Defining "Engineering" for Informal Learning Environments: An Empirically Grounded Framework and Equity Implications

• In Event: Promoting Equity Through Effective Informal STEM Learning Environments

Abstract

Recently, engineering has become increasingly recognized as a central component of preschool-12th grade STEM education enterprise – not only in pre-college classroom settings, but also through afterschool and summer programming, TV and media, museum exhibitions, and family-based programs [1]. However, children have been learning engineering in informal environments for decades. In interviews with practicing engineers, Ferguson and his colleagues captured accounts of a variety of ways that the adults had experiences with engineering and engineering-related practices, skills, and knowledge when they were children [2]. Other research has documented ways that engineers introduce engineering to their own children [3] and how families draw on their assets as they interact with each other during engineering activities [4].

As we consider opportunities to engage with engineering in informal settings, several essential questions have emerged about what “counts” as engineering - and of course, by which stakeholders, groups, and communities. For example, it is quite common for children and youth to hear messages that if “you’re good at math, you should be an engineer.” While there are many connections between mathematics and engineering, this rhetoric can limit how engineering is conceptualized. In other instances, connections between mathematics (and other subjects) and engineering are de-emphasized such that engineering is experienced as “building.” This too can limit how engineering is conceptualized– and can also lead to dissonance when youth later experience engineering activities that do incorporate more math and other skills.

In our research, we have investigated engineering learning in a variety of informal environments in studies of preschool-aged, elementary-aged, and middle-school-aged learners [4-10]. From these studies, we offer a set of ideas for considering how engineering is defined and recognized in informal learning environments:
• Engineering can be learned as a discipline and a career but also as a practice that humans use to solve problems every day. Outside of school, families and children are naturally resourceful problem-solvers.
• Engineering design is an iterative activity to develop an object, system, or process that addresses a particular need, solves a particular problem, or accomplishes a particular goal.
• The inclusion of context/narrative and people (or animals) that will be impacted is a critical aspect of engineering design.
• Engineering design involves not only developing solutions to problems, but also processes for developing an understanding of the problem.
• Design goals and constraints may be externally defined, self-defined, or a combination of both, and the nature of the goals may change quickly and fluidly throughout the design process.
• In informal education or family learning contexts, the nature of an engineering design process is guided by a variety of goals and values that may or may not align with the design goals (e.g., spending time together, promoting child creativity and other aspects of development, etc.).
We offer these ideas recognizing that some conceptualizations of engineering have the potential to connect with and reinforce the rich engineering-related knowledge and skills that already exist within families, while other approaches are more likely to exclude or devalue these assets, especially for families from traditionally underrepresented communities.

Authors

• Monica Elaine Cardella, National Science Foundation

• Gina Navoa Svarovsky, University of Notre Dame

• Scott Pattison, TERC