Balancing disciplinary knowledge and practical reasoning in problem solving is needed for meaningful learning. In STEM problem solving, science subject matter with associated practices often appears distant to learners due to its abstract nature. Consequently, learners experience difficulties making meaningful connections between science and their daily experiences. Applying Dewey’s idea of practical and science inquiry and Bereiter’s idea of referent-centred and problem-centred knowledge, we examine how integrated STEM problem solving offers opportunities for learners to shuttle between practical and science inquiry and the kinds of knowledge that result from each form of inquiry. We hypothesize that connecting science inquiry with practical inquiry narrows the gap between science and everyday experiences to overcome isolation and fragmentation of science learning. In this study, we examine classroom talk as students engage in problem solving to increase crop yield. Qualitative content analysis of the utterances of six classes of 113 eighth graders and their teachers were conducted for 3 hours of video recordings. Analysis showed an almost equal amount of science and practical inquiry talk. Teachers and students applied their everyday experiences to generate solutions. Science talk was at the basic level of facts and was used to explain reasons for specific design considerations. There was little evidence of higher-level scientific conceptual knowledge being applied. Our observations suggest opportunities for more intentional connections of science to practical problem solving, if we intend to apply higher-order scientific knowledge in problem solving. Deliberate application and reference to scientific knowledge could improve the quality of solutions generated.

No abstract

STEM education and research has gained popularity internationally over the last decade. However, there is a lack in specifications in existing K-12 STEM classroom observation protocols of how features of an integrated STEM experience/lesson would lead to desired outcomes and how those outcomes should be measured. To bridge this gap, we propose the development of a new integrated STEM classroom observation protocol (iSTEM protocol). This article describes the ongoing development work of the iSTEM protocol, which features two creative attempts. Firstly, the productive disciplinary engagement framework is adapted to design a classroom observation protocol that provides a coherent frame of design principles to be met to achieve desired 3-dimensional pedagogical outcomes. Secondly, interdisciplinarity of student engagement was interpreted in terms of the extent to which students take a systematic and disciplinary-based approach to make and justify decisions during STEM problem-solving. The iSTEM protocol comprises 15 items (4-point scale) rated holistically for the extents to which evidence was found in the observed lesson for (1) the 3-dimensional pedagogical outcomes of productive interdisciplinary engagement (five items) and (2) problematising, resources, authority, and accountability design principles (10 items). The accompanying iSTEM profile visually represents and communicates the strengths and inadequacies in design principles, thus providing explanations for extents of students’ productive interdisciplinary engagement. The iSTEM protocol will contribute as a research tool for STEM education researchers and as a pedagogical guide for STEM classroom teachers to improve their design of STEM learning experiences. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11165-023-10110-z.