Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

“Finding the Joy in the Unknown”: Implementation of STEAM Teaching Practices in Middle School Science and Math Classrooms

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In response to a desire to strengthen the economy, educational settings are emphasizing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curriculum and programs. Yet, because of the narrow approach to STEM, educational leaders continue to call for a more balanced approach to teaching and learning, which includes the arts, design, and humanities. This desire created space for science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) education, a transdisciplinary approach that focuses on problem-solving. STEAM-based curricula and STEAM-themed schools are appearing all over the globe. This growing national and global attention to STEAM provides an opportunity for teacher education to explore the ways in which teachers implement STEAM practices, examining the successes and challenges, and how teachers are beginning to make sense of this innovative teaching practice. The purpose of this paper is to examine the implementation of STEAM teaching practices in science and math middle school classrooms, in hopes to provide research-based evidence on this emerging topic to guide teacher educators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. All names are pseudonyms to ensure anonymity of the participants.

References

  • Brady J (2014) STEM is incredibly valuable, but if we want the best innovators we must teach the arts. Innovation 5:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush T, Saye J (2008) The effects of multimedia-supported problem-based inquiry on student engagement, empathy, and assumptions about history. Interdiscip J Probl Based Learn 2(1):4. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1052

    Google Scholar 

  • ChanLin L (2008) Technology integration applied to project-based learning in science. Innov Educ Teach Int 45(1):55–65. doi:10.1080/14703290701757450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin C, Chia L (2004) Problem-based learning: using students’ questions to drive knowledge construction. Sci Educ 88:707–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor AM, Karmokar S, Whittington C (2015) From STEM to STEAM: strategies for enhancing engineering & technology education. Int J Eng Pedag 5(2):37–47. doi:10.3991/ijep.v5i2.4458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Plano-Clark V (2007) Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

  • Cross N (2001) Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Des Issues 17(3):49–55. doi:10.1162/074793601750357196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond L, Snyder J (2000) Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teach Teach Educ 16(5):523–545. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00015-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis TE (2014) Transforming the culture of the STEM disciplines: a multiple case study of successful strategies for inclusive excellence

  • Dede C, Richards J (eds) (2012) Digital teaching platforms: customizing classroom learning for each student. Teachers College Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Delaney M (2014) Schools shift from STEM to STEAM. EdTech, April 2, 1–4. http://www.edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2014/04/schools-shift-stem-steam

  • Eisner EW (2002) The arts and the creation of mind. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer PA (2005) Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educ Technol Res Dev 53(4):25–39. doi:10.1007/BF02504683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher C, Sanderson P (1996) Exploratory sequential data analysis: exploring continuous observational data. Interactions 3(2):25–34. doi:10.1145/227181.227185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fountain H (2014) Putting the art in STEM. The New York Times, New York, p ED12

    Google Scholar 

  • Henrkisen D, DeSchryver M, Mishra P, Deep-Play Research Group (2015) Rethinking technology & creativity in the 21st century transform and transcend: synthesis as a trans-disciplinary approach to thinking and learning. TechTrends 59(4):5. doi:10.1007/s11528-015-0863-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrington J, Reeves TC, Oliver R (2014) Authentic learning environments. In: Spector JM, Merrill MD, Elen J, Bishop MJ (eds) Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 4th edn. Springer, New York, pp 401–412. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Herro D, Quigley C (2016) Exploring teachers’ perspectives of STEAM teaching: implications for practice. Prof Dev Educ (under review)

  • Hew KF, Brush T (2007) Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educ Technol Res Dev 55(3):223–252. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver CE (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 16(3):235–266. doi:10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Society for Technology Education (ISTE) (2015). http://www.iste.org/standards/istestandards/standards-for-students

  • Jakobsen CH, Hels T, McLaughlin WJ (2004) Barriers and facilitators to integration among scientists in transdisciplinary landscape analyses: a cross-country comparison. For Policy Econ 6(1):15–31. doi:10.1016/S1389-9341(02)00080-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen W, Goldsworthy P (1996) Multidisciplinary research for natural resource management: conceptual and practical implications. Agric Syst 51(3):259–279. doi:10.1016/0308-521X(95)00046-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson L, Adams Becker S, Estrada V, Freeman A (2015) NMC horizon report: 2015 K-12 edition. The New Media Consortium, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones VR (2014) Teaching STEAM: 21st century skills. Child Technol Eng 18(4):11–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Katehi L, Pearson G, Feder MA (eds) (2009) Engineering in K-12 education: understanding the status and improving the prospects. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman D, Moss DM, Osborn TA (2003) Beyond the boundaries: a transdisciplinary approach to learning and teaching. Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim Y, Park N (2012) The effect of STEAM education on elementary school student’s creativity improvement. In: Kim T, Stoica A, Fang W, Vasilakos T, Villalba J, Arnett K et al (eds) Computer applications for security, control and system engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 115–121. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35264-5_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kim S, Song K (2013) Gifted students’ perception changes toward computer science after STEAM-based CS education. J Converg Inf Technol 8(14):214

    Google Scholar 

  • Maeda J (2013) STEM + art = STEAM. STEAM J 1(1):34. doi:10.5642/steam.201301.34

    Google Scholar 

  • Max-Neef MA (2005) Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecol Econ 53(1):5–16. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meeth LR (1978) Interdisciplinary studies: a matter of definition. Change Mag High Learn 10(7):10. doi:10.1080/00091383.1978.10569474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller J, Knezek G (2013) STEAM for student engagement. Paper presented at the society for information technology and teacher education international conference, vol 2013, No. 1, pp 3288–3298

  • Mishra P, Koehler MJ, Henriksen D (2011) The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind: extending the TPACK framework towards 21st century learning. Educ Technol 51(2):22–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan L (2012) All students are artists. Educ Leadersh 69(5):48–51

    Google Scholar 

  • NCTE Executive Committee (2008) The NCTE definition of 21st century literacies. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition

  • Oliver R, Herrington J (2003) Exploring technology-mediated learning from a pedagogical perspective. Interact Learn Environ 11(2):111–126. doi:10.1076/ilee.11.2.111.14136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papa R (ed) (2010) Technology leadership for school improvement. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Penuel WR, Means B (2000) Designing a performance assessment to measure students’ communication skills in multi-media-supported, project-based learning. In Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans

  • Petts J, Owens S, Bulkeley H (2008) Crossing boundaries: interdisciplinarity in the context of urban environments. Geoforum 39(2):593–601. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2006.02.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savery JR (2006) Overview of problem-based learning: definitions and distinctions. Interdiscip J Probl Based Learn 1(1):3

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank RC (1983) Dynamic memory: a theory of reminding and learning in computers and people. Cambridge University Press

  • Trilling B, Fadel C (2009) 21st century skills: learning for life in our times. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Urdan T, Schoenfelder E (2006) Classroom effects on student motivation: goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. J Sch Psychol 44(5):331–349. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez JA, Sneider CI, Comer MW (2013) STEM lesson essentials, grades 3–8: integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Heinemann, Portsmouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson AD, Watson GH (2013) Bonus Article: transitioning STEM to STEAM: Reformation of Engineering Education. J Qual Particip 36(3)

  • Wickson F, Carew AL, Russell A (2006) Transdisciplinary research: characteristics, quandaries and quality. Futures 38(9):1046–1059. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2006.02.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winterman B, Malacinski GM (2015) Teaching evidence-based innovation (EBI) as a transdisciplinary professional skill in an undergraduate biology writing workshop. Int J Arts Sci 8(2):423

    Google Scholar 

  • Yackman G (2007) STE@M education. Retrieved from http://steamedu.com

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

    Cassie F. Quigley & Dani Herro

Authors
  1. Cassie F. Quigley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dani Herro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cassie F. Quigley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Quigley, C.F., Herro, D. “Finding the Joy in the Unknown”: Implementation of STEAM Teaching Practices in Middle School Science and Math Classrooms. J Sci Educ Technol 25, 410–426 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9602-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9602-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation