Sex differences in the perceived value of outreach and museums/science centres in students' decisions to enrol in university science, technology and engineering courses

This paper reports a number of findings from the Interests and Recruitment in Science (IRIS) study carried out in Australia in 2011. The findings concern the perceptions of first year university students in science, technology and engineering courses about the influence of museums/science centres and outreach activities on their choice of course. The study found that STE students in general tended to rate museums/science centres as more important in their decisions than outreach activities. However, a closer examination showed that females in engineering courses were significantly more inclined to rate outreach activities as important than were males in engineering courses or females in other courses. The implications of this finding for strategies to encourage more young women into engineering are discussed.

Starting out in STEM : a study of young men and women in first year science, technology, engineering and mathematics courses

In late 2011, first year university students in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses across Australia were invited to participate in the international Interests and Recruitment in Science (IRIS) study. IRIS investigates the influences on young people's decisions to choose university STEM courses and their subsequent experiences of these courses. The study also has a particular focus on the motivations and experiences of young women in courses such as physics, IT and engineering given the low rates of female participation in these fields. Around 3500 students from 30 Australian universities contributed their views on the relative importance of various school and non-school influences on their decisions, as well as insights into their experiences of university STEM courses so far. It is hoped that their contributions will help improve recruitment, retention and gender equity in STEM higher education and careers.

David F. Treagust : congenial soul, science educator, and international research leader

For almost a half century David F. Treafust has been an exemplary science educator who has contributed through his dedication and commitments to students, curriculum development and collaboration with teachers, and cutting edge research in science education that has impacted the field globally, nationally and locally. A hallmark of his outstanding career is his collaborative style that inspires others to produce their best work.

The importance of science fiction and other STEM-related mass media in young people’s decisions to enrol in university STEM courses

This paper presents Australian results from the Interests and Recruitment in Science (IRIS) study with respect to the influence of STEM-related mass media, including science fiction, on students’ decisions to enrol in university STEM courses. The study found that across the full cohort (N=2999), students tended to attribute far greater influence to science-related documentaries/channels such as Life on Earth and the Discovery Channel, etc. than to science-fiction movies or STEM-related TV dramas. Males were more inclined than females to consider science fiction/fantasy books and films and popular science books/magazines as having been important in their decisions. Students taking physics/astronomy tended to rate the importance of science fiction/fantasy books and films higher than students in other courses. The implications of these results for our understanding of influences on STEM enrolments are discussed.

Sustainability into the engineering curriculum

Higher education institutions have made some progress towards Engineering Education for Sustainable Development (EESD). There is however a ‘time lag dilemma’ facing engineering educators, where the pace of traditional curriculum renewal may not be sufficient to keep up with potential market,regulatory and institutional shifts.

Fusing curricula : science, technology and ICT

Curriculum demands continue to increase on school education systems with teachers at the forefront of implementing syllabus requirements. Education is reported frequently as a solution to most societal problems and, as a result of the world’s information explosion, teachers are expected to cover more and more within teaching programs. How can teachers combine subjects in order to capitalise on the competing educational agendas within school timeframes? Fusing curricula requires the bonding of standards from two or more syllabuses. Both technology and ICT complement the learning of science. This study analyses selected examples of preservice teachers’ overviews for fusing science, technology and ICT. These program overviews focused on primary students and the achievement of two standards (one from science and one from either technology or ICT). These primary preservice teachers’ fused-curricula overviews included scientific concepts and related technology and/or ICT skills and knowledge. Findings indicated a range of innovative curriculum plans for teaching primary science through technology and ICT, demonstrating that these subjects can form cohesive links towards achieving the respective learning standards. Teachers can work more astutely by fusing curricula; however further professional development may be required to advance thinking about these processes. Bonding subjects through their learning standards can extend beyond previous integration or thematic work where standards may not have been assessed. Education systems need to articulate through syllabus documents how effective fusing of curricula can be achieved. It appears that education is a key avenue for addressing societal needs, problems and issues. Education is promoted as a universal solution, which has resulted in curriculum overload (Dare, Durand, Moeller, & Washington, 1997; Vinson, 2001). Societal and curriculum demands have placed added pressure on teachers with many extenuating education issues increasing teachers’ workloads (Mobilise for Public Education, 2002). For example, as Australia has weather conducive for outdoor activities, social problems and issues arise that are reported through the media calling for action; consequently schools have been involved in swimming programs, road and bicycle safety programs, and a wide range of activities that had been considered a parental responsibility in the past. Teachers are expected to plan, implement and assess these extra-curricula activities within their already overcrowded timetables. At the same stage, key learning areas (KLAs) such as science and technology are mandatory requirements within all Australian education systems. These systems have syllabuses outlining levels of content and the anticipated learning outcomes (also known as standards, essential learnings, and frameworks). Time allocated for teaching science in obviously an issue. In 2001, it was estimated that on average the time spent in teaching science in Australian Primary Schools was almost an hour per week (Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). More recently, a study undertaken in the U.S. reported a similar finding. More than 80% of the teachers in K-5 classrooms spent less than an hour teaching science (Dorph, Goldstein, Lee, et al., 2007). More importantly, 16% did not spend teaching science in their classrooms. Teachers need to learn to work smarter by optimising the use of their in-class time. Integration is proposed as one of the ways to address the issue of curriculum overload (Venville & Dawson, 2005; Vogler, 2003). Even though there may be a lack of definition for integration (Hurley, 2001), curriculum integration aims at covering key concepts in two or more subject areas within the same lesson (Buxton & Whatley, 2002). This implies covering the curriculum in less time than if the subjects were taught separately; therefore teachers should have more time to cover other educational issues. Expectedly, the reality can be decidedly different (e.g., Brophy & Alleman, 1991; Venville & Dawson, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers report that students expand their knowledge and skills as a result of subject integration (James, Lamb, Householder, & Bailey, 2000). There seems to be considerable value for integrating science with other KLAs besides aiming to address teaching workloads. Over two decades ago, Cohen and Staley (1982) claimed that integration can bring a subject into the primary curriculum that may be otherwise left out. Integrating science education aims to develop a more holistic perspective. Indeed, life is not neat components of stand-alone subjects; life integrates subject content in numerous ways, and curriculum integration can assist students to make these real-life connections (Burnett & Wichman, 1997). Science integration can provide the scope for real-life learning and the possibility of targeting students’ learning styles more effectively by providing more than one perspective (Hudson & Hudson, 2001). To illustrate, technology is essential to science education (Blueford & Rosenbloom, 2003; Board of Studies, 1999; Penick, 2002), and constructing technology immediately evokes a social purpose for such construction (Marker, 1992). For example, building a model windmill requires science and technology (Zubrowski, 2002) but has a key focus on sustainability and the social sciences. Science has the potential to be integrated with all KLAs (e.g., Cohen & Staley, 1982; Dobbs, 1995; James et al., 2000). Yet, “integration” appears to be a confusing term. Integration has an educational meaning focused on special education students being assimilated into mainstream classrooms. The word integration was used in the late seventies and generally focused around thematic approaches for teaching. For instance, a science theme about flight only has to have a student drawing a picture of plane to show integration; it did not connect the anticipated outcomes from science and art. The term “fusing curricula” presents a seamless bonding between two subjects; hence standards (or outcomes) need to be linked from both subjects. This also goes beyond just embedding one subject within another. Embedding implies that one subject is dominant, while fusing curricula proposes an equal mix of learning within both subject areas. Primary education in Queensland has eight KLAs, each with its established content and each with a proposed structure for levels of learning. Primary teachers attempt to cover these syllabus requirements across the eight KLAs in less than five hours a day, and between many of the extra-curricula activities occurring throughout a school year (e.g., Easter activities, Education Week, concerts, excursions, performances). In Australia, education systems have developed standards for all KLAs (e.g., Education Queensland, NSW Department of Education and Training, Victorian Education) usually designated by a code. In the late 1990’s (in Queensland), “core learning outcomes” for strands across all KLA’s. For example, LL2.1 for the Queensland Education science syllabus means Life and Living at Level 2 standard number 1. Thus, a teacher’s planning requires the inclusion of standards as indicated by the presiding syllabus. More recently, the core learning outcomes were replaced by “essential learnings”. They specify “what students should be taught and what is important for students to have opportunities to know, understand and be able to do” (Queensland Studies Authority, 2009, para. 1). Fusing science education with other KLAs may facilitate more efficient use of time and resources; however this type of planning needs to combine standards from two syllabuses. To further assist in facilitating sound pedagogical practices, there are models proposed for learning science, technology and other KLAs such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), Productive Pedagogies (Education Queensland, 2004), de Bono’s Six Hats (de Bono, 1985), and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1999) that imply, warrant, or necessitate fused curricula. Bybee’s 5 Es, for example, has five levels of learning (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate; Bybee, 1997) can have the potential for fusing science and ICT standards.

Cultivating Innovation through Social Relationships: A Qualitative Study of Outstanding Australian Innovators in Science, Technology and the Creative Industries

In this chapter, we describe and explore social relationship patterns associated with outstanding innovation. In doing so, we draw upon the findings of 16 in-depth interviews with award-winning Australian innovators from science & technology and the creative industries. The interviews covered topics relating to various influences on individual innovation capacity and career development. We found that for all of the participants, innovation was a highly social process. Although each had been recognised individually for their innovative success, none worked in isolation. The ability to generate innovative outcomes was grounded in certain types of interaction and collaboration. We outline the distinctive features of the social relationships which seem to be important to innovation, and ask which ‘social network capabilities’ might underlie the ability to create an optimal pattern of interpersonal relationships. We discuss the implications of these findings for universities, which we argue play a key role in the development of nascent innovators.

Science teacher leadership for transforming the curriculum and classroom practice

While teacher leadership is the basis for innovation and reform within schools, few international studies have focused on the leadership practices of science teachers and heads of science departments. This chapter reviews the Australasian literature that addresses the issue both directly and indirectly. The transformational practices of heads of science departments as well as influential science teachers within departments are identified in this chapter.

Integrating engineering education within the elementary and middle school mathematics curriculum

Many nations are experiencing a decline in the number of graduating engineers, an overall poor preparedness for engineering studies in tertiary institutions, and a lack of diversity in the field. Given the increasing importance of mathematics, science, engineering, and technology in our world, it is imperative that we foster an interest and drive to participate in engineering from an early age. This discussion paper argues for the integration of engineering education within the elementary and middle school mathematics curricula. In doing so, we offer a definition of engineering education and address its core goals; consider some perceptions of engineering and engineering education held by teachers and students; and offer one approach to promoting engineering education within the elementary and middle school mathematics curriculum, namely through mathematical modeling.

Teaching and learning science and mathematics through technology practice

In this chapter we review studies of the engagement of students in design projects that emphasise integration of technology practice and the enabling sciences, which include physics and mathematics. We give special attention to affective and conceptual outcomes from innovative interventions of design projects. This is important work because of growing international concern that demand for professionals with technological expertise is increasing rapidly, while the supply of students willing to undertake the rigors of study in the enabling sciences is proportionally reducing (e.g., Barringtion, 2006; Hannover & Kessels, 2004; Yurtseven, 2002). The net effect is that the shortage in qualified workers is having a detrimental effect upon economic and social potential in Westernised countries (e.g., Department of Education, Science and Training [DEST], 2003; National Numeracy Review Panel and National Numeracy Review Secretarial, 2007; Yurtseven, 2002). Interestingly, this trend is reversed in developing economies including China and India (Anderson & Gilbride, 2003).

Parents as coteachers of science and technology in a middle-school classroom

This study explores coteaching/cogenerative dialoguing with parents to investigate how it may be employed to engage parents more meaningfully in schools. The cogens provided a space where participants became aware of resources available for coteaching, made decisions about planning and enacting coteaching, as well as interstitial culture that facilitated positive parent-teacher relationships.

Science and technology supervision resources

This document is an adaptation of a report submitted to the ALTC in 2009, with additional data collected through subsequent interviews with science supervisors. The organisation of the contents also reflects a development of thought since the original project. The framework presented in this document is intended to provide science and technology supervisors with a range of options with respect to supervisory pedagogy. It has been developed to highlight different aspects of thinking about supervision as a teaching and learning practice; as well as approaches, strategies and roles associated with supervision. It will enable science and technology supervisors to become aware of the diverse options available to them and provide systematic ways of thinking about supervisory practices. Use of this framework will encourage supervisors to make choices based on broader, rather than more limited, repertoires. It will also encourage thinking about supervision as a teaching and learning practice.