Students' use of STEM content in design justifications during engineering design‐based STEM integration

Abstract

Engineering design‐based STEM integration is one potential model to help students integrate content and practices from all of the STEM disciplines. In this study, we explored the intersection of two aspects of pre‐college STEM education: the integration of the STEM disciplines, and the NGSS practice of engaging in argument from evidence within engineering. Specifically, our research question was: While generating and justifying solutions to engineering design problems in engineering design‐based STEM integration units, what STEM content do elementary and middle school students discuss? We used naturalistic inquiry to analyze student team audio recordings from seven curricular units in order to identify the variety of STEM content present as students justified their design ideas and decisions (i.e., used evidence‐based reasoning). Within the four disciplines, fifteen STEM content categories emerged. Particularly interesting were the science and mathematics categories. All seven student teams used unit‐based science, and five used unit‐based mathematics, to support their design ideas. Five teams also applied science and/or mathematics content that was outside the scope of the units' learning objectives. Our results demonstrate that students integrated content from all four STEM disciplines when justifying engineering design ideas and solutions, thus supporting engineering design‐based STEM integration as a curricular model.

Scientific Performance and Mapping of the Term STEM in Education on the Web of Science

“…This term has had an increasing impact in the educational field, especially in recent years. It is defined as an interdisciplinary pedagogical application of the disciplines of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, through the integration of all curricular elements [13][14][15][16][17], being used at various educational stages, by integrating content in a practical way, from a holistic and meaningful approach, with the intention of being applied in a practical way in one's own society [18][19][20].…”

Evidence‐based reasoning: Eliciting STEM content during engineering design justifications

“…The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the research in Siverling, Suazo‐Flores, Mathis, and Moore (), and provide possible classroom practice applications of the research through relevant resources. In Siverling et al (), we sought to understand the integration of the STEM disciplines while students learned within engineering design‐based STEM integration units, as well as their practice of generating and justifying their design decisions––which is related to the practice of engaging in argument from evidence. The research was part of a National Science Foundation Mathematics‐Science Partnership project (grant no.…”

“…The study data consisted of student discussions from one team of students per classroom. More information about the curricula and data collection can be found in the Siverling et al () article.…”

“…The research question studied in Siverling et al () was: While generating and justifying solutions to engineering design problems in engineering design‐based STEM integration units, what STEM content do elementary and middle school students discuss? We identified students’ use of the practice of evidence‐based reasoning (EBR) to investigate this question which is a form of engaging in argument from evidence (as defined by the Next Generation Science Standards [NGSS; NGSS Lead States, ]), and we further defined EBR as making any design idea or decision “claim” and having at least one supporting statement for that claim.…”

Teachers Noticing Chemical Thinking While Students Plan and Draw Designs

“…But, while researchers may be able to identify students' disciplinary thinking while students design (e.g. English, King, & Smeed, 2017;Siverling, Suazo-Flores, Mathis, & Moore, 2019;Chusinkunawut, et al, 2020), there exists little empirical research on science teachers' noticing of student thinking during designbased activities. There have, however, been calls for investigating teachers' attention to student thinking in design-based science classrooms (Watkins et al, 2018).…”