Chengfan Deng

doi:10.70711/neet.v2i9.5665

Review and Application Integrated STEM Education

Chengfan Deng

Abstract

This paper explores integrated STEM education, with a literature review and comparison of STEM programs. A 10% STEM education goal is proposed, alongside a school-based STEM curriculum. The aim is to enhance STEM educations progression and implementation,
emphasizing its importance in fostering students future skills.

Keywords

STEM education; Curriculum design; Teaching approaches; Regional comparison; 21st-century skills

Full Text:

PDF

Included Database

References

[1] Barb Bloemhof. (2015). Inquiry-Based Learning in an Undergraduate Honours Program: Lessons from the Bachelor of Health Sciences

Honours Program at McMaster University. In Patrick Blessinger & John M. Carfora (Eds.), Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Programs: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators (pp. 213 - 240). Bingley, UK:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

[2] Bybee, R. W. (2013). The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Virginia: National Science Teachers Association.

[3] China Education Science Research Institute STEM Education Research Center. (2019). China STEM Education Research Report.

[4] Hong Kong Federation of Education Workers, & Hong Kong STEM Education Alliance. (2023). Hong Kong STEM Education: Policy

Research Report on Teacher Training for Primary and Secondary Schools.

[5] Ke, F., Dai, C.-P., & West, L. (2024). Mathematical experience in game-based problem-solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.

Advance online publication.

[6] Han, S. W. (2015). Curriculum standardization, stratification, and students STEM-related occupational expectations: Evidence from

PISA 2006. International Journal of Educational Research, 72, 103115.

[7] LEE, Y. T., CHAN, M. H., CHAN, W. H., FOK, N. H., KWOK, B. W., LEE, H. M., NG, W. S., TSANG, Y. F., & YEUNG, C. H. (Eds.).

(2017). STEM Education: From Theory to Practice. Hong Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong.

[8] Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2019). Design and Design

Thinking in STEM Education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2, 93104.

[9] McComas, W. F., & Burgin, S. R. (2020). ACritique of STEM Education: Revolution-in-the-Making, Passing Fad, or Instructional Imperative? Science & Education, 29, 805829.

[10] National Academy of Sciences. (2018). Graduate STEM Education for the 21st Century. National Academies Press.

[11] Patrick Blessinger, & John M. Carfora. (2015). Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Programs: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

[12] Schweingruber, H., Pearson, G., & Honey, M. (Eds.). (2014). STEM Integration in K-12 Education: Status, Prospects, and an Agenda

for Research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

[13] Tamara J. Moore, Amanda C. Johnston, & Aran W. Glancy. (2020). STEM Integration: A Synthesis of Conceptual Frameworks and

Definitions. In Handbook of Research on STEM Education. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.

[14] Uttal, D. H., & Cohen, C. A. (2012). Spatial Thinking and STEM Education: When, Why, and How? In Psychology of Learning and

Motivation (Vol. 57, pp. 147-178). Elsevier Inc.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.70711/neet.v2i9.5665

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.