Journal of Science Education (과학교육연구지)

Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Issues in Research of Global STEM Education: A Meta Synthesis Approach

국제 STEM 교육 연구에서의 이슈: 메타 종합적 접근

  • Received : 2021.02.23
  • Accepted : 2021.03.15
  • Published : 2021.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify the main issues of international STEM education by synthesizing the findings in the field of global STEM education. The data in this study are the results of meta-analysis or systematic literature studies that reflect key issues of STEM education through the review of selection criteria and groups of experts. The following issues of STEM education were selected by conducting a qualitative meta-analysis of a total of 23 studies. First, STEM education is a global educational trend and has been studied in many countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, Republic of Korea, and Turkey. Second, STEM education contributes positively to the improvement of students' cognitive, affective, psychomotor, and career domains. Third, STEM education has been studied with the use of various instructional tools and technologies. Furthermore, the growth of teachers' expertise in STEM education is one of the main factors for the implementation of successful STEM education. In addition, issues such as diversity, equity, and valid and reliable research design were discussed for the successful practice of STEM education. This study provides implications for the direction of convergence education and practical strategies in South Korea and gives suggestions for future research.

이 연구의 목적은 국제 STEM 교육 분야의 연구 결과를 종합하여 국제 STEM 교육의 주요 이슈를 파악하는 데 있다. 이 연구의 분석 대상 자료는 선정 기준과 전문가 그룹의 검토를 통해 다양한 STEM 교육의 이슈를 반영하고 있는 메타분석 또는 체계적 문헌연구의 결과이다. 총 23개의 연구를 대상으로 질적 메타 분석을 하여 다음과 같은 STEM 교육의 이슈를 선정하였다. 첫째, STEM 교육은 국제적인 교육 동향으로 미국, 캐나다, 호주, 한국, 터키 등 많은 국가에서 연구되고 있다. 둘째, STEM 교육은 학생들의 인지적, 정의적, 심동적, 그리고 진로 영역의 향상에 긍정적으로 기여하고 있다. 셋째, STEM 교육은 다양한 수업 도구와 기술의 사용과 함께 연구되어 왔다. 또한, STEM 교육에 대한 교사의 전문성 신장이 성공적인 STEM 교육의 실현의 주요 요인들 중 하나이다. 그 외에 STEM 교육의 성공적인 실천을 위해 다양성, 평등, 타당하고 신뢰로운 연구 설계 등의 이슈에 대해 논의하였다. 또한 이 연구는 우리나라 융합교육의 방향과 실천 전략을 위한 함의점을 제공할 수 있으며 향후 연구에 대한 제언을 줄 수 있다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 연구는 공주대학교 연구년 사업 (2018년 하반기 선발: 2019-2020년)에 의하여 연구되었음.

References

  1. All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Diversity and Inclusion in STEM (2020). Inquiry on equity in STEM education final report. British Science Association. Retrieved December 22, 2020, from https://www.britishscienceassociation.org/inquiry-equity-in-stem-education
  2. Batdi, V., Talan, T., & Semerici, C. (2019). Meta-thematic analysis of STEM education. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7(4), 382-399.
  3. 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, 12(5), 23-38.
  4. Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Olsen, M. W., & Leary, H. (2015). A pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 183-197.
  5. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x
  6. Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-387. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00985.x
  7. Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30-35.
  8. Canada 2067. (2017). Canada 2067 Learning Roadmap. Retrieved December 15, 2020, from https://canada2067.ca/app/uploads/2018/11/Canada-2067-Learning-RoadmapNov1-WEB.pdf
  9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the bahavioral science (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associations.
  10. Cook, J. W. (Ed.) (2019). Sustainability, human Well-Being, and the future of education. Helsinki, Finland: Palgrave Macmillan.
  11. Committee on STEM Education. (2018). Charting a course for success: America's strategy for STEM education. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council.
  12. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
  13. D'Angelo, C. M., Rutstein, D., & Harris, C. J. (2016). Learning with STEM simulation in the classrooms: Finding and trends from a Meta-analysis. Educational Technology, 56(3), 58-61.
  14. Education Council. (2015). National STEM school education strategy: A comprehensive plan for science, technology, engineering and mathematics education in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Author.
  15. Ejiwale, J. (2013). Barriers to successful implementation of STEM education. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(2), 63-74. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v7i2.220
  16. Finegold, P., Stagg, P., & Hutchinson, J. (2011) Good timing: Implementing STEM careers strategy win secondary schools (Final report of the STEM Careers Awareness Timeline Pilot). Centre for Education and industry, University of Warwick.
  17. Finnish National Board of Education. (2016). New national core curriculum for basic education: Focus on school culture and integrative approach. Retrieved from https://www.oph.fi/en/statistics-and-publications/publications/new-national-core-curriculum-basic-education-focus-school
  18. Halinen, I. (2018). The new educational curriculum in Finland. In Matthes, M., Pulkkinen, L., Clouder, C., Heys, B. (Eds.) Improving the quality of childhood in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: Alliance for Childhood European Network Foundation.
  19. Holmes, K., Gore, J., & Smith, M. (2018). An integrated analysis of school students' aspirations for STEM careers: Which student and school factors are most predictive? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16, 655-675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9793-z
  20. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  21. Ibanez, M. & Delgado-Kloos, C. (2018). Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 123, 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.002
  22. Izzah, S., & Wiyanto, W. (2018). The effect of STEM education on the attitudes of secondary school students: A meta-analysis. Advanced in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 247, 454-458.
  23. Kanadi, S. (2019). A meta-summary of qualitative findings about STEM education. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 959-976. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12162a
  24. Kang, N. (2019). A review of the effect of integrated STEM or STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) education in South Korea. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0030-2
  25. Kim, N. Belland, B., Lefler, M., Andreasen, L., Walker, A., & Axelrod, D. (2020). Computer-Based Scaffolding targeting individual versus groups in problem-centered instruction for STEM education: Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 415-461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09502-3
  26. Lawner, E. K., Quinn, D. M., Camacho, G., Johnson, B. T., & Pan-Weisz, B. (2019). Ingroup role models and underrepresented students' performance and interest in STEM: A meta-analysis of lab and field studies. Social Psychology of Education, 22, 1169-1195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-019-09518-1
  27. Lynch, K., Hill, H. C., Gonzalez, K. E., & Pollard, C. (2019). Strengthening the research base that informs STEM instruction improvement efforts: A meta-analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(3), 260-293. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373719849044
  28. Murphy, S., MacDonald, A., Danala, L., & Wang, C. (2019). An analysis of Australian STEM education strategies. Policy Futures in Education, 17(2), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210318774190
  29. Parkin, A. (2018) Canada 2067. Supporting Education Transformation in Canada: The Intersection of Canada 2067 and Education 2030 Framework for Action. London, ON: Let's Talk Science.
  30. Pellas, N., Kazanidis, I., Konstantinou, N., & Georgiou, G. (2017). Exploring the educational potential of three-dimensional multi-user virtual worlds for STEM education: A mixed-method systematic literature review. Educational Information Technology, 22, 2235-2279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9537-2
  31. Prinsley, R., & Johnston, E. (2015, December). Transforming STEM teaching in Australian primary schools; everybody's business. Office of the Chief Scientist. Retrieved December 11, 2020, from https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/sites/default/files/Transforming-STEM-teaching_FINAL.pdf
  32. Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEM mania. Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20-26.
  33. Sarac, H. (2018). The effect of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics - STEM educational practices on students' learning outcomes: A meta-analysis study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 17(2), 125-142.
  34. Sarica, R. (2020). Analysis of postgraduate theses related to STEM education in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 13(2), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.13.2.1
  35. Siekmann, G., & Korbel, P. (2016). Defining 'STEM' skills: Review and synthesis of the literature. Adelaide, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia.
  36. Siregar, N., Rosli, R., Maat, S., & Capraro, M. (2020). The effect of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) program on students' achievement in Mathematics: A meta-analysis. International Electronics Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), 1-12.
  37. Straw, S., & MacLeod, S. (2013). Improving young people's engagement with science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). National Foundation for Educational Research, UK.
  38. Timulak, L. (2014). Qualitative Meta-Analysis. In U., Flick. (Ed). The sage handbook of qualitative data analysis. Washington, DC: Sage.
  39. UK Commission for Employment and Skills [UKCES]. (2015). High level STEM skills requirements in the UK labour market. Commission for Employment and Skills, UK.
  40. van den Hurk, A., Meelissen, M., & van Langen, A. (2019). Interventions in education to prevent STEM piplline leakage. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 150-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1540897
  41. World Economic Forum (2019, October 9). The Global Competitiveness Report 2019. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-competitiveness-report-2019
  42. Yildirim, B. (2016). An analyses and meta-synthesis of research on STEM education. Journal of Education and Practices, 7(34), 23-33.
  43. Young, J., Ortiz, N., & Young, J. (2017). STEMulating interest: A meta-analysis of the effects of out-of-school time on student STEM interest. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(1), 62-74.
  44. Zainuddin, S. H., & Iksan, Z. (2019). Sketching engineering design in STEM classroom: A systematic review. Creative Education, 10(12), 2775-2783. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1012204
  45. Zeng, Z., Yao, J., Gu, H., & Przybylski, R. (2018). A meta-analysis on the effects of STEM education on students' abilities. Science Insight Education Frontiers, 1(1), 1-16.