Educators are interested in true or authentic education; hence, STEM education has emerged. The acronym, “STEM,” literally stands for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and is being used across diverse fields. Since the word STEM was initially used in undergraduate courses, its meaning has been expanded and now implies more than just the combination of four disciplines in the education field. “STEM education” has been defined as a comprehensive and interdisciplinary teaching and learning approach especially for the four disciplines (i.e., science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) (Capraro, Capraro, & Morgan, 2013; Gonzalez & Kuenzi, 2012) often integrating a powerful communication component. Therefore, most people believe there is a positive effect for STEM education and easily assume that STEM integrated education influences teachers’ instructional strategies and students’ attitude and academic achievement, positively.
As a result of the belief in the power of STEM education, classroom teachers are asked to integrate STEM education into their lessons. Specifically, mathematics and science teachers in middle schools are strongly recommended to incorporate technology and engineering components in their classrooms because too few middle school curricula include technology and engineering disciplines as subjects. Additionally, teachers in middle schools face a number of challenges to employing STEM education in their classrooms (Executive Office of the President of the U.S., 2014). Although there have been investments in STEM teacher professional development, the lack of curriculum and standards aligning STEM education with middle school subject curriculum has erected barriers for teacher implementation (Kuenzi, 2008). Classroom teachers struggle with how state standards can be integrated into STEM lessons, what are STEM best practices, and what are the benefits educators can gain from STEM education. The answers to these questions are slow in coming but will be helpful for teachers and researchers.
The reason behind the support for STEM education by educators and policy makers and why teachers try to enact it may be because they believe STEM education contributes to deepening students’ understanding of content (Kuenzi, 2008). Specifically, various groups have argued that mathematics and science can be learned more effectively when taught in a rich applied environment such as engineering or technology contexts (Dugger, 1993). Another reason for STEM education is because it inspires students to be actively engaged in learning and helps them realize the meaning of learning specific content (Meyrick, 2012). Many issue facing middle grades education such as student behavioral issues, low achievement, and high dropout rate can be related to students’ lack of motivation (Klem & Connell, 2004). STEM education can be an alternative education strategy to address some of these educational issues.
However, to guarantee best practices in classrooms for STEM education, more research needs to be conducted on current standards, teachers and students’ perceptions and attitudes, and documentation of actual practices. The seven articles in this special issue were selected to focus on these needs.
One article focuses on the STEM integration in four middle school mathematics standards, two examine teachers’ and students’ perceptions and attitude toward STEM integrated into the common core state standards and STEM project based learning, one reports on the positive impact of a mathematical problem-solving instructional program for low-achieving students and ones with learning disabilities, one describes an intensive professional development program emphasizing the importance of eliciting students’ prior knowledge for meaningful STEM education, and finally two investigate unique interdisciplinary programs integrating technology and art in mathematics classrooms and the impact on students’ attitude and achievement. These articles were selected because they all provide practical implications for STEM integrated education especially for middle grade teachers and students. Research indicates that middle grade education plays a role in bridging elementary and secondary education, which ultimately impacts students’ majors and professions at the postsecondary level. The following articles provide significant implications for how middle grade teachers can integrate a STEM interdisciplinary instructional approach into their specific content and how middle grade students might benefit from STEM integrated learning.
In the first piece of research in this special issue, Mary Margaret Capraro and Sandra B. Nite reviewed four middle school mathematics standards (i.e., NCTM Principles and Standards for School Mathematics, the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, and the Texas College and Career Readiness Standards) and evaluated the extent of STEM integration within each of these standards. In detail, they examine how many cases of integration of two or more STEM subjects, real-world contextual problems, and project based learning the four standards contained. Findings indicate how the curriculum and standards reflect the current need for STEM integration and how much they support teachers in designing lessons.
The next two articles in this special issue investigate the participants’ perceptions and attitudes toward STEM education using factor analyses. The second article by Jon D. Davis, Jeffrey Choppin, Corey Drake, and Amy Roth McDuffie, employed two national surveys involving 769 items and identify the factors underlying middle grade school mathematics teachers’ perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and their instructional environments. Findings from this study describe teachers’ perceptions on the multifaceted relationships among Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, state assessment, teacher evaluation, professional development, and classroom practices. Additionally, the third study conducted by Suny-oung Han and Daniel Carpenter revealed the factors of students’ attitude toward STEM project based learning. They employed factor analyses revealing five factors for students’ attitude toward STEM project based learning indicating students’ learning style and preference for studying. Findings from these two studies are valuable in terms that they provide critical information about both teachers and students. Understanding teachers and students should be a priority for any other discussions in the field of education.
The fourth research article in this special issue by Sheree T. Sharpe, Rachel Fults, and Jennifer Krawec introduced a mathematical problem solving instructional program and examined its impact on middle school students. In the sense that problem-solving skills have been emphasized as one of the 21st century skills, it should be addressed in middle grade classrooms and the authors of this study suggest an alternative instructional approach to improve students’ problem solving skills. Additionally, this study provides meaningful implications for special education or differentiated learning by focusing more on high-need students such as low-achieving students and ones with learning disabilities.
In the fifth article, Jennifer C. Mesa, Rose M. Pringle, and Natalie King examined an intensive professional development program emphasizing the importance of eliciting student preconceptions and the middle grade science teachers’ practice in highlighting students’ prior knowledge in classrooms. Through professional development activities, teachers begin to incorporate instructional strategies based on students’ prior knowledge. However, despite the sustained professional development, findings from the analysis of 61 classroom observations revealed a deficit of consideration of students’ prior knowledge in actual classrooms, which is critical for meaningful STEM education.
The final two articles in this special issue provided two practical examples of STEM integrated lessons. The sixth study, conducted by Gerald Ardito, Pauline Mosley, and Lauren Scollins introduce a technology-rich learning environment especially utilizing robotics in mathematics classrooms. They examined the impact of the robotics-integrated lesson on students’ understanding of mathematics content, problem solving skills, and collaboration ability. The seventh article by Matthew Conley, Lisa Douglass, and Rachel Trinkley added an art perspective to STEM and stretched the concept to STEAM. They describe the exploration of the Columbus Museum of Art integrating the learning-thinking model (i.e., Ovserve, Describe, Interpret, and Prove) into mathematics methods courses. These two studies include two important implications for teaching and research. First, two practical examples of lessons are introduced for teachers to effective pedagogies for planning future STEM integrated lessons. In addition, these two studies contribute to the literature relating to STEM integrated teaching practice and its impact on students’ attitude and achievement by providing sufficient quantitative and qualitative findings.
We hope the seven articles in this special issue answer some inquiries that MGRJ readers might have. Specifically, it is our hope that middle grade teachers and educators can take a broader view on STEM education through the diverse content described in these seven articles. As guest editors of the STEM education special issue of MGRJ, we appreciate the opportunity to gather good pieces of research on STEM education and share them with readers.
