Log in

Investigating Preservice STEM Teacher Conceptions of STEM Education

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

Abstract

Surrounding the national emphasis on improving STEM education, effective STEM educators are required. Connected, yet often overlooked, is the need for effective preservice STEM teaching instruction for incoming educators. At a basic level, preservice STEM teacher education should include STEM content, pedagogy, and conceptualization. However, the literature suggests no leading conception of STEM education, and little is known about how preservice STEM teachers are conceptualizing STEM education. In order to explore preservice STEM teacher conceptions of STEM education, preservice teachers at a large, Midwestern research university were given an open-ended survey eliciting both textual and visual responses. Here, we report and discuss the results of employing this instrument in relation with the current STEM conceptualization literature.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson TR, Schonborn KJ, du Plessis L, Gupthar AS, Hull TL (2013) Identifying and develo** students ability to reason with concepts and representations in biology. In: Multiple representations in biological education. Springer, Netherlands, pp 19–38

  • Babbie ER (1990) Survey research methods. Wadsworth Pub, Co Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodnar G, Klobuchar M, Geelan D (2001) The many forms of constructivism. J Chem Educ 78(8):1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodner GM, Orgill M (2007) Theoretical frameworks for research in chemistry/science education. Pearson Prentice Hall

  • Breiner JM, Harkness SS, Johnson CC, Koehler CM (2012) What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. Sch Sci Math 112(1):3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley BC (2000) Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):895–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee R (2013) The case of STEM education: challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press, Arlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz K (2006) Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative research. Sage Publications Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook MP (2006) Visual representations in science education: the influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Sci Educ 90(6):1073–1091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fink A (1995) The survey handbook, vol 1. Thousand Oaks, CA

  • Fowler CW (1988) Population dynamics as related to rate of increase per generation. Evol Ecol 2(3):197–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurtado S, Newman CB, Tran MC, Chang MJ (2010) Improving the rate of success for underrepresented racial minorities in STEM fields: insights from a national project. New Dir Inst Res 2010(148):5–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CC (2013) Conceptualizing integrated STEM education. Sch Sci Math 113(8):367–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly GA (1955) The psychology of personal constructs. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim B (2001) Social constructivism. Emerg Perspect Learn Teach Technol 1(1):16

    Google Scholar 

  • Koonce DA, Zhou J, Anderson CD, Hening DA, Conley VM (2011) What is STEM? Retrieved from http://www.asee.org/public/conferences/1/papers/289/view

  • Lynch SJ, Peters-Burton EE, Ford MR (2014) Building STEM opportunities for all. Educ Leadersh 72(4):54–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson S, Krajcik J, Borko H (1999) Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In: Gess-Newsome J, Lederman NG (eds) Examining pedagogical content knowledge. Springer, Berlin, pp 95–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer RE, Bove W, Bryman A, Mars R, Tapangco L (1996) When less is more: meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. J Educ Psychol 88(1):64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill C (2009) The future of TE masters degrees: STEM. In: Presentation at the 70th annual international technology education association conference, Louisville, Kentucky

  • Moore TJ, Johnson CC, Peters-Burton EE, Guzey SS (2015) The need for a STEM road map. In: Johnson CC, Peters-Burton EE, Moore TJ (eds) STEM road map: a framework for integrated STEM education. Routledge, p 1

  • Morrison JA (1999) Investigating teachers’ understanding and diagnosis of students’ preconceptions in the secondary science classroom. Retrieved from Oregon State University Library. http://hdl.handle.net/1957/33374

  • Nadelson LS, Callahan J, Pyke P, Hay A, Dance M, Pfiester J (2013) Teacher STEM perception and preparation: inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. J Educ Res 106(2):157–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council (2014) STEM integration in K-12 education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2013) Monitoring progress toward successful K-12 STEM education: a nation advancing?. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien S, Karsnitz J, Sandt S, Bottomley L, Parry E (2014) Engineering in preservice teacher education. In: Purzer S, Strobel J, Cardella ME (eds) Engineering in pre-college settings: synthesizing research, policy, and practices. Purdue University Press, pp 277–300

  • Outlier Research & Evaluation. (2014). What do STEM schools do? 78 components of inclusive STEM high schools. Retrieved from http://outlier.uchicago.edu/s3/findings/infographic/

  • Peeck J (1993) Increasing picture effects in learning from illustrated text. Learn Instr 3(3):227–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez AJ (2015) What about a dimension of engagement, equity, and diversity practices? A critique of the next generation science standards. J Res Sci Teach 52(7):1031–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth WM, Bowen GM, McGinn MK (1999) Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. J Res Sci Teach 36(9):977–1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherin MG (2007) The development of teachers’ professional vision in video clubs. In: Goldman R, Pea R, Barron B, Derry S (eds) Video research in the learning sciences. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Skiba R, Rausch MK (2004) The relationship between achievement, discipline, and race: an analysis of factors predicting ISTEP scores. Children left behind policy briefs. Supplementary Analysis 2-D. Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana University

  • Tobin K (1990) Social constructivist perspectives on the reform of science education. Aust Sci Teach J 36(4):29–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsupros N, Kohler R, Hallinen J (2009) STEM education: a project to identify the missing components. Intermed Unit 1:1–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Glasersfeld E (1995) Radical constructivism: a way of knowing and learning. Studies in mathematics education series: 6. Falmer Press, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeff Radloff.

Appendix

Appendix

Preservice Teacher STEM Education Survey.

Below we provided the front and back pages (Figs. 3, 4) of the STEM survey we utilized during the course of this study, with all prompts and questions. Immediately below is the front page (Fig. 3).

Below is the back page of the STEM survey utilized during this study (Fig. 4).

Fig. 3
figure 3

The front page of the survey given to the preservice teacher participants

Fig. 4
figure 4

The back page of the survey given to the preservice teacher participants

Table 9 represents a breakdown by teacher experience and visualization type, showing percentages of visualization types by group as well as total participants.

Table 9 Frequencies of visual representations by group

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Radloff, J., Guzey, S. Investigating Preservice STEM Teacher Conceptions of STEM Education. J Sci Educ Technol 25, 759–774 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9633-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9633-5

Keywords

Navigation