Standards for K-12 Engineering Education?

Standards for K-12 Engineering Education?

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1-148

[No Author Info available]

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85024130470     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.17226/12990     Document Type: Book

References (207)

1. AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.
2. AAAS. 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Project 2061. Washington, DC: AAAS.
3. Carnegie Corporation of New York. 2009. The Opportunity Equations: Transforming Mathematics and Science Education for Citizenship and the Global Economy. Institute for Advanced Study, Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. Available online at http://www.opportunityequation.org/TheOpportunityEquation.pdf. (January 26, 2010)
4. Chang, K. 2009. White House begins campaign to promote science and mathematics education. New York Times. November 23, 2009. Available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/science/24educ.html. (January 25, 2010)
5. DeBoer, G. 1991. A History of Ideas in Science Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
6. DOEd (U.S. Department of Education). 2008. National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics, 2007 (NCES 2008-022), Table 3. Available online at http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65. (January 26, 2010)
7. DOEd. 2009. Race to the Top Fund Executive Summary. November 2009. Available online at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf. (January 25, 2010)
8. DOL (U.S. Department of Labor). 1991. What Work Requires of Schools-A SCANS Report for American 2000. Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. Available online at http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf. (January 26, 2010)
9. Dugger, W.E. Jr. 2007. The status of technology education in the United States: A triennial report of the findings from the states. The Technology Teacher 67(1): 14-21.
10. FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology). 2009. 2008 Annual Report. Available online at http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Who/Annual_Report-Financials/2008_AR_FINAL.pdf. (January 26, 2010)
11. Herschbach, D.R. 2009. Technology Education-Foundations and Perspectives. Homewood, IL: American Technical Publishers, Inc.
12. ITEA (International Technology Education Association). 2000. Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology. Reston, VA: ITEA.
13. Kendall, J.S., and R.J. Marzano. 2010. Content knowledge: A compendium of standards and benchmarks for K-12 education. Denver, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning. 4th ed. Available online at http://www.mcrel.org/standards-benchmarks/. (September 13, 2010)
14. NAE and NRC (National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council). 2009. Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
15. NAS, NAE, and IOM (National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine). 2007. Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
16. NCEE (National Commission on Excellence in Education). 1983. A Nation at Risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
17. NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics). 1989. Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
18. NCTM. 1991. Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM
19. NCTM. 2000. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
20. NCTM. 2008. Curriculum Focal Points for Prekindergarten through Grade 8. Reston, VA: NCTM.
21. NRC (National Research Council). 1996. National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22. NRC. 2001. Investigating the Influence of Standards: A Framework for Research in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education. Committee on Understanding the Influence of Standards in K-12 Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
23. Obama, B. 2009. Remarks by the president at the National Academy of Sciences Annual Meeting. April 27, 2009. Washington, D.C. Available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-the-National-Academy-of-Sciences-Annual-Meeting/. (January 25, 2010)
24. Schoenfeld, A.H. 2002. Making mathematics work for all children: issues of standards, testing, and equity. Educational Researcher 31: 13-25.
25. Sizer, T. 1964. Secondary Schools at the Turn of the Century. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
26. Wulf, W.A. 1998. Diversity in engineering. The Bridge 28(4). Available online at http://www.nae.edu/Publications/TheBridge/Archives/CompetitiveMaterialsandSolutions/Diversity inEngineering.aspx. (Accessed May 19, 2010)
27. AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1998. Blueprints for Reform: Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Available online at http://www.project2061.org/publications/bfr/online/blpintro.htm. (August 4, 2010)
28. Bybee, R. 2009. K-12 Engineering Education Standards: Opportunities and Barriers. Paper presented at the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering Education, July 8, 2009, Washington, D.C. Available online at http://www.nae.edu/Programs/TechLit1/K12stds/WorkshoponStandardsforK-12EngineeringEducation/15165.aspx. (January 22, 2010)
29. Corcoran, T., F.A. Mosher, and A. Rogat. 2009. Learning Progressions in Science: An Evidence-Based Approach to Reform. Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE). CPRE Research Report #RR-63. Philadelphia, PA: CPRE.
30. DeBoer, G. 2006. History of the science standards movement in the United States. Pp. 7-49 in The Impact of State and National Standards on K-12 Science Teaching, D. Sunal and E. Wright, eds. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
31. DeVries, M.J. 2009. Report for NAE on non-U.S. Standards for Pre-university Engineering Education. Paper presented at the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering Education, July 8, 2009, Washington, D.C. Available online at http://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=15169. (January 22, 2010)
32. Dugger, W.E. Jr. 2007. The status of technology education in the United States: a triennial report of the findings from the states. The Technology Teacher 67(1): 14-21.
33. Finn, C., L Julian, and M.J. Petrilli. 2006. The State of State Standards-2006. Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Available online at http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/State%20of%20State%20Standards2006FINAL.pdf. (accessed March 10, 2010)
34. Harris, D.N., and M. Goertz. 2008. The potential effects of "high-quality and uniform" standards: Lessons from a synthesis of previous research and proposals for a new research agenda. A Final Report to the National Research Council. Available online at http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/Harris%20Goertz%20Paper.pdf. (accessed May 19, 2010)
35. ITEA (International Technology Education Association). 2000. Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology. Reston, VA.: ITEA.
36. NAEd (National Academy of Education). 2009. Standards, Assessments, and Accountability. Education Policy White Paper. Available online at http://www.naeducation.org/Standards_Assessments_Accountability_White_Paper.pdf. (January 27, 2010)
37. NCES (National Center for Education Statistics). 2008. Digest of Education Statistics. Table 64, Public and private elementary and secondary teachers, enrollment, and pupil/teacher ratios: Selected years, fall 1955 through fall 2017. Available online at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_064.asp. (December 30, 2009)
38. NRC (National Research Council). 2002. Understanding the Influence of Standards: A Framework for Research in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
39. Porter, A., M. Polikoff, and J. Smithson. 2008. Is There a De Facto National Curriculum: Evidence from State Content Standards? Paper presented at the workshop on Assessing the Role of K-12 Academic Standards in States, National Research Council Center for Education, January 18, 2008, Washington, D.C. Available online at http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/Porter_Smithson%20State%20Standards%20Paper_Tables.pdf.(January 22, 2010)
40. Rothman, R. 2003. Imperfect Matches: The Alignment of Standards and Tests. Commissioned paper prepared for the National Research Council Committee on Test Design for K-12 Science Achievement. Available online at http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/Alignment%20of%20Standards.doc. (January 27, 2010)
41. Spillane, J. 2004. Standards Deviation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Weiss, I.R., J.D. Pasley, S. Smith, E.R. Banilower, and D.J. Heck. 2003. A Study of K-12 Mathematics and Science Education in the United States. Available online at http://www.horizon-research.com/insidetheclassroom/reports/highlights/highlights.pdf.(February 3, 2010)
43. AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.
44. AAAS. 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Project 2061. Washington, DC: AAAS.
45. AAAS. 2001. Atlas of Science Literacy, Volume 1. Project 2061. Washington, DC: AAAS.
46. AAAS. 2007. Atlas of Science Literacy, Volume 2. Project 2061. Washington, DC: AAAS.
47. ASEE CMC (American Society for Engineering Education Corporate Member Council). 2008. K-12 STEM Guidelines for All Americans. Available online at http://www.asee.org/activities/organizations/councils/cmc/upload/2009/CMC_K-12_STEM_Guidelines_for_all_Americans.pdf. (January 27, 2010)
48. CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers) and NGA (National Governors Association). 2010. Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Available online at http://www.core standards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf. (September 8, 2010)
49. Childress, V., and C. Rhodes. 2008 Engineering student outcomes for grades 9-12. The Technology Teacher 67(7): 5-12.
50. Childress, V., and M. Sanders. 2007. Core engineering concepts foundational for the study of technology in grades 6-12. Paper presented the National Symposium to Explore Effective Practices for the Professional Development of K-12 Engineering and Technology Education Teachers. Feb. 11-13, 2007. Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas. Available online at http://www.conferences.ilstu.edu/NSA/papers/ChildressSanders.pdf. (January 27, 2010)
51. Custer, R.L., J.L. Daugherty, and J.P. Meyer. 2009. Formulating the conceptual base for secondary level engineering education-a review and synthesis. Paper presented at the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering, Washington, D.C., July 8-9, 2009. Available online at http://www.nae.edu/Programs/TechLit1/K12stds/WorkshoponStandardsforK-12EngineeringEducation/15095.aspx. (January 27, 2010)
52. Foster, J. 2009. The Development of Technology/Engineering Concepts in Massachusetts Academic Standards. Paper presented at the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering, July 8-9, 2009, Washington, D.C. Available online at http://www.nae.edu/Programs/TechLit1/K12stds/WorkshoponStandardsforK-12EngineeringEducation/15163.aspx. (February 4, 2010)
53. Hacker, M., M. DeVries, and A. Rossouw. 2009. CCETE Project: Concepts and Contexts in Engineering and Technology Education-Results of the International Research Study. Available online at http://www.hofstra.edu/pdf/Academics/Colleges/SOEAHS/ctl/CTL_Edu_Initiatives_CCETE_revised.pdf. (March 12, 2010)
54. ITEA (International Technology Education Association). 2000. Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology. Reston, VA: ITEA.
55. ITEEA (International Technology and Engineering Educators Association). 2010. ITEA Officially Becomes ITEEA. News release, March 1, 2010. Available online at http://www.iteea.org/AboutITEEA/NameChange.pdf. (April 30, 2010)
56. Koehler, C., E. Faraclas, S. Sanchez, S.K. Latif, and K. Kazerounian. 2005. Engineering Frameworks for a High School Setting: Guidelines for Technical Literacy for High School students. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Conference. Available online at http://soa.asee.org/paper/conference/paper-view.cfm?id=21254. (February 26, 2010)
57. Koehler, C., D. Giblin, D.M. Moss, E. Faraclas, and K. Kazerounian. 2006. Are Concepts of Technical & Engineering Literacy Included in State Curriculum Standards? A Regional Overview of the Nexus between Technical & Engineering Literacy and State Science Frameworks. Proceedings of the 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Available online at http://soa.asee.org/paper/conference/paper-view.cfm?id=1712. (February 5, 2010)
58. McGrath, E. 2009. K-12 engineering standards in NJ. Presentation to the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering, Washington, D.C., July 8-9, 2009
59. MDE (Minnesota Department of Education). 2010. Minnesota Academic Standards. Science K-12. 2009 Version. May 24, 2010. Available online at http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/Standards/documents/Publication/013906.pdf. (September 2, 2010)
60. MDOE (Massachusetts Department of Education). 2006. Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework. October 2006. Available online at http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/scitech/1006.pdf. (March 31, 2010)
61. MDESE (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education). 2009. Spring 2009 MCAS Tests: Summary of State Results. Table 30: 2009 statewide MCAS results: Classes of 2011 and 2012 number and percentage of students in grades 9 and 10 scoring Needs Improvement (NI) or higher in high school science and technology/engineering. Available online at http://www.doe.mass.edu/mcas/2009/results/summary.pdf. (February 4, 2010)
62. NAE and NRC (National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council). 2009. Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Committee on K-12 Engineering Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
63. NASDCTEc (National Association of Directors of Career and Technical Education Consortium). 2007. Career Clusters and Programs of Study: State of the States. April 2007. Available online at http://www.careerclusters.org/resources/publications/State_of_the_States_Report.pdf. (February 12, 2010)
64. NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics). 1989. Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
65. NCTM. 2000. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
66. NGS (National Geographic Society). 2007. Ocean Literacy. The Essential Principles of Ocean Sciences. K-12. An Ocean-Oriented Approach to Teaching Science Standards. Available online at http://www.coexploration.org/oceanliteracy/documents/OceanLitChart.pdf. (February 10, 2010)
67. NMEA (National Marine Educators Association). 2009. Special Report #3: The Ocean Literacy Campaign. Impacts of the Ocean Literacy Principles. December. Ocean Springs, MS: NMEA.
68. NRC (National Research Council). 1996. National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
69. NSTA (National Science Teachers Association) Press. 2007. Resources for Environmental Literacy Series: Five Teaching Modules for Middle and High School Teachers. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
70. NYSDE (New York State Department of Education). 1996a. Learning Standards for Mathematics, Science, and Technology. Revised Edition, March 1996. Standard 1: Analysis, Inquiry, and Design. Available online at http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/mst/pub/mststa1_2.pdf. (March 31, 2010)
71. NYSDE. 1996b. Learning Standards for Mathematics, Science, and Technology. Revised Edition, March 1996. Standard 6: Interconnectedness-Common Themes. Available online at http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/mst/pub/mststa6_7.pdf. (March 31, 2010
72. P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Skills). 2009. P21 Framework Definitions. Available online at http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf. (February 12, 2010)
73. Robelen, E.W. 2010. Work begins on "next generation" of science standards. Education Week. February 10, 2010.
74. Sneider, C. 2006. Draft Learning Progressions for Engineering Design. Boston Museum of Science, November 12, 2006. Unpublished.
75. Sneider C., and L.P. Rosen. 2009. Towards a vision for engineering education in science and mathematics standards. Paper presented at the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering, Washington, D.C., July 8-9, 2009. Available online at http://www.nae.edu/Programs/TechLit1/K12stds/WorkshoponStandardsforK-12EngineeringEducation/15091.aspx. (February 2, 2010)
76. SFN (Society for Neuroscience). 2008. Neuroscience Core Concepts. The Essential Principles of Neuroscience. Available online at http://downloads.climatescience.gov/Literacy/Climate %20Literacy%20Booklet%20Hi-Res.pdf. (February 10, 2010)
77. State of Vermont DOE (Department of Education). 2000. Vermont's Framework of Standards and Learning Opportunities. Fall 2000. Updated 3/10/10. Available online at http://education.vermont.gov/new/pdfdoc/pubs/framework.pdf. (March 31, 2010)
78. State of Washington OSPI (Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction). 2009. Washington State K-12 Science Learning Standards. June 2009. Available online at http://www.k12.wa.us/Science/pubdocs/WAScienceStandards.pdf. (March 31, 2010)
79. Strang. C. 2008. Education for ocean literacy and sustainability: Learning from elders, listening to youth. The Current: The Journal of Marine Education 24(3). Ocean Springs, MS: National Marine Educators Association.
80. TeachEngineering. 2009. Quality Review Rubric for Engineering Content. Available online at http://www.teachengineering.org/documents/TE_Engr_reviewcriteriarubric_061008toNewReviewersCoBranded.pdf. (February 14, 2010)
81. TDE (Tennessee Department of Education). 2009. Users Guide to the Tennessee Science Curriculum Framework. Available online at http://www.state.tn.us/education/ci/sci/doc/Users_guide.pdf. (March 31, 2010)
82. USGCRP (U.S. Global Change Research Program). 2009. Climate Literacy. The Essential Principles of Climate Science. A Guide for Individuals and Citizens. Available online at http://downloads.climatescience.gov/Literacy/Climate%20Literacy%20Booklet%20Hi-Res.pdf. (February 10, 2010)
83. WestEd. 2007. Science Assessment and Item Specifications for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Science NAEP 2009. Available online at http://www.nagb.org /publications/frameworks/naep2009-science-specs07.doc. (February 5, 2010)
84. WestEd. 2010. Technology and Engineering Literacy Framework for the 2014 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Pre-publication Edition. Available online at http://www.edgateway.net/cs/naepsci/download/lib/249/prepub_naep_tel_framework.pdf?x-r=pcfile_d. (July 8, 2010)
85. Wise, S.L., and C.E. DeMars. 2003. Examinee motivation in low-stakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Higher Education Assessment Conference, Seattle, Washington, June 2003. Available online at http://www.jmu.edu/assessment/wm_library/Examinee_Motivation.pdf. (February 10, 2010)
86. Chi, B., J. Freeman, and S. Lee. 2008. Science in After-School Market Research Study: A Final Report to the S.D. Bechtel, Jr., Foundation. Coalition for Science after School and Center for Research, Evaluation and Assessment. Lawrence Hall of Science, University of California, Berkeley.
87. DOEd (U.S. Department of Education). 2007. Report of the Academic Competitiveness Council. Washington, DC: DOEd. Also available online at http://www.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/competitiveness/acc-mathscience/index.html. (April 9, 2010)
88. NAE and NRC (National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council). 2009. Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Committee on K-12 Engineering Education. Recommendations 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
89. Rutherford, J. 2009. Standards 2.0: New models for the new century: Alternatives to traditional content standards. Paper presented at the NAE Workshop on Standards for K-12 Engineering Education, Washington, D.C., July 8, 2009. Available online at http://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=15167. (April 9, 2010)
90. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.
91. AAAS. 1993. Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
92. Bybee, R., and Ferrini-Mundy, J. 1997. Guest Editorial. School Science and Mathematics 97(6): 281-282.
93. Collins, A. 1995. National science education standards in the United States: A process and a product. Studies in Science Education 26: 7-37.
94. DeBoer, G. 1991. A History of Ideas in Science Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
95. DeBoer, G. 2006. History of the Science Standards Movement in the United States. Pp. 7-49 in The Impact of State and National Standards on K-12 Science Teaching, edited by D. Sunal and E. Wright. New York: Information Age Publishing.
96. Engineering Concepts Curriculum Project. 1971. The Man-Made World. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
97. Hiebert, J. 1999. Relationships between research and the NCTM standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1): 3-19.
98. Holdren, J. 2009. Science in the White House. Science 324, 1 May, 2009.
99. Houston, J. 2007. Future skill demands, from a corporate consultant perspective. Presentation at the National Academies Workshop on Research Evidence Related to Future Skill Demands. Available online at http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/Future_Skill_Demands_Presentations.html. (September 13, 2010)
100. Hurd, P. 1999. Standards are fine, but they are not a reinvention. Education Week, November 24: 31.
101. International Technology Education Association (ITEA). 2000. Standards for technological literacy. Reston, Va: ITEA.
102. Levy, F., and R.J. Murnane. 2004. The New Division of Labor: How Computers Are Creating the Next Job Market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
103. National Academy of Engineering. 2009. Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the prospects. Edited by L. Katehi, G. Pearson, and M. Feder. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
104. National Assessment Governing Board. 2008. Science Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
105. National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. A Nation at Risk. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
106. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). 1989. Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, Va: NCTM.
107. NCTM. 2000. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
108. National Research Council (NRC). 1996. National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
109. NRC. 2002. Investigating the Influence of Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
110. Sanders, M. 2009. STEM, STEM education, STEM mania. The Technology Teacher 68 (4): 20-26. Reston, Va.: International Technology Education Association.
111. Sizer, T. 1964. Secondary Schools at the Turn of the Century. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
112. Van Scotter, P., Bybee, R., and Dougherty, M. 2000. Fundamentals of integrated science: what teachers should consider when planning an integrated science curriculum. The Science Teacher 67(6): 25-28.
113. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET). (2000). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, http://www.abet.org/.
114. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993/2009). Benchmarks for science literacy. Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
115. Antony, G. (1996). Active learning in a constructivist framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 31(4), 349-369.
116. Aung, W., Kwasiborksi, V., & Soyster, A. L. (2007). A review of engineering education 1998-2007. Division of Engineering Education and Centers, Directorate for Engineering, National Science Foundation.
117. Bijker, W., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1989). The social construction of technological systems. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
118. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
119. Bransford, J. D., & Donavon, M. S. (2005). Scientific inquiry and how people learn. In M. S. Donavon, & J. D. Bransford (Eds.). How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom (pp. 397-419). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
120. Bucciarelli, L. L. (2003). Engineering philosophy. Delft University Press: The Netherlands.
121. Childress, V., & Rhodes, C. (2008). Engineering student outcomes for grades 9-12. The Technology Teacher, 5(7), 5-12.
122. Childress, V., & Sanders, M. (2007). Core engineering concepts foundational for the study of technology in grades 6-12. In R. Custer (Ed.). Professional development for engineering and technology: A national symposium, February 2007. Retrieved September 03, 2008, http://www.conferences.ilstu.edu/NSA/homepage.html.
123. Costa, A. L., & Liebmann, R. M. (1997). Toward renaissance curriculum: An idea whose time has come. In A. L. Costa, & R. M. Liebmann. (Eds.). Envisioning process as content: Toward a renaissance curriculum (pp. 1 - 20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
124. Custer, R. L. (1995). Examining the dimensions of technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 5(5), 219-244.
125. Daugherty, J. L. (2008). Engineering-oriented professional development for secondary level teachers: A multiple case study analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
126. Dearing, B. M., & Daugherty, M. K. (2004). Delivering engineering content in technology education. The Technology Teacher, 64(3), 8-11.
127. Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81-112.
128. Eisenhart, M., Borko, H., Underhill, R., Brown, C., Jones, D., & Agard, P. (1993). Conceptual knowledge falls through the cracks: Complexities of learning to teach mathematics for understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(1), 8-40.
129. Erekson, T. L., & Custer, R. L. (2008). Conceptual foundations: Engineering and technology education. In R. L. Custer, & T. L. Erekson. Engineering and technology education. 57th Yearbook, Council on Technology Teacher Education (pp. 1-12). Woodland Hills, CA: Glencoe.
130. Erickson, H. L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
131. Florman, S. (1996). The introspective engineer. New York: St Martin's Press.
132. Goldman, S. L. (1991). The social captivity of engineering. In P. T. Durbin (Ed.), Critical perspectives on non academic Science and Engineering, Lehigh University Press, Bethlehem, PA.
133. Gomez, A. G., Oakes, W. C., & Leone, L. L. (2006). Engineering your future: A project-based introduction to engineering. 2nd ed. Wildwood, MO: Great Lakes Press.
134. Guskey, T. (2003). What makes professional development effective? Phi Delta Kappan 84, 748-750.
135. Harris, K. S., & Rogers, G. E. (2008). Secondary engineering competencies: A Delphi study of engineering faculty. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 45(1), 5-25.
136. Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. 1986. Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.). Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
137. Hill, A. M., & Anning, A. (2001). Primary teachers' and students' understanding of school situated design in Canada and England. Research in Science Education, 31(1), 117-135.
138. International Technology Education Association (ITEA). (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA
139. Koen, B. V. (2003). Discussion of the Method: Conducting the Engineer's Approach to Problem Solving. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
140. Layton, E. T. (1974). Technology as knowledge. Technology and Culture, 15(1), 31-41.
141. Lewis, T. (2005). Coming to terms with engineering design as content. Journal of Technology Education, 16(2), 37-54.
142. Lewis, T., Petrina, S., & Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem posing: Adding a creative increment to technological problem solving. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 36(1), 5-35.
143. Malterud, K. (2001). Qualitative research: Standards, challenges, and guidelines. The Lancet, 358, 483-488.
144. Martin M.W. & Schinzinger R (1996), Ethics in engineering. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
145. Mawson, B. (2003). Beyond 'The Design Process': An Alternative pedagogy for technology education. International Journal of Design Education, 13(2), 117-128.
146. McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7, 141-159.
147. Meyer, J. H. F. & Land, R. (2006). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines. In J. H. F. Meyer & R. Land, (Eds.). Overcoming barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (pp. 3-18). London: Routledge Falmer.
148. Mitcham, C. (1991). Engineering as productive activity: Philosophical remarks. In P. T. Durbin (Ed.). Critical perspectives on nonacademic science and engineering. Research in Technology Studies, Vol. 4. London and Toronto: Associated University Press.
149. Mitcham, C. (1999), Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
150. National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2005). The engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
151. NAE and NRC (National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council). (2009) Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
152. National Council Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
153. National Research Council (NRC). (1996) National science education standards, Washington DC: National Academy Press.
154. Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
155. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 175-189.
156. Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: An iterative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 346-362.
157. Ropohl, G. (1991). Deficiencies in engineering education. In P. T. Durbin (Ed.). Critical Perspectives on Nonacademic Science and Engineering. Research in Technology Studies, Vol. 4. London and Toronto: Associated University Press.
158. Sigel, I. E. (1983). Is the concept of the concept still elusive or what do we know about concept development? In E. K. Scholnick (Ed.). New trends in conceptual representation: Challenges to Piaget's theory? Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
159. Skolimowski, H. (1991). The eco-philosophy approach to technological research. In P. T. Durbin (Ed.). Critical Perspectives on Nonacademic Science and Engineering. Research in Technology Studies, Vol. 4. London and Toronto: Associated University Press.
160. Smith, P. C. (2006). Essential aspects and related academic concepts of an engineering design curriculum in secondary technology education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Georgia, Urbana-Champaign.
161. Supovitz, J., & Turner, H. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963-980.
162. Tennyson, R. D., & Cocchiarella, M. J. (1986). An empirically based instructional design theory for teaching concepts. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 40-71.
163. Vincenti, W. G. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it: Analytical studies from aeronautical history. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
164. Welch, M. (1999). Analyzing the tacit strategies of novice designers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(1), 19-34.
165. Wicklein, R. C. (2006). Five good reasons for engineering design as the focus for technology education. The Technology Teacher, 65(7), 25-29.
166. Williams, P. J. (2000). Design: The only methodology of technology?" Journal of Technology Education, 11(2), 48-60.
167. Winner, L. (1977). Autonomous technology: Technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA.
168. Wordnet. Definitions of core on the web, Retrieved March 14, 2009, http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn.
169. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.
170. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
171. International Technology Education Association (ITEA). (1996). Technology for all Americans.Reston, VA: Author.
172. International Technology Education Association (ITEA). (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
173. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MA ESE). (1996).Massachusetts Science and Technology Curriculum Framework. Accessed at http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/archive.html
174. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MA ESE). (2001). Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework. Accessed at http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/current.html
175. Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 69, Section 1D. Accessed at www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/69-1d.htm
176. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
177. U.S. Department of Education (USED), National Assessment Governing Board. (1996). Science Framework for the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: Author.
178. U.S. Department of Education (USED), National Assessment Governing Board. (2000). Science Framework for the 1996 and 2000 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: Author.
179. U.S. Department of Education (USED), National Assessment Governing Board. (2008). Science Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: Author.
180. AAAS (1990). Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Project 2061. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
181. AAAS (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Project 2061. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
182. Beatty, Alexandra, Rapporteur (2008). Common Standards for K-12 Education?: Considering the Evidence: Summary of a Workshop Series, Committee on State Standards in Education: A Workshop Series, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
183. Duschl, R.A., Schweingruber, H.A., and Shouse, A.W., eds. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
184. Foecke, H. A. (1970). "Engineering in the Humanistic Tradition," Impact of Science on Society, vol. XX, no. 2.
185. Foecke, Harold A. (1995). "Fifty Years of UNESCO Leadership in Science and Technology Education," UNESCO 50 Years for Education, CD-ROM.
186. Hudson, S., McMahon, K., and Overstreet, C. (2002). The 2000 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education: Compendium of Tables. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
187. ITEA (2000). Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology. International Technology Education Association and National Academy of Engineering. Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association.
188. Klein, D., et al. (2005). The State of State Math Standards. Available online at http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=338.
189. Koehler, C., Faraclas, E., Giblin, D., Kazerounian, K., and Moss, D. (2006). Are concepts of technical & engineering literacy included in state curriculum standards? A regional overview of the nexus between technical & engineering literacy and state science frameworks. Proceedings of 2006 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Chicago, IL, Paper No. 2006-1510, June 18-21.
190. Koehler, C., Faraclas, E., Sanchez, S., Latif, S.K., and Kazerounian, K. (2005). Engineering frameworks for a high school setting: Guidelines for technical literacy for high school students. Proceedings of 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.
191. Layton, D. (1993). Technology's Challenge to Science Education: Cathedral, Quarry, or Company Store? Philadelphia: Open University Press.
192. MA DOE (2001, 2006). Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework. Malden, MA: Massachusetts Department of Education. Available online at http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/scitech/1006.pdf.
193. McCarthy, J. and Comfort, K. (1993). What's the Big Idea? An Assessment Framework for CLAS Science Assessment. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education.
194. McNeil, Michelle (2009). "Forty-Six States Commit to Common Standards Push." Education Week, June 1, 2009. Available online at http://www.edweek.org.
195. Michaels, S., Shouse, A.W., and Schweingruber, H.A. (2008). In Ready, Set, Science!: Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science Classrooms. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
196. NAGB (In Press). Technology Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
197. NAGB (2008). Science Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. National Assessment Governing Board. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
198. NCTM (1980). NCTM, 1980, An Agenda for Action: Recommendations for School Mathematics of the 1980s. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
199. NCTM (1989). Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
200. NCTM (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
201. NCTM (2008). The Role of Technology in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Online at http://www.nctm.org/about/content.aspx?id=14233.
202. NRC (National Research Council) (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
203. NRC (2005). Rising above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. National Research Council. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
204. ODE (2009). Science Content Standards Revision Draft. Oregon Department of Education. Available online at: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?=2560
205. Reys, B., ed. (2006). The Intended Curriculum as Represented in State-Level Curriculum Standards: Consensus or Confusion? Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
206. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) (1986-2003). Innovations in Science and Technology Education. Volumes I-VIII. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
207. Wicklein, R. (2003). Five good reasons for engineering as THE focus for technology education. Athens: University of Georgia. Available online at: http://www.uga.edu/teched/conf/wick_engr.pdf.