View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

How to Avoid Seven Common (but Seldom Discussed) STEM Curriculum Pitfalls: Making STEM More Culturally and Socially Relevant

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: How to Avoid Seven Common (but Seldom Discussed) STEM Curriculum Pitfalls: Making STEM More Culturally and Socially Relevant
Language: English
Authors: Rodriguez, Alberto J. (ORCID 0000-0003-1269-2254)
Source: Multicultural Perspectives. 2021 23(4):224-231.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 8
Publication Date: 2021
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Descriptors: STEM Education, Curriculum Development, Culturally Relevant Education, Social Justice, Best Practices, Ethnic Stereotypes, Cultural Awareness, Multicultural Education, Minority Group Students
DOI: 10.1080/15210960.2021.1979402
ISSN: 1521-0960
Abstract: Even though significant progress has been made on raising awareness about equity and diversity issues in science education in the last two decades, the current push to address the Next Generation Science Standards' (NGSS) emphasis on integrating engineering and scientific practices has opened up new pitfalls. Here, I describe seven of the most salient pitfalls we should all seek to avoid if we are committed to making STEM education more culturally and socially relevant. Suggestions are provided to encourage educators, researchers, and curriculum developers to distinguish and stress the importance of engaging children in STEM instead of teaching STEM to students.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1324239
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFpQuHVaawVFHXZJJ8dLjeLAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDOZSFYKiqeiJNYROOAIBEICBm77XJPbQ6bET_s0Vah7iTjXOwyvUnsJVDmgoQtAliR03jz5RlC4R1kAlbFeObbfwg8awOkeJ31jBFYGuQ1NfUL2vfPZxn_vAZ16DtX1OV0k9fOrQM-AA5W6B2ZXmJYswLOYyeVa_Pq6IKK_29s49rNx_MH2uCObDXZlp_YoCFHFmXqI_IzVBUaAjjdVHPLk0LPoTsjU33aKOsLGH
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0153950905;7mr01oct.21;2021Dec07.02:21;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0153950905-1">How to Avoid Seven Common (but Seldom Discussed) STEM Curriculum Pitfalls: Making STEM More Culturally and Socially Relevant </title> <sbt id="AN0153950905-2">Introduction</sbt> <p>Even though significant progress has been made on raising awareness about equity and diversity issues in science education in the last two decades, the current push to address the Next Generation Science Standards' (NGSS) emphasis on integrating engineering and scientific practices has opened up new pitfalls. Here, I describe seven of the most salient pitfalls we should all seek to avoid if we are committed to making STEM education more culturally and socially relevant. Suggestions are provided to encourage educators, researchers, and curriculum developers to distinguish and stress the importance of engaging children in STEM instead of teaching STEM to students.</p> <p>The (re)current systemic racism and acts of violence against African Americans and other peoples of color have encouraged all of us to reflect on ways to expand our cultural knowledge and competency. As we pursue this important effort, it is essential to avoid being blinded by our good intentions in seeking to be more critically reflective. For example, in a critical review of the National Research Council's (NRC, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref1">12</reflink>]) <emph>National Science Standards</emph>, I explained that these standards were shrouded in a <emph>discourse of invisibility</emph> (Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref2">18</reflink>]). That is, even though the standards document was crowded with pictures of ethnically diverse children throughout, it never addressed directly the well-documented issues that prevent culturally diverse students and women from having equal opportunities for success in science. Almost two decades later, the NRC sought to address this shortfall by making equity and diversity issues more explicit in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013). While there are major concerns with this version too (Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref3">20</reflink>]), we can all agree that progress has been made (e.g., NGSS Lead States, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref4">15</reflink>], Appendix D). However, the hurried response to the NGSS's new emphasis on integrating engineering and scientific practices has created many pitfalls in curriculum and practice that undermine the NGSS' equity and diversity goals. Therefore, here I describe seven top pitfalls that should be avoided by those committed to making STEM curriculum and pedagogy culturally and socially relevant.</p> <p>To facilitate discussion, I briefly use examples from my experiences working with teachers and their students during research projects; from my work with pre-service teachers; and even from my experiences as the only person of color participating in STEM workshops for science educators. To make these brief examples more concrete, I also draw from popular curricula, including <emph>Engineering is Elementary</emph> (EiE). EiE curriculum kits (eie.org) were originally developed in 2005, and they continue to grow in popularity after the NGSS were released in 2013. Many aspects of the EiE curriculum are indeed very useful, but like many other forms of commercially available curriculum, they should not be consumed without critically examining its potential impact. In fact, educators should always ask, "what kinds of modifications or enhancements can teachers implement that will allow their own creativity as teachers and curriculum developers to flourish?" (Tieso, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref5">27</reflink>], p. 199). Furthermore, developing and adapting curriculum to specific sociocultural contexts is one of the essential skills of effective and culturally inclusive teachers (Mensah & Larson, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref6">10</reflink>]; Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref7">19</reflink>]). When commercial curriculum is promoted and uncritically implemented as prescribed, it deepens the commonly found pitfalls I wish to discuss herein. If we consider the basic definition of pitfall as "any trap or danger for the unwary" (dictionary.com), my goal is to raise awareness and generate discussion so that these pitfalls are avoided.</p> <p>Thus, with humility, this manuscript is written for a wider audience in hope that teacher educators, researchers, teachers, administrators, curriculum developers and policy makers might find it useful. The pitfalls described below are arranged in descending order with #1 being the most distressing. Nevertheless, any of these pitfalls are cause for concern, and unfortunately, I rarely encounter only one of them when examining commercial curricula.</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-3">#7 Profit Before Ethics</hd> <p>STEM activities often involve competitions to design the most "innovative and cost-effective" product (e.g., https://stem.getintoenergy.com/competitions/). These activities also often describe the businesses "funding" the competition as "clients." Unfortunately, these activities communicate implicit messages that contradict the engineering professional standards and the spirit of the NGSS. In other words, when the main driver of the activity is cost-efficiency and competition, this communicates that "profit" and "winning" are what matters most to STEM professionals. However, according to the first canon of the National Society of Professional Engineers' (NSPE) Code of Ethics: "Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public" (NSPE, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref8">14</reflink>]). Similarly, ethical issues and practices are addressed in the NGSS, but I rarely encounter STEM activities that directly promote ethical practices.</p> <p>Furthermore, this type of competition and profit-oriented activities often do not encourage students to take into account the potential environmental impact of some engineering efforts on communities (or the planet). To address this pitfall, for example, in my science methods courses and research projects, students are encouraged to engineer a water filtration system using everyday materials. Our emphasis is different, however, because instead of focusing on a competition for "the best," "cheapest," or "fastest" water filter, our focus is on solving <emph>the problem</emph> as a community. To this end, the engineering design problem is first contextualized by discussing the importance of water quality and access; how families can test the quality of their water; how communities are affected by unethical practices (e.g., water contamination in Flint, Michigan), and the role we can all play in protecting our environment and our families (Bazzul & Tolbert, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref9">2</reflink>]). In this way, students still work in groups to build an efficient water filtration system, and they are encouraged to provide feedback on each other's designs. This produces deeper conceptual understandings of environmental issues and the role science and engineering can (should) play in serving society when the focus is solving problems for the common good and not on winners or losers (Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref10">22</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-4">#6 The 180 Stereotype Reversal</hd> <p>In our efforts to be inclusive, educators must take care not to inadvertently create inauthentic and extreme scenarios. For example, going from only portraying peoples of color in high poverty contexts to the 180 stereotype reversal of only portraying them in high affluent contexts (e.g., extravagant travel). To illustrate this pitfall we can use, <emph>Hop to It,</emph> from <emph>Engineering is Elementary</emph> (EiE) (Engineering is Elementary, 2014). Therein, Jacob and India (whose ethnicities are not mentioned) are clever siblings who are traveling around the world by themselves (there is no context about their parents or how they are financing their travels). In the story book, we see them skiing, scuba diving, and rock climbing—all by themselves. In this adventure, Jacob and India explain that during their trip to Australia, a cane toad—an invasive species—snuck into their backpack. The curriculum includes a short video about cane toads, their damaging impact, and a recording of the siblings urging friends to help build a trap to catch the cane toad. While this activity helps students gain knowledge about invasive species, I believe that this scenario would be perceived as distracting and spurious. Furthermore, the main goal of the EiE's story books is to contextualize the engineering activities so that students can relate with the characters. However, activities like this one contradicts the NGSS' objective that "By solving problems through engineering in local contexts ... students gain knowledge of science content, <emph>view science as relevant to their lives and future</emph>, and engage in science in socially relevant and transformative ways" (NGSS Lead States, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref11">15</reflink>], Appendix D, p. 5).</p> <p>It is easy to fall into this kind of pitfall if we do not keep in mind who our students (or research participants) are. For example, I was talking to a group of high school Latinas who were participating in our research project located in the US Southern Borderlands. I was wondering about their plans for the summer as our project was coming to an end. In my middle-class Latino mind, I was envisioning for them a summer camp with multiple opportunities to make new friends, explore careers options, and learn new and exciting things because I had just enrolled my two teenage children in summer camps. When I asked them what their plans were for the summer, the young women looked at me somewhat perplexed and then looking at each other, and almost in unison, exclaimed, "I'm working." Another elaborated, "I have to work...that's my time to make my own money so that I can buy what I want." Even though, I come from the same SES background as these students, and I never had opportunities to enjoy summer camps, my relatively new middle-class Latino positionality and my good intentions have pushed me into a common pitfall. We can avoid such pitfalls by keeping our pre-conceptions and privilege in check, by seeking to learn more about who our students and their families are, and by exposing them to more culturally and socially relevant curriculum.</p> <p>We can avoid such pitfalls by keeping our pre-conceptions and privilege in check, by seeking to learn more about who our students and their families are, and by exposing them to more culturally and socially relevant curriculum.</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-5">#5 Peoples of Color as Cultural Background Props</hd> <p>Closely linked with the aforementioned, Pitfall #5 involves the use of traditionally underrepresented students (and their families) as characters of a story/engineering design scenario only as "cultural props." That is, they are used as <emph>colorful</emph> characters in culturally decontextualized scenarios that do not permit students to gain any meaningful cultural knowledge. In contrast, culturally inclusive approaches to pedagogy and curriculum promote students' cultural identity by engaging them with relevant activities that <emph>affirm</emph> their own and other peoples' cultures (Mensah & Larson, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref12">10</reflink>]). Similarly, sociotransformative approaches to pedagogy and curriculum implementation <emph>explicitly</emph> engage students with systemic social inequalities so that they develop awareness and agency (Rodriguez & Morrison, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref13">25</reflink>]).</p> <p>To illustrate this pitfall, we borrow from the EiE's story book, <emph>Mariana Becomes a Butterfly</emph> (Engineering is Elementary, 2005). Here, we are introduced to Mariana, a precocious girl who lives in the Dominican Republic. She is concerned that her imported ohelo plant is no longer producing berries. With the help of her aunt, who is an agricultural engineer, Mariana discovers that her plant does not have natural pollinators. She then decides to engineer an efficient pollinating tool. This is a fun engineering design problem. However, there are several missed opportunities for making the pollinator activity more authentic and culturally/socially relevant for all students. For instance, we never learn anything else about Mariana and her country's culture. This could have been an ideal opportunity to integrate social studies with the science and language literacy curriculum by engaging students in a discussion about colonialism and its devastating effects on developing countries. The Dominican Republic (originally colonized by Spain) occupies about two thirds of a tiny island (known as Hispaniola) in the Caribbean; whereas the other third comprises Haiti (a former colony of France). Since the Taino indigenous people of the island were practically decimated by the conquistadores through war and the pandemic they brought, most of the population for both countries are now mulattos (mixed descendants of Europeans and African slaves) and, to a lesser extend for the Dominican Republic, mestizos (mixed descendants of Europeans and indigenous people). Interestingly, however, mulattos from the Dominican Republic are also Blatinos/nas or AfroLatinas/nos (i.e., Spanish-speaking, descendants of African slaves who continue to enrich the diversity of the Latin American culture).</p> <p>These fascinating cultural differences and long struggles with colonialism that left these countries highly vulnerable after their natural resources were relentlessly exploited provide multiple entry points for meaningful discussions about colonialism, racism, and the wealth disparity we suffer today.</p> <p>These fascinating cultural differences and long struggles with colonialism that left these countries highly vulnerable after their natural resources were relentlessly exploited provide multiple entry points for meaningful discussions about colonialism, racism, and the wealth disparity we suffer today. Further, important conversations about what it means to be Black, African American, Blatino, AfroLatino/a, Latino/a, Latinx, Mestizo, Aboriginal, Anglo-European or White in the US/world could be initiated from the students' juxtapositions. As these challenging times of social unrest demonstrate, we must seize every opportunity to have these types of meaningful conversations with children about our rich and beautiful cultural diversity early in primary school, as well as throughout their schooling (including higher education). This is one step toward dismantling systemic racism and other oppressive practices because it allows for the deconstruction of the historical and socioeconomic foundations that sustain them.</p> <p>I appreciate that some educators may not be comfortable with situating a science/STEM lesson within sociohistorical contexts or integrating subjects across the curriculum, but we should strive to at least contextualize the activities in more socially relevant contexts. For instance, the EiE story book about Mariana included her aunt, who is a strong female role model as an agricultural engineer and studies invasive species. However, this story misses the opportunity to directly highlight the importance of having more women in STEM, and raising awareness about pervasive gender-based stereotypes and discrimination that hinder the participation of women and students of color in STEM fields. It would have been ideal to include this kind of dialog in the story book, for example, by having Mariana notice that her aunt is the only female and the only Blatina or Latina in the laboratory when she visits her.</p> <p>We know that teachers welcome and appreciate explicit examples for addressing equity, gender, and cultural issues; thus, including representative images or short assertions are not enough (Underwood & Mensah, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref14">29</reflink>]; Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref15">19</reflink>]; Rodriguez & Zozakiewicz, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref16">26</reflink>]). There is also an extensive research base that articulates well the benefits of supporting children's cultural identity development (e.g., Brown, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref17">3</reflink>]; Turner & Drake, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref18">28</reflink>]). Similarly, there is extensive research calling for more pre- and in-service teachers' professional development on the critical exploration of their own identities and privilege (or lack thereof) [e.g., Avraamidou, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref19">1</reflink>]; Matias, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref20">9</reflink>]; Rivera Maulucci, 2013], as well as providing more practical strategies for facilitating difficult in-class conversations about racism, ethnicity, colonialism and other forms of oppression (e.g., Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref21">19</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref22">21</reflink>]; Underwood, & Mensah, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref23">29</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-6">#4 Be Creative (But Not Really)</hd> <p>It is common to find design activities that passionately promote creativity, but then require students to use a prescribed set of materials along with lockstep (or implied lockstep) procedures. I recognize that sometimes limiting materials and procedures saves time, allows more control, might be cost efficient, and can be a helpful starting place for inexperienced teachers. These are all valid arguments; however, by being too restrictive with materials and procedures, students do eventually catch on that they are expected to be creative, but not really. In addition, they begin to recognize that there is always a <emph>preferred best way</emph> to complete a design task; especially, when commercial or prepackaged curriculum is used.</p> <p>To illustrate this pitfall, we can consider one of the most popular engineering kits being sold according to Amazon.com, <emph>Elenco Snap Circuits</emph> (see Elenco Snap Circuits @amazon.com). According to the product advertisement, "With this building toy, <emph>young engineers</emph> can assemble over 100 different electronic circuit projects with just 30+ electronic parts." (emphasis mine). If we take a closer look at lessons used in conjunction with this toy or its assembling instructions, we can recognize that it is inappropriate to name these activities "projects," or "engineering projects," because they provide children with explicit instructions for how to build them. To put it in another way, if I bought an IKEA bookshelf and have my students put it together strictly using the included instructions, I would not call that an engineering project, nor would this effort help my students gain admission to engineering programs. Why should following confirmation activities that do not truly include the engineering design process be called engineering projects? Furthermore, if teachers are not purposely facilitating deep understanding of scientific concepts, environmental and social impact, and the messiness of the engineering design process, students are going to just build toys while learning little about engineering practices and even less about science.</p> <p>In my research, I urge teachers to be intellectually honest. That is, if the nature of the activity really requires limiting materials and procedures, we should avoid making statements such as "you can use whatever you want and be as creative as you wish." Instead, I ask participants to suggest additional every-day materials, as well as changes in procedures, and to share these with the class. Sometimes, some of these changes are quite possible, creative and inexpensive, but most importantly, this approach enables participants to share their own cultural knowledge and enact their sense of agency in constructing new knowledge.</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-7">#3 Raise Awareness! Promote Agency! (But Don't Make Waves!)</hd> <p>One of the primary goals of the NGSS' conceptual framework is to help:</p> <p>students see how science and engineering are instrumental in addressing major challenges that confront society today, such as generating sufficient energy, preventing and treating diseases, maintaining supplies of clean water and food, and solving the problems of global environmental change (NRC, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref24">13</reflink>], p. 9).</p> <p>This is a noble and essential endeavor if we are to have a well-informed and socially responsible citizenry. However, what do we do when students take to heart what we, and the NGSS, is advocating, and they seek to take transformative action? For example, students may want: healthier food choices in the cafeteria menu; a school-wide recycling program; a school vegetable garden to mitigate the lack of access to fresh produce in their neighborhoods; access to free clinics; and so on. How do we support students if their petitions to school or city officials fall on deaf ears? In what ways are we committed to walking the NGSS's "informed citizenry" talk, if students—with their awakened sense of agency and desire to effect change—come asking for our support? In my science methods courses, we often have good discussions about this important issue. Novice teachers are understandably apprehensive about being involved in situations in which they might be labeled as "trouble-makers" due to supporting students' potentially controversial projects like any of the ones mentioned above.</p> <p>One way to address this issue is by distinguishing whether our role is <emph>to teach STEM to students</emph>, or is it <emph>to engage children in STEM</emph>? The latter involves helping children acknowledge that "addressing major challenges that confront society today" (NRC, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref25">13</reflink>], p. 9) is messy and complicated. It is also intellectually and ideologically honest to help children become aware that effecting change requires effective communication skills, building alliances, patience and determination. After all, are these not skills we wish for all children to develop? Hayward's ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref26">7</reflink>]) research with young children engaged in environmental activism provides brilliant examples of how children embrace opportunities to be authors of the world they are inheriting.</p> <p>Social engagement through STEM activities could take many other forms in addition to addressing environmental issues. For example, elsewhere (Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref27">24</reflink>]), I described how a popular science activity (making ice-cream) can be modified into an engineering design project. Essentially, this activity involves students collaboratively designing a "green energy" ice-cream machine. The class then picks the three most efficient machines in order to organize a fund-raiser to support local food shelters.</p> <p>In short, <emph>engaging</emph> children <emph>in</emph> science or STEM places the learners—people–at the center of the equation. Therefore, we are compelled to consider who they are (in terms of culture, ethnicity, gender, language ability, prior experiences, and so on). Similarly, this approach compels us to take into account the context in which we teach (i.e., urban vs. rural, demographics, school inequalities, funding, historical context, and so on). In this way, teacher and students engage in culturally and socially relevant STEM activities that inspire students to take action; to work toward improving their social and natural worlds.</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-8">#2 Failure Is Not an Option</hd> <p>Failure is an essential element in the engineering design process. In fact, engineers believe that every failure represents a step closer to success. However, this concept is not equally embraced in school contexts, especially, at the elementary level (Loterro-Perdue, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref28">8</reflink>]). In addition, acknowledging failure as part of engineering design requires providing more time for improvement and re-tests, but teachers are often pressed for time. This results in some students not being able to complete and/or test their projects successfully. Furthermore, certain kinds of curriculum topics (e.g., addressing hunger in the community; genetic variations; access to health care) and certain pedagogical approaches (e.g., assigning projects to groups formed by mixed ability, language learners, and/or culturally diverse students) can provoke strong negative emotions among students who may already be feeling excluded, bullied or discriminated against at school. These situations may also (re)invoke feelings of failure that could cause students to further withdraw from participation (Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref29">22</reflink>]).</p> <p>It is essential to encourage students to embrace "failure" as an instructive and common aspect of the design process, and to properly scaffold assistance so that all students see their projects through. One way to achieve this is by having collaborative groups provide feedback to each other's design (Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref30">23</reflink>]). I found that students enjoy helping each other, and this message can also be more consistent by avoiding the competitive discourse that often permeates the language of STEM activities. Instead, we should promote collaboration; the power of learning from mistakes or "failures" like engineers do; and the joy of engaging in the engineering design process to solve common problems.</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-9">#1 The Savior Fetish</hd> <p>This is the most unsettling pitfall I often encounter in various STEM-related activities. The tendency of portraying members of the predominant culture in the role of <emph>saviors</emph>, <emph>rescuers</emph> and/or <emph>fixers</emph> of the <emph>Other</emph> (i.e., the culturally different, poor, and always in some kind of distress; Rodriguez, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref31">21</reflink>]). To illustrate this pitfall, we can again draw from the highly popular EiE curriculum. In <emph>A Stick in the Mud: Evaluating a Landscape</emph> (Engineering is Elementary, 2017), grades 1–5 children are introduced to a male geotechnical engineer (who might be Nepali) and an Anglo male (who supposedly invented the TarPul bridge—a small cable cart mounted on a wire that people can pull themselves to move above a rapid flowing river). According to the EiE's Unit Overview, the main goals of this activity is for students to dig "into the role of geotechnical engineers," and "select a safe, flood-proof, and erosion-proof location for a new TarPul." While again, these activities are well-intended, no context is provided as to <emph>who invited</emph> these individuals to build a TarPul bridge, and there is no evidence that the geotechnical engineers had anything to <emph>learn from</emph> the villagers (who have managed flooding and worked their lands for generations). Most importantly, there is no effort to discuss the significant socioeconomic and political disadvantages the villagers are encountering, which are quite similar to those of rural communities across the US and other parts of the world.</p> <p>The tragic events we are currently experiencing has irreversibly opened our eyes to the systemic racism and other oppressive practices peoples of color often encounter on a daily basis.</p> <p>This activity could provide excellent opportunities to address culturally and socially relevant issues by encouraging students to discuss questions such as: Why does the Nepali government not build a safe bridge for villagers to access schools, medical services, and markets? What would students do right here in this country if they were in a similar situation in their own neighborhoods? It would be more realistic to provide a scenario in which villagers are already advocating for themselves and pressuring government authorities to build a safe suspension bridge. Portraying peoples of color as passive (villagers), with primitive knowledge, and always in need of saving are common traits of the <emph>Savior Fetish</emph> pitfall. The documentary, <emph>Most Dangerous Ways to School in Nepal</emph>, provides a useful contrast to the EiE's version of TarPuls, and it shows how dangerous these bridges are. Educators interested in better understanding the importance of contextualizing STEM activities should watch this film (Most Dangerous Ways to School in Nepal, 2015).</p> <hd id="AN0153950905-10">Closing Thoughts</hd> <p>The tragic events we are currently experiencing has irreversibly opened our eyes to the systemic racism and other oppressive practices peoples of color often encounter on a daily basis. We can make a significant contribution to addressing issues of equity, diversity and social justice in our own working contexts as educators by turning our shock and outrage into transformative action. One good place to start is by critically reflecting on our good intentions and by avoiding the pitfalls discussed herein. By shifting our focus from <emph>teaching STEM to</emph> students to engaging <emph>children in</emph> culturally and socially relevant STEM, we can illustrate how STEM should be used to improve the world around us through an ethics of caring for each other and for our planet.</p> <ref id="AN0153950905-11"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref19" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alberto J. Rodriguez is now a distinguished professor of education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education, University of Houston.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0153950905-12"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Avraamidou, L. (2016). Stories of self and science: Preservice elementary teachers' identity work through time and across contexts, Pedagogies: An International Journal, 11 (1), 43 – 62, https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2015.1047837</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref9" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bazzul, J., & Tolbert, S. (2019). Love, politics and science education on a damaged planet. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14, 303 – 308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09913-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref17" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Brown, B. (2013). The language identity dilemma: An examination of language, cognition, identity, and their implications for learning. In J. Biachini, V. Akerson, A. Calabrese-Barton, O. Lee, & A. J. Rodriguez (Eds.), Moving the equity agenda forward: Equity research, practice, and policy in science education (pp. 223 – 259). Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Engineering is Elementary. (2014). Hop to it: Safe removal of invasive species. Museum of Science, Boston. <ulink href="http://d7.eie.org/engineering-advenEietures/curriculum-units/hop-it">http://d7.eie.org/engineering-advenEietures/curriculum-units/hop-it</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Engineering is Elementary. (2005). Mariana becomes a butterfly: An agricultural engineering story. Museum of Science, Boston. https://<ulink href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ainn5MlweQU">www.youtube.com/watch?v=ainn5MlweQU</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Engineering is Elementary. (2017). A stick in the mud: Evaluating a landscape. Museum of Science, Boston. https://<ulink href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFF0mHaYUes">www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFF0mHaYUes</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref26" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Hayward, B. (2012). Children, citizenship and environment: Nurturing a democratic imagination in a changing world. Routlege.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref28" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Loterro-Perdue, P. S. (2015). The engineering design process as a safe place to try again: Responses to failure by elementary teachers and students [Paper presentation]. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, IL.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref20" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Matias, C. E. (2016). "Why do you make me hate myself?": Re-teaching Whiteness, abuse, and love in urban teacher education, Teaching Education, 27 (2), 194 – 211, https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2015.1068749</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mensah, F. M., & Larson, K. (2017). A summary of inclusive pedagogies for science education. Department of Mathematics, Science & Technology, Teachers College, Columbia University. https://<ulink href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/342211718%5fA%5fSummary%5fof%5fInclusive%5fPedagogies%5ffor%5fScience">www.researchgate.net/publication/342211718%5fA%5fSummary%5fof%5fInclusive%5fPedagogies%5ffor%5fScience</ulink> Education [accessed Jun 20 2020].</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Most Dangerous Ways to School in Nepal (a free documentary. It is noteworthy to contrast the images beginning at the 22 min mark with the TarPul images provided in the EiE story book). (2015). https://<ulink href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGKy%5fdREpg">www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGKy%5fdREpg</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academy Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Society of Professional Engineers. (2019). Code of ethics for engineers. NSPE. https://<ulink href="http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics">www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Next Generation Science Standards. (2013). Appendix D – "All standards, all students": Making the Next Generation Science Standards accessible to all students. https://<ulink href="http://www.nextgenscience.org/appendix-d-case-studies">www.nextgenscience.org/appendix-d-case-studies</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. National Academies Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rivera Maulucci, M. S. (2013). Emotions and positional identity in becoming a social justice science teacher: Nicole's story. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 453 – 478. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21081</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: A critique of the NRC's National Science Education Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199701)34:1<19::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-R</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (2015a). Managing sociocultural and institutional challenges through sociotransformative constructivism: A longitudinal case study of a high school science teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52 (4), 448–460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21207</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (2015b). What about a dimension of equity, engagement and diversity practices? A critique of the Next Generation Science Standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52 (7), 1031–1051. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21232</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (2016) For whom do we do equity and social justice work? Recasting the discourse about the Other to effect transformative change. In N. M. Joseph, C. Haynes, & F. Cobb (Eds.), Interrogating whiteness and relinquishing power: White faculty's commitment to racial consciousness in STEM education (pp. 241–251). Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (2017) How do we prepare for and respond to students' evoked emotions when addressing real social inequalities through engineering activities? Theory Into Practice, 56 (4), 263–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1350497</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (2021a) Engineering your own liquid soap: An example of how to use a culturally and socially responsible engineering design process. Science & Children, 58 (4), 92–97. https://<ulink href="http://www.nsta.org/science-and-children/science-and-children-marchapril-2021/engineering-your-own-liquid-soap">www.nsta.org/science-and-children/science-and-children-marchapril-2021/engineering-your-own-liquid-soap</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J. (2021b) Sociotransformative STEM education. In C. C. Johnson, E. E. Peters-Burton, & T. J. Moore (Eds.), STEM road map 2.0: A framework for integrated STEM education (pp. 189—202). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J., & Morrison, D. (2019). Expanding and enacting transformative meanings of equity, diversity and social justice in science education. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 14, 265 – 281 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09938-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rodriguez, A. J., & Zozakiewicz, C. (2010) Facilitating the integration of multiple literacies through science education and learning technologies (pp. 23 – 45). In A. J. Rodriguez (Ed.), Science education as a pathway to teaching language literacy. SENSE Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tieso, C. (2001). Curriculum: Broad brushstrokes or paint‐by‐the‐numbers? The Teacher Educator, 36 (3), 199 – 213, https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730109555264</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Turner, E. E. & Drake, C. (2016). A review of research on prospective teachers' learning about children's mathematical thinking and cultural funds of knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 67 (1) 32 – 46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487115597476</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Underwood, J. B. & Mensah, F. M. (2018). An investigation of science teacher educators' perceptions of culturally relevant pedagogy, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29 (1), 46 – 64.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Alberto J. Rodriguez</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref30"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1324239
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: How to Avoid Seven Common (but Seldom Discussed) STEM Curriculum Pitfalls: Making STEM More Culturally and Socially Relevant
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rodriguez%2C+Alberto+J%2E%22">Rodriguez, Alberto J.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1269-2254">0000-0003-1269-2254</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Multicultural+Perspectives%22"><i>Multicultural Perspectives</i></searchLink>. 2021 23(4):224-231.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 8
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22STEM+Education%22">STEM Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Development%22">Curriculum Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Culturally+Relevant+Education%22">Culturally Relevant Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Justice%22">Social Justice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Best+Practices%22">Best Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethnic+Stereotypes%22">Ethnic Stereotypes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Awareness%22">Cultural Awareness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multicultural+Education%22">Multicultural Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Minority+Group+Students%22">Minority Group Students</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/15210960.2021.1979402
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1521-0960
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Even though significant progress has been made on raising awareness about equity and diversity issues in science education in the last two decades, the current push to address the Next Generation Science Standards' (NGSS) emphasis on integrating engineering and scientific practices has opened up new pitfalls. Here, I describe seven of the most salient pitfalls we should all seek to avoid if we are committed to making STEM education more culturally and socially relevant. Suggestions are provided to encourage educators, researchers, and curriculum developers to distinguish and stress the importance of engaging children in STEM instead of teaching STEM to students.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1324239
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1324239
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/15210960.2021.1979402
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 8
        StartPage: 224
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: STEM Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Culturally Relevant Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Justice
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Best Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ethnic Stereotypes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cultural Awareness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multicultural Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Minority Group Students
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: How to Avoid Seven Common (but Seldom Discussed) STEM Curriculum Pitfalls: Making STEM More Culturally and Socially Relevant
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rodriguez, Alberto J.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1521-0960
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 23
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Multicultural Perspectives
              Type: main
ResultId 1