The purpose of this study was to investigate if schools that obtained an AdvancED STEM Certification experienced an effect on student achievement. As political and educational leaders have placed more emphasis on STEM education, the amount of government funding focused on its proliferation has only increased (Uy, 2009). One approach to STEM education is an institutional certification through a state department of education or an independent accrediting agency. Parents often view schools obtaining these certifications as academically superior to their non-STEM
counterparts (Judson, 2014; Rogers-Chapman, 2014; Sahin, 2013). The researcher used a quantitative analysis to compare achievement levels in twenty Georgia elementary
schools that obtained a STEM certification through AdvancED. The researcher compared two years of pre-certification scores from end-of-grade assessments in English Language Arts, mathematics, science, and social studies to scores from two years post-certification to identify any statistically significant difference.
Discussion and Conclusions of the Study
The evidence from this study indicated elementary schools in Georgia that obtained an AdvancED STEM certification did not experience an increase in achievement in any content area. It is the opinion of this researcher that though the criteria for certification is stringent and the standards are lofty, the investments put forth to obtain the certification are not reaping rewards in the classroom in terms of
of resources are often part of planning and preparation in certification efforts. One might conjecture that a measurable effect would have at least been evident in science and mathematics because these content areas are foundational in STEM education; however, no such effect was evident in this study. These findings should be useful for educational leaders as they make informed decisions on how to allocate financial resources to ensure their investments reap an academic return.
Moreover, this study addressed specific gaps in the literature. The body of knowledge was scant in research that focused specifically on STEM achievement at the elementary levels. As the focus on STEM education grows, more school leaders will study the value of completing a STEM certification. This study provided insight that by simply pursuing a STEM certification, an institution cannot be guaranteed a positive academic return. Additionally, the research was limited on studies that examined content areas beyond the traditional STEM disciplines of mathematics and science. The results of this study indicated certification efforts led to no significant increase in achievement in any content area.
Additionally, the literature was sparse in research that examined the effect STEM certifications had on student achievement. The standards an institution must meet to earn such a certification are strenuous and often require a significant amount of resources, focused professional development, and years of pedagogical shifts. It is the opinion of the researcher that many public institutions in the United States, especially in lower
socioeconomic areas, do not have ancillary funds available to invest in policies and educational shifts that will not yield positive academic returns. This study should prove significant to those leaders tasked with making difficult decisions regarding their
judicious allocation of fiscal resources. If the efforts yield little or no academic return, school leaders may choose to direct resources to other avenues.
It is also of value to note that while the researcher analyzed quantitative data, there are numerous qualitative aspects of integrating STEM education and pursuing a STEM certification that may justify the cost and labor. Sanders (2009) corroborated this conjecture by pointing to impacts on academic interest and levels of student motivation. When the core tenets of STEM such as project-based learning, real-world problem- solving, and interdisciplinary learning environment are established within an institution, the curriculum is viewed as more rigorous and academically superior (Judson, 2014; Rogers-Chapman, 2013; Sahin, 2013). The measure and effect of these qualitative elements simply cannot be measured by our current style of standardized assessments. This truth makes it nearly impossible to generate a definitive conclusion as to the true effect of STEM education and efforts to implement it within an institution.
Implications for Practice
The results of this study offer several implications for educational leaders. As the analysis of the assessment scores did not indicate the efforts put forth to obtain an
AdvancED STEM Certification resulted in a positive change in achievement, leaders may use this information to reexamine institutional plans relating to STEM initiatives. To obtain a STEM certification, many schools must enact a high degree of pedagogical and infrastructural shifts. School leaders may use the results from this study to make informed decisions relating to the fiscal feasibility and how or if they should proceed with STEM implementation win their institution.
Though the results of this study stemmed from a quantitative analysis of achievement data, it is evident through the current body of knowledge that positive
qualitative aspects often accompany STEM education efforts (Sanders, 2009). While some school leaders may view the results of this study and feel that pursuing STEM initiatives is not a financially sound decision, they must also understand that not all positive effects will be evident in achievement levels only. School officials should also examine to what extent STEM education changes school culture and shifts the overall atmosphere of learning within an institution. These measures cannot be evaluated solely through quantitative tests such as end-of-year assessments. As previous researchers indicate, a positive effect on student motivation and self-efficacy, leaders should not discount the pursuing of STEM education in their schools simply due to the lack of a statistically significant increase in achievement as measured in standardized test scores. As STEM education is becoming more pervasive, it is imperative that educational leaders either look to redesign standardized assessments to reflect what level students are
engaging in STEM-based skills or develop a separate metric that focuses on measuring these skills specifically. As many of the benefits of STEM education evolve from STEM- based skills such as problem-solving and critical-thinking, it is imperative that we can assess student growth within these skills. Leaders can use results from those metrics coupled with standardized test data to make a significantly more informed and valid decision on the nature and future of STEM education in their institutions.
Recommendations for Future Research
Based on the results of the study and the information found in the review of literature, the researcher has several recommendations for future studies related to the topic of study. As this study analyzed two years of pre-treatment achievement data compared to two years of post-treatment data, it might be of interest to examine the effects of a STEM certification over a larger time span. As it often takes several years to
fully and effectively implement pedagogical shifts, a study in which the researcher examines test data over a three to five-year period could yield different results.
Additionally, the researcher in this study focused on standardized state assessment data. It is possible that by analyzing an alternate form of data, the impact of the
certification would present differently. Just as many factors influence student
achievement, many variables determine the true effect of such a large pedagogical shift in the case of STEM certification. While quantitative student data may not result in a
statistically significant outcome, there are many qualitative aspects to implementing such broad and sweeping changes involving STEM education. It would be of interest to examine the perceptions of students and teachers related to how integrative STEM education alters the learning environment, school culture, and student self-efficacy.
The researcher limited this study to elementary schools in the state of Georgia only. Similar studies focusing on elementary schools in other states would be a positive addition to the body of knowledge. Moreover, the literature is limited in research related to elementary STEM achievement (Judson, 2014). For this reason, any quantitative study focusing on elementary STEM achievement would aide in filling this gap in the literature.
Additionally, the standards and requirements for obtaining an AdvancED STEM certification are rigorous. Meeting these standards require an institution to assess and alter most aspects of their instructional practices, professional development, and to some extent, infrastructure. It would be of interest to select a sample of schools that have obtained this certification and perform a case study to examine the depth to which these institutional changes are received and implemented by faculty and staff.
References
AdvancED. (2018). STEM Certification. Retrieved April 26, 2018, from http://www.advanc- ed.org/about-us
Alumbaugh, K. M. (2015). The Perceptions of Elementary STEM Schools in Missouri (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/openview/4997e4df9137ac836635343a8d0adcd0/1?pq- origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y. (Order No. 10031817)
American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (2014). Standards for
Educational and Psychological Testing, 2014 Edition. American Educational Research
Association (AERA). Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED565876&site=ehos t-live&scope=site
Blackley, S., & Howell, J. (2015). A STEM narrative: 15 Years in the making. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 40(40), 101-112.
https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n7.8Bodilly, S., & Beckett, M. K. (2005). Making
out-of-school time matter: Evidence for an action agenda. Santa Monica, CA: Rand
Corporation. Retrieved from www.rand.og//pubs/monographs/MG242/index.html Breiner, J., Harkness, S.., Johnson, C. & Koehler, C.. (2012). What Is STEM? A discussion
about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and
Brown, R., Brown, J., Reardon, K., & Merrill, C. (2011). Understanding STEM: Current perceptions. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(6), 5–9.
Buchanan, N., & Woerner, B. (2002). Meeting the needs of gifted learners through innovative high school programs. Roeper Review, 24(4), 213–219.
Butz, W.P., Kelly, T.K., Adamson, D.M., Bloom, G.A., Fossum, D., & Gross, M.E. (2004).
Will the scientific and technical workforce meet the requirements of the federal government? Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and
Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.
Capraro, R., Capraro, M., & Morgan, J. (2013). STEM project-based learning: An integrated
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach. Rotterdam,
Amsterdam: Rotterdam Sense Publishing
Carmichael, C. C. (2017). A state-by-state policy analysis of STEM education for K-12 public
schools (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/pqdthss/docview/1899933519/abstract/53037346BD34B17P Q/1.(Order No.10281229).
Charette, R. N. (2015). STEM sense and nonsense. Educational Leadership, 72(4), 79–83. Clark, A., & Ernst, J. (2008). STEM-Based Computational Modeling for Technology
Education. Journal of Technology Studies, 34(1), 20–27.
Claymier, B. (2014). Integrating STEM into the elementary curriculum. Children’s
Technology & Engineering,(18)2, 5
Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11463&page=R1
Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm revisited. Washington, DC: Rapidly Approaching Category 5 National Academies Press. Retrieved from:
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12999
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=TvklAQAAIAAJ
Dick, S. (2008). NASA - The birth of NASA. Retrieved from
https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/whyweexplore/Why_We_29.html Dugger, W. E., & Fellow, S. (2016). Evolution of STEM in the United States.
Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED516009.pdf
Engineering definition and meaning. (2018). Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/science
Erdogan, N., Navruz, B., Younes, R., & Capraro, R. M. (2016). Viewing how STEM project- based learning influences students’ science achievement through the implementation lens: A latent growth modeling. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and
Technology Education, 12(8), 2139–2154. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1294a
Executive Office of the President. (2010). Report to the President. Prepare and inspire: K-12
Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dect=t&b=eric&AN=ED&site=ehost- live&scope=site
Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2015). STEM for citizenship. Educational Leadership, 72 (4), 86-87 Garber, S. (2007). Sputnik and the dawn of the space age. Retrieved from
https://history.nasa.gov/sputnik/
George Washington: First annual address to congress. (1790). Retrieved from http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29431
Georgia Department of Education. (2018a). Certification Process. Retrieved from http://www.stemgeorgia.org/certification/
Georgia Department of Education. (2018b). 2017-18 Georgia milestones validity and reliability brief. Retrieved from https://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and- Assessment/Assessment/Documents/Milestones/201718_Georgia_Milestones_Validity_a nd_Reliability_Brief.pdf
Georgia Department of Education. (2019a). Georgia Milestones 2018-2019 statewide scores. Retrieved September 26, 2019, from https://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and- Assessment/Assessment/Pages/Georgia-Milestones-2018-2019-Statewide-Scores.aspx Georgia Department of Education. (2019b). Georgia Milestones achievement level descriptors.
Retrieved from https://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and- Assessment/Assessment/Pages/Georgia-Milestones-ALD.aspx
Gonzalez, H. & Kuenzi, J. (2012). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
(STEM) Education: A primer. (CRS Report No. R42642). Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf
Governor’s Office of Student Achievement. (2019). Downloadable Data. Retrieved from https://gosa.georgia.gov/report-card-dashboards-data/downloadable-data
Granovskiy, B. (2018). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)
Education: An overview. (CRS Report No. R4223). Retrieved from
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45223.pdf
Gutek, G. (2014). Philosophical, ideological, and theoretical perspectives on education. (2nd Ed.). New York: Pearson
Hanford, S. (1997). An examination of specialized schools as agents of educational
change. New York, NY: Columbia University
Hanover Research. (2011). K-12 STEM education overview, Washington, DC: Hanover Research. Retrieved from: http://www.hanoverresearch.com/wp-
ontent/uploads/2011/12/K-12-STEMEducation-Overview-Membership.pdf
Hansen, M. (2014). Characteristics of schools successful in STEM: Evidence from two states’ longitudinal data. Journal of Educational Research, 107(5), 374–391.
Indiana Department of Education. (2018). Indiana STEM Education: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Retrieved from
https://www.doe.in.gov/wf-stem/indiana-stem-education-science-technology- engineering-and-mathematics
Isaacs, A., Wagreich, P., & Gartzman, M. (1997). The quest for integration: School mathematics and science. American Journal of Education, 106(1), 179–206.
Judson, E. (2014). Effects of transferring to STEM-focused charter and magnet schools on student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 107(4), 255–266
Judy, B. (2011). Five innovations from World War II. Retrieved from http://bigdesignevents.com/2011/09/innovations-from-world-war-ii/
Kelly, B (2012). STEM: What it is, and why we should care. Retrieved:
https://money.usnews.com/money/careers/articles/2012/09/10/stem-what-it-is-and-why- we-should-care
Kuenzi, J. (2008). "Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) Education: background, federal policy, and legislative action" (2008). Congressional Research
Service Reports. 35.
Mathematics definition and meaning. (2018). Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/science
Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons. Melbourne: The Australian Council of Learned Academies.
McClain, M. L. (2015). The effect of STEM education on mathematics achievement of fourth-
grade underrepresented minority students (Doctoral dissertation). (Order No. 3723284).
Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/pqdthss/docview/1728919094/abstract/65A5F9EA589644C5 PQ/1
McKinnon, F. R. (2018). The Effects of STEM education on elementary student achievement (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/pqdthss/docview/2172440427/abstract/65A5F9EA589644C5 PQ/5. (Order No. 10981603)
Meyrick, M. K. (2011). How STEM education impress student learning. Meridian K-12
School Computer Technologies Journal, 14(1), 1–6.
Morgan, G. A. (2004). SPSS for introductory statistics : Use and interpretation. New York, New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Moore, T. J., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Advancing the state of the art of STEM integration.
Journal of STEM Education, 15(1), 6.
National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration
in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18612.
National Consortium for Specialized Secondary Schools of Mathematics and Science, (2008). History and Founders. Retrieved from http://ncsss.org/about/history-and-founders National Institute of STEM Education (2018). Teacher Certification. Retrieved from
http://nise.institute/teacher-certification.php
National Research Council. (2011). Successful k-12 stem education: Identifying effective
approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13158
National Science Foundation. (2010). The National Science Foundation: A brief history. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from
https://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/nsfoutreach/htm/hist_z2/hist_stc.htm
Obama, B. (2009). “President Obama’s Race-to-the-Top speech (Transcript). Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/realitycheck/the-press-office/remarks-president- department-education
Office of the Press Secretary. (2009). President Obama launches "Educate to Innovate"
campaign for excellence in science, technology, engineering & math (stem) education. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-
office/president-obama-launches-educate-innovate-campaign-excellence-science- technology-en
Olivarez, N. (2012). The impact of a STEM program on academic achievement of eighth
grade students in a south Texas middle school (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
https://search-proquest-
com.lmunet.idm.oclc.org/pqdthss/docview/1284793784/93583D5060C4B74PQ/1?accoun tid=12101. (Order No. 3549798)
Proudfoot, D., Green, M., Otter, J., & Cook, D. (2018). STEM Certification in Georgia’s schools: A causal comparative study using the Georgia student growth model. Georgia
Educational Researcher, 15(1) 15-31.
Records of the Federal Convention. (1787). Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8. Retrieved June 12, 2018, from http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_8_8s6.html Reeve, E. M. (2015). STEM thinking! Technology and Engineering Teacher, 75(4), 8–16. Riskowski, J. (2009). Exploring the effectiveness of an interdisciplinary water resources
engineering module in an eighth grade science course. International Journal of
Engineering Education. 25(1) 181-195.
Rockland, R., Bloom, D. S., Carpinelli, J., Burr-Alexander, L., Hirsch, L. S., & Kimmel, H. (2010). Advancing the “E” in K-12 STEM education. Journal of Technology Studies,
36(1), 53–64.
Roehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H. H., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E Enough? Investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration: is adding the “E” enough? School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00112.x
Rogers-Chapman, M. F. (2014). Accessing STEM-focused education: Factors that contribute to the opportunity to attend stem high schools across the United States. Education and
Rothwell, J.T., Lobo, J., Strumsky, D., & Muro, M. (2013). Patenting prosperity: Invention and economic performance in the United States and its areas. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Sahin, A., (2013). STEM clubs and science fair competitions: Effects on post-secondary matriculation. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(1), 7-13. Sahin, A., Oren, M., Willson, V., Hubert, T., & Capraro, R. M. C. (2015). Longitudinal
analysis of T-STEM academies: How do Texas Inclusive STEM academies (T-STEM) perform in mathematics, science, and reading? International Online Journal of