What initiates evidence‐based reasoning?: Situations that prompt students to support their design ideas and decisions

Background As engineering becomes increasingly incorporated into precollege classrooms, it is important to explore students' ability to engage in engineering practices. One of these practices, engaging in argument from evidence, has been well studied in science education. However, it has not ye...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2021-04, Vol.110 (2), p.294-317
Hauptverfasser: Siverling, Emilie A., Moore, Tamara J., Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth, Mathis, Corey A., Guzey, S. Selcen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 317
container_issue 2
container_start_page 294
container_title Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)
container_volume 110
creator Siverling, Emilie A.
Moore, Tamara J.
Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth
Mathis, Corey A.
Guzey, S. Selcen
description Background As engineering becomes increasingly incorporated into precollege classrooms, it is important to explore students' ability to engage in engineering practices. One of these practices, engaging in argument from evidence, has been well studied in science education. However, it has not yet been fully explored in engineering education. Purpose This study aims to identify the classroom situations that prompt students to justify their engineering design ideas and decisions. The following research question guided the study: What initiates the need for fifth‐ to eighth‐grade students to use evidence‐based reasoning (EBR) while they are generating solutions to engineering design problems in engineering design‐based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration units? Methods Within the naturalistic inquiry methodology, we analyzed student team audio recordings from the implementation of seven different engineering design‐based STEM integration curricula across three school districts to identify instances of EBR and categorize the situations that led to them. Results This analysis produced seven categories of situations that prompted students to use EBR. Two of these categories, responding to adult and documenting, were teacher‐prompted; students frequently justified their design ideas and decisions when talking with adults or responding to prompts on worksheets. The other five categories were student‐directed: negotiating, correcting, validating, clarifying with team, and sharing. These categories occurred without direct prompts from adults or documents. Conclusions This study offers implications for teachers and curriculum developers about how to explicitly integrate scaffolds for EBR into design‐based curricula as well as what situations teachers can look for to observe student‐directed use of EBR.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jee.20384
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2529618468</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1296648</ericid><sourcerecordid>2529618468</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3194-8a0905a56e3d8b5da679a4a7130473c0eef8e9fb3345a857b5eb2b5ff68a1da83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtKxTAQhoMoeLwsfAAh4MpFPUnTpqkbkUO9ccCFissybaeag6Y1SRV3PoLP6JOYWnHnKjDzzZeZn5A9zo44Y_F8hXgUM6GSNTKLuVRRrgRbJzPOZB4lmWCbZMu5FWMsZzKbkbf7R_BUG-01eHQUX3WDpsavj88KHDbUIrjOaPNwckxvtB_A68446sex3nbPvafOD2HGh2JH3dD3nfWhj9rSBp1-MDQowVEwTSjU2o2CHbLRwpPD3d93m9ydFbeLi2h5fX65OF1GteB5EikIe6aQShSNqtIGZJZDAhkXLBxTM8RWYd5WQiQpqDSrUqziKm1bqYA3oMQ2OZi8YdeXAZ0vV91gTfiyjNM4l1wlcqQOJ6q2nXMW27K3-hnse8lZOeZahlzLn1wDuz-xaHX9xxVXPNhkMrrmU_9NP-H7_6Lyqigm4zeSaIY4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2529618468</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What initiates evidence‐based reasoning?: Situations that prompt students to support their design ideas and decisions</title><source>Education Source</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Siverling, Emilie A. ; Moore, Tamara J. ; Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth ; Mathis, Corey A. ; Guzey, S. Selcen</creator><creatorcontrib>Siverling, Emilie A. ; Moore, Tamara J. ; Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth ; Mathis, Corey A. ; Guzey, S. Selcen</creatorcontrib><description>Background As engineering becomes increasingly incorporated into precollege classrooms, it is important to explore students' ability to engage in engineering practices. One of these practices, engaging in argument from evidence, has been well studied in science education. However, it has not yet been fully explored in engineering education. Purpose This study aims to identify the classroom situations that prompt students to justify their engineering design ideas and decisions. The following research question guided the study: What initiates the need for fifth‐ to eighth‐grade students to use evidence‐based reasoning (EBR) while they are generating solutions to engineering design problems in engineering design‐based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration units? Methods Within the naturalistic inquiry methodology, we analyzed student team audio recordings from the implementation of seven different engineering design‐based STEM integration curricula across three school districts to identify instances of EBR and categorize the situations that led to them. Results This analysis produced seven categories of situations that prompted students to use EBR. Two of these categories, responding to adult and documenting, were teacher‐prompted; students frequently justified their design ideas and decisions when talking with adults or responding to prompts on worksheets. The other five categories were student‐directed: negotiating, correcting, validating, clarifying with team, and sharing. These categories occurred without direct prompts from adults or documents. Conclusions This study offers implications for teachers and curriculum developers about how to explicitly integrate scaffolds for EBR into design‐based curricula as well as what situations teachers can look for to observe student‐directed use of EBR.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1069-4730</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2168-9830</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jee.20384</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Adults ; argumentation ; Categories ; Classroom Environment ; Classrooms ; Curricula ; Decision Making ; Decisions ; Design ; Design engineering ; design practice ; Engineering Education ; Evidence ; Evidence Based Practice ; evidence‐based reasoning ; Grade 5 ; Grade 6 ; Grade 7 ; Grade 8 ; Logical Thinking ; Persuasive Discourse ; Problem Solving ; Prompting ; P‐12 [syn, P12, K‐12, K12] ; Reasoning ; Science education ; Science Instruction ; STEM ; STEM Education ; Students ; Teachers ; Technical education</subject><ispartof>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.), 2021-04, Vol.110 (2), p.294-317</ispartof><rights>2021 American Society for Engineering Education.</rights><rights>2021 ASEE</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3194-8a0905a56e3d8b5da679a4a7130473c0eef8e9fb3345a857b5eb2b5ff68a1da83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3194-8a0905a56e3d8b5da679a4a7130473c0eef8e9fb3345a857b5eb2b5ff68a1da83</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1806-7102 ; 0000-0002-7956-4479 ; 0000-0002-7982-3960 ; 0000-0001-6565-3879</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%2Fjee.20384$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjee.20384$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1296648$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Siverling, Emilie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Tamara J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mathis, Corey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guzey, S. Selcen</creatorcontrib><title>What initiates evidence‐based reasoning?: Situations that prompt students to support their design ideas and decisions</title><title>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)</title><description>Background As engineering becomes increasingly incorporated into precollege classrooms, it is important to explore students' ability to engage in engineering practices. One of these practices, engaging in argument from evidence, has been well studied in science education. However, it has not yet been fully explored in engineering education. Purpose This study aims to identify the classroom situations that prompt students to justify their engineering design ideas and decisions. The following research question guided the study: What initiates the need for fifth‐ to eighth‐grade students to use evidence‐based reasoning (EBR) while they are generating solutions to engineering design problems in engineering design‐based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration units? Methods Within the naturalistic inquiry methodology, we analyzed student team audio recordings from the implementation of seven different engineering design‐based STEM integration curricula across three school districts to identify instances of EBR and categorize the situations that led to them. Results This analysis produced seven categories of situations that prompted students to use EBR. Two of these categories, responding to adult and documenting, were teacher‐prompted; students frequently justified their design ideas and decisions when talking with adults or responding to prompts on worksheets. The other five categories were student‐directed: negotiating, correcting, validating, clarifying with team, and sharing. These categories occurred without direct prompts from adults or documents. Conclusions This study offers implications for teachers and curriculum developers about how to explicitly integrate scaffolds for EBR into design‐based curricula as well as what situations teachers can look for to observe student‐directed use of EBR.</description><subject>Adults</subject><subject>argumentation</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Classroom Environment</subject><subject>Classrooms</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Decisions</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Design engineering</subject><subject>design practice</subject><subject>Engineering Education</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Evidence Based Practice</subject><subject>evidence‐based reasoning</subject><subject>Grade 5</subject><subject>Grade 6</subject><subject>Grade 7</subject><subject>Grade 8</subject><subject>Logical Thinking</subject><subject>Persuasive Discourse</subject><subject>Problem Solving</subject><subject>Prompting</subject><subject>P‐12 [syn, P12, K‐12, K12]</subject><subject>Reasoning</subject><subject>Science education</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>STEM</subject><subject>STEM Education</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Technical education</subject><issn>1069-4730</issn><issn>2168-9830</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kMtKxTAQhoMoeLwsfAAh4MpFPUnTpqkbkUO9ccCFissybaeag6Y1SRV3PoLP6JOYWnHnKjDzzZeZn5A9zo44Y_F8hXgUM6GSNTKLuVRRrgRbJzPOZB4lmWCbZMu5FWMsZzKbkbf7R_BUG-01eHQUX3WDpsavj88KHDbUIrjOaPNwckxvtB_A68446sex3nbPvafOD2HGh2JH3dD3nfWhj9rSBp1-MDQowVEwTSjU2o2CHbLRwpPD3d93m9ydFbeLi2h5fX65OF1GteB5EikIe6aQShSNqtIGZJZDAhkXLBxTM8RWYd5WQiQpqDSrUqziKm1bqYA3oMQ2OZi8YdeXAZ0vV91gTfiyjNM4l1wlcqQOJ6q2nXMW27K3-hnse8lZOeZahlzLn1wDuz-xaHX9xxVXPNhkMrrmU_9NP-H7_6Lyqigm4zeSaIY4</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Siverling, Emilie A.</creator><creator>Moore, Tamara J.</creator><creator>Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth</creator><creator>Mathis, Corey A.</creator><creator>Guzey, S. Selcen</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</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>4T-</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1806-7102</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7956-4479</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7982-3960</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6565-3879</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>What initiates evidence‐based reasoning?: Situations that prompt students to support their design ideas and decisions</title><author>Siverling, Emilie A. ; Moore, Tamara J. ; Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth ; Mathis, Corey A. ; Guzey, S. Selcen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3194-8a0905a56e3d8b5da679a4a7130473c0eef8e9fb3345a857b5eb2b5ff68a1da83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adults</topic><topic>argumentation</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Classroom Environment</topic><topic>Classrooms</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Decisions</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Design engineering</topic><topic>design practice</topic><topic>Engineering Education</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Evidence Based Practice</topic><topic>evidence‐based reasoning</topic><topic>Grade 5</topic><topic>Grade 6</topic><topic>Grade 7</topic><topic>Grade 8</topic><topic>Logical Thinking</topic><topic>Persuasive Discourse</topic><topic>Problem Solving</topic><topic>Prompting</topic><topic>P‐12 [syn, P12, K‐12, K12]</topic><topic>Reasoning</topic><topic>Science education</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>STEM</topic><topic>STEM Education</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Technical education</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Siverling, Emilie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Tamara J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mathis, Corey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guzey, S. Selcen</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>Docstoc</collection><jtitle>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Siverling, Emilie A.</au><au>Moore, Tamara J.</au><au>Suazo‐Flores, Elizabeth</au><au>Mathis, Corey A.</au><au>Guzey, S. Selcen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1296648</ericid><atitle>What initiates evidence‐based reasoning?: Situations that prompt students to support their design ideas and decisions</atitle><jtitle>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>110</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>294</spage><epage>317</epage><pages>294-317</pages><issn>1069-4730</issn><eissn>2168-9830</eissn><abstract>Background As engineering becomes increasingly incorporated into precollege classrooms, it is important to explore students' ability to engage in engineering practices. One of these practices, engaging in argument from evidence, has been well studied in science education. However, it has not yet been fully explored in engineering education. Purpose This study aims to identify the classroom situations that prompt students to justify their engineering design ideas and decisions. The following research question guided the study: What initiates the need for fifth‐ to eighth‐grade students to use evidence‐based reasoning (EBR) while they are generating solutions to engineering design problems in engineering design‐based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration units? Methods Within the naturalistic inquiry methodology, we analyzed student team audio recordings from the implementation of seven different engineering design‐based STEM integration curricula across three school districts to identify instances of EBR and categorize the situations that led to them. Results This analysis produced seven categories of situations that prompted students to use EBR. Two of these categories, responding to adult and documenting, were teacher‐prompted; students frequently justified their design ideas and decisions when talking with adults or responding to prompts on worksheets. The other five categories were student‐directed: negotiating, correcting, validating, clarifying with team, and sharing. These categories occurred without direct prompts from adults or documents. Conclusions This study offers implications for teachers and curriculum developers about how to explicitly integrate scaffolds for EBR into design‐based curricula as well as what situations teachers can look for to observe student‐directed use of EBR.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/jee.20384</doi><tpages>24</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1806-7102</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7956-4479</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7982-3960</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6565-3879</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1069-4730
ispartof Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.), 2021-04, Vol.110 (2), p.294-317
issn 1069-4730
2168-9830
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2529618468
source Education Source; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Adults
argumentation
Categories
Classroom Environment
Classrooms
Curricula
Decision Making
Decisions
Design
Design engineering
design practice
Engineering Education
Evidence
Evidence Based Practice
evidence‐based reasoning
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Logical Thinking
Persuasive Discourse
Problem Solving
Prompting
P‐12 [syn, P12, K‐12, K12]
Reasoning
Science education
Science Instruction
STEM
STEM Education
Students
Teachers
Technical education
title What initiates evidence‐based reasoning?: Situations that prompt students to support their design ideas and decisions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T01%3A58%3A58IST&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=What%20initiates%20evidence%E2%80%90based%20reasoning?:%20Situations%20that%20prompt%20students%20to%20support%20their%20design%20ideas%20and%20decisions&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20engineering%20education%20(Washington,%20D.C.)&rft.au=Siverling,%20Emilie%20A.&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=110&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=294&rft.epage=317&rft.pages=294-317&rft.issn=1069-4730&rft.eissn=2168-9830&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jee.20384&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2529618468%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=2529618468&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1296648&rfr_iscdi=true