Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Teaching Integrated STEM: the Impact of Personal Background Characteristics and School Context

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A promising approach to increase students’ motivation for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is integrated STEM education (iSTEM). This is an instructional approach that emphasizes the deeper connections between the STEM disciplines by involving students in design challenges centered around real-world problems. However, the successful implementation of a new instructional approach, such as iSTEM, strongly depends on teachers’ attitudes toward the innovation. Therefore, a deeper understanding of teachers’ attitudes toward teaching iSTEM is necessary. This study uses a survey method to investigate the influence of teachers’ background characteristics and school context variables on teachers’ attitudes toward teaching iSTEM. To do so, a differential approach is used. Attitudes toward five key principles for iSTEM (integration, problem-centered, inquiry-based, design-based, and cooperative learning) are examined separately to get a more in-depth and nuanced insight into the factors influencing these attitudes. Results of the multiple regression analyses show that participation in professional development is positively linked to teachers’ attitudes toward all key principles, whereas several other teacher and school context variables are positively correlated with attitudes toward one or two principles. Moreover, experience in mathematics and total years of teaching show a negative correlation with several aspects of teachers’ attitudes toward teaching iSTEM. Findings of this study are valuable, since they not only provide insight into possible barriers to the implementation of iSTEM but also suggest opportunities for overcoming these barriers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. London, England: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., & de Miranda, M. A. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9341-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldemir, J., & Kermani, H. (2017). Integrated STEM curriculum: Improving educational outcomes for head start children. Early Child Development and Care, 187(11), 1694–1706. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1185102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, H. M., & Krogh, L. B. (2010). Science and mathematics teachers’ core teaching conceptions and their implications for engaging in cross-curricular innovations. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an understanding of science teaching practice. Journal for Research in Science Teaching, 33, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023666618800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayub, A. F. M., Bakar, K. A., & Ismail, R. (2015). Factors predicting teachers’ attitudes towards the use of ICT in teaching and learning. In I. Mohamed, L. T. How, A. C. Y. Mui, & W. K. Bin (Eds.), AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1682, No. 1, p. 030010). Melville, NY: AIP Publishing.

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barham, A. I. (2002). An assessment of the effectiveness of cooperative learning strategies in promoting problem-solving skills and achievement in mathematics (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from University of Huddersfield Repository: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/6907/

  • Bryan, L. A., Moore, T. J., Johnson, C. C., & Roehrig, G. H. (2015). Integrated STEM education. In C. C. Johnson, E. E. Peters-Burton, & T. J. Moore (Eds.), STEM roadmap: A framework for integration (pp. 23–37). London, England: Taylor & Francis.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: Are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(3), 497–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9314-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., & Yeung, A. S. (2015). Self-efficacy in Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language in Australian Schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(8), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n8.2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, R., Knezek, G., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2015). Alignment of hands-on STEM engagement activities with positive STEM dispositions in secondary school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(6), 898–909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9572-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. M., DePiper, J. N., Frank, T. J., Nishio, M., Campbell, P. F., Smith, T. M., Choi, Y. (2014). Teacher characteristics associated with mathematics Teachers’ beliefs and awareness of their Students' mathematical dispositions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(2), 246–284. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.45.2.0246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180–213.

  • Day, C., & Sachs, J. (2004). Professionalism, performativity and empowerment: Discourses in the politics, policies and purposes of continuing professional development. In C. Day & J. Sachs (Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers (pp. 3–32). Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeChenne, S. E., Koziol, N., Needham, M., & Enochs, L. (2015). Modeling sources of teaching self-efficacy for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graduate teaching assistants. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-09-0153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denessen, E., Vos, N., Damen, T., Koch, S., Louws, M., & Wigboldus, D. (2011). Explicit and implicit measures of teacher attitudes towards science and technology. In M. J. de Vries, H. van Keulen, S. Peters, & J. Walma van der Molen (Eds.), Professional development for primary teachers in science and technology (pp. 107–119). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Diggs, V. (2009). Ask-think-create: The process of inquiry. Knowledge Quest, 37(5), 30–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaghue, H. (2003). An instrument to elicit teachers' beliefs and assumptions. ELT Journal, 57(4), 344–351. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.4.344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Integrated curriculum, meeting standards through. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durlak, J. (1998). Why program implementation is important. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 17(2), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1300/J005v17n02_02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

  • Eck, M. J. (1969). Occupational experience: A business teachers' asset. Business Education. Forum, 24(3), 30–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeln, K., Euler, M., & Maass, K. (2013). Inquiry-based learning in mathematics and science: A comparative baseline study of teachers’ beliefs and practices across 12 European countries. ZDM, 45(6), 823–836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0507-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R., Felder, G., Mauney, M., Hamrin, C., & Dietz, J. (1995). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. III. Gender differences in student performance and attitudes. Journal of Engineering Education, 84(2), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00162.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitudes, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Retrieved from https://www.GR%20downloadables/STEM%20Education.pdf.

  • Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18(3), 326–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(81)90019-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, S., Yalvae, B., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2015). In-service teachers' implementation and understanding of STEM project based learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1306a

  • Henson, R. K. (2001). Teacher self-efficacy: Substantive implications and measurement dilemmas. Invited keynote at the annual meeting of the Educational Research Exchange, Texas A & M University, Texas.

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 236–262. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, M. K., Yang, H. J., & Yang, H. H. (2016). Design and Verify an instrument of assessing attitude toward STEM teaching. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 10, 41–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, M. (1989). The professional life cycle of teachers. Teachers College Record, 91(1), 31–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarski, R. W., Kulig, K., & Olson, R. E. (1990). Clinical teaching in physical therapy: Student and teacher perceptions. Physical Therapy, 70(3), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/70.3.173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory Into Practice, 38(2), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Levin, J. (1994). Primary/elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science in four areas related to gender differences in students’ science performance. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 6(1), 46–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03170649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones Jr., M. E. (1973). Work experience programs in business education. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 15(2), 22–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ke, F. (2014). An implementation of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Computers & Education, 73, 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, J. (1986). Keeping current: Eight teachers share their secrets. Vocational Education Journal, 61(5), 36–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koballa, T. R. (1988). Attitude and related concepts in science education. Science Education, 72(2), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730720202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, K. Y., & Williams, P. J. (2016). Taiwanese preservice teachers’ science, technology, engineering, and mathematics teaching intention. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(6), 1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9645-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maasz, J., & Schlöglmann, W. (Eds.). (2009). Beliefs and attitudes in mathematics education: New research results. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maio, G., & Haddock, G. (2014). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. London, England: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & Hau, K. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling techniques (pp. 315–353). Hillsdale, MI: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellati, M., Khademi, M., & Shirzadeh, A. (2015). The relationships among sources of teacher pedagogical beliefs, teaching experiences, and student outcomes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 4(2), 177–184. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.2p.177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menmuir, J., & Adams, K. (1997). Young children's inquiry learning in mathematics. Early Years, 17(2), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/0957514970170207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metin, M., Acisli, S., & Kolomuc, A. (2012). Attitude of elementary prospective teachers towards science teaching. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 2004–2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, T. J., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Advancing the state of the art of STEM integration. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 15(1), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustafa, N., Ismail, Z., Tasir, Z., Said, M., & Haruzuan, M. N. (2016). A meta-analysis on effective strategies for integrated STEM education. Advanced Science Letters, 22(12), 4225–4228. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2016.8111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.667014

  • National Academies of Science. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm. Report from the committee on prospering in the global economy of the 21 st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

  • Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027870190403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Society of Professional Engineers. (2013). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. (NSPE Position Statement No. 1768). Retrieved from https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/

  • Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F. (1992). Contextual effects on the self-perceived efficacy of high school teachers. Sociology of Education, 65(2), 150–167. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, P. A. (2003). Inquiry in technology education. In K. D. Helgeson & A. E. Schwaller (Eds.), Selecting instructional strategies for technology education (pp. 117–129). Peoria, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102–119). New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sade, D., & Coll, R. (2003). Technology and technology education: Views of some Solomon Island primary teachers and curriculum development officers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(1), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026155003835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2007). Science education and youth’s identity construction—Two incompatible projects? In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The re-emergence of values in the science curriculum (pp. 231–249). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stains, M., & Vickrey, T. (2017). Fidelity of implementation: An overlooked yet critical construct to establish effectiveness of evidence-based instructional practices. Life Sciences Education, 16(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0113.

  • Stodolsky, S. S., & Grossman, P. L. (1995). The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: An analysis of five academic subjects. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 227–249. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032002227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. J ournal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER) , 2(1), 28-34. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653

  • Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2002). The influence of resources and support on teachers’ efficacy beliefs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

  • Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2017a). Development and validation of an instrument for measuring teachers' attitudes toward teaching integrated STEM (HIVA Working Paper). Retrieved from Research Institute for Work and Society website: https://hiva.kuleuven.be/nl/backupoud/docs/working-papers/HIVA_WP2017_Lieve_Thibaut.pdf

  • Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2017b). How school context and personal factors relate to teachers’ attitudes toward teaching integrated STEM. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9416-1

  • Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., Depaepe, F. (2018a). Integrated STEM education: A systematic review of instructional practices in secondary education. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 02. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/85525

  • Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2018b). The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 190-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.014

  • van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., & Walma van der Molen, J. H. (2015). Improving primary teachers’ attitudes toward science by attitude-focused professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(5), 710–734. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. (2012). Primary teachers' attitudes toward science: A new theoretical framework. Science Education, 96(1), 158–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 1(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the IWT-SBO (grant name STEM@school).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Group Education and Labour Market, Research Institute for Work and Society (HIVA), KU Leuven, Parkstraat 47-Box 5300, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Lieve Thibaut & Heidi Knipprath

  2. MICAS, Microelectronics and sensors, Department of Electrical Engineering (ESAT), KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10-Box 2443, 3001, Leuven, Belgium

    Wim Dehaene

  3. Centre for Instructional Psychology and Technology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational, Sciences, KU Leuven, Dekenstraat 2-Box 3773, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Fien Depaepe

Authors
  1. Lieve Thibaut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heidi Knipprath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wim Dehaene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fien Depaepe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lieve Thibaut.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W. et al. Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Teaching Integrated STEM: the Impact of Personal Background Characteristics and School Context. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 17, 987–1007 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9898-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9898-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation