102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

A Qualitative Study of Teacher Perspectives of Assessment in STEM Education

Abstract
Background: Schools around Australia are implementing STEM education in their
classrooms and want to ensure their implementation is effective in preparing students for
STEM careers. STEM education requires quality curriculum, appropriate pedagogy, authentic
assessment, teacher support including collaboration and effective professional development.
This study focuses on assessment in the STEM environment. First reviewing the literature to
determine what is perceived as effective STEM assessment and then interviewing teachers to
determine their perception of effective STEM assessment. Teachers are important in ensuring
students develop and are able to achieve their goals, hence their perception influences both
STEM instruction and how it is assessed. Through 6 semi-structured interviews, teacher’s
views on STEM assessment are gathered and major and minor themes are analysed using a
grounded theory approach.
Results: Of the 16 teachers contacted for semi-structured interviews, 6 responded and were
interviewed. The interviews were divided into four main categories; general perceptions of
STEM, views on effective assessment in general, effective STEM assessment and challenges
and overcoming them. Findings indicated that teachers value STEM education and believe
effective assessment should be inclusive, fully demonstrate student knowledge and skill,
provide students feedback and reflect the outcomes it means to assess. Teachers believed that
effective STEM assessment should have real-world applications and should focus on process
rather than simply product. Possible challenges included finding teachers with adequate
expertise in al STEM disciplines, assessing individuals in a group-problem-solving setting
and difficult assessing process. Possible ways to overcome these challenges included having
pre- and post-learning to ensure students have an adequate understanding to then embark on
their projects and have a chance to reflect, giving students feedback and equipping them with
teamwork and critical thinking skills.
Conclusion: There is a lack of standardised STEM assessment and hence little research
indicating its quality. By gathering some of the perceptions surrounding assessment in
STEM, there appears to be many challenges but also thoughts on possible solutions which
could be implemented through collaboration and professional development. Also there is a
desire for further research on several aspects of STEM assessment.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

Introduction

There has a persistent national interest in Australia regarding education reforms that will
build science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) capacity in the Australian
workforce as well as STEM literacy in the community (Australian Industry Group, 2013,
2015). STEM education provides a framework for new problems to be tackled and as a result
graduates develop a range of skills that enable entrepreneurial behaviours including;
creativity, open-mindedness, independence and objectivity (Fitzallen & Brown, 2017, OCS,
2016). Since STEM skills are becoming increasingly important in the workplace, the
development of engaging school curricula, pedagogy and assessment are needed to attract
students and ensure integrated learning takes place (Fraser et al, 2018). Rosicka (2016)
conducted a literature review looking for successful interventions of STEM education and
found that there were four major themes; teacher capacity, integration of STEM disciplines,
active learning and student engagement and participation. Another essential aspect of
effective STEM education is the nature of classroom assessment in STEM. There has been
research in this area, although not a wide variety.

This qualitative research study looks at teacher’s perceptions of assessment in STEM

education. Margot & Kettler (2019) conducted a literature review on teachers’ perception of
STEM integration and education. Their thematic analysis led to 17 findings which were
supported by multiple text segments extracted from studies that qualified for the review.
When collated, these came down to the following themes regarding perception of STEM
education initiatives. Firstly, teacher’s age, gender, experience and perceived value of STEM
education may influence their motivation and support for STEM initiatives. Secondly,
secondary teachers seem to be more likely to perceive STEM initiatives as a challenge to
their understanding of high-quality learning opportunities for students. Thirdly, STEM
education initiatives may require shifts in pedagogy, curriculum, assessment, support,
training and hence teachers view these as challenges. Finally, teacher perceive the engaging
and authentic nature of interdisciplinary STEM education initiatives as likely to be beneficial
for students (Margot & Kettler, 2019). Margot & Kettler (2019) recommended that teachers
be encouraged to work together to create innovative ways to successfully create an
interdisciplinary environment and deal with the needs and supports teachers require for
STEM instruction. They also specifically recommended
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

“Research into effective formative assessment strategies during STEM education…Teachers

felt this was a missing component of STEM programs (Asghar et al., 2012, Dare et al., 2014).
Effective ways to gauge student understanding would yield more efficient STEM talent
development. Teachers could better differentiate for various ability levels within their
classrooms if they better understand each student’s progress through the unit (Tomlinson &
Moon, 2013).”

Hence, with multiple schools around Australia looking to implement STEM integrated
initiatives, it is the belief of this study that understanding how to effectively assess STEM
students is crucial. Hence, this study begins by looking at the current literature on assessment
in STEM education and investigates teachers’ perceptions on STEM assessment as a ‘first-
step’ towards ensuring STEM assessments are as authentic as the initiative as a whole.

Literature Review

In reviewing the literature it was determined that first an understanding of the challenge of
assessment in STEM education was of utmost importance as it formed a foundation for then
overcoming these challenges. According to Honey et al (2014), assessments actually form a
barrier to STEM education being incorporated in K-12 education because of the challenge of
designing assessments that are effective for both discipline specific and integrated learning.
This is due to assessments historically being focused on the concepts of a specific discipline
and rarely on the disciplinary practices or application of knowledge (Honey et al, 2014). This
applies to both large scale summative and everyday formative assessments because of the
vast possible combinations of integrated knowledge and practices related to the STEM
subject areas. Traditionally STEM-based education environments have been based on the
cognitive dimensions of remembering and understanding phenomena rather than application,
analysis, evaluation and creation, that is, higher-order learning. Hence, assessments were also
mainly multiple choice and short answer which is less helpful in an inquiry/problem based
learning environment (Ernst & Glennie, 2015). STEM Problem-based learning, according to
Capraro & Corlu (2013), has redefined assessment as it has shifted the focus to formative
assessment. That is, it has caused the focus to be on the learning process itself. This not only
confronts teacher’s practices but also student expectation with regard to assessment. Since the
emphasis is not on factual content but on interactions among concepts, STEM assessments
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

should feature tasks that provide real-world contexts for using integrated knowledge while
engaging in scientific inquiry and engineering practices. However, not all the content is
amenable to this format.

There is a consensus in the literature that currently assessments of STEM learning tend to be
either discipline-specific standardised tests of content knowledge or evaluations of student
performance specific to projects or products in particular interventions. Standardised
assessments typically include items only partially aligned with an integrated STEM
curriculum or projects, whereas project specific assessments measure more specific
outcomes, however, often the details of the tests and their technical quality are not reported
(Honey et al, 2014). Honey et al (2014), found no evidence that researchers, curriculum
developers or practitioners were measuring outcomes of integrated STEM experiences in
reliable and valid ways.

Summative and Formative Assessments

Honey et al (2014) suggests that assessments of integrated STEM education should use
multiple levels including formative, interim and summative measures. They should be
coherent, in that they connect integrated STEM goals and curricula, and continuous, in terms
of using multiple assessments over time. According to Capraro & Corlu (2013), summative
STEM PBL assessments should be planned concurrently with lesson development such that
they occur in increments throughout the instruction. Students should be prepared in advance
for these assessments and accountability should be fostered through peer assessment,
contracts that clearly articular expectation. Explicit assessment also allows students to self-
regulate their behavior, that is, by co-developing the rubric students establish ownership of
the assessment model. Honey et al (2014) identifies the importance of summative
assessments in generalising learning across a range of integrated STEM initiatives. Han et al
(2015) discussed the use of formative assessment (and scaffolding) in PBL in STEM and its
ability promote deep understanding. Formative STEM PBL assessment are a means of
students applying their knowledge by producing ‘artifacts’ which depict a rich complete
picture of what students have learned. Both forms should also be combined with reflection
tasks such that students can be more flexible with their knowledge. Assessment must also
evaluate both individual and group work and in terms of group assessment several aspects
need to be determined such that the assessment is well-suited to the task and productive.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

According to Honey et al (2014), a primary example of an assessment design that integrates

technology and engineering, and can be adapted to include mathematics and science, is the
Technology and Engineering Literacy Framework for the 2014 National Assessment of
Educational Progress (TEL; NAGB 2010). The TEL framework is a typical large-scale
assessment, administered by computer and consists of short (12-minute) and long (25-minute)
scenario-based item sets. Large-scale assessments mainly assess STEM disciplines separately
but may include tasks that assess science or math in the context of a design problem (Honey
et al, 2014). Harwell et al (2015) reports on the process of developing, scaling, and validating
assessments in engineering, science and mathematics in an upper elementary (grades 4-5) and
middle school (grades 6-8) in the USA. The assessment consisted of a multiple choice
questionnaire with questions from each subject taken from a national assessment database
and according the Harwell et al (2015), the results provided evidence that the assessments
were psychometrically sound instruments sensitive to a STEM-oriented curriculum. Hence,
when the literature was reviewed the standardised assessments available were more geared to
assessing factual knowledge which only partially encompasses STEM learning.

Performance Based Assessment

Another form of assessment relevant to STEM discussed in the literature is performance

based assessment which involves a task with associated assessment piece that describes the
qualities of performance identified in course objectives. This form of assessment challenges
STEM students to use higher-order cognitive skills such as creativity, analysis and
application (Ernst & Glennie, 2015). Thibaut (2018) conducted a literature review which
found three articles discussing assessment, specifically Satchwell & Loepp (2002) dictated
that assessments should provide students with authentic tasks that require them to connect all
key concepts studied in STEM and should include a scoring rubric. According to Oberg
(2009), it also caters for students from various cultural and linguistic backgrounds as they are
given a chance to demonstrate their learning rather than simply recalling it. Borthwick et al
(2007) discusses three forms of performance- based learning with the ‘enminding’ model
being most relevant to STEM education. The ‘enminding’ model involves connecting student
learning experiences and disciplinary education through authentic activities. Ernst (2008)
highlights evidence that cognitive assessments could be used alongside performance
assessments to evaluate educational and professional competence. The use of modelling is an
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

example of ‘enminding’. Psycharis’ (2016) research showed that when students combined the
features of inquiry-based learning, scientific abilities in the form of well-defined rubrics,
modelling indicators and modelling ability they were able to create their own conceptual
models such that were very close to the scientific description. Students benefited most from
being given a scientific abilities rubric which guided them in the process of self-assessment.

Potter et al (2017) adds another element to performance-based assessment by introducing the

expertise of technology and engineering teachers in an advisory capacity to establish
performance-based protocols that ensure student application of knowledge. Ernst & Glennie
(2015) in a pilot study used these professionals to help assesses performance based
assessments in four STEM high schools in North Carolina. The performance tasks required
students to move through four activities; research, brainstorming, exploration and reflection,
record their findings in a notebook. The study team scored the students’ work using a
standard rubric as well as guiding the science teachers through the process. The study
concluded that performance-based learning, a mode native to engineering and technology,
can be implemented in STEM curricula with the same results of proficiency being achieved.

Suggestions for further research

It was clear during this literature review, that assessment in STEM has not been a prominent
research topic but is a great area of interest. Capraro & Corlu (2013) give a lot of direction in
terms of how to assess STEM learning and Honey et al (2014) also discuss many of the
challenges and give recommendations which should all be areas of research. To start, Honey
et al (2014) recommends that “organisations with expertise in assessment research and
development create assessments that appropriately measure the various learning and affective
outcomes of integrated STEM education.” This should involve modifying existing tools in
formative and summative assessment and performance based assessment as well as new
emerging approaches and techniques. Research should then determine the reliability and
validity of these assessments and find ways to improve them. The focus should be on
assessments that are based on authentic activities rather than large-scale multiple choice
questionnaires, as it is evident that there is a gap in the evaluation of authentic assessments.
There should also be a focus on how assessment in STEM enriches learning and leads to the
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

goals of STEM education being achieved – that is a STEM workforce and STEM literacy in
the community.

Research Question

How can the understanding gained from STEM education be effectively assessed in the
classroom setting?
- What assessment strategies are currently in place to measure student learning and
achievement resulting from integrated STEM education? Are they effective?
- What are the limitations to effectively assessing STEM learning?
- How can we improve on our current classroom assessment tools?

Part of the bigger question of whether STEM education is effective in preparing students for
STEM careers is the question of whether classroom assessments actually assess student
learning effectively. As with all disciplines, assessment forms a part of learning and when it
is ineffective it can form an obstacle to learning rather than assist it. According to NESA
(2019), quality summative assessments must; be based on syllabus outcomes, be valid,
include clear criteria, enable demonstration of learning through various task types, be
reliable, be free from bias, enable feedback, be inclusive and form part of ongoing
monitoring. Developing effective formative and summative assessments for STEM education
is even more challenging due to its integrated nature. According to Harwell et al (2015)
“existing assessments tend to focus on knowledge in a single discipline.” They also generally
focus on content knowledge alone rather than practices and applications of knowledge.
According to Honey et al (2014), it does not suffice to simply assess content by focusing
questions on specific disciplines (e.g. engineering and mathematics). Instead, assessments
should evaluate students’ ability to make connections between disciplines or use concepts
from various disciplines in different contexts. Although such outcomes might be harder to
measure, they are in fact more relevant to the deeper learning needed for tertiary education
and career readiness (Honey et al, 2014). Hence, by looking at the efficacy of STEM
classroom assessments, the limitations to assessment and possible improvements which could
be implemented can be determined.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

Research Method & Design

As a way of beginning the process of implementing effective integrated STEM classroom

assessments, this research study endeavoured to scope out the perception of teachers
regarding effective assessment in STEM. Currently there is very little in the form of research
looking at assessment in STEM specifically. Hence, ultimately the desire of this study is that
it would encourage qualitative evaluations of student perception of assessment and attempts
at assessing the validity and reliability of various forms of summative and formative
assessments implemented in integrated STEM classrooms in several schools.

This study was a qualitative action research study that was descriptive in nature, in that, its
primary focus was the exploration of participants’ perceptions regarding a specific
phenomenon or experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). It involved the use of one-on-one
interviews to gain an in-depth understanding of the participants’ beliefs.

The study used purposive sampling to select 16 secondary teachers who work in schools that
are in the process of implementing STEM education or already have some STEM classes.
However, due to the sparsity of STEM teachers, only one of the participants teaches STEM.
Teachers selected were of any gender, age and ethnicity, had any level of education and years
of teaching experience, taught any grade level from grades 7 to 12 and any subject related to
STEM. The teachers selected work in Western Sydney but in different schools in the region –
both high and low performing. According to Merriam & Tisdell (2016), purposive sampling
is based on the notion that a sample is taken from a population that knows the most about a
topic.

Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with each of these teachers
investigating perception/beliefs regarding assessment and as it related to the integrated-
STEM environment. Data collection occurred over the course of two weeks where teachers
were either informed in person or over email about the interview and then the interview itself
conducted over the phone or in person. 16 teachers were contacted and 6 agreed to be
interviewed. The interview questions were divided into three main categories; general views
on STEM education, important aspects of assessment in general, what is needed to ensure
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

STEM assessment is effective, the challenges to STEM assessment and overcoming these
challenges.

Grounded theory with a systematic design was used through the use of open coding, axial
coding and selective coding to analyse the data and (Creswell, 2012). Open coding involved
identify categories of interest observed in the data through a line-by-line process with codes
being created as appropriate to the data. The next stage involved defining codes that were
relevant the research question and these were made into themes (Esterberg, 2002). Themes
were more dynamic, with some areas of interest being noted to be more prevalent than others.
The data was then reviewed line-by-line with these themes in mid to determine all instances
that support each theme.

As the focus of the research was on teacher perception regarding STEM education, an open
ended question was used at the outset to gauge the participant’s general view on STEM
integrated teaching environments. This was to determine if teachers where aware of what it
was and if they had any pre-existing views that may skew their view of assessment in STEM.

Results

Demographic characteristics
The majority of the participants were female (66.67%) and had worked for less than ten years
(83.33%) whereas the sample were exactly divided in half with regard to reported race as
caucasion (50%) and teaching science (50%). Also, the majority taught grades 7 to 10
(66.67%), referred to in table 1.

Table 1: Teacher demographics

Teacher Experience (years) Subject taught
1 5 Science
2 14 STEM/Science
3 7 Science
4 2 Multiple disciplines
5 4 Special needs
6 1 Mathematics

A General Perception of STEM

102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

Participants were first given an introduction the goal of these interviews and the nature of the
research project and asked to introduce themselves. They were then asked about their views
about STEM education ‘off the bat’. As this was intended only as a test of an assumption
made in conducting these interviews, in that, there would be a general support for STEM
education and all that it promises, it was expected that responses would be brief. Two major
themes were ascertained; ‘STEM forms an integral part of education in terms of preparing
students for an evolving technologically advancing world’ and ‘STEM allows students to
develop their critical and creative thinking, problem solving, communication and
collaborative skills’. A minor theme, brought up by one participant, was that technology is
the most captivating aspect of STEM as it allows students to enjoy the sense of achievement
in finishing a piece of work and in being innovative. There were no responses that perceived
STEM anything other than the aforementioned descriptions, however one participant had no
preconceived notions regarding STEM education.

Views on Effective Assessment in General

The next two questions were regarding the aspects that make assessments effective; one a
direct question and the other allowing for participants to share about an assessment they
particularly enjoyed giving their students. Interestingly, the first of the major themes was the
need for assessments to be both inclusive and allow for differentiation. One participant
emphasised that “assessment should have items that can be achieved by all students and
others that can challenge those with higher capabilities” and another suggested assessments
should be “accessible to all students”. Yet another described that “assessment should be
adjusted accordingly to care to the needs of all students for equal learning opportunities”.

The second was that assessments should allow students to demonstrate the full depth of their
knowledge and skills. Put simply one of the participants mentioned, “an effective classroom
assessment is one that tells you what your students know and what they can and can’t do”.
Another described effective assessment as “one that allows students to demonstrate their full
understanding or depth of knowledge and the skills that they have learned during the course.”
This was re-iterated almost verbatim by other participants.

The third was the importance of providing students with feedback such that they can
improve. One participant suggested students using feedback from peer assessment to improve
their work prior to submitting. Another described an assessment they gave which involved
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

creating an information stall which included their model of a phenomena in electricity and
have students from the year below evaluate their model and presentation. The students had to
then use this feedback to give themselves approximated scaling ranks and then negotiated this
with their teacher. The same participant that gave this example, indicated that students should
be invested in the marking and when probed further explained that, through the teacher
giving feedback, students can better understand where they lie in terms of their scaling and
hence are more invested in marking.

The final major theme delineated was that assessments should reflect the outcomes they mean
to assess. One referred to “matching an assessment to the learning goals or outcomes”.
Another explained further that by aligning assessments with outcomes, this avoids
unnecessary synthesis or formatting for the intention of scaling, In fact this participant felt
that student differentiation should reflect the outcome rather than the nature of the task.

Some minor themes included assessment involving reflecting on understanding. Also that
there needs to be a variety of formative and summative assessments. Another specifically
referred to “colour and creativity” when describing their favourite assessment and another
cherished students being able to express themselves in different ways. Yet another participant
said their favourite assessments were oral as they were more organic and the students felt less
pressured as it was more of a conversation.

Effective STEM Assessment

Participants were first informed of some of the evidence behind effective STEM assessment
and then asked to discuss their views on what would make STEM assessments more
effective. The first major theme was the need for assessments to have a real-world
application. One participant recommended that students “must solve a relatable or real-world
problem” and another said they believed STEM assessments should “solve a current real-
world issue”.

Another major theme was surrounding process and product. One of the participants suggested
that “process is as important as product” in STEM assessment. Another suggested that the
product needed to be meaningful and useful. And another focused on the need to incorporate
STEM skills more fully in assessment, that is, assessing process.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

A minor theme was the need for there to be engagement in STEM from teachers and students.
One participant described, “For the whole thing to work students need to be engaged and this
is heavily dependent on teachers being enthusiastic about the STEM culture.”

Challenges and Overcoming Them

The final two research questions were concerning the challenges faced by assessment in
STEM and how they can be overcome. An overriding theme during the interviews was the
difficulty of finding teachers with expertise in such diverse areas and the lack of collaboration
between disciplines. One participant mentioned that not only is it difficult to find teachers
with expertise in all the areas of STEM education but “it is hard just bringing teachers with
different areas of expertise together to collaborate and truly integrate the content and skills
effectively”. Another participant described that “STEM covers such a broad range of
concepts and skills, how could one teacher not only teach it but also assess it effectively?”.

A second major theme was difficulty in assessing individuals in the problem-based learning
setting. One participant said “I think it’s difficult assessing individuals when a lot of STEM
projects are teamwork. Even making marking schemes that assess teamwork is challenging.”
Another participant suggested a solution for this would be scaffolding teamwork skills, “by
enhancing student’s teamwork skills, through scaffolding, teachers are better able to assess
each individual as their work is less hindered by poor team dynamic”. Another participant
added “by equipping students with told needed for team work and critical thinking, they can
tackle the problem-solving learning environment with more confidence.” A final participant
discussed problem-based learning with relation to self-directed learning, “problem-based
learning, or any constructivist approach is needed in STEM education where the student is
placed as the main agent of their learning. Although this can pose a challenge, I think it’s as
simple as determining the students’ interests before creating tasks as well as examining
difficult concepts such that these can be covered early on equipping students for the project
they will be working on.”

A third major theme was the challenge of assessing the process as well as the product. A
participant discussed this issue and said, “Students would need to first understand the
requirements of the assessment and then the rubric. If the rubric emphasises the importance
of process by maybe assessing things like a portfolio or smaller tasks that lead up to the end
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

product, this I think would give students more appreciation for the process behind the
product.” A participant also brought up this subject with a recommendation, “I believe pre-
and post- learning tasks where students maybe are prepared for the assessment with tasks and
then spend time reflecting and giving feedback afterwards helps ensure they have gained the
skills needed to make the product.”

There were several minor themes mainly with regard to overcoming STEM assessment
challenges. Firstly, one participant recommended teachers joining a STEM network and
another “liasing with expert teachers”. A couple brought up the importance of having more
formative assessments “so students can show what they know” and yet another mentioned the
need for “hands-on activities”.

General Discussion

The themes revealed by the interviews were indicative of the perceptions teachers hold of
STEM integrated assessment. Past research investigating teacher’s general perception of
STEM integration shows some similarity with the findings of this research study but with
obvious gaps. The major and minor themes were analysed and compared with related themes
found when Margot & Kettler (2019) analysed the literature. Below are the themes found in
is this research study (in italics) correlated with that of the studies reviewed by Margot and
Kettler (2019).

The need for assessments to have a real-word application

Challenge of finding teachers with expertise in diverse areas and the lack of collaboration
between disciplines
Margot and Kettler (2019) found that teachers perceived that students gain the skills to solve
problems similar to those they will encounter in future careers through the cross-curricular
nature of STEM education (Asghar et al., 2012; Bruce-Davis et al., 2014; Dare et al., 2014;
McMullin and Reeve, 2014; Smith et al., 2015). However secondary teachers also brought up
the challenge of collaboration across disciplines due to limited communication, the concept
of interdisciplinarity being difficult and specifically technology being hard to integrate (El-
Deghaidy et al., 2017; Al Salami et al., 2017). Teachers also explained the importance of
STEM teachers collaborating with other STEM teachers and university professionals to
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

enhance preparation of STEM lessons and model a team approach for students (Asghar et al.,
2012, Herro & Quigley, 2017; Stohlmann et al., 2012)

Problem based learning in STEM education needing to be self-directed

Assessment needs to be inclusive and allow for differentiation
Margot and Kettler (2019) found that teachers agreed STEM faced pedagogical challenges
including shifting from teacher-led instruction to student-led instruction (Lesseig et al., 2016;
Park et al., 2017). Teachers also expressed concern regarding STEM pedagogy meeting the
needs of all learners (Herro & Quigley, 2017; Park et al., 2017).

Difficulty assessing individuals in a group-oriented setting

Margot & Kettler (2019) found that teachers were concerned about group grading and the
lack of confidence in assessing each member of a group individually to make sure they had
mastered the standards (Herro & Quigley, 2017).

Formative assessment is crucial to STEM education (minor theme)

Teachers felt there were not enough formative assessments to discover what students had
understood the concepts of each discipline (Asghar et al., 2012; Dare et al., 2014). Formative
assessments assist teachers in understanding when something needs to be retaught or when
students already have a good understanding of the material.

Notably, these were several major themes found when interviewing teachers on the
perception of STEM assessment that were not discussed in the literature previously. These
included the importance of providing students with feedback, matching assessment to
learning outcomes, the process being as important as the product and assessing the process
and the product. As these themes specifically related to assessment in STEM, this may
explain why they have not been discussed specifically previously in the literature.

Limitations and Future Research

Limitations of this research project included firstly the lack of access to STEM assessments
that could be evaluated even in the form of a case study. As a result of the lack of
assessments available, STEM classes that could be observed or even STEM teachers that
could be interviewed in a focus group format, the direction of this research project had to be
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

shifted to a qualitative research study looking at teachers’ perception of STEM assessment.

Then once this decision was made, it was also met with limitations including the limited
number of responses to requests for interviews, the impact of COVID-19 on being able to
meet with teachers in person.

In terms of future research specific to assessment in the STEM integrated environment,

research specifically into effective formative assessment strategies needs to be conducted.
Preferably through case studies looking at STEM classrooms in different schools with
varying structures and socioeconomic backgrounds, assessment could be evaluated over a
longer period of time to determine what worked and what did not. Also, on a broader scale,
research should be done on how to bring the various members of the multidisciplinary team
to the table to collaborate and ensure they are equipped and developed professionally in order
to provide a true team-model for their students.

Conclusion and Implications

The study’s findings regarding perceptions of teachers’ regarding integrated STEM

assessments were analysed qualitatively and found to have evidence based implications in the
application of STEM education. Major themes surrounded the challenges faced and how to
overcome them, specifically; finding teachers with the expertise and providing them with the
tools and time needed to collaborate, implementing a self-directed learning environment; and
ensuring assessments are inclusive and allow for differentiation. Themes regarding the
characteristics of effective STEM assessment included using formative assessments, real-
world problem solving and assessing individuals appropriately in a more group-focused
context. These themes aligned with the findings of Margot & Kettler’s (2019) systemic
literature review on teachers’ perceptions of STEM however brought more depth to the
assessment focus which was deemed to be poorly addressed in STEM programs (Nadelson
and Seifert, 2013). Hence, in term of implications to practice, this study identifies several
challenges to assessment in STEM education as well as possible ways to overcome them.
Proposed solutions included; providing students with feedback, having pre- and post-
assessment learning tasks to ensure students are both prepared for the assessment and are able
to reflect on the understanding and skills they gained; equipping students with tools needed
for teamwork and critical thinking and establishing a school culture that promotes STEM
education.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

References

Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., & de Miranda M. A. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers’
attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and
Design Education, 27, 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9341-0.

Asghar, A., Ellington, R., Rice, E., Johnson, F., & Prime, G. M. (2012). Supporting STEM
education in secondary science contexts. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based
Learning, 6(2), 85–125. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1349.

Australian Industry Group. (2013). Lifting our science, technology, engineering and maths
(STEM) skills. Sydney: Australian Industry Group.

Australian Industry Group. (2015). Progressing STEM Skills in Australia. Sydney: Australian
Industry Group

Borthwick, F., Bennett, S., Lefoe, G. E., & Huber, E. (2007). Applying authentic learning to
social science: A learning design for an inter-disciplinary sociology subject.

Bruce-Davis, M. N., Gubbins, E. J., Gilson, C. M., Villanueva, M., Foreman, J. L., &
Rubenstein, L. D. (2014). STEM high school administrators’, teachers’, and students’
perceptions of curricular and instructional strategies and practices. Journal of Advanced
Academics, 25(3), 272–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X14527952.

Capraro, R. M., & Corlu, M. S. (2013). Changing views on assessment for STEM project-
based learning. In STEM project-based learning (pp. 109-118). SensePublishers, Rotterdam.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). NJ: Pearson.

Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Driven by beliefs: understanding
challenges physical science teachers face when integrating engineering and physics. Journal
of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 4(2), 47–61.
https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1098.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

El-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M. & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM
integration in schools: views from in-service science teachers. EURASIA Journal of
Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 13(6), 2459–2484.
https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01235a.

Ernst, J., & Glennie, E. (2015). Redesigned high schools for transformed STEM learning:
Performance assessment pilot outcome. Journal of STEM Education, 16(4).

Esterberg, K. (2002). Qualitative methods in social research. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Fitzallen, N., & Brown, N. (2017). Outcomes for engineering students delivering a STEM
outreach and education programme. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(6), 632-
643.

Fraser, S., Earle, J., & Fitzallen, N. (2018). What Is in an Acronym? Experiencing STEM
Education in Australia. In STEM education: An emerging field of inquiry (pp. 9-30). Brill
Sense.

Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers
differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science
and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089-1113.

Harwell, M., Moreno, M., Phillips, A., Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2015).
A study of STEM assessments in engineering, science, and mathematics for elementary and
middle school students. School Science and Mathematics, 115(2), 66-74.

Herro, D. & Quigley, C. (2017). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of STEAM teaching through
professional development: implications for teacher educators. Professional Development in
Education, 43, 416–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2016.1205507.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. A. (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12
education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research (Vol. 500). Washington, DC:
National Academies Press.

Lesseig, K., Slavit, D., Nelson, T. H., & Seidel, R. A. (2016). Supporting middle school
teachers’ implementation of STEM design challenges. School Science and Mathematics,
116(4), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12172.

Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and
education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2.

McMullin, K., & Reeve, E. (2014). Identifying perceptions that contribute to the development
of successful project lead the way pre-engineering programs in Utah. Journal of Technology
Education, 26(1), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v26i1.a.2.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA). (2019). Assessment in Stage 6. NESA.

Retrieved July 24 from
https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/Understanding-the-
curriculum/assessment

Öberg, G. (2009). Facilitating interdisciplinary work: Using quality assessment to create

common ground. Higher Education, 57(4), 405-415.

Office of the Chief Scientist. (2016). Australia's STEM workforce, Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government. Retrieved from
http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/Australias-STEM-workforce_full-
report.pdf

Park, M., Dimitrov, D. M., Patterson, L. G., & Park, D. (2017). Early childhood teachers’
beliefs about readiness for teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15, 275–291.
102512 Researching STEM Education 19897921 Peter Fahim

Potter, B. S., Ernst, J. V., & Glennie, E. J. (2017). performance-based assessment in the
secondary STEM classroom. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 76(6), 18.

Psycharis, S. (2016). The impact of computational experiment and formative assessment in

inquiry-based teaching and learning approach in STEM education. Journal of Science
Education and Technology, 25(2), 316-326.

Rosicka, C. (2016). Translating STEM education research into practice.

Satchwell, R. E. and Loepp, F. L. (2002). Designing and Implementing an Integrated

Mathematics, Science, and Technology Curriculum for the Middle School. Journal of
Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3), 41-66.

Smith, K. L., Rayfield, J., & McKim, B. R. (2015). Effective practices in STEM integration:
describing teacher perceptions and instructional method use. Journal of Agricultural
Education, 56(4), 182–201. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2015.04183.

Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated
STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), Article 4.
https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653

Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., ... &
Hellinckx, L. (2018). Integrated STEM education: A systematic review of instructional
practices in secondary education. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 2.