STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 1

Running Head: STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education Dee Dee Aldrich, Chris Burken, Barbie Montgomery, Lynnea Urbanowicz Northern Illinois University 501 Proseminar March 2013

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 2

Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) gained much attention in recent years due to the reality that students are underperforming in these areas in relation to other countries, and the realization that in order for America to remain competitive in a global economy, we must produce students with high-quality STEM skills. This literature review takes a look at the overarching trend towards STEM education especially in the areas of why STEM education is important, why America has fallen behind, how to improve STEM education, how teacher attitudes and training affect STEM education, and paying special attention to implementing STEM in elementary education. The summaries of the following articles attempt to shed light on these issues.

Why Implement STEM Education: An increased initiative to incorporate STEM education within K-12 education sprouted from hopes to promote increased global competitiveness in areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In an article prepared for the National Governors Association, Thomasian addressed the numerous reasons for the importance of STEM education, as well as Americas decline in test scores among K-12 students suggesting improvements to be made. STEM education was identified as a necessity for the success of Americas future economy, and because of this, the federal and state governments put a strong emphasis on effective STEM education. From a governmental standpoint, the goals for STEM education were to raise the level of competence in all American students and increase the number of students that pursue STEM careers. Data on STEM test scores showed that American students were ranked 26th in the world in math scores and 13th in the world in science scores, with little improvement in the last 10 years. Studies identified the following five issues as holding Americas STEM educational goals

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 3

back: inconsistent state standards in math and science, a lack of qualified math and science classroom teachers, lack of preparation for postsecondary STEM study, failure to motivate student interest in math and sciences, and failure of the postsecondary system to meet STEM job needs (Thomasian, 2011). Regarding inconsistent state standards, one suggested improvement was the development of the Common Core Standards. These standards were designed to align with college and work expectations; to be clear, understandable, and consistent; to include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills; to build on strengths and lessons of current state standards; informed by other top-performing countries so that all students are prepared to succeed in the global economy and society; and evidence-based (Thomasian, 2011). Thomasian addressed the concern of the lack of qualified math and science teachers by reporting research on STEM teachers which showed that in chemistry, only 36.8 percent of teachers held a major and certification in the subject. In earth sciences, only 27.4 percent of teachers majored and held a certificate in the subject. Of more concern, 21.6 percent of teachers in the physical sciences and 43.5 percent of the teachers did not have a degree or certificate in the subject of earth science (Thomasian, 2011). Therefore, many states put their focus on recruiting and increasing the number of high level teachers in science disciplines, and to do this, many states were using financial rewards such as signing bonuses and salary increases to entice teachers to work at a difficult to serve school or in a difficult to staff position, to obtain advanced degrees and certifications, or to complete professional development. Incentives should be given for exceeding student achievement expectations on the state assessment and working in a school with a significant growth rate in achievement (Thomasian, 2011). It was not all about financial reward for teachers though. Studies showed that schools retained teachers by maintaining

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 4

discipline, providing strong leadership, giving teachers input regarding school wide decisions, providing some classroom autonomy, and, most importantly, providing relevant and useful professional development opportunities (Thomasian, 2011). Thomasian depicted data points regarding the benefits of jobs in STEM fields which projected growth at a higher rate than other jobs, paid higher salaries, and were projected to make the most difference to our economy due to potential for innovation. Statistics regarding STEM reflected the following: STEM job holders earned 11 percent higher wages compared to other STEM degree holders who held non-STEM jobs, the top 10 bachelor-degree majors with the highest median earnings were in STEM fields, and the average annual wage for all STEM careers was $77,880 in May 2009, quite a bit above the U.S. average of $43,460 for non-STEM occupations. Between 2001-2011, STEM jobs grew three times faster than non-STEM jobs. STEM jobs were projected to grow by 17 percent during the 20082018 period compared to 9.8 percent growth for non-STEM jobs. In 2010, the unemployment rate for STEM workers was 5.3 percent and for all other occupations, it was 10 percent (Thomasian, 2011). Overall STEM education illuminated a compelling path to financial success, both for students and the economy. Producing students that go on to graduate with STEM degrees was seen as crucial to our economys future success because of the need to compete in a global economy where discovery, innovation, and rapid transformation are necessary elements for success (Thomasian, 2011). Innovation was linked to economic growth and these statistics were noted: STEM fields overwhelmingly lead other fields in producing new patents. For example, during 19982003, scientists and engineers applied for almost 10 times more patents and developed almost eight times more patents than applicants from all other fields (Thomasian, 2011). Six key elements to improving STEM education for K-12 grades included: implementing definite math and science

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 5

standards and improved assessments, placing and retaining more qualified teachers in the classroom, providing serious preparation for STEM students, using informal learning to enhance math and science beyond the classroom, boosting the quality and supply of STEM teachers, and establishing goals for postsecondary institutions to meet STEM job needs (Thomasian, 2011). Karen Hawley Miles discussed educational strategies that could improve the level of STEM instruction. These educational strategies included: eliminating policies that determine class size, removing pay for longevity, providing incentives that reward high level STEM teachers, utilizing outside partners and technology, and creating STEM charter schools with outside funds to support STEM teachers (Thomasian, 2011). This article was prepared for the National Governors Association. The National Governors Association was responsible for creating the new Common Core Standards and had an agenda with regard to the future economy of their respective states. They likely reported with some bias that STEM education is a necessity, however, the article is rich with quantitative data. In his article about promoting STEM careers, Steve Metz highlights the increasingly complex and challenging problems that face our nation and world. He further argued that many of these new problems will require a skilled STEM workforce. Metz focused on the foundational skills required in order to pursue careers in the math and science fields (Metz, 2011). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (U.S. Department of Education, 2011), there has been an increase in the number of college degrees obtained in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics from colleges and universities in the United States. The U.S., however, still has some ground to make up as international comparisons in the subjects of science and mathematics due to polls that consistently place the United States in the middle of the pack or lower (Venkataraman, Riordan, & Olson, 2010).

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 6

Teacher Training and Attitudes: Another area represented through research highlighted the importance of professional development opportunities used to train teachers in these STEM areas and addressed the attitudes toward STEM education itself. Johnathan Breiner, Shelly Harkness, and Carla Johnson, researched and reported on the perceptions of STEM among educators. Drawing upon research from NCEE, NSF, and the Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century, STEM education would answer the call to strengthen science and mathematics education and commit to increasing the development of future scientists and engineers. This report indicated that the generation of students moving through the public school systems were both scientifically and technologically illiterate (NCEE,1983). Therefore, efforts directed toward improving science education have been made including the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994, which made funds available for equipment and materials for hands-on science and math instruction in K12 settings. Additional improvements include an increase in funding in 2006 and 2007 in multiple education-based policy programs providing additional resources for technology education and improving professional development opportunities for STEM teachers, and plans made by President Obama to expand the Educate to Innovate campaign in K12 science and math education in order to increase the exposure to quality STEM education through various funding and mandating strategies.The type of instruction found within STEM curriculum replaced a traditional lecture-based education and included best practices, such as inquiry and project-based learning, while it paralleled the work of real-life scientists and engineers. However, the authors also addressed many misconceptions of STEM through a research case study conducted at the University of Cincinnati that surveyed 222 faculty members about two questions: what is STEM, and how does STEM influence, or impact your life? These

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 7

questions brought about data that suggested there are many confusions about the term STEM itself and used studies by Schwartz & Lederman (2002), Labov, Reid, & Yamamoto (2010), and Sanders (2009), which implored educators to connect the STEM education and activities to real world problems, make them relevant to students lives, and to show the integration across multiple academic disciplines. This article challenged stakeholders to define STEM more clearly and to highlight the shared outcomes it wishes to promote: creating better teachers, students, and a prepared workforce so that the United States will be able to better compete in the global society. In his article addressing integration opportunities within STEM education, Mark Sanders reported that curricular connections with science and mathematics education are important. Sanders & Binderup (2000) supported Sanders by explaining how technology, science and mathematics connections became the primary focus for technology educators in the 1990s. The International Technology Education Association realized this connection and it manifested into Standard #3 of Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology (ITEA, 2000/2002/2007). Bruning, Schraw, Norby, and Ronning (2004) supported STEM education by identifying cognitive themes that resonate throughout it. These four themes provide a framework to organize the mathematics with science and help to promote the recall and transfer of knowledge. Bransford, Brown, & Cocking (2000) provide examples of how STEM education is learner-centered and knowledge-centered. Capturing groups of learners and enabling them to socially interact to attain knowledge is critical to this process. Hartzler (2000) researched the effectiveness of integrated instruction on student achievement. Research showed improvement in the achievement, interest, motivation, and self-efficacy for all students. This

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 8

article supports the educational field by providing the research of the integral role that STEM education plays within our twenty-first century classrooms (Sanders, 2009). In an article about facilitative learning, James Ejiwale discussed the changes that STEM educators face as they move from a teacher-centered (dictator) style learning delivery to a student- centered (facilitator) style and considered the elements affecting competent facilitation in STEM programs. Ejiwale noted the trend of employers looking for employees who demonstrate skills in collaboration, creative problem solving, product building, design, and critical thinking (Aleman, 1992) and America striving to be competitive in STEM careers. The need for STEM programs to develop those attributes in students was discussed taking into account a big picture goal of students entry into the workforce. A detailed account of the attributes necessary for an effective facilitator surprisingly included nonaction, silence and absence. (Bentley, 1994). Instructors should be truly committed and well versed in connecting with learners in an array of ways including hands-on learning, cross disciplinary learning, and providing opportunities for team teaching and team planning (Darling-Hammond, 1994). Instructors efficacy and attitude in their own ability to engage all types of students was viewed as an indicator of their achievement and student motivation (Moore & Esselman, 1992). Facilitative skills were noted within the research as not innate to teachers (Wittmer et al., 1980) and the need to acquire the skills was necessary in order to encourage student to become active learners. Active learning was defined as students taking responsibility for their own learning, receiving choices and decisions about learning, accepting guidance and learner support, requiring teamwork with educators and peers, and responding with feedback on the enhancement of the learning services provided (Glasgow, 1997). This article was accessible and adequately referenced. It had interesting insights into the requirements of and dynamic of

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 9

changing to facilitative learning. It continued to support the prevalent STEM theme that curriculum must mimic real life STEM experiences and careers. In their article addressing the integration of professional development within the implementation of STEM, Coats, Moll, Nadelson, and Seifert, expressed that in order to enhance the STEM curriculum in grades K-12, many teachers needed assistance in meeting the demands of implementing the STEM curriculum. Teacher comfortability drastically changed the STEM instruction, due to uncertainty of the subject matter. Thus, the topic avoided or not taught to the best ability (Bursal & Paznokas, 2006; NRC, 2007). Teachers lack of appropriate instruction on STEM directly impacted student learning and how STEM was perceived by students (Beilock,Gunderson, Ramirez, & Levine, 2010). Relevant and credible professional development attending to teacher comfort levels in STEM teaching was illustrated, especially in the area of scientific inquiry (National Research Council [NRC], 1997, 2000). Teaching inquiry proved challenging for many educators (Nadelson, 2009). Scientific inquiry made a correlation between learning and real life job experience and this correlation led to more STEM graduates. Because K-12 teachers had limited opportunities to expose students to authentic scientific research over a long-term period, their knowledge of the inquiry process was limited to experiences in coursework and professional development (NRC, 2000). Many teachers passed on their unease with inquiry based learning by imitating the way they learned in college. The limited educational preparation of STEM teachers required illustrated that continued professional development was essential to develop their knowledge about the subject matter (NRC, 2007). The need for professional development increased for middle school teachers, as they specialized in a subject, but often received no more preparation than the elementary teacher education described above. If states planned to implement cutting edge STEM curriculums complete with scientific inquiry

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 10

based teaching, professional development for elementary teachers will be necessary and beneficial for increasing teachers comfort levels and abilities in teaching STEM (Coats, Moll, Nadelson, & Seifert, 2012). This article contained quantitative data and good references, however the professional development only spanned a four day period.

Implementation of STEM in Elementary School: Finally, implementation of STEM in elementary schools will continue to become an area of discussion and research. In an article about the increasing demands on the need of rigor within the curriculum the authors identified the link between the disciplines, referring to the national learning standards associated with each. Additionally, they established the relationship between the two disciplines on the most basic level, use. Teachers of mathematics incorporate technology in order to strengthen the learning process while teachers of technology incorporate mathematics principles to further understand, use, and design technologies (Daugherty, Merrill, & Reese, 2010). Borgman et al. (2008) noted the increased number of reports calling for better preparation and an increase in skills in the areas of mathematics and science in order to be effective in the workplace of the 21st century. Scher (2000) examined the development of instructional technologies used for teaching mathematics, including graphing calculators, as well as the increase in software used for performing mathematics. While there have been several revisions to curriculum over the years, there is little data about which changes have been most effective (National Research Council, 2004). This uncertainty was further supported by Wenglinskys (1998) study, which found that using computers, especially for drills and practice, had a negative correlation with student achievement, and Faulkners (2008) study ten years later determining that computer-assisted instruction supports drill and practice. It is clear that there is an increase in the number of students using various technologies, but Brown et al. (2007) found that teachers

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 11

are unsure if the use of technology is a ladder or a crutch for students. The authors identify integration through engineering design as a way to address the issues of relevance within the two disciplines. This article made it clear that the authenticity of the tasks used to integrate mathematics and technology remained the key objective. In his article on coordination of science education, Rudy Kraus explained the importance of integrating science with technology. Students need to be provided with the opportunities to build their abilities to think like scientists. In order to provide this, teachers should be clear on their expectations of the science standards and consider the Herron scale (Herron, 1971). The Herron scale is a resource that helps teachers to evaluate their lessons in three parts: problem, procedure and solution. Lessons increase in difficulty as students are given only one or two parts on the Herron scale. By using this tool, Kraus believes that this will help instructors to integrate science, technology and engineering for their students. The integration of the two disciplines can maximize the use of the limited classroom time while introducing students to the components of science and technology that they will encounter later in life (Kraus, 2009). Sean Brophy and Merredith Portsmore presented an article providing the viewpoint of how engineering education can support STEM with real world problem solving. They also explore the challenges of STEM learning with teacher knowledge and professional development. There is a rapid evolution for technology and industrial growth, and this creates a need for students entering higher education to be prepared in a different manor. Outreach programs are being implemented in engineering, science, mathematics, and technology from engineers and technologists. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) has provided guidelines for these types of programs to focus on. A strong focus is on the design concepts of hands-on, interdisciplinary, and standards-based education. Young learners were able to demonstrate their

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 12

work through these approaches and there were some that could even evaluate their designs too. Older students were able to evaluate more complex concepts and look deeper at the function, structures and behaviors of them. The research proves how inquiry based science and mathematics using develop the learners ability to evaluate, develop, design, communicate, apply, represent, express, synthesize and conduct experiments for success (Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers 2008). Design-based teaching materials and programs have not been implemented long enough to have the data on the efficacy and impact of them yet.The authors argued that there are a few challenges with implementing STEM education in the elementary level. One challenge that is faced with STEM is teacher readiness and comfort. Teachers of STEM need experiences and a level of proficiency which will allow them to readily assess and assist their students in the learning environment (Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers 2008). Elementary teachers are currently not required to have an engineering background and would need to have a familiarity of the engineering content and processes of design to support the inquiry portion that is crucial to STEM. Another challenge is preparing teachers with the correct professional development to evaluate students learning on the process and function in which they used as opposed to one final correct answer. Teachers need to have a certain level of engineering analysis to be able to determine the quality of the students process and solution, and this kind of professional development requires an investment of time (Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers 2008). STEM goals for learners are to transfer scientific knowledge and processes to understand world, know and use innovative technologies and analyze their effects, understand the engineering process in order to understand the design of technological development, and the analyze, reason, and communicate the solutions to mathematical problems while applying them

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 13

to a variety of situations. STEM education promotes critical thinking skills and attempts to educate experts in areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. One of the hopes of STEM education is to produce more interest in the following areas: computer/information systems, game design, software development, biology, chemistry, physics, engineering, and the field of mathematics. In their article Diana Epstein and Raegen T. Miller, addressed the crisis for Elementary educator and the STEM initiative. They argued that oftentimes Elementary educators are not equipped with the knowledge to best instruct students in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and math. Their research highlighted that prospective teachers can become certified educators without taking a rigorous college-level STEM class such as calculus, statistics, or chemistry, and without the higher level knowledge of sciences and mathematics. In their report, the authors focus on the necessity of preparing elementary school teachers to lay the foundation for future STEM learning. In order to improve STEM education, strengthening the selection, preparation, and licensure of elementary school teachers is vital. These authors recommend: increasing science and mathematics preparation programs, as well as including more instruction of mathematics and science in education courses, and implementing teacher compensation policies. In order for the United States to gain success in the globally competitive 21st century, it is crucial that elementary school teachers improve their knowledge within STEM (Epstein & Miller, 2011). In his article of the importance of subject integration and interdisciplinary studies, David Thornburg, further noted that traditionally math and science have been emphasized more than technology and engineering in practical applications of STEM. Supporters of STEM education encourage increasing the technology and engineering in the standard K-12 curriculum. In order

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 14

to effectively address learning in twenty-first century school, instruction of technology is not solely incorporating computer literacy, but it focuses on the continuous learning of a variety of tools and techniques in instruction (Thornburg, 2008). The research has proven that STEM is a program that is readily available among the middle school and high school levels and provides numerous benefits to both the individual student as well as the global economy and future of the United States competitive and innovative advantages in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. However, lack of research and implementation at the elementary school level needs to be rethought because these years are foundational to a students educational future. With the increasing needs of our economy, the prevalent need and importance of beginning STEM implementation at the elementary school level is recommended. The education system must continue to evolve and adapt to better meet the needs of the 21st century learners and their futures.

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 15

References Aleman, M. P. (1992). Redefining teacher. Educational Leadership, 50(3), 97. Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., & Levine, S. C. (2010). Female teachers math anxiety affects girls math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, 107, 18601863. Bentley, T. (1994). Facilitation: Providing opportunities for learning. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill. Borgman, C.L., Abelson, H., Dirks, L., Johnson, R., Koedinger, K.R., Linn, M.C., Lynch, C.A., Oblinger, D.G., Pea, R.D., Salen, K., Smith, M.S., & Szalay, A. (2008). Fostering learning in the networked world: The cyberlearning opportunity and challenge, A 21st century agenda for the National Science Foundation (Report of the NSF Task Force on Cyberlearning). Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 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). Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M. & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in p-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3) 369-387. Brown, E.T., Karp, K., Petrosko, J.M., Jones, J., Beswick, G., Howe, C., & Zwanizig, K. (2007). Crutch or catalyst: Teachers beliefs and practices regarding calculator use in mathematics instruction. School Science and Mathematics, 107 (3), 102-116. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, J. G., Norby, M. M., & Ronning, R. R. (2004). Cognitive

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 16

Psychology and Instruction. Columbus: OH: Pearson. Bursal, M., & Paznokas, L. (2006). Mathematics anxiety and pre-service elementary teachers confidence to teach mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematics, 106(4), 173179. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and empowering America for brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academics Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html. Darling-Hammond, L. (1994, September). Will 21st-century schools really be different? Education Digest, 60, 48. Daugherty, J. L., Merrill, C., & Reese, G. C. (2010). Trajectories of mathematics and technology education pointing to engineering design. The Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 46-52. Ejiwale, J. A. (2012). Facilitating teaching and learning across stem fields. Journal of STEM Education,13(3), 87-94. Retrieved from http://www.ulib.niu.edu:4426/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=8fb4a56e-80ef-4138-8b8d0499f2cded86@sessionmgr13&vid=2&hid=26 Epstein, D., & Miller, R. T. (2011). Slow off the mark: Elementary school teachers and the crisis in STEM education. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 77(1), 4-10. Faulkner, L.R. (2008). Foundations for success: National Mathematics Advisory Panel (Final Report Briefing). Washington, D.C.; U.S. Department of Education. Glasgow, N. A. (1997). New curriculum for new times: A guide to student-centered,

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 17

problem-based learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Herron, M. (1971).The nature of scientific inquiry. The School Review, 79 (2), 171-212. Hartzler, D. S. (2000). A Meta-analysis of Studies Conducted on Integrated Curriculum Programs and Their Effects on Student Achievement. Doctoral dissertation. Indiana University. International Technology Education Association. (2000/2002/2007). Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology. Reston, VA: Author. Kraus, R. (2009). Coordinating with science education. Technology and Children: A Journal for Elementary School Technology Education, 14(1) 8-9. Labov, J. B., Reid, A. H., & Yamamoto, K. R. (2010). Integrated biology and undergraduate science education: a new biology education for the twenty-first century? CBE Life Science Education, 9, 10-16. Metz, S. (2011). Promoting STEM careers starts in the K-12 classroom. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 6(24). Moore, W., & Esselman, M. (1992). Teacher efficacy, power, school climate and achievement: A desegregating districts experience. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Nadelson, L. S. (2009). How true inquiry can happen in K-16 science education. The Science Educator, 18(1), 4857. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC. National Research Council. (1997). Science for all children: A guide to improving elementary science in your district. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 18

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry in the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of K-12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, D.C.: The National Academic Press. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades k-8. Committee on science learning, kindergarten through eighth grade. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Science Foundation. (1996). Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology, NSF, 96. Arlington, VA. Sanders, M. E. (2009). Stem, stem education, stemmania. The Technology Teacher. 68 (4)20-26. Sanders, M. E., & Binderup, K. (2000). Integrating Technology Education Across The Curriculum. A Monograph. Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association. Sanders, M. E., & Wells, J. (2005, September 15). STEM graduate education/research collaboratory. Paper presented to the Virginia Tech Faulty, Virginia Tech. Thomasian, J. National Governors Association, (2011). Building a science,technology, engineering and math education agenda. Retrieved from website: http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/1112STEMGUIDE.PDF. Scher, D. (2000). Lifting the curtain: The evolution of Geometers sketchpad. The Mathematics Educator, 10(1), 42-48.

STEM Curriculum in Elementary Education 19

Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Its the nature of the beast: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39 (3). Thornburg, David. 2008. Why STEM Topics are Interrelated: The Importance of Interdisciplinary Studies in K-12 Education. The Thornburg Center for Space Exploration, p. 5. http://www.tcse-k12.org/pages/stem.pdf U.S. Department of Education. (2011, April). Postsecondary awards in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, by state: 2001 and 2009. Washington, DC. Venkataraman, B., Riordan, D.G., & Olson, S. (2010, September). Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for Americas future. Washington, DC: Presidents Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Wittmer, J. & Myrick, R. D. (1980). Facilitating teaching: Theory and practice. Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media Corporation.