Mathematics and Science Integration: Models and Characterizations

Abstract

The squeeze on instructional time and other factors increasingly leads educators to consider mathematics and science integration in an effort to be more efficient and effective. Unfortunately, the need for common understandings for what it means to integrate these disciplines, as well as the need for improving disciplinary knowledge, appears to continue to be significant obstacles to an integrated approach to instruction. In this study we report the results of a survey containing six instructional scenarios administered to thirty‐three middle grades science and math teachers. Analysis of teacher responses revealed that while teachers applied similar criteria in their reasoning, they did not possess common characterizations for integration. Furthermore, analysis suggested that content knowledge serves as a barrier to recognizing integrated examples. Implications for professional development planners include the need to develop and provide teachers with constructs and parameters for what constitutes mathematics and science integration. Continued emphasis on improving teacher content knowledge in both mathematics and science is also a prerequisite to enabling teachers to integrate content.

STEM learning through engineering design: fourth-grade students’ investigations in aerospace

“…The benefits to be gained from such integration have been variously documented, together with the challenges faced. Studies have indicated that students become better problem solvers, display more positive and motivated learning, and improve in their mathematics and science achievements (e.g., Furner and Kumar 2007a;Stinson et al 2009). Specifically, through the integration of engineering, students should become more aware of its role and presence in society and be able to apply engineering design processes to the solution of real-world problems (e.g., National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council NAE and NRC 2009a).…”

“…One of the challenges facing researchers is how to overcome obstacles to effective STEM integration including the lack of a unified and explicit understanding of what this entails, together with inadequate knowledge of multidisciplinary content many teachers experience (Moore et al 2014a;Stinson et al 2009). It is beyond the scope of this study to investigate STEM integration more broadly; rather, the present study represents just one approach to such integration through introducing young students to meaningful engineering-based problems that draw upon their curriculum in mathematics, science, and technology and engage them in the processes of engineering design.…”

Interdisciplinary Mathematics Education: A State of the Art

“…In another project, middle school teachers of science and mathematics understandings of integration were surveyed via reflection on various presented scenarios, and description of their own attempts at integration (Stinson et al 2009). Differences were identified in their characterisations of integration, and content knowledge was perceived as a barrier to integration.…”

The Implementation of Integrated Science Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Instruction using Robotics in the Middle School Science Classroom

“…Over the past the past twenty years, scholarly journals, and articles in various STEM areas published many articles devoted to areas such as integrated instruction, interdisciplinary approaches, fused, trans disciplinary, and thematic teaching (e.g., Berlin & White, 1995;Brazee & Capelluti, 1995, Stinson, Harkness, Meyer, & Stallworth, 2009). Shoemaker (1991) suggested that there are "an equal number of terms to describe the various ways integrated instruction might be approached" (p. 793).…”