Public dialogue with science and development for teachers of STEM

Linking public dialogue with pedagogic praxis

Richard Watermeyer, Catherine Montgomery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)
19 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Despite evidence of quality teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subject domains (ACME 2007, Pollard et al. 2003) and insistence on the part of many national governments on the economic value of STEM, education, recruitment and retention into STEM subject fields and occupations is said to be continually blighted by a ‘leaky pipeline’. In the UK context, schools are seen to benefit from a multitude of external STEM engagement and enrichment providers and STEM engagement initiatives, the contribution of which is to increase pupil interest, enthusiasm and awareness of STEM. However, despite evidence of the positive impacts of STEM engagement on learners, there exists a dearth of understanding related to how principles of STEM engagement can facilitate STEM teachers in becoming more pedagogically innovative and relevant and, therefore, engaging of their learners in the classroom context. Teachers are also at the nexus of tensions between STEM engagement and the pressures of the curriculum, the assessment system and other aspects of formal schooling. In this article, we employ a secondary data analysis of two prominent cases of public engagement in science and technology (PEST) in the UK to elicit combined lessons for STEM engagement and the pedagogical development of teachers. We consider the successes of science dialogue, which as one iteration of PEST, may be a fertile site for learning, in establishing principles of best practice that might be transposed to the development of teachers as more able and effective in the engagement of learners in STEM.
Original languageEnglish
Article number1422621
Pages (from-to)90-106
Number of pages17
JournalJournal of Education for Teaching
Volume44
Issue number1
Early online date7 Jan 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

pedagogics
dialogue
mathematics
engineering
teacher
science
economic value
secondary analysis
best practice
evidence
pupil
occupation
data analysis

Cite this

Public dialogue with science and development for teachers of STEM : Linking public dialogue with pedagogic praxis. / Watermeyer, Richard; Montgomery, Catherine.

In: Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol. 44, No. 1, 1422621, 2018, p. 90-106.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{aa599b48fe1748c6a6ceb6bf94943aab,
title = "Public dialogue with science and development for teachers of STEM: Linking public dialogue with pedagogic praxis",
abstract = "Despite evidence of quality teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subject domains (ACME 2007, Pollard et al. 2003) and insistence on the part of many national governments on the economic value of STEM, education, recruitment and retention into STEM subject fields and occupations is said to be continually blighted by a ‘leaky pipeline’. In the UK context, schools are seen to benefit from a multitude of external STEM engagement and enrichment providers and STEM engagement initiatives, the contribution of which is to increase pupil interest, enthusiasm and awareness of STEM. However, despite evidence of the positive impacts of STEM engagement on learners, there exists a dearth of understanding related to how principles of STEM engagement can facilitate STEM teachers in becoming more pedagogically innovative and relevant and, therefore, engaging of their learners in the classroom context. Teachers are also at the nexus of tensions between STEM engagement and the pressures of the curriculum, the assessment system and other aspects of formal schooling. In this article, we employ a secondary data analysis of two prominent cases of public engagement in science and technology (PEST) in the UK to elicit combined lessons for STEM engagement and the pedagogical development of teachers. We consider the successes of science dialogue, which as one iteration of PEST, may be a fertile site for learning, in establishing principles of best practice that might be transposed to the development of teachers as more able and effective in the engagement of learners in STEM.",
author = "Richard Watermeyer and Catherine Montgomery",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1080/02607476.2018.1422621",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "90--106",
journal = "Journal of Education for Teaching",
issn = "0260-7476",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public dialogue with science and development for teachers of STEM

T2 - Linking public dialogue with pedagogic praxis

AU - Watermeyer, Richard

AU - Montgomery, Catherine

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Despite evidence of quality teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subject domains (ACME 2007, Pollard et al. 2003) and insistence on the part of many national governments on the economic value of STEM, education, recruitment and retention into STEM subject fields and occupations is said to be continually blighted by a ‘leaky pipeline’. In the UK context, schools are seen to benefit from a multitude of external STEM engagement and enrichment providers and STEM engagement initiatives, the contribution of which is to increase pupil interest, enthusiasm and awareness of STEM. However, despite evidence of the positive impacts of STEM engagement on learners, there exists a dearth of understanding related to how principles of STEM engagement can facilitate STEM teachers in becoming more pedagogically innovative and relevant and, therefore, engaging of their learners in the classroom context. Teachers are also at the nexus of tensions between STEM engagement and the pressures of the curriculum, the assessment system and other aspects of formal schooling. In this article, we employ a secondary data analysis of two prominent cases of public engagement in science and technology (PEST) in the UK to elicit combined lessons for STEM engagement and the pedagogical development of teachers. We consider the successes of science dialogue, which as one iteration of PEST, may be a fertile site for learning, in establishing principles of best practice that might be transposed to the development of teachers as more able and effective in the engagement of learners in STEM.

AB - Despite evidence of quality teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subject domains (ACME 2007, Pollard et al. 2003) and insistence on the part of many national governments on the economic value of STEM, education, recruitment and retention into STEM subject fields and occupations is said to be continually blighted by a ‘leaky pipeline’. In the UK context, schools are seen to benefit from a multitude of external STEM engagement and enrichment providers and STEM engagement initiatives, the contribution of which is to increase pupil interest, enthusiasm and awareness of STEM. However, despite evidence of the positive impacts of STEM engagement on learners, there exists a dearth of understanding related to how principles of STEM engagement can facilitate STEM teachers in becoming more pedagogically innovative and relevant and, therefore, engaging of their learners in the classroom context. Teachers are also at the nexus of tensions between STEM engagement and the pressures of the curriculum, the assessment system and other aspects of formal schooling. In this article, we employ a secondary data analysis of two prominent cases of public engagement in science and technology (PEST) in the UK to elicit combined lessons for STEM engagement and the pedagogical development of teachers. We consider the successes of science dialogue, which as one iteration of PEST, may be a fertile site for learning, in establishing principles of best practice that might be transposed to the development of teachers as more able and effective in the engagement of learners in STEM.

U2 - 10.1080/02607476.2018.1422621

DO - 10.1080/02607476.2018.1422621

M3 - Article

VL - 44

SP - 90

EP - 106

JO - Journal of Education for Teaching

JF - Journal of Education for Teaching

SN - 0260-7476

IS - 1

M1 - 1422621

ER -