SEMANTICS PERCEPTIONS OF PRE-SERVICE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS TOWARDS STEM FIELDS AND CAREERS

Öz

In this study, it was aimed to determine the STEM semantics of pre-service science and mathematics teachers towards STEM fields and their careers and to examine these semantics perceptions in terms of the department, gender, grade level, income level, curriculum knowledge, and STEM experience. The sample of the study consists of 197 (167 female, 30 male) pre-service science and mathematics teachers. In the research conducted according to the cross-sectional survey design, descriptive and two-way MANOVA were used in the analysis of the data obtained with the STEM Semantic Survey. As a result of the research, it was determined that the semantics of pre-service science and mathematics teachers towards STEM fields and careers were generally positive. In addition, gender, department, grade level, income level, knowing the place of STEM education in the curriculum, and STEM experience, which are determined as demographic variables, have no statistically significant effect on the semantics of pre-service science and mathematics teachers towards STEM fields and careers. Suggestions were made in line with the findings obtained from the research and the limitations of the research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• STEM education

FEN BİLİMLERİ VE MATEMATİK ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ STEM ALANLARINA VE KARİYERLERİNE YÖNELİK SEMANTİK (ANLAMSAL) ALGILARI

Öz

Bu araştırmada fen bilimleri ve matematik öğretmeni adaylarının STEM alanlarına ve kariyerlerine yönelik semantik algılarının belirlenmesi ve bu semantik algıların bölüm, cinsiyet, sınıf seviyesi, gelir düzeyi, öğretim programı bilgisi, STEM ders alma durumu değişkenleri açısından incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini 197 (167 kadın, 30 erkek) fen bilimleri ve matematik öğretmeni adayı oluşturmaktadır. Kesitsel tarama desenine göre yürütülen araştırmada, STEM Semantik Farklılık Ölçeği ile elde edilen verilerin analizinde betimsel ve iki yönlü MANOVA kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, fen bilimleri ve matematik öğretmen adaylarının STEM alanlarına ve kariyerlerine yönelik semantik algılarının genel olarak olumlu yönde olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca demografik değişkenler olarak belirlenen cinsiyet, bölüm, sınıf seviyesi, aile aylık geliri, STEM eğitiminin öğretim programındaki yerini bilme durumu ve STEM Ders Alma durumunun, fen bilimleri ve matematik eğitimi öğretmen adaylarının STEM alanlarına ve kariyerlerine yönelik semantik algıları üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olmadığı görülmüştür. Araştırmadan elde edilen bulgular ve araştırmanın sınırlılıkları doğrultusunda önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• STEM eğitimi
• STEM semantik algılar
• öğretmen adayları
• fen bilimleri öğretmen adayı
• matematik öğretmen adayı

Kaynakça

1. Akaygün, S. & Aslan Tutak, F. (2016). STEM images revealing STEM conceptions of pre-service chemistry and mathematics teachers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 4(1), 56-71.
2. Akgündüz, D., Aydeniz, M., Çakmakçı, G., Çavaş, B., Çorlu, M., Öner, T ve Özdemir, S. (2015). STEM eğitimi Türkiye raporu: Günümüz modası mı yoksa gereksinim mi? İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi STEM Merkezi, İstanbul.
3. Aydın-Günbatar, Tarkın-Çelikkıran, Kutucu, & Ekiz-Kıran (2018). The influence of a design-based elective STEM course on pre-service chemistry teachers’ content knowledge, STEM conceptions, and engineering views. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 954.
4. Aydoğan Yenmez, A., Gökçe, S., Aydede, M.N., & Çelik,T. (2021). Investigation of pre-service teachers' awareness of STEM and STEM teaching intention. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 8(1). 250-260.
5. Baran, E., Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., Mesutoğlu, 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.
6. Blackley, S., Sheffield, R., Maynard, N., Koul, R., & Walker, R. (2017). Makerspace and reflective practice: Advancing pre-service teachers in STEM education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 22-37.
7. Bryan, L. A., Moore, T.J., Johnson, C. C., & Roehrig, G.H (2016). Integrated STEM education. In C. C. Johnson, E. E. Peters-Burton, & T. J. Moore (Eds.), STEM Road Map: A Framework for Integrated STEM Education. New York: Routledge.
8. Buyruk, B. & Korkmaz, Ö. (2014). FeTeMM farkındalık ölçeği (FFÖ): geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 13(2), 61-76.

9. Bybee, R. W. (2011). Scientific and engineering practices in k-12 classrooms: Understanding a framework for k-12 science education. Science and Children, 49(4), 10-16.
10. Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington: NSTA Press.
11. Çalışıcı, H., & Özçakır Sümen, Ö. (2018). Metaphorical Perceptions of Prospective Teachers for STEM Education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(5), 871-880.
12. Çevik, M. (2018). Investigating STEM semantics and perceptions of engineer candidates and pre-service teachers: A mixed method study. International Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2), 1-18.
13. Çiftçi, A., Topçu, M. S., & Foulk, J. A. (2020). Pre-service early childhood teachers’ views on STEM education and their STEM teaching practices. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-27.
14. Çınar, Pırasa & Sadoğlu (2016). Views of Science and Mathematics Pre-service Teachers Regarding STEM. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(6), 1479-1487.
15. Çorlu, M. & Aydın, E. (2016). Evaluation of learning gains through integrated STEM projects. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 4(1), 20-29.
16. Corlu, M. S. (2012). A pathway to STEM education: Investigating pre-service mathematics and science teachers at Turkish universities in terms of their understanding of mathematics used in science (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
17. 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.
18. Delen, İ., & Uzun, S. (2018). Matematik öğretmen adaylarının FeTeMM temelli tasarladıkları öğrenme ortamlarının değerlendirilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(3), 617-630.
19. Faikhamta, C. (2020). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Views of the Nature of STEM. Science Education International, 31(4), 356-366.
20. Gökçe, S. & Aydoğan Yenmez, A. (2020). Pre-Service Teachers' Metaphoric Perceptions Regarding STEM Education, International Journal of Education Technology and Scientific Researches, 5(12), 1133-1161.
21. Gonzalez, H. B. & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress.
22. Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. Washington: DC: Congressional Research Service. Erişim: 24.04.2021, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf
23. Gül, K. (2019). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarina yönelik bir STEM eğitimi dersinin tasarlanması, uygulanması ve değerlendirilmesi (Doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
24. Hacıoğlu, Y., Yamak, H. & Kavak, N. (2016). Pre-Service science teachers’ cognitive structures regarding Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) and Science Education. Journal of Turkish Science Education. 13 [Special Issue], 88-102.
25. Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2018). Examining elementary pre-service teachers’ science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teaching intention. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(10), 1-11.
26. Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, A. (2014). STEM integration in K-12education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington: National Academies Press.
27. Karakaya, F., & Avgın, S.S. (2016). Effect of demographic features to middle school students’ attitude towards STEM. Journal of Human Sciences. 13(3), 4188-4198.
28. Karisan, D., Macalalag, A., & Johnson, J. (2019). The effect of methods course on pre-service teachers’ awareness and intentions of teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 5(1), 22-35.
29. Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. (2015). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers' STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14-31.
30. Kırılmazkaya, G. (2017). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının FeTeMM öğretimine ilişkin görüşlerinin araştırılması (Şanlıurfa örneği). Harran Maarif Dergisi, 2(2), 59-74.
31. Kızılay, E. (2017). STEM semantik farklılık ölçeği’nin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması. International Journal of Social Science. 58, 131-144.
32. Knezek, G. & Christensen, R. (2008). STEM semantics survey. Erişim: 26.04.2021, http://iittl.unt.edu/sites/default/files/ST EMSemanticssurvey.pdf
33. Knezek, G., Christensen, R., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2011). Contrasting perceptions of STEM content and careers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 92-117.
34. Lavrakas, P. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of survey research methods. Sage publications.
35. Lin, K. Y. & Williams, P. J. (2016). Taiwanese preservice teachers’ Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics teaching intention. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 14. 1021–1036.
36. Lin, K. Y., Wu, Y. T., Hsu, Y. T., & Williams, P. J. (2021). Effects of infusing the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to develop preservice technology teachers’ engineering design thinking. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1–15.
37. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2016). STEM eğitimi raporu. Ankara: Yenilik ve Eğitim Teknolojileri Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı. Ankara.
38. Moore, T.J., Stohlmann, M.S., Wang, H.H., Tank, K.M., Glancy, A.W., & Roehrig, G.H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in precollege settings: Research into practice içinde (s. 35–60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue Press.
39. National Academy of Engineering (NAE) & National Research Council (NRC) (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
40. National Research Council (NRC) (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
41. Next Generations Science Standards [NGGS]. (2013). The next generation science standards-executive summary. Erişim: 12.03.2021. https://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/default/files/Final%20Release%20NGSS%20Front%20Matter%20-%206.17.13%20Update_0.pdf
42. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge.
43. Radloff J. & Guzey S. (2016). Investigating preservice STEM teacher conceptions of STEM education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 759–774.
44. Ryu, M., Mentzer, N. & Knobloch, N. (2019). Preservice teachers’ experiences of STEM integration: challenges and implications for integrated STEM teacher preparation. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29, 493–512.
45. Siew, N. M., Amir, N. ve Chong, C. L. (2015). The perceptions of pre-service and in-service teachers regarding a project-based STEM approach to teaching science. Springer Plus, 4(8), 1-20.
46. Skinner, E., Saxton, E., Currie, C., & Shusterman, G. (2017). A motivational account of the undergraduate experience in science: Brief measures of students’ self-system appraisals, engagement in coursework, and identity as a scientist. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2433–2459.
47. Tekerek, B., & Karakaya, F. (2018). STEM education awareness of pre-service science teachers. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 5(2), 348-359.
48. Türk Sanayicileri ve İşadamları Derneği (TUSİAD) (2014). STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, Fen, Teknoloji, Mühendislik, Matematik) alanında eğitim almış işgücüne yönelik talep ve beklentiler araştırması. Erişim: 10.03.2021. https://tusiad.org/tr/yayinlar/raporlar/item/8054-stem-alaninda-egitim-almis-isgucune-yonelik-talep-ve-beklentiler-arastirmasi
49. Türk, N., Kalaycı, N., & Yamak, H. (2018). New trends in higher education in the globalizing world: STEM in teacher education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(6), 1286-1304.
50. Tyler-Wood, T., Knezek, G. & Christensen, R. (2010). Instruments for assessing interest in STEM content and careers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2), 341-363.
51. Yılmaz, K. G. (2019). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının fen, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik (STEM) alanlarına yönelik ilgi düzeyleri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Bartın Üniversitesi, Bartın.