Pandemic PD: Sustaining Inquiry and Community Amid K-12 Uncertainty

Brian Johnson,Heather Skaza Acosta,Heather Walsh-Haney,Jessica P Marcolini,Laura Frost,Susan J Cooper

doi:10.15695/jstem/v4i3.06

Abstract

We describe a long-standing weeklong K-12 STEM teacher workshop that shifted to a virtual platform in 2020. We re-engaged former participants during this STEM Institute with goals of 1) modeling ways to connect best practices for STEM education gained in previous workshops to a virtual environment, 2) providing space for teacher reflection on their virtual learning implementation during Spring 2020 without sufficient planning time, 3) offering collaborative planning time as they prepared for the Fall 2020 semester, and 4) supporting Southwest Florida STEM teachers through community building during the institute. We continued to focus our delivery (previously in person now virtually) on the 5E model (BSCS, 1987). Drawing upon past participant surveys and anecdotal data from previous years, facilitators addressed teachers’ need for tools and lessons they could implement in their own virtual classes in the fall with plenty of time to listen and learn from each other. Here we discuss our virtual STEM Institute structure in contrast to previous years, virtual tools demonstrated by facilitators and teacher participants, and facilitator experiences and outcomes during the virtual workshop. We provide both qualitative and quantitative summary data from participant surveys on satisfaction with STEM Institute components related to the goals described.

Highlights

Despite the over 15,000 school districts in the U.S, all offering multiple professional development programs with various sponsors, the effective preparation, induction, and professional development of STEM teachers has been poorly studied (Wilson, 2011)
METHODS we describe the STEM Institute’s historical program structure, and how it was transformed for the summer of 2020
Even though we had teacher participants from early elementary through high school, all participants expressed agreement when asked if the materials provided would be useful in their classrooms and if they could use the materials with modifications

Summary

Introduction

Despite the over 15,000 school districts in the U.S, all offering multiple professional development programs with various sponsors, the effective preparation, induction, and professional development of STEM teachers has been poorly studied (Wilson, 2011). Current comprehensive reviews of STEM teacher professional development are lacking. Wilson’s review “suggests that professional development in STEM, when available, is often short, fragmented, ineffective, and not designed to address the specific need of individual teachers” The literature tells us that there is a definite link between teacher confidence, anxiety, efficacy, and the student’s ability to learn (Riggs and Enochs, 1990; Tschannen-Moran et al, 1998). There is further evidence that when teachers are uncomfortable teaching topics, they tend to avoid them or deliver superficial coverage (Brusal and Paznoka, 2006, National Research Council, 2007). At no time in history has teachers’ self-efficacy been more important than during 2020 when teachers were asked to learn new technologies while shifting to remote teaching

Objectives

Results

Conclusion