21^st Century Curriculum Change Initiative: A Focus on STEM Education as an Integrated Approach to Teaching and Learning

Kimberly Barcelona^1,

¹Department of Defense Educational Activity, Fort Rucker Alabama, United States of America

Cite this paper:
Kimberly Barcelona. 21^st Century Curriculum Change Initiative: A Focus on STEM Education as an Integrated Approach to Teaching and Learning. American Journal of Educational Research. 2014; 2(10):862-875. doi: 10.12691/education-2-10-4

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to apply Kotter’s 8-Stage Process for Change in transforming traditional school organizationsinto models for 21^st century instruction and explore research that suggests the change process was effectively implemented in order to improve student achievement. This paper is developed through inquiry and research that describes a course of action for a change initiative to enrich curricula and meet a vision for competency-based curricular reform. Two analyses were conducted including (1) review of literature and statistics driving the need for curricular reform and (2) a qualitative analyses of data collection from studies conducted on schools which instituted curricular reform to develop interdisciplinary curricula in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). Analyzing and using the statistics and data from school systems in the state of Maine, which have made changes in their curricula and instructional methods, allows for critical review of the success of the change process. Results reveal that curriculum reform in the areas of STEM that creates a shift towards a more integrated approach in curriculum design has improved student achievement. Improving curriculum and instruction would be a hollow gesture without identifying and reviewing the research that suggests the use and application of the principles from John Kotter’s 8-Stage Process for Change outlined in his book Leading Changewas applied to deeply root successful change. Curriculum reform is a response to the growing need for educating future innovators that can continue to keep our world moving forward. Kotter’s first step to creating change begins with a sense of urgency and currently we have a wealth of studies that are conducted that speak loudly to our society that we must focus on curriculum that involves students in problem solving challenges and innovative thinking activities to prepare them for the needs our society today and in the future. The educational system we have today is a product of the industrial age and was organized like an assembly line to produce a standardized product, which was considered the educated. At the time, it fit the needs of businesses. It is time that we begin asking what skills we will need our learners to know in the next twenty years. Engineers work in teams to solve large, complex problems and educational systems lack necessary skill building activities to foster what industries will need for the future success of our global society (Senge, 2014). As our economy moves from a manufacturing-based economy to, an information and service-based economy, the demand for a workforce well educated in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) is growing. Unfortunately, the number of students who choose STEM fields continues to decline (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2009; Galloway, 2008; National Research Council Committee on Science, Engineering Education Reform, 2006; Mooney & Laubach, 2002). As such, there is a great need to spark interest among our K-12 youth in STEM, and to develop and facilitate quality engineering experiences for K-12 students (National Science Board, 2003; Frantz, DiMiranda & Siller, 2011) (Table 1).

Keywords:
21st century learning curriculum STEM education problem solving teaching

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Anderson, R.D. (2000). Study of Curriculum Reform. [Volume I: Findings and Conclusions.] Studies of Education Reform. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC.
[2]	Barker, B. S., &Ansorge, J. (2007). Robotics as Means to Increase Achievement Scores in an Informal Learning Environment. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 229-243.
[3]	Becker, K. & Park, K. (2011). “Effects of integrative approaches among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects on students’ learning: A preliminary meta-analysis.” Journal of STEM Education, Volume 12.
[4]	Brown, J. (2013). “The Current Status of STEM Education Research”. Journal of STEM Education. Retrieved from http://ojs.jstem.org/index.php?journal=JSTEM&page=article&op=view&path[]=1652&path[]=1490.
[5]	Foy, P., Martin, M.O., & Mullis, I.V.S. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics and TIMSS 2011 International Results in Science. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
[6]	Honey, M., Pearson G., &Schweingruber, H. (2014). STEM Integration in K-12 Education: Status, Prospects, and an Agenda for Research.National Academy of Engineering; National Research Council. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18612&page=5.
[7]	Horn, M. (2014). Disrupting Class. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=i3Xzz2T59eU#t=137.
[8]	Kotter, J.P. (2012). Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
[9]	Kuenzi, J.J. (2008). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: Background, Federal Policy, and Legislative Action. Education Policy and Domestic Social Policy Division.
[10]	Lake, C. (1994). Integrated Curriculum. School Improvement Research Series. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education.
[11]	Levy, F. &Murnana, M. (2004).The New Division of Labor--How to Prepare for America's Changing Job Market. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2004/murnane05132004.html.
[12]	Maine STEM Collaborative (2014). Maine Mathematics & Science Alliance. Augusta, ME. Retrieved from www.umaine.edu/epscor/STEMCollab.htm, www.mmsa.org, www.mainestem.org.
[13]	National Research Council (2011). STEM Education: Identifying Effective Approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
[14]	Pinnell, M., Rowly, J.,Preiss, S., Franco, S., Blust, R. & Beach, R. (2013). “Bridging the Gap Between Engineering Design and PK-12 Curriculum Development Through the use of the STEM Education Quality Framework.”Journal of STEM Education, Volume 14. Retrieved from http://ojs.jstem.org/index.php?journal=JSTEM&page=article&op=view&path[]=1804&path[]=1562.
[15]	Rhoten, D., & Parker, A. (2004). “Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path.”Science, Vol. 306, p. 2046.
[16]	Riskowski, J. L., Todd, C. D., Wee, B., Dark, M., & Harbor, J. (2009). “Exploring the Effectiveness of an Interdisciplinary Water Resources Engineering Module in an Eighth Grade Science Course”. International Journal of Engineering Education, 25(1), 181-195.
[17]	Scott, C. (2012). “An Investigation of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Focused High School in the U.S.”.Journal of STEM Education. Volume 13. Retrieved from http://ojs.jstem.org/index.php?journal=JSTEM&page=article&op=view&path[]=1629&path[]=1493.
[18]	Senge, P. (2014). Organizational Dynamics, Culture and Generational Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAkJqzJYHJc.
[19]	Singer, S.R., Nielsen, N.R. & Schweingruber, H.A. (2012). Discipline-based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering Committee on the Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline-Based Education. Research Board on Science Education Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. National Research Council of the National Academies.