Building
Capacity for
Teaching
Engineering
in K-12
Education

Committee on Educator Capacity Building in
K–12 Engineering Education

National Academy of Engineering

Board on Science Education

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

A Consensus Study Report of

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This activity was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. (1540253). Additional funding was provided by the Samueli Foundation and Robin K. and Rose M. McGuire. 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.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-49942-2
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-49942-9
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25612
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020932742

Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; www.nap.edu.

Copyright 2020 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Building Capacity for Teaching Engineering in K–12 Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25612.

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATOR CAPACITY BUILDING IN K–12 ENGINEERING EDUCATION

ELLEN KULLMAN (NAE), chair, CEO and President, Carbon; retired CEO and Chair, DuPont

DIRAN APELIAN (NAE), Distinguished Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, University of California, Irvine and Alcoa-Howmet Professor of Engineering and Founding Director of the Metal Processing Institute, Worcester Polytechnic Institute

RODGER BYBEE, Executive Director (retired), Biological Sciences Curriculum Study

JASON COLEMAN, Cofounder and Executive Director, Project SYNCERE

DAVID CRISMOND, Associate Professor, School of Education, City College of New York

MARSHALL DAVIS, Supervisor for PreK–12 Science, Saint Paul Public Schools

CHERYL FARMER, Director of Precollege Engineering Education Initiatives, The University of Texas at Austin

JEN GUTIERREZ, K–12 STEM Education Consultant, Arizona

TANNER HUFFMAN, Assistant Professor, Department of Integrative STEM Education, School of Engineering, The College of New Jersey

BRYAN KIND, Vice President of Programs, Project Lead The Way

CHENTEL NEAT, STEM Magnet Coordinator, Colbert Museum Magnet School

BRIAN J. REISER, Professor of Learning Sciences, Northwestern University

MARIA SIMANI, Executive Director, California Science Project

BLAIRE THRASHER, Engineering and Technology Education Instructor, East Coweta Middle School, Georgia

BRUCE WELLMAN, Engineering Chemistry Teacher & Extreme Conditions Robotics Teacher, Engineering Academy, Olathe Northwest High School, Kansas

SUZANNE WILSON, Neag Endowed Professor of Teacher Education, University of Connecticut

Staff

GREG PEARSON, Study Director and Scholar, National Academy of Engineering

ELIZABETH T. CADY, Senior Program Officer, National Academy of Engineering

KAVITA CHANDRA, Mirzayan Program Fellow (January–April 2016)

KENNE DIBNER, Program Officer, Board on Science Education, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

CAMERON H. FLETCHER, Senior Editor, National Academy of Engineering

PENELOPE GIBBS, Administrative and Financial Associate, National Academy of Engineering

MICHAEL HOLZER, Senior Program Assistant, National Academy of Engineering (since May 2017)

MARIBETH KEITZ, Web Communications Manager, National Academy of Engineering

JAY LABOV, Senior Advisor for Education and Communication, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (until November 2018)

ALBERT MANERO II, Mirzayan Program Fellow (January–April 2017)

KIRSTEN SAMPSON-SNYDER, Director of Reports, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

HEIDI SCHWEINGRUBER, Director, Board on Science Education, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

JASON WILLIAMS, Senior Financial Associate, National Academy of Engineering (until May 2017)

Acknowledgments

This Consensus Study Report represents the work of many individuals, especially those who served on the committee and participated in the committee’s open sessions. The first thanks are to the committee members for their deep knowledge and contributions to the study.

The committee employed several consultants who collected and analyzed data that appear in the report. Thanks go to Jackie DeLisi, Lisa MarcoBujosa, and Quincy Chang (Education Development Center); Michael de Miranda (Texas A&M University); and Daniel Kuehn (Urban Institute).

The committee benefited from presentations by several individuals who participated in our fact-finding workshops in April and August of 2017. In addition to committee members and consultants, workshop presenters were David Evans (National Science Teaching Association), Okhee Lee (New York University), Douglas Clements (University of Denver), James Basham (University of Kansas), Matt Irvin (University of South Carolina), Christine Cunningham (then of Engineering is Elementary), Bernie Zubrowski (EDC), Jose Rivas (Lennox Math, Science and Technology Academy), Amy Morriss (Academy of Our Lady), Brandon Hernandez (Olathe Public Schools Engineering Academy), Glenn Bradbury (Bozeman High School), Julia Harth (HB Whitehorne Middle School), Christopher Kohnke (Colbert Elementary School), Adrianne Wheeler (Project SYNCERE), Angie Brayford (SHINE), Jim Short (Carnegie Corporation of New York), Pam Lottero-Perdue (Towson University), Karen Worth (Wheelock College), Ken Welty (Univer-

sity of Wisconsin–Stout), Robin Adams (Purdue University), Tamara Moore (Purdue University), Deidre Sessoms (CSU-Sacramento), Pat Yongpradit (Code.org), Maria Hyler (Learning Policy Institute), Madelyn Gardner (Learning Policy Institute), Jennifer Ryan Crozie (IBM International Foundation), and Maura Banta (IBM).

This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Paul R. Gray, Department

of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, and Joseph Krajcik, College of Natural Science and College of Education, Michigan State University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.

Thanks are also due to the project staff: Greg Pearson, Beth Cady, Kenne Dibner, Cameron Fletcher, Penelope Gibbs, Michael Holzer, Maribeth Keitz, Jay Labov, Kirsten Sampson-Snyder, Heidi Schweingruber, and Jason Williams.

This page intentionally left blank.

Contents

SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

A Brief Background on Engineering in K–12 Education

Statement of Task

Addressing the Statement of Task

The Basis for Evidence Used in the Report

Study Process

Audiences

Report Organization

References

2 ENGINEERING AND K–12 EDUCATION

What Is Engineering?

Engineering’s Relationship to Science, Technology, and Mathematics

Learning Objectives for K–12 Engineering Education

Conclusion

References

3 GOALS OF K–12 ENGINEERING EDUCATION

The Goal of Developing Engineering Literacy

The Goal of Improving Mathematics and Science Achievement through Integrated STEM Learning

The Goal of Improving Preparation for College and Career

The Goal of Preparing for Matriculation in Engineering Programs

Emphasis and Overlap of the Four Goals

Conclusion

References

4 THE WORKFORCE OF K–12 TEACHERS OF ENGINEERING

Characteristics of the Workforce

Professional Learning Experiences for K–12 Teachers of Engineering

Credentialing Pathways and Policies

Conclusion

Appendix 4-A: EDC Data Collection Methodology

Appendix 4-B: EDC Survey

Appendix 4-C: EDC Follow-up Interview Protocol

References

5 PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

Learning Needs for Teaching Engineering

Teacher Learning Opportunities

Conclusion

References

6 CREATING A SYSTEM OF SUPPORT FOR K–12 ENGINEERING TEACHERS

Federal Legislation

State Policies

School and District Policies and Culture

Higher Education

Research Infrastructure

Conclusion

References

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Context for the Preparation of K–12 Teachers of Engineering

Preparing K–12 Teachers of Engineering

Key Influences on the System

Directions for Research

Final Thoughts

APPENDIXES

A Committee Biographies

B Workshop 1 Agenda

C Workshop 2 Agenda

This page intentionally left blank.

Boxes, Figures, and Tables

BOXES

1-1 Statement of Task

2-1 Essential Qualities of Engineering

2-2 Engineering Design

2-3 Typical Steps in the Engineering Design Process

3-1 Characteristics of a Technologically Literate Citizen

3-2 College, Career, and Citizenship Readiness

4-1 Technology Education

4-2 Transitioning from Being an Engineer in Industry to a K–12 Teacher

4-3 Engineering-Related Standards and Elements of 2020 Science Teacher Preparation Program Standards

4-4 Survey Research on Pre- and In-Service Preparation of K–12 Teachers of Engineering

4-5 Overview of Curriculum Projects PLTW, EiE, and EbD

4-6 A Credentialing Primer

4-7 Determining What Counts as “Engineering Content”

4-8 Praxis Test Specifications for the “Technological Design and Problem Solving” Section of ETS Exam 5051

5-1 Danielson Framework

5-2 InTASC Core Teaching Standards

5-3 Standards for Preparation and Professional Development for Teachers of Engineering

5-4 Inclusive Pedagogies

5-5 Achievement Gaps in the National Assessment of Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL)

5-6 CAEP Standards for Teacher Preparation Programs

5-7 Overcoming Teachers’ Fear of Engineering

5-8 Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy to Teach Engineering

5-9 Measuring Self-Efficacy

6-1 Questions Relevant to the Integration of Science and Engineering in NGSS

6-2 Engineering Technology Education

6-3 Universities with Graduate Schools or Departments of Engineering Education

FIGURES

2-1 Example Models of the Engineering Design Process

3-1 Notional Representation of the Four Goals of K–12 Engineering Education in Relation to Grade Bands and Depth/Complexity of STEM Ideas and Practices

5-1 The Arc of Teacher Professional Learning

6-1 A Systems View of Quality Preparation of K–12 Teachers of Engineering

TABLES

1-1 Percent of US High Schools Offering at Least One Engineering Course, 2012 and 2018

1-2 Percent of US K–12 Schools with One or More Engineering-Focused Competitions or Clubs, 2012 and 2018

2-1 Race/Ethnicity and Gender in Engineering Education and Occupations Compared with the US Population, Various Years

2-2 Notable Differences in the Shared Practices of Engineering and Science

2-3 Framework for Quality K–12 Engineering Education

2-4 Grade-Band Benchmarks for STL Standard 11: Students Will Develop Abilities to Apply the Design Process

2-5 Grade-Band Performance Expectations in NGSS for Engineering Design

4-1 Engineering, Science, Mathematics, and English and Language Arts Teaching Assignments, 2015–16

4-2 Main Teaching Area of Engineering Teachers, in Areas Accounting for 2 Percent or More of Teachers, Weighted Values

4-3 Main Teaching Area of Industrial Arts or Technology Teachers, in Areas Accounting for 2 Percent or More of Teachers

4-4 Race/Ethnicity and Gender of K–12 Engineering and Technology Education or Industrial Arts Teachers and Degree Earners in Engineering and Engineering Technology Compared with Those in the US Population and K–12 Teacher Workforce, Percent, Various Years

4-5 Education and Teaching Certification of Engineering Teachers

4-6 Education and Teaching Certification of Industrial Arts or Technology Teachers

4-7 Reported Goals of Engineering-Focused Professional Development Programs (N=46)

4-8 Measures of Program Outcomes (N=49)

4-A-1 Inclusion Criteria

5-1 Sykes and Wilson Framework

5-2 Abbreviated sample of core concepts and subconcepts of engineering for secondary school students

5-3 Engineering-Related Domains and Standards in Texas’s Certification Exam for Grade 6–12 Teachers of Mathematics/Physical Science/Engineering

5-4 The Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix

This page intentionally left blank.