SCIENCE TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES AND TEACHING GUIDELINES ON STEM EDUCATION IN LARGE HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE LOWER NORTHERN PART OF THAILAND
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to explore science teachers’ perspectives and guidelines on STEM education in large high schools in the Lower Northern part of Thailand. Seven teachers in the Department of Science and Technology who were experienced in teaching for 2–26 years were pleased to participate in in-depth interviews. The researchers collected data through interviews and document analysis, which were then analyzed by content analysis, member check, and peer debriefing. The findings indicated that 1) the participants understood that STEM education is mixing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and constructing innovations for solving daily problems. However, they were unclear how to integrate technology and engineering to science; 2) they perceived that STEM education was crucial for the enhancement of higher-order thinking skills when they employed project-based learning, but the collaboration among teachers with is different disciplines was rarely found due to time limitations and lack of facilities; and 3) they did project-based learning activities as STEM-based learning activities if their schools required a student project as an academic evaluation. Some teachers used steps of the engineering design process for STEM education based on the Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology guidelines.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The owner of the article does not copy or violate any of its copyright. If any copyright infringement occurs or prosecution, in any case, the Editorial Board is not involved in all the rights to the owner of the article to be performed.
References
Chamrat, S (2017). The Definition of STEM and Key Features of STEM Education Learning Activity. STOU Education Journal, 10(2), 13-34.
Dare, A. E., & Ellis, A. J., & Roeh, H. G. (2018). Understanding science teachers’ implementations of integrated STEM curricular units through a phenomenological multiple case study. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, 4.
Faikhamta, C., Suknarusaithagul, N., Yokyong, S., Panyanukit, P., Prasoplarb, T., Muangsong, K., Ninubon, J., & Nuamcharoen, N. (2022). A conceptualization of STEM–BCG for Education. Journal of Research Unit on Science, Technology and Environment for Learning, 13(2), 344-362.
Kijkuakul, S. (2015). STEM Education (Part II). Journal of Educational Naresuan University, 17(3), 154-160.
Kijkuakul, S. (2022). Science learning management. Phitsanulok: Naresuan University Publishing House.
Ladachart, L., Phothong, W., Rittikoop, W., & Ladachart, L. (2019). Teachers’ understanding and views about STEM education and engineering design. Silpakorn University Journal, 39(3), 133–149.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concept, and core ideas. Committee on New Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Science and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Office of the Education Council. (2017). Education Plan (B.E. 2560- 2579). Bangkok: Prikwhan Graphic.
Srikoom, W., & Faikhamta, C., & Deborah, L. H. (2018). Dimension of effective STEM integrate teaching practice. K-12 STEM Education, 4(2), 313-330.
Srikoom, W., & Hanuscin, D. L., & Faikhamta, C. (2017). Perceptions of in-service teachers toward teaching STEM in Thailand. Asia-Pacifi Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 18(2), 1-23.
Vichaidit, C., & Faikhamta, C. (2021). Science teachers’ perceptions on pedagogical content knowledge for STEM. Journal of Educational Naresuan University, 23(2), 152-168.
Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12–19. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x