Page 80 - Standards for K-12 Engineering Education

Standards for K-12 Engineering Education?

APPENDIX B 65

Final Reflections

Despite the significant barriers just described, the likelihood is high that the National
Academies or some other agency or organization will develop content standards for K–12
engineering education. This likelihood is supported by a recent report, Engineering in K–12
Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects (NAE, 2009). The following
suggestions may help inform the initial work.
First, should the standards be for K–12 engineering or for STEM literacy? This seems a
critical initial decision. After review and consideration, I come down in favor of STEM literacy.
This would avoid the “silo” problem, include engineering knowledge and design, place
engineering in a leadership position, and provide a potential entry point into K–12 education. It
would also promote an integrated approach to STEM programs (Van Scotter et al., 2000).
Second, the development of engineering education standards should be completed by a
group that includes advisors, an oversight board, expert developers, engineers, educators, and
classroom teachers. The goal is to develop standards with a “neutral” perspective that is not
grounded in extant curricula, assessments, or projects.
Third, either specific engineering education standards or standards for STEM literacy will
require content that represents the most important knowledge and skills for the subject(s).
Fourth, currently the question of what students should know and be able to do is a guide
to decisions about content standards. We must understand the balance between learning
outcomes for knowledge and learning outcomes for abilities.
Fifth, regardless of the path chosen, the content standards should address relationships
among core academic disciplines—English, mathematics, science, and social studies.
Sixth, we must make the case that content standards for engineering are “world class”
and suggest a positive contribution to international competitiveness.
Seventh, we must develop post-standard strategies to ensure that the standards have a
positive and effective influence (NRC, 2002).
In conclusion, in this era of standards-based reform with the focus on STEM education,
engineering has been ignored. Although there are significant opportunities to change the
situation, this will require overcoming barriers, especially to the implementation of new
standards. Developing them may be easy, but overcoming the implementation barriers will be
difficult. Assuming an “if you build them, they will come” posture would be a fatal mistake.
But we must seize the opportunity for the benefit of the nation, the education system, and
especially the students in our schools.

References
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). 1989. Science for All
Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and
Technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.
AAAS. 1993. Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, R., and Ferrini-Mundy, J. 1997. Guest Editorial. School Science and Mathematics 97(6):
281–282.
Collins, A. 1995. National science education standards in the United States: A process and a
product. Studies in Science Education 26: 7-37.
DeBoer, G. 1991. A History of Ideas in Science Education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.