Research Article

STREAM role models 4 ALL: A project supported by Scientix STE(A)M Partnership Education Resilience in Europe

Paraskevi Efstratiou Foti 1 * , Matthaios Patrinopoulos 1 , Paraskevi Iatrou 2 , Maria Rellia 3
More Detail
1 Regional Center for Educational Planning, Attica, GREECE2 School of Pedagogical and Technological Education, Socialinnov, GREECE3 Ralleia Experimental Primary Schools of Piraeus, Piraeus, GREECE* Corresponding Author
Eurasian Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 4(1), 2024, 13-18, https://doi.org/10.30935/ejsee/14563
Published: 26 April 2024
OPEN ACCESS   657 Views   509 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

STREAM role models 4 ALL project serves as a comprehensive guide for educators aiming to integrate STEM education into their classrooms. Emphasizing the incorporation of art into STEM education, the project advocates for a STEAM approach that fosters students’ exploration, discovery, and engagement in innovative engineering skills. It underscores the benefits of employing pedagogical methods such as inquiry-based learning and problem-based learning to cultivate active learning, deeper knowledge, and critical thinking skills. Furthermore, the project underscores the significance of computational thinking in shaping problems and expressing solutions in a manner conducive to efficient computer execution. Addressing the challenges encountered by schools when implementing STEM approaches, including the necessity for teacher training, access to resources, and the creation of a supportive classroom climate, the project offers valuable insights. Overall, STREAM role models 4 ALL project provides a valuable resource for educators seeking to promote STEM education and equip students with the skills to address global challenges through exploration, discovery, and creative problem-solving.

CITATION (APA)

Foti, P. E., Patrinopoulos, M., Iatrou, P., & Rellia, M. (2024). STREAM role models 4 ALL: A project supported by Scientix STE(A)M Partnership Education Resilience in Europe. Eurasian Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 4(1), 13-18. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejsee/14563

REFERENCES

  1. Asunda, P. A. (2014). A conceptual framework for STEM integration into curriculum through career and technical education. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 49(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE49.1Asunda
  2. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: The teacher’s experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 112-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2014.991099
  3. Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. In W. H. Gijselaers (Ed.), New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 3-11). Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966804
  4. Boon, M., & Van Baalen, S. (2019). Epistemology for interdisciplinary research–shifting philosophical paradigms of science. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 9, 16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-018-0242-4
  5. Chesloff, J. (2013). STEM education must start in early childhood. Education Week, 32(23), 27-32. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-stem-education-must-start-in-early-childhood/2013/03
  6. Falik, O., Eylon, B., & Rosenfeld, S. (2008). Motivating teachers to enact free-choice PBL in science and technology (PBLSAT): Effects of a professional development model. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19, 565-591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-008-9113-8
  7. Foti, P. (2021a). Exploring kindergarten teachers’ views on STEAM education and educational robotics: Dilemmas, possibilities, limitations. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 82-95. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.00
  8. Foti, P. (2021b). The ST(R)E(A)M methodology in kindergarten: A teaching proposal for exploratory and discovery learning. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 2(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2021.2.1.21
  9. Foti, P. (2022). Cultivating preschool students’ digital competence through developmentally appropriate software. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 7(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v7i2.4257
  10. Foti, P. (2023). Educational robotics and computational thinking in early childhood–Linking theory to practice with ST(R)EAM learning scenarios. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 8(1), 111-128. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v8i1.4677
  11. Foti, P., & Rellia, M. (2020). ST(R)EAM and educational robotics. Grigoris Editions.
  12. Foti, P., & Rellia, M. (2023). Creativity and innovation. ST(R)EAM learning scenarios and skills labs. Grigoris Editions.
  13. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 11(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
  14. Gredler, M. E. (2012). Understanding Vygotsky for the classroom: Is it too late? Educational Psychology Review, 24, 113-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9183-6
  15. Lyons, C. D., & Tredwell, C. T. (2015). Steps to implementing technology in inclusive early childhood programs. Computers in the Schools, 32(2), 152-166.
  16. Nunes, S., Oliveira, T. A., & Oliveira, A. (2017, July). Problem based learning–a brief review. In AIP conference proceedings (Vol. 1863, No. 1). AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4992682
  17. Patrinopoulos, M., & Iatrou, P. (2019). Implementation of STEM tinkering approaches in primary school education in Greece. Sino-US English Teaching, 16(12), 510-516. https://doi.org/10.17265/1539-8072/2019.12.004
  18. Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
  19. Psycharis, S., Iatrou, P., Kalovrektis, K., & Xenakis, A. (2022). The impact of the computational pedagogy STEAM model on prospective teachers’ computational thinking practices and computational experiment capacities. A case study in a training program. In M. E. Auer, W. Pachatz, & T. Rüütmann (Eds.), Learning in the Age of Digital and Green Transition. ICL 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems (vol 634, pp. 400-411). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26190-9_41
  20. Psycharis, S., Kalovrektis, K., & Xenakis, A. (2020). A conceptual framework for computational pedagogy in STEAM education: Determinants and perspectives. Hellenic Journal of STEM Education, 1(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.12973/hjstem/01120
  21. Psycharis, S., & Kotzampasaki, E. (2019). The impact of a STEM inquiry game learning scenario on computational thinking and computer self-confidence. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(4), em1689. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/103071
  22. Quigley, C. F., & Herro, D. (2016). “Finding the joy in the unknown”: Implementation of STEAM teaching practices in middle school science and math classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 410-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9602-z
  23. Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Teacher Technology, 68, 20-26. https://www.teachmeteamwork.com/files/sanders.istem.ed.ttt.istem.ed.def.pdf
  24. Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002
  25. Swartz, J. R., Costa, L., A., Beyer, K., Reagan, R., & Kallick, B. (2010). Thinking-based learning: Promoting quality student achievement in the 21st century. Teachers College Press.
  26. Tindall, T., & Hamil, B. (2004). Gender disparity in science education: The causes, consequences, and solutions. Education, 125(2), 282-295.
  27. Tsupros, N., Kohler, R., & Hallinen, J. (2009). STEM education: A project to identify the missing components. Intermediate Unit, 1, 11-17. https://www.cmu.edu/gelfand/archive/archived-documents/stem-survey-report-cmu-iu1.pdf
  28. Wing, J. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society. Social Issues in Computing. http://socialissues.cs.toronto.edu
  29. Yakman, G., & Lee, H. (2012). Exploring the exemplary STEAM education in the US as a practical educational framework for Korea. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(6), 1072-1086. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.6.1072