6E LEARNING byDeSIGN™ MODEL

THE ITEEA

6E Learning
byDeSIGN™ Model
MAXIMIZING INFORMED DESIGN AND INQUIRY
IN THE INTEGRATIVE STEM CLASSROOM
In April, 2013, the role of technology and engineering in schools and classrooms shifted
forever.

W
hen the Next Generation Science concepts to ensure that materials developed have
Standards (NGSS) document, a strong Integrative STEM focus?
(NRC, 2013) was released in April
2013, teachers in the profession I propose that a new modified model, based
BY had mixed emotions. Many viewed the standards on the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study’s
as invasive to their classrooms, while others found (BSCS) 5E Instructional Model (Bybee, 1997), will
BARRY N. them a refreshing take on what technology and maximize the concepts of Design and Inquiry in
BURKE, DTE engineering educators have been doing for years. an Integrative way (Sanders, 2009). The ITEEA
The reality is that NGSS provides an opportu- 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ Model provides a

“
nity to Engage, Explore, Explain, eNGINEER, student-centered framework for instruction that
Enrich, and Evaluate technology and engineering leverages the T and E of STEM as it integrates
programs and classrooms within the school and content in a purposeful and informed way.
greater community. As stated by Sanders (2011),
We must view NGSS validates an integrative STEM approach by BSCS 5E Instructional
this as an recognizing that technology and engineering pro-
Model
opportunity to vide opportunities for students to develop deeper
knowledge about science. Many are familiar with the BSCS 5E Instructional
Engage,
Model. Developed by the Biological Sciences Cur-
Explore, The question is—“How should we look at design riculum Study (BSCS), the 5E model is a learning
Explain, and inquiry?” Most technology and engineering cycle based on a constructivist view of learning
eNGINEER, educators would say they have been doing both (Rowrich, 2005 p.29). The objective of a construc-
for years. Others would say that inquiry should be tivist model is to provide students with experienc-
Enrich, and
done in science, while design should be done in es that make them reconsider their conceptions.
Evaluate in technology and engineering. Curriculum design- Then, students “redefine, reorganize, elaborate,
every school ers everywhere look for the perfect way to plan and change their initial concepts through self-
and every and integrate content in order to give students reflection and interaction with their peers and their
classroom. the want and need to learn. Can we legitimately environment” (Bybee 1997, p. 176). The 5E model
combine inquiry and design in a way that makes provides a planned sequence of instruction that
sense and builds on the ability to deliver Integra- places students at the center of their learning ex-
tive STEM—by strengthening the T and E (Tech- periences, encouraging them to explore, construct
nology and Engineering)? How can we implement their own understanding of scientific concepts,
research-based strategies using engineering and relate those understandings to other concepts
(Rowrich, 2005 p.29).

14 technology and engineering teacher March 2014

In 2004, ITEEA’s STEMCenter for Teaching and Learn- (Rousouw, 2005), and the Informed Design Teaching and
ing (STEMCTL) adopted the BSCS 5E Instructional Model. Learning Matrix (Crismond, 2012) were used. Additionally, math-
All of the standards-based materials used in the Engineering ematical modeling concepts (Lesh, 2010) were incorporated.
byDesign™ Model Program are developed around the BSCS
framework. The basic premise of the 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ Model was
to develop a student-centered model that would blend design
Concepts, Contexts, and (context and concepts) and inquiry. Having used the BSCS 5E
model for many years, there was always the struggle that design
Models in Technology and was not fully represented. To that end, this new model adds an
Engineering Classrooms “e” called eNGINEER. It is in this phase or cycle where students
There exists in the profession much discussion about “what” truly design and model as engineers would.
should be taught in classrooms. Some would argue that, as
long as students are using their hands, it does not matter. Many What follows are descriptions of each of the six Es. Table 1
would point to the technological literacy standards and say this (pages 18-19) provides a summary of what a student will experi-
is the content for technology and engineering (technological ence in each phase, as well as teacher expectations to facilitate
literacy). The evolution from skills-based to an emphasis on the student learning. Much of the BSCS model has been incor-
technological literacy creates many opportunities when chan- porated and enhanced by integrating it throughout the concepts
neled to content. of eNGINEERING (design, systems, modeling, human values,
and resources).
When looking at the conceptual base for technology and engi-
neering, STEMCTL is using the following Contexts and Con- ENGAGE
cepts (Rousouw, 2005) as the basis for developing classroom The purpose of the ENGAGE phase is to pique student in-
materials and professional development. terest and get them personally involved in the lesson, while
pre-assessing prior understanding.

Contexts Based on Personal Themes, Subconcepts,

During this experience, students first encounter and identify the
and Global Concerns and Social Contexts
instructional task. During the ENGAGE phase, students make
• Food • Design
connections between past and present learning experiences
• Energy • Modeling
(prior knowledge), setting the organizational groundwork for up-
• Health & Safety/Security • Systems
coming activities. The purpose is to pique students’ curiosity and
• Shelter • Resources
encourage them to ask their own questions (Bybee, 1997).
• Transport/Mobility • Human Values
• Water
EXPLORE
The purpose of the EXPLORE phase is to provide students
Modeling plays a significant role in the conceptual base. Often with the opportunity to construct their own understanding
we think of models as real objects that look or act like the real of the topic.
artifact. A model is a system that is used to describe (or inter-
pret) another system of interest in a purposeful way. Under-
standing models usually involves a variety of diagrams, concrete
models, experience-based metaphors, and other expressive
media (Lesh, 2010 p7).

ITEEA’s 6E Learning byDeSIGN™

Model
For purposes of developing an instructional model that blends
design and inquiry, the BSCS 5E Instructional Model (Bybee,
1997), the conceptual base (concepts and contexts) as de-
scribed in the Delphi study by Rousouw, Hacker, and de Vries

March 2014 technology and engineering teacher 15

6E LEARNING byDeSIGN™ MODEL

In the EXPLORE phase, students have the opportunity to get eNGINEER is the phase of learning where learners use inquiry
directly involved with phenomena and materials. As they work and integrate it with the concepts of engineering concepts to
together in teams, students build a set of common experiences make informed design decisions in their solutions. They en-
that prompts sharing and communicating. The teacher acts as gineer creative solutions using design, systems, modeling,
a facilitator, providing materials and guiding the students' focus. resources, and human values as the basis for development,
The students' inquiry process drives the instruction during an construction, refinement, assessment, and redesign. “The
exploration. Students are actively learning through inquiry- materials used in this phase are designed to intensify learning
based science instruction and engineering challenges. Through in math and science and other core-curriculum subjects, and
Socratic Questioning, emphasis is placed on questioning, data capitalize on the hands-on interdisciplinary nature of engineer-
analysis, and critical thinking. Through self-designed or guided ing.” (Katehi, 2009, p.92)
exploration, students make hypotheses, test their own predic-
tions, and draw their own conclusions (Bybee, 1997). ENRICH
The purpose of the ENRICH phase is to provide students
EXPLAIN with an opportunity to explore in more depth what they
The purpose of the EXPLAIN phase is to provide students have learned and to transfer concepts to more complex
with an opportunity to explain and refine what they have problems.
learned so far and determine what it means.
ENRICH is the phase during which learners can transfer under-
EXPLAIN is the standing and purpose to new situations and applications. They
phase during understand and are able to utilize the concepts “Design,” “Mod-
which learn- eling,” “Resources,” and “Systems” and apply them to “Human
ers begin to Values” in ways that enrich their understanding and their ability
communicate to transfer learning to new situations and problems.
what they have
learned. Lan- EVALUATE
guage provides The purpose of the EVALUATION phase is for both students
motivation for and teachers to determine how much learning and under-
sequencing standing have taken place.
events into a
logical format. Communication occurs between peers, with the EVALUATE, the final "E," is an ongoing diagnostic process that
facilitator, and through reflection and Socratic Questioning. The allows the teach-
Explain phase introduces vocabulary in context and corrects er to determine
or redirects misconceptions. if the learner
has attained
eNGINEER understand-
The purpose of the eNGINEER phase is to provide students ing of concepts
with an opportunity to develop greater depth of under- and knowledge.
standing about the problem topic by applying concepts, Evaluation and
practices, and assessment are
attitudes. They not linear and
use concepts should occur
learned about at all points (all
the natural phases) along
world and the continuum of
apply them to the instructional
the man-made process. Some
(designed) of the tools that
world. assist in this di-
agnostic process

16 technology and engineering teacher March 2014

are: rubrics, teacher observation, student interviews, portfolios, Science%20Inquiry%201%2020112012/Forms/AllItems.
and project- and problem-based learning products. Video seg- aspx (Choose: What is Inquiry Science [long version]).
ments can be used to determine students’ depth of understand- Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purpos-
ing. Students will be excited to demonstrate their understanding es to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
through journals, drawings, models, and performance tasks Crismond, D. P. & Adams, R. S. (2012). The Informed de-
(Bybee, 1997). sign teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering
Education, 101:738–797. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.
EndNotes tb01127.x.
The 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ model can and will provide Foundation for Critical Thinking. (2013). The role of socratic
teachers and curriculum developers a systematic way to ensure questioning in thinking. Retrieved from www.criticalthinking.
that the T and E of STEM are fully integrated into the classroom. org/pages/the-role-of-socratic-questioning-in-thinking-teach-
It is a natural unification and integration of Design and Inquiry ing-learning/522
that builds on the contexts of engineering in ways that maximize Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (2009). Engineering in K-12
the content in both Standards for Technological Literacy and education: Understanding the status and improving the
Next Generation Science Standards. prospects. Retrieved from www.sdsa.org/resources/publica-
tions/Engineering in K-12 Education.pdf
The STEMCenter for Teaching and Learning has begun to Lesh, R., et al. (2010). Modeling students’ mathematical model-
use the 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ instructional model in all of ing competencies. Springer Science+Busines Media. DOI
the materials developed (K-12) for the Engineering byDeSIGN™ 10.1007/978-1-4419-0561-1_1.
model program. The framework has been integrated into the National Research Council. (2013). Next generation science
writing process as authors develop standards-based materials standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The
and the professional development model. National Academies Press.
Roussouw, A., Hacker, M., & de Vries, M. J. (2011). Concepts
And finally—Next Generation Science Standards provides and contexts in engineering and technology education: An
our profession with an opportunity to step in and showcase international and interdisciplinary Delphi study. International
the integrative nature of technology and engineering in STEM Journal of Technology and Design Education (November
classrooms. The debate in the profession will continue to evolve, 2011). Retrieved from http://download.springer.com/static/
but we must view this as an opportunity to Engage, Explore, pdf/236/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10798-010-9129-1.
Explain, eNGINEER, Enrich, and Evaluate in every school and pdf?auth66=1389103429_d23942cf0c4acd75e9fcbf0ac90e
every classroom. It goes back to the old saying used by multiple 5155&ext=.pdf
presidents and legislators since the 1960s—“If not now, when? Rohrich, K. & Morgan, E. (2005). Picture perfect science les-
If not us, who?” The answer to this is simple—now is the time, sons: Using children’s books to guide inquiry, Grades 3-6.
and we are the best qualified to bring STEM to life. NSTA Press, Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://learning-
center.nsta.org/files/PB186X-4.pdf
We welcome your feedback – please send me your thoughts at Sanders, M. (2009). Integrative STEM education: Primer. The
bburke@iteea.org. Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–27.
Sanders, M. (2012). Integrative STEM education as “best prac-
References tice.” In Proceedings of the 7th Biennial International Con-
ference onTechnology Education Research (pp. 103–117).
Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people
Queensland, Australia. Retrieved from www.griffith.edu.
learn: Mind, brain, experience, and school. Washington,
au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/514769/2012-TERC-Vol-
DC: National Research Council. Retrieved from www.citeu-
ume-2-of-2.pdf#page=109
like.org/group/9538/article/4434749
Burghardt, M. D. & Hacker, M. (2004). Informed design: A con-
Barry N. Burke, DTE is Director of ITEEA’s
temporary approach to design pedagogy as the core pro-
STEMCenter for Teaching and Learning. He
cess in technology. The Technology Teacher, 64 (1), 6-8.
can be reached at bburke@iteea.org.
Bybee, R. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins
and effectiveness. Boulder, CO: BSCS. Retrieved from
http://sharepoint.snoqualmie.k12.wa.us/mshs/ramseyerd/

March 2014 technology and engineering teacher 17

6E LEARNING byDeSIGN™ MODEL

Table 1. What a student will experience in each phase of the six Es.

Phase OVERVIEW The Student: The Teacher:

E NGAGE
The purpose for the ENGAGE phase is to pique
student interest and get them personally in-
• Becomes familiar with con-
cepts
•
•
Asks questions
Gathers materials
volved in the lesson, while pre-assessing prior • Checks for understanding • Researches and presents
understanding. • Clarifies the Big Idea and major concepts
connects with the Enduring • Connects learning to prior
During this experience, students first encounter and Understandings (Wiggins & knowledge and experiences
identify the instructional task. During the ENGAGE McTighe) • Describes the Design Process
phase, students make connections between past • Identifies what they know, • Introduces how Human Values
and present learning experiences, setting the orga- need to know, and want to are important
nizational groundwork for upcoming activities. The learn • Oversees safety and skills
purpose is to pique students’ curiosity and encour- • Contributes to identification instruction
age them to ask their own questions. (Bybee, 1997) and development of objectives • Encourages and guides initial
for the lessons EDJ entries
• Researches • Assesses student understand-
• Interacts with materials and ing to direct instructional strate-
equipment (etc.) gies.
• Identifies “Human Values” as
they relate to the Big Idea and
Enduring Understandings
• Makes entries in the Engineer-
ing Design Journal (EDJ)

E XPLORE
The purpose for the EXPLORE phase is to pro-
vide students with the opportunity to construct
• Forms generalizations about
major concepts
• Introduces Modeling (COPA-
constraints, optimization, and
their own understanding of the topic. • Participates as part of a team predictive analysis) concepts
• Participates in team and class • Reiterates the Design Process
In the EXPLORE phase, the students have the discussions • Encourages student participa-
opportunity to get directly involved with phenomena • Engages in “Modeling” activi- tion in discussions
and materials. As they work together in teams, ties (predictive analysis) • Uses Socratic Questioning –
students build a set of common experiences that • Compares team data as it seeking to understand, then
prompt sharing and communicating. The teacher relates to the criteria and con- seeking further understanding
acts as a facilitator, providing materials and guiding straints through additional questioning
the students' focus. The students' inquiry process • Makes entries and develops • Facilitates student team pro-
drives the instruction during an exploration. Stu- additional questions in EDJ cesses
dents are actively learning through inquiry-based • Encourages EDJ entries and
science instruction and engineering challenges. student reflection
Through Socratic Questioning, emphasis is placed
on: questioning, data analysis, and critical thinking.
Through self-designed or guided exploration, stu-
dents make hypotheses, test their own predictions,
and draw their own conclusions (Bybee, 1997).

E XPLAIN
The purpose for the EXPLAIN phase is to
provide students with an opportunity to explain
• Applies concepts, principles,
and theories related to “Sys-
• Introduces the concept of
Systems and how they interact
and refine what they have learned so far and tems” • Reiterates the Design Process
determine what it means. • Uses “Modeling,” “Human • Uses Socratic Questioning –
Values,” and “Systems” seeking to understand, then
EXPLAIN is the phase during which learners begin (Roussouw, 2010, p 422) to seeking further understanding
to communicate what they have learned. Language develop proposed solutions to through additional questioning
provides motivation for sequencing events into a problems • Leads class discussions
logical format. Communication occurs between • Uses the Design Process to • Corrects misconceptions
peers, with the facilitator, and through reflection form explanations • Provides appropriate resources
and Socratic Questioning. The Explain phase • Makes entries and explains • Questions students to ensure
introduces vocabulary in context and corrects or concepts in EDJ that connections are made to
redirects misconceptions (Bybee, 1997). • Uses a variety of information broader contexts
and communication technolo- • Encourages EDJ entries and
gies and skills student reflection

18 technology and engineering teacher March 2014

Table 1, continued.

Phase OVERVIEW The Student: The Teacher:

e NGINEER
The purpose of the eNGINEER phase is to
provide students with an opportunity to develop
• Applies concepts, principles,
and theories related to “De-
• Introduces the concepts of De-
sign and Resources, describ-
(Extend/Elaborate) greater depth of understanding about the prob- sign” and how “Resources” ing how they interact
lem topic by applying concepts, practices and guide decision-making • Reiterates the Design Process
attitudes. They use concepts learned about the • Uses “Design,” “Modeling,” • Facilitates student learning
natural world and apply them to the man-made “Human Values,” “Resources” through use of inquiry and
(designed) world. and “Systems” to develop pro- design
posed solutions to problems • Elaborates understanding of
eNGINEER is the phase of learning where learners • Uses creativity to design and design failures
use inquiry and integrate it with the concepts of build solutions • Provides students with re-
engineering concepts to make informed design • Uses the Design Process to sources for the application of
decisions in their solutions. They engineer cre- test and redesign solutions engineering solutions
ative solutions using design, systems, modeling, against criteria and constraints • Guides students in the applica-
resources, and human values as the basis for de- • Identifies problems and uses tion of quality control methods
velopment, construction, refinement, assessment, Modeling to predict redefined • Encourages EDJ entries and
and redesign. “The materials used in this phase are solutions student innovation
designed to intensify learning in math and science • Applies “what if” concepts to
and other core-curriculum subjects, and capitalize different contexts
on the hands-on interdisciplinary nature of engi- • Controls quality of designed
neering” (Katehi, 2009, p.92). solutions
• Makes entries and explains
eNGINEERing connections in
EDJ

E NRICH
The purpose for the ENRICH phase is to provide
students with an opportunity to explore in more
• Understands the Design
Process and applies it to new
• Provides students with re-
sources for identifying new ap-
depth what they have learned and to transfer situations plications of design concepts
concepts to more complex problems. • Enriches the understanding • Questions students to ensure
of eNGINEERing concepts to that connections are made to
ENRICH is the phase during which learners can different contexts and applica- broader contexts
transfer understanding and purpose to new situa- tions • Guides students in produc-
tions and applications. They understand and are • Conducts appropriate research ing effective communication
able to utilize the concepts “Design,” “Modeling,” • Enters data in Inventors log- through EDJ entries
“Resources,” and “Systems” and apply them to book
“Human Values” in ways that enrich their under- • Considers “spinoffs” and tech-
standing and their ability to transfer learning to new nology transfer based on the
situations and problems (Bybee, 1997). basic design

E VALUATE
The purpose for the EVALUATION phase is for
both students and teachers to determine how
• Demonstrates an understand-
ing of the eNGINEERing
• Uses pre-assessment tools to
identify student learning needs,
much learning and understanding has taken concepts “Design,” “Modeling,” wants, and deficiencies
place. “Resources,” and “Systems” • Facilitates and engages stu-
and applies them to “Human dents to understand “Design,”
EVALUATE is an ongoing diagnostic process that Values” in their solutions “Modeling,” “Resources,”
allows the teacher to determine if the learner has • Uses self-assessments to “Systems,” and “Human Val-
attained understanding of concepts and knowledge. determine if they have learned ues” throughout the learning
Evaluation and assessment is not linear and should what they identified in the process
occur at all points (all phases) along the continuum Engage phase as important to • Ensures that student learning
of the instructional process. Some of the tools know or do to be able to de- is based on STL, CCSS, and
that assist in this diagnostic process are: rubrics, velop solutions to the problem. NGSS
teacher observation, student interviews, portfolios, This double-check is done in • Uses a variety of formative
projects, and problem-based learning products. Vid- each of the six phases. assessment tools throughout
eo segments can be used to determine students’ • Completes (formative and each phase
depth of understanding. Students will be excited to summative) assessment activi- • Explains rubrics and other as-
demonstrate their understanding through journals, ties according to established sessment tools
drawings, models, and performance tasks (Bybee, rubrics • Provides feedback on online
1997). • Uses the EDJ to provide formative and other assess-
daily and periodic evidence of ment tools.
progress toward learning goals • Utilizes knowing and doing
identified at the outset. assessment tools to evaluate
program effectiveness.
March 2014 technology and engineering teacher 19