STEM Eğitimi İçin Bir Mühendislik Modeli Oluşturma Etkinliğinden Çıkan Ürünler

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Mühendislik Model Oluşturma Etkinliklerinin (MühMOE) STEM eğitimine geçişte mühendislik ile okul matematiği arasında köprü kurmak için bir araç olarak kullanılıp kullanılmayacağını incelemektir. Bu amaçla, araştırmacılar matematik öğretmeni ile birlikte çalışarak disiplinlerarası bir doğaya sahip "Trafik Işıkları Problemi" geliştirdiler. Geliştirilen bu problem, Türkiye'nin Doğu bölgesinde bir il merkezinde 2017-2018 eğitim-öğretim yılında 7. sınıfta öğrenim gören 3 ve 4 kişilik iki gruba uygulanmıştır. Problemin çözüm sürecinde öğrenciler matematik, fen bilimleri, teknoloji ve mühendislik bilgilerini bütünleşik bir yapıda kullanarak kendi matematiksel ve bilimsel fikirlerini ortaya atmış, bu fikirlerini grup içi tartışmalarla destekleyerek birbirinden farklı modeller (ürün) ortaya koymuşlardır. Grupların problem çözme sürecinde geliştirdikleri modellerin farklı olmasında; öğrencilerin ilk defa böyle bir problem ile karşılaşmaları, grup içerisindeki kişilerin farklı düşünmeleri, problemin doğası gereği karmaşık yapıda olması gibi nedenlerin etkili olduğunu söylemek mümkündür. Elde edilen bulgular ışığında trafik ışıkları modelleme probleminin disiplinlerarası bir doğaya sahip olduğu görülmüş, bu problemin STEM eğitimi için önemli bir işlev görebileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• STEM Eğitimi
• Mühendislik Model Oluşturma Etkinliği (MühMOE)
• Tasarım Süreci

Products From Building an Engineering Model for Stem Education Activity

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine whether the purpose of the Engineering Model Eliciting Activities (EngMEAs) are to be used as a tool to bridge engineering and school mathematics in the transition to STEM education. To this end, researchers have developed "Traffic Lights Problem", which has an interdisciplinary nature, working with mathematics teacher. This problem was applied to two groups of 3 and 4 students studying in the 7th grade in a city center in the eastern region of Turkey in the 2017-2018 academic year. In the process of solving the problem, the students used mathematics, science, technology and engineering knowledge in an integrated structure and introduced their own mathematical and scientific ideas and supported these ideas with in-group discussions and presented different models (products). The models of the students were different from each other because of students’ first exposure to such a process, different way of thoughts in the groups and inherent complexity of the modelling problems. In the light of the findings, it was concluded that the traffic lights modeling problem had an interdisciplinary nature, and this problem may have an important function for STEM education.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• STEM Education
• Engineering Model Eliciting Activity (EngMEAs)
• Design Process

Kaynakça

1. Akgündüz, D., Aydeniz, M., Çakmakçı, G., Çavaş, B., Çorlu, M. S., Öner, T., et al. (2015). A report on STEM Education in Turkey: A provisional agenda or a necessity? Istanbul, Turkey: Aydin University. Istanbul Aydın University STEM Center and Faculty of Education.
2. Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press
3. Chamberlin, S. A., & Moon, S. M. (2006). Model-eliciting Activities: An Introduction to Gifted Education. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 37-47.
4. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2012). Implementing the common core state standards. Washington DC:Author. Retrieved February, 23, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4086-3.ch003.
5. Çorlu, M. (2013). Uzman alan öğretmeni eğitimi modeli ve görüşler. Retrieved January 27, 2017, from http://fetemm.tstem.com/gorusler.
6. Doerr, H., & English, L. D. (2001). A modelling perspective on students' learning through data analysis. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 361-368). Utrecht University. https://doi.org /30034902?seq=1.
7. Dolk, M., Widjaja, W., Zonneveld, E., & Fauzan, A. (2010). Examining teachers’ role in relation to their beliefs and expectations about students’ thinking in design research. A decade of PMRI in Indonesia, 175-187. http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30048399.
8. El-Deghaidy, H. and Mansour, N. (2015). Science teachers’ perceptions of STEM education: Possibilities and challenges. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 51-54. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijlt.1.1.51-54

9. Engineers Australia (2009). Technically Speaking Victoria: Confronting the challenges facing science, technology, engineering and mathematics education and promotion. [cited 11 Aug 20].
10. English, L. D. & Mousoulides, N. (2011). Engineering-based modelling experiences in the elementary and middle classroom. In M. S. Khine, & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), Models and modeling: Cognitive tools for scientific enquiry (pp. 173-194). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0449-7_8.
11. English, L. D. (2015). STEM: challenges and opportunities for mathematics education. In Proceedings of the 39th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 4-18). PME. https://doi.org /10.1007/978-3-030-11066-6_5.
12. English, L. D. (2016). Advancing mathematics education research within a STEM environment. In Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2012-2015 (pp. 353-371). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org /10.1007/978-981-10-1419-2_17.
13. English, L. D., Hudson, P., & Dawes, L. (2013). Engineering-based problem solving in the middle school: design and construction with simple machines. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 3 (2), 43-55.
14. English, L., & Sriraman, B. (2010). Problem solving for the 21st century. In Theories of mathematics education (pp. 263-290). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org /10.1007/978-3-642-00742-2_27.
15. Güder, Y. ve Gürbüz, R. (2018). STEM eğitimine geçişte bir araç olarak disiplinler arası matematiksel modelleme oluşturma etkinlikleri: öğretmen ve öğrenci görüşleri [Özel Sayı]. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(2), 171-199. https://doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.457626
16. Holmes, M., Rulfs, J., & Orr, J. (2007). Curriculum development and integration for K-6 engineering education. Paper presented at the 2007 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. https://peer.asee.org/curriculum-development-and-integration-for-k-6-engineering-education.
17. Kertil, M., & Gurel, C. (2016). Mathematical Modeling: A Bridge to STEM Education. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 4(1), 44-55. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1086722.pdf.
18. Kurup, A., Chandra, A., & Binoy, V. V. (2015). Little minds dreaming big science’: Are we really promoting ‘children gifted in STEM’in India. Current Science, 108(5), 779-781. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24216499?seq=1.
19. Lesh, R., & Caylor, B. (2007). Introduction To Special Issue: Modeling as application versus modeling as a way to create mathematics. International. Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 12 (3), 173-194.
20. Lesh, R. & Doerr, H. M. (2003). Foundations of a models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching, learning, and problem solving. In R. Lesh, & H. M. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 3–33). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org /9781410607713/chapters/10.4324/9781410607713-7.
21. Lesh, R., & Kelly, A. (2000). Multitiered teaching experiments. Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education, 197-230. https://doi.org /9781410602725/chapters/10.4324/9781410602725-16.
22. Lesh, R., Doerr, H. M., Carmona, G., & Hjalmarson, M. (2003). Beyond constructivism. Mathematical thinking and learning, 5(2-3), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2003.9680000.
23. Lesh, R., & Yoon, C. (2007). What is distinctive in (our views about) models & modelling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching?. In Modelling and applications in mathematics education (pp. 161-170). Springer, Boston, MA.
24. MEB, 2016. “STEM Education Report”, Ankara. (ISBN: 978-975-11-3989-4). http://yegitek.meb.gov.tr/STEM_Education_Report.pdf.
25. Moore, T.J. & Hjalmarson, M.A. (2010). Developing measures of roughness: Problem solving as a method to document student thinking in engineering. International Journal of Engineering Education, 26 (4), 820-830. http://www.modelsandmodeling.pitt.edu/Publications_files/Tamara IJEE_1.pdf.
26. Mousoulides, N. G., Christou, C., & Sriraman, B. (2008). A modeling perspective on the teaching and learning of mathematical problem solving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(3), 293-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060802218132.
27. Mousoulides, N. G., & English, L. D. (2011). Engineering model eliciting activities for elementary school students. In Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling (pp. 221-230). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0910-2_23.
28. Nadelson, L. S. and Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Context, challenges, and the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 221-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1289775.
29. National Academy of Engineering. (2012). NAE Grand Challenges for Engineering. Retrieved from http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/challenges.aspx.
30. Nutchey, D., Grant, E., Cooper, T., & English, L. (2015). Introducing the multi-faceted teaching experiment. In Proceedings of the CAR Symposia: Contemporary Approaches to Research in Mathematics, Science, Health and Environmental Education. https://doi.org/94775/.
31. Osman, K., & Saat, R. M. (2014). Editorial. Science technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education in Malaysia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(3), 153-154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1077a.
32. Petroski, H. (2003). Engineering: Early education. American Scientist, 91(3), 206-209. https://doi.org /27858205?seq=1.
33. Piaget, J. The psychology of intelligence. New York: Routledge, 1963.
34. Roehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H. H., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E enough?: investigating the Impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM Integration. School of Engineering Education Faculty Publications. Paper 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00112. x
35. Sabelli, N. H. (2006). Complexity, technology, science, and education. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 5-9. https://doi.org /25473505?seq=1.
36. 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.
37. Shahali, M., Hafizan, E., Halim, L., Rasul, S., Osman, K., Ikhsan, Z., et al. (2015). Bıtara-stem training of trainers'programme: impact on trainers'knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and efficacy towards integrated stem teaching. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14(1).
38. Shaughnessy, J. M. (2013). Mathematics in a STEM context. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 18(6), 324. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacmiddscho.18.6.0324?seq=1.
39. Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., & Cripps Clark, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the primary-secondary school transition. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. http://pandora.nla.gov.au/tep/88047
40. Wang, H. (2012). A New era of science education: science teachers‘ perceptions and classroom practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) ıntegration. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest. (3494678)
41. Zawojewski, J. S. (2016). Teaching and learning about mathematical modeling. In C. Hirsch and A.R. McDuffie, eds. Annual Perspectives in Mathematics Education 2016: Mathematical Modeling and Modeling Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM, pp.51-52.
42. Zawojewski, J. S., Hjalmarson, J. S., Bowman, K., & Lesh, R. (2008). A modeling perspective on learning and teaching in engineering education. Models and modeling in engineering education: Designing experiences for all students. Rotterdam: Sense Publications. https://doi.org /9789087904043/BP000002.xml