Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Teachers' attitudes towards S.T.E.M. in secondary education

Article Sidebar

Download PDF
Submitted   May 16, 2022
Published   Jul 5, 2022
Issue    Vol 2 No 2 (2022)
DOI   10.25082/AMLER.2022.02.007

Views

1425

Downloads

838

Citations

PlumX Metrics

Main Article Content

Maria Kalliontzi corresponding author
Department of Preschool Education, University of Crete, Crete, Greece

Abstract

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the level of secondary education teachers' attitudes towards implementing S.T.E.M. in the classroom. Moreover, previous relative research studies' findings were reviewed to assist in the analysis of the current study. The main instrument of the study was a questionnaire containing 18 items using a 5-point Likert scale administered to 121 K-12 school teachers. Descriptive, independent t-tests and ANOVA analyses were applied to analyze the research findings. The results showed a highly positive attitude towards S.T.E.M. education. Nevertheless, teachers seem concerned about implementing the framework in the classroom and appear willing to participate in relative seminars. Overall, this study's findings comply with the findings of the international literature and are expected to raise awareness among the relevant departments of the Hellenic Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.

Keywords
S.T.E.M., teachers' attitudes, secondary education, software application

Article Details

How to Cite
Kalliontzi, M. (2022). Teachers’ attitudes towards S.T.E.M. in secondary education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(2), 389-400. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2022.02.007
Creative Commons License

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

References

  1. Abdulwali, H. A., Naem, M. A., & Aljallal M. A. (2019). Saudi Arabian science and mathematics teachers' attitudes toward integrating S.T.E.M. in teaching before and after participating in a professional development program. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1580852. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1580852
  2. Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitude, personality and behaviour. Chicago: The Dorsey Press.
  3. Ajzen, I. F., & Fisbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs: N.J.Q. Prentice-Hall.
  4. Alsmadi, M. A. (2020). Requirements for Application of the S.T.E.M. Approach Perceived by Science, Math and Computer Teachers and their Attitudes towards it. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(9), 1879. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8391
  5. Ampartzaki, M., Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, St., & Giannakou, V. (2022). Perceptions About S.T.E.M. and the Arts: Teachers', Parents' Professionals' and Artists' Understandings About the Role of Arts in S.T.E.M. Education. In St. Papadakis & M. Kalogiannakis (Eds), S.T.E.M., Robotics, Mobile Apps in Early Childhood and Primary Education - Technology to promote teaching and learning. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, (pp. 601-624). Switzerland, Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0568-1_25
  6. Anderson, L. W. (1981). Assessing affective characteristics in the school. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  7. Baltsavias, A., & Kyridis, A. (2020). Preschool Teachers' Perspectives on the Importance of S.T.E.M. Education in Greek Preschool Education. Journal of Education and Practice, 11, 4.
  8. Bers, M. U. (2018). Coding and computational thinking in early childhood: the impact of ScratchJr in Europe. European Journal of S.T.E.M. Education, 3(3), 8. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/3868
  9. Chatzopoulos, A., Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, S., & Papoutsidakis, M. (2022). A Novel, Modular Robot for Educational Robotics Developed Using Action Research Evaluated on Technology Acceptance Model. Education Sciences, 12(4), 274. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040274
  10. Chatzopoulos, A., Kalogiannakis, M., Papoutsidakis, M., & Psycharis, S. (2019). Action Research Implementation in Developing an Open Source and Low-Cost Robotic Platform for S.T.E.M. Education. International Journal of Computer Applications. 178. 33-46. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2019919039
  11. Chia, P. L., & Maat, S. M. (2018). An Exploratory Study of Teachers' Attitudes towards Integration of S.T.E.M. in Malaysia. International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Applied Sciences (I.J.E.E.A.S.), 1(1), 45-50. Retrieved from https://ijeeas.utem.edu.my/ijeeas/article/view/3904
  12. Courtney, T. (2016), S.T.E.M. 2026: A Vision for Innovation in S.T.E.M. Education. https://oese.ed.gov
  13. de Vries, M. J., van Keulen, H., Peters, S., & van der Molen, J. W. (Eds.). (2012). Professional development for primary teachers in science and technology (Vol. 9). Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-713-4
  14. Duran, M., Höft, M., Lawson, D., Medjahed, B., & Orady, E. (2013). Urban High School Students' IT/S.T.E.M. Learning: Findings from a Collaborative Inquiry- and Design-Based Afterschool Program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(1), 116-137.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9457-5
  15. Eguchi, A. (2014). Robotics as a learning tool for educational transformation. In: Proceedings of 4th InternationalWorkshop Teaching Robotics, Teaching with Robotics and 5th International Conference Robotics in Education, Padova.
  16. English Learners in S.T.E.M. Subjects. (2018). Transforming Classrooms, Schools, and Lives. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
  17. English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school S.T.E.M. education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x
  18. Galih A.S., & Chatree F. (2020). Exploring the relationship of teachers' attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge towards integrated S.T.E.M., 19, 2514-2531. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2020.764619
  19. Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (S.T.E.M.) education: A primer. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
  20. Green, A. (2017). The next generation of constructivist reform in science and S.T.E.M.: case study explorations of the practices of students and the perspectives of teachers. Dissertation. The University of Maryland.
  21. Hackman, S., Zhang, D., & He, J. (2021). Secondary school science teachers' attitudes towards S.T.E.M. education in Liberia. International Journal of Science Education. 43, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1864837
  22. Huber, B., Tarasuik, J., Antoniou, M. N., Garrett, C., Bowe, S. J., Kaufman, J., & Team, S. B. (2016). Young children's transfer of learning from a touchscreen device. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 56-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.010
  23. Ioannou, M., & Bratitsis, T. (2016). Utilizing Sphero for a speed related S.T.E.M. activity in Kindergarten. Hellenic Conference on Innovating S.T.E.M. Education.
  24. Kalogiannakis, M., Ampartzaki, M., Papadakis, S. t., & Skaraki E. (2018). Teaching natural science concepts to young children with mobile devices and hands-on activities. A case study. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 9(2), 171-183. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTCS.2018.090965
  25. Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2019). The Use of Developmentally Mobile Applications for Preparing Pre-Service Teachers to Promote S.T.E.M. Activities in Preschool Classrooms. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1486-3.ch005
  26. Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2017). Pre-service kindergarten teachers acceptance of ``ScratchJr" as a tool for learning and teaching computational thinking and Science education. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Research, practice and collaboration in science education (pp. 21-25). Dublin: Dublin City University and the University of Limerick.
  27. Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2022). Preparing Greek Pre-service Kindergarten Teachers to Promote Creativity: Opportunities Using Scratch and Makey Makey. In K.-J, Murcia, C., Campbell, M.-M. Joubert & S. Wilson (Eds.), Children's Creative Inquiry in S.T.E.M. Sociocultural Explorations of Science Education, vol 25. (pp. 347-354), Switzerland, Cham: Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94724-8_20
  28. Kanaki, K., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2022). Assessing Algorithmic Thinking Skills in Relation to Age in Early Childhood S.T.E.M. Education. Education Sciences, 12(6), 380. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060380
  29. Kartal, B., & Tasdemir, A. (2021). Pre-service teachers' attitudes towards S.T.E.M.: Differences based on multiple variables and the relationship with academic achievement. International Journal of Technology in Education, 4(2), 200-228. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.58
  30. Kastriti, E., Kalogiannakis, M., Psycharis, S., & Vavougios, D. (2022). The teaching of Natural Sciences in kindergarten based on the principles of S.T.E.M. and STEAM approach. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(1), 268-277. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2022.01.011
  31. Leoste, J., & Heidmets M. (2019). Bringing an educational robot into a basic educationmath lesson. In: Merdan M. & Lepuschitz W. & Koppensteiner G. & Balogh R. & Obdržálek D. (eds.) Robotics in Education. RiE 2019. Advances in Intelligent SyS.T.E.M.s and Computing, vol. 1023. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_21
  32. Madden, L., Beyers J., & O' Brien S. (2016). The Importance of S.T.E.M. Education in the Elementary Grades: Learning from Pre-service and Novice Teachers' Perspectives. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 1-18.
  33. Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers' perception of S.T.E.M. integration and education: A syS.T.E.M.atic literature review. International Journal of S.T.E.M. Education, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.118640594-018-0151-2
  34. Mayes, R., & Gallant, B. (2018). The 21st Century S.T.E.M. Reasoning. US-China Education Review B, 8(2), 67-74. https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-6248/2018.02.002
  35. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. (2009). Preferred reporting items for syS.T.E.M.atic reviews and meta-analyses: the P.R.I.S.M.A. statement. Chinese Integrative Medicine, 7(9), 889-896. https://doi.org/10.3736/jcim20090918
  36. Morrison, J., & Bartlett, R. V. (2009). S.T.E.M. as a Curriculum Education Week. https://www.edweek.org
  37. Mostafa, T. (2019). Why don't more girls choose to pursue a science career? P.I.S.A. in Focus, No. 93, O.E.C.D. Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/02bd2b68-en
  38. Nadelson, L., Seifert, A., Moll, A., & Coats, B. (2012). i-S.T.E.M. summer institute: an integrated approach to teacher professional development in S.T.E.M. Journal of S.T.E.M. Education, 13(2), 69-83. https://www.academia.edu/19005867
  39. National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12635
  40. Nuangchalerm, P. (2018). Investigating views of S.T.E.M. primary teachers on S.T.E.M. education. Bulgarian Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 208-2015.
  41. Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  42. Pai, M., Mcculloch, M., & Gorman, J. D. (2004). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: an illustrated, step-by-step guide. National Medical Journal of India, 17(2), 86-95. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.md.0000119761.27564.c9
  43. Pamuk, S. (2011). Understanding preservice teachers' technology use through T.P.A.C.K. framework. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), 425-439. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00447.x
  44. Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2020). Exploring Preservice Teachers' Attitudes About the Usage of Educational Robotics in Preschool Education. In M. Kalogiannakis & S. J. Papadakis (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Tools for Teaching Computational Thinking in P-12 Education (pp. 335-351). I.G.I. Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4576-8.ch013
  45. Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019a). Evaluating a course for teaching introductory programming with Scratch to pre-service kindergarten teachers. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(3), 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2019.10020447
  46. Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019b). Evaluating the effectiveness of a game-based learning approach in modifying students' behavioural outcomes and competence, in an introductory programming course. A case study in Greece. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 10(3), 235-250. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTCS.2019.10024369
  47. Papadakis, S., Trampas, A. M., Barianos, A. K., Kalogiannakis, M., & Vidakis, N. (2020). Evaluating the Learning Process: The ThimelEdu Educational Game Case Study. In CSEDU (2) (pp. 290-298). https://doi.org/10.5220/0009379902900298
  48. Pellas, N., Kazanidis, I., Konstantinou, N., & Georgiou, G. (2017). Exploring the educational potential of three-dimensional multi-user virtual worlds for S.T.E.M. education: A mixed-method syS.T.E.M.atic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 22(5), 2235-2279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9537-2
  49. Petousi, V., & Sifaki, E. (2020). Contextualizing harm in the framework of research misconduct. Findings from a discourse analysis of scientific publications. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 23(3-4), 149-174. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2020.10037655
  50. Psycharis, S. (2018). STEAM in education: A literature review on the role of computational thinking, engineering epiS.T.E.M.ology, and computational science. Computational STEAM Pedagogy (C.S.P.). Scientific Culture, 4(2), 51-72.
  51. Ring, E. A., Dare, E. A., Crotty, E. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2017). The evolution of teacher conceptions of S.T.E.M. education throughout an intensive professional development experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(5), 444-467. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1356671
  52. Rockland, R., Bloom, D. S., Carpinelli, J., , Burr-Alexander, L., Hirsch, L. S., & Kimmel, H. (2010). Advancing the ``E'' in K-12 S.T.E.M. education. Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 53-64.
  53. Sabini, J. (1995). Social psychology, (2nd edition). New York: W.W.Norton.
  54. Saxton, E., Burns, R., Holveck, S., Kelley, S., Prince, D., Rigelman, N., & Skinner, E. A. (2014). A Common Measurement SyS.T.E.M. for K-12 S.T.E.M. education: Adopting an educational valuation methodology that elevates theoretical foundations and syS.T.E.M.s thinking. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 40, 18-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.11.005
  55. Scott, A., & Martin, A., (2013). Perceived barriers to higher education in S.T.E.M. among high-achieving underrepresented high school students of color. The American Educational Research Association annual conference in San Francisco, April 27-31, 2013.
  56. Smyrnova-Trybulska, E., Morze, N., Kommers, P, Zuziak, W., & Gladun, M. (2016). Educational robots in primary school teachers' and students' opinion about S.T.E.M. education for young learners. In: International Association for Development of the Information Society.
  57. Tao, Y. (2019). Kindergarten Teachers' Attitudes toward and Confidence for Integrated S.T.E.M. Education. Journal for S.T.E.M. Education Research, 2, 154-171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00017-8
  58. Tawfik, G. M., Dila, K. A. S., Mohamed, M. Y. F., Tam, D. N. H., Kien, N. D., Ahmed, A. M. & Huy, N. T. (2019). A step by step guide for conducting a syS.T.E.M.atic review and meta-analysis with simulation data. Tropical Medicine and Health, 47(1), 46.. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41182-019-0165-6
  59. Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2018). How school context and personal factors relate to teachers attitudes toward teaching integrated S.T.E.M. International Journal of Technology & Education, 28, 631-651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9416-1
  60. Vlasopoulou, M., Kalogiannakis, M., & Sifaki, E. (2020). Investigating Teachers' Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions for the Impending Integration of S.T.E.M. Education in Primary Schools. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6717-3.ch009
  61. Wang, H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). S.T.E.M. Integration: Teacher Perceptions and Practice. Journal of Pre College Engineering Education, 1, 1-13.
  62. Wei, K. W., & Maat, S. M. (2020). The attitude of primary school teachers towards S.T.E.M. education. T.E.M. Journal, 9(3), 1243-1251. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM93-53
  63. Yildiz, E. P., Alkan, A., & Cengel, M. (2019). Teacher candidates attitudes towards the S.T.E.M. and sub-dimensions of S.T.E.M. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 14(2), 322-344. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v14i2.4144
  64. Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social influence. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  65. Papadakis, S. (2021). Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research (A.M.L.E.R.): Mobile learning as an educational reform. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.01.001
  66. Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Zaranis, N. (2021). Teaching mathematics with mobile devices and the Realistic Mathematical Education (RME) approach in kindergarten. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.01.002
  67. Katsaris, I., & Vidakis, N. (2021). Adaptive e-learning systems through learning styles: A review of the literature. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 124-145. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.007
  68. Qureshi, A., & Qureshi, N. (2021). Challenges and issues of STEM education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 146-161. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.009
  69. Chaldi, D., & Mantzanidou, G. (2021). Educational robotics and STEAM in early childhood education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 72-81. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.003
  70. Foti, P. (2021). Exploring kindergarten teachers' views on STEAM education and educational robotics: Dilemmas, possibilities, limitations. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 82-95. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.004
  71. Tsoukala, C. (2021). STEM integrated education and multimodal educational material. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 96-113. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.005
  72. Dahal, N., Manandhar, N., Luitel, L., Luitel, B., Pant, B., & Shrestha, I. (2022). ICT tools for remote teaching and learning mathematics: A proposal for autonomy and engagements. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(1), 289-296. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2022.01.013
  73. Kastriti, E., Kalogiannakis, M., Psycharis, S., & Vavougios, D. (2022). The teaching of Natural Sciences in kindergarten based on the principles of STEM and STEAM approach. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(1), 268-277. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2022.01.011
  74. Tallou, K. (2022). Museum and Kindergarten: STEM connections between exhibits and science. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(2), 333-340. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2022.02.003