Page 37 - Standards for K-12 Engineering Education

Standards for K-12 Engineering Education?

24 STANDARDS FOR K–12 ENGINEERING EDUCATION?

public. It would also put engineering in a position to become more of a partner in improving
teaching and learning in science, technology, and mathematics.

BOX 3-1
Core Engineering Concepts, Skills, and Dispositions in K–12 Education

The committee reviewed eight papers that attempt to identify core concepts, skills, and dispo-
sitions appropriate to K–12 engineering education (see annex to this chapter.) Most of these docu-
ments provided analyses of existing reports, articles, and other materials, and more than half also
included opinions solicited from experts, mostly engineers and engineering educators. Although no
two authors or research groups used exactly the same methodology or examined exactly the same
source materials, all eight papers identified doing or understanding design—or both—as a “big
idea” in engineering. This was the only concept or skill recognized by all.
In four of the papers, systems were identified as important, either as a concept or as a skill or
disposition (i.e., “systems thinking”), and four identified constraints as a core concept. Four or
more identified as important optimization, modeling, and analysis, which are both concepts and
practices in engineering design. Communication was judged to be a critical skill in five papers, the
same number that identified understanding the relationship between engineering and society as
important. Making connections between engineering and science, technology, and
mathematics, although a rather general idea that does not fit neatly into any of the three categories,
emerged as highly relevant in six of the eight papers.

National Standards

Science Education Standards. At the national level, the infusion approach is evident in
several existing STEM standards (e.g., Sneider and Rosen, 2009; see also Appendix B). For
example, National Science Education Standards (NSES) emphasizes the interdependence of
science and technology and suggests that students should understand and acquire the capabilities
of engaging in technological design (NRC, 1996). In fact, engineering appears in numerous
instances in NSES (Box 3-2). Although these do not add up to a comprehensive portrayal of the
role of engineering in scientific activities, they do suggest an acknowledgment of the importance
of engineering.
Although the other set of national science standards, Benchmarks for Science Literacy
(AAAS, 1993), is predicated on a “scientific enterprise” of which mathematics, engineering, and
technology are critical components, engineering is rarely mentioned. However, in Science for
All Americans (SFAA; AAAS, 1989), which makes a case for scientific literacy and was the
foundation for Benchmarks, considerable attention is paid to engineering, especially in the
discussion on the nature of technology. Since Benchmarks is presented as an online publication
(http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online), it might be possible to transpose the SFAA
engineering properties into graded benchmark statements and insert them appropriately.
Engineering learning goals could also be inserted elsewhere in Benchmarks—particularly in the
chapter on the designed world.
The NRC has initiated a new project to develop a framework for the next generation of K–12
science education standards (Robelen, 2010). Because one of four project “design teams” is
charged with elucidating the big ideas in engineering and technology, the framework will almost
certainly encourage learning goals related to engineering education. The new framework is

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.