Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1875 Download : 937

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Preparing students with knowledge and expertise in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is vital in meeting the demand for digital age career opportunities. Nevertheless, there is sparse research on teachers' views of student preparedness and teachers' knowledge of STEM in classroom instruction. The present study examines secondary school teachers' perceptions of STEM pedagogical content knowledge (STEMPCK). An online survey was administered to 66 Malaysian secondary school teachers through Google Forms to determine their perspectives of STEMPCK. Data were collected and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 20.0. The descriptive analysis showed that the selected teachers highly agreed on the pedagogical knowledge and knowledge of 21st century skill components of STEMPCK. However, the non-parametric analysis showed no significant mean differences in STEMPCK scores based on gender, educational qualification, and teaching experience. The study's implications suggest that teachers in these fields should be equipped with the necessary knowledge to be more confident in implementing STEM teaching in their respective schools.

Keywords

Secondary Schools STEM Pedagogical Content Knowledge Teacher Knowledge Teaching Practices 21st Century Skills

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Rahman, N. A., Rosli, R., Rambely, A. S., Siregar, N. C., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2022). Secondary school teachers’ perceptions of STEM pedagogical content knowledge. Journal on Mathematics Education, 13(1), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i1.pp119-134
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdurrahman, A. (2019). Developing STEM learning makerspace for fostering student's 21st century skills in the fourth industrial revolution era. Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1155, No. 1, pp. 1-6). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1155/1/012002
  2. Allam, Z. (Ed.). (2020). Data as the new driving gears of urbanization. Cities and the Digital Revolution (pp. 1–29). Palgrave Pivot. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29800-5_1
  3. Allen, M., Webb, A. W., & Matthews, C. E. (2016). Adaptive teaching in STEM: Characteristics for effectiveness. Theory into Practice, 55(3), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1173994
  4. Alonzo, A. C., & Kim, J. (2015). Declarative and dynamic pedagogical content knowledge as elicited through two video-based interview methods. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(8), 1259 – 1286. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21271
  5. Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., & de Miranda M. A. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers' attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 63–88. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10798-015-9341-0.
  6. Attard, C., Grootenboer, P., Attard, E., & Laird, A. (2020). Affect and engagement in STEM education. In A. Macdonald, L. Danaia & S. Murphy (Eds.), STEM Education Across the Learning Continuum (pp. 195–212). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2821-7_11
  7. Ayar, M. C. (2015). First-hand experience with engineering design and career interest in engineering: An informal STEM education case study. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(6), 1655-1675. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.6.0134
  8. Aydin-Gunbatar, S., Ekiz-Kiran, B., & Oztay, E. S. (2020). Pre-service chemistry teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for integrated STEM development with LESMeR model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(4), 1063-1082. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RP00074D
  9. Britton, D. M. (2017). Beyond the chilly climate: The salience of gender in women's academic careers. Gender & Society, 31(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243216681494
  10. Burrows, A. C., Borowczak, M., Myers, A., Schwortz, A. C., & McKim, C. (2021). Integrated STEM for teacher professional learning and development: "I need time for practice". Education Sciences, 11(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010021
  11. Carlson, J., & Daehler, K. R. (2019). The refined consensus model of pedagogical content knowledge in science education. In Hume A., Cooper R., & Borowski, A. (Eds.) Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science (pp. 77-92). Springer.
  12. Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender-balanced than others?. Psychological Bulletin, 143, 1-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000052
  13. Chuang, S. (2020). An empirical study of displaceable job skills in the age of robots. European Journal of Training and Development, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-10-2019-0183
  14. Çinar, S., Pirasa, N., Uzun, N., & Erenler, S. (2016). The effect of STEM education on pre-service science teachers' perception of interdisciplinary education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(special issue), 118-142.
  15. Depaepe, F., Verschaffel, L., & Kelchtermans, G. (2013). Pedagogical content knowledge: A systematic review of the way in which the concept has pervaded mathematics educational research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.001
  16. Evans, C. A., Chen, R., & Hudes, R. P. (2020). Understanding determinants for STEM major choice among students beginning community college. Community College Review, 48(3), 227–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552120917214
  17. Faikhamta, C., Lertdechapat, K., & Prasoblarb, T. (2020). The impact of a PCK-based professional development program on science teachers' ability to teaching STEM. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 43, 1-22.
  18. Gardner, K., Glassmeyer, D. M., & Worthy, R. (2019). Impacts of STEM professional development on teachers' knowledge, self-efficacy, and practice. Frontiers in Education, 4(26), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00026
  19. Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen & J. Loughran (Eds.). Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28-42). Routledge.
  20. Giamellaro, M., & Siegel, D. R. (2018). Coaching teachers to implement innovations in STEM. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 1-38.
  21. Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up STEM: An analysis of teacher-developed engineering design-based STEM integration curricular materials. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6(1), 11-29. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1129
  22. Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (2014), STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press.
  23. Hossain, M. M., & Robinson, M. G. (2012). How to motivate U.S. students to pursue STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) careers. US-China Education Review, 2(4), 442–451.
  24. Hudson, P., English, L., Dawes, L., King, D., & Baker, S. (2015). Exploring links between pedagogical knowledge practices and student outcomes in STEM education for primary schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(6), 134-151. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.277020514111390
  25. Kaleva, S., Pursiainen, J., Hakola, M., Rusanen, J., & Muukkonen, H. (2019). Students' reasons for STEM choices and the relationship of mathematics choice to university admission. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0196-x
  26. Kelley, T. R., Knowles, J. G., Holland, J. D., & Han, J. (2020). Increasing high school teachers' self-efficacy for integrated STEM instruction through a collaborative community of practice. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(14), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00211-w
  27. Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International, 25(3), 246–258.
  28. Ketelhut, D. J., Mills, K., Hestness, E., Cabrera, L., Plane, J., & McGinnis, J. R. (2020). Teacher change following a professional development experience in integrating computational thinking into elementary science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 174-188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09798-4
  29. Kinboon, W., Sanghuaypai, S., & Nantachukra, A. (2019). Needs assessment for the 21st century teaching and learning in STEM education to promote students' problem-solving in Thailand. Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1340, No. 1, p. 012073). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1340/1/012073
  30. Lau, M., & Multani, S. (2018). Engineering STEM teacher learning: Using a museum-based field experience to foster STEM teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for engineering. In S. M. Uzzo, S. B. Graves, E. Shay, M. Harford, R. Thompson (Eds), Pedagogical Content Knowledge in STEM (pp. 195-213). Springer, Cham.
  31. Lee, E., & Luft, J. A. (2008). Experienced secondary science teachers' representation of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1343–1363. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802187058
  32. Maass, K., Geiger, V., Ariza, M. R., & Goos, M. (2019). The role of mathematics in interdisciplinary STEM education. ZDM, 51(6), 869-884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01100-5
  33. Moore, T. J., Johnson, C. C., Peters-Burton, E. E., & Guzey, S. (2015). The need for a STEM road map. In C. C. Johnson, E. E. Peters-Burton, & T. J. Moore (Eds.), STEM road map: A framework for integrated STEM education (pp.1-13). Routledge.
  34. Nguyen, N-G. (2020). Using the problem-based learning in STEM teaching about bamboo toothpick houses. International Education Studies, 13(12), 70-87. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v13n12p70
  35. Nind, M. (2020). A new application for the concept of pedagogical content knowledge: teaching advanced social science research methods. Oxford Review of Education, 46(2), 185-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2019.1644996
  36. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (2018). PISA 2018 Results. Combined Executives Summaries Volume I, II & III: What students know and can do. OECD Homepage. https://www.oecd.org
  37. Rahman, N. A., Rosli, R., & Rambely, A. S. (2021a). Mathematical teachers' knowledge of STEM-based education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1806, No. 1, p. 012216). IOP Publishing.
  38. Rahman, N. A., Rosli, R., & Rambely, A. S. (2021b). Validating STEM pedagogical content knowledge scale for secondary school mathematics teachers. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(14), 3666-3678.
  39. Rahman, N. A., Rosli, R., Rambely, A. S., & Halim, L. (2021). Mathematics teachers' practices of STEM education: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(3), 1541-1559.
  40. Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20-26. https://www.teachmeteamwork.com/files/sanders
  41. Sanders, M. (2012). Integrative STEM education as best practice. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of Best Practice in Technology, Design, & Engineering Education (Vol.2, pp.103-117). Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Queensland, Australia.
  42. Schwab, K. (2019). Insight report: The global competitiveness report. World Economic Forum. (Geneva). http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2019.pdf
  43. 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), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1
  44. Siregar, N. C., Rosli, R., Maat, S. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2019). The effect of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) program on students’ achievement in Mathematics: A meta-analysis. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5885
  45. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
  46. Song, M. (2019). Integrated STEM teaching competencies and performances as perceived by secondary teachers in South Korea. International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 22(2), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-02-2019-0016
  47. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 28-34. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653.
  48. Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: An introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 99-103. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18
  49. Sujarwanto, E., & Ibrahim, M. (2019). Attitude, knowledge, and application of STEM owned by science teachers. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1417(1), 012096. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1417/1/012096
  50. Topcu, M. K. (2020). Competency framework for the fourth industrial revolution. In S. O. Atiku (Ed.), Human Capital Formation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution (pp. 18-43). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9810-7.ch002
  51. Tunc, C., & Bagceci, B. (2021). Teachers' views of the implementation of STEM approach in secondary schools and the effects on students. Pedagogical Research, 6(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/9295
  52. Vermote, B., Aelterman, N., Beyers, W., Aper, L., Buysschaert, F., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2020). The role of teachers' motivation and mindsets in predicting a (de) motivating teaching style in higher education: A circumplex approach. Motivation and Emotion, 44(2), 270-294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-020-09827-5
  53. Vossen, T. E., Henze, I., De Vries, M. J., & Van Driel, J. H. (2019). Finding the connection between research and design: The knowledge development of STEM teachers in a professional learning community. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30, 295-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09507-7
  54. Wells, J. G. (2013). Integrative STEM education at Virginia Tech: Graduate preparation for tomorrow leaders. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 72(5), 28-35.
  55. Westaway, L., Kaiser, G., & Graven, M. (2020). What does social realism have to offer for research on teacher identity in mathematics education? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(7), 1229-1247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10021-4
  56. Yıldırım, B. (2016). An analyses and meta-synthesis of research on STEM education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(34), 23-33.
  57. Yıldırım, B., & Türk, C. (2018). Opinions of middle school science and mathematics teachers on STEM education. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 10(1), 70–78.
  58. Yıldırım, B., & Şahin T. E. (2019). STEM pedagogical content knowledge scale (STEMPCK): A validity and reliability study. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 53(2), 1-20.
  59. Younes, R. G., Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., Rosli, R., Lee, Y., Vela, K., & Bevan, D. (2020). Jack and Jill went up the hill, but Jill won both ways: The true story about differential academic achievement. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 28(4), 44-57. https://doi.org/10.30722/IJISME.28.04.004
  60. Zaza, S., Abston, K., Arik, M., Geho, P., & Sanchez, V. (2020). What CEOs have to say: Insights on the STEM workforce. American Business Review, 23(1), 136-155. https://doi.org/10.37625/abr.23.1.136-155