SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitimde Yeni Yaklaşımlar Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2

Teachers' STEM club activities implementation levels

Öğretmenlerin STEM kulübü etkinliklerini uygulama seviyeleri

Seyide Eroglu(Nuh Mehmet Baldöktü Anadolu Lisesi)0000-0002-7363-6638
Hasan Gökçe(Bünyan Topsöğüt Ortaokulu)0000-0002-1518-2295
Melek Karaca0000-0002-6957-5932
Oktay Bektas(ERCIYES UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-2562-2864
Pages
141–161
Publication Date
2024-12-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

At the end of the study, suggestions were made that other studies on STEM clubs could be enriched by taking into account different dimensions such as teachers, students, planning and implementation, and that studies examining variables such as gender and professional seniority not only as independent variables but also as moderating and mediating variables could be added to the literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this research is to determine the level of implementation of STEM club activities by teachers in schools in terms of teacher, student, planning and implementation dimensions, taking into account gender and seniority variables.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample of the research consists of 139 teachers and carried out STEM club activities in the 2019-2020 academic year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:At the end of the study, suggestions were made that other studies on STEM clubs could be enriched by taking into account different dimensions such as teachers, students, planning and implementation, and that studies examining variables such as gender and professional seniority not only as independent variables but also as moderating and mediating variables could be added to the literature.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2019-2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:STEM eğitimi · sosyal kulüp çalışmaları · nitel araştırma

Abstract

The aim of this research is to determine the level of implementation of STEM club activities by teachers in schools in terms of teacher, student, planning and implementation dimensions, taking into account gender and seniority variables. The study uses the cross-sectional survey model design and explanatory correlation model. The study has chosen the purposive sampling design. The sample of the research consists of 139 teachers and carried out STEM club activities in the 2019-2020 academic year. The STEM Club Evaluation Scale was used as the data collection tool. As a result of descriptive statistical analyses, the independent samples t-test, correlation and regression analyses, each dimension in the scale was found to statistically significantly predict the level at which teachers implement STEM club activities. In this context, the dimensions of teachers and students explain a high level of the variance in teachers’ STEM club activities implementation level, while the dimension of planning and implementation explains this at a moderate level. The study has concluded teachers’ STEM club activities implementation level to not differ according to gender in terms of the dimensions of teachers and of planning and implementation, while this level does differ in favor of females in terms of the dimension of students. At the end of the study, suggestions were made that other studies on STEM clubs could be enriched by taking into account different dimensions such as teachers, students, planning and implementation, and that studies examining variables such as gender and professional seniority not only as independent variables but also as moderating and mediating variables could be added to the literature.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı, öğretmenlerin STEM kulübü etkinliklerini okullarda uygulama düzeylerini öğretmen, öğrenci, planlama ve uygulama boyutları açısından cinsiyet ve kıdem değişkenlerini dikkate alarak belirlemektir. Araştırmada kesitsel tarama modeli tasarımı ve açıklayıcı korelasyon modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada amaçlı örnekleme seçilmiştir. Araştırmanın örneklemini 2019-2020 eğitim öğretim yılında STEM kulübü etkinlikleri yürüten 139 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak STEM Kulübü Değerlendirme Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Tanımlayıcı istatistiksel analizler, bağımsız örneklem t-testi, korelasyon ve regresyon analizleri sonucunda, ölçekte yer alan her bir boyutun öğretmenlerin STEM kulübü etkinliklerini uygulama düzeyini istatistiksel olarak anlamlı şekilde yordadığı bulunmuştur. Bu bağlamda öğretmen ve öğrenci boyutları öğretmenlerin STEM kulübü etkinliklerini uygulama düzeyindeki varyansı yüksek düzeyde açıklarken, planlama ve uygulama boyutu bunu orta düzeyde açıklamaktadır. Öğretmen ile planlama ve uygulama boyutları açısından öğretmenlerin STEM kulübü etkinliklerini uygulama düzeylerinin cinsiyete göre farklılaşmadığı, öğrenci boyutu açısından ise bu düzeyin kadınlar lehine farklılaştığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışma sonunda, STEM kulüpleri ile ilgili diğer çalışmalarda, öğretmen, öğrenci, planlama ve uygulama gibi farklı boyutların da dikkate alınarak çalışmaların zenginleştirilebileceği, cinsiyet ve mesleki kıdem gibi değişkenlerin yalnızca bağımsız değişkenler olarak değil, aynı zamanda düzenleyici ve aracı değişkenler olarak incelendiği çalışmaların alan yazına kazandırılabileceği şeklinde öneriler ortaya konmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Eroglu, S., Gökçe, H., Karaca, M., Bektas, O. (2024). Teachers' STEM club activities implementation levels. Eğitimde Yeni Yaklaşımlar Dergisi, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 141–161. https://doi.org/10.70325/eyyad.1529931

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (56)

  1. Akar, F., & Nayir, K. F. (2015). Examining effectiveness of social clubs in educational organizations: Need for change in implementation. Pegem of Education and Instruction, 5(2), 167-186. https://doi.org/167-186. 14527/pegegog.2015.009
  2. Akay, S. (2012). Teachers 'attitudes to club social studies and analysis of the problems encountered in these studies: For Gediz district (Publication No. 313322). [Unpublished master's thesis, Yeditepe University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  3. Altunel, M. (2018). STEM education and Turkey: opportunities and risks. Seta Perspective, 207, 1-7.
  4. Ayaz, M., Gulen, S., & Gok, B. (2020). Examination of the effect of electronic portfolio use on the academic achievement and STEM attitude of eighth grade students in the application process of STEM activities. Journal of Education Faculty, 17(1), 1153-1179. https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.801394
  5. Ayers, K. A., Wade-Jaimes, K., Wang, L., Pennella, R. A. ve Pounds, S. B. (2020). The St. Jude STEM Clubs: An Afterschool STEM Club for Upper Elementary School Students in Memphis, TN. Journal of STEM outreach, 3(1), 1-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.15695%2Fjstem%2Fv3i1.13
  6. Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2009). The nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science and achievement of scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1147–1178. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069022000016942
  7. Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187-1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20237
  8. Carver, P. R., & Iruka, I. (2006). National Household Education Surveys program of 2005: After-school programs and activities: 2005. National Center for Education Statistics.
  9. Chatterjee, S., & Hadi, A. S. (2015). Weighted least squares. Regression analysis by example. 5th edition, Wiley, 179-196.
  10. Dabney, K. P., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., Miller-Friedmann, J. L., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Hazari, Z. (2012). Out-of-school time science activities and their association with career interest in STEM. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(1), 63-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2011.629455
  11. Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14(1), 10–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558499141003
  12. Ekmekci, A. (2006). Sufficiency level of educative branch training in the first grade of primary school (Publication No. 187354). [Unpublished master's thesis, Zonguldak Karaelmas University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  13. Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of science education and technology, 16(2), 171-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1
  14. Ferrara, M., Mason, H., Wee, B., Rorrer, R., Jacobson, M., & Gallagher, D. (2017). Enriching undergraduate experiences with outreach in school STEM clubs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 47(6), 74. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/k7kwn
  15. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th Edition). Boston, McGraw-Hill.
  16. Gabrielson, I., Lu, Y., & Nath, S. R. (2009). STEM club participation: Increasing engagement in science and technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 337–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9147-7
  17. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference. (14th ed.). Routledge.
  18. Gibson, H. L., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86(5), 693–705. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10039
  19. Gogebakan, M. (2016). The effectiveness of social club activities in high schools. (Publication No. 440724). [Unpublished master's thesis, Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  20. Gokce, H., Eroglu, S., Karaca, M., & Bektas, O. (2022). STEM club evaluation scale: validity and reliability study. Journal of Science Learning, 5(2), 250-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v5i2.39826
  21. Gokyer, N., & Zincirli, M. (2011). The perceptions of advisors and social club representative students on the level of realization of social club activities performed. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy Education Sciences, 6(2), 1836-1851.
  22. Gonsalves, A., Rahm, J., & Carvalho, A. (2013). “We could think of things that could be science”: Girls' re‐figuring of science in an out‐of‐school‐time club. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(9), 1068-1097. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21105
  23. Gottfried, M. A., & Williams, D. N. (2013). STEM club participation and STEM schooling outcomes. Education Policy Analysis Archives/Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 21, 1-24. http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1361
  24. Gursakal, S. (2012). An evaluation of PISA 2009 student achievement levels’ affecting factors. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Faculty of Economics & Administrative Sciences, 17(1), 441-452.
  25. Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089-1113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9526-0
  26. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  27. Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2013). Conditional process modeling: Using structural equation modeling to examine contingent causal processes. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2 ed., pp. 217–264). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
  28. Holdren, J. P., & Lander, E. (2010). Prepare and inspire: K-12 science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education for America's future. Executive Office of the President, The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stem-ed-final.pdf
  29. Karakaya, F., & Avgin, S. S. (2016). Effect of demographic features to middle school students’ attitude towards FeTeMM (STEM). Journal of Human Sciences, 13(3), 4188-4198.
  30. Karakucuk, S. (1997). Recreation leisure time evaluation concept scope and a research. Seren Ofset, Ankara, 30-51.
  31. Karaman, P., & Sahin, C. (2014). Investigating the assessment literacy of teacher candidates. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty (KEFAD), 15(2), 175-189.
  32. Kilicarslan, T. (2009). Teachers’ attitudes of educational club activities (Publication No. 239207). [Unpublished master's thesis, Yeditepe University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  33. Kirdar A. (2002). The Adequancy level of educational club stuties at the first step of primary schools (Publication No. 108730). [Unpublished master's thesis, Sakarya University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  34. Kose, E. (2004, July). The reasons why primary school students prefer extracurricular activities. 13. National Educational Sciences Congress, Malatya.
  35. Lang, C., Powell, G., Moore, N. J., & Ibrahim, F. (2018). Connecting teachers, students and pre-service teachers to improve STEM pathways in schools. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 26(8), 45-66.
  36. Miller, K. W., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2017). The influence of specific STEM extra curricular activities on career choice. International Journal of Science Education, 39(9), 1209–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1328466
  37. National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12190
  38. Nguyen, T. T. K., Van Bien, N., Lin, P. L., Lin, J., & Chang, C. Y. (2020). Measuring teachers’ perceptions to sustain STEM education development. Sustainability, 12(4), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041531
  39. Onay, I. (2012). Evaluation of student-teacher-parent and administrator views about the efficiency of student club practices in primary schools (Publication No. 308761). [Unpublished master's thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  40. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS user guide Step-by-step data analysis with SPSS. (S. Balcı and B. Ahi, Translation). Ankara: Memoir Publishing.
  41. Polat, B. S. (2017). Investigation of opinions of administrators, teachers and students about the effectiveness of social club activities in secondary schools (Publication No. 458740). [Unpublished master's thesis, Ataturk University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  42. Saglam, A., & Yayla, A. (2014). Views of teachers towards functions of social clubs implemented in primary and secondary schools. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty (KEFAD), 15(2), 279-296.
  43. Sahin, A. (2013). STEM clubs and science fair competitions: Effects on post-secondary matriculation. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(1), 5-11.
  44. Sahin, A., (2015). STEM Students on the Stage (SOS): Promoting Student Voice and Choice in STEM Education through an Interdisciplinary, Standards-focused Project Based Learning Approach. Journal of STEM Education, 16(3), 24-33.
  45. Sahin, A., Ayar, M. C., & Adıguzel, T. (2014). STEM related after-school program activities and associated outcomes on student learning. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 309-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.1876
  46. Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, I. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1
  47. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson Education Company.
  48. Thomas, T. A., (2014). Elementary teachers’ receptivity to integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education in the elementary grades (Publication No. 3625770). [Doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
  49. Timurlenk, M. (1998). The Administration of the educational club activities at secondary schools (Kars example) (Publication No. 72903). [Unpublished master's thesis, Dokuz Eylul University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  50. Vandell, D. L., Pierce, K. M., & Dadisman, K. (2005). Out-of-school settings as a developmental context for children and youth. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 33, 43-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2407(05)80004-7
  51. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development (p.79-91). In Mind in Society. (Trans. M. Cole). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  52. Wagner, T. (2008). Rigor redefined. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 20–24.
  53. Wang, H. (2012). A New era of science education: science teachers’ perceptions and classroom practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration. (Publication No. 3494678). [Doctoral dissertation]. Retrieved from Proquest.
  54. Yaman, E., & Ersal, Ö. (2015). Problems and solutions encountered in social clubs. International Peer-Reviewed Journal of Humanities and Academic Science, 4(11), 238–254.
  55. Yıgıt, N. (2008). The evaluation of the student club in high schools (Publication No. 229241). [Unpublished master's thesis, Anadolu University]. The Thesis Database of the Turkish Council of Higher Education.
  56. Young, J. R., Ortiz, N., & Young, J. L. (2017). STEMulating interest: A meta-analysis of the effects of out-of-school time on student STEM interest. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(1), 62-74. https://10.18404/ijemst.61149