Evaluation of STEM Education Supported by Nature Courses and Informatics According to Students’ Views

Year 2023, , 838 - 857, 28.12.2023

Fatma Keskinkılıç , Menderes Ünal

https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1306815

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the courses designed using the STEM approach, which combines nature-based learning environments with informatics from the perspective of students. Under the scope of nature-based courses, such as "Drama, Biomimicry, Ecoprint, Basic Electricity, Metamorphosis, and Bridging Science" were conducted for 10 days. Following, informatics-based courses such as “Digital Storytelling, Algorithm and Augmented Reality/Visual Block Programming” were instructed to students and employed to perform STEM activities by getting the inspiration of the courses. Then the views of 37 middle school students who participated in the courses were collected using a semi-structured form of qualitative data collection tools in four categories: Preparation, Instructional Material, Process, and Contribution. The data were analyzed by categorical content analysis, and the findings related to each subcategory, concept, and code for each category were presented in tables. In order to increase coding reliability, the opinions of two field experts and a measurement and evaluation expert were consulted. Consensus was reached with another expert, resulting in a 95% agreement. According to the study results, the students expressed positive opinions on the courses in general and stated that courses and game-based lessons that are based on learning by doing and experiencing are more interesting, and that the combination of nature-based learning and information technology is an important experience for them.

Keywords

Nature-based learning, Informatics, STEM, Middle School Student

Supporting Institution

TUBITAK, Science and Society Programs as 4004-Nature Education and Science Schools Project

Project Number

121B918

References

• Açıkgöz, K.Ü. (2008). Active learning (10th edition). İstanbul: Biliş Publications.
• Ayar, M. C. (2015). First-hand experience with engineering design and career interest in engineering: an informal stem education case study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(6), 1655-1675. DOI:10.12738/estp.2015.6.0134
• Avcı, E., Okuşluk, F., & Yıldırım, B. (2021). The effect of stem supported robotic coding activities on gifted students' attitude towards coding. Journal of Educational Theory and Practice Research, Volume 7, Issue 2, 228-235.
• Buldur, S., Bursal, M., Yücel, E., & Yalçın Erik, N. (2018). The effect of an interdisciplinary nature education project on the affective characteristics and environmental awareness of secondary school students. Journal of Human and Social Sciences Research, 7 (5), 284-303. http://www.itobiad.com/issue/41845/498087.
• Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for stem education: challenges and opportunities. NSTA press
• Cleaver, S. (2007). How green classrooms are reconnecting kids with nature. Instructor, p20-24 Nov-Dec. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ792953
• Çiftçi, S., & Bildiren, A. (2020). The effect of coding courses on the cognitive abilities and problem-solving skills of preschool children. Computer Science Education, Vol. 30, No. 1, 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2019.1696169
• Demirel, Ö. (2006). Öğretme sanatı. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
• Dönmez, İ. (2017). Opinions of students and team coaches on robotic tournaments within the framework of stem education (science heroes meet example). Journal of Education, Science and Technology Research, 2(1), 25-42.
• Gencer, A. S., Doğan, H., Bilen, K., & Bilge, C. A. N. (2019). Integrated stem education models. Journal of Pamukkale University Faculty of Education, 45(45), 38-55.
• Gökoğlu, S. (2017). Algorithm perception in programming education: a metaphor analysis. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 6(1), 1-14.
• Greca Dufranc, I. M., García Terceño, E. M., Fridberg, M., Cronquist, B. & Redfors, A. (2020). Robotics and early-years STEM education: The botSTEM framework and activities. European Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 01. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/7948
• Günbatar, S. A., & Tabar, V. (2019). Content analysis of stem research in turkey. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Faculty of Education, 16(1), 1054-1083.
• Güven, İ. (2004). Expectations from teachers for effective teaching. Journal of National Education, Fall, Issue, 164.
• Eguchi, A. (2014). Robotics as a learning tool for educational transformation. In proceeding of 4th international workshop teaching robotics, Teaching with Robotics & 5th International Conference Robotics in Education Padova (Italy).
• Haddon, L (2004). Information and Communication Technologies in Everyday Life: A Concise Introduction and Research Guide. Berg, Oxford. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259256921
• Harmin, M., & Toth, M. (2006). Inspiring active learning: a complete handbook for today's teachers. ASCD. Horizon Report, (2016). The NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2016 K-12 Edition examines emerging technologies for their potential impact on and use in teaching, learning, and creative inquiry in schools.
• Kasalak, İ., Altun, A. (2020). Effects of robotic coding activities on the effectiveness of secondary school students' self-efficacy for coding. Ilkogretim Online - Elementary Education Online, 19 (4): pp. 2171- 2182.
• Kavak, Ş. (2020). The Effect of STEM Education Based Activities on Basic Scientific Process Skills of Preschool Children. (Doctoral dissertation). Çukurova University.
• Kimbell, A. R., Schuhmann, A., & Brown, H. (2009). More kids in the woods: Reconnecting Americans with nature. Journal of Forestry, October/November.
• Lamanauskas V. (2013). Natural science education importance in adolescence. Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 12, No. 4.
• Louv, R. (2019). Last child in nature. Nature deprivation in children and the healing power of nature. TUBITAK Popular Science Books. Ankara.
• Mısırlı, Z. A. (2015). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin eğitim teknolojisi standartlarına ilişkin yeterliklerinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5, 311-337.
• Moore, K.D. (2001). Classroom teaching skills. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.
• Noel-Storr, J. (2004). The role of immersive informal science programs. http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0403/0403144.pdf
• Okal, G., Yıldırım, B., & Temur, S. (2020). The effect of coding education on 5th, 6th and 7th grade students' programming self-efficacy and attitudes about technology. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2.
• Önür, Z & Kozikoğlu, İ. (2020). Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Eğitim Teknolojisi Yeterlikleri. Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(2), 439-464.
• Özçelik, D.A. (2014). Educational programs and teaching (general teaching method). Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Özdemir, P., Akfırat, N., & Adıgüzel, Ö. (2009). Nature education with science and creative drama. Journal of Creative Drama, 4(7), 69-78.
• Özmen, B. & Altun, A. (2014). Undergraduate students' experiences in programming: difficulties and obstacles. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(3), 9-27.
• Patton, Q. M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. News bury Park, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
• Popat, S., Starkey, L. (2019). Learning to code or coding to learn? A systematic review. Computers & Education, 128, 365-376.
• Resnick, M., & Siegel, D. (2015). A different approach to coding. International Journal of People-Oriented Programming, 4(1), 1-4.
• Sönmez, V. (2017). Teaching principles and methods. Ankara Anı Publishing.
• Tamilselvan, N., Sivakumar, N. & Savukan, R. (2012). Information and Communications Technologies (ICT). International Journal of Library and Information Science, Volume 1, Issue 1.
• Tuğluk, M. N., & Öcal, S. (2017). Examination of stem education and its effect on economy: importance of early childhood education. Educational Research Practice, 362.
• Yıldırım, B., & Altun, Y. (2015). Examining the effects of stem education and engineering practices in science laboratory course. Al-Jazari Journal of Science and Engineering, 2(2),28-40.
• Zinth, J. D. (2015). Computer science in high school graduation requirements. Education Commission of the States (ECS) Education Trends. www.ecs.org