Using Mathematical Modeling for Integrating STEM Disciplines: A Theoretical Framework

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 3, 628 - 653, 13.12.2019

Muhammed Fatih Doğan , Ramazan Gürbüz , Zeynep Çavuş Erdem , Seda Şahin

https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.502007

Öz

The main
goal of STEM education is to provide students with knowledge and skills in
science, technology, mathematics, and engineering through interdisciplinary
approaches. However, perspective on the nature of STEM approaches and how it
should be implemented in the classrooms without losing discipline integrity are
still not uncovered and stay as important challenges for both educators and
researchers. In this paper, we introduce a theoretical framework that can shed
light on how to engage students effectively in STEM education by providing
mathematical modeling as a tool for integrating different disciplines. Thus,
this framework is for designing, implementing, and evaluating mathematical
modeling thinking within an interdisciplinary nature. Furthermore, we provide
an example of the interdisciplinary mathematical modeling task with
hypothetical student engagement in the process and analyzed the student's
thinking with our framework. Although the focus of this paper is mainly about
integrating mathematics and science, we believe that our framework can be
applied to all STEM disciplines.  We conclude
that interdisciplinary mathematical modeling framework might be an important
tool to overcome some of the challenges that stressed in the literature since
it increases the transfer capacity of STEM-focused knowledge and skills to
real-world scenarios by presenting problem situations in a real-world context.

Anahtar Kelimeler

: Interdisciplinary mathematical modeling, mathematical modeling, Mathematics and Science Education, STEM education, STEM integration

Kaynakça

• Berry, M. R., Chalmers, C., & Chandra, V. (2012). STEM futures and practice, can we teach STEM in a meaningful and integrated way. 2nd International STEM in Education Conference. Beijing, China.
• Berry, J., & Houston, K. (1995). Students using posters as a means of communication and assessment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29(1), 21-27.
• Bowman, K. (2010). Background paper for the AQF Council on generic skills. Australian Qualification Framework Council: Canberra, Australia.
• Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1991). Applied mathematical problem solving, modelling, applications, and links to other subjects—State, trends and issues in mathematics instruction. Educational studies in mathematics, 22(1), 37-68.
• Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA press.
• Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, (2011). Retrieved from “http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standards1.pdf”, [ 15- January- 2017]
• Chan, J. K. (2001). A curriculum for the knowledge age: The Singapore approach. In Eighth Annual Curriculum Corporation Conference, Sydney, Australia.
• CPDD (2006), Mathematics Syllabus: Primary 2007, Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education, Singapore.
• Davison, D. M., Miller, K. W., & Metheny, D. L. (1995). What does integration of science and mathematics really mean?. School science and mathematics, 95(5), 226-230.
• English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 5-24.
• Fitzallen, N. (2015). STEM Education: What Does Mathematics Have to Offer?. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
• Furner, J. M., & Kumar, D. D. (2007). The Mathematics and Science Integration Argument: A Stand for Teacher Education. Eurasia journal of mathematics, science & technology education, 3(3), 185-189.
• Galili, I. (2018). Physics and mathematics as interwoven disciplines in science education. Science & Education, 27(1-2), 7-37.
• Gravemeijer, K., Stephan, M., Julie, C., Lin, F. L., & Ohtani, M. (2017). What mathematics education may prepare students for the society of the future?. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 105-123.
• Kaiser, G., & Sriraman, B. (2006). A global survey of international perspectives on modelling in mathematics education. ZDM, 38(3), 302-310.
• Lawrenz, F., Gravemeijer, K., & Stephan, M. (2017). Introduction to this Special Issue. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 1-4.
• Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. M. (2003). Foundations of a models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching, learning, and problem solving. Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 3-33).
• Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: country comparisons: international comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report.
• McBride, J. W., & Silverman, F. L. (1991). Integrating elementary/middle school science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 91(7), 285-292.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2016). STEM eğitim raporu. Ankara: Yenilik ve Eğitim Teknolojileri Genel Müdürlüğü.
• Ministry of National Education [MEB], (2018). The Board of Education, secondary school mathematics program (5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grade) curriculum was accessed from "http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Programlar.aspx". Access Date [20-Feb-2018].
• Moore, T. J., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Advancing the State of the Art of STEM Integration. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 15(1), 5.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Ed.). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics (Vol. 1). National Council of Teachers of.
• Ng, K. E. D. (2011). Mathematical knowledge application and student difficulties in a design-based interdisciplinary project. In Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling (pp. 107-116). Springer, Dordrecht.
• Niss, M. (1989). Aims and scope of applications and modelling in mathematics curricula. Applications and modelling in learning and teaching mathematics, 22-31.
• 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 (2015). P21 Framework definitions, Retrieved on December 20 2016 from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_Framework_Definitions_New_Logo_2015.pdf.
• Rowlands, S. (2015). Gloria Ann Stillman, Gabriele Kaiser, Werner Blum, Jill P. Brown (eds): Teaching Mathematical Modelling: Connecting to Research and Practice.
• Sanders, M. (2009). Integrative STEM education: primer. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20-26.
• Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2007). Lack of focus in the mathematics curriculum: Symptom or cause. Lessons learned: What international assessments tell us about math achievement, 65-84.
• Shaughnessy, J. M. (2013). Mathematics in a STEM context. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle school, 18(6), 324-324.
• Smith, J., & Karr-Kidwell, P. J. (2000). The interdisciplinary curriculum: A literary review and a manual for administrators and teachers.
• Treacy, P., & O’Donoghue, J. (2014). Authentic integration: A model for integrating mathematics and science in the classroom. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(5), 703-718.
• Uhden, O., Karam, R., Pietrocola, M., & Pospiech, G. (2012). Modelling mathematical reasoning in physics education. Science & Education, 21(4), 485-506.
• Wagner, T. (2014). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need and what we can do about it. Basic Books.
• Wilhelm, J. A., & Walters, K. L. (2006). Pre-service mathematics teachers become full participants in inquiry investigations. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(7), 793-804.