CAREER: Framing and Reframing Agency in Making and Engineering (FRAME)

工程课堂上一个持续存在的问题是，学生们看不到他们所学习的东西的价值，并且在面对现实世界的开放式设计问题时不知道如何指导自己的学习。这个问题源于学生过去的经验，主要解决只有一个正确答案的问题。学生很少有这样的机会的一个原因是，教师缺乏可行的支持学生采取开放式设计问题的所有权所需的教学工具的星座。框架和重构机构在制造和工程（框架）项目调查的教学工具的星座需要发展学生的“框架机构”-定义为有机会，并采取相应的决定有关的设计问题和方法进行学习和开发解决方案。教师有时不确定为什么有些活动支持学生掌握核心概念，而其他活动则不支持。框架代理的构建将有助于澄清表面上看起来相似的学习经历中的关键差异。教学工具的星座-这是开发，测试和完善跨工程设置在西班牙裔服务机构-将帮助教师有效地支持学生采取自己的学习的所有权。此外，框架项目是在一个少数民族占多数的国家，是一个丰富的文化挂毯祝福。UNM最近的研究发现了这些学生带来的工程资产;框架项目将为教师参与这些资产提供新的支持。这些发现对于指导其他州具有相关性，这些州的未来人口统计数据预计与新墨西哥州相似。来自多个领域的研究表明，框架问题可以解释学习和解决方案的创造性等结果，但这方面的实证支持仍然薄弱。FRAME项目填补了这一空白，提供了新的理论，经验支持，经过验证的测量工具和基于研究的教学工具。研究问题指导这项工作：（1）学生如何以及何时做出决定，这是他们的设计和学习的后果？(2)哪些资源支持学生构建问题？(3)框架机构在多大程度上解释了关键结果的差异，例如坚持工程的意图，专业工程身份的发展，相关的学习和创新设计？框架项目的第一阶段澄清“框架机构”作为一个结构进行定性分析，对比的情况下，从多个环境中，学生从事设计活动，并没有显示框架机构。分析的重点是语言的使用和互动。第二阶段通过与学生设计师的访谈建立在这项工作的基础上，以了解他们对框架机构的观点。这一分析有助于制定和验证一项衡量框架机构的调查。第三阶段建立框架代理理论，使用验证的调查来检验框架代理预测关键结果的假设：专业工程身份的发展，坚持工程的意图，和创新设计。第4和第5阶段通过使用基于设计的研究来整合研究和教育目标，目标是共同开发关于框架机构如何支持关键成果发展和开发教学工具的理论。这一阶段由一个研究问题指导：一系列的教学工具--包括将学生明确定位为设计师，一个帮助学生理解和产生关于问题的新想法的“错误理论协议”，并设计猜想/反思图，支持学生追踪他们对与问题相关的决策的理解随时间的发展--支持框架机构的发展，反过来，关键成果？

A persistent problem in engineering classrooms is that students don't see value in what they are learning and don't know how to direct their own learning when faced with real-world open-ended design problems. This problem stems from students' past experiences of predominantly solving problems that have a single correct answer. One reason students have few such opportunities is that faculty lack the constellation of instructional tools needed to feasibly support students to take ownership of open-ended design problems. The Framing and Reframing Agency in Making and Engineering (FRAME) project investigates the constellation of instructional tools needed to develop students' "framing agency" -- defined as having and taking opportunities to make consequential decisions about a design problem and ways to proceed in learning and developing solutions. Faculty members are sometimes uncertain why some activities support students to take ownership of core concepts, whereas other activities do not. The construct of framing agency will help clarify critical differences in what -- on the surface -- appear to be similar learning experiences. The constellation of instructional tools -- which are developed, tested and refined across engineering settings at a Hispanic-serving institution -- will help faculty to effectively support students to take ownership of their learning. Additionally, the FRAME project is set in a minority-majority state that is blessed with a rich tapestry of cultures. Recent research at UNM has uncovered engineering assets such students bring; the FRAME project will provide new supports for faculty to engage these assets. The findings have relevance for guiding other states whose future demographics are predicted to be similar to New Mexico's. Research from a number of fields suggests that framing problems may explain outcomes such as learning and the creativity of solutions, but the empirical backing for this remains weak. The FRAME project fills this gap, providing new theory, empirical backing, a validated measurement tool, and research-based instructional tools. Research questions guide this work: (1) How and when do students make decisions that are consequential to their designing and learning? (2) What resources support students to frame problems? (3) To what extent does framing agency explain variance in key outcomes, such as intent to persist in engineering, professional engineering identity development, relevant learning, and innovative design? Phase 1 of the FRAME project clarifies "framing agency" as a construct by conducting qualitative analysis, contrasting cases from multiple settings in which students engaged in design activities did and did not display framing agency. The analysis focuses on language use and interactions. Phase 2 builds on this work through interviews with student designers to understand their point of view on framing agency. This analysis feeds into the development and validation of a survey to measure framing agency. Phase 3 builds theory about framing agency, using the validated survey to test the hypothesis that framing agency predicts key outcomes: professional engineering identity development, intent to persist in engineering, and innovative designing. Phases 4 and 5 integrate research and educational goals by using design-based research with a goal of jointly developing theory about how framing agency supports the development of key outcomes and developing instructional tools. This phase is guided by a research question: How can a constellation of instructional tools -- including explicit positioning of students as designers, a "wrong theory protocol" that helps students understand and generate novel ideas about the problem, and design conjecture/reflection maps that support students to trace the development of their understanding of decisions related to the problem over time -- support the development of framing agency, and in turn, key outcomes?