iSTEM and Learning Outcomes

1. iSTEM and Learning Outcomes Anthony Petrosino University of Texas, Austin NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL—BOARD ON SCIENCE EDUCATION Committee on Integrated STEM Education Second Meeting Keck Center, Room 204 Washington, D.C. January, 10-12, 2012

2. Acknowledgements • Leona Schauble (Vanderbilt) • Rick Duschl (Penn St) • LupitaCarmoa (University of Texas, Austin) • Candace Walkington (University of Wisconsin)

3. A “typical” integrated STEM Activity

4. Beyond Fun and Engagement How high did the rocket go? How did you figure that out?

5. Doing Deeper Scaffolding the Experimentation Process Sources of Variance –Data Modeling

6. Discipline vs Integration • John Dewey • Dewey criticized the presentation of information in isolated separate subjects: • “We do lie in a stratified earth, one of which is mathematical, another physical, another historical, and so on. We should not be able to live very long in any one taken by itself. We live in a world where all sides are bound together. All studies grow out of relations in the one great common world.”

7. The Uniqueness of the Engineer • Engineers use science, but distinguish themselves from scientists. They do math but do not identify themselves as mathematicians. They use and invent technology but typically reject the title of technician. As a profession, engineers enjoy a complex relationship with the other STEM fields, having to demonstrate mastery with each of them, yet acting in a manner wholly distinct from any of them. –Walkington et al, in press Candace Walkington

8. STEM: Integrated or Separated • Integrated STEM: The principles of science and the analysis of mathematics are combined with the design process of technology and engineering in the classroom. • Separated S.T.E.M.: Each subject is taught separately with the hope that the synthesis of disciplinary knowledge will be applied. This may be referred to as STEM being taught as “Silos”

9. Overarching Questions 1)What are the stated goals/objectives of integrated STEM projects? 2)In what ways have these goals/objectives been measured? 3)What evidence from research or evaluation do we have that integrated STEM projects are achieving these goals/objectives? Do we know what characteristics of integrated STEM are associated with positive outcomes? 4)Does the broader research literature on science learning provide insights about why and how integrated STEM projects are effective for supporting these goals/objectives? 5)Where evidence is not available, what kinds of research or evaluation would be needed in order to show that iSTEM supports these goals/objectives?

10. 1) What are the stated goals/objectives of integrated STEM projects? • Using an interdisciplinary or integrated curriculum provides opportunities for more relevant, less fragmented, and more stimulating experiences for learners • When done properly, integration of STEM brings together overlapping concepts and principles in a meaningful way and enriches the learning context. • Learning situated in such enriched (macro) contexts often lead to meaningful learning experiences.

11. 2) In what ways have these goals/objectives been measured? • Affective measures • Standardized tests • Project specific assessments • Detailed qualitative analysis • However….

12. However…. • Studies showing advantages of integrated curricula on student performance typically show only relative benefits over “business-as-usual” models rather than an explication of how actions and reasoning processes have changed. • How integration happens, why it succeeds or fails, and the manner in which it improves performance and learning all remain fairly underspecified in the literature. (Nathan, M. J. Srisurichan, R., Walkington, C., Wolfgram, M., Williams, C. & Alibali, M. W. (under review)

13. 3a) What evidence from research or evaluation do we have that integrated STEM projects are achieving these goals/objectives? • There is some empirical support for positive effects on learning with curricula that provide iSTEM (Burghardt and Hacker, 2002; Fortus, Krajcik, Dershimer, Marx, & Mamlok-Naaman, 2005; Hartzler, 2000; Kolodner, et al., 2003; Satchwell & Loepp, 2002; Phelps, Camburn, & Durham, 2009; Wang, Moore, Roehrig, & Park, in press).

14. Continued… • This is also supported by learning sciences research on transfer of knowledge (e.g. Pellegrino et al., 2001; Sheppard, Pellegrino, & Olds, 2008). • …provided there is explicit attempts to integrate

15. Findings Show Uneven and Difficult • Yet the effects of iSTEM on student learning are uneven (Hartzler, 2000; Prevost et al., in press; Tran & Nathan, 2010a, 2010b) • And high quality implementations of iSTEM are not commonplace (Katehi et al., 2009; Nathan et al., 2008; Prevost et al., 2009; Prevost et al., 2010; Welty, Katehi, Pearson & Feder, 2008).

16. 3b) Do we know what characteristics of integrated STEM are associated with positive outcomes? We seem to think we do… •Base integration on how students experience, organize, and think about science and math. •Take advantage of patterns as children from the day they are born are looking at patterns and trying to make sense of the world. •Collect and use data in problem-based integrated activities that invoke process skills. •Integrate where there is an overlapping content in math and science. •Be sensitive to what students believe and feel about math and science, their involvement and the confidence in their ability to do science and math. •Use instructional strategies that would bridge the gap between students’ classroom experiences and real-life experiences outside the classroom.

17. Cont… •An understanding of the nature of subject field and the need for teachers, for example, single subject field/single teacher; single subject field/multiple teachers; multiple subject fields/single teacher; or multiple subject fields/multiple teachers. •A deeper knowledge of methods of interdisciplinary subject matter correlation (unified subject field, theme, topic, problem-based, etc.) •Strategies for motivating students to use process skills, such as reading, writing, reporting, research, problem solving, mathematical application, data collection, data analysis, an drawing conclusions.

18. So, Where Are We? • Mitch Nathan • “Yet, our review of iSTEM research and policy reveals an important and noticeable gap; namely that the integration process, while touted for its benefits and broad appeal, remains somewhat mysterious. How integration occurs, whether integration is chiefly about instructional practices or the knowledge states of students, and what demonstrable impact it has on performance, all remain largely underspecified.”

19. 4) Does the research literature provide insights on effective integrated STEM projects? • A situated posits that knowing in a domain involves the adoption and reorganization of appropriate participation practices in social systems of activity • knowledge of mathematical and scientific ideas is not separable from the practices through which these ideas arise, or the context of the learning environment • The context of an activity system like school includes learners, teachers, curriculum materials, and the physical environment, as well as representational, material, informational, and conceptual resources. • Communities and groups have the power to shape what counts as knowledge, including the meanings of terminology, concepts, and principles, and how these can be applied in practice by community members. • Viewing learning as a trajectory of participation in activity systems leads to a conceptualization of transfer as the ways in which participation in activity in one social setting contributes to growth as a learner and future participation in other activity systems of value

20. “Big P”---”Little p”/Strong P---Weak p • Project-based instruction • Model-eliciting activities • Agent-based modeling and simulations, etc. • Challenge Based Instruction…

21. The Legacy Cycle Schwartz, D., Lin, X., Brophy S., Bransford, J. (1999). Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional designs. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.) Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A NewParadigm of Instructional Theory (Pp. 183 – 214). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

22. 5) What kinds of research or evaluation would be needed in order to show that iSTEM supports these goals/objectives?

24. Leona Schauble • “Many projects have attempted to "integrate," but mostly they are problematic because they are not guided either by strong long-term views of the development of the disciplines they are trying to integrate, much less by any long-term sense of how student knowledge co-develops across disciplines.

25. Conclusion • Although these competencies might be of great importance (especially from an economics perspective for its connection to the job market), not enough is emphasized about the STEM content addressed and the development of student thinking of STEM. Even less attention is provided to the development of student thinking of iSTEM.Iargue that if iSTEM education is to become a reality in K-12, there is an imminent need to put less weight in student development of “skills and competencies for the 21st Century” and begin prioritizing student understanding of STEM and iSTEM content.