Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to introduce and analyze results of the research carried out at Estonian Centre for Engineering Pedagogy at Tallinn University of Technology (TUT). Micro-lessons of 260 technical teachers teaching at vocational schools, gymnasiums and universities have been analyzed with special matrix for lesson analysis. The research has been carried out in 4 groups: (1) STEM teaching at vocational schools, (2) STEM teaching at gymnasiums (high schools), (3) STEM teaching at universities (including colleges and universities of applied higher education), and (4) STEM continuing education in engineering companies. Most common teaching models, strategies and methods enabling deep understanding and interactive learning used in STEM teaching by technical teachers who have graduated from TUT either on master level or in continuing education have been determined and analyzed in the present article.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Jolly, A.: STEM vs. STEAM: Do the Arts Belong? EdWeek.org. http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2014/11/18/ctq-jolly-stem-vs-steam.html Education Week: Teacher. Retrieved 17 May 2016
Crawley, E., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D.: Rethinking Engineering Education, The CDIO Approach. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
IGIP curriculum http://www.igip.org/igip/ing-paed-igip. Retrieved on 31 May 2016
Kiewra, K.A.: “Teaching how to Learn” The Teacher’s Guide to Student Success. Corwin Press, Sage (2009)
Felder, R.M.: Teaching engineering in the 21st century with a 12th-century model: how bright is that? Chem. Eng. Edu. 40(2), 110–113 (2006)
Kipper, H., Rüütmann, T.: Contemporary teaching strategies and models capaciating critical thinking and deep understanding in teaching engineering. In: Proceedings of the Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010, pp. 463–464. SEFI, Brussel, Belgium (2010)
Prince, Michael J., Felder Richard, M.: Inductive teaching and learning methods: definitions, comparisons, and research bases. J. Eng. Edu. 95(2), 123–138 (2006)
Burden, P.R., Byrd, D.M.: Methods for Effective Teaching Meeting the Needs of All Students, 5th (edn.), Pearson Education Inc. (2010)
Adolf, M.: Ingenieurpädagogik – Praxis der Vermittlung technischen Wissens, 4th (edn.). Springer Verlag, Wien/New York (1999)
Felder, R.M.: Inductive teaching and learning methods: definitions, comparisons and research bases. J. Eng. Edu. 95(2), 123–138 (2006)
Felder, R.M., Brent, R.: Understanding students differences. J. Eng. Edu. 94(1), 57–72 (2005)
De Graaff, E., Kolmos, A.: Characteristics of problem-based learning. Int. J. Eng. Edu. 19(5), 657–662 (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rüütmann, T. (2017). Analysis of STEM Teaching – Most Common Strategies and Methods Enabling Deep Understanding and Interactive Learning Applied by Graduates of Technical Teacher Initial and Continuing Education Programs in Estonia. In: Auer, M., Guralnick, D., Uhomoibhi, J. (eds) Interactive Collaborative Learning. ICL 2016. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 544. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50337-0_39
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50337-0_39
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50336-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50337-0
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)