Integrated STEM for Teacher Professional Learning and Development: “I Need Time for Practice”
Abstract
:1. Setting the Stage
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Social Constructionist Theoretical Framework
3.2. Participants
3.3. Instruments
3.3.1. Mixed Method Instrument—(a) Pre/Post Astronomy Content Tests & (d) Open-Ended Questions
3.3.2. Quantitative Instrument—(b) MOSART Test
3.3.3. Quantitative Instrument—(c) STEBI Survey
3.3.4. Qualitative—(e) Notebook Feedback
3.3.5. Qualitative—(f) Lesson Plans
3.3.6. Qualitative—(g) Classroom Observations
4. Data Analysis
5. The Professional Learning and Development Structure
6. Results
6.1. Astronomy Content Knowledge Gains
6.2. Teacher Perceptions of Astronomy
6.3. Evidence of Astronomy Planning and Implementation
7. Discussion and Conclusions
8. Implications, Limitations, and Future Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bailey, J.M.; Slater, T.F. A review of astronomy education research. Astron. Ed. Rev. 2003, 2, 20–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meech, K.J. Technological innovations and publications related to space science education. Adv. Space Res. 1997, 20, 1351–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slater, T.F. The first big wave of astronomy education research dissertations and some directions for future research efforts. Astron. Ed. Rev. 2008, 7, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buaraphan, K. Embedding nature of science in teaching about astronomy and space. J. Sci. Ed. Technol. 2012, 21, 353–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Docktor, J.L.; Mestre, J.P. Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top. 2014, 10, 020119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lelliot, A.; Rollnick, M. Big ideas: A review of astronomy education research 1974–2008. Int. J. Sci. Ed. 2010, 32, 1771–1799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarng, W.; Lin, Y.S.; Lin, C.P.; Ou, K.L. Development of a lunar-phase observation system based on augmented reality and mobile learning technologies. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2016, 2016, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Enderson, M.C.; Reed, P.A.; Grant, M.R. Secondary STEM teacher education. In Handbook of Research on STEM Education, 1st ed.; Johnson, C.C., Mohr-Schroeder, M.J., Moore, T.J., English, L.D., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; pp. 349–360. [Google Scholar]
- National Research Council. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roth, W.M. Authentic School Science: Knowing and Learning in Open-Inquiry Science Laboratories; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
- Spuck, T. Putting the “authenticity” in science learning. In Einstein Fellows: Best Practices in STEM Education; Spuck, T., Jenkins, L., Dou, R., Eds.; Peter Lang Publisher: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Reiff, P.H.; Cline, T.D. Education and communication for the magnetospheric multiscale misson. Space Sci. Rev. 2016, 199, 721–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- VanMeter-Adams, A.; Frankenfeld, C.L.; Bases, J.; Espina, V.; Liotta, L.A. Students who demonstrate strong talent and interest in STEM are initially attracted to STEM through extracurricular experiences. CBE Life Sci. Ed. 2014, 13, 687–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moore, T.J.; Johnston, A.C.; Glancy, A.W. STEM integration: A synthesis of conceptual frameworks and definitions. In Handbook of Research on STEM Education, 1st ed.; Johnson, C.C., Mohr-Schroeder, M.J., Moore, T.J., English, L.D., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; pp. 3–16. [Google Scholar]
- French, D.A.; Burrows, A.C. Inquiring astronomy: Incorporating student-centered pedagogical techniques in an introductory college science course. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2017, 46, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zalles, D.; Manitakos, J. Strategizing teacher professional development for classroom uses of geospatial data and tools. Contemp. Issues Technol. Teach. Ed. 2016, 16, 286–309. [Google Scholar]
- Zeggelaar, A.; Vermeulen, M.; Jochems, W. Exploring what works in professional development: An assessment of a prototype intervention and its accompanying design principles. Prof. Dev. Ed. 2017, 44, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Crippen, K.J. Argument as professional development: Impacting teacher knowledge and beliefs about science. J. Sci. Teach. Ed. 2012, 23, 847–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loucks-Horsley, S.; Love, N.; Stiles, K.; Mundry, S.; Hewson, P.W. Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics; Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Penuel, W.R.; Fishman, B.J.; Yamaguchi, R.; Gallagher, L.P. What makes professional development effective: Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. Am. Ed. Res. J. 2007, 44, 921–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zozakiewicz, C.; Rodriguez, A.J. Using sociotransformative constructivism to create multicultural and gender-inclusive classrooms an intervention project for teacher professional development. Ed. Policy 2007, 21, 397–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burrows, A.C.; Breiner, J.; Keiner, J.; Behm, C. Biodiesel and integrated STEM: Vertical alignment of high school biology/biochemistry and chemistry. J. Chem. Ed. 2014, 91, 1379–1389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jackson, J.K.; Ash, G. Science achievement for all: Improving science performance and closing achievement gaps. J. Sci. Teach. Ed. 2012, 23, 723–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stolk, M.J.; DeJong, O.; Bulte, A.M.; Pilot, A. Exploring a framework for professional development in curriculum innovation: Empowering teachers for designing context-based chemistry education. Res. Sci. Ed. 2011, 41, 369–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Burrows, A.C.; DiPompeo, M.A.; Myers, A.D.; Hickox, R.C.; Borowczak, M.; French, D.A.; Schwortz, A.C. Authentic science experiences: Pre-collegiate science educators’ successes and challenges during professional development. Probl. Ed. 21st Century 2016, 70, 59–73. [Google Scholar]
- Marshall, J.C.; Alston, D.M. Effective, sustained inquiry-based instruction promotes higher science proficiency among all groups: A 5-year analysis. J. Sci. Teach. Ed. 2014, 25, 807–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeidler, D. Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis. In Handbook of Research on Science Education; Lederman, N., Abell, S., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; Volume 2, pp. 697–726. [Google Scholar]
- Burrows, A.C.; Harkness, S.S. Experiencing action evaluation’s cyclic process: Partnering conflict, reflection, and action. Ed. Action Res. 2016, 24, 460–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burrows, A.C. Partnerships: A systemic study of two professional developments with university faculty and K-12 teachers of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Probl. Ed. 21st Century 2015, 65, 28–38. [Google Scholar]
- Reeves, T.D.; Chiang, J.L. Building pre-service teacher capacity to use external assessment data: An intervention study. Teach. Educ. 2017, 52, 155–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, R.C.; Darling-Hammond, L.; Andree, A.; Richardson, N.; Orphanos, S. Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the U.S. and Abroad; Technical Report; National Staff Development Council: Dallas, TX, USA, 2009; Available online: https://learningforward.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/status-of-professional-learning-phase-1-technical-report.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2020).
- McConnell, T.J.; Parker, J.M.; Eberhardt, J. Assessing teachers’ science content knowledge: A strategy for assessing depth of understanding. J. Sci. Teach. Ed. 2013, 24, 717–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Research Council (NRC). Preparing Teachers Building Evidence for Sound Policy; Technical Report; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; Available online: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12882/preparing-teachers-building-evidence-for-sound-policy (accessed on 28 October 2020).
- Hwang, M.Y.; Hong, J.C.; Hao, Y.W. The value of CK, PK, and PCK in professional development programs predicted by the progressive beliefs of elementary school teachers. Eur. J. Teach. Ed. 2018, 41, 448–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finkelstein, K.D.; Sneden, C.; Hemenway, M.K.; Preston, S. Collaboration between astronomers at UT Austin and K-12 teachers: Connecting the experience of observing and research with the classroom. In Proceedings of the 225th American Astronomical Society Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, 4–8 January 2015; Volume 225. Available online: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AAS...22524605F/abstract (accessed on 22 October 2020).
- Crawford, B. From inquiry to scientific practices in the science classroom. In Handbook of Research on Science Education; Lederman, N., Abell, S., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 515–541. [Google Scholar]
- Decker, A.; McGill, M.M. A systematic review exploring the differences in reported data for pre-college educational activities for computer science, engineering, and other STEM disciplines. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Darling-Hammond, L.; Hyler, M.E.; Gardner, M. Effective Teacher Professional Development; Learning Policy Institute: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2017; Available online: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report (accessed on 22 October 2020).
- Koro-Ljungberg, M.; Yendol-Hoppey, D.; Smith, J.J.; Hayes, S.B. (E)pistemological awareness, instantiation of methods, and uninformed methodological ambiguity in qualitative research projects. Educ. Res. 2009, 38, 687–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W. Research Design; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Creswell, J.W.; Miller, D.L. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 2000, 39, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Makrakis, V.; Kostoulas-Makrakis, N. Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Experiences from conducting a mixed methods evaluation in the RUCAS programme. Eval. Program Plan. 2016, 54, 144–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riggs, I.M.; Enochs, L.G. Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Sci. Educ. 1990, 74, 625–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keller, M.M.; Neumann, K.; Fischer, H.E. The impact of physics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and motivation on students’ achievement and interest. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2017, 54, 586–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doppelt, Y.; Schunn, C.D.; Silk, E.M.; Mehalik, M.M.; Reynolds, B.; Ward, E. Evaluating the impact of facilitated learning community approach to professional development on teacher practice and student achievement. Res. Sci. Technol. Ed. 2009, 27, 339–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanli, U. A study on identifying the misconceptions of pre-service and in-service teachers about basic astronomy concepts. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Ed. 2014, 10, 471–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burrows, A.C.; Slater, T.F. A proposed integrated STEM framework for contemporary teacher preparation. Teach. Ed. Pract. 2015, 28, 318–330. [Google Scholar]
- Wright, K.B. Improvement science as a promising alternative to barriers in improving STEM teacher quality through professional development. J. Ed. Strateg. Issues Ideas 2019, 92, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dare, E.A.; Ellis, J.A.; Roehrig, G.H. Understanding science teachers’ implementations of integrated STEM curricular units though a phenomenological multiple case study. Int. J. STEM Ed. 2018, 5, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
- Nadelson, L.S.; Seifert, A.L. Integrated STEM defined: Contexts, challenges, and the future. J. Ed. Res. 2017, 110, 221–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Demographic | 2014 LASSI (n = 8) | 2015 LASSI (n = 22) | 2016 RAMPED (n = 30) |
---|---|---|---|
Level (El, M, H, O) | 2, 2, 2, 2 | 16, 3, 3, 0 | 6, 14, 9, 1 |
Primary Subject (S, T, E, M, O/A) | 1, 0, 0, 3, 4 | 4, 0, 0, 1, 17 | 15, 1, 1, 3, 10 |
Gender (F, M) | 4, 4 | 16, 6 | 19, 11 |
Level (El, M, H, O) | 2, 2, 2, 2 | 16, 3, 3, 0 | 6, 14, 9, 1 |
Primary Subject (S, T, E, M, O/A) | 1, 0, 0, 3, 4 | 4, 0, 0, 1, 17 | 15, 1, 1, 3, 10 |
Gender (F, M) | 4, 4 | 16, 6 | 19, 11 |
PLD Design: 8-Hour Days For 2 Weeks |
---|
2014 LASSI |
Goal: Expose K12 teachers to astronomy lessons and show connection with all STEM content. |
Emphasis: Astronomy exposure with STEM connections |
Daily structure: Scheduled activities (~6 h/day) collaborative work time (~2 h/day). |
Data collection & analysis: During on-campus activities with peers and faculty support |
Data presentation: At the end of the two-week session to their peers, highlighting main “take-aways” and key content knowledge gains. No outsiders attended the presentations. |
Examples: How can I use a solar system scaling activity to teach metrics, scale, and distance? How far away is Mars, and can we reach it in our lifetime? Would it be possible, with current technology, to colonize Mars? |
Remaining participant need: Project work with space to fail |
2015 LASSI |
Goal: Encourage K12 teachers to create, explore, collect data, analyze data, & present their own astronomy research question or project; focus on data from an observatory or general topic. Use integrated STEM concepts. |
Emphasis: Authentic science astronomy experience/project |
Biggest change from 2014 LASSI: Focus shifted to independent authentic research projects |
Daily structure: Collaborative work time with faculty support (~6 h/day) and one planned activity a day (~2 h/day). |
Data collection & analysis: During peer collaborations on & off campus, some faculty support, minimal during activities. |
Data presentation: At the end of the two-week session to peers and others, using electronic poster format, highlighting the main research question, data, analysis, and lessons learned. Several (~5) outsiders attended the presentations. |
Examples: (Observatory) Analysis of spectra; (General) Does Venus have phases like the moon?; How can Jupiter’s moons be distinguished from each other?; Can the size of a celestial body be calculated using angular size and portions? |
Remaining participant need: Project work with more structure and faculty supported space |
2016 RAMPED |
Goal: Expose K12 teachers to all aspects of STEM using different STEM disciplines (including astronomy), and assist them in creating classroom lessons showcasing their learning. Showcase integrated STEM activities. |
Emphasis: Different and engaging STEM exposures |
Biggest change from 2015 LASSI: Focus shifted to different content & technology exposure; less independent work time. |
Daily structure: Planned activities (~6 h/day) and collaborative work (~2 h/day). |
Data collection & analysis: During on-campus planned sessions with faculty support. |
Data presentation: At the end of the two-weeks to their peers and others, using a printed poster, conference-like session, highlighting main the K12 classroom connections and lessons learned. Many (>15) outsiders attended the presentations. |
Examples: Using SDSS, how can you create a list of potential changing-look quasars?; How can Raspberry Pis be used to teach K12 weather concepts?; How does NetLogo show and allow modeling manipulations of natural phenomenon? |
Remaining participant need: Less areas of focus (max. 4) |
Instrument | Key Finding(s) of Teacher Participant Knowledge Gains across Projects | ||
---|---|---|---|
N Sample vs. Total | 2014 LASSI | 2015 LASSI | 2016 RAMPED |
7 of 8 | 21 of 22 | 29 of 30 | |
Pre-to-Post Question Content Gains (Section 3.3.1) | Only post data collected. | …experienced significant positive content knowledge gains (p < 0.001) in over 60% of content pre/post questions [22,26]. Potential relationship between significant change and technical vs conceptual assessment questions. (See Table 4) | |
MOSART Survey (Section 3.3.2) Result Post PLD | …had few misconceptions (most scored above 80%) | Not Collected | …had some misconceptions (most scored above 60%) |
Astronomy Content Gains (Pre/Post) (SeeSection 3.3.1) | ||
2015 LASSI | ||
Content Focus (3 to 5 questions each) | p-value | Technical vs. Conceptual Split |
Foundations of Computing | <0.0001 | 60:40 |
Galileoscopes | Not Sig. | 80:20 |
EM Spectrum, Gravity | <0.0001 | 80:20 |
Doppler Effect & Angular Size | Not Sig. | 80:20 |
Stellar Classification & Gas Giant Planets | <0.0001 | 60:40 |
Galaxies, Quasars & Gas Giants Moon | <0.0001 | 50:50 |
Hubble’s Law, 3-Color Images, & Remote Observation | <0.0001 | 50:50 |
2016 RAMPED | ||
Content Focus (3 questions) | p-value | Technical vs. Conceptual Split |
Astronomy | Not Sig. (n = 2) <0.0001 (n = 1) | 33:67 |
Data Source | Key Finding(s) of Teacher Participant Perceptions across Projects. Teachers | ||
---|---|---|---|
2014 LASSI | 2015 LASSI | 2016 RAMPED | |
N Sample vs. Total | 7 of 8 | 21 of 22 | 29 of 30 |
Pre-to-Post STEBI Survey Scores (Section 3.3.3) | Not Collected | …experienced a slight decrease in self-efficacy | |
Open-ended Questions (Section 3.3.1) | …enjoyed hands-on engagement but gained the most from success after challenging experiences. (See Table 6) | ||
Notebook Feedback (Section 3.3.4) | Not Collected | …moved from excitement, to despair, to understanding. [22] | |
Aggregate of Content Gains Perceptions (Section 3.3.6) | Not Collected | …self-identified, with varying levels of detail—their own knowledge gains. (See Table 7) |
Teacher Perceptions of Astronomy (Open Ended Questions + Notebook Excerpts) |
---|
2014 LASSI |
“I enjoyed the hands-on part of the labs where we actually did some of the work we expect the students to do. I also liked when we were asked how we would adapt each part of the PD for use in our own class.” “Variety of instructors and ideas presented, some was challenging, some more basic—good mixture.” “This activity has students partake in research … similar to what astronomers do for research…” |
2015 LASSI |
“I have a pretty solid physics background (introductory only) and felt the concepts were interesting and helped elevate my knowledge.” “I appreciated having the opportunity to visit with experts. I learned a lot during my discussions.” “The topics were presented in a way that I could grasp the information even with my limited background experience in astronomy. I found every lesson very interesting and appreciated that I could relate most to my professional growth as a classroom teacher.” “The first week the material was really too complex for me, but during the 2nd week things came together and I felt really proud of the learning that had happened in the two-week PD.” |
2016 RAMPED |
“This was my first experience with the space concepts. I was overwhelmed; my table partner again, was invaluable to my comfort with the material. I need time for practice.” “The tutorials were good and helped to fill in some of the holes that were present for those that were not in the space session earlier. I do feel as though there was an expectation that we would quickly pick up Python and be able to extend on our own.” “I have never participated in a better, more relevant professional development.” |
Teacher Self-Reported Astronomy Content Gains (Notebook & Open-Response Excerpts) |
---|
2014 LASSI |
“I really learned a lot about astronomy today that I did not previously know.” “I found the morning sessions very informative and it helped me understand astronomy and waves.” |
2015 LASSI |
“Angular size was very helpful. I have a better understanding of how to measure things from a distance.” “I have a better understanding of gravity, how telescopes are constructed, and the kinds of Kepler’s Laws, and how to measure angular sizes and distance.” “I learned a lot about spectra! I feel confident that I can tell the difference between a star, galaxy and quasar. I can confidently tell the temperature and how something is redshifting.” “I have learned about quasars, the many different moons that orbit the planets in our solar system...their characteristics and interesting facts, how the temperature has affected the formation of the planets in our Solar System, remote observing and 3-color images.” |
2016 RAMPED |
“I have had the opportunity to learn about astronomy data repositories that even the public has access to! How neat!” “I learned about which attributes can be measured from point sources in images, and how they can be used to differentiate quasars from stars.” “I know that the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) is an incredible resource for myself and my students.” “This week I finally realized how computer science fits into STEM, computer science was foundational to the experiments we were doing with the Sloan data.” |
Instrument | Key Finding(s) of Teacher Participant Classroom Use across Projects. Teachers | ||
---|---|---|---|
2014 LASSI | 2015 LASSI | 2016 RAMPED | |
N Sample vs. Total | 7 of 8 | 21 of 22 | 29 of 30 |
Lesson Plan | … planned use of (1) Foundational math, (2) Astronomy concepts, and (3) Associated technology. (See Table 9) | ||
Lesson Plan Topics (See Table 10) | Use of Science and Math dominated. Astronomy in 5 of 6 science lessons. | Used a balanced approach, emphasis on Science. Astronomy in 13 of 16 science lessons. | Use of Technology dominated. Astronomy in 8 of 15 science lessons. |
Classroom Observations | Not Collected | See Table 10 |
Astronomy Planning and Use (Lesson Plan) |
---|
2014 LASSI |
“[I will connect] knowledge about astronomy… to [my] Common Core State Standards-based math classes.” “There are many astronomy connections that I can use in my classroom and it was very beneficial to have time to work on how to incorporate the astronomy ideas and activities from LASSI for my students.” “One of the things that I found to be useful in today’s sessions was [how to] use technology within the classroom. This is an area that I believe to be weak in my school.” |
2015 LASSI |
“Understanding the material of astronomy on a deeper level will help me teach my second-grade students at their level and allow me to answer some of their advanced questions. Creating a lesson plan has been a great take-away that I will be able to implement into my classroom.” “I can use the information in black holes and wormholes in my classroom to fit with the space curriculum as well as in my astronomy club.” “In 5th grade part of the NGSS is the stars and planets so I will use what I [learned] … in my classroom.” “The concepts of wavelength and frequency as it pertains to light would be useful in a Trigonometry class.” “I could use all of the topics in different ways. Hubble’s Law and constant fit well in a linear functions unit. Wavelength, frequency, and energy fit well in a Trigonometry class after sinusoidal functions.” |
2016 RAMPED |
“Great application problem with eclipse [in 2017].” “I see a benefit in physics & astronomy [classrooms].” “I like how the idea of algorithms was brought down to an elementary school level [in the] discussion of sequencing.” “I came away with an incredible amount of curriculum, ideas and connections that I can use in my classroom!” “The applications for my classroom will really support me in helping my students to understand and apply 21st-century skills.” |
Astronomy Use (Classroom Observations of Lessons) | ||
---|---|---|
2016 RAMPED | ||
Level | Astronomy Content | Primary Subject |
Elementary (3) | Orders of Magnitude (2) Space Book (1) | Math (2) Reading (1) |
Middle School (1) | Diffusion of Gasses, spatial patterns, analyzing spectra (1) | Chemistry (1) |
High School (3) | Space, Gasses and Coding (1) Plasma (1) Elliptical Orbits/Ellipse (1) | Physics (2) Math (1) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Burrows, A.C.; Borowczak, M.; Myers, A.; Schwortz, A.C.; McKim, C. Integrated STEM for Teacher Professional Learning and Development: “I Need Time for Practice”. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010021
Burrows AC, Borowczak M, Myers A, Schwortz AC, McKim C. Integrated STEM for Teacher Professional Learning and Development: “I Need Time for Practice”. Education Sciences. 2021; 11(1):21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010021
Chicago/Turabian StyleBurrows, Andrea C., Mike Borowczak, Adam Myers, Andria C. Schwortz, and Courtney McKim. 2021. "Integrated STEM for Teacher Professional Learning and Development: “I Need Time for Practice”" Education Sciences 11, no. 1: 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010021
APA StyleBurrows, A. C., Borowczak, M., Myers, A., Schwortz, A. C., & McKim, C. (2021). Integrated STEM for Teacher Professional Learning and Development: “I Need Time for Practice”. Education Sciences, 11(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010021