Beyond content and curriculum in elementary classrooms: conceptualizing the cultivation of integrated STEM teacher identity

Abstract

As K-12 STEM education moves toward the integrated application of mathematics and science concepts in collaborative and complex real-world problem solving, there is a commensurate need to redefine what it means to be a STEM teacher in the early grades. Elementary teachers need more than professional development with innovative content and curriculum to be ready to integrate STEM; they need the agency that comes with a strong sense of who they are and who they want to become as STEM teachers. In this commentary, we propose a model for integrated STEM teacher identity with the goal of building a robust definition that is applicable to multiple educational contexts. The model captures the tensions between elementary teachers’ multiple identities as STEM learners, professional teachers, and STEM education innovators. Our proposed model structures the complexity of these roles as an intertwining of components from extant professional teacher identity and STEM learner identity models. The careful cultivation of integrated STEM identities has the power to increase teachers’ readiness to not only try but to sustain innovative curriculum. Teacher educators and professional development facilitators can use this model to provide more personalized support to teachers. Recommendations for future refinement of this model are offered along with implications for more equitable access to integrated STEM experiences for all students.

Applying a model of integrated STEM teacher identity to understand change in elementary teachers' STEM self‐efficacy and career awareness

“…Our model captures the tensions between elementary teachers' own STEM learning experiences, presumptions about good teaching, and the challenges of teaching integrated STEM as inquiry‐driven problem solving using science and mathematics. Integrated STEM teacher identity is distinct from science or mathematics teacher identity because of its transdisciplinary emphasis centered on the engineering design process (Galanti & Holincheck, in press).…”

“…Theoretical model of integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teacher identity (Galanti & Holincheck, 2022). …”

“…Teachers must see themselves as competent STEM learners and facilitators to effectively implement integrated STEM experiences. Integrated STEM teacher identity (Galanti & Holincheck, 2022) is an intertwining of teachers' professional motivation, self‐image, self‐efficacy, and task‐perception (Hanna et al, 2020), as well as perceptions of their own STEM competence, performance, recognition, and interest (Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Hazari et al, 2010).…”

“…In this article, we use quantitative data from a graduate STEM education course for practicing elementary teachers to examine STEM teaching efficacy beliefs and STEM career awareness. We apply the nine dimensions of our theoretical model of integrated STEM teacher identity (Galanti & Holincheck, 2022) in our qualitative analysis of course assignments. Using this contextualization of the quantitative data, we report on teachers' evolving beliefs about themselves and their readiness to integrate STEM.…”

A model for principals' STEM leadership capability

“…While there have been positive reports on the outcomes of integrated STEM initiatives (e.g., Hobbs et al, 2018), there are relatively few longitudinal evaluation reports on the implementation of STEM programmes—a situation aggravated by funding within STEM that tends to be focused on single disciplines (e.g., Li et al, 2020). Of those programmes that claim successful outcomes, factors that seem key are interdisciplinary collaboration and the sharing of knowledge between and across faculties/departments (e.g., Lane et al, 2022; Li, 2020; Wang et al, 2020), positive teachers' dispositions and beliefs (Dong et al, 2020; El Nagdi et al, 2018; Goos et al, 2020), the provision of time and support for the acquisition of new capabilities (e.g., with digital tools) (Hollman et al, 2019; Kennedy et al, 2014)—all necessary for teachers and students to develop integrated STEM identities (e.g., Galanti & Holincheck, 2022). The lack of longitudinal data about students' attainment of relevant knowledge, understanding, skills, values, attitudes, engagement and participation following STEM interventions is compounded by limited research into the influence of teacher attitudes and school context on the implementation of STEM integration (Hudson et al, 2015; Thibaut et al, 2018) and challenges associated with the assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education (Gao et al, 2020), making it difficult to draw valid conclusions (Chachashvili‐Bolotin et al, 2016).…”