Keywords: STEM; Instructional Strategies; Silo Instruction; Embedded Instruction; Integration Instruction; Technology Education
PATT 26 Conference; Technology Education in the 21st Century; Stockholm; Sweden; 26-30 June; 2012
Banks; F. (2009). Technological literacy in a developing world context: The case of Bangladesh. In PATT-22: ‚ÄėPupils Attitude Towards Technology‚Äô Conference; p. 24-38; August 2009; Delft; The Netherlands.
Barlex; D. (2009). The STEM programme in England. In PATT-22: ‚ÄėPupils Attitude Towards Technology‚Äô Conference; p. 63-74; August 2009; Delft; The Netherlands.
Bour; I.; Bursuc; A.; & Konstantinidis; S. (Eds). (2011). Proceedings from SEFI ‚Äô11: Gender related perceptions of Science; Technology; Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education. Lisbon: Portugal.
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 Mathematics; 112(1); p. 3-11.
Chen; M. (2001). A potential limitation of embedded-teaching for formal learning. In J. Moore & K. Stenning (Eds.); Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 194-199). Edinburgh; Scotland: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Inc.
Deslauriers; L.; Schelew; E.; & Wieman; C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science; 332(6031); 862-864. DOI: 10.1126/science.1201783
Dickstein; M. (2010). STEM for all students: Beyond the silos. [White Paper]. Retrieved from http://www.creativelearningsystems.com/files/STEM-for-All-Students-Beyond-the-Silos.pdf
Dugger; W. (2010). Evolution of STEM in the U.S. 6th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=silo%20instruction%20and%20stem%20education&source=web&cd=1& ved=0CEsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iteea.org%2FResources%2FPressRoom%2F TERCBeginner.ppt&ei=FRIvT56UBYn00gH2j6nsCg&usg=AFQjCNGfvapUAmsFpGg2PM ufDDVnYqPYPg
Harden; R. (2000). The integration ladder: A tool for curriculum planning and evaluation. Medical Education; 34(1); 551-557.
Hmelo; C.E.; & Narayanan; N.H. (1995). Anchors; cases; problems; and scenarios as contexts for learning. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 5-8). Pittsburgh; PA; U.S.A.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Inc.
International Technology and Engineering Education Association (ITEEA). (2007). Standards for technological literacy (STL): Content for the study of Technology (3rd ed.). Reston;VA: Author.
Jacobs; H. (Ed.). (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria; VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kelley; T. (2010). Staking the claim for the ‚ÄėT‚Äô in STEM. The Journal of Technology Studies; 36(1); 2-9.
Laboy-Rush; D. (2011). Integrated STEM education through problem-based learning. [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/dlaboyrush/integrating-stem-educationthrough- project-based-learning
Morrison; J. (2006). STEM education monograph series: Attributes of STEM education. Teaching Institute for Essential Science. Baltimore; MD.
Morrison; J.; & Bartlett; R. (2009). STEM as curriculum. Education Week; 23; 28‚Äď31.
Novack; J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or appropriate propositional hierarchies (liphs) leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education; 86(4); 548-571.
Rossouw; A.; Hacker; M.; & de Vries; M. (2010). Concepts and contexts in engineering and technology education: An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education; 21(4); 409-424.
Sanders; M. (2009). STEM; STEM education; STEMmania. The Technology Teacher; 68(4); 20-26.
Wang; H.; Moore; T.; Roehrig; G.; & Park; M. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research; 1(2); 1-13.
Williams; J. (2011). STEM education: Proceed with caution. Design and Technology Education; 16(1); 26-35.