Joey Rider-Bertrand and Kim Weaver will be hosting a session on "Leading Change Starting with Kindergarten." Joey is the Curriculum & Instruction Specialist for STEM at Lancaster Lebanon IU 13. Kim is an elementary STEM educator in St. Mary's County, Maryland. Please join Joey and Kim from February 11 - 24, 2013.
So many times educators and schools focus on change at the secondary level. Technology and engineering education and STEM are no exception. How many middle schools and high schools can you name that are currently developing or implementing "engineering programs" or a "STEM initiative?" Perhaps this is because the results are evident within a shorter period of time. Whereas, when change is initiated at early childhood and elementary levels, it often not until much higher grade levels that the results become apparent. While there are elementary schools that are incorporating technology, engineering, and/or STEM in the educational program, many of these schools also remain laser-focused on reading and math and separate content areas for development.
ReplyDeleteDuring a recent visit to a prestigious school system with secondary schools named as some of the nation's very best in STEM, I had the opportunity to see an elementary school that is focused on STEM. It was exciting to see students excited about STEM. It was interesting to learn of the grants that the school was able to secure to initiate a STEM approach. It was somewhat of a let down to realize how very little technology and engineering was a part of STEM in a "STEM school." This did not surprise me. In fact, I am ashamed to say that I have somehow become quite numb to this common situation. On the other hand, the administrators from school districts in my region that also attended this visit thought that they had just found the magic bullet! We debriefed later that day, and the misunderstandings about technology, engineering, and STEM were plentiful, especially at the elementary level.
A few of the administrators asked me what I thought of the school and its approach to STEM. What would I do the same or differently if I were the principal? I caught myself before jumping up on the soapbox that I seem to carry with me more and more often, and turned the question right back on the administrators. In this first post, I now ask the same to the members of ITEEA - What should technology, engineering, and/or STEM look like in an elementary school? Please respond by adding a comment to this post.
I was approached last year about a STEM K-8 school that was to be built in Illinois in the same city as a national known Math & Sciece school. I presented what ITEEA's curriculum arm was doing in way of K-5 and what they have already done for 6-8. Needless to say, I am afraid the school will be what you saw and experienced. The difficult thing in life is to change perceptions. Whether is of a person, a profession or in this case a field of study. The only way I know how to answer your question is to say what we have done in the way of curriculum with TEEMS (EbD). Now the next step is to promote, promote and promote.
ReplyDeleteIn my nine years with LEGO® as an educational consultant I learned that young children respond to "hands-on" activities commonly referred to as using "manipulatives". When early education students "play" they are building their resources to apply problem solving strategies. As we seek to discover what the T&E of STEM should look like in an elementary program, I would submit that is isn't as important to know WHAT to teach as it is to know HOW to incorporate the process of implementing Technology & Engineering concepts in an instructional program. To this end those of us that have influence upon educational practice need to be able to address the need for the training of all future educators in the delivery of T&E based instruction from pre-K through adult education.
ReplyDeleteThe curriculum materials provided through the EbD network provide an introduction to this methodology, and need to be promoted nationally within "teacher prep" programs at the college level. As more teachers understand, are prepared to use, and are comfortable with incorporating T&E activities in their instruction we should see progress toward the reality of a true K-12 Technology & Engineering program. We need to accept this challenge as one would accept the challenge of "eating an elephant" - take one small bite at a time.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy background as an elementary teacher includes open learning, Montessori, British Infant School, and multiage philosophies. I spent my career advocating hands-on, meaningful activities that required students to apply everyday lessons as a way to develop ownership of essential knowledge and become self-confident learners. After becoming involved in design technology/children’s engineering in the summer of 1998 I began to implement Children’s Engineering as a natural extension of the hands-on, open-ended projects that I utilized in my classroom. A retired classroom teacher, I now provide professional development to elementary educators across the county.
ReplyDeleteIt is my belief that Children’s Engineering highlights the T&E in STEM education. If we can help elementary educators (K-5) understand the broad meaning of technology, the differences between science and technology, and to recognize technology in the content that they already teach, we can show elementary teachers that they can integrate technology and engineering into their daily lessons without adding an additional subject to the school day.
The key is to provide the proper in-service that will help develop the background knowledge that will persuade teachers that technology and engineering is not an add-on at the K-5 grade levels. I truly believe at the elementary level that in-service training that builds background information is the best way to bring about change.
The bottom line is that we need to avoid the perception that including technology and engineering education at the K-5 level adds another subject to the school day.
Ginger Whiting
Children’s Engineering Educators, LLC
I can't help but wonder...should ITEEA have a position (and therefore a position statement) on the incorporation of technology and engineering at the elementary level? ITEEA-EbD has a number of elementary curricular products...Tech Starters, KITS, HITS, TEEMS. But, based on the latest comments I am curious about exactly WHAT ITEEA should espouse and specifically HOW ITEEA believes it should be accomplished. In other words, is technology and engineering at the elementary exclusively about teaching the design process (technological design and/or engineering design) or is it also about the CONTENT of technology and engineering.
ReplyDeleteJust like in science and math, technology and engineering includes processes/skills and content knowledge. So, in some ways, the inclusion of technology and engineering IS adding another content area to the elementary level. I'm not sure that the best way to approach the addition of T/E to the elementary level is to try to sneak it in, or devalue it by only incorporating the processes (ie. design). I was a science teacher at one point, and I would have NEVER argued for only teaching scientific process skills without teaching science content. The two go together. When I served as a math specialist at the elementary level, I taught students content and skills of math. I would have never tried to help a struggling student learn their multiplication facts exclusively through memorization, because research indicates that for students that struggle, memorization is their downfall in many cases. So, I would teach students about patterns, number relationships, fact families, and what it means from a conceptual standpoint to multiply.
When I offer workshops on STEM education to K-12 teachers, I do not just focus on the processes of scientific inquiry, design, and problem-solving. I try to help teachers see the relationships between and among the content of each discipline, as well. I encourage the teachers to integrate content and incorporate processes of all of the STEM disciplines.
Perhaps the members of ITEEA-CSL have thoughts on this that could be recorded in this online discussion? If you have an opinion on this, please respond. I would be happy to forward thoughts to ITEEA's BoD President.
Twenty years ago I was very fortunate to be introduced to a gentleman who wanted to get technology/engineering into the elementary classrooms. He began talking to me about building bridges with my students. I became very interested because it was a way to get children involved in a hands-on/minds-on activity. Once he came in and guided me through the process I was turned on automatically to Technology Education. I watched the students with amazement! They were engaged, communicating, and excited about learning. I began writing furiously to incorporate this activity into all the subject areas I had to teach. It was so easy to incorporate it. Needless, to say I am still developing new technology/engineering activities to be used in elementary classrooms, twenty years later because I truly believe this is the way to teach children.
ReplyDeleteI have shared my knowledge over the course of the years and watched teachers take activities into their classrooms and then slowly they have had to dismiss them because of all of the demands that are put on them. The main focus of course at the elementary level is reading and math. Even though students will be tested on science skills it is still not a big part of ones day. STEM is making its appearance but it is not being incorporated as it should be. I am still hearing most elementary teachers referring to the T as instructional technology. There is definitely a misunderstanding as to what it “really” is at the elementary level. My charge would be to get teachers at the middle school level, high school level, board level, or college level to partner up with elementary teachers to help them with the understanding of what the T and E is in STEM. I have been very fortunate to be a part of the STEM initiative taking place in South Carolina. They have dynamic people at Clemson helping elementary teachers to gain an understanding of STEM. They are using EbD products to guide their teachers forward.
With the new science standards, I am thrilled they are including engineering because I feel this will put it in the forefront. How are states preparing to handle this new endeavor for the new science standards?
I have had success with in-service workshops and graduate classes for elementary teachers using the K-5 STL Benchmarks to demonstrate the connections between technology and engineering and the math, science, social studies, language arts content that is required in the elementary classroom. Right or wrong, good or bad, the reality is that many elementary teachers are provided pacing charts by their school divisions do not feel that they have time to teach what is PERCEIVED as an add-on.
ReplyDeleteI believe good in-service builds background/content knowledge so that teachers can integrate the K-5 STL Benchmarks, not “sneak them in.” Many of the K-5 benchmarks are already being taught at the K-5 level. Once teachers recognize that, the perception of just another add-on starts to fade. It is amazing how an understanding of what technology is can change the way an elementary teacher presents some lessons!
When teachers are unaware that “technology” means more than computers and electronics (educational technology) they cannot consciously integrate appropriate vocabulary and content into what they are already doing. It is the professional development that introduces these concepts that helps elementary teachers understand the importance of including technology education into what they do everyday. I believe providing activities without this background knowledge does a disservice to the teachers. We always make sure to do both.
For our purposes, I think that it is also important to recognize that the approach for teaching K-2 students and K-5 students might be different, just as the STL Benchmarks are divided by those grade levels.
Oops! I meant to type "K-2" and "3-5" students in that last paragraph.
ReplyDelete