2026 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

The industry demand for highly trained engineers is escalating (National Science Board, 2019), yet access to authentic engineering learning in U.S. high schools remains uneven (Authors, 2021). Robotics is a proven lever for motivating students toward engineering pathways (Burack et al., 2019), but is often confined to extracurricular activities and constrained by high kit costs and limited teacher expertise (Authors, 2024). To address these barriers, a blended engineering+robotics [PROGRAM NAME] initiative was funded through a workforce development grant in 2021. Significant work was directed in the first phase to develop cost-effective, 3-D printed robotics kits, establish blended engineering and robotics education models for implementation in high schools across the nation, and build a year-round teacher support infrastructure.

The second phase aims to iteratively develop adaptive, flexible robotics lessons that any engineering program can adopt, provide AI-enabled performance support for teachers, scale the program nationally, and conduct comprehensive research exploring teacher facilitators and barriers and the role of various partnerships in scaling efforts. The proposed poster will describe our design-based implementation research approach (Penuel et al., 2011) and results for the following question: How do implementation conditions and support structures shape high school teachers’ capacity to deliver, adapt, and sustain robotics-integrated engineering instruction across diverse school contexts?

Data were collected through multiple focus groups, lesson-embedded feedback cards, and monthly Community of Practice discussions, working with 15 high school teachers nationwide over 1.5 years. Data were analyzed using open coding and constant comparison methods (Corbin & Strauss, 2015) to uncover emergent themes. Findings indicate that teachers’ capacity to deliver, adapt, and sustain robotics-integrated engineering education grows when practical supports align with local contexts. Offering multiple implementation models gives schools the flexibility to adapt to local constraints. Hands-on in-person professional development, modular, clear scope-and-sequence curricular materials, and just-in-time troubleshooting resources boost teacher confidence, while Communities of Practice reduce isolation. These results surface concrete design requirements and support needed to expand equitable, classroom-embedded robotics at scale. This work also highlights the value of inviting teachers as co-designers (Davis et al., 2014) into the development of robotics/engineering curricula to ensure context-responsive learning experiences.