The Impact of STEM Project Writing Education on Candidate Female Teachers’ Attitudes, their Semantic Perceptions and Project Writing Skills Towards STEM Education
AbstractThis reserach investigated the impact of Scientix STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) on female candidate teachers’ attitudes towards STEM education, their semantic perceptions of STEM discipline scopes, specifying their needs in writing STEM projects, their learning outcomes from education, and the difficulties they face in the process of project writing. Prior to the education process, the participants were given a STEM educational attitude scale, a STEM semantic contrast scale, and a questionnaire with open-ended questions to make them understand the semantic background. At the end of the training, they were given a STEM education evaluation questionnaire with open-ended questions and the same scales were used. The contents of the projects they wrote were evaluated. In the end, a meaningful difference was observed in the attitudes of female teachers towards STEM education. As for STEM semantic discrepencies, a meaningful difference was observed only in the sub-dimension of technology. Although the female candidate teachers had not received any education in project writing before (%72.72), they seemed higly confident of themselves in writing STEM projects (%87.87). The results of the content analysis showed that female teachers’ learning outcomes from STEM project development were in the themes of knowledge, skills, professional and individual development, awareness, and affective development contributing to the skills of the 22nd century. The difficulties they faced during developing projects were specifying project topics/problems, budget calculations, writing reports, forming a time schedule, overviewing literature and drawing prototype product. According to the document analysis of project reports, problems arise from project expenses and calculations of budget, advertisement activities, specifying project output and writing, and formation of job and time table. This research is considered to be important with the expectation that it will enlighten female candidate teachers who are expected to be role models in their education in preparing STEM projects in the future.
Akgündüz, D., Aydeniz, M., Çakmakçı, G., Çavaş, B., Corlu, M. S., Öner, T. &. Özdemir, S. (2015). STEM eğitimi Türkiye raporu: Günün modası mı yoksa gereksinim mi? [A report on STEM Education in Turkey: A provisional agenda or a necessity?][White Paper]. İstanbul, Turkey: Aydın Üniversitesi. Retrieved from http://www.aydin.edu.tr/belgeler/IAUSTEM-Egitimi-Turkiye-Raporu- 2015.pdf
Alves A. C., Sousa R.M, Fernandes S., Cardoso E., Carvalho M. A., Figueiredo J. & Pereira R.(2016) Teacher's experiences in PBL: implications for practice, European Journal of Engineering Education, 41(2), 123-141.
Bybee, R. W. (2010) Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.
Barbercheck, M. (2001). Mixed messages: Men and women in advertisements in science. In M. Wyer M. Barbercheck D. Giesman H. O. Ozturk & M. Wayne (Eds.), Women, science, and technology: A reader in feminist science studies (pp. 117–131). London, England:Routledge.
Blackburn, H. (2017). The Status of Women in STEM in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature 2007–2017, Science & Technology Libraries, 36:3, 235-273.
Buunk, A. P., Peiró, J. M., & Griffioen, C. (2007). A positive role model may stimulate career oriented behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1489–1500.
Carli, L.L., Alawa, L., Lee, Y. B. Zhao, B. & Kim, E. (2016). Stereotypes about gender and science: Women&scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40 pp. 244-260, 10.1177/0361684315622645.
Cheryan, S., Drury, B. J., & Vichayapai, M. (2013). Enduring influence of stereotypical computer science role models on women’s academic aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(1), 72–79. doi:10.1177/0361684312459328.
Cheryan, S., Siy, J. O., Vichayapai, M., Drury, B., & Kim, S. (2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 656–664. doi:10.1177/1948550611405218.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis fort he behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 51–69. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.51.
Corbett, C. & Hill, C. (2015). Solving the Equation: the Variables for Women's Success in Engineering and Computing 978-1-879922-45-7, The American Association of University Women, Washington, DC.
Craft, A.M.& Capraro, R. M. (2017). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Project-Based Learning: Merging Rigor and Relevance to Increase Student Engagement. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science, 6 (3), 140-158.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Derin, G., Aydın, E. & Kırkıç, K.A. (2017). STEM (Fen-Teknoloji-Mühendislik–Matematik) Eğitimi Tutum Ölçeği. El-Cezeri Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi, 4(3), 547-559.
Destin, M., & Oyserman, D. (2010). Incentivizing education: Seeing schoolwork as an investment, not a chore. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 846–849.
Drury, B. J., Siy, J. O., & Cheryan, S. (2011). When do female role models benefit women? The importance of differentiating recruitment from retention in STEM. Psychological Inquiry, 22, 265–269. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2011.620935.
Dori, J. Y. & Tal, T. Revital (2000). Formal and Informal Collabarate Projects: Engaging In Industry With Environmental Awareness. Science Education, 84(1), 95-113.
Farrell, L.& McHugh, L. (2017). Examining gender-STEM bias among STEM and non-STEM students using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP). Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 6(1), 80-90.
Galvan, M. E., & Coronado, J. M. (2014). Problem-Based and Project-Based Learning: Promoting Differentiated Instruction. National Teacher Education Journal, 7(4), 39-42.
Gonzalez, H.B. & Kuenzi J. (2012). Congressional Research Service Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Primer, p. 2. Also available online at http://www.stemedcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/STEMEducation-Primer.pdf.
Han, S.Yalvac, B. Capraro, M.M. & Capraro, R. M. (2015). In-service Teachers’ Implementation and Understanding of STEM Project Based Learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 63-76.
Herrmann, S. D., Adelman, R. M., Bodford, J. E., Graudejus, O., Okun, M. A., & Kwan, V. S. Y. (2016). The Effects of a Female Role Model on Academic Performance and Persistence of Women in STEM Courses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1-11.
Hill, C. Corbett, C. & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. American Association of University Women. 1111 Sixteenth Street NW, Washington DC.
Johnson, R. B. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Kızılay, E. (2017). The Adaptaiıon Of STEM Semantics Survey Into Turkish. International Journal of Social Science, 58, 131-144.
Lane, K.A. ,Goh, J.X. & Driver-Linn, E. (2012). Implicit science stereotypes mediate the relationship between gender and academic participation. Sex Roles, 66 , 220-234.
Leavey, N. 2016. Mentoring women in STEM: A collegiate investigation of mentors and protégés. Ph.D., State University of New York at Stony Brook.
Lockwood, P. (2006). “Someone like me can be successful”: Do college students need same-gender role models? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 36–46. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00260.
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 91–103. doi:10.1037/0022-35184.108.40.206.
Marx, D. M., & Goff, P. A. (2005). Clearing the air: The effect of experimenter race on targets’ test performance and subjective experience. British Journal of Social Psychology,44, 645–657. doi:10.1348/014466604X17948.
Marx, D. M., & Ko, S. J. (2012). Superstars “like” me: The effect of role model similarity on performance under threat. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 807–812.
Marx, D. M., Monroe, A. H., Cole, C. E., & Gilbert, P. N. (2013). No doubt about it: The effect of role model uncertainty on performance under threat. Journal of Social Psychology,153(5), 542–559. doi:10.1080/00224545.2013.778811
Marx, D. M., & Roman, J. S. (2002). Female role models: Protecting female students math test performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1185–1197. doi:10.1177/01461672022812004.
Miles M.B. & Huberman A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Morrison, J. (2006). STEM education monograph series: Attributes of STEM education. Teaching Institute for Essential Science. Baltimore, MD.
Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J. & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty's subtle gender biases favoring male students. Proceedings from the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 16474-16479.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (2015). The Condition of Education 2015. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM Education: Identifying effective approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Science Foundation. (2010). Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators: identifying and developing our nation’s human capital. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2010/ nsb1033.pdf.
Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2010). Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist, 38, 1001–1043.
Partnership for 21st Century Learning. From www.p21.org.
Pintó, R. (2005). Introducing curriculum innovations in science: Identifying teachers' transformations and the design of related teacher education. Science Education, 89(1), 1-12.
Robnett, R.D. & Thoman, S.E. (2017). STEM success expectancies and achievement among women in STEM majors. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 52, 91-100.
Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A. & Kern, A. (2007) Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 44(7), 883-907.
Roehrig, G. H., Moore J., T., Wang, H.-H., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E enough? Investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31–44.
Resolution A/RES/70/1. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. In: Seventieth United Nations General Assembly, New York, 15 September 2015–13 September 2016. New York: United Nations; 2015 (http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/ RES/70/1&Lang=E).
Sassler, S., Glass, J., Levitte, Y., Michelmore, K.M. (2017). The missing women in STEM? Assessing gender differentials in the factors associated with transition to first jobs. Social Science Research, 63, 192-208.
Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review, 115(2), 336-356.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Open coding. In A. Strauss & J. Corbin (Eds.), Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (pp. 101-121). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.
Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept and professional goals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255–270.
Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
The Global Gender Gap Report 2015. From the World Economic Forum, http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2015/
Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York: United Nations; 2016.
UNESCO (2015). Women in Science.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.
Timur, B. & İmer Çetin, N. (2017). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmenlerinin proje geliştirmeye yönelik yeterlikleri: hizmet içi eğitim programının etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD), 18 (2), 97-111.
Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2015).
Tseng, K-H., Chang, C-C., Lou , S-J., Chen, W-P. (2013). Attitudes towards science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in a project-based learning (PjBL) environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(1), 87-102.
Wang, X. (2013). Modeling entrance into STEM fields of study among students beginning at community colleges and four-year institutions. Research in Higher Education, 54(6), 664-692.
Wang, Y., Lavonen, J. & Tirri, K. (2018). Aims for Learning 21st Century Competencies in National Primary Science Curricula in China and Finland. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6):2045–2057
Ward, J. D. ve Lee, C. L. (2002). A review of problem-based learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 20(1), 16-26.
Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J.S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
Zoller, H.U. (1991). Problem Solving and the “Problem Solving Paradox” in Decision Making Oriented Environimental Education, InKeiny, S. and Zoller, U. (Eds), Conceptual Issues in Enviromental Education, New York: Peter Lang. Pub.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Copyrights for articles published in International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction are retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.