A review of science, technology, engineering & mathematics (STEM) education research from 1999-2013: A Malaysian perspective

Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 155-163

  Jayarajah, Kamaleswaran ^a   Saat, Rohaida Mohd ^a   Rauf, Rose Amnah Abdul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Education; Engineering and mathematics; Review; Science; STEM; Technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84903885882     PISSN: 13058215     EISSN: 13058223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.12973/eurasia.2014.1072a     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Ali, A. T. (September, 2012). Teaching & learning of science & mathematics in schools: towards a more"creative & innovative Malaysia". Paper presented at the Colloquium Science & Mathematic Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
2. Bagiati, A., Yoon, S.Y., Evangelou, D., Ngambeki, I. (2010). Engineering curricula in early education: describing the landscape of open resources. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 12(2), 2-13.
3. Bartholomew, R., Anderson, D., Moeed, A. (2012). Resilience of Science Teaching Philosophies and Practice in Early Career Primary Teaching Graduates. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(2), 103-112.
4. Brown, J., Brown R., & Merrill, C. (2012). Science and technology educators' enacted curriculum: areas of possible collaboration for an integrative STEM approach in public schools. Technology Teacher, 71(4), 30-34.
5. Bybee, R. W & Fuchs, B. (2006). Preparing the 21st century workforce: A new reform in science and technology education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 349-352.
6. Cleaves, A. (2005). The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 27(4), 471-486.
7. DeJarnette, N. K. (2012). America's children: Providing early exposure to STEM (Science,Technology, Engineering and Maths) initiatives. Journal of Education, 133(1), 77-84.
8. Ellis, P. D. (2011). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis and the interpretation of research results. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
9. Goldberg M. A. (2002). Human Capacity Building for APEC Science, Technology & Innovation: Preconditions & Key Issues to Succeed. (Proceeding APEC-ISTWG Forum Paper Summary. APRU-APEC Committee, Berkeley California.
10. Hernandez, P. R., Bodin, R., Elliott, J. W., Ibrahim, B., Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., & de Miranda, M.A. (in-press). Connecting the STEM dots: Measuring the effect of an integrated engineering design intervention. International Journal of Technology and Design Education http://doi: 10.1007/s10798-013-9241-0
11. Humphrey, S. E. (2011). What does a great meta-analysis look like? Organizational Psychology Review, 1(2), 99-103.
12. Jones, A., Buntting, C. and Vries, M. J. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology Design Education 23, 191-212.
13. Kabilan, M. K. (2003). Online professional development of teachers: An examination of structures and trends in Malaysia. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(4), 367-382.
14. rd Presidental Address, Malaysia.
15. Lindahl, B. (2003). Pupils' responses to school science and technology?: A longitudinal study of pathways to upper secondary school.Unpublished summary of PhD thesis, University of Gothenburg, Kristianstad.
16. Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V.S., Foy, P., and Stanco, G.M. (2012).TIMSS 2011 International results in science. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
17. Meyrick, M. K. (2011). How STEM Education Impress Student Learning. Meridian K-12 School Computer Technologies Journal, 14(1), 1-6.
18. Mena, I. B., Diefes-Dux, H.A. (2012). First-year engineering students' portrayal of engineering in a proposed museum exhibit for middle school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology 21(2), 304-316.
19. Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI). (2008).2008 Report: Malaysian science and technology indicatiors. Putrajaya: Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre, MOSTI.
20. Narayan, R., Park, S., Peker, D., Suh, J. (2013). Students' Images of Scientists and Doing Science: An International Comparison Study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 9(2), 115-129.
21. Nordin, K. (2012). JumlahPelajarSains Di IPT Makin Kurang, BeritaHarian [The Total Science Students at Local Varsities Are Decreasing]. Retrieved from Berita Harian. Retrieved from http://www.bharian.com.my/articles/Jumlahpelaj arsainsdiIPTmakinkurang/Article/
22. OECD (2010), PISA 2009 at a Glance, OECD Publishing. (Available at:http://www.oecd.org/pisa/46660259.pdf )
23. Petroski, H. (2010). The essential engineer: Why science alone will not solve our global problems. New York: Vintage Books: A division of random house.
24. Poll, H. (2004). American Perspectives on Engineers and Engineering: Reveals Public Perceptions of Engineering: 1998. from American Association of Engineering Societies. Retrieved from: http://www.aaes.org/ harris2004_files/frame.htm.
25. The Joanna Briggs Institute for Evidence Based Nursing & Midwifery (2001). An introduction to systematicreviews. Changing Practice, 1, 1-6.
26. Reigeluth, C. M & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2009). Instructional-design theories and models (Volume III). London: Routledge.
27. Rhoads, T. R., Walden, S. E., Winter, B. A (2004). Sooner Element Engineering and Science (SEES) a model for after school science clubs based on university and K-5 partnership.Journal of STEM Education, 5(3), 47-52.
28. Saat, R. M. (2012). Practices in Mathematics & Science Education: A Reflection. In S. N. Akmar (Ed.), What We Learned From Science Education Reform: The Malaysian Experience. Selangor Darul Ehsan: Pearson Malaysia.
29. Singh, K., Granville. M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and Science Achievement: Effects of Motivation, Interest, and Academic Engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323-332.
30. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2010). Education for all.Global monitoring report.Retrived from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/reports/
31. U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Report of the Academic Competitiveness Council. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from :http://coalition4evidence.org/wp-content/uploads/ACC-report-final.pdf
32. Yarker, M, B., Park, S. (2012). Analysis of Teaching Resources for Implementing an Interdisciplinary Approach in the K-12 Classroom. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(4), 223-232.