Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Research on Teacher Opinions on STEM Practices

Year 2018, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 42 - 53, 29.03.2018

Abstract

The aim of this study is to present the opinions
of teachers who have integrated STEM practices in their lessons with all
dimensions. For this purpose, 6 teachers who are working in different cities of
Turkey have formed the study group of the research.
Within the scope of
the study, case study method was used among qualitative research methods.
"STEM Teacher Interview Form (SÖGF)" consisting of 7 questions was
used as data collection tool.
In the light of the data obtained as a result of
qualitative evaluation, teachers emphasized that they do not have enough
knowledge about the field they are acquainted with, that a good STEM teacher
should be sufficient in pedagogy, engineering and integration. It is also
emphasized that strategies and methods such as project based learning, research
based learning and probing solving based learning should be used during STEM
applications.
In the light of these results, suggestions were made for future studies
about teachers.

References

  • Alumbaugh, K. M. (2015). The Perceptions of Elementary STEM Schools in Missouri. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lindenwood University, Missouri.
  • American Institute of Physics. (2015). President Obama on STEM education. Retrieved May 2017, https://www.aip.org/fyi/2015/president-obama-stem-education.
  • Banks, F., & Barlex, D. (2014). Teaching STEM in the secondary school: How teachers and schools can meet the challenge. London: Routledge.
  • Cantrell, P., Pekca, G., & Ahmad, I. (2006). The effects of engineering modules on student learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education. 95(4), 301-309.
  • Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. (Eds.). (2013). Project-based learning: an integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach (2nd ed.). Rotterdam: Sense.
  • Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Dass, P.M. (2015). Teaching STEM effectively with the learning cycle approach. K- 12 STEM Education. 1(1), 5-12.
  • Evans, E. M. (2015). Preparıng Elementary Pre-Servıce Teachers to Integrate STEM: A Mıxed-Methods Study. Doctor of Educatıon. Northern Illinois University, Illinois.
  • Dugger, W. E. (2010). Evolution of STEM in the united states. the 6th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research. (8-11 December), Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
  • Felix, A., & Harris, J. (2010). A project-based, STEM integrated: Alternative energy team challenge for teachers. The Technology Teacher. 69(5), 29-34.
  • Glesne, C. (2014). Nitel araştırmaya giriş (A. Ersoy & P. Yalçınoğlu, Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. Gonzalez, H. B. & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education: A Primer. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved Jule 2017, https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf. Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 13(5), 1089-1113.
  • Haynes, M.M., & Santos, A.D. (2007). Effective teacher professional development: Middle school engineering content. International Journal of Engineering Education. 23(1), 24-29.
  • Hynes, M. M. (2008). Middle-school teachers’ use and development of engineering subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge: a pilot study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tufts University, Medford.
  • Kabaran, G. G. & Uşun, S. (2017). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin fakülte ve öğretim elemanı kavramlarına ilişkin metaforları. Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi. 3(2), 35-49.
  • Kennedy, M. M., S. Ahn & J. Choi (2008) The value added by teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, and J. McIntyre (Editors). Handbook of research on teacher education: enduring issues in changing contexts (pp. 1249-1273) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2016). STEM eğitim raporu. Ankara: Yenilik ve Eğitim Teknolojileri Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Morrison, J. (2006). TIES STEM education monograph series, attributes of STEM education. Baltimore, MD: TIES.
  • Ostler, E. (2012). 21st century STEM education: a tactical model for long-range success. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology. 2(1), 28-33.
  • Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved July 2017, www.21centruryskills.org. Selvi, M. & Yıldırım, B. (2017). STEM öğretme-öğrenme modelleri: 5e öğrenme modeli, proje tabanlı öğrenme ve STEM SOS modeli. S. Çepni (Ed.). Kuramdan Uygulamaya STEM+A+E Eğitimi (s.203-236). Ankara: Pegem.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researche., 15(2), 4–14.
  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012) Considerations for teaching ıntegrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER). 2(1).
  • Sözer, E. (2008). Eğitimin felsefi temelleri. M. Gültekin (Ed.). Eğitim bilimine giriş içinde (s. 57-75). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM (2010). What is STEM education?. Retrieved March 2017, http://www.tiesteach.org/stem-education.aspx.
  • Yıldırım, B. & Altun, Y. (2014). STEM eğitimi üzerine derleme çalışması: Fen bilimleri alanında örnek ders uygulanmaları. VI. International Congress of Education Research (5-8 Haziran), Ankara, Türkiye.
  • Yıldırım, B. (2017a). Fen eğitiminde STEM. M. P. Demirci Güler (Ed.). Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi (s. 283-295). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Yıldırım, B. (2017b). Bilim merkezleri ve STEM. A. Güney (Ed.). Her Yönüyle Bilim Merkezi: Bilim Merkezlerine Dair Kavramsal Bir Okuma (s. 207-220). Konya: Çizgi Kitapevi.
  • Yıldırım, B., (2016). 7. Sınıf fen bilimleri dersine entegre edilmiş fen teknoloji mühendislik matematik (STEM) uygulamaları ve tam öğrenmenin etkilerinin incelenmesi. (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER). 1(2), 2.
  • Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics. 112(1), 12-19.

STEM Uygulamalarına Yönelik Öğretmen Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi

Year 2018, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 42 - 53, 29.03.2018

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, STEM uygulamalarına derslerinde yer veren
öğretmenlerin STEM eğitimine yönelik görüşlerini tüm boyutları ile ortaya
koymaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, araştırmanın çalışma grubunu Türkiye’nin
farklı illerinde görev yapmakta olan 6 öğretmen oluşturmuştur. Çalışma
kapsamında, nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden durum çalışması yöntemi
kullanılmıştır. Veri toplama aracı olarak 7 sorudan oluşan “STEM Öğretmen
Görüşme Formu (SÖGF)” kullanılmıştır. Nitel veriler sonucunda elde edilen
veriler ışığında, öğretmenlerin kendilerini alan bilgisi konusunda yeterli
hissetmedikleri, iyi bir STEM öğretmeninde alan, pedagoji, mühendislik ve
entegrasyon bilgisi olması gerektiğini vurgulamışlardır. Ayrıca STEM
uygulamaları sırasında proje tabanlı öğrenme, araştırma temelli öğrenme ve
probleme dayalı öğrenme gibi strateji ve yöntemlerin kullanılması gerektiği
üzerinde durulmuştur. Elde edilen bu sonuçlar ışığından, öğretmenler ile ilgili
yapılacak başka çalışmalar için önerilerde bulunulmuştur. 





References

  • Alumbaugh, K. M. (2015). The Perceptions of Elementary STEM Schools in Missouri. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lindenwood University, Missouri.
  • American Institute of Physics. (2015). President Obama on STEM education. Retrieved May 2017, https://www.aip.org/fyi/2015/president-obama-stem-education.
  • Banks, F., & Barlex, D. (2014). Teaching STEM in the secondary school: How teachers and schools can meet the challenge. London: Routledge.
  • Cantrell, P., Pekca, G., & Ahmad, I. (2006). The effects of engineering modules on student learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education. 95(4), 301-309.
  • Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. (Eds.). (2013). Project-based learning: an integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach (2nd ed.). Rotterdam: Sense.
  • Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Dass, P.M. (2015). Teaching STEM effectively with the learning cycle approach. K- 12 STEM Education. 1(1), 5-12.
  • Evans, E. M. (2015). Preparıng Elementary Pre-Servıce Teachers to Integrate STEM: A Mıxed-Methods Study. Doctor of Educatıon. Northern Illinois University, Illinois.
  • Dugger, W. E. (2010). Evolution of STEM in the united states. the 6th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research. (8-11 December), Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
  • Felix, A., & Harris, J. (2010). A project-based, STEM integrated: Alternative energy team challenge for teachers. The Technology Teacher. 69(5), 29-34.
  • Glesne, C. (2014). Nitel araştırmaya giriş (A. Ersoy & P. Yalçınoğlu, Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. Gonzalez, H. B. & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education: A Primer. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved Jule 2017, https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf. Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 13(5), 1089-1113.
  • Haynes, M.M., & Santos, A.D. (2007). Effective teacher professional development: Middle school engineering content. International Journal of Engineering Education. 23(1), 24-29.
  • Hynes, M. M. (2008). Middle-school teachers’ use and development of engineering subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge: a pilot study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tufts University, Medford.
  • Kabaran, G. G. & Uşun, S. (2017). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin fakülte ve öğretim elemanı kavramlarına ilişkin metaforları. Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi. 3(2), 35-49.
  • Kennedy, M. M., S. Ahn & J. Choi (2008) The value added by teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, and J. McIntyre (Editors). Handbook of research on teacher education: enduring issues in changing contexts (pp. 1249-1273) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2016). STEM eğitim raporu. Ankara: Yenilik ve Eğitim Teknolojileri Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Morrison, J. (2006). TIES STEM education monograph series, attributes of STEM education. Baltimore, MD: TIES.
  • Ostler, E. (2012). 21st century STEM education: a tactical model for long-range success. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology. 2(1), 28-33.
  • Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved July 2017, www.21centruryskills.org. Selvi, M. & Yıldırım, B. (2017). STEM öğretme-öğrenme modelleri: 5e öğrenme modeli, proje tabanlı öğrenme ve STEM SOS modeli. S. Çepni (Ed.). Kuramdan Uygulamaya STEM+A+E Eğitimi (s.203-236). Ankara: Pegem.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researche., 15(2), 4–14.
  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012) Considerations for teaching ıntegrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER). 2(1).
  • Sözer, E. (2008). Eğitimin felsefi temelleri. M. Gültekin (Ed.). Eğitim bilimine giriş içinde (s. 57-75). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM (2010). What is STEM education?. Retrieved March 2017, http://www.tiesteach.org/stem-education.aspx.
  • Yıldırım, B. & Altun, Y. (2014). STEM eğitimi üzerine derleme çalışması: Fen bilimleri alanında örnek ders uygulanmaları. VI. International Congress of Education Research (5-8 Haziran), Ankara, Türkiye.
  • Yıldırım, B. (2017a). Fen eğitiminde STEM. M. P. Demirci Güler (Ed.). Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi (s. 283-295). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Yıldırım, B. (2017b). Bilim merkezleri ve STEM. A. Güney (Ed.). Her Yönüyle Bilim Merkezi: Bilim Merkezlerine Dair Kavramsal Bir Okuma (s. 207-220). Konya: Çizgi Kitapevi.
  • Yıldırım, B., (2016). 7. Sınıf fen bilimleri dersine entegre edilmiş fen teknoloji mühendislik matematik (STEM) uygulamaları ve tam öğrenmenin etkilerinin incelenmesi. (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER). 1(2), 2.
  • Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics. 112(1), 12-19.
There are 29 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Article
Authors

Bekir Yıldırım

Publication Date March 29, 2018
Submission Date December 27, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 4 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Yıldırım, B. (2018). STEM Uygulamalarına Yönelik Öğretmen Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi. Eğitim Kuram Ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 42-53.