Honors Mentorship Week of 10/24/16

Since starting my mentorship, my perception has changed as I've gained perspective on how much it takes to keep the students engaged. With so many students of so many different backgrounds and interests, it can be a real challenge to engage them into the content. With engineering, I feel that there is a subject or area for anyone with a desire to create. However, in a larger class and younger students, it can be a challenge to tailor the content and curriculum to indivual students. I've seen that my mentor's solution to this is to teach everyone the content, but allow them apply it in their own way through projects that are open to creativity. I was surprised and really impressed to see the kinds of ideas students came up with when they participate in projects that allow them to think outside the box. Of course, some students put forth very little effort in their class and projects, but the majority are very invested in the class and come up with really interesting ideas when given the chance.
As rewarding as my experiences with my internship have been, not every minute of it is super exciting. I've seen that in order to create an enriching student experience, there is a lot of work that must go in behind the scenes. In engineering classes, the students work with professional programs like adobe illustrator. In order for them to complete their projects, I've had to help them trouble shoot problems that I wasn't even one hundred percent sure how to fix. In addition, all of the projects, tests, and quizes for each class must be graded which can be very time consuming. Despite some of the more tedious aspects, all of these things are worth it to see the students excell and be able to learn about such intersting topics.

Annotated Bibliography Summary (Week of 10/17/16)

Ayar, M. C. (2015). First-hand Experience with Engineering

Design and Career Interest in Engineering: An Informal     

STEM Education Case Study.Educational Sciences: Theory    

& Practice, 15(6), 1655. doi:10.12738/estp.2015.6.0134

The article is perfect for my research, as it describes a case study in which engineers and educators experiment with different styles of teaching as well as the implementation of newer updated curriculum standards. The trials of the case study come together to emphasize the importance of a more hands-on style of teaching engineering that results in an enriching experience for the kids, and higher levels of positive feedback. Engineering is the real-world application of math and sciences, so it would seem common sense teach in a style that promotes the application of modern standards and concepts, but because the field is always changing, the educational system and standard have a hard time keeping up. This results in standards that are outdated and inapplicable to the modern industry, and can even decrease student interest. Fortunately, case studies like the one in this article have shed light on the issue, and have suggested significant cause for the regular reformation of curriculum content and standards. The article describes a study in which practicing engineers worked with educators to host a summer camp in which they taught the kids through hands-on labs and activities. They compared the results to that of the standard classroom setting. What they found was that the flexibility provided through the lack of strict state mandated standards, in addition to the opportunities for students to exercise their creativity, resulted in much more positive results and feedback,

The goal of teaching engineering in schools in the first place is to excite kids about STEM areas of study and show them what a career in engineering might look like. I have experienced this first hand in my internship, where I have witnessed the difference in excitement between the hands on applications of standards through things like robotics, versus the confinements set forth by state mandated standards. Many of these standards have not been updated in nearly ten years, which is astounding if you consider how much technology has changed over the past decade. In these past few years we’ve seen revolutionary advancements such as the introduction of smartphones, further automation of robotic manufacturing, and even self-driving cars. However, the Georgia state standards suggest that engineering teachers should still be teaching things in a manner that does not accommodate these new changes in the field. The case study affirmed this idea in showing that students exhibited significantly more interest through hands-on experiences rather than standard classroom lectures. Of course, lectures are necessary sometimes, but this study would suggest that they’re useless without allowing the students to experience the application of the taught concepts first-hand. Another parallel between my observations and the study, is that learning through trial and error proves invaluable in the students’ retention of information. Just like you wouldn’t expect a student to know how to do algebra after a lecture without any practice, the same goes for the basic fundamentals of engineering.

All in all, the article was an excellent parallel to my research, because it showed many similarities between what I have begun to witness at my internship with robotics and engineering education, as well as the cons of having strict state-mandated standards. I feel the information presented in the article will be a highly valuable reference as I conduct my own research in the field of engineering and career tech education.

Scholarly Article Graphic Organizer

Name: Simon Langen

Source #____ Bibliography (MLA or APA) 10 pts	References Ayar, M. C. (2015). First-hand Experience with Engineering Design and Career Interest in Engineering: An Informal      STEM Education Case Study.Educational Sciences: Theory     & Practice, 15(6), 1655. doi:10.12738/estp.2015.6.0134
Annotation: (Describe ALL info. that might be important for your paper. Explain to the reader and/or summarize what might be found in this source) 35 pts	The article is a very in-depth analysis/case-study of techniques for engaging students in STEM education and career fields. It describes student feedback and results produced by different methods of teaching. The article also highlights the issues with the current outdated engineering curriculum standards in a constantly changing field. The article focuses on using a loose yet modern and practical technique of teaching through hands-on applications such as robotics, and electronics.
Potential Quotes: (Are there any significant quotes you can use or paraphrase from this source?) 15 pts	” More importantly, they revealed that active engagement in engineering practices was the key to fostering interest in engineering, in turn pursuing a career in engineering.” (page 6) “Slangen et al. desired to explore whether or not to develop technological literacy through robotics activities when students were engaged in an environment of direct manipulation. They found that students developed more sophisticated conceptual perspectives on robotics.” (page 6)
Assessment: (Analyze and explain why this source is credible) 15 pts	The source is a scholarly article reviewing data collected first hand in a case study. It is highly detailed and peer-reviewed. I also found it using the Galileo search engine, which produces primarily credible scholarly articles.
Reflection: (How will you potentially use it?) 25 pts	This will be an excellent source of information, because it directly reflects my experiences with robotics education vs. curriculum based education at my workplace. I plan to discuss the difference in student engagement during class where my mentor must implement a specific set of curriculum standards, versus after school at during robotics where students are allowed to work with hands on methods to learn mechanical, electrical, and programming concepts that go into creating robots.