If you are in the field of education, you are probably more than familiar with the acronym for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). You may also have a strong opinion of the STEM movement, as it is one more initiative you may have to accommodate among several other current major overhauls of the public education system, such as the adoption of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), the new teacher and principal evaluation requirements, and the new Smarter Balanced Assessment that is aligned to the new standards, just to name a few.
Over the last six decades, the American school system has been under fire and perceived as not preparing students well enough. It began with Sputnik and the race to the moon in the late 1950s and continues today as the Race to the Top, the Obama administration’s answer to school reform through financial incentives. Throughout the history of the American public school system, the need for change or reform is prefaced with a crisis.
Over the last six decades, the American school system has been under fire and perceived as not preparing students well enough. It began with Sputnik and the race to the moon in the late 1950s and continues today as the Race to the Top, the Obama administration’s answer to school reform through financial incentives. Throughout the history of the American public school system, the need for change or reform is prefaced with a crisis.
Just recently, the U.S. Department of Education announced that test scores of American students lag far behind the top performing countries in East Asia, Europe, and North America (Canada) according to the latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results. Many people are under the impression that American students were once at the top in international test scores. The fact is, according to educational historian Diane Ravitch, “The U. S. has never been first in the world, nor even near the top, on international tests.” The author added that students today are performing about as well as they have for the last 50 years.
It seems the cry for reform is a familiar one, and the answer to the crisis is similar. Increase the rigor of coursework, change the standards, and add more assessments to monitor student progress. If the international assessment scores are the way we are measuring the effectiveness of our education system, then results indicate the aforementioned reform efforts have done little, if anything to improve student achievement. While much attention has been given to the implementation of academic standards and high stakes testing over the last two decades, little attention has been given to quality instruction outside of building-level evaluation systems. The newly adopted CCSS do address pedagogical shifts and recommend instructional strategies, but just directing teachers to change their practice does not provide them with the tools and supports necessary to change their instructional habits.
So, can the STEM reform movement be the answer? The STEM education philosophy is rooted in the tenets of cognitive science and constructivist learning theory (Sanders, 2009) and is characterized by instructional strategies that encourage inquiry, discovery, integrated lessons, hands-on and collaborative learning, all applied in the context of real-world problems (National Research Council, 2011). This is a starkly different approach to the traditional teacher-centered model of teaching and learning, where teachers are transmitters of knowledge and students are passive receptors (Agarwal & Gautam, 2011). If student achievement is to improve, instructional practices must align with what research reveals about how the brain learns. However, effective school-wide practices do not come about overnight or serendipitously, nor can it be imposed upon teachers. Changing instructional practices is an intentional process and must develop out of voluntary, internal commitment that is achieved through self-reflection.
The STEM reform movement has the potential to meet the challenges of preparing students for college and careers in the 21st century, but also has the potential of not having any impact on student achievement generally, if little or no attention is given to the instructional practices of all teachers. To make this critical shift in practice, teachers need ongoing, job-embedded professional development centered on instruction. If STEM reform is going to be the answer to improving student achievement and preparing students for college and careers in the 21st century, quality, research-based instruction must be a core element of the initiative.
It seems the cry for reform is a familiar one, and the answer to the crisis is similar. Increase the rigor of coursework, change the standards, and add more assessments to monitor student progress. If the international assessment scores are the way we are measuring the effectiveness of our education system, then results indicate the aforementioned reform efforts have done little, if anything to improve student achievement. While much attention has been given to the implementation of academic standards and high stakes testing over the last two decades, little attention has been given to quality instruction outside of building-level evaluation systems. The newly adopted CCSS do address pedagogical shifts and recommend instructional strategies, but just directing teachers to change their practice does not provide them with the tools and supports necessary to change their instructional habits.
So, can the STEM reform movement be the answer? The STEM education philosophy is rooted in the tenets of cognitive science and constructivist learning theory (Sanders, 2009) and is characterized by instructional strategies that encourage inquiry, discovery, integrated lessons, hands-on and collaborative learning, all applied in the context of real-world problems (National Research Council, 2011). This is a starkly different approach to the traditional teacher-centered model of teaching and learning, where teachers are transmitters of knowledge and students are passive receptors (Agarwal & Gautam, 2011). If student achievement is to improve, instructional practices must align with what research reveals about how the brain learns. However, effective school-wide practices do not come about overnight or serendipitously, nor can it be imposed upon teachers. Changing instructional practices is an intentional process and must develop out of voluntary, internal commitment that is achieved through self-reflection.
The STEM reform movement has the potential to meet the challenges of preparing students for college and careers in the 21st century, but also has the potential of not having any impact on student achievement generally, if little or no attention is given to the instructional practices of all teachers. To make this critical shift in practice, teachers need ongoing, job-embedded professional development centered on instruction. If STEM reform is going to be the answer to improving student achievement and preparing students for college and careers in the 21st century, quality, research-based instruction must be a core element of the initiative.
Learn more about high-quality professional development to build strong instructional habits.
References
Agarwal, R., & Gautam, A. (2011). Effect of constructivist methods of teaching on academic achievement of primary school students. GYANODAYA: The Journal of Progressive Education, 4(1), 1-6. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=86011068&site=ehost-live&scope=site
National Research Council. (2011). In Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences (Ed.), Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ravitch, D. (2013, December 3). My View of the PISA Scores [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://dianeravitch.net/2013/12/03/my-view-of-the-pisa-scores/
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. Retrieved from http://esdstem.pbworks.com/f/TTT+STEM+Article_1.pdf
National Research Council. (2011). In Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences (Ed.), Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ravitch, D. (2013, December 3). My View of the PISA Scores [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://dianeravitch.net/2013/12/03/my-view-of-the-pisa-scores/
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. Retrieved from http://esdstem.pbworks.com/f/TTT+STEM+Article_1.pdf
Bracken Budge, Ed.D. Candidate Consultant
Bracken Budge began his career in education in Walla Walla, Washington after graduating from Whitman College with a teaching credential and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Sociology. His first teaching assignment was with Walla Walla Community College where he taught English, Intro to College Algebra, and GED Prep to inmates at the Washington State Penitentiary. It was this experience that inspired Bracken to spend the rest of his career ensuring young people receive a quality education. He then received a Masters of Science degree in Psychology with an emphasis in School Counseling from Utah State University and worked four years as a school counselor in a middle school in Preston, Idaho. While working as a school counselor, Bracken attended Idaho State University and completed the school administration certification program. He has spent the last 14 years as a school administrator in Idaho and in Washington State. Currently, Bracken is on a year leave of absence from his principal job pursuing a Doctorate of Education in Organizational Leadership with an emphasis in Education and Effective Schools through Grand Canyon University and is working as a consultant with the BERC Group. His research interests are STEM education, the science of teaching and learning, and student engagement.