Abstract
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) each have distinct epistemological foundations for the production of knowledge, yet a recent international trend in education is to integrate these fields as an approach to teaching and learning. According to the literature, integrated STEM education involves concurrent teaching of two or more knowledge domains from the collection of traditional knowledge silos that constitute STEM. The rationale for integrated STEM education is grounded in a perceived need to simulate the complexity of real-world situations, where examples of integrated STEM tend to evolve over time, through the need to solve problems in naturalistic contexts by teams of researchers with different disciplinary expertise. In educational settings, each school STEM discipline has evolved with pedagogical responses to simulate real-world contexts such as science inquiry or mathematical problem solving, however, the notion of integrated STEM adds layers of complexity to pedagogical responses. Our aim in this chapter is to address this complexity from the perspective of integrated STEM in initial teacher education programs, based on critical reflections of our recent teaching experiences and learning experiences of our students. We explore the demands on initial teacher education STEM students in terms of the diversity of analytical epistemological orientations, and we consider possible strategies for understanding synthetic epistemological orientations that may inform better our understanding of learning through integrated STEM.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allchin, D. (1999a). Do we see through a social microscope? Credibility as a vicarious selector. Philosophy of Science, 66, S287–S298.
Allchin, D. (1999b). Values in science: An educational perspective. Science & Education, 8, 1–12.
Bellocchi, A. (2017). Interaction ritual approaches to emotion and cognition in science learning experiences. In A. Bellocchi, C. Quigley, & K. Otrel-Cass (Eds.), Exploring emotions, aesthetics and wellbeing in science education research (pp. 85–105). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43353-0_5
Bellocchi, A., King, D., & Ritchie, S. M. (2016). Context based assessment: Creating opportunities for resonance between classroom fields and societal fields. International Journal of Science Education, 38, 1304–1342. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1189107
Buldt, B., Lowe, B., & Muller, T. (2008). Towards a new epistemology of mathematics. Erkenntnis, 68(3), 309–329.
Chalmers, A. (2013). What is this thing called science? Brisbane: University of Queensland Press.
Collins, R. (2004). Interaction ritual chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Darling-Hammond, L., Barron, B., Pearson, P. D., Schoenfeld, A. H., Stage, E. K., Zimmerman, T. D., … Tilson, J. L. (2015). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. Wiley.
Davis, J. P. (2017). Emotions, social beings & ethnomethods: Understanding analogical reasoning in everyday science classrooms. In A. Bellocchi, C. Quigley, & K. Otrel-Cass (Eds.), Exploring emotions, aesthetics and wellbeing in science education research (pp. 121–140). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43353-0_7
Davis, J. P., & Bellocchi, A. (2018). Objectivity, subjectivity and emotion in school science inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 1419–1447. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21461
Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2006). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching, and research. New York, NY: Routledge.
Durkheim, E. (2008). The elementary forms of the religious life (C. Cosman, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford World’s Classics. (Original work published 1912).
English, L. D. (2016). STEM Education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
Fan, L., & Zhu, Y. (2007). Representation of problem-solving procedures: A comparative look at China, Singapore, and US mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9069-6
Hong, Y.-C., & Choi, I. (2011). Three dimensions of reflective thinking in solving design problems: A conceptual model. Educational Technology Research & Development, 59, 687–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9202-9
Huq, A., & Gilbert, D. (2017). All the world’s a stage: Transforming entrepreneurship education through design thinking. Education and Training, 59, 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-12-2015-0111
Kelly, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
King, D., & English, L. (2016). Engineering design in the primary school: Applying stem concepts to build an optical instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 38, 2762–2794. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1262567
Liberman, K. (2007). Dialectical practice in Tibetan philosophical culture: An ethnomethodological inquiry into formal reasoning. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Liberman, K. (2013). More studies in ethnomethodology. Albany, NY: SUNY.
Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2016). Epistemic fluency and professional education: Innovation, knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
McLaughlin, C. A., & MacFadden, B. J. (2014). At the elbows of scientists: Shaping science teachers’ conceptions and enactment of inquiry-based instruction. Research in Science Education, 44, 927–947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9408-z
Nadelson, L. S., & Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Contexts, challenges, and the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110, 221–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1289775
Nagdi, M. E., Leammukda, F., & Roehrig, G. (2018). Developing identities of STEM teachers at emerging STEM schools. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0136-1
Noble, T., DiMattia, C., Nemirovsky, R., & Barros, A. (2006). Making a circle: Tool use and the spaces where we live. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 387–437. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2404_1
Núñez, R. E., Edwards, L. D., & Matos, J. F. (1999). Embodied cognition as grounding for situatedness and context in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39, 45–65.
Quality Assurance Agency. (2018). Enterprise and entrepreneurship education: Guidance for UK higher education providers. Retrieved August 30, 2018, from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaas/enhancement-and-development/enterprise-and-entrpreneurship-education-2018.pdf?sfvrsn=15f1f981_8
Ries, E. (2014). The lean startup: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. New York, NY: Currency.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
Sanders, M. E., & Wells, J. G. (2010). Virginia Tech, Integrative STEM Education Graduate Program. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20100924150636/http://www.soe.vt.edu/istemed
Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1
STEM Task Force Report. (2014). Innovate: A blueprint for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in California public education. Dublin, CA: Californians Dedicated to Education Foundation.
Takeuchi, M. A. (2016). Friendships and group work in linguistically diverse mathematics classrooms: Opportunities to learn for English language learners. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25, 411–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2016.1169422
Valiela, I. (2001). Doing science: Design, analysis, and communication of scientific research. New York: Oxford University Press.
Van Manen, M. (1997). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Watson, A. D. (2015). Design thinking for life. Art Education, 68, 12–18.
Wickman, P.-O. (2017). Back to the drawing board: Examining the philosophical foundations of educational research on aesthetics and emotions. In A. Bellocchi, C. Quigley, & K. Otrel-Cass (Eds.), Exploring emotions, aesthetics and wellbeing in science education research (pp. 9–37). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43353-0_2
Acknowledgments
We wish to acknowledge the STEM Education Research Group and the School of Teacher Education and Leadership of the Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, for funding that partly supported this work. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Queensland University of Technology.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Davis, J.P., Chandra, V., Bellocchi, A. (2019). Integrated STEM in Initial Teacher Education: Tackling Diverse Epistemologies. In: Sengupta, P., Shanahan, MC., Kim, B. (eds) Critical, Transdisciplinary and Embodied Approaches in STEM Education. Advances in STEM Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29488-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29489-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)