“Integrative” vs “Integration”: STEM Skills and Concept Development in 6th Grade Students
Presenter Type
UNO Undergraduate Student
Major/Field of Study
<--Please Select Department-->
Other
Physics & Math
Advisor Information
Dr. Kelly Gomez Johnson
Location
CEC RM #116
Presentation Type
Oral Presentation
Start Date
22-3-2024 1:00 PM
End Date
22-3-2024 2:15 PM
Abstract
As a whole, interest in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education in schools is on the rise at a national level, and it is widely recognized that the development of skills and concepts in science, technology, engineering, and math are not only beneficial to students, but are in fact necessities for future citizens of an increasingly global world (Kelley & Knowles, 2016.) Despite this increasing acceptance and awareness of the need for STEM literacy, there is a lack of consensus on what STEM education actually entails and viewpoints on how it should be implemented into the school system vary widely. It is often left up to individual districts - or even individual educators - to decide how to integrate STEM learning within a typical educational framework. With no widespread guidelines, this can be a daunting task (Honey, Pearson, & Schweingruber, 2014.) Approaches range from teaching one STEM subject by itself in a more traditional classroom style (e.g., mathematics) to teaching two subjects at a time using new and novel methods (e.g., teaching mathematics using technology). There are even perspectives encouraging STEM integration to be more dynamic and student-led, while other viewpoints emphasize the typical, often more static, procedure of teacher-centered instruction (English, 2016.) In a paper entitled, “Advancing Elementary and Middle School STEM education,” author and mathematics educator Lyn D. English notes that even among researchers opinions are quite distinct and controversial. She cites Sanders and Wells, “for example, [who] argued that “integrative STEM” and “STEM integration” are markedly different, with integrative indicating an “ongoing, dynamic, learner-centered process of teaching and learning”, as distinct from integrated, which suggests a more static, teacher-directed process.” To better understand the complex nature of STEM education and learning, the focus of this project is to investigate the differences between “integrative STEM” and “STEM integration,” and to determine in which format students learn and develop best, if either. Situated in a metropolitan area elementary school, this study implements both approaches to STEM learning to teach and expose 6th grade students to careers and concepts in STEM disciplines. This research specifically seeks to answer the question, “Do elementary-age students learn STEM skills and concepts better through integrative STEM approaches or through STEM integration approaches?”
“Integrative” vs “Integration”: STEM Skills and Concept Development in 6th Grade Students
CEC RM #116
As a whole, interest in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education in schools is on the rise at a national level, and it is widely recognized that the development of skills and concepts in science, technology, engineering, and math are not only beneficial to students, but are in fact necessities for future citizens of an increasingly global world (Kelley & Knowles, 2016.) Despite this increasing acceptance and awareness of the need for STEM literacy, there is a lack of consensus on what STEM education actually entails and viewpoints on how it should be implemented into the school system vary widely. It is often left up to individual districts - or even individual educators - to decide how to integrate STEM learning within a typical educational framework. With no widespread guidelines, this can be a daunting task (Honey, Pearson, & Schweingruber, 2014.) Approaches range from teaching one STEM subject by itself in a more traditional classroom style (e.g., mathematics) to teaching two subjects at a time using new and novel methods (e.g., teaching mathematics using technology). There are even perspectives encouraging STEM integration to be more dynamic and student-led, while other viewpoints emphasize the typical, often more static, procedure of teacher-centered instruction (English, 2016.) In a paper entitled, “Advancing Elementary and Middle School STEM education,” author and mathematics educator Lyn D. English notes that even among researchers opinions are quite distinct and controversial. She cites Sanders and Wells, “for example, [who] argued that “integrative STEM” and “STEM integration” are markedly different, with integrative indicating an “ongoing, dynamic, learner-centered process of teaching and learning”, as distinct from integrated, which suggests a more static, teacher-directed process.” To better understand the complex nature of STEM education and learning, the focus of this project is to investigate the differences between “integrative STEM” and “STEM integration,” and to determine in which format students learn and develop best, if either. Situated in a metropolitan area elementary school, this study implements both approaches to STEM learning to teach and expose 6th grade students to careers and concepts in STEM disciplines. This research specifically seeks to answer the question, “Do elementary-age students learn STEM skills and concepts better through integrative STEM approaches or through STEM integration approaches?”