skip to main content
10.1145/3407982.3408028acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescompsystechConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Blending Technology-based Teacher-led and Student-centered Approaches in STEM Education

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

The paper describes an extensive study of the teachers' views on technology use in teaching strategies in a way to build on the students' knowledge acquisition. This research exploits the findings from a targeted survey among STEM teachers of different educational levels, types of schools, and regions in Bulgaria. The usefulness and the usage frequency of various types of ICT resources are investigated. Two main technology-enhanced teaching approaches are considered -- a teacher-led and a student-centered. The goal is to outline an appropriate ratio between them. The solution is given by a precise formal description and evaluation of the teacher's subjective preferences concerning these teaching approaches. For this purpose, the mathematical approach of decision-making that involves utility and probability theory, and a stochastic approximation is applied. As a result, the utility functions of teacher-led and student-centered teaching are constructed thus, enabling determination of their optimal proportion.

References

  1. Peter C. Fishburn, 1970. Utility theory for decision-making, New York, Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Mark Prensky, 2008. The role of technology. Educational Technology, 48, 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Richard J. Harnish, K. Robert Bridges, D avid N. Sattler, Margaret L. Signorella, Michael Munson, (Eds.). 2018. The use of technology in teaching and learning. Society for the Teaching of Psychology. Available at: https://teachpsych.org/ebooks/useoftechGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Strategy for effective implementation of Information and Communication Technologies in education and science in the republic of Bulgaria (2014-2020). Available at: http://www.strategy.bg/StrategicDocuments/View.aspx?lang=bg-BG&Id=904Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Babette Moeller and Tim Reitzes, (2011). Integrating technology with student-centered learning Education development center, Inc. (EDC). Quincy, MA: Nellie Mae Education FoundationGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Tom Sherrington, 2019. Teacher-led instruction and student-centred learning are opposites. In The researchED Guide to Education Myths: An evidence-informed guide for teachers. C. Barton, T. Bennett (Eds), pp. 71--82, John Catt Educational, Limited.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Simin Ghavifekr, and Wan Athirah Wan Rosdy, 2015. Teaching and learning with technology: Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools, International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 1(2), 175--191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Stanislav Dimitrov and Elena Paunova-Hubenova, 2019. Conditions for applying the ICTs in Bulgarian schools. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference High Technologies. Business. Society (INDUSTRY-4.0). Vol. 3, 6, Scientific Technical Union of Mechanical Engineering, 188--191.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Sundarajan Amutha, 2016. Impact of e-content integration in science on the learning of students at tertiary level, International Journal of Information and Education Technology. 6, 8, 643--646. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.766Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Svetozar Ilchev, Dimitar Petkov, Rumen Andreev, and Zlatolilia Ilcheva, 2019. Smart compact laser system for animation projections. Cybernetics and Information Technologies. 19, 3, 137--153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/cait-2019--0030Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Irina Topalova, Alexander Tzokev, and Svetozar Ilchev, 2007. A Preprocessing Method and Classification of 2D Objects Using Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium of the Danube-Adria-Association-for-Automation-and-Manufacturing (DAAAM) Intelligent Manufacturing & Automation: Focus on Creativity, Responsibility and Ethics of Engineers, Zadar, Croatia, 767--768.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Gunawan Gunawan, Ahmad Harjono, Hermansyah Hermansyah, and Lovy Herayanti, 2019. Guided inquiry model through virtual laboratory to enhance students' science process skills on heat concept, Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 38, 2, 259--268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v38i2.23345Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Gunay Kazimzade. 2016. ICT in education - science, technology, engineering and mathematics, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ict-education-science-technology-engineering-gunay-kazimzadeGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. María-Blanca Ibáñez and Carlos Delgado-Kloos, 2018. Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review. Computers and Education, 123, 109--123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Wadi D. Haddad, 2008. ICTs for education: a reference handbook (Vol. 3): Resources (English). ICT-in-education toolkit. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/722851468314988988/ResourcesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Valentina Terzieva, Elena Paunova-Hubenova, Stanislav Dimitrov and Yordanka Boneva, 2019. ICT in STEM education in Bulgaria. In M Auer., T. Tsiatsos (Eds.) The Challenges of the Digital Transformation in Education. Proceedings of ICL2018 AISC, Springer, Cham, Vol. 916, 801--812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11932-4_74Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ralph L. Keeney and Howard Raiffa, 1993. Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs, Cambridge University PressGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Yuri Pavlov and Rumen Andreev, 2013. Decision control, management, and support in adaptive and complex systems: Quantitative models, Hershey, PA: IGI Global DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2967-7Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Blending Technology-based Teacher-led and Student-centered Approaches in STEM Education

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        CompSysTech '20: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies
        June 2020
        343 pages
        ISBN:9781450377683
        DOI:10.1145/3407982

        Copyright © 2020 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 25 August 2020

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        CompSysTech '20 Paper Acceptance Rate46of72submissions,64%Overall Acceptance Rate241of492submissions,49%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader