The S-T-E-M Quartet
Tóm tắt
The issue of integrated STEM curriculum design and evaluation requires a more consistent understanding and clarity among STEM educators. In this paper, we propose an instructional framework of STEM integration based on the theoretical notions of disciplinarity and problem-centred learning. The proposed S-T-E-M Quartet instructional framework utilises complex, persistent and extended problems at its core, and the problem solving process as the overarching frame. The key difference between the proposed S-T-E-M Quartet instructional framework and models such as the STEM road map and the Cubic model for STEAM education is the emphasis on the connections between different disciplines. Similar to the STEM road map, the application of the S-T-E-M Quartet framework begins with a single lead discipline as the focus and subsequently examines how knowledge and skills of the lead discipline are connected and related to the other three disciplines. As an instructional framework, the S-T-E-M Quartet requires description of learning outcomes for each discipline when students work with the problem. The learning outcomes within individual disciplines constitute the vertical learning within a discipline. Depending on the problem described, the learning outcomes for some disciplines might be more in-depth than others. As the S-T-E-M Quartet foregrounds connections between disciplines, attention is also paid to the strength of connections, whether they are weak, moderate or strong. A case example of application of the S-T-E-M Quartet instructional framework is presented as an illustration of how the S-T-E-M Quartet instructional framework can be used to design and reflect on STEM tasks.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Banks, F., & Barlex, D. (2014). Teaching STEM in the secondary school: Helping teachers meet the challenge. Milton Park, UK: Routledge.
Becher, T. (1987). The disciplinary shaping of the profession. In B. R. Clarks (Ed.), The academic profession. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Bereiter, C. (1992). Referent-centred and problem-centred knowledge: Elements of an educational epistemology. Interchange, 23(4), 337–361.
Bernstein, B. (1977). Class, codes, and control (Vol. 3). London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique (revised ed.) (pp. 3–24). Lanham, USA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.
Bryan, L. A., Moore, T. J., Johnson, C. C., & Roehring, 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 (pp. 23–38). New York, USA: Routledge.
Bybee, R. W. (2013). Case for stem education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington, USA: NSTA press.
Choi, B. C., & Pak, A. W. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and investigative medicine, 29(6), 351.
Cunningham, C., & Kelly, G. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486–505.
English, L. D. (2016). Advancing mathematics education research within a STEM environment. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2012–2015 (pp. 353–371). Singapore: Springer.
English, L. D., King, D., & Smeed, J. (2016). Advancing integrated STEM learning through engineering design: Sixth-grade students’ design and construction of earthquake resistant buildings. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1264053.
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, D.C.: The National Academy Press.
Hung, W. (2009). The 9-step problem design process for problem-based learning: Application of the 3D3R model. Educational Research Review, 4, 118–141.
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 1–11.
King, A. R., & Brownell, J. (1966). The curriculum and the disciplines of knowledge. New York, USA: John Wiley.
Koh, T. (2018). Humanities at the heart of a holistic education in a tech-driven world. Retrieved on Jul 16, 2018 from https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/tommy-koh-humanities-education-fourth-industrial-revolution-10522334.
Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity. (2016). Introduction to STEAM education. Seoul: KOFAC.
Lester, F. K., & Kehle, P. (2003). From problem solving to modeling: The evolution of thinking about research on complex mathematical activity. In R. Lesh & H. M. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 501–517). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
MacDonald, S. P. (1994). Professional academic writing in the humanities and social sciences. Illinois, USA: Southern Illinois University Press.
Marrero, M. M., Gunning, A. E., & Germain-Williams, T. (2014). What is STEM education? Global Education Review, 1(4), 1–6.
Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K. M., Glaney, A. W., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in precollege settings: Research into practice (pp. 35–60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue Press.
Morrison-Love, D. (2017). Towards a transformative epistemology of technology education: An epistemology of technology education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 51(1), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12226.
National Research Council (NRC) (2009). Learning science in informal environments. Washington, D.C., USA: The National Academies Press.
NGSS Lead States (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, D.C., USA: The National Academies Press.
Pantin, C. F. A. (1968). The relations between the sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Park, H., Byun, S., Sim, J., Han, H., & Baek, Y. S. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions and practices of STEAM education in South Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7), 1739–1753. https://doi.org/10.12973/Eurasia.2016.1531a.
Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26.
Shinn, T. (1982). Scientific disciplines and organizational specificity. In N. Elias, H. Martins, & R. D. Whitely (Eds.), Scientific establishments and hierarchies. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding (Vol. 1). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Whitely, R. (1976). Umbrella and polytheistic scientific disciplines and their elites. Social Studies of Sciences, 6, 471–497.
Whitely, R. (1984). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.