University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The challenges teachers face effectively implementing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

The challenges teachers face effectively implementing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

1

THE CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE EFFECTIVELY IMPLEMENTING
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS (STEM) CURRICULA:
AN EVALUATION STUDY

by

Saundra Johnson Austin

__________________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

Copyright 2019 Saundra Johnson Austin

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

2
DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to my God-fearing, beloved, mother, the late Cleo Priscilla
(Young) Johnson. Thank you for instilling in me your passion for education.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are a few people who have made this dissertation possible that I would like to
acknowledge. Words cannot express how grateful I am for their support. What follows is an
attempt to show my gratitude.
It goes without saying that I must thank my dissertation committee. I wish each of you
the very best in your future teaching, research, administrative, and community endeavors.
First, I would like to thank my chair, Dr. Monique C. Datta for your support, especially
during those ‘life changing events.’ You are an amazing woman, Dr. Datta. I am forever
grateful for your patience and understanding through it all. I will always remember your famous
words, “trust the process.” As difficult as this process was, I had to keep reminding myself of
that in order to make it through. Thank you, again!
As for Dr. Anthony B. Maddox, P.E., my committee member with many talents, thank
you for your confidence in me and my work as a science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) educator and professional. Your reputation preceded you and I am very
grateful that our paths crossed and that you said yes to serving on my committee.
I dare not forget my committee member Dr. Don Murphy, who introduced me to
knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences in EDUC 725, Organizational
Change and Its Effectiveness. I figured if you were that meticulous with teaching and wanting
your students to learn, then I needed you on my committee to hold me accountable. Thank you
for saying, yes, and for sharing your K-12 education background with me during our discussions.
To my scholarly coach Dr. Joyce Wiggins, thank you for sharing your wisdom
throughout my writing process.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

4
A special thanks to Ms. Minnie McGee, retired Minority Engineering Program Director
at The Ohio State University, for telling me that it was time to invest in myself.
Thank you to my dear friends Gloria, Leanice and La Countess, for continually praying
with me and for me.
To my sisters, Deborah, Lori, and Chairta, and my cousin Maurice, for your love and
overwhelming support throughout this process. You were always there cheering me on and
lifting me up in prayer. Thank you for your understanding that I had to miss all the fun that you
were having while I was working on my doctorate.
To the most important person in my life, my loving husband and best friend, Clyde. I
remember when I first started this program and I shared with you how challenging it was going
to be for us both. You said, “Just like always, I am all in.” Thank you for allowing our life to be
placed on hold, while I pursued my goal of attaining my doctorate in education. No more
evenings of you serving me dinner, while I am writing my assignments and dissertation at my
computer, and many other things!
To my cohort six classmates, it was a pleasure getting to know each of you in class every
week since 2016. May you continue to achieve your goals. You can now check of your list this
great achievement. Fight on rogue change agents!
Finally, to anyone who is working on your doctorate, I pass on to you, “trust the
process!”
To God be the Glory!

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 7
List of Figures 8
Abstract 9
Chapter 1: Introduction 10
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 10
Organizational Context and Mission 11
Organizational Goal 14
Related Literature 16
Importance of the Evaluation 18
Description of Stakeholder Groups 19
Stakeholder Performance Goals 20
Stakeholder Group for the Study 21
Purpose of the Project and Questions 22
Methodological Framework 23
Definitions 23
Organization of the Dissertation 25
Chapter 2: Literature Review 27
Influences on the Problem of Practice 27
The Role of Teachers in STEM Education 28
Effective Implementation of STEM Curricula 36
Challenges Teachers Face Effectively Implementing STEM Curricula 42
Clark and Estes’ Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 44
Framework
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 45
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, 65
and the Organizational Context
Conclusion 66
Chapter 3: Methodology 67
Participating Stakeholders 67
Data Collection and Instrumentation 71
Credibility and Trustworthiness 77
Validity and Reliability 78
Ethics 79
Limitations and Delimitations 80

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

6
Chapter 4: Results and Findings 83
Purpose of the Study 83
Participating Stakeholders 84
Findings 90
Findings: Research Question 1 91
Findings: Research Question 2 97
Documents and Artifacts Analysis Findings 123
Synthesis 125
Chapter 5: Recommendations 127
Introduction 127
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 127
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 140
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 156
Limitations and Delimitations 157
Future Research 157
Conclusion 158
References 160
Appendices 190
Appendix A: Recruitment Letter 190
Appendix B: Informed Consent/Information Sheet 191
Appendix C: Interview Protocol 194
Appendix D: Observation Protocol 197
Appendix E: Summarized Components of the Observation Protocol 200
Appendix F: Sample Growth Survey 203

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals 21
Table 2. Summary of Bloom’s Educational Objectives 47
Table 3. Assumed Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments 52
Table 4. Assumed Motivation Influences and Assessments 57
Table 5. Assumed Stakeholder Organizational Influences 64
Table 6. Mapping of Assumed Influences to Qualitative Data Collection Method 73
Table 7. A Summary Demographic Profile of Participants 84
Table 8. ESA Course and Observation Schedule 88
Table 9. Summary of Qualitative Methods for Confirming Objectives for Stakeholder 91
Goal
Table 10. Validation Status for Knowledge Influences 98
Table 11. Validation Status for Motivation Influences 114
Table 12. Validation Status for Organizational Influences 119
Table 13. Summary of Validated Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 128
Table 14. Summary of Validated Motivation Influences and Recommendations 133
Table 15. Summary of Validated Organization Influences and Recommendations 136
Table 16. The New World Kirkpatrick Model Four Levels of Evaluation 140
Table 17. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 143
Table 18. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 144
Table 19. Required Drivers to Support Teachers’ Critical Behaviors 146
Table 20. Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 150
Table 21. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 152

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Framework for discipline-based education research 40
Figure 2. A modified conceptual framework 65
Figure 3. Observation profile of class size by ESA teacher 106
Figure 4. The New World Kirkpatrick Model 141
Figure 5. Sample dashboard for achieving objectives for ESA STEM curricula 155
implementation

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

9
ABSTRACT
The problem of practice for this evaluation study was teachers’ influence on effectively
implementing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula. STEM
research is driven by how teachers influence curricula implementation. Effective
implementation is vital to STEM curricula implemented in classrooms across the United States.
Therefore, the purpose of this evaluation study was to understand the challenges that teachers
from Eastfield Public School District (EPSD, a pseudonym) and faculty from local colleges and
universities face effectively implementing STEM curricula at Eastfield STEM Academy (ESA, a
pseudonym). ESA is a non-profit organization based on the East Coast of the United States. The
findings showed that ESA teachers understood STEM curricula, effectively implemented STEM
curricula, know strategies for implementing STEM curricula, understood the challenges for
effectively implementing STEM curricula, and are motivated by the outcomes of implementing
STEM curricula. Also, ESA supports professional development. The most significant
recommendation was for ESA teachers to develop and apply the best practices for effectively
implementing ESA STEM curricula.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

10
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
The problem of practice for this evaluation study was teachers’ influence on effectively
implementing STEM curricula. Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
research is driven by how teachers influence curricular implementation (Holstein & Keene,
2013). Teachers are essential and they influence the implementation of STEM curricula
(Holstein & Keene, 2013; McFadden & Roehrig, 2017); however, teachers’ abilities to
implement curricula are based on their understandings of curricular objectives, contents,
materials, and methods (Odili, Ebisine, & Ajuar, 2011; Piasta, Justice, McGinty, Mashburn, &
Slocum, 2015). In addition, teachers face challenges implementing STEM curricula (Sentance &
Csizmadia, 2017). The effectiveness of the implementation is determined by the fidelity of the
original intent for delivering the implementation (Hodges, Gale & Meng, 2016; Holstein &
Keene, 2013). Effective implementation is vital to STEM curricula implemented in classrooms
across the United States (Holstein & Keene, 2013). Students must rely on teachers as the
primary source for learning about STEM disciplines and STEM related jobs (Hossain &
Robinson, 2012; Rabenberg, 2013; Wasserman & Rossi, 2015). There is increasing concern of
the lack of preparation of students, teachers, and professionals in STEM (Ejiwale, 2013). If the
United States is to remain globally competitive, to fill the gap in the workforce more women and
underrepresented groups are needed for the United States’ future STEM talent pool (Brown,
2016; Carnevale, Smith, & Melton, 2011; Hossain & Robinson, 2012). Therefore, the purpose of
this evaluation study was to understand the challenges teachers face effectively implementing
STEM curricula at Eastfield STEM Academy (ESA, a pseudonym), a non-profit organization
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

11
based on the East Coast of the United States. This evaluation study will explore the factors that
influence the role of teachers in STEM education, the effective implementation of STEM
curricula, and the challenges teachers face effectively implementing STEM curricula. The
findings from the evaluation study will offer recommendations to address the problem of
practice.
Organizational Context and Mission
The Eastfield STEM Academy (ESA, a pseudonym) is a non-profit organization located
on the East Coast of the United States. The organization was founded in 2014. The mission is to
introduce the needed knowledge of STEM through curricula, programs, and activities to at-risk
students. ESA offers local students the opportunity to explore STEM and personalize their
learning experiences on a regular basis. Since 2014, a total of 1,590 students have participated in
ESA, representing 3
rd
through 11
th
grades from the Eastfield Public School District (EPSD, a
pseudonym). ESA is held in an after-school setting during the academic year on Mondays
through Thursdays and Saturdays, as well as during the summer months. The ESA executive
director (ED) relied heavily on relationships established with the EPSD superintendent and local
churches to recruit teachers. In the 2017-2018 academic year, ESA offered STEM courses
during the fall, spring, and summer sessions. The STEM courses offered included biology,
chemistry, earth and environmental sciences, engineering, mathematics, physics, and robotics.
This evaluation study focused on the ESA teachers implementing STEM curricula for the
summer 2018 session. The intensive, two-week summer 2018 session was offered Monday
through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Breakfast and lunch were provided to the ESA
students. A total of 130 students participated in the summer 2018 session. Ten 75- and 85-
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

12
minute STEM courses were offered. Each course had up to 30 students representing five cohorts
of students; 3
rd
, 4
th
, 5
th
, 6
th
and 7
th
, and 8
th
through 11
th
grade students.
The theme chosen by the ESA ED for the summer 2018 session was fun STEM learning
of robotics, rockets, drones, coding, mathematics, and science experiments. These STEM topics
were the foundation for the development of the STEM curricula implemented for the summer
2018 session. Additionally, the ESA STEM curricula were a problem- and project-based,
experiential learning system. Project-based learning focuses on understanding specific problems
to develop a viable solution. Whereas, problem-based learning develops hypotheses building
and testing for a deeper understanding of the complex problems. Since various levels of student
achievement exist in the classroom, teachers are challenged with changing their instructional
approaches to meet students’ abilities (Han, Capraro, & Capraro, 2015). However, teachers must
comprehend problem-based learning in STEM to be successful in their teaching practices (Han,
Yalvac, Capraro, & Capraro, 2013). Yet, teachers serve as learning coaches when implementing
problem- and project-based learning approaches (Wiek, Xiong, Brundiers, & van der Leeuw,
2013). Both problem- and project-based learning are key components to STEM curricular
implementation.
The ESA STEM curricula included activities that strengthened the self-efficacy of the
ESA students and was intended to empower them to pursue STEM studies and careers. In
academic environments, self-efficacy is critical as a predictor of academic performance,
especially for students studying STEM (Wilson, Bates, Scott, Painter, & Shaffer, 2015).
Furthermore, self-efficacy in mathematics and science is a predictor of students graduating with
a bachelor’s degree in a STEM field (Larson et al., 2015). Most notably, the ESA STEM
curricula were designed in collaboration with the ESA ED, selected teachers from EPSD, and
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

13
faculty from local colleges and universities. The stakeholder group of focus for this evaluation
study was the teachers implementing the STEM curricula for the ESA in a state on the East
Coast of the United States.
ESA is in a major city, where 63% of the population is African American and 21% of the
children under the age of 18 live in poverty, compared to 14.7% living in poverty in the state
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). For the 2015-16 academic year, EPSD graduation rates were 66%,
compared to surrounding high schools where students graduated at a rate of 88% to 99% (U.S.
News & World Report, 2018). The ESA ED is determined that their student’s future success will
not be defined by their zip code.
The organization has a vision to build a state-of the art technology and science center that
offers students throughout the region access and exposure to enhanced and challenging learning
in STEM. ESA is planning to build a multipurpose facility that houses interactive exhibits,
classrooms, laboratories, and other spaces that feature science and technology advancement to
support early exposure and learning. As students are engaged in activities throughout the center,
they become more interested in STEM courses offered by ESA. All students from the EPSD will
have access to the center every day, free of charge. The ESA board of directors are committed to
creating an informal science and technology learning center for nearly 9,000 students attending
public schools annually through public-private partnerships with local institutions of higher
education, as well as businesses. The center is designed to help students overcome barriers to
success in education in an out-of-school setting.
Recently, education has become the primary goal of science museums and science
centers (Feinstein & Meshoulam, 2014). However, there is a gap between the actual and
potential museum audiences leaving a challenge for museums to address “a broader spectrum of
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

14
our diverse society” (Feinstein & Meshoulam, 2014, p. 371). As the ESA ED benchmarked
museums on the East Coast of the United States, it was discovered that outreach efforts targeting
the underserved population were minimal. The Center for the Future of Museums understands
the need for museums to remain relevant to society as the nation becomes more diverse and the
gap among wealthy and poor Americans grows (Ash & Lombana, 2013). By housing the
technology and science center in an urban area, the ESA begins to close the gap for a more
STEM-ready region.
STEM education is designed to raise a generation of innovators (Corlu, Capraro, &
Capraro, 2014). Yet, curricula, qualified teachers, and difficulty retaining teachers are barriers to
STEM education in the United States, which hinders student achievement and motivation
(Hossain & Robinson, 2012). Building a STEM literate society is the purpose of STEM
education. Learning activities focused on higher order thinking and 21
st
century skills are a
significant benefit for underserved students (Zielezinski & Darling-Hammond, 2016). The 21
st

century skills are described as accountability, adaptability, collaboration, creativity and
innovation, critical thinking, communication, global awareness, leadership, problem solving,
responsibility, self-development, self-management, social skills, systems thinking, and
information, media, and technology literacy (Bybee, 2010; Kennedy & Odell, 2014). Therefore,
to meet the global demands for STEM related skills, an intervention such as the ESA is essential
for underrepresented groups in the region.
Organizational Goal
The organizational goal at ESA is to effectively implement 100% of the STEM curricula
for the summer 2018 session by August 31, 2018. The STEM curriculum is effectively
implemented when the curricular objectives are met (Odili et al., 2011; Piasta et al., 2015).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

15
Regarding ESA, effective implementation will be realized by tracking the progress of the
curricular objectives, which are: (1) incorporate problem- and project-based learning, hands-on
learning activities; (2) develop pre-approved lesson plans guided by the curricula; (3) incorporate
curricula for students of diverse educational, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds; and (4)
provide a positive learning environment for all learners.
Regarding the first objective, Han et al. (2015) state that project-based learning enforces
guidance by the teacher and fosters a learning environment. For the second objective, Capraro
and Jones (2013) found that a more structured lesson plan works best for project-based learning
than the traditional teaching and learning approaches. The 2010 President’s Council of Advisors
on Science and Technology (PCAST) report grounds the third objective, which states that
student interest in STEM and STEM proficiency in K-12 school are falling behind (Peters-
Burton, Lynch, Behrend, & Means, 2014). The nation’s leading engineers and scientists are
members of PCAST who advise the President of the United States and the Executive Office of
the President on policy recommendations related to science, technology, and innovation (White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy, 2009). Furthermore, well-prepared STEM
teachers are key to implementing STEM curricula (Peters-Burton et al., 2014). Nonetheless,
affirmed opportunity structures, such as STEM-teaching classrooms, are ideal for confirming a
STEM career pathway for underrepresented students (Peters-Burton et al., 2014). The final
objective aligns with research by Stansell, Tyler-Wood, and Austin (2016), which states that the
responsibility lies upon the teacher to use problem-based learning to address the various
knowledge domains to achieve positive student outcomes.
The ESA ED established the organizational goal. The ESA ED met with teachers to
determine what worked, what did not work, and what needed improvement as a reflective
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

16
practice to develop the STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session. The reflective practice is
referred to as reflection-on-action and involves reflecting on a past event (Barley, 2012; Wilson,
2014). Also, Sellars (2017) found that, to maximize learning, it is critical for teachers to develop
reflective practice. To maximize learning the process requires staying on task and remaining
engaged (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2015). Therefore, reflection is a valuable process for the teachers
implementing STEM curricula at ESA.
There is a growing need to understand the challenges teachers face implementing STEM
curricula (Shernoff, Sinha, Bressler, & Ginsburg, 2017). The research study by Odili et al.
(2011) concluded that teachers bring value to the implementation process. Central to completing
the implementation of any curricula are the teachers (Odili et al., 2011; Piasta et al., 2015). Yet,
the development and implementation processes are very complex, and if not carefully planned,
are meaningless for teachers (Barton, Garvis, & Ryan, 2014). The transformation of curricular
implementation must involve teachers (Lumadi, 2014). Regarding ESA, EPSD teachers and
faculty from local colleges and universities were hired to implement the STEM curricula and
were engaged throughout various stages of the development and implementation processes.
Related Literature
Without the advancement of scientific disciplines, the United States will continue to lag
behind its global competitors. In 1957, when the Russians launched Sputnik, the first artificial
Earth satellite, the United States sparked a sense of urgency and began the global competition to
advance STEM education (Daza, 2013; Epstein & Miller, 2011; Gonzalez & Kuenzi, 2012;
Maguth, 2012; Stevenson, 2014). Due to Russia’s ability to educate young scientists and
mathematicians, the United States Congress passed the National Defense Education Act of 1958
as a response (Maguth, 2012). However, the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, called for a more
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

17
robust mathematics and science curricula. The rigor of American curricula was transformed as
policymakers acted swiftly to reform American schools, where rigor refers to fostering higher-
level thinking (Maguth, 2012). Now, though, the demand for stronger mathematics and science
curricula in the United States is greater (Breiner, Harkness, Johnson, & Koehler, 2012; Maguth,
2012). Therefore, addressing teachers’ influences on effectively implementing STEM curricula
is significant.
A study revealed the importance of teachers understanding their impact on effectively
implementing STEM curricula. Lumadi (2014) explored the factors faced by teachers in
implementing curricula. The findings indicated the importance of teachers having the skills and
knowledge to implement curricula, particularly for mathematics and science curricula. Of the
160 respondents, 53% indicated training as a key component to delivering quality STEM
education. In addition, 60% of the teachers indicated they did not have enough time to
implement the curricula effectively. The study concluded that involving teachers is critical to the
process of implementing curricula.
Despite efforts to implement STEM curricula, there is little evidence on the implications
of STEM education (Herschbach, 2011). STEM education research is driven by how teachers
influence curricular implementation (Holstein & Keene, 2013). The effectiveness of the
implementation is determined by the fidelity of the implementation, which is adhering to the
original intent for delivering the implementation (Hodges et al., 2016). Holstein and Keene’s
(2013) qualitative research study addressed the challenges teachers faced implementing STEM
curricula and their influence on effective implementation. The study revealed that some teachers
were more faithful with implementation than others based on their belief about students and their
abilities, their non-traditional belief about teaching, and their lack of knowledge on the subject.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

18
The study also revealed that teachers can implement curricula but can be further guided by
professional development. Nonetheless, if teachers desire to implement STEM curricula, then
professional development is a valuable resource (Nadelson et al., 2013).
Importance of the Evaluation
Teachers’ influences on effectively implementing STEM curricula is an important
problem to address for a variety of reasons. If an evaluation study is not conducted, ESA
teachers will continue to implement the STEM curricula without understanding their impact on
students’ meaningful learning experiences, how best to mitigate the challenges they face
effectively implementing STEM curricula, and their impact on fundraising for the program.
Meaningful learning is centered on more than what teachers teach students (Sharan, 2015).
Studies show that meaningful learning is the use of prior knowledge to understand and acquire
new skills that are retained as part of the knowledge transfer process (Mayer, 2011; Wang,
Moore, Roehrig, & Park, 2011). Mayer (2011) states that qualitative methods, such as observing
students during learning, can determine learning outcomes. Such meaningful learning
experiences benefits the students’ pathways to success, which aligns with the ESA mission to
introduce students to STEM. Conversely, there are consequences for the students not having
access to STEM curricula, which is why the ESA ED’s goal was to provide STEM curricula to
prepare ESA students for relevant STEM jobs. From 2014-2024, occupations in STEM are
expected to grow 8.9% compared to 6.4% for non-STEM occupations (Noonan, 2017).
Teachers are central to implementing curricula that will assist in developing STEM
professionals (Odili et al., 2011; Piasta et al., 2015). Their reflection-on-action is warranted to
understand how to mitigate the challenges they face. By reflecting on past events, one can
evaluate what has happened and identify opportunities for improvement (Wilson, 2014). In
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

19
addition, the consequence of not holding the teachers accountable will have an impact on the
ESA ED’s responsibility to raise funds for the program. Stevenson (2014) states that teachers
and other educators should pursue funding to offer programs that excite students on the wonders
of STEM.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The ESA ED played a key role in the development of the STEM curricula. However, a
group of stakeholders directly contributed to and benefited from the achievement of the
organization’s goal to effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer
2018 by August 31, 2018. Therefore, this study focused on the evaluation of an intensive, two-
week summer 2018 session. The stakeholders included ESA teachers, board members, and
teacher assistants (TAs).
The teachers were a committed group of educators representing the EPSD and faculty
from local colleges and universities. Typically, over 40% of ESA teachers returned each year.
The teachers were paid $95 per hour and were reimbursed up to $125 for necessary classroom
supplies. Nine teachers agreed to teach as many as two 75- and 85-minute courses in the
summer 2018 session. Based on their STEM certification and subject matter expertise, teachers
provided instruction from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. to 130 EPSD students in 3
rd
through 11
th
grades.
The ESA board of directors’ primary responsibility was to raise funds for the expansion
of the ESA program. As of August 2018, 13 dedicated women and men from various industries,
non-profits, and government sectors represented the ESA board of directors. Engineers, doctors,
entrepreneurs, business owners, retirees, parents, and EPSD administrators made up the ESA
board. The ED counts on the board to tap into their network of professionals for potential
donors.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

20
Additionally, TAs provide instructional support to the teachers in the classrooms. The
ESA ED reported that 12 former students, entering the 12
th
grade in fall 2018, were expected to
return as teacher assistants (TAs) for the summer 2018 session. The TAs received a stipend for
their support in the classroom. All TAs were required to complete orientation and training prior
to entering the classrooms. As a result, ESA students benefited by having another person
available in the classroom to answer questions, as well as the opportunity to establish a student-
mentor relationship with the ESA TAs. All three stakeholder groups were identified for their
individual and collective alignment toward achieving the organization’s performance goal to
effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by August
31, 2018.
Stakeholder Performance Goals
Table 1 references how the goals of the ESA teachers, the ESA board, and the ESA TAs
as stakeholders were aligned with the organizational goal, which supports the ESA mission.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

21
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The mission of ESA is to introduce the needed knowledge of science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) through activities and program offerings that enables
at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning experience.
Organizational Performance Goal
To effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by
August 31, 2018.
ESA Teachers ESA Board ESA TAs
By August 31, 2018, the ESA
teachers achieve 100% of the
objectives for effectively
implementing the ESA STEM
curricula for the summer 2018
session.
By December 2018,
raise $5M to fund the
expansion of the
program for the
following year.
100% of the TAs
complete the orientation
and training prior to the
start of the summer 2018
session.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Collectively, all ESA stakeholders will contribute to the organizational performance goal
to effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by
August 31, 2018. However, for this evaluation study, the ESA teachers were the primary focus.
The primary stakeholder goal was that the ESA teachers would achieve 100% of the objectives
for effectively implementing the ESA STEM curricula by August 31, 2018. Effective
implementation will be realized by tracking the progress of the curricular objectives, which are:
(1) incorporate project- and problem-based, hands-on learning activities; (2) develop pre-
approved lesson plans guided by the curricula; (3) incorporate curricula for students of diverse
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

22
educational, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds; and (4) provide a positive learning
environment for all learners.
It is important that the ESA teachers achieve 100% of the objectives for numerous
reasons. For example, failure of achieving the stakeholder goal will impact ESA teachers’
learning and instruction. Stansell et al. (2016) state it is the responsibility of the teacher to use
problem-solving techniques that address various knowledge domains to achieve student
outcomes. If project-based learning is not incorporated into the ESA STEM curricula, then the
objectives will not be achieved. Furthermore, the ESA ED and the ESA teachers convened to
determine the STEM curricula for the 2018 summer session. Certified STEM teachers were
recruited to effectively implement the ESA STEM curricula. Since the ESA STEM curricula
targets underrepresented groups, the program has the potential to broaden participation in STEM
education and careers.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this evaluation study was to understand the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing STEM curricula at ESA. While a complete performance evaluation
would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder of focus in this analysis
are the ESA teachers who are implementing STEM curricula. To guide the study, the following
questions were addressed:
1. To what extent is ESA meeting its organizational goal to effectively implement 100%
of the STEM curricula?
2. What are the teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related
to achieving the organizational goal?
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

23
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of teachers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis was adapted to the evaluation model and
implemented as the conceptual framework. The framework contributed to three performance
influences representing knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational (KMO) elements.
The analysis was a systematic, analytical method that helped to clarify organizational goals and
identified the KMO influences of the teachers at ESA. The teachers’ knowledge of STEM, their
motivations to teach STEM, and their goals were in alignment with the organizational
performance goal to effectively implement STEM curricula. An analysis between the actual
performance and the performance goals may reveal an identified gap that the framework
specifically examines. The evaluation study determined the actual performance of the ESA
teachers.
Definitions
Curriculum: “Defined as a product, a document which includes details about goals, objectives,
context, teaching techniques, evaluation, assessment, and resources” (Samson & Charles,
2018, p. 61).
Curricular Effectiveness: Can be defined by answering three questions: (1) How effective; (2)
for whom; and (3) under what conditions? (Holstein & Keene, 2013).
Curricular Implementation: Two components: (1) Technical — actual development of
curriculum or program; and (2) Managerial — planning for development (Odili et al.,
2011).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

24
Digital Natives: “Refers to a group of young people who have been immersed in technology all
their lives, giving them distinct and unique characteristics that set them apart from
previous generations and who have sophisticated technical skills and learning preferences
for which traditional education is unprepared” (Kirschner & van Merriënboer, 2013,
p. 190).
Diversity: A term that describes the difference and similarities that people have and encompasses
acceptance and respect (Wulf, 1998).
Gamification: “The use of game design elements in nongame contexts” (Ding, Guan, & Yu,
2017, p. 148).
Generation Z: Those whose life and socialization depend on the use of the internet and social
media and lack the ability to pay constant attention (Cilliers, 2017; Ding et al., 2017).
Global Competitiveness: The Global Competitiveness Report of the World Economic Forum
defines competitiveness as the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the
level of productivity of a country (Schwab, Sala-i-Martin, & Greenhill, 2011).
Highly Qualified Teachers: Defined as “having a bachelor’s degree, a full state certification, and
demonstrated competency, as defined by the state, in each core academic subject that
they teach” (Hill & Gruber, 2011, p. 1).
Problem-Based Learning: “An instructional (and curricular) learner-centered approach that
empowers learners to conduct research, integrate theory and practices, and apply
knowledge and skills to develop a viable solution to a defined problem” (Walker, Leary,
Hmelo-Silver, & Ertmer, 2015, p. 5).
Project-Based Learning: An instructional strategy that empowers students to participate in active
learning constructs (Han et al., 2015).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

25
Self-Efficacy: Mastery experience, vicarious experience, social persuasion, and
emotional/psychological states are four sources Bandura describes to identify self-
efficacy (Stokes, Evans, & Craig, 2017).
STEM Education: The term STEM education is referred to as “teaching and learning in the fields
of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics; typically including educational
activities across all grade levels, from pre-school to post-doctorate, and in both formal
and informal classroom settings” (Kennedy & Odell, 2014, p. 246).
STEM Teacher Education: “The ability to identify, apply, and integrate concepts from science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics to understand complex problems and to
innovate to solve them” (Rinke, Gladstone-Brown, Kinlaw, & Cappiello, 2016, p. 301).
Underrepresented Minorities (URMs): The National Science Foundation (NSF) considers
women and three racial/ethnic groups underrepresented in science and engineering;
Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians or Alaska Natives, because their representation
in science and engineering is smaller than their representation in the United States
(National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2013).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation is organized in five chapters. Chapter 1 provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about effective implementation
of STEM curricula. The organization’s mission and goals, related literature and the importance
of the evaluation, stakeholders and their goals, purpose of project and questions, and the
methodological framework for the project, as well as the definitions were introduced. Chapter 2
will provide stakeholder KMO influences on the problem of practice and a review of current
literature related to the scope of the evaluation study. Topics on the role of teachers in STEM
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

26
education, effective implementation of STEM curricula, and the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing STEM curricula will be explored. Chapter 3 will describe the assumed
KMO influences preventing ESA from achieving the organizational performance goal. In
Chapter 4, the data and results will be assessed and analyzed. Chapter 5 will focus on
recommendations for closing the perceived gaps in the organizational performance. The
recommendations will be based on data and related literature. An implementation and evaluation
plan will also be provided.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

27
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The demand for stronger mathematics and science curricula in the United States is greater
since the race to launch the first satellite into outer-space (Breiner et al., 2012; Maguth, 2012;
Stevenson, 2014). Absent from a strong foundation in STEM, the next generation of STEM
professionals will not materialize (Hossain & Robinson, 2012). Shernoff and colleagues (2017)
described a growing need to understand the challenges teachers face implementing STEM
curricula. Therefore, this literature review will examine teachers’ influences on effectively
implementing STEM curricula. In this chapter, the influences on the problem of practice are
reviewed, as well as the role of the teachers as the stakeholder group of focus. Next, the
explanation of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences used in this evaluation
study will be outlined. The chapter concludes with explanations of teacher’s knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences using the seminal work of Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap
analysis conceptual and methodological framework.
Influences on the Problem of Practice
In the next decade, nearly 80% of the jobs in the United States will require skills in
STEM (Stokes et al., 2017). Similarly, between 2014-2024, STEM occupations are expected to
grow by 8.9%, as compared to 6.4% for non-STEM occupations (Noonan, 2017). Of the STEM
disciplines, mathematics and science occupations are projected to grow the fastest by 28.2%, as
compared to 6.5% for the average projected growth of all occupations (Fayer, Lacey, & Watson,
2017). Yet, employers purport there is a shortage of qualified workers to meet the demands of
STEM occupations (American College Testing [ACT], 2013). Both the 2005 congressional
testimony from former chairman Augustine of the Committee on Prospering in the Global
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

28
Economy of the 21
st
century and the report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, were highly
influential in establishing the narrative on the STEM-qualified worker shortage (Stevenson,
2014). Kennedy and Odell (2014) argue that based on the changing global economy and
workforce needs, a shortage of prepared STEM workers and educators will ensue.
The Role of Teachers in STEM Education
K-12 education in the United States lacks the rigor of STEM (Sahin & Top, 2015). Over
the past decade, attention to STEM education has increased, calling for improvements in the
quality of curriculum and instruction (Honey, Pearson, & Schweingruber, 2014). Also, current
STEM education approaches lack standards-focused, ready-to-teach teacher and student
materials and frequent teacher training (Sahin & Top, 2015). The actual skills needed for STEM
education depends on the expertise of teachers (Corlu et al., 2014). In addition, teacher
effectiveness is challenged with content knowledge in various STEM subjects being taught
(Honey et al., 2014). The expertise of teachers is the key factor that determines whether STEM
education produces positive student outcomes (Honey et al., 2014).
The pupil-teacher ratio and the background and experience of teachers significantly
impact education (Dutta & Sahney, 2016). In the 1980s, the pupil-teacher ratio dropped from
over 18:1 to nearly 16:1 (Cowan, Goldhaber, Hayes, & Theobald, 2016). The pupil-teacher
ratios are projected to shrink from 16:1 to about 15.3:1, which by 2025, will require an additional
145,000 teachers for sustainability (Dee & Goldhaber, 2017; Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, &
Carver-Thomas, 2016).
The STEM teacher shortage is recognized as an acute shortage and is less likely to
respond to the labor market demand (Martin & Mulvihill, 2016; Sutcher et al., 2016). Although,
the size of the teaching force has grown (Ingersoll, Merrill, & Owens, 2017), student
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

29
enrollments, pupil-teacher ratios, and teacher attrition are the leading reasons why there is a
growing teacher shortage in the United States (Sutcher et al., 2016). Despite the U.S. workforce
representing teachers at over 4% (Shuls & Trivitt, 2015), over time, the production of potential
teachers has increased (Cowan et al., 2016). Furthermore, the overall production of teachers has
exceeded public school enrollments across the country (Cowan et al., 2016). Between 2013-
2025, public school enrollment is expected to increase 2% to 56.5 million students for
elementary and secondary school enrollment, 2% to 40.0 million students for Pre-K to 8
th
grade
enrollment, and 3% to 16.5 million students for 9
th
through 12
th
grade enrollment (Hussar &
Bailey, 2017). By 2025, the demand for teachers is expected to grow to 316,000 teachers per
year (Sutcher et al., 2016). Also, if current trends continue, the teacher supply will continue to
shrink based on 2025 projections of as few as 200,000 teacher hires (Sutcher et al., 2016).
Shortage of STEM Teachers
There is a growing concern for the shortage of mathematics and science teachers across
the United States (Avant, 2015; Cowan et al., 2016; Diekman & Benson-Greenwald, 2018;
Goldhaber, Krieg, Theobald, & Brown, 2015; Hutchison, 2012; Schmidt & Fulton, 2016; Yang
et al., 2015). To address this concern, Stokes et al. (2017) examined the impact of developing
informal and formal learning experiences for teachers in the teachHouston/Noyce Scholarship
program. The teachHouston program is a STEM teacher education program collaboration
among the colleges of natural sciences, mathematics, education, and local school districts in
Houston. The program focuses on combatting the shortage of qualified math and science
teachers through the Physics By Inquiry Course and the Noyce Internship Institute. Of the 121
participants, one participant of the Noyce scholarship concluded they plan to receive teaching
certification in both mathematics and physics and 12 participants pursued their science
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

30
composite certificate. Overall, positive findings indicate that self-efficacy had the potential to
increase the production and retention of urban STEM teachers.
Furthermore, teacher shortages tend to follow a cyclical pattern, with high and low labor
markets and are most challenging for hiring STEM teachers (Dee & Goldhaber, 2017; Sutcher et
al., 2016). The United States Department of Education reported teacher shortages in
mathematics and science in 42 and 40 states, respectively (Sutcher et al., 2016). Likewise,
teacher attrition rates are at an all-time high of 8%, which is twice as high as Singapore and
Finland. Teachers play a critical role in the success of students in STEM (Stokes et al., 2017).
Stronge (2018) states that student achievement is determined by the characteristics and
behaviors of teachers. Also, student achievement is linked to teacher quality for teacher quality
matters (Shuls & Trivitt, 2015). Teacher shortages contribute to the low mathematics and
science ability of school-aged students (Hutchison, 2012). In addition, student academic
performances are directly tied to mathematics and science teacher shortages resulting in the
future well-being and security of the nation (Yang et al., 2015).
Another indicator of the STEM-teacher shortage is the slow rise in interested students in
the STEM teaching profession (ACT, 2017b). A series of the reports on The Condition of STEM
revealed that of the 1.9 million ACT high school test-takers in 2015, 939,049 indicated an
interest in STEM compared to 2.1 million ACT test-takers in 2016, of which 1,009,232 indicated
an interest in STEM (ACT, 2015, 2016). The 2016 report released that 1,258 (1%) ACT test-
takers indicated an interest in teaching math or science (ACT, 2016). The 2017 report revealed
that approximately 2,030,038 million high school graduates took the ACT test, which is a slight
decline from 2016 the previous year (ACT, 2017a). Of the 2017 high school test-takers, 12.65%
were African American, 17.13% were Hispanic, and 52.33% were White. Also, 48% of the U.S.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

31
high school graduates in 2017 were interested in pursuing STEM education and careers (ACT,
2017b). Based on these trends, STEM education should remain the educational priority for the
21
st
century (Parry, 2015; Rinke et al., 2016), particularly since the United States is ranked 20th
in the world for STEM degrees earned among 24-year-olds (Hossain & Robinson, 2012).
Additionally, out of 57 participating countries in the Programme for International Student
Assessment (PISA), the U.S. is ranked 24
th
in science literacy and 27
th
in mathematics literacy
(Rinke et al., 2016). However, Dubois Baber (2015) stated that there is a decline in America’s
STEM education. An increase in high-quality math and science teachers is essential to
developing STEM graduates (ACT, 2013).
Certified STEM Teachers
A 1986 report, A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the 21st Century was issued by the
Carnegie Foundation and served as the basis for creating the National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards (National Board) (Bricker, 2015). The Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) of 1965, which was later amended in 2001 and 2015, requires that
qualified teachers have a bachelor’s degree, a full state certification, and demonstrated
competency in each core academic subject they teach (Hill & Gruber, 2011). Based on these
requirements a teacher becomes eligible to pursue the advanced-teaching credential (Gaudreault
& Woods, 2012). The certification is derived from five core propositions that are built on
National Board Standards that teachers: (1) are committed to educating students; (2) know their
subjects; (3) manage and monitor student learning; (4) think systematically; and (5) belong to a
community of learners (National Board, n.d.). The process of becoming certified involves the
completion of 10 assessments, four portfolio entries, and six constructed-response exercises to
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

32
evaluate content knowledge and the certification is renewable in 10 years (Gaudreault & Woods,
2012).
Bricker (2015) conducted a qualitative study on teachers who received their California
National Board Certification in 2005 and 2006. The participants for the study were 565 teachers
of the nearly 6,000 National Board-Certified teachers in the state of California. The purpose of
the study was to identify the factors that motivated teachers to renew their national board
certification. The study suggested that increasing the number of teachers who are nationally
board certified can have a profound impact on schools in general. The findings indicated that the
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards facilitates a quality teaching force (Bricker,
2015).
Moreover, Bricker (2015) described the process as requiring a teacher to be in an actual
classroom, teaching a specific subject matter, designing curriculum and using instructional
strategies that will meet the needs of students. Also, Bricker (2015) stated that the National
Board Certification has yet to achieve national acceptance as the gold standard of teacher
certification. Of the 3.5 million teachers in the United States, over 112,000 teachers achieved
National Board Certification (National Board, n.d.; Sawchuk, 2015). Teachers who complete the
certification report there is value in achieving the certification, despite the demanding hours and
a three-year commitment of analyzing their teaching behavior and required reflection
(Gaudreault & Woods, 2012). Good teaching and learning is often the outcome of reflective
practice (Yanuarti & Treagust, 2015).
The theory of reflection-on-action seeks to understand what has happened, allowing the
practitioner to recall and analyze performance that prompts new knowledge (Barley, 2012;
Miller, 2017). However, Beauchamp (2015) raised questions on the validity of reflective
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

33
practice since there is a lack of evidence on whether reflective practice enhances teacher and
student learning performance. Despite these findings, students taught by national board-certified
teachers learn more than students in other elementary and high school classrooms (Sawchuk,
2015).
Furthermore, a report by the U. S. Department of Education on teacher shortages
confirmed there is a demand for certified STEM teachers (Yang et al., 2015). Students achieve
higher levels in mathematics when teachers hold standard certifications in mathematics, and to a
lesser degree, in science (Hutchison, 2012). The National Board certification is a traditional
pathway for teachers to become certified with proven results, yet teacher certification numbers
remain low (Hutchison, 2012). Also, low numbers of certified teachers are one of the leading
reasons why students are not pursuing STEM studies and careers (Hutchison, 2012). STEM
professionals interested in a career change, as well as recent college graduates who did not major
in education, are drawn to alternative pathways for certification.
Non-Traditional Pathway to Teacher Certification
Although national board certification is a traditional pathway for teachers to become
certified, teacher certification numbers remain low (Bricker, 2015). Nearly 30% of math and
science teachers entered teaching through the alternative certification program in 2007; however,
not all math and science teachers are certified to teach through traditional pathways (ACT,
2013). Based on the results of a quantitative study of 164 traditionally certified and alternatively
certified teachers in school districts throughout the state of New Jersey, alternative certification
methods should be considered as a solution for the shortage of high-qualified STEM teachers
(Avant, 2015). Teachers can typically obtain a license to teach elementary school without taking
a rigorous college-level STEM course, such as calculus, statistics, or chemistry, and without
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

34
demonstrating a solid grasp of mathematics knowledge, scientific knowledge, or the nature of
scientific inquiry (Epstein & Miller, 2011). The practice of securing a license without rigor often
diminishes the curiosity of students and lowers the confidence of students early in their education
(Epstein & Miller, 2011).
Moreover, teacher candidates should obtain a license with the passing of the mathematics
and science portions of the exam before sending thousands of teachers into the classroom in all
states (Epstein & Miller, 2011). The seminal 1994 Longitudinal Survey of American Youth
revealed what a teacher knows about her subject has a positive impact on students’ learning
(Ejiwale, 2013). An important element for improving students’ learning in the classroom is
through professional development activities of teachers (Bricker, 2015). Such activities should
focus on the subject being taught, as well as how students learn the subject (Bricker, 2015).
Professional Development of STEM Teachers
In addition to the shortage of qualified teachers, another barrier related to advancing
STEM education is the lack of investments in teachers (Shernoff et al., 2017). Professional
development for teachers is both an opportunity and an obligation and facilitates change while
confirming current practices (Patton, Parker, & Tannehill, 2015). The qualitative study of 22
elementary (23%), middle (36%), and high school (36%) teachers (17 females) and four
administrators (two females) found that teachers (all White) were challenged with implementing
STEM education effectively, despite demonstrated understanding through professional
development (Shernoff et al., 2017).
Similarly, STEM professional development is vital to the preparation of elementary
education teachers to effectively meet the needs of their students, whereas certification
curriculum requires candidates to complete two college-level science and mathematics courses
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

35
(Nadelson et al., 2013). The three-day professional development institute examined the impact
on changes in attitudes, confidence, and efficacy for 33 (year 1) and 32 (year 2) K-5 teachers
teaching STEM (Nadelson et al., 2013). The study confirmed the need for and influence of
effective models for teaching STEM while motivating K-6 teachers to pursue on-going STEM
professional development.
Hands-on activities are the most effective form of professional development for in-
service and pre-service teachers (Jeffery, McCollough, & Moore, 2016). The mixed methods
study examined the impact of a STEM professional development program. The study focused on
math and science content knowledge, self-efficacy, and interest in STEM of four to eight
students and pre- and in-service teachers (Jeffery et al., 2016). As a result of the study’s
planning, teaching, and evaluation methods, a noticeable increase in student development and
better prepared beginning teachers was achieved.
Additionally, practicing reflection is a way to further enhance a teacher’s professional
development (Yanuarti & Treagust, 2015). Of the eight teachers, including senior teachers, who
participated in the qualitative research study in a small urban center in Indonesia, three teachers
assumed reflective teaching is reflective activities before closing the lesson, one teacher
performed reflection-in-action, three teachers performed reflection-on-action, and one teacher
just heard about reflective teaching term (Yanuarti & Treagust, 2015). Reflective teacher
practice improved their teaching skills and also led to continuous professional development.
However, there are fewer ongoing and intensive professional development opportunities for
teachers who are needed to sustain student learning (Krasnoff, 2015). Hence, there is a need to
further investigate teachers’ professional development experiences as they implement STEM
curricula (Guzey, Tank, Wang, Roehrig, & Moore, 2014).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

36
Effective Implementation of STEM Curricula
STEM teachers play a vital role in implementing curricula (Mamlok-Naaman, 2017).
The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (1996) states that the
characteristics of an educational ecosystem are what defines teaching, instead of one teacher
working in isolation. Together, secondary and post-secondary educators can develop
pedagogical models that lead to purposeful STEM instruction, resulting in an increase in student
engagement (Kennedy & Odell, 2014). Well-educated STEM teachers are needed to raise the
capacity of the current generation (Corlu et al., 2014). Teachers play an important role in
shaping students’ interest in STEM (Kennedy & Odell, 2014). A critical component of teacher
effectiveness has shifted from what teachers know and think to what they do (Chestnutt, 2017).
Teacher effectiveness is based on student achievement, performance ratings from peers,
administrators, and key stakeholders (Stronge, 2018). Therefore, it is important to note the role
of teachers implementing STEM curricula. For these reasons, the ESA ED focused on
implementing practices that supported the organization’s mission.
Holstein and Keene (2013) explore the importance of studying curricular effectiveness.
In the 2010 report, Standards for K-12 Engineering Education, the National Academy of
Engineering noted the difficulty of ensuring usefulness and effective implementation (Guzey,
Moore, & Harwell, 2016). The knowledge teachers gain from professional development
programs supports effective implementation of STEM curricula (Takahashi, 2014). Takahashi
(2014) examined a collaborative approach to implementing new curricula through school-based
lesson study, which involved a team of Japanese teachers studying the national standards,
reading research articles, examining available curricula to design lessons for insight into how
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

37
students learn, and to improve teaching. Findings from the study confirmed school-based lesson
study as an effective way to implement new curricula.
Implementation of Project Lead The Way
A variety of STEM curricular providers assert that their curricula are effective for student
learning. Yet, there is limited research examining the skills, knowledge, and experiences of
teachers effectively implementing STEM curricula (Stohlmann, Moore, & Roehrig, 2012). A
study by Stohlmann and colleagues (2012) examined the implementation of Project Lead The
Way (PLTW) curriculum at middle schools. Project Lead The Way is a STEM curriculum and
professional development program designed to increase K-12 students’ interest in science and
engineering (Sherman, Li, Darwin, Taylor, & Song, 2017). The STEM curriculum is paving the
way for more K-12 students to access real-world, applied learning experiences that empower
them to gain the skills they need to thrive in college, career, and beyond (Holstein & Keene,
2013; Tai, 2012). The scalability of PLTW makes it a successful program to implement based
on the programs existing infrastructure and track record for incorporating the STEM curriculum
and professional development into schools (Cuny, 2015); however, the cost for of implementing
PLTW can be challenging for some schools (Ericson, Adrion, Fall, & Guzdial, 2016).
Stohlmann et al. (2012) studied the factors that teachers must consider to effectively
implement the PLTW curriculum, Gateway to Technology. Four PLTW teachers from a large
mid-western suburban middle school, grades 6
th
to 8
th
, were the participants in the study.
Attempts were made by the PLTW teachers to rely on quality pedagogy to provide comfort in
implementing the curriculum. Student presentations, designing and building dragsters with 3D
modeling software, and small group discussions regarding the activities were a few of the
approaches PLTW teachers took for students to work together to develop their own ideas.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

38
However, three of the four PLTW teachers reported they were uncomfortable with not knowing
the direction students would go. Overall, the teachers had difficulty with the PLTW lessons,
particularly how long they would be and how best to guide students. Therefore, the findings
indicated effectively implementing STEM curricula requires dedicated, organized, and
knowledgeable teachers who are committed to being PLTW teachers long-term and are provided
support and time to collaborate to maximize student learning.
Similarly, Keith (2018) studied the implementation of PLTW curriculum in four 1
st
grade
classrooms. The purpose of the study was to investigate the implementation of PLTW
curriculum in 1
st
grade classrooms. The study sought to determine teachers’ perceptions of the
program’s effectiveness, teachers’ levels of self-efficacy in teaching science, and student
achievement. Factors existed that prevented teachers from understanding how to implement the
curriculum effectively. Such challenges included the lack of confidence in STEM subjects that
results in students’ inability to grasp the concepts fully. Furthermore, the survey results of four
teachers and two media specialists revealed confidence in implementing the science curriculum;
however, the interviews revealed that more training is required to increase teachers’ knowledge
to properly teach the STEM curriculum. The study further determined the need for dedicated
training for teachers to effectively implement the STEM curriculum.
Bicer, Boedeker, Kopparla, Capraro, and Capraro (2015) conducted a quantitative study
in Texas in which seven STEM academies (1,682 students) implemented PLTW engineering
curriculum and 10 STEM academies (3,070 students) implemented the mainstream curriculum.
Bicer et al. (2015) stated that as the largest non-profit STEM program, PLTW provides over
6,000 programs to more than 5,000 K-12 teachers in all 50 states, as well as the District of
Columbia. The growth of mathematics scores was observed based on STEM high schools with
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

39
PLTW and STEM high schools without PLTW. The study concluded that regardless of school
type, the mathematics scores of students improved from 10
th
to 11
th
grade and showed no
statistically significant difference between PLTW schools and non-PLTW schools. These
disparities may be attributed to the dependence on teachers’ significant time commitments and
the responsibilities of the administrators to commit the necessary resources for proper
implementation. Time constraints prohibited the fidelity of implementation from determining
how well PLTW was implemented in the schools.
Fidelity of Curriculum Implementation
There is a call to action for effective STEM curriculum implementation. Barker, Nugent,
and Grandgenett (2014) state that the fidelity of curriculum implementation can determine a
program’s impact based on the design for achievement. Researchers describe the fidelity of
implementation as the practitioner implementing the curriculum as the author intended (Hodges
et al., 2016; Holstein & Keene, 2013; Stains & Vickrey, 2017). The teacher’s understanding of
the curriculum objectives, contents, materials, and methods drives the implementation process
(Odili et al., 2011). Such knowledge can only occur by understanding and measuring whether
the intervention was implemented with fidelity (Stains & Vickrey, 2017). Odili et al. (2011)
argued that failed attempts for STEM curriculum implementation are the result of the teacher’s
inadequate knowledge of educational innovation (Odili et al., 2011). Researchers further state
that there is no equivalency to teacher quality and implementation fidelity (Holstein & Keene,
2013).
A common framework for the discipline-based education research community further
describes two critical components measuring the structure and processes of an intervention
designed to relate to outcomes in Figure 1. Examples of the structural components (procedural
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

40
and educative) include the materials needed and the frequency of use of certain activities. The
process components (pedagogical and student engagement) refer to how the intervention is
expected to be implemented, such as the behaviors of teachers and students. Moreover, the
framework is used to determine whether the intervention was effective and identified the causes
related to the success or failure of the intervention (Stains & Vickrey, 2017). Above all, a
transformation takes place when the teacher rewrites the curriculum, known as a teacher’s
conception. This conception implies that the teacher’s knowledge becomes her belief that
influences her instructional decisions (Holstein & Keene, 2013).

Figure 1. Framework for discipline-based education research (Stains & Vickrey, 2017)

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

41
Studies show the fidelity of implementation as a critical measure for effective
implementation. A pilot study was conducted in central Massachusetts to determine the impact
of STEM curriculum of 17 Pre-K teachers’ engineering content knowledge, self-efficacy, and
teaching practice (Sibuma, Wunnava, John, Anggoro, & Dubosarsky, 2018). An implementation
science framework used observations to measure the fidelity of implementation. The findings
indicate that pre-school children can attain higher levels of understanding STEM when Pre-K
teachers receive well-organized, thought-provoking professional development.
Samson and Charles (2018) conducted an empirical study with structured interviews to
understand the challenges facing 10 female and 10 male secondary school principals
implementing curriculum in the Capricorn Education District in the Limpopo province of South
Africa. Key findings from the empirical study revealed a lack of resources from 90% of the
respondents from rural areas and a lack of clarity on policy guidelines provided by governmental
officials from 80% of the respondents. These findings reflect similar results from a nine-year
research study that investigated teachers’ involvement in the implementation of the basic science
and technology curricula in primary schools in Warri South Local Government of the Delta State
in Nigeria (Odili et al., 2011). Twenty-six headmasters and 26 teachers of primary science and
technology were randomly selected. All the teachers sampled in the study: (1) lacked
availability of the curriculum; (2) lacked curriculum guidance for developing lesson plans; and
(3) lacked knowledge of the new curriculum and which meant the curriculum could not be
successfully implemented. Understanding the curriculum objectives, contents, materials, and
methods are critical to the teacher’s ability to implement the curriculum. Unfortunately, the lack
of teacher’s knowledge of the curriculum presents obstacles for student learning. Thus, the
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

42
quality of the teachers depends on the flexibility of the educational system; a system that
includes researchers, as well as policymakers (Holstein & Keene, 2013; Karam et al., 2017).
Challenges Teachers Face Effectively Implementing STEM Curricula
To advance STEM education, STEM teachers will have to know how to implement
STEM practices, policies, and programs; however, this presents significant challenges (Bybee,
2010). Although there are several challenges that teachers face implementing STEM curricula,
this evaluation study focused on research related to the challenges in developing lesson plans, the
challenges in developing implementation practices, and the challenges with large class sizes.
Challenges in Developing Lesson Plans
The most common activity at the core of teacher education is lesson planning (Lee, Lim,
& Kim, 2016). Classroom instruction is guided by lesson plans. As a document and artifact,
lesson plans are intended to reflect teachers’ thinking on the delivery of content to enhance
student learning (Lee et al., 2016). An investigative study was conducted on 198 teachers (3
rd

through 6
th
grades) from 43 schools in 17 districts in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area (Guzey et al.,
2014). The purpose of the study was to examine the effects that a year-long professional
development program had on teachers developing lesson plans for the implementation of the
engineering curriculum. The traditional teaching and learning approaches have led to more
structured, project-based lesson plans (Capraro, Capraro, & Morgan, 2013). A total of 77 lesson
plans were coded and categorized from posters and professional learning community workshops
that resulted in five types of lesson plans. The challenges the teachers faced implementing the
lesson plans were: (1) teachers lacked knowledge or comfort with using engineering design as a
vehicle to teach content; (2) teachers believe engineering is adding to their loaded science
curriculum; (3) teachers face challenges teaching science through the engineering design
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

43
challenge; and (4) teachers struggled with implementing some of the engineering design units
within the time constraints. The lack of direction on how to integrate meaningful subjects is
often a challenge that teachers face when implementing STEM curricula (Guzey et al., 2016).
Challenges in Developing Implementation Practices
Tan and Leong (2014) studied the challenges the science department faced implementing
their science curriculum. The three-year-old math and science high school in Singapore had a
population of 600 students. The results highlight three key challenges: (1) benchmarking the
school; (2) professional development of STEM staff; and (3) assessment. The findings further
indicated that teachers play a significant role in developing curricular materials. The study
revealed the need for the teachers to work together in groups to have regular conversations to
ensure the fidelity of implementation in the curriculum process. Overall, the school was pleased
with the potential for the development of strong curriculum implementation practices for other
schools in the region.
Challenges with Large Class Sizes
A challenge for schools across the United States is increased class sizes. Increasing class
size is seen as a budget-cutting measure that has less impact on students (Chingos, 2013). With
enrollment increases, schools are faced with either hiring more teachers or increasing class size.
Smaller class sizes increase the opportunity for individualized instruction from the teacher
(Chingos, 2013; Goodpaster, Adedokun, & Weaver, 2012). In contrast, large class sizes reduce
the interaction between the student and the teacher (Foley & Masingila, 2014; White et al.,
2015).
A study was conducted with middle and high school teachers observing 51 STEM
courses across 13 departments at the University of Maine to investigate the active engagement
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

44
nature of instruction (Smith, Vinson, Smith, Lewin, & Stetzer, 2014). The study revealed that
despite the large class sizes, teacher instruction varied, using a combination of traditional
lecturing and interactive teaching methods. These findings suggest that students’ behavior differ
significantly with the various levels of lecturing. Furthermore, large classes employed a wide-
range of teaching instruction, while smaller classes more often presented materials. The results
from the study were used to develop professional development training for the faculty at the
University of Maine.
Clark and Estes ’ Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Framework
The seminal work of Clark and Estes (2008) offers a conceptual framework that
contributes to three performance influences representing knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational elements. An analysis between the actual performance and the performance goals
reveals an identified gap that the framework specifically examines. Clark and Estes (2008)
assert that knowledge and skill can enhance one’s performance. Rueda (2011) suggests that
knowledge be addressed directly. Factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive are four
types of knowledge and skills identified by Krathwohl (2002) through enhancements such as
information, job aids, training, and education (Clark & Estes, 2008). Three facets of motivation
that impact the learning and teaching environment are active choice, persistence, and mental
effort (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). These three motivational influences are demonstrated
through self-efficacy and utility value (Bandura, 2000; Eccles, 2006; Pajares, 2006). Finally,
organizational influences on stakeholder performance include work processes (linkage of people,
equipment, and materials), material resources (tangible supplies and equipment), and value
chains and streams (interactions and processes for implementation).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

45
Knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are the three elements of Clark and
Estes’ (2008) gap analysis. The three elements address the stakeholder performance goal and are
described in the following three sections. The first section will be a discussion of assumed
influences on the stakeholder performance goal in the context of knowledge and skills. Next,
assumed influences on the attainment of the stakeholder goal from the perspective of motivation
will be debated. Finally, assumed organizational influences on the achievement of the
stakeholder goal will be explored. Each of the assumed stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on performance will be examined through the methodology discussed
in Chapter 3.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
The section that follows focuses on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that affect the achievement of the stakeholder goal. The teachers at ESA are the
stakeholder group identified in the problem of practice. The stakeholder goal is that the ESA
teachers achieve 100% of the objectives for implementing the ESA STEM curricula by August
31, 2018. The findings will reveal the importance of examining the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences of the ESA teachers for implementing the STEM curricula that
supports the organizational goal.
Knowledge and Skills
Raising the question, “what one needs to know to achieve his or her goals?” provides for
deeper insight into the problem of practice (Rueda, 2011). This is a more direct approach to
learning the issue and how it can enhance one’s performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). Such
enhancements include information, job aids, training, and education. Information reduces
uncertainty, effective job aids guide practice towards achievement, training requires guided
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

46
practice and corrective feedback, and education prevents future challenges and problems (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
How an individual learns can be best described by Bloom’s taxonomy. In 1956, the
psychologist first introduced a learning taxonomy, which was later revised by Krathwohl in 2002
(Radmehr & Drake, 2018; Verenna, Noble, Pearson, & Miller, 2018). The reframing of Bloom’s
taxonomy added another dimension to learning outcomes, linking instruction and performance
(Lo, Larsen, & Yee, 2016). In particular, the teachers’ instruction is the basis for meaningful
learning in the classroom, promoting the knowledge of learners’ experiences, feelings, and
interactions with other learners (Sharan, 2015). Adams (2015) defined Bloom’s taxonomy as
calling attention to specific learning objectives that require higher levels of cognitive skills for
the individual to achieve deeper learning, while knowledge and skills are transferred to various
tasks and contexts. As outlined in Table 2, Ramirez (2017) further explains the six categories of
Bloom’s taxonomy as knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and
evaluation. An explanation of the four types of knowledge follows, along with the related
experiences of teachers at ESA, which is essential to address to achieve the stakeholder goal.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

47
Table 2
Summary of Bloom’s Educational Objectives
Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation
Lower levels of
thinking
Higher levels of
thinking
Skills Recall Understand Use in a
new but
similar
situation
Deconstruct Create Critically
examine
Name Explain Explore
relationships
Generate Make an
informed
judgment
Recognize Paraphrase Parse data Design
Identify Summarize Formulate
Give examples
Note. (Ramirez, 2017, p. 147)

Knowledge influences. Researchers describe the four knowledge types as factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognition (Krathwohl, 2002; Radmehr & Drake, 2018, Reuter et
al., 2018; Rueda, 2011). Factual is the type of knowledge related to the facts. Conceptual is
knowledge of structures related to a specific area. Procedural is knowing how to do something.
Metacognition is knowing when and why to do something. Also, factual, conceptual, and
procedural knowledge types are based on the original taxonomy, whereas the metacognitive
knowledge type is the result of a revised taxonomy (Rueda, 2011). In addition, Mayer (2011)
notes metacognition as having two components. First, awareness is, “knowing how one learns”
and second is control, “knowing how to monitor and control one’s learning” (p. 43). The
following sections describe four knowledge influences that are related to the stakeholder’s goal
for implementing the ESA STEM curricula.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

48
Teachers need knowledge of STEM curricula. Teachers at all levels should understand
STEM education (Breiner et al., 2012; Chiu, Price, & Ovrahim, 2015). Guzey et al. (2016) state
that STEM education approaches chosen by teachers improve curricular design, which leads to
better student learning. Many factors influence student learning, including the teacher’s subject
matter knowledge (Hollins, 2011). Quality instruction is improved with the teacher’s knowledge
of the learner (Hollins, 2011). Therefore, teacher preparation in teaching STEM is vital to
student performance (DeBiase, 2016).
Furthermore, teachers are required to have enough knowledge of STEM to contribute to
the design of effective curricula (Guzey et al., 2016). Unfortunately, there are limitations to
teacher effectiveness, one of which is knowledge of the content being taught. Programs across
the United States are preparing teachers with the content knowledge in STEM subjects (Honey et
al., 2014). STEM teacher preparation has a direct correlation to content and curricular
knowledge, and pedagogy support, where content knowledge is what a teacher already knows
and the curricular knowledge is content that creatively engages students through a variety of
materials, resources, and tools (DeBiase, 2016). Pedagogical content is content that exceeds the
knowledge a teacher has on a subject or topic (DeBiase, 2016). The integration of these concepts
frames the acquisition and synthesis that are ideal to STEM disciplines (DeBiase, 2016). In
summary, the mastery of content and knowledge are needed for teachers to implement STEM
curricula.
Teachers need knowledge of which practices result in effective implementation of
STEM curricula. Kelley and Knowles (2016) agree on the need for further research concerning
the effective implementation of STEM curricula. The researchers suggest removing barriers
which prevent teachers from learning key theories, pedagogical approaches, and becoming more
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

49
aware of the research results of STEM education initiatives. Ejiwale (2013) stated that poor
preparation and the lack of inspiration of students as yet another barrier. Furthermore, Chiu et al.
(2015) stressed the importance of involving teachers in planning the implementation of STEM
curricula. For example, the U.S. Department of Education Delivery Institute published an
Adoption and Implementation Workbook for states to use the Next Generation Science Standards
(NGSS) as a guide for teachers when implementing STEM curricula (Chiu et al., 2015; Shernoff
et al., 2017). The recommendation is to use practices true to NGSS, as well as the diverse
instructional practices that draw upon literacy and mathematical practices referenced in the
Common Core State Standards for reinforcement (Chiu et al., 2015). Additionally, researchers
recommend the practice of partnering with museums, science centers, and businesses to facilitate
in-school and extracurricular opportunities for teachers to implement STEM curricula (Chiu et
al., 2015). Finally, the results of a three-day professional development institute where the best
instructional practices were presented proved to be favorable for 33 cohort one participants and
36 cohort two participants (Nadelson et al., 2013). The favorable outcomes included increased
knowledge in STEM. More can be learned from incorporating STEM in teachers’ lesson plans
(Shernoff et al., 2017).
Teachers need to know how to incorporate STEM curricula into their lesson plans.
School administrators recognize the importance of hiring STEM teachers to support their STEM
goals (Shernoff et al., 2017). To support their research interests in STEM, a needs assessment
study was conducted by Shernoff et al. (2017) to understand the challenges facing 22 K-12
teachers and four administrators implementing STEM curricula and instruction. Findings
suggested that structured lesson plans, as well as materials, models, and good exemplars were
identified as resources needed for STEM curricular implementation. In addition, Hu and
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

50
Garimella (2014) conducted a mixed methods study examining iPad use, proficiency, adoption,
and integration into the design of lesson plans. Regarding the latter, lesson plans were analyzed,
and evidence showed that teachers’ proficiencies could be identified from their lesson plans
indicating a shift in their mindset. Findings showed teachers acknowledging the need to move
away from lecturing and move towards more hands-on instruction. Lesson plans are a reflection
of the teacher collecting her thoughts on how best to deliver specific content to foster student
learning and are essential to guiding classroom instruction (Lee et al., 2016).
Teachers need to take time to reflect on their effectiveness in implementing STEM
curricula. Dewey defined reflective thought as beliefs or forms of knowledge that support the
intended thought (Barley, 2012). Schön’s work on reflective practice contributed to the
experiences of reflective practice for today’s teachers (Beauchamp, 2015). How teachers reflect
on their work can be done by exercising four components: (1) reflection before action;
(2) knowing in action; (3) reflection in action; and (4) reflection on action (Barley, 2012).
However, individual matters, political issues, or school environments hinder teachers from fully
experiencing reflective practice (Yanuarti & Treagust, 2015). This idea is evident from the
model of reflection studied on eight secondary school teachers from a small urban centre
(Yanuarti & Treagust, 2015). The study suggested that reflective practice enhances one’s
teaching skills. Moreover, Tam’s (2015) longitudinal study examined the role of professional
development in changing teachers’ beliefs and practices. The findings indicate that ongoing
professional collaboration with teachers supports teacher growth and learning.
Aldemir and Kermani (2017) conducted a study that adopted a quasi-experimental, pre-
post-intervention design to implement STEM curricula in four Head Start classrooms in North
Carolina County over approximately 10 weeks. Two of the four classrooms were a control
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

51
group. Three pre-professional development sessions were provided to the teachers in the
intervention group. The sessions were designed to help the teachers understand the
implementation of STEM curricula for which they had no prior training. A research team
periodically reviewed whether the implementation was according to development principles
(Aldemir & Kermani, 2017; Odili et al., 2011; Piasta et al., 2015). Two of the teachers in the
intervention group reported their dedication to self-reflection. Similarly, reflection was
identified as a major contributor to instruction by faculty (Borrego & Henderson, 2014). In
addition to the STEM curricula preparing the preschoolers with 21
st
century skills, the results of
the study revealed that early childhood educators recognized their role in advancing STEM
concepts to future STEM professionals.
In addition to the organizational mission, performance and stakeholder goals, Table 3
reflects the knowledge influences that ESA teachers need as stakeholders, followed by the
corresponding knowledge types and assessments.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

52
Table 3
Assumed Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments
Organizational Mission
The mission of Eastfield STEM Academy is to introduce the needed knowledge of science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) through activities and program offerings that
enables at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning experience.
Organizational Performance Goal
To effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session
Stakeholder Goal
By August 31, 2018, the ESA teachers achieve 100% of the objectives for effectively implementing
the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session.
Assumed Knowledge Influence Knowledge Influence Assessment
Declarative
Teachers need knowledge of STEM
curricula.
How would you describe the ESA STEM curricula?
What do you like the most about it? What do you like
the least about it? Have the skills and competencies of
the students improved? In what way?
Conceptual
Teachers need knowledge of which
practices result in effective
implementation of STEM curricula.
What strategies worked best during implementation of
the STEM curricula? What challenges did you face
during the implementation? Were you able to mitigate
those challenges? If so, explain how this was done.
Procedural
Teachers need to know how to
incorporate STEM curricula into
their lesson plans.
Explain the process that you go through to develop your
lesson plans.
Metacognitive
Teachers need to take time to reflect
on their effectiveness in
implementing STEM curricula.
How comfortable are you now with implementing the
curriculum in your classroom compared to your earlier
involvement? What additional support or resources
would help you feel equipped? What has changed over
time and what accounts for that change?

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

53
Motivation
Effective implementation of ESA STEM curricula requires an in-depth analysis of
motivational influences. Active choice, persistence, and mental effort are three facets of
motivation that impact the learning and teaching environment (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda,
2011). All nine EPSD teachers and faculty from local colleges and universities chose to
implement ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session. Upon agreeing to implement
ESA STEM curricula, teachers also agreed to persist in teaching STEM during the intensive,
two-week summer 2018 program. In addition, the teachers understood the mental effort that is
involved with teaching. Therefore, three motivational influences are very much linked to the
stakeholder goal (Rueda, 2011), and are demonstrated through self-efficacy and utility value.
Self-efficacy theory. Self-efficacy is defined as self-perceptions that individuals or
groups hold about their capabilities (Bandura, 2000; Holzberger, Philipp, & Kunter, 2013;
Pajares, 2006; Ross, Perkins, & Bodey, 2016; Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2016). Mastery
experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological and affective states are
the four sources of self-efficacy proposed by Bandura (Burckhardt, 2017; Pfitzner-Eden, 2016).
Behavior is influenced through various levels of self-efficacy; specifically, how much effort goes
into achieving one’s goals, as well as the extent to which one persists in the face of adversity.
Kelley and Knowles (2016) agree that self-efficacy is a good predictor of behavior. Moreover,
people demonstrating high self-efficacy are likely to succeed when facing obstacles (Ross et al.,
2016). The greatest influence on student achievement are the individual characteristics of
teachers, such as their beliefs and commitments (van der Heijden, Geldens, Beijaard, & Popeijus,
2015). Therefore, self-efficacy is a powerful force for determining and regulating motivation
levels (Ross et al., 2016).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

54
Teachers need to believe they can effectively implement STEM curricula. Carney,
Brendefur, Thiede, Hughes, and Sutton (2016) stated that “teachers’ beliefs heavily influence
teachers’ adoption of new instructional practices, and the depth of their implementation and
persistence” (p. 548). Such beliefs are active and often learned, as opposed to fixed character
traits that are often influenced by their surroundings (Aldridge & Fraser, 2016). Moreover,
teaching methods and strategies adopted by teachers have been influenced by their beliefs
(Barak, 2014). Teacher persistence of educational beliefs and the difficulty of teacher change
has been well documented (Carney et al., 2016). A research analysis by Carney et al. (2016)
examined the knowledge, self-efficacy, and beliefs of approximately 4,000 teachers and
administrators. In Idaho, a taskforce formed resulting in the passing of legislature mandating
that all K-12 mathematics educators and administrators complete a three-credit professional
development course. The course, Mathematical Thinking for Instruction (MIT), is required for
recertification and was designed to significantly shift the participant’s knowledge and beliefs
about mathematics and pedagogy. The three-year professional development program was
deemed a success based on the changes in teachers’ beliefs and increased standardized test scores
in targeted classrooms.
Furthermore, a research study examined the efficacy of curriculum-based interventions
for high school students (Taylor et al., 2015). The participants in the study represented nine
schools in urban areas and nine schools in rural areas throughout the state of Washington. The
treatment and comparison schools represented a diverse mix of nine schools each. A particular
finding from the study suggested that teachers implemented the curriculum based on their beliefs
and understanding of what was best for the students. In cases where teachers’ understandings
and beliefs were in line with the intent of the curriculum developers, the curriculum objectives
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

55
were met. Conversely, a divergence from the developers’ intent created a gap in the teachers’
instructions. These findings confirm that a clear path toward curriculum implementation fidelity
involves unambiguous instructions, as well as strong teacher beliefs and understanding of the
curriculum (Taylor et al., 2015).
Utility value theory. Eccles defines utility value as a perceived usefulness to achieve
personal goals (Durik, Shechter, Noh, Rozek, & Harackiewicz, 2015; Eccles, 2006; Rueda,
2011). There are four types of task values that Eccles identified as predictors of one’s
motivation and achievement. Utility value refers to the usefulness or importance of tasks or
goals, intrinsic interest refers to enjoyment of a task, attainment value refers to the importance of
accomplishing one’s goals since it relates to one’s identity, and perceived value refers to the
aspects of the task that relate to time, effort, or other dimensions (Canning & Harackiewicz,
2015; Rueda, 2011). Research has shown that the latter, perceived value, fosters various
adaptive processes and outcomes that include interest, engagement, and achievement outcomes
(Canning & Harackiewicz, 2015). Moreover, the question often raised is, “Do I want to do the
task?” or “Why should I do this task?” as opposed to “Can I do the task?” (Rueda, 2011). The
more likely a person chooses, persists, and engages in a task is an indication that she values the
activity (Rueda, 2011). Starting a task is influenced by values, while persisting in a task is
influenced by expectancies (Rueda, 2011). For this evaluation study, the ESA teachers have
shown interest in implementing the ESA STEM curricula.
Teachers need to see the value in implementing STEM curricula. Lesseig, Nelson,
Slavit, and Seidel (2016) conducted a two-year research study that focused on the challenges and
the value teachers placed on implementing STEM curricula, called STEM Design Challenges
(DC). The study was designed to validate key assumptions that teachers have limited resources,
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

56
as well as limited experience in implementing STEM curricula. The purpose for the study was to
understand what motivated the teachers to persevere with implementing DC in the STEM
curriculum. The participants taught at two middle schools located in a large school district in the
western part of the United States. The study suggested that students’ use of STEM practices and
the level of motivation, engagement, and empowerment were the two significant areas that
teachers valued the most. The findings indicated that teachers’ beliefs and practices impacted
using STEM DCs to obtain successful student outcomes. Overall, the study validated the
complexities of implementing STEM-oriented, project-based instruction from past findings.
Furthermore, a qualitative study on implementing STEM in a high school engineering
course was conducted by Valtorta and Berland (2015). The engineering course enrolled 31 high
school juniors and seniors, of which only one student was female. The teacher taught physics
and robotics along with the engineering courses and was certified to the teach the course.
Although the study presented mixed results, the findings indicated that teachers may bring doubt
to the classroom regarding the value of project-based engineering curricula and the value of
students engaging in STEM concepts. Regarding the latter, only eight of the 11 episodes were
successfully implemented to support students’ design work in class. The three unsuccessful
implementations revealed that students found that the STEM concepts were not useful to them.
These findings show evidence of students’ lack of motivation while completing their design
implementations.
Table 4 outlines the three identified motivational influences, in addition to noting the
organizational mission, and performance and stakeholder goals. The assumed motivational
influences reflected in the table are self-efficacy and utility value.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

57
Table 4
Assumed Motivation Influences and Assessments
Organizational Mission
The mission of ESA is to introduce the needed knowledge of science, technology,
engineering and mathematics (STEM) through activities and program offerings that enables
at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning experience.
Organizational Performance Goal
To effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session.
Stakeholder Goal
By August 31, 2018, the ESA teachers achieve 100% of the objectives for effectively
implementing the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session.
Assumed Motivation Influence Motivation Influence Assessment
Self-Efficacy
Teachers need to believe
they can effectively
implement STEM curricula.
How useful do you believe STEM curriculum has been
in your classroom? What are other teachers at ESA
saying about the program? What are your thoughts
about the program?
Utility Value
Teachers need to see the
value in implementing
STEM curricula.
The word value is described as usefulness. How would
you describe the value in implementing STEM curricula
at ESA?

Organization
Clark and Estes (2008) identifies organizational influences as a member of the trio of
influences that complement knowledge and skills and motivation influences. Individually and
collectively, all three influences serve as contributing factors to performance gaps that often
impede progress. What follows is a literature review of organizational-related influences that
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

58
impact the achievement of the stakeholder goal. This literature review is a gap analysis on the
following: (1) promoting a culture of effective implementation of STEM curricula; (2) forming a
climate that empowers; (3) providing professional development in STEM education; and
(4) providing professional development for effectively implementing STEM curricula. This
section of the literature review explores the elements of organizational culture necessary to
achieve the organizational goal to effectively implementing 100% of the ESA STEM curricula
for the summer 2018 session by August 31, 2018.
Cultural models and cultural settings. The definition of the culture of a group refers to
a set of learned assumptions that have evolved over time that the group uses to solve external
problems for internal application (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Northouse, 2016; Schein, 2010). As
membership grows, these assumptions have worked well enough to become perceived solutions
to those problems (Schein, 2010). The two influences that affect an organization’s culture
include how an individual thinks and how an individual behaves. How an individual thinks the
world works and ought to work is derived from a common set of schemas called cultural models;
compared to visible or the who, what, when, where, why and how an individual behaves refers to
cultural setting (Rueda, 2011). Also, it is important to understand the characteristics of cultural
settings or social context that influences behavior in the classrooms (Rueda, 2011). The key
dimensions of organizational social context are culture and climate (Glisson, 2015). In addition,
the cultural models and cultural settings can be applied to groups and organizations (Rueda,
2011; Schein, 2010). This section explores the cultural models and cultural settings that may
prevent ESA teachers from achieving the stakeholder goal
ESA needs to provide a culture where teachers can effectively implement STEM
curricula. Schein (2010) infers the importance of understanding the culture to understand the
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

59
organization. Organizational influences that maximize a productive climate are related to
cultural settings such as communication, teamwork, and ethical decision making (Lawrence-
Fowler, Grabowski, & Reilly, 2015). First, communication that is consistent and candid
regarding the plans and progress of projects and policies is recommended (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Communication that is clear and candid engenders trust and fosters adjustment of worker
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). Forming a centralized communication system that connects
all team members is preferred (Schein, 2010). Second, Clark and Estes (2008) suggests that
teamwork begins with all team members having the acquired skills to achieve the organizational
goals. Teamwork is further enhanced when more collaborations and less destructive competition
occurs (Clark & Estes, 2008). Third, decisions that are difficult to make are related to the
inability to come to a consensus (Schein, 2010). The decision-making process is either based on
decisions that can be empirically resolved or those that are based on consensual criteria (Schein,
2010). The latter is preferred, since the approach calls for consensus on the criteria, as well as on
the decision process (Schein, 2010). A climate that is adopted by teachers facilitates beliefs and
values and forms a practice that can be referenced in the future (Lawrence-Fowler et al., 2015).
Organizational culture is improved when work processes determine how people work together to
achieve goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Furthermore, culture and climate are widely used to explain organizational performance
(Glisson, 2015). Analysts suggest that climate is a manifestation of culture based on underlying
assumptions (Schein, 2010). The common behavioral norms, values, and expectations for an
organization are defined as the organization’s culture (Glisson, 2015). Artifacts (concrete items
or observed behaviors), espoused beliefs and values (aspirations and goals), and basic underlying
assumptions (beliefs and values taken-for-granted) are the three levels of culture (Schein, 2010).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

60
In addition, the employee’s sense of well-being, motivation, behavior, and performance is
impacted by the work environment or climate (Glisson, 2015). Beliefs and values originate from
leadership; however, gradually they become the shared basic assumptions that define the
character and identity for the group or organization (Schein, 2010). STEM curriculum is
implemented based on the culture of an organization (Retnawati, Hadi, & Nugraha, 2016).
ESA needs to empower teachers to effectively implement STEM curricula. To achieve
the organizational goal, ESA teachers must feel empowered to effectively implement the ESA
STEM curricula. Eberle, Lund, Tchounikine, and Fischer (2016) describe 12 socio-technical
Grand Challenge Problems (GCP) that relate to learning and the educational systems. The
purpose of the collection of challenges was to identify technology-enhanced learning practices
from experts in research, practice, or policy making. Of the 12 GCPs, GCP 3, GCP 8, and GCP
11 are the challenges relevant to this aspect of the evaluation study on empowerment. GCP 3
refers to a practice of empowering collaboration among STEM teachers and software developers
to enhance teacher preparation and student learning (Pedaste et al., 2016; Sharples, 2016). Such
assistance is required to empower STEM teachers with relevant resources to improve student
learning. Furthermore, virtual teaching assistants served as the liaison for implementing
technology-enhanced software curricula (Pedaste et al., 2016). This approach suggests the
incorporation of virtual teaching assistants into teacher professional development as a
scientifically proven practice (Pedaste et al., 2016). A key learning was to empower teachers
rather than replace teachers (Sharples, 2016).
Also, GCP 8 states that as STEM teachers are empowered to report their experience with
implementing the technology curricula, developers become aware of potential flaws that impede
student learning (Mödritscher, Luengo, Law, Hoppe, & Stegmann, 2016). Such feedback as end-
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

61
users position teachers to recommend solutions for developers to further analyze (Mödritscher et
al., 2016). Also, as STEM teachers are empowered to report their experience with implementing
the technology curricula, developers become aware of potential flaws the impede student
learning (Mödritscher et al., 2016). The result of valuable teacher input reduces the long-term
risks of reducing student interest in STEM (Mödritscher et al., 2016).
Finally, teachers’ reflections on technology curriculum implementation improves
teachers’ professional behaviors and attitudes (Mödritscher et al., 2016). Reflection-on-action
provides insight to individual, as well as team performance, facilitates new knowledge, and
recalls known knowledge (Barley, 2012). Similarly, GCP 11 purports a workforce of
empowered teachers can benefit society in the long-term (Wasson, Hanson, & Mor, 2016).
Providing teachers with necessary resources to reflect on their practice and student learnings can
result in a more attractive teaching profession and better workplace for teachers (Wasson et al.,
2016).
ESA needs to provide teachers with professional development in STEM education.
Professional development is widely recognized by educational institutions across the United
States as a systematic approach to changing teachers’ practices, attitudes, and beliefs (Patton et
al., 2015). Traditional professional development formats are challenged with sustainability in
effective teacher practice (Johnson, 2013). A departure from the traditional “one shot” workshop
approach is warranted as studies show more sustainable approaches can change teachers’
behaviors (Patton et al., 2015). A five-year research study was conducted by Desimone (2011)
in four phases. The study focused on the effective professional development with characteristics
that can be identified as critical components to increasing teacher knowledge and skills for
improving teacher practice. Desimone (2011) noted:
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

62
The components of the conceptual framework include content knowledge focus, actively
learning opportunities with new content and skills, coherence of new strategies with
school/district initiatives, duration of support sustained over time, and collective
participation of many or all teachers for same school. (p. 695)
Participants for the study were 10 middle school science teachers, 50 elementary school science
teachers, eight building principals, and one district administrator. The purpose of the study was
to explore the sources of educational turbulence for teachers within a large urban district.
Accountability, funding, curriculum and instruction, personnel, scheduling, learning
environment, and community engagement were the seven themes that emerged from data
collection. The data that categorized the theme for curriculum and instruction revealed that no
professional development was provided to the teachers implementing the new curriculum and the
fidelity of implementation was impacted since the school district changed curriculum twice over
the five-year study period. Moreover, the longitudinal study revealed the professional
development model will likely fall short when educational turbulence lacks the inclusion of high-
quality science teaching within the curriculum. Therefore, professional development is an
obligation, as well as an opportunity, that serves as platform for teacher practice (Patton et al.,
2015).
ESA needs to provide professional development for the teachers to effectively
implement STEM curricula. Curricular implementation requires well-trained and confident
teachers (Thompson, Bell, Andreae, & Robins, 2013). Teachers face opportunities and
challenges when implementing STEM curricula (Nadelson et al., 2013). The challenges can be
met by organizations requiring teachers to engage in ongoing professional development to
achieve the organizational goals (Nadelson et al., 2013). A qualitative study was conducted on
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

63
91 digital technology teachers implementing a new computer science curriculum in a New
Zealand high school (Thompson et al., 2013). Of the 404 members of the New Zealand
Association of Computing Digital and Information Technology Teachers, 91 teachers (51%
female) representing 71 of the 490 New Zealand high schools responded to the survey. The
study suggested that teachers showed relatively low confidence in teaching the new computer
science curriculum. Unfortunately, teachers were given short notice of the curriculum changes,
which raised other concerns. Despite the teachers having little formal training, they were able to
reflect on the implementation as part of the professional development process. If reflective
practice was introduced as a tool rather than a concept, then a focus on shifting the approach
should occur for a more meaningful professional development practice (Beauchamp, 2015).
Also, revealing were comments from teachers indicating the need to know how to better teach
programming and computer science, as opposed to understanding it. Furthermore, findings from
the survey revealed the need for professional development in the format best suited for teachers
(Thompson et al., 2013). Subject knowledge in STEM and pedagogical knowledge in STEM is
required to deliver STEM topics effectively (Thompson et al., 2013).
Table 5 describes the details of the organizational influences related to the organizational
goal.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

64
Table 5
Assumed Stakeholder Organizational Influences
Organizational Mission
The mission of Eastfield STEM Academy is to introduce the needed knowledge of science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) through activities and program offerings
that enables at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning experience.
Organizational Performance Goal
To effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session.
Stakeholder Goal
By August 31, 2018, the teachers achieve 100% of the objectives for effectively implementing
the ESA STEM curricula.
Assumed Organizational Influence Organizational Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1
ESA needs to provide a culture
where teachers can effectively
implement STEM curricula.
Describe the culture at ESA. How does the
organization handle implementing STEM curricula?
Cultural Model Influence 2
ESA needs to empower teachers
to effectively implement STEM
curricula.
Describe how you have been empowered to
implement the STEM curriculum at ESA.
Cultural Setting Influence 1
ESA needs to provide teachers
with professional development in
STEM education.
Describe the professional development training that
you received in STEM education. How often have
you had professional training in STEM education?
Cultural Setting Influence 2
ESA needs to provide
professional development for the
teachers to effectively implement
STEM curricula.
Describe the professional development training that
you received for effectively implementing STEM
curriculum in your classroom? How often have you
had professional development training for the ESA
STEM curricula?

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

65
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation,
and the Organizational Context
The problem of practice in this study is teachers’ influences on effectively implementing
ESA STEM curricula. Coupled with the problem of practice, theories, literature, and research
findings support the conceptual framework (Maxwell, 2013). Clark and Estes (2008) offers a
conceptual framework that contributes to three performance influences representing knowledge
and skills, motivation, and organizational elements. The teachers’ knowledge of STEM, their
motivation to teach STEM, and their stakeholder goal align with the organizational goal. An
analysis between the actual performance and the performance goals reveals an identified gap that
the framework in Figure 2 specifically examines for this evaluation study. The illustration
incorporates the important influences that are relevant for the problem of practice.

Figure 2. A modified conceptual framework
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

66
Culture, climate, policies, and procedures are organizational influences that impact the
stakeholder goal, whereas knowledge and motivation influences impact the achievement of
teachers implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Therefore, knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences are the three elements of Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis that will
be addressed in this evaluation study.
Clark and Estes (2008) state that knowledge and skill can enhance one’s performance.
Declarative (factual and conceptual), procedural, and metacognitive are three types of knowledge
and skills (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda 2011). Three facets of motivation that impact the learning
and teaching environment are active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Rueda, 2011). These three motivational influences are demonstrated through self-efficacy and
utility value (Bandura, 2000; Eccles, 2006). Finally, organizational influences on stakeholder
performance includes work processes (linkage of people, equipment and materials), material
resources (tangible supplies and equipment), and value chains and streams (interactions and
processes for implementation).
Conclusion
The purpose of the study is to evaluate the challenges teachers face effectively
implementing STEM curricula at the ESA. The extant literature confirmed there is a problem,
while the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences were used to measure the gap in
the performance goal. Chapter 2 closed with an illustration of a modified conceptual framework
that explains the impact of the organizational influences on the stakeholder goal. Chapter 3
presents the study’s methodological approach.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

67
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this evaluation study is to understand the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing ESA STEM curricula. The primary stakeholders and focus for this
study were the ESA teachers. The organizational goal was to effectively implement 100% of the
ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by August 31, 2018. Chapter 3 is an outline
of the qualitative design methods for data collection and analysis. The research questions for this
study were:
1. To what extent is ESA meeting its organizational goal to effectively implement
STEM curricula?
2. What are the teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related
to achieving the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of teachers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
The remainder of the chapter discusses the participating stakeholders, data collection and
instrumentation, and data analysis. Next, credibility and trustworthiness and validity and
reliability are discussed. Finally, ethics and limitations and delimitations are explained.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group for this evaluation study were nine ESA teachers representing
EPSD teachers and faculty from local colleges and universities. For the intensive, two-week
summer 2018 session, the ESA teachers were hired to implement the ESA STEM curricula to
achieve the organizational goal. In 2012-2013, the EPSD was comprised of 644 teachers of
which 100% were certified, 1% had less than three years of experience, and 46% held a master’s
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

68
degree plus 30 hours or a doctorate (state education department, n.d.). Male and female
educators from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds with educational profiles like the EPSD
were expected to implement the ESA STEM curricula during the 2018 summer session. Nearly
55% of the student population at EPSD are females and 63% of the students are Black or African
American (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). Therefore, the ESA ED chose selection criteria for the
ESA teachers that were based on the racial and ethnic background of the students participating in
ESA; 130 students in 3
rd
through 11
th
grades. As a result, of the nine ESA teachers, three are
female, six are male, six are Black or African Americans, and three are White.
Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Observations are designed to take place where the phenomenon of interest occurs in its
natural setting (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Combining the observation with document analysis
and interviews completed the triangulation process that many researchers employ (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Observing the ESA teachers before the interviews were conducted provided
additional questions that may not have otherwise materialized. The criteria used to recruit a
purposeful sample of nine volunteers are identified in the next section and are consistent with the
conceptual framework described in Chapter 2. Purposeful sampling is described as the
researcher selecting a sample that provides the most information for the research study
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Criterion 1. The first criterion for the purposeful sample was that a teacher teaches at
ESA. The participants being observed acknowledged that they met this criterion before the
observation began by responding yes to the question.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

69
Criterion 2. The second criterion for the purposeful sample is that the teacher was a
fully credentialed teacher. The participants being observed acknowledged that they met this
criterion before the observation began by responding yes to the question.
Criterion 3. The third criterion for the purposeful sample was teachers were
implementing STEM curricula in their classrooms. The participants being observed
acknowledged that they met this criterion before starting the observation by responding yes to
the question.
Observation Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
In the recruitment email communication (Appendix A), the ESA ED encouraged the
teachers to permit observing the implementation of the STEM curriculum in their respective
classrooms. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) recommend observing in public spaces, the workplace,
or watching films as a form of practice. Prior to the researcher’s arrival on site, the ESA ED
reported that the nine ESA teachers agreed to be observed. The researcher arrived on site the
first day of the intensive, two-week summer 2018 session to schedule a date and time for the
observations and the interviews with the nine ESA teachers. The composition of the participants
were three female and six male ESA teachers representing EPSD teachers and faculty from the
local colleges and universities. At the beginning of each observation, the information sheet and
consent form was presented for the participant’s signature (Appendix B). A request was made
for a copy of each ESA teacher’s lesson plans and syllabi at the beginning of each observation.
Furthermore, the rationale for observing the ESA teachers before the interviews were
conduction, provided additional questions that may not have otherwise materialized (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

70
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Interviewing is a qualitative data collection method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). It is the
process whereby the researcher and the participant engage in a conversation with structure and a
purpose based on questions related to a research study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In-person
semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand how the teachers’ knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences contribute to achieving the organizational goal. Semi-
structured interviews provided the flexibility of questions or a mix of more or less structured
questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This format provided the ability to respond to situations,
to the respondent’s worldviews, and to different topics that arose as described by Merriam and
Tisdell (2016). In addition, minimizing bias, asking good questions, generating quality data, and
validating findings are good characteristics of the neo-positivist interviewer (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The criteria used to recruit a purposeful sample of nine volunteers are identified in the
next section and are consistent with the conceptual framework described in Chapter 2.
Criterion 1. The first criterion for the purposeful sample is that the teacher teaches at
ESA. The interview participants acknowledged that they met this criterion before the interview
began by responding yes to this question.
Criterion 2. The second criterion for the purposeful sample is that EPSD teachers are
fully credentialed. The interview participants acknowledged that they met this criterion before
the interview began by responding yes to this question.
Criterion 3. The third criterion for the purposeful sample was ESA teachers were
implementing STEM curricula in their classrooms. The interview participants acknowledged
that they met this criterion before starting the interview began by responding yes to this question.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

71
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
In the same recruitment email communication (Appendix A), the ESA ED introduced the
researcher to the nine teachers to encourage their participation in this evaluation study. The
researcher sent a follow up email communication providing more details regarding the interview
process and offered a $20 gift card as an incentive to encourage 100% participation. The
rationale for identifying the ESA teachers as participants for this evaluation study was based on
the nine ESA teachers who are implementing the ESA STEM curricula for the program. The
composition remained the same: three female and six male EPSD teachers and faculty from local
colleges and universities. The nine ESA teachers were determined as the purposeful sampling of
participants.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The qualitative design method was chosen to understand the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session as the
purpose for this evaluation study (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The literature
review examined the challenges teachers face implementing STEM curricula, then focused more
narrowly on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that affected the
organizational goal. The conceptual framework illustrates how the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational assumed influences were used to guide this evaluation study (Figure 2).
Observations were performed, documents and artifacts were produced, and interviews
were conducted as the three forms of data collected and used to validate the assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs. The data was collected and analyzed from the interviews
using open and axial coding and emergent themes (inductive, in vivo or empirical coding) and
drew from personal experience and questioning as described by Merriam and Tisdell (2016).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

72
These two analytic tools were used to further engage in the coding process to capture the
frequency and typicality of the responses from the study participants. The interview questions
were grouped based on the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model for knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences. The interview protocol in Appendix C outlines how
each interview question corresponds to a gap analysis element. Furthermore, the data collected
provided insight into the gaps that prevented the ESA teachers from effectively implementing
STEM curricula. Table 6 maps the assumed knowledge, motivation, and observational
influences from the conceptual framework to the data collection method for this evaluation
study.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

73
Table 6
Mapping of Assumed Influences to Qualitative Data Collection Method
Observations
Documents
and Artifacts Interviews
Knowledge
Declarative What is STEM curriculum? ✓
Conceptual Practices for effective
implementation of STEM
curriculum
✓ ✓
Procedural Incorporate STEM
curriculum into lesson plans
✓ ✓
Metacognitive Reflection on effective
implementation
✓
Motivation
Self-efficacy Believes in implementing
STEM curriculum
✓ ✓
Utility Value Values implementing STEM
curriculum
✓
Organization
Cultural Models Culture for effective
implementation
✓ ✓
Cultural Models Empower effective
implementation
✓ ✓
Cultural Settings Professional Development
for STEM education
✓
Cultural Settings Professional Development
for effective STEM
curriculum implementation
✓

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

74
Observations
Each ESA teacher signed the information sheet and consent form (Appendix B) prior to
the observations. At the beginning of each observation, a copy of the lesson plan or syllabus was
provided. An announcement was made introducing the researcher to each class. During the
observations, the researcher reviewed how the teacher implemented the ESA STEM curricula in
their natural setting. Observations are designed to take place where the phenomenon of interest
occurs in its natural setting (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The observations took place on site at
ESA during the first week of the intensive, two-week summer 2018 session according to the
course and observation scheduled (Table 8). A video recording captured the activities during
classroom instruction. The videos were saved in password-protected files on a secure laptop and
electronic files were backed-up using DropBox. In addition, the observation protocol was used
that was approved by the USC IRB to perform the observations (Appendix D).
Regarding the observation criteria, the participants needed to be an ESA teacher, fully
credentialed, and implementing ESA STEM curriculum in their respective classrooms. The nine
ESA teachers who participated in this evaluation study met all three observation criteria. The
three criteria were designed to ensure that the participants were qualified to implement the ESA
STEM curricula. At the conclusion of each observation, the interview date and time was
confirmed with each ESA teacher.
Observations were used to triangulate the data collected from the nine interviews and the
document artifacts requested during the observations. Therefore, the observations were
scheduled in their respective classrooms where the ESA teachers were implementing the ESA
STEM curricula.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

75
Documents and Artifacts
Documents and artifacts in the form of lesson plans and syllabi were collected at the
beginning of each observation and were used to triangulate the observation and interview data.
The purpose of triangulation is to verify whether research methods with different strengths and
limitations all support a common conclusion (Maxwell, 2013). Triangulation strengthens
reliability and internal validity of the data (Creswell, 2014). For this evaluation study, the
triangulation method provided additional insight that would not otherwise be captured in the
observations and interviews. Although the documents and artifacts were not produced
particularly for this study, the documents were a stable source of information that aligned with
the conceptual framework (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Interviews
Each of the nine ESA teachers confirmed the date and time of their interview and
observation on the first day of the intensive, two-week summer 2018 session. The ESA teachers
were presented with the information sheet and consent form for this evaluation study prior to the
interviews and observations (Appendix B). The interview criteria required that the participants
needed to be an ESA teacher, fully credentialed, and implementing the ESA STEM curricula for
the summer 2018 session. All three interview criteria were met. The three criteria were
designed to ensure that the participants were qualified to implement ESA STEM curricula.
Interviews were conducted with nine ESA teachers in their respective classrooms with
permission to record the interviews. A semi-structured interview approach was conducted and
consisted of 13 open-ended questions with multiple parts (Appendix C). The interview questions
were expanded upon based on participant responses.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

76
In addition, the researcher was the primary instrument for this evaluation study to acquire
meaning from the data collection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interviewing the ESA teachers was
designed to understand their challenges while implementing STEM curricula (Samson &
Charles, 2018). At the end of each interview, gratitude was expressed for the ESA teacher’s
time. The recordings from the interviews were uploaded to Rev.com for transcription. Nearly
277 minutes were spent interviewing the nine teachers; an average interview of 30.8 minutes and
ranged from 15 minutes to one hour and nine minutes. Within 24 hours of uploading the
recorded files, the transcribed interviews were received, and the coding process began. The data
was organized by question using Microsoft Excel spreadsheets and coded as themes for
knowledge, motivation, and organizational emerged. Analytic codes emerged from the interview
data and were one of the primary sources for the findings of this evaluation study (Creswell,
2014).
Data Analysis
The analysis for the qualitative methodological study was based on observations,
documents and artifacts, and onsite interviews at ESA. Prior to the individual observations, the
teachers’ lesson plans and syllabi were reviewed for triangulation. The observation protocol
(Appendix D) was designed to collect information about the ESA teachers in a classroom setting
where activities, conversations, and STEM curricula were implemented. In addition to collecting
data from the interview (Appendix C) and observation protocols (Appendix D), a set of brief
field notes were written during the observations and analytic memos were generated. The field
notes were written after each observation and interview to capture thoughts and concerns in
relation to the conceptual framework and research questions. As stated by Harding (2013),
“Qualitative data analysis is both an art and a science” (p. 108). Furthermore, a semi-structured
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

77
interview process allowed the researcher to ask the participants to expand on their responses.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state that semi-structured interviews include questions that are more
and less structurally worded. Next, the researcher undertook a three-phase approach to
conducting a thorough analysis in relation to the conceptual framework and research questions.
A codebook was created in three phases. In the first phase, open coding focused on empirical
codes while applying a priori codes from the conceptual framework. In the second phase, the a
priori codes were aggregated using axial coding. In the third phase theoretical coding was used
to identify patterns and themes, which was supported by a focus on typicality. Finally, the
researcher analyzed the collected data to write the findings found in Chapter 4.
Each ESA teacher received a recruitment email from the ESA ED introducing the
researcher (See Appendix A). The recruitment email further detailed the researcher seeking
volunteers for classroom observations and interviews with an offer to receive a $20 gift card for
those teachers who agreed to volunteer. Prior to arriving at ESA, nine ESA teachers agreed to
participate in this evaluation study. The course schedule in Table 8 was referenced to formally
coordinate meeting each of the nine participants. The nine participants signed the consent form
(see Appendix B), agreed to their classroom being observed during the 75- and 85-minute time
periods, and agreed to provide the researcher with a copy of their lesson plan or course syllabus
as documents and artifacts. The observations took place during week one of the two-week
summer 2018 session (See Appendix D).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Internal validity or credibility assesses research based on the presentation of the data
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Strategies were employed to ensure internal validity through history,
testing, maturation, and selection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). There are several known strategies
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

78
that increase the internal validity of research studies, such as triangulation, member checks or
respondent violation, understanding of phenomenon, researcher’s position or reflexivity, and
peer review (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For the purpose of this evaluation study, the researcher
chose to focus on triangulation and understanding the phenomenon as strategies that most related
to this evaluation study. In addition, data was collected until no new information surfaced.
Questions like, “Has saturation been reached and are there patterns and conclusions that fit the
preponderance of data?” were used to understand the phenomenon (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Likewise, alternative explanations in looking for data were pursued. Nonetheless, none of the
five strategies have meaning unless the researcher shares the assumptions that detail the biases
related to the evaluation study. Doing so will eliminate personal theories, beliefs, and
perceptions and begin to build trust among the ESA teachers. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state
that “trustworthiness of data is related to the trustworthiness of the those who collect and analyze
the data” (p. 260). As each protocol was introduced, the data collection process and the potential
impact on the program was explained to each ESA teacher to put them at ease and to build their
trust. In addition, as data was assessed and analyzed, the researcher documented additional
research opportunities to pursue from this evaluation study.
Validity and Reliability
Internal validity or credibility measures the extent to which research findings are credible
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). How the findings match the reality further validates the research
questions. Holistic, multidimensional, and ever-changing are characteristics of reality
underlying the qualitative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Furthermore, there are many
threats to the internal validity of a study (Creswell, 2014). Moreover, there are external threats
that can cause inaccurate conclusions to be reached. For example, external validity answers the
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

79
question, “Can the findings from the qualitative study be applied to other situations?” (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). However, the threat to external validity related to this evaluation study can
lead to inaccurate conclusions. Therefore, the researcher refrained from relying on 25 years of
experience in STEM education to interfere with thoroughly analyzing the data from the
evaluation study. Reliability measures the consistency of research findings over time (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). For this evaluation study, the researcher was able to determine reliability once
the qualitative data was collected and analyzed.
Ethics
As an outsider to ESA, the researcher relied heavily on working with the ESA ED for the
onsite data collection. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) stated the importance of collaboration in the
case of an outsider. This approach ensures a more authentic level of engagement with
participants that have the capability of improving the organization. Interviews were conducted
with the ESA ED before, during, and after the program. Furthermore, the researcher was
responsible for demonstrating respect for persons, seeking justice, and ensuring that no harm is
done to the human subjects during the research process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The intent
was to seek a review from the University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board
(IRB) because the evaluation study posed a low risk to the participants, as well as low emotional
stress (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). Once the approval process was complete, the researcher complied
with six ethical principles that were administered prior to the start of the evaluation study:
(1) provide informed consent to participants; (2) offer voluntary participation; (3) ensure
confidentiality; (4) inform participants of the right to withdraw without penalty; (5) offer a
separate permission to record; and (6) inform participants of the storage and security of data
pertaining to the study (Glesne, 2011; Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

80
Each of the six principles were outlined in a consent form that teachers read and signed,
confirming their participation in the research study (Appendix B). The form specified that the
data collected will remain confidential. In addition, video and audio files from the observations
were stored on the researcher’s laptop and backed-up in DropBox. Since permission to record
the interviews was granted, the data was stored on two recording devices, with one device as a
back-up. The devices were also stored in the office safe. All the recorded data will remain in the
researcher’s possession for up to three years. In addition, the interview recordings were
uploaded to Rev.com for transcription. Once the transcription was completed, the files were
reviewed for inconsistencies and inaccuracies to finalize the analyses for effective
implementation of the ESA STEM curricula.
The researcher acknowledges that some assumptions and biases may have occurred as
data was collected, analyzed, and reported. To minimize these practices, the researcher reflected
on the processes through documentation that can lead to immediate course corrections. To
further mitigate this, the researcher resorted to taking descriptive field notes during the
observations and interviews. Ultimately, it was the researcher’s goal to establish the
environment for ESA teachers to share their experience in implementing the ESA STEM
curricula.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations
Limitations occur in a study that a researcher cannot control and can impact the end result
(Connelly, 2013; Simon & Goes, 2013). Such occurrences take place in their natural setting
where it is difficult to replicate the studies, which are derived from implicit characteristics of the
method and design (Simon & Goes, 2013). In addition, limitations provide a stronger
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

81
understanding of the problem of practice (Creswell, 2014). For this evaluation study, the small
sample size of nine ESA teachers was a limitation that was not in the researcher’s control. The
ESA ED recruited the nine ESA teachers to implement the ESA STEM curricula for the summer
2018 session. The ESA teachers committed to implement the STEM curricula described in
Table 8. Qualitative studies show small sample size as a limitation (Koch, Niesz, & McCarthy,
2014).
The second limitation for this evaluation study was the two-week duration for
implementing the ESA STEM curricula. This specific validity threat is mitigated through
intensive, long-term involvement (Creswell, 2014). In addition to recruiting the ESA teachers to
implement the STEM curricula, the ESA ED also decided that the program duration was
adequate for implementing the ESA STEM curricula. The two-week summer session was an
improvement over the previous year’s one-week program. The change in the duration of the
program was based on the ESA ED’s prior knowledge of implementing STEM curricula since
the inception of the program in 2014.
A third limitation that the researcher observed was the student disruptions that hindered
the ESA teachers from effectively implementation the ESA STEM curricula. Student disruptions
caused the ESA teachers to momentarily depart from implementing the ESA STEM curricula to
address the students’ immediate needs. Teachers have implemented classroom interventions that
hold the non-disruptors accountable for reducing the student disruptions in the classroom
(Briesch, Chafouleas, Neugebauer, & Riley-Tillman, 2013). By establishing specific classroom
rules that all the students agree to, the non-disruptors enforce the rules allowing the teacher to
focus on implementing the curriculum.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

82
Finally, the researcher could have interviewed the TAs, had time permitted. TAs add
value to what teachers do in the classroom (Sharples, Webster, & Blatchford, 2015). The
additional data could have presented an added perspective on the ESA STEM curricular
implementation process, given the TAs’ role in the classroom setting. The researcher would
have conducted interviews with the ESA TAs based on an IRB approved interview protocol.
Delimitations
Simon and Goes (2013) state that delimitations are the based on the researcher’s choices,
the objectives, questions, paradigm, methodology, variables of interest, participants, and
theoretical perspectives and framework. The researcher’s choice of the problem of practice
implies that there were other related problems from which to choose. The problem of practice
was the ESA teachers’ influences on effectively implementing the ESA STEM curricula. This
was chosen based on the researcher’s desire to broaden the participation of underrepresented and
underserved groups in STEM studies and careers on the East Coast of the United States. The
ESA ED granted the researcher access to the ESA teachers to conduct this evaluation study.
Therefore, the researcher chose to focus on the challenges teachers face effectively implementing
ESA STEM curricula, where the ESA teachers were the stakeholder group of focus.
The researcher projected that the results of this evaluation study would contribute to the
ESA organizational goal. A qualitative approach was chosen by the researcher to draw upon the
experiences collected from interviews, observations, and triangulated documents and artifacts.
Theoretically, the evaluation study was based on the researcher’s STEM education perspective.
The results of this evaluation study are expected to contribute to extant literature, despite the
constraints the researcher posed on personal interest in broadening the participation of
underrepresented and underserved groups in STEM studies and careers.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

83
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This chapter explains the qualitative research methods used to collect and analyze the
data from observations, interviews, and document analysis of lesson plans and syllabi. ESA was
the site location for this evaluation study and nine teachers volunteered to be observed and
interviewed during the summer 2018 session. In addition, this chapter addresses the findings
from the three research questions related to the evaluation study.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the evaluation study was to understand the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing STEM curricula for ESA. The research questions that guided this
evaluation study were:
1. To what extent is ESA meeting its organizational goal to effectively implement 100%
of the STEM curricula for summer 2018?
2. What are the teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related
to achieving the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of teachers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
The data was collected using qualitative research methods (Creswell, 2014; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The qualitative research methods help to understand the participants studied,
their physical, social, and cultural contexts, and the processes related to maintaining relationships
(Maxwell, 2013). For this evaluation study, the qualitative research method were used to
examine the ESA teachers’ knowledge, skills and motivation for effectively implementing the
ESA STEM curricula.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

84
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholder group of focus for this evaluation study were nine EPSD
teachers and faculty from local colleges and universities. Table 7 summarizes the demographic
data collected during the interviews. Pseudonyms replaced the actual names of the nine
participants that the ESA ED selected to implement the ESA STEM curricula for the summer
2018 session. The participants met the criteria for the interviews and observations, which
included that the teachers were a fully credentialed ESA teacher who is implementing the ESA
STEM curriculum. The participants adhered to the request to provide copies of their lesson plans
and syllabi prior to the start of the observations. The ESA ED was also interviewed for this
evaluation study.

Table 7
A Summary Demographic Profile of Participants
Participant* Ethnicity ESA Subject Taught
Years
Teaching
Years Teaching
at ESA
Lesson Plan or
Syllabus
Aaron Black Mathematics 18 5 Lesson Plan
Barbara White 4-H 18 1 Syllabus
Cheryl Black Web Design 1 1 Syllabus
David White Mbots 3 1 Syllabus
Ellen Black SolidWorks 25 3 Lesson Plan
Frank Black Marketing 5 2 Syllabus
Geoff White Physics 30 5 Lesson Plan
Hank Black Hydroponics 50 2 Lesson Plan
Ian Black Financial Literacy 2 3 Syllabus
Note: *Pseudonyms replaced the actual names of participants.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

85
Three participants were female, and six participants were male. Eight participants earned
a master’s degree, of which one had more than one master’s degree and two participants earned
doctorates. Each of the participants earned at least one certification in their chosen profession.
Cheryl, Frank, and Hank were the only participants who did not teach two ESA courses for the
2018 summer session. All nine ESA teachers have full-time positions at local school districts,
colleges, and universities. The following section further details information about each of the
nine ESA teachers who participated in this evaluation study. Specific characteristics that could
compromise their identity were omitted.
Aaron has been teaching at the secondary and the post-secondary levels since 2000. He
is a Black male who holds his doctorate in leadership and several master’s degrees in: business
administration; information technology; mathematics education; and healthcare. His
certifications are in mathematics, school administration, and school business leadership. For the
past five years, Aaron implemented the ESA mathematics curriculum and enjoyed making math
fun for the 3
rd
grade class that was observed. He prides himself on meeting the needs of the
students by designing the course curriculum and lesson plans based on their deficiencies. Aaron
holds a position at a local K-12 school.
Barbara is a White female with 18 years of experience and is a certified 4-H teacher. 4-H
stands for head, heart, hands, and health and these four development areas are designed to
engage youth in reaching their fullest potential. Her bachelor’s degree in chemistry set her on
the path to becoming a 4-H professional. She relied heavily upon her professional development
training in 4-H to create the syllabus and implement the ESA STEM curriculum. Barbara
designed the curriculum to address the social, emotional, and wellness of the whole student.
This was Barbara’s first year as an ESA teacher. Her 3
rd
grade class was observed.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

86
Cheryl is a Black female who enjoyed teaching kindergarten through 1
st
grade and has
also taught as an adjunct professor at a local community college. She earned a bachelor’s and
master’s degree in information technology (IT) and implemented the web design course for ESA.
She also is certified in IT and as a teaching assistant. Cheryl’s syllabus incorporated a 10-day
lesson plan detailing what she planned to accomplish as a first year ESA teacher. During the
observation, Cheryl provided step-by-step instruction to the 8
th
through 11
th
grade students as
they designed their websites.
David is a White male who holds a bachelor’s degree in earth science and a master’s
degree in educational technology and is certified in these subjects as well. He has three years of
teaching experience and he relied upon his college experience to develop and implement the
mBots curriculum for 3
rd
grade students. He completed his first year of teaching at ESA. His
syllabus outlined the objectives for the 10-day course.
Ellen is a Black female who has enjoyed teaching for the past 25 years at a local school
district. She has worked at EST since 2015. However, this was the first year that she
implemented the SolidWorks curriculum for the summer 2018 session. Ellen attained her
bachelor’s degree in biology with a minor in chemistry and is certified in general science and
biology. Her 3
rd
grade class was observed going outside to study ecosystems. Ellen believes the
program is a great opportunity for the students.
Frank worked for ESA since 2016 and relied upon his professional experience in
marketing and finance to implement the curriculum for the marketing course. In the past two
years, he has seen significant improvements in the students understanding of these subjects. For
the past five years, Frank taught marketing at a local community college. He also teaches at the
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

87
high school level. He is a Black male who earned a bachelor’s degree in history and his MBA
with emphasis in finance. Also, Frank is a certified teaching assistant.
Geoff is a master teacher with 30 years of teaching physics. He is a White male who
teaches AP physics at an affluent high school. His philosophy is that it takes caring people to be
great teachers. Geoff has been teaching at ESA since 2014. To develop and implement the
curriculum for the course, Geoff relied upon years of teaching experience, professional
development training, and his leadership roles within various professional physics associations.
Also, Geoff utilized his experience to develop the lesson plans for the course. He volunteered to
prepare a group of ESA students to compete in a robotics competition at a local university and he
was proud that his team won. He attained his bachelor’s degree in physics and mathematics and
a master’s degree in physics. He also holds certifications in 7
th
through 12
th
grade physics,
mathematics, and general science.
Hank has 50 years of teaching experience and accepted the ESA ED’s invitation to teach
at ESA in 2016. The curriculum designed for the hydroponics course is based on his research in
the subject. He is a professor at a local university. He earned his doctorate in public
administration, and master’s degrees in medical micro and parasitology and public and
community health. His certifications are in aquaponics, hydroponics, and aquaculture. Also,
Hank facilitates professional development training in these subjects. Hank’s lesson plan was
based on his hydroponics curriculum. He taught 8
th
through 11
th
grade students for the summer
2018 session.
Ian has been teaching for 21 years at a local middle school and has been teaching at ESA
since 2015. He implemented the financial literacy curriculum for the summer 2018 session, and
his 4
th
grade course was observed. Ian has a bachelor’s degree in art education and master’s
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

88
degrees in multicultural education and administration. He is certified in K-12 art and special
education for 5
th
through 12
th
grade students. Ian cares about the progress of the students in his
course.
The participants for this evaluation study were observed using the observation protocol
that was analyzed in six components: observation profile; learner-centered; lesson planning;
resource-rich; engaging and action-oriented; and assessment-driven categories. The data
collected from observation protocol is summarized in Appendix F. The criteria that determined
if the five components of the observation protocols were met, was 50% of the ESA teachers were
observed in the affirmative. Table 8 highlights the nine courses that were observed followed by
brief descriptions of each course.

Table 8
ESA Course and Observation Schedule
Grades 3
rd
4
th
5
th
6
th
& 7
th
8
th
– 11
th

8:30–9:30 a.m. BREAKFAST
9:30–10:55 a.m. 4-H Financial
Literacy
Chibitronics Solid
Works
Web Design
11:00 a.m.–12:25 p.m. mBots 4-H Solid Works Math Physics
12:30–1:25 p.m. LUNCH
1:30–2:45 p.m. Math Physics Financial
Literacy
Marketing Hydroponics
2:45–3:00 p.m. DISMISSAL
Note: Highlighted courses were observed during week one of the two-week summer 2018
session.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

89
4-H: Head, heart, hands, and health are the four development areas designed to engage
youth in reaching their fullest potential. The 4-H organization is administered by the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The
ESA teacher used a ‘learn by doing’ instructional approach with limited lecture time. The
observation involved the properties of matter, which used sunlight to make prints and used
polymers to detect UV light.
Financial Literacy: EVERFI was the curriculum for this ESA course that covered nine
topics: savings; banking; credit cards and interest rates; credit scores; financing higher education;
renting vs. owning; taxes and insurance; consumer protection; and investing. The topic on
buying goods and services was observed.
Hydroponics: This STEM subject is the method of growing plants without using soil.
The ESA teacher used a lab setting to demonstrate how the process worked. The observation
entailed the students learning the basic concepts of hydroponics.
Marketing: The ESA teacher for this course created a curriculum that examined a
marketing plan by a prominent company, and the students reviewed a product that they were
familiar with. During the observation, the class was discussing product development.
Math: The ESA teacher used 4NUMS.com, a mental math approach, as the lesson plan
during the observation. A block of four numbers were presented to each student group. The
students were instructed to use addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division to calculate
their answers.
mBots: This is a robotics course for beginners. Students were given a low-cost, easy-to-
run robot kit to gain hands-on experience on graphical programming, electronics, and robotics.
On the day of the observation, the students were continuing to work in teams to program their
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

90
robots. The objective for each group was to program their robot to make musical tones,
complete simple moves, and to light up. Before the class ended, each team demonstrated
whether their robots achieved the objective.
Physics: The students were introduced to the fundamentals of physics in this class. The
electric circuit lab with breadboards was the activity observed for this class.
Solid Works: The ESA teacher implemented SolidWorks, a solid modeling computer-
aided design tool, to teach students about ecosystems. After a classroom exercise on building
habits in the tropical rainforest and the arctic tundra, the class went outside where the ESA
teacher asked the students to identify an organism for their 3-D modeling project.
Web Design: WordPress was used to design and create websites for this course. Students
used templates for the website design and Trello was used as the project management tool to
track their progress. The observation entailed observing groups of students choosing their
domain names, themes, and content, despite the challenges they faced troubleshooting access to
the internet in the beginning of class.
Findings
This section is organized by the research questions that guided the data collection and
analysis for this evaluation study. The first research question is organized by the four objectives
for effectively implementing the ESA STEM curricula. The second research question is
organized by the five themes and related knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
The themes are: (1) ESA teachers understand STEM curriculum; (2) ESA teachers know
strategies for implementing the ESA STEM curricula; (3) ESA teachers understand the
challenges for implementing the ESA STEM curricula; (4) ESA teachers are motivated by the
outcomes of implementing the ESA STEM curricula; and (5) ESA supports professional
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

91
development practices for implementing ESA STEM curricula. Research question 3 is addressed
in Chapter 5. The remaining sections address findings from the documents and artifacts, and the
observations.
Findings: Research Question 1
Research question 1 asks, “to what extent is ESA meeting its organizational goal to
effectively implement STEM curricula?” The four curriculum objectives for the stakeholder
goal are identified in Table 9 to address this question. Chapter 1 introduced the ESA teachers as
the stakeholder group of focus and the stakeholder goal by August 31, 2018, the ESA teachers
achieve 100% of the objectives for effectively implementing the ESA curricula for the summer
2018 session. The findings from observations and documents and artifacts, and informed by
literature, confirms that the four objectives were met.

Table 9
Summary of Qualitative Methods for Confirming Objectives for Stakeholder Goal
Objective
No. Objective
Qualitative
Method
Objective
Met?
1 Incorporate project- and problem-based, hands-
on learning
Observations Yes
2 Develop pre-approved lesson plans guided by
the curricula
Documents and
Artifacts
Yes
3 Incorporate curricula for students of diverse
educational, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds
Observations Yes
4 Provide a positive learning environment for all
learners
Observations Yes

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

92
Objective 1: To Incorporate Project- and Problem-Based, Hands-On Learning
Project-based learning focuses on understanding specific problems to develop a viable
solution (Wiek et al., 2013), whereas problem-based learning goes beyond understanding to
applying knowledge and skills to define the problem (Walker et al., 2015). Although all nine
ESA teachers incorporated project- and problem-based, hands-on learning into their STEM
curricula, two observations are presented to support this claim.
During the observation in the mBots class, David challenged each group of 3
rd
graders to
program their robots to make musical tones, complete a simple move, and light up. Problem-
based learning steeped in STEM activities measures student engagement and skill development
(Hall & Miro, 2016). Each group participated in the challenge with excitement; however, only
four of the six groups met the challenge for the first demonstration. The two groups who
experienced challenges received support from David and their peers on how to improve.
Research suggests that teachers are learning coaches when implementing project-and problem-
based learning approaches (Wiek et al., 2013). David did not prompt the peer groups to provide
support to the groups in need of assistance, yet they did. A positive learning environment
appears to have been established in the mBots class prior to the observation.
A project- and problem-based learning activity was also observed in the 4-H class.
According to the syllabus issued at the beginning of the observation, the 3
rd
grade students
learned about the properties of matter through chromatography. After Barbara gave a brief
introduction to chromatography, the four TAs took the initiative to distribute the materials to
each group. TAs add value to what teachers do in the classroom (Sharples et al., 2015). The
actual activity took place outside since the sun was needed for the activity to be successful. The
activity concluded with each group articulating how the sun was instrumental in creating their
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

93
paper designs. They used terminology such as the separation of pigments, markers, and
molecular size and shape to describe the process for their designs. Prizes were awarded to each
group for encouragement.
Objective 2: Develop Pre-Approved Lesson Plans Guided by the Curricula
Lesson plans are designed to improve students’ learning in the classroom, as well as
future learning outcomes (Peters-Burton et al., 2014). Course syllabi are among the documents
that teachers refer to during curriculum implementation (Peters-Burton et al., 2014). Aaron,
Ellen, Geoff, and Hank provided a copy of their lesson plans, while Barbara, Cheryl, David,
Frank, and Ian provided copies of their syllabi as shown in Table 7. Each of the nine ESA
teachers confirmed that their lesson plans and syllabi were pre-approved by the ESA ED at the
start of the two-week summer session. An analysis of the lesson plans and syllabi revealed that
10-day lesson plans were incorporated into each syllabus. There was no evidence that using the
lesson plan or the syllabus as a guide for implementing the ESA STEM curricula, resulted in
different outcomes than expected. Both documents guided the effective implementation of the
ESA STEM curricula and met the stated objective.
Objective 3: Incorporate Curriculum for Students of Diverse Educational, Cultural, and
Linguistic Backgrounds
The nine classroom observations revealed that there was diversity among the ESA
students. The mission of ESA is to introduce the needed knowledge of STEM through activities
and program offerings that enable at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning
experience. The ESA STEM curricula were designed to serve students from various cultures and
backgrounds. ESA students were identified as Black, Hispanic, White, and Asian. One student
identified as gender neutral. According to the ESA ED, more than 70% of the 130 students were
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

94
Black. ESA is centrally located in a city where 63% of the population is Black and 21% of the
children under the age of 18 live in poverty (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). The ESA ED is
determined that the ESA students’ future success in STEM will not be defined by their zip code.
It was critical for the ESA teachers to implement the ESA curriculum based on the profile
of the ESA students. The ESA ED developed the theme for ESA’s summer 2018 session to
focus on STEM curriculum that this generation of diverse Generation Z students would need and
want to know in preparation for college and careers. For example, the marketing and web design
curricula were designed with the ESA students in mind. Within 10 days, the students would
develop a marketing plan that focused on the company’s product or service. During the
observation, Frank guided the discussion on product development. To start the discussion, the
6
th
and 7
th
grade students were asked to think about products that they see and use in their
community daily. In groups, the ESA students would then discuss how that product goes to
market. Frank understood that by connecting the discussion to something they are familiar with
would generate healthy discussion. He said, “I found that allowing students to choose a product
that they are familiar with engages them more in the conversation.” The products shared in the
report-out ranged from iPhones to UGG boots. As the students presented their product
development plans, Frank gave the students hints to keep them focused and on track.
Regarding the web design class, the ESA students were asked to design a website.
During the interview, Cheryl confirmed that none of the students had prior knowledge of how to
design and develop a website. She said, “I was counting on that being the case.” When asked
why, she replied, “because this makes the class more interesting.” During the observation,
students were asked to be creative in identifying a theme and domain name for their websites.
Due to the challenges they were facing with the internet connection, students talked within their
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

95
groups regarding the theme for their websites. Students choose sports, science, cooking, video
games, and music. Despite the internet challenges, the students showed excitement about their
projects. Since some of the ESA students considered at-risk students, it was expected that there
would be some behavioral issues. However, the behavior of a Black male ESA student
contrasted with the behavior that was expected from at-risk students. Aaron and Frank both
reported that a Black male ESA student was very intelligent, yet he did not want to appear to be
among his peers. This situation was evident by how quickly and correctly the ESA student
responded to questions, but he gave the answers to other ESA students in his group for them to
respond to the question. The ESA student’s behavior was in no way disruptive. In fact, the
transfer of information from him to his peer group was very discreet. It was unclear why the
ESA student did not want to appear knowledgeable about the STEM subjects. Research suggests
there are several factors that influence Black males’ decisions to enter college, and less than 10%
of Black males intend to major in STEM (Strayhorn, 2015). Aaron related to the ESA student’s
behavior because the behavior reminded Aaron of himself at that age. It was not until someone
pulled Aaron aside did his behavior change. Both Aaron and Frank committed to coaching the
ESA student on an academic path of success. For these reasons, the ESA ED focused his efforts
on recruiting Black male teachers. ESA was designed for at-risk students to overcome the
barriers that prohibit them from the needed knowledge of STEM. Therefore, the conclusion is
that Objective 3 has been met.
Objective 4: Provide a Positive Learning Environment for All Learners
Objective 4 aims to provide a positive learning environment for all learners. As students
are exposed to learning math and science in interactive environments, they become better
communicators and develop collaborative skills. As a result, their confidence and competence
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

96
increase in these subjects (Ejiwale, 2013). The characteristics of successful schools and
programs focused on STEM have knowledgeable teachers who address the needs of all learners
in supportive and resource-rich environment (Ejiwale, 2013). The ESA ED is very familiar with
the students, where they attend school, the conditions upon which they are taught STEM, and
commitment and dedication of their school teachers and administrators. The target population of
students for the ESA program were coined as digital natives, whereby learning is essentially
playing; gamification (Ding et al., 2017; Kirschner & van Merriënboer, 2013). “Gamification
facilitates learning through increased attention spans and the added element of fun during the
interaction and learning process” (Ding et al., 2017, p. 148). All nine of the ESA teachers
wanted the ESA students to have fun while they were learning STEM. Geoff said, “Although
subjects like physics may be hard for some students, making it fun helps the student learn at their
level. I have learned to meet students where they are.” The ESA ED recruited the ESA teachers
with the capacity to teach this cadre of students. Establishing a positive learning environment
involves the teachers and the students. ESA teachers reported their experience with providing a
positive learning environment. In fact, Geoff stated:
I insist on a safe zone and each student signs a pledge that they will not ‘diss’ their peers
including no fake sarcasm. I try to create an atmosphere where it is okay to fail. I ask the
students to draw their successes and failures. My favorite quote by Will Smith is, “You
haven’t achieved something until you’ve failed.”
Overall, it is through doing STEM activities that students can develop positive STEM learning
identities that guides their pursuit into STEM studies and careers (Bevan, Ryoo, & Shea, 2017).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

97
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1
Research question 1 states: To what extent is ESA meeting its organizational goal to
effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula? By analyzing the four objectives of
the stakeholder goal, the findings indicate the organizational goal was met. The data collected
from observations and document analysis, as well as the related literature, supported achieving
the stakeholder goal. The ESA teachers as the stakeholder group of focus was essential to ESA
achieving the stakeholder and organizational goals.
Findings: Research Question 2
Research question 2 states: What are the teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goal? To answer this question,
the study is evaluated in the context of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
by five themes. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis and the qualitative methods were used
to determine the validation status of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
The term ‘majority’ is used for the influences that were validated when five or more ESA
teachers responded in agreement, and two or more qualitative research methods were used for
the analysis. Each of the knowledge and motivation types were validated. However, only three
of the four organizational types were validated. The findings for the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences are summarized in a table that introduces each influence.
Findings from Knowledge Influences
Rueda (2011) states that knowledge is required to achieve a goal. This evaluation study
focused on the knowledge necessary for ESA teachers to accomplish the organizational goal.
The findings are identified and support the answer to research question 2. Table 10 summarizes
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

98
the validation status of the assumed knowledge influences. All four knowledge types were
validated.

Table 10
Validation Status for Knowledge Influences
Knowledge Type Assumed Influence Status
Declarative ESA teachers need knowledge of what is STEM curriculum. Validated
Conceptual ESA teachers need knowledge of which practices result in
effective implementation of STEM curricula.
Validated
Procedural ESA teachers need to know how to incorporate STEM
curriculum into their lesson plans.
Validated
Metacognitive ESA teachers need to take time to reflect on their
effectiveness in implementing STEM curricula.
Validated

Theme 1: ESA teachers understood STEM curriculum. When interviewed, the ESA
ED expressed the importance for the ESA curricula to have a more math and science focus. All
nine ESA teachers demonstrated their knowledge of STEM curriculum during the observations
and interviews. The ESA teachers’ knowledge of STEM curriculum was demonstrated by their
individual implementation of the ESA STEM curriculum. Collectively, the ESA teachers
implemented the curriculum that they were hired to do.
In observing the financial literacy class, it was evident how math was infused into the
curriculum to teach the students about the topic. Ian said, “When I was first asked to teach the
financial literacy course, I said to myself, how much math is going to be involved with this
curriculum. The more that I discovered about the curriculum, I liked what I saw.” Ian’s course
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

99
syllabus covered the basic principles of earning income, buying goods and services, using credit,
saving, investing and protecting and insuring. He also wanted to expose the students to the basic
principles on how the economy works. Twenty-seven 5
th
grade students were engaged in the
lesson and were on task. They were very actively engaged and worked collaboratively to
respond to the learner-centered questions.
The ESA teachers described their curriculum as problem-, project-, and time-based. In
addition to problem- and project-based curriculum, Ian shared that his curriculum was also time-
based and asked one of the students to volunteer keeping track of time on his behalf. The ESA
ED designed the problem- and project-based curricula to culminate with individual and team
project presentation during the closing ceremony. Members of the community, ESA parents, and
volunteers were invited to witness the hard work of the ESA teachers and students. For example,
students in the marketing class made group presentations of their marketing plans, the web
design class launched their websites to the public using WordPress, and a competition ensued
amongst the mBots teams.
Each of the nine ESA teachers challenged the ESA students, either physically with hands-
on problem- and project-based learning activities or verbally with critical their thinking
activities. Various teaching methodologies optimize the learning process (Brown & Mbati,
2015). For example, during the marketing observation, Frank asked tough and intriguing
questions that stimulated the students’ thinking: “Why do we have so many products in the
market? Give me an example of a product that failed in your view.” These questions led to
hearty discussions from the students. They stopped raising their hands and began to give their
answers all at once. Some responses from students caused other students to respond in
agreement, while other students disagreed.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

100
Prior to Ellen’s class going outside, they discussed ecosystems and habitats, and watched
a video on 3D modeling. The students were tasked with designing an organism using the 3D
printer. Resource-rich environments provide constructive learning opportunities for students
(Brown & Mbati, 2015). When the students were outside, Ellen asked, “What habitats and
ecosystems do you see? What organism will your group design using the 3D printer?” She
reminded the students to think about what they discussed in class. The students immediately
responded to her questions. She went on to tell the students that they will design an organism
and give a presentation about how that organism lives within a habitat or ecosystem. The
presentations will take place during the closing ceremony.
As information about STEM was introduced, the students decided when they would
recall the information for future use. The timing could have occurred before the class ended or
when students are back in school in the fall. Since the observations were conducted during a
class period, the ESA teachers focused on encouraging the students to answer questions and to
work in groups to complete their projects. Students in every cohort were challenged. There was
no evidence of a specific cohort of ESA students not becoming challenged by the curriculum.
The curriculum was designed to keep students at the core of the implementation process and the
recruiting process.
The findings also revealed that some of the ESA teachers were more comfortable than
others in implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Eight of the ESA teachers were comfortable
and very comfortable implementing the ESA STEM curricula, while one ESA teacher, Ellen,
was not as comfortable. Ellen looked forward to implementing the SolidWorks curriculum the
following year to become more familiar with the curriculum. She did share that the curriculum
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

101
vendor was looking forward to receiving her feedback so that her suggestions would be
incorporated for a future release of the curriculum.
Six ESA teachers liked that the ESA STEM curricula was implemented over a two-week
period as opposed to one-week, and that ESA was free to the students. Geoff shared that in the
past, the ESA summer session was one-week. He believed that two weeks allowed for more
meaningful STEM instruction that would have a greater impact on the ESA students. The ESA
teachers also liked that the ESA curriculum enhanced the students’ STEM learning and
academics. Aaron said, “Students are here for a reason: to learn.” When Aaron sees the students
two or three years later, they often recognize him, and express that they learned a lot in his math
class. He went on to say that teachers rarely see the impact they had on students’ decisions to
study a STEM major in college. In Geoff’s case, he attended an ESA fundraiser where former
ESA students gave their testimonies on how they benefited from participating in ESA and were
doing well in college. Stories like these helped to raise funds to offer ESA to more students.
Just as Aaron indicated that the students were there to learn, the teachers were there
because they chose to be. Five ESA teachers liked that the curriculum they were implementing
enhanced the students’ learning about the STEM field. Geoff said, “It is beautiful to see how the
summer program is actually changing lives and getting students to think seriously about
science.” His comment was based on his 30 years of teaching experience. The ESA ED and
ESA teachers believe in the organization’s mission to introduce STEM, enabling at-risk students
to explore and personalize their learning experience. When the students are learning, the
teachers are learning the impact of implementing the curriculum. David was extremely pleased
by the way the 3
rd
grade students responded to building mBots, both individually and in groups.
“The students are genuinely happy to be here during the summer,” David shared. It helped that
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

102
ESA teachers could be flexible and creative in engaging the students and with implementing the
ESA STEM curriculum. The ESA ED learned early in launching ESA how important it was to
allow the ESA teachers the flexibility and creativity in implementing the ESA STEM curricula.
The majority of ESA teachers did not like that ESA students were likely to return to their
schools in the fall with no follow-up courses or activities in STEM. This situation was reported
by some of the returning ESA teachers and those who work at EPSD. Aaron, Ellen, Frank,
Hank, and Ian all raised concern regarding the lack of STEM instruction and activities that takes
place in schools with limited resources. However, ESA is offered throughout the academic year,
which allows students to resume learning more about STEM. Also, for those students who only
participated in ESA during the summer 2018 session, the ESA teachers were creative in
introducing STEM concepts for students to apply when they needed to recall what they had
learned. The ESA ED shared that these cognitive skills are an expected outcome of ESA. He
recruited ESA teachers based on their knowledge of STEM curricula and their commitment to
enable at-risk students to explore and personalize their STEM learning experiences.
Theme 2: ESA teachers understand the challenges for implementing the ESA STEM
curricula. A theme that was observed in the classrooms and reported during interviews centered
on the challenges that the ESA teachers faced implementing the ESA STEM curricula for the
summer 2018 session. These challenges disrupted the approaches that the ESA teachers had for
implementing the ESA STEM curricula according to their lesson plans and syllabi that were
shared. Throughout the interviews, the ESA teachers reported various challenges that caused
delays in them meeting the organizational and the stakeholder goals. The observations also
confirmed these challenges.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

103
ESA teachers had difficulty launching their courses. Several ESA teachers reported
challenges launching their courses. David shared that he could have used more time to prepare
for the mBots course. Proper preparation was key for setting up his classroom, particularly
regarding the computer usage. Software had to be downloaded in advance for the students to
access on the first day and specific computer stations had to be designated for uploading each
group’s coding projects. His preference was for every student in his class to have access to a
laptop so they could experience what he had planned according to his syllabus.
Barbara indicated that she also needed more prep time. She was not aware that storage
would not be available to store her supplies. So, she carried the supplies back and forth for the
two weeks. It was not evident during either David’s or Barbara’s observations that their
instruction or delivery was lacking due to these challenges. This observation is a testament to
their ability to quickly adapt to continuing to achieve the organizational goal.
Laptops were a hot commodity for the ESA teachers who needed them to implement the
curriculum for their course. During the interview with Ian, Aaron walked into the classroom to
attempt to take the cart of laptops for his class next door. Ian stopped him saying, “I am
planning on using the laptops for my next class.” Ian was disappointed that there were not
enough laptops and felt that each ESA student should have their own laptop during the program.
ESA teachers were challenged with disciplining students. According to the interviews
with the ESA ED, it was expected that there would be some behavioral issues with some ESA
students. The ESA ED hoped that ESA would be an opportunity for the at-risk students to
increase their interest in STEM, improve their self-efficacy in learning about STEM, and become
interested in careers in STEM.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

104
Observations found that some ESA students tended to ‘act out’ when they were around
other students of color. In contrast, the observations concluded that the few White students in
the class were quieter, more engaging with the ESA teachers, and responded more to the ESA
teachers’ questions. At one point, Hank told a White student, “I am going to give someone else a
chance to answer the questions.”
Hank also had a student who was not attentive. For example, a student was sleeping in
class, which was evident by him laying his head on the desk. The ESA ED happened to be
making his rounds to all the classes, which he often did throughout the day, and witnessed this as
well. He pulled the student out of the class. When the ESA ED was asked what was going on
with the student, he responded, “The student was up all-night playing videos and was tired.” He
reiterated this is not uncommon for a student or two to fall asleep in class: “When that happens, I
just remind the teachers that we are here to give the students a positive experience, regardless of
their behavior.”
In Frank’s class, the students were very loud. It took some time for Frank to get the class
to settle down. In this case, the TAs were of no assistance in getting the class settled, which was
the opposite in Barbara’s class. During the interview, Frank said, “Students were more talkative
this year, compared to last year.” However, he also shared that the ESA students in this year’s
class were more knowledgeable of the content. Frank admitted that this could be because there
were some returning students in his class.
ESA teachers experienced larger than expected class sizes. The class sizes ranged from
18 to 28 ESA students for the various cohorts. Research shows that smaller classroom sizes
promotes positive engagement among students (Wang & Degol, 2017). However, six ESA
teachers reported large class size as one of the challenges they faced effectively implementing
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

105
the ESA STEM curricula and suggested that an ideal class size would be 20 students. Smaller
class sizes also increase the opportunity for individualized instruction from the teacher (Chingos,
2013; Goodpaster et al., 2012). The smaller class sizes allowed the ESA teachers to be more
engaged with the ESA students individually. Further analysis found that only one of the nine
classes had less than 20 students, which was David’s classroom where the students were
programming mBots. Due to the nature of David’s class, it was difficult for him to engage each
student one-on-one. He said, “I am glad that we were provided TAs for our classes.” There
were three TAs in David’s class who provided the additional support that the students needed
and required.
The ESA teachers experienced an increase in class size after the two-week summer
session began. The ESA ED did not want to turn away students whose parents wanted their child
to have a summer STEM experience. The ESA staff were checking in new students each day
during the week of the observations. As a result, the ESA ED escorted the students to the
appropriate classroom, the classes were disrupted, and lesson plans were altered. Research
suggests that course objectives are compromised when the class size is too large (Nedungadi,
Raman, & McGregor, 2013). However, the insight gained from the interviews indicated that the
disruption did not divert from the ESA teachers’ responsibilities to implement the ESA STEM
curriculum for their class. Ian shared, “My lesson plan was based on the number of students in
the class. So, when more students showed up in my class, I had to quickly modify the activity to
accommodate those students.” The ESA students already in class were just as accommodating to
the new students as was the ESA teacher. One student moved her book bag out of the seat next
to her to accommodate the students who just arrived. Ian was able to adjust his lesson plan that
day without jeopardizing implementation of the curriculum. In addition, Ian engaged students to
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

106
become the time keepers and asked the TAs to help with distributing the materials. However,
students had less time to report out what they learned due to the larger class size.
When the ESA ED was asked why some students were just arriving, he responded,
“Some students are returning from vacation and some had conflicts with other summer programs
and sports camps. My experience is that the parents want to keep their kids busy the entire
summer.” He went on to say that there were cases where the older sibling was accepted into the
program and the parent or guardian asked that both children participate in the program.
Nonetheless, Figure 3 illustrates the comparison of the class size to the number of teaching
assistants by ESA teacher.

Figure 3. Observation profile of class size by ESA teacher

9
10
8
11
9 9 9 9
10
18
10
17
7
18
19
14
18
12
2
4
0
3
2 2 2
1
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Aaron Barbara Cheryl David Ellen Frank Geoff Hank Ian
Comparison of Class Size to Teaching Assistants
Female Students Male Students TAs
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

107
Of the six ESA teachers who reported that large class size was a challenge, Geoff’s
physics class was impacted the most because he did not have any TAs. During the interview, he
shared, “I was concerned that I could not get to each group to check on their progress [for
downloading the software for the electrical circuits].” Geoff expressed great concern about this,
since he prided himself on connecting with all the students in his class. Evidence shows that
large class sizes reduces the interaction between the student and the teacher (Foley & Masingila,
2014; White et al., 2015). Since there were no TAs in Geoff’s class, he was pleased to see
students assisting other groups.
There were also challenges related to the gender distribution of students. Only two
classes had the same or more female students in attendance. Of the students in Aaron’s and
Barbara’s class, 50% were female. David had more female students than male students in his
class. Also, in the classrooms for Aaron, David, and Frank, female students were the leaders in
their peer groups. Research shows that at the middle and high school levels, girls perform equal
or better than their male counterparts on math and science state and national assessments (Tan,
Calabrese Barton, Kang, & O’Neill, 2013. However, many girls lose interest in STEM and
choose not to further their studies and careers in STEM (Dasgupta & Stout, 2014). ESA was
designed to engage both female and male students.
Theme 3: ESA teachers know the strategies for implementing the ESA STEM
curricula. Chiu et al. (2015) stress the importance of involving teachers in planning the
implementation of STEM curricula. To support the implementation process, the ESA ED met
with each of the ESA teachers before the summer 2018 session began to discuss their approaches
for implementing the curriculum, logistics, student profiles, and any questions they had. Kelley
and Knowles (2016) agree that barriers prevent teachers from learning key theories, pedagogical
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

108
approaches, and becoming more aware of research results of STEM education activities. The
findings revealed the following strategies for implementing the ESA STEM curriculum:
conducted student assessments, referred to teaching experience, utilized TAs, incorporated
lesson plans, and reflection.
ESA teachers understood student assessment as a practice for implementing the ESA
STEM curricula. Crisp, Guàrdia, and Hillier (2016) stated that assessment is critical to the
teaching and learning environment. Assessing the students’ needs supported the implementation
of the ESA STEM curricula. During the interviews, ESA teachers reported that they conducted
assessments to determine the students’ understanding of the material that was presented. Ian
reported, “I don’t call my exams ‘tests.’ I call them assessments to relieve the anxiety that some
students have around taking ‘tests.’ They get enough ‘test taking’ during the school year.” His
assessments were conducted daily.
Like Ian, Barbara reported that testing occurred on the first day of class to assess the
students. The results of the testing revealed what the students knew and did not know about the
STEM topic. Barbara said, “I wanted to know how well the students worked independently and
if there were any literacy issues.” These findings assisted Barbara with implementing the 4-H
curriculum. Also, Ellen took her students outside the classroom to assess what they knew about
ecosystems based on a brief introduction of key science terms that she taught before leaving the
classroom. Upon returning to the classroom, Ellen continued implementing the curriculum
according to her lesson plan. Therefore, assessing the students was a strategy for effectively
implementing the ESA STEM curricula.
The ESA teachers kept in mind that the implementation took place during a two-week
summer session as opposed to a fall, spring, or year-round implementation. This practice forced
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

109
the ESA teachers to determine curricula that yields outcomes in a shorter period of time. The
assessment of outcomes is demonstrated through lower order and higher order learning (Van der
Kleij, Feskens, & Eggen, 2015). Lower order learning outcomes recall, recognize, and
understand concepts without the need to apply such knowledge (Van der Kleij et al., 2015).
Conversely, the higher order learning outcomes assess the students’ abilities to apply their
knowledge in new situations resulting in knowledge transfer. The ESA teachers assessed the
knowledge of the students by asking specific questions and the students’ responses gave an
indication whether the STEM content was understood and later applied when engaging in the
activities. Furthermore, providing students with feedback can quickly lessen the gap of students’
current and intended learning outcomes.
ESA teachers referred to their years of teaching as a practice for implementing the
ESA STEM curricula. During the interviews, six ESA teachers said that they relied on their
years of teaching as a practice for implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Odili et al. (2011)
suggest that teaching experience influenced the teachers’ abilities to implement the STEM
curriculum. In observing Hank’s hydroponics class, it was evident that his 50 years of
experience enabled him to engage a variety of learning styles and behaviors. As he said during
the interview, “I have seen all types of learning styles.” It does not surprise him that there is
always one student who wants to ‘out-teach’ him, meaning that students think they know what
question he is about to ask, and they raise their hand prematurely and blurt out the wrong answer.
During the observation, Hank handled it well by encouraging the student to review his notes
before giving it another try. He later said, “I like wearing my lab coat in class because it seems
to encourage the students to learn more about a profession that I have known for many years and
enjoy teaching.”
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

110
Geoff also relied on his 30 years of teaching physics to implement the ESA STEM
curriculum. He stated, “After these many years, you start to learn from the students what they
are most in need of despite what you think they need to know at the time.” It was clear that
Geoff enjoys physics and wants all of his students to understand the doors that can open when
studying this subject. Often, he leads discussions on best practices for implementing physics
curriculum with teachers at his school during the year: “We learn from each other, in that
regard.” The ESA ED said that Geoff continues to make his class challenging and exciting for
the students. Geoff travels quite a distance to be an ESA teacher and he had just as much energy
as the students in his class. Overall, it was evident that the ESA ED sought teachers with a range
of teaching experiences. Therefore, years of experience surfaced as a strategy for effective
implementation of the ESA STEM curricula.
ESA Teachers used the TAs as a practice for implementing the ESA STEM curricula.
Eight of the nine classes had TAs, each assigned to the student cohorts based on identified needs.
For example, the 3
rd
grade cohort was assigned at least one college student as a more
authoritative figure. TAs add value to what teachers contribute to the academic progress of the
students while in the classroom (Sharples et al., 2015; Webster, Blatchford, & Russell, 2013).
The ESA ED intentionally hired the TAs for additional support in the classroom. He was
adamant about hiring former students as TAs to support the ESA teachers in implementing the
ESA STEM curricula. The ESA ED reported that nine of the 10 TAs were former ESA
participants of one or more ESA sessions, and seven TAs participated in three or more previous
ESA sessions. Aaron and Frank had TAs who were former ESA students; one Black female and
one Black male. The former ESA students added additional insight that ESA teachers did not
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

111
have. In addition, the TAs were closer to the students’ ages and could relate to their ESA
experience. Ellen suggested:
It would be good if the TAs learned about what we are teaching in the classroom, so they
could help us more. I think this would cut down on the amount of time it takes to make
sure the students are following our instructions.
The TAs would require additional training by the ESA teachers, as well as the ESA ED. It is
important for TAs to contribute to the academic progress of the students while in the classroom
(Webster et al., 2013).
Barbara’s classroom had the largest number of TAs: two Black females, one Black male,
and one Hispanic male for the 3
rd
grade cohort. The TAs assisted Barbara with distributing the
materials and met with each group of students to ensure that they were following her
instructions. It was unclear why four TAs were assigned to the 3
rd
grade cohort. While Barbara
appreciated the additional support for the 20 students, Barbara preferred that the TAs be more
knowledgeable about the STEM curriculum being implemented in her classroom. Barbara and
Ellen both believed the students’ experiences would be further enhanced if the TAs were trained
beyond the standard onboarding they received during the orientation.
ESA teachers had knowledge of how to incorporate STEM curriculum into their lesson
plans. Structured lesson plans are identified as resources needed for STEM curriculum
implementation (Shernoff et al., 2017). The findings from this procedural knowledge influence
were revealed when ESA teachers were asked to explain the process that they go through to
develop their lesson plans. Procedural knowledge refers to knowing how to do something
(Rueda, 2011). Barbara responded:
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

112
I utilize content from various resources and work with my colleagues to prepare each
lesson plan. For today I adjusted the lesson based on the feedback I received from one of
the teacher assistants, so I moved the activity outside for the 3
rd
graders to burn off some
their energy.
Lesson plans are a reflection of the teacher collecting her thoughts on how best to deliver
specific content to foster student learning (Lee et al., 2016). Four ESA teachers shared copies of
their lesson plans and five ESA teachers provided copies of their syllabi. All four ESA lesson
plans were collected and pre-approved by the ESA ED. The lesson plans were used as a guide to
implement the ESA STEM curricula and were no longer than one page. The documents varied
for each ESA teacher, and depending on the number of teaching years, the document displayed
more content. Also, each of the lesson plans were designed for the appropriate grade level. The
largest cohort was the 8
th
through 11
th
grade students. The lesson plans had to address a wide
range of grades for each grade level. Geoff and Hank had lesson plans for the 8
th
through 11
th
grade students. There was no evidence that a lesson plan for a wider range of students was more
challenging to implement than a lesson plan developed for 3
rd
grade students.
It was discovered that all syllabi had incorporated 10 days of lesson plans. “My syllabus
is mapped out by session but acts as a rough guide. I realize that I may not be able to cover
everything in the syllabus,” Frank said. The observations further revealed that neither the lesson
plans nor the syllabi impacted implementing the curriculum any differently. It did not matter
whether the document was time-based, a re-worked lesson plan from a previous AP physics
course, or the source of the content came from the online SolidWorks websites. Both documents
were essential to guiding the classroom instruction.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

113
ESA teachers reflected on implementing the ESA STEM curricula. The observations
lacked any noticeable form of reflection by the ESA teachers. However, during the interviews,
the nine ESA teachers reflected on all aspects of implementing the ESA STEM curricula. There
are four ways teachers reflects on their work: (1) reflection-before-action; (2) knowing-in-action;
(3) reflecting-in-action; and (4) reflection-on-action (Barley, 2012). Their answers to the
questions demonstrated their knowledge and motivation for achieving the goal to achieve the
organizational goal. For example, Aaron and Geoff reflected on how the ESA curriculum had
evolved since the non-profit organization was founded in 2014. There is a need to engage more
students in STEM learning and careers through extracurricular activities, especially those
students who are not interested in, don’t have access to, and cannot afford to participate in STEM
activities and programs (Kim et al., 2015). Although the math and physics curricula have been
the staple ESA STEM subjects, the 4-H, financial literacy, mbots, and web design are new
curricula that was implemented during the summer 2018 session. For Aaron, it was simple:
“Develop the curriculum based on the needs of the students.” It has been Aaron’s experience
that math is not easy for some students, so he makes every attempt to make it fun. In observing
Aaron’s mental math class, the students play off of one another’s responses. He takes a ‘rapid
fire’ approach to implementing the math curriculum and it works. Students leave his class with
the understanding and appreciation for math.
Geoff has enhanced the physics curriculum by incorporating a robotics competition that
takes place outside of his classroom. He decided to coach a team of students for a local
competition that they won. Geoff reflected on how he designs his physics curriculum, which is
based on his experience as a master physics teacher: “I enjoy collaborating with other physics
teachers in my district to develop curriculum. We learn so much from each other.” He realizes
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

114
that not every school offers physics, so he wants to do his part to introduce the STEM subject to
as many ESA students as possible.
Summary of findings for knowledge influences. The four assumed knowledge
influences were validated through observations, interviews and document analysis. The ESA
teachers had knowledge of implementing STEM curriculum, as well as practices for
implementing the curriculum. Also, lesson plans proved to be as equal to syllabi when used as a
guide for implementing the ESA curricula. Regarding the challenges that ESA teachers face
implementing the ESA STEM curricula, three key findings emerged: launching courses, large
class sizes, and disciplining students. The challenges will need to be addressed before future
curricula are implemented.
Findings from Motivational Influences
Mayer (2011) describes motivation as the catalyst individuals need to actively apply and
use their knowledge. Self-efficacy and utility value were validated for the assumed motivational
influence as indicated in Table 11. Observations and interviews with ESA teachers revealed
their motivation for implementing the ESA STEM curricula.

Table 11
Validation Status for Motivation Influences
Motivation Type Assumed Influence Status
Self-Efficacy Teachers need to believe they can effectively implement
STEM curricula.
Validated
Utility Value Teachers need to see the value in implementing STEM
curricula.
Validated

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

115
Theme 4: ESA teachers are motivated to implement the ESA STEM curricula.
Three facets of motivation impact the learning and teaching environment: active choice,
persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). All nine ESA teachers
actively chose to implement the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session. Also, the
ESA teachers agreed to persist in teaching over the two-weeks. Finally, ESA teachers
understand that mental effort is involved with teaching. These three facets of motivational
influences are directly linked to achieving the stakeholder goal.
ESA teachers believe they can effectively implement STEM curricula. The findings
indicated that the nine ESA teachers were motivated by their belief that they can effectively
implement the ESA STEM curricula. The depth of the implementation is influenced by the
teachers’ beliefs (Carney et al., 2016). The pre-approved lesson plans and syllabi were used as a
guide to effectively implement the ESA STEM curricula. When information was presented to
the ESA teachers, they took ownership by making adjustments to the curriculum implementation
as needed. For instance, Barbara made an adjustment to her curriculum based the input from her
assigned TAs.
However, not all ESA teachers were able to make these adjustments due to their level of
comfort in implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Ellen shared that she looked forward to
implementing SolidWorks the following year, since she was not as comfortable this year as she
would have liked. Given the ESA ED’s level of support that was observed onsite, it is likely that
Ellen’s comfortable level with implementing the SolidWorks curriculum will improve.
ESA teachers see the value in implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Utility value is
a perceived usefulness to achieve personal goals (Durik et al., 2015; Eccles, 2006; Rueda, 2011).
All nine ESA teachers believed the curriculum was useful and that they could effectively
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

116
implement the curriculum in accordance with its intended use. “I believe the STEM curriculum
selected for the 3
rd
grade class worked well because the students had fun while making some
science connections within their knowledge base,” said Barbara. She had the support of four
TAs, which was the most of all the STEM classes. However, her preference was for the TAs to
have completed specific training for implementing the STEM curriculum in her course. The
additional training would require the orientation go beyond the traditional onboarding, which
was led by the ESA ED.
Aaron had a different approach when about the value of implementing the mathematics
curriculum:
I look at the students’ deficiencies to build the curriculum. Coming in with scripted
curriculum is not going to work. The curriculum has to be based on their deficiencies to
get the students where they need to be. You must ask the students what they don’t know
to get them there. Any curriculum can be downloaded but you have to listen to what the
students need. That is a teacher.
Aaron’s insight into the value of implementing the right curriculum is one of the reasons why the
ESA ED invited him back for the past five years. His style of instruction is very engaging and
action-oriented. Aaron is very comfortable with implementing curriculum that meet the needs of
the students.
David believed the STEM curriculum implemented for his course was useful because
“the students have not been exposed to this type of technology. Students are learning how to
solve problems, work in groups, develop social skills, and apply those skills elsewhere.” David
also expressed how pleased he was that the students were open to learning a new STEM subject.
These responses have yielded outcomes that resulted in very careful curriculum design and
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

117
planning by the ESA ED. In addition, Ian shared, “The value of the curriculum provides real-
world skills because it provides purpose and meaning to the students.” Furthermore, perceived
value fosters various adaptive processes and outcomes that include interest, engagement, and
achievement outcomes (Canning & Harackiewicz, 2015).
ESA teachers are motivated by the outcomes of implementing the ESA STEM
curricula. The ESA ED designed the curriculum to yield student enrichment. “We are
preparing students for 21
st
century skills that are needed for STEM jobs in our region and the
United States,” David said. The interviews revealed that the ESA teachers had expectations on
what impact the implementation of the ESA STEM curriculum would have on their students. Six
ESA teachers were motivated by the prospect of their students learning more about STEM and
being prepared to apply what they learned upon returning to school in the fall. Frank reported
that students’ skills had improved from the previous cohort. In contrast, Aaron stated, “It is hard
to see skills improving when there is only two-weeks for the program, but the students do show
confidence.” A confirmation of this finding speaks to what Cheryl experienced as well: “This is
a high-skills cohort. When I provide instruction, they get it! They understand and are able to
take direction and go with it.” In their role, ESA teachers encourage students to learn about
STEM and to pursue studying STEM in college.
The fastest growing occupations from 2014 to 2024 are in STEM disciplines (Fayer et al.,
2017). Hank believed that implementing the ESA STEM curricula helps the United States
remain competitive against other countries. But if the United States is to remain globally
competitive, more women and underrepresented groups are needed to fill the gap in the
workforce (Brown, 2016; Carnevale et al., 2011; Hossain & Robinson, 2012). In 2014, the ESA
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

118
ED had the foresight to develop STEM-ready students in anticipation for the STEM jobs that
would be available in the region.
Summary of findings for motivation influences. Findings from the analysis revealed
that ESA teachers believe they can effectively implement the ESA STEM curricula and that they
value the ESA STEM curricula. Interestingly, the outcomes from implementing the ESA STEM
curricula were also a motivating factor. ESA teachers understand that they play a key role in
introducing STEM to ESA students.
Findings from Organizational Influences
Organizational influences are members of a trio of influences that complement
knowledge and skills and motivational influences (Clark & Estes, 2008). Such organizational
influences are the programs, policies, and protocols that guide cultural models and cultural
settings (Clark & Estes, 2008). Table 12 describes the validation status of the assumed
organizational influences. For this evaluation study, the organizational barriers that were
analyzed to achieve the organizational goal are: provide a supportive culture, empower ESA
teachers, and provide professional development in STEM and the ESA STEM curricula.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

119
Table 12
Validation Status for Organizational Influences
Organization Assumed Influence Status
Cultural Model 1 ESA needs to provide a culture where teachers can
effectively implement STEM curricula.
Validated
Cultural Model 2 ESA needs to empower teachers to effectively implement
STEM curricula.
Validated
Cultural Setting 1 ESA needs to provide teachers with professional
development in STEM education.
Not
Validated
Cultural Setting 2 ESA needs to provide professional development for the
teachers to effectively implement STEM curricula.
Validated

Theme 5: ESA provide cultural models and cultural settings for teachers to
effectively implement STEM curricula. Clark and Estes (2008) states that effective
organizations ensure that organizational messages, rewards, policies, and procedures align and
support the goal of the organization to best govern the work. A culture that evolves preserves its
identity (Schein, 2010). During the interviews, the ESA teachers identified a culture that drives
the outcomes of effective implementation of the STEM curriculum. Similarly, the external
outcomes were perceived as ESA filling a void since the EPSD lacked the resources to fully
implement a STEM curriculum like the one used by ESA.
Hank commented on how the community rallied at annual ESA fundraising event, which
clearly identified the impact of the program by highlighting the students’ academic achievements
in STEM. The ESA ED and board made the decision to make the ESA free for students and
parents with the support of local businesses and non-profit organizations. Hank further stated
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

120
that the event was designed to raise funds for program expansion and build a technology science
center of which the city and the region would benefit.
Another ESA community event culminated on day 10 of the intensive two-week summer
2018 session. Parents, siblings, local business owners, city and church officials, donors, and
potential donors were invited to witness what the ESA teachers and students were able to achieve
with limited resources. The problem- and project-based curriculum yielded competitions such as
marketing plan presentations, mBots demonstrations, and web design presentations. The judges
for the competitions included members of the ESA board, city officials, and EPSD
administration. The donations from local businesses provided awards to the 130 ESA students at
the closing ceremony.
ESA empowers teachers to effectively implement STEM curricula. Empowerment
theory as a methodology can be adaptive and effective in individuals, organizations, and
communities (Gomes, Coimbra, & Menezes, 2017). Empowerment was used as a cultural model
influence to identify gaps in the organizational goal. When asked if the ESA teachers felt
empowered to implement the STEM curriculum, all nine of the ESA teachers responded in the
affirmative. These findings were confirmed during the classroom observations. The ESA ED
demonstrated his overwhelming support of the ESA teachers. When he visited their classrooms,
the ESA ED responded to their needs and concerns as they arose. For example, when Ellen
discovered that she did not have enough copies of the activity on the tropical rainforest and arctic
tundra for her class, the ESA ED provided the additional copies that she needed. Also, the ESA
ED was helpful in finding another extension cord for David to use to charge one of the laptops as
there were not enough electrical outlets in the room. Further insight revealed that eight ESA
teachers were comfortable or very comfortable with implementing the ESA STEM curricula, but
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

121
Ellen was not as comfortable with implementing the SolidWorks curriculum. Individuals feel
empowered as their level of comfort is optimized (Schott et al., 2012).
ESA encourages professional development for the ESA teachers to effectively
implement STEM curricula. Teachers’ professional development positively enhances job
performance (Evers, van der Heijden, Kreijns, & Vermeulen, 2016). During the interviews, all
nine ESA teachers confirmed their participation in some form of professional development
related to implementing ESA STEM curricula, whether online, in-person, or by phone. The ESA
teachers shared that the ESA ED encouraged them to work closely with their respective vendor
to implement the STEM curriculum. Cheryl, Ellen, and Ian indicated their vendors offered
professional development. Curriculum implementation requires well-trained confident teachers
(Thompson et al., 2013). WordPress was the vendor for the web design course and Cheryl
shared that she had a positive experience working alongside them. Her class experienced
considerable delays launching the course due to internet glitches. Cheryl told the ESA students,
“I apologize for the problems that we are having getting your domain names established, but
some of the names that you chose were blocked by your school, especially the names associated
with gaming.” Cheryl was on the phone with WordPress troubleshooting the issue and they
came to this conclusion.
According to Ellen, the SolidWorks vendor chose her course as a pilot for future releases.
These new releases will benefit the future implementation of the SolidWorks curriculum. She
said, “I was surprised that our class was chosen as a pilot.” Valuable support was provided to
Ellen online and by phone, which was helpful and timely for her implementation of the
SolidWorks curriculum. During the observation with Ian, a demonstration was given on how the
online curriculum worked. Ian also relied heavily on the vendor to implement EVERFI, the
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

122
financial literacy curriculum. EVERFI offered online tutorials to refer to for proper
implementation.
The ESA ED offered professional development support as needed, and he also
encouraged the ESA teachers to refer to their professional networks for professional
development. In response to the request, Hank collaborated with his professional network of
leading researchers in hydroponics across the globe. Such opportunities keep Hank abreast of
the latest research to teach in his classrooms. The challenges teachers face implementing STEM
curricula can be overcome by organizations requiring teachers to engage in ongoing professional
development to achieve the organizational goal (Nadelson et al., 2013).
Teacher-focused implementation was key to the ESA teachers. They realized the
importance of participating in professional development activities for effective implementation
of the ESA STEM curricula. Six ESA teachers reported their participation in various types of
professional development to support the effective implementation of the ESA curriculum. The
ESA teachers shared that these professional development opportunities were helpful to them.
Professional development is recognized widely as a systematic approach to changing teachers’
practice, attitudes, and beliefs (Patton et al., 2015).
With some additional prompting, the inquiry also revealed the type, payment source,
when, and how often ESA teachers participated in professional development. The ESA teachers
also participated in STEM related professional development supported by their current employer,
whereby ESA benefitted. The types of professional development included in-service days,
conferences and workshops, video conferences, and webinars. David was the only ESA teacher
who paid for his professional development training, while other ESA teachers indicated that their
professional development was paid by their current employer. Barbara was the only ESA
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

123
teacher who said that her employer provided release time for her to participate in relevant
professional development that supported the implementation of the 4-H curriculum. Her
employer was flexible in allowing time away from her daytime responsibilities. In addition, the
findings revealed that the professional development took place 50% of the time during school
hours and 50% of the time after school hours, and at least once per year. The ESA teachers
recognize that more professional development would have been offered by ESA had additional
financial support been available. Therefore, ESA teachers accesses resources available to them
by their current employer to implement the ESA curriculum.
Summary of findings for organizational influences. At the center of the organizational
findings was professional development. Without this practice, it would be challenging to
achieve the organizational goal. The new curriculum that was incorporated in the summer 2018
session required considerable professional development. Also, the professional development
practices at ESA concluded that the organization ascribes to a supportive culture but does have
limited resources. The organization relied upon external professional development to fill the
gap. Finally, the cultural setting type for professional development in STEM education was not
validated due to limited data collection.
Documents and Artifacts Analysis Findings
Lesson plans and syllabi were the documents and artifacts triangulated with the
observations and interviews to answer research question 1. The four objectives for the
stakeholder goal were met to achieve the organizational goal to effectively implementation 100%
of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by August 31, 2018. Prior to the
observations, five of the nine teachers presented copies of their class syllabus, whereas four of
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

124
the nine ESA teachers provided copies of their lesson plans. The findings from the lesson plans
and syllabi are analyzed in the sections that follow.
Lesson Plans
Four ESA teachers provided lesson plans. In all four cases, the activities were hands-on,
very engaging, and project-based. There is a research debate as to the effectiveness of a lesson
plan when there is little to no time for an assessment to determine the impact (Bagiati &
Evangelou, 2015). When asked about strategies that worked during the curriculum
implementation, six ESA teachers revealed that they create a student profile for assessment. For
example, Barbara conducted a test on the first day of the two-week session. She also indicated
that a TA provided insight into how the students were feeling that day. Shortly afterwards,
Barbara altered the lesson plan to fit the needs of the students. The TA who informed Barbara
about the students, was also the most engaging TA in the classroom. Other engaging TAs
worked in Ellen’s classroom where she used her lesson plan to implement the SolidWorks
curriculum. The objective for Ellen’s lesson plan was to learn about ecosystems. Ellen’s
instructions were clear, and the students were able to follow along with the activities. Research
finds the importance of having clear learning goals and objectives for lesson plans (Guzey et al.,
2016).
Syllabus
Five ESA teachers provided a copy of their course syllabus. An effective syllabus
maintains the integrity of curriculum (Wolf, Czekanski, & Dillon, 2013) and the teacher is
viewed as effective when the course syllabus is detailed (Jenkins, Bugeja, & Barber, 2014). Of
the five syllabi that were received, Barbara’s course syllabus was the most detailed in that
expected outcomes for the students’ science abilities, engineering skills, and life skills were
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

125
included. Barbara ascribes to engaging students on all levels. Her professional development
training through 4-H was the source for this holistic approach. Also, within academic settings,
the syllabus acts as an implicit contract between the teacher and the student (Wolf et al., 2013).
The ESA teachers understood the importance of establishing a solid teacher-student partnership
for learning purposes. Barbara mentioned, “It would be nice to get the know the students better.
I realize we only have two weeks with them though.” Aaron said, “After a while you do get to
know the students when they return each year.”
Synthesis
The purpose for the evaluation study was to understand the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing ESA STEM curricula. A qualitative research design was used to
answer two research questions. The findings from the document analysis, observations, and
interviews analyzed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences affecting the ESA
teachers’ abilities to meet the organizational and stakeholder goals. The Clark and Estes (2008)
gap analysis determined the gaps in the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
The four objectives from the stakeholder goal and related literature were analyzed to
determine the answer to research question 1. Data collected from observations and documents
and artifacts determined that the stakeholder goal was met. The implementation of the ESA
STEM curricula was driven by these four objectives. The buy-in of the ESA teachers was
essential for achieving the stakeholder and organizational goal.
Research question 2 was answered in the context of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis. The knowledge findings confirmed that ESA teachers understood STEM curricula and
the challenges for implementing the STEM curriculum, and they identified the strategies to
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

126
mitigate those challenges. The ESA ED was also met with challenges that he consistently
responded to with the ESA mission at the center of those decisions.
An unexpected finding was that the ESA teachers were also motivated by the outcomes
of implementing the ESA STEM curricula. The literature review for this evaluation study
addressed the global impact of STEM education. The motivation findings supported this review.
The ESA teachers overwhelmingly believed that implementing the ESA STEM curricula was
contributing to STEM education and exposing students to STEM who would not otherwise have
access to the STEM curriculum.
Only three of the four assumed organizational influences were validated. The
organizational influence for the cultural setting type regarding the professional development in
STEM education was not validated due to limited data collected from observations and
interviews. The professional development in STEM education was born by the ESA teachers on
their own time; however, ESA benefited. The ESA teachers participated in some form of
professional development to support the implementation of the ESA STEM curricula. The
professional development was either provided by their current employer or by working closely
with the curriculum vendors. The ESA teachers used their preparation time for the professional
development needed for ESA STEM curriculum implementation.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

127
CHAPTER 5
RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
This study evaluated the challenges ESA teachers face effectively implementing ESA
STEM curricula and ESA’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences (KMO)
affecting the achievement of the organizational goal to effectively implement 100% of the ESA
STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by August 31, 2018. Chapter 4 presented a
qualitative analysis of the data collected and identified the assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that were validated.
Chapter 5 provides recommended modifications to ESA based on the findings in Chapter
4. If the recommendations are implemented, they will contribute to future implementations of
ESA STEM curricula. The recommendations are based on the four levels of the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), which focuses on organizational training
in conjunction with Clark & Estes’ (2008) gap analysis. Chapter 5 begins with recommendations
organized by KMO. A framework of the New World Kirkpatrick Model based on the
recommendations will be presented along with sample implementation and evaluation plans.
Chapter 5 closes with the strengths and weaknesses, limitations and delimitation, and future
research for this evaluation study.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Table 13 presents the knowledge influences from Chapter 2 that were
validated by this evaluation study. The four types of knowledge as described by Krathwohl
(2002) are factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

128
Table 13
Summary of Validated Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Validated Knowledge
Influence Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
Declarative
Teachers need
knowledge of STEM
curricula.
How individuals organize knowledge
influences how they learn and apply
what they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Present to ESA teachers the data and
information about what STEM
curriculum is in three well-organized
steps that build upon each other.
To develop mastery, individuals must
acquire component skills, practice
integrating them, and know when to
apply what they have learned (Schraw
& McCrudden, 2006).
Provide teachers with the training
opportunities to participate in relevant
STEM curriculum webinars, seminars,
etc. that results in increased mastery to
integrate, and apply these practices.
Conceptual
Teachers need
knowledge of which
practices result in
effective implementation
of ESA STEM curricula.
Information learned meaningfully and
connected with prior knowledge is
stored more quickly and remembered
more accurately because it is elaborated
with prior knowledge (Chiu et al.,
2015; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Provide teachers with information on
best practices for effectively
implementing STEM curricula.
Procedural
Teachers need to know
how to incorporate ESA
STEM curricula into
their lesson plans.
Continued practice promotes
automaticity and takes less capacity in
working memory (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide teachers with the opportunity to
participate in relevant STEM curriculum
webinars, seminars, etc., that results in
increased mastery to integrate and apply
these practices.
Guides are used to show how to do
something that reflects the delivery of
content (Rueda, 2011; Shernoff et al.,
2017).
Provide teachers with the opportunity to
participate in relevant STEM curriculum
webinars and seminars to receive
cognitive modeling (demonstration)
feedback that results in increased
mastery to teach procedural skills.
Metacognitive
Teachers need to take
time to reflect on their
effectiveness in
implementing STEM
curricula.
The use of metacognitive strategies
facilitates learning (Baker, 2006;
Barley, 2012).
Provide teacher training on modeling
reflection, such as journaling of their
effective implementation of STEM
curricula.
Facilitating transfer promotes learning
(Mayer, 2011).
Guide teachers on which metacognitive
skills are most effective in advancing
their own self-regulation.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

129
All four knowledge types were validated in this study. Rueda (2011) describes factual
knowledge as the facts, conceptual knowledge as knowledge of structures pertinent to a
particular area, procedural knowledge as knowing how to do something, and metacognitive
knowledge as knowing when and why to do something. Clark and Estes (2008) states that
knowledge is critical element to achieving performance goals. Also included in Table 13 are the
recommendations to improve stakeholder performance, which are based on the principles of
information processing system theory. Validation is supported by the literature review,
observations, semi-structured interviews, and the review of documents and artifacts.
Declarative knowledge recommendations. To effectively implement the ESA STEM
curricula, ESA teachers need declarative knowledge in which to understand STEM curricula.
Findings from the evaluation study concluded ESA teachers’ knowledge of STEM curricula was
demonstrated through their individual and collective implementation of the ESA STEM curricula
using a problem- and project-based learning system. As indicated in Table 13, researchers found
that organized knowledge influences how individuals learn and apply what they know, which
requires the mastery of skills to practice and integrate what they have learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). This information suggests that it is essential for ESA teachers to master
acquiring and incorporating skills, then apply them at the appropriate time to benefit from
organized knowledge. Therefore, the recommendation is to present teachers with the data and
information about STEM curricula in three well-organized steps that build on each other. Also,
provide training opportunities that increase ESA teachers’ mastery in integrating and applying
these practices.
To positively influence learning, individuals organize, analyze, integrate, and apply what
they know to achieve their own goals (Dawes, 2018; McCrudden, Schraw, & Hartley, 2006;
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

130
Rueda, 2011). Moreover, to achieve those goals, individuals must acquire the component skills,
practice integrating them, and know when to apply them with the support of professional
development (Ekanayake & Wishart, 2015; Wright et al., 2018). A beneficial learning
environment supports individuals becoming the authority of data and information (Ekanayake &
Wishart, 2015). Professional development workshops support the teachers’ learning, attitudes,
and shared knowledge and skills to increase their mastery in integrating and applying these
practices.
Conceptual knowledge recommendations. Through the findings analyzed in this
evaluation study, it was found that teachers needed conceptual knowledge of strategies for
implementing the ESA STEM curricula. All the teachers referred to their years of teaching as a
practice for implementing ESA STEM curricula. Information learned meaningfully should be
connected to prior knowledge, which results in more accurate remembrance (Chiu et al., 2015;
Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). This approach suggests that providing ESA teachers with
meaningful learning experiences would enhance their knowledge of STEM curriculum
implementation. Helping ESA teachers connect prior knowledge to new knowledge encourages
meaningful learning. Therefore, the recommendation is to provide teachers with information on
best practices for effectively implementing STEM curricula.
Jackson (2015) studied the alignment of best practices for learning related to
performance. There are certain pedagogic practices that link learning to effective practice of
knowledge and skills. Information gathered from multiple sources increases confidence,
knowledge, and abilities (Grabowsky, 2015; Paris, Hu, Koo, Marshall, & Musacchia, 2016).
Evidence-based information gathering does improve confidence and proficiency in teaching.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

131
Providing information on best practices would improve teachers’ knowledge of effectively
implementing STEM curricula.
Procedural knowledge recommendations. Findings from the procedural knowledge
influence revealed that ESA teachers needed knowledge of how to incorporate STEM curricula
into their lesson plans. Four ESA teachers used lesson plans and five ESA teachers used syllabi
with lesson plans as a guide for implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Schraw and
McCrudden (2006) found that the ability to do things without occupying the mind of details
facilitates a response pattern that is automatic, resulting in learning, repetition, and practice. This
practice would suggest that providing learners with the opportunity to repeat practices enhances
their learning. Also, Shernoff et al. (2017) found that lesson plans are a resource for
implementing STEM curricula. Therefore, the recommendation is to provide teachers with the
opportunity to participate in relevant STEM curriculum webinars and seminars to receive
cognitive modeling feedback that results in the mastery in integrating and applying these
practices.
Lee et al. (2016) examined how the use of lesson plans supports student engagement as
teachers reflect on how to deliver the content. This strategy suggests that lesson plans guide
what takes place in the classroom. In addition, a phenomenological approach studied the
capability of teachers to master their knowledge upon receiving training and how that knowledge
was applied (Barras et al., 2016). The findings revealed that the transfer of knowledge occurred
through pedagogical content knowledge, a reflective practitioner, and focused professional
identity. Overall, teachers who participate in relevant training enhance their procedural skills.
Metacognitive knowledge recommendations. The metacognitive findings from the
study revealed that all nine ESA teachers practiced reflection-on-action during their interviews.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

132
Although, teachers needed to take time to reflect on their effectiveness in implementing the ESA
STEM curricula, this was not observed. Reflection-on-action is one of four ways teachers reflect
on their work, which demonstrates strategies that facilitate learning (Baker, 2006; Barley, 2012;
Mayer, 2011). The research suggests that providing instruction in metacognitive skills increases
self-regulation. Since learning is supported when people can practice their skills, the
recommendation is to provide teacher training on modeling reflection to advance the teachers’
self-regulation.
When teachers use journals as a learning tool to reflect on their experiences, they are
promoting their ability to reflect (Ruiz-Lopez et al., 2015). However, it is the fidelity of journal
writing as a reinforcement method that teaches resourcefulness skills (Boebel Toly, Blanchette,
Musil, & Zauszniewski, 2016). Daily journal entries are the source of various levels of support.
Also, metacognition should be considered when self-regulating in learning environments
(Garrison & Akyol, 2015). Teachers share positive beliefs about the role of metacognition
(Spruce & Bol, 2015). Reflective practice builds metacognitive skills that would be most
effective in advancing teachers’ self-regulation.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. The ESA teachers demonstrated active choice, persistence, and mental
effort through two motivational influences: self-efficacy and utility value (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Rueda, 2011). Motivational influences were directly linked to achieving the stakeholder goal.
Table 14 reflects the validated motivational influences and recommendations for self-efficacy
and utility value.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

133
Table 14
Summary of Validated Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Validated Motivation
Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Self-Efficacy
Teachers need to believe
they can effectively
implement ESA STEM
curricula.
High self-efficacy can positively
influence motivation (Carney et
al., 2016; Hodges et al., 2016;
Pajares, 2006).
Provide teachers with lessons
learned and testimonials from
other teachers who have
implemented ESA STEM
curricula.
Feedback and modeling increase
self-efficacy (Pajares, 2006).
Provide teachers with real-
time feedback on how they
are implementing the STEM
curricula.
Utility Value
Teachers need to see the
value in implementing
ESA STEM curricula.
Rationales that include a
discussion of the importance and
utility value of the work or
learning can help learners
develop positive values (Durik et
al., 2015; Eccles, 2006; Pintrich,
2003).
Provide teachers with data
and information on the impact
implementing STEM
curricula can have on the
United States’ global
competitiveness.
Learning and motivation are
enhanced if the learner values
the task (Eccles, 2006; Rueda,
2011).
Provide teachers with real-
time data and information on
key student learnings.

Self-efficacy. An analysis of this evaluation study concluded that the nine ESA teachers
believed they could effectively implement the ESA STEM curricula. According to self-efficacy
theory, high self-efficacy can positively influence motivation (Pajares, 2006). Self-efficacy
theory is one’s belief in his or her own abilities (Carney et al., 2016; Hodges et al., 2016). Thus,
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

134
teachers with high levels of self-esteem positively impact the implementation process. Pajares
(2006) found that feedback and modeling increase self-efficacy. Providing immediate feedback
is essential for simple tasks, with delayed feedback being used for complex tasks, as long as the
comments are balanced with strengths and challenges. Providing teachers with lessons learned
and testimonials from other teachers and receiving fair feedback is essential to teachers’ self-
efficacy.
Self-efficacy contributes to the quality of curriculum implementation (Susilanas, Asra, &
Herlina, 2018). The efficacy of a teacher is a critical predictor of their instructional behavior
(Palmer, Dixon, & Archer, 2015). In addition, teachers should consider real-time feedback
mechanisms to improve their learning process (Wilson & Czik, 2016).
Utility value. ESA teachers also saw value in effectively implementing the ESA
curricula. Expectancy value theory includes a discussion of the importance and utility value of
the work or learning can help learners develop positive values, whereas utility value relies on an
individual’s goals to determine fit and needs (Durik et al, 2015; Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003;
Rueda, 2011). Learning and motivation are enhanced when the learner values the task.
Providing teachers with data and information on the impact that implementing STEM curricula
can have on United States global competitiveness is the first recommendation. The second
recommendation is to provide teachers with real-time data and information on key student
learnings.
Interventions improved students’ interest, utility value, content knowledge, and intentions
for studying future STEM subjects (Duffin, Starling, Day, & Cribbs, 2016). Real-time data and
information provided teachers with the content to deliver to students. Students with more
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

135
positive teacher connections improves students’ performance (Hulleman, Kosovich, Barron, &
Daniel, 2017).
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. The organizational influences reflected in Table 15 were presented in
Chapter 2 and three of the four influences were validated in this evaluation study. Clark and
Estes (2008) refer to organizational influences as a member of a trio of influences that
complement the needed knowledge and skills and motivational influences. All three influences
contribute to performance gaps that often impede achieving the stakeholder goal. However,
organizational culture is improved when work processes determine how people work together to
achieve goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Schein (2004) infers the importance of understanding the
culture to understand the organization. Schneider, Brief, and Guzzo (1996) state that climate can
become the focus to change culture. Effective leaders rely upon climate to implement policies
and practices to drive a belief and value system as a guide for employees (Schneider et al., 1996).
Culture and climate are tangibles that are sustainable towards achieving organizational goals.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

136
Table 15
Summary of Validated Organization Influences and Recommendations
Validated Organization
Influence Principle and Citation (P & C) Context-Specific Recommendation
Cultural Model 1
ESA needs to provide a
culture where teachers
can effectively
implement STEM
curricula.
Effective change efforts use evidence-
based solutions and adapt them, where
necessary, to the organization’s culture
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Establish a culture whereby teachers
have time to share best practices among
their peers and collaborate on
curriculum advancement.
Staying current with research and practice
is correlated with increased student
learning outcomes (Waters, Marzano, &
McNulty, 2003).
Establish a culture whereby teachers
can give feedback to school
administrators on how best to support
their learning for optimal performance.
Effective organizations ensure that
organizational messages, rewards,
policies, and procedures that govern the
work of the organization are aligned with
or are supportive of organizational goals
and values (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Implement strategies that provide
teachers with the support of their
individual and organizational goals.
Cultural Model 2
ESA needs to empower
teachers to effectively
implement STEM
curricula.
Learning is measured based on systems of
accountability (Dowd & Shieh, 2013;
Golden, 2006).
Promote learning by offering and
financially supporting a variety of
internal and external professional
development opportunities to improve
effective implementation of STEM
curricula.
A strong organizational culture controls
organizational behavior and can block
and organization from making necessary
changes for adapting to a changing
environment (Schein, 2004).
Provide a culture whereby teachers
have time to share best practices among
their peers and collaborate on
curriculum advancement.
Cultural Setting 2
ESA needs to provide
professional
development for the
teachers to effectively
implement STEM
curricula.
Ensuring staff resource needs are met is
correlated with increased student learning
outcomes (Waters et al., 2003).
Provide professional development
opportunities in enough time for
teachers to incorporate findings in
implementing the STEM curricula.
Effective change efforts utilize feedback
to determine when/if improvement is
happening (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Provide the opportunity for teachers to
provide feedback as decisions are being
made.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

137
Cultural model recommendations. Findings from this evaluation study revealed that
two cultural model influences were validated. An analysis of the organizational influences
concluded that ESA provided cultural models for teachers to effectively implement STEM
curricula. Rueda (2011) defines cultural models as “the shared mental schema or normative
understandings of how the world works, or ought to work” (p. 55).
Cultural model 1. Evidence-based solutions are used to effect change within an
organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). Effective change efforts must use evidence-based solutions
and adapt them, where necessary, to the organization’s culture (Moran & Brightman, 2000). By
adopting a change process ESA teachers can impact student performance. Staying current with
research and practice is correlated with increased student learning outcomes (Waters et al.,
2003). Kezar (2001) suggests conducting a self-discovery audit to inform the organization of its
current state. Effective organizations ensure that organizational messages, rewards, policies, and
procedures align and support the goals and values of the organization to best govern the work
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Furthermore, rewarding systems are to be valued by the target population
and have values that elicit a change in behavior (Hansen, Smith, & Hansen, 2002). ESA teachers
needed to know that the organization will reward their efforts to achieve the organizational goal;
however, the incentive to achieve the stakeholder goal is lacking. Roberts (2010) states that
people respond positively or negatively to well- and poorly-designed incentives. ESA must take
the time to review the processes that govern their work to provide a culture, whereby teachers
have time to share best practices, to provide feedback to the ESA administration, and to support
individual and organizational goals.
Cultural model 2. The study found that ESA teachers need to empower teachers to
effectively implement ESA STEM curricula. However, to hold the stakeholder accountable,
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

138
measurement of learning and performance is required as these are essential components for an
effective accountability system. Researchers agree that learning is measured based on systems of
accountability (Dowd & Shieh, 2013; Golden, 2006). Learning can be measured by offering and
financially supporting a variety of internal and external professional development to improve
effective implementation of STEM curricula. Dowd and Shieh (2013) studied how systems of
accountability measure learning. In further reviewing the professional accountability
mechanism, the researchers agree that practitioners are accountable for using their knowledge
and wisdom to increase performance and impact important decisions as they occur. A shared
governance exists when facilitating the development of best practices. Therefore, the
recommendation is to promote learning by offering and financially supporting a variety of
internal and external professional development opportunities that improve effective
implementation of STEM curricula.
Providing a culture for teachers to have time to share best practices among their peers and
collaborate on curriculum advancement will assist ESA achieve the organizational goal. A
strong organizational culture controls organizational behavior and can block an organization
from making necessary changes for adapting to a changing environment (Schein, 2004).
However, Burke’s (2005) research found that leaders should not be held accountable for the
needed variance but to incorporate risk to assist with developing the desired change belief
systems. An individual’s performance improves because of the interaction with employees
(Berger, 2014). Collaborative problem-solving skills are regarded as one of the key 21
st
century
skills (Hesse et al., 2015). ESA teachers are expected to collaborate on implementing the ESA
STEM curricula. Researchers agree that collaboration is a viable method for problem solving
that transforms a current state to a future desired goal (Care, Griffin, Scoular, Awwal, &
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

139
Zoanetti, 2015). Collaborative problem solving must be measurable, assessed by teachers in the
classroom, and be teachable (Hesse et al., 2015).
Cultural settings recommendations. Only one cultural setting organizational influence
was validated for this evaluation study. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) define cultural
settings as the coming together of two or more people to accomplish something over time.
Cultural settings are often constrained and enabled by the ‘ecological niche’ in which they
reside. Effective change efforts utilize feedback to determine when or if improvement is
happening (Clark & Estes, 2008). In this instance, ESA needs to provide professional
development for the teachers to effectively implement STEM curricula. Ensuring staff resource
needs are met is correlated with increased student learning outcomes (Waters et al., 2003).
Effective change efforts utilize feedback to determine when or if improvement is happening.
Creating a monitoring process, such as meetings where feedback is given, allows for corrections
if needed. Also, this recommendation aligns resources with the goals and priorities of the
organization. Providing professional development as a resource for the ESA teachers is a timely
tool for incorporating findings in implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Also, providing on
demand feedback on teachers’ performance as decisions are made is essential to organizational
change is a recommendation.
Guzey et al. (2014) examined the effects of professional development programs on
implementing engineering design in classrooms. For a majority of teachers, the success for
effectively implemented engineering design lessons in their respective classroom was based on
the structure of the professional development program. Evers et al. (2016) agree that
professional development is a job resource, suggesting that professional development positively
enhanced job performance. Moreover, Van den Bergh, Ros, and Beijaard (2014) conducted a
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

140
study that focused on improving teacher feedback during active learning. If certain conditions
are met, the professional development of the teachers can be effective and sustainable.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The framework used for the implementation and evaluation plan is the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Figure 4 illustrates an organizational
training model used in conjunction with the Clark and Estes gap analysis (2008). The model
further addresses KMO influences validated by this evaluation study. The recommendations for
the study are described in Table 16.

Table 16
The New World Kirkpatrick Model Four Levels of Evaluation
Evaluation
Level
Evaluation
Type Description
4 Results Measures the results of the organizational goals to effectively
implement 100% of the STEM curricula by August 31, 2018.
3 Behavior Measures the critical behaviors that motivated ESA teachers to
effectively implementing the STEM curricula.
2 Learning Measures the ESA teachers’ knowledge related to learning how
to effectively implement the STEM curricula.
1 Reaction Measures the reactions of ESA teachers.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

141
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) recommend the four evaluation levels be
implemented in numerical descending order, so the focus became results-oriented. Therefore,
the implementation plan for this study aligned with the New World Kirkpatrick Model depicted
in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)

Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
ESA is a non-profit organization founded in 2014 with a mission to introduce the needed
knowledge of STEM through curriculum, programs, and activities offered regularly that enables
at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning experiences. The ESA organizational
goal is to effectively implement 100% of the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

142
by August 31, 2018. ESA teachers from EPSD and faculty from local colleges and universities
were the primary focus. Odili et al. (2011) state that teachers are essential to curriculum
implementation. If the United States is to remain globally competitive, more women and
underrepresented groups are needed for the future STEM talent pool (Carnevale et al., 2011).
ACT (2013) described the need for more high-quality math and science teachers as an essential
component to developing this graduate pool. However, students must rely on teachers as the
primary vehicle for learning about STEM disciplines (Wasserman & Rossi, 2015). Researchers
agree that implementing STEM curricula exposes students to real world, applied learning
experiences that empowers them to gain the skills they need to thrive in college, career, and
beyond (Holstein & Keene, 2013; Tai, 2012). Therefore, the purpose of this evaluation study
was to understand the challenges teachers face effectively implementing ESA STEM curricula.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Indicators that assist with closing the gap among individual initiatives and organizational
results are described as leading indicators according to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016).
Short-term observations and measurements are examples of leading indicators that track the
critical behaviors for the organization’s desired results. A balance with emphasis on the highest-
level of results must be achieved if the leading indicators are to remain important measures
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 17 reflects the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading
Indicators in the form of external and internal outcomes, metrics, and methods for ESA
stakeholders.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

143
Table 17
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
ESA teachers are recognized
locally for implementing ESA
STEM curricula to underserved
and underrepresented students of
color.
Local newspapers feature 100%
of the ESA teachers throughout
the school year.
Review final reports
from teachers to learn
more about their
summer program
experience.
Internal Outcomes
Increased collaborations among
ESA teachers.
Percentage of teachers engaged
in collaboration to implement
ESA STEM curricula.
End-of-program
report.
Increased commitments from
ESA teachers to return to the
program to teach.
Percentage of commitments
from teachers to return to ESA.
End-of-program
report.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Critical behaviors are those performed on the job that support
targeted outcomes, if performed consistently (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). As much as
70% of the learning that contributes directly to job performance takes place on the job. On-the-
job learning is the result of employees and their employers sharing in the responsibility for good
performance. This evaluation study focused on the ESA teachers’ on-the-job performance. To
address the job performance of ESA teachers, the following three critical behaviors were
reviewed. The first critical behavior focused on team meetings among the teachers and the
executive director to determine what worked and what did not work well to establish best
practices for the program. The second critical behavior focused on the amount of collaboration
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

144
among the teachers to implement the STEM curriculum. Finally, the third critical behavior
focused on the confidence of the teachers to effectively implement the STEM curricula. The
specific metrics, methods, and timing for each outcome behaviors are reflected in Table 18.

Table 18
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metrics Methods Timing
1. The teachers meet as a
group with the ESA ED
to discuss best practices
and professional
development experiences
for implementing the
ESA STEM curricula.
The number of
teachers that share
feedback on what
worked and what did
not work to form
best practices.
The ESA ED will
establish a
convenient time for
all ESA teachers to
meet in person or
online.
ESA teachers and
ESA ED meet
weekly.
2. The ESA teachers
meet to collaborate on
implementing ESA
STEM curricula.
The number of
collaborations that
take place among the
teachers.
The ESA teachers
will discuss
strategies for
collaboration.
ESA teachers meet
daily in congruent
with their
schedules.
3. The teachers show
confidence in effectively
implementing the STEM
curricula.
The number of
teachers invited back
to teach at ESA.
The ESA ED will
meet with each ESA
teacher to track their
progress and
commitment to the
program.
ESA ED to meet
one-on-one with
each teacher
weekly to
determine their
commitment to
ESA.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

145
Required drivers. For Level 3 to be successful, the results at Level 4 are critical, which
is why required drivers are addressed in this evaluation study. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick
(2016) define required drivers as mechanisms to reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward for
performance of critical behaviors, which are driven by the organization’s processes and systems.
Support and accountability are two categories under which the three required drivers fall.
Reinforce, encourage, and reward fall under the support category, while monitor falls under the
accountability category. Organizations that incorporate accountability and support systems
during the training can reinforce the knowledge and skills of individuals by as much as 85%
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In addition, there is nearly a 15% success rate for
organizations that focus only on the training events to create optimal job performance
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The drivers that are required for optimal ESA teacher
performance are described in Table 19.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

146

Table 19
Required Drivers to Support Teachers’ Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
Provide teachers with access to articles and websites where
information on STEM curricula can be found.
Daily 1, 2, 3
Provide ESA teachers with feedback and the opportunity to
participate in relevant STEM curriculum webinars, seminars,
etc. that result in mastery of implementing and applying these
practices.
Daily 2, 3
Encouraging
Promote participation in professional development. Daily 1, 3
Rewarding
Provide ESA teachers with lessons learned and testimonials
from other teachers who have effectively implemented ESA
STEM curricula.
Daily 1, 3
Provide ESA teachers with real-time feedback on how they are
implementing STEM curricula.
Daily 1, 3
Provide ESA teachers with real-time data and information on
key student learnings.
Daily 1, 3
Monitoring
Provide a culture whereby ESA teachers have time to share best
practices among their peers.
Daily 1, 3

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

147
Organizational support. The purpose of Level 2 of the New World Kirkpatrick Model
is to determine the degree to which the participants require the intended knowledge, skills,
attitude, confidence and commitment based on their participating in the learning process
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Therefore, ESA will provide the following support to
implement the required drivers previously described. To ensure that the required drivers are
implemented, ESA will first establish weekly meetings with the teachers. The purpose of the
meetings is to discuss best practices for achieving the stakeholder goal; specifically, what is
working, what is not working, and what professional development activities are needed for
successful STEM curriculum implementation. Moreover, the ESA ED will establish one-on-one
meetings with all ESA teachers to: (1) assess the progress of their STEM curriculum
implementation; (2) determine their professional development needs; (3) confirm their level of
commitment to return as an ESA teacher for summer 2019; (4) encourage the teachers to
collaborate on developing best practices for implementing the STEM curricula; and (5) confirm
their level of commitment to return as an ESA teacher for summer 2019. As a result of the one-
on-one, collaborative, and full-team meetings, the ESA ED will recognize ESA teachers for their
performance during the program’s closing ceremony. Invited guests will include community
leaders, city officials, other educators, and parents for a community celebration.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. The learning goals described in this section are categorized using the
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) evaluation components of learning: skills, knowledge,
attitude, confidence, and commitment. The learning goals align with the validated gaps in
Chapter 4 of this evaluation study. Following the completion of the recommended solutions, the
ESA teachers will be able to:
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

148
1. Apply knowledge from training opportunities on implementing STEM curricula
(Knowledge — Declarative)
2. Apply best practices that result in effective implementation of STEM curricula
(Knowledge — Conceptual)
3. Apply best practices learned from colleagues and professional development activities
(Knowledge — Procedural)
4. Value effectively implementing STEM curricula (Attitude — Utility Value)
5. Commit to returning to implement STEM curriculum in summer 2019 (Commitment)
6. Believe they can effectively implement STEM curricula (Confidence — Self-
Efficacy)
Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved during the
ESA’s two-week intensive summer STEM session on the East Coast of the United States. Ten
EPSD teachers and faculty from local colleges and universities will be the STEM teachers.
During the 75- and 85-minute classes, ESA teachers will implement the ESA STEM curricula
Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. to 130 students enrolled in the EPSD from
3
rd
to 11
th
grade. The class size will be capped at 20 students and include two teaching assistants
who are either a past ESA participant or trained in the field of education.
Two months prior to the start of the ESA summer session, the ED will meet with each
teacher to confirm the STEM subject for which they are certified to teach. During the initial
meeting, each ESA teacher will present the ED with their professional development needs for the
summer session and commit to keeping a journal reflecting on best practices to enhance their
knowledge and skills on implementation of the STEM curriculum. Also, during the initial
meeting, the ED will share data and information in the form of job aids and research journals on
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

149
STEM curricula, and the global impact on the value of implementing STEM curricula to support
the workforce needs in the region. In addition, the teachers will be informed of the opportunity
to be recognized and celebrated during the closing ceremony of the summer session as a form of
motivation to effectively implement the STEM curriculum.
One month prior to the start of the program, the ESA ED will meet to introduce and
encourage the ESA teachers to collaborate on implementing the curriculum and to begin
developing their lesson plans and syllabi. The ESA ED will also introduce the teachers to their
TAs within three weeks of the summer session. Also, each TA will be required to complete a
half-day orientation facilitated by the ED. Furthermore, during the initial meeting of the ESA
teachers and the TAs, the lesson plans and syllabi for the courses will be discussed and finalized
within a week of the summer session.
Once the summer session begins the ESA ED will meet weekly with the ESA teachers,
both individually and as a group congruent with their teaching schedules. The ESA ED will also
meet with the TAs to make the necessary adjustments to support the ESA teachers in curriculum
implementation. Also, to motivate the ESA teachers, the ESA ED will provide feedback on the
implementation process. The ESA teachers will meet at least once a week to collaborate,
motivate one another, and share best practices to implement the STEM curricula. Within one
week of the close of the program, a debrief will take place with the ED, ESA teachers, and TAs.
Components of learning. The literature review for this evaluation study describes
knowledge and motivation contributions that improve stakeholder performance. Therefore, it is
important to evaluate the learning for knowledge and motivation to ensure that ESA teachers
have the information they need and are motivated to see the value in implementation of STEM
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

150
curricula. As such, Table 20 lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components of
learning.
Evaluation of the components of learning. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) describe
declarative, procedural, attitude, confidence, and commitment as five essential components to
assess the learning of ESA teachers. Table 20 reflects the evaluation methods that correlate with
each learning component and the corresponding duration.

Table 20
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Methods or Activities Timing
Declarative Knowledge — “I know it.”
Report knowledge of best practices for implementing
STEM curricula with ESA ED and ESA teachers.
During one-on-one and
team meetings.
Procedural Skills — “I can do it right now.”
Apply best practices for implementation of the ESA
STEM curricula.
During the two-week
intensive summer session.
Attitude — “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Report what worked and did not work. During the debrief at the
end of the session.
Confidence — “I think I can do it on the job.”
Feedback from peers and ED on implementing STEM
curricula.
During one-on-one and
team meetings
Commitment — “I will do it on the job.”
ESA teachers commit to returning to implement STEM
curricula in summer 2019.
During the debrief.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

151
Level 1: Reaction
Level 1 assesses whether participants find on the training favorable, engaging, and
relevant (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Investment at this level is at the cost of Level 3,
which is often only evaluated for 33% of live classroom programs and 17% of electronically
delivered programs (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The three components of the Level 1 are
customer satisfaction, engagement, and relevance. Customer satisfaction is known to have a
positive correlation to learning. It can be used to identify and eliminate any barriers to learning
during the program. Engagement relates to learning attainment, whereas relevance refers to the
opportunity for participants to use what they learn in the on-the-job training experience. Table
21 lists the reactions of ESA teachers for this evaluation study.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

152

Table 21
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Evaluation of best practices shared among the
colleagues on implementing the STEM curricula.
During the two-week intensive
summer session.
Evaluation of achieving objectives for implementing
STEM curricula.
During the debrief.
Evaluation of what worked and did not work with
implementing the STEM curriculum survey.
During the one-on-one and team
meetings, as well as the debrief.
Relevance
Confirmation of returning next year. During the debrief.
Evaluation of what worked and did not work with
implementing the STEM curriculum through a brief
survey.
During the one-on-one and team
meetings, as well as the debrief.
Customer Satisfaction
Evaluation of what worked and did not work with
implementing the STEM curriculum through a brief
survey.
During the one-on-one and team
meetings, as well as the debrief.
Evaluation of reflection and professional
development activities.
During the one-on-one and team
meetings, as well as the debrief.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

153
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. On the last day of the program
the ESA ED will host the closing ceremony where community leaders, parents, teachers and
students will be in attendance. During the closing ceremony the ESA ED will distribute a brief
survey to assess their growth in the knowledge, skills and motivation of STEM curriculum
implementation (Appendix F). The survey will indicate relevance of the material on the job,
participants’ satisfaction, commitment, attitude, and confidence in applying what has been
learned. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) will be used to
evaluate Level 1 and Level 2. Specifically, for Level 2, the teachers will accept the survey and
agree to complete the survey in advance of their debrief that will take place a week later. The
correspondence to the teachers will include optional dates for the debrief for consideration. In
addition, the correspondence will include an agenda for the meeting, detailing: primary
reflections referenced in their journals; the top three best practices that were implemented; what
worked, did not work, and what should be done differently; and their commitment to return next
year.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. At the ESA closing
ceremony the ESA ED will distribute the survey containing open-ended and scaled-questions to
the ESA teachers (Appendix F). The blended survey approach integrates the evaluation across
all four levels of The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 1
will evaluate the teachers’ engagement, relevance, and satisfaction. Level 2 will measure the
teachers’ confidence, knowledge, attitude, and commitment. Level 3 will measure the teachers’
critical behaviors. Finally, Level 4 will measure the results of ESA. A week later, the ESA ED
and ESA teachers will discuss the findings from the survey during the debrief.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

154
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 goals for the ESA teachers as previously discussed in Table 17 are to
increase collaborations among ESA teachers and increase commitments from ESA teachers to
return to the ESA program. To support these goals a scorecard will measure the objectives for
implementing the ESA STEM curricula. The objectives should be measured weekly and
discussed during the weekly debrief. The purpose of the scorecard is to track the progress of the
goals and objectives. The base refers to data collected in a prior year, however, since the
scorecard is being used for the first time, the base does not apply. The goal is for all nine ESA
teachers to achieve all four objectives for the stakeholder goal. Ideally, it would benefit ESA if
the ESA teachers reported their progress daily, however, weekly will meet the minimum
expectation. When the report is due, the ESA teachers are expected to forecast whether they will
achieve implementing the ESA STEM curricula. A visual of that forecast can be further
identified with green (on schedule), yellow (caution), or red (at-risk). Figure 5 is a sample
dashboard for Level 4. Similar dashboards will be developed to monitor the performance of
Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 goals.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

155

Figure 5. Sample dashboard for achieving objectives for ESA STEM curricula implementation

Summary
This evaluation study was informed by the New World Kirkpatrick Model
implementation and evaluation plan (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Also, the results from
the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis performed informed the application of the Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick model. The Level 4 analysis focused on the results of the ESA program by
establishing leading indicators, metrics, and methods of evaluation. The Level 3 assessment
focused on the critical behaviors that would be expected of the students while implementing the
ESA STEM curricula. The Level 2 analysis focused on the ESA teachers’ learning. The Level 1
recommendations focused on the ESA teachers’ reaction to ESA STEM curriculum
implementations. The integration of the gap analysis and the Kirkpatrick model provided a
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

156
holistic approach to discovering the challenges ESA teachers face implementing the ESA STEM
curricula.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
The problem of practice for this evaluation study was the ESA teachers’ influence on
effectively implementing the ESA STEM curricula. The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
framework measures the organization’s gap between the desired performance goals and the
current achievement using the assumed KMO influences. The purpose of the gap analysis for
this evaluation study was to determine whether the ESA teachers had the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational support to achieve the organizational goal to effectively implement 100% of
the ESA STEM curricula for the summer 2018 session by August 31, 2018. The gap analysis
framework was used in combination with the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) to analyze the problem of practice. Also, the approach identified
recommendations, evaluation, and implementation plans based on empirical results.
Unfortunately, the New World Kirkpatrick Model only focuses on organizational training. This
identified weakness limited the gap analysis to only the knowledge influence as opposed to the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Motivation is what drives individuals to
use and apply their knowledge (Mayer, 2011). Despite having the knowledge to perform a set of
tasks, the individual may encounter organizational barriers that prevent them from meeting their
performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
A key factor that bolstered the quality of the evaluation study was the research
methodology and design. A qualitative methods design was chosen to draw upon the
experiences from data collected from the observations, interviews, and document analysis. In
addition, the documents and artifacts were unobtrusive data collected that supported the research
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

157
methodology (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The stability of the lesson plans and syllabi posed as
an advantage to the study, providing a unique research perspective to further analyze the problem
of practice. However, the documents and artifacts were not intended for research purposes
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A brief analysis of the documents and artifacts is summarized in
Appendix E.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations occur in a study that a researcher cannot control and can impact the result
(Connelly, 2013; Simon & Goes, 2013). For this evaluation study, the small sample size of nine
ESA teachers was a limitation that was not in the researcher’s control. Another limitation for
this evaluation study was the two-week duration for implementing the ESA STEM curricula.
Last, the researcher could have interviewed the TAs, had time permitted.
Simon and Goes (2013) state that delimitations are based on the researcher’s choices; the
objectives, questions, paradigm, methodology, variables of interest, participants, and theoretical
perspectives and framework. The researcher’s choice of the problem of practice implies that
there were other related problems to choose from. The problem of practice was the ESA
teachers’ influence on effectively implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Also, theoretically,
the evaluation study was based on the researcher’s STEM education perspective. The results of
this evaluation study are expected to contribute to extant literature, despite the constraints the
researcher posed on personal interest in broadening the participation of underrepresented and
underserved groups in STEM studies and careers.
Future Research
The mission of ESA is to introduce the needed knowledge of STEM through activities
and program offerings that enables at-risk students to explore and personalize their learning
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

158
experience. There are several research opportunities that can expand this evaluation study.
Future research on the ESA students, teachers, TAs, and ecosystem of partners are worthwhile to
explore as each study would contribute to the economic impact on the East Coast of the United
States. First, a longitudinal study on the six cohorts of 130 students in 3
rd
through 11
th
grades
who participated in the intensive two-week summer 2018 session to track their matriculation
patterns in STEM studies and careers. A quantitative study on the knowledge the ESA students
retained could compliment the longitudinal study. Second, the ESA teachers’ knowledge and
motivational developments could further enhance the existing study. Third, exploring the TAs
impact on implementing the ESA STEM curricula would be a worthwhile endeavor. Finally,
future research can be conducted to determine the economic impact of the program on the East
Coast of the United States. All the above are models for STEM programs and have the potential
to scale across the United States. An innovative cross-cutting tool is required to measure the
impact of STEM education (Chatterji, 2018). However, the rapid change in technology
challenges this claim. Further exploration is being done to identify a game-changing approach to
address the systemic problem of practice.
Conclusion
The purpose of this evaluation study was to understand the challenges teachers face
effectively implementing ESA STEM curricula. The knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences effecting the organizational goal were guided by three research questions. This study
concluded that the teachers effectively implementing the ESA STEM curricula for the intensive
two-week summer 2018 session. However, several gaps were identified. First, there was a gap
in the declarative, conceptual, and procedural knowledge of STEM curricula, what practices
result in effective implementation, and how to incorporate STEM curricula into lesson plans.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

159
Second, a lack of confidence and value in implementing the ESA STEM curricula. Finally, there
was a gap in ESA’s ability to provide a culture that empowers and provides adequate
professional development for effective implementation of the ESA STEM curricula. The New
World Kirkpatrick Model was used to develop recommendations for effectively implementing
the ESA STEM curricula (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). If the recommendations are
implemented, the ESA can benefit further from the research opportunities suggested in this
evaluation.
Also, the importance of the problem of practice emanates from the federal legislation.
Former Presidents G. W. Bush and B. Obama acknowledged the importance of STEM education
by establishing STEM initiatives and made a commitment to address the need to increase the
number of K-12 STEM educators (Rothwell, 2013). The federal government provided funding
for STEM programs through policies and legislation, and individual states were responsible for
making decisions regarding curriculum, teacher certification, and standards (Ericson et al.,
2016). Overall, legislative acts, federal and national programs have promoted teacher
certification, yet the number of certified STEM teachers remains low (Avant, 2015; Martin &
Mulvihill, 2016).
The researcher chose to focus on the challenge teachers face effectively implementing
ESA STEM curricula to address broadening the participation of underrepresented and
underserved groups in STEM studies and careers on the East Coast of the United States. If the
United States is to remain globally competitive, more women and underrepresented groups are
needed for the future U.S. STEM talent pool (Carnevale et al., 2011). This evaluation study
elucidates practices for teachers to effectively implement STEM curricula for scalability and the
promise of preparing future STEM professionals.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

160
REFERENCES
Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the
Medical Library Association, 103(3), 152–153.
Aldemir, J., & Kermani, H. (2017). Integrated STEM curriculum: Improving educational
outcomes for Head Start children. Early Child Development and Care, 187(11), 1694–
1706.
Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2016). Teachers’ views of their school climate and its
relationship with teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Learning Environments
Research, 19(2), 291–307.
American College Testing. (2013, June). STEM educator pipeline: Doing the math on recruiting
math and science teachers. Iowa City, IA. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/STEM-Educator-Pipeline.pdf
American College Testing. (2015). The condition of STEM 2015. Iowa City, IA. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/National-STEM-Report-
2015.pdf
American College Testing. (2016). The condition of STEM 2016. Iowa City, IA. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/STEM2016_08_Delaware.pdf
American College Testing. (2017a). The condition of college and career readiness 2017. Iowa
City, IA. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/cccr2017/CCCR_National_201
7.pdf
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

161
American College Testing. (2017b). STEM education on the U.S.: Where we are and what we
can do. Iowa City, IA. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/STEM/2017/STEM-
Education-in-the-US-2017.pdf
Ash, D., & Lombana, J. (2013). Reculturing museums: Working toward diversity in informal
settings. Journal of Museum Education, 38(1), 69–80.
Avant, K. S. (2015). Teacher certification in technology education: Differences in testing scores
of alternative and traditional certified teachers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Walden University, Minneapolis, MN.
Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: The
teacher’s experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1),
112–128.
Baker, L. (2006). The development of metacognitive knowledge and control of comprehension
contributors and consequences. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Barak, M. (2014). Closing the gap between attitudes and perceptions about ICT-enhanced
learning among pre-service STEM teachers. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 23(1), 1–14.
Barker, B. S., Nugent, G., & Grandgenett, N. F. (2014). Examining fidelity of program
implementation in a STEM-oriented out-of-school setting. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 24(1), 39–52.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

162
Barley, M. (2012). Learning from reflective practice and metacognition — an anesthetist’s
perspective. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 13(2),
271–280. doi:10.1080/14623943.2012.657792
Barras, D., Bitu, B., Geofroy, S., Lochan, S., McLeod, L., & Ali, S. (2016). Social sciences
teachers’ perceptions of transformatory learnings and the transfer of transformatory
learnings from an initial in-service professional development programme at The
University of the West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago, 2013-2014. Caribbean Curriculum,
24, 75–99.
Barton, G. M., Garvis, S., & Ryan, M. E. (2014). Curriculum to the classroom: Investigating the
spatial practices of curriculum implementation in Queensland schools and its implications
for teacher education. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(3), 166–177.
Beauchamp, C. (2015). Reflection in teacher education: Issues emerging from a review of
current literature. Reflective Practice, 16(1), 123–141.
doi:10.1080/14623943.2014.982525
Berger, B. K. (2014). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of
strategic employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public
Relations, 1(1), 1–17.
Bevan, B., Ryoo, J., & Shea, M. (2017). What if? Building creative cultures for STEM making
and learning. Afterschool Matters, 25, 1–8.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

163
Bicer, A., Boedeker, P., Kopparla, M., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2015, October).
Comparing students’ mathematics achievement by their school types: Inclusive STEM
schools that implemented PLTW curriculum with inclusive STEM schools that did not
implement PLTW. Paper presented at 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, El
Paso, TX. doi:10.1109/FIE.2015.7344245
Boebel Toly, V., Blanchette, J. E., Musil, C. M., & Zauszniewski, J. A. (2016). Journaling as
reinforcement for the resourcefulness training intervention in mothers of technology-
dependent children. Applied Nursing Research, 32, 269–274.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(5
th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Borrego, M., & Henderson, C. (2014). Increasing the use of evidence‐based teaching in STEM
higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal of Engineering
Education, 103(2), 220–252.
Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A
discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and
Mathematics, 112(1), 3–11.
Bricker, B. J. (2015). National board certification: The perceived value and renewal rates of
California national board-certified teachers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
California State University San Bernardino, San Bernardino, CA.
Briesch, A. M., Chafouleas, S. M., Neugebauer, S. R., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2013). Assessing
influences on intervention implementation: Revision of the Usage Rating Profile-
Intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 51(1), 81–96.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

164
Brown, B. R. (2016). A case study analysis of minority students’ negotiation of STEM,
racial/ethnic, and graduate student identities (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Purdue
University, West Lafayette, IN.
Brown, T. H., & Mbati, L. S. (2015). Mobile learning: Moving past the myths and embracing the
opportunities. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,
16(2), 115–135.
Burckhardt, C. B. (2017). Mindfulness in the special education classroom: A mixed methods
pilot study of the learning to breathe mindfulness curriculum (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Burke, W. W. (2005). Organization change theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering
Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.
Canning, E. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2015). Teach it, don’t preach it: The differential effects
of directly-communicated and self-generated utility value information. Motivation
Science, 1(1), 47–71.
Capraro, M. M., & Jones, M. (2013). Interdisciplinary STEM project-based learning. In R. M.
Capraro, M. M. Capraro, & J. R. Morgan (Eds.), STEM project-based learning (pp. 51–
58). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. R. (Eds.). (2013). STEM project-based learning:
An integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach.
Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

165
Care, E. Griffin, P., Scoular, C., Awwal, N. & Zoanetti, N. (2015). Collaborative problem-
solving tasks. In P. Griffin & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century
skills: Methods and approach (pp. 85–94). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Melton, M. (2011). STEM. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown
University Center for Education and the Workforce.
Carney, M. B., Brendefur, J. L., Thiede, K., Hughes, G., & Sutton, J. (2016). Statewide
mathematics professional development: Teacher knowledge, self-efficacy, and beliefs.
Educational Policy, 30(4), 539–572.
Chatterji, A. K. (2018). Innovation and American K–12 education. Innovation Policy and the
Economy, 18(1), 27–51.
Chestnutt, C. (2017). Examining elementary mathematics teachers’ knowledge and
implementation of high leverage teaching practices (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.
Chingos, M. M. (2013). Class size and student outcomes: Research and policy implications.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 32(2), 411–438.
Chiu, A., Price, C. A., & Ovrahim, E. (2015, April). Supporting elementary and middle school
STEM education at the whole school level: A review of the literature. Paper presented at
the NARST 2015 Annual Conference, Chicago, IL.
Cilliers, E. J. (2017). The challenge of teaching generation Z. PEOPLE: International Journal of
Social Sciences, 3(1), 188–198.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Connelly, L. M. (2013). Limitation section. Medsurg Nursing, 22(5), 325–325, 336.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

166
Corlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education:
Implications for educating our teachers in the age of innovation. Education and Science,
39(171), 74–85.
Cowan, J., Goldhaber, D., Hayes, K., & Theobald, R. (2016). Missing elements in the discussion
of teacher shortages. Educational Researcher, 45(8), 460–462.
doi:10.3102/0013189X16679145
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crisp, G., Guàrdia, L., & Hillier, M. (2016). Using e-assessment to enhance student learning and
evidence learning outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
Education, 13(18), 1–3.
Cuny, J. (2015). Transforming K-12 computing education: AP® computer science principles.
Association for Computing Machinery Inroads, 6(4), 58–59.
Dasgupta, N., & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics: STEMing the tide and broadening participation in STEM careers. Policy
Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 21–29.
Dawes, L. M. (2018). Informed learning and the ARL framework: What faculty teach and how
students learn. Paper presented at the Georgia International Conference on Information
Literacy, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/gaintlit/2018/2018/1
Daza, S. L. (2013). A promiscuous (feminist) look at grant-science: How colliding imaginaries
shape the practice of NSF policy. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in
Education, 26(5), 580–598. doi:10.1080/09518398.2013.786844
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

167
DeBiase, K. (2016). Teacher preparation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
instruction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). California State University, Long Beach,
CA.
Dee, T. S., & Goldhaber, D. (2017). Understanding and addressing teacher shortages in the
United States (Policy Proposal 2017-05). Washington, D.C.: The Hamilton Project,
Brookings.
Desimone, L. M. (2011). A primer on effective professional development. Phi Delta Kappan,
92(6), 68–71. doi:10.1177/003172171109200616
Diekman, A. B., & Benson-Greenwald, T. M. (2018). Fixing STEM workforce and teacher
shortages: How goal congruity can inform individuals and institutions. Policy Insights
from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5(1), 11–18. doi:10.1177/2372732217747889
Ding, D., Guan, C., & Yu, Y. (2017). Game-based learning in tertiary education: A new learning
experience for the Generation Z. International Journal of Information and Education
Technology, 7(2), 148–152.
Dowd, A. C., & Shieh, L. T. (2013). Community college financing: Equity, efficiency, and
accountability. In The NEA Almanac of Higher Education (pp. 37–65). Washington,
D.C.: National Education Association.
Dubois Baber, L. (2015). Considering the interest-convergence dilemma in STEM education.
The Review of Higher Education, 38(2), 251–270. doi:10.1353/rhe.2015.0004
Duffin, L. C., Starling, M. P., Day, M. M., & Cribbs, J. D. (2016). The effects of a consumer
chemistry intervention on urban at‐risk high school students’ performance, utility value,
and intentions to pursue STEM. School Science and Mathematics, 116(7), 356–365.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

168
Durik, A. M., Shechter, O. G., Noh, M., Rozek, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2015). What if I
can’t? Success expectancies moderate the effects of utility value information on
situational interest and performance. Motivation and Emotion, 39(1), 104–118.
Dutta, V., & Sahney, S. (2016). School leadership and its impact on student achievement: The
mediating role of school climate and teacher job satisfaction. International Journal of
Educational Management, 30(6), 941–958.
Eberle, J., Lund, K., Tchounikine, P., & Fischer, F. (Eds.). (2016). Grand challenge problems in
technology-enhanced learning II: MOOCs and beyond. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Ejiwale, J. A. (2013). Barriers to successful implementation of STEM education. Journal of
Education and Learning (EduLearn), 7(2), 63–74.
Ekanayake, S. Y., & Wishart, J. (2015). Integrating mobile phones into teaching and learning: A
case study of teacher training through professional development workshops. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 173–189.
Epstein, D., & Miller, R. (2011). Slow off the mark: Elementary school teachers and the crisis in
science, technology, engineering, and math education. Washington, D.C.: Center for
American Progress. Retrieved from
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/reports/2011/05/04/9680/slow-off-
the-mark/
Ericson, B., Adrion, W. R., Fall, R., & Guzdial, M. (2016). State-based progress towards
computer science for all. ACM Inroads, 7(4), 57–60.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

169
Evers, A. T., van der Heijden, B. I., Kreijns, K., & Vermeulen, M. (2016). Job demands, job
resources, and flexible competence: The mediating role of teachers’ professional
development at work. Journal of Career Development, 43(3), 227–243.
Fayer, S., Lacey, A., & Watson, A. (2017). STEM occupations: Past, present, and future
(Spotlight on Statistics). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Feinstein, N. W., & Meshoulam, D. (2014). Science for what public? Addressing equity in
American science museums and science centers. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 51(3), 368–394.
Foley, A. R., & Masingila, J. O. (2014). Building capacity: Challenges and opportunities in large
class pedagogy (LCP) in Sub-Saharan Africa. Higher Education, 67(6), 797–808.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56.
Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2015). Toward the development of a metacognition construct for
communities of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 66–71.
Gaudreault, K. L., & Woods, A. M. (2012). The benefits of pursuing national board certification
for physical education teachers. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,
83(8), 49–52.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers (4
th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Glisson, C. (2015). The role of organizational culture and climate in innovation and
effectiveness. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance,
39(4), 245–250.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

170
Golden, D. (2006, November 13). Colleges, accreditors seek better ways to measure learning.
Wall Street Journal, B1, B2.
Goldhaber, D., Krieg, J., Theobald, R., & Brown, N. (2015). Refueling the STEM and special
education teacher pipelines. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(4), 56–62.
Gomes, I., Coimbra, J. L., & Menezes, I. (2017). Psychological empowerment as a predictor of
quality in training. The Journal of Quality in Education, 2(2).
Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) education: A primer (R42642). Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research
Service. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf
Goodpaster, K. P., Adedokun, O. A., & Weaver, G. C. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of rural
STEM teaching: Implications for rural teacher retention. Rural Educator, 33(3), 9–22.
Grabowsky, A. (2015). Library instruction in communication disorders: Which databases should
be prioritized? Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 79.
doi:10.5062/F4707ZFB
Guzey, S. S., Moore, T., & Harwell, M. (2016). Building up STEM: An analysis of teacher-
developed engineering designed-based STEM integration curricular materials. Journal of
Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 6(1), 2. doi:10.7771/2157-9288.1129
Guzey, S. S., Tank, K., Wang, H. H., Roehrig, G., & Moore, T. (2014). A high‐quality
professional development for teachers of grades 3–6 for implementing engineering into
classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 114(3), 139–149.
Hall, A., & Miro, D. (2016). A study of student engagement in project‐based learning across
multiple approaches to STEM education programs. School Science and Mathematics,
116(6), 310–319.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

171
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.
Han, S., Yalvac, B., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2013) In-service teachers’
implementation and understanding of STEM project-based learning. Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 63–76.
Hansen, F., Smith, M., & Hansen, R. B. (2002). Rewards and recognition in employee
motivation. Compensation & Benefits Review, 34(5), 64–72.
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Herschbach, D. R. (2011). The STEM initiative: Constraints and challenges. Journal of STEM
Teacher Education, 48(1), 96–122.
Hesse, F., Care, E., Buder, J., Sassenberg, K., & Griffin, P. (2015). A framework for teachable
collaborative problem-solving skills. In P. Griffin & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and
teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach (pp. 37–46). Dordrecht,
Netherlands: Springer.
Hill, J. G., & Gruber, K. J. (2011). Education and certification qualifications of
departmentalized public high school-level teachers of core subjects: Evidence from the
2007-08 schools and staffing survey (NCES 2001-317). Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Zosh, J. M., Golinkoff, R. M., Gray, J. H., Robb, M. B., & Kaufman, J. (2015).
Putting education in “educational” apps: Lessons from the science of learning.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(1), 3–34.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

172
Hodges, C. B., Gale, J., & Meng, A. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy during the implementation of
a problem-based science curriculum. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher
Education, 16(4), 434–451.
Hollins, E. R. (2011). Teacher preparation for quality teaching. Journal of Teacher Education,
62(4), 395–407. doi:10.1177/0022487111409415
Holstein, K. A., & Keene, K. A. (2013). The complexities and challenges associated with the
implementation of a STEM curriculum. Teacher Education and Practice, 26(4), 616–
636.
Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to
instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3),
774–786.
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12
education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, D.C.: National
Academies Press.
Hossain, M., & Robinson, M. G. (2012). How to motivate US students to pursue STEM careers.
US-China Education Review, A(4), 442–451.
Hu, H., & Garimella, U. (2014). iPads for STEM teachers: A case study on perceived usefulness,
perceived proficiency, intention to adopt, and integration in K-12 instruction. Journal of
Educational Technology Development and Exchange (JETDE), 7(1), 49–66.
Hulleman, C. S., Kosovich, J. J., Barron, K. E., & Daniel, D. B. (2017). Making connections:
Replicating and extending the utility value intervention in the classroom. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 109(3), 387–404.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

173
Hussar, W. J., & Bailey, T. M. (2017). Projections of education statistics to 2025 (NCES 2017-
019). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics.
Hutchison, L. F. (2012). Addressing the STEM teacher shortage in American schools: Ways to
recruit and retain effective STEM teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 34(5), 541–550.
Ingersoll, R., Merrill, L., & Owens, C. (2017). A quarter century of changes in the elementary
and secondary teaching force: From 1987 to 2012 (NCES 2017-092). Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Jackson, D. (2015). Employability skill development in work-integrated learning: Barriers and
best practice. Studies in Higher Education, 40(2), 350–367.
doi:10.1080/03075079.2013.842221
Jeffery, T. D., McCollough, C. A., & Moore, K. (2016). Impact of collaborative teaching on K-
12 mathematics and science learning. The Journal of the Effective Schools Project, 23,
37–44.
Jenkins, J. S., Bugeja, A. D., & Barber, L. K. (2014). More content or more policy? A closer
look at syllabus detail, instructor gender, and perceptions of instructor effectiveness.
College Teaching, 62(4), 129–135.
Johnson, C. C. (2013). Educational turbulence: The influence of macro and micro-policy on
science education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(4), 693–715.
Karam, R., Pane, J. F., Griffin, B. A., Robyn, A., Phillips, A., & Daugherty, L. (2017).
Examining the implementation of technology-based blended algebra I curriculum at
scale. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(2), 399–425.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

174
Keith, K. (2018). Case study: Exploring the implementation of an integrated STEM curriculum
program in elementary first grade classes (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Concordia
University, Portland, OR.
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education.
International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 1–11.
Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science
Education International, 25(3), 246–258.
Kezar, A. (2001). Research-based principles of change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and conceptualizations.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 113–123.
Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote
elementary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching.
Computers & Education, 91, 14–31.
Kirkpatrick, J., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Four levels of training evaluation. Alexandria, VA:
ATD Press.
Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends
in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183.
Koch, L. C., Niesz, T., & McCarthy, H. (2014). Understanding and reporting qualitative
research: An analytical review and recommendations for submitting authors.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 57(3), 131–143.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

175
Krasnoff, B. (2015). What the research says about class size, professional development, and
recruitment, induction, and retention of highly qualified teachers: A compendium of the
evidence on Title II, Part A, program-funded strategies. Portland, OR: Northwest
Comprehensive Center.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Larson, L. M., Pesch, K. M., Surapaneni, S., Bonitz, V. S., Wu, T. F., & Werbel, W. (2015).
Predicting graduation: The role of mathematics/science self-efficacy. Journal of Career
Assessment, 23(3), 399–409. doi:10.1177/1069072714547322
Lawrence-Fowler, W. A., Grabowski, L. M., & Reilly, C. F. (2015, October). Bridging the
divide: Strategies for college to career readiness in computer science. Paper presented at
the 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, El Paso, TX.
doi:10.1109/FIE.2015.7344317
Lee, J., Lim, W., & Kim, H. (2016). Lesson planning: How do pre-service teachers benefit from
examining lesson plans with mathematics teaching practices as an analytical lens?
Education of Primary School Mathematics, 19, 211–222.
doi:10.7468/jksmec.2016.19.3.211.
Lesseig, K., Nelson, T. H., Slavit, D., & Seidel, R. A. (2016). Supporting middle school
teachers’ implementation of STEM design challenges. School Science and Mathematics,
116(4), 177–188.
Lo, S. M., Larsen, V. M., & Yee, A. T. (2016). A two dimensional and non-hierarchical
framework of Bloom’s taxonomy for biology. The Federation of American Societies for
Experiential Biology Journal, 30(Supplement 1).
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

176
Lumadi, M. W. (2014). Exploring factors faced by teachers in curriculum implementation.
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(6), 171.
Maguth, B. M. (2012). In defense of the social studies: Social studies programs in STEM
education. Social Studies Research & Practice, 7(2), 65–90.
Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2017). Curriculum implementation in science education. In K. S. Taber &
B. Akpan (Eds.), Science education (pp. 199–210). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
Martin, L. E., & Mulvihill, T. M. (2016). Voices in education: Teacher shortage: Myth or
reality? The Teacher Educator, 51(3), 175–184. doi:10.1080/08878730.2016.1177427
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2006) The effect of general relevance
instructions on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. The Journal of
Experimental Education, 74(4), 291–310, doi:10.3200/JEXE.74.4.291-310
McFadden, J. R., & Roehrig, G. H. (2017). Exploring teacher design team endeavors while
creating an elementary-focused STEM-integrated curriculum. International Journal of
STEM education, 4(21), 1–22.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, L. B. (2017). Review of journaling as a teaching and learning strategy. Teaching and
Learning in Nursing, 12(1), 39–42.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

177
Mödritscher, F., Luengo, V., Law, E. L. C., Hoppe, H. U., & Stegmann, K. (2016). Grand
Challenge Problem 8: Interactive learning analytics: From accountability to ‘opportunity
management’ in a multi-actor perspective. In J. Eberle, K. Lund, P. Tchounikine, & F.
Fischer (Eds.), Grand challenge problems in technology-enhanced learning II: MOOCs
and beyond (pp. 39–44). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Moran, J., & Brightman, B. (2000). Leading organizational change. Journal of Workplace
Learning Employee Counseling Today, 12(2), 66–74.
Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM
perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for
elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157–168.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (n.d.). National Board certification.
Arlington, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nbpts.org/national-board-certification
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2013). Women, minorities, and persons
with disabilities in science and engineering (Special Report NSF 13-304). Alexandria,
VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching
for America’s future. New York, NY: Author.
Nedungadi, P., Raman, R., & McGregor, M. (2013, October). Enhanced STEM learning with
online Labs: Empirical study comparing physical labs, tablets and desktops. Paper
presented at 2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Oklahoma City, OK.
doi:10.1109/FIE.2013.6685106
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

178
Noonan, R. (2017). STEM Jobs: 2017 update (ESA Issue Brief 02-17). Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Office of the Chief
Economist.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership, theory, and practice (7
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Odili, J. N., Ebisine, S. S., & Ajuar, H. N. (2011). Teachers’ involvement in implementing the
basic science and technology curriculum of the nine-year basic education. US-China
Education Review, B(5), 636–642.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Palmer, D., Dixon, J., & Archer, J. (2015). Changes in science teaching self-efficacy among
primary teacher education students. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(12),
27–40.
Paris, M., Hu, J., Koo, V., Marshall, S., & Musacchia, G. (2016, April). Increasing confidence in
evidence-based information gathering for first year AuD students. Paper presented at
Audiology Now! Convention 2016, Phoenix, AZ.
Parry, E. A. (2015, Spring). The “E” in STEM: Explicitly teaching engineering. Alpharetta, GA:
AdvancED. Retrieved from http://www.advanc-ed.org/source/e-stem-explicitly-teaching-
engineering
Patton, K., Parker, M., & Tannehill, D. (2015). Helping teachers help themselves: Professional
development that makes a difference. NASSP Bulletin, 99(1), 26–42.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

179
Pedaste, M., Lazonder, A., Raes, A., Wajeman, C., Moore, E., & Girault, I. (2016). Grand
Challenge Problem 3: Empowering science teachers using technology-enhanced
scaffolding to improve inquiry learning. In J. Eberle, K. Lund, P. Tchounikine, & F.
Fischer (Eds.), Grand challenge problems in technology-enhanced learning II: MOOCs
and beyond (pp. 17–20). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Peters-Burton, E. E., Lynch, S. J., Behrend, T. S., & Means, B. B. (2014). Inclusive STEM high
school design: 10 critical components. Theory Into Practice, 53(1), 64–71.
Pfitzner-Eden, F. (2016). Why do I feel more confident? Bandura’s sources predict preservice
teachers’ latent changes in teacher self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1486.
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01486
Piasta, S. B., Justice, L. M., McGinty, A., Mashburn, A., & Slocum, L. (2015). A comprehensive
examination of preschool teachers’ implementation fidelity when using a supplemental
language and literacy curriculum. Child & Youth Care Forum, 44(5). 731–755.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Rabenberg, T. A. (2013). Middle school girls’ STEM education: Using teacher influences,
parent encouragement, peer influences, and self-efficacy to predict confidence and
interest in math and science (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Drake University, Des
Moines, IA.
Radmehr, F., & Drake, M. (2018). An assessment-based model for exploring the solving of
mathematical problems: Utilizing revised Bloom’s taxonomy and facets of
metacognition. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 59, 41–51.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

180
Ramirez, T. V. (2017). On pedagogy of personality assessment: Application of Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99(2), 146–
152.
Retnawati, H., Hadi, S., & Nugraha, A. C. (2016). Vocational high school teachers’ difficulties
in implementing the assessment in curriculum 2013 in Yogyakarta Province of Indonesia.
International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 33–48.
Reuter, R., Jahn, S., Figas, P., Bartel, A., Mottok, J., & Hagel, G. (2018, June). Learning tasks
for software engineering education: An exemplary development of learning tasks for
software engineering based on didactic function and knowledge type. Paper presented at
the 3
rd
European Conference of Software Engineering Education, Seeon/Bavaria,
Germany. doi:10.1145/3209087.3209097
Rinke, C. R., Gladstone‐Brown, W., Kinlaw, C. R., & Cappiello, J. (2016). Characterizing
STEM teacher education: Affordances and constraints of explicit STEM preparation for
elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 116(6), 300–309.
Roberts, J. (2010). Designing incentives in organizations. Journal of Institutional Economics,
6(1), 125–132.
Ross, M., Perkins, H., & Bodey, K. (2016). Academic motivation and information literacy self-
efficacy: The importance of a simple desire to know. Library & Information Science
Research, 38(1), 2–9.
Rothwell, J. (2013, June). The hidden STEM economy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings
Institution. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-hidden-stem-
economy/
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

181
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Ruiz-Lopez, M., Rodriguez-Garcia, M., Purificacion-Gonzales, V., Marquez-Cav, M., Garcia-
Mateos, M., Ruiz-Ruiz, B., & Herrera-Sanchez, E. (2015). The use of reflective
journaling as a learning strategy during the clinical rotations of students from the faculty
of health sciences: An action-research study. Nurse Education Today, 35, 26–32.
Sahin, A., & Top, N. (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.
Samson, M. K., & Charles, M. M. (2018). Challenges facing secondary school principals in the
implementation of the national curriculum statements in Capricorn District of the
Limpopo Province. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 2(1), 60–
70.
Sawchuk, S. (2015, March 31). Board-certified teachers more effective, new studies affirm.
Education Week. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/04/01/board-
certified-teachers-more-effective-new-studies-affirm.html
Schein, E. H. (2004). The concept of organizational culture: Why bother? In E. H. Schein (Ed.),
Organizational culture and leadership (3
rd
ed., pp. 3–24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey
Bass.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

182
Schmidt, M., & Fulton, L. (2016). Transforming a traditional inquiry-based science unit into a
STEM unit for elementary pre-service teachers: A view from the trenches. Journal of
Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 302–315.
Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 2(4), 7–19.
Schott, M., Scheib, J., Long, N., Fleming, K., Benne, K., & Brackney, L. (2012). Progress on
enabling an interactive conversation between commercial building occupants and their
building to improve comfort and energy efficiency (NREL/CP-5500-55197). Golden, CO:
National Renewable Energy Lab.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2016). Self-efficacy theory in education. In K. R. Wentzel
& D. B. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 34–54). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Schwab, K., Sala-i-Martin, X., & Greenhill, R. (2011). The global competitiveness report, 2011–
2012. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GCR_Report_2011-12.pdf
Sellars, M. (2017). Reflective practice for teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2017). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies
from a teacher’s perspective. Education Information Technology, 22(2), 469–495.
doi:10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0
Sharan, Y. (2015). Meaningful learning in the cooperative classroom. Education 3-13, 43(1), 83–
94.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

183
Sharples, J., Webster, R., & Blatchford, P. (2015). Making best use of teaching assistants
(Guidance report). London, UK: Education Endowment Foundation.
Sharples, M. (2016). A challenge to enhance the system of education — a comment from a
researcher perspective. In J. Eberle, K. Lund, P. Tchounikine, & F. Fischer (Eds.), Grand
challenge problems in technology-enhanced learning II: MOOCs and beyond (pp. 39–
44). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Sherman, D., Li, Y., Darwin, M., Taylor, S., & Song, M. (2017). Final report of the impacts of
the National Math+ Science Initiative’s (NMSI’s) College Readiness Program on high
school students’ outcomes. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research.
Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education
and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to
STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(13), 1–16.
doi:10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1
Shuls, J. V., & Trivitt, J. R. (2015). Teacher qualifications and productivity in secondary skills.
Journal of School Choice, 9(1), 49–70. doi:10.1080/15582159.2015.998964
Sibuma, B., Wunnava, S., John, M.-S., Anggoro, F., & Dubosarsky, M. (2018, March). The
impact of an integrated Pre-K STEM curriculum on teachers’ engineering content
knowledge, self-efficacy, and teaching practices. Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE
Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC), Princeton, NJ.
doi:10.1109/ISECon.2018.8340489
Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. (2013). Scope, limitations, and delimitations. Retrieved from
http://dissertationrecipes.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/04/limitationscopedelimitation1.pdf
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

184
Smith, M. K., Vinson, E. L., Smith, J. A., Lewin, J. D., & Stetzer, M. R. (2014). A campus-wide
study of STEM courses: New perspectives on teaching practices and perceptions. CBE —
Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 624–635.
Spruce, R., & Bol, L. (2015). Teacher beliefs, knowledge, and practice of self-regulated learning.
Metacognition and Learning, 10(2), 245–277.
Stains, M., & Vickrey, T. (2017). Fidelity of implementation: An overlooked yet critical
construct to establish effectiveness of evidence-based instructional practices. CBE — Life
Sciences Education, 16(1).
Stansell, A., Tyler-Wood, T., & Austin, S. (2016). The development of a transmedia STEM
curriculum: Implications for mathematics education. Journal of Mathematics Education,
9(2), 72–80.
Stevenson, H. J. (2014). Myths and motives behind STEM (science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics) education and STEM-worker shortage narrative. Issues in Teacher
Education, 23(1), 133–146.
Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated
STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER),
2(1), 28–34.
Stokes, D., Evans, P., & Craig, C. (2017). Developing STEM teachers through both informal and
formal learning experiences. Salamanca, Spain: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2015). Factors influencing Black males’ preparation for college and success in
STEM majors: A mixed methods study. Western Journal of Black Studies, 39(1), 45–63.
Stronge, J. H. (2018). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

185
Susilanas, R., Asra, A., & Herlina, H. (2018). The contribution of the self-efficacy of curriculum
development team and curriculum document quality to the implementation of diversified
curriculum in Indonesia. MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences,
2(3), 31–40.
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016, September 15). A coming crisis
in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the U.S. Palo Alto, CA: Learning
Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming-crisis-
teaching-brief
Tai, R. H. (2012). An examination of the research literature on Project Lead The Way.
Indianapolis, IN: Project Lead The Way.
Takahashi, A. (2014). Supporting the effective implementation of a new mathematics
curriculum: A case study of school-based lesson study at a Japanese public elementary
school. In I. Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp.
417-441). New York, NY: Springer.
Tam, A. C. F. (2015). The role of a professional learning community in teacher change: A
perspective from beliefs and practices. Teachers and Teaching, 21(1), 22–43.
Tan, A. L., & Leong, W. F. (2014). Mapping curriculum innovation in STEM schools to
assessment requirements: Tensions and dilemmas. Theory Into Practice, 53(1), 11–17.
Tan, E., Calabrese Barton, A., Kang, H., & O’Neill, T. (2013). Desiring a career in STEM‐
related fields: How middle school girls articulate and negotiate identities‐in‐practice in
science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(10), 1143–1179.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

186
Taylor, J. A., Getty, S. R., Kowalski, S. M., Wilson, C. D., Carlson, J., & Van Scotter, P. (2015).
An efficacy trial of research-based curriculum materials with curriculum-based
professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 984–1017.
Thompson, D., Bell, T., Andreae, P., & Robins, A. (2013, March). The role of teachers in
implementing curriculum changes. Paper presented at the 44
th
ACM Technical
Symposium on Computer Science Education, Denver, CO.
doi:10.1145/2445196.2445272
Valtorta, C. G., & Berland, L. K. (2015). Math, science, and engineering integration in a high
school engineering course: A qualitative study. Journal of Pre-College Engineering
Education Research (J-PEER), 5(1), 15–29.
Van den Bergh, L., Ros, A., & Beijaard, D. (2014). Improving teacher feedback during active
learning: Effects of a professional development program. American Educational
Research Journal, 51(4), 772–809.
van der Heijden, H. R. M. A., Geldens, J. J. M., Beijaard, D., & Popeijus, H. L. (2015).
Characteristics of teachers as change agents. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 681–699.
Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-
based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of
Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511.
Verenna, A. A., Noble, K. A., Pearson, H. E., & Miller, S. M. (2018). Role of comprehension on
performance at higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy: Findings from assessments of
healthcare professional students. Anatomical Sciences Education, 11(5), 433–444.
Walker, A. E., Leary, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Ertmer, P. A. (Eds.). (2015). Essential readings
in problem-based learning. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

187
Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher
perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-
PEER), 1(2), 1–13.
Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future
directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 119–140.
Wasserman, N. H., & Rossi, D. (2015). Mathematics and science teachers’ use of and confidence
in empirical reasoning: Implications for STEM teacher preparation. School Science and
Mathematics, 115(1), 22–34.
Wasson, B., Hanson, C., & Mor, Y. (2016). Grand Challenge Problem 11: Empowering teachers
with student data. In J. Eberle, K. Lund, P. Tchounikine, & F. Fischer (Eds.), Grand
challenge problems in technology-enhanced learning II: MOOCs and beyond (pp. 55–
58). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-
continent Research for Education and Learning.
Webster, R., Blatchford, P., & Russell, A. (2013). Challenging and changing how schools use
teaching assistants: Findings from the Effective Deployment of Teaching Assistants
project. School Leadership & Management, 33(1), 78–96.
White, C., McCollum, M., Bradley, E., Roy, P., Yoon, M., Martindale, J., & Worden, M. K.
(2015). Challenges to engaging medical students in a flipped classroom model. Medical
Science Educator, 25(3), 219–222.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

188
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. (2009, April 27). About PCAST.
Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast/about
Wiek, A., Xiong, A., Brundiers, K., & van der Leeuw, S. (2013). Integrating problem- and
project-based learning into sustainability programs: A case study of the school of
sustainability at Arizona State University. International Journal of Sustainability in
Higher Education, 15(4), 431–449. doi:10.1108/IJSHE-02-2013-0013
Wilson, D. M., Bates, R., Scott, E., Painter, S. M., & Shaffer, J. (2015). Differences in self-
efficacy among women and minorities in STEM. Journal of Women and Minorities in
Science and Engineering, 21(1), 27–45.
Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts
classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality.
Computers & Education, 100, 94–109.
Wilson, M. (2014). Critical reflection on authentic leadership and school leader development
from a virtue ethical perspective. Educational Review, 66(4), 482–496.
Wolf, Z. R., Czekanski, K. E., & Dillon, P. M. (2013). Course syllabi: Components and
outcomes assessment. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 4(1), 100–107.
Wright, A., Moss, P., Dennis, D., Harrold, M., Levy, S., Furness, A. L., & Reubenson, A. (2018).
The influence of a full-time, immersive simulation-based clinical placement on
physiotherapy student confidence during the transition to clinical practice. Advances in
Simulation, 3(3), 1–10. doi:10.1186/s41077-018-0062-9
Wulf, W. A. (1998). Diversity in engineering. The Bridge, 28(4). Washington, D.C.: National
Academy of Engineering.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

189
Yang, J., Lee, Y., Park, S., Wong-Ratcliff, M., Ahangar, R., & Mundy, M. (2015). Discovering
the needs assessment of qualified STEM teachers for the high-need schools in south
Texas. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 16(4), 55–60.
Yanuarti, E., & Treagust, D. F. (2015, October). Reflective teaching practice: Teachers’
perspectives in an Indonesian context. Paper presented at 1st UPI International
Conference on Sociology Education, Bandung, Indonesia.
Zielezinski, M. B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2016). Promising practices: A literature review of
technology use by underserved students. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity
Policy in Education.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

190
APPENDIX A
RECRUITMENT LETTER
My name is Saundra Johnson Austin and as a doctoral student in Organizational Change and
Leadership program at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education. I
invite you to contribute to a study that explores the influence of teachers on STEM Curricular
Implementation. Your participation will include being observed in your classroom and a
personal interview with you at a convenient time. You are eligible to participate in the study
because you are currently a teacher at Eastfield STEM Academy.

Your involvement in this study is voluntary; the alternative is not to participate. If you decide to
participate, you will be given an information sheet about the study, participate in a classroom
observation, followed by an interview that will take approximately 30 minutes. All participants
who participate in the observation and the interview will receive a $20 gift card.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

191
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT/INFORMATION SHEET
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education Organizational Change and Leadership
Waite Phillips Hall, 3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

The Challenges Teachers Face Effectively Implementing STEM Curricula:
An Evaluation Study

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Saundra Johnson Austin and Dr.
Monique C. Datta at the University of Southern California, because you are a teacher at Eastfield
STEM Academy. There is no funding supporting this study. Your participation is voluntary.
You should read the information below and ask questions about anything you do not understand
before deciding whether to participate.

Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. You may also decide to discuss
participation with your family or friends. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign
this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effective implementation of 100% of the STEM
curricula at the Eastfield STEM Academy for the summer 2018 session.

STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to participate in the following
activities:

Observations:
You are being asked to be observed during the class period when the STEM curriculum is being
used by your students. This is a 75- or 85-minute period. I will not be addressing the class but
ask that you inform the students that the observation is being recorded for research purposes. At
the beginning of the observation I will ask to review your lesson plan and syllabus for the day.

Interviews:
The interview is approximately 30 minutes and will take place in a quiet setting where you
cannot be disturbed. You will be asked to sign a consent form and I will seek your permission to
record the interview for research purposes.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks or discomforts to your participation.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

192
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There are not anticipated benefits to your participation. We hope that this study will help
researchers learn more about what are teacher influences in implementing science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
For your participation, you will receive a $20 gift card at the conclusion of the observation and
interview.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Your participation will remain confidential and the information that you share will not contain
any identifiers to you. The researcher will store the data collected from the observation and
interviews on a password-protected computer in a secure office. The data files will be destroyed
three years after the completion of the survey.

The individual interviews will be facilitated by the researcher. Only the professional transcriber
and the researcher will have access to the audio recordings. The transcripts will remain
confidential, stored on a password-protected computer in a secure office, and will be destroyed
after they are transcribed.

We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we
are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The members
of the research team, the funding agency and the University of Southern California’s Human
Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

CERTIFICATE OF CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential,
except if necessary, to protect your rights or welfare (for example, if you are injured and need
emergency care). A Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained from the Federal
Government for this study to help protect your privacy. This certificate means that the
researchers can resist the release of information about your participation to people who are not
connected with the study, including courts. The Certificate of Confidentiality will not be used to
prevent disclosure to local authorities of child abuse and neglect, or harm to self or others.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or
remedies because of your participation in this research study.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

193
ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
If you do not want to participate in this study, you will not be visited in your classroom for an
observation and you will not be interviewed. The researcher will not record any information
about you.

EMERGENCY CARE AND COMPENSATION FOR INJURY
If you are injured as a direct result of research procedures you will receive medical treatment;
however, you or your insurance will be responsible for the cost. The University of Southern
California does not provide any monetary compensation for injury.

INVESTIGATOR ’S CONTACT INFORMATION
Saundra Johnson Austin Dr. Monique C. Datta
saundraj@usc.edu mdatta@usc.edu
574-261-5876

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT — IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT (If the participant is 14 years or older)

I have read the information provided above, I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

____________________________________________
Name of Participant

____________________________________________ _____________________________
Signature of Participant Date

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

194
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Introduction

Thank you for agreeing to work with me on my evaluation study. I know that you are busy and I
appreciate the time you are investing to help me with my research. I am a doctoral candidate at
the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education Organizational Change and
Leadership program.

I am interested in understanding how you are implementing STEM curriculum in your classroom
for the Eastfield STEM Academy. I will be observing your colleagues and interviewing them as
well.

I want to assure you I am strictly acting as a researcher in our time together today. This means
that the nature of my questions is not evaluative in any manner. I will not be making any
judgements relative to how you are performing in effectively implementing STEM curriculum.
Also, this interview is confidential. Your name and your perspectives will not be shared with
anyone.

The data for this study will be compiled into a final report and dissertation, but none of the data
will be directly attributed to you. I will be using a pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and
will ensure that you are not identified in any of the data in the final report. I will provide a copy
of the final report to you, if you have any interest in reviewing my findings. The data will be
stored in a password protected computer for three years.

If you do not have any questions about the purpose of my interview with you today, I would like
to get started. I would like to record our conversation today, so I do not miss any key points and
insights that you share with me. However, if you are uncomfortable with our interview being
recorded, I will not record the interview because I do not want the recording to be a hindrance to
what you might be willing to share. I would also like to follow up with you to review my notes
and confirm your input.

The purpose of this evaluation study is to understand the challenges teachers face in effectively
implementing STEM curriculum. To guide the study the following questions will be addressed:

1. To what extent is the Eastfield STEM Academy meeting its organizational goal to
effectively implement 100% of the STEM curricula?
2. What are the teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related
to achieving the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of teachers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?

Before we proceed with the interview, I would like to ask you a few questions about your
background and experience.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

195
I would like to ask you some questions about your education and background experience.

1. What did you earn your bachelor’s degree in? Do you have a master’s degree? If so, in
what? ________________________________________________________________

2. Are you certified in one subject or two? Which subjects?
a. _______________________________________________________________

3. How long have you been teaching?
a. Less than one year
b. 1-3 years
c. 4-6 years
d. 7-10 years
e. over 10 years

4. How long have you been teaching at Eastfield STEM Academy?
a. Less than one year
b. 1-3 years
c. 4-6 years
d. 7-10 years
e. over 10 years

I would like to ask you some questions about your preparation of STEM curriculum
implementation.

5. Describe the professional development training that you received in STEM education.
How often have you had professional training in STEM education? (O-Cultural Setting
Influence 1)

6. Describe the professional development training that you received for effectively
implementing STEM curriculum in your classroom? How often have you had
professional development training for STEM curriculum? Is there anything else that you
wish you had? (O-Cultural Setting Influence 2)

7. How have you been supported during the implementation process? Was professional
development offered? If so, when is it being offered? Is it offered during school hours or
after school or both? Is funding available to further your professional development? (O-
Cultural Model Influence 1)

I would like to ask you questions about how your knowledge of STEM curriculum.

8. How would you describe STEM curriculum at Eastfield STEM Academy? What do you
like the most about it? What do you like the least about it? Have the skills and
competencies of the students improved? In what way? (K-Factual)

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

196
9. What strategies worked best during implementation of the STEM curriculum? What
challenges did you face during the implementation? Were you able to mitigate those
challenges? If so, please explain how this was done. (K-Conceptual)

10. Explain the process that you go through to develop your lesson plans. (K-Procedural)

I would like to ask you some questions about your motivation to implement STEM curriculum.

11. How comfortable are you now with implementing STEM curriculum in your classroom
compared to your earlier involvement? What additional support or resources would help
you feel equipped? What has changed over time and what accounts for that change? (K-
Metacognitive)

12. How useful do you believe STEM curriculum has been in your classroom? What are
other teachers at Eastfield STEM Academy saying about the program? What are your
thoughts about the program? (M-Self Efficacy)

13. The word value is described as usefulness. How would you describe the value in
implementing STEM curricula at Eastfield STEM Academy? (M-Utility Value)

Closing Question

Is there anything else you would like to add before we end our conversation?

Closing, Thank You, Follow Up

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me today. I really appreciate your willingness to
participate in my evaluation study and supporting my research. In appreciation of your time I
would like to present you with at $20 gift card.

Would you mind a follow up email, if I have any additional questions? Thank you again for
your participation.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

197
APPENDIX D
OBSERVATION PROTOCOL
Hello,

My name is Saundra Johnson Austin and I am a doctoral candidate in the Organizational Change
and Leadership Program at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education.

I am currently conducting an evaluation study on the teachers at the Eastfield STEM Academy.

The purpose of the evaluation to understand the challenges that teachers face in effectively
implementing STEM curricula.

The purpose of this observation is to document and understand how teachers currently
implement STEM curricula.

I would like a copy of your lesson plan, syllabus, or other documents to use as a guide during the
observation. I will observe the lesson objective and how it is communicated to students. Also,
the observation will include details of the activities taking place in the classroom and how the
teacher facilitates student learning.

The information that you provide will serve to inform future research on how to implement
STEM curricula.

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

198
Date of Observation: __________________ Start Time: _________ End Time: _________
Teacher ID:__________________________ Female:________ Male: ________
School/University Name: _____________________________________________________
Teaching Grade Level: __________________________ Class Period: __________________
Today’s Lesson Topic: _________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Today’s Learning Objective: ____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Total # Teaching Assistants: _______ # Female Students: _______ # Male Students: _______
# Students in Attendance: __________# Female Students: _______ # Male Students: _______
# 3
rd
Graders: ______ # 4
th
Graders: ______ # 5
th
Graders: ______ # 6
th
Graders: ______
# 7
th
Graders: ______ # 8
th
Graders: ______ # 9
th
Graders: ______ # 10
th
Graders: ______
# 11
th
Graders: ______

1. Learner-Centered
Does the teacher:
□ Challenge the students?
□ Give explanations of what is expected?
□ Give students choice and control?
□ Encourage students to work together?
□ Ask open-ended questions requiring a thoughtful
response from students?
□ Provide material that is interesting and
relevant?
□ Shows respect (knows names, is polite,
etc.?)
□ Provide individual attention to personal
learning styles
□ Encourages students to ask questions
Specific examples of learner centered behavior as checked above:

2. Lesson Planning
Does the teacher:
□ Provide the class with a plan for that class period?
(Either verbally or written outline)
□ Provide a summary of the previous class to lead into
the objective of the day?
□ Come to the class prepared with notes, aides,
equipment needed, etc.?
□ Explain all materials needed for that
class period?
□ Follow a clear format throughout the
class time?
□ Summarizes material presented?
Specific examples of lesson planning behavior as checked above:

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

199
3. Resource-Rich
Does the teacher use:
□ Notes
□ Handouts
□ Whiteboard
□ Videos
□ Computer presentation
□ Demonstrations
□ Textbooks
□ Overheads
□ Other resource materials
Specific examples of resource-rich behavior as checked above:

4. Engaging and Action-Oriented
Does the teacher:
□ Give examples?
□ Ask questions?
□ Provide group/individual activities?
□ Give demonstrations?
□ Checks students’ progress?
□ Confirm students’ completion of tasks?
□ Encourage students to continue working on tasks
outside the classroom?
□ Ask for demonstrations from students?
□ Require problem-solving skills of
learners?
□ Provide assistance when needed and/or
asked?
□ Move about the classroom?
□ Change or adapt their instruction if
students are not responding?
Specific examples of engaging and action-oriented behavior as checked above:

5. Assessment-Drive
Does the teacher:
□ Ask questions to determine students understanding
of material presented?
□ Provide specific encouraging feedback to students on
a frequent basis?
□ Give quizzes and/or exams?
□ Provide additional material if needed?
□ Show interest in students’ feedback?
Specific examples of assessment-driven behavior as checked above:

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

200
APPENDIX E
SUMMARIZED COMPONENTS OF THE OBSERVATION PROTOCOL
1.0 Learner-Centered
Does the teacher:
Observation
Count
Challenge the students 9
Encourage students to ask questions 7
Encourage students to work together 6
Provide materials that are interesting and relevant 6
Show respect (knows names, is polite, etc.) 6
Ask open-ended questions requiring a thoughtful response from students 5
Give explanation of what is expected 5
Give students choice and control 5
Provide individual attention to personal learning styles 3

2.0 Lesson Planning
Does the teacher:
Observation
Count
Provide a summary of the previous class to lead into the objective of the day 5
Explain all materials needed for that class period 5
Follow a clear format throughout the class time? 5
Summarize materials presented? 5
Provide the class with a plan for the class period? (Either verbally or written
outline)
3
Come to the class prepared with notes, aides, equipment needed, etc. 3

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

201
3.0 Resource-Rich
Does the teacher:
Observation
Count
Whiteboard 5
Demonstrations 3
Handouts 2
Notes 1
Videos 1
Computer presentations 1
Other resource materials 1

4.0 Engaging and Action-Oriented
Does the teacher:
Observation
Count
Ask questions 6
Provide group/individual activities 5
Give demonstrations 5
Move about the classroom 5
Check student progress 5
Ask for demonstrations from students 3
Provide assistance when needed and or asked 3
Require problem-solving skills of learners 3
Change or adapt their instruction if students are not responding 3
Encourage students to continue working on tasks outside the classroom 2
Give examples 1

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

202
5.0 Assessment-Driven
Does the teacher:
Observation
Count
Ask questions to determine students understanding of material presented? 7
Show interest in students’ feedback? 7
Provide specific encouraging feedback to students on a frequent basis? 6
Provide additional material if needed? 2
Give quizzes and/or exams? 1

CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IMPLEMENTING STEM

203
APPENDIX F
SAMPLE GROWTH SURVEY
Kirkpatrick
Level Type of Question Sample Question
1 Likert Scale:
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
A Great Deal
How much did participating in professional
development activities impact the implementation of
ESA STEM curricula?
2 Open ended Which of the four objectives for implementing the ESA
STEM curricula challenged you the most?
3 Open ended Now that the debrief has taken place is there anything
else that you would like to share regarding your
teaching experience and the implementation of the ESA
STEM curricula?
4 Rating scale (0-5) What is the likelihood that you will return to ESA
summer 2019?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Teacher perceptions of evaluation policy in Hawaii

PDF

STEM teacher education: An evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation of project based learning implementation in STEM

PDF

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Mathematics, Engineering, Science, Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher a...

PDF

Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher advis...

PDF

Teacher perception of the implementation of the educator effectiveness system

PDF

Sustained mentoring of early childhood education teachers: an innovation study

PDF

The mentorship of instructors and its impact on computer science interest among middle school girls: an evaluation study

PDF

Implementing standards-based grading in the era of common standards: an evaluation study

PDF

STEM industries apprenticeships: organization influences, skill gaps, and challenges facing the 21st-century workforce: an evaluation study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Bridging the empathy gap: a mixed-method approach to evaluating teacher support in bullying prevention and intervention at an urban middle school in India

PDF

Exploration of STEM teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and the organizational influences of culturally inclusive teaching practices

PDF

High attrition rate of preschool teachers in Hong Kong: an evaluation study

PDF

Educator professional development for technology in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Assessing the meaning and value of traditional grading systems: teacher practices and perspectives

PDF

IEP stakeholder communication and collaboration and its effects on student placement

PDF

Teacher diversity training: a qualitative study to examine novice teacher influences

PDF

Addressing systemic challenges in elementary-school teacher preparation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics

Asset Metadata

Creator Austin, Saundra Johnson (author)

Core Title The challenges teachers face effectively implementing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/22/2019

Defense Date 03/04/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag challenges implementing science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) curricula,effective implementation,OAI-PMH Harvest,teachers' influence on implementing STEM curriculum

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique C. (committee chair), Maddox, Anthony B. (committee member), Murphy, Don (committee member)

Creator Email saundraj@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-141140

Unique identifier UC11675669

Identifier etd-AustinSaun-7212.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-141140 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-AustinSaun-7212.pdf

Dmrecord 141140

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Austin, Saundra Johnson

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA