Integrated curricula have become a major educational focus in Korea. Policy changes began in 2009 when the Korea Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology announced a new curriculum incorporating Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM). Various stages of educational reform have occurred since that time. This study represents the first opportunity for readers of English-language journals to learn about these changes. The aims of the current study are to demonstrate the potential for engaging elementary school pre-service teachers in development of STEAM lesson plans within a science methods course and to elucidate the challenges in this instructional approach. Participants were 119 elementary pre-service teachers in their third year of study at a national university in Korea. Results show that developing STEAM lesson plans had a positive influence on elementary pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward STEAM. Specifically, we found significant improvement on a pre-post survey for participants’ awareness, perceived ability, value, and commitment for STEAM. Secondly, qualitative coding analysis of open-ended surveys revealed pre-service teachers’ views of the potential benefits and challenges of developing STEAM lesson plans. Finally, we provide a rubric for evaluating pre-service teachers’ STEAM lesson plans, based on our experience with teaching this skill within a science methods course.
This is a preview of subscription content,to check access.
Access this article
Aschbacher, P. R. (1991). Humanitas: a thematic curriculum. Education Leadership, 49(2), 16–19.
Baek, Y., Park, H., Kim, Y., Noh, S., Park, J., Lee, J., et al. (2011). STEAM education in Korea. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 11(4), 149–171 [Korean Language Journal].
Baxter, J. A., Ruzicka, A., Beghetto, R. A. & Livelybrooks, D. (2014). Professional development strategically connecting mathematics and science: the impact on teachers’ confidence and practice. School Science and Mathematics, 114(3), 102–113.
Beane, J. A. (1995). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 616–622.
Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G. & Levine, S. C. (2010). Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(5), 1860–1863.
Berlin, D. F. & Lee, H. (2005). Integrating science and mathematics education: historical analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 105(1), 15–24.
Berlin, D. F. & White, A. L. (1994). The Berlin‐White integrated science and mathematics model. School Science and Mathematics, 94(1), 2–4.
Braunger, J. & Hart-Landsberg, S. (1994). Crossing boundaries: explorations in integrative curriculum. Washington, DC: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M. & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P‐12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.
Bursal, M. & Paznokas, L. (2006). Mathematics anxiety and preservice elementary teachers’ confidence to teach mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematics, 106(4), 173–180.
Cervetti, G. N., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D. & Goldschmidt, P. G. (2012). The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 631–658.
Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Sandmann, A. & Ahern, J. (1999). A literature review of science and mathematics integration. School Science and Mathematics, 99(8), 421–430.
Drake, S. M. (1991). How our team dissolved the boundaries. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 20–22.
Fogarty, R. (1991). Ten ways to integrate curriculum. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 61–65.
Frykholm, J. & Glasson, G. (2005). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(3), 127–141.
Furner, J. M. & Kumar, D. D. (2007). The mathematics and science integration argument: a stand for teacher education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(3), 185–189.
Gresnigt, R., Taconis, R., van Keulen, H., Gravemeijer, K. & Baartman, L. (2014). Promoting science and technology in primary education: a review of integrated curricula. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 47–84.
Hurd, P. D. (1991). Why we must transform science education. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 33–35.
Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kim, J. (2011). A cubic model for STEAM education. The Korean Journal of Technology Education, 11(2), 124–139 [in Korean].
Kim, S., Chung, Y., Woo, A. & Lee, H. (2012). Development of a theoretical model for STEAM education. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(2), 388–401 [in Korean].
Kim, D., Ko, D., Han, M. & Hong, S. (2014). The effects of science lessons applying STEAM education program on the creativity and interest levels of elementary students. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 34(1), 43–54 [in Korean].
Koirala, H. P. & Bowman, J. K. (2003). Preparing middle level preservice teachers to integrate mathematics and science: problems and possibilities. School Science and Mathematics, 103(3), 145–154.
Kwon, S., Nam, D. & Lee, T. (2012). The effects of STEAM-based integrated subject study on elementary school students’ creative personality. Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information, 17(2), 79–86 [in Korean].
Lam, C. C., Alviar-Martin, T., Adler, S. A. & Sim, J. B. (2013). Curriculum integration in singapore: teachers’ perspectives and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31, 23–34.
Lederman, N. G. & Lederman, J. S. (2013). Is it STEM or “S & M” that we truly love? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(8), 1237–1240.
Lederman, N. G. & Niess, M. L. (1997). Integrated, interdisciplinary, or thematic instruction? Is this a question or is it questionable semantics? School Science and Mathematics, 97(2), 57–58.
Lee, S. (2012). STEAM effects of STEAM-based environmental program for elementary school students’ environmental literacy. Journal of Korean Society for Environmental Education, 25(1), 66–76 [in Korean].
Lehman, J. R. (1994). Integrating science and mathematics: perceptions of preservice and practicing elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 94(2), 58–64.
Mahoney, M. P. (2010). Student attitudes toward STEM: development of an instrument for high school STEM-based programs. The Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 24–34.
Martinello, M. L. & Cook, G. E. (1994). The interdisciplinary qualities of inquiry. The Educational Forum, 58(1), 36–47.
Mathison, S. & Freeman, M. (1998). The logic of interdisciplinary studies (Report series 2.33). Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED418434).
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2011). Science curriculumSeoul, South Korea: MOEST [Korean Language Book].
NGSS Lead States (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Panaritis, P. (1995). Beyond brainstorming: Planning a successful interdisciplinary program. Phi Delta Kappan, 623–628.
Park, H. & Shin, Y. (2012). Effects of science lesson applying STEAM education on self-efficacy, interest, and attitude towards science. Biology Education, 40(1), 132–146 [in Korean].
Ritchie, S. M. & Hampson, B. (1996). Learning in-the-making: a case study of science and technology projects in a year six classroom. Research in Science Education, 26(4), 391–407.
Roehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H. & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E enough? Investigating the impact of K‐12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31–44.
Saçkes, M., Flevares, L. M., Gonya, J. & Trundle, K. C. (2012). Preservice early childhood teachers’ sense of efficacy for integrating mathematics and science: Impact of a methods course. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 33(4), 349–364.
Shin, Y. & Han, S. (2011). A study of the elementary school teachers’ perception in STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, Mathematics) education. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 30(4), 514–523 [in Korean].
Shin, D., Kim, J., Kim, R., Lee, J., Lee, H. & Lee, J. (2012). Development of interdisciplinary teacher education programs. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 16(1), 371–398 [in Korean].
Son, Y., Jung, S., Kwon, S., Kim, H., & Kim, D. (2012). Analysis of prospective and in-service teachers' awareness of STEAM convergent education. Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences, 13(1), 255–284 [in Korean].
Tamassia, L. & Frans, R. (2014). Does integrated science education improve scientific literacy? Journal of the European Teacher Education Network, 9, 131–141.
Venville, G., Wallace, J., Rennie, L. J. & Malone, J. (1998). The integration of science, mathematics, and technology in a discipline‐based culture. School Science and Mathematics, 98(6), 294–302.
Yeung, S. Y. S. & Lam, C. C. (2007). Teachers’ conception of curriculum integration: a problem hindering its implementation in Hong Kong. Education Journal, 35(2), 109–144.
Yoon, S. Y., Dyehouse, M., Lucietto, A. M., Diefes‐Dux, H. A. & Capobianco, B. M. (2014). The effects of integrated science, technology, and engineering education on elementary students’ knowledge and identity development. School Science and Mathematics, 114(8), 380–391.
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, D., Bolger, M. Analysis of Korean Elementary Pre-Service Teachers’ Changing Attitudes About Integrated STEAM Pedagogy Through Developing Lesson Plans. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 15, 587–605 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9709-3