenges. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 299–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2006a). Educating for innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 41–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2006b). Introduction: The new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 1–16). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from internal-pdf://Sawyer 2006 New science of learning-3484481024/Sawyer 2006 New science of learning.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silk, E. M., Schunn, C. D., & Cary, M. S. (2009). The impact of an engineering design curriculum on science reasoning in an urban setting. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(3), 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, J., & Hall, S. (1996). An inquiry into progression in primary technology: A role for teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 6(3), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00419883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, N. (2011). How children learn: The characteristics of effective early learning. England: British Association for Early Childhood Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinner, A. (1996). Providing a contextual base and a theoretical structure to guide the teaching of science from early years to senior years. Science & Education, 5(3), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00414315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stouffer, W., Russell, J. S., & Oliva, M. G. (2004). Making the strange familiar: Creativity and the future of engineering education (pp. 20–23). Presented at the Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Commission on Early Childhood Education and Care. (2011). Council conclusions on early childhood education and care: Providing all our children with the best start for the world of tomorrow. Brussels: European Union. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0066.

  • Thompson, S., & Lyons, J. (2008). Engineers in the classroom: Their influence on African-American students’ perceptions of engineering. School Science and Mathematics, 108(5), 197–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trundle, K. C., & Saçkes, M. (Eds.). (2015). Research in early childhood science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401795043.

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, A., Campbell, C., & Jane, B. (2006). Enhancing the creative process for learning in primary technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(3), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-005-5633-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendell, K., Kendall, A., Portsmore, M., Wright, C. G., Jarvin, L., & Rogers, C. (2014). Embedding elementary school science instruction in engineering design problem solving. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 143–162). Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wendell, K., Wright, C., & Paugh, P. (2015). Engineering design as disciplinary discourse: An exploration of language demands and resources among urban elementary students. Chicago, IL: Presented at the NARST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicklein, R. C. (2006). Five good reasons for engineering as THE focus for technology education. International Technology Education Association. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1065&context=ncete_publications.

  • Wilson, E. O. (2002). The power of story. American Educator, 26(1), 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zubrowski, B. (2002). Integrating science into design technology projects: Using a standard model in the design process. Journal of Technology Education, 13(2), 48–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Museum of Science, Boston, MA, USA

    Christine M. Cunningham, Cathy P. Lachapelle & Martha E. Davis

Authors
  1. Christine M. Cunningham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cathy P. Lachapelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martha E. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine M. Cunningham .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Lyn English

  2. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Tamara Moore

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cunningham, C.M., Lachapelle, C.P., Davis, M.E. (2018). Engineering Concepts, Practices, and Trajectories for Early Childhood Education. In: English, L., Moore, T. (eds) Early Engineering Learning. Early Mathematics Learning and Development. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8621-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8621-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-8620-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-8621-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation