Portfolio For Stem Education And Communication Sample

Introduction

I chose this module because I have a passion for teaching mathematics and taking this module will let me know how to get the students interested in Class. I am motivated by STEM education difficulties and opportunities to create a new generation of professionals. This module is very helpful to anyone who is interested in untangling the factors that lead to STEM education challenges as well as learning on how to ensure and promote accessibility in STEM education for everyone. In this manner, I also hope to try to hone the skills of considering as many different angles and approaches in order to explain ideas that anyone could easily understand. Lastly, I want to be able to create an environment where every student would be happy to find enjoyment in engaging in STEM.

Week 1: “Introduction to Communicating STEM”

This was the reason why I decided to take this module because the communication of the STEM subjects may be all-important in keeping students interested in the sciences for real. In the papers this week especially Moote et al. (2020), the science capital of the students from different backgrounds is made clear as to how it affects their aspirations in STEM. This underlines the necessity of actions aimed at making effective changes in the learning process to make all the students who want to acquire STEM knowledge and skills, feel free to do so. The paper is chiefly going to scrutinize the essential socio-economic and cultural determinants of students to STEM education and the readership of this research paper envisages educators and policymakers who are concerned in the existing gaps in STEM education. Further this paper has limitation to lack of data about determining socioeconomic status which create very complex factor. In addition, Jenkins & Nelson (2005), focused on insight gender contrasts perspectives in different topics in STEM. This paper is more comprehensive analysis that affecting students attitudes towards STEM.

Based on the participant’s own experience, I saw how disparities in STEM access affect learning engagement. For example, example during my school years engagement in extracurricular activities which involved STEM led to increased, confidence in the STEM activities among students. The difficulty is to reduce these inequalities while adapting STEM to the public’s stereotype of difficulties, or as much as it is perceived to be unreachable for students from diverse backgrounds. Even for teachers the challenge is usually two-pronged: on the one hand there is the curriculum which has to be delivered but on the other hand there is also the job which needs to be done to make the environment more inclusive and interesting.

Some of the learning for this week are; understanding the importance of Science Capital and how it affects learners. According to the current study, schools should focus on the following aspects of STEM communication: The use of context – for example, relating word problems to the real world or through group projects (Dare et al. 2021). Change strategies offer constraints and entail statements such as starting a mentoring program where students of colour have STEM professionals as their tutors, providing genuine and realistic role models and teacher training to adopt culturally responsive teaching practices.

Week 2: “What do we teach and how do we teach STEM subjects”

This week’s readings brought into focus the complex nature of the process of implementing pedagogy in STEM stating a combination of curriculum development, teaching pedagogy, as well as students and how they relate. Hodson (2014) focuses on the diverse goals of science education: This framework comprises learning science as content, learning scientific activity, and learning about science. Thus, the goals highlighted in the paper require more individualized approaches to teaching as common practice shows and it makes the paper relevant for educators who should enhance their practices. On the contrary, Holman and Yeomans (2018) offer a more helpful information-sharing approach mapping ways of enhancing secondary science teaching and learning through well-drafted lesson plans and enhanced resource management. Both papers are directed towards educators; Hodsonis in the style of educating teacher educators and researchers, while Holman and Yeomans are for classroom teachers. Both the paper has same point of view, where the first paper is opinion based and the second paper is based on practical guide for teachers.

This week it mainly focused on national curriculum activity and learn how effectively teach. This focuses on particular arts and sports evident and provides priority in syllabus. In my point of view, the combination of theory and practice shows good efficiency but it is not easy to apply them. There are lessons where practical activities were as interesting as entertainment, but the given activities were not combined with theory which gave me a partial vision of the subject. Time on task or merely providing the objectives of each paper, followed by clear descriptions of the reason behind each activity is highlighted in both papers. Teachers face quite a task when it comes to meeting curriculum requirements and at the same time encouraging the creation of instructional material that enables effective teaching and fostering of understanding and discovery (Choi and Chung, 2021).

Major teaching points include the connection between various practices as well as the adoption of multiple teaching approaches. To improve communication in STEM subjects the teachers should utilize the connection between the subjects for example science issues and mathematics problem solving. Some recommendations for implementation entail creating the student’s autonomous inquiry tasks for combining the theoretical and practical learning processes that develop critical thinking and curiosity.

Week 3: “STEM for all pupils - Making STEM accessible”

This week the format of the class also illustrated what can make it difficult for students to participate in STEM. Sukarman and Retnawati (2022) focused on the difficulties of teacher in implementing integrated STEM education, namely; inadequate time for collaboration, lack of professional development and limited resources. I preferred this paper because of high relevancy with this season’s topic about STEM barriers. They have their audience as educators and policy makers designing STEM education in traditional framework. Along the same line, the study by Sidekerskienė and Damaševičius (2023) also explained the democratising aspects of digital escape rooms since they make education enjoyable in form of games. The paper is addressed to educators seeking new approaches to enhancing the learning of subjects in STEM disciplines. As for the second paper, it also carries out a comparison between traditional methods of knowledge acquisition and enriching discovery learning education.

Considering my practice, I realized that the traditional approach does not cater for the learning disability of students with special needs. One of the goals that I found most relevant was the focus on active integration of various digital tools; when in school, I remember how useful it was to learn some concepts such as interacting simulations during lessons. Nevertheless, difficulties remain unresolved: inequality of technology distribution and long hours of preparation from the teachers’ side.

Some of the things that we learn are getting to appreciate the significance of diversifying STEM in manners that are creative and that adapt. To enhance the accessibility, enhance teachers' training and ensure equivalent technological facilities to every school (Basar et al. 2021). Specific recommendations include instruction on builders like libre-office.org and trying STEAM projects, which connect STEM to students’ routines.

Week 4: “Misconceptions in STEM subjects”

Modell, Michael, and Wenderoth (2005) evaluate that misconceptions of STEM are ingrained in cognition and require proper effort to address the student's mental schemas. This evidence mainly emphasises on presenting and encouraging broader challenges to address misconceptions across STEM, however, it does not focus on biology. As teachers discover this misconception and process this experience leads them to provide valuable information for correcting them. On the other hand, Welder (2012) aligns this discussion with the algebra misconception that errors in early learning disrupt undertsading in the future. Both are needed for teachers to discover the origin of misconceptions, discover student thought processes and apply proper strategies to correct them. This link with STEM capital recognises unique students and their knowledge shape of undertsading new concepts. However, these have practical challenges for example in large classes teachers face struggles to identify individual misconceptions. Here, the author Welder focuses on operational symbols relevant to observed classmates by misinterpreting algebraic notation. In order to tackle this, consideration of diagnosis tools such as targeted questioning and frequent re-learning sessions are effective (Rea et al. 2022). It engages the students with different visual examples that bridge the gaps between real-world applications and abstract concepts by reinforcing correct mental models. 

Focusing on what is learnt in class, the conclusion is that misconceptions always arise from logical arguments which are backed by perceived factual evidence in the form of an experience, though incorrect. Another challenge that makes efforts to address these misconceptions a hard nut to crack is the phenomenon called cognitive dissonance where the head becomes discordant to letting go of supposed facts. This serves to stress the lack of barriers other than misconceptions in regard to learning and the need for students to feel comfortable enough to question things. 

Week 5: “Pop-Culture, contexts and interests”

This week focused on how the implementation of student interests makes STEM education enjoyable. Hagay and Baram-Tsabari (2015) have proposed the idea of the “shadow curriculum” in which teachers add topics that learners are interested in into lessons. This paper focuses on using student-generated questions to enhance and situate learning appropriately for science educators to teach their students. It considers workload of UK teachers and limited timeframe of teachers in significant amount of work, commit valuable class and so on. Here it particularly focuses on subject maths that difficult for students to evaluate new questions for new topic. On the other hand, Dietrich et al., (2021) have shown how pop culture may be used as a teaching aid they developing an interest on science. Such work is useful for teachers interested in bringing innovation into lesson plans and making STEM topics more engaging for children. This paper mainly focuses on qualitative data and difficulty to access learning outcomes in focus on student enjoyment towards content.

Recalling my learning experiences it could help to know what is popular nowadays and how the lesson corresponds to such trends as using video games in order to explain probability. But here lie some difficulties: a problem in keeping topicality variably pertinent to a range of students’ interests and concerns and a problem in harmonizing such issues with curricular ones. Quite frequently, teachers are limited in the use of creativity due to the need to connect the use of fun content to more serious tests (Hang, & Van, 2020). Therefore the implications are that lesson attributes that make students relate to what is taught increase commitment to STEM. To enhance on this area, the educators could enhance regional-based or culturally related examples which align to the students’ context. Some recommendations entail carrying out student projects for which the students have chosen issues that exist in the real world.

Week 6: “Practical work in STEM subjects”

The emphasis was made on the practical works in STEM and how it can be useful and effective during the study process this week. Sharpe and Abrahams (2020) identified students’ perceptions and attitudes to practical work in biology, chemistry, and physics showing that while young students prefer practical activities in class, they move to perceiving them as irrelevant as the end of the year comes closer. This paper failed to present massage clearly because much language are technical and difficult to understand theoretical perspectives. This paper is for the teacher, who would like to maximize practical activities to increase their sustained functionality. Even further, Ramsey (2022), sought to expand this conversation by discussing the intersection of STEM and arts: music with the suggestion that techniques like this can help to enhance understanding of STEM. Ramsey’s audience comprises interdisciplinary teachers, who strive to introduce STEM and arts connections.

Based on my own observations, actual lab exercises in physics and chemistry were entertaining though frequently devoid of links to theory seen in other subjects, which decreased their perceived usefulness. Both the paper is discussed about personal interest and situational interest that link back to the STEM capital in week one based on personal interest. Teachers struggle to conduct practical’s that not only interest the learners but also repeat concepts in the course of the teaching activity mainly given the fact that most learners are preparing for examinations. Some of the learning points include the need to foster links between practical activities and curriculum objectives as well as the benefits of considering subject matter from a cross-discipline manner. The teachers could apply project work in order to enhance STEM communication; for example, when creating experiments associated with daily issues or artwork. Feasible recommendations can be identified, such as autonomy, critical thinking, and enhanced correspondence between the theoretical and practical levels of learning (Alsaleh, 2020).

Week 7: “Explanations – Why are they important in STEM”

This week emphasizes a focal approach to explanations in order to teach STEM subjects. With reference to Banister and Ryan (2001), storytelling has been advocated as a method of reductionism because the tellable form helps to humanise and memorise abstract concepts. In their paper targeting primary and secondary school teachers, they note that stories produce feelings which improve students’ interest. Here Treagust et al. (1998) dissected the way through which most people can gain understanding by employing analogical reasoning which is the linking of new ideas with well-understood principles. However, they emphasize that equally dangerous are misconceptions resulting from poor choice of analogy. This paper is therefore relevant to preserves and in-service teachers providing them with methods on how best to incorporate analogy into the teaching of science.

I can now agree that many a time, the stories and analogy were the most vivid part of the teaching. For instance, a description of planetary orbits as a ‘dance’ helped explain a concept better than equations could ever deliver. The difficulty is to choose exemplifications which may be comprehensible for other students but does not simplify information or create misconceptions. There is, however, the challenge of the timed nature of most educational systems and the need for teachers to create lessons and activities on a daily basis puts pressure on creativity. Some of the points that will be taken away include the correlation of the stories and the use of analogies with the objectives of the lessons. It is suggested for STEM communication improvement that teachers may use culturally appropriate narratives and metaphors for a particular population of learners.

Week 8: “Modelling for students understanding”

This week taught the class that modelling is essential in enhancing the development of concepts to be taught to the students in STEM-related courses. Jonassen et al. (2005) stated that model building is a strong method to support conceptual change since practices learned enable the development of the mental model and its modification. This paper is therefore intended for educators who wish to adopt model-based learning in classrooms to enhance deeper cognitive processing. Kertil and Gurel (2016) examined how mathematical modelling can be used in STEM, and makes the students able to think critically and to solve practical problems. This paper’s audience comprises teachers practising mathematics and STEM teaching who look for teaching strategies using context. This is link with previous week that support teaching modelling and enable critically to improve the models across misconceptions.

Thinking about how STEM education was done in my elementary school, I realized that building models in physics or mathematics really helped me to make abstract notions more real. However, one issue arising from using models is the fact that teachers have to put an effort to ensure that the students understand that models over-simplify systems. To enhance commendation in STEM, teachers should employ hands-on modelling practices and should ensure that they relate their message to practice and both the weeks are correctively measure on this. Such recommendations focus on applicability; therefore, one should utilize specific graphic representations to model and explain ideas, and it is possible to offer students working on the model to the other students to critique or improve.

Week 9: “Questioning – How to ask and answer questions in STEM learning”

The texts for the current week focused on the centrality of questioning in STEM approaches. Alexander et al. (2022) uniquely centred on the perspective theoretical framework for questioning in secondary classrooms on how effectively formulated questions enhance critical thinking and understanding among students. As such, the paper is devoted to educators and researchers who want to improve the kinds of questions that can be used in a classroom. In the same way, Salmon and Barrera (2021) also focused on intentional questioning stating that when teachers ask questions, students benefit from increased thinking and learning. Their work focuses on questions asking for educators who anticipate enhancing the results achieved by their learners.

In my own experience, it was the higher quality of questions performed by teachers that defined how far I was prepared to go. There were specific lessons that involved questioning which made me engage my cognitive skills and Practical Knowledge in relation to theory. But on the timing and when the questions are asked all the students can answer, teachers sometimes do not have ideas on this.

This manual provides the following major guidelines Some of the question types suggested are: Always avoid close-ended questions which do not lead to further discussion or thinking. Regarding questioning, the academic debacle recommends their use in enhancing STEM communication but not in the traditional authority-assisted way, but rather questioning for self-organization and reflection. Practical suggestions comprise wait-time after posing questions to enable time for students to reflect as well as encouragement of asking basic questions in class to enable building students’ confidence and participation.

Week 10: “Creativity and active learning in STEM”

From this week’s readings, the ideas of creativity and the overall learning process as an active one were brought forward in the context of STEM learning. Kind and Kind (2007) have worked to understand the importance of creativity as a way to improve students’ interest and thinking in science education stressing that creativity has to be taught as a way to empower problem-solving skills. Their paper is intended for science teachers and policymakers who have to combine imagination and rationality. It would be better if the paper more focus on culture but it failed to incorporate appropriate culture. On the other hand, Hunter-Doniger et al. (2018) talked about the involvement of arts in STEM Education (STEAM) and stressed the importance of culturally responsive approaches and mathematics storytelling. Their intended audience comprises teachers, who want to link STEM with cultural and individual learners’ contexts. However, this paper is neglected to focus on creative learning or working in STEM.

Thinking back on my experiences, I recall how incorporated attempts in Math such as solving real-life situations actually encouraged me to pay attention to figures of speech. One of them is the fact that creativity is a problem as far as basics are concerned: teachers need to introduce creativity without losing information. Major considerations focus on the aspect of innovativeness to spice up the learning process. Therefore, STEM communication should be enhanced by demanding that students use art or stories to explain their ideas. Some recommendations involve implementing a project-based approach which combines contextual learning with the application of STEM assistive technology and more creativity.

Conclusion

In this particular module, my knowledge concerning STEM communication and the ways of interest stimulation among students has expanded. Every aspect ranging from incorporating students’ interest to the demystifying misconceptions was insightful for me to future practice. It has become evident that creativity, active learning and questioning require flexibility and that ways of teaching and addressing groups of learners need to be as inclusive as possible. It has helped me prepare to positively influence students, and create passion for STEM-related subjects.

Structured academic assistance and assignment samples from Native Assignment Help deliver clear, well-researched, and plagiarism-free content, supporting better understanding and effective completion of academic tasks.

References

• Moote, J, Archer, L, DeWitt, J, MacLeod, E. (2020) Science capital or STEM capital? Exploring relationships between science capital and technology, engineering, and maths aspirations and attitudes among young people aged 17/18. J Res Sci Teach. 2020; 57: 1228–1249
• Jenkins, E. W. & Nelson, N. W. (2005) Important but not for me: students’ attitudes towards secondary school science in England, Research in Science & Technological Education, 23:1, 41-57
• 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(11), 737.
• Hodson, D. (2014) ‘Learning Science, Learning about Science, Doing Science: Different goals demand different learning methods’, International Journal of Science Education, 36 (15), pp2534 – 2553.
• Holman, J. and Yeomans, E. (2018) Improving Secondary Science Guidance Report. London. Education Endowment Foundation
• Choi, L. & Chung, S., (2021). Navigating online language teaching in uncertain times: Challenges and strategies of EFL educators in creating a sustainable technology-mediated language learning environment. Sustainability, 13(14), p.7664.
• Sukarman, S. & Retnawati, H. (2022) Teachers’ barriers in implementing integrated STEM education: A literature review. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2022, Vol.2575 (1)
• Sidekerskienė T, Damaševičius R. Out-of-the-Box Learning: Digital Escape Rooms as a Metaphor for Breaking Down Barriers in STEM Education. Sustainability. 2023; 15(9):7393.
• Basar, Z. M., Mansor, A. N., Jamaludin, K. A., & Alias, B. S. (2021). The effectiveness and challenges of online learning for secondary school students–A case study. Asian Journal of University Education, 17(3), 119-129.
• Modell, H., Michael, J. & Wenderoth, M. P. (2005) ‘Helping the Learner To Learn: The Role of Uncovering Misconceptions’, The American Biology Teacher, 67(1), pp. 20 – 26
• Welder, R.M. (2012), Improving Algebra Preparation: Implications From Research on Student Misconceptions and Difficulties. School Science and Mathematics, 112: 255-264
• Rea, S. D., Wang, L., Muenks, K., & Yan, V. X. (2022). Students can (mostly) recognize effective learning, so why do they not do it?. Journal of Intelligence, 10(4), 127.
• J Res Sci Teach - 2015 - Hagay - A strategy for incorporating students interests into the high‐school science classroom.pdf
• Dietrich, N., Jiminez, M., Harrison, A.W., Coudret, C. & Olmos, E. (2021) Using Pop-Culture to Engage Students in the Classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 98, 896-906
• Hang, L. T., & Van, V. H. (2020). Building Strong Teaching and Learning Strategies through Teaching Innovations and Learners' Creativity: A Study of Vietnam Universities. International Journal of Education and Practice, 8(3), 498-510.
• Sharpe, R. and Abrahams, I. (2020), ‘Secondary school students’ attitudes to practical work in biology, chemistry and physics in England’, in ‘Research in Science & Technological Education’, Volume 38, Issue 1, pages 84 to 104
• Ramsey, G.P. (2022) ‘Integrating science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) and music: Putting the arts in science, technology, engineering, arts, and math (STEAM) through acousticsa’, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 152(2), pp. 1106–1111
• Alsaleh, N. J. (2020). Teaching Critical Thinking Skills: Literature Review. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 19(1), 21-39.
• Banister, F. and Ryan, C. (2001), Developing Science concepts through story-telling, School Science Review, 83(302), p 75 - 83
• Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G. and Venville, G. J. (1998) ‘Teaching science effectively with analogies: An approach for preservice and inservice teacher education’, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(2), pp. 85–101.
• Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., and Gottdenker, J., (2005) ‘Model building for conceptual change’, Interactive Learning Environments, 12(1), pp. 15 – 37
• Kertil, M. & Gurel, C. (2016) Mathematical Modelling: A bridge to STEM education, International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp. 44-55
• Alexander, K., Gonzalez, C. H., Vermette, P. J., & Di Marco, S. (2022). Questions in secondary classrooms: Toward a theory of questioning. Theory and Research in Education, 20(1), 5-25.
• Salmon, A., Barrera, M.,(2021) Intentional questioning to promote thinking and learning,Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol 40
• Kind, P.M. and Kind, V. (2007) ‘Creativity in science education: perspectives and challenges for developing school science’, Studies in Science Education, 43(1), pp. 1-37
• Hunter-Doniger, T., Howard, C., Harris, R. and Hall, C. (2018) ‘STEAM Through Culturally Relevant Teaching and Storytelling’, Art Education. Routledge, 71(1), pp. 46–51:10.