Urban High School Students' IT/STEM Learning: Findings from a Collaborative Inquiry- and Design-Based Afterschool Program

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 116-137

  Duran, Mesut ^a   Höft, Margret ^a   Lawson, Dan B ^a   Medjahed, Brahim ^b   Orady, Elsayed A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN DEARBORN   (United States)

^b University of Michigan Dearborn   (United States)

Author keywords

Afterschool programs; High school education; Inquiry and design based learning; IT; STEM; Urban education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84895900336     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-013-9457-5     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Barab SA, Duffy TM (2000) From practice fields to communities of practice. In: Jonassen D, Land S (eds) Theoretical foundation of learning environments. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 25-56.
2. Brown JS, Collins A, Duguid P (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educ Res 18(1): 32-42.
3. Bruce BC (2003) Literacy in the information age: inquiries into meaning making with new technologies. International Reading Association, Newark.
4. Cole M (1996) Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
5. Dawsey CP (October 20, 2011) Detroit public schools hits enrollment goal. Detroit Free Press, Detroit.
6. Edelson DC (2001) Learning-for-use: a framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. J Res Sci Teach 38(3): 355-385.
7. Friedman T (2006) The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux Publishing, New York.
8. Gay LR, Mills GE, Airasian P (2006) Educational research: competencies for analysis and applications, 8th edn. Pearson Education, Inc, Upper Saddle River.
9. Harel I (1991) Children designers. Ablex, Norwood.
10. Harel I, Papert S (1991) Constructionism. Ablex, Norwood.
11. Kane TJ (2004) The impact of afterschool programs: interpreting the results of four recent evaluations. William T. Grant Foundation, New York.
12. Lavy J, Wegner E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
13. Marsden E, Torgerson CJ (2012) Single group, pre- and post-test research designs: some methodological concerns. Oxf Rev Educ 38(5): 583-616.
14. Mendoza EM, Johnson KO (2000) Land of plenty: diversity as America's competitive edge in science, engineering and technology. Report of the congressional commission on the advancement of women and minorities in science, engineering and technology development. Retrieved 8 May 2011, from http://www. nsf. gov/pubs/2000/cawmset0409/cawmset_0409. pdf.
15. Mishra P, Koehler MJ, Zhao Y (2006) Communities of designers: a brief history and introduction. In: Mishra P, Koehler MJ, Zhao Y (eds) Faculty development by design: integrating technology in higher education. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte.
16. Mrozowski J (June 4, 2008) Report: Detroit's graduation rate ranks last among big cities. The Detroit News, Detroit.
17. National Center for Women in Information Technology (2007) NCWIT scorecard: a report on the status of women in information technology. Retrieved 8 May 2011, from http://www. ncwit. org/sites/default/files/resources/scorecard2010_printversion_web. pdf.
18. National Center for Women in Information Technology (2009) Women in IT: the facts. Retrieved 28 Oct 2012, from http://www. ncwit. org/sites/default/files/resources/ncwit_thefacts_rev2010. pdf.
19. National Governors Association and Council for Competitiveness (2007) Innovation America: a partnership. Retrieved 01 May 2007, from http://www. nga. org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/0702INNOVATIONPARTNERSHIP. PDF.
20. National Research Council (2011) Successful K-12 STEM education: identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Committee on highly successful science programs for K-12 science education. Board on science education and board on testing and assessment, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. The National Academies Press, Washington.
21. National Science Board (2010) Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators: identifying and developing our nation's human capital. Retrieved 15 Oct 2012, from http://www. nsf. gov/nsb/publications/2010/nsb1033. pdf.
22. Parker C, Malyn-Smith J, Reynolds-Alpert S, Bredin S (2010) The innovative technology experiences for students and teachers (ITEST) program: teachers developing the next generation of STEM talent. J Technol Teach Educ 18: 187-201.
23. Pollock L, McCoy K, Carberry S, Hundigopal N, You X (2004) Increasing high school girls' self confidence and awareness of CS through a positive summer experience. In: Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education. Retrieved 3 Jan 2013, from http://doi. acm. org/10. 1145/971300. 971369.
24. Scott C (2012) An investigation of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) focused high schools in the U. S. J STEM Educ 13(5): 30-39.
25. Songer N, Lee H, Kam R (2002) Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: what are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? J Res Sci Teach 39: 129-143.
26. STEM fields (n. d.). In: Wikipedia. Retrieved 8 May 2013, from http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/STEM_fields#cite_note-nsf. gov-5.
27. Subotnik R, Rayhack K, Edmiston A (2006) Current models of identifying and developing STEM talent: implications for research, policy and practice. Retrieved 8 May 2011, from http://www7. nationalacademies. org/cfe/Rena%20Subotnik%20Think%20Piece. pdf.
28. The American Competitiveness Initiative (2007) Retrieved 8 May 2011, from http://www. whitehouse. gov/administration/eop/ostp.
29. Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.