Abstract
In 2012, engineering was adopted as a content area in K-12 science education. Yet few science teachers have engineering content or pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers learn how to teach engineering through professional development experiences, for which Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) outline seven characteristics of effectiveness. This mixed-methods study compared three cohorts of the NSF-funded Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) participants at one university. Two cohorts of in-service teachers experienced RET on-site, and one (summer 2020) experienced the program 100% remotely, due to COVID-19. Research questions explore 1) the extent to which the RET program delivered in-person and remotely reflected the seven characteristics of effective PD; and 2) whether program outcomes of the hands-on, lab-based program could be achieved remotely. This study found that six of the seven characteristics of effective PD were fully evidenced in all three RET cohorts, and one was partially evidenced. Program outcomes were achieved at high and comparable levels for all cohorts, though the nature of the experience varied by mode of delivery. This research contributes to existing literature that finds no inherent differences in the quality of teacher professional development delivered in-person or remotely.
Highlights
Hands-on, laboratory experiences are considered essential in STEM education
Program leaders faced an unprecedented challenge shared by all STEM educators: Can a hands-on, lab-based, professional development program successfully achieve its program outcomes if it is delivered partially or completely remotely? After extensive deliberation and consultation with lab faculty, Stanford program leaders decided to pilot a 100% virtually delivered summer program to a limited number of teachers
The mixed-methods, evaluation study reported here relies upon Darling-Hammond et al.’s 2017 research into high quality, teacher professional development to explore the extent to which the Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) program met the seven qualities of effective teacher professional learning opportunities and whether a lab-based teacher professional learning experience can be effectively implemented through an online format
Summary
When escalation of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 locked Principal Investigators (PIs), lab staff, and students out of college and university labs, educators worldwide had to strategize alternatives (Chen et al, 2020). In March 2020, leaders of the Stanford Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) programs for K-12 teachers were finalizing participant selection, recruiting staff, and preparing program materials for summer 2020 when University restrictions due to COVID-19 closed all labs. Program leaders faced an unprecedented challenge shared by all STEM educators: Can a hands-on, lab-based, professional development program successfully achieve its program outcomes if it is delivered partially or completely remotely? After extensive deliberation and consultation with lab faculty, Stanford program leaders decided to pilot a 100% virtually delivered summer program to a limited number of teachers. The mixed-methods, evaluation study reported here relies upon Darling-Hammond et al.’s 2017 research into high quality, teacher professional development to explore the extent to which the RET program met the seven qualities of effective teacher professional learning opportunities and whether a lab-based teacher professional learning experience can be effectively implemented through an online format
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
