Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Advancing Elementary and Middle School STEM Education

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Navigating the current STEM agendas and debates is complex and challenging. Perspectives on the nature of STEM education and how it should be implemented without losing discipline integrity, approaches to incorporating the arts (STEAM) and how equity in access to STEM education can be increased are just a few of the many issues faced by researchers and educators. There are no straightforward answers. Opinions on how STEM education should be advanced vary across school contexts, curricula and political arenas. This position paper addresses five core issues: (a) perspectives on STEM education, (b) approaches to STEM integration, (c) STEM discipline representation, (d) equity in access to STEM education and (e) extending STEM to STEAM. A number of pedagogical affordances inherent in integrated STEM activities are examined, with the integration of modelling and engineering design presented as an example of how such learning affordances can be capitalized on.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atweh, B. & Ala’i, K. (2012). Socially response-able mathematics education: Lessons from three teachers. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Cheng & S. F. Ng (Eds.), Mathematics education: Expanding horizons proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 98–105). Singapore: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2015, December). Australian curriculum: Foundation-Year 10; design and technologies and digital technologies (Version 8.1). Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/download/f10.

  • Blum, W. & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2009). Mathematical modelling: Can it be taught and learnt? Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application, 1(1), 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, L. A., Moore, T. J., Johnson, C. C. & Roehrig, G. H. (2015). 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. 23–37). New York, NY: Routledge.

  • Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

  • Caprile, M., Palmen, R., Sanz, & Dente, G. (2015). Encouraging STEM studies for the labour market (Directorate-General for Internal Policies: European Parliament). Brussels, Belgium: European Union. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/542199/IPOL_STU%282015%29542199_EN.pdf.

  • Carberry, A. R. & McKenna, A. F. (2014). Exploring student conceptions of modeling and modeling uses in engineering design. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(1), 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charette, R.N. (2013). The STEM crisis is a myth. IEEE Spectrum. Retrieved from http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-is-a-myth.

  • Commonwealth of Australia (2015). Vision for a science nation: Responding to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Australia’s future. Consultation Paper. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia.

  • Crismond, D. P. & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiFrancesca, D., Lee, C. & McIntyre, E. (2014). Where is the “E” in STEM for young children? Issues in Teacher Education, 23(1), 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorie, B.L., Cardella, M.E. & Svarovsky, G.N. (2014). Capturing the design thinking of young children interacting with a parent. Paper presented at the 121st SEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN.

  • Early Childhood STEM Working Group (2017). Early STEM matters: Providing high-quality STEM experiences for all young learners. Chicago, IL: Erikson Institute. http://ecstem.uchicago.edu.

  • Education Council (2015). National STEM school education strategy. Retrieved from http://www.educationcouncil.edu.au.

  • English, L. D. (2013). Reconceptualising statistical learning in the early years. In L. D. English & J. Mulligan (Eds.), Reconceptualising early mathematics learning (pp. 67–82). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

  • English, L.D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1). doi:10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1.

  • English, L. D., Arleback, J. B. & Mousoulides, N. (2016). Reflections on progress in mathematical modelling research. In A. Gutierrez, G. Leder & P. Boero (Eds.), The second handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 383–413). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

  • English, L.D., & King, D. (2015). STEM learning through engineering design: Fourth-grade students’ investigations in aerospace. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(14). doi:10.1186/s40594-015-0027-7.

  • English, L. D., & King, D. T. (2017). Engineering education with fourth-grade students: Introducing design-based problem solving. International Journal of Engineering Education, 33(1B), 346-360.

  • English, L. D., King, D. & Smeed, J. (2016). Advancing integrated STEM learning through engineering design: Sixth-grader students’ design and construction of earthquake resistant buildings. Journal of Educational Research. doi:10.1080/00220671.2016.1264053.

  • English, L. D. & Mousoulides, N. (2015). Bridging STEM in a real-world problem. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 20(9), 532–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2015). Encouraging STEM studies for the labour market. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies.

  • Evamy, C. (2005). Bridge aesthetics study. Edmonton, Canada: Alberta infrastructure and transportation.

  • Fitzallen, N. (2015). STEM education: What does mathematics have to offer? In M. Marshman (Ed.), Mathematics education in the margins. Proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 237–244). Sydney, Australia: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA).

  • Gadanidis, G. & Hughes, J. (2011). Performing big math ideas across the grades. Teaching Children Mathematics, 17(8), 486–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J.M., Minniti, L. & White, B.J.G. (2016). Computational thinking, grade 1 students and the binomial theorem. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1007/s40751-016-0019-3.

  • Goldman, S. & Zielezinski, M. B. (2016). Teaching with design thinking: Developing new vision and approaches to 21st century learning. In L. A. Annetta & J. Minogue (Eds.), Connecting science and engineering education practices in meaningful ways: Building bridges (pp. 237–262). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer International Publishing.

  • Gravemeijer, K. (1999). How emergent models may foster the constitution of formal mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1, 155–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, B. (1997). Modeling reality in mathematics classroom: The case of word problems. Learning and Instruction, 7, 293–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grover, S. & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J. & Roehrig, G. H. (2010). Curriculum development for STEM integration: Bridge design on the white earth reservation. In L. M. Kattington (Ed.), Handbook of curriculum development (pp. 347–366). Hauppauge, NY: Nova.

  • Hamilton, E., Lesh, R., Lester, F. & Brilleslyper, M. (2008). Model-eliciting activities (MEAs) as a bridge between engineering education research and mathematics education research. Advances in Engineering Education, 1(2), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoachlander, G. (2014). Integrating S, T, E, and M. Educational Leadership, 72, 74–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honey, M., Pearson, G. & Schweingruber (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • Hopkins, S., Forgasz, H., Corrigan, D. & Panizzon, D. (2014). The STEM issue in Australia: What it is and where is the evidence? Paper presented at the STEM Conference, Vancouver, Canada. Retreived from http://stem2014.ubc.ca.

  • Hunter, R., Hunter, J., Jorgensen, R. & Choy, B. H. (2016). Innovative and powerful pedagogical practices in mathematics education. In K. Makar, S. Dole, M. Goos, J. Visnovska, A. Bennison & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2012–2015 (pp. 213–234). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer International Publishing.

  • Jackson, E. (2011). The top ten lessons Steve Jobs taught us. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2011/10/05/the-top-ten-lessons-steve-jobs-taughtus/#61b8cad462f6.

  • Jho, H., Hong, O. & Song, J. (2016). An analysis of STEM/STEAM teacher education in Korea with a case study of two schools from a community of practice perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7), 1843–1862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katehi, L., Pearson, G. & Feder, M. (Eds.). (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • Kelley, T.R. & Knowles, J.G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11). Advanced online publication. doi:10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.

  • Kim, D. & Bolger, M. (2016). Analysis of Korean elementary pre-service teachers’ changing attitudes about integrated STEAM pedagogy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1007/s10763-015-9709-3.

  • King, D. & English, L. D. (2016). Engineering design in the primary school: Applying STEM concepts to build an optical instrument. International Journal of Science Education. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1080/09500693.2016.1262567.

  • Lesh, R. A. & Doerr, H. (2003). Beyond constructivism: A models and modelling perspective on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Lucas, B., Claxton, G. & Hanson, J. (2014). Thinking like an engineer: Implications for the education system. London, United Kingdom: Royal Academy of Engineers. Retrieved from www.raeng.org.uk/thinkinglikeanengineer.

  • Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B. & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council of Learned Academies.

  • Masters, G. (2016). Policy insights: Five challenges in Australian school education. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

  • Moore, T.J., Glancy, A.W., Tank, K.M., Kersten, J.A., Smith, K.A., Karl A. & Stohlmann, M.S. (2014). A framework for quality K-12 engineering education: Research and development. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education, 4(1), Article 2. doi:10.7771/2157-9288.1069.

  • Moore, T. J., Miller, R. L., Lesh, R. A., Stohlmann, M. S. & Kim, Y. R. (2013). Modeling in engineering: The role of representational fluency in students’ conceptual understanding. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(1), 141–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, T., Stohlmann, M., Wang, H., Tank, K., Glancy, A. & Roehrig, G. (2014b). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 35–60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

  • Nadelson, L., Seifert, A., Moll, A. & Coats, B. (2012). i-STEM summer institute: An integrated approach to teacher professional development in STEM. Journal of STEM Education, 13(2), 69–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • National Science and Technology Council (2013). A report from the committee on STEM education. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council.

  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2015). PISA 2015 draft mathematics framework. Paris, France: Author.

  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2016). Why access to mathematics matters and how it can be measured. In Equations and inequalities: Making mathematics accessible to all. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264258495-4-en.

  • Office of the Chief Scientist (2014). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Australia’s future. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government.

  • Portsmore, M., Watkins, J. & McCormick, M. (2012). Planning, drawing and elementary students in an integrated engineering design and literacy activity. Paper presented at the 2nd P-12 Engineering and Design Education Research Summit, Washington, DC.

  • Purzer, S., Hathaway Goldstein, M., Adams, R., Xie, C. & Nourian, S. (2015). An exploratory study of informed engineering design behaviors associated with scientific explanations. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(9). Advanced online publication. doi:10.1186/s40594-015-0019-7.

  • Romberg, T. A., Carpenter, T. & Dremock, F. (Eds.). (2005). Understanding mathematics and science matters. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. Technology Teacher, 68, 20–26. Retrieved from http://esdstem.pbworks.com/f/TTT+STEM+Article_1.pdf.

  • Sanders, M. (2012). Integrative STEM education as “best practice”. Paper presented at the 7th Biennial International Technology Education Research Conference, Queensland, Australia.

  • Schneider, C., Stephenson, C., Schafer, B. & Flick, L. (2014). Exploring the science Framework and NGSS: Computational thinking in the science classroom. Science Scope, November, 10–15.

  • Shaughnessy, M. (2013). By way of introduction: Mathematics in a STEM context. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 18(6), 324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. A., Mesa, V. M., Morris, K. A., Star, J. R. & Benken, B. M. (2009). Teaching mathematics for understanding: An analysis of lessons submitted by teachers seeking NBPTS certification. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 501–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S. R., Nielsen, N. R. & Schweingruber, H. A. (Eds.). (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • STEM Task Force Report (2014). Innovate: A blueprint for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in California public education. Dublin, Ireland: Californians Dedicated to Education Foundation.

  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J. & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 2(1), 28–34. doi:10.5703/1288284314653.

  • Strawhacker, A. L. & Bers, M. U. (2015). “I want my robot to look for food”: Comparing children’s programming comprehension using tangible, graphical, and hybrid user interfaces. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(3), 293–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swaid, S. I. (2015). Bringing computational thinking to STEM education. ScienceDirect, 3, 3657–3682.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Royal Society Science Policy Centre (2014). Vision for science and mathematics education. London, United Kingdom: The Royal Society.

  • Vale, C., Atweh, B., Averill, R. & Skourdoumbis, A. (2016). Equity, social justice and ethics in mathematics education. In I. K. Makar, S. Dole, M. Goos, J. Visnovska, A. Bennison & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2012–2015 (pp. 97–118). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

  • Vasquez, J., Schneider, C. & Comer, M. (2013). STEM lesson essentials, grades 3–8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

  • Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L. & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 127–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J.G. (2013). Integrative STEM education at virginia tech: Graduate preparation for tomorrow’s leaders. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 72(5), 28–34.

  • Williams, P. J. (2011). STEM education: Proceed with caution. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 16(1), 26–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. doi:10.1145/1118178.1118215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zawojewski, J. S., Hjalmarson, M. A., Bowman, K. J. & Lesh, R. (2008). A modeling perspective on learning and teaching in engineering education. In J. S. Zawojewski, H. A. Diefes-Dux & K. J. Bowman (Eds.), Models and modeling in engineering education: Designing experiences for all students (pp. 1–16). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research reported in this article was supported by a Linkage Grant (no. LP120200023) and Discovery Grant (no. DP 150100120) from the Australian Research Council. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not the Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lyn D. English.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

English, L.D. Advancing Elementary and Middle School STEM Education. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 15 (Suppl 1), 5–24 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x

Keywords

Navigation