The Effects of Out-of-School Learning Environments on STEM Education: Teachers’ STEM Awareness and 21st-Century Skills

Year 2024, Volume: 17 Issue: 1, 57 - 79, 28.01.2024

Mustafa Çevik Büşra Bakioğlu Zeynep Temiz

https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.1309078

Abstract

This study was carried out within the scope of a nature education and science camp project. It aimed to investigate the effects of STEM activities conducted in out-of-school environments on teachers’ STEM awareness and 21st-century skills. The research was designed according to the explanatory sequential pattern of the mixed method, and the quantitative and qualitative methods are the continuation of each other. Twenty-three science, elementary math, technology, and design teachers who worked at public middle schools participated in a six-day program that integrated STEM subjects with out-of-school learning. Seven different STEM-integrated out-of-school activities were implemented for six days in one of the central Anatolian regions in Turkey. STEM awareness and 21st-century skills scales were implemented in the study for data collection. A semi-structured interview was also conducted with teachers. The aim was for the teachers who participated in the project to integrate out-of-school and STEM education and then transfer this newly gained knowledge to their students. Both quantitative and qualitative findings support that teacher’s acquisition of knowledge and skills throughout the science camp would support their students’ craft, analytical thinking, motivation, problem-solving skills, and self-esteem. As such, out-of-learning environments should be used more in both STEM and 21st-century skills education.

Keywords

out of school learning, middle school teacher training, STEM education, 21st century skills

Project Number

122B774

References

• Akaygün, S., Aslan-Tutak, F., Bayazıt, N., Demir, K., & Kesner, J. E. (2015). Kısaca FeTeMM eğitimi: Öğretmenler ve öğrencileri için iki günlük çalıştay. 2. International Conference on New Trends in Education, İstanbul, Türkiye.
• Akgündüz, D., & Ertepınar, E. (Eds.). (2015). STEM eğitimi Türkiye raporu. Scala Basım Yayım Tan. San. Tic. Ltd. Şti.
• Akgündüz, D., Aydeniz, M., Çakmakçı, G., Çavaş, B., Çorlu, M., Öner, T., & Özdemir, S. (2015). STEM eğitimi Türkiye raporu: Günümüz modası mı yoksa gereksinim mi? İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi STEM Merkezi.
• Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21St century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD education working papers, no. 41. OECD Publishing (NJ1).
• Aslan-Tutak, F., Akaygün, S., & Teksezen, S. (2017). Collaboratively learning to teach STEM: Change in participating pre-service teachers’ awareness of STEM. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 32(4), 794-816.
• Bakırcı, H., & Kutlu, E. (2018). Fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin FeTeMM yaklaşımı hakkındaki görüşlerinin belirlenmesi. Türk Bilgisayar ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 9(2), 367-389.
• Bakioğlu, B., & Çevik, M. (Eds). (2021). Okul dışı ortamlarda STEM eğitimi. Nobel Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Balım, A. G., Çeliker, H. D., Türkoğuz, S., & Kaçar, S. (2013). The effect of reflections of science on nature project on students’ science process skills. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 2(1), 149-157.
• Baran, E., Bilici, S. C., Mesutoglu, C., & Ocak, C. (2016). Moving STEM beyond schools: Students’perceptions about an out‐of‐school STEM education program. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 4(1), 9–19.
• Bogner, F. X., & Wiseman, M. (2004). Outdoor ecology education and pupils’ environmental perception in preservation and utilization. Science Education International, 15, 27-48.
• Bozkurt Altan, E., Üçüncüoğlu, İ., & Öztürk N. (2019). Preparation of out-of-school learning environment based on STEM education and investigating its effects. Science Education International, 30(2), 138-148.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çokluk, Ö., & Köklü, N. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik (7. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
• Bybee, R. W. (2009). The BSCS 5E instructional model and 21st century skills. Colorado Springs.
• Cooper, R., & Heaverlo, C. (2013). Problem solving and creativity and design: What influence do they have on girls’ interest in STEM subject areas?. American Journal of Engineering Education, 4(1), 27-38.
• Chin, C-C. (2004). Museum experience- A resource for science teacher education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 63-90.
• Cunningham, C. M., & Kelly, G. J. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21271
• Çelik, İ. (2012). Bir bilim kampından notlar. TUBİTAK Bilim ve Teknik Dergisi, 538, 15-19.
• Çevik, M. (2017). Ortaöğretim öğretmenlerine yönelik FeTeMM farkındalık ölçeği (FFÖ) geliştirme çalışması. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(3), 2436-2452.
• Çevik, M., & Abdioğlu, C. (2018). Bir bilim kampının 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin STEM başarılarına, fen motivasyonlarına ve üstbilişsel farkındalıklarına etkisinin ı̇ncelenmesi. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(7), 304-327.
• Çevik, M., & Senturk C. (2019). Multidimensional 21th century skills scale: Validity and reliability study. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 14(1), 011–028.
• Çorlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education: implications for educating our teachers for the age of innovation. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(171), 74-85.
• Grajcevci, A., & Shala, A. (2016). Formal and non-formal education in the new era. Action Researcher in Education, 7(7), 119-130.
• Greenwood J. (2020) On two foundational principles of the Berlin school of Gestalt psychology. Review of General Psychology, 24(3), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019893972
• Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30(4), 233-252.
• Hamarat, E. (2019). In focus on 21st century skills Turkiye’s education policy. SETA Analiz, No. 272.
• Holloway, I., & Wheeler, S. (1996). Qualitative research for nurses. Blackwell Science Ltd.
• Kalemkuş, J. (2021). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı kazanımlarının 21. yüzyıl becerileri açısından incelenmesi. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 11(1), 63-87. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.800552
• Karademir, E. (2018). Okul dışı ortamlarda fen öğretimi. O. Karamustafaoğlu, Ö. Tezel ve U. Sarı (Eds.), Güncel yaklaşım ve yöntemlerle etkinlik destekli fen öğretimi (p. 426- 447). Pegem Akademi.
• Karisan, D., Macalalag, A., & Johnson, J. (2019). The effect of methods course on preservice teachers' awareness and intentions of teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subject. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 5(1), 22-35.
• Koosimile, A. T. (2004). Out-of-school experiences in science classes: problems, issues and challenges in Botswana. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 483 – 496.
• Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214-222.
• Kubat, U. (2018). Opinions of pre-service science teachers about outdoor education. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 48, 111-135.
• Laçin Şimşek, C. (Ed.). (2011). Fen öğretiminde okul dışı öğrenme ortamları. Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Larson, L. C., & Miller, T. N. (2011). 21st century skills: Prepare students for the future. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(3), 121-123.
• Markowitz, D. G. (2004). Evaluation of the long-term impact of a university high school summer science program on students' interest and perceived abilities in science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(3), 395-407.
• Martin, L. M. W. (2004). An emerging research framework for studying informal learning and schools. Science Education, 88(S1), 71-82.
• Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded Sourcebook. (2nd ed). Sage.
• Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research, 40(1), 120–123.
• National Science Teachers Association [NSTA] (2011). Quality Science Education and 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from http://science.nsta.org/nstaexpress/PositionStatementDraft_21stCenturySkills.pdf
• Ngaka, W., Openjuru, G., & Mazur, R. E. (2012). Exploring formal and non-formal education practices for integrated and diverse learning environments in Uganda. The International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities and Nations, 11(6), 109- 121.
• OECD. (2019). Educating 21st century children: Emotional well-being in the digital age (t. burns ve f. gottschalk, ed.). organisation for economic co-operation and development. https://doi.org/10.1787/b7f33425-en
• Orion, N., Hofstein, A.,Tamir, P. & Giddings, G. J. (1997) Devolopment and validation of an instrument for assesing the learning environment of outdoor science activities. Science Education, 81, 161-171.
• Özbilen, A. G. (2018). STEM eğitimine yönelik öğretmen görüşleri ve farkındalıkları. Bilimsel Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 1-21.
• Özçelik, A., & Akgündüz, D. (2018). Evaluation of gifted/talented students’ out-of-school STEM education. Trakya University Journal of Education Faculty 8(2), 334-351.
• Panizzon, D., & Gordon, M. (2003). Mission possible: a day of science, fun and collaboration. Australian Primary Junior Science Journal,19(2), 9-14.
• Peterson, T., & Fix, S. (Eds.). (2007). Afterschool advantage: Powerful new learning opportunities. Moorestown.
• Plano Clark, V. L., & Creswell, J. W. (2008). The mixed methods reader. Sage.
• Privitera, G. J. (2015). Statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd edition). Sage Publications.
• Randler, C., Kummer, B., & Wilhelm, C. (2012). Adolescent learning in the zoo: Embedding a non-formal learning environment to teach formal aspects of vertebrate biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 384-391.
• Schnittka, C. G., Bell, R. L., & Richards, L. G. (2010). Save the penguins: Teaching the science of heat transfer through engineering design. Science Scope, 34(3), 82–91.
• Scott Simmons, O. (2021). A holistic model for student success in STEM (with J. Adams, D. Bright, J. Jackson), in social justice and education in the 21st century: Research from South Africa and The United States (Willie Pearson & Vijay Reddy eds.) (Springer 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3829944
• Sharts-Hopko, N. C. (2002). Assessing rigor in qualitative research. Journal of the Association of Nurses in Aids Care, 13(4), 84-86.
• Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75.
• Smith, J. W. (2017). Outdoor education. In The Good Education of Youth (pp. 366-367). University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills, and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373-394.
• Sungur Gül, K., & Marulcu, İ. (2014). Investigation of in service and preservice science teachers’ perspectives about engineering-design as an instructional method and legos as an instructional material. International Periodical for The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(2),761-786.
• Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2007) Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Tatar, N. & Bağrıyanık, K. E. (2012). Opinions of science and technology teachers about outdoor education. Elementary Online, 11(4), 882-896.
• The Parlimentary Office of Science Techonogy. (2011). Informal STEM Education. Retrieved from https://post.parliament.uk/research-briefings/post-pn-382/
• Thomas, G. (2010) Facilitator, teacher, or leader? Managing conflicting roles in outdoor education. Journal of Experiential Education, 32(3), 239–254.
• Timur, S., Timur, B., Yalçınkaya-Önder, E., & Küçük, D. (2020). Attitudes of the students attending out-of-school STEM workshops towards STEM education. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 13(2), 334-351.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Wang, Hui-Hui. (2012). A new era of science education: science teachers’ perceptions and classroom practices of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) integration. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/120980
• Wasti, S. P., Simkhada, P., Van Teijlingen, E. R., Sathian, B., & Banerjee, I. (2022). The Growing Importance of Mixed-Methods Research in Health. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, 12(1), 1175-1178.
• Wilcox, R. R. (2012). Modern statistics for the social and behavioral sciences: A practical introduction. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9. Baskı). Seçkin Press.
• Young, J., Ortiz, N., & Young, J. (2017). STEMulating interest: A meta-analysis of the effects of out-of-school time on student STEM interest. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(1), 62-74.