##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Abstract

The study aimed to develop the scoring framework for the selfrating proficiency indicators for Philippine STEAM educators. The study further sought to design mathematical framework and program for scoring STEAM educators’ proficiency and validate the designed scoring program. About 1507 responses from the self-rating STEAM proficiency tool were used to undergo the three tier quantitative and qualitative validation. Mathematical equations were derived to direct the development of the scoring programs using Microsoft Excel and Fortran. Results show an agreement between the proficiency profiles generated from the Microsoft Excel and Fortran program. Using the online survey and the classroom observation rating, proficiencies were compared as determined through the Fortran program of the predetermined career stage (distinguished, highly proficient, proficient, beginner). Lastly, qualitative validation was performed by comparing the generated codes in the interview transcripts and observation notes and the attributes in the PPST domains and TPACK dimensions. Qualitative validation indicates that the occurrences of the indicators in the interview and classroom observation matched with the expected attributes per career stage as per the PPST. This indicates that the validation of the scoring system developed for the online survey generate the STEAM educator proficiency. Further, the scope of thescoring framework developed is universal and may be adapted to suit any local setting. However, increasing the number of interviews and classroom observations to 10% of the sample population of teachers will produce a robust scoring program.

How to Cite

Palisoc CP, Morales MPE, Avilla RA, Ayuste TO, Ramos-Butron B, Casilla NA. 2020. Developing STEAM educators’ proficiency scoring framework. The Palawan Scientist. 12:20–42. https://doi.org/10.69721/TPS.J.2020.12.1.02.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

STEAM education, TPACK dimension, PPST domain, STEAM educators’ proficiency, STEAM proficiency scoring program

References
Center for Excellence in Universal Design. 2019. The 7 Principles. http://universaldesign.ie/What-is-Universal-Design/The-7-Principles/. Accessed on 17 October 2019.

Deloitte AG. 2015. Industry 4.0: Challenges and solutions for the digital transformation and use of exponential technologies. The Creative Studio at Deloitte, Zurich Switzerland. 28pp.

Department of Education-Teacher Education Council. 2017. Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers. https://www.pnu.edu.ph/rctq/forms/professional-standards-for-teachers-in-the-philippines-july2017.pdf. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Diwan P. 2017. Is Education 4.0 an imperative for success of 4th Industrial Revolution? https://medium.com/@pdiwan/is-education-4-0-an-imperative-for-success-of-4th-industrial-revolution-50c31451e8a4. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Ejiwale JA. 2013. Barriers to successful implementation of STEM Education. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(2): 63-74.

Fisk P. 2017. Education 4.0 … the future of learning will be dramatically different, in school and throughout life. https://www.thegeniusworks.com/2017/01/future-education-young-everyone-taught-together/. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Ghanbari S. 2015. Learning across disciplines: A collective case study of two university programs that integrate the arts with STEM. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 16(7). http://www.ijea.org/v16n7/. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Goldsberry C. 2018. What does Industry 4.0 mean for the global workforce? https://www.fastenernewsdesk.com/21572/what-does-industry-4-0-mean-for-the-global-workforce/. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Haron H. 2018. Education in the Era of IR 4.0. 2018 International Conference on Information Managements and Technology. (ICIMTech 2018) at Alam Sutera Main Campus, Bina Nusantara University, on 3-5 September, Jakarta Indonesia. http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/22486/1/Education%20in%20the%20Era%20of%204.0.pdf. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Hazelkorn E, Ryan C, Beernaert Y, Constantinou CP, Deca L, Grangeat M, Karikorpi M, Lazoudis A, Casulleras RP, and Welzel-Breuer M. 2015. Science Education for Responsible Citizenship. http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_science_education/KI-NA-26-893-EN-N.pdf. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Kim B and Kim J. 2016. Development and validation of evaluation indicators for teaching competency in STEAM Education in Korea. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(7): 1909–1924.

Mars RB, Verhagen L, Gladwin TE, Neubert FX, Sallet J and Rushworth MF. 2016. Comparing brains by matching connectivity profiles. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 60: 90-97.

Miller D. 2017. Importance of School Monitoring and Evaluation Systems. http://leansystemssociety.org/importance-of-school-monitoring-and-evaluation-systems/. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Ministry of Finance of the Slovak Republic. 2018. National Reform Programme of the Slovak Republic 2018. Ministry of Finance of the Slovak Republic. 64pp.

Mishra P and Koehler MJ. 2006. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6): 1017-1054.

Montero B and Evans CD. 2011. Intuitions without concepts lose the game: mindedness in the art of chess. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 10(2): 175–194.

Morales MPE, Anito JV, Avilla RA, Abulon ELR and Palisoc CP. 2019. Proficiency indicators for Philippine STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Agri/fisheries, Mathematics) Educators. Philippine Journal of Science, 148(2): 265-281.

Morrison JS. 2006. TIES STEM Education Monograph Series: Attributes of STEM Education. Teaching Institute for Essential Science. 7pp.
Obama B. 2016. Remarks by the President at the White House Science Fair. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/04/13/remarks-president-white-house-science-fair. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Renjen P. 2018. Industry 4.0: Are you ready? Deloitte Review (22): 1-11.

Shook E and Knickrehm M. 2017. Harnessing Revolution: Creating the Future Workforce. Accenture Strategy. 27pp.

Steel GE. 2015. Using technology for evaluation and assessment. https://nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Using-Technology-for-Evaluation-and-Assessment.aspx. Accessed on 15 February 2020.

Tsupros N, Kohler R and Hallinen J. 2009. STEM Education in Southwestern Pennsylvania. Report of a project to identify the missing components. Carnegie Mellon University. 35pp.

Wilson SM. 2016. Measuring the Quantity and Quality of the K-12 STEM Teacher Pipeline. https://stemindicators.sri.com/archive/resources/Wilson_FullPaper.pdf. Accessed on 15 February 2020.
Section
Original Article