Results
Teaching
The PLTW teachers tried to rely on quality pedagogy to
help them be more comfortable with the curriculum. In
eleven of the twelve classroom observations, the teachers
employed a student-centered approach to teaching including
student presentations, designing a Rube Goldberg
machine, building dragsters, designing dragsters with 3-D
modeling software, small group discussions of readings,
and measurement activities. The teachers were not focused
on lecturing, but on having students work together and
develop their own ideas.
However, at times not knowing what direction students
would go in the lessons made teachers less comfortable and
confident in their knowledge. Teachers had difficulties
knowing how long lessons would last and knowing how to
best guide students in their work. Three of the four teachers
mentioned this several times throughout the year. In one
activity, students dissemble a device and look for the six
simple machines in the device. Then students are asked to
create a new mechanical device that represents a simple
machine from the dissembled pieces. Since students
brought in their own devices, it made it difficult for the
teachers to be familiar with what each device consisted of
in order to help students struggling to find simple machines
as they took apart their device.
Teachers’ Comfort Level
While teachers worked hard throughout the year, there
were signs that at times teachers were not confident in their
implementation of the curriculum. In the informal interviews
with the PLTW teachers throughout the year, this
appeared to be an important topic that affected what was
accomplished in the classes. For example, one teacher felt
that she had always done a great job teaching in her over
ten years of teaching experience, but really struggled with
feeling that she was helping students learn important
content this year and enjoy the class.
The teachers’ comfort level was also affected by whether
or not teachers felt a passion to continue to develop a career
as a PLTW teacher and by their uncertainty about the future
of PLTW classes. Since the teachers had been trained to
teach subjects other than PLTW classes, all of them
appeared to have been unsure if they wanted to keep
teaching PLTW long term. One teacher made several
comments throughout the year that she just wanted to teach
a mathematics class because she did not go to school to
teach STEM. All of the teachers at several times noted
being uncomfortable teaching the curriculum. If the PLTW
teaching job is just a short-term job until a math or science
teaching job becomes available, then it may affect the
amount of investment and work that teachers are going to
put into developing the PLTW classes. STEM specific
classes are still relatively new and with any new curricular
implementation, there can be uncertainty regarding its
longevity. This can affect both the amount of time teachers
are willing to invest and retention of PLTW teachers.
Another aspect that affected the teachers’ implementation
is that the PLTW teachers had different teaching
backgrounds. It is important that teachers share their
knowledge, because if content knowledge is lacking in
areas, it can lead to less effective pedagogy: ‘‘Limited
subject matter knowledge restricts a teacher’s capacity to
promote conceptual learning among students’’ (Ma, 1999;
p.36). The PLTW teachers had different subject backgrounds
(mathematics, science, technology) and felt more
M. Stohlmann et al. / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research 31
comfortable with certain parts of the PLTW curriculum.
However, this is a possible strength, because teachers with
different backgrounds can be a resource for teachers with
questions and possibly can find connections beyond the
curriculum as written.
The PLTW teachers talked during the week to share
ideas about how to teach the classes. Also, twice during the
year the PLTW teachers from four middle schools in the
district meet to discuss what was working and to share
teaching ideas. This was beneficial and helped the teachers
feel more comfortable.
Materials
PLTW sells materials kits that the middle school
purchased for the activities in the curriculum. The materials
kits have to be purchased each year as students use the
materials in projects such as designing a dragster out of
wood and building a Rube Goldberg machine. Through the
use of various materials, students can see that technology is
not just electronics but can involve many different things.
Since the different projects require materials used over
several class periods, room space can be a concern.
Teachers will need storage or a large classroom for keeping
student projects and materials organized. Teachers need to
make sure that their school will support their program fully
to provide students the necessary materials.
Electronic technology materials are also necessary for
teachers to be the most effective. Internet websites, applets,
design programs, dynamic software
ResultsTeachingThe PLTW teachers tried to rely on quality pedagogy tohelp them be more comfortable with the curriculum. Ineleven of the twelve classroom observations, the teachersemployed a student-centered approach to teaching includingstudent presentations, designing a Rube Goldbergmachine, building dragsters, designing dragsters with 3-Dmodeling software, small group discussions of readings,and measurement activities. The teachers were not focusedon lecturing, but on having students work together anddevelop their own ideas.However, at times not knowing what direction studentswould go in the lessons made teachers less comfortable andconfident in their knowledge. Teachers had difficultiesknowing how long lessons would last and knowing how tobest guide students in their work. Three of the four teachersmentioned this several times throughout the year. In oneactivity, students dissemble a device and look for the sixsimple machines in the device. Then students are asked tocreate a new mechanical device that represents a simplemachine from the dissembled pieces. Since studentsbrought in their own devices, it made it difficult for theteachers to be familiar with what each device consisted ofin order to help students struggling to find simple machinesas they took apart their device.Teachers’ Comfort LevelWhile teachers worked hard throughout the year, therewere signs that at times teachers were not confident in theirimplementation of the curriculum. In the informal interviewswith the PLTW teachers throughout the year, thisappeared to be an important topic that affected what wasaccomplished in the classes. For example, one teacher feltthat she had always done a great job teaching in her overten years of teaching experience, but really struggled withfeeling that she was helping students learn importantcontent this year and enjoy the class.The teachers’ comfort level was also affected by whetheror not teachers felt a passion to continue to develop a careeras a PLTW teacher and by their uncertainty about the futureof PLTW classes. Since the teachers had been trained toteach subjects other than PLTW classes, all of themappeared to have been unsure if they wanted to keepteaching PLTW long term. One teacher made severalcomments throughout the year that she just wanted to teacha mathematics class because she did not go to school toteach STEM. All of the teachers at several times notedbeing uncomfortable teaching the curriculum. If the PLTWteaching job is just a short-term job until a math or scienceteaching job becomes available, then it may affect theamount of investment and work that teachers are going toput into developing the PLTW classes. STEM specificclasses are still relatively new and with any new curricularimplementation, there can be uncertainty regarding itslongevity. This can affect both the amount of time teachersare willing to invest and retention of PLTW teachers.Another aspect that affected the teachers’ implementationis that the PLTW teachers had different teachingbackgrounds. It is important that teachers share theirknowledge, because if content knowledge is lacking inareas, it can lead to less effective pedagogy: ‘‘Limitedsubject matter knowledge restricts a teacher’s capacity topromote conceptual learning among students’’ (Ma, 1999;p.36). The PLTW teachers had different subject backgrounds(mathematics, science, technology) and felt moreM. Stohlmann et al. / Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research 31comfortable with certain parts of the PLTW curriculum.However, this is a possible strength, because teachers withdifferent backgrounds can be a resource for teachers withquestions and possibly can find connections beyond thecurriculum as written.The PLTW teachers talked during the week to shareideas about how to teach the classes. Also, twice during theyear the PLTW teachers from four middle schools in thedistrict meet to discuss what was working and to shareteaching ideas. This was beneficial and helped the teachersfeel more comfortable.MaterialsPLTW sells materials kits that the middle schoolpurchased for the activities in the curriculum. The materialskits have to be purchased each year as students use thematerials in projects such as designing a dragster out ofwood and building a Rube Goldberg machine. Through theuse of various materials, students can see that technology isnot just electronics but can involve many different things.Since the different projects require materials used overseveral class periods, room space can be a concern.Teachers will need storage or a large classroom for keepingstudent projects and materials organized. Teachers need tomake sure that their school will support their program fullyto provide students the necessary materials.Electronic technology materials are also necessary forteachers to be the most effective. Internet websites, applets,design programs, dynamic software
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..