Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.8
2.5
Journals
Education Sciences
Special Issues
Inquiry-Based STEM Teaching and Learning
share announcement

Inquiry-Based STEM Teaching and Learning

A special issue of Education Sciences (ISSN 2227-7102). This special issue belongs to the section "STEM Education".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 May 2024) | Viewed by 10747

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Michael R.L. Odell

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Education, University of Texas at Tyler, 3900 University Blvd, Tyler, TX 75701, USA
Interests: STEM teaching and learning; preservice STEM; STEM schools
Prof. Dr. Teresa Kennedy

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. College of Education and Psychology, The University of Texas at Tyler, 3900 University Blvd, Tyler, TX 75799, USA
2. College of Engineering, The University of Texas at Tyler, 3900 University Blvd, Tyler, TX 75799, USA
Interests: bilingual STEM education; sustainable STEM education; international education
Dr. Eric (Rick) Worch

E-Mail
Guest Editor
School of Teaching & Learning, College of Education & Human Development, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, USA
Interests: early STEM education

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Internationally, high-stakes testing is driving STEM teaching and learning. This Special Issue explores the impact of high-stakes testing on teachers’ implementations of inquiry-based STEM teaching practices and its effect on students’ attitudes toward science, beliefs about the nature of science, and content knowledge. High-stakes testing impacts the teaching practices of teachers (Smith 1991; Johnson and Leden, 2019). Zhao et al. (2016) found that high-stakes testing had a significant impact on the pedagogy implemented in the classroom focusing primarily on facts versus inquiry. Teacher preparation programs typically prepare preservice and inservice teachers with inquiry-based strategies as these strategies have been shown to promote the deeper learning of STEM content (Odell & Pedersen, 2020). Additionally, the ability of teachers to engage in inquiry activities over an extended period has a positive impact on their attitudes toward implementing inquiry science (Worch, Duran, & Duran, 2016). However, there are often barriers to implementing inquiry-based learning in schools solely focused on high-stakes test scores. There is evidence that schools can implement inquiry-based pedagogy and earn high scores on high-stakes tests. Schools implementing project- and problem-based learning as the primary pedagogy had higher achievement than comparison schools (Odell, Kennedy &Stocks, 2019).

This Special Issue of Education Sciences aims to reflect the current empirical research on the implementation of inquiry-based teaching and learning in STEM education at the primary and secondary levels, including inservice and preservice STEM teacher preparation.

We invite original research on STEM teacher education, STEM teacher professional development, the implementation of inquiry-based pedagogies, and the impact on student academic and non-academic outcomes. We are particularly interested in documenting the successful implementation of inquiry pedagogy that enhances tests scores.

Themes:

  • inquiry-based practice
  • impact of high-stakes testing on pedagogy
  • student understanding of the nature of science
  • impact on student achievement
  • pedagogical content knowledge (PCK)

References

Jonsson A., & Leden L. (2019) The ambiguous influence of highstakes testing on science teaching in Sweden, International Journal of Science Education, 41(14), 1926–1943. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1647474.  

Odell, M. R., Kennedy, T. J., & Stocks, E. (2019). The Impact of PBL as a STEM School Reform Model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 13(2). Available at: https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1846.

Odell, M.R.L., & Pedersen, J.L. (2020). Project and Problem-Based Teaching and Learning. In B. Akpan & T.J. Kennedy (Eds.), Science Education in Theory and Practice: An Introductory Guide to Learning Theory. (Chapter 23, pp. 343–357). Switzerland: Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-030-43619-3; ISBN 978-3-030-43620-9 (eBook). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9.

Smith, M. L. (1991). Put to the test: The effects of external testing on teachers. Educational Researcher, 20(5), 811. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X020005008.

Worch, E. A., Duran, E., & Duran, L. B. (2016). An analysis of elementary science teachers’ beliefs regarding inquiry science teaching. World Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), 182–199.

Zhao, M. R., Mu, B. L., & Lu, C. P. (2016). Teaching to the test: approaches to teaching in senior secondary schools in the context of curriculum reform in China. Creative Education, 7, 32–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.71004.

Dr. Michael R.L. Odell
Prof. Dr. Teresa Kennedy
Dr. Eric (Rick) Worch
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Education Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • STEM education
  • PCK
  • high-stakes testing
  • teacher education
  • accountability
  • policy

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

13 pages, 2628 KiB  
Article
Self-Regulated Learning in Science Classes with a Discovery Learning Environment and Collaborative Discovery Learning Environment
by Marina Balazinec, Ines Radanovic and Mila Bulic
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(6), 669; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060669 - 19 Jun 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1530
Abstract
The study aims to compare how discovery learning and collaborative discovery learning affect knowledge acquisition, the development of understanding through phases of self-regulated learning (SRL), and the use of SRL strategies at the individual level. The sample consists of 981 eleven-year-old students. The [...] Read more.
The study aims to compare how discovery learning and collaborative discovery learning affect knowledge acquisition, the development of understanding through phases of self-regulated learning (SRL), and the use of SRL strategies at the individual level. The sample consists of 981 eleven-year-old students. The results show that both methods have a positive effect on knowledge acquisition. Collaborative discovery learning has more positive effects on the development of students’ understanding by developing collaborative skills. Motivational strategies (especially in girls) are more developed in collaborative discovery learning than in discovery learning. Students who show more pronounced negative characteristics of self-regulation also achieve poorer results in the knowledge test, and this is more pronounced in students who have participated in discovery learning. The tendency of an affirmative attitude towards the characteristics of SRL in the entire population of students indicates a proportional growth in accordance with success in learning, but in more successful students, it indicates a uniform retention of an affirmative attitude. The tendency toward an affirmative attitude regarding the characteristics of collaborative learning is inversely proportional to students’ success, with a more pronounced attitude decrease in more successful students. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Inquiry-Based STEM Teaching and Learning)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 725 KiB  
Article
Culturally Responsive Pedagogical Knowledge: An Integrative Teacher Knowledge Base for Diversified STEM Classrooms
by Justina A. Ogodo
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(2), 124; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020124 - 25 Jan 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 6018
Abstract
Teaching can be challenging, especially when teachers are under-prepared to enter a workforce with a constantly changing landscape. Preparing teachers for STEM content has generated multiple approaches from varying perspectives. While some scholars advocate for content expertise, others promote pedagogy or social context [...] Read more.
Teaching can be challenging, especially when teachers are under-prepared to enter a workforce with a constantly changing landscape. Preparing teachers for STEM content has generated multiple approaches from varying perspectives. While some scholars advocate for content expertise, others promote pedagogy or social context as approaches for translating STEM content for students. Yet, many contend that teachers must be culturally knowledgeable to respond to student diversity effectively. While these arguments are valuable and needed, many have not considered the interconnectedness of these approaches, often used in silos. This conceptual paper unpacks some of these arguments using the social constructivism theory of learning as the epistemic lens to examine and interpret what STEM teacher knowledge should encompass in the 21st-century diversified classroom. After thoroughly evaluating the core elements of three commonly used teacher constructs, this paper presents an integrative, holistic teacher knowledge—culturally responsive pedagogical knowledge (CRPK) framework that considers the necessary qualities that teachers must possess that are functional, content-focused, and pedagogically inclusive. The proposed CRPK construct would be a valuable programmatic tool for teacher preparation, curriculum development, and classroom praxis. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Inquiry-Based STEM Teaching and Learning)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1109 KiB  
Article
Reflections of a First-Year Chemistry Teacher: Intersecting PCK, Responsiveness, and Inquiry Instruction
by Dana Lynn Morris
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(1), 93; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14010093 - 15 Jan 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1833
Abstract
Many educators agree that science instruction should be dominated by inquiry strategies, while others stress the need for responsive practices to place a focus on student learning and understanding. Some scholars believe the two approaches exist on opposite ends of an instructional spectrum, [...] Read more.
Many educators agree that science instruction should be dominated by inquiry strategies, while others stress the need for responsive practices to place a focus on student learning and understanding. Some scholars believe the two approaches exist on opposite ends of an instructional spectrum, while others believe they may be aligned and intertwined. Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), the broadly accepted gold standard for science education, seems to include both. Understanding how teachers incorporate inquiry strategies and responsiveness and how the two intersect could lead to a more complete framework for K–12 science instruction and help streamline science teacher education. This qualitative single-case study examined the reflections of a first-year chemistry teacher by exploring how she demonstrated responsiveness to students while maintaining a teaching orientation of inquiry-based instruction. Results indicated that responsiveness depended on a high level of PCK and led to higher or lower levels of inquiry based on the students’ need for teacher support. Additionally, findings showed that the teacher’s stated and demonstrated beliefs about inquiry were disconnected. Finally, a gap between science conceptual understanding and mathematics PCK suggested the need to support more innovative mathematics pedagogical strategies during physical science teacher education. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Inquiry-Based STEM Teaching and Learning)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Back to TopTop