Aguilera, D., Lupiáñez, J. L., Vílchez-González, J. M., & Perales-Palacios, F. J. (2021). In search of a long-awaited consensus on disciplinary integration in STEM education. Mathematics, 9(6), 597. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060597
Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 1745–1765. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601075629
Aldag, H. (2006). Toulmin discussion model. Journal of Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, 15(1), 13–34.
Amgoud, L., & Prade, H. (2009). Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artificial Intelligence, 173, 413–436.
Arık, S., & Yılmaz, M. (2017). Attitudes of science teachers towards environmental problems and their metaphorical perceptions for environmental pollution. Kastamonu Education Journal, 25(3), 1147–1164.
Boran, G. H. (2014). The effect of argumentation-based science teaching on the views of science and epistemological beliefs. Doctoral Thesis, Pamukkale University Institute of Educational Sciences, Denizli.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Pegem Academy.
Cabello, V. M., Real, C., & Impedovo, M. A. (2019). Explanations in STEM areas: An analysis of representations through language in teacher education. Research in Science Education, 49, 1087–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9856-6
Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., Nitzani-Hendel, R., Zacharia, Z., Rosenfeld, S., Berman, S., & Shildhouse, B. (2019). Ninth-grade students’ perceptions of the factors that led them to major in high school science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines. Science Education, 103(5), 1176–1205. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21524
Chachashvili-Bolotin, S., Lissitsa, S., & Milner-Bolotin, M. (2019). STEM outcomes of second-generation immigrant students with high-skilled parental backgrounds. International Journal of Science Education, 41(17), 2465–2483. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1686549
Chacko, P., Appelbaum, S., Kim, H., Zhao, J., & Montclare, J. K. (2015). Integratng technology in STEM education. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 5(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.124
Chen, C., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2019). The effect of first high school science teacher’s gender and gender matching on students’ science identity in college. Science Education, 104(1), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21551
Chen, X. (2015). STEM attrition among high-performing college students in the United States: Scope and potential causes. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 5(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.136
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative research methods (Trans. Ed.: Whole, M., & Demir, S.B.). Ankara: Political Publications Distribution.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2015). Design and execution of mixed method researches (2nd Edition) (Trans. Ed.: Dede, Y., & Demir, S.B.,). Ankara: Anı publications
Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2019). Creating a continuum of STEM models: Exploring how K-12 science teachers conceptualize STEM education. International Journal of Science Education, 41(12), 1701–1720. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1638531
Daugherty, M. K., Carter, V., & Swagerty, L. (2014). Elementary STEM education: the future for technology and engineering education? Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 49(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE49
Dierking, L. D., & Falk, J. H. (2016). 2020 Vision: Envisioning a new generation of STEM learning research. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9713-5
Doğan, H. (2019). Social work education and opinions on the future of the profession. İstanbul: Nar Paplication
Dönmez, İ. (2020). Adaptation of STEM motivation scale into Turkish: validity and reliability study. YYU Journal of Education Faculty, 17(1), 486–510. https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.693825
Donovan, B. M., Molly, A. M., Stuhlsatz, M. A. M., Edelson, D. C., & Buck Bracey, Z. E. (2019). Gendered genetics: How reading about the genetic basis of sex differences in biology textbooks could affect beliefs associated with science gender disparities. Science Education, 103(4), 719–749. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21502
Dou, R., Hazari, Z., Dabney, K., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. (2019). Early informal STEM experiences and STEM identity: The importance of talking science. Science Education, 103(3), 623–637. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21499
Dufresne, R. J., Gerace, W. J., & Leonard, W. J. (1997). Solving physics problems with multiple representations. The Physics Teacher, 35(5), 270–275. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2344681
Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y., & Park, J. Y. (2015). Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998–2014. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(5), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1
Garner, P. W., Gabitova, N., Gupta, A., & Wood, T. (2018). Innovations in science education: Infusing social emotional principles into early STEM learning. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 889–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9826-0
Glesne, C. (2013). Introduction to qualitative research (Trans. Ed .: Ersoy, A., & Yalcinoglu, P.). Anı Publishing.
Gülen, S., & Yaman, S. (2019). The effect of integration of STEM disciplines into Toulmin’s argumentation model on students’ academic achievement, reflective thinking, and psychomotor skills. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(2), 216–230. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused10276a
Gülen, S. (2016). The effect of argumentation based science learning approach based on science-technology-engineering and mathematics disciplines on students’ learning products. Doctoral Thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University Institute of Educational Sciences, Samsun.
Gülen, S. (2018). Determination the effect of STEM-integrated argumentation based science learning approach in solving daily life problems. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 10(4), 95–114.
Han, J., Kelley, T., & Knowles, J. G. (2021). Factors influencing student STEM learning: Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy, 21st century skills, and career awareness. Journal for STEM Education Research, 4, 117–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-021-00053-3
Hill, C. T. (2019). STEM is not enough: Education for success in the post-scientific society. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28, 69–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9745-1
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (Eds.) (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press.
Ikkataı, Y., Inoue, A., Kano, K., Minamizaki, A., McKay, E., & Yokoyama, H. M. (2019). Parental egalitarian attitudes towards gender roles affect agreement on girls taking STEM fields at university in Japan. International Journal of Science Education, 41(16), 2254–2270. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1671635
Isabelle, A.D., & Zinn, G. A. (2017). Steps to STEM; A science curriculum supplement for upper elementary and middle school grades – teacher’s edition. Sense Publishers
Kandemir, M. A. (2015). Examining reflective thinking tendency levels of primary school mathematics and classroom teacher candidates according to some variables. Education Sciences, 10(4), 253–275.
Kang, H., Barton, A. C., Tan, E., Simpkins, S. D., Rhee, H., & Turner, C. (2018). How do middle school girls of color develop STEM identities? Middle school girls’ participation in science activities and identification with STEM careers. Science Education, 103(2), 418–439. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21492
Kloser, M., Wilsey, M., Hopkins, D. W., Dallavis, J. W., Lavin, E., & Comuniello, M. (2018). Dual identities: Organizational negotiation in STEM-focused Catholic schools. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(2), 549–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9819-z
Luo, T., Wang, J., Liu, X., & Zhou, J. (2019). Development and application of a scale to measure students’ STEM continuing motivation. International Journal of Science Education, 41(14), 1885–1904. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1647472
Lytle, A., & Shin, J.E. (2020). Incremental beliefs, STEM efficacy and STEM interest among first-year undergraduate students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09813-z
Marker, M. (2019). Indigenous STEM success stories as disquieting decolonization: Thoughts on new times and old thoughts about place-ness. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14(1), 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9873-1
Martín-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & Vílchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A Review of Literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522
Mathis, C. A., Siverling, E. A., Glancy, A. W., & Moore, T. J. (2015). Teachers’ use of argumentation in the development of integrated STEM curricula. In Conference Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education.
Merriam, S. B. (2013). A guide to qualitative research design and application (Trans. Ed .: Turan, S.). Nobel Publishing.
Miles, B. M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage Publication.
Miller, B. G., & Roehrig, G. (2018). Indigenous cultural contexts for STEM experiences: Snow snakes’ impact on students and the community. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 31–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9738-4
Ministry of National Education (MoNE), (2018). Elementary and Secondary School 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 grades science curriculum. MoNE publications
Olitsky, S., Perfetti, A., & Coughlin, A. (2019). Filling positions or forging new pathways? Scholarship incentives, commitment, and retention of STEM teachers in high-need schools. Science Education, 104(2), 113–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21552
Pierson, A. E., Brady, C. E., & Clark, D. B. (2020). Balancing the environment: Computational models as interactive participants in a STEM classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09797-5
Rainey, K., Dancy, M., Mickelson, R., Stearns, E., & Moller, S. (2018). Race and gender differences in how sense of belonging influences decisions to major in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(10), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0115-6
Reinhold, S., Holzberger, D., & Seidel, T. (2018). Encouraging a career in science: A research review of secondary schools’ effects on students’ STEM orientation. Studies in Science Education., 54(1), 69–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2018.1442900
Reinholz, D. L., & Apkarian, N. (2018). Four frames for systemic change in STEM departments. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(3), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0103-x
Salzman, H., & Lieff Benderly, B. (2019). STEM performance and supply: Assessing the evidence for education policy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28, 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9758-9
Sanders, M. E., (2012). Integrative stem education as best practice. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in technology, design, & engineering education. 2, 103–117. Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Queensland, Australia.
Schreffler, J., Vasquez, E., III., Chini, J., & James, W. (2019). Universal design for learning in postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(8), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0161-8
Segars, A. H., & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 517–525.
Siegel, D., & Giamellaro, M. (2019). Defining STEM within a school district: A co-constructed and evolving process. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15, 739–777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09959-2
Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781.
Smyrnaiou, Z., Petropoulou, E., & Sotiriou, M. (2015). Applying argumentation approach in STEM education: A case study of the European student parliaments project in Greece. American Journal of Educational Research, 3(12), 1618–1628.
Struyf, A., De Loof, H., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2019). Students’ engagement in different STEM learning environments: Integrated STEM education as promising practice? International Journal of Science Education, 41(10), 1387–1407. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1607983
Tharayil, S., Borrego, M., Prince, M., Nguyen, K. A., Shekhar, P., Finelli, C. J., & Waters, C. (2018). Strategies to mitigate student resistance to active learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(7), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0102-y
Todd, B., & Zvoch, K. (2019). Exploring girls’ science affinities through an informal science education program. Research in Science Education, 49, 1647–1676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9670-y
Toulmin, S.(1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsai, C. Y. (2018). The effect of online argumentation of socio-scientific issues on students’ scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes. Computers & Education, 116, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.009
Tzu-Ling, H. (2019). Gender differences in high-school learning experiences, motivation, self-efficacy, and career aspirations among Taiwanese STEM college students. International Journal of Science Education, 41(13), 1870–1884. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1645963
Witherspoon, E. B., & Schunn, C. D. (2019). Locating and understanding the largest gender differences in pathways to science degrees. Science Education, 104(2), 144–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21557
Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Seçkin Publishing.
Zhao, Y. (2019). The rise of the useless: The case for talent diversity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28, 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9743-3
Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x
Zouda, M. (2018). Issues of power and control in STEM education: A reading through the postmodern condition. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 1109–1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9820-6