Preservice Mathematics Teachers’ Experiences in Designing STEM Lessons

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the views of pre-service mathematics teachers on STEM education and the challenges encountered during the lesson planning process. The qualitative research method was utilized for in-depth analysis. In the study, pre-service mathematics teachers were engaged in activities related to STEM that the researchers prepared. After this, they were asked to create and teach lesson plans focusing on STEM. In order to get more information about their experience, three interviews were conducted with them at the beginning, middle, and the end of the study. Analysis of the interviews revealed significant changes in the pre-service teachers’ comprehension of STEM education. Furthermore, it was observed that the participants could integrate mathematics and science into their lessons more easily than engineering and technology disciplines. The participants who stated that the integration of mathematics and technology is important could not actually perform this integration effectively. Finally, the participants stated that STEM education is an essential educational approach within mathematics education, expressing their intentions to incorporate STEM activities into their future lesson plans.

Keywords

• STEM Education
• Lesson Planning
• Pre-service Mathematics Teachers

References

1. Anderson, J., English, L., Fitzallen, N., & Symons, D. (2020). The contribution of mathematics education researchers to the current STEM education agenda. Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2016–2019, 27–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4269-5_3
2. Aydın, G. (2020). İlkokul öğretmenlerinin öğrencilerle fen, Matematik, Mühendislik, Teknoloji (stem) Eğitimi öncesi gereksinimleri; durum çalışması. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 20(88), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2020.88.1
3. Bartels, S. L., Rupe, K. M., & Lederman, J. S. (2019). Shaping pre-service teachers’ understandings of STEM: A collaborative math and Science Methods Approach. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 30(6), 666–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560x.2019.1602803
4. Basu, A. C., Hill, A. S., Isaacs, A. K., Mondoux, M. A., Mruczek, R. E., & Narita, T. (2021). Integrative STEM education for undergraduate neuroscience: design and implementation. Neuroscience Letters, 746, 135660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2021.135660
5. Bergsten, C., & Frejd, P. (2019). Preparing pre-service mathematics teachers for STEM education: An analysis of lesson proposals. ZDM, 51(6), 941–953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01071-7
6. Berisha, F., & Vula, E. (2021). Developing pre-service teachers conceptualization of stem and stem pedagogical practices. Frontiers in Education, 6, 585075. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.585075
7. Berlin, D. F., & White, A. L. (2010). Pre-service mathematics and science teachers in an integrated teacher preparation program for grades 7-12: A 3-year study of attitudes and perceptions related to integration. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(1), 97-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9164-0
8. Berisha, F., & Vula, E. (2021). Developing pre-service teachers conceptualization of stem and stem pedagogical practices. Frontiers in Education, 6, 585075https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.585075

9. Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: a 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.
10. Cahyono, A. N., Asikin, M., Zahid, M. Z., Laksmiwati, P. A., & Miftahudin, M. (2021). The roboste[m] project: Using robotics learning in a STEM education model to help prospective mathematics teachers promote students’ 21st-centuryskills. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(7), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.7.5
11. Ceylan, Ö., & Karahan, E. (2021). Stem Odaklı Matematik Uygulamalarının 11. sınıf öğrencilerinin Matematik Tutum ve bilgileri üzerine Etkisi. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 11(2), 660–683. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.793601
12. Chai, C. S., Rahmawati, Y., & Jong, M. S.-Y. (2020). Indonesian science, Mathematics, and engineering pre-service teachers’ experiences in stem- TPACK design-based learning. Sustainability, 12(21), 9050. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219050
13. Corlu, M. S. (2045). Fetemm Eğitimi Makale çağrı mektubu. Turkish Journal of Education, 3(1), 4-10. .https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.181071
14. Corlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education: Implications for educating our teachers in the age of innovation. Eğitim Ve Bilim, 39(171), 74–85. Çalış, S. (2020). Physics-chemistry pre-service teachers' opinions about preparing and implementation of STEM lesson plan. JOTSE, 10(2), 296-305.
15. Çalisici, H., & Sümen, Ö. Ö. (2018). Metaphorical Perceptions of Prospective Teachers for STEM Education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(5), 871-880.
16. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing program outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 120-138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105283796
17. English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
18. Fitzallen, N. (2015). STEM Education: What Does Mathematics Have to Offer? In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Mathematics education in the margins (Proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia), pp. 237–244. Sunshine Coast: MERGA.
19. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
20. Hoon, T. S., Ruzaina, S., & Syed, B. (2022). Science , Technology , Engineering , and Mathematics ( STEM ) Education in University : Pre- service Teachers ’ Perceptions. Asian Journal of University Education, 18(3), 637–648. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v18i3.18951
21. Jocius, R., O’Byrne, W. I., Albert, J., Joshi, D., Robinson, R., & Andrews, A. (2021). Infusing Computational Thinking into STEM Teaching: From Professional Development to Classroom Practice. Educational Technology & Society, 24(4), 166–179.
22. Johnson, C. C. (2012). Implementation of STEM education policy: Challenges, progress, and lessons learned. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 45- 55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00110.x
23. Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM Education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
24. Lawson, M. A., Herrick, I. R., & Rosenberg, J. M. (2021). Better Together: Mathematics and Science Pre-Service Teachers’ Sensemaking about STEM. Educational Technology & Society, 24(4), 180–192. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48629254
25. Maiorca, C., & Mohr‐Schroeder, M. J. (2020). Elementary Pre-service Teachers’ integration of engineering into STEM Lesson Plans. School Science and Mathematics, 120(7), 402–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12433
26. Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151 Marrero, M. E., Gunning, A., & Germain-Williams, T. (2014). What is STEM education? Global Education Review, 1(4). 1-6.
27. Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a qualitative study (Vol. 2, pp. 214-253). The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods.
28. McCulloch, A. W., Hollebrands, K., Lee, H., Harrison, T., & Mutlu, A. (2018). Factors that influence secondary mathematics teachers’ integration of technology in mathematics lessons. Computers & Education, 123, 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.008
29. McKay, B. (2020). STEM Education: Practical Application for Every Learner. Midwest Quarterly, 61(3), 356–359.
30. MoNE (Ministry of National Education) (2023). Secondary School Science Course (Year 5, 6, 7 and 8) Curriculum. Ankara: MEB
31. Nadelson, L., Seifert, A., Moll, A., & Coats, B. (2012). I-STEM summer institute: an integrated approach to teacher professional development in STEM. Journal of STEM Education, 13(2), 69–83
32. National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. Pearson, G. (2017). National Academies piece on Integrated Stem. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 224–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1289781
34. Pimthong, P., & Williams, J. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ understanding of STEM education. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2018.07.017
35. Pimthong, P., & Williams, P. J. (2021). Methods course for primary level stem pre- service teachers: Constructing Integrated Stem Teaching. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(8). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11113
36. Roehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Ring-Whalen, E. (2021). Beyond the basics: A detailed conceptual framework of Integrated Stem. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00041-y
37. Suratno, Wahono, B., Chang, C.-Y., Retnowati, A., & Yushardi. (2020). Exploring a Direct Relationship between Students’ Problem-Solving Abilities and Academic Achievement: A STEM Education at a Coffee Plantation Area. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(2), 211–224.
38. Sümen, Ö. Ö., & Çalisici, H. (2016). Pre-Service Teachers' Mind Maps and Opinions on STEM Education Implemented in an Environmental Literacy Course. Educational sciences: Theory and practice, 16(2), 459-476.
39. Şahin, E., & Kabasakal, V. (2018). Investigation of students’ views on the use of dynamic mathematics programs (geogebrea) in STEM education approach. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(STEMES’18), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.463877
40. Şahin, E., & Yıldırım, B. (2020). Determination of the Effects of STEM Education Approach on Career Choices of Gifted and Talented Students. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(3), 1-13.
41. Tatar, E., Zengin, Y., & Kağızmanlı, T. (2013). Dinamik matematik yazılımı ile etkileşimli tahta teknolojisinin matematik öğretiminde kullanımı. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 4(2).
42. Tondeur, J., Roblin, N. P., van Braak, J., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education: In search of a new curriculum. Educational Studies, 39(2), 239–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2012.713548
43. Wijaya, T. T., Jiang, P., Mailizar, M., & Habibi, A. (2022). Predicting factors influencing pre-service teachers’ behavior intention in the implementation of STEM education using partial least squares approach. Sustainability, 14(16), 9925. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14169925.
44. Yata, C., Ohtani, T., & Isobe, M. (2020). Conceptual framework of stem based on Japanese subject principles. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(12), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00205-8
45. Zhang, Y., & Zhu, J. (2023). Stem pre-service teacher education: A Review of Research Trends in the past ten years. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2292. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13300