Engineering: A Year-Long Case Study on STEM Practices and Successes for Students With Moderate to Severe Intellectual Disability

Abstract

Engineering is a complex and multifaceted field that integrates scientific and mathematical principles to solve real-world challenges. Despite noteworthy growth in research on math and science instruction for students with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities (MSD) over the past several decades, limited research has explored instruction in scientific and engineering practices for these students. The current qualitative, multiple case-study focuses on the first year of a National Science Foundation (NSF) funded research program following five teachers from multiple schools across two U.S. states implementing the engineering curriculum in special education classrooms for students with MSD. The results revealed the positive outcomes of the engineering program on both teacher perspectives and student outcomes. In addition, future research is discussed.

Keywords

STEM case studies research methods moderate to severe intellectual disability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brantlinger

E. A.

Jiminez

R. T.

Klingner

Pugach

Richardson

(2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205

Cardella

M. E.

Svarovsky

G. N.

Pattison

S. A.

(2020). Engineering education in pre-kindergarten through fifth grade: An overview [Commissioned paper for the Committee on Enhancing Science and Engineering in Prekindergarten through Fifth Grades]. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. https://doi.org/10.17226/26215

CAST. (2024). Universal design for learning guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(2018). Focus groups. In Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(Eds.), Research methods in education (8th ed., pp. 532–533). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539

Cunningham

C. M.

(2017). Engineering in elementary STEM education: Curriculum design, instruction, learning, and assessment. Teachers College Press.

Cunningham

C. M.

Lachapelle

C. P.

Brennan

R. T.

Kelly

G. J.

Tunis

C. S. A.

Gentry

C. A.

(2020). The impact of engineering curriculum design principles on elementary students’ engineering and science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(3), 423–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21601

Davis

E. A.

Petish

Smithey

(2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076004607

Desimone

L. M.

(2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140

Donnellan

A. M.

(1984). The criterion of the least dangerous assumption. Behavioral Disorders, 9(2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874298400900201

10.

English

Moore

(Eds.). (2018). Early engineering learning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8621-2

11.

Grossman

Hammerness

McDonald

(2009). Redefining teaching, re-imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875340

12.

Guskey

T. R.

(2000). Evaluating professional development. Sage.

13.

Jimenez

Trela

Saunders

Schreiber

(2023). Access geometry. Attainment Company.

14.

Jimenez

B. A.

Croft

Twine

Gorey

(2021). Development of engineering habits of mind for students with intellectual disability. The Journal of Special Education, 55(3), 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669211009960

15.

Klimaitis

C. C.

Mullen

C. A.

(2021). Including K-12 students with disabilities in STEM education and planning for inclusion. Educational Planning, 28(2), 27–43. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1301785

16.

Knight

V. F.

Huber

H. B.

Kuntz

E. M.

Carter

E. W.

Juarez

A. P.

(2019). Instructional practices, priorities, and preparedness for educating students with autism and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 34(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357618755694

17.

Knight

V. F.

Wood

McKissick

B. R.

Kuntz

E. M.

(2020). Teaching science content and practices to students with intellectual disability and autism. Remedial and Special Education, 41(6), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932519843998

18.

Leko

M. M.

Cook

B. G.

Cook

(2021). Qualitative methods in special education research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 36(4), 278–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12268

19.

Lilly

McAlister

A. M.

Chiu

(2022, January). Teachers’ beliefs in enacting an interdisciplinary engineering project in inclusive and general classroom contexts [Paper presentation]. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

20.

Luna

M. J.

Selmer

S. J.

Rye

J. A.

(2018). Teachers “noticing of students” thinking in science through classroom artifacts: In what ways are science and engineering practices evident? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(2), 148–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1427418

21.

Margot

K. C.

Kettler

(2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2

22.

National Assessment Governing Board. (2014). Technology and engineering literacy framework for the 2014 National Assessment of Educational Progress. https://www.nagb.gov/naep-subject-areas/technology-and-engineering-literacy/framework-archive/2014-technology-framework/toc/ch_2/design/design2.html

23.

National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K–8. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625

24.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165

25.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290

26.

Pattison

Svarovsky

Ramos-Montañez

Gontan

Weiss

Núñez

Corrie

Smith

Benne

(2020). Understanding early childhood engineering interest development as a family-level systems phenomenon: Findings from the head start on engineering project. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 10(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1234

27.

Riggs

I. M.

Enochs

(1990). The development of an elementary teachers’ science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 35–39.

28.

Rodgers

D’Agostino

Berenbon

Mikita

Winkler

Wright

M. E.

(2022). Teachers’ beliefs and their students’ progress in professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 73(4), 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871221075275

29.

Spooner

Knight

V. F.

Browder

D. M.

Smith

B. R.

(2012). Evidence-based practice for teaching academics to students with severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33(6), 374–387. https://doi.org./10.1177/0741932511421634

30.

Spooner

Root

J. R.

Saunders

A. F.

Browder

D. M.

(2019). An updated evidence-based practice review on teaching mathematics to students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 40(3), 150–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517751055

31.

Trainor

A. A.

Graue

(2014). Evaluating rigor in qualitative methodology and research dissemination. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 390–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914522904

32.

Yin

R. K.

(2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.

33.

Youth Engineering Solutions. (n.d.). Museum of Science Boston. https://yes.mos.org/