Teacher Professional Development for STEM Integration in Elementary/Primary Schools: A Systematic Review

References

1. References
2. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over
3. ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20.
4. Bates. C. C., & Morgan, D. N. (2018). Seven elements of effective professional development.
5. The Reading Teacher, 71(5), 623–626. https://doi:10.1002/trtr.1674
6. *Baxter, J. A., Ruzicka, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Livelybrooks, D. (2014). Professional
7. development strategically connecting mathematics and science: The impact on teachers' confidence and practice. School Science and Mathematics, 114(3), 102–113. https://doi:10.1111/ssm.12060
8. Van den Bergh, L., Ros, A., & Beijaard, D. (2014). Improving teacher feedback during active
9. learning: Effects of a professional development program. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 772–809. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214531322
10. Birman, B., Desimone, L., Porter, A., & Garet, M. (2000). Designing professional
11. development that works. Educational Leadership,57(8), 28–33.
12. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
13. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. https://doi:10.3102/0013189X033008003
14. *Boice, K. L., Jackson, J. J., Alemdar, M., Rao, A. E., Grossman, S., & Usselam, M. (2021).
15. Supporting teachers on their STEAM journey: A collaborative STEAM teacher training program. Education Sciences, 11, 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030105
16. Borko, H., & Putnam, R. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.),
17. Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 673–708). Macmillan.
18. Cochran-Smith, M., & Demers, K.E. (2008). How do we know what we know? Research and
19. teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, & D. J. McIntyre (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed., pp. 1009–1016). Routledge.
20. Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). Studying teacher education: The report of the
21. aera panel on research and teacher education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
22. *Cook, K., Bush, S., Cox Jr, R., & Edelen, D. (2020). Development of elementary teachers'
23. science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics planning practices. School Science and Mathematics, 120(4), 197–208. https://doi:10.1111/ssm.12400
24. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support professional
25. development in an era of reform. The Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 597–604.
26. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education,
27. (3), 166–173. https://doi:10.1177/0022487100051003002
28. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of
29. Teacher Education, 57(3), 300–314. https://doi:10.1177/0022487105285962
30. Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What
31. matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46–53.
32. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional
33. development. Learning Policy Institute.
34. Desimone, L. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development:
35. Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi:10.3102/0013189X08331140
36. Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teachers’ professional
37. development in the United States. Psychology, Society, & Education, 7(3), 252–263. https://doi:10.25115/psye.v7i3.515
38. Desimone, L.M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional
39. development. Theory into Practice, 56(1), 3-12.
40. Desimone, L., Porter, A.C., Garet, M.S., & Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of
41. professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112. https://doi:10.3102/01623737024002081
42. Desimone, L., Smith, T.M., & Phillips, K. (2013). Linking student achievement growth to
43. professional development participation and changes in instruction: A longitudinal study elementary students and teachers in Title I schools. Teachers College Record, 115(5), 1–46.
44. Desimone, L. M., Smith, T. M., Hayes, S., & Frisvold, D. (2005). Beyond accountability and
45. average math scores: Relating multiple state education policy attributes to changes in student achievement in procedural knowledge, conceptual understanding and problem solving in mathematics. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(A), 5–18.
46. English, L. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal
47. of STEM Education, 3(1), 1–8. https://doi:10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
48. Fullan, M., & Milles, M. (1992). Getting reform right: What works and what doesn’t. Phi
49. Delta Kappan, 73, 744–752.
50. Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What makes
51. professional development effective? American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. https://doi:10.3102/00028312038004915
52. Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
53. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching,
54. (3), 381–391. https://doi:10.1080/135406002100000512
55. Guskey, T. R. (2014). Evaluating professional learning. In Billett, S., Harteis, C., & Gruber,
56. H. (Eds.). International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning. (pp. 1215–1235). Springer.
57. *Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up STEM: An analysis of
58. teacher-developed engineering design-based STEM integration curricular materials. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 6(1), 11–29.
59. *Havice, W., Havice, P., Waugaman, C., & Walker, K. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness
60. of integrative STEM education: Teacher and administrator professional development. Journal of Technology Education, 29(2), 73–90.
61. Joffe, H. (2011). Thematic analysis. In D. Harper & A. R. Thompson (Eds.), Qualitative
62. methods in mental health and psychotherapy: A guide for students and practitioners (pp. 209-223). Wiley.
63. Knapp, M.S. (2003). Professional development as a policy pathway. Review of Research in
64. Education, 27, 109–157.
65. Kelley, T., & Knowles, J. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education.
66. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi:10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
67. Lawless, K.A., & Pellegrino, J.W. (2007). Professional development in integrating
68. technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614. https://doi:10.3102/0034654307309921
69. Little, J. W. (1987). Teachers as colleagues. In V. Richardson-Koehler (Ed.), Educators'
70. handbook: A research perspective (pp. 491–518). Longman.
71. *McFadden, J., & Roehrig, G. (2017). Exploring teacher design team endeavors while
72. creating an elementary-focused STEM-integrated curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 1–22. https://doi:10.1186/s40594-017-0084-1
73. Nadelson, L. S., & Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Contexts, challenges, and
74. the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 221–223. https://doi:10.1080/00220671.2017.1289775
75. OECD (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong
76. learners. OECD Publishing. https://doi:10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
77. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., & Mulrow, C. D.,
78. et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71). https://doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
79. *Parker, C., Abel, Y., & Denisova, E. (2015). Urban elementary STEM initiative.
80. School Science and Mathematics, 115(6), 292–301. https://doi:10.1111/ssm.12133
81. Parsad, B., Lewis, L., Farris, E., & Greene, B. (2001). Teacher preparation and professional
82. Development (NCES 2001-088). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
83. Pearson, G. (2017). National academies piece on integrated STEM. The Journal of
84. Educational Research, 110(3), 224–226. https://doi:10.1080/00220671.2017.1289781
85. Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., & Yamaguchi, R. (2007). What makes professional
86. development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958. https://doi:10.3102/0002831207308221
87. Popova, A., Evans, D., Breeding, M. E., & Arancibia, V. (2018). Teacher professional
88. development around the World: The gap between evidence and practice (WPS 8572). World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/349051535637296801/Teacher-Professional-Development-around-the-World-The-Gap-between-Evidence-and-Practice
89. *Rich, P. J., Jones, B., Belikov, O., Yoshikawa, E., & Perkins, M. (2017). Computing and
90. engineering in elementary school: The effect of year-long training on elementary teacher self-efficacy and beliefs about teaching computing and engineering. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 1(1), 1–20. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572692.pdf
91. *Rich, P.J., Belikov, O., Yoshikawa, E., & Perkins, M. (2018). Enablers and inhibitors to
92. integrating computing and engineering lessons in elementary education. Journal of
93. Technology and Teacher Education, 26(3), 437–469. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/181979/
94. *Sias, C. M., Nadelson, L. S., Juth, S. M., & Seifert, A. L. (2017). The best laid plans:
95. Educational innovation in elementary teacher generated integrated STEM lesson plans. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 227–238. https://doi:10.1080/00220671.2016.1253539
96. Smith, K. (2017). Teachers as self-directed learners: Active positioning through professional
97. learning. Springer. https://doi:10.1007/978-981-10-3587-6
98. Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of
99. the literature. UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning.
100. *Wentworth, N., & Monroe, E. E. (2011). Inquiry-based lessons that integrate technology:
101. Their development and evaluation in elementary mathematics teacher education. Computers in the Schools, 28(4), 263–277. https://doi:10.1080/07380569.2011.620938

Keywords

teacher professional development, integrated STEM education, review of literature, elementary teachers

Affiliations