Qualifications, Problems and Solution Recommendations of Teachers in Science, Engineering and Entrepreneurship Practices

Öz

The aim of this research is to indicate the awareness, entrepreneurship levels of science teachers within the scope of STEM approach and to identify teachers' competencies, opinions, problems and solution suggestions within the scope of Science, Engineering and Entrepreneurship Practices. In the study, “STEM-Awareness Scale”, “Entrepreneurship Scale” in quantitative data and “Semi-Structured Interview Form” developed by the researcher in qualitative data were used as data collection tools. According to the results of the research, it was determined that science teachers' STEM awareness levels were good and their STEM awareness did not differ according to gender and professional seniority. When teachers are examined in terms of entrepreneurship levels, it is seen that they consider themselves adequate and entrepreneurship does not differ according to gender and professional seniority. In the semi-structured interview results, it was determined that the majority of science teachers did not receive education within the scope of STEM approach, they found themselves inadequate in the fields of education, encountered many problems while applying STEM, and conditions affected them negatively. The most emphasized in the suggestions given by the teachers for these situations is that STEM education should be taken.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Engineering and entrepreneurship practices
• Science education
• Science teacher
• STEM education

Kaynakça

1. Adeyemo, S. A. (2009). Understanding and acquisition of entrepreneurial skills: A pedagogical reorientation for classroom teacher in science education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(3), 57-65. Retrieved from: https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/125
2. Apedoe, X.S., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M.R. & Schunn, C.D. (2008). Bringing Engineering Design into High School Science Classrooms: The Heating/Cooling Unit, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454-465. Retrieved from: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/166658/.
3. Aslan-Tutak, F., Akaygun, S., & Tezsezen, S. (2017). Collaboratively Learning to Teach STEM: Change in Participating Preservice Teachers’ Awareness of STEM. Hacettepe University Joournal of Education, 32(4), 794-816. https://DOI : 10.16986/HUJE.2017027115
4. Avcı, S. (2014). Ortaokul eğitim yöneticilerinin bilgi yönetimi yeterlilikleri (Bağcılar ilçesi örneği) [Secondary school administrators' knowledge management comptencies (Examples country Bağcılar)], Unpublished master dissertation. Aydın University, Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul.
5. Bahar, M., Yener, D., Yılmaz, M., Emen, H., & Gürer, F. (2018). The Changes of Standards in the 2018 Science Curriculum and STEM Integration. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 18(2), 702-735. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-412111
6. Bakırcı, H., & Kutlu, E. (2018). Determination of Science Teachers’ views on STEM Approach. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 9(2), 367-389. https://DOI: 10.16949/turkbilmat.417939
7. Bakırcı, H., & Öçsoy, K. (2017). An Investigation of the Activities in Science Textbooks in terms of the Concept of Entrepreneurship. Adıyaman University Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(2), 256-276. https://DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.322438
8. Berková K., Frendlovská D., Pospíšil Závodný J., Vojáčková H., & Kolářová D. (2020). Education towards Entrepreneurial Careers in a Czech College: An Empirical Study. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 13(1), 1-9. http://dx.doi. org/10.7160/eriesj.2020.130101

9. Bers, M. U., & Portsmore, M. (2005). Teaching partnerships: Early childhood and engineering student teaching math and science through robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(1), 59-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-2734-1
10. Bray, J. H. (2010). Psychology as a core science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) discipline. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
11. Breiner, M. J., Johnson, C. C., Harkness, S. S., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x
12. Buschor, C., Berweger, S., Frei, A., and Kappler, C. (2014). Majoring in STEM—What accounts for women's career decision making? A mixed methods Study. The Journal of Educational Research, 107(3), 167-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2013.788989
13. Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM Education: A 2020 Vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70 (1), 30-35. Capobianco, B. M. (2011). Exploring a science teacher’s uncertainty with integrating engineering desing: An action research study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 645-660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9203-2
14. Ciğerci, D. (2020). Okul yöneticilerinin ve öğretmenlerin FeteMM eğitimine yönelik farkındalıklarının incelenmesi [Investigation of STEM awareness of the teachers and school administrators]. Unpublished master dissertation, Maltepe University Graduate School, İstanbul.
15. Çavaş, B., Bulut, Ç., Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2013). Fen eğitimine mühendislik odaklı bir yaklaşım: Engıneer projesi ve uygulamaları [An engineering-focused approach to science education: The Engineering project and its applications]. Fen bilimleri öğretimi dergisi, 1(1), 12-22. Retrieved from: https://dergi.fead.org.tr/?page_id=137
16. Çelik, H., Bacanak, A., & Çakır, E. (2015). Development of science laboratory entrepreneurship scale. Journal of Turkish Science Education,12(3), 65-78. doi: 10.12973/tused.10147a
17. Çepni, S. (2014). Araştırma ve Proje Çalışmalarına Giriş [Introduction to Research and Project Studies]. 7. Baskı, Trabzon: Cepheler Yayıncılık.
18. Çepni,S. (2017). Kuramdan Uygulamaya STEM (+A/+E) Eğitimi. [STEM (+ A / + E) Education from Theory to Practice]. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
19. Çevik, M. (2017). A study of STEM Awareness Scale development for high school teachers. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(3), 2436-2452. doi:10.14687/jhs.v14i3.4673
20. Çevik, M., Danıştay, A., & Yağcı, A. (2017). Evaluation of STEM (Science – Technology – Engineering – Mathematics) Awareness of Secondary School Teachers with Various Variables. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 7(3), 584-599. DOI: 10.19126/suje.335008
21. Demir, S., Böyük, U., & Koç, A. (2011). Views of Science and Technology Teachers on Laboratory Conditions and Use of Laboratory with Their Tendencies to Follow Technological Innovations. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 7(2), 66-79. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/mersinefd/issue/17378/181450
22. Deveci, İ. (2018). The STEM Awareness as Predictor of Entrepreneurial Characteristics of Prospective Science Teachers. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(4), 1247-1256. doi:10.24106/ kefdergi.356829
23. Deveci, İ., & Çepni, S. (2014). Entrepreneurship in Science Teacher Education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 11(2), 161-188. doi: 10.12973/tused.10114a
24. Duygu, E. (2018). Simülasyon tabanlı sorgulayıcı öğrenme ortamında Fetemm eğitiminin bilimsel süreç becerileri ve Fetemm farkındalıklarına etkisi [The effect of STEM education on science process skills and STEM awareness in simulation based inquiry learning environment]. Unpublished master dissertation. Kırıkkale University Institute of Science, Kırıkkale.
25. Elliott, B., Oty, K., McArthur, J., & Clark, B. (2001). The effect of an interdisciplinary algebra/ science course on students’ problem solving skills, critical thinking skills and attitudes towards mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 32(6), 811-816. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390110053784
26. Erdogan, N., & Stuessy, C. (2015). Examining the Role of Inclusive STEM Schools in the College and Career Readiness of Students in the United States: A Multi-Group Analysis on the Outcome of Student Achievement. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(6), 1517-1529. DOI 10.12738/estp.2016.1.0072
27. Eroğlu, S., & Bektaş, O. (2016). STEM eğitimi almış fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin stem temelli ders etkinlikleri hakkındaki görüşleri [Ideas of Science Teachers took STEM Education about STEM based Activities]’, Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 4(3), 43-67. DOI :10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.4c3s3m
28. Ezeudu, F. O., Ofoegbu, T. O., & Anyaegbunnam, N. J. (2013). Restructuring STM (science, technology, and mathematics) education for entrepreneurship. US-China Education Review A, 3(1), 27-32. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539960.pdf
29. Hacıoğlu, Y., Yamak, H., & Kavak, N. (2016). Teachers’ Opinions Regarding Engineering Design Based Science Education. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 5(3), 807-830. Doi: 10.14686/buefad.v5i3.5000195411
30. Hançer, A. H., Şensoy, Ö., & Yıldırım, H. (2003). An Evalatıon about the Importance of Contemporary Scıence Educatıon at Elemantary Schools and How This Kind of Science Teaching Must Be. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 13(1), 80-88. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/pauefd/issue/11130/133116
31. Havlicek, J., Pelikan, M. & Birdthistle, N. (2014). Dreams of the Future: An Examination of Czech and Irish Tertiary Level Students Intention to be an Entrepreneur, In: Proceedings of the 37th ISBE Conference, Manchester, p. 12.
32. Jin, K., Li, H., Yang, L., & Song, Q. (2015). Introducing Entrepreneurship Thinking into STEM Curriculum through Hands-on Projects. International Conferences New Perspectives in Science Education, Edition 3, Florence, Italy.
33. Karaer, H. (2006). Opinions of Science Course Teachers about the Subject Teaching in Primary School (Amasya Sample). Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 8(1), 97-111. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/erziefd/issue/5996/79805
34. Karakaya, F., & Avgın, S. S. (2016). Effect of demographic features to middle school students’ attitude towards FeTeMM (STEM). Journal of Human Sciences, 13(3), 4188-4198. Retrieved from: https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/4104
35. Karakaya, F., Ünal, A., Çimen, O., & Yılmaz, M. (2018). STEM Awareness Levels of Science Teachers. JRES, 5(1), 124-138. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/496663
36. Karatepe, A., Yıldırım, H.İ., Şensoy, Ö., & Yalçın, N. (2004). Teachers’ Views About Current Science Curriculum Appropriateness for Acquiring the Aims of Science Education. Gazi University Kırşehir Journal of Education Faculty, 5(2), 165-175. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefad
37. Kılıç, S. (2014). Effect size, Journal of Mood Disorders, 4(1), 44-46. DOI: 10.5455/jmood.20140228012836 Kızılay, E. (2016). Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Opinions About STEM Disciplines and Education. Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 47, 403-417. http://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS346
38. Kızılot, M. (2019). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Entegre FeTeMM Öğretimi Yönelimlerinin ve FeTeMM Farkındalıklarının Belirlenmesi [Pre-service Teachers’ Integrative STEM Teaching Intention and Awareness of STEM]. Unpublished master dissertation, Onsekiz Mart University Institute of Education Sciences, Çanakkale.
39. Köstekçi, E. (2016). Öğretmen adaylarının girişimcilik özellikleri ile yansıtıcı düşünme düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Examining the Relationship Between Entrepreneurship Characteristics and Reflective Thinking Levels of Pre-service Teachers]. Unpublished master dissertation, Bartın University Institute of Education Sciences, Bartın.
40. Kubat, U. (2015). Evalution of Content and Objectives of fifth Grade Science Curricula in Views of Science Teacher. Turkish Studies, 10(11), 1061-1070. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.8661
41. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understanding of reality. Journal of Tought,21(3), 28-49. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42589189
42. Marulcu, İ., & Sungur, K. (2012). Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Perspectives on Engineers, Engineering and Engineering Design as Context. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Sciences, 12, 13-23. Retrieved from: https://fenbildergi.aku.edu.tr/1201/012202(13-23)(12-014).pdf
43. Mcdonald, C. V. (2016). STEM Education : A review of the contribution of the disciplines of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Science Education International, 27(4), 530-569.
44. MEB. (2017). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı [Turkey Ministry of National Education Science Curriculum]. Ankara.
45. MEB. (2018). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı [Turkey Ministry of National Education Science Curriculum]. Ankara.
46. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons
47. Moore, T. J., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Advancing the state of the art of STEM Integration. Journal of STEM Education, 15(1), 5-10. Retrieved from: http://mspnet-static.s3.amazonaws.com/Moore_Smith_2014_Advancing_the_Art_of_STEM_Integration.pdf
48. NRC. (2009). Successful k-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington DC: The National Academic Press.
49. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2004). Mixed methods research. R. B. Johnson, ve L. B. Christensen (Ed.). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (s. 408-431), Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014.
50. Özdemir, U., & Cappellaro, E. (2020). Elementary School Teachers’ STEM Awareness and Their Opinions towards STEM Education Practices. Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, 8(1), 46-75. Retrieved from: https://dergi.fead.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/33.pdf
51. Özkul, G., & Dulupçu, M. A. (2007). The Effect of Personal Development onto Entrepreneur Types: An Investigation in Antalya-Isparta Provinces. Girişimcilik ve Kalkınma Dergisi, 2, 67-92. Retrieved from: http://gkd.dergi.comu.edu.tr/upload/842f9d86-e749-4e9a-b6a2-7918aa6acb32.pdf
52. Pan, V. L., & Akay, C. (2015). Examining Teacher Candidates' Entrepreneurship Levels in Terms of Various Variables. NWSA-Education Sciences, 10(2), 125-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.12739/NWSA.2015.10.2.1C063
53. Ritz, J.M., & Fan, S. C. (2015). STEM and technology education: International state-of-the-art. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25, 429–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9290-z
54. Roberts, A., & Cantu, D. (2012). Applying STEM Instructional Strategies to Design and Technology Curriculum. Technology Education in The 21st Century, Proceeding of The PATT 26 Conference, Linkoping University, Stockholm.
55. Sarı, U., & Yazıcı, Y.Y. (2019). Science teachers' opinions on science and engineering applications. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 5(2), 157-167. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/689467
56. Selvi, K. (2006). Developing a Teacher Trainees’ Democratic Values Scale: Validity and Reliability Analyses. Social Behavior and Personality, 34(9), 1171–1178. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2006.34.9.1171
57. Shahin, M., Ilic, O., Gonsalvez, C., & Jon Whittle J. (2021). The impact of a STEM-based entrepreneurship program on the entrepreneurial intention of secondary school female students. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00713-7
58. Siew, N. M., Amir, N., & Chong, C. L. (2015). The perceptions of pre-service and inservice teachers regarding a project-based STEM approach to teaching science. Springer Plus, 4(8), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-4-8
59. Srikoom, W., Hanuscin, D., & Faikhamta, C. (2017). Perceptions of in-service teachers toward teaching STEM in Thailand. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 18(2), 1-23. Retrieved from: https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v18_issue2/srikoom/index.htm
60. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for Teaching Integrated STEM Education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 2(1), Article 4, pp. 28-34. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653
61. Şahin, B. (2019). STEM etkinliklerinin Fen Öğretmeni Adaylarının STEM Farkındalıkları, Tutumları ve Görüşleri Üzerine Etkisinin Belirlenmesi [Determination of the effects of STEM activities on STEM awareness, attitudes and opinions of prospective science teachers]. Unpublished master dissertation, Bartın University Institute of Education Sciences, Bartın
62. Tekbıyık, A., & Akdeniz, A. R. (2008). Teachers’ Views about Adoption and Application of Primary Science and Technology Curriculum. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 23-37. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/39764
63. Tezel, Ö., & Yaman, H. (2017). A Review of Studies on STEM Education in Turkey. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 6(1), 135-145. Retrieved from: http://www.jret.org/FileUpload/ks281142/File/13.ozden_tezel.pdf
64. Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., . . . Depaepe, F. (2018). Integrated STEM Education: A Systematic Review of Instructional Practices in Secondary Education. European Jourrnal of STEM Education, 3(1), 02. DOI: 10.20897/ejsteme/85525
65. Timur, B., & İnançlı, E. (2018). Science Teacher and Teacher Candidates' Opinions about STEM Education. International Journal of Science and Education, 1(1), 48-66. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/549916
66. Verheul, I., Audretsch, D. B., Thrik, A. R., & Wennekers, A. R. (2002). An eclectic theory of entrepreneurship: policies, institutions and culture, in: D.B. Audretsch, A.R. Thurik, I. Verheul and A.R.M. Wennekers (eds.), Entrepreneurship: Determinants and Policies in a European-US Comparison,. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston/ Dordrecht.
67. 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), Article, 2. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314636
68. Yamak, H., Bulut, N., & Dündar, S. (2014). The Impact of STEM Activities on 5th Grade Students Scientific Process Skills and Their Attitudes Towards Science. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 34(2), 246-265. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefd.15192
69. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences] (6. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
70. Yıldırım, B., & Altun, Y. (2015). Investigating the Effect of STEM Education and Engineering Applications on Science Laboratory Lectures. El-Cezeri Journal of Science and Engineering, 2(2), 28-40. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ecjse/issue/4899/67132
71. Yılmaz, E., & Sünbül, A. (2009). Developing Scale of University Students Entrepreneurship. Selçuk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 21, 195-203. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/susbed/issue/61797/924383