[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"_public_publisher_byId_ab09de12-34a2-4dd8-85d3-df0959ef1c9e":3,"_public_publication_all{\"sortAscending\":false,\"sortField\":\"updateTime\",\"page\":0,\"size\":10,\"facet\":true,\"searchKey\":\"publisherId:ab09de12-34a2-4dd8-85d3-df0959ef1c9e,\"}":155},{"code":4,"data":5,"meta":20},"SUCCESS",{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":9,"slug":10,"properties":11,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":22,"manageAffiliations":32,"indexDatabases":53,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":109,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},"ab09de12-34a2-4dd8-85d3-df0959ef1c9e","2024-04-09T07:08:48.113+00:00","2025-11-21T10:06:51.049+00:00",[],"International-Journal-of-STEM-Education",{"issn":12,"title":14,"url":16},{"VOID":13},"21967822",{"EN":15},"International Journal of STEM Education",{"VOID":17},"https:\u002F\u002Flink.springer.com\u002Fjournal\u002F40594","PUBLISHER","PENDING",null,0,[23],{"id":24,"createTime":25,"updateTime":26,"relativeEntities":27,"label":28,"description":31,"parentId":20,"standard":20,"scholarHubFieldId":20},"9453b68b-1f13-43ae-b408-f58e623184da","2023-04-07T03:04:38.672+00:00","2023-11-21T08:09:16.453+00:00",[],{"VI":29,"EN":30},"Giáo dục","Education",{},[33,43],{"id":34,"createTime":35,"updateTime":36,"relativeEntities":37,"slug":38,"properties":39,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"url":20,"parentIds":42,"statistic":20},"26a19206-5cad-4456-bb2f-49abd254fbc6","2024-04-19T01:59:34.612+00:00","2025-11-21T10:06:47.646+00:00",[],"SPRINGER",{"title":40},{"EN":38},"AFFILIATION",[],{"id":44,"createTime":45,"updateTime":46,"relativeEntities":47,"slug":48,"properties":49,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":51,"url":20,"parentIds":52,"statistic":20},"e7ad393e-6843-4e02-b4d9-d29a3c567e03","2023-05-29T10:24:52.891+00:00","2025-11-21T10:07:17.718+00:00",[],"SpringerOpen",{"title":50},{"EN":48},8,[],[54,73,90],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":56,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":71,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},"ac1ab231-6728-4eab-a442-d531e936a9d1",{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":60,"label":61,"description":63,"key":66,"publicationTags":67,"standard":20},"a8273be3-1221-4f26-949d-71dc71ff1fc3","2023-05-22T09:59:54.622+00:00","2025-11-21T10:07:52.181+00:00",[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},"ISI-SSCI -  Social Sciences Citation Index",{"VI":64,"EN":65},"Cơ sở dữ liệu SSCI","SSCI database","ssci",[68,69],"SSCI","ISI","https:\u002F\u002Fmjl.clarivate.com\u002Fsearch-results?issn=2196-7822",[72],"24a9d6c5-1f55-43b6-b34d-2d0ab498c53b",{"id":74,"indexDatabase":75,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":88,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},"efceb3ed-bf69-4867-863b-bf395b231ce1",{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":79,"label":80,"description":82,"key":85,"publicationTags":86,"standard":20},"a4921856-b128-4d9f-8f1f-e80813d3bbd4","2023-05-22T09:59:31.026+00:00","2025-11-21T10:07:52.153+00:00",[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},"ISI\u002FSCIE - Science Citation Index Expanded",{"VI":83,"EN":84},"Cơ sở dữ liệu SCIE","SCIE database","scie",[87,69],"SCIE",[89],"efd9d227-9b96-498c-81fd-03096cd13052",{"id":91,"indexDatabase":92,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":106,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},"931a5f06-b97b-4d74-a1a5-1b9ff924d2dc",{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":96,"label":97,"description":99,"key":101,"publicationTags":102,"standard":20},"3c7051d4-eb7d-4c57-a56b-36fc74c5d1e9","2023-05-22T09:57:18.509+00:00","2025-11-21T10:07:52.274+00:00",[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},"Scopus - Elsevier",{"EN":98,"VI":100},"Cơ sở dữ liệu Scopus thuộc Elsevier","scopus",[103],"SCOPUS","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.scopus.com\u002Fsourceid\u002F21100873488","2014-2025",[107],"90617f9b-a5d6-432e-b450-512fe6e1328f","SCOPUS__Q1",{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":110,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":123,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":133,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":143,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},0.38,0.13,0.23,0.27,0.63,1.45,1.23,1.48,0.39,34,18,328,{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},15,16,28,39,38,44,37,12,1498,{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},84,56,109,472,195,361,17,46,4.57,{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},10.5,1.2,3.5,3.89,12.1,5.13,8.2,0.46,1.18,21,"JOURNAL",{"meta":156,"data":158},{"total":157},"329",[159,331,757,905,1071,1168,1287,1398,1522,1646],{"id":160,"createTime":161,"updateTime":162,"relativeEntities":163,"slug":164,"properties":165,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":162,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":177,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":178,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":287,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":328,"publishYear":329,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"c34f6ef6-7c28-46ba-a2bc-02aeaccf7e17","2024-01-27T05:49:01.794+00:00","2025-01-26T23:56:15.624+00:00",[],"A-content-analysis-of-research-on-technology-use-for-teaching-mathematics-to-students-with-disabilities-word-networks-and-topic-modeling",{"references":166,"abstract":168,"title":170,"doi":172},{"VOID":167},"Adams, K., & Cook, A. (2014). Access to hands-on mathematics measurement activities using robots controlled via speech generating devices: Three case studies. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 9(4), 286–298. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3109\u002F17483107.2013.825928\nAdamu, I., & Soykan, E. (2019). Content analyses on the use of technology in dyslexia: The articles in the web of science data base. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 6(4), 789–797.\nAltun, H., & Kahveci, G. (2019). The effectiveness of virtual reality-based teaching material on geometry related problem solving in students with learning disabilities. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 460–482. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17522\u002Fbalikesirnef.562047\nAmankwah-Amoah, J. (2016). Competing technologies, competing forces: The rise and fall of the floppy disk, 1971–2010. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 107, 121–129. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.techfore.2016.03.019\nAmerican Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002F0000165-000\nAspiranti, K. B., Larwin, K. H., & Schade, B. P. (2020). iPads\u002Ftablets and students with autism: A meta-analysis of academic effects. Assistive Technology, 32(1), 23–30. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10400435.2018.1463575\nBagozzi, B. E., & Berliner, D. (2018). The politics of scrutiny in human rights monitoring: Evidence from structural topic models of US State Department human rights reports. Political Science Research and Methods, 6(4), 661–677. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1017\u002Fpsrm.2016.44\nBarron, B., & Kantor, R. J. (1993). Tools to enhance math education: The Jasper series. Communications of the ACM, 36(5), 52–54. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1145\u002F155049.155060\nBenoit, K., Watanabe, K., Wang, H., Nulty, P., Obeng, A., Müller, S., & Matsuo, A. (2018). quanteda: An R package for the quantitative analysis of textual data. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(30), 774. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21105\u002Fjoss.00774\nBillard, C., Jung, C., Munnich, A., Gassama, S., Touzin, M., Mirassou, A., & Willig, T. N. (2021). External validation of BMT-i computerized test battery for diagnosis of learning disabilities. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 9, 733713. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffped.2021.733713\nBlackhurst, A. E. (2005). Historical perspectives about technology applications for people with disabilities. In D. Edyburn, K., Higgins, & R. Boone (Eds.), Handbook of special education technology research and practice (pp. 1–27). Knowledge by Design.\nBlei, D. M., & Lafferty, J. D. (2007). A correlated topic model of science. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 1(1), 17–35. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1214\u002F07-AOAS114\nBlei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022.\nBottge, B. A., Cohen, A. S., & Choi, H. J. (2018). Comparisons of mathematics intervention effects in resource and inclusive classrooms. Exceptional Children, 84(2), 197–212. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0014402917736854\nBottge, B. A., Rueda, E., Serlin, R. C., Hung, Y.-H., & Kwon, J. M. (2007). Shrinking achievement differences with anchored math problems: Challenges and possibilities. The Journal of Special Education, 41(1), 31–49. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F00224669070410010301\nBouck, E. C., Long, H., & Park, J. (2021). Using a virtual number line and corrective feedback to teach addition of integers to middle school students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 33(1), 99–116. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10882-020-09735-z\nBouck, E. C., Mathews, L. A., & Peltier, C. (2020). Virtual manipulatives: A tool to support access and achievement with middle school students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 35(1), 51–59. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0162643419882422\nBouck, E. C., Meyer, N. K., Joshi, G. S., & Schleppenbach, D. (2013). Accessing algebra via MathSpeak™: Understanding the potential and pitfalls for students with visual impairments. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(1), 49–63. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F016264341302800105\nBouck, E. C., Myers, J. A., & Witzel, B. S. (2022). Teaching math online to secondary students with learning disabilities: Moving beyond the pandemic. TEACHING Exceptional Children. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F00400599221092136\nBouck, E. C., Park, J., Sprick, J., Shurr, J., Bassette, L., & Whorley, A. (2017). Using the virtual-abstract instructional sequence to teach addition of fractions. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 70, 163–174. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.ridd.2017.09.002\nCarreon, A., Smith, S. J., Mosher, M., Rao, K., & Rowland, A. (2022). A review of virtual reality intervention research for students with disabilities in K–12 settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 37(1), 82–99. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0162643420962011\nCenter for Applied Special Technology. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines (Graphic organizer version 2.2). Center for Applied Special Technology.\nChen, Z., Zhang, R., Xu, T., Yang, Y., Wang, J., & Feng, T. (2020a). Emotional attitudes towards procrastination in people: A large-scale sentiment-focused crawling analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 110, 106391. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.chb.2020.106391\nChen, X., Zou, D., Cheng, G., & Xie, H. (2020b). Detecting latent topics and trends in educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling: A retrospective of all volumes of Computers & Education. Computers & Education, 151, 103855. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.compedu.2020.103855\nChen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2022). Two decades of artificial intelligence in education. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 28–47.\nCommittee on STEM Education. (2018). Charting a course for success: America’s strategy for STEM education. National Science & Technology Council. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.whitehouse.gov\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2018\u002F12\u002FSTEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf\nCox, S. K., Root, J. R., & Gilley, D. (2021). Let’s see that again: Using instructional videos to support asynchronous mathematical problem solving instruction for students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36(2), 97–104. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0162643421996327\nCsárdi, G., & Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems, 1695. https:\u002F\u002Figraph.org\nEmerson, R. W., & Anderson, D. L. (2018). Using description to convey mathematics content in visual images to students who are visually impaired. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 112(2), 157–168. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0145482X1811200204\nEmprin, F., & Petitfour, É. (2021). Using a simulator to help students with dyspraxia learn geometry. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 7(1), 99–121. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs40751-020-00077-1\nEndNote Team. (2013). EndNote (Version EndNote 20) [Computer software]. Clarivate.\nEnnis, R. P., & Losinski, M. (2019). Interventions to improve fraction skills for students with disabilities: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 85(3), 367–386. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0014402918817504\nFalkenberg, C. A. (2010). The effects of self-monitoring on homework completion and accuracy rates of students with disabilities in an inclusive general education classroom (Publication No. 3447782) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida International University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nGarcía-Redondo, P., García, T., Areces, D., Núñez, J. C., & Rodríguez, C. (2019). Serious games and their effect improving attention in students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(14), 2480. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3390\u002Fijerph16142480\nGarg, M., & Kumar, M. (2018). The structure of word co-occurrence network for microblogs. Physica a: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 512, 698–720. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.physa.2018.08.002\nGrimmer, J., Roberts, M. E., & Stewart, B. M. (2022). Text as data: A new framework for machine learning and the social sciences. Princeton University Press.\nHiggins, C. (1970). Mathematics for handicapped-programming concepts. Focus on Exceptional Children, 2(4), 8–10.\nHuscroft-D’Angelo, J., Higgins, K., & Crawford, L. (2014). Communicating mathematical ideas in a digital writing environment: The impacts on mathematical reasoning for students with and without learning disabilities. Social Welfare Interdisciplinary Approach, 4(2), 68–84.\nHvitfeldt, E., & Silge, J. (2021). Supervised machine learning for text analysis in R. Chapman and Hall\u002FCRC. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1201\u002F9781003093459\nIndividuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).\nIstenic Starcic, A., & Bagon, S. (2014). ICT-supported learning for inclusion of people with special needs: Review of seven educational technology journals, 1970–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 202–230. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fbjet.12086\nJaspers, K. E., McCleary, D. F., McCleary, L. N., & Skinner, C. H. (2017). Evidence-based interventions for math disabilities in children and adolescents. In L. A. Theodore (Ed.), Handbook of evidence-based interventions for children and adolescents (pp. 99–110). Springer Publishing Company.\nJaspers, M. W. M. (1991). Prototypes of computer-assisted instruction for arithmetic word-problem solving [Doctoral dissertation, University of Nijmegen].\nJones, C., & Shao, B. (2011). The net generation and digital natives: implications for higher education. Higher Education Academy.\nJung, S., & Yoon, W. C. (2020). An alternative topic model based on Common Interest Authors for topic evolution analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 14(3), 101040. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.joi.2020.101040\nKaczorowski, T., McMahon, D., Gardiner-Walsh, S., & Hollingshead, A. (2022). Designing an inclusive future: Including diversity and equity with innovations in special education technology. TEACHING Exceptional Children. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F00400599221090506\nKagohara, D. M., van der Meer, L., Ramdoss, S., O’Reilly, M. F., Lancioni, G. E., Davis, T. N., Rispoli, M., Lang, R., Marschik, P. B., Sutherland, D., Green, V. A., & Sigafoos, J. (2013). Using iPods® and iPads® in teaching programs for individuals with developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(1), 147–156. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.ridd.2012.07.027\nKellems, R. O., Eichelberger, C., Cacciatore, G., Jensen, M., Frazier, B., Simons, K., & Zaru, M. (2020). Using video-based instruction via augmented reality to teach mathematics to middle school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(4), 277–291. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0022219420906452\nKelly, B., Carnine, D., Gersten, R., & Grossen, B. (1986). The effectiveness of videodisc instruction in teaching fractions to learning-disabled and remedial high school students. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8(2), 5–17. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F016264348600800202\nKim, S. J., & Xin, Y. P. (2022). A synthesis of computer-assisted mathematical word problem-solving instruction for students with learning disabilities or difficulties. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 20(1), 1–19.\nKim, Y., Jang, S. N., & Lee, J. L. (2018). Co-occurrence network analysis of keywords in geriatric frailty. Journal of Korean Academy of Community Health Nursing, 29(4), 429–439. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.12799\u002Fjkachn.2018.29.4.429\nKiru, E. W., Doabler, C. T., Sorrells, A. M., & Cooc, N. A. (2018). A synthesis of technology-mediated mathematics interventions for students with or at risk for mathematics learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(2), 111–123. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0162643417745835\nKoestler, C., Felton-Koestler, M. D., Bieda, K., & Otten, S. (2013). Connecting the NCTM process standards and the CCSSM practices. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.\nKoller, E. Z., & Mulhern, T. J. (1977). Use of pocket calculator to train arithmetic skills with trainable adolescents. Journal for Special Educators of the Mentally Retarded, 13(2), 309–319.\nLämsä, J., Hämäläinen, R., Aro, M., Koskimaa, R., & Äyrämö, S. M. (2018). Games for enhancing basic reading and maths skills: A systematic review of educational game design in supporting learning by people with learning disabilities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(4), 596–607. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fbjet.12639\nLi, Y., & Xiao, Y. (2022). Authorship and topic trends in STEM education research. International Journal of STEM Education, 9, 62. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00378-4\nMarín-Marín, J. A., Moreno-Guerrero, A. J., Dúo-Terrón, P., & López-Belmonte, J. (2021). STEAM in education: a bibliometric analysis of performance and co-words in Web of Science. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, 41. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-021-00296-x\nMcLeod, K. G. (2011). An investigation of the relationships between educational technology and mathematics achievement of students with learning disabilities (Publication No. 3455448) [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nMiundy, K., Zaman, H. B., Nordin, A., & Ng, K. H. (2019). Screening test on dyscalculia learners to develop a suitable augmented reality (AR) assistive learning application. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.22452\u002Fmjcs.sp2019no1.7\nMorano, S., Flores, M. M., Hinton, V., & Meyer, J. (2020). A comparison of concrete-representational-abstract and concrete-representational-abstract-integrated fraction interventions for students with disabilities. Exceptionality, 28(2), 77–91. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09362835.2020.1727328\nMoyer-Packenham, P. S., & Bolyard, J. J. (2016). Revisiting the definition of a virtual manipulative. In P. S. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives (pp. 3–23). Springer.\nMu, W., Lim, K. H., Liu, J., Karunasekera, S., Falzon, L., & Harwood, A. (2022). A clustering-based topic model using word networks and word embeddings. Journal of Big Data, 9(1), 1–38. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40537-022-00585-4\nNabors, L., Monnin, J., & Jimenez, S. (2020). A scoping review of studies on virtual reality for individuals with intellectual disabilities. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 4, 344–356. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs41252-020-00177-4\nNational Center for Education Statistics. (2019). NAEP report card: 2019 NAEP mathematics assessment. National Center for Education Statistics. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nationsreportcard.gov\u002Fhighlights\u002Fmathematics\u002F2019\nNational Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Students with disabilities. Condition of education. National Center for Education Statistics. https:\u002F\u002Fnces.ed.gov\u002Fprograms\u002Fcoe\u002Findicator\u002Fcgg\nNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.\nNational Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. http:\u002F\u002Fwww.corestandards.org\u002FMath\nNational Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. National Mathematics Advisory Panel.\nNewman, M. (2018). Networks. Oxford University Press.\nNwaizu, P. C. I. (1991). Using teacher-assisted and computer-assisted instruction to teach multiplication skills to youths with specific learning disabilities (Publication No. 9103959) [Doctoral dissertation, University of New Orleans]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nOk, M. W., Bryant, D. P., & Bryant, B. R. (2020). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematics performance of students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the research. Exceptionality, 28(1), 30–44. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09362835.2019.1579723\nOk, M. W., & Kim, W. (2017). Use of iPads and iPods for academic performance and engagement of preK–12 students with disabilities: A research synthesis. Exceptionality, 25(1), 54–75. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09362835.2016.1196446\nPaez, A. (2017). Gray literature: An important resource in systematic reviews. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 10(3), 233–240. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fjebm.12266\nPage, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., & Moher, D. (2021). Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: Development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 134, 103–112. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.jclinepi.2021.02.003\nPalmer, J. T., Hendel, A., & Dempsey, B. (1985). The micro-computer and the learning disabled a useful tool. Journal of Reading, Writing and Learning Disabilities, 1(2), 117–125. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F0748763850010204\nPapadimitriou, C. H., Raghavan, P., Tamaki, H., & Vempala, S. (2000). Latent semantic indexing: A probabilistic analysis. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 61(2), 217–235. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1006\u002Fjcss.2000.1711\nPark, J. (2019). Supporting maintenance in mathematics using the virtual-representational-abstract instructional sequence intervention package (Publication No. 13882021) [Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nPark, J., Bouck, E., & Duenas, A. (2019). The effect of video modeling and video prompting interventions on individuals with intellectual disability: A systematic literature review. Journal of Special Education Technology, 34(1), 3–16. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0162643418780464\nPark, J., Bryant, D. P., & Shin, M. (2022). Effects of interventions using virtual manipulatives for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of single-case research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 55(4), 325–337. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F00222194211006336\nPedersen, T. (2022). ggraph: An implementation of grammar of graphics for graphs and networks (R package version 2.1.0). https:\u002F\u002FCRAN.R-project.org\u002Fpackage=ggraph\nPedersen, T. (2023). tidygraph: A tidy API for graph manipulation (R package version 1.2.3). https:\u002F\u002FCRAN.R-project.org\u002Fpackage=tidygraph\nPeltier, C. J., Vannest, K. J., & Marbach, J. J. (2018). A meta-analysis of schema instruction implemented in single-case experimental designs. The Journal of Special Education, 52(2), 89–100. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0022466918763173\nPerperoglou, A., Sauerbrei, W., Abrahamowicz, M., & Schmid, M. (2019). A review of spline function procedures in R. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1), 1–16. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs12874-019-0666-3\nPitchford, N. J., Kamchedzera, E., Hubber, P. J., & Chigeda, A. L. (2018). Interactive apps promote learning of basic mathematics in children with special educational needs and disabilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 262. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffpsyg.2018.00262\nPorter, M. F. (2001). Snowball: A language for stemming algorithms. https:\u002F\u002Fsnowballstem.org\nPrabavathy, M., & Sivaranjani, R. (2020). Effects of virtual manipulative in enhancing basic arithmetic for students with developmental dyscalculia. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 7(6), 19–26.\nRadecki, A., Bujacz, M., Skulimowski, P., & Strumiłło, P. (2020). Interactive sonification of images in serious games as an education aid for visually impaired children. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(2), 473–497. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fbjet.12852\nRemata, H. R., & Lomibao, L. S. (2021). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-specific learning disorder (SLD) in mathematics learner’s response towards synchronous online class. American Journal of Educational Research, 9(7), 426–430. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.12691\u002Feducation-9-7-5\nRoberts, M. E., Stewart, B. M., & Tingley, D. (2014). stm: R Package for structural topic models. Harvard University.\nRoberts, M. E., Stewart, B. M., & Tingley, D. (2019). stm: An R package for structural topic models. Journal of Statistical Software, 91(2), 1–40. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.18637\u002Fjss.v091.i02\nRobinson, D., & Silge, J. (2022). widyr: Widen, process, then re-tidy data (R package version 0.1.5). https:\u002F\u002FCRAN.R-project.org\u002Fpackage=widyr\nRodriguez, M. Y., & Storer, H. (2020). A computational social science perspective on qualitative data exploration: Using topic models for the descriptive analysis of social media data. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 38(1), 54–86. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F15228835.2019.1616350\nRoot, J. R. (2016). Effects of modified schema-based instruction on real-world algebra problem solving of students with autism spectrum disorder and moderate intellectual disability (Publication No. 10111877) [Doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nRoot, J. R., Cox, S. K., & Gonzalez, S. (2019). Using modified schema-based instruction with technology-based supports to teach data analysis. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 44(1), 53–68. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F154079691983391\nSatsangi, R., Billman, R. H., Raines, A. R., & Macedonia, A. M. (2021a). Studying the impact of video modeling for algebra instruction for students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 55(2), 67–78. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0022466920937467\nSatsangi, R., Raines, A. R., & Fraze, K. (2021b). Virtual manipulatives for teaching algebra: A research-to-practice guide for secondary students with a learning disability. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 26(1), 46–58. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.18666\u002FLDMJ-2021-V26-I1-10349\nSaunders, A. F., Spooner, F., & Ley Davis, L. (2018). Using video prompting to teach mathematical problem solving of real-world video-simulation problems. Remedial and Special Education, 39(1), 53–64. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0741932517717042\nSchaefer Whitby, P. J. (2009). The effects of a modified learning strategy on the multiple step mathematical word problem solving ability of middle school students with high-functioning autism or Asperger’s syndrome (Publication No. 3383694) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nSchwemmer, C. (2021). stminsights: A ‘Shiny’ application for inspecting structural topic models (R package version 0.4.1). https:\u002F\u002FCRAN.R-project.org\u002Fpackage=stminsights\nSharma, D., Kumar, B., & Chand, S. (2019). A trend analysis of machine learning research with topic models and Mann–Kendall test. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications, 11(2), 70–82. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.5815\u002Fijisa.2019.02.08\nShin, M., & Bryant, D. P. (2017). Improving the fraction word problem solving of students with mathematics learning disabilities: Interactive computer application. Remedial and Special Education, 38(2), 76–86. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0741932516669052\nShin, M., Bryant, D. P., Powell, S. R., Jung, P.-G., Ok, M. W., & Hou, F. (2021a). A meta-analysis of single-case research on word-problem instruction for students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 42(6), 398–411. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0741932520964918\nShin, M., Ok, M. W., Choo, S., Hossain, G., Bryant, D. P., & Kang, E. (2023a). A content analysis of research on technology use for teaching mathematics to students with disabilities: Word networks and topic modeling [Data files and scripts]. Center for Open Science. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17605\u002FOSF.IO\u002F8CNYW\nShin, M., Park, J., Grimes, R., & Bryant, D. P. (2021b). Effects of using virtual manipulatives for students with disabilities: Three-level multilevel modeling for single-case data. Exceptional Children, 87(4), 418–437. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F00144029211007150\nShin, M., Simmons, M., Meador, A., Goode, F. J., Deal, A., & Jackson, T. (2023b). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: Applied examples using virtual manipulatives. Intervention in School and Clinic, 58(3), 198–204. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F10534512221081268\nSilge, J., & Robinson, D. (2016). tidytext: Text mining and analysis using tidy data principles in R. Journal of Open Source Software, 1(3), 37. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21105\u002Fjoss.00037\nSteele, M. M. (2007). Teaching calculator skills to elementary students who have learning problems. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 52(1), 59–62. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3200\u002FPSFL.52.1.59-64\nStewart, K. B. (2007). Blending assessment with instruction program (BAIP): Impact of an online standards-based curriculum on 8th grade students’ math achievement (Publication No. 3274526) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nSwanson, H. L. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Guilford Press.\nTowers, D. (2018). Effects of the graphing calculator on students with and without disabilities (Publication No. 10831620) [Doctoral dissertation, St. John's University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.\nTsuei, M. (2017). Learning behaviours of low-achieving children’s mathematics learning in using of helping tools in a synchronous peer-tutoring system. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 147–161. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10494820.2016.1276078\nU.S. Department of Education. (2022). 43rd annual report to congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2021. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs. https:\u002F\u002Fsites.ed.gov\u002Fidea\u002Ffiles\u002F43rd-arc-for-idea.pdf\nWang, X., & McCallum, A. (2006). Topics over time: A non-Markov continuous-time model of topical trends. Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 424–433). ACM.\nXin, Y. P., Park, J. Y., Tzur, R., & Si, L. (2020). The impact of a conceptual model-based mathematics computer tutor on multiplicative reasoning and problem-solving of students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 58, 100762. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.jmathb.2020.100762",{"EN":169},"The purpose of this study was to conduct a content analysis of research on technology use for teaching mathematics to students with disabilities. We applied word networks and structural topic modeling of 488 studies published from 1980 to 2021. Results showed that the words “computer” and “computer-assisted instruction” had the highest degree of centrality in the 1980s and 1990s, and “learning disability” was another central word in the 2000s and 2010s. The associated word probability for 15 topics also represented technology use within different instructional practices, tools, and students with either high- or low-incidence disabilities. A piecewise linear regression with knots in 1990, 2000, and 2010 demonstrated decreasing trends for the topics of computer-assisted instruction, software, mathematics achievement, calculators, and testing. Despite some fluctuations in the prevalence in the 1980s, the support for visual materials, learning disabilities, robotics, self-monitoring tools, and word problem-solving instruction topics showed increasing trends, particularly after 1990. Some research topics, including apps and auditory support, have gradually increased in topic proportions since 1980. Topics including fraction instruction, visual-based technology, and instructional sequence have shown increasing prevalence since 2010; this increase was statistically significant for the instructional sequence topic over the past decade.",{"EN":171},"A content analysis of research on technology use for teaching mathematics to students with disabilities: word networks and topic modeling",{"VOID":173},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-023-00414-x","PUBLICATION","VERIFIED","Auto Verify","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-023-00414-x",[179,202,219,236,252,268],{"id":180,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":182,"affiliations":184,"properties":199},"cecaa509-83aa-4a7b-94db-7b95200c1faa",2,[183],"AUTHOR",[185],{"id":186,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":187,"properties":196},"82180faa-7513-4580-aa42-0237f2e9ba53",{"id":188,"createTime":189,"updateTime":190,"relativeEntities":191,"slug":192,"properties":193,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"5d06fb58-e256-4848-921a-94d987028328","2024-09-01T03:53:32.139+00:00","2025-02-24T02:42:46.671+00:00",[],"University-of-Minnesota-Minneapolis-United-States",{"title":194},{"EN":195},"University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States",{"title":197},{"VI":198},"University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA",{"title":200},{"VI":201},"Sam Choo",{"id":203,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":204,"affiliations":205,"properties":216},"2b4439d3-c84c-49b1-b0b6-e58bbeb1ab6a",[183],[206],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":207,"properties":20},{"id":208,"createTime":209,"updateTime":210,"relativeEntities":211,"slug":212,"properties":213,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"0606da3c-f13d-484c-9f45-3f5b8636beb3","2024-01-27T05:49:01.847+00:00","2025-06-11T19:08:43.132+00:00",[],"Department-of-Education-West-Texas-A-M-University-Amarillo-USA",{"title":214},{"VI":215},"Department of Education, West Texas A&M University, Amarillo, USA",{"title":217},{"VI":218},"Mikyung Shin",{"id":220,"sortIndex":221,"researcher":20,"roles":222,"affiliations":223,"properties":233},"e32412fb-0141-462d-b4a3-27e54be532cc",4,[183],[224],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":225,"properties":20},{"id":226,"createTime":227,"updateTime":227,"relativeEntities":228,"slug":229,"properties":230,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"8ffc8ee4-44f3-4050-aa07-bc55178f06bd","2024-04-14T17:01:14.005+00:00",[],"The-Meadows-Center-for-Preventing-Educational-Risk-The-University-of-Texas-at-Austin-Austin-USA",{"title":231},{"EN":232},"The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, USA",{"title":234},{"VI":235},"Diane P. Bryant",{"id":237,"sortIndex":238,"researcher":20,"roles":239,"affiliations":240,"properties":249},"f1f494fc-295b-4097-a8a3-4efad48cf4ad",5,[183],[241],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":242,"properties":20},{"id":243,"createTime":244,"updateTime":244,"relativeEntities":245,"slug":20,"properties":246,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"1cf00470-8fb3-44fd-8581-642da8e807ec","2024-01-27T05:49:01.975+00:00",[],{"title":247},{"VI":248},"Joongbu University, Goyang, South Korea",{"title":250},{"VI":251},"Eunyoung Kang",{"id":253,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":255,"affiliations":256,"properties":265},"d10b8331-72b1-4705-9a28-e5a352eb5656",1,[183],[257],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":258,"properties":20},{"id":259,"createTime":260,"updateTime":260,"relativeEntities":261,"slug":20,"properties":262,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"8d9f3ff8-5b5b-4126-a5d1-743d92c12234","2024-01-27T05:49:01.919+00:00",[],{"title":263},{"VI":264},"Daegu University, Gyeongsan, South Korea",{"title":266},{"VI":267},"Min Wook Ok",{"id":269,"sortIndex":270,"researcher":20,"roles":271,"affiliations":272,"properties":283},"f071afc0-f727-4cef-8086-046521d56235",3,[183],[273],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":274,"properties":20},{"id":275,"createTime":276,"updateTime":277,"relativeEntities":278,"slug":279,"properties":280,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"fe2c7178-e2d1-4ee5-a8b5-396987567a94","2024-02-10T03:54:35.263+00:00","2024-12-01T13:51:17.101+00:00",[],"University-of-North-Texas-Denton-USA",{"title":281},{"VI":282},"University of North Texas, Denton, USA",{"title":284},{"VI":285},"Gahangir Hossain","ARTICLE",{"url":177,"publisher":288,"properties":323},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":289,"slug":10,"properties":290,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":294,"manageAffiliations":295,"indexDatabases":296,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":318,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":291,"title":292,"url":293},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[297,304,311],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":298,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":303,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":299,"label":300,"description":301,"key":85,"publicationTags":302,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":305,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":310,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":306,"label":307,"description":308,"key":101,"publicationTags":309,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":312,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":317,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":313,"label":314,"description":315,"key":66,"publicationTags":316,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":319,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":320,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":321,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":322,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":324,"pages":326},{"VOID":325},"10",{"VOID":327},"1-23","2023-03-26",2023,false,{"id":332,"createTime":333,"updateTime":334,"relativeEntities":335,"slug":336,"properties":337,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":334,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":347,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":349,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":350,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":393,"citationCount":434,"citationInfo":435,"publishDate":437,"publishYear":438,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":439,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"0e6e4460-595f-4194-902e-e70b4f9c1805","2024-04-16T22:39:57.046+00:00","2024-12-26T23:45:50.393+00:00",[],"Engineering-pedagogical-content-knowledge-examining-correlations-with-formal-and-informal-preparation-experiences",{"keywords":338,"openalex":339,"abstract":341,"title":343,"doi":345},{},{"VOID":340},"W4220837706",{"EN":342},"\u003Cjats:title>Abstract\u003C\u002Fjats:title>\u003Cjats:sec>\u003Cjats:title>Background\u003C\u002Fjats:title>\u003Cjats:p>Developing pre-service educators’ content and pedagogical knowledge is critical for providing high-quality instruction in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Specifically, pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) has been identified as one of the most critically needed research areas within engineering education. However, limited research exists on PCK in engineering education contexts. Therefore, this study investigated whether specific teacher preparation coursework and informal educational experiences influenced high school instructors’ teaching of engineering content and practices.\u003C\u002Fjats:p>\u003C\u002Fjats:sec>\u003Cjats:sec>\u003Cjats:title>Results\u003C\u002Fjats:title>\u003Cjats:p>Using methods similar to a previous study examining technology and engineering educators’ teaching of science content and practices (Love & Wells in International Journal of Technology and Design Education 28:395–416, 2018), this study utilized a random sample of 55 Foundations of Technology and Engineering (FoTE) educators from 12 county school systems in the United States. The participants completed the TEES-PCK survey (Love in The Journal of Technology Studies 41: 58–71, 2015), which collected data about their formal and informal preparation experiences. Based on participant responses, eight educators were purposefully selected to be observed while teaching the same FoTE lesson. The observed teaching of engineering content and practices for these eight educators were assigned a rating using the reliable and validated RTOP instrument modified by Love et al. (Journal of Technology Education 29: 45–66, 2017). The TEES-PCK survey data and teaching observation ratings for the eight educators were analyzed using an exploratory correlational design. Spearman’s rho tests were used to examine the strength of the relationship between specific formal or informal preparation experiences and their teaching of engineering content and practices. The data were validated through corroboration with FoTE curriculum content analyses, classroom audio recordings and notes, and interviews. The analyses found several formal and informal preparation experiences significantly correlated with participants’ teaching of engineering content and practices.\u003C\u002Fjats:p>\u003C\u002Fjats:sec>\u003Cjats:sec>\u003Cjats:title>Conclusions\u003C\u002Fjats:title>\u003Cjats:p>This study presents recommendations for informing the preparation of educators to teach engineering content and practices in greater depth. The findings provide implications for educational researchers, teacher preparation programs, and in-service professional development efforts. This study contributes to the limited yet essential research area of engineering PCK.\u003C\u002Fjats:p>\u003C\u002Fjats:sec>",{"EN":344},"Engineering pedagogical content knowledge: examining correlations with formal and informal preparation experiences",{"VOID":346},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00345-z",[348],"EN","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00345-z",[351,372],{"id":352,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":353,"affiliations":354,"properties":365},"17a201dc-0af3-4cad-8a8e-9fa99d6755df",[],[355],{"id":356,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":357,"properties":20},"47ce31a2-68f6-4313-ae56-da674d0f8cd0",{"id":358,"createTime":359,"updateTime":359,"relativeEntities":360,"slug":361,"properties":362,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"f3703754-c2bd-43a7-b18a-1f39ad48b39b","2024-04-16T22:39:57.068+00:00",[],"Career-and-Technical-Education-Program-California-State-University-San-Bernardino-San-Bernardino-USA",{"title":363},{"EN":364},"Career and Technical Education Program, California State University San Bernardino, San Bernardino, USA",{"openalex":366,"orcid":368,"title":370},{"VOID":367},"A5019482851",{"VOID":369},"https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-9704-6870",{"EN":371},"Andrew J. Hughes",{"id":373,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":374,"affiliations":375,"properties":386},"a6272bca-2321-462d-8901-5b22dc80d36a",[],[376],{"id":377,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":378,"properties":20},"ae605828-2a21-4a23-908b-302674187bdd",{"id":379,"createTime":380,"updateTime":380,"relativeEntities":381,"slug":382,"properties":383,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"69033fb0-cebc-4d62-9f0b-4bc7e0b81826","2024-04-16T22:39:57.056+00:00",[],"Department-of-Teacher-Education-The-Pennsylvania-State-University-Harrisburg-Harrisburg-USA",{"title":384},{"EN":385},"Department of Teacher Education, The Pennsylvania State University - Harrisburg, Harrisburg, USA",{"openalex":387,"orcid":389,"title":391},{"VOID":388},"A5044571114",{"VOID":390},"https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-1161-1443",{"EN":392},"Tyler S. Love",{"url":20,"publisher":394,"properties":429},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":395,"slug":10,"properties":396,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":400,"manageAffiliations":401,"indexDatabases":402,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":424,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":397,"title":398,"url":399},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[403,410,417],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":404,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":409,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":405,"label":406,"description":407,"key":85,"publicationTags":408,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":411,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":416,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":412,"label":413,"description":414,"key":101,"publicationTags":415,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":418,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":423,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":419,"label":420,"description":421,"key":66,"publicationTags":422,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":425,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":426,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":427,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":428,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":430,"issue":432},{"VOID":431},"9",{"VOID":433},"1",11,{"total":434,"publishYear":20,"statisticByYear":436},{"2022":270,"2023":238,"2024":181},"2022-12-01",2022,[440,444,448,451,455,459,463,466,470,473,476,480,484,488,492,496,499,503,507,511,515,519,523,527,531,535,539,542,546,550,554,558,562,566,569,572,576,580,584,587,590,594,598,601,605,609,613,616,620,624,627,631,635,639,642,646,650,654,657,661,665,669,672,675,679,682,686,689,692,696,700,704,707,710,714,718,722,725,729,732,736,739,743,747,750,753],{"id":20,"text":441,"url":20,"identifiers":442},"Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1405–1416.",{"doi":443},"10.1080\u002F09500690802187041",{"id":20,"text":445,"url":20,"identifiers":446},"Alamri, N. M., Aldahmash, A. H., & Alsharif, K. M. (2018). Emerging trends in research on math teacher professional development. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 91–106.",{"doi":447},"10.12973\u002Fiji.2018.1137a",{"id":20,"text":449,"url":20,"identifiers":450},"Ball, D. L. & Hill, H. C. (2008). Learning mathematics for teaching: Survey of elementary teachers. Report prepared for Learning Mathematics for Teaching Project, University of Michigan.",{},{"id":20,"text":452,"url":20,"identifiers":453},"Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: what makes it special. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.",{"doi":454},"10.1177\u002F0022487108324554",{"id":20,"text":456,"url":20,"identifiers":457},"Berisha, F., & Vula, E. (2021). Developing pre-service teachers STEM understanding and pedagogical practices. Frontiers in Education, 6, 585075. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffeduc.2021.585075",{"doi":458},"10.3389\u002Ffeduc.2021.585075",{"id":20,"text":460,"url":20,"identifiers":461},"Bloor, M., & Wood, F. (2006). Keywords in qualitative methods: a vocabulary of research concepts. Sage.",{"doi":462},"10.4135\u002F9781849209403",{"id":20,"text":464,"url":20,"identifiers":465},"Chai, C. S., Jong, M.S.-Y., Chen, M., & Zhou, W. (2019). Validating and modelling teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge for integrative science, technology, engineering and mathematics education. Educational Technology & Society, 22(3), 61–73.",{},{"id":20,"text":467,"url":20,"identifiers":468},"Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Jiao, Q. G. (2007). A mixed methods investigation of mixed methods sampling designs in social and health science research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 267–294. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F1558689807299526.",{"doi":469},"10.1177\u002F1558689807299526",{"id":20,"text":471,"url":20,"identifiers":472},"Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education.",{},{"id":20,"text":474,"url":20,"identifiers":475},"Cwik, L. C. (2012). The relation between middle school science teachers’ science content preparation, professional development, and pedagogical content knowledge and their attitudes and beliefs towards inquiry-based instruction. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations database. (3520547).",{},{"id":20,"text":477,"url":20,"identifiers":478},"Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8, 1–44.",{"doi":479},"10.14507\u002Fepaa.v8n1.2000",{"id":20,"text":481,"url":20,"identifiers":482},"De Miranda, M. A. (2018). Pedagogical content knowledge for technology education. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Handbook of technology education (pp. 685–698). Springer.",{"doi":483},"10.1007\u002F978-3-319-44687-5_47",{"id":20,"text":485,"url":20,"identifiers":486},"de Vries, M. J. (2015). Research challenges for the future. In P. J. Williams, A. Jones, & C. Buntting (Eds.), The future of technology education (pp. 253–269). Springer.",{"doi":487},"10.1007\u002F978-981-287-170-1_14",{"id":20,"text":489,"url":20,"identifiers":490},"de Vries, M. J., Gumaelius, L., & Skogh, I. (2016). Pre-university engineering education. Sense Publishers. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-94-6300-621-7",{"doi":491},"10.1007\u002F978-94-6300-621-7",{"id":20,"text":493,"url":20,"identifiers":494},"Denson, C. D., & Lammi, M. (2014). Building a framework for engineering design experiences in high school. Journal of Technology Education, 26(1), 75–87.",{"doi":495},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v26i1.a.5",{"id":20,"text":497,"url":20,"identifiers":498},"Design and Technology Teachers’ Association Australia (DATTA Australia). (2019). Technologies teacher shortage survey: National overview 2019. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.datta.wa.edu.au\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2019\u002F10\u002FTECHNOLOGY-TEACHER-SHORTAGE-SURVEY-REPORT-2019-DATTA-AUSTRALIA.pdf",{},{"id":20,"text":500,"url":20,"identifiers":501},"Doyle, A., Seery, N., Gumaelius, L., Canty, D., & Hartell, E. (2019). Reconceptualising PCK research in D&T education: proposing a methodological framework to investigate enacted practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(3), 473–491. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-018-9456-1",{"doi":502},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-018-9456-1",{"id":20,"text":504,"url":20,"identifiers":505},"Doyle, S. (2007). Member checking with older women: a framework for negotiating meaning. Health Care for Women International, 28(10), 888–908. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F07399330701615325",{"doi":506},"10.1080\u002F07399330701615325",{"id":20,"text":508,"url":20,"identifiers":509},"Ernst, J. V., & Williams, T. O. (2015). The “Who, what, and how conversation”: characteristics and responsibilities of current in-service technology and engineering educators. The Journal of Technology Studies, 41(1), 48–56. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21061\u002Fjots.v41i1.a.6",{"doi":510},"10.21061\u002Fjots.v41i1.a.6",{"id":20,"text":512,"url":20,"identifiers":513},"Fantz, T. D., & Katsioloudis, P. J. (2011). Analysis of engineering content within technology education programs. Journal of Technology Education, 23(1), 19–31.",{"doi":514},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v23i1.a.3",{"id":20,"text":516,"url":20,"identifiers":517},"Fox-Turnbull, W. (2006). The influences of teacher knowledge and authentic formative assessment on student learning in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(1), 53–77. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-005-2109-1.",{"doi":518},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-005-2109-1",{"id":20,"text":520,"url":20,"identifiers":521},"Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Pedagogical content knowledge: an introduction and orientation. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, 6(1), 3–17. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F0-306-47217-1_1",{"doi":522},"10.1007\u002F0-306-47217-1_1",{"id":20,"text":524,"url":20,"identifiers":525},"Graber, K. C. (1995). The influence of teacher education programs on the beliefs of student teachers: general pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and teacher education course work. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14(2), 157–178.",{"doi":526},"10.1123\u002Fjtpe.14.2.157",{"id":20,"text":528,"url":20,"identifiers":529},"Guimarães, L. M., & Lima, Rd. S. (2021). A systematic literature review of classroom observation protocols and their adequacy for engineering education in active learning environments. European Journal of Engineering Education. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F03043797.2021.1937946",{"doi":530},"10.1080\u002F03043797.2021.1937946",{"id":20,"text":532,"url":20,"identifiers":533},"Gumbo, M. T., & Williams, P. J. (2014). Discovering grade 8 technology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in the Tshwane district of Gauteng province. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(3), 479–488.",{"doi":534},"10.1080\u002F09751122.2014.11890159",{"id":20,"text":536,"url":20,"identifiers":537},"Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372–400.",{"doi":538},"10.5951\u002Fjresematheduc.39.4.0372",{"id":20,"text":540,"url":20,"identifiers":541},"Howell, D. C. (2007). Statistical methods for psychology (6th ed.). Thomson Wadsworth.",{},{"id":20,"text":543,"url":20,"identifiers":544},"Hughes, A. J. (2017). Educational complexity and professional development: teachers’ need for metacognitive awareness. Journal of Technology Education, 29(1), 25–44.",{"doi":545},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v29i1.a.2",{"id":20,"text":547,"url":20,"identifiers":548},"Hughes, A. J. (2019). Measuring metacognitive awareness: applying multiple, triangulated, and mixed-methods approaches for an encompassing measure of metacognitive awareness. Journal of Technology Education, 30(2), 3–20.",{"doi":549},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v30i2.a.1",{"id":20,"text":551,"url":20,"identifiers":552},"Hughes, A. J., & Denson, C. (2021). Scaffolding middle and high school students’ engineering design experiences: quality problem-SCOPEing promoting successful solutions. Journal of Technology Education, 32(2), 4–20.",{"doi":553},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v32i2.a.1",{"id":20,"text":555,"url":20,"identifiers":556},"Hughes, A. J., & Partida, E. (2020). Promoting pre-service STEM education teachers’ metacognitive awareness: professional development designed to improve teacher metacognitive awareness. Journal of Technology Education, 32(1), 5–20.",{"doi":557},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v32i1.a.1",{"id":20,"text":559,"url":20,"identifiers":560},"Hume, A., & Berry, A. (2011). Constructing CoRes—a strategy for building PCK in pre-service science teacher education. Research in Science Education, 41(3), 341–355. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11165-010-9168-3",{"doi":561},"10.1007\u002Fs11165-010-9168-3",{"id":20,"text":563,"url":20,"identifiers":564},"Hynes, M. M. (2012). Middle-school teachers’ understanding and teaching of the engineering design process: a look at subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(3), 345–360. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-010-9142-4",{"doi":565},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-010-9142-4",{"id":20,"text":567,"url":20,"identifiers":568},"Hynes, M. M., Crismond, D., & Brizuela, B. (2010). Middle-school teachers’ use and development of engineering subject matter knowledge: Analysis of three cases. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education. AC 2010-447.",{},{"id":20,"text":570,"url":20,"identifiers":571},"International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA). (2020). Standards for technological and engineering literacy: the role of technology and engineering in STEM education. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.iteea.org\u002Fstel.aspx",{},{"id":20,"text":573,"url":20,"identifiers":574},"Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2004). Enhancing practicing primary school teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(2), 121–140. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1605\u002F01.301-0011005022.2010",{"doi":575},"10.1605\u002F01.301-0011005022.2010",{"id":20,"text":577,"url":20,"identifiers":578},"Jones, L. C. R., McDermott, H. J., Tyrer, J. R., & Zanker, N. P. (2021). The effect of teachers’ confidence on technology and engineering curriculum provision. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(1), 117–137.",{"doi":579},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-019-09542-4",{"id":20,"text":581,"url":20,"identifiers":582},"Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1–11. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-016-0046-z",{"doi":583},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-016-0046-z",{"id":20,"text":585,"url":20,"identifiers":586},"Kelley, T. R., Knowles, J. G., Han, J., & Trice, A. N. (2021). Models of integrated STEM education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 22(1), 34–45.",{},{"id":20,"text":588,"url":20,"identifiers":589},"Khader, F. R. (2012). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and actual classroom practices in social studies instruction. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(1), 73–92.",{},{"id":20,"text":591,"url":20,"identifiers":592},"Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204.",{"doi":593},"10.1080\u002F03057260903142285",{"id":20,"text":595,"url":20,"identifiers":596},"Kind, V., & Chan, K. K. H. (2019). Resolving the amalgam: connecting pedagogical content knowledge, content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 964–978. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09500693.2019.1584931",{"doi":597},"10.1080\u002F09500693.2019.1584931",{"id":20,"text":599,"url":20,"identifiers":600},"Krauss, S., Baumert, J., & Blum, W. (2008). Secondary mathematics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge: validation of the COACTIV constructs. The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(5), 873–892.",{},{"id":20,"text":602,"url":20,"identifiers":603},"Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.2307\u002F2529310",{"doi":604},"10.2307\u002F2529310",{"id":20,"text":606,"url":20,"identifiers":607},"Lau, M., & Multani, S. (2018). Engineering STEM teacher learning: using a museum-based field experience to foster STEM teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for engineering. In S. Uzzo, S. Graves, E. Shay, M. Harford, & R. Thompson (Eds.), Pedagogical content knowledge in STEM: research to practice (pp. 195–213). Springer. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-319-97475-0_11",{"doi":608},"10.1007\u002F978-3-319-97475-0_11",{"id":20,"text":610,"url":20,"identifiers":611},"Litowitz, L. S. (2014). A curricular analysis of undergraduate technology & engineering teacher preparation programs in the United States. Journal of Technology Education, 25(2), 73–84.",{"doi":612},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v25i2.a.5",{"id":20,"text":614,"url":20,"identifiers":615},"Lomas, G., Nicholas, P. (2009). The impact of a university course focusing on PCK and MCK: Does teachers’ classroom practice reflect the professional development experience? Findings from the New Zealand numeracy development projects, 189-197. Report prepared for the New Zealand Ministry of Education.",{},{"id":20,"text":617,"url":20,"identifiers":618},"Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2012). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Sense Publishers.",{"doi":619},"10.1007\u002F978-94-6091-821-6",{"id":20,"text":621,"url":20,"identifiers":622},"Loughran, J., Milroy, P., Berry, A., Gunstone, R., & Mulhall, P. (2001). Documenting science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge through PaP-eRs. Research in Science Education, 31(2), 289–307. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1023\u002FA:1013124409567.",{"doi":623},"10.1023\u002FA:1013124409567",{"id":20,"text":625,"url":20,"identifiers":626},"Love, T. S. (2013). Theoretical underpinnings toward assessing science pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of technology educators. In J. Williams & D. Gedera (Eds.), Technology education for the future—a play on sustainability. Proceedings of the 27th Pupil's Attitude Toward Technology Conference (pp. 291–296) University of Waikato.",{},{"id":20,"text":628,"url":20,"identifiers":629},"Love, T. S. (2015). Examining the demographics and preparation experiences of foundations of technology teachers. The Journal of Technology Studies, 41(1), 58–71. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21061\u002Fjots.v41i1.a.7",{"doi":630},"10.21061\u002Fjots.v41i1.a.7",{"id":20,"text":632,"url":20,"identifiers":633},"Love, T. S., & Love, Z. J. (2022). The teacher recruitment crisis: examining influential recruitment factors from a United States technology and engineering teacher preparation program. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-022-09727-4",{"doi":634},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-022-09727-4",{"id":20,"text":636,"url":20,"identifiers":637},"Love, T. S., & Loveland, T. (2014). Exploring the proposition of a joint conference between state science, and technology and engineering education associations. Journal of Technology Education, 26(1), 2–21. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21061\u002Fjte.v26i1.a.1",{"doi":638},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v26i1.a.1",{"id":20,"text":640,"url":20,"identifiers":641},"Love, T. S., & Roy, K. R. (2022). Safer engineering and CTE instruction: a national STEM education imperative. International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.iteea.org\u002FSafetyReport.aspx",{},{"id":20,"text":643,"url":20,"identifiers":644},"Love, T. S., Roy, K. R., Gill, M., & Harrell, M. (in press). Examining the influence that safety training format has on educators’ perceptions of safer practices in makerspaces and integrated STEM labs. Journal of Safety Research, 82(2022).",{"doi":645},"10.1007\u002Fs10956-022-09955-2",{"id":20,"text":647,"url":20,"identifiers":648},"Love, T. S., & Wells, J. G. (2018). Examining correlations between preparation experiences of US technology and engineering educators and their teaching of science content and practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(2), 395–416. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-017-9395-2",{"doi":649},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-017-9395-2",{"id":20,"text":651,"url":20,"identifiers":652},"Love, T. S., Wells, J. G., & Parkes, K. A. (2017). Examining the teaching of science, and technology and engineering content and practices: an instrument modification study. Journal of Technology Education, 29(1), 45–66. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21061\u002Fjte.v29i1.a.3",{"doi":653},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v29i1.a.3",{"id":20,"text":655,"url":20,"identifiers":656},"Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: the construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Kluwer Academic Publishers.",{},{"id":20,"text":658,"url":20,"identifiers":659},"Manizade, A. G., & Mason, M. M. (2011). Using Delphi methodology to design assessments of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76(2), 183–207. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10649-010-9276-z",{"doi":660},"10.1007\u002Fs10649-010-9276-z",{"id":20,"text":662,"url":20,"identifiers":663},"Martin, G., & Ritz, J. (2014). Comparative analysis of research priorities for technology education. Australasian Journal of Technology Education, 1(2014), 9–17.",{"doi":664},"10.15663\u002Fajte.v1i1.12",{"id":20,"text":666,"url":20,"identifiers":667},"National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: understanding the status and improving the prospects. National Academies Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17226\u002F12635",{"doi":668},"10.17226\u002F12635",{"id":20,"text":670,"url":20,"identifiers":671},"NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. National Academies Press.",{},{"id":20,"text":673,"url":20,"identifiers":674},"Niiranen, S., Ikonen, P., Rissanen, T., & Rasinen, A. (2020). Development of teacher education students’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) through reflection and a learning-by-doing approach in craft and technology education. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 25(3), 35–46.",{},{"id":20,"text":676,"url":20,"identifiers":677},"Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F02602930701293231",{"doi":678},"10.1080\u002F02602930701293231",{"id":20,"text":680,"url":20,"identifiers":681},"Özden, M. (2008). The effect of content knowledge on pedagogical content knowledge: the case of teaching phases of matters. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practices, 8(2), 633–645.",{},{"id":20,"text":683,"url":20,"identifiers":684},"Park, S., Jang, J., Chen, Y., & Jung, J. (2011). Is pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) necessary for reformed science teaching? Evidence from an empirical study. Research in Science Education, 41(2), 245–260. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11165-009-9163-8",{"doi":685},"10.1007\u002Fs11165-009-9163-8",{"id":20,"text":687,"url":20,"identifiers":688},"Parker, C. E., Pillai, S., & Roschelle, J. (2016). Next generation STEM learning for all: a report from the NSF supported forum. Education Development Center.",{},{"id":20,"text":690,"url":20,"identifiers":691},"Perez, B. (2013). Teacher quality and teaching quality of 7th-grade algebra I honors teachers. (Order No. 3571434) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida Atlantic University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.",{},{"id":20,"text":693,"url":20,"identifiers":694},"Phillips, K. R., De Miranda, M. A., & Shin, J. T. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge and industrial design education. The Journal of Technology Studies, 35(2), 47–55.",{"doi":695},"10.21061\u002Fjots.v35i2.a.5",{"id":20,"text":697,"url":20,"identifiers":698},"Reinsfield, E., & Lee, K. (2021). Exploring the technology teacher shortage in New Zealand: the implications for quality teaching and learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-021-09668-4",{"doi":699},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-021-09668-4",{"id":20,"text":701,"url":20,"identifiers":702},"Rohaan, E. J., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. G. (2011). Exploring the underlying components of primary school teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for technology education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 7(4), 293–304.",{"doi":703},"10.12973\u002Fejmste\u002F75199",{"id":20,"text":705,"url":20,"identifiers":706},"Rose, M. A., Shumway, S., Carter, V., & Brown, J. (2015). Identifying characteristics of technology and engineering teachers striving for excellence using a modified Delphi. Journal of Technology Education, 26(2), 2–21.",{},{"id":20,"text":708,"url":20,"identifiers":709},"Sawada, D., Piburn, M., Falconer, K., Turley, J., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP) (ACEPT technical report No. IN00-1). Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers, Arizona State University.",{},{"id":20,"text":711,"url":20,"identifiers":712},"Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: the reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 245–253. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.1949-8594.2002.tb17883.x",{"doi":713},"10.1111\u002Fj.1949-8594.2002.tb17883.x",{"id":20,"text":715,"url":20,"identifiers":716},"Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1), 113–125.",{"doi":717},"10.1023\u002FA:1003044231033",{"id":20,"text":719,"url":20,"identifiers":720},"Settlage, J. (2013). On acknowledging PCK’s shortcomings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(1), 1–12. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10972-012-9332-x.",{"doi":721},"10.1007\u002Fs10972-012-9332-x",{"id":20,"text":723,"url":20,"identifiers":724},"Sheskin, D. J. (2011). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (5th ed.). Chapman and Hall.",{},{"id":20,"text":726,"url":20,"identifiers":727},"Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.",{"doi":728},"10.17763\u002Fhaer.57.1.j463w79r56455411",{"id":20,"text":730,"url":20,"identifiers":731},"Shulman, L. S., & Hutchings, P. (2004). Teaching as community property: essays on higher education. Jossey-Bass.",{},{"id":20,"text":733,"url":20,"identifiers":734},"Taylor, J. A., Getty, S. R., Kowalski, S. M., Wilson, C. D., Carlson, J., & Van Scotter, P. (2015). An efficacy trial of research-based curriculum materials with curriculum-based professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 984–1017. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0002831215585962",{"doi":735},"10.3102\u002F0002831215585962",{"id":20,"text":737,"url":20,"identifiers":738},"Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2006). A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 12–28.",{},{"id":20,"text":740,"url":20,"identifiers":741},"Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(3), 398–405. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fnhs.12048",{"doi":742},"10.1111\u002Fnhs.12048",{"id":20,"text":744,"url":20,"identifiers":745},"Vossen, T. E., Henze, I., De Vries, M. J., & Van Driel, J. H. (2020). Finding the connection between research and design: the knowledge development of STEM teachers in a professional learning community. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(2), 295–320. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-019-09507-7",{"doi":746},"10.1007\u002Fs10798-019-09507-7",{"id":20,"text":748,"url":20,"identifiers":749},"Wells, J. G. (2008). STEM education: the potential of technology education. Paper presented at the 95th Mississippi Valley Technology Teacher Education Conference, St. Louis, MO, 1–21. http:\u002F\u002Fwww.mississippivalley.org\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2015\u002F12\u002FWells_2008_MississippiValleyConference_STEM-ED_TE-Potential.pdf",{},{"id":20,"text":751,"url":20,"identifiers":752},"Wells, J. G. (2016). PIRPOSAL model of integrative STEM education: conceptual and pedagogical framework for classroom implementation. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 75(6), 12–19.",{},{"id":20,"text":754,"url":20,"identifiers":755},"Williams, J., & Lockley, J. (2012). Using CoRes to develop the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of early career science and technology teachers. Journal of Technology Education, 24(1), 34–53.",{"doi":756},"10.21061\u002Fjte.v24i1.a.3",{"id":758,"createTime":759,"updateTime":759,"relativeEntities":760,"slug":20,"properties":761,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":770,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":771,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":862,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":903,"publishYear":904,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"e06356cb-39aa-4970-bb50-b2736a66055b","2023-12-13T23:39:37.288+00:00",[],{"references":762,"abstract":764,"title":766,"doi":768},{"VOID":763},"American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (2013). The changing teacher preparation profession: a report from AACTE's professional educational data system (PEDS). http:\u002F\u002Fblogs.edweek.org\u002Fedweek\u002Fcharterschoice\u002FAACTE.pdf. Accessed March 22 2014.\nBagiati, A. (2011). Early engineering: a developmentally appropriate curriculum for young children (Dissertation). West Lafayette: Purdue University.\nBagiati, A, & Evangelou, D. (2008). An examination of web-based P-12 engineering curricula: issues of pedagogical and engineering content fidelity. In Proceedings of the Research in Engineering Education Symposium.\nBagiati, A, Evangelou, D (in press (a)). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher's experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1).\nBagiati, A, Evangelou, D, (in press (b)) Practicing engineering while building with blocks: identifying engineering thinking. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(1).\nBagiati, A, Yoon, SY, Evangelou, D, Kaloustian, G, Cekic, O, Zhu, J Magana, AJ (2011). Engineering in early education: A multicultural comparison of web resources. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada.\nBagiati, A, Yoon, SY, Evangelou, D, & Ngambeki, I. (2010). Engineering curricula in early education: Describing the landscape of open resources. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 12(2), 1–15.\nBairaktarova, D, Evangelou, D, Bagiati, A, & Dobbs-Oates, J (2012). The role of classroom artifacts in developmental engineering. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX.\nBecker, SB. (2010). Why don't young people want to become engineers? Rational reasons for disappointing decisions. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(4), 349–366.\nBorko, H, Whitcomb, J, & Liston, D. (2009). Wicked problems and other thoughts on issues of technology and teacher learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 3–7.\nBrophy, S & Evangelou, D (2007). Precursors to engineering thinking (PET). In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii. June 24–27.\nBrophy, S, Klein, S, Portsmore, M, & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.\nBybee, RW. (2011). K-12 engineering education standards: opportunities and barriers. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(5), 21–29.\nCampos, BP, Kallos, D, & Stephenson, J. (2000). Green paper on teacher education in Europe. Urnéa, Sweden: TNTEE.\nCopple, C, & Bredekamp, S (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for Education of Young Children.\nDimopoulos, C, Katzis, K, & Hawwash, K. (2011). Attracting students to engineering education studies: a survey of practices. Lisbon, Portugal: European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI).\nGiordan, A. (2010). Nouveaux contenus, nouvelles pratiques, peut-on mutualiser les problèmes et les acquis? In A. Hasni, & J. Lebeaume (Éds). Nouveaux enjeux de l’éducation scientifique et technologique: visées, contenus, compétences et pratiques (pp. 17-49). Ottawa : Presses Universitaires.\nGounari, P. (2009). Rethinking critical literacy in the new information age. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 6(3), 148–175.\nGraziano, WG, Habashi, MM, Evangelou, D, & Ngambeki, I. (2012). Orientations and motivations: are you a “people person”, a “thing person”, or both? Motivation and Emotion, 36(4), 465–477.\nHedtke, R, Kahlert, J, & Schwier, V. (2001). Service industry for teachers? Using the Internet to plan lessons. European journal of education, 36(2), 189–193.\nHsu, M-C, Purzer, S, & Cardella, ME. (2011). Elementary teachers' views about teaching design, engineering, and technology. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1(2), 31–39.\nJohnstone, S. (2005). Open educational resources serve the world. Sharing educational resources over the Internet provides multiple benefits, from academic collaboration to economic development. Boulder, Colorado: EDUCAUSE Quarterly.\nJung, I. (2005). ICT-pedagogy integration in teacher training: application cases worldwide. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 94–101.\nKatehi, L, Pearson, G, & Feder, M. (2009). The status and nature of K-12 engineering education in the United States. The Bridge, 3(3), 5–10.\nKim, KS, Hong, JH, Huh, CS, Moon, DY, Kim, MY, Lee, CH, Kim, KY, Choi, EK, & Kim, YM. (2013). A study on the reinforcement strategies of engineering education in elementary and secondary school [초중등 공학교육 강화방안 정책연구]. Daejeon, South Korea: Korea Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [한국교육과학기술부], Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science & Creativity [한국과학창의재단].\nKuenzi, JJ. (2008). CRS report for congress: science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: background, federal policy, and legislative action. Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, RL33434, Washington, DC. Retrieved on December 30th 2014 from https:\u002F\u002Fwww.hsdl.org\u002F?view&did=715973\nLebeaume, J. (2011). Integration of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Is This Curricular Revolution Really Possible in France? Design and Technology Education, 16(1), 47–52.\nLock, JV. (2006). A new image: online communities to facilitate teacher professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(4), 663–678.\nMoore, TJ. (2010). Implementing K-12 engineering standards through STEM integration. In National Science Foundation (NSF) Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Program, Engineering Education Division, Award # 1055382.\nNational Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.\nPerrault, AM (2007). An exploratory study of biology teachers' online information seeking practices. School Library Media Research (pp. 10).\nPimienta, D, Prado, D, & Blanco, A. (2009). Twelve years of measuring linguistic diversity in the Internet: balance and perspectives. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.\nPunie, Y. (2012). Preface. In Joint Research Centre of the European Commission Innovating Learning: key elements for developing creative classroom in Europe (p. 1). Luxemburg: Publications Office of the European Union.\nRecker, M. (2006). Perspectives on teachers as digital library users: consumers, contributors, and designers. D-Lib Magazine, 12(9), 2.\nRecker, M, Dorward, J, & Nelson, LM. (2004). Discovery and use of online learning resources: case study findings. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 7, 93–104.\nSanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 20, 20–26.\nShulman, LS. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.\nToombs, WE, & Tierney, WG. (1993). Curriculum definitions and reference points. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 8(3), 175–195. Retrieved from http:\u002F\u002Fwww.ascd.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fjcs\u002Fspring1993\u002FCurriculum-Definitions-and-Reference-Points.aspx.\nWang, H-H, Moore Tamara, J, Roehrig, GH, & Park, MS. (2011). STEM integration: teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 1, 2.\nWatt, HM, Richardson, PW, & Pietsch, J. (2007). Choosing to teach in the “STEM” disciplines: characteristics and motivations of science, ICT, and mathematics teachers. In mathematics: essential research, essential practice. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (2nd ed., pp. 795–804). Adelaide: MERGA.\nWiggins, G, & McTighe, J. (1997). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.\nWiggins, G, & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.\nYaşar, Ş, Baker, D, Robinson-Kurpius, S, Krause, S, & Roberts, C. (2006). Development of a survey to assess K-12 teachers' perceptions of engineers and familiarity with teaching design, engineering, and technology. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(3), 205–216.",{"EN":765},"The newly formed discipline of engineering education is addressing the need to (a) enhance STEM education for precollege students and (b) identify optimum ways to introduce engineering content starting, perhaps, from the early ages. Introducing engineering at the Prekindergarten through 12th grade (PreK-12) education level requires significant changes in teacher preparation and support. It highlights the need for developing developmentally appropriate content knowledge and pedagogical methods, thus revealing the challenges of preparing teachers to incorporate this type of knowledge base into their practice. Although professional development offered by universities, school districts, and other educational entities provides the primary source of formal learning tools for teachers, an increasing number of teachers also utilize other informal web-based resources regularly. This paper examines available PreK-12 engineering web resources offered by entities formally related to education in seven different languages, namely Arabic, Chinese (Mandarin), English, French, Greek, Korean, and Spanish. Findings showed how different educational systems designated different attention to the entry level ages when introducing engineering content. Differences in the terminology used to identify STEM resources for introducing these topics also became apparent. Similarities suggest that a large number of resources available on the web were originating in all researched languages. However, the developmental appropriateness and content validity of many of these resources remained questionable in many cases. In general, there was a plethora of isolated activities and lesson plans but significantly fewer complete engineering curricula available to teachers on the web. This study presents a comparative analysis of the international landscape of PreK-12 engineering education and provides guidelines and samples of state-of-the art resources in each language for teachers interested in introducing their students to engineering as a reliable starting point towards PreK-12 engineering information gathering.",{"EN":767},"The landscape of PreK-12 engineering online resources for teachers: global trends",{"VOID":769},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-014-0015-3","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-014-0015-3",[772,787,802,817,832,847],{"id":773,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":774,"affiliations":775,"properties":784},"1b534c4f-165d-467b-acce-a9f316f8493d",[183],[776],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":777,"properties":20},{"id":778,"createTime":779,"updateTime":779,"relativeEntities":780,"slug":20,"properties":781,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"999d58f6-659c-4cb5-bd4a-bc81de812ed5","2023-12-13T23:39:37.313+00:00",[],{"title":782},{"VI":783},"Department of Education Sciences in Early Childhood, Democritus University, Alexandroupolis, Greece",{"title":785},{"VI":786},"Demetra Evangelou",{"id":788,"sortIndex":221,"researcher":20,"roles":789,"affiliations":790,"properties":799},"1e6f01e5-0314-4380-94d2-274c868f5406",[183],[791],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":792,"properties":20},{"id":793,"createTime":794,"updateTime":794,"relativeEntities":795,"slug":20,"properties":796,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"43a5e394-1cbc-4197-a9e8-724b28887feb","2023-12-26T03:47:31.981+00:00",[],{"title":797},{"VI":798},"Department of Education, Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon",{"title":800},{"VI":801},"Garene Kaloustian",{"id":803,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":804,"affiliations":805,"properties":814},"9bcbbfa6-9333-4b7a-8424-0c4285e7f7a7",[183],[806],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":807,"properties":20},{"id":808,"createTime":809,"updateTime":809,"relativeEntities":810,"slug":20,"properties":811,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"21c3656d-c155-4117-8375-676adc1d38e5","2023-12-13T23:39:37.296+00:00",[],{"title":812},{"VI":813},"MIT-SUTD Collaboration Office, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA",{"title":815},{"VI":816},"Aikaterini Bagiati",{"id":818,"sortIndex":238,"researcher":20,"roles":819,"affiliations":820,"properties":829},"ecbfd0dd-0e92-4d77-84be-768502abf252",[183],[821],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":822,"properties":20},{"id":823,"createTime":824,"updateTime":824,"relativeEntities":825,"slug":20,"properties":826,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"e1de311f-33dd-4b30-b6ba-822d0ef53736","2023-12-13T23:39:37.337+00:00",[],{"title":827},{"VI":828},"Graduate School of Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai City, P. R. China",{"title":830},{"VI":831},"Jiabin Zhu",{"id":833,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":834,"affiliations":835,"properties":844},"f60ecfe7-9460-47e6-b7ac-c09443166396",[183],[836],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":837,"properties":20},{"id":838,"createTime":839,"updateTime":839,"relativeEntities":840,"slug":20,"properties":841,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"19bf62a2-3a93-42be-bf9a-a928400d2a30","2023-12-13T23:39:37.305+00:00",[],{"title":842},{"VI":843},"Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA",{"title":845},{"VI":846},"So Yoon Yoon",{"id":848,"sortIndex":270,"researcher":20,"roles":849,"affiliations":850,"properties":859},"cdf05b27-a840-4a23-99c0-f8c284415c71",[183],[851],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":852,"properties":20},{"id":853,"createTime":854,"updateTime":854,"relativeEntities":855,"slug":20,"properties":856,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"372c1523-b285-4bff-aa40-37fb97203430","2023-12-13T23:39:37.321+00:00",[],{"title":857},{"VI":858},"Computer and Information Technology Department, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA",{"title":860},{"VI":861},"Alejandra Magana",{"url":770,"publisher":863,"properties":898},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":864,"slug":10,"properties":865,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":869,"manageAffiliations":870,"indexDatabases":871,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":893,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":866,"title":867,"url":868},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[872,879,886],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":873,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":878,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":874,"label":875,"description":876,"key":85,"publicationTags":877,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":880,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":885,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":881,"label":882,"description":883,"key":101,"publicationTags":884,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":887,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":892,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":888,"label":889,"description":890,"key":66,"publicationTags":891,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":894,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":895,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":896,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":897,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":899,"pages":901},{"VOID":900},"2",{"VOID":902},"1-15","2015-01-15",2015,{"id":906,"createTime":907,"updateTime":907,"relativeEntities":908,"slug":20,"properties":909,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":918,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":919,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1031,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1070,"publishYear":438,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"57de1fcf-8f5c-417a-bb62-b7b2a5417fcc","2023-12-29T23:35:34.497+00:00",[],{"references":910,"abstract":912,"title":914,"doi":916},{"VOID":911},"Andrews, T. C., & Lemons, P. P. (2015). It’s personal: biology instructors prioritize personal evidence over empirical evidence in teaching decisions. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(1), ar7. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.14-05-0084\nApkarian, N., Henderson, C., Stains, M., Raker, J., Johnson, E., & Dancy, M. (2021). What really impacts the use of active learning in undergraduate STEM education? Results from a national survey of chemistry, mathematics, and physics instructors. PLoS ONE, 16(2), e0247544. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1371\u002Fjournal.pone.0247544\nApkarian, N., & Kirin, D. (2017). Progress through calculus: Census survey technical report. Mathematical Association of America. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.maa.org\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002FPtC%20Technical%20Report_Final.pdf\nApkarian, N., & Rasmussen, C. (2017). Mathematics instruction leadership in undergraduate departments. In A. Weinberg, C. Rasmussen, J. Rabin, M. Wawro, & S. Brown, Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. http:\u002F\u002Fsigmaa.maa.org\u002Frume\u002FRUME20.pdf\nApkarian, N., Smith, W. M., Vroom, K., Voigt, M., Gehrtz, J., Team, P. P., & Team, S. P. (2019). X-PIPS-M survey suite. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.maa.org\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002FXPIPSM%20Summary%20Document.pdf\nAragón, O. R., Eddy, S. L., & Graham, M. J. (2018). Faculty beliefs about intelligence are related to the adoption of active-learning practices. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(3), ar47. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.17-05-0084\nArmbruster, P., Patel, M., Johnson, E., & Weiss, M. (2009). Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 8(3), 203–213. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.09-03-0025\nAustin, A. E., & Sorcinelli, M. D. (2013). The future of faculty development: where are we going? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2013(133), 85–97. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftl.20048\nBahník, Š, & Vranka, M. A. (2017). Growth mindset is not associated with scholastic aptitude in a large sample of university applicants. Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 139–143. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.paid.2017.05.046\nBaker, L. A., Chakraverty, D., Columbus, L., Feig, A. L., Jenks, W. S., Pilarz, M., Stains, M., Waterman, R., & Wesemann, J. L. (2014). Cottrell Scholars Collaborative New Faculty Workshop: professional development for new chemistry faculty and initial assessment of its efficacy. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(11), 1874–1881. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Fed500547n\nBallen, C. J., Wieman, C., Salehi, S., Searle, J. B., & Zamudio, K. R. (2017). Enhancing diversity in undergraduate science: self-efficacy drives performance gains with active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education, 16(4), ar56. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.16-12-0344\nBates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.18637\u002Fjss.v067.i01\nBathgate, M. E., Aragón, O. R., Cavanagh, A. J., Frederick, J., & Graham, M. J. (2019a). Supports: a key factor in faculty implementation of evidence-based teaching. CBE Life Sciences Education, 18(2), ar22. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.17-12-0272\nBathgate, M. E., Aragón, O. R., Cavanagh, A. J., Waterhouse, J. K., Frederick, J., & Graham, M. J. (2019b). Perceived supports and evidence-based teaching in college STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 11. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-019-0166-3\nBauer, C., Libby, R. D., Scharberg, M., & Reider, D. (2013). Transformative research-based pedagogy workshops for chemistry graduate students and postdocs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(2), 36–43.\nBazett, T., & Clough, C. L. (2021). Course coordination as an avenue to departmental culture change. Primus, 31(3–5), 467–482. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10511970.2020.1793853\nBeatty, I. D., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2005). Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. American Journal of Physics, 74(1), 31–39. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1119\u002F1.2121753\nBeichner, R. J. (2008). The SCALE-UP project: A student-centered active learning environment for undergraduate programs. National Academy of Sciences. https:\u002F\u002Fsites.nationalacademies.org\u002Fcs\u002Fgroups\u002Fdbassesite\u002Fdocuments\u002Fwebpage\u002Fdbasse_072628.pdf\nBeichner, R. J., Saul, J. M., Abbott, D. S., Morse, J. J., Deardorff, D. L., Allain, R. J., Bonham, S. W., Dancy, M. H., & Risley, J. S. (2007). The Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) project (Vol. 1). American Association of Physics Teachers. http:\u002F\u002Fwww.per-central.org\u002Fdocument\u002FServeFile.cfm?ID=4517\nBenabentos, R., Hazari, Z., Stanford, J. S., Potvin, G., Marsteller, P., Thompson, K. V., Cassone, V. M., Murasko, D., & Kramer, L. (2020). Measuring the implementation of student-centered teaching strategies in lower- and upper-division STEM courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 69(4), 342–356. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10899995.2020.1768005\nBettinger, E., Ludvigsen, S., Rege, M., Solli, I. F., & Yeager, D. (2018). Increasing perseverance in math: evidence from a field experiment in Norway. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 146, 1–15. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.jebo.2017.11.032\nBian, L., Leslie, S.-J., Murphy, M. C., & Cimpian, A. (2018). Messages about brilliance undermine women’s interest in educational and professional opportunities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 404–420. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.jesp.2017.11.006\nBlackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.1467-8624.2007.00995.x\nBodzin, A. M., & Beerer, K. M. (2003). Promoting inquiry-based science instruction: the validation of the science teacher inquiry rubric (stir). Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15(2), 39. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002FBF03173842\nBorda, E., Schumacher, E., Hanley, D., Geary, E., Warren, S., Ipsen, C., & Stredicke, L. (2020). Initial implementation of active learning strategies in large, lecture STEM courses: lessons learned from a multi-institutional, interdisciplinary STEM faculty development program. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 4. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-0203-2\nBressoud, D., & Rasmussen, C. (2015). Seven characteristics of successful calculus programs. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 62(2), 144–146. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1090\u002Fnoti1209\nBroda, M., Yun, J., Schneider, B., Yeager, D. S., Walton, G. M., & Diemer, M. (2018). Reducing inequality in academic success for incoming college students: a randomized trial of growth mindset and belonging interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 11(3), 317–338. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F19345747.2018.1429037\nBrownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: lack of training, time, incentives, and tensions with professional identity? CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339–346. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.12-09-0163\nBurke, K. A., Greenbowe, T. J., & Gelder, J. I. (2004). The multi-initiative dissemination project workshops: who attends them and how effective are they? Journal of Chemical Education, 81(6), 897. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Fed081p897\nBurnette, J. L., O’Boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: a meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 139(3), 655–701. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002Fa0029531\nCanning, E. A., Muenks, K., Green, D. J., & Murphy, M. C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. Science Advances, 5(2), eaau4734. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fsciadv.aau4734\nCohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.4324\u002F9780203771587\nCohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Pyschological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002F0033-2909.112.1.155\nCohen, J., & Goldhaber, D. (2016). Building a more complete understanding of teacher evaluation using classroom observations. Educational Researcher, 45(6), 378–387. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0013189X16659442\nCommon Data Set Initiative. (n.d.). Retrieved 6 July 2021 from https:\u002F\u002Fcommondataset.org\nCoppola, B. P. (2016). Broad & capacious: a new norm for instructional development in a research setting. Change the Magazine of Higher Learning, 48(2), 34–43. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F00091383.2016.1163206\nCotner, S., Loper, J., Walker, J. D., & Brooks, D. C. (2013). “It’s not you, it’s the room”—are the high-tech, active learning classrooms worth it? Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(6), 82–88.\nCox, B. E., McIntosh, K. L., Reason, R. D., & Terenzini, P. T. (2011). A culture of teaching: policy, perception, and practice in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 52(8), 808–829. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11162-011-9223-6\nDancy, M., Lau, A. C., Rundquist, A., & Henderson, C. (2019). Faculty online learning communities: a model for sustained teaching transformation. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(2), 020147. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1103\u002FPhysRevPhysEducRes.15.020147\nDerting, T. L., Ebert-May, D., Henkel, T. P., Maher, J. M., Arnold, B., & Passmore, H. A. (2016). Assessing faculty professional development in STEM higher education: sustainability of outcomes. Science Advances, 2(3), e1501422. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fsciadv.1501422\nDesimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 3–12. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F00405841.2016.1241947\nDrinkwater, M. J., Gannaway, D., Sheppard, K., Davis, M. J., Wegener, M. J., Bowen, W. P., & Corney, J. F. (2014). Managing active learning processes in large first year physics classes: the advantages of an integrated approach. Teaching & Learning Inquiry THe ISSOTL Journal, 2(2), 75–90. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.2979\u002Fteachlearninqu.2.2.75\nDurham, M. F., Knight, J. K., Bremers, E. K., DeFreece, J. D., Paine, A. R., & Couch, B. A. (2018). Student, instructor, and observer agreement regarding frequencies of scientific teaching practices using the Measurement Instrument for Scientific Teaching-Observable (MISTO). International Journal of STEM Education, 5, 31. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-018-0128-1\nDweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press.\nDweck, C. S. (2019). The choice to make a difference. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(1), 21–25. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F1745691618804180\nDweck, C. S., Chiu, C.-Y., & Hong, Y.-Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and reactions: a word from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 267–285. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002Fs15327965pli0604_1\nDweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002F0033-295X.95.2.256\nEbert-May, D., Derting, T. L., Henkel, T. P., Middlemis Maher, J., Momsen, J. L., Arnold, B., & Passmore, H. A. (2015). Breaking the cycle: future faculty begin teaching with learner-centered strategies after professional development. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(2), ar22. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.14-12-0222\nEmerson, K. T. U., & Murphy, M. C. (2014). A company I can trust? Organizational lay theories moderate stereotype threat for women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 295–307. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0146167214564969\nErdmann, R., Miller, K., & Stains, M. (2020). Exploring STEM postsecondary instructors’ accounts of instructional planning and revisions. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 7. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00206-7\nFairweather, J. (2008). Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education. https:\u002F\u002Fsites.nationalacademies.org\u002Fcs\u002Fgroups\u002Fdbassesite\u002Fdocuments\u002Fwebpage\u002Fdbasse_072637.pdf\nFairweather, J. S., & Rhoads, R. A. (1995). Teaching and the faculty role: enhancing the commitment to instruction in American colleges and universities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(2), 179–194. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F01623737017002179\nFeldman, A. (2000). Decision making in the practical domain: a model of practical conceptual change. Science Education, 84(5), 606–623.\nFerrare, J. J. (2019). A multi-institutional analysis of instructional beliefs and practices in gateway courses to the sciences. CBE Life Sciences Education, 18(2), ar26. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.17-12-0257\nFLEXspace. (2018). Retrieved 1 June 2020 from https:\u002F\u002Fflexspace.org\nFoote, K., Knaub, A., Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Beichner, R. J. (2016). Enabling and challenging factors in institutional reform: the case of SCALE-UP. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010103. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1103\u002FPhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010103\nFreeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1073\u002Fpnas.1319030111\nFukawa-Connelly, T., Johnson, E., & Keller, R. (2016). Can math education research improve the teaching of abstract algebra? Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 63(3), 276–281. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1090\u002Fnoti1339\nGardner, G. E., & Jones, M. G. (2011). Pedagogical preparation of the science graduate teaching assistant: challenges and implications. Science Educator, 20(2), 31–41.\nGasiewski, J. A., Eagan, M. K., Garcia, G. A., Hurtado, S., & Chang, M. J. (2012). From gatekeeping to engagement: a multicontextual, mixed method study of student academic engagement in introductory STEM courses. Research in Higher Education, 53(2), 229–261. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11162-011-9247-y\nGess-Newsome, J., Southerland, S. A., Johnston, A., & Woodbury, S. (2003). Educational reform, personal practical theories, and dissatisfaction: the anatomy of change in college science teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 731–767. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F00028312040003731\nGibbons, R. E., Villafañe, S. M., Stains, M., Murphy, K. L., & Raker, J. R. (2018). Beliefs about learning and enacted instructional practices: an investigation in postsecondary chemistry education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(8), 1111–1133. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.21444\nGolnabi, A. H., Murray, E., & Su, H. (2021). How precalculus course coordination can impact students’ academic performance. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.33423\u002Fjhetp.v21i5.4278\nGormally, C., Evans, M., & Brickman, P. (2014). Feedback about teaching in higher ed: neglected opportunities to promote change. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 187–199. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.13-12-0235\nHaak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332(6034), 1213. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fscience.1204820\nHandelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., Gentile, J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tilghman, S. M., & Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science, 304(5670), 521. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fscience.1096022\nHarris, R. B., Mack, M. R., Bryant, J., Theobald, E. J., & Freeman, S. (2020). Reducing achievement gaps in undergraduate general chemistry could lift underrepresented students into a “hyperpersistent zone.” Science Advances, 6(24), eaaz5687. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fsciadv.aaz5687\nHayward, C. N., Weston, T., & Laursen, S. L. (2018). First results from a validation study of TAMI: Toolkit for Assessing Mathematics Instruction. In A. Weinberg, C. Rasmussen, J. Rabin, M. Wawro, & S. Brown, Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. http:\u002F\u002Fsigmaa.maa.org\u002Frume\u002FRUME21.pdf\nHenderson, C. (2008). Promoting instructional change in new faculty: an evaluation of the physics and astronomy new faculty workshop. American Journal of Physics, 76(2), 179–187. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1119\u002F1.2820393\nHenderson, C., Beach, A., & Famiano, M. (2009). Promoting instructional change via co-teaching. American Journal of Physics, 77(3), 274–283. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1119\u002F1.3033744\nHenderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: an analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20439\nHenderson, C., Connolly, M., Dolan, E. L., Finkelstein, N., Franklin, S., Malcom, S., Rasmussen, C., Redd, K., & St. John, K. (2017). Towards the STEM DBER alliance: why we need a discipline-based STEM education research community. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 14. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-017-0076-1\nHenderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2007). Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: the influence of both individual and situational characteristics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 3, 020102. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1103\u002FPhysRevSTPER.3.020102\nHenderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2009). Impact of physics education research on the teaching of introductory quantitative physics in the united states. Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, 5(2), 020107. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1103\u002FPhysRevSTPER.5.020107\nHenderson, C., Dancy, M., & Niewiadomska-Bugaj, M. (2012). Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? Physical Review Physics Education Research, 8(2), 020104. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1103\u002FPhysRevSTPER.8.020104\nHerrington, D. G., Bancroft, S. F., Edwards, M. M., & Schairer, C. J. (2016). I want to be the inquiry guy! How research experiences for teachers change beliefs, attitudes, and values about teaching science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(2), 183–204. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10972-016-9450-y\nHill, H. C., Charalambous, C. Y., & Kraft, M. A. (2012). When rater reliability is not enough: teacher observation systems and a case for the generalizability study. Educational Researcher, 41(2), 56–64. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0013189X12437203\nHora, M. T. (2012). Organizational factors and instructional decision-making: a cognitive perspective. The Review of Higher Education, 35(2), 207–235. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1353\u002Frhe.2012.0001\nHora, M. T., & Anderson, C. (2012). Perceived norms for interactive teaching and their relationship to instructional decision-making: a mixed methods study. Higher Education, 64(4), 573–592. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10734-012-9513-8\nHouseknecht, J. B., Bachinski, G. J., Miller, M. H., White, S. A., & Andrews, D. M. (2020). Effectiveness of the active learning in organic chemistry faculty development workshops. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 387–398. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1039\u002FC9RP00137A\nJohnson, E., Keller, R., & Fukawa-Connelly, T. (2018). Results from a survey of abstract algebra instructors across the united states: understanding the choice to (not) lecture. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 4(2), 254–285. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs40753-017-0058-1\nJohnson, E., Keller, R., Peterson, V., & Fukawa-Connelly, T. (2019). Individual and situational factors related to undergraduate mathematics instruction. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 23. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-019-0175-2\nKnaub, A. V., Foote, K. T., Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Beichner, R. J. (2016). Get a room: the role of classroom space in sustained implementation of studio style instruction. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 8. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-016-0042-3\nKoch, A. K. (2017). It’s about the gateway courses: defining and contextualizing the issue. New Directions for Higher Education, 2017(180), 11–17. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fhe.20257\nKogan, M., & Laursen, S. L. (2014). Assessing long-term effects of inquiry-based learning: a case study from college mathematics. Innovative Higher Education, 39(3), 183–199. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10755-013-9269-9\nKoziol, S. M., & Burns, P. (1986). Teachers’ accuracy in self-reporting about instructional practices using a focused self-report inventory. The Journal of Educational Research, 79(4), 205–209. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F00220671.1986.10885678\nKuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.18637\u002Fjss.v082.i13\nLandis, C. R., Peace, G. E., Scharberg, M. A., Branz, S., Spencer, J. N., Ricci, R. W., Zumdahl, S. A., & Shaw, D. (1998). The new traditions consortium: shifting from a faculty-centered paradigm to a student-centered paradigm. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(6), 741. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Fed075p741\nLandrum, R. E., Viskupic, K., Shadle, S. E., & Bullock, D. (2017). Assessing the STEM landscape: the current instructional climate survey and the evidence-based instructional practices adoption scale. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 25. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-017-0092-1\nLane, A. K., McAlpin, J. D., Earl, B., Feola, S., Lewis, J. E., Mertens, K., Shadle, S. E., Skvoretz, J., Ziker, J. P., Couch, B. A., Prevost, L. B., & Stains, M. (2020). Innovative teaching knowledge stays with users. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(37), 22665. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1073\u002Fpnas.2012372117\nLane, A. K., Skvoretz, J., Ziker, J. P., Couch, B. A., Earl, B., Lewis, J. E., McAlpin, J. D., Prevost, L. B., Shadle, S. E., & Stains, M. (2019). Investigating how faculty social networks and peer influence relate to knowledge and use of evidence-based teaching practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 28. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-019-0182-3\nLeslie, S.-J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219), 262–265. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fscience.1261375\nLevy, R. (2019). VITAL faculty: a growing workforce in colleges and universities. Mathematical Association of America. Retrieved 10 July 2021 from https:\u002F\u002Fwww.mathvalues.org\u002Fmasterblog\u002Fvital-faculty\nLi, Y., & Bates, T. C. (2017). Does growth mindset improve children’s IQ, educational attainment or response to setbacks? Active-control interventions and data on children’s own mindsets. SocArXiv. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.31235\u002Fosf.io\u002Ftsdwy\nLorah, J. (2018). Effect size measures for multilevel models: definition, interpretation, and times example. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 6(1), 8. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40536-018-0061-2\nLorenzo, M., Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2006). Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom. American Journal of Physics, 74(2), 118–122. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1119\u002F1.2162549\nLotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 1318–1347. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20191\nLund, T. J., Pilarz, M., Velasco, J. B., Chakraverty, D., Rosploch, K., Undersander, M., & Stains, M. (2015). The best of both worlds: building on the copus and rtop observation protocols to easily and reliably measure various levels of reformed instructional practice. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(2), ar18. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.14-10-0168\nLund, T. J., & Stains, M. (2015). The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 13. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-015-0026-8\nMarsh, H. W., Rowe, K. J., & Martin, A. (2002). Phd students’ evaluations of research supervision: Issues, complexities, and challenges in a nationwide Australian experiment in benchmarking universities. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(3), 313–348. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1353\u002Fjhe.2002.0028\nMartinez, A. E., & Pilgrim, M. E. (2021). Online grading platforms: establishing a connection between course coordination and local data. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F0020739X.2021.1937731\nMcMahon, K., Yeh, C.S.-H., & Etchells, P. J. (2019). The impact of a modified initial teacher education on challenging trainees’ understanding of neuromyths. Mind, Brain, and Education, 13(4), 288–297. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fmbe.12219\nMichael, J. (2007). Faculty perceptions about barriers to active learning. College Teaching, 55(2), 42–47.\nMoore, G. A. (2002). Crossing the chasm. HarperCollins.\nMurray, T. A., Higgins, P., Minderhout, V., & Loertscher, J. (2011). Sustaining the development and implementation of student-centered teaching nationally: the importance of a community of practice. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 39(6), 405–411. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fbmb.20537\nMyers, R. (1990). Classical and modern regression with applications (2nd ed.). Duxbury.\nOleson, A., & Hora, M. T. (2014). Teaching the way they were taught? Revisiting the sources of teaching knowledge and the role of prior experience in shaping faculty teaching practices. Higher Education, 68(1), 29–45. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10734-013-9678-9\nPeace, G. E., Lewis, E. L., Burke, K. A., & Greenbowe, T. J. (2002). The multi-initiative dissemination project: active-learning strategies for college chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6), 699. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Fed079p699\nPelletreau, K. N., Knight, J. K., Lemons, P. P., McCourt, J. S., Merrill, J. E., Nehm, R. H., Prevost, L. B., Urban-Lurain, M., & Smith, M. K. (2018). A faculty professional development model that improves student learning, encourages active-learning instructional practices, and works for faculty at multiple institutions. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(2), es5. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.17-12-0260\nPopova, M., Kraft, A., Harshman, J., & Stains, M. (2021). Changes in teaching beliefs of early-career chemistry faculty: a longitudinal investigation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1039\u002FD0RP00313A\nPopova, M., Shi, L., Harshman, J., Kraft, A., & Stains, M. (2020). Untangling a complex relationship: teaching beliefs and instructional practices of assistant chemistry faculty at research-intensive institutions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(2), 513–527. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1039\u002FC9RP00217K\nPorter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2001). Analyzing faculty workload data using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 171–196. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1023\u002FA:1026573503271\nPrince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x\nProsser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1997). Relations between perceptions of the teaching environment and approaches to teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(1), 25–35. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.2044-8279.1997.tb01224.x\nR Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.R-project.org\u002F\nRasmussen, C., Ellis, J., Zazkis, D., & Bressoud, D. (2014). Features of successful calculus programs at five doctoral degree granting institutions. Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vancouver, Canada. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.maa.org\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002Fpdf\u002Fcspcc\u002Frasmussen_ellis_zazkis_bressoud.pdf\nRasmussen, C., Apkarian, N., Hagman, J. E., Johnson, E., Larsen, S., & Bressoud, D. (2019). Brief report: characteristics of precalculus through calculus 2 programs: insights from a national census survey. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50(1), 98–111. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.5951\u002Fjresematheduc.50.1.0098\nRasmussen, C., & Ellis, J. (2015). Calculus coordination at PhD-granting universities: more than just using the same syllabus, textbook, and final exam. In D. Bressoud, V. Mesa, & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Insights and recommendations from the maa national study of college calculus (pp. 111–120). MMA Press.\nRattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). “It’s ok—not everyone can be good at math”: instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 731–737. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.jesp.2011.12.012\nRaudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Sage.\nReinholz, D. L., & Apkarian, N. (2018). Four frames for systemic change in STEM departments. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 3. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-018-0103-x\nRobinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351–357. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.2307\u002F2087176\nRogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. The Free Press.\nRuiz-Primo, M. A., Briggs, D., Iverson, H., Talbot, R., & Shepard, L. A. (2011). Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning. Science, 331(6022), 1269. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fscience.1198976\nSCALE-UP. (2011). Retrieved 15 July 2020 from https:\u002F\u002Fsites.google.com\u002Fview\u002Fscale-up\u002Fhome\nSelya, A., Rose, J., Dierker, L., Hedeker, D., & Mermelstein, R. (2012). A practical guide to calculating Cohen’s f2, a measure of local effect size, from PROC MIXED. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 111. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffpsyg.2012.00111\nSeymour, E., DeWelde, K., & Fry, C. (2011). Determining progress in improving undergraduate STEM education: The reformers’ tale. A White Paper commissioned for the Forum, “Characterizing the Impact and Diffusion of Engineering Education Innovations”. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nae.edu\u002FFile.aspx?id=36664\nSeymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (Eds.). (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Westview Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1086\u002F495437\nSeymour, E., & Hunter, A.-B. (Eds.). (2019). Talking about leaving revisited: persistence, relocation, and loss in undergraduate STEM education. Springer International Publishing. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-030-25304-2\nShadle, S. E., Marker, A., & Earl, B. (2017). Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 8. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-017-0062-7\nSisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two Meta-Analyses. Psychological Science, 29(4), 549–571. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0956797617739704\nSmart, J. C., & Umbach, P. D. (2007). Faculty and academic environments: Using Jolland’s theory to explore differences in how faculty structure undergraduate courses. Journal of College Student Development, 48(2), 183–195. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1353\u002Fcsd.2007.0021\nSmeby, J.-C., & Try, S. (2005). Departmental contexts and faculty research activity in Norway. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 593–619. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11162-004-4136-2\nSmith, T., Brumskill, R., Johnson, A., & Zimmer, T. (2018). The impact of teacher language on students’ mindsets and statistics performance. Social Psychology of Education, 21(4), 775–786. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11218-018-9444-z\nSmith, M. K., Vinson, E. L., Smith, J. A., Lewin, J. D., & Stetzer, M. R. (2014). A campus-wide study of STEM courses: new perspectives on teaching practices and perceptions. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 624–635. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.14-06-0108\nSnijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling (2nd ed.). Sage Publishing.\nSonnert, G., Fox, M. F., & Adkins, K. (2007). Undergraduate women in science and engineering: effects of faculty, fields, and institutions over time. Social Science Quarterly, 88(5), 1333–1356. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.1540-6237.2007.00505.x\nSoutherland, S. A., Sowell, S., Blanchard, M., & Granger, E. M. (2011a). Exploring the construct of pedagogical discontentment: A tool to understand science teachers’ openness to reform. Research in Science Education, 41(3), 299–317. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11165-010-9166-5\nSoutherland, S. A., Sowell, S., & Enderle, P. (2011b). Science teachers’ pedagogical discontentment: Its sources and potential for change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(5), 437–457. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10972-011-9242-3\nSpringer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21–51. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F00346543069001021\nSrinivasan, S., Gibbons, R. E., Murphy, K. L., & Raker, J. (2018). Flipped classroom use in chemistry education: results from a survey of postsecondary faculty members. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(4), 1307–1318. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1039\u002FC8RP00094H\nStains, M., Harshman, J., Barker, M. K., Chasteen, S. V., Cole, R., DeChenne-Peters, S. E., Eagan, M. K., Esson, J. M., Knight, J. K., Laski, F. A., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., Lee, C. J., Lo, S. M., McDonnell, L. M., McKay, T. A., Michelotti, N., Musgrove, A., Palmer, M. S., … (2018). Anatomy of STEM teaching in North American universities. Science, 359(6383), 1468–1470. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1126\u002Fscience.aap8892\nStains, M., Pilarz, M., & Chakraverty, D. (2015). Short and long-term impacts of the Cottrell scholars collaborative new faculty workshop. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(9), 1466–1476. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Facs.jchemed.5b00324\nStegall, S. L., Grushow, A., Whitnell, R., & Hunnicutt, S. S. (2016). Evaluating the effectiveness of POGIL-PCL workshops. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(2), 407–416. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1039\u002FC5RP00225G\nSturtevant, H., & Wheeler, L. (2019). The STEM Faculty Instructional Barriers and Identity Survey (FIBIS): development and exploratory results. International Journal of STEM Education, 6, 35. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-019-0185-0\nStyers, M. L., Van Zandt, P. A., & Hayden, K. L. (2018). Active learning in flipped life science courses promotes development of critical thinking skills. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(3), ar39. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.16-11-0332\nTai, R. H., Sadler, P. M., & Loehr, J. F. (2005). Factors influencing success in introductory college chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(9), 987–1012. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20082\nTheobald, E. (2018). Students are rarely independent: when, why, and how to use random effects in discipline-based education research. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(3), rm2. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.17-12-0280\nTheobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., … (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1073\u002Fpnas.1916903117\nTomkin, J. H., Beilstein, S. O., Morphew, J. W., & Herman, G. L. (2019). Evidence that communities of practice are associated with active learning in large STEM lectures. International Journal of STEM Education, 6, 1. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-018-0154-z\nWalczyk, J. J., Ramsey, L. L., & Zha, P. (2007). Obstacles to instructional innovation according to college science and mathematics faculty. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 85–106. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20119\nWalter, E. M., Beach, A. L., Henderson, C., Williams, C. T., & Ceballos-Madrigal, I. (2021). Understanding conditions for teaching innovation in postsecondary education: development and validation of the Survey of Climate for Instructional Improvement (SCII). International Journal of Technology in Education, 4(2), 166–199.\nWalter, E. M., Henderson, C. R., Beach, A. L., & Williams, C. T. (2016). Introducing the Postsecondary Instructional Practices Survey (PIPS): a concise, interdisciplinary, and easy-to-score survey. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(4), ar53. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.15-09-0193\nWaxman, H. C., & Padrón, Y. N. (2004). The uses of the classroom observation schedule to improve classroom instruction. In H. C. Waxman, R. S. Hilberg, & R. G. Tharp (Eds.), Observational research in U.S. Classrooms: new approaches for understanding cultural and linguistic diversity (pp. 72–96). Cambridge University Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1017\u002FCBO9780511616419.004\nWheeler, L. B., Maeng, J. L., & Whitworth, B. A. (2017). Characterizing teaching assistants’ knowledge and beliefs following professional development activities within an inquiry-based general chemistry context. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(1), 19–28. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Facs.jchemed.6b00373\nWilliams, M., Apkarian, N., Uhing, K., Martinez, A. E., Rasmussen, C., & Smith, W. M. (2021). In the driver’s seat: course coordinators as change agents for active learning in university precalculus to calculus 2. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs40753-021-00153-w\nWilliams, C. T., Walter, E. M., Henderson, C., & Beach, A. L. (2015). Describing undergraduate STEM teaching practices: a comparison of instructor self-report instruments. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 18. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-015-0031-y\nWindschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: the interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165–205. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F00028312039001165\nWood, W., & Gentile, J. (2003). Meeting report: the first national academies summer institute for undergraduate education in biology. Cell Biology Education, 2(4), 207–209. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.03-10-0042\nWoodbury, S., & Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). Overcoming the paradox of change without difference: a model of change in the arena of fundamental school reform. Educational Policy, 16(5), 763–782. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F089590402237312\nWyse, S. A., Long, T. M., & Ebert-May, D. (2014). Teaching assistant professional development in biology: designed for and driven by multidimensional data. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 212–223. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1187\u002Fcbe.13-06-0106\nYeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: when students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F00461520.2012.722805\nYeager, D. S., Hanselman, P., Walton, G. M., Murray, J. S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., Tipton, E., Schneider, B., Hulleman, C. S., Hinojosa, C. P., Paunesku, D., Romero, C., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Iachan, R., Buontempo, J., Yang, S. M., Carvalho, … (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573(7774), 364–369. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1038\u002Fs41586-019-1466-y\nYeager, D. S., Romero, C., Paunesku, D., Hulleman, C. S., Schneider, B., Hinojosa, C., Lee, H. Y., O’Brien, J., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Greene, D., Walton, G. M., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Using design thinking to improve psychological interventions: the case of the growth mindset during the transition to high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 374–391. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002Fedu0000098\nYeager, D. S., Walton, G. M., Brady, S. T., Akcinar, E. N., Paunesku, D., Keane, L., Kamentz, D., Ritter, G., Duckworth, A. L., Urstein, R., Gomez, E. M., Markus, H. R., Cohen, G. L., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Teaching a lay theory before college narrows achievement gaps at scale. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(24), E3341. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1073\u002Fpnas.1524360113",{"EN":913},"Active learning used in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses has been shown to improve student outcomes. Nevertheless, traditional lecture-orientated approaches endure in these courses. The implementation of teaching practices is a result of many interrelated factors including disciplinary norms, classroom context, and beliefs about learning. Although factors influencing uptake of active learning are known, no study to date has had the statistical power to empirically test the relative association of these factors with active learning when considered collectively. Prior studies have been limited to a single or small number of evaluated factors; in addition, such studies did not capture the nested nature of institutional contexts. We present the results of a multi-institution, large-scale (N = 2382 instructors; N = 1405 departments; N = 749 institutions) survey-based study in the United States to evaluate 17 malleable factors (i.e., influenceable and changeable) that are associated with the amount of time an instructor spends lecturing, a proxy for implementation of active learning strategies, in introductory postsecondary chemistry, mathematics, and physics courses. Regression analyses, using multilevel modeling to account for the nested nature of the data, indicate several evaluated contextual factors, personal factors, and teacher thinking factors were significantly associated with percent of class time lecturing when controlling for other factors used in this study. Quantitative results corroborate prior research in indicating that large class sizes are associated with increased percent time lecturing. Other contextual factors (e.g., classroom setup for small group work) and personal contexts (e.g., participation in scholarship of teaching and learning activities) are associated with a decrease in percent time lecturing. Given the malleable nature of the factors, we offer tangible implications for instructors and administrators to influence the adoption of more active learning strategies in introductory STEM courses.",{"EN":915},"Evaluating the impact of malleable factors on percent time lecturing in gateway chemistry, mathematics, and physics courses",{"VOID":917},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00333-3","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00333-3",[920,937,952,964,983,1000,1016],{"id":921,"sortIndex":270,"researcher":20,"roles":922,"affiliations":923,"properties":934},"daaa7190-d25a-440c-8aba-096b1ba32693",[183],[924],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":925,"properties":20},{"id":926,"createTime":927,"updateTime":928,"relativeEntities":929,"slug":930,"properties":931,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"93544b24-35dc-48b3-8179-43c63bc4676f","2024-01-17T13:11:07.445+00:00","2024-12-03T03:24:13.000+00:00",[],"Department-of-Chemistry-University-of-Virginia-Charlottesville-USA",{"title":932},{"VI":933},"Department of Chemistry, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA",{"title":935},{"VI":936},"Marilyne Stains",{"id":938,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":939,"affiliations":940,"properties":949},"3facd483-3525-4bb3-a428-0a4fbdb2c33e",[183],[941],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":942,"properties":20},{"id":943,"createTime":944,"updateTime":944,"relativeEntities":945,"slug":20,"properties":946,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"9e737529-7685-4c0c-ba18-a096fff0268c","2024-01-31T00:16:34.581+00:00",[],{"title":947},{"VI":948},"Department of Chemistry, University of South Florida, Tampa, USA",{"title":950},{"VI":951},"Jeffrey R. Raker",{"id":953,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":954,"affiliations":955,"properties":961},"2b7517a2-72d8-465f-ac58-842d5f4300a4",[183],[956],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":957,"properties":20},{"id":943,"createTime":944,"updateTime":944,"relativeEntities":958,"slug":20,"properties":959,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":960},{"VI":948},{"title":962},{"VI":963},"Brandon J. Yik",{"id":965,"sortIndex":221,"researcher":20,"roles":966,"affiliations":967,"properties":980},"9caab17f-5b4b-4ddb-99c5-36d4ddb37cdc",[183],[968],{"id":969,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":970,"properties":977},"3c65b807-29ea-45df-8625-05c6e130b8f3",{"id":971,"createTime":972,"updateTime":972,"relativeEntities":973,"slug":20,"properties":974,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"9b415f1d-0af9-4df4-beb4-2907bd466e81","2024-01-16T20:25:00.224+00:00",[],{"title":975},{"VI":976},"Department of Physics and Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, United States",{"title":978},{"VI":979},"Department of Physics and Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, USA",{"title":981},{"VI":982},"Charles Henderson",{"id":984,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":985,"affiliations":986,"properties":997},"8947b251-2433-4898-8aed-4c7b6e0a9d84",[183],[987],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":988,"properties":20},{"id":989,"createTime":990,"updateTime":991,"relativeEntities":992,"slug":993,"properties":994,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"5e89144b-0568-46b6-94a2-5850f404bfec","2024-01-21T07:17:37.742+00:00","2024-12-28T06:49:41.970+00:00",[],"School-of-Mathematical-and-Statistical-Sciences-Arizona-State-University-Tempe-USA",{"title":995},{"VI":996},"School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, USA",{"title":998},{"VI":999},"Naneh Apkarian",{"id":1001,"sortIndex":1002,"researcher":20,"roles":1003,"affiliations":1004,"properties":1013},"b0b9eb35-0786-4987-bf31-7cce32da9db8",6,[183],[1005],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1006,"properties":20},{"id":1007,"createTime":1008,"updateTime":1008,"relativeEntities":1009,"slug":20,"properties":1010,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"7db94b95-c808-4764-92cf-9f20cb6611f7","2023-12-28T12:22:15.245+00:00",[],{"title":1011},{"VI":1012},"Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, USA",{"title":1014},{"VI":1015},"Estrella Johnson",{"id":1017,"sortIndex":238,"researcher":20,"roles":1018,"affiliations":1019,"properties":1028},"fd732519-93c6-4ebf-966a-c1f28787dd7c",[183],[1020],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1021,"properties":20},{"id":1022,"createTime":1023,"updateTime":1023,"relativeEntities":1024,"slug":20,"properties":1025,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"5e10f44f-0079-47b1-8ef8-8da3bc8e5ec1","2023-12-29T23:35:34.593+00:00",[],{"title":1026},{"VI":1027},"Department of Physics and Center for STEM Learning, University of Colorado, Boulder, USA",{"title":1029},{"VI":1030},"Melissa H. Dancy",{"url":918,"publisher":1032,"properties":1067},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1033,"slug":10,"properties":1034,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1038,"manageAffiliations":1039,"indexDatabases":1040,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1062,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1035,"title":1036,"url":1037},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1041,1048,1055],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1042,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1047,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1043,"label":1044,"description":1045,"key":85,"publicationTags":1046,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1049,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1054,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1050,"label":1051,"description":1052,"key":101,"publicationTags":1053,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1056,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1061,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1057,"label":1058,"description":1059,"key":66,"publicationTags":1060,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1063,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1064,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1065,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1066,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":1068,"pages":1069},{"VOID":431},{"VOID":327},"2022-02-10",{"id":1072,"createTime":1073,"updateTime":1074,"relativeEntities":1075,"slug":1076,"properties":1077,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":1074,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":181,"primaryUrl":1086,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":1087,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1127,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1167,"publishYear":438,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"e8ac51d8-6f0c-45c9-ac48-273544e69274","2023-12-26T11:02:12.354+00:00","2025-02-11T23:30:44.647+00:00",[],"Applying-multimodal-learning-analytics-to-examine-the-immediate-and-delayed-effects-of-instructor-scaffoldings-on-small-groups-collaborative-programming",{"references":1078,"abstract":1080,"title":1082,"doi":1084},{"VOID":1079},"Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002FS15327809JLS1203_1\nBelland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing results from empirical research on computer-based scaffolding in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309–344. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0034654316670999\nBezemer, J. (2008). Displaying orientation in the classroom: Students’ multimodal responses to teacher instructions. Linguistics and Education, 19(2), 166–178. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.linged.2008.05.005\nBliss, J., Askew, M., & MacRae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: Scaffolding revisited. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1), 37–61. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F0305498960220103\nBloome, D., Beierle, M., Grigorenko, M., & Goldman, S. (2009). Learning over time: Uses of intercontextuality, collective memories, and classroom chronotopes in the construction of learning opportunities in a ninth-grade language arts classroom. Language and Education, 23(4), 313–334. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09500780902954257\nBrown, R., & Renshaw, P. (2009). Positioning students as actors and authors: A chronotopic analysis of collaborative learning activities. Mind, Culture and Activity, 13(3), 247–259. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002Fs15327884mca1303_6\nBulu, S. T., & Pedersen, S. (2010). Scaffolding middle school students’ content knowledge and ill-structured problem solving in a problem-based hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58(5), 507–529. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11423-010-9150-9\nChatti, M. A., Muslim, A., & Schroeder, U. (2017). Toward an open learning analytics ecosystem. In B. K. Daniel (Ed.), Big data and learning analytics in higher education (pp. 195–219). Cham: Springer. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-319-06520-5_12\nChevalier, M., Giang, C., Piatti, A., & Mondada, F. (2020). Fostering computational thinking through educational robotics: A model for creative computational problem solving. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–18. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00238-z\nChinese Ministry of Education. (2019). Report on the development of online learning in China 2019. Tsinghua University Press.\nChiu, T. K. F. (2021). A holistic approach to the design of artificial intelligence (AI) education for K-12 schools. TechTrends, 65(5), 796–807. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11528-021-00637-1\nClark, D. B., & Sengupta, P. (2020). Reconceptualizing games for integrating computational thinking and science as practice: Collaborative agent-based disciplinarily-integrated games. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(3), 328–346. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10494820.2019.1636071\nCress, U., Rosé, C., Wise, A. F., & Oshima, J. (2021). International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning. Springer. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-030-65291-3\nDamşa, C. I., & Nerland, M. (2016). Student learning through participation in inquiry activities: Two case studies in teacher and computer engineering education. Vocations and Learning, 9(3), 275–294. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs12186-016-9152-9\nDemir, O., & Seferoglu, S. S. (2020a). A comparison of solo and pair programming in terms of flow experience, coding quality, and coding achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(8), 1448–1466. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0735633120949788\nDemir, O., & Seferoglu, S. S. (2020b). The effect of determining pair programming groups according to various individual difference variables on group compatibility, flow, and coding performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 41–70. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0735633120949787\nDi Mitri, D., Schneider, J., & Drachsler, H. (2021). Keep me in the loop: Real-time feedback with multimodal data. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs40593-021-00281-z\nDillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (Vol. 1, pp. 1–15). Elsevier.\nFanchamps, L. J. A., Slangen, L., Hennissen, P., & Specht, M. M. (2021). The influence of SRA programming on algorithmic thinking and self-efficacy using Lego robotics in two types of instruction. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(2), 203–222. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-019-09559-9\nFedorenko, E., Ivanova, A., Dhamala, R., & Bers, M. U. (2019). The language of programming: A cognitive perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(7), 525–528. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.tics.2019.04.010\nGaul, C., & Kim, M. K. (2020). Learner participation regulation supported by long-term peer moderation and participation feedback during asynchronous discussions. Journal of Computers in Education, 7(3), 295–331. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs40692-020-00158-5\nGidalevich, S., & Kramarski, B. (2019). The value of fixed versus faded self-regulatory scaffolds on fourth graders’ mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science, 47(1), 39–68. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11251-018-9475-z\nGoodyear, P., Jones, C., & Thomson, K. (2014). Computer-supported collaborative learning: Instructional approaches, group processes and educational designs. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 439–451). Springer.\nGresalfi, M., Martin, T., Hand, V., & Greeno, J. (2009). Constructing competence: An analysis of student participation in the activity systems of mathematics classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(1), 49–70. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1515\u002Fctra-2016-0019\nGrévisse, C., Rothkugel, S., & Reuter, R. A. P. (2019). Scaffolding support through integration of learning material. Smart Learning Environments, 6(1), 1–24. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40561-019-0107-0\nGrossen, M., & Bachmann, K. (2000). Learning to collaborate in a peer-tutoring situation: Who learns? What is learned? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(4), 491–508. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002FBF03172990\nGuzdial, M., & Morrison, B. (2016). Growing computer science education into a STEM education discipline. Communications of the ACM, 59(11), 31–33. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1145\u002F3000612\nHolmes, N. G., Day, J., Park, A. H. K., Bonn, D. A., & Roll, I. (2014). Making the failure more productive: Scaffolding the invention process to improve inquiry behaviors and outcomes in invention activities. Instructional Science, 42(4), 523–538. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11251-013-9300-7\nHmelo-Silver, C. E., & DeSimone, C. (2013). Problem-based learning: An instructional model of collaborative learning. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (1st ed., pp. 370–385). New York, NY: Routledge.\nHwang, W. Y., Shadiev, R., Wang, C. Y., & Huang, Z. H. (2012). A pilot study of cooperative programming learning behavior and its relationship with students’ learning performance. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1267–1281. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.compedu.2011.12.009\nJadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Miller, B. W., Kim, I. H., Kuo, L. J., Dong, T., & Wu, X. (2011). Influence of a teacher’s scaffolding moves during child-led small group discussions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1), 194–230. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0002831210371498\nJohnson, E. K. (2019). Waves: Scaffolding self-regulated learning to teach science in a whole-body educational game. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(2), 133–151. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-018-9753-1\nKhan, S. M. (2017). Multimodal behavioral analytics in intelligent learning and assessment systems. Innovative assessment of collaboration (pp. 173–184). Springer. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-319-33261-1_11\nKiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A. K., & Seidel, T. (2015). Effects of a classroom discourse intervention on teachers’ practice and students’ motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94–103. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.learninstruc.2014.10.003\nKim, N. J., Vicentini, C. R., & Belland, B. R. (2022). Influence of scaffolding on information literacy and argumentation skills in virtual field trips and problem-based learning for scientific problem solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(2), 215–236. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10763-020-10145-y\nKirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why unguided learning does not work: An analysis of the failure of discovery learning, problem-based learning, experiential learning and inquiry-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002Fs15326985ep4102_1.\nKunkle, W. M., & Allen, R. B. (2016). The impact of different teaching approaches and languages on student learning of introductory programming concepts. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 16(1), 1–26. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1145\u002F2785807\nKwon, K., Hong, R., & Laffey, J. M. (2013). The educational impact of metacognitive group coordination in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1271–1281. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.chb.2013.01.003\nKynigos, C., & Diamantidis, D. (2022). Creativity in engineering mathematical models through programming. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 54, 149–162. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11858-021-01314-6\nLai, X., & Wong, G. K. W. (2022). Collaborative versus individual problem solving in computational thinking through programming: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 150–170. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fbjet.13157\nLavonen, J., Meisalo, V., & Lattu, M. (2002). Collaborative problem solving in a control technology learning environment, a pilot study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 12(2), 139–160. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1023\u002FA:1015261004362\nLewis, C. (2012). The importance of students’ attention to program state: A case study of debugging behavior. In C. Alison, S. Kate, & S. Beth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th annual international conference on international computing education research (pp. 127–134). Association for Computing Machinery.\nLin, Y., Wu, C., & Chiu, C. (2018). The use of wiki in teaching programming: Effects upon achievement, attitudes, and collaborative programming behaviors. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 16(3), 18–45. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.4018\u002FIJDET.2018070102\nMaksic, S., & Josic, S. (2021). Scaffolding the development of creativity from the students’ perspective. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100835. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.tsc.2021.100835\nMargulieux, L. E., & Catrambone, R. (2021). Scaffolding problem solving with learners’ own self explanations of subgoals. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 33(2), 499–523. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs12528-021-09275-1\nMattanah, J. F., Pratt, W. P., Cowan, P. A., & Cowan, C. P. (2005). Authoritative parenting, parental scaffolding of long-division mathematics, and children’s academic competence in fourth grade. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 26(1), 85–106. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.appdev.2004.10.007.\nMeloth, M. S., & Deering, P. D. (1999). The role of the teacher in promoting cognitive processing during collaborative learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 235–255). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.\nNedić, J., Jošić, S., & Baucal, A. (2015). The role of asymmetrical interaction in the assessment of nonverbal abilities of children from the drop-in center. Teaching Innovations, 28(3), 189–206. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.5937\u002Finovacije1503189N\nOuyang, F., Chang, Y. H., Scharber, C., Jiao, P., & Huang, T. (2020). Examining the instructor-student collaborative partnership in an online learning community course. Instructional Science, 48(2), 183–204. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11251-020-09507-4\nOuyang, F., Chen, S., Yang, Y., & Chen, Y. (2022). Examining the effects of three group-level metacognitive scaffoldings on in-service teachers’ knowledge building. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(2), 352–379. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F07356331211030847\nOuyang, F., Chen, Z., Cheng, M., Tang, Z., & Su, C.-Y. (2021). Exploring the effect of three scaffoldings on the collaborative problem-solving processes in China’s higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(35), 1–22. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs41239-021-00273-y\nOuyang, F., & Xu, W. (2022). The effects of three instructor participatory roles on a small group’s collaborative concept mapping. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(4), 930–959. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F07356331211057283\nPapadakis, S. (2018). Is pair programming more effective than solo programming for secondary education novice programmers? A case study. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 13(1), 1–16. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F1555412015622345\nPedró, F., Subosa, M., Rivas, A., & Valverde, P. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities for sustainable development. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.\nPerret-Clermont, A. N. (1980). Social interaction and cognitive development in children. Academic Press.\nPlonka, L., Sharp, H., Van der Linden, J., & Dittrich, Y. (2015). Knowledge transfer in pair programming: An in-depth analysis. International Journal of Human–computer Studies, 73, 66–78. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.ijhcs.2014.09.001\nRasku-Puttonen, H., Eteläpelto, A., Arvaja, M., & Häkkinen, P. (2003). Is successful scaffolding an illusion?—Shifting patterns of responsibility and control in teacher–student interaction during a long-term learning project. Instructional Science, 31(6), 377–393. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1023\u002FA:1025700810376\nRiikonen, S., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2020). Bringing maker practices to school: Tracing discursive and materially mediated aspects of student teams’ collaborative making processes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15(3), 319–349. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11412-020-09330-6\nRoehler, L. R., & Cantlon, D. J. (1997). Scaffolding: A powerful tool in social constructivist classrooms. In K. Hogan & M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues (pp. 6–42). Brookline.\nRoschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–197). Springer.\nSamuelsen, J., Chen, W., & Wasson, B. (2019). Integrating multiple data sources for learning analytics—Review of literature. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 14(1), 1–20. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs41039-019-0105-4\nSandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.10130\nSchneider, B., Dowell, N., & Thompson, K. (2021). Collaboration analytics—current state and potential futures. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(1), 1–12.\nSerrano-Cámara, L. M., Paredes-Velasco, M., Alcover, C. M., & Velazquez-Iturbide, J. Á. (2014). An evaluation of students’ motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning of programming concepts. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 499–508. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.chb.2013.04.030\nShaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9–45. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.18608\u002Fjla.2016.33.3\nShaffer, D. W., Hatfield, D. L., Svarovsky, G. N., Nash, P., Nulty, A., Bagley, E., Frank, K. A., Rupp, A. A., & Mislevy, R. (2009). Epistemic network analysis: A prototype for 21st century assessment of learning. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 1–21. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1162\u002Fijlm.2009.0013\nShaffer, D. W., & Ruis, A. R. (2017). Epistemic network analysis: A worked example of theory-based learning analytics. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. Wise, & D. Gašević (Eds.), Handbook of learning analytics (pp. 175–187). Society for Learning Analytics and Research.\nSinha, S., Rogat, T. K., Adams-Wiggins, K. R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2015). Collaborative group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 273–307. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11412-015-9218-y\nSocratous, C., & Ioannou, A. (2021). Structured or unstructured educational robotics curriculum? A study of debugging in block-based programming. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(6), 3081–3100. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11423-021-10056-x\nSocratous, C., & Ioannou, A. (2022). Evaluating the impact of the curriculum structure on group metacognition during collaborative problem-solving using educational robotics. TechTrends. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11528-022-00738-5\nStahl, G. (2009). Studying virtual math teams. New York: Springer. Available at http:\u002F\u002FGerryStahl.net\u002Fvmt\u002Fbook.\nSun, D., Ouyang, F., Li, Y., & Zhu, C. (2021). Comparing learners’ knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes between two instructional modes of computer programming in secondary education. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(54), 1–15. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-021-00311-1\nSun, J. C., & Hsu, K. Y. (2019). A smart eye-tracking feedback scaffolding approach to improving students’ learning self-efficacy and performance in a C programming course. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 66–72. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.chb.2019.01.036\nTartas, V., & Perret-Clermont, A. N. (2008). Socio-cognitive dynamics in dyadic interaction: How do you work together to solve Kohs cubes? European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5(5), 561–584. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F17405620701859522\nTawfik, A. A., Law, V., Ge, X., Xing, W., & Kim, K. (2018). The effect of sustained vs. faded scaffolding on students’ argumentation in ill-structured problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 436–449. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.chb.2018.01.035\nTeague, D., & Roe, P. (2008). Collaborative learning—Towards a solution for novice programmers. In S. Hamilton & M. Hamilton (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth conference on Australasian computing education—CRPIT Volume 78 (pp. 147–153). Australian Computer Society, Australia.\nTohyama, S., Matsuzawa, Y., Yokoyama, S., Koguchi, T., & Takeuchi, Y. (2018). Constructive interaction on collaborative programming: Case study for grade 6 students group. IFIP world conference on computers in education (pp. 589–598). Springer International Publishing. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-319-74310-3_59\nTwiner, A., Littleton, K., Whitelock, D., & Coffin, C. (2021). Combining sociocultural discourse analysis and multimodal analysis to explore teachers’ and pupils’ meaning making. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 30, 100520. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.lcsi.2021.100520\nUmapathy, K., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2017). A meta-analysis of pair-programming in computer programming courses: Implications for educational practice. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 17(4), 1–13. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1145\u002F2996201\nvan de Pol, J., Mercer, N., & Volman, M. (2019). Scaffolding student understanding in small-group work: Students’ uptake of teacher support in subsequent small-group interaction. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(2), 206–239. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10508406.2018.1522258\nvan de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10648-010-9127-6\nvan de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2015). The effects of scaffolding in the classroom: Support contingency and student independent working time in relation to student achievement, task effort and appreciation of support. Instructional Science, 43(5), 615–641. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11251-015-9351-z\nVeerasamy, A. K., D’Souza, D., Linden, R., & Laakso, M. J. (2019). Relationship between perceived problem-solving skills and academic performance of novice learners in introductory programming courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35, 246–255. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fjcal.12326\nVillamor, M. M., & Rodrigo, M. M. T. (2019). Gaze collaboration patterns of successful and unsuccessful programming pairs using cross-recurrence quantification analysis. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 14(1), 1–22. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs41039-019-0118-z\nWang, X., & Hwang, G. (2017). A problem posing-based practicing strategy for facilitating students’ computer programming skills in the team-based learning mode. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(6), 1655–1671. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11423-017-9551-0\nWebb, N. M. (2009). The teacher’s role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 1–28. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1348\u002F000709908X380772\nWebb, N. M., & Farivar, S. (1999). Developing productive group interaction in middle school. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 117–149). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.\nWebb, N. M., Nemer, K. M., & Ing, M. (2006). Small group reflections: Parallels between teacher discourse and student behavior in peer-directed groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 63–119. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002Fs15327809jls1501_8\nWei, X., Lin, L., Meng, N., Tan, W., & Kong, S. C. (2020). The effectiveness of partial pair programming on elementary school students’ computational thinking skills and self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 160, 104023. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.compedu.2020.104023\nWiig, C., Silseth, K., & Erstad, O. (2017). Creating intercontextuality in students learning trajectories. Opportunities and difficulties. Language and Education, 32(1), 43–59. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09500782.2017.1367799\nWittwer, J., Nückles, M., Landmann, N., & Renkl, A. (2010). Can tutors be supported in giving effective explanations? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 74–89. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002Fa0016727\nWittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instruction explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43(1), 49–64. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F00461520701756420\nWu, B., Hu, Y., Ruis, A. R., & Wang, M. (2019). Analysing computational thinking in collaborative programming: A quantitative ethnography approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(3), 421–434. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fjcal.12348\nYeomans, L., Zschaler, S., & Coate, K. (2019). Transformative and troublesome? Students’ and professional programmers’ perspectives on difficult concepts in programming. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 19(3), 1–27. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1145\u002F3283071\nZatarain Cabada, R., Barrón Estrada, M. L., Ríos Félix, J. M., & Alor Hernández, G. (2018). A virtual environment for learning computer coding using gamification and emotion recognition. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1048–1063. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10494820.2018.1558256\nZhang, J. (2007). A cultural look at information and communication technologies in Eastern education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 301–314. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11423-007-9040-y\nZhang, J. (2013). Chapter 28: Collaboration, technology, and culture. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 495–508). Routledge.\nZheng, L. (2021). Improving programming skills through an innovative collaborative programming model: A case study. Lecture notes in educational technologyData-driven design for computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 75–85). Springer. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-981-16-1718-8_6\nZheng, L., Zhen, Y., Niu, J., & Zhong, L. (2022). An exploratory study on fade-in versus fade-out scaffolding for novice programmers in online collaborative programming settings. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs12528-021-09307-w",{"EN":1081},"Instructor scaffolding is proved to be an effective means to improve collaborative learning quality, but empirical research indicates discrepancies about the effect of instructor scaffoldings on collaborative programming. Few studies have used multimodal learning analytics (MMLA) to comprehensively analyze the collaborative programming processes from a process-oriented perspective. This research conducts a MMLA research to examine the immediate and delayed effects of instructor scaffoldings on small groups’ collaborative programming in K-12 education context with an aim to provide research, analytics, and pedagogical implications. The results indicated that the instructor provided five types of scaffoldings from the social, cognitive, and metacognitive dimensions, and groups had seven types of responses (i.e., immediate uptake and delayed use) to five instructor scaffoldings, ranging from the low-to-medium and high level of cognitive engagement. After the scaffolding was faded, groups used the content from the high-control cognitive scaffolding frequently to solve problems in a delayed way, but groups did not use the instructor’s scaffolding content from the social and low-control cognitive scaffoldings from the pedagogical perspective, instructors should consider scaffolding types, group states and characteristics, as well as the timing of scaffolding to better design and facilitate collaborative programming. From an analytical perspective, MMLA was proved to be conducive to understand collaborative learning from social, cognitive, behavioral, and micro-level dimensions, such that instructors can better understand and reflect on the process of collaborative learning, and use scaffoldings more skillfully to support collaborative learning. Collaborative programming is encouraged to be integrated in STEM education to transform education from the instructor-directed lecturing to the learner-centered learning. Using MMLA methods, this research provided a deep understanding of the immediate and delayed effects of instructor scaffoldings on small groups’ collaborative programming in K-12 STEM education from a process-oriented perspective. The results showed that various instructor scaffoldings have been used to promote groups’ social and cognitive engagement. Instructor scaffoldings have delayed effects on promoting collaborative programming qualities. It is highly suggested that instructors should integrate scaffoldings to facilitate computer programming education and relevant research should apply MMLA to reveal details of the process of collaboration.",{"EN":1083},"Applying multimodal learning analytics to examine the immediate and delayed effects of instructor scaffoldings on small groups’ collaborative programming",{"VOID":1085},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00361-z","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-022-00361-z",[1088,1103,1115],{"id":1089,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":1090,"affiliations":1091,"properties":1100},"3455d081-498e-40de-9b54-403adc1fc3df",[183],[1092],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1093,"properties":20},{"id":1094,"createTime":1095,"updateTime":1095,"relativeEntities":1096,"slug":20,"properties":1097,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"cbf608f0-b103-4319-bb07-8988fd9c9045","2023-12-11T23:10:35.139+00:00",[],{"title":1098},{"VI":1099},"College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China",{"title":1101},{"VI":1102},"Fan Ouyang",{"id":1104,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":1105,"affiliations":1106,"properties":1112},"9144b1e3-1a1e-4dc4-9deb-8b0941a8eb56",[183],[1107],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1108,"properties":20},{"id":1094,"createTime":1095,"updateTime":1095,"relativeEntities":1109,"slug":20,"properties":1110,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1111},{"VI":1099},{"title":1113},{"VI":1114},"Xinyu Dai",{"id":1116,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":1117,"affiliations":1118,"properties":1124},"5d914fc3-a416-455a-a82d-f3c2120becb9",[183],[1119],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1120,"properties":20},{"id":1094,"createTime":1095,"updateTime":1095,"relativeEntities":1121,"slug":20,"properties":1122,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1123},{"VI":1099},{"title":1125},{"VI":1126},"Si Chen",{"url":1086,"publisher":1128,"properties":1163},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1129,"slug":10,"properties":1130,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1134,"manageAffiliations":1135,"indexDatabases":1136,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1158,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1131,"title":1132,"url":1133},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1137,1144,1151],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1138,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1143,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1139,"label":1140,"description":1141,"key":85,"publicationTags":1142,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1145,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1150,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1146,"label":1147,"description":1148,"key":101,"publicationTags":1149,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1152,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1157,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1153,"label":1154,"description":1155,"key":66,"publicationTags":1156,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1159,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1160,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1161,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1162,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":1164,"pages":1165},{"VOID":431},{"VOID":1166},"1-21","2022-07-08",{"id":1169,"createTime":1170,"updateTime":1171,"relativeEntities":1172,"slug":1173,"properties":1174,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":1171,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":1185,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":1186,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1249,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1285,"publishYear":1286,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"9ecb679c-0e74-4b0c-8f6e-5a81ff989e86","2024-04-06T13:18:27.537+00:00","2024-12-25T23:25:56.449+00:00",[],"NGSS-based-teacher-professional-development-to-implement-engineering-practices-in-STEM-instruction",{"references":1175,"keywords":1177,"abstract":1179,"title":1181,"doi":1183},{"VOID":1176},"Al-Balushi, S., & Al-Abdali, N. (2015). Using a Moodle-based professional development program to train science teachers to teach for creativity and its effectiveness on their teaching practices. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(4), 461–475. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-014-9530-8.\nAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press.\nAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science (1994). Benchmarks for science literacy. Oxford University Press.\nAmerican Society for Engineering Education (2014). Standards for preparation and professional development for teachers of engineering. American Society for Engineering Education.\nAnthony, A. (2003). Computing education in academia: Toward differentiating the disciplines. In Proceedings of the CITC 2003 4th conference on information technology curriculum, (pp. 1–8). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1145\u002F947121.947123.\nAschbacher, P. R., Ing, M., & Tsai, S. M. (2014). Is science me? Exploring middle school students’ STE-M career aspirations? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 735–743. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-014-9504-x.\nAshford, S. N., Lanehart, R. E., Kersaint, G. K., Lee, R. S., & Kromrey, J. D. (2016). STEM pathways: Examining persistence in rigorous math and science coursetaking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(6), 961–975. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-016-9654-0.\nAstor-Jack, T., McCallie, E., & Balcerzak, P. (2007). Academic and informal science education practitioner views about professional development in science education. Science Education, 91(4), 604–628. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.20205.\nAvraamidou, L. (2015). Reconceptualizing elementary teacher preparation: a case for informal science education. International Journal of Science Education, 37(1), 108–135. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09500693.2014.969358.\nBanilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Malzahn, K. A., Plumley, C. L., Gordon, E. M., & Hayes, M. L. (2018). Report of the 2018 national survey of science and mathematics education+. Horizon Research, Inc http:\u002F\u002Fwww.horizon-research.com\u002Freport-of-the-2018-nssme.\nBrand, B. R. (2020). Integrating science and engineering practices: Outcomes from a collaborative professional development. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(13). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00210-x.\nBugallo, M. F., & Kelly, A. M. (2014). A pre-college recruitment strategy for electrical and computer engineering study. In Integrated STEM education conference (ISEC), 2014 IEEE 4th, (pp. 1–4). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1109\u002FISECon.2014.6891010.\nBybee, R. W. (2011). Scientific and engineering practices in K-12 classrooms. The Science Teacher, 78(9), 34–40.\nCampbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F0049124113500475.\nCantrell, P., Pekcan, G., Itani, A., & Velasquez-Bryant, N. (2006). The effects of engineering modules on student learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 301–309. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2006.tb00905.x.\nChristian, K., Kelly, A. M., Bugallo, M. F., & Sheppard, K. (2018). University-based training of high school science teachers to implement the next generation science standards. In Proceedings of the 2018 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition https:\u002F\u002Fpeer.asee.org\u002F29898.\nClarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947–967. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002FS0742-051X(02)00053-7.\nClarke, D. J., & Peter, A. (1993). Modelling teacher change. In Contexts in mathematics education. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA), (pp. 167–175) https:\u002F\u002Fpub.uni-bielefeld.de\u002Frecord\u002F2938175.\nCreswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori, & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, (pp. 209–240). Sage.\nCunningham, C. M., & Kelly, G. J. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486–505. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.21271.\nCunningham, C. M., Knight, M. T., Carlsen, W. S., & Kelly, G. (2007). Integrating engineering in middle and high school classrooms. International Journal of Engineering Education, 23(1), 3–8.\nDarling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute https:\u002F\u002Flearningpolicyinstitute.org\u002Fproduct\u002Feffective-teacher-professional-development-report.\nDaugherty, J. L. (2010). Engineering professional development design for secondary school teachers: A multiple case study. Journal of Technology Education, 21(1), 10–24. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.21061\u002Fjte.v21i1.a.1.\nDaugherty, J. L., & Custer, R. L. (2012). Secondary level engineering professional development: Content, pedagogy, and challenges. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22, 51–64. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-010-9136-2.\nDuschl, R. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Planning and carrying out investigations: An entry to learning and to teacher professional development around NGSS science and engineering practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 1(12). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-014-0012-6.\nFabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002F1082-989X.4.3.272.\nFaul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3758\u002FBF03193146.\nFischer, C. T. (2009). Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters. Psychotherapy Research Methods, 19(4-5), 583–590. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10503300902798375.\nFortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20040.\nFouad, N. (1995). Career linking: An intervention to promote math and science career awareness. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73(5), 527–534. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.1556-6676.1995.tb01789.x.\nGaret, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F00028312038004915.\nGearns, R., Kelly, A. M., & Bugallo, M. F. (2018). Professional development for high school guidance counselors to facilitate precollege STEM preparation. In Proceedings of the 2018 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition https:\u002F\u002Fpeer.asee.org\u002F30897.\nGibbons, S. J., Hirsch, L. S., Kimmel, H., Rockland, R., & Bloom, J. (2003). Counselors’ attitudes and knowledge about engineering. In Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Engineering Education, (pp. 1–7).\nGuest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F1525822X05279903.\nGuzey, S. S., Ring-Whalen, E. A., Harwell, M., & Peralta, Y. (2019). Life STEM: A case study of life science learning through engineering design. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(1), 23–42. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10763-017-9860-0.\nHaag, S., & Megowan-Romanowicz, C. (2015). Next generation science standards: A national mixed-methods study on teacher readiness. School Science and Mathematics, 115(8), 416–426. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fssm.12145.\nHall, C., Dickerson, J., Batts, D., Kauffman, P., & Bosse, M. (2011). Are we missing opportunities to encourage interest in STEM fields? Journal of Technology Education, 23(1), 32–46 https:\u002F\u002Feric.ed.gov\u002F?id=EJ965337.\nHardré, P. L., Nanny, M., Refai, H., Ling, C., & Slater, J. (2010). Engineering a dynamic science learning environment for K-12 teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 37(2), 157–178 https:\u002F\u002Fwww.jstor.org\u002Fstable\u002F23479594.\nHarris, D., Black, L., Hernandez-Martinez, P., Pepin, B., & Williams, J. (2015). Mathematics and its value for engineering students: What are the implications for teaching? International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 46(3), 321–336. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F0020739X.2014.979893.\nJick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.2307\u002F2392366.\nKelley, T. R., Knowles, J. G., Holland, J. D., & Han, J. (2020). Increasing high school teachers self-efficacy for integrated STEM instruction through a collaborative community of practice. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, 1–13. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00211-w.\nKelly, A. M., & Sheppard, K. (2009). Secondary physics availability in an urban setting: The relationship to academic achievement and course offerings. American Journal of Physics, 77(10), 902–906. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1119\u002F1.3191690.\nKelly, A. M., & Sheppard, K. (2010). The relationship between the urban small schools movement and access to physics education. Science Educator, 19(1), 14–25 https:\u002F\u002Feric.ed.gov\u002F?id=EJ874150.\nKelly, A. M., & Sheppard, K. (2019). Access to elite urban science schools in the U.S.: Opportunity, disparate impact, and equal protection. Teachers College Record https:\u002F\u002Fwww.tcrecord.org\u002FContent.asp?ContentID=22951.\nKimmel, H., Carpinelli, J., & Rockland, R. (2007, September). Bringing engineering into K-12 schools: A problem looking for solutions? In Paper presented at the International Conference in Engineering Education.\nKnapp, M. S. (2003). Chapter 4: Professional development as a policy pathway. Review of Research in Education, 27(1), 109–157. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0091732X027001109.\nKolmos, A., Mejlgaard, N., Haase, S., & Holgaard, J. E. (2013). Motivational factors, gender and engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38(3), 340–358. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F03043797.2013.794198.\nKrakehl, R., Kelly, A. M., Sheppard, K., & Palermo, M. (2020). Physics teacher isolation, contextual characteristics, and student achievement. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16(2), 020117. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1103\u002FPhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020117.\nKrayem, Z. N., Kelly, A. M., Bugallo, M. F., Westerfeld, D., Gearns, R., & Westervelt, K. (2018). Precollege electrical engineering outreach: The design of a home security system. In Proceedings of the 2018 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition https:\u002F\u002Fpeer.asee.org\u002F30881.\nLauer, P. A., Christopher, D. E., Firpo-Triplett, R., & Buchting, F. (2014). The impact of short-term professional development on participant outcomes: A review of the literature. Professional Development in Education, 40(2), 207–227. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F19415257.2013.776619.\nMatusovich, H. M., Streveler, R. A., & Miller, R. L. (2010). Why do students choose engineering? A qualitative, longitudinal investigation of students’ motivational values. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(4), 289–303. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2010.tb01064.x.\nMay, G. S., & Chubin, D. E. (2003). A retrospective on undergraduate engineering success for underrepresented minority students. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(1), 27–39. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2003.tb00735.x.\nMcGowan, V., Ventura, M., & Bell, P. (2017). Reverse engineering: How students’ everyday experiences can support science learning through engineering design. Science and Children, 54(8), 68–72.\nMehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71–85. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x.\nMessick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5–11. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0013189X018002005.\nMontfort, D. B., Brown, S., & Whritenour, V. (2013). Secondary students’ conceptual understanding of engineering as a field. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 3(2), 2. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.7771\u002F2157-9288.1057.\nMoore, J. L. (2006). A qualitative investigation of African American males’ career trajectory in engineering: Implications for teachers, school counselors, and parents. Teachers College Record, 108(2), 246–266.\nMorse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13–22. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1177\u002F160940690200100202.\nMundfrom, D. J., Shaw, D. G., & Ke, T. L. (2005). Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. International Journal of Testing, 5(2), 159–168. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002Fs15327574ijt0502_4.\nNathan, M. J., Tran, N. A., Atwood, A. K., Prevost, A. M. Y., & Phelps, L. A. (2010). Beliefs and expectations about engineering preparation exhibited by high school STEM teachers. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(4), 409–426. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2010.tb01071.x.\nNational Academy of Engineering (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. The National Academies Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17226\u002F12635.\nNational Academy of Engineering and National Research Council (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. The National Academies Press.\nNational Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (2018). Science and engineering indicators 2018. National Science Foundation https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nsf.gov\u002Fstatistics\u002F2018\u002Fnsb20181\u002F.\nNational Research Council (1996). National science education standards. The National Academies Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17226\u002F4962.\nNational Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17226\u002F13165.\nNew York State Education Department (1996). Standard 4 (Science). In Learning standards for MST. New York State Education Department.\nNew York State Education Department (2016). New York State P-12 science learning standards. New York State Education Department.\nNew York State Education Department (2018). New York State school report cards. New York State Education Department.\nNew York State Education Department (2019). New York State P-12 Science Standards development, adoption, and implementation. New York State Education Department.\nNGSS Lead States (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.17226\u002F18290.\nNugent, G., Kunz, G., Rilett, L., & Jones, E. (2010). Extending engineering education to K-12. The Technology Teacher, 69(7), 14–20.\nPackard, B. W. L., & Jeffers, K. C. (2013). Advising and progress in the community college STEM transfer pathway. NACADA Journal, 33(2), 65–76. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.12930\u002FNACADA-13-015.\nPadwa, L., Kelly, A. M., & Sheppard, K. (2019). Chemistry teacher isolation, contextual characteristics, and student performance. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(11), 2383–2392. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1021\u002Facs.jchemed.9b00392.\nPeters-Burton, E. E., & Johnson, T. (2018). Cross-case analysis of engineering education experiences in inclusive STEM-focused high schools in the United States. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 6(4), 320–342 https:\u002F\u002Feric.ed.gov\u002F?id=EJ1193468.\nPorter, T., West, M. E., Kajfez, R. L., Malone, K. L., & Irving, K. E. (2019). The effect of teacher professional development on implementing engineering in elementary schools. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 9(2), 5. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.7771\u002F2157-9288.1246.\nPurzer, S., Moore, T. J., Baker, D., & Berland, L. (2014). Supporting the implementation of the next generation science standards (NGSS) through research. National Association of Research in Science Teaching https:\u002F\u002Fnarst.org\u002Fblog\u002Fngss-engineering.\nPurzer, S., & Quintana-Cifuentes, J. P. (2019). Integrating engineering in K-12 science education: Spelling out the pedagogical, epistemological, and methodological arguments. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(13). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs43031-019-0010-0.\nPutnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3102\u002F0013189X029001004.\nSaldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.\nSheppard, K., Padwa, L., Kelly, A. M., & Krakehl, R. (2020). Out-of-field teaching in chemistry and physics: An empirical census study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(7), 746–767. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F1046560X.2019.1702268.\nShernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(13). https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-017-0068-1.\nSilk, E. M., Schunn, C. D., & Cary, M. S. (2009). The impact of an engineering design curriculum on science reasoning in an urban setting. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(3), 209–223. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-009-9144-8.\nSinger, J. E., Ross, J. M., & Jackson-Lee, Y. (2016). Professional development for the integration of engineering in high school STEM classrooms. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6(1), 3. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.7771\u002F2157-9288.1130.\nSmith, P. S. (2020). Obstacles to and progress toward the vision of the NGSS. Horizon Research, Inc.\nStevens, J. P. (2012). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Routledge.\nStuart, Z., Kelly, A. M., Westerfeld, D., & Bugallo, M. F. (2021). NGSS engineering practices in physics instruction: Building a night light. The Physics Teacher, 59(3), 171–174.\nSupovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002F1098-2736(200011)37:9\u003C963::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-0.\nThatcher, W., & Meyer, H. (2017). Identifying initial conceptions of engineering and teaching engineering. Education Sciences, 7(4), 88. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3390\u002Feducsci7040088.\nThompson, G. (2019). Update on the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). Victory\u002FA Pass Education Group https:\u002F\u002Fvictoryprd.com\u002Fblog\u002Fupdate-on-next-generation-science-standards-ngss\u002F.\nTyson, W. (2011). Modeling engineering degree attainment using high school and college physics and calculus coursetaking and achievement. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(4), 760–777. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2011.tb00035.x.\nWang, H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1(2), Article 2. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.5703\u002F1288284314636.\nWatkins, J., McCormick, M., Wendell, K. B., Spencer, K., Milto, E., Portsmore, M., & Hammer, D. (2018). Data-based conjectures for supporting responsive teaching in engineering design with elementary teachers. Science Education, 102(3), 548–570. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.21334.\nWilliams, T., Singer, J., Krikorian, J., Rakes, C., & Ross, J. (2019). Measuring pedagogy and the integration of engineering design in STEM classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(3), 179–194. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-018-9756-y.\nYaşar, Ş., Baker, D., Robinson-Kurpius, S., Krause, S., & Roberts, C. (2006). Development of a survey to assess K-12 teachers’ perceptions of engineers and familiarity with teaching design, engineering, and technology. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(3), 205–216. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2006.tb00893.x.\nYerrick, R., & Beatty-Adler, D. (2011). Addressing equity and diversity with teachers through informal science institutions and teacher professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 229–253. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10972-011-9226-3.\nYoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W. Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Issues & answers. REL 2007-No. 033. Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest (NJ1) https:\u002F\u002Feric.ed.gov\u002F?id=ED498548.\nYoon, S., Evans, M. G., & Strobel, J. (2014). Validation of the teaching engineering self-efficacy scale for K-12 teachers: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(3), 463–485. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fjee.20049.",{"EN":1178},"",{"EN":1180},"With widespread adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) in the USA (US), research is needed on how secondary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teachers conceptualize the integration of engineering knowledge and practices in traditional STEM classrooms. The present study explored the affective impacts of participation in an engineering education workshop for secondary STEM teachers as part of a 200-h professional development program. The workshop focused on the implementation of electrical engineering and biotechnology principles and design practices in disciplinary instruction, as well as training teachers to differentiate among engineering fields and advise on career pathways. The conceptual framework for the workshop design was based upon elements of the interconnected model of professional growth to identify influences contributing to engineering pedagogical self-efficacy and career awareness. The overarching research questions addressed how professional development in engineering education affected secondary STEM teachers’ beliefs about the value of using engineering design to support learning, their self-efficacy regarding teaching engineering in their courses, perceived obstacles to effective STEM integration, and their confidence advising students about engineering post-secondary study and careers. The convergent parallel mixed methods design involved factor analysis, comparisons of means, and phenomenology with elements of grounded theory. The survey sample included 60 STEM teachers in the treatment group and 28 teachers in the control group. Six science teachers participated in interviews before and after the engineering workshops. Findings indicated that participating teachers significantly improved their confidence in engineering pedagogy, as well as their knowledge of engineering careers and precollege preparation for post-secondary engineering. Teachers expressed their views of engineering as a potentially powerful tool in developing students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills, particularly when integrating the practices of science and engineering with the instruction of disciplinary content. The results from this study demonstrate that a university-based professional development workshop series, developed by engineering and science education faculty, is an effective first-step intervention to improve the engineering knowledge and skills of secondary STEM educators, ultimately facilitating NGSS adoption in classroom instruction. Educating teachers on engineering career pathways is another innovation for the promotion of more diverse participation in engineering fields.",{"EN":1182},"NGSS-based teacher professional development to implement engineering practices in STEM instruction",{"VOID":1184},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-021-00284-1","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-021-00284-1",[1187,1212,1228],{"id":1188,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":1189,"affiliations":1190,"properties":1209},"d972e214-ed46-4d47-b476-eea49b1b5c6a",[183],[1191,1200],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1192,"properties":20},{"id":1193,"createTime":1194,"updateTime":1194,"relativeEntities":1195,"slug":1196,"properties":1197,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"a01abcfa-a50a-4781-998b-1607dabf4c2d","2024-04-06T13:18:27.547+00:00",[],"Institute-for-STEM-Education-092-Life-Sciences-Stony-Brook-University-Stony-Brook-USA",{"title":1198},{"VI":1199},"Institute for STEM Education, 092 Life Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, USA",{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1201,"properties":20},{"id":1202,"createTime":1203,"updateTime":1203,"relativeEntities":1204,"slug":1205,"properties":1206,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"65911478-07b2-4f1a-b626-71ed7c1021f9","2024-04-06T13:18:27.560+00:00",[],"Department-of-Physics-Astronomy-092-Life-Sciences-Stony-Brook-University-Stony-Brook-USA",{"title":1207},{"VI":1208},"Department of Physics & Astronomy, 092 Life Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, USA",{"title":1210},{"VI":1211},"Angela M. Kelly",{"id":1213,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":1214,"affiliations":1215,"properties":1225},"92d77dc9-fd06-4db0-89a9-8eae420d3973",[183],[1216],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1217,"properties":20},{"id":1218,"createTime":1219,"updateTime":1219,"relativeEntities":1220,"slug":1221,"properties":1222,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"709dee8d-2777-48d9-aa24-6683f7895a71","2024-04-06T13:18:27.572+00:00",[],"Department-of-Electrical-Computer-Engineering-245-Light-Engineering-Stony-Brook-University-Stony-Brook-USA",{"title":1223},{"VI":1224},"Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, 245 Light Engineering, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, USA",{"title":1226},{"VI":1227},"Mónica F. Bugallo",{"id":1229,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":1230,"affiliations":1231,"properties":1246},"6c40ab3f-74db-4183-b481-14172864b3e2",[183],[1232,1237],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1233,"properties":20},{"id":1193,"createTime":1194,"updateTime":1194,"relativeEntities":1234,"slug":1196,"properties":1235,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1236},{"VI":1199},{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1238,"properties":20},{"id":1239,"createTime":1240,"updateTime":1240,"relativeEntities":1241,"slug":1242,"properties":1243,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"a64de9c1-a149-485d-a758-6e54794813f7","2024-04-06T13:18:27.549+00:00",[],"Smithtown-High-School-East-Smithtown-USA",{"title":1244},{"VI":1245},"Smithtown High School East, Smithtown, USA",{"title":1247},{"VI":1248},"Kimberly B. Christian",{"url":20,"publisher":1250,"properties":20},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1251,"slug":10,"properties":1252,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1256,"manageAffiliations":1257,"indexDatabases":1258,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1280,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1253,"title":1254,"url":1255},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1259,1266,1273],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1260,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1265,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1261,"label":1262,"description":1263,"key":85,"publicationTags":1264,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1267,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1272,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1268,"label":1269,"description":1270,"key":101,"publicationTags":1271,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1274,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1279,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1275,"label":1276,"description":1277,"key":66,"publicationTags":1278,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1281,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1282,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1283,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1284,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},"2021-03-23",2021,{"id":1288,"createTime":1289,"updateTime":1290,"relativeEntities":1291,"slug":1292,"properties":1293,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":1290,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":1302,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":1303,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1356,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1397,"publishYear":1286,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"0e3b0738-0f75-4e6c-9c2d-31d082d64464","2024-01-25T19:45:28.993+00:00","2025-01-15T23:25:29.732+00:00",[],"Conceptual-connections-between-science-and-engineering-in-elementary-teachers-unit-plans",{"references":1294,"abstract":1296,"title":1298,"doi":1300},{"VOID":1295},"Apedoe, X., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M., & Schunn, C. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: the heating\u002Fcooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 454–465. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-008-9114-6.\nAtman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359–379. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2007.tb00945.x.\nBamberger, Y., Cahill, C., Hagerty, J., Short, H., & Krajcik, J. (2010). Learning science by doing design: How can it work at the middle school level. Journal of Education, Informatics, and Cybernetics, 2(2), 41–46.\nBanilower, E. R. (2019). Understanding the big picture for science teacher education: The 2018 NSSME+. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 30(3), 201–208. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F1046560X.2019.1591920.\nBanilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Malzahn, K. M., Plumley, C. L., Gordon, E. M., & Hayes, M. L. (2018). Report of the 2018 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill: Horizon Research, Inc.\nBarab, S. A., & Luehmann, A. L. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87(4), 454–467.\nBerland, L., Steingut, R., & Ko, P. (2014). High school student perceptions of the utility of the engineering design process: Creating opportunities to engage in engineering practices and apply math and science content. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 705–720. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-014-9498-4.\nBrophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.\nCapobianco, B. M., DeLisi, J., & Radloff, J. (2018). Characterizing elementary teachers’ enactment of high-leverage practices through engineering design-based science instruction. Science Education, 102(2), 342–376. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.21325.\nCapobianco, B. M., & Rupp, M. (2014). STEM teachers’ planned and enacted attempts at implementing engineering design-based instruction. School Science and Mathematics, 114(6), 258–270. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fssm.12078.\nChao, J., Xie, C., Nourian, S., Chen, G., Bailey, S., Goldstein, M. H., … Tutwiler, M. S. (2017). Bridging the design-science gap with tools: Science learning and design behaviors in a simulated environment for engineering design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(8), 1049–1096. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.21398.\nClandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1992). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association, (pp. 363–461). New York: Macmillan.\nCohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression\u002Fcorrelation analysis for the behavioral sciences, (3rd ed., ). Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.\nCraig, C. (2012). Professional development through a teacher-as-curriculum-maker lens. In M. Kooy, & V. van Klaas (Eds.), Teacher learning that matters: International perspectives, (pp. 100–112). New York: Routledge.\nCreswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, (2nd ed., ). Thousand Oaks: Sage.\nCrismond, D. (2001). Learning and using science ideas when doing investigate-and-redesign tasks: A study of naive, novice, and expert designers doing constrained and scaffolded design work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 791–820. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.1032.\nCrotty, E. A., Guzey, S. S., Roehrig, G. H., Glancy, A. W., Ring-Whalen, E. A., & Moore, T. J. (2017). Approaches to integrating engineering in STEM units and student achievement gains. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 7(2), 1. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.7771\u002F2157-9288.1148.\nCunningham, C. M., & Carlsen, W. S. (2014). Precollege engineering education. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, volume 2, (pp. 747–758). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.\nCunningham, C. M., & Kelly, G. J. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486–505.\nDare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Driven by beliefs: understanding challenges physical science teachers face when integrating engineering and physics. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 4(2), 49–61.\nDare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2018). Understanding science teachers’ implementations of integrated STEM curricular units through a phenomenological multiple case study. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(4), 1–19. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-018-0101-z.\nDavis, E. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers' critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90(2), 348–375.\nDiefes-Dux, H. A. (2014). In-service teacher professional development in engineering education: Early years. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in precollege settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices, (pp. 233–257). Lafayette: Purdue University Press.\nEnochs, L. G., & Riggs, I. M. (1990). Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: A preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90(8), 694–706. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.1949-8594.1990.tb12048.x.\nFortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J. S., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20040.\nFrykholm, J., & Glasson, G. (2005). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(3), 127–141. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.1949-8594.2005.tb18047.x.\nGoldstein, M. H., Omar, S. A., Purzer, S., & Adams, R. S. (2018). Comparing two approaches to engineering design in the 7th grade science classroom. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 6(4), 381–397.\nGuzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up STEM: an analysis of teacher-developed engineering design-based STEM integration curricular materials. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6(1), 2. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.7771\u002F2157-9288.1129.\nGuzey, S. S., Tank, K., Wang, H. 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. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fssm.12061.\nHarrell, F. E. (2015). Regression modeling strategies: With applications to linear models, logistic and ordinal regression, and survival analysis, (2nd ed., ). Dordrecht: Springer.\nJohri, A., & Olds, B. M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151–185. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2011.tb00007.x.\nKanter, D. E. (2010). Doing the project and learning the content: designing project-based science curricula for meaningful understanding. Science Education, 94(3), 525–551. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.20381.\nKelly, G. J., & Cunningham, C. M. (2019). Epistemic tools in engineering design for K-12 education. Science Education, 103(4), 1080–1111.\nKing, D., & English, L. D. (2016). Engineering design in the primary school: Applying STEM concepts to build an optical instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 38(18), 2762–2794. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09500693.2016.1262567.\nKolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., & Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle school science classroom: Putting learning by design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1207\u002FS15327809JLS1204_2.\nKrippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fj.1468-2958.2004.tb00738.x.\nKrippendorff, K. (2012). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.\nLawrence Hall of Science (2015). Full option science system: next generation. Nashua: Delta Education.\nLead States, N. G. S. S. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nLehman, J., Kim, W., & Harris, C. (2014). Collaborations in a community of practice working to integrate engineering design in elementary science education. Journal of STEM Education, 15(3), 21–28.\nLevy, S. T. (2013). Young children’s learning of water physics by constructing working systems. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 537–566. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-012-9202-z.\nLewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: Bases for an accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255–281. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20111.\nLong, J. S., & Freese, J. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata, (2nd ed., ). College Station: Stata Press.\nLoucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2010). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics, (3rd ed., ). Thousand Oaks: Sage.\nMaeng, J. L., Whitworth, B. A., Gonczi, A. L., Navy, S. L., & Wheeler, L. B. (2017). Elementary science teachers’ integration of engineering design into science instruction: results from a randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1529–1548.\nMehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71–85. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fj.2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x.\nMiles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.\nMoore, T. J., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., & Kersten, J. A. (2015). NGSS and the landscape of engineering in K-12 state science standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(3), 296–318. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.21199.\nMuseum of Science, Boston (2007). Engineering is elementary. Boston: Museum of Science.\nNational Academy of Engineering (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nNational Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nNational Research Council (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nPenner, D. E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics: A design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 429–449. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10508406.1998.9672060.\nPleasants, J., & Olson, J. K. (2019). What is engineering? Elaborating the nature of engineering for K-12 education. Science Education, 103(1), 145–166. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fsce.21483.\nPuntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185–217. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.20048.\nPurzer, Ş., Goldstein, M. H., Adams, R. S., Xie, C., & Nourian, S. (2015). An exploratory study of informed engineering design behaviors associated with scientific explanations. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 9.\nPurzer, S., & Quintana-Cifuentes, J. P. (2019). Integrating engineering in K-12 science education: spelling out the pedagogical, epistemological, and methodological arguments. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 13.\nRadloff, J., & Capobianco, B. M. (2019). Investigating elementary teachers’ tensions and mitigating strategies related to integrating engineering design-based science instruction. Research in Science Education. Advance online publication. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11165-019-9844-x.\nRemillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.\nRiskowski, J. L., Todd, C. D., Wee, B., Dark, M., & Harbor, J. (2009). Exploring the effectiveness of an interdisciplinary water resources engineering module in an eighth-grade science course. International Journal of Engineering Education, 25(1), 181–195.\nRoehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E., & Wieselmann, J. R. (2021). Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education 8(1), 1–21.\nRoehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H. H., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E enough? Investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31–44.\nRoth, W. M. (2001). Learning science through technological design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 768–790. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.1031.\nSadler, P. M., Coyle, H. P., Cook-Smith, N., & Miller, J. L. (2006). MOSART: Misconceptions-oriented standards-based assessment resources for teachers. Cambridge: Harvard College Retrieved from http:\u002F\u002Fwww.cfa.harvard.edu\u002Fsmgphp\u002Fmosart\u002Fabout_mosart.html.\nSchneider, R., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 221–245.\nSchnittka, 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. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F09500693.2010.529177.\nSchwarz, C. V., Gunckel, K. L., Smith, E. L., Covitt, B. A., Bae, M., Enfield, M., & Tsurusaki, B. K. (2008). Helping elementary preservice teachers learn to use curriculum materials for effective science teaching. Science Education, 92(2), 345–377.\nSidawi, M. M. (2009). Teaching science through designing technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(3), 269–287. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10798-007-9045-1.\nSilk, E. M., Schunn, C. D., & Cary, M. S. (2009). The impact of an engineering design curriculum on science reasoning in an urban setting. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(3), 209–223. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10956-009-9144-8.\nSpinler, C. D. (2018). Organizational perspectives on co-teaching triads participating in a science and engineering professional development program [Doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University]. ISU Campus Repository. https:\u002F\u002Flib.dr.iastate.edu\u002Fetd\u002F16672\nTeddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.\nTytler, R., Prain, V., & Hobbs, L. (2019). Rethinking disciplinary links in interdisciplinary STEM learning: a temporal model. Research in Science Education. Advance online publication. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11165-019-09872-2.\nWalkington, C., Nathan, M., Wolfgram, M., Alibali, M., & Srisurichan, R. (2014). Bridges and barriers to constructing conceptual cohesion across modalities and temporalities: Challenges of STEM integration in the precollege engineering classroom. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in precollege settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices, (pp. 183–210). Lafayette: Purdue University Press.\nWendell, K. B., & Rogers, C. (2013). Engineering design-based science, science content performance, and science attitudes in elementary school. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 513–540. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Fjee.20026.\nWheeler, L. B., Navy, S. L., Maeng, J. L., & Whitworth, B. A. (2019). Development and validation of the classroom observation protocol for engineering design (COPED). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(9), 1285–1305. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1002\u002Ftea.21557.\nYoon, S. Y., Evans, M. G., & Strobel, J. (2012). Development of the teaching engineering self-efficacy scale (TESS) for K-12 teachers. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, (pp. 25–46). San Antonio: ASEE.",{"EN":1297},"Around the world, efforts are underway to include engineering design as part of elementary science instruction. A common rationale for those efforts is that Engineering Design-based Science Teaching (EDST) is a productive pedagogical approach for developing students’ understanding of core science concepts. Effectively utilizing EDST requires that teachers develop design activities that are highly connected to science content so that students can apply and expand their understanding of relevant concepts. In this study, we examine how a group of elementary (grades 3–5) pre-service and in-service teachers incorporated EDST into their planned science instruction. Those teachers were participants in a professional development project aimed at supporting EDST. We examine the ways that participants used EDST, the extent to which engineering design activities were connected to science concepts, and factors associated with those connections. Most of the participants in the study developed science units in which an engineering design activity was placed at the end of the unit. Approximately half of those design activities lacked connections to the science concepts in the unit; they were typically related to the topic of the science unit, but did not require the use or development of key science ideas. Eleven percent of participants developed engineering activities with deep connections to science concepts, and 35% developed activities with shallow connections. No differences were found between life science, physical science, and earth\u002Fspace science units in terms of the extent of conceptual connections. However, we did find that participants who utilized and adapted published engineering curriculum materials rather than make them from scratch were more likely to have unit plans with higher levels of conceptual connections. Our findings suggest that elementary teachers need additional support in order to effectively utilize EDST in their classrooms. Even within the context of a supportive professional development project, most of the engineering activities developed by our participants lacked substantial connections to the science concepts in their unit plans. Our findings highlight the value of high-quality curriculum materials to support EDST as well as the need to further expand the curriculum resources that are available to elementary teachers.",{"EN":1299},"Conceptual connections between science and engineering in elementary teachers’ unit plans",{"VOID":1301},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-021-00274-3","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-021-00274-3",[1304,1321,1336],{"id":1305,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":1306,"affiliations":1307,"properties":1318},"633f2181-d8d2-422a-b6e4-24661df9ba92",[183],[1308],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1309,"properties":20},{"id":1310,"createTime":1311,"updateTime":1312,"relativeEntities":1313,"slug":1314,"properties":1315,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"1710c0b6-aca1-4c79-a3d7-f71b1463ab77","2023-12-28T02:48:58.519+00:00","2025-02-24T02:42:46.817+00:00",[],"Texas-A-M-University-College-Station-USA",{"title":1316},{"VI":1317},"Texas A&M University, College Station, USA",{"title":1319},{"VI":1320},"Joanne K. Olson",{"id":1322,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":1323,"affiliations":1324,"properties":1333},"cbf5265b-b709-4bfc-9ca6-6eca2838d538",[183],[1325],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1326,"properties":20},{"id":1327,"createTime":1328,"updateTime":1328,"relativeEntities":1329,"slug":20,"properties":1330,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"28dde03f-a033-4922-9919-9d5b6f9146e7","2023-12-31T20:42:22.597+00:00",[],{"title":1331},{"VI":1332},"Keene State College, Keene, USA",{"title":1334},{"VI":1335},"Jacob Pleasants",{"id":1337,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":1338,"affiliations":1339,"properties":1353},"ee20f228-334b-4982-a51b-318d1645257d",[183],[1340],{"id":1341,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1342,"properties":1351},"d4ed7811-89da-491f-bdab-386e4fb77f50",{"id":1343,"createTime":1344,"updateTime":1345,"relativeEntities":1346,"slug":1347,"properties":1348,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"a2b75297-5f39-497a-ad6d-d4090441889e","2024-09-26T01:27:10.969+00:00","2025-01-25T16:26:21.457+00:00",[],"Iowa-State-University-Ames-USA",{"title":1349},{"EN":1350},"Iowa State University, Ames, USA",{"title":1352},{"VI":1350},{"title":1354},{"VI":1355},"Kristina M. Tank",{"url":1302,"publisher":1357,"properties":1392},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1358,"slug":10,"properties":1359,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1363,"manageAffiliations":1364,"indexDatabases":1365,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1387,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1360,"title":1361,"url":1362},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1366,1373,1380],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1367,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1372,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1368,"label":1369,"description":1370,"key":85,"publicationTags":1371,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1374,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1379,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1375,"label":1376,"description":1377,"key":101,"publicationTags":1378,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1381,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1386,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1382,"label":1383,"description":1384,"key":66,"publicationTags":1385,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1388,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1389,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1390,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1391,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":1393,"pages":1395},{"VOID":1394},"8",{"VOID":1396},"1-17","2021-04-08",{"id":1399,"createTime":1400,"updateTime":1401,"relativeEntities":1402,"slug":1403,"properties":1404,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":1401,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":1413,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":1414,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1481,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1521,"publishYear":904,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"131b2703-9a17-44c9-a511-d0f75871b8bf","2024-01-29T03:36:42.609+00:00","2025-01-30T23:19:29.798+00:00",[],"An-exploratory-study-of-informed-engineering-design-behaviors-associated-with-scientific-explanations",{"references":1405,"abstract":1407,"title":1409,"doi":1411},{"VOID":1406},"Adams, RS, Turns, J, & Atman, CJ. (2003). Educating effective engineering designers: the role of reflective practice. Design Studies, 24(3), 275–294.\nApedoe, XS, Reynolds, B, Ellefson, MR, & Schunn, CD. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: the heating\u002Fcooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454–465.\nApedoe, XS, & Schunn, CD. (2013). Strategies for success: uncovering what makes students successful in design and learning. Instructional Science, 41(4), 773–791.\nBall, LJ, & Christensen, BT. (2009). Analogical reasoning and mental simulation in design: two strategies linked to uncertainty resolution. Design Studies, 30(2), 169–186.\nBaker, RS, Corbett, AT, & Wagner, AZ. (2006). Human classification of low-fidelity replays of student actions. In Proceedings of the Educational Data Mining Workshop at the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems.\nBrophy, S, Klein, S, Portsmore, M, & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.\nBruner, JS. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32.\nBucciarelli, LL. (1996). Designing engineers. Cambridge: MIT Press. Chapter 1–2, 6.\nBurghardt, MD, & Hacker, M. (2004). Informed design: a contemporary approach to design pedagogy as the core process in technology. The Technology Teacher, 64(1), 6–8.\nCajas, F. (2001). The science\u002Ftechnology interaction: implications for science literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 715–729.\nCrismond, DP, & Adams, RS. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797.\nCross, N. (2001). Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In CM Eastman, WM McCracken, & W Newstetter (Eds.), Design Learning and Knowing: Cognition in Design Education. New York: Elsevier Press.\nCross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London: Springer. Chapter 1–2.\nDaugherty, J, & Mentzer, N. (2008). Analogical reasoning in the engineering design process and technology education applications. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 7–21.\nDoppelt, Y, Mehalik, MM, Schunn, CD, Silk, E, & Krysinski, D. (2008). Engagement and achievements: a case study of design-based learning in a science context. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 22–39.\nDorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532.\nDubberly, H. (2004). How do you design? A compendium of models. Dubberly Design Office, San Francisco CA. [–Retrieved from http:\u002F\u002Fwww.dubberly.com\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2008\u002F06\u002Fddo_designprocess.pdf]\nFish, J, & Scrivener, SA. (1990). Amplifying the mind’s eye: sketching and visual cognition. Leonardo, 23(1), 117–126.\nGoel, V, & Pirolli, P. (1992). The Structure of design problem spaces. Cognitive Science, 16(3), 395–429.\nGoldschmidt, G. (1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 123–143.\nGoldschmidt, G, & Smolkov, M. (2006). Variances in the impact of visual stimuli on design problem solving performance. Design Studies, 27(5), 549–569.\nHmelo, CE, Holton, DL, & Kolodner, JL. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 247–298.\nJonassen, DH. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.\nJonassen, DH. (2012). Designing for decision making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(2), 341–359.\nKolko, J. (2010). Abductive thinking and sensemaking: the drivers of design synthesis. Design Issues, 26(1), 5–28.\nKolodner, JL. (2002). Facilitating the learning of design practices: lessons from an inquiry into science education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3), 9–40.\nKolodner, JL, Crismond, D, Fasse, BB, Gray, JT, Holbrook, J, Ryan, M, et al. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: putting a learning-by-design curriculum into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–548.\nLachapelle, CP, & Cunningham, CM. (2014). Engineering in elementary schools. In S Purzer, J Strobel, & ME Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: synthesizing research, policy, and practices. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.\nLawson, B, & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press (Elsevier).\nLewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: bases for an accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255–281.\nNational Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.\nNational Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nNational Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nNational Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nAchieve. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.\nPaletz, S, Schunn, CD, & Kim, KH. (2013). The interplay of conflict and analogy in multidisciplinary teams. Cognition, 126(1), 1–19.\nPapadouris, N. (2012). Optimization as a reasoning strategy for dealing with socioscientific decision‐making situations. Science Education, 96(4), 600–630.\nPenner, DE, Giles, ND, Lehrer, R, & Schauble, L. (1997). Building functional models: designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 125–143.\nPurzer, Ş, Strobel, J, & Cardella, ME. (2014). Engineering in pre-college settings: synthesizing research, policy, and practices. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.\nSadler, PM, Coyle, HP, & Schwartz, M. (2000). Engineering competitions in the middle school classroom: key elements in developing effective design challenges. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 299–327.\nScholten, M, & Sherman, SJ. (2006). Tradeoffs and theory: the double-mediation model. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 135, 237–261 and 552.\nSchön, DA. (1993). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.\nSchnittka, 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.\nSchunn, CD, Silk, EM, & Apedoe, XS. (2012). Engineering in and for science education. In J Shrager & S Carver (Eds.), The journey from child to scientist: Integrating cognitive development and the education sciences (pp. 207–225). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.\nSnetsinger, C, Brewer, C, & Brown, F. (1999). Capture the wind: students get a charge from wind energy. The Science Teacher, 66, 38–42.\nSubramanian, K. (1999). Practical physics. The Science Teacher, 66, 37–39.\nSvihla, V, & Petrosino, AJ. (2008). Improving our understanding of K-12 engineering education. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education. Greece: Heraklion.\nValkenburg’s, R. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies, 19(3), 249–271.\nVattam, SS, & Kolodner, JL. (2008). On foundations of technological support for addressing challenges facing design-based science learning. Pragmatics & Cognition, 16(2), 406–437.\nXie, C, Zhang, H, Nourian, S, Pallant, A, & Bailey, S. (2014a). A study of the instructional sensitivity of CAD logs based on time series analysis. International Journal of Engineering Education, 30(4), 760–778.\nXie, C, Zhang, H, Nourian, S, Pallant, A, & Hazzard, E. (2014b). A time series analysis method for assessing engineering design processes using a CAD tool. International Journal of Engineering Education, 30(1), 218–230.\nZhang, Z, Xie, C, & Nourian, S. (2014). Detecting iterative cycles of engineering design from student digital footprints in computer-aided design software. Poster presented at the 2014 International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Boulder CO: International Society of the Learning Sciences.\nZubrowski, B. (2002). Integrating science into design technology projects: using a standard model in the design process. Journal of Technology Education, 13(2), 47–65.",{"EN":1408},"Design and science inquiry are intertwined during engineering practice. In this study, we examined the relationship between design behaviors and scientific explanations. Data on student design processes were collected as students engaged in a project on designing energy-efficient buildings on a blank square city block surrounded by existing buildings using a computer-aided design program, Energy3D, with built-in solar energy simulation capabilities. We used criterion sampling to select two highly reflective students among 63 high school students. The main data sources were design replays (automatic playback of student design sequences within the CAD software) and electronic notes taken by the students. We identified evidence of informed design such as problem framing, idea fluency, and balancing benefits and trade-offs. Opportunities for meaningful science learning through engineering design occurred when students attempted to balance design benefits and trade-offs. The results suggest that design projects used in classrooms should emphasize trade-off analysis and include time and resources for supporting trade-off decisions through experimentation and reflection. Future research should explore ways to visualize patterns of design behavior based on large samples of students.",{"EN":1410},"An exploratory study of informed engineering design behaviors associated with scientific explanations",{"VOID":1412},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-015-0019-7","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-015-0019-7",[1415,1430,1445,1457,1469],{"id":1416,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":1417,"affiliations":1418,"properties":1427},"2e925478-d8d8-4960-960a-b7903dbf48d3",[183],[1419],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1420,"properties":20},{"id":1421,"createTime":1422,"updateTime":1422,"relativeEntities":1423,"slug":20,"properties":1424,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"bfa98f85-0172-4f2c-89f9-9f8986e4e3cb","2024-01-29T03:36:42.629+00:00",[],{"title":1425},{"VI":1426},"School of Engineering Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA",{"title":1428},{"VI":1429},"Şenay Purzer",{"id":1431,"sortIndex":221,"researcher":20,"roles":1432,"affiliations":1433,"properties":1442},"a8044a5a-e5f8-40d9-8af5-2b17713e93e1",[183],[1434],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1435,"properties":20},{"id":1436,"createTime":1437,"updateTime":1437,"relativeEntities":1438,"slug":20,"properties":1439,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"9de58e01-cd63-4b14-85a3-be589580b256","2024-01-29T03:36:42.669+00:00",[],{"title":1440},{"VI":1441},"The Intelligent Learning Environments Laboratory, Concord, USA",{"title":1443},{"VI":1444},"Saeid Nourian",{"id":1446,"sortIndex":270,"researcher":20,"roles":1447,"affiliations":1448,"properties":1454},"a353c3fe-eb5f-42d7-b9a4-c8bd4c937a62",[183],[1449],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1450,"properties":20},{"id":1436,"createTime":1437,"updateTime":1437,"relativeEntities":1451,"slug":20,"properties":1452,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1453},{"VI":1441},{"title":1455},{"VI":1456},"Charles Xie",{"id":1458,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":1459,"affiliations":1460,"properties":1466},"a68bb750-807f-40ab-861b-687edf17144c",[183],[1461],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1462,"properties":20},{"id":1421,"createTime":1422,"updateTime":1422,"relativeEntities":1463,"slug":20,"properties":1464,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1465},{"VI":1426},{"title":1467},{"VI":1468},"Robin S Adams",{"id":1470,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":1471,"affiliations":1472,"properties":1478},"c01193d5-fc7a-42d5-b25f-d859ae5909cb",[183],[1473],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1474,"properties":20},{"id":1421,"createTime":1422,"updateTime":1422,"relativeEntities":1475,"slug":20,"properties":1476,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1477},{"VI":1426},{"title":1479},{"VI":1480},"Molly Hathaway Goldstein",{"url":1413,"publisher":1482,"properties":1517},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1483,"slug":10,"properties":1484,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1488,"manageAffiliations":1489,"indexDatabases":1490,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1512,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1485,"title":1486,"url":1487},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1491,1498,1505],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1492,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1497,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1493,"label":1494,"description":1495,"key":85,"publicationTags":1496,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1499,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1504,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1500,"label":1501,"description":1502,"key":101,"publicationTags":1503,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1506,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1511,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1507,"label":1508,"description":1509,"key":66,"publicationTags":1510,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1513,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1514,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1515,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1516,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":1518,"pages":1519},{"VOID":900},{"VOID":1520},"1-12","2015-05-20",{"id":1523,"createTime":1524,"updateTime":1524,"relativeEntities":1525,"slug":20,"properties":1526,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":1535,"fullTextUrl":20,"authors":1536,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1603,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1644,"publishYear":1645,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"d002fbdc-f6dc-4edb-be97-b2dfe6235b6d","2023-12-07T23:19:00.354+00:00",[],{"references":1527,"abstract":1529,"title":1531,"doi":1533},{"VOID":1528},"Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Stoll, J. (2010). Help wanted: projections of jobs and education requirements through 2018. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Available: https:\u002F\u002Fcew.georgetown.edu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2014\u002F12\u002Ffullreport.pdf. Accessed July, 2015.\nDuBois, D. L., Hollaway, B. E., Valentine, J. C., & Cooper, H. (2002). Effectiveness of mentoring programs for youth: a meta-analytical review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 157–197.\nGregg-Jolly, L. A., Kington, R., Lopatto, D., & Swartz, J. E. (2011). Benefits of intertwining teaching and research. Science, 331, 532.\nKnopf, J.A., Hahn, R.A., Proia, .K.K., Truman, B.I., Johnson, R.L., Muntaner, C. et al (2015). Out-of-school-time academic programs to improve school achievement: a community guide health equity systematic review. J Public Health Manag Pract, Epub ahead of print\nLinstone, H.A., Turoff, M. (1975). Delphi method: techniques and applications. Addison-Wesley Publishing\nLopatto, D. E. (2005). Undergraduate research experiences and the epigenesis of a science career. Developmental Biology, 283, 586–587.\nLopatto, D. (2007). Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6, 297–306.\n[NACE] National Association of Colleges and Employers. (2014). Job outlook 2015. Available: https:\u002F\u002Fwww.umuc.edu\u002Fupload\u002FNACE-Job-Outlook-2015.pdf. Accessed 12 Mar 2016.\n[NDE] Nebraska Department of Education. (2013). 2012–2013 state of the schools report. Available: http:\u002F\u002Freportcard.education.ne.gov. Accessed 12 Mar 2016.\nReform for the Future, 2012. Available: (https:\u002F\u002Fwww.whitehouse.gov\u002Fissues\u002Feducation\u002Freform). Accessed 12 Mar 2016.\nSacco, K., Falk, J. H., & Bell, J. (2015). Informal science education: lifelong, life-wide, life-deep. PLoS Biology, 12(11), e1001986.\nU.S. Department of Commerce, Economics, and Statistics Administration. (2011). U.S. innovations report, Department of Commerce, United States of America. STEM: good jobs now and for the future. Available: http:\u002F\u002Fwww.esa.doc.gov\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002Fstemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf. Accessed 12 Mar 2016.",{"EN":1530},"The Nebraska Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 4U (NE STEM 4U) program was initiated at the University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO) in 2013. NE STEM 4U is a student-run, faculty-led program facilitating problem-based learning (PBL) sessions in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) for socioeconomically disadvantaged kindergarten through grade 8 (K-8) students. PBL sessions are provided throughout the academic year in a twice-weekly, after-school, informal education program. The instructional material provided after school builds upon the curricula of the school day. Importantly, this program is a partnership between faculty members and administrators in higher education at UNO with community partners of Omaha including Collective for Youth, Beyond School Bells, and Omaha Public Schools. We focus on engaging K-8 youth in after-school immersion experiences in STEM fields using undergraduate students as mentors and facilitators using a model of problem-based learning. This program fosters an educational pipeline for students with hands-on experience in problem-solving and critical thinking. The partnerships among the community provide the foundation for success for students across the K-16 pipeline. Herein, we describe the model of this program as documented by demonstrated successes to date in an effort to guide others in developing such a model in their city or region. We also provide models for implementation of assessment instruments.",{"EN":1532},"NE STEM 4U: an out-of-school time academic program to improve achievement of socioeconomically disadvantaged youth in STEM areas",{"VOID":1534},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-016-0037-0","http:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Farticles\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-016-0037-0",[1537,1552,1567,1579,1591],{"id":1538,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":1539,"affiliations":1540,"properties":1549},"d2105f47-36be-4368-ba83-7aca9b1d05c3",[183],[1541],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1542,"properties":20},{"id":1543,"createTime":1544,"updateTime":1544,"relativeEntities":1545,"slug":20,"properties":1546,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"9143d1ac-eb9f-470f-83a9-ac80146f7c53","2024-01-21T07:16:02.232+00:00",[],{"title":1547},{"VI":1548},"Department of Biology, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, USA",{"title":1550},{"VI":1551},"Kari L. Nelson",{"id":1553,"sortIndex":270,"researcher":20,"roles":1554,"affiliations":1555,"properties":1564},"5b7dc0c2-606a-4df9-b05e-98c63b4a46c9",[183],[1556],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1557,"properties":20},{"id":1558,"createTime":1559,"updateTime":1559,"relativeEntities":1560,"slug":20,"properties":1561,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"fcc5ce28-62ad-425b-a9e7-b994c45b0a7c","2023-12-07T23:19:00.608+00:00",[],{"title":1562},{"VI":1563},"Department of Teacher Education, University of Nebraska Omaha, Omaha, USA",{"title":1565},{"VI":1566},"Neal F. Grandgenett",{"id":1568,"sortIndex":221,"researcher":20,"roles":1569,"affiliations":1570,"properties":1576},"8469e82e-4624-4f96-afc4-954d12970267",[183],[1571],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1572,"properties":20},{"id":1543,"createTime":1544,"updateTime":1544,"relativeEntities":1573,"slug":20,"properties":1574,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1575},{"VI":1548},{"title":1577},{"VI":1578},"William E. Tapprich",{"id":1580,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":1581,"affiliations":1582,"properties":1588},"b35770d5-6d41-41ec-82ad-356857aacbdc",[183],[1583],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1584,"properties":20},{"id":1543,"createTime":1544,"updateTime":1544,"relativeEntities":1585,"slug":20,"properties":1586,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1587},{"VI":1548},{"title":1589},{"VI":1590},"Jamie L. Luhr",{"id":1592,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":1593,"affiliations":1594,"properties":1600},"8556c2a7-e0ae-41ff-8ddc-06286bcc32e1",[183],[1595],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1596,"properties":20},{"id":1543,"createTime":1544,"updateTime":1544,"relativeEntities":1597,"slug":20,"properties":1598,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1599},{"VI":1548},{"title":1601},{"VI":1602},"Christine E. Cutucache",{"url":1535,"publisher":1604,"properties":1639},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1605,"slug":10,"properties":1606,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1610,"manageAffiliations":1611,"indexDatabases":1612,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1634,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1607,"title":1608,"url":1609},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1613,1620,1627],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1614,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1619,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1615,"label":1616,"description":1617,"key":85,"publicationTags":1618,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1621,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1626,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1622,"label":1623,"description":1624,"key":101,"publicationTags":1625,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1628,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1633,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1629,"label":1630,"description":1631,"key":66,"publicationTags":1632,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1635,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1636,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1637,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1638,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":1640,"pages":1642},{"VOID":1641},"3",{"VOID":1643},"1-7","2016-03-24",2016,{"id":1647,"createTime":1648,"updateTime":1649,"relativeEntities":1650,"slug":1651,"properties":1652,"entityType":174,"verifyStatus":175,"verifyTime":1649,"verifyNote":176,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"primaryUrl":1661,"fullTextUrl":1662,"authors":1663,"publicationType":286,"publisherRelationship":1725,"citationCount":20,"citationInfo":20,"publishDate":1766,"publishYear":1767,"citationAnalyzeStatus":19,"lastCitationAnalyze":20,"indexDatabases":20,"openAccess":20,"references":20,"isForceReanalyzing":330},"9e6e3dfd-8860-46d4-9171-dd2e6ce1785a","2023-12-08T06:54:57.587+00:00","2024-12-28T23:12:15.852+00:00",[],"Speaking-up-a-model-of-self-advocacy-for-STEM-undergraduates-with-ADHD-and-or-specific-learning-disabilities",{"references":1653,"abstract":1655,"title":1657,"doi":1659},{"VOID":1654},"citation_title=Diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders; citation_publication_date=2013; citation_id=CR1; citation_publisher=Author\nAmericans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, § 2, 104 Stat. 328 (1990).\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of College Student Development; citation_title=Interpersonal maturity: Integrating agency and communion; citation_author=MB Baxter Magolda; citation_volume=41; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2000; citation_pages=141-156; citation_id=CR3\ncitation_journal_title=Public Health Research; citation_title=Implications for public health research of models and theories of disability: A scoping study and evidence synthesis; citation_author=M Berghs, K Atkin, H Graham, C Hatton, C Thomas; citation_volume=4; citation_issue=8; citation_publication_date=2016; citation_pages=1-166; citation_doi=10.3310\u002Fphr04080; citation_id=CR4\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Education and Training Studies; citation_title=Postsecondary students with specific learning disabilities and with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder should not be considered as a unified group for research or practice; citation_author=J Budd, CS Fichten, M Jorgensen, A Havel, T Flanagan; citation_volume=4; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=2016; citation_pages=206-216; citation_id=CR5\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Geoscience Education; citation_title=A synthesis of instructional strategies in geoscience education literature that address barriers to inclusion for students with disabilities; citation_author=IG Carabajal, AM Marshall, CL Atchison; citation_volume=65; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=2017; citation_pages=531-541; citation_id=CR6\nCAST. (2020). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. \n                  http:\u002F\u002Fudlguidelines.cast.org\n                  \n                .\nCharmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Self-disclosure decisions of university students with learning disabilities; citation_author=EV Cole, SW Cawthon; citation_volume=28; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=163-179; citation_id=CR9\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Positive psychology and self-efficacy: Potential benefits for college students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disabilities; citation_author=CA Costello, SLM Stone; citation_volume=25; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2012; citation_pages=119-129; citation_id=CR10\ncitation_journal_title=International Journal of Disability, Development and Education; citation_title=Support for students with hidden disabilities in universities: A case study; citation_author=D Couzens, S Poed, M Kataoka, A Brandon, J Hartley, D Keen; citation_volume=62; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=24-41; citation_doi=10.1080\u002F1034912X.2014.984592; citation_id=CR11\ncitation_journal_title=Circulation; citation_title=Qualitative and mixed methods provide unique contributions to outcomes research; citation_author=LA Curry, IM Nembhard, EH Bradley; citation_volume=119; citation_issue=10; citation_publication_date=2009; citation_pages=1442-1452; citation_doi=10.1161\u002Fcirculationaha.107.742775; citation_id=CR12\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=College student narratives about learning and using self-advocacy skills; citation_author=M Daly-Cano, A Vaccaro, B Newman; citation_volume=28; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=213-227; citation_id=CR13\ncitation_journal_title=Intervention in School and Clinic; citation_title=Assisting students with high-incidence disabilities to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics; citation_author=C Dunn, KS Rabren, SL Taylor, CK Dotson; citation_volume=48; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2012; citation_pages=47-54; citation_doi=10.1177\u002F1053451212443151; citation_id=CR14\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Learning Disabilities; citation_title=Comorbidity of LD and ADHD: Implications of DSM-5 for assessment and treatment; citation_author=GJ DuPaul, MJ Gormley, SD Laracy; citation_volume=46; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2013; citation_pages=43-51; citation_id=CR15\ncitation_journal_title=American Secondary Education; citation_title=Students with disabilities: Transitioning from high school to higher education; citation_author=SE Eckes, TA Ochoa; citation_volume=33; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2005; citation_pages=6-20; citation_id=CR16\nEisner, E. W. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Merrill.\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=College students with disabilities: The relationship between student characteristics, the academic environment, and performance; citation_author=AR Fleming, AJ Plotner, KM Oertle; citation_volume=30; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2017; citation_pages=209-221; citation_id=CR18\ncitation_journal_title=Information Research; citation_title=Validating coding for a theoretical model of information behaviour; citation_author=A Foster, C Urquhart, J Turner; citation_volume=13; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=2008; citation_pages=358; citation_id=CR19\ncitation_journal_title=The Qualitative Report; citation_title=The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory; citation_author=SM Fram; citation_volume=18; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2013; citation_pages=1-25; citation_id=CR20\nGelbar, N., Madaus, J. W., Dukes, L., Faggella-Luby, M., Volk, D., & Monahan, J. (2019). Self-determination and college students with disabilities: Research trends and construct measurement. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 163–181 \n                  https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F19496591.2019.1631835\n                  \n                .\ncitation_journal_title=The Qualitative Report; citation_title=Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research; citation_author=N Golafshani; citation_volume=8; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=2003; citation_pages=597-607; citation_id=CR22\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of College Admission; citation_title=The necessity of academic accommodations for first-year college students with learning disabilities; citation_author=WM Hadley; citation_volume=195; citation_publication_date=2007; citation_pages=9-13; citation_id=CR23\ncitation_journal_title=Quest; citation_title=Disability discourse: Overview and critiques of the medical and social models; citation_author=JA Haegele, S Hodge; citation_volume=68; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2016; citation_pages=193-206; citation_doi=10.1080\u002F00336297.2016.1143849; citation_id=CR24\nHarbour, W. S., & Greenberg, D. (2017). Campus climate and students with disabilities. NCCSD Research Brief, 1(2) \n                  http:\u002F\u002Fhdl.handle.net\u002F10919\u002F86931\n                  \n                .\ncitation_journal_title=Remedial and Special Education; citation_title=Self-advocacy instruction to teach high school seniors with mild disabilities to access accommodations in college; citation_author=DG Holzberg, DW Test, DE Rusher; citation_volume=40; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2019; citation_pages=166-176; citation_id=CR26\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of College Student Development; citation_title=Qualitative analysis of the barriers college students with disabilities experience in higher education; citation_author=BS Hong; citation_volume=56; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=209-226; citation_id=CR27\ncitation_journal_title=ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders; citation_title=Living “in the zone”: hyperfocus in adult ADHD; citation_author=KE Hupfeld, TR Abagis, P Shah; citation_volume=11; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2019; citation_pages=191-208; citation_doi=10.1007\u002Fs12402-018-0272-y; citation_id=CR28\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Science Education for Students with Disabilities; citation_title=Ambiguity in speaking chemistry and other STEM content: Educational implications; citation_author=MD Isaacson, M Michaels; citation_volume=18; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=1-9; citation_id=CR29\nIzzo, M., & Lamb, M. (2002). Self-determination and career development: Skills for successful transitions to postsecondary education and employment. [White paper]. Post-School Outcomes Network of the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET) at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. \n                  http:\u002F\u002Fwww.ncset.hawaii.edu\u002FPublications\n                  \n                \n\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Learning Disabilities; citation_title=The transition from high school to postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A survey of college service coordinators; citation_author=SJ Janiga, V Costenbader; citation_volume=35; citation_issue=5; citation_publication_date=2002; citation_pages=463-470; citation_id=CR31\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Measuring self-advocacy skills among student veterans with disabilities: Implications for success in postsecondary education; citation_author=AR Kinney, AM Eakman; citation_volume=30; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=2017; citation_pages=343-358; citation_id=CR32\ncitation_journal_title=American Journal of Occupational Therapy; citation_title=Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness; citation_author=L Krefting; citation_volume=45; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=1991; citation_pages=214-222; citation_id=CR33\nKreider, C. M., Medina, S., Lan, M.-F., Wu, C.-Y., Percival, S. S., Byrd, C. E., Delislie, A., Schoenfelder, D., & Mann, W. C. (2018). Beyond academics: A model for simultaneously advancing campus-based supports for learning disabilities, STEM students’ skills for self-regulation, and mentors’ knowledge for co-regulating and guiding. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. \n                  https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffpsyg.2018.01466\n                  \n                .\ncitation_journal_title=Career Development for Exceptional Individuals; citation_title=A comparison of postsecondary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) enrollment for students with and without disabilities; citation_author=A Lee; citation_volume=34; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2011; citation_pages=72-82; citation_id=CR35\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Students with disabilities choosing science technology engineering and math (STEM) majors in postsecondary institutions; citation_author=A Lee; citation_volume=27; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2014; citation_pages=261-272; citation_id=CR36\nLin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge University Press.\nLincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice; citation_title=Validating an assessment of individual actions, postsecondary, and social supports of college students with disabilities; citation_author=A Lombardi, H Gerdes, C Murray; citation_volume=48; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2011; citation_pages=107-126; citation_id=CR39\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Education and Training Studies; citation_title=STEM faculty experiences with students with disabilities at a land grant institution; citation_author=TS Love, N Kreiser, E Camargo, ME Grubbs, EJ Kim, PL Burge, SM Culver; citation_volume=3; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2014; citation_pages=27-38; citation_id=CR40\ncitation_title=Accommodating students with disabilities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Findings from research and practice for middle grades through university education; citation_publication_date=2012; citation_id=CR41; citation_author=NW Moon; citation_author=RL Todd; citation_author=DL Morton; citation_author=E Ivey; citation_publisher=Center for Assistive Technology and Environmental Access, College of Architecture, Georgia Institute of Technology\ncitation_journal_title=Qualitative Health Research; citation_title=Perfectly healthy, but dead: The myth of inter-rater reliability; citation_author=JM Morse; citation_volume=7; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=1997; citation_pages=445-447; citation_id=CR42\nNational Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2019 (NSF Publication No. 19-304). National Science Foundation. \n                  https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nsf.gov\u002Fstatistics\u002Fwmpd\n                  \n                \n\ncitation_journal_title=The Qualitative Report; citation_title=Applying constant comparative method with multiple investigators and inter-coder reliability; citation_author=JD Olson, C McAllister, LD Grinnell, K Gehrke Walters, F Appunn; citation_volume=21; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2016; citation_pages=26-42; citation_id=CR44\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of College Student Development; citation_title=Marginalization of published scholarship on students with disabilities in higher education journals; citation_author=EV Peña; citation_volume=55; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2014; citation_pages=30-40; citation_doi=10.1353\u002Fcsd.2014.0006; citation_id=CR45\ncitation_journal_title=Current Psychiatry Reports; citation_title=Specific learning disorders and ADHD: current issues in diagnosis across clinical and educational settings; citation_author=AV Pham, A Riviere; citation_volume=17; citation_issue=6; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=38; citation_doi=10.1007\u002Fs11920-015-0584-; citation_id=CR46\nRaue, K., & Lewis, L. (2011). Students with disabilities at degree-granting postsecondary institutions (NCES Publication No. 2011–018). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. \n                  https:\u002F\u002Fnces.ed.gov\u002Fpubs2011\u002F2011018.pdf\n                  \n                \n\ncitation_journal_title=Psychology in the Schools; citation_title=The learning and study strategies of college students with ADHD; citation_author=A Reaser, F Prevatt, Y Petscher, B Proctor; citation_volume=44; citation_issue=6; citation_publication_date=2007; citation_pages=627-638; citation_id=CR48\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Teaching in Physical Education; citation_title=A practical guide to collaborative qualitative data analysis; citation_author=KAR Richards, MA Hemphill; citation_volume=37; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2018; citation_pages=225-231; citation_id=CR49\ncitation_journal_title=New Directions for Higher Education; citation_title=Measuring campus climate for personal and social responsibility; citation_author=AJ Ryder, JJ Mitchell; citation_volume=2013; citation_issue=164; citation_publication_date=2013; citation_pages=31-48; citation_id=CR50\nSaldaña. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.\ncitation_journal_title=Qualitative Health Research; citation_title=Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology project; citation_author=M Sandelowski, J Barroso; citation_volume=13; citation_issue=6; citation_publication_date=2003; citation_pages=781-820; citation_doi=10.1177\u002F1049732303013006003; citation_id=CR52\ncitation_journal_title=International Journal of STEM Education; citation_title=Universal design for learning in postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: A systematic literature review; citation_author=J Schreffler, E Vasquez Iii, J Chini, W James; citation_volume=6; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2019; citation_pages=8; citation_doi=10.1186\u002Fs40594-019-0161-8; citation_id=CR53\ncitation_journal_title=CBE Life Sciences Education; citation_title=Beyond the biology: A systematic investigation of noncontent instructor talk in an introductory biology course; citation_author=SB Seidel, AL Reggi, JN Schinske, LW Burrus, KD Tanner; citation_volume=14; citation_issue=4; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=ar43; citation_doi=10.1187\u002Fcbe.15-03-0049; citation_id=CR54\ncitation_journal_title=Remedial and Special Education; citation_title=Section 504, the ADA, and public schools: What educators need to know; citation_author=TE Smith; citation_volume=22; citation_issue=6; citation_publication_date=2001; citation_pages=335-343; citation_id=CR55\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Self-advocacy and perceptions of college readiness among students with ADHD; citation_author=L Stamp, M Banerjee, FC Brown; citation_volume=27; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2014; citation_pages=139-160; citation_id=CR56\ncitation_journal_title=CBE Life Sciences Education; citation_title=Knowledge of learning makes a difference: A comparison of metacognition in introductory and senior-level biology students; citation_author=JD Stanton, KM Dye, MS Johnson; citation_volume=18; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2019; citation_pages=ar24; citation_doi=10.1187\u002Fcbe.18-12-0239; citation_id=CR57\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Law and Education; citation_title=Special education, private schools, and voucers: Do all students get choice?; citation_author=SS Taylor; citation_volume=34; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2005; citation_pages=1-24; citation_id=CR58\ncitation_journal_title=Remedial and Special Education; citation_title=A conceptual framework of self-advocacy for students with disabilities; citation_author=DW Test, CH Fowler, WM Wood, DM Brewer, S Eddy; citation_volume=26; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2005; citation_pages=43-54; citation_doi=10.1177\u002F07419325050260010601; citation_id=CR59\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: Lessons learned from a decade of NSF funding; citation_author=LP Thurston, C Shuman, BJ Middendorf, C Johnson; citation_volume=30; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2017; citation_pages=49-60; citation_id=CR60\ncitation_journal_title=The Qualitative Report; citation_title=Accommodations in the college setting: The perspectives of students living with disabilities; citation_author=LC Timmerman, TM Mulvihill; citation_volume=20; citation_issue=10; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=1609-1625; citation_id=CR61\ncitation_journal_title=Qualitative Inquiry; citation_title=Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research; citation_author=SJ Tracy; citation_volume=16; citation_issue=10; citation_publication_date=2010; citation_pages=837-851; citation_doi=10.1177\u002F1077800410383121; citation_id=CR62\ncitation_journal_title=New Directions for Institutional Research; citation_title=Researching students with disabilities: The importance of critical perspectives; citation_author=A Vaccaro, EW Kimball, RS Wells, BJ Ostiguy; citation_volume=2014; citation_issue=163; citation_publication_date=2015; citation_pages=25-41; citation_doi=10.1002\u002Fir.20084; citation_id=CR63\ncitation_title=MAXQDA 2020 [computer software]; citation_publication_date=2017; citation_id=CR64; citation_publisher=VERBI Software. maxqda.com\ncitation_journal_title=Learning Disabilities Research and Practice; citation_title=Using a self-advocacy intervention on African American college students’ ability to request academic accommodations; citation_author=AR Walker, DW Test; citation_volume=26; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2011; citation_pages=134-144; citation_doi=10.1111\u002Fj.1540-5826.2011.00333.x; citation_id=CR65\ncitation_journal_title=Exceptionality; citation_title=A social-ecological approach to promote self-determination; citation_author=HM Walker, C Calkins, ML Wehmeyer, L Walker, A Bacon, SB Palmer; citation_volume=19; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2011; citation_pages=6-18; citation_doi=10.1080\u002F09362835.2011.537220; citation_id=CR66\ncitation_journal_title=Focus on autism and other developmental disabilities; citation_title=Self-determination for people with developmental disabilities and autism: Two self-advocates’ perspectives; citation_author=MJ Ward, RN Meyer; citation_volume=14; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=1999; citation_pages=133-139; citation_id=CR67\nWehmeyer, M. L., Abery, B. H., Mithaug, D. E., & Stancliffe, R. J. (2003). Theory in self-determination: Foundations for educational practice. Charles C Thomas.\ncitation_journal_title=Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability; citation_title=Building relationships, sharing resources, and opening opportunities: A STEM learning community builds social capital for students with disabilities; citation_author=J Whitney, S Langley-Turnbaugh, L Lovewell, B Moeller; citation_volume=25; citation_issue=2; citation_publication_date=2012; citation_pages=131-144; citation_id=CR69\ncitation_journal_title=Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; citation_title=College students with ADHD and other hidden disabilities: Outcomes and interventions; citation_author=LE Wolf; citation_volume=931; citation_issue=1; citation_publication_date=2001; citation_pages=385-395; citation_id=CR70\ncitation_journal_title=International Journal of Disability, Development and Education; citation_title=A door must be opened: Perceptions of students with disabilities in higher education; citation_author=N Yssel, N Pak, J Beilke; citation_volume=63; citation_issue=3; citation_publication_date=2016; citation_pages=384-394; citation_doi=10.1080\u002F1034912X.2015.1123232; citation_id=CR71",{"EN":1656},"Students with disabilities are underrepresented in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses. Students with disabilities who engage in self-advocacy earn higher GPAs and are more likely to graduate from college compared to students with disabilities who do not engage in self-advocacy. We utilized Test’s conceptual framework of self-advocacy, which breaks self-advocacy into four components: knowledge of self, knowledge of rights, communication, and leadership to investigate how students with invisible disabilities practice self-advocacy in undergraduate STEM courses. Through a partnership with a disability resource center (DRC), we recruited and interviewed 25 STEM majors who received accommodations for attention-deficit\u002Fhyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and\u002For a specific learning disorder (SLD). Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analyzed using content analysis. We found evidence of all components of Test’s conceptual framework of self-advocacy and operationalize each based on our participants’ experiences. We identified novel components of self-advocacy for students with ADHD\u002FSLD in undergraduate STEM courses, including knowledge of STEM learning contexts and knowledge of accommodations and the process to obtain them, as well as, a novel self-advocacy behavior, filling gaps. Filling gaps involved participants taking action to mitigate a perceived limitation in either their formal accommodations from the DRC or a perceived limitation in the instructional practices used in a STEM course. We also identified beliefs, such as view of disability and agency, which influenced the self-advocacy of our participants. We incorporated the emergent forms of self-advocacy into Test’s conceptual framework to propose a revised model of self-advocacy for students with ADHD\u002FSLD in undergraduate STEM courses. We developed a revised conceptual model of self-advocacy for students with ADHD\u002FSLD in undergraduate STEM courses. This conceptual model provides a foundation for researchers who wish to study self-advocacy in undergraduate STEM courses for students with ADHD\u002FSLD in the future. It also offers insights for STEM instructors and service providers about the self-advocacy experiences of students with ADHD\u002FSLD in undergraduate STEM courses. We propose hypotheses for additional study based on our conceptual model of self-advocacy. Implications for research and teaching are discussed.",{"EN":1658},"Speaking up: a model of self-advocacy for STEM undergraduates with ADHD and\u002For specific learning disabilities",{"VOID":1660},"10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00233-4","https:\u002F\u002Flink.springer.com\u002Farticle\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00233-4","https:\u002F\u002Fstemeducationjournal.springeropen.com\u002Fcounter\u002Fpdf\u002F10.1186\u002Fs40594-020-00233-4",[1664,1679,1696,1713],{"id":1665,"sortIndex":21,"researcher":20,"roles":1666,"affiliations":1667,"properties":1676},"7f855d75-021d-4f05-890b-981cd42bd902",[183],[1668],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1669,"properties":20},{"id":1670,"createTime":1671,"updateTime":1671,"relativeEntities":1672,"slug":20,"properties":1673,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"335b7108-9a60-4805-868c-dc529093a4b1","2023-12-29T22:25:39.073+00:00",[],{"title":1674},{"VI":1675},"Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, USA",{"title":1677},{"VI":1678},"Pfeifer, Mariel A.",{"id":1680,"sortIndex":181,"researcher":20,"roles":1681,"affiliations":1682,"properties":1693},"2dcb4c55-31a4-48db-b4bf-9b8ebc4e9bae",[183],[1683],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1684,"properties":20},{"id":1685,"createTime":1686,"updateTime":1687,"relativeEntities":1688,"slug":1689,"properties":1690,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"a490f584-5279-496a-b28d-b4f1c6371b41","2023-12-12T06:41:34.534+00:00","2024-08-31T09:58:29.651+00:00",[],"Department-of-Psychology-Smith-College-Northampton-USA",{"title":1691},{"VI":1692},"Department of Psychology, Smith College, Northampton, USA",{"title":1694},{"VI":1695},"Hendrickson, McKenna",{"id":1697,"sortIndex":270,"researcher":20,"roles":1698,"affiliations":1699,"properties":1710},"0a1a9f2b-61f2-4411-b36f-feae671f5d96",[183],[1700],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1701,"properties":20},{"id":1702,"createTime":1703,"updateTime":1704,"relativeEntities":1705,"slug":1706,"properties":1707,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},"98c13393-aa8d-45f2-9265-b7173cc75062","2023-12-12T08:32:48.386+00:00","2024-09-22T08:00:20.570+00:00",[],"Department-of-Cellular-Biology-University-of-Georgia-Athens-USA",{"title":1708},{"VI":1709},"Department of Cellular Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, USA",{"title":1711},{"VI":1712},"Stanton, Julie Dangremond",{"id":1714,"sortIndex":254,"researcher":20,"roles":1715,"affiliations":1716,"properties":1722},"78148168-daf3-4100-9c59-35f3544ef5e0",[183],[1717],{"id":20,"sortIndex":21,"affiliation":1718,"properties":20},{"id":1702,"createTime":1703,"updateTime":1704,"relativeEntities":1719,"slug":1706,"properties":1720,"entityType":41,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21},[],{"title":1721},{"VI":1709},{"title":1723},{"VI":1724},"Reiter, Eve Melanie",{"url":1661,"publisher":1726,"properties":1761},{"id":6,"createTime":7,"updateTime":8,"relativeEntities":1727,"slug":10,"properties":1728,"entityType":18,"verifyStatus":19,"verifyTime":20,"verifyNote":20,"syncStatus":19,"languages":20,"translateLanguages":20,"viewCount":21,"subjectFields":1732,"manageAffiliations":1733,"indexDatabases":1734,"url":20,"thumbnailPath":20,"statistic":1756,"gsStatistic":20,"type":154,"analyzePriority":20},[],{"issn":1729,"title":1730,"url":1731},{"VOID":13},{"EN":15},{"VOID":17},[],[],[1735,1742,1749],{"id":74,"indexDatabase":1736,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1741,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":76,"createTime":77,"updateTime":78,"relativeEntities":1737,"label":1738,"description":1739,"key":85,"publicationTags":1740,"standard":20},[],{"EN":81,"VI":81},{"VI":83,"EN":84},[87,69],[89],{"id":91,"indexDatabase":1743,"url":104,"indexYears":105,"academicFieldIds":1748,"indexDatabaseRanking":108},{"id":93,"createTime":94,"updateTime":95,"relativeEntities":1744,"label":1745,"description":1746,"key":101,"publicationTags":1747,"standard":20},[],{"EN":98,"VI":98},{"EN":98,"VI":100},[103],[107],{"id":55,"indexDatabase":1750,"url":70,"indexYears":20,"academicFieldIds":1755,"indexDatabaseRanking":20},{"id":57,"createTime":58,"updateTime":59,"relativeEntities":1751,"label":1752,"description":1753,"key":66,"publicationTags":1754,"standard":20},[],{"EN":62,"VI":62},{"VI":64,"EN":65},[68,69],[72],{"impactFactor":21,"impactFactorByYear":1757,"i10Index":120,"i10IndexLast5Year":121,"totalPublication":122,"totalPublicationByYear":1758,"totalCitation":132,"totalCitationByYear":1759,"totalCitationPerPublication":142,"totalCitationPerPublicationByYear":1760,"hindexLast5Year":153,"hindex":153},{"2015":111,"2016":112,"2017":113,"2018":114,"2019":115,"2020":116,"2021":117,"2022":118,"2023":119},{"2014":51,"2015":124,"2016":125,"2017":126,"2018":127,"2019":128,"2020":129,"2021":130,"2022":127,"2023":128,"2024":131},{"2014":134,"2015":121,"2016":135,"2017":136,"2018":137,"2019":138,"2020":139,"2021":140,"2022":141},{"2014":144,"2015":145,"2016":146,"2017":147,"2018":148,"2019":149,"2020":150,"2021":151,"2022":152},{"volume":1762,"pages":1764,"issue":1765},{"VOID":1763},"7",{"VOID":1166},{"VOID":433},"2020-12-01",2020]