nach oben

International Journal of Technology and Design Education

13.04.2024

The effect of a STEM integrated curriculum on design thinking dispositions in middle school students

verfasst von: Dina Thomason, Pei-Ling Hsu

Erschienen in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

STEM, the integration of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects is a popular topic as schools grapple with how to best prepare students for an ever-evolving society. As societal and technological challenges emerge, design thinking has been lauded as a method to enable people to help tackle those challenges. The steps of the design thinking process, empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test align with engineering design and can be used as a problem-solving method in classrooms to help promote creativity, critical thinking, and collaboration. The purpose of this explanatory sequential mixed methods study was to better understand if a STEM integrated curriculum helps promote design thinking in middle schoolers. The study compared two middle school groups, one that uses an integrated STEM curriculum and one that does not. Quantitative data was collected using the design thinking disposition survey through pre and post testing. Qualitative data was collected through free response questions and student and teacher interviews. There was no difference found in the change of design thinking dispositions between students at the two schools, however both groups scored lowest on the design thinking disposition of prototype. Free response questions showed that students at the STEM integrated school perceived an increased ability to design solutions to problems. Student and teacher interviews highlighted benefits of using a STEM integrated curriculum including providing collaborative opportunities to solve hands-on, open-ended problems. How a STEM integrated curriculum can develop design thinking should continue to be examined.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Adams, E. L. (2021). The effect of a middle grades STEM initiative on students’ cognitive and noncognitive outcomes. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.100983.

Aldemir, J., & Kermani, H. (2017). Integrated STEM curriculum: Improving educational outcomes for Head Start children. Early Childhood Development and Care, 187(11), 1694–1706. https://doi.org/10.1080.03004430.2016.1185102.CrossRef

Amir, N. (2020). Strengthening the science-D&T interaction through simple maker centered projects in a Singapore classroom. Physics Education, 55(4). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ab9212.

Arık, M., & Topçu, M. S. (2022). Implementation of engineering design process in the K-12 science classrooms: Trends and issues. Research in Science Education, 52, 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09912-x.CrossRef

Avcu, Y. E., & Er, K. O. (2020). Developing an instructional design for the field of ict and software for gifted and talented students. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(1), 161–183. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.6.1.161.CrossRef

Awad, N. (2023). Exploring STEM integration: Assessing the effectiveness of an interdisciplinary informal program in fostering students’ performance and inspiration. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(2), 679–699. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1931832.CrossRef

Baran, E., Bilici, S. C., Mesutoglu, C., & Ocak, C. (2019). The impact of an out-of-school STEM education program on students’ attitudes toward STEM and STEM careers. School Science and Mathematics, 119, 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1111.ssm.12330.CrossRef

Bartholomew, S. R., & Strimel, G. J. (2018). Factors influencing student success on open-ended design problems. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28, 753–770. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9415-2.CrossRef

Bond, L. (2007). My child doesn’t test well. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED498967.pdf.

Boone, H. N., & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing likert data. The Journal of Extension, 50(2). https://doi.org/10.34068/joe.50.02.48. Article 48.

Brown, T. J. (2008). June). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86, 84–92. Google Scholar | Medline | ISI.

Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. HarperCollins.

Chan, H., Choi, H., Hailu, M. F., Whitford, M., & Duplechain DeRouen, S. (2020). Participation in structured STEM-focused out‐of‐school time programs in secondary school: Linkage to postsecondary STEM aspiration and major. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(8), 1250–1280. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21629.CrossRef

Chin, C., & Chia, L. G. (2006). Problem-based learning: Using ill-structured problems in biology project work. Science Education, 90(1), 44–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20097.CrossRef

Chiu, M. H., & Krajcik, J. (2020). Reflections on Integrated approaches to STEM Education: An International Perspective. In J. Anderson, & Y. Li (Eds.), Integrated approaches to STEM education. Advances in STEM education. Springer. https://doi-org.utep.idmhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52229-2_29.

Christensen, K. S., Hjorth, M., Iversen, O. S., & Smith, R. C. (2019). Understanding design literacy in middle-school education: Assessing students’ stances towards inquiry. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29, 633–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9459-y.CrossRef

Crawford, B. A., Krajcik, J. S., & Marx, R. W. (1999). Elements of a community of learners in a middle school science classroom. Science Education, 83, 701–723. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199911)83:6<701::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-2.CrossRef

Cresswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th ed.). Pearson.

Cresswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd Edition. SAGE.

Dare, E. A., Keratithamkul, K., Hiwatig, B. M., & Li, F. (2021). Beyond content: The role of STEM disciplines, real-world problems, 21st century skills, and STEM careers within science teachers’ conceptions of integrated STEM education. Education Sciences, 11, 737. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110737.CrossRef

Davey, J. W., Gugiu, P. C., & Coryn, C. L. S. (2010). Quantitative methods for estimating the reliability of qualitative data. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 6(13), 140–162. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v6i13.266.CrossRef

Dewey, J. (2007). Experience and education. Free.

Dosi, C., Rosati, F., & Vignoli, M. (2018). Measuring design thinking mindset. International Design Conference-2018. https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0493.

English, L. D., & King, D. T. (2015). STEM learning through engineering design: Fourth grade students’ investigations in aerospace. International Journal in STEM Education, 2(14). https://doi.org/10.1186/240594-015-0027-7.

Ericson, J. D. (2021). Mapping the relationship between critical thinking and design thinking. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00733-w.CrossRef

Falco, L. (2020). An intervention to support mathematics self-efficacy in middle school. In L. M. Harrison, E. Hurd, & K. Brinegar (Eds.), Integrative and interdisciplinary curriculum in the middle school: Integrated approaches in teacher preparation and practice (pp. 37–67). Routledge.

Fan, S-C., Yu, K-C., & Lou, S-J. (2018). Why do students present different design objectives in engineering design projects? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(4), 1039–1060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9420-5.CrossRef

Forbes, A., Falloon, G., Stevenson, M., Hatzigianni, M., & Bower, M. (2021). An analysis of the nature of young students’ STEM learning in 3D technology-enhanced makerspaces. Early Education and Development, 32(1), 172–187.CrossRef

Frykholm, J., & Glasson, G. (2010). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science & Mathematics, 105(3), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18047.x.CrossRef

Furner, J. M., & Kumar, D. D. (2007). The mathematics and science integration argument: A stand for teacher education. Eurasia Journal for Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 185–189. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75397.CrossRef

Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. Walden Faculty and Staff Publications 455. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/facpubs/455.

Goldman, S., & Kabayadondo, Z. (Eds.). (2017). Taking design thinking to school. Routledge.

Goldman, S., Zielezinski, M. B., Vea, T., Bachas-Daunert, S., & Kabayadondo, Z. (2017). Capturing middle school students’ understandings of design thinking. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.) Taking Design Thinking to School (pp. 94–111). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781317327585-14.

Goldstein, M. H. (2018). Characterizing trade-off decisions in student designers (Order No. 10840585). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2102578313). https://utep.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/characterizing-trade-off-decisions-student/docview/2102578313/se-2.

Guzey, S. S., & Li, W. (2023). Engagement and science achievement in the context of integrated STEM education: A longitudinal study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-10023-y.CrossRef

Gwangwava, N. (2021). Learning design thinking through a hands-on learning model. International Journal of Innovative Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (IJITLHE), 2(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJITLHE.20210101.oa4.CrossRef

Haimovitz, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2017). The origins of children’s growth and fixed mindsets: New Research and a new proposal. Child Development, 88(6), 1849–1859. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12955.CrossRef

Hallström, J., & Ankiewicz, P. (2023). Design as the basis for integrated STEM education: A philosophical framework. Frontiers in Education (Lausanne), 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1078313.

Hayes, J. C., & Kraemer, D. J. M. (2017). Grounded understanding of abstract concepts: The case of STEM learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0046-z.CrossRef

He, X., Li, T., Turel, O., Kuang, Y., Zhao, H., & He, Q. (2021). The impact of STEM education on mathematical development in children aged 5–6 years. International Journal of Education Research, 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101795.

Hiğde, E., & Aktamış, H. (2022). The effects of STEM activities on students’ STEM career interests, motivation, science process skills, science achievement and views. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101000.

Holthius, N., Deutscher, R., Schultz, S. E., & Jamshidi, A. (2018). The New NGSS classroom: A curriculum framework for project-based science learning. American Educator, 42(2), 23–27. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A543900497/OVIC?u=txshracd2603 &sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=215b1271.

Hou, H. I., & Lien, W. C. (2022). Students’ critical thinking skills in an interactive EMI learning context: Combining experiential learning and reflective practices. ICFAI Journal of English Studies, 17(2), 60–72.

Hung, W., Jonassen, D. H., & Liu, R. (2007). Problem-based learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, van J. Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology 1 (pp. 485–506). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

IDEO (2023). Design thinking for educators. https://designthinking.ideo.com/resources/design-thinking-for-educators.

International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (2020). Standards for technological and engineering literacy: The role of technology and engineering in STEM education. https://www.iteea.org/STEL.aspx.

Isabell, T., & Mentzer, N. (2022). Three tools for teaching design in your classroom: Monday morning ready. The Technology Teacher, 82(1), 18–21.

Kang, H., Calabrese Barton, A., Tan, E., Simpkins, S. D., Rhee, H., & Turner, C. (2019). How do middle school girls of color develop STEM identities? Middle school girls’ participation in science activities and identification with STEM careers. Science Education, 103, 418–439. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21492.CrossRef

Kelley, T. R., & Sung, E. (2017). Sketching by design: Teaching sketching to young learners. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27, 363–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9354-3.CrossRef

Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., & Hong, H. Y. (2015). Design thinking and education. Design thinking for education: Conceptions and application in teaching and learning. Springer.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall.

Kress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2018). Collective knowledge construction. In International Handbook of the Learning Sciences (1st Ed., pp. 137–146). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315617572-14.

Ladachart, L., Cholsin, J., Kwanpet, S., Teerapanpong, R., Dessi, A., Phuangsuwan, L., & Phothong, W. (2022). Ninth-grade students’ perceptions on the design-thinking mindset in the context of reverse engineering. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(5), 2445–2465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09701-6.CrossRef

Lee, H., & Blanchard, M. R. (2019). Why teach with PBL? Motivational factors underlying middle and high school teachers’ use of problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1719.

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557–584. https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557.CrossRef

Lester, J. N., Cho, Y., & Lochmiller, C. R. (2020). Learning to do qualitative data analysis: A starting point. Human Resource Development Review, 19(1), 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484320903890.CrossRef

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(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z.CrossRef

Liedtka, J. (2014). Innovative ways companies are using design thinking. Strategy & Leadership, 42(2), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-01-2014-0004.CrossRef

Lin, L., Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., & Shen, S. (2020). From knowledge and skills to digital works: An application of design thinking in the information technology course. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36, 100646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100646.CrossRef

Loes, C. N., & Pascarella, E. T. (2017). Collaborative learning and critical thinking: Testing the link. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(5), 726–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1291257.CrossRef

Lofgran, B. B., Smith, L. K., & Whiting, E. F. (2015). Science self-efficacy and school transitions. School Science and Mathematics, 115, 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12139.CrossRef

Lord, K. C. (2019). Flexible learning: The design thinking process as a K-12 educational tool. Journal of Higher Education Thinking and Practice, 19(7), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v19i7.2531.CrossRef

Luchs, M. G. (2015). A brief introduction to design thinking. In Design Thinking (eds M.G. Luchs, K.S. Swan and A. Griffin). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119154273.ch1.

Maiorca, C., Roberts, T., Jackson, C., et al. (2021). Informal learning environments and impact on interest in STEM careers. International Journal of Science and Math Education, 19, 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10038-9.CrossRef

Marks, J. (2017). The impact of a brief design thinking intervention on students’ design knowledge, iterative dispositions, and attitudes towards failure. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Marks, J., & Chase, C. C. (2019). Impact of a prototyping intervention on middle school students’ iterative practices and reactions to failure. Journal of Engineering, Education108(4), 547–573. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20294.CrossRef

Marra, R., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works: Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4), 221–238.

Marsden, E., & Torgerson, C. J. (2012). Single group, pre- and post-test research designs: Some methodological concerns. Oxford Review of Education, 38(5), 583–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2012.731208.CrossRef

McCurdy, R. P., Nickels, M., & Bush, S. B. (2020). Problem-based design thinking tasks: Engaging student empathy in STEM. Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 24(2), 22–55.

McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.CrossRef

Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-School science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x.CrossRef

Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Jackson, C., Miller, M., Walcott, B., Little, D. L., Speler, L., Schooler, W., & Schroeder, D. C. (2014). Developing Middle School Students’ interests in STEM via Summer Learning experiences: See Blue STEM Camp. School Science and Mathematics, 114(6), 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12079.CrossRef

Morris, T. H. (2020). Experiential learning - a systematic review and revision of Kolb’s model. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1064–1077. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1570279.CrossRef

Nadelson, L. S., & Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Contexts, challenges, and the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 221–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1289775.CrossRef

National Research Council, et al (2014). STEM integration in K-12 Education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research, edited by Heidi Schweingruber, et al., National Academies Press. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/utep/detail.action?docID=3379257.

Ng, W., & Fergusson, J. (2020). Engaging high school girls in interdisciplinary STEAM. Science Education International, 31(3), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i3.7.CrossRef

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies.

Nokes-Malach, T. J., Richey, J. E., & Gadgil, S. (2015). When is it better to learn together? Insights from research on collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review (27), 645–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9312-8.

Ortiz-Revilla, J., Adúriz-Bravo, A., & Greca, I. M. (2020). A framework for epistemological discussion on integrated STEM education. Science & Education, 29, 857–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00131-9.CrossRef

Pappas, I. O., Mora, S., Jaccheri, L., & Mikalef, P. (2018, April). Empowering social innovators through collaborative and experiential learning. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), pp. 1080–1088. IEEE, 2018.

Pattison, N. P. (2021). Powerful partnerships: An exploration of the benefits of school and industry partnerships for STEM education. Teachers and Curriculum, 21(2), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.15663/tandc.v21i0.367.CrossRef

Razzouk, R. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/003454312457429.CrossRef

Rehmat, A. P., & Hartley, K. (2020). Building engineering awareness: Problem based learning approach for STEM integration. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28636.

Reynante, B. M., Selbach-Allen, M. E., & Pimentel, D. R. (2020). Exploring the promises and perils of integrated STEM through disciplinary practices and epistemologies. Science & Education, 29, 785–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00121-x.CrossRef

Roehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E., et al. (2021). Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum. International Journal for STEM Education, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00259-8.

Saldaňa, J. (2012). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Sage.

Salzman, H., Kuehn, D., & Lowell, L. (2013). Guestworkers in the high-skill U.S. labor market: An analysis of supply, employment and wage trends (pp. 1–35). Economic Policy Institute. Briefing Paper no359https://doi.org/10.7282/T379469D.

Santos, L. F. (2017). The role of critical thinking in science education. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(20), 160–173.

Shanks, M. (2012). An introduction to design thinking: process guide [PDF] Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford https://web.stanford.edu/~mshanks/MichaelShanks/files/509554.pdf.

Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 13–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1.CrossRef

Sikka, A. (1991). The effect of creativity training methods on the creative thinking of fourth, fifth, and sixth-grade minority students (Order No. 9312052). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (303924270). Retrieved from https://utep.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/effect-creativity-training-methods-on-creative/docview/303924270/se-2.

Siverling, E. A., Suazo-Flores, E., Mathis, C. A., & Moore, T. J. (2019). Students’ use of STEM content in design justifications during engineering design‐based STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 119(8), 457–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12373.CrossRef

Solodikhina, A., & Solodikhina, M. (2022). Developing an innovator’s thinking in engineering education. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 2569–2584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10709-7.CrossRef

Stanford d.school (2023). Tools for taking action. https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources.

Stohlmann, M. (2022). Growth mindset in K-8 STEM education: A review of the literature since 2007. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(2), 149–162. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202213029.CrossRef

Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653. Article 4.

Struyf, A., De Loof, H., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2019). Students’ engagement in different STEM learning environments: Integrated STEM education as promising practice? International Journal of Science Education, 41(10), 1387–1407. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1607983.CrossRef

Tan, A-L., Ong, Y. S., Ng, Y. S., & Tan, J. H. J. (2023). STEM problem solving: Inquiry, concepts, and reasoning. Science & Education, 32, 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00310-2

Trochim, W. M., & Donnelly, J. P. (2001). Research methods knowledge base (Vol. 2). Macmillan Publishing Company, Atomic Dog Pub.

Tsai, M. J., & Wang, C. Y. (2021). Assessing young students’ design thinking disposition and its relationship with computer programming self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 410–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120967326.CrossRef

Vasquez, J., Sneider, C., & Comer, M. (2013). STEM lesson essentials, grades 3–8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Heinemann.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wan, Z. H., Jiang, Y., & Zhan, Y. (2021). STEM education in early childhood: A review of empirical studies. Early Education and Development, 32(7), 940–962. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.1814986.CrossRef

Wingard, A., Kijima, R., Yang-Yoshihara, M., & Sun, K. (2022). A design thinking approach to developing girls’ creative self-efficacy in STEM. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46. https://doi.org/10.10169/j.tsc.2022.101140.

Zhou, N., Pereira, N. L., George, T. T., Alperovich, J., Booth, J., Chandrasegaran, S., Tew, J. D., Kulkarni, D. M., & Ramani, K. (2017). The influence of toy design activities on middle school students’ understanding of the engineering design processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(5), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9693-1.CrossRef

Titel: The effect of a STEM integrated curriculum on design thinking dispositions in middle school students
verfasst von: Dina Thomason
Pei-Ling Hsu
Publikationsdatum: 13.04.2024
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education
Print ISSN: 0957-7572
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1804
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09894-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Premium Partner