Dual Identities: Organizational Negotiation in STEM-Focused Catholic Schools
Saved in:
| Title: | Dual Identities: Organizational Negotiation in STEM-Focused Catholic Schools |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Kloser, Matthew, Wilsey, Matthew, Hopkins, Dawn W., Dallavis, Julie W., Lavin, Erin, Comuniello, Michael |
| Source: | Cultural Studies of Science Education. Jun 2018 13(2):549-579. |
| Availability: | Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 31 |
| Publication Date: | 2018 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | STEM Education, Catholic Schools, Institutional Mission, Case Studies, Educational Change, Organizational Change |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11422-017-9819-z |
| ISSN: | 1871-1502 |
| Abstract: | In the last decade, STEM-focused schools have opened their doors nationally in the hope of meeting students' contemporary educational needs. Despite the growth of these STEM-focused institutions, minimal research exists that follows how schools make a transition toward a STEM focus and what organizational structures are most conducive to a successful transition. The adoption of a STEM focus has clear implications for a school's organizational identity. For Catholic schools, the negotiation of a new STEM focus is especially complex, as Catholic schools have been shown to generally possess a distinct religious and cultural organizational identity. The adoption of a second, STEM-focused identity raises questions about whether and how these identities can coexist. Framed by perspectives on organizational identity and existing conceptualizations of the cultural and religious hallmarks of Catholic schools, this study utilizes a multiple-case study design to explore the organizational transition of four Catholic K-8 institutions to Catholic STEM-focused schools. These cases demonstrate the particular challenges of negotiating multiple organizational identities. While variation existed in how the four schools accommodated these identities, the most promising environments for successful transition drew upon an aggregative model of identity negotiation, that is, when schools attended to both identities, but ensured that the original Catholic identity of the school remained foundational to all decisions. The least successful identity negotiations occurred when there was a lack of common understanding about what comprised a STEM-focused school, leading to minimal buy-in from stakeholders or when a school sought to make the transition for recruitment or marketing rather than mission-driven reasons. Discussion of the more successful identity aggregation provides a framework for schools within and beyond the religious sector that desire to adopt an additional STEM-focused identity. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 40 |
| Entry Date: | 2018 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1182402 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFdKNQ7Qwv1Mvt71jBPUesPAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDGNtjM_RncG7RjI8twIBEICBm9ChmtzjUPlIHvuChmH9jDSySLXzHtpt3A2WXia7BCK-Ri45piwIM4l71EORTAUtbcQJf9JFn3hjaqYAnXQMDSI8LWVjHoupfCKMCJ_t291UqTwwwC5ELpyGnR-JSnUs0dae7uUpbW1ZQABP9XlqaHN0U_1kixvWRQzYwUZs3BOS9VsECGPOym8Pu8W1TlwNd01BOZYY8IqotXrL Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0130147599;[3h02]01jun.18;2018Jun15.09:19;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0130147599-1">Dual identities: organizational negotiation in STEM-focused Catholic schools </title> <p>In the last decade, STEM-focused schools have opened their doors nationally in the hope of meeting students’ contemporary educational needs. Despite the growth of these STEM-focused institutions, minimal research exists that follows how schools make a transition toward a STEM focus and what organizational structures are most conducive to a successful transition. The adoption of a STEM focus has clear implications for a school’s organizational identity. For Catholic schools, the negotiation of a new STEM focus is especially complex, as Catholic schools have been shown to generally possess a distinct religious and cultural organizational identity. The adoption of a second, STEM-focused identity raises questions about whether and how these identities can coexist. Framed by perspectives on organizational identity and existing conceptualizations of the cultural and religious hallmarks of Catholic schools, this study utilizes a multiple-case study design to explore the organizational transition of four Catholic K-8 institutions to Catholic STEM-focused schools. These cases demonstrate the particular challenges of negotiating multiple organizational identities. While variation existed in how the four schools accommodated these identities, the most promising environments for successful transition drew upon an aggregative model of identity negotiation, that is, when schools attended to both identities, but ensured that the original Catholic identity of the school remained foundational to all decisions. The least successful identity negotiations occurred when there was a lack of common understanding about what comprised a STEM-focused school, leading to minimal buy-in from stakeholders or when a school sought to make the transition for recruitment or marketing rather than mission-driven reasons. Discussion of the more successful identity aggregation provides a framework for schools within and beyond the religious sector that desire to adopt an additional STEM-focused identity.</p> <p>STEM; Organizational identity; Catholic school; Organizational transformation; STEM-focused schools</p> <p>Over the past century, crises have shaped many innovations in science and mathematics education (DeBoer [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref1">12</reflink>] ). Recently, concerns over poor international achievement in the STEM fields have resulted in many new reforms, including the formation of STEM-focused schools. A full STEM school or STEM academy model has been cited as one promising path for improving STEM education (National Research Council [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref2">27</reflink>] ). For example, in 2010, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) advocated for the creation of 1000 new STEM-focused schools over the next decade, 800 of which are targeted at the elementary and middle grade levels (PCAST [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref3">30</reflink>] ).</p> <p>The adoption of a STEM-focused identity raises interesting theoretical and empirical questions for any school with an established organizational identity that seeks to adopt an innovative model, and hence, negotiate a new identity. As STEM-focused schools continue to emerge, understanding how these organizations conceptualize the important facets of a STEM identity and reconciling these elements with their existing identity has important implications for the stability of schools. This study uses organizational identity theory to explore the emergence of STEM school transformations in four schools that have an existing, well-defined identity, which in turn can influence school culture, teaching, and learning. Specifically, our central research question explores: How do school stakeholders negotiate the existing organizational identity of their school with an emergent STEM-focused organizational identity?</p> <p>The context of Catholic schools provides one opportunity to investigate this question because Catholic schools have faced their own crisis, resulting in new school models that require the negotiation of new identities. The cost to educate children in Catholic schools has risen sharply due to a move toward a lay teaching force. Enrollment in these schools has dropped precipitously, resulting in massive school closures, particularly in large, urban contexts (Goldschmidt and Walsh [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref4">17</reflink>] ). In response, some Catholic K-8 schools have recently embraced innovative school models, adopting additional foci such as blended-learning (Davis and Venugopal [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref5">11</reflink>] ), dual language, and STEM. As Catholic schools are locally governed and often face fewer bureaucratic obstacles to change, they provide a case to investigate the negotiation of dual identities within a short time span. Furthermore, the adoption of a STEM focus in the four Catholic school cases described below were all informed by state or national STEM school frameworks that influence organizational decisions in other school sectors.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-2">Background literature and theoretical framework</hd> <hd id="AN0130147599-3">Organizational culture and identity</hd> <p>Organizational identity has been defined as “that which is central, enduring, and distinctive about an organization’s character” (Albert and Whetten [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>] , p. 63). While this definition suggests that identity is a static feature of organizations, more recent work suggests that organizational identity is to some degree dynamic, based on a close reciprocal relationship between the organization’s image—how the organization and the public perceive the organization—and what is central, enduring and distinctive about the organization (Gioia, Schultz and Corley [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref7">16</reflink>] ). As organizations respond to external information and pressures, examining the organization’s image allows organizations to better adapt their organizational identity to fit their environment. From this perspective, organizational identity is capable of being shaped, refined, and managed.</p> <p>Research on organizational identity has compared this construct to the psychological processes involved in individual identity formation, particularly in individual role formation. Just as individuals are considered to have multiple role identities (Stryker and Burke [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref8">36</reflink>] ), Michael Pratt and Peter Foreman ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref9">29</reflink>] ) argue that organizations can have multiple identities “when different conceptions exist regarding what is central, distinctive, and enduring about the organization” (p. 20). How an organization is able to manage the addition of role identities has implications for the success and survival of the organization, as the organization as a whole must make decisions related to the costs (e.g., potential for internal conflict) and benefits (e.g., ability to appeal to multiple stakeholders) of embracing multiple identities.</p> <p>Pratt and Foreman ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref10">29</reflink>] ) detail four possible ways of handling multiple identities. Organizations may compartmentalize the multiple identities, incorporating and preserving the identities without creating links between them, keeping the identities as separate and defining features of the organization. A second option is to integrate them, combining the multiple identities into one new, overarching identity. Organizations may also choose to retain all identities and form links between them, aggregating the identities into a hierarchy that allows one identity to carry more weight. When identities are at odds or conflict, organizations may be forced to delete or eliminate all but the dominant organizational identity.</p> <p>Catholic schools adopting a STEM-focus can be considered organizations faced with the addition of a role identity. US Catholic schools have traditionally held a distinct organizational identity, providing academic and religious instruction to students in the United States for over 200 years. The addition of a STEM-focused identity in these schools may be negotiated in multiple ways. Schools may choose to compartmentalize the STEM focus, considering it separate from its Catholic identity, or schools may choose to integrate the two identities, generating a new culture and identity. Catholic schools also have the option to aggregate the two identities, keeping the Catholic identity primary while incorporating aspects of the STEM identity into the Catholic nature of the school. Finally, Catholic schools could also find that the two identities simply cannot coexist without the exclusion of the other identity and thus, one identity is ‘deleted’. In order to understand the negotiation of identities, we must first conceptualize that which is central and distinctive about STEM-focused and Catholic school identities.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-4">Elements of a STEM school identity</hd> <p>The relatively recent adoption of a STEM-focused identity in schools at least partially explains why so little is known about this school model. Not only do minimal empirical data exist about these schools and their outcomes, but a majority of the literature that does exist focuses on high schools, not K-8 schools. Rena Subotnik, Robert Tai, Rochelle Rickoff and John Almarode’s ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref11">37</reflink>] ) review of STEM-focused schools notes that although the popularity of this organizational approach has increased, the field has no evidence for which organizational structures of STEM-focused school are most effective and why. Other studies have indicated minimal, but positive outcomes for students in STEM schools. For instance, across 51 inclusive STEM-focused schools in Texas, students were slightly more likely to have higher math and science scores, less likely to be absent from school, and more likely to take more advanced courses than their comparative peers (National Research Council [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref12">27</reflink>] ). Catherine Scott’s ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref13">32</reflink>] ) multiple case study of ten STEM-focused high schools also showed that students in STEM schools were more likely to score higher than the state average in mathematics, science, and English, although no controls were used at the student level for previous achievement, socioeconomic status, or race.</p> <p>Little is known about STEM schools as well because the term has been taken up and applied locally (Eisenhart, Weis, Allen, Cipollone, Stich and Dominguez [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref14">15</reflink>] ). A variety of STEM school definitions exist and as many states are constructing their own criteria for STEM school certification or designation, what defines a STEM school can vary regionally. Furthermore, most definitions from the literature and those constructed by states take the form of lists - lists of critical component, essential elements, or indicators that schools must have to reflect a STEM focus. In conceptualizing STEM school identity, we draw significantly from these definitional lists of critical components, most often, but not exclusively focused at the secondary level (see Table 1). Specifically, we draw on: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref15">1</reflink>) Sharon Lynch, Peters-Burton, Behrend, Han, Ford, Spillane and House ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref16">23</reflink>] ) in-depth case studies of 8 inclusive STEM-focused high schools; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref17">2</reflink>) the University of Chicago’s qualitative study of 25 inclusive STEM-focused high schools (LaForce, Noble, King, Holt and Century [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref18">21</reflink>] ); (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref19">3</reflink>) Scott’s ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref20">32</reflink>] ) mixed methods study of 10 inclusive STEM high-schools; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref21">4</reflink>) the National Research Council’s ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref22">27</reflink>] ) report on effective STEM education; and (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref23">5</reflink>) the rubric for receiving STEM designation for elementary schools from the South Carolina Department of Education ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref24">34</reflink>] ), a leading state in STEM certification. Drawing on these components, we define a STEM-focused K-8 school as one whose administration, faculty, and staff are prepared and committed to engaging students, often from a targeted population, in a problem-focused STEM curriculum and pedagogical approach that fosters learning not only within the school walls, but engages the school’s broader communities. We briefly synthesize the research cited above in describing the major components of this definition.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-5">Problem-focused STEM curriculum and instruction</hd> <p>Central to a STEM-school is its designated emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. STEM content matters and has been exhibited in high school contexts by early college level coursework such as advanced placement or dual credit classes. But content does not solely define these schools’ identities. Equally important, STEM schools are characterized by reformed instructional approaches. Students engage actively in STEM learning through problem- or project-based learning that draws on authentic experiences. This reformed pedagogy can take the form of capstone courses in which the STEM disciplines are integrated in a problem derived from the community or student experience. Embedded within this pedagogical approach is the intentional integration of technology that goes beyond usage and exposes students to the content and skills necessary to manipulate and understand information systems, databases, and social networking resources.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-6">Extended community engagement</hd> <p>Teaching and learning in STEM-focused schools is not bound to traditional class time. Learning, especially at the high school level, often occurs through internships, apprenticeships, and informal engagements with industry. Engaging the community includes bringing in members of the scientific and engineering community to help coordinate problem-based learning units and sending students out to the STEM community directly. Lynch, Peters-Burton, Behrend, Han, Ford, Spillane and House ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref25">23</reflink>] ) have charted mandatory internship programs at the high school level as well as university and industry sponsorships for informal STEM learning, such as robotics teams. A central element of STEM-schools places students in contexts of service learning as well as career and technical training both within and outside the walls of their school (LaForce, Noble, King, Holt and Century [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref26">21</reflink>] ). Even at the elementary level where internships and college credit are developmentally inappropriate, the community can play a significant role in the definition of the school’s STEM focus. For example, the South Carolina ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref27">34</reflink>] ) school designation requires that the governance of the school be supported by a team of “community stakeholders [that] assembles quarterly to discuss challenges and solutions to…improving a STEM program” (p. 16).</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-7">Prepared faculty and staff</hd> <p>The investment in human capital is a common theme across the STEM school studies. The studies listed in Table 1 all identify highly qualified STEM teaching faculty as distinctive in this school model. The study of 25 inclusive high schools noted that teachers in these contexts were responsible for creating all or part of the curriculum (LaForce, Noble, King, Holt and Century [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref28">21</reflink>] ). Teachers created special projects that placed students in authentic or real-world contexts, thus requiring a strong understanding of the content and practices of the STEM disciplines. Furthermore, STEM-schools provided time for faculty to solve problems and identify areas of strengths and weaknesses within the STEM program (Lynch, Peters-Burton, Behrend, Han, Ford, Spillane and House [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref29">23</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Given the rapid change of technology and pedagogical experiences for students, existing research shows that STEM schools create a culture of continuous improvement (Spillane, Lynch and Ford [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref30">35</reflink>] ). Gaps in teacher knowledge and skills are supplemented with coherent opportunities to meet the STEM mission of the school. Of course, this only occurs with the support and vision of the administration. Although school structure and organization have resulted in multiple administrative styles, administrators in a STEM context have been shown to dedicate and protect STEM learning time and provide the resources necessary to enact the school’s STEM mission. Recent research suggests that STEM schools are highly collaborative environments that benefit from distributed leadership models and a reinvisioning of the relationship between teachers, students, and knowledge (Spillane, Lynch and Ford [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref31">35</reflink>] ).</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-8">Target populations</hd> <p>Research on the elements of STEM-focused schools and existing school structures does not fully agree on the targeted population for STEM schools. Lynch, Peters-Burton, Behrend, Han, Ford, Spillane and House ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref32">23</reflink>] ) case studies as well as the research conducted by Melanie LaForce, Noble, King, Holt and Century ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref33">21</reflink>] ) focus only on schools with an inclusive STEM mission. The purpose of inclusive STEM schools is to prepare all students for success in STEM with a special emphasis on helping underrepresented minorities find success in these disciplines (Spillane, Lynch and Ford [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref34">35</reflink>] ). Some states, such as South Carolina, require inclusivity in order to receive a STEM school designation. Yet not all STEM schools have an inclusive mission. The National Research Council’s ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref35">27</reflink>] ) report highlighting successful K-12 STEM education identifies three school types—selective, inclusive, and schools with a career and technical education focus—as viable STEM school models. Based on the target population of the schools, other elements may exist. In inclusive STEM schools, explicit support is available for underrepresented minorities in the form of bridge programs, tutoring, mentorships, and counseling.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-9">Catholic school identity</hd> <p>Catholic schools have been a part of the American educational system for over 275 years, emphasizing strong academics and religious formation (Ozar and Weitzel-O’Neill [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref36">28</reflink>] ). As the system grew to its peak enrollment in the late 1950s and into the latter half of the twentieth century, Catholic schools developed a reputation for academic excellence (Hallinan and Kubitschek [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref37">19</reflink>] ). A “Catholic school advantage” was supported by the work of James Coleman, Sally Hoffer and James Kilgore ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref38">8</reflink>] ) and Anthony Bryk, Valerie Lee and Peter Holland ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref39">5</reflink>] ), who found that students in Catholic high schools scored higher on achievement tests in reading and mathematics than their public school counterparts. More recent research at the high school level also finds evidence of a Catholic school advantage in mathematics (Carbonaro and Covay [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref40">7</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Whether a Catholic school advantage exists in K-8 contexts is less established. Maureen Hallinan and Warren Kubitschek ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref41">19</reflink>] ) found mixed results at the middle school level as sixth and eighth grade students in Catholic schools in Chicago did not consistently out-perform their public schools peers in math or reading. While Chicago Catholic schools were found to be more successful with disadvantaged youth in reading achievement, students in public schools outperformed Catholic school students in eighth grade mathematics (Hallinan and Kubitschek [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref42">19</reflink>] ). Other research at the elementary level demonstrates similar findings related to mathematics, with public elementary students performing slightly better than their Catholic school counterparts (Reardon, Cheadle and Robinson [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref43">31</reflink>] ).</p> <p>In addition, achievement analyses at the high school level have indicated that Catholic schools better serve disadvantaged youth, as achievement gains were greater for these students than their more privileged Catholic school peers, and particularly for students who were multiply disadvantaged (Bryk, Lee and Holland [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref44">5</reflink>] ). This advantage has been attributed to Catholic schools’ high expectations for all students, evidenced by the core academic curriculum offered in Catholic high schools along with a minimal use of tracking. These findings suggest that Catholic schools may better approximate the ideals of the common school as achievement in Catholic schools is less dependent on family background (Coleman, Hoffer and Kilgore [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref45">8</reflink>] ). As such, Catholic schools may be well poised to support students from populations that are currently underrepresented in STEM fields.</p> <p>While the academic reputation of Catholic schools has varied over time, scholarly writings on Catholic schools support an overarching Catholic school identity. Our framework for classifying and recognizing characteristics of Catholic school identity draws on the framework of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops’ ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref46">26</reflink>] ) To Teach as Jesus Did, augmented by the work of Archbishop Michael Miller ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref47">25</reflink>] ), Lorraine Ozar and Patricia Weitzel-O’Neill ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref48">28</reflink>] ), Timothy Cook and Rev. Thomas Simonds ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref49">10</reflink>] ), and Church documents by the Congregation for Catholic Education (CCE [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref50">9</reflink>] ) and the Canon Law Society of America ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref51">6</reflink>] )—the governing framework for Catholic schools (see Table 2). We have organized the Catholic school identity framework around three common objectives of all Catholic schools—(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref52">1</reflink>) to teach the faith, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref53">2</reflink>) to teach within the experience of Christian community, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref54">3</reflink>) to prepare individuals for effective Christian witness and service to others (National Conference of Catholic Bishops [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref55">26</reflink>] #82). Finally, in order to maintain a designation as a Catholic school, these schools must satisfy Canon law, that is, regulations established by the governance of a Christian organization.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-10">To teach the faith</hd> <p>Catholic schools are committed to teaching Catholic faith, animated by the person of Jesus Christ (Miller [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref56">25</reflink>] ). The Catholic Church document, The Catholic School notes that Catholic schools must make “constant reference to the Gospel and provide a frequent encounter with Christ” (Congregation for Catholic Education [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref57">9</reflink>] , #55). This commitment includes, but goes beyond traditional religion or theology classes and is woven into all dimensions of life, subjects, and programs at a Catholic school (Miller [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref58">25</reflink>] ). Catholic schools focus on educating the whole person (Congregation for Catholic Education [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref59">9</reflink>] ), in order “to develop gradually every capability of every student: his or her intellectual, physical, psychological, moral, and religious capacities” (Miller [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref60">25</reflink>] , p. 42). Catholic schools should also “form [people] in the habit of critical reflection, a kind of questioning that engages people’s reason, memory, and imagination, and is critical in the sense of becoming aware of the historical source and the responsibility of all knowledge” (Groome [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref61">18</reflink>] , p. 120). Thus, Catholic schools are conceptualized as contexts where students learn to “trust their own discernment and decision making” (Groome [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref62">18</reflink>] , p. 121) rather than as sites of religious indoctrination.</p> <p>The emphasis placed on teaching the Catholic faith in Catholic schools highlights a commonly voiced concern about the conflict between teaching religion and science education. Recent research shows that a majority of young people perceive an opposition between science and religion (Billingsley, Riga, Taber and Newdick [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref63">3</reflink>] ). This perception could negatively influence student learning and their pursuit of science-related careers, especially among those with religious faith (Taber, Billingsley, Riga and Newdick [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref64">38</reflink>] ). Berry Billingsley, Keith Taber, Fran Riga and Helen Newdick ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref65">4</reflink>] ) note that students’ understanding of the relationship between faith and reason relates to their corresponding perception of the nature of science and the nature of religion. Although the perceived relationship and sometimes tensions between faith and reason may influence how a STEM-focused Catholic school negotiates its dual identities, probing specific tensions is beyond the scope of this paper.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-11">To build community</hd> <p>A hallmark of Catholic schools is their emphasis on community (Ozar and Weitzel-O’Neill [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref66">28</reflink>] ). The importance of community is theological, rooted in the doctrine of the Trinity (DelFra, Mattison, McGraw, and Scully in press), but also instrumental in terms of how members of the school interact. Miller ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref67">25</reflink>] ) discusses four ways in which community is manifested: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref68">1</reflink>) teamwork among stakeholders—educators, administrators, parents, and bishops; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref69">2</reflink>) cooperation needed between the educators and bishops; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref70">3</reflink>) relationship between the student and the teacher; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref71">4</reflink>) the physical environment of the school. These four areas underscore the reliance of community on healthy and positive relationships. Cook and Simonds ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref72">10</reflink>] ) build on the centrality of community by emphasizing relationships, particularly relationships within the school as well as the local and world community. The student-teacher relationship is crucial in forming students who can become citizens of the world.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-12">To serve</hd> <p>Not only do Catholic schools work to teach the faith and build community, but they emphasize serving the greater good, both locally and globally. A school is Catholic “because it prepares for a fully human life at the service of others and for the life of the world to come” (Miller [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref73">25</reflink>] p. 44). This idea is reiterated explicitly in the National Standards and Benchmarks for Effective Catholic Elementary and Secondary Schools:</p> <p>All curriculum and instruction in a Catholic school should foster: the desire to seek wisdom and truth, the preference for social justice, the discipline to become self-learners, the capacity to recognize ethical and moral grounding for behavior, and the responsibility to transform and enrich the world with Gospel values (emphasis added, Ozar and Weitzel-O’Neill [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref74">28</reflink>] , p. 2).</p> <p>Based on these established norms for service, students in Catholic schools often have required service hours and structures for engaging students in on-going service.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-13">To satisfy canon law</hd> <p>Canon law requires certain standards be met in order for a school to be considered Catholic. The local bishop possesses considerable influence and decision-making power in establishing and enforcing these requirements. The local bishop is responsible for ensuring that instruction is grounded in Catholic doctrine—particularly religious education—and that teachers are “outstanding in correct doctrine and integrity of life” (Canon Law Society of America [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref75">6</reflink>] , p. 803 §2). Moreover, even if a school is sponsored by a Catholic religious institute or order, it must have the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority to bear the name “Catholic school” (Canon Law Society of America [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref76">6</reflink>] , p. 803 §3). At the local level, the pastor of a parish school has the authority to make hiring and firing decisions for school leadership and to guide the decision-making of the school, although the responsibility for many day-to-day operations are often delegated to the principal. Additionally, although not consistently enforced, Catholic schools have a responsibility to be “at least as academically distinguished as … other schools in the area” (806 §3).</p> <p>Both the Catholic and STEM identities have distinct and discernable characteristics as presented above. The following section outlines the methods used to explore schools negotiating these two identities in practice.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-14">Methods</hd> <p>This study used a multiple case study approach. The data were part of a larger data set investigating the longitudinal implementation and impact of a STEM-focused adoption in Catholic schools. Multiple types of data, described below, were used to triangulate the initial assumptions, perspectives, and dispositions of various stakeholders in these Catholic schools.</p> <p>The case study approach was chosen because it is best suited for considering questions of how and why, particularly in the study of programs and processes, and allows for an investigation of “a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref77">40</reflink>] , p. 13). The multiple case study approach is deemed appropriate here as it “focuses on understanding the dynamics present within single settings” (Eisenhardt [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref78">14</reflink>] , p. 534) and allows for both within-case and cross-case analysis as a means for testing and generating theory (Baxter and Jack [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref79">2</reflink>] ). The use of a multiple case study design is more robust here than a single case design in that it provides opportunities for refining and extending theory through replication; for this reason, it is an appropriate method for studying school innovations, particularly independent programs conducted at different sites (Yin [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref80">40</reflink>] ).</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-15">Participating schools</hd> <p>Given the novelty of Catholic STEM-focused schools and the lack of an official STEM designation or registry among Catholic schools at the time of the study, snowball sampling was used to develop the four-school sample over 2 years. Snowball, or chain-referral sampling, is used to find members of a group that may be difficult to identify (Krathwohl [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref81">20</reflink>] ). The first school, Annunciation (pseudonyms are used throughout this paper), contacted our university requesting resources in order to successfully transform into a Catholic STEM Academy. A partnership developed in which the authors agreed to facilitate an initial discussion about STEM schools among school stakeholders and review decisions made a year later. In return, Annunciation agreed to participate in research investigating this organizational change. Publicity about the Annunciation transformation led other interested schools to contact the authors. Fortunately, the four participating schools are located in multiple states and cater to a diversity of student demographics, financial stability, and governance structures. Each school context is described briefly in the order in which they contacted the researchers.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-16">Annunciation</hd> <p>Annunciation is located outside of a large metropolitan area in the Pacific Northwest. The school, originally founded in the 1920s, is a small school, with an enrollment of 111 students in Kindergarten through grade 8. The student population comes from a working-class neighborhood with diverse racial and ethnic composition: 37% white, 8% black, 19% Hispanic, and 23% Asian students. Students of mixed race and native populations make up the remaining 13%. Each member of the school faculty is white, and the principal is the only male adult in the building. Teacher experience ranges from less than 2 years to more than 25 years with the majority of teachers having been in the classroom at least 3 years.</p> <p>Annunciation’s enrollment has decreased significantly over the last decade as the cost of educating students has increased. Since the collection of this data, some class years have been combined in the lower elementary to form multi-level classrooms with one teacher. An extensive remodeling of the school’s library into a STEM lab with flexible workspace, computers, and sinks, was funded by a local foundation prior to data collection.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-17">St. Mark</hd> <p>The parish school community of St. Mark is located in a large suburb in the Southeast and is a small but stable school, enrolling 177 students in grades K-8. The student population is majority white at 68%, with 10% black, 17% Hispanic, 2% Asian, and 2% mixed or other race students. High levels of wealth surround the school, but most students from this parish are from middle- to lower-middle class families. The faculty at St. Mark includes a largely female population and two male teachers. The teaching staff has one black teacher and one Hispanic teacher amid the majority of white teachers. One-third of the teachers at St. Mark are in their first 2 years of teaching and another third have twenty or more years of experience.</p> <p>The adoption of a STEM focus has been coupled with interest and leadership from strong math and science teachers. The STEM-focused approach has been supported by the diocesan schools office, which paid for the initial visioning session. At the time of the visioning session, a new pastor had been assigned to the parish and fully supported the initiative.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-18">St. Elizabeth Ann Seton</hd> <p>St. Elizabeth Ann Seton was the only new school in development among the sample. The diocese, situated along the Atlantic coast, with permission from the bishop, was creating a new stand-alone middle school that would combine students from the middle schools (grades 6-8) of multiple local K-8 parish schools. The parish schools would continue as K-5 Catholic schools that would funnel into a single STEM-focused middle school. At the time of the visioning session, the school was scheduled to open in 18 months. A former public school building had been identified for lease and a representative from the diocesan schools office and a sitting principal had been tapped to lead the school development, ranging from building decisions to curriculum development and staffing. The bishop appointed one of the parish priests to serve as the chaplain for the pending school.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-19">Prince of Peace</hd> <p>The largest of the four participating schools, Prince of Peace is located in a large city in the Southeast. A PK-8 parish school, Prince of Peace has an enrollment of 239 students in grades K-8 and averages more than 26 students per grade level. The student population is 56% white, 10% black, 5% Hispanic, 13% Asian, 10% of two or more races, and 6% Native American. The school, which has now reached a new equilibrium at more than 230 students, declined significantly in the 1990’s from a previous enrollment of nearly 400 students. During this decline, the student population shifted from an upper middle-class to a lower middle-class socioeconomic background. All of the teachers and administrators are white females. Teaching experience among the faculty ranges from 3 years to over 20 years, with about half of the teachers with more than 20 years of experience.</p> <p>Prince of Peace is also working closely with state accreditation agencies as a pilot program for STEM accreditation. Prior to the visioning session, the school had built and started using an outdoor learning garden and had instituted some “STEAM” activities that included the arts as well as traditional STEM elements, specifically focused on the physics of instruments and sound (Table 3).</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-20">Data sources and data collection</hd> <p>Four main sources of data were collected for this analysis: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref82">1</reflink>) visioning session artifacts; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref83">2</reflink>) teacher and administrator baseline surveys; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref84">3</reflink>) student baseline surveys; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref85">4</reflink>) stakeholder interviews.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-21">Visioning session artifacts</hd> <p>The visioning session was the initial opportunity for school stakeholders to envision the ways in which the school would incorporate the STEM disciplines within the Catholic school. The visioning session was facilitated by one of the authors and focused on heterogeneous group work among the stakeholders based on guiding questions. Adapting Simon Sinek’s ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref86">33</reflink>] ) work on leadership development, stakeholder groups worked collaboratively to develop public artifacts for the “why” and “how” of a STEM school transformation. Specifically, groups were given the following questions and were asked to publically represent their ideas on large sheets of butcher paper that were hung around the room:</p> <p>Session 1 Prompts: Why do you believe that a Catholic, STEM-focused education is important for students in this school?</p> <p>Session 2 Prompts: How will your school accomplish its STEM-focused mission?</p> <p>The first question focused on the organizational identity element of purpose while the second set of questions sought to identify initial perspectives on culture and distinctive elements in the school. A plenary session followed each small group session in which groups highlighted elements of their “why” and “how” discussions. The artifacts from the visioning session—the butcher paper with group ideas about the prompts—were labeled and photographed for later analysis.</p> <p>During the visioning session, the presenting member of the research team spent approximately five hours with the school stakeholders. The presentation focused mostly on raising questions that the stakeholders addressed and then discussed. The presenting member of the research team did provide an overview of what the literature stated as constituting a STEM-focused school using the five main sources cited in the literature review. The South Carolina state criteria were used for all four schools as an example of common state guidelines since most of the states were in the process of establishing STEM guidelines at the time of the data collection. The presenting member of the research team made no specific reference to elements of Catholic identity since this identity had already been established. The presenter’s questions for the small groups did ask the stakeholders to think about how the Catholic identity of the school would be part of the school transformation.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-22">Teacher/administrator baseline surveys</hd> <p>Teachers and administrators in the school, including instructors of non-STEM subjects, completed an online baseline survey at the start of the transformation process and a year-end survey at the end of each year. The survey contained five parts, four of which were derived from existing survey instruments: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref87">1</reflink>) perceptions of STEM disciplines; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref88">2</reflink>) vision and goals for a STEM-focused school; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref89">3</reflink>) teaching practices; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref90">4</reflink>) school and classroom resources; and (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref91">5</reflink>) demographics. For this analysis, only perspectives from the baseline survey were used and analysis focused on the set of six questions from the vision and goals section. These questions included:</p> <p>What do you think are the three most important goals for a STEM-focused school?</p> <p>How, if at all, do you think a Catholic STEM-focused school differs from a non-religious STEM-focused school?</p> <p>How important is a STEM-focus for students’ K-8 education? [5 pt. Likert scale from unimportant to very important]? Please explain your rating.</p> <p>How supportive are you of the recent transformation of your school to a STEM-focused Catholic school? [5 pt. Likert scale from unsupportive to very supportive].</p> <p>What single aspect of the STEM transformation process do you find most exciting?</p> <p>What single aspect of the STEM transformation process do you find most concerning?</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-23">Student surveys</hd> <p>Students from grades 3-8 were surveyed at the start of the transformation process and at the end of successive school years. Surveys pulled items from existing validated survey instruments in areas of interest in STEM disciplines, self-efficacy across STEM disciplines, engagement in STEM disciplines in and out of school, and perspectives on the relationship between religion and science. For this paper, only the questions focused on the relationship between religion and science were analyzed. The questions included:</p> <p>14a. Do you think that religion and science are related to one another in any way? (Circle ‘yes’ or ‘no’)</p> <p>14b. Please explain why you chose ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in Question 14a.</p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0130147599-24">Stakeholder interviews</hd> <p>Individual interviews were conducted with seven stakeholders from each school: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref92">1</reflink>) school pastor; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref93">2</reflink>) school principal; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref94">3</reflink>) diocesan assistant superintendent in charge of curriculum and instruction; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref95">4</reflink>) teacher in a STEM discipline; (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref96">5</reflink>) teacher in a self-contained or non-STEM discipline; (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref97">6</reflink>) community partner; (<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref98">7</reflink>) school parent. Interviews were semi-structured with four common questions for all stakeholders and one or two stakeholder specific questions pertaining to the STEM transformation of the school. Interviewers were allowed follow-up questions to probe for specific details of a respondent’s answer. Interviews generally lasted between 20-30 min, were audio recorded and transcribed. The common questions among the stakeholders included:</p> <p>From your perspective, what does success for a Catholic STEM-focused school look like 5-years from now?</p> <p>Do you believe a STEM-focused school helps support the mission of Catholic education? Why or why not? If yes, how?</p> <p>What do you think are your roles/responsibilities in the transformation process?</p> <p>What is the level of buy-in from the following stakeholders to move toward a more STEM-focused school: [asked about each of the other six stakeholders].</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-25">Researcher positioning</hd> <p>Although researcher subjectivity influences all studies, it is especially important to note how the positioning of the research team influenced the gathering and analysis of data. Five of the six authors spent at least 2 years teaching in Catholic middle or high schools allowing for both insight and bias in interpreting the data. While the researchers were former employees of K-12 Catholic schools, this positioning did not influence their academic freedom at the time of data collection nor during the analysis of and writing about the data.</p> <p>As mentioned above, several members of the research team helped lead an initial visioning session about the adoption of a STEM focus for the four schools studied here. Although the session focused on raising questions for stakeholders to answer, the presenters did present elements of the STEM definition discussed in the literature review above and answered questions throughout the day, making it impossible to remain entirely free from influencing some stakeholder’s initial conceptions of STEM schools.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-26">Data analysis</hd> <p>Visioning session documents were coded separately by task: (a) “why” and (b) “how.” For drawings and concept maps, a single figure or node was coded; for bulleted lists, each bullet was coded with both a parent and when appropriate, a child code. Codes were developed inductively. Coders analyzed the data independently and then met to reconcile codes to reach 100% agreement on all codes. Frequencies for child and parent codes were represented as histograms and disaggregated by school for between-subjects comparisons.</p> <p>For teacher/administration and student survey data, Likert-style questions were analyzed quantitatively by calculating means and standard deviations overall and by school. Open-ended questions were coded according to the STEM and Catholic identity frameworks illustrated in Tables 1 and 2. Similar histograms of the codes were created for each question as well as grouped into larger super-categories.</p> <p>Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and read by four researchers. After initial discussion of the transcripts and calibration with the codes, two researchers focused on coding the STEM identity elements and two researchers focused on coding the Catholic identity elements. Coding proceeded deductively using the respective conceptual frameworks summarized by Tables 1 and 2 (Miles, Huberman and Saldaña [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref99">24</reflink>] ). Individuals coded interviews and then reconciled codes with the partner researcher, until consensus was reached. During the consensus-making process, code definitions were refined, specific examples were cited, and emergent codes were added to the initial list. To normalize the mention of codes, we represented whether an interviewee mentioned a particular code rather than how often an individual mentioned a code.</p> <p>Once all data were coded, a case was generated for each school based on the four data types. Each case was built in light of both the STEM and Catholic identity frameworks and Pratt and Foreman’s ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref100">29</reflink>] ) framework for how organizations deal with multiple identities.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-27">Results</hd> <p>The following four cases are presented separately with common themes taken up in the discussion that follows. The first two cases represent schools with significant tension between their Catholic and STEM identities. The second two cases present findings from schools that are engaging the two identities in different ways. Each case begins with the foundational perspectives of a Catholic STEM-focused school at the visioning session followed by adult and student perceptions.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-28">Annunciation</hd> <p>Annunciation began the STEM transformation process largely due to external pressures. Previously, the school had not implemented elements described as STEM, but the diocesan schools office and a local foundation encouraged the school to develop a stronger STEM focus that would reflect the technology-based industry surrounding the school. Twenty-three stakeholders, including two teachers from the school, participated in the initial visioning session. Additional participants included external partners from the diocesan schools office, other schools, parents, local industry leaders, the pastor, and the out-going principal.</p> <p>Stakeholders’ vision for “why” and “how” a STEM-focused Catholic school could exist emphasized the theme of forming students for society and the future. Participants proposed an identity for the school that would produce students who contributed to the broader community, mostly derived from a faith-based perspective. As the pastor noted, Annunciation could be the “beacon for [the community]…a Catholic school that has STEM integrated into the curriculum.”</p> <p>One team’s “why” for a Catholic STEM-focused school exemplifies this mission of society formation through the lens of faith (Fig. 1a). This stakeholder group saw that students must be prepared for the 21st century, but in doing so, respond to the social justice needs of the world. Here, the STEM identity and Catholic identity work together in that creative problem solving—often seen as a hallmark of STEM education—happens through a Catholic lens.Visioning session artifacts responding to “Why create a Catholic STEM-focused school?” or “How will we create a Catholic STEM-focused school? a Annunciation. b St. Elizabeth Ann Seton. c, d St. Mark. e Prince of Peace</p> <p>Furthermore, participants in the visioning session, as well as the stakeholder interviews, identified the curriculum as the mechanism for how adoption of the STEM focus would occur. Thirty-percent of the suggestions for implementation in the visioning session focused on curriculum. Interviews with stakeholders also emphasized the need for revised curriculum that went beyond the status quo. Curriculum suggestions were general in nature, like the desire for teachers to “Striv[e] for excellent instruction”, “Use a common language”, or “Offer opportunities to spark curiosity, ignite innovation, and synthesize real world experiences and apply them to the global community.” The more in-depth interviews focused the curricular needs on problem-based learning in order for students to engage in open-ended, complex tasks.</p> <p>Though profound STEM curricular improvements were an identified need within the school, multiple sources of data pointed to the prominence of the Catholic identity as the intended guiding influence for the STEM reforms. In response to thinking about changes to the curriculum, one surveyed teacher responded, “I would assume that the lessons designed would be filtered through the religious requirements of teaching within a Catholic school”. The pastor, the principal, and the diocesan officials especially emphasized the need for integrating and weaving religion together with the STEM disciplines. The first grade teacher echoed this in her interview saying, “I think integration is the biggest thing, integrating our Catholic identity, you know, writing a lot about science and doing lots of math with our science.” The teacher mentioned that this might play out when doing engineering projects “that incorporate our Catholic identity. When we talk about building structures, we want to build them the best that we can so they support and help others”.</p> <p>While early intentions pointed toward aggregation or integration, early actions at Annunciation indicated some level of compartmentalization. At the start of the transformation, two teachers, one for elementary and one for middle school, were assigned to be STEM liaisons. One teacher’s interview described a time when she asked one of the specialists for help and the specialist replied, “That’s not my area.” Another teacher had grave concerns about the disproportionate role of STEM in the children’s education, thus forcing out other important aspects of learning. She stated, “The library was moved to a tiny room to make way for the STEM lab….This is very upsetting. Like I have stated before, children need a well-rounded education including access to a library. We are charging parents for an education that isn’t even whole and covering it up with a fancy STEM lab.” Annunciation parents who were interviewed recognized that early efforts STEM efforts resulted in teachers having “a tough time fusing the [STEM and the Catholic identities] together.”</p> <p>Compartmentalization was also influenced by the physical environment of the school. Prior to the visioning session, a local foundation provided approximately $40,000 to renovate the library into a STEM lab-a space for collaboration, digital technology, and stylized images of the STEM disciplines-although no references were made in the visioning session about the need for physical changes to the school facility. The presence of the new lab may have actually led to less accountability for STEM integration because teachers felt that STEM only occurred in the lab space. When asked what she thought was the most exciting aspect of adopting a STEM identity, one teacher replied, “Tough to say. The lab isn’t even complete so there is not much to be excited about, it’s just an empty room.” Even the principal addressed his concerns about the STEM identity of the school given its tie to a lab that was not completed saying,</p> <p>The most concerning aspect about the transformation is that the horse was put before the cart…The lab space wasn’t finished until the end of August. We still don’t have furniture. We still don’t have computers. We don’t have curriculum. There’s a lack of vision. People need to know where we are going. It’s hard to sell a product without vision and without a complete program.</p> <p></p> <p>The construction of the lab may have represented less the curricular needs of the new STEM program and more the financial pressures of decreased enrollment. When asked about the single most exciting element of the STEM transformation, three of the teachers, including the principal, cited the marketing potential for enrollment increases. One teacher stated,</p> <p>The most exciting aspect about the transformation is that it will give Annunciation an opportunity to attract more potential students. Annunciation has experienced a significant loss in student population and our hope is that this new program will help us be sustainable so that the Archdiocese doesn’t shut our school down.</p> <p></p> <p>Even two parents with children in the school envisioned a successful Catholic STEM-focused school 5 years in the future not in terms of the curricular model put forth at the visioning session, but in terms of “rooms filled…all the grades having 20+ students so each grade could have their own teacher…basically the school remaining open.”</p> <p>Ultimately, the reconciliation of the STEM and Catholic identities shifted from original views of an integrated curriculum toward compartmentalization of the identities, especially revolving around where STEM occurs, as well concern over a general lack of clarity about both identities. One teacher’s response to a survey question exemplifies the lack of clarity around the school’s identity:</p> <p>That our school is calling itself a STEM Academy and projecting ourselves as such, yet we do not have a firm grasp on the concept and how it should look. To succeed we should have everything in place first and feel at ease and confident in our ability in all grades to support what we say we are. The school does not yet even have a curriculum to work from. We are expected to create one yet clearly no one is sure what we are looking at yet nor have goals been defined.</p> <p></p> <p>Whether compartmentalized or misunderstood, the development of the new STEM identity lacked clarity for many stakeholders. With a strong vision from a steering committee that included many voices external to the school indicating that the tenets of the Catholic faith should be a filter for making decisions about STEM implementation in the school, this message was not fully shared by the faculty, staff, and students at the start of the process. Perhaps the lack of identity is best summarized by a middle school teacher’s response when she was asked about the perceived differences among Catholic STEM-focused schools and non-religious STEM-focused schools: “[I’m] not sure there is a difference.”</p> <p>While the teachers lacked clarity in how the STEM and Catholic identities would be reconciled, students also found tension between these two identities. When asked if religion and science are related to each other, the majority, 62%, of the 61 students in grades 3-8, marked “No.” Students who saw no overlap between faith and reason generally cited that science’s purview was the physical world whereas religion dealt with the meta-physical world. For instance, one-fourth grader wrote, “No, [religion and science aren’t related] because religion talks about God and science teaches us about what animals eat, about spiders.” A smaller number of students disagreed on epistemological grounds. Seven students cited the different methodological approaches to making claims, like one-sixth grader who stated, “Because science you do experiments and see what happens and religion you learn about God and Jesus.”</p> <p>An upper-elementary teacher noted the tension that sometimes exists for younger students. She mentioned one little boy who asked her, “But how could that be if God made the world in 7 days, and it doesn’t even mention dinosaurs in the Bible?” She says that this gives her and the teachers in the school the opportunity to “talk about science and the Bible and how, you know, the Catholic church’s teaching on the Bible is a way for us to understand how God loves us, but we don’t read the Bible [literally]…there’s two different ways of reading.” Conversely, some older students appeared to see ways in which science and religion could inform each other. One-sixth grade student picked up the theme of creation, stating, “God created everything. We have science from the human discoveries of God’s creation. How the human body system, animal system, and plant system, and all other systems work, God left it for us to find out.” In general, though, the relationship between science and religion lacked clarity for students as well as many adults in the school.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-29">St. Elizabeth Ann Seton</hd> <p>St. Elizabeth Ann Seton STEM Academy was a project devised by administrators in the diocesan schools office and pursued with permission from the local bishop. Administrators saw opportunity for innovation and growth, but parents were divided between excitement and skepticism, the latter largely stemming from one parish community. As a new school, the leaders of the project sought to pull together stakeholders from the multiple parishes that would feed into the school. The visioning session served as the first moment for an array of stakeholders to build a common understanding of what constitutes a STEM focus and how, if at all, the STEM identity would interact with the Catholic identity of the school.</p> <p>At the visioning session, St. Elizabeth stakeholders identified both social and economic reasons for creating a Catholic STEM-focused school. Artifacts from the visioning session pointed to “social justice” and “moral underpinnings” alongside the need to “deal with ‘messy’, complex issues” and develop “competitive life skills” as reasons for the existence of the school. Forming students for society represented over a third of all codes for “why” a Catholic STEM-focused school should exist (Fig. 1b). Interestingly, across nearly all groups, a unique term was used by St. Elizabeth stakeholders—virtue-to help define its purpose. In answering the “why” question, stakeholders noted the need to “develop virtuous leaders,” “model [the] virtuous lives of scientists, mathematicians, and saints,”, and “develop moral leaders that live virtuous lives.” While other schools focused on similar themes, they often used more contemporary terms like “moral” rather than the more philosophical term “virtue.”</p> <p>Responses to “how” the school would meet its vision elicited some ideas that reflected tension among stakeholders. The pastor at one of the feeder school parishes believed firmly in a “classical Catholic education.” He had extended post-secondary study in Latin and Greek and envisioned a type of Catholic school in which students would engage the great minds of Catholic theology, philosophy, and culture. This tension between STEM—a modern phenomenon—and classical education emerged in the visioning artifacts that included mixed groups of stakeholders. For example, Fig. 1b shows elements of both a STEM identity and a perceived “classical” Catholic education identity. When identifying how the Catholic STEM-focused school would function, the group noted problem-based learning as a main component, but other elements—“debate,” “rhetoric,” “historically informed,” and “Latin”—suggested a specific classical orientation to the school’s pedagogy. Whereas other schools identified computer-coding languages, some stakeholders at St. Elizabeth identified a classical language as a necessary element of the STEM-focused Catholic school.</p> <p>Across the artifacts, the Christian theme of the school was central to its function. One poster from the visioning session used the phrase “Catholic Identity Infuses Everything” and placed other aspects-culture, professional development, and problem-based learning-around this title. Another artifact noted that the integration of Gospel values and STEM would all contribute to “living out the mission of the school—Christ-centered and charity to one another.” The primacy of faith was consistent, but how that faith played out pedagogically, whether through more contemporary or more classical methods, remained in tension.</p> <p>At the diocesan level, leadership noted the importance of several elements central to a STEM identity. The associate superintendent wanted “more student engage[ment] with inquiry-based teaching and learning.” The principal leading the transformation also saw an opportunity for a “cultural transformation” that would lead to more collaboration and interdisciplinary teaching. Through this refined pedagogy, they envisioned a more holistic education that addressed the academic, spiritual, and physical needs of children.</p> <p>Several months after the visioning session, the research team received a call from the diocesan schools office. The bishop, who, as previously mentioned, holds canonical authority within a diocese for determining the Catholicity of a school, suspended indefinitely the creation of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton. Leaders of the transformation provided several reasons for the suspension of the initiative. The principal leading the day-to-day organization cited financial reasons, specifically the lack of funds to renovate a new building that would house the new middle school. And while she noted that the suspended project “had nothing to do with a change in philosophy or concern about a STEM application approach,” she later mentioned that there was “concern about…perce[ptions] more globally amongst the pastoral side of the larger system [outside of] the Catholic Schools Office.”</p> <p>The tensions that existed among stakeholders, especially the one pastor who emphasized a classical form of education, could not be ignored. The principal noted “there was a huge marketplace and a large portion of the Catholic community fully engaged and very supportive,” but “there were individual fiefdoms that might be impacted by the initiative.” As the pastor had made his opinions public, even through a Sunday worship service homily, the leaders of the initiative felt “kind of sabotaged” that they could not move forward. Members of the diocesan schools office mentioned that “when the [current] bishop retired” they might be able to revisit the possibility of a Catholic STEM-focused school.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-30">St. Mark</hd> <p>St. Mark began the move to a STEM-focused school as a proactive step toward strengthening curriculum and providing a market niche for the school within an environment of state-funded school choice. The initial visioning session comprised 27 participants that included three teachers, the principal, and the pastor from the school as well as external partners from the parish, the diocesan schools office, other diocesan schools, and local universities. During the visioning session, participants voiced several reasons for becoming a STEM-focused school, including preparing students for the future, better integrating faith and reason, forming students for society, and fostering student creativity. Of these four themes, preparing students for the future and better integrating faith and reason appeared most often and at similar rates within the artifacts, suggesting that stakeholders understood STEM-focused education as providing important academic outcomes for students as well as opportunities to better understand how faith and science can be integrated into thought and action. Forming students for society, with a focus on faith, and fostering student creativity also surfaced, albeit less often, suggesting that participants saw a STEM-focused education as providing ways for students to grow in both faith and ways of thinking. Figure 1c demonstrates one group’s responses that encompassed each of the four themes and pointed toward ideas of integrating the Catholic and STEM identities in the way ethical issues are approached and how faith might “blend” with fact in the dual-identity setting.</p> <p>When asked to consider “how” to make the move toward a STEM-focused school, participants understood the transformation as one primarily requiring organizational modifications (47%), with the majority of these responses focusing on curriculum changes as well as school scheduling, student assessment, and school facilities to a lesser extent. Stakeholders also viewed changes in school culture as a way to make the shift to a STEM-focused school, involving both school personnel and the school and larger community. While responses were somewhat vague across groups, one group attempted to detail these changes at different levels of school and community, framing these practical changes by phrases and images informed by faith, including “Remember where you came from—God” and “Keep God as focus” along with an image of a cross (see the margins of Fig. 1d). In doing so, this group acknowledged that faith should be considered as part of all necessary decisions and should infuse the final product, pointing toward the aggregation of a STEM identity within a Catholic identity framework.</p> <p>Along these lines, early attitudes and responses captured in teacher surveys and interviews suggest that the majority of school faculty viewed the transformation positively and as an opportunity to bring faith and science together more explicitly for students. As a STEM-focused Catholic school, the school will be able to “use God as a center” for STEM projects, incorporate “faith into the lessons,” provide students “freedom to explore the unknown without being restricted by the limitations of no religion,” and “show students how science is not ‘void’ of God.” The pastor, although new to the parish and school, also seemed to understand the transformation as a way to bring faith and science together:</p> <p>I am a great believer that science is a gift to us from God…When we use it with an open and inquiring mind it actually leads us to God. And I mean, I am a great supporter of John Paul II’s encyclical “Fides et Ratio,” that faith and reason are the two wings that lift us up into the contemplation of truth.</p> <p></p> <p>Across responses, school stakeholders perceived a Catholic school environment as a good fit for introducing a STEM curriculum, with the benefit that teachers and students would be able to bring faith into everything they do. School stakeholders seemed confident in their ability to provide a Catholic education, particularly in their conception of a Catholic school as weaving faith throughout the curriculum and educating the “whole child.” Some concern was expressed about the ability to take on the new STEM identity and nearly all stakeholders recognized that professional development was a necessary element for faculty going forward. During these early stages, select teachers had begun attending different professional development programs, returning back to the school to share what they had learned with the rest of the faculty. One teacher described the process as “supporting each other” through implementation trial and error, and “pushing” each other to “link” STEM with the faith components.</p> <p>Across stakeholder interviews and survey responses, the word “integration” was used to describe the process of becoming a STEM-focused school. Different stakeholders, however, understood this term differently. Some stakeholders described a vision of a school with STEM “integrated across the entire school, not just little segments of it… at all grade levels and across all curriculums.” In this sense, the integration can be thought of as infusing STEM across the existing entity of the school. However, the Catholic educators were more explicit about integrating Catholic faith into the elements of the curriculum, including this new STEM focus, which may be due to the traditional way that Catholic schools have been structured, with the goal of Catholic faith and belief infusing the academic education. One stakeholder described the integration of faith in a Catholic school, “It’s a whole. The Catholic identity is actually not a separate component of the school. It’s the air they breathe.”</p> <p>Survey responses also point toward this idea of Catholic culture as permeating the school and the STEM focus, describing faith as the backdrop for the inclusion of science, with “Catholic values as the basis” for learning and morals and values as an “influence on the [STEM] program’s goals.” In this sense, the opportunity to integrate faith into STEM was seen as the dominant focus of the integration, rather than an integration of STEM across the curriculum. Taken together these attitudes suggest that rather than true integration, at this stage in the process, the transformation may be better characterized as aggregation, with the STEM-focus a secondary priority to the Catholic-focus.</p> <p>From a student perspective, the survey of students in grades 3-8 suggests that slightly more students understand religion and science as related (54%) as opposed to understanding them as separate (46%). Similar to students at Annunciation, those who saw religion and science as completely separate focused on differences in content between religion and science, with religion about “beliefs” and science about “theory, fact, and knowledge.” Some made a meta-physical/physical distinction between the two, explaining that “religion is about God, science is about the planet.” One student specifically noted a disconnect between the two subjects at school: “When I’m learning about these subjects at school, none of them come into contact each other.” In contrast, students who understood religion and science as related focused on the role of God as creator and the role of man in attempting to learn about and understand God’s creation. One student explained, “God created plants, animals, nature and the world. And scientists study plants, animals, nature, and the world.” Another student put it this way, “In religion you learn about God, and in science you learn about God’s living things.” Some students referenced God’s plans for the world in relation to creation saying, “God created everything with a scientific backing for us humans to comprehend.” Compared to Annunciation, students at St. Mark were more likely to see a relationship between the domains of the school’s two prospective identities.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-31">Prince of Peace</hd> <p>With the goal of becoming the first Catholic school in their state to receive an official STEM-school designation, Prince of Peace began developing their STEM identity as their state Department of Education was developing a STEM school rubric. While some individual teachers had begun to implement STEM lessons and integrate science and mathematics into other core subjects, the principal wanted a more comprehensive and structured approach to adapting a STEM focus for the entire school community. This focus started with the initial visioning session, which included 25 stakeholders. This group included teachers from Prince of Peace, teachers from the Catholic school for students with disabilities (which shares the campus with Prince of Peace), parents, local industry leaders, faculty members from local universities, the pastor, the diocesan superintendent, and the principal of the school.</p> <p>In thinking about “why” Prince of Peace should become a Catholic school with a STEM focus, two clear themes emerged. First, stakeholders saw a Catholic STEM-focused school as responding to the need to form students who serve both their local communities and the greater good. In particular, visioning participants were interested in fostering students who would be intellectually capable of responding to challenges, and whose actions would be built upon a foundation of Catholic values. Stakeholders envisioned “life-long learners” with students “learning beyond the classroom,” possessing a “servant attitude,” and are able to “draw upon their Catholic perspective when faced with ethical issues related to STEM.” To these participants, a Catholic STEM school would not only produce citizens who were responding to the growing challenges in the world, but would also instill habits of learning to produce a continually learning citizenry. The emphasis on formation for society was echoed by the second theme: the potential of a Catholic STEM-focused school to prepare students for success in future pursuits, specifically in educational endeavors and potential careers. Ideas included being able to “compete in a global market,” “to prepare our students for the technological world,” and for “future education.” Here, the vision of a Catholic STEM-focused school drew on elements of both identities to imagine the educational future of their students.</p> <p>When responding to the task of brainstorming “how” to shape a Catholic school with a STEM focus, visioning participants focused on three key areas: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref101">1</reflink>) school culture; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref102">2</reflink>) organizational modifications; and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref103">3</reflink>) professional development. Transforming the school culture to better reflect the goals of STEM education was the highest priority, but stakeholders recognized the importance of changing the school schedule and offering professional development as means for supporting this primary goal. One team’s “how” clearly emphasized the importance of organization modifications and professional development (see Fig. 1e). The participants made it clear that the school day of a Catholic STEM-focused school should not look like a traditional school day. Time would need to be scheduled for teachers to collaborate and plan cross-curricular integrated lessons as well as “First Friday Design Challenges” which would bring together multi-grade teams to address authentic and themed problems in quarter or semester blocks. Stakeholders also noted that the transformation could not come only from within the walls of Prince of Peace. The school needed to involve parents and community members to transform the culture. While the suggestions were broad, groups emphasized “community involvement” and “community/stakeholder buy-in” as well as stressing the importance of parent communication and the need for parents to help with activities and projects. Thus, pieces of the STEM identity were to be made more visible in order to fully promote a school culture reflecting the aims of a Catholic STEM-focused school.</p> <p>The ideas generated in the initial brainstorming session laid the foundation for efforts at Prince of Peace to adopt a STEM focus and strongly indicated the potential synergies in pairing a STEM identity with the existing Catholic identity of the school. In subsequent surveys of the Prince of Peace teachers and follow-up interviews with a variety of stakeholders, these sentiments were largely—but not completely—echoed. In the survey, teachers continued the push from the visioning session on the importance of organizational modifications, specifically with increased STEM time and a STEM focused and integrated curriculum. One teacher mentioned, “The school needs to have each grade level include all parts of STEM….Each grade level should build on the materials from the previous years.” Another teacher valued the “implementation of an interdisciplinary approach rather than [teaching] the individual subjects.” Teachers saw a natural fit of a STEM identity with their existing Catholic identity. One teacher noted, “Faith is an integral part of our lives (as much as STEM).” Another continued, “Catholic STEM focus will attach a greater purpose to all STEM outcomes. For example, will this problem resolution benefit people? Is it a fair distribution of resources? Etc.”</p> <p>This mutual benefit between the STEM and Catholic identities also surfaced in the follow-up interviews with stakeholders. One parent stated, “Well, I think Catholicism and science have always gone hand-in-hand. They may have disagreed in somewhat small famous incidents, but for the most part, Catholicism is pretty pro-science.” There was a sense of opportunity in many of the interviews about the transformation of Prince of Peace into a Catholic STEM-focused school. The principal illustrated this idea describing what success at a Catholic STEM-focused school might look like,</p> <p>Success would look like all of these projects having a purpose and relating to one of the social teachings of the church…. You know, that all these projects would be geared toward a purpose. And that purpose would be shared if people and kids would realize why they’re doing things for a greater purpose than just knowledge for knowledge sake.</p> <p></p> <p>This idea reflects the emphasis placed on forming students for society and for serving the greater good, which came out of the visioning session. Moreover, the push to tying STEM projects and problems to real-world challenges, particularly ones that address Catholic social teaching, echoes the desire to integrate the subjects and situated learning in authentic situations.</p> <p>While a majority of the responses in the surveys and interviews reiterate the optimism and sentiment of the visioning session, one new theme that came across more clearly in the stakeholder interviews was a one-way assimilation of identity. The stakeholders were adamant that Prince of Peace was first and foremost a Catholic school and if it were to become a Catholic STEM-focused school, it would not sacrifice its Catholic principles. The diocesan administrator noted,</p> <p>Of course, I would like to say that when we have STEM, I’d like to include religion in there always. That it is religion interwoven into everything we do, right, as a Catholic school. So that that STEM program needs to have that religious component interwoven into what’s going on with the science, technology, and mathematics that’s taking place in the STEM program.</p> <p>And the school pastor continued,</p> <p>Well, one concern and I’ve noticed a little bit here with the STEM is that they are increasing the amount for STEM but they are reducing sometimes the requirements for a Catholic education in the faith… So that’s why maintaining that strong balance between the two of them, that the STEM does not overtake or be dominant, that would take away from the Catholic school identity and the Catholic faith.</p> <p></p> <p>Thus, the stakeholders of Prince of Peace were open to potential educational opportunities—especially in the realm of producing informed and engaged global citizens—by becoming a Catholic STEM-focused school, but not at the expense of losing its roots in Catholicism. In other words, the school was happy to augment their Catholic identity with elements from a STEM identity, but not the other way around.</p> <p>Evidence from the visioning sessions, interviews, and surveys strongly suggest that Prince of Peace stakeholders are committed to its Catholic identity and the promise of supplementing this identity with aspects of a STEM identity. This overlap is particularly visible in using problem- or project-based learning to situate classroom learning in real-world contexts, which also address Catholic social teaching. While there is optimism regarding this dual-identity, change is hard and there appeared to be definite tension about the transformation process. In other words, Prince of Peace sees the value of the “why,” but it is the “how” which may ultimately result in the deletion or compartmentalization of the STEM identity. The emphasis on changing the school culture, highlighted during the visioning session, must be shared by all stakeholders of the school, not just the ones present at the visioning session, or sentiments like the following may derail the transformation process:</p> <p>The teachers that continue to use the same lesson plans for decades and seem resistant to doing something different. I find this concerning because they make it clear that their needs come before the students. What is easiest for them is not always what is best for the students.</p> <p></p> <p>Similar to St. Mark, a slight majority of students, 53%, in grades 3-8, answered, “Yes” to the question about whether science and religion were related in any way, but students in the upper grades dominated this finding. Only 33% of students in the lower grades saw a relationship between science and religion with many noting, as this third grader wrote, “No [science and religion aren’t related] because religion takes place in saints and God. Science takes place in spiders and frogs.” Explanations for students who did see a relationship were more varied, but generally fell into one of two categories: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref104">1</reflink>) that science and religion could help explain one another; and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref105">2</reflink>) that science and religion covered similar topics. In a response that was typical of the first category, an eighth grade student commented,</p> <p>Yes [science and religion are related], because everything involving anything has to do with science. Science is everywhere. The Bible said God made the earth in a week but science says dinosaurs roamed the earth centuries before man. This means that God’s time is different than ours, but it connects to science with religion. There are many ways in which religion and science are connected like the Shroud of Turin, etc.</p> <p></p> <p>The second category usually included some reference to the Biblical story of the creation of the universe, as noted by this sixth grader, “I chose yes because some stories in the bible explain things that science found out years later. For ex: creation. The bible tells us that only with his voice the sun and space were made. Science says there was a big bang that caused it. That big bang was God’s voice and breath.”</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-32">Discussion</hd> <p>The four cases above illustrate varied ways in which school stakeholders, in this instance, Catholic school stakeholders, can negotiate the presence of multiple organizational identities. The patterns and perspectives elicited for these cases have broad implications for different types of schools interested in adopting a new identity and enacting a shift from an existing purpose, brand, and culture. In this discussion we first take up the ways in which the four cases engaged the dual identities and the implications these findings have for all school types adopting that seek to adopt a STEM focus. We address, in brief, the specific context of Catholic schools and how thinking about organizational identity might shape a STEM-focused transformation while making analogous connections to other school types. Following our proposed framework we cite several limitations of this study and propose important questions for future investigation.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-33">Negotiating Multiple Identities</hd> <p>Like most Catholic schools, each of the four case schools experienced enrollment decline over the past two decades. In some cases, the adoption of a STEM identity was intended to directly address this crisis. In other cases, the primary purpose of the school’s adoption of a STEM focus was to improve the quality of outcomes for students in the 21st century. The cases represent different ways in which the schools’ stakeholders envisioned this transformation and how this led to negotiating the multiple identities. Although data from each school reflected instances of dealing with the two identities in multiple ways, overarching patterns arose that characterized each school’s approach.</p> <p>Annunciation and St. Elizabeth Ann Seton represent examples of organizations that found great initial difficulty in negotiating multiple identities. The integration of STEM disciplines with each other and across other subjects—a foundational element of our conceptual framework for STEM-focused schools—was central to the initial vision of these schools. Yet the teachers at Annunciation saw the task of “teaching STEM” as the province of a designated teacher or as the activities that take place in a specific space—a STEM lab—that was not integrated into the daily modes of teaching and learning. Generally, teachers felt overwhelmed by the task of creating more integrated, problem-based curriculum even though initial visions for the school transformation emphasized the importance of this pedagogical approach. Thus, in Annunciation, the STEM disciplines actually remained compartmentalized and sectioned off from not only the existing Catholic identity, but also most other parts of the school day.</p> <p>For St. Elizabeth Ann Seton, reconciling the two identities was influenced by some stakeholders’ a priori belief that the two identities were at odds. The stakeholders leading the transformation saw the promise of bringing together STEM and religious perspectives as constructive whereas classicist stakeholders viewed the relationship as potentially destructive. The latter group viewed the innovation as encroaching on a perceived enduring culture of Catholic education that understood STEM as a fad and subordinate to classical notions of education including rhetoric, Latin, and Greek. The unresolved tension from this vocal minority led to the deletion of the STEM identity, the suspension of the creation of the new school, and the protection of business as usual among the feeder schools.</p> <p>Importantly, for both compartmentalization and deletion cases, stakeholder interviews and initial actions emphasized the importance buy-in plays when adopting a new identity. The top-down approach at Annunciation generated little buy-in from the faculty. While initial visioning showed promises of the two identities working together, early implementation resulted in compartmentalization and only an external image of STEM in the marketing of the school. Attempts were made to infuse STEM into the curriculum, but initially these attempts met resistance and were unsuccessful due to a lack of clarity around the goals of STEM education and how it fit together with the other disciplines. On the other hand, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton did not lack buy-in from the faculty, but from at least one particular individual, the pastor, who, along with a set of influential parents adopted skepticism toward the addition of a STEM identity. The school project was suspended indefinitely not because of the lack of buy-in or energy from those leading the program, but because of canonical authority that raised significant, and in this case almost unmovable, obstacles to proceeding.</p> <p>Although St. Mark and Prince of Peace discussed the adoption of a STEM focus in unique ways, stakeholders from both schools clearly established a hierarchical relationship between the two identities, with the Catholic identity providing the central purpose for the school and the STEM identity fitting within that existing Catholic culture and framework. In negotiating these two identities through aggregation, the schools generated buy-in across stakeholders and identified authentic ways in which faith and the STEM disciplines could mutually inform student thinking and learning. Prince of Peace made specific connections to recently released papal documents about stewardship and care for the environment in relation to project-based lessons using the learning garden. Furthermore, stakeholders saw ways in which students could learn about plants and living systems to produce food for the poor. In this way, initial plans focused on substantive elements of both the STEM and Catholic identities of the school. By aggregating these identities, they found a path for integrating disciplines in ways that facilitated teacher participation and still reflected elements of both a STEM and Catholic identity. For St. Mark and Prince of Peace, questions still remained—especially about teacher professional development—but the task of negotiating multiple identities was seen as the responsibility of administrators and stakeholders and thus, had the possibility of forming an aggregated identity in ways that respected and built on each identity.</p> <p>The negotiation of organizational identity through an aggregated approach in these two cases provides examples of the possible for other schools that seek to adopt a STEM identity when a strong school purpose, culture, and brand already exist. For Catholic schools, canon law and almost three centuries of history necessitate that the Catholic identity of the school define the school’s culture, focus its practices, and meet the requirements of the local bishop. For most parents, the religious foundation along with the perceived academic rigor and safety of the school, are the top reasons for choosing Catholic schools (Lockwood [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref106">22</reflink>] ). Thus, a hierarchical relationship in which the Catholic identity remains central allows for greater buy-in from stakeholders. Furthermore, aggregating the two identities may lead to curricular and instructional integration that reflects authentic, rigorous disciplinary learning in both domains. For example, historical case studies can engage students in both the constructive (e.g., the long-standing astronomical research done at the Vatican observatory) and destructive (e.g., the trial of Galileo for his heliocentric model of the solar system) relationship between faith and the STEM disciplines. Or, teachers could create contexts for engineering design challenges and scientific investigations that allow students to solve problems that address Catholic social teachings or reflect current Catholic teachings on environmental stewardship and care for creation.</p> <p>How these four cases dealt with both identities has implications for schools from other sectors like public or charter schools. Although the original identity would vary among Catholic, public, and charter schools, the Catholic schools explored in this study all drew from critical components of the existing STEM school literature as well as state rubrics, in this case, the rubric for South Carolina. This rubric served as an initial guiding framework until other state frameworks became available. Schools from all sectors could help shape their STEM identity by drawing on the rigorous, problem-focused principles of STEM teaching and learning as well as the emphasis on integration across STEM and other disciplines.</p> <p>In other sectors, balancing the two identities might involve a neighborhood public school or charter school ensuring that their primary, historical identity does not get lost in adopting a STEM focus, but rather is central to many aspects of the STEM learning itself. Neighborhood public schools may draw on generations of students who are tied to the local culture and geography. Charter schools often develop and exude a particular culture or address the needs of targeted populations. If adopting a STEM focus, these organizations may benefit from creating a hierarchy of identities that values the existing identity to create stakeholder buy-in while still adopting the essential components of a STEM-focused school. Furthermore, these schools should draw upon their existing identity, such as local resources, industries, or environmental phenomena, to shape the types of rigorous, problem-based STEM experiences in which students engage.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-34">Limitations</hd> <p>The cases presented in this paper focus on the inflection point when organizations, here Catholic schools, seek to adopt a second, significant organizational identity. These data represent initial perspectives of a variety of stakeholders, generally within the first few months of starting the transformation process. Thus, fully implemented models and perspectives of stakeholders from implemented models may provide different perspectives. Given the relative novelty of the Catholic STEM-focused school, data from more established schools were not available.</p> <p>A significant gap in the interview and survey data necessarily exists for St. Elizabeth Ann Seton, the case that focused on the incompatibility of the two identities. The diocesan staff was willing to provide interviews after the creation of the school was halted indefinitely. However, the other stakeholder data such as student surveys and parent and teacher interviews do not exist, as the school was never established.</p> <p>Finally, the case study approach with four schools limits the generalizability of the claims to these particular schools. Quantitative claims cannot be made about the frequency of perspectives across the broader group of Catholic schools that increasingly adopt some level of STEM identity or for other school types that seek to adopt a STEM focus. Nevertheless, the multiple points of data collected for each school provide us not only cases of how schools do or do not handle multiple organizational identities, but also an initial empirical basis that moves this nascent field toward a theoretical framework which future studies can test.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-35">Future research and conclusion</hd> <p>Given the recent phenomenon of schools across all sectors adopting a STEM focus, future work needs to explore the implementation of dual organizational identities and how organizations assimilate a STEM identity into existing identities or are forced to reject a STEM identity. Longitudinal case studies or ethnographies could help develop portraits of how and what schools actually adopt within the STEM disciplines and how this does or does not interact with elements of a school’s existing identity. For schools with an existing strong identity, such as the Catholic schools explored in this study, understanding the factors that affect how identities are negotiated is particularly important. Given recent case studies of how schools in the public sector have failed to realize the intended goals of STEM-focused schools (Weis, Eisenhart, Cipollone, Stich, Nikischer, Hanson and Dominguez [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref107">39</reflink>] ), especially for underserved populations, comparisons across sectors may provide evidence for what elements must be in place to support a STEM-focus or how particular elements, especially those unique to Catholic schools, may create unresolvable tensions between the two identities.</p> <p>Additionally, more quantitative studies may investigate student outcomes within Catholic STEM-focused schools. Although past research suggested an academic Catholic school advantage at the high school level (Bryk, Lee and Holland [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref108">5</reflink>] ), current data suggests that this advantage may not hold for the elementary and middle grades, particularly in the STEM area of mathematics (Hallinan and Kubitschek [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref109">19</reflink>] ). Redesigning the culture, scope, and sequence around the STEM disciplines may once again change relative student outcomes in Catholic and public schools. Investigating student achievement, interest in STEM, and students’ identification with the STEM disciplines before, during, and after an organizational transformation would provide more nuanced understandings of sector differences in light of new Catholic school models. Since the limited research indicates that many STEM-focused reforms quickly dissolve (Weis, Eisenhart, Cipollone, Stich, Nikischer, Hanson and Dominguez [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref110">39</reflink>] ), it would be important to know if different identity structures result in shorter or longer term reforms.</p> <p>Catholic schools represent the largest private school system in the United States. Yet innovative school models across sectors have encouraged Catholic schools to explore the adoption of a second significant organizational identity—a STEM identity—along with their traditional Catholic framework. As shown in this study, schools and school stakeholders deal with the interaction of these organizational identities in multiple ways, ranging from compartmentalization and deletion to aggregation. Across all schools, initial interest existed in weaving together elements of the two identities, but there were questions about how this specifically could occur. Furthermore, each school stressed the importance of maintaining their Catholic identity, first and foremost, and weaving the Catholic identity throughout the STEM elements. Given this orientation, we note that identity integration, as defined by the creation of an entirely new identity within an organization, may not be the ultimate goal for Catholic schools, but rather schools with existing strong purposes and culture should focus on aggregation. The most central, enduring, and distinctive identity - in this study, the Catholic identity, should have a hierarchical role in order for the adoption of a second identity to be possible. This aggregation model may also be appropriate for public and charter schools who seek to maintain a dominant, existing identity, while expanding their STEM focus.</p> <p>Lead Editor: Colette Murphy</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-36">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>We are grateful to the Institute for Educational Initiatives and its Fellows’ Grant program for providing the seed grant that funded the data collection for this paper.</p> <hd id="AN0130147599-37">References</hd> <hd id="AN0130147599-38">Citations</hd> <p>1 Albert, S., &amp; Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity. In L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 263-295). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Retrieved from, <ulink href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1986-02640-001">http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1986-02640-001</ulink>.</p> <ulist> <item>2 Baxter, P., &amp; Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers., The Qualitative Report, 13, 44-559. Retrieved from, http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf.</item> <item>3 Billingsley B, Riga F, Taber KS, Newdick H, Secondary school teachers’ perspectives on teaching about topics that bridge science and religion, Curriculum Journal, 2014, 25, 3, 372, 395, 10.1080/09585176.2014.920264</item> <item>4 Billingsley B, Taber K, Riga F, Newdick H, Secondary school students’ epistemic insight into the relationships between science and religion—A preliminary enquiry, Research in Science Education, 2013, 43, 4, 1715, 1732, 10.1007/s11165-012-9317-y</item> <item>5 Bryk AS, Lee VR, Holland P, Catholic schools and the common good, 1993, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press</item> <item>6 Code of Canon Law, 1999, Washington, DC, Author</item> <item>7 Carbonaro W, Covay E, School sector and student achievement in the era of standards based reforms, Sociology of Education, 2010, 83, 160, 182, 10.1177/0038040710367934</item> <item>8 Coleman JS, Hoffer T, Kilgore S, High school achievement: Public, Catholic, and private schools compared, 1982, New York, Basic Books</item> <item>9 The Catholic school, 1977, Washington, DC, United States Catholic Conference</item> <item>10 Cook, T. J., &amp; Simonds, T. A. (2011). The charism of 21st-century Catholic schools: Building a culture of relationships., Journal of Catholic Education, 14. Retrieved from, http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ce/vol14/iss3/7.</item> <item>11 Davis M, Venugopal N, Catholic schools turn to blended learning, Education Week, 2012, 32, 9, 9</item> <item>12 DeBoer GE, A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice, 1991, New York, Teachers College Press</item> <item>13 DelFra, L., Mattison, W., McGraw, S., &amp; Scully, T. (in press). Education in the Catholic key. In W. Jeynes (Ed.), Handbook of Christian education. London: Routledge.</item> <item>14 Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research., Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550. Retrieved from, http://www.jstor.org/stable/258557.</item> <item>15 Eisenhart M, Weis L, Allen CD, Cipollone K, Stich A, Dominguez R, High school opportunities for STEM: Comparing inclusive STEM-focused and comprehensive high schools in two US cities, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2015, 52, 763, 789, 10.1002/tea.21213</item> <item>16 Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M., &amp; Corley, K. G. (2000). Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability., Academy of Management Review, 25, 63-81. Retrieved from, http://www.jstor.org/stable/259263.</item> <item>17 Goldschmidt, E. P., &amp; Walsh, M. E. (2013). Urban Catholic elementary schools: What are the governance models?, Journal of Catholic Education, 17. Retrieved from, http://dx.doi.org/10.15365/joce.1701072013.</item> <item>18 Groome TH, McLaughlin T, O’Keefe J, O’Keeffe B, What makes a school Catholic, The contemporary Catholic school: Context, identity and diversity, 1996, London, Falmer Press, 107, 125</item> <item>19 Hallinan M, Kubitschek WN, A comparison of academic achievement and adherence to the common school ideal in public and catholic schools, Sociology of Education, 2012, 85, 1, 22, 10.1177/0038040711431586</item> <item>20 Krathwohl DR, Methods of educational and social science research, 2009, 3, Long Grove, IL, Waveland Press</item> <item>21 LaForce M, Noble E, King H, Holt S, Century J, The 8 elements of inclusive STEM high schools: Findings from the STEM school study, 2014, Chicago, IL, The University of Chicago</item> <item>22 Lockwood, R. (2014)., Factors influencing parental choice and enrollment in Catholic schools (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Dissertation No. 3617421).</item> <item>23 Lynch, S. J., Peters-Burton, E. E., Behrend, T., Han, E. M., Ford, M., Spillane, N., &amp; House, A. (2015). Exemplar inclusive STEM high school curriculum and instruction: Cross case analysis of eight schools. In, Presented at the annual meeting of the national association of research in science teaching, Chicago, IL.</item> <item>24 Miles M, Huberman M, Saldaña J, Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, 2014, 3, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage</item> <item>25 Miller J, Holy The, Five essential marks of Catholic schools, See’s teaching on Catholic schools, 2006, Atlanta, GA, Sophia Institute Press, 17, 63</item> <item>26 National Conference of Catholic Bishops. (1972)., To teach as Jesus did. Washington, DC: U.S. Catholic Conference.</item> <item>27 Successful K-12 STEM education: identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, 2011, Washington, DC, National Academies Press</item> <item>28 Ozar LA, Weitzel-O’Neill P, National standards and benchmarks for effective Catholic elementary and secondary schools, 2012, Chicago, Loyola University Chicago, Center for Catholic School Effectiveness</item> <item>29 Pratt, M. G., &amp; Foreman, P. O. (2000). Classifying managerial responses to multiple organizational identities., Academy of Management Review, 25, 18-42. Retrieved from, http://www.jstor.org/stable/259261.</item> <item>30 Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) for America’s future, 2010, Washington, DC, Executive Office of the President</item> <item>31 Reardon, S. F., Cheadle, J. E., &amp; Robinson, J. P. (2009). The effect of Catholic schooling on math and reading development in kindergarten through fifth grade., Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2, 45-87. Retrieved from, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19345740802539267.</item> <item>32 Scott, C. (2012). An investigation of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) focused high schools., U.S. Journal of STEM Education, 13, 30-39. Retrieved from, http://ojs.jstem.org/.</item> <item>33 Sinek S, Start with why: How great leaders inspire everyone to take action, 2009, New York, Penguin</item> <item>34 South Carolina Department of Education. (2016)., South Carolina STEM implementation continuums. Retrieved from, http://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards-learning/programs-grants-awards/stem-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics/.</item> <item>35 Spillane NK, Lynch SJ, Ford MR, Inclusive STEM high schools increase opportunities for underrepresented students, Phi Delta Kappan, 2016, 97, 8, 54, 59, 10.1177/0031721716647021</item> <item>36 Stryker S, Burke PJ, The past, present and future of an identity theory, Social Psychological Quarterly, 2000, 63, 284, 297, 10.2307/2695840</item> <item>37 Subotnik RF, Tai RH, Rickoff R, Almarode, Specialized public high schools of science, mathematics, and technology and the STEM pipeline: What do we know now and what will we know in 5 years?, Roeper Review, 2010, 32, 7, 16, 10.1080/02783190903386553</item> <item>38 Taber, K., Billingsley, B., Riga, F., &amp; Newdick, H. (2011). To what extent do pupils perceive science to be inconsistent with religious faith? An exploratory survey of 13-14 year-old English pupils., Science Education International, 22(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref111">2</reflink>), 99-118. ISSN-2077-2327.</item> <item>39 Weis L, Eisenhart M, Cipollone K, Stich AE, Nikischer AB, Hanson J, Dominguez R, In the guise of STEM education reform: Opportunity structures and outcomes in inclusive STEM-focused high schools, American Educational Research Journal, 2015, 52, 1024, 1059, 10.3102/0002831215604045</item> <item>40 Yin R, Case study research: Design and methods, 1994, Beverly Hills, CA, Sage</item> </ulist> <p>PHOTO (COLOR)</p> <aug> <p>By Matthew Kloser; Matthew Wilsey; Dawn W. Hopkins; Julie W. Dallavis; Erin Lavin and Michael Comuniello</p> <p></p> <p>Matthew Kloseris the founding director of the University of Notre Dame Center for STEM Education and a faculty member and Fellow of the Institute for Educational Initiatives at the University of Notre Dame. Dr. Kloser’s research focuses on issues of teaching, learning, and assessment in science classrooms with a special focus on biology education.</p> <p>Matthew Wilseyis the associate director of the Center for STEM Education at the University of Notre Dame. His work focuses on improving STEM teaching and learning through professional development, teacher education, and research in the areas of STEM integration, assessment frameworks, and core instructional practices. Prior to joining the Center, Matt taught science at the secondary level.</p> <p>Dawn Hopkinsis an assistant clinical professor with the Vera Z. Dwyer College of Health Sciences at Indiana University South Bend. Her interests focus on the use of technology in the teaching and learning of biostatistics, community health, and exercise physiology.</p> <p>Julie W. Dallavisis a doctoral candidate in the Department of Sociology and the Center for Research on Educational Opportunity at the University of Notre Dame. Her dissertation research focuses on how teachers and leaders in schools understand and enact an organizational mission as well as how shared ideas of mission influence teacher practice and student achievement.</p> <p>Erin Lavinis the advanced placement biology teacher at Mount Saint Mary Catholic High School in Oklahoma City. She earned her M.Ed. through the University of Notre Dame’s Alliance for Catholic Education.</p> <p>Michael Comuniellois the Associate Program Director for the Alliance for Catholic Education (ACE) Teaching Fellows Program at the University of Notre Dame. Prior to joining the ACE Teaching Fellows staff, Comuniello taught high school chemistry and physics in southern Florida after earning his M.Ed. from the University of Notre Dame.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib1" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib2" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib3" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib4" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib5" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib8" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib7" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib9" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib6" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref107"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1182402 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Dual Identities: Organizational Negotiation in STEM-Focused Catholic Schools – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kloser%2C+Matthew%22">Kloser, Matthew</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wilsey%2C+Matthew%22">Wilsey, Matthew</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hopkins%2C+Dawn+W%2E%22">Hopkins, Dawn W.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dallavis%2C+Julie+W%2E%22">Dallavis, Julie W.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lavin%2C+Erin%22">Lavin, Erin</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Comuniello%2C+Michael%22">Comuniello, Michael</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Cultural+Studies+of+Science+Education%22"><i>Cultural Studies of Science Education</i></searchLink>. Jun 2018 13(2):549-579. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 31 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2018 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22STEM+Education%22">STEM Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Catholic+Schools%22">Catholic Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Institutional+Mission%22">Institutional Mission</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Case+Studies%22">Case Studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Change%22">Educational Change</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Organizational+Change%22">Organizational Change</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1007/s11422-017-9819-z – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1871-1502 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: In the last decade, STEM-focused schools have opened their doors nationally in the hope of meeting students' contemporary educational needs. Despite the growth of these STEM-focused institutions, minimal research exists that follows how schools make a transition toward a STEM focus and what organizational structures are most conducive to a successful transition. The adoption of a STEM focus has clear implications for a school's organizational identity. For Catholic schools, the negotiation of a new STEM focus is especially complex, as Catholic schools have been shown to generally possess a distinct religious and cultural organizational identity. The adoption of a second, STEM-focused identity raises questions about whether and how these identities can coexist. Framed by perspectives on organizational identity and existing conceptualizations of the cultural and religious hallmarks of Catholic schools, this study utilizes a multiple-case study design to explore the organizational transition of four Catholic K-8 institutions to Catholic STEM-focused schools. These cases demonstrate the particular challenges of negotiating multiple organizational identities. While variation existed in how the four schools accommodated these identities, the most promising environments for successful transition drew upon an aggregative model of identity negotiation, that is, when schools attended to both identities, but ensured that the original Catholic identity of the school remained foundational to all decisions. The least successful identity negotiations occurred when there was a lack of common understanding about what comprised a STEM-focused school, leading to minimal buy-in from stakeholders or when a school sought to make the transition for recruitment or marketing rather than mission-driven reasons. Discussion of the more successful identity aggregation provides a framework for schools within and beyond the religious sector that desire to adopt an additional STEM-focused identity. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: Ref Label: Number of References Group: RefInfo Data: 40 – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2018 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1182402 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1182402 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s11422-017-9819-z Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 31 StartPage: 549 Subjects: – SubjectFull: STEM Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Catholic Schools Type: general – SubjectFull: Institutional Mission Type: general – SubjectFull: Case Studies Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Change Type: general – SubjectFull: Organizational Change Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Dual Identities: Organizational Negotiation in STEM-Focused Catholic Schools Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Kloser, Matthew – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wilsey, Matthew – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Hopkins, Dawn W. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Dallavis, Julie W. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Lavin, Erin – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Comuniello, Michael IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 06 Type: published Y: 2018 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1871-1502 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 13 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Cultural Studies of Science Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
