Louie B. Dasas, University of Santo Tomas Senior High School
When people ask me why I became a teacher, I always answer: “I believe I was destined to be a STEM teacher.” Two things were central to me growing up: teachers and schools. Almost all of family members were teachers. The house where I spent most of my childhood was a 10-meter distance away from my school. Being “destined” to teach is really more of an understatement. My decision to become a STEM teacher roots deeply on my love for Science. Growing up, I found excitement in chanting “Bawat bata may tanong, ba’t ganito, ba’t ganun? Hayaang buksan ang isipan… sa science or agham!” Yes, I was a hard-core Sineskwela fan who pondered about how the world works and why it works the way it does. My pursuit of STEM teaching as a career was never an easy path as I struggled to prove to people that I made the right decision. Since I did fairly well in my Science subjects, people always told (and convinced) me I can pursue a medical career. But I found teaching having more impact than high salaries or prestige. I found personal mission in making students wonder about the world the same way I did growing up.
I have been teaching for 13 years now and I can say STEM teaching in the Philippines is not a walk in the park. Like other teachers, STEM teachers juggle daily stresses of lesson plan preparation, other school assignments, problematic students, and difficult parents. But what makes STEM teaching particularly challenging is given that students’ perceptions of STEM classes are affected by practices that teachers do in the classroom (Barlow & Brown, 2020; Bernardo et al., 2008). The inherent stigma of STEM being difficult makes it particularly challenging. Being a STEM teacher goes beyond simply teaching STEM. It also demands a unique identity rooted on professional and personal characteristics (El Nagdi et al., 2018). I continue to realize that successful STEM teaching roots from successful STEM learning.
I recall one school year when I had was assigned to handle a Biology class of a ‘difficult section’. I found my students to struggling to understand fundamental concepts and apply relevant science skills. I found a number of them failing my examinations and not remembering a simple concept we discussed in class. This served as a ‘teachable moment’ for me. I got to learn about STEM teaching better. I had to reconceptualise my teaching repertoire putting aside the bucketful of theories and principles I learned about STEM content and pedagogy. In pursuit of what works, I had to learn by heart.
The first few weeks involved trial-and-error and constant search for what works best in my classroom. I realized that reading is indispensable to the STEM teaching profession. I found myself reading about both STEM content and pedagogy. I began using snippets of ideas from articles I read into my own teaching practices in the classroom. I used inquiry questions and did demonstrations. I also made my students use web simulations and interactive animations. Slowly, I began to change my way of approaching STEM teaching and gained more confidence (Rosicka, 2016). Making my students genuinely interest and motivated to learn – this for me is what works.
In 2016, I was given the opportunity to lead a group of STEM teachers and shepherd Grade 11 and 12 STEM students. This was a daunting task because I was assigned to lead a diverse group of teachers composed of seasoned teachers and beginning teachers. In addition, the University of Santo Tomas Senior High School, fondly called “USTSHS”, is the largest Senior High School in the Philippines in terms of student population. Way back, it had approximately 10,000 Grade 11 and Grade 12 students. I was challenged to lead more or less 5,000 STEM students. Indeed, STEM teachers and student were more than just a number. This stage in my career made me realize valuable lessons about STEM teaching. Observing STEM teachers in the classroom, revisiting STEM lesson plans, and engaging in casual conversations to a number of very diligent STEM students, I have come to realize a number of things pertaining to what doesn’t work in STEM teaching.
STEM teaching demands a completely distinct teaching paradigm that differs a lot from the disciplinal teaching of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. As I interacted with STEM teachers, I realized that the inherent preference for teaching according to discipline is a major challenge for STEM teachers in the Philippines. I encountered teachers who deliver lectures for 2 hours without giving opportunities for students to ask questions and clarify concepts. Literature describes STEM education as an interdisciplinary approach to teaching and learning that removes the traditional barriers separating the four disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, integrating them into real-world, rigorous, and relevant learning experiences for students (Vasquez et al., 2013). It was my duty that my STEM teacher colleagues realize this fact. I had to journey with them as they shifted paradigms into becoming STEM educators. I understood that I cannot turn my visions into reality alone. Instead, developing my vision involves merging it into a shared vision with my colleagues (Taylor et al, 2014).
My interactions with STEM students also made me ponder on the fact that conventional teaching such as lectures simply doesn’t work (Wieman, 2014). The same problem was shared in a forum spearheaded by the National Academy of Science and Technology (NAST) in 2016 where teaching styles of STEM teachers were argued to be a sustaining factor in teaching STEM. I was challenged to look for other ways to such as using active learning (Freeman et al., 2014) and engaging in inquiry-based teaching.
Being a STEM teacher and STEM teacher-leader, I realized the important role of learning about and with others. STEM teachers need to understand how students, whether D-gen, N-gen, millennials, Xennials, think and behave in order to make them learn STEM better. Teachers must use their students’ passions to ignite their interest and motivate them to learn even the most difficult concepts in STEM. This can only be achieved if a STEM teacher takes time to learn about his students – learning about others.
I also found out that effective STEM classroom teaching requires dialogue. A STEM teacher must learn how to deal with his colleagues of diverse backgrounds, age-group, and educational philosophies. STEM teaching requires one to skilfully master the art of negotiation, compromise, and cooperation. The growing interest towards social groups that make STEM teachers come together and talk about their own classroom experiences. Since “effective STEM teaching is broad and multifaceted, different types of teacher knowledge integrate to inform a teacher’s decisions for planning, enactment, and reflection on his/her STEM instruction” (Chan et al., 2019, p. 44). This therefore calls for a unified means that allows STEM teacher enrich their knowledge-bases. STEM teachers teaching STEM teachers. Successful STEM teaching revolves around the central construct of successful social interactions that allow a commonplace for learning and sharing of best practices – learning with others.
As I continue to journey in my career as a STEM teacher, I carry with me robust insights from both theoria and praxis. I derive these from continuously looking for opportunities to learn, relearn, and unlearn skills and concepts. I acquire insights from interactions I have with dynamic STEM teachers here and abroad, both seasoned and beginning teachers. This is a basic STEM teacher need – casual collisions. STEM teachers need opportunities to engage in meaningful discourse with other STEM teachers.
After 13 years of teaching, I am yet to learn more. I continue to hone my ever-evolving teaching-scape drawn from propositions from theories and research, strategic insights from classroom experience, and valuable mentoring and support from others. As a STEM teacher, this for me is what truly matters.
References:
Bernardo, A.B.I., Limjap, A.A., Prudente, M.S. et al. Students ’ perceptions of science classes in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(3), 285–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026717
Barlow, A., Brown, S. (2020). Correlations between modes of student cognitive engagement and instructional practices in undergraduate STEM courses. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(18), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00214-7
Chan K.K.H., Yeh YF., Hsu YS. (2019). A Framework for Examining Teachers’ Practical Knowledge for STEM Teaching. In Y.S. Hsu and Y.F. Yeh (Eds.) Asia-Pacific STEM Teaching Practices. Singapore: Springer.
El Nagdi, M., Leammukda, F. & Roehrig, G. (2018). Developing identities of STEM teachers at emerging STEM schools International Journal of STEM Education, 5(36), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0136-1
Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
National Academy of Science and Technology (2016). Forum on the challenges and opportunities in the implementation of the K12 STEM curriculum. https://www.nast.ph/index.php/13-news-press-releases/258-forum-on-the-challenges-and-opportunities-in-the-implementation-of-the-k-12-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-curriculum
Rosicka, C. (2016). From concept to classroom: Translating STEM education research into practice. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=professional_dev
Vasquez, J.A., Sneider, C. and Comer, M. (2013). STEM lesson essentials, grades 3-8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. New York: Heinemann.
Taylor, C. M., Cornelius, C. J., & Colvin, K. (2014). Visionary leadership and its relationship to organizational effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(6), 566–583. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2012-0130
Wieman, C. E. (2014). Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear message. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8319–8320. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1407304111