Enacting ambitious engineering curriculum in science classrooms: examining teachers’ implementation of Virtual Engineering Internships

References

• Arastoopour, G., Shaffer, D. W., Swiecki, Z., Ruis, A. R., & Chesler, N. C. (2016). Teaching and assessing engineering design thinking with virtual internships and epistemic network analysis. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(3B), 1492–1501.
   Google Scholar
• Bagley, E. A. S., & Shaffer, D. W. (2009). “They listen to stakeholders”: Promoting civic thinking through epistemic game play. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulation, 1(1), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.4018/jgcms.2009010103
   Google Scholar
• Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play: Using games to position person, content, and context. Educational Researcher, 39(7), 525–536. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10386593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00985.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2009). Design for scalability: A case study of the River City curriculum. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 353–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9156-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, J., Dede, C., Ketelhut, D. J., & Nelson, B. (2006). A design-based research strategy to promote scalability for educational innovations. Educational Technology, 46(3), 27–36.
   Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032006003
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, C. M., & Lachapelle, C. P. (2014). Designing engineering experiences to engage all students. In J. Strobel, S. Purzer, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 117–142). Purdue University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dede, C. (2010). Technological supports for acquiring 21st century skills. International Encyclopedia of Education, 3, 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00739-9
   Google Scholar
• Dedoose Version 8.7.27, web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data (2019). Los Angeles, CA: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC wsw.dedoose.com
   Google Scholar
• Deshpande, A. A., & Huang, S. H. (2011). Simulation games in engineering education: A state-of-the-art review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 19(3), 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.20323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, J., Iversen, E., & Kalyandurg, C. (2004). Engineering in the K-12 classroom: An analysis of current practices and guidelines for the future. A production of the ASEE Engineering K, 12. http://www.engineeringk12.org
   Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2014). Preparing content area teachers for disciplinary literacy instruction: The role of literacy teacher educators. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(6), 444–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.269
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107
   Google Scholar
• Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43–76. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, B., Marginson, S., & Tytler, R. (Eds.). (2014). The age of STEM: Educational policy and practice across the world in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Householder, D. L., & Hailey, C. E. (Eds.). (2012). Incorporating engineering design challenges into STEM courses (Report No. 166). National Center for Engineering and Technology Education.
   Google Scholar
• Kamarainen, A., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., & Dede, C. J. (2015). Exploring ecosystems from the inside: How immersion in a multi-user virtual environment supports epistemologically grounded practices in ecosystem science instruction. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2), 148–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9531-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C. (2007). Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20152
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Montgomery, R., Greenwald, E., Crane, S., Krakowski, A., & Barber, J. (2020). Operationalizing optimization in a middle school virtual engineering internship: Using student log-file data to assess an NGSS engineering practice. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(3), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09826-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, T. J., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., & Kersten, J. A. (2015). NGSS and the landscape of engineering in K–12 state science standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(3), 296–318. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Academy of Engineering. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K–12 education: Status, prospectus, and an agenda for research. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012a). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a conceptual framework for new K–12 science education standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012b). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Niederhauser, D. S., Howard, S. K., Voogt, J., Agyei, D. D., Laferriere, T., Tondeur, J., & Cox, M. J. (2018). Sustainability and scalability in educational technology initiatives: Research-informed practice. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(3), 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9382-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9384-1
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Regents of the University of California. (2018). Amplify science curriculum. Amplify.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp, A. A., Gushta, M., Mislevy, R. J., & Shaffer, D. W. (2010). Evidence-centered design of epistemic games: Measurement principles for complex learning environments. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 8(4). https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/jtla/article/view/1623
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers and Education, 46(3), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaffer, D. W. (2007). Epistemic games to improve professional skills and values. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
   Google Scholar
• Shaffer, D. W., Hatfield, D., Svarovsky, G. N., Nash, P., Nulty, A., Bagley, E., Frank, K., Rupp, A. A., & Mislevy, R. (2009). Epistemic network analysis: A prototype for 21st-century assessment of learning. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1162/ijlm.2009.0013
   Google Scholar
• Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336957
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tutwiler, M. S., & Grotzer, T. (2013). Why immersive, interactive simulation belongs in the pedagogical toolkit of “Next Generation” science: Facilitating student understanding of complex causal dynamics. In M. Khine & I. Saleh (Eds.), Approaches and strategies in next generation science learning (pp. 127–146). IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Calabrese Barton, A. (2016). Rigor and equity by design: Seeking a core of practices for the science education community. In D. Gitomer & C. Bell (Eds.), AERA handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 1099–1158). Washington, DC: AERA Press.
   Google Scholar