Annotated Bibliography I
Ayar, M. C. (2015). First-hand Experience with Engineering
Design and Career Interest in Engineering: An Informal
STEM Education Case Study.Educational Sciences: Theory
& Practice, 15(6), 1655. doi:10.12738/estp.2015.6.0134
The article is perfect for my research, as it describes a case study in which engineers and educators experiment with different styles of teaching as well as the implementation of newer updated curriculum standards. The trials of the case study come together to emphasize the importance of a more hands-on style of teaching engineering that results in an enriching experience for the kids, and higher levels of positive feedback. Engineering is the real-world application of math and sciences, so it would seem common sense teach in a style that promotes the application of modern standards and concepts, but because the field is always changing, the educational system and standard have a hard time keeping up. This results in standards that are outdated and inapplicable to the modern industry, and can even decrease student interest. Fortunately, case studies like the one in this article have shed light on the issue, and have suggested significant cause for the regular reformation of curriculum content and standards. The article describes a study in which practicing engineers worked with educators to host a summer camp in which they taught the kids through hands-on labs and activities. They compared the results to that of the standard classroom setting. What they found was that the flexibility provided through the lack of strict state mandated standards, in addition to the opportunities for students to exercise their creativity, resulted in much more positive results and feedback,
​
The goal of teaching engineering in schools in the first place is to excite kids about STEM areas of study and show them what a career in engineering might look like. I have experienced this first hand in my internship, where I have witnessed the difference in excitement between the hands on applications of standards through things like robotics, versus the confinements set forth by state mandated standards. Many of these standards have not been updated in nearly ten years, which is astounding if you consider how much technology has changed over the past decade. In these past few years we’ve seen revolutionary advancements such as the introduction of smartphones, further automation of robotic manufacturing, and even self-driving cars. However, the Georgia state standards suggest that engineering teachers should still be teaching things in a manner that does not accommodate these new changes in the field. The case study affirmed this idea in showing that students exhibited significantly more interest through hands-on experiences rather than standard classroom lectures. Of course, lectures are necessary sometimes, but this study would suggest that they’re useless without allowing the students to experience the application of the taught concepts first-hand. Another parallel between my observations and the study, is that learning through trial and error proves invaluable in the students’ retention of information. Just like you wouldn’t expect a student to know how to do algebra after a lecture without any practice, the same goes for the basic fundamentals of engineering.
All in all, the article was an excellent parallel to my research, because it showed many similarities between what I have begun to witness at my internship with robotics and engineering education, as well as the cons of having strict state-mandated standards. I feel the information presented in the article will be a highly valuable reference as I conduct my own research in the field of engineering and career tech education.
Annotated Bibliography II
Mizell, S., & Brown, S. (2016). The Current Status of STEM Education Research 2013 2015. Journal Of
STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 17(4), 52-56.
The information presented in the article conveys the data and observations regarding current research of American STEM proficiency in students of grades kindergarten through 12th. The article addresses data recovered from ten case studies over the past 20 years, and illustrates trends regarding demographics, schooling, and student involvement. It overviews involvement nationwide, and it gives a wide overview of many different case studies and projects. The data portrays continued development of STEM research based on a call to action by the American government for an all hands on effort to increase proficiency nationwide. It overviews not only methods of education, but methods of progress tracking through the case studies. It describes the processes of data collection, and analyzes the data. The data is used to draw conclusions about the viability of STEM research, and profiles trends in student ability. The advancement of STEM proficiency is increasing according to the data. It goes on to contend that; “This is encouraging since proficiency in STEM fields is critical to remaining a leader in the 21st century global workforce.” (Mizell, 54)
Potential quotes from the article include statements reflecting the data such as, “The current analysis has demonstrated that the research base for STEM education has expanded” (Mizell, 54) or “As the two studies are compared, it is apparent that there are areas in which a shift has taken place.” I could also include quotes regarding data reflection such as, “In the original article, Brown suggested that more rigorous methods could strengthen the field of STEM education research.” (Mizell, 54)
The source is credible, as it is a scholarly article regarding a collection of data. It is rather unbiased and draws valid conclusions based on the data. It is not politicized; it is just a reflection of data that leaves room for interpretation. The information presented within the article is completely cited and the source itself was procured from the Galileo search engine. The source is up to date as well, having been published October first of 2016.
The article fits well into my research as it demonstrates the current state of American STEM proficiency. I will use it to illustrate trends, and make connections to my experience with the robotics students. The data will be a valuable reference in my research, and it will help me to draw conclusions of my own. It suggests trends that directly reflect the students I am working with in my research.
Annotated Bibliography III
National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM Education: Identifying Effective Approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
​
The article “Successful K-12 STEM Education” explores research that identifies successes and drawbacks in different approaches to STEM curriculum and education practices. It overviews a variety of case studies and teachers to exemplify a variety of approaches to engineering education. It suggests a hands on approach to improve student feedback and engagement. Some potential quotes include: “School programs are designed to develop sound character, creativity, ethical judgment, concerned attitudes, and the ability to live productively and harmoniously in a global workforce.” and “the most useful way of identifying criteria for success relates to educational practices: what practices should be used to identify effective STEM schools? Focusing on practices instead of outcomes provides schools with concrete guidance for improving the quality of STEM instruction and, presumably, of STEM learning.” The article lists all its informational sources at the beginning. It is a “.org” source which typically suggests a degree of credibility as well. It is very well documented and provides a lot of unbiased and sourced information that I plan to use in my own research. It relates directly to my research topic and provides valuable resources for reference in my studies.