The past 30 years have yielded a mature body of research regarding effective professional development for teachers of science and mathematics, leading to a robust selection of professional development programs for these teachers. The current emphasis on connections among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics underscores the need for similar research into the nature of effective professional development for teachers of engineering. With this in mind, this paper completes a review of the literature concerning effective professional development for teachers of engineering, both as a unique discipline and as a context for teaching and learning in other subjects. The results of this review serve as the foundation for five research-based design standards for professional development initiatives in the field of engineering education, which have been published on the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) website along with a matrix that will enable providers and consumers of engineering professional development to determine the extent to which a given program focuses on each of those standards.

This study examined the teachers' development as scientists for participants in three National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Teachers. Participants included secondary science and math teachers with varying levels of education and experience who were immersed in research environments related to engineering and science topics. Teachers' functionality as scientists was assessed in terms of independence, focus, relationships with mentors, structure, and ability to create new concepts. Hierarchies developed within these constructs allowed tracking of changes in functionality throughout the 6-week programs. Themes were further identified in teachers' weekly journal entries and exit interviews through inductive coding. Increases in functionality as scientists were observed for all teachers who completed both the program and exit interview (n = 27). Seven of the 27 teachers reached high science functionality; however, three of the teachers did not reach high functionality in any of the constructs during the program. No differences were observed in demographics or teaching experience between those who did and did not reach high functionality levels. Inductive coding revealed themes such as teachers' interactions with mentors and connections made between research and teaching, which allowed for descriptions of experiences for teachers at high and low levels of functionality. Teachers at high functionality levels adjusted to openended environments, transitioned from a guided experience to freedom, felt useful in the laboratory, and were self-motivated. In contrast, teachers at low functionality levels did not have a true research project, primarily focused on teaching aspects of the program, and did not display a transition of responsibilities.

This phenomenological study examined the impact of Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) teacherdeveloped curriculum on teaching styles and strategies at two RET sites with common Legacy Cycle training. The study was conducted to assess and document program-specific and National Science Foundation (NSF) goals related to classroom practices and outcomes. We set out to define how the RET program influenced teachers' teaching style and strategies and how teachers' new curriculum from the RET program affected students. Twenty-seven science and math teachers participated in interviews at the end of their summer research experience, and twenty of these teachers participated in interviews after teaching their Legacy Cycle module during the academic year. These interviews were coded for themes and subthemes relating to teachers' teaching styles and their effects on students. Teachers used real-world contexts within their Legacy Cycle curricula and thus began to teach in interdisciplinary ways, exposing students to engineering in the process. According to their teachers, students enjoyed learning with the Legacy Cycle curricula. They took a more active role in the classroom, leading them to be better able to apply their new knowledge. Using the Legacy Cycle as a pedagogical approach in an RET program leads to instructional materials that integrate teachers' research while maintaining use of state and national standards. Teachers perceived that student enjoyment of, and engagement in, the material increased, while also exposing them to engineering.

In this study, we collected the opinions of prominent members of engineering industry and academia in order to determine a clear definition of what it means for engineering graduates to be globally competent. The data collection was conducted via an online survey, which was adapted from a survey outlined in Parkinson et al.'s 2009 paper entitled "Developing Global Competence in Engineers: What Does It Mean? What Is Most Important?". The similarity between our surveys allowed us to compare our results to the results they presented. We also collected more demographic data, which allowed us to look for relationships between the participants' answers and the way they ranked the thirteen dimensions. We found that only some of the demographic information correlated with some of the competencies, but not all. Our survey indicated that the top five most important dimensions of global competence are: 1) the ability to communicate across cultures, 2) the ability to appreciate other cultures, 3) a proficiency working in or directing a team of ethnic and cultural diversity, 4) the ability to effectively deal with ethical issues arising from cultural or national differences, 5) possessing understanding of cultural differences relating to product design, manufacture, and use, and 5) possessing understand implications of cultural differences of how engineering tasks might be approached. While more research is needed in this area, it is our hope that these findings will lead to a well-supported definition for what it means to be a globally competent engineer. A definition like this will help engineering universities focus the global education of their students to produce more competitive graduates for the international job market.

began as the Director of the Center for STEM Education in April 2011 just as the Center began. An engineer by training and in her ways of thinking, she received a BSE in biomedical and electrical engineering from Duke University in 1991. She then earned her M.S. from Drexel University in 1993 and her Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Vanderbilt University in 1996. Dr. Klein-Gardner's career focuses on K-12 science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education, particularly as it relates to increasing interest in and participation by females. Dr. Klein-Gardner serves as the Director of the Center for STEM Education for Girls at the Harpeth Hall School in Nashville, TN. Here she leads professional development opportunities in STEM for K-12 teachers and works to Identify and disseminate best practices from successful K12, university and corporate STEM programs for females. This Center also leads a program for rising high school girls that integrates community service and engineering design in a global context. She continues to serve as an Adjoint Professor of the Practice of Biomedical Engineering, Teaching & Learning, and Radiological Sciences at Vanderbilt University. She served as the Associate Dean for Outreach in the Vanderbilt School of Engineering from 2007-2010. Dr. Klein-Gardner currently serves as the chair of the American Society for Engineering Education's K12 division.