Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)
Recent education reforms including the Next Generation Science Standards emphasize integrating engineering into K‐12 science instruction. Although prior studies have characterized engineering design (ED) in K‐12 settings, no validated protocols attempt to characterize ED integration in secondary sci...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of research in science teaching 2019-11, Vol.56 (9), p.1285-1305 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1305 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 1285 |
| container_title | Journal of research in science teaching |
| container_volume | 56 |
| creator | Wheeler, Lindsay B. Navy, Shannon L. Maeng, Jennifer L. Whitworth, Brooke A. |
| description | Recent education reforms including the Next Generation Science Standards emphasize integrating engineering into K‐12 science instruction. Although prior studies have characterized engineering design (ED) in K‐12 settings, no validated protocols attempt to characterize ED integration in secondary science classrooms. The present study used the ED and observation protocol literature to develop, validate, and test the reliability of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED) instrument. Consistent with the ED literature, the COPED characterizes two components of ED: process and habits of mind. To use COPED, researchers code for ED process components, engineering habits of mind, and instructional grouping in 2‐min increments. Researchers also record qualitative field notes. Post‐observation, researchers include descriptions of disciplinary ties and ED structure. Support for content validity was established through two cycles of expert panel review and revision. Interrater reliability for the instrument was Cohen's κ = .81. The data collected from the reliability study were subsequently analyzed to demonstrate the utility of COPED in characterizing ED integration. The COPED provides researchers a tool to systematically characterize ED instruction within secondary science classrooms. Using COPED to characterize ED may support science educators in developing ED‐related teacher preparation and professional development. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/tea.21557 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2304027779</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1231384</ericid><sourcerecordid>2304027779</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3197-fe4f20f5cdd91533253987e9384005382319e8e9e22a21e00941e207e7d3214b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kD9PwzAUxC0EEqUw8AGQLLHQIfTZTnA8Vmn4p0rtUGbLTV5KqtQuTlrUb48hiI3pDffTvbsj5JrBPQPg4w7NPWdJIk_IgIFKIy7FwykZBI1HsYD0nFy07QYAhGJqQPQUD9i43RZtR40t6cE0dWm62lnqKtq9I80a07beuS2dr1r0h15ceNe5wjW0cp7mdl1bRF_bNZ1iW68tvcvmi3w6uiRnlWlavPq9Q_L2mC-z52g2f3rJJrOoEEzJqMK44lAlRVkqlgjBE6FSiUqkMUAiUh4oTFEh54YzBFAxQw4SZSk4i1diSG573513H3tsO71xe2_DS80FxMCllCpQo54qvAudsNI7X2-NP2oG-ns_HfbTP_sF9qZnQ63ij8tfWcgSYgV93OufdYPH_430Mp_0jl_xpXj6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2304027779</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Education Source</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Wheeler, Lindsay B. ; Navy, Shannon L. ; Maeng, Jennifer L. ; Whitworth, Brooke A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Lindsay B. ; Navy, Shannon L. ; Maeng, Jennifer L. ; Whitworth, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><description>Recent education reforms including the Next Generation Science Standards emphasize integrating engineering into K‐12 science instruction. Although prior studies have characterized engineering design (ED) in K‐12 settings, no validated protocols attempt to characterize ED integration in secondary science classrooms. The present study used the ED and observation protocol literature to develop, validate, and test the reliability of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED) instrument. Consistent with the ED literature, the COPED characterizes two components of ED: process and habits of mind. To use COPED, researchers code for ED process components, engineering habits of mind, and instructional grouping in 2‐min increments. Researchers also record qualitative field notes. Post‐observation, researchers include descriptions of disciplinary ties and ED structure. Support for content validity was established through two cycles of expert panel review and revision. Interrater reliability for the instrument was Cohen's κ = .81. The data collected from the reliability study were subsequently analyzed to demonstrate the utility of COPED in characterizing ED integration. The COPED provides researchers a tool to systematically characterize ED instruction within secondary science classrooms. Using COPED to characterize ED may support science educators in developing ED‐related teacher preparation and professional development.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4308</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1098-2736</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/tea.21557</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Classroom observation ; Classroom Observation Techniques ; Classrooms ; Cognitive Processes ; Content Validity ; Design ; Design engineering ; Education reform ; Educational Change ; Elementary Secondary Education ; Engineering ; engineering design ; Engineering Education ; Habits ; instrument development ; Interrater Reliability ; Observation ; Professional development ; Reliability ; Researchers ; Science ; Science Instruction ; Science Teachers ; Secondary School Science ; secondary science ; Teacher Improvement ; Teachers ; Teaching Methods ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Journal of research in science teaching, 2019-11, Vol.56 (9), p.1285-1305</ispartof><rights>2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3197-fe4f20f5cdd91533253987e9384005382319e8e9e22a21e00941e207e7d3214b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3197-fe4f20f5cdd91533253987e9384005382319e8e9e22a21e00941e207e7d3214b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6930-3267 ; 0000-0003-4955-4023 ; 0000-0003-2794-0345 ; 0000-0002-3944-291X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Ftea.21557$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Ftea.21557$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,30976,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1231384$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Navy, Shannon L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maeng, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitworth, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><title>Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)</title><title>Journal of research in science teaching</title><description>Recent education reforms including the Next Generation Science Standards emphasize integrating engineering into K‐12 science instruction. Although prior studies have characterized engineering design (ED) in K‐12 settings, no validated protocols attempt to characterize ED integration in secondary science classrooms. The present study used the ED and observation protocol literature to develop, validate, and test the reliability of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED) instrument. Consistent with the ED literature, the COPED characterizes two components of ED: process and habits of mind. To use COPED, researchers code for ED process components, engineering habits of mind, and instructional grouping in 2‐min increments. Researchers also record qualitative field notes. Post‐observation, researchers include descriptions of disciplinary ties and ED structure. Support for content validity was established through two cycles of expert panel review and revision. Interrater reliability for the instrument was Cohen's κ = .81. The data collected from the reliability study were subsequently analyzed to demonstrate the utility of COPED in characterizing ED integration. The COPED provides researchers a tool to systematically characterize ED instruction within secondary science classrooms. Using COPED to characterize ED may support science educators in developing ED‐related teacher preparation and professional development.</description><subject>Classroom observation</subject><subject>Classroom Observation Techniques</subject><subject>Classrooms</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>Content Validity</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Design engineering</subject><subject>Education reform</subject><subject>Educational Change</subject><subject>Elementary Secondary Education</subject><subject>Engineering</subject><subject>engineering design</subject><subject>Engineering Education</subject><subject>Habits</subject><subject>instrument development</subject><subject>Interrater Reliability</subject><subject>Observation</subject><subject>Professional development</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Science Teachers</subject><subject>Secondary School Science</subject><subject>secondary science</subject><subject>Teacher Improvement</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0022-4308</issn><issn>1098-2736</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kD9PwzAUxC0EEqUw8AGQLLHQIfTZTnA8Vmn4p0rtUGbLTV5KqtQuTlrUb48hiI3pDffTvbsj5JrBPQPg4w7NPWdJIk_IgIFKIy7FwykZBI1HsYD0nFy07QYAhGJqQPQUD9i43RZtR40t6cE0dWm62lnqKtq9I80a07beuS2dr1r0h15ceNe5wjW0cp7mdl1bRF_bNZ1iW68tvcvmi3w6uiRnlWlavPq9Q_L2mC-z52g2f3rJJrOoEEzJqMK44lAlRVkqlgjBE6FSiUqkMUAiUh4oTFEh54YzBFAxQw4SZSk4i1diSG573513H3tsO71xe2_DS80FxMCllCpQo54qvAudsNI7X2-NP2oG-ns_HfbTP_sF9qZnQ63ij8tfWcgSYgV93OufdYPH_430Mp_0jl_xpXj6</recordid><startdate>201911</startdate><enddate>201911</enddate><creator>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</creator><creator>Navy, Shannon L.</creator><creator>Maeng, Jennifer L.</creator><creator>Whitworth, Brooke A.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley-Blackwell</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6930-3267</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4955-4023</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2794-0345</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3944-291X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201911</creationdate><title>Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)</title><author>Wheeler, Lindsay B. ; Navy, Shannon L. ; Maeng, Jennifer L. ; Whitworth, Brooke A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3197-fe4f20f5cdd91533253987e9384005382319e8e9e22a21e00941e207e7d3214b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Classroom observation</topic><topic>Classroom Observation Techniques</topic><topic>Classrooms</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>Content Validity</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Design engineering</topic><topic>Education reform</topic><topic>Educational Change</topic><topic>Elementary Secondary Education</topic><topic>Engineering</topic><topic>engineering design</topic><topic>Engineering Education</topic><topic>Habits</topic><topic>instrument development</topic><topic>Interrater Reliability</topic><topic>Observation</topic><topic>Professional development</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Science Teachers</topic><topic>Secondary School Science</topic><topic>secondary science</topic><topic>Teacher Improvement</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Navy, Shannon L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maeng, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitworth, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of research in science teaching</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</au><au>Navy, Shannon L.</au><au>Maeng, Jennifer L.</au><au>Whitworth, Brooke A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1231384</ericid><atitle>Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)</atitle><jtitle>Journal of research in science teaching</jtitle><date>2019-11</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1285</spage><epage>1305</epage><pages>1285-1305</pages><issn>0022-4308</issn><eissn>1098-2736</eissn><abstract>Recent education reforms including the Next Generation Science Standards emphasize integrating engineering into K‐12 science instruction. Although prior studies have characterized engineering design (ED) in K‐12 settings, no validated protocols attempt to characterize ED integration in secondary science classrooms. The present study used the ED and observation protocol literature to develop, validate, and test the reliability of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED) instrument. Consistent with the ED literature, the COPED characterizes two components of ED: process and habits of mind. To use COPED, researchers code for ED process components, engineering habits of mind, and instructional grouping in 2‐min increments. Researchers also record qualitative field notes. Post‐observation, researchers include descriptions of disciplinary ties and ED structure. Support for content validity was established through two cycles of expert panel review and revision. Interrater reliability for the instrument was Cohen's κ = .81. The data collected from the reliability study were subsequently analyzed to demonstrate the utility of COPED in characterizing ED integration. The COPED provides researchers a tool to systematically characterize ED instruction within secondary science classrooms. Using COPED to characterize ED may support science educators in developing ED‐related teacher preparation and professional development.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/tea.21557</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6930-3267</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4955-4023</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2794-0345</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3944-291X</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-4308 |
| ispartof | Journal of research in science teaching, 2019-11, Vol.56 (9), p.1285-1305 |
| issn | 0022-4308 1098-2736 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2304027779 |
| source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Education Source; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Classroom observation Classroom Observation Techniques Classrooms Cognitive Processes Content Validity Design Design engineering Education reform Educational Change Elementary Secondary Education Engineering engineering design Engineering Education Habits instrument development Interrater Reliability Observation Professional development Reliability Researchers Science Science Instruction Science Teachers Secondary School Science secondary science Teacher Improvement Teachers Teaching Methods Validity |
| title | Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED) |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T13%3A33%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20and%20validation%20of%20the%20Classroom%20Observation%20Protocol%20for%20Engineering%20Design%20(COPED)&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20research%20in%20science%20teaching&rft.au=Wheeler,%20Lindsay%20B.&rft.date=2019-11&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1285&rft.epage=1305&rft.pages=1285-1305&rft.issn=0022-4308&rft.eissn=1098-2736&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/tea.21557&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2304027779%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2304027779&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1231384&rfr_iscdi=true |