RESEARCH PAPER
Pre-service Science Teachers Learn a Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)-Oriented Program: The Case of Sound, Waves and Communication Systems
Nayif Awad 1  
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, ISRAEL
Online publish date: 2018-01-21
Publish date: 2018-01-21
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(4):1431–1451
KEYWORDS
This article was published with the financial support of the EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education for doctoral students.
ABSTRACT
The current article about pre-service teachers (n=60) describes the implementation and evaluation of an innovative curriculum for teaching sound, waves and communication systems (SWCS). The study sought to investigate pre-service teachers’ successes and difficulties in learning a science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)-based program, to examine the program’s influence on students’ interest and self-efficacy beliefs about learning science and technology, and to explore the factors that affected their achievements and motivation. The participants were two groups of pre-service teachers who learned the course within their studies towards a B.Ed. degree in science teaching. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected by a final exam, a retention exam, a Motivation Questionnaire, final projects, class observations and interviews with the students. The findings revealed that the pre-service teachers successfully learned the new subject and were motivated in learning the course. The integration of science and technology studies, engaging the students in hands-on lab work and the use of ICT tools played a crucial role in promoting meaningful learning. However, the PBL part of the course contributed relatively little because the learners encountered difficulties in learning new subjects independently.
 
REFERENCES (87)
1.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256....
 
2.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviors predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 261-278. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709....
 
3.
Augustine, N. R. (2005). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
 
4.
Australian Council of State School Organizations (ACSSO) (2010). Australian Education Digest, STEM Education Special. Retrieved from http://www.acsso.org.au/AED100....
 
5.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the Exercise of Control. New York, W. H. Freeman and Company.
 
6.
Barak, M. (2013). Teaching engineering and technology: cognitive, knowledge and problem-solving taxonomies. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 11(3), 316-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-0....
 
7.
Barak, M. (2014). Closing the gap between attitudes and perceptions about ICT-enhanced learning among pre-service STEM teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956....
 
8.
Barak, M., & Dori, Y. J. (2005). Enhancing undergraduate students’ chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Science Education, 89(1), 117-139. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20....
 
9.
Barak, M., & Ziv, S. (2013). Wandering: a web-based platform for the creation of location-based interactive learning objects. Computers & Education, 62(2), 159-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
10.
Barak, M., Nissim, Y., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2011). Aptness between teaching roles and teaching strategies in ICT-integrated science lessons. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 7, 305-322. https://doi.org/10.28945/1526.
 
11.
Barron, B. J., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). Doing with understanding: lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 271-311. https://doi.org/10.1080/105084....
 
12.
Basturk, R. (2008). Applying the many-faceted Rasch model to evaluate PowerPoint presentation performance in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(4), 431-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/026029....
 
13.
Becker, K. H., & Park, K. (2011). Integrative approaches among science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects on students’ learning: a meta-analysis. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 12(5/6), 23-37.
 
14.
Bell, R. L., Maeng, J. L., & Binns, I. C. (2013). Learning in context: technology integration in a teacher preparation program informed by situated learning theory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 348-379. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21....
 
15.
Bergman, D. J., & Morphew, J. (2015). Effects of a science content course on elementary pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy of teaching science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(3), 73-81. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst....
 
16.
Bilgin, I., Karakuyu, Y., & Ay, Y. (2015). The Effects of Project Based Learning on Undergraduate Students’ Achievement and Self-Efficacy Beliefs towards Science Teaching. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(3), 469-477. https://doi.org/10.12973/euras....
 
17.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M. & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/004615....
 
18.
Brown, J. L., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318....
 
19.
Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 
20.
Bybee, R. W. (2013). The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
 
21.
Caleon, I., & Subramaniam, R. (2010). Development and application of a three-tier diagnostic test to assess secondary students’ understanding of waves. International Journal of Science Education, 32(7), 939-961. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
22.
Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. R. (2013). STEM Project-based Learning. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94....
 
23.
Chai, C. S., Koh, E., Lim, C. P., & Tsai, C.-C. (2014). Deepening ICT integration through multilevel design of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692....
 
24.
Chang, H. P., Chen, J. Y., Guo, C. J., Chen, C. C., Chang, C. Y., Lin, S. H., … Tseng, Y. T. (2007). Investigating primary and secondary students’ learning of physics concepts in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 465-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
25.
Chen, F., Gorbunova, N. V., Masalimova, A. R., & Birova, J. (2017). Formation of ICT-competence of future university school teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 4765-4777.
 
26.
Chiu, J. L., Chen, J. K., & Linn, M. C. (2013). Overcoming deceptive clarity by encouraging metacognition in the web-based inquiry science environment. In R. Azevedo & V. A. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 517-531), Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-....
 
27.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano, C. V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
 
28.
Crismond, D. P. (2011). Scaffolding strategies for integrating engineering design and scientific inquiry in project-based learning environments. In M. Barak & M. Hacker (Eds.) (pp. 235-255). Fostering Human Development through Engineering and Technology Education, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94....
 
29.
De Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305-308. https://doi.org/10.1126/scienc....
 
30.
Deemer, S. (2004). Classroom goal orientation in high school classrooms: revealing links between teacher beliefs and classroom environments. Educational Research, 46(1), 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318....
 
31.
Dolmans, D. M., de Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. P., & van der Vleuten, C. M. (2005). Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education, 39(7), 732-741. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365....
 
32.
Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243-279. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327....
 
33.
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
 
34.
Eshach, H. & Schwartz, J. L. (2006). Sound stuff? Naïve materialism in middle-school students’ conceptions of sound. International Journal of Science Education, 28(7), 733-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
35.
Field, M., Lee, R., & Field, M. L. (1994). Assessing interdisciplinary learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1994(58), 69-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.372....
 
36.
Fore, G. A., Feldhaus, C. R., Sorge, B. H., Agarwal, M., & Varahramyan, K. (2015). Learning at the nano-level: accounting for complexity in the internalization of secondary STEM teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate....
 
37.
Fortus, D., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2014). Measuring students’ continuing motivation for science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(4), 497-522. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21....
 
38.
Frykholm, J., & Glasson, G. (2005). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(3), 127-141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949....
 
39.
Gero, A. (2016). Development of interdisciplinary lessons integrating science and engineering in heterogeneous teams: education students’ attitudes. IJEP, 6(2), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v....
 
40.
Greene, J. C. (2005). The generative potential of mixed methods inquiry. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 28(2), 207-211. https://doi.org/10.1080/014067....
 
41.
Hechter, R. P. (2011). Changes in pre-service elementary teachers’ personal science teaching efficacy and science teaching outcome expectancies: the influence of context. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(2), 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972....
 
42.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/004615....
 
43.
Hoffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 722-738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lear....
 
44.
Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
 
45.
Hossain, M. M., & Robinson, M. G. (2012). How to Motivate US Students to Pursue STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) Careers. Online submission. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED53354....
 
46.
Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K. (2011). A comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation-laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 71-93. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
47.
Jimoyiannis, A. (2010). Designing and implementing an integrated technological pedagogical science knowledge framework for science teachers’ professional development. Computer Education, 55(3), 1259-1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
48.
Joo, Y. J., Bong, M., & Choi, H. J. (2000). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, academic self-efficacy, and Internet self-efficacy in web-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 5-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0231....
 
49.
Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). Metacognition in chemical education: question posing in the case-based computerized learning environment. Instructional Science, 37(5), 403-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251....
 
50.
Katehi, L., Pearson, G., Feder, M. A., Committee on K-12 Engineering Education. National Academy of Engineering & National Research Council (U.S.). (2009). Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. National Academies Press, Washington DC.
 
51.
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594....
 
52.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching? Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326....
 
53.
Lattuca, L. R., Voight, L. J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Theoretical support and researchable questions. The Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.20....
 
54.
Linder, C. J. (1993). University physics students’ conceptualizations of factors affecting the speed of sound propagation. International Journal of Science Education, 15(6), 655-662. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
55.
Liu, X. (2006). Effects of combined hands-on laboratory and computer modeling on student learning of gas laws: a quasi-experimental study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956....
 
56.
Llinares, S., & Krainer, K. (2006). Mathematics (student) teachers and teacher educators as learners. In A. Gutierrez & P. Boero (Eds.), Handbook of Research on the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
 
57.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three – strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-0....
 
58.
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: when presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 187. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0....
 
59.
McDonnough, J. T., & Matkins, J. J. (2010). The role of field experience in elementary preservice teachers’ self‐efficacy and ability to connect research to practice. School Science and Mathematics, 110(1), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949....
 
60.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage.
 
61.
Morrison, J. A., Raab, F., & Ingram, D. (2008). Factors influencing elementary and secondary teachers’ views on the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(4), 384-403. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
62.
Nadelson, L., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/002206....
 
63.
Najjar, L. J. (1998). Principles of educational multimedia user interface design. Human Factors, 41(2), 311-323. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872....
 
64.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
 
65.
National Science Foundation. (2007). A National Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the U.S. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education System. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/edu_com... report.pdf.
 
66.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate....
 
67.
Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z.C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: an effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96(1), 21-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20....
 
68.
Osborne, J., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Literature Review in Science Education and the Role of ICT: Promise, Problems and Future Directions. Bristol: Future lab.
 
69.
Park, H. R., Khan, S., & Petrina, S. (2009). ICT in science education: a quasi-experimental study of achievement, attitudes toward science, and career aspirations of Korean junior high school students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(8), 993-1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
70.
Pejuan, A., Bohigas, X., Jaén, X., & Periago, C. (2012). Misconceptions about sound among engineering students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 669-685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956....
 
71.
Polman, J. L. (2000). Designing Project-Based Science: Connecting Learners through Guided Inquiry. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
 
72.
Punch, K., & Oancea, A. (2014). Introduction to Research Methods in Education. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
 
73.
Rogers, L., & Twidle, J. (2013). A pedagogical framework for developing innovative science teachers with ICT. Research in Science & Technological Education, 31(3), 227-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/026351....
 
74.
Satchwell, R. E., & Loepp, F. L. (2002). Designing and implementing an integrated mathematics, science, and technology curriculum for the middle school. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3), 41-66.
 
75.
Schmidt, M., & Fulton, L. (2016). Transforming a traditional inquiry-based science unit into a STEM unit for elementary pre-service teachers: a view from the trenches. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 302-315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956....
 
76.
Sherman, A., & MacDonald, L. (2007). Preservice teachers’ experiences with a science education module. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(4), 525-541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972....
 
77.
Skryabin, M., Zhang, J., Liu, L., & Zhang, D. (2015). How the ICT development level and usage influence student achievement in reading, mathematics, and science? Computers & Education, 85, 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
78.
Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education? Computers & Education, 44(3), 343-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
79.
Sozen, M., & Bolat, M. (2011). Determining the misconceptions of primary school students related to sound transmission through drawing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15(5), 1060-1066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsp....
 
80.
Teo, T., & Ke, K. (2014). Challenges in STEM teaching: implication for preservice and in-service teacher education program. Theory into Practice, 53(1), 18-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/004058....
 
81.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning. ‏ San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.
 
82.
Tongchai, A., Sharma, M. D., Johnston, I. D., Arayathanitkul, K., & Soankwan, C. (2009). Developing, evaluating and demonstrating the use of a conceptual survey in mechanical waves. International Journal of Science Education, 31(18), 2437-2457. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
83.
Tsai, C. C. (2006). Reinterpreting and reconstructing science: teachers’ view changes toward the nature of science by courses of science education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(3), 363-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate....
 
84.
Tsai, H.-Y., Chung, C.-C., & Lou, S.-J. (2017). Construction and Development of iSTEM Learning Model. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmst....
 
85.
Vandervelde, J. (2006). A+ PowerPoint Rubric. Retrieved on 6 September 2005 from http://www.uwstout.edu /soe/profdev/pptrubric.html.
 
86.
Vasquez, J. A., Sneider, C. I., & Comer, M. W. (2013). STEM Lesson Essentials, Grades 3-8: Integrating Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
 
87.
Wittmann, C. M. (2003). Understanding and affecting student reasoning about sound waves. International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), 991-1013. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215