Engaged students are emotionally invested in their learning and sustain concentration on one task for long periods of time. They feel compelled to seek new learning opportunities to deepen their understanding. All students should have the opportunity to experience engaging school learning environments. However, falling high school graduation rates in many US states and fewer adolescents enrolling in postsecondary education after high school are evidence of declining student engagement. In the critical Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines, most students have reported low engagement. This article argues that the secondary STEM education system must prioritize student engagement which will result in improved student achievement and persistence in STEM college and career pathways. Existing literature indicates that youth engage deeply with STEM activities when they make meaningful connections to the material through strategies like project-based learning which blur the line between classroom and community. This article proposes systems changes to improve student engagement including new data systems to measure and track student engagement, supporting teachers in transforming their practice, and leveraging STEM community assets to create authentic learning experiences. Examples of these changes are used throughout the article demonstrate new possibilities to improve the student experience in high school STEM education.
References
[1]
Anderson, M. (2021). Moving beyond Compliance. ASCD.
https://www.ascd.org/blogs/moving-beyond-compliance-mike-anderson-august-2021
[2]
Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J. S., & Pagani, L. S. (2009). Student Engagement and Its Relationship with Early High School Dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 651-670.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
[3]
Babendure, J., Balfakih, N., Faretta, S., & Hughes, B. (2018). Enter the Nation’s First Student Chief Science Officers. Connected Science Learning, 1.
https://www.nsta.org/connected-science-learning/connected-science-learning-january-march-2018-0/enter-nations-first
[4]
Baker, A. (2018). Making Connections with the STEM Learning Ecosystems Initiative. Scientific American Blog Network.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/budding-scientist/making-connections-with-the-stem-learning-ecosystems-initiative/
[5]
Barnum, M. (2022). Graduation Rates Dip across U.S. as Pandemic Stalls Progress. Chalkbeat.
https://www.chalkbeat.org/2022/1/24/22895461/2021-graduation-rates-decrease-pandemic
[6]
Bell, A., Chetty, R., Jaravel, X., Petkova, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2019). Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134, 647-713. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjy028
[7]
Bempechat, J., Kenny, M., Blustein, D., & Seltzer, J. (2014). Fostering Positive Youth Development through Work-Based Learning: The Cristo Rey Model. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 116, 232-252.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811411601310
[8]
Burns, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Teaching around the World: What Can TALIS Tell Us? Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/library/publications/1295
[9]
City, E. A., Elmore, R., Fiarman, S., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional Rounds in Education: A Network Approach to Improving Teaching and Learning. Harvard Education Press.
[10]
Committee on STEM Education (2018). Charting a Course for Success: America’s Strategy for STEM Education. National Science and Technology Council.
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf
[11]
Couch, S., Skukauskaite, A., & Estabrooks, L. B. (2019). Invention Education and the Developing Nature of High School Students’ Construction of an “Inventor” Identity. Technology & Innovation, 20, 285-302. https://doi.org/10.21300/20.3.2019.285
[12]
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Applications of Flow in Human Development and Education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9094-9
[13]
Davenport Huyer, L., Callaghan, N. I., Dicks, S., Scherer, E., Shukalyuk, A. I., Jou, M., & Kilkenny, D. M. (2020). Enhancing Senior High School Student Engagement and Academic Performance Using an Inclusive and Scalable Inquiry-Based Program. npj Science of Learning, 5, Article No. 17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-00076-2
[14]
de Royston, M. M., Lee, C., Nasir, N. S., & Pea, R. (2020). Rethinking Schools, Rethinking Learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 102, 8-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720970693
Dou, R., & Cian, H. (2021). Constructing STEM Identity: An Expanded Structural Model for STEM Identity Research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59, 458-490.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21734
[17]
Fincke, K., Morrison, D., Bergsman, K., & Bell, P. (2021). Leveraging Student Voice through Practical Measures. The Science Teacher, 89, 32-26.
[18]
Fletcher Jr., E. C., Warren, N. Q., & Hernández-Gantes, V. M. (2018). Preparing High School Students for a Changing World: College, Career, and Future Ready Learners. Career and Technical Education Research, 43, 77-97.
https://doi.org/10.5328/cter43.1.77
[19]
Fraysier, K., Reschly, A., & Appleton, J. (2020). Predicting Postsecondary Enrollment with Secondary Student Engagement Data. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38, 882-899. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282920903168
[20]
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
[21]
Gale, J. (2022). Inventing the Baby Saver: An Activity Systems Analysis of Applied Engineering at the High School Level. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 12, Article No. 1.
[22]
Hird, M., Larson, R., Okubo, Y., & Uchino, K. (2014). Lesson Study and Lesson Sharing: An Appealing Marriage. Creative Education, 5, 769-779.
https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2014.510090
[23]
Hubbard, A., & D’Silva, K. (2018). Professional Learning in the Midst of Teaching Computer Science. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 86-94). Association for Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230983
[24]
Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Salonen, V., Salmela-Aro, K., Schneider, B., & Krajcik, J. (2021). A Teacher-Researcher Partnership for Professional Learning: Co-Designing Project-Based Learning Units to Increase Student Engagement in Science Classes. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32, 625-641. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.1872207
[25]
Kim, D., Kim, S. L., & Barnett, M. (2021). “That Makes Sense Now!”: Bicultural middle School Students’ Learning in a Culturally Relevant Science Classroom. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 23, 145-172.
[26]
Larson, R. C. (2021). Teaching Our Students How to Fly. INFORMS.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orms.2021.04.10
[27]
Lei, H., Cui, Y., & Zhou, W. (2018). Relationships between Student Engagement and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46, 517-528. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7054
[28]
Lewis, C. C., Perry, R. R., Friedkin, S., & Roth, J. R. (2012). Improving Teaching Does Improve Teachers: Evidence from Lesson Study. Journal of Teacher Education, 63, 368-375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112446633
[29]
Madaus, G., & Russell, M. (2010). Paradoxes of High-Stakes Testing. Journal of Education, 190, 21-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022057410190001-205
[30]
Milner-Bolotin, M., & Marotto, C. C. F. (2018). Parental Engagement in Children’s STEM Education. Part I: Meta-Analysis of the Literature. LUMAT: International Journal of Math, Science and Technology Education, 6, 41-59.
https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.6.1.292
[31]
Moss, E., Bauer, L., & Lu, S. (2020). Teen Disengagement Is on the Rise. Brookings.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/10/01/teen-disengagement-is-on-the-rise/
[32]
National Science Board & National Science Foundation (2021). Elementary and Secondary STEM Education (NSB-2021-1; Science and Engineering Indicators 2022).
https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20211
[33]
Navy, S. L., Maeng, J. L., Bell, R. L., & Kaya, F. (2021). Beginning Secondary Science Teachers’ Implementation of Process Skills, Inquiry, and Problem-Based Learning during the Induction Years: A Randomised Controlled Trial. International Journal of Science Education, 43, 1483-1503. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1919334
[34]
Newcomb, T. (2020, February 11). Remote-Controlled High-Tech Microscope Brings Cutting-Edge Science to Tennessee HS. And Now, More Underserved Schools Are Getting in on it.
https://www.the74million.org/article/remote-controlled-high-tech-microscope-brings-cutting-edge-science-to-tennessee-hs-and-now-more-underserved-schools-are-getting-in-on-it/
[35]
Oakes, J. (1990). Multiplying Inequalities: The Effects of Race, Social Class, and Tracking on Opportunities to Learn Mathematics and Science. Rand Corp.
[36]
Parker, F., Novak, J., & Bartell, T. (2017). To Engage Students, Give Them Meaningful Choices in the Classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99, 37-41.
https://kappanonline.org/engage-students-give-meaningful-choices-classroom/
https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717734188
[37]
Plasman, J. S., Gottfried, M. A., & Klasik, D. J. (2021). Do Career-Engaging Courses Engage Low-Income Students? AERA Open, 7, 1-17.
https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211053324
[38]
Reeve, J. (2013). How Students Create Motivationally Supportive Learning Environments for Themselves: The Concept of Agentic Engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 579-595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032690
[39]
Rhodes, H. J. (2007). Confronting the Challenges of Student Engagement: A Case Study of a School-Based Intervention. Pardee RAND Graduate School.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/rgs_dissertations/2007/RAND_RGSD218.pdf
[40]
Rodriguez, A. J. (2015). What about a Dimension of Engagement, Equity, and Diversity Practices? A Critique of the Next Generation Science Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 1031-1051. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21232
[41]
Schenkel, K., Bliesener, S., Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2020). Community Ethnography. Science Scope, 43, 56-64.
[42]
Schneider, J., & Gottlieb, D. (2021). In Praise of Ordinary Measures: The Present Limits and Future Possibilities of Educational Accountability. Educational Theory, 71, 455-473.
https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12488
[43]
Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Optimal Learning Environments to Promote Student Engagement. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7089-2
[44]
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Shneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student Engagement in High School Classrooms from the Perspective of Flow Theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 158-176. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.18.2.158.21860
[45]
Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The Challenges of Defining and Measuring Student Engagement in Science. Educational Psychologist, 50, 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
[46]
Webber, K., Robert, J., Williams Moore, M., & Burg, T. (2020). Measuring the Impact of Business Engagement on STEM Education. In C. C. Johnson, M. J. Mohr-Schroeder, T. J. Moore, & L. D. English (Eds.), Handbook of Research on STEM Education (pp. 459-469). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429021381-42
[47]
Zhang, H., Estabrooks, L., & Perry, A. (2019). Bringing Invention Education in Middle School Science Classrooms: A Case Study. Technology & Innovation, 20, 235-250.
https://doi.org/10.21300/20.3.2019.235
