To address the lack of interdisciplinary programs that combine science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), the sound, waves and communication systems (SWCS) program was developed and implemented with different populations: three in-service schoolteachers, 60 pre-service teachers in a college for teacher education, and 120 middle school students. In addition, six pre-service teachers who had learned the swcs course worked in coordination with in-service teachers and taught the course for middle school students. This article presents the program’s development and effects, focusing on examining motivational and achievement outcomes. The study aimed at investigating the extent to which participants (both pre-service teachers and school students) could learn/teach an interdisciplinary program, and how the swcs program could affect learners’ knowledge and their attitudes towards science class. The study used the mixed method combining both quantitative and qualitative tools. The main results highlight learners’ high motivation and knowledge acquisition in learning the program. However, learners still face difficulties, for example, in developing projects and dealing with alternative ideas. Furthermore, the study points to the potential that lies in integrating pre-service teachers in dual learning and teaching experience s .
KeywordsMiddle School StudentsSTEM EducationSound WavesTeachers’ College
Ackerman, D. B. & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Integrating Thinking and Learning Skills across the Curriculum. In H. H. Jacobs (Eds.), Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation (pp. 25-38). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Adams, A. E., Miller, B. G., Saul, M., & Pegg, J. (2014). Supporting Elementary Pre-Service Teachers to Teach STEM through Place-Based Teaching and Learning Experiences. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 18, No. 5.
Barak, M. (2013). Teaching Engineering and Technology: Cognitive, Knowledge and Problem-Solving Taxonomies. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 11, 316-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-04-2012-0020
Barak, M. (2014). Closing the Gap between Attitudes and Perceptions about ICT-Enhanced Learning among Pre-Service STEM Teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9446-8
Barak, M., & Shachar, A. (2008). Project in Technology and Fostering Learning Skills: The Potential and Its Realization. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9098-2
Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of Integrative Approaches among Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Subjects on Students’ Learning: A Preliminary Meta-Analysis. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 12, 23-37.
Bonwell, C. (1996). Building a Supportive Climate for Active Learning. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 6, 4-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966704
Carrier, S. J. (2009). The Effects of Outdoor Science Lessons with Elementary School Students on Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21, 35-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173683
Chi, M. T. H., Adams, J., Bogusch, E. B., Bruchok, C., Kang, S., Lancaster, M., Levy, R., McEldoon, K., Stump, G. S., Wylie, R., Xu, D., & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2018). Translating the ICAP Theory of Cognitive Engagement into Practice. Cognitive Science, 1-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12626
Fortus, D., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2014). Measuring Students’ Continuing Motivation for Science Learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 497-522. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21136
Greeno, J. G., Collims A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and Learning. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 15-46). New York: MacMillan.
Henderson, J. B., Osborne, J., MacPherson, A., & Szu, E. (2014). A New Learning Progression for Student Argumentation in Scientific Contexts. In E-Book Proceedings of the ESERA 2013 Conference (Vol. 7, pp. 26-42).
Johnson, S. D., & Aragon, S. A. (2003). An Instructional Strategy Framework for Online Learning Environments. In S. A. Aragon (Ed.), Facilitating Learning in Online Environments, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, (pp. 31-44). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Kastelan, I., Lopez, B. J. R., Artetxe, G. E., Piwinski, J., Barak, M., & Temerinac, M. (2014). E2LP: A Unified Embedded Engineering Learning Platform. Microprocessors and Microsystems: Part B, 38, 933-946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2014.09.003
Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to Promote Elementary Education Pre-Service Teachers’ STEM Engagement, Learning, and Teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005
Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity Development as a Lens to Science Teacher Preparation. Science Education, 91, 822-839. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20209
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A New Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive Multimodal Learning Environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 309-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, NASEM (2019). Science and Engineering for Grades 6-12: Investigation and Design at the Center. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of collaborative, Critical Discourse. Science, 328, 463-466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Rutten, N., van, V. J. T., & van, J. W. R. (2015). Inquiry-Based Whole-Class Teaching with Computer Simulations in Physics. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 1225-1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1029033
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
Trundle, K. C., & Bell, R. L. (2010). The Use of a Computer Simulation to Promote Conceptual Change: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Computers & Education, 54, 1078-1088.
Vandervelde, J. (2006). A+ PowerPoint Rubric. http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/pptrubric.html
Yerushalmi, E., & Eylon, B. S. (2013). Supporting Teachers Who Introduce Curricular Innovations into Their Classrooms: A Problem-Solving Perspective. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 9, Article ID: 010121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.010121
Ackerman, D. B. & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Integrating Thinking and Learning Skills across the Curriculum. In H. H. Jacobs (Eds.), Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation (pp. 25-38). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Adams, A. E., Miller, B. G., Saul, M., & Pegg, J. (2014). Supporting Elementary Pre-Service Teachers to Teach STEM through Place-Based Teaching and Learning Experiences. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 18, No. 5.
Barak, M. (2013). Teaching Engineering and Technology: Cognitive, Knowledge and Problem-Solving Taxonomies. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 11, 316-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-04-2012-0020
Barak, M. (2014). Closing the Gap between Attitudes and Perceptions about ICT-Enhanced Learning among Pre-Service STEM Teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9446-8
Barak, M., & Shachar, A. (2008). Project in Technology and Fostering Learning Skills: The Potential and Its Realization. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9098-2
Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of Integrative Approaches among Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Subjects on Students’ Learning: A Preliminary Meta-Analysis. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 12, 23-37.
Bonwell, C. (1996). Building a Supportive Climate for Active Learning. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 6, 4-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966704
Carrier, S. J. (2009). The Effects of Outdoor Science Lessons with Elementary School Students on Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21, 35-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173683
Chi, M. T. H., Adams, J., Bogusch, E. B., Bruchok, C., Kang, S., Lancaster, M., Levy, R., McEldoon, K., Stump, G. S., Wylie, R., Xu, D., & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2018). Translating the ICAP Theory of Cognitive Engagement into Practice. Cognitive Science, 1-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12626
Fortus, D., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2014). Measuring Students’ Continuing Motivation for Science Learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 497-522. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21136
Greeno, J. G., Collims A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and Learning. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 15-46). New York: MacMillan.
Henderson, J. B., Osborne, J., MacPherson, A., & Szu, E. (2014). A New Learning Progression for Student Argumentation in Scientific Contexts. In E-Book Proceedings of the ESERA 2013 Conference (Vol. 7, pp. 26-42).
Johnson, S. D., & Aragon, S. A. (2003). An Instructional Strategy Framework for Online Learning Environments. In S. A. Aragon (Ed.), Facilitating Learning in Online Environments, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, (pp. 31-44). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Kastelan, I., Lopez, B. J. R., Artetxe, G. E., Piwinski, J., Barak, M., & Temerinac, M. (2014). E2LP: A Unified Embedded Engineering Learning Platform. Microprocessors and Microsystems: Part B, 38, 933-946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2014.09.003
Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to Promote Elementary Education Pre-Service Teachers’ STEM Engagement, Learning, and Teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005
Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity Development as a Lens to Science Teacher Preparation. Science Education, 91, 822-839. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20209
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A New Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive Multimodal Learning Environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 309-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, NASEM (2019). Science and Engineering for Grades 6-12: Investigation and Design at the Center. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of collaborative, Critical Discourse. Science, 328, 463-466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Rutten, N., van, V. J. T., & van, J. W. R. (2015). Inquiry-Based Whole-Class Teaching with Computer Simulations in Physics. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 1225-1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1029033
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
Trundle, K. C., & Bell, R. L. (2010). The Use of a Computer Simulation to Promote Conceptual Change: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Computers & Education, 54, 1078-1088.
Vandervelde, J. (2006). A+ PowerPoint Rubric. http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/pptrubric.html
Yerushalmi, E., & Eylon, B. S. (2013). Supporting Teachers Who Introduce Curricular Innovations into Their Classrooms: A Problem-Solving Perspective. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 9, Article ID: 010121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.010121