Two out of three fourth graders cannot read proficiently and seven out of ten inner-city and rural fourth graders cannot read at the most basic level (Paige, 2002). Data such as these create considerable pressure on K-8 teachers to elevate reading proficiency. As well, one of the further challenges of tests such as the MontCas (Science and Math) and NAEP (Science and Math) is that the assessment questions often require strong reading comprehension skill levels as well as sufficient science and math conceptual understanding.
Added to this now is the growing pressure to incorporate STEM into the K-12 classroom. How do you envision a math/science education curriculum that aligns with the expectations of NCLB while still providing a STEM-rich environment for science inquiry and problem-based math learning?
To explore this question, it will be helpful to examine some of the government policies behind these education agendas. Education Week just published an excellent summary of current STEM policy that integrates our discussion of NAEP and STEM. Check out the main article and click on the online reports of each state to see how Montana is doing.
1.Education Week: The push to improve STEM education.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/03/27/30intro.h27.html
After reading the article, let's start with the basics. What exactly is STEM? What does NAEP have to do with STEM? What do NAEP and STEM have to do with K-8 elementary teachers? How is Montana doing in STEM? How does Montana compare to other states. How do you put all this together for your science and math curriculum program? Finally, where do you stand in all of this? Do you agree with the policies being put forth by the federal government regarding work force development? Does it fit with your personal understanding of the purpose of schooling? Can you see benefits? What parts of this discussion worry you most?
12 comments:
Stem is the push to improve science, technology, engineering and mathematics education across the nation. NAEP is the exam that students take to measure these skills. Teachers and administrators can use the results of this test to see where their school or state measures up. They can see where their students are excelling and lacking.
NAPE and STEM give k-8 elementary teachers the support and knowledge to teach science, technology, engineering and mathematics. STEM gives the expectations, guidelines, ideas and motivation to teach. NAPE is the exam that will probably motivate teachers to teach these subjects seriously and consistently.
Montana students are doing quite well in STEM. According to the 2007 NAPE 44.4 percent of Montana’s 4th grade students scored proficient. This probably sounds low at first glance, but it is above the national average of 38.6 percent. Furthermore Montana is ranked 13 among the United States. Montana managed to score a C- in technology. Montana is working toward improving their technology use and capacity which will greatly improve this grade. As a teacher, this may look daunting and frankly uninspiring, but it shows that if we build a strong math and science curriculum it will be appreciated both by students who will be able to take the test successfully and our administrators who appreciate proficient test scores.
I think that the STEM program is a positive program. This program gives students the opportunity to learn in more depth these subjects. I don’t think it matters if I agree or disagree with the way the government is making policies regarding work force development. The government will always want more well educated people in all facets of our society. Think about programs like Future Farmers of America. At the core it’s the same deal, just for farmers and I’m sure there are many more similar programs out there. I think that STEM has positive benefits for our students. This program may open the engineering door to a student who otherwise would never have been able to see this type of work or have the resources to learn about these topics. I see education as a way to motivate and inspire students. This program, in a sense, does fit with my understanding of the purpose of schooling. As a teacher, I am most worried that we won’t be needed anymore. Teaching will become an entirely standardized process where the ‘teachers’ have little to no say in what is actually being taught.
STEM is the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics program that is being pushed throughout schools in the United States. NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) is a federally sponsored assessment of what America's students know and can do in various subject areas; including mathematics, science, technology, reading, geography, etc. NAEP & STEM allow K-8 teachers the opportunity to see how their students' achievement levels in certain subject areas compare to that of other students across the United States. STEM is helping teachers raise the bar for their students in science, technology, engineering, and math by getting them involved in activities and projects that they are interested in. NAEP is an important exam that essentially holds teachers and schools responsible for how their students are performing in these critical subject areas.
Montana is doing pretty good in STEM. The 4th grade math scores from the NAEP taken in 2007 show that 44.4% of Montana students are proficient, which is higher than the national average of 38.6%. The state rank at this level is 13. The 8th grade math scores from the 2007 NAEP show that 37.6% of Montana students are proficient which is also higher than the national average which is 31.0%. The state rank at this level is 10. The 4th & 8th grade science scores taken from the 2005 NAEP are also higher than the national average- MT 4th grade proficiency in science was 36.8% compared to the national average of 27.0% and the MT 8th grade proficiency in science was 41.6% compared to the national average of 27.3%. Montana is not doing very well in technology compared to other states, our access to technology is above the average score of other states, but our use and capacity of technology is far below the score of other states. These scores show that we need to continue to build a strong science and math curriculum program and possibly incorporate technology throughout more of our lessons.
I think that STEM is a great program-it is building on and expanding the way teachers and students view science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. It grabs the attention of students and gets them excited about these areas through interesting experiments and projects. It is changing how students learn & become motivated about subjects such as science & math, which for many, are two of the more challenging subjects in school. I agree that the policies being put forth by the federal government regarding work force development are important and need to be incorporated into schools. I think that the purpose of school is to help students become well-rounded individuals that will go on to contribute to society in some form or another and I think that programs such as STEM will help achieve this. I think that these policies and programs will benefit schools, teachers, and students in several ways- including holding educators, as well as students, responsible for the learning that takes place in school. One thing that worries me about this whole discussion is the fact that students are constantly being tested and it seems as though that’s become top priority in schools today-which I know is important, but what if all this testing is having a negative impact on how students are performing in school?
Like Erin said, STEM is the drive to improve education in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. NAEP, the national association of education progress, is the test that students take to measure these skills. The idea behind STEM is that schools must do a better job preparing students for an economy that will require different and more technically sophisticated skills. The NAEP test, allows educators to see just exactly how well their school/state is doing and how it measures up against others.
NAEP and STEM have to do with k-8 elementary teachers because it is measuring our ability to access, and use technology in the STEM areas. Montana’s STEM results for 2007 in mathematics was a 44.4% (for fourth graders) compared to the nations average of 38.6%. Montana is ranked 13th in math among the other states, and comparatively is doing quite well. In science, Montana’s state average is 36.8%, well above the national average of 27%. Looking at the technology use and capacity policies map, I noticed that Montana only has 1 policy, while states like Georgia have 9, and 10 policies.
What surprised me the most looking at Montana’s report card was that overall we were given a grade of B in our ability to access technology, while we were given and F in our capacity to actually USE the technology. This is concerning in that if we have the access to use technology then why is it not being used?
I think that using STEM education in the math and science curriculum, would first be done by aligning it with state and national standards, and using it in an interdisciplinary way. I think that the STEM program can be beneficial if it is used properly and appropriately. I agree that it is important for teachers to have high expectations in these subject areas, but the competitiveness of all of this seems to be the major facet going on here. I do agree that science, technology, engineering and mathematics are important and vital to a successful workforce, but I don’t agree that they are the ONLY areas we should be focusing on as teachers. The benefits I see in this program are having students leave high school with a deeper foundation in these four areas; It’s great in that it provides students with skills needed to enter pos-secondary school It is concerning and worrisome to me in that we as educators are losing a lot of freedom as these types of programs come into existence. I have always believed that the purpose of schooling is to make students better citizens and prepare them be successful in life. STEM is a way of achieving this, but I don’t think it should be the only way to do so.
I don’t believe that NCLB and STEM are contradictory. I think they become so when schools begin removing science from the curriculum in order to get better scores on tests. So I think that all schools should teach a diverse and integrated curriculum. Teaching science, math, reading, writing, the arts, and health are an essential part of education! I see integrating technology and engineering as a fairly simple process. Students’ understandings of math and science grow exponentially when exposed to science inquiry and problem-based math. The depth of their understandings through this process is amazing if more schools took the time to focus on their students and what they need to know and not teaching to the test. STEM is an acronym for science, technology, engineering, and math. It is a curriculum that incorporates these four aspects into the teaching program. NAEP numbers are showing that though test scores are improving somewhat, that a very low percentage of students are at or above proficient.
Montana is ranked 13th in STEM performance and is performing above the national average. Montana is ranked 7th as far as making gains in the 4th grade but then falls significantly (down to 46th) for 8th grade in math. This means somewhere along the line we are either not emphasizing this in the curriculum or it is not as well planned out. We rated a B in available technology but failed in actually implementing this technology. It is very unfortunate that students have these tools available but are not getting the opportunity to use it. Texas scored lower than we did (C) for available technology, yet scored higher (B-) with the use of the technology. Also, Texas has a different trend with achievement gains. They are ranked 26 for 4th grade math, but number 2 for 8th grade math. I think that STEM is an important component for education and teachers must find creative ways to integrate it into the classroom since time and resources can be an issue.
I think that it is important to give students the best education we possibly can, but the government needs to decide who is in charge! Either the Federal government needs to step back and allow the states to decide what is best for their students, or we need a National Curriculum. I don’t foresee a middle ground on this topic as it now stands. I don’t think that we should ever apologize for helping our students to be prepared to enter the workforce as competent adults (so I guess I would call this a benefit). The large majority of them will enter the workforce and understanding basic skills-technology, math, reading, and writing are absolutely essential. So I do believe that STEM is a worthy attempt to help educate America’s children. I worry that the states playing tug-of-war with the federal government creates an unhealthy educational environment (for both teachers and students). I also worry that enforcement of STEM means that teachers are even more stressed about time and curriculum and that means less time for other curriculum.
Erin Barr
STEM is the integration of science, technology, engineering, and math. These four subject correlate with each other in many ways, such as knowing how to take measurements (math) when doing a science experiment (science) and recording your data in a spreadsheet (technology). There are many other ways these subjects relate as well. NAEP is an exam used to measure how well students know these skills. Teachers can use the results of NAEP tests to monitor how well their students are mastering the STEM skills. This helps the teachers know what to teach and what the students already know. Teachers can also compare their students' scores to other students in their state or around the country.
Montana is doing mediocre in STEM. Montana students have pretty good access to technology, however, teachers aren't using this technology! Compared to the average score of other states, Montana is 6.3 points behind in the technology field. Montana student achievement levels are higher than the national average. Although, the achievement levels are higher than the national average, they are still below 50% for 4th and 8th grade science and math.
As I mentioned before, I think it is an excellent idea to integrate math, science, technology, and engineering. I think the engineering units that we purchased for class are a great way for teachers to learn how to integrate the subjects and are interesting to students. Knowledge of these four subjects will help students succeed in the future, which is one of the reasons for schooling. Giving students access to the information about how they can use the knowledge they have in their lives is crucial as well. When students see that math and science can be fun, they are more willing to learn. Also, our society today is so technology based, it is almost impossible to succeed without some knowledge of how to use various technologies out there, from calculators, to computers. What worries me is the increasing dependence on technology. Soon, teachers may become obsolete. Computers may run the world. People get lazy and have a machine do all the work for them. Although technology is helpful, we need to know how to not depend on it for everything.
STEM is a push by business leaders, governors, and others to improve education in the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. NAEP or the National Assessment of Educational Progress is a standardized test used to measure student competency in the areas of math and science from state to state or even school to school. These tests have revealed that United States’ scores in math and science are a cause for concern leading to a push for the STEM approach to education. NAEP and STEM both affect K-8 elementary teachers directly. For example, NAEP and STEM allow the teachers to monitor their students’ progress and compare it to the progress of other states and even other schools. Meanwhile, STEM is causing teachers to incorporate a curriculum weighted with more activities and projects based on the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Montana is doing fairly well in STEM. For example, according latest NAEP conducted in 2007, the Montana 4th graders were 44% proficient in math, compared to the national average of only 38%. Meanwhile, Montana 8th graders are nearing 38% proficiency in math while the national average is only 31%. Montana’s science scores are also above the national average, for example Montana 4th graders are nearing 37% proficiency in science while the national average is only 27%. Meanwhile, Montana 8th graders are almost 42% proficient in science while the national average lags behind at only 27%. Unfortunately, Montana is not doing quite as well in the technology field. According to the report card Montana has access to technology, however we are feeling to use it within the curriculum!
I am torn on this subject. While I do see many benefits in improving education in the STEM subject areas I can’t help but wonder how this will affect other subject areas. Will this have a similar effect as NCLB where certain subjects are being deemed as more important and being taught with more depth, even at the expense of others? Do we really want to be sending the message to our students that it is ok that they have minimal or no knowledge of subjects such as history and language arts as long as they can successfully run a computer? As long as STEM is used in conjunction with other subjects within the curriculum I don’t foresee a problem, however if STEM overtakes other subjects within the curriculum I am worried.
STEAM is a program that promotes excellence in technology, science and engineering. NEAP, National Assessment of Educational Progress, is an assessment to measure whether or not students are preforming well. This helps teachers and educators compare their students with those across the United States. STEM wants to prepare students for the new economy, and what better way then to prepare them with technology, science, math and engineering skills. NEAP is a tool teachers can use to see if their students are indeed becoming prepared for the future.
According to research, the state of montana is doing okay within the STEM system. However, Montana was above 6 points behind others when it came to technology. It seems our school systems do have the tools (not all, but most) and yet teachers do not implement them. I can honestly understand why some teachers would not use technology. It becomes more difficult in some ways to control your class, but the benefits far outweigh those disruptions!
Montana is ranked 13th in STEM performance, which is above average. Although when looking at statistic it does not look like Montana is soaring with success, we are well on our way. As long as we continue to keep our children up to date with the changing times, and change ourselves as teachers to help fit these new cirriculms.
I believe the STEM program is a good program. BUT- I also find it disconcerning that yet agian arts, literature and music manage to find their way to the back shelf. YES- i do think technology is imporatant, and YES i do think science and math are imperative, but I also think that children need the oppertunity to have multiple genres of learning. Perhaps if STEM in cooperated these subjects as well, I would find it to be a more well rounded program. As a student, I know that I find the Arts, History and English of more interest, and if I had not had any of those in my curricular setting, I would have probably shut off. I think children will do the same if these are the only core subjects they study.
One other thing I believe, and see through this blog others feel the same, is the testing has become so monumental. NAEP offers teachers to see how well students learned their facts, but not how well they are applying them within every day life and out of the classroom. Although I do think NAEP is a good idea, I feel that we need to concentrate more on the meat of our classrooms, and less on A, B, C, and D. Those children may forget those specific facts, but they may grasp a concept forever. I guess I just do not want teachers to lose the ability to teach... teach their own unique way.. teach whats important, but in their own style... and not just adhere to a test.
All in all I am for STEM and NAEP. However, I would make adaption.
STEM is the push to improve science, technology, engineering, and math. NAEP is the National Assessment of Educational Progress. This is a national representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. Two of the subject are math and science, this is where the connection is made with the STEM program. Both of these ideals put a great deal of pressure on K-8 teachers, making sure they are adequately teaching the subjects. If teachers do not get their students to the level expected they are deemed to be labeled as not “fully qualified, to master material that becomes more complex and demanding every year” says Education week. Furthermore this may cause schools to lose funding and even teachers to lose their jobs. Also by looking at students scores from the NAEP tests teachers and administrators can get a better idea of where the students need to focus. Teachers will have a better understanding of students know and what they need further help on. I was really surprised at the access Montana students have to technology, but yet it isn’t used. It was in also interesting to see that we were ahead of the national standard for achievement level for the NAEP testing but yet, like others have mentioned we are still below 50%. In a competitive world some may look at that as a positive thing, but I believe that we still need to worry about how much our students are gaining a better understanding for math and science. As a state we are ranked 13th in math (for 4th graders), and 5th in science for students reaching proficiency. Students achieving excellence in math were ranked 24th, and in science we ranked 8th. I think STEM is an awesome tool to use in the classroom. It would be easy to use the STEM activities to fulfill your science, literacy, and other curriculum. However, like we talked about in class, I am a little worried about the lack of math in the kits. I understood how math was used in some areas, but not very much and with little explanation following. It is understandable to me that the federal government is implementing all of these new policies, but some of it still seems unreasonable. Schools, and students themselves, vary so much from one place to another, it seems difficult to cover so many diversities with specific, have to follow, curriculum. The purpose of teaching to me is to meet each individual students needs. Being in schools now I understand how difficult that is in general. With all the extra added pressure to fulfill federal policies, many other important issues may be ignored in the classroom.
Stem is a program being pushed in schools to try and improve Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics in education. NAEP is the National Assessment of Educational Progress. This is tests that students have to take to to measure if students understand math, science, reading,ect. The results that are found from the test let school districts, and states see how they compare to other states. NAPE holds teachers accountable for what students are learning in science, math, reading, ect. STEM is used as an aid to help incorporate these areas into the classroom.
Montana is doing pretty good in some areas of STEM and not so good in others. In technology we are below the state average in most categories. However we are doing very well in science being above the average percentile, and average for math. The fourth grade Montana state average is 44.4% which is higher than the National average at 38.6%. The Montana science average for 4th grade is 36.8% while the National average is only at 27%. While these scored might not seem very good at first, compared to other states and the National average Montana is doing pretty well in most categories except for technology. However Montana is trying to improve this average. By looking at these scored it shows that Montana schools are working hard to improve the scores and learning of students in the classroom. Teachers are learning different ways to teach these concepts while making it fun and appropriate for their students.
I believe that the STEM program is a good program that has shown to be successful in increasing the scores in different subject areas across the board. I also agree with the way the government is making work force policies. They are striving to make education better for the students. They are looking to improve the way students learn these areas and the way teachers teach the subject areas to their students. I do however agree with Natalie that while these ares of education are important; science, math, technology, and engineering, there are plenty of other areas that need are being overlooked.
I do think that this program fits with my understanding of schooling, but am worried that the classroom will just be turned into a strictly testing curriculum that does not have any room for learning in a fun and exciting way. I am worried that when I get into the classroom my goal will be pushed towards making the national average instead of making sure my students are involved and excited about what they are learning.
STEM is science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. STEM wants to improve the skills in all of these fields in all students. NAEP is the national test taken to measure the improvement of these skills. NAEP and STEM help teachers and administrators see where their school needs improvement. NAEP and STEM also want teachers to be proficient in these subjects in order to teach their students. STEM provides the ideas and guidelines for teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Montana students are above the national average in scoring proficient. Montana is working to improve their technology as their score was a C-. Montana is ranked 13th in the nation. If you as a teacher implement a strong math and science curriculum then the students will benefit conceptually.
I do not agree with the federal government's policies that are being put forth on workforce development. Students are in school to further their knowledge and be able to function in society as citizens. Students are not in school to help the United States score better internationally. There are benefits to this in that students will receive a better math and science education. I am worried that students will be used as clusters to further the technology in the United States and not as individuals that deserve to work where they want. Each person needs to make their own decision as to their career.
STEM is an effort to improve science, technology, engineering and mathematics in the Nation’s education curriculum. Meanwhile, NAEP is a standardized test, which can be used to gauge students’ abilities in these particular subject areas. STEM and NAEP are interconnected, because the NAEP seems to have resulted from the STEM movement. The push for American students to excel in science and mathematics started in the 1960’s, when were in a “space race” with the USSR, but somehow it seems to have been lost along the way – until recently.
As elementary teachers, we will be very involved with STEM and NAEP, as we are required to test our students in science and math, as part of NCLB. These test put a ton of pressure on teachers and students, and many ways seem to have altered school curriculums in a profound way. The third grade curriculum I have been observing doesn’t include Science or Social Studies, because neither of these subject areas are covered on the MontCas. The curriculum is totally controlled by the tests, which doesn’t seem to be in learner’s best interest. Students in the higher grades obviously have more exposure to science, because it is part of their test, but that shouldn’t mean that third graders don’t get to crack a science book all year.
Montana could be doing better when it comes to STEM. We scored a C- on the technology report card, and in some classes I’ve seen it would be closer to an F. As for some of the other grades, Montana scores fairly well in some categories, but could use some improvement in others. The scores seemed all over the board, and when averaged together, that’s probably what they are – average. It’s nice to see that we were ranked 2nd in 8th grade science, but then we’re 46th in achievement gains for 8th grade math. We need to make some major improvements in these areas where we are ranked so low, especially in areas that deal with poverty gaps.
As a future teacher, I see the need for injecting better use of technology into my math and science curriculum. I think some of the resistance in Missoula, comes from having an older work force. In some cases, it seems as though there may be some resistance to some of the newer technologies that are available, and as a result, students are being short-changed. I see the need for some big changes in some of the lower grades, and I hope to have administrators and coworkers who are willing to embrace some of my “newfangled” ideas.
I agree with the feds in a certain regard, but I think the system in fundamentally flawed. Whether people want to admit it our not, many teachers are definitely teaching to the test, often times, because they are feeling an intense pressure to do so. Their curriculums are dictated by the school board, which can sometimes make or break the quality of instruction. I believe that we do need to focus on Math, Science, Engineering (Although, most engineers I know are pretty dull), and technology, but only if they can be taught harmoniously with other subject areas. I’m sick of seeing subjects being pushed aside because they’re not on the tests, which is definitely not the purpose of schooling. There can be benefits to testing, but only if they are a one part of the curriculum, and aren’t dictating a teacher’s every move. After I everything I’ve seen and learned, I am worried that I too will be stuck teaching to the test. In many places, especially when you are a new (untenured) teacher, your job may depend on how well your kids score. That’s a scary proposition.
STEM is all about increasing students’ exposure and learning opportunities in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in American schools. NAEP is the National Assessment of Educational Progress and is a nationally representative test of what students should know and do in various subjects. This test is also known as “the nation’s report card,” in that it provides the results of student achievement in areas including math and science, which are two of the focused disciplines in the STEM program. Achievement scores on the NAEP reports can determine the value and need for the STEM program and its implementation in our nation’s school curriculums. Some of the efforts that STEM is pursuing are to target underachieving groups of students, particularly African-American, Hispanic, female students, and students of poverty in order to create a more diverse and culturally representative talent pool.
As others have stated in their blogs, NCLB is putting much pressure on K-8 teachers as we will be testing our students in the areas of math, reading, and now science. As teachers are placed under the eye of parents, administrators, legislators, and the government, we are held “accountable” for student learning and failure in these subjects. Therefore, STEM is a program that supports the teachers and the schools by strengthening the resources and tools used to ensure an improved and competitive education system in our country. According to the state technology report card found in the Education Week link, Montana has an overall score of a C-, whereas the average of the other states’ score is a C+. Even though we have scored a B in having access to the technology, we actually scored a D+ in our usage of it in the classroom, and an F for the capacity to implement this technology. Yikes! However, according to the 2007 NAEP test results, Montana scored above the national average in the areas of 4th and 8th grade math and science. Even though these scores are above several other states’, we still need to establish a workable, accessible, and sound math and science curriculum for our students, and continue to implement current STEM programs. A child’s education is dependent upon well-structured curricula that can better prepare these young people for our evolving global economy. They need to be science-, technology-, engineer-, and math-savvy as we teachers pave the road for our nation’s future.
As far as I’m concerned, the federal government will continue to promote plans like STEM, especially since they look good on paper. The idea is there…to improve our youth’s education and understanding in competitive fields like science, math, and technology. However, the funding and the execution are not always supported. As a teacher, I can see the benefits that STEM can offer and what NAEP can tell us performance-wise on standardized tests. These programs can look very idealistic. But, there is a whole other world out there in our own country (speaking from a Montanan’s standpoint) that includes inner-city schools where safety is a primary concern, not calculus homework. STEM seems like it has to be more of a movement than just a program. Schools, teachers, and administrators nationwide need to be educated and taught how to effectively teach students these crucial disciplines. If successfully implemented, STEM can really grab students’ attention and interests in these fields. As Ashley pointed out, “this program gets students excited about these areas through interesting experiments and projects. It is changing how students learn & become motivated about subjects such as science and math, which for many, are two of the more challenging subjects in school.” Providing a STEM-rich environment for science inquiry and problem-based math learning can definitely align with the goals for NCLB because this program will enrich students’ overall education as well as prepare them for standardized testing. Hopefully, these projects might be able to eliminate “teaching to the test” because it seems like teaching is becoming more of an obstacle course rather than an inspirational approach to educating our children.
Post a Comment