Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research
ISSN (Print): 1949-4270 - ISSN (Online): 1949-4289

Research article    |    Open Access
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2024, Vol. 19(1) 41-65

STEM-Engineering Education with a Disadvantaged Student Group

Ganime Aydın, Mehpare Melen & Jale Çakıroğlu

pp. 41 - 65   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2024.655.3

Publish Date: March 31, 2024  |   Single/Total View: 47/217   |   Single/Total Download: 61/235

PDF Download

Abstract

The aims of this research were to examine the changes in the students' perceptions of engineers, engineering as a profession, learning of engineering design processes (EDP), awareness of engineering branches, and their future career choices through Engineering Design Process activities with the 5E learning model. Sixty disadvantaged students between 4th grade to 8th grades comprised the sample group. Engineering activities were held over 8 weekend days outside of school with engineers and science educators. The study was a single group pre-test and post-test weak experimental design using qualitative data sources. Draw an Engineer Test (DAET) along with written descriptions were used as a pre-test and post-test to examine students' perceptions of engineers and engineering before and after the intervention and the career choice test (CCT) was used to compare their future career choices and awareness of engineering branches. Based on the results, their perceptions about engineering changed by using the words design, produce, invention, and production, which were included in EDP. Their career choice of being an engineer or learning engineering branches changed with the aim of improving their standard of living.

Keywords: Engineering education, STEM, Engineering Design Process, Disadvantaged students

How to Cite this Article?

APA 7th edition
Aydin, G., Melen, M., & Cakiroglu, J. (2024). STEM-Engineering Education with a Disadvantaged Student Group. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 19(1), 41-65. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2024.655.3

Harvard
Aydin, G., Melen, M. and Cakiroglu, J. (2024). STEM-Engineering Education with a Disadvantaged Student Group. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 19(1), pp. 41-65.

Chicago 16th edition
Aydin, Ganime, Mehpare Melen and Jale Cakiroglu (2024). "STEM-Engineering Education with a Disadvantaged Student Group". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 19 (1):41-65. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2024.655.3

References
  1. Almquist, Y., Modin, B., & Östberg, V. (2010). Childhood social status in society and school: Implications for the transition to higher levels of education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31(1), 31-45. doi: 10.1080/01425690903385352. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  2. Altan, E. B., & Koroğlu, E. (2019). STEM Education for disadvantaged students: Teacher and student experiences. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 10(4), 462-489. doi: 10.17569/tojqi.615378 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Ball, C., Huang, K. T., Rikard, R. V., & Cotten, S. R. (2019). The emotional costs of computers: An expectancy-value theory analysis of predominantly low socioeconomic status minority students’ STEM attitudes, Information, Communication and Society, 22(1), 105-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1355403 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. doi:10.1146/annurev. psych.52.1.1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Banerjee, P. A. (2016). A systematic review of factors linked to poor academic performance of disadvantaged students in science and maths in schools. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1178441. [Google Scholar]
  7. Baran, E., Bilici, S. C., Mesutoglu, C., & Ocak, C. (2016). Moving STEM beyond schools: Students’ perceptions about an out-of-school STEM education program. International Journal of Education in Mathematics Science and Technology, 4(1), 9-19. doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.71338 [Google Scholar]
  8. Baran, E., Canbazoglu Bilici, S., Mesutoglu, C., & Ocak, C. (2019). The impact of an out‐of‐school STEM education program on students’ attitudes toward STEM and STEM careers. School Science and Mathematics, 119(4), 223-235. doi:10.1111/ssm.12330. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  9. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (Eds.) (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Research Council. Available from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12190.html. [Google Scholar]
  10. Blotnicky, K.A., Franz-Odendaal, T., French, F. & Joy, P. (2018). A study of the correlation between STEM career knowledge, mathematics self-efficacy, career interests, and career activities on the likelihood of pursuing a STEM career among middle school students. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, 22, 1- 15. doi:10.1186/s40594-018-0118-3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Bourdieu, P. (1990). In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology. (Edt. M. Adamson), Cambridge: Cambridge Polity Pres. London. Brenneman, K. (2014). Science in the early years. The progress of education reform. Education Commission of the States, 15(2). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560994.pdf on May 2016. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bozkurt, M.D., Altinoz, N. & Acikyildiz, M. (2023). Effects of 5E Integrated STEM Based Activities on Middle School Students’ Attitudes Towards Science, Science Anxiety and Perceptions of STEM Fields. International Journal of Progressive Education, 19(6), 50-65. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2023.615.4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Brown, P. & Borrego, M. (2013). Engineering efforts and opportunities in the National Science Foundation's Math and Science Partnerships (MSP) Program. Journal of Technology Education, 24(2), 41-54. doi.org/10.21061/jte.v24i2.a.4. [Google Scholar]
  14. Brown, S., and Lent, R. (1996). A social cognitive framework for career choicecounseling. The Career Development Quarterly, 44, 355-367. doi.org/10.1002/j.2161- 0045.1996.tb00451.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2014). Scientific research methods (17th ed.). Ankara: Pegem Publications. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bybee, R., & Landes, N. M. (1990). Science for life and living: An elementary school science program from Biological Sciences Improvement Study (BSCS). The American Biology Teacher, 52(2), 92-98. doi.org/10.2307/4449042 [Google Scholar]
  17. Chachashvili-Bolotin, S., Milner-Bolotin, M., & Lissitsa, S. (2016). Examination of factors predicting cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling doi.org/10.1037/0022 [Google Scholar]
  18. Compeau, S. (2016). The calling of an engineer: High school students’ perceptions of engineering. Retrieved from http://qspace.library.queensu.ca/jspui/handle/1974/13924. [Google Scholar]
  19. Cunningham, C. M., & Carlsen, W. S. (2014). Teaching engineering practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 197-210. doi:10.1007/s10972-014-9380-5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Cunningham, C., Lachapelle, C. P., and Lindgren-Streicher, A. (2005, June). Assessing elementary school students' conceptions of engineering and technology. In 2005 Annual Conference (pp. 10-227). doi: 10.18260/1-2—14836.Dabney, K. P., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., Miller-Friedmann, J. L., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Hazari, Z. (2012). Out-of-school time science activities and their association with career interest in STEM. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(1), 63-79. doi :10.1080/21548455.2011.629455. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Ebenezer, J. (2013). Social justice pedagogy for all science learners. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 252- 264. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.802461 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Efron, R. (1969). What is perception? In Proceedings of the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science 1966/1968 (pp. 137-173). Springer, Dordrecht. [Google Scholar]
  23. English, L. D., Hudson, P., & Dawes, L. (2013). Engineering-based problem solving in the middle school: Design and construction with simple machines. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 3(2), 43- 55. doi:10.7771/2157-9288.1081. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. Falk, J. H. & Dierking, L. D. (1997). School field trips: Assessing their long‐term impact. Curator: The Museum Journal, 40(3), 211-218. doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1997.tb01304.x [Google Scholar]
  25. Fan, S. C., & Yu, K. C. (2017). How an integrative STEM curriculum can benefit students in engineering design practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 107–129. [Google Scholar]
  26. Flynn, D. T. (2016). STEM field persistence: The impact of engagement on postsecondary STEM persistence for underrepresented minority students. Journal of Educational Issues, 2(1), 185- 214. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v2i1.9245. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  27. Fouad, N., and Byars-Winston, A. (2005). Cultural context of career choice: Meta-analysis of race/ethnicity differences. The Career Development Quarterly, 53(3),223-233. doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2005.tb00992.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Franz-Odendaal, TA, Blotnicky, K, French, F, & Joy, P. (2016). Experiences and perceptions of STEM subjects, careers, and engagement in STEM activities among middle school students in the maritime provinces. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 16(2), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1166291 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. Gladstone, J. R., & Cimpian, A. (2021). Which role models are effective for which students? A systematic review and four recommendations for maximizing the effectiveness of role models in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), [59]. doi:10.1186/s40594-021-00315-x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Guzey, S.S., Tank, K., Wang, H., Roehrig, G., & Moore, T. (2014). A high-quality professional development for teachers of grades 3–6 for implementing engineering into classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 114 (3), 139-149. doi:10.1111/ssm.12061. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Heilbronner, N. N. (2009). Pathways in STEM: Factors affecting the retention and attrition of talented men and women from the STEM pipeline. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED513162. on May 2022. [Google Scholar]
  32. Henley, L., Roberts, P. (2016). Perceived barriers to higher education in STEM among isadvantaged rural students: A case study. Inquiry: The Journal of the Virginia Community Colleges, 20 (1). Retrieved from https://commons.vccs.edu/inquiry/vol20/iss1/4 on April 2020 [Google Scholar]
  33. Karatas, F.O., Micklos, A, & Bodner, G.M. (2011). Sixth-grade students’ views of the nature of engineering and images of engineers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(2), 123–135. doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9239-2 [Google Scholar]
  34. Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. National Academy Press, Washington DC. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kelly, K., Dampier, D. A. & Carr, K. (2013). Willing, able, and unwanted: High school girl’s potential selves in computing. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 19(1), 67- 85. doi: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2013004471. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. Klassen, R. M. & Usher, E. L. (2010). Self-efficacy in educational settings: Recent research and emerging directions., Urdan, T. C. and Karabenick, S. A. (Ed.) The Decade Ahead: Theoretical Perspectives on Motivation and Achievement (Advances in Motivation and Achievement, Vol. 16 Part A), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 1-33. doi.org/10.1108/S0749-7423(2010)000016A004 [Google Scholar]
  37. Knight, M., & Cunningham, C. (2004). Draw an Engineer Test (DAET): Development of a tool to investigate students' ideas about engineers and engineering. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 4079-4089. Retrieved from http://engineering.nyu.edu [Google Scholar]
  38. Lent, R. W., Brown, S.D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social. [Google Scholar]
  39. Lottero-perdue, B. P., Bolotin, S., Benyameen, R., Brock, E., and Metzger, E. (2015). The engineering design process-5E. Science and Children, 3(1), 60–66. doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00640-3 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lowrie, T., Downes, N., & Leonard, S. (2018). STEM Education for all young Australians. A Bright spots STEM learning hub foundation paper for SVA, in partnership with Samsung. University of Canberra STEM Education Research Centre. Retrieved from https://www.socialventures.com.au/assets/STEM-education-for-all-young-Australians-Smaller.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  41. Mangu, D. M., Lee, A. R., Middleton, J. A., & Nelson, J. K. (2015). Motivational factors predicting STEM and engineering career intentions for high school students. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2015. 32614 2015. IEEE, (pp. 1–8). IEEE Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7344065. [Google Scholar]
  42. Mann, E. L., Mann, R. L., Strutz, M. L., Duncan, D., & Yoon, S. Y. (2011). Integrating engineering into K-6 curriculum: Developing talent in the STEM disciplines. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(4), 639-658. doi:10.1177/1932202X11415007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  43. McWhirter, E. (1997). Perceived barriers to education and career: ethnic and gender differences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50(1), 124-140. doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1995.1536society [Google Scholar]
  44. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation: Revised and expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Franscisco, USA: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ministry of Education [MoNE](2018). Science education program Retrieved from http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ on March 2020. [Google Scholar]
  46. Mohr-Schroeder, et al (2014). Developing middle school students’ interests in STEM via summer learning experiences: see Blue STEM camp. School Science and Mathematics, 114(6), 291–301. doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12079 [Google Scholar]
  47. Moore, T. J., Glancy, A. W., Tank, K. M., Kersten, J. A., Smith, K. A., and Stohlmann, M. S. (2014). A framework for quality K-12 Engineering education: Research and development. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 4(1), 1- 13. doi:10.7771/2157-9288.1069. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  48. National Research Council [NRC] (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research, The National Academies Press. Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]
  49. National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A framework for K12 science education: Practices, cross cutting concepts, and core ideas., The National Academies Press. Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]
  50. Next Generations Science Standards [NGSS]. (2013). The next generation science standards-executive summary. Retrieved from: http://www.nextgenscience.org. [Google Scholar]
  51. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd ed.). Saint Paul, MN: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  52. Psychology, 47(1), 36-49. doi.org/10.1177/001316449105100402 [Google Scholar]
  53. Rogers, C. & Portsmore, M. (2004). Bringing engineering to elementary school. Journal of STEM Education, 5(3), 17-28. doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653 [Google Scholar]
  54. Schnittka, C., & Bell, R. (2011) Engineering design and conceptual change in science: Addressing thermal energy and heat transfer in eighth grade. International Journal of Science Education, 33(13), 1861-1887, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.529177. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  55. Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2012). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (pp. 13–27). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  56. Shahali, M., Hafizan, E., Halim, L., Rasul, S., Osman, K., Ikhsan, Z., & Rahim, F. (2015). Bitara-stem training of trainers' programme: Impact on trainers' knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and efficacy towards integrated stem teaching. Journal of Baltic Science Education, ISSN: 1648–3898,14(1), 85- 95. [Google Scholar]
  57. Simsek, C. L. (2011). Science learning out-of school. Pegem A. Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  58. Timur, S., Timur, B. & Cetin, N.I. (2019). Effects of Stem Based Activities on In-Service Teachers’ Views . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(4), 102-113. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2019.220.6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  59. Tseng, K. H., Chang, C. C., Lou, S. J., & Chen W. P. (2013). Attitudes towards science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in a project-based learning (PjBL) environment. International Journal Technology Design Education, 23, 87-102. doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9160-x [Google Scholar]
  60. Uluduz, Ş. M., & Çalık, M. (2022). A thematic review of STEM education for disadvantaged students. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 22(4), 938-958. doi.org/10.1007/s42330-022-00247-w. [Google Scholar]
  61. Weber, N., Duncan, D., Dyehouse, M., Strobel, J., & Diefes-Dux, H. A. (2011). The development of a systematic coding system for elementary students’ drawings of engineers. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER): 1(1), 49- 62. [Google Scholar]
  62. Weininger, E. B., & Lareau, A. (2003). Translating bourdieu into the American context: The question of social class and family-school relations. Poetics 31(5-6), 375-402. doi: 10.1016/S0304-422X(03)00034-2. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  63. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through adolescence. In A. Wigfield and J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 91–120). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50006-1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  64. Xie, Y., Fang, M., & Shauman, K. (2015). STEM Education. Annual Review of Sociology, 1 (41), 331-357. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  65. Zaff, J., & Redd, Z. (2001). Logic models and outcomes for out-of-school time programs: Report to the DC children and youth investment trust Corporation. Washington, DC: Children and Youth Investment Trust Corporation. [Google Scholar]
Meta
Vol. 19 (1)
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 19 Issue 1

March 2024

All Manuscript

Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research

Copyright © 2025 Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website were created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.