Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-021-00242-x below:

A Theoretical Framework for Integrated STEM Education

• Aguilera Morales, D., Martín-Páez, T., Valdivia-Rodríguez, V., Ruiz-Delgado, A., Williams-Pinto, L., Vílchez-González, J. M., & Perales-Palacios, F. J. (2018). Inquiry-based science education. A systematic review of Spanish production. Revista De Educación, 381, 259–284. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2017-381-388

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Aikenhead, G. (2015). Humanist perspectives on science education. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science education (pp. 467–471). Springer.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20399

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.3102/000283121143329

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Archer, L., Osborne, J., DeWitt, J., Dillon, J., Wong, B., & Willis, B. (2013). ASPIRES. Young people’s science and career aspirations, age 10–14. Retrieved from King’s College London website: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/education/research/ASPIRES/ASPIRES-final-report-December-2013.pdf

• Arriassecq, I., Greca, I. M., & Cayul, E. E. (2017). Teaching-learning sequences based on research results: proposal of a theoretical framework to address Special Relativity Theory. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 35(1), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1716

• Artigue, M. (1988). Ingénierie didactique. Recherches En Didactique Des Mathématiques, 9(3), 281–308.

  Google Scholar 

• Astolfi, J. P. (1988). El aprendizaje de conceptos científicos: Aspectos epistemológicos, cognitivos y lingüísticos. Enseñanza De Las Ciencias, 6(2), 147–155.

  Google Scholar 

• Astolfi, J. P. (1994). El trabajo didáctico de los obstáculos, en el corazón de los aprendizajes científicos. Enseñanza De Las Ciencias, 12(2), 206–216.

  Google Scholar 

• Astolfi, J. P. (1999). El tratamiento didáctico de los obstáculos epistemológicos. Revista Educación y Pedagogía, 11(25), 149–171.

  Google Scholar 

• Astolfi, J. P., Darot, É., Ginsburger-Vogel, Y., & Toussaint, J. (1997). Mots-clés de la didactique des sciences. Repères, définitions, bibliographies. De Boeck Université.

  Google Scholar 

• Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

  Google Scholar 

• Authors. (n.di)

• Bachelard, G. (1938). La formation de l’esprit scientifique: Contribution à une psychanalyse de la connaissance objective. Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin.

  Google Scholar 

• Bevins, S., & Price, G. (2016). Reconceptualising inquiry in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 38(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1124300

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Brown, J. (2012). The current status of STEM education research. Journal of STEM Education, 13(5), 7–11.

  Google Scholar 

• Buty, C., Tiberghien, A., & Le Maréchal, J. F. (2004). Learning hypotheses and an associated tool to design and to analyse teaching-learning sequences. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 579–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690310001614735

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.

  Google Scholar 

• Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA.

  Google Scholar 

• Calabrese Barton, A. M. (2012). Citizen(s’) science. A response to “The future of citizen science.” Democracy & Education, 20(2), 1–4.

  Google Scholar 

• Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Morgan, J. R. (2013). STEM project-based learning. An integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) approach. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense

• Chesky, N. Z., & Wolfmeyer, M. R. (2015). Philosophy of STEM education: A critical investigation. Palgrave Macmillan.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Chu, H.-E., Martin, S. N., & Park, J. (2019). A theoretical framework for developing an intercultural STEAM program for Australian and Korean students to enhance science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(7), 1251–1266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9922-y

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Commission, European. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. European Communities.

  Google Scholar 

• Commission, European. (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. European Union.

  Google Scholar 

• Connor, A. M., Karmokar, S., & Whittington, C. (2015). From STEM to STEAM: Strategies for enhancing engineering & technology education. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogies, 5(2), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v5i2.4458

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Coria, K., & Porta Massuco, C. (2020). Galaxia inter. Una introducción a las problemáticas interdisciplinarias. UNICEN.

  Google Scholar 

• Crippen, K. J., & Archambault, L. (2012). Scaffolded inquiry-based instruction with technology: A signature pedagogy for STEM education. Computers in the Schools, 29(1–2), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2012.658733

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Dahncke, H., Duit, R., Gilbert, J., Östman, L., Psillos, D., & Pushkin, D. B. (2001). Science education versus science in the academy: Questions-discussion-perspectives. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Gräber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education. Past, present, and future 43–48.Kluwer Academic.

  Google Scholar 

• Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century. UNESCO.

  Google Scholar 

• Develaki, M. (2020). Comparing crosscutting practices in STEM disciplines. Science & Education, 29(4), 949–979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00147-1

  Article  Google Scholar 

• DeWitt, J., & Archer, L. (2015). Who aspires to a science career? A comparison of survey responses from primary and secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13), 2170–2192. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1071899

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Duit, R. (2006). Research on science teaching. A prerequisite for improving educational practice. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 11(30), 741–770.

  Google Scholar 

• Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., & Kattmann, U. (2005). Towards science education research that is relevant for improving practice: the model of educational reconstruction. In H. E. Fischer (Ed.), Developing standards in research on science education (pp. 1–9). Taylor & Francis.

  Google Scholar 

• Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education. The importance of theories and their development. Teacher College Press.

  Google Scholar 

• English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(3), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Erduran, S. (2020). Nature of “STEM”? Science & Education, 29(4), 781–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00150-6

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Springer.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Falloon, G., Hatzigianni, M., Bower, M., Forbes, A., & Stevenson, M. (2020). Understanding K-12 STEM education: A framework for developing STEM literacy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(3), 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09823-x

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Fensham, P. J. (2001). Science content as problematic: Issues for research. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Gräber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education. Past, present, and future 27–41.Kluwer Academic.

  Google Scholar 

• Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., & Pacheco, R. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (2000). La ciencia posnormal. Ciencia con la gente. Icaria.

  Google Scholar 

• Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 38(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gallagher, S. A., Sher, B. T., Stepien, W. J., & Workman, D. (1995). Implementing problem-based learning in science classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 95(3), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15748.x

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gil Cantero, F., & Reyero, D. (2014). The priority of the philosophy of education on the empirical disciplines in educational research. Revista Española De Pedagogía, LXXI, I(258), 263–280.

  Google Scholar 

• Gilbert, J. K., & Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based teaching in science education. Springer.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Gough, A. (2015). STEM policy and science education: Scientistic curriculum and sociopolitical silences. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(2), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9590-3

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289976

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Greca, I. M., Ortiz-Revilla, J., & Arriassecq, I. (2021). Design and evaluation of a STEAM teaching-learning sequence for primary education. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 18(1), 1802. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2021.v18.i1.1802

• Gresnigt, R., Taconis, R., van Keulen, H., Gravemeijer, K., & Baartman, L. (2014). Promoting science and technology in primary education: A review of integrated curricula. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 47–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.877694

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Herschbach, D. R. (2011). The STEM Initiative: Constraints and challenges. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 48(1), 96–122.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Hoachlander, G., & Yanofsky, D. (2011). Making STEM real. Educational Leadership, 68(6), 60–65.

  Google Scholar 

• Hoeg, D., & Bencze, L. (2017). Rising against a gathering storm: A biopolitical analysis of citizenship in STEM policy. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 12(4), 843–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9838-9

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kang, N.-H. (2019). A review of the effect of integrated STEM or STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) education in South Korea. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0034-y

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the family resemblance approach can be transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25(9–10), 1115–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9861-3

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kezar, A., Gehrke, S., & Bernstein-Sierra, S. (2017). Designing for success in STEM communities of practice: Philosophy and personal interactions. The Review of Higher Education, 40(2), 217–244. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2017.0002

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91–196). London, England: Cambridge University Press.

• Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its problems. University of California Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Laudan, L. (1984). Science and values: The aims of science and their role in scientific debate. University of California Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Levinson, R. (2018). Introducing socio-scientific inquiry-based learning (SSIBL). School Science Review, 100(371), 31–35.

  Google Scholar 

• Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2010). Eyeballs in the fridge: Sources of early interest in science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(5), 669–685. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902792385

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Martinand, J. L. (1986). Connaître et transformer la matière. Peter Lang.

  Google Scholar 

• Martinand, J. L. (1988). Cuestiones actuales de la didáctica de las ciencias físicas en Francia: Observaciones comparativas. Enseñanza De Las Ciencias, 6(1), 47–53.

  Google Scholar 

• Martín-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & Vílchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A Review of Literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (2014). International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching. Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (2018). History, philosophy and science teaching. New perspectives. Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• McComas, W. F., & Burgin, S. R. (2020). A critique of “STEM” education. Science & Education, 29(4), 805–829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00138-2

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Méheut, M., & Psillos, D. (2004). Teaching-learning sequences: aims and tools for science education research. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 515–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690310001614762

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Millar, V. (2020). Trends, issues and possibilities for an interdisciplinary STEM curriculum. Science & Education, 29(4), 929–948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00144-4

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20347

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Mizell, S., & Brown, S. (2016). The current status of STEM education research 2013–2015. Journal of STEM Education, 17(4), 52–56.

  Google Scholar 

• Morin, E. (1990). Introduction à la pensée complexe. ESF.

  Google Scholar 

• Murphy, S., MacDonald, A., Danaia, L., & Wang, C. (2019). An analysis of Australian STEM education strategies. Policy Futures in Education, 12(2), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210318774190

  Article  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.

  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. National Academy Press.

  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (2008). Ready, set, SCIENCE!: Putting research to work in k-8 science classrooms. The National Academies Press.

  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. The National Academies Press.

  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education. Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The National Academies Press.

  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.

  Google Scholar 

• National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education. Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. The National Academies Press.

  Google Scholar 

• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Ortiz-Revilla, J. (2020). El desarrollo competencial en la Educación Primaria: efectos de una propuesta STEAM integrada (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://riubu.ubu.es/handle/10259/5521

• Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2018). La Educación STEAM y el desarrollo competencial en la Educación Primaria. In I. M. Greca & J. Á. Meneses Villagrá (Eds.), Proyectos STEAM para la Educación Primaria. Fundamentos y aplicaciones prácticas (pp. 41-54). Madrid, Spain: Dextra.

• Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Meneses Villagrá, J. Á. (2019). La investigación de diseño en el desarrollo de propuestas didácticas STEAM. In P. Membiela, M. I. Cebreiros & M. Vidal (Eds.), Nuevos retos en la enseñanza de las ciencias (pp. 217-222). Ourense, Spain: Educación Editora.

• Ortiz-Revilla, J., Adúriz-Bravo, A., & Greca, I. M. (2020). A framework for epistemological discussion around an integrated STEM education. Science & Education, 29(4), 857–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00131-9

• Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2021a). Conceptualization of competencies: systematic review of research in primary education. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 25(1), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v25i1.8304

• Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Meneses-Villagrá, J. Á. (2021b). Effects of an integrated STEAM approach on the development of competence in primary education students. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 44(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2021.1925473

• Perrenoud, P. (1997). Construire des compétences dès l’école. ESF.

  Google Scholar 

• Perrenoud, P. (1999). Dix nouvelles compétences pour enseigner. Invitation au voyage. ESF.

  Google Scholar 

• Piaget, J. (1936). La naissance de l’intelligence chez l’enfant. Delachaux et Niestlé.

  Google Scholar 

• Pleasants, J. (2020). Inquiring into the nature of STEM problems. Science & Education, 29(4), 831–855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00135-5

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Psillos, D. (2001). Science education researchers and research in transition: Issues and policies. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Gräber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education. Past present and future (pp. 11–16). Kluwer Academic.

  Google Scholar 

• Quigley, C. F., & Herro, D. (2016). “Finding the joy in the unknown”: Implementation of STEAM teaching practices in middle school science and math classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(3), 410–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9602-z

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Quigley, C., Herro, D., & Jamil, F. M. (2017). Developing a conceptual model of STEAM teaching practices. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12201

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Reynante, B. M., Selbach-Allen, M. E., & Pimentel, D. R. (2020). Exploring the promises and perils of integrated STEM through disciplinary practices and epistemologies. Science & Education, 29(4), 785–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00121-x

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ritz, J. M., & Fan, S. C. (2015). STEM and technology education: International state of the art. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(4), 429–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9290-z

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Romero-Ariza, M. (2017). Inquiry-based learning: Is there enough evidence of its benefits in science education? Revista Eureka Sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación De Las Ciencias, 27(2), 286–299.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Sanders, M. (2008). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26.

  Google Scholar 

• Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1337–1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182

  Article  Google Scholar 

• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2016). Education 2030. Incheon Declaration and framework for action for the implementation of sustainable development goal 4. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245656E.pdf

• Vallett, D. B., Lamb, R., & Annetta, L. (2018). After-school and informal STEM projects: The effect of participant self-selection. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(3), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9721-1

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Vergnaud, G. (1982). A classification of cognitive tasks and operations of thought involved in addition and subtraction problems. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 39–59). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  Google Scholar 

• Vergnaud, G. (1990). La théorie des champs conceptuels. Recherches en Didáctique des Mathématiques, 10(23), 133–170.

  Google Scholar 

• Vergnaud, G. (1996). Algunas ideas fundamentales de Piaget en torno a la didáctica. Perspectivas, 26(1), 195–207.

  Google Scholar 

• Vergnaud, G. (1998). A comprehensive theory of representation for mathematics education. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(99)80057-3

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Vergnaud, G. (2007). In what sense the conceptual fields theory might help us to facilitate meaningful learning? Investigações Em Ensino De Ciências, 12(2), 285–302.

  Google Scholar 

• Vergnaud, G. (2013). Conceptual Development and Learning. Revista Qurriculum, 26, 39–59.

  Google Scholar 

• Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. The MIT Press.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 1(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314636

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Williams, J. P. (2011). STEM education: Proceed with caution. Design and Technology Education: an International Journal, 16(1), 26–35.

  Google Scholar 

• Zeidler, D. L. (2016). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 11–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9578-z

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2007). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: conscience, character, and care. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 201–216). Springer.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x

  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4