e-Learning Integrated STEM Education Center (eLISE) in Asia: A Reflection Case Study of Taiwan and Vietnam Research Project

Abstract

Objective:This article describes the implementation plan, advance and future directions of the academic and educational research center eLISE (e-Learning Integrated STEM Education Center) whose foundation intends to narrow the collaboration between Taiwan and Vietnam in e-Learning and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) in the framework of the New Southbound Policy[1], a long-term project announced by the Taiwanese government to strengthen the partnership with South Asian countries.

Originality / contribution:This article contributes to the reflection about the promotion of international cooperation in innovation, scientific and technological research as well as the analysis of public policies guided towards e-Learning and STEM innovation.

Information collection method / strategies: The stages of the research and innovation process were (1) Innovation e-Learning and STEM Instruction teaching material and module: test application, teacher workshops and interviews (2) Innovation e-Learning and STEM assessment through CloudClassRoom observation with Gamified Electronic Audio Response System and Google Bert. 

Conclusions: The description of the implementation of eLISE, the explanation of the development of innovative curriculums and teacher workshops, as well as the talent exchange and the cooperation between industry and academy, highlights the importance of cultivate talents and workforces educated through STEM and e-Learning, seeking regional development and prosperity for both, Taiwan and Vietnam.

[1] Office of Trade Negotiations, executive Yuan, Bureau of Foreign Trade, T. M. of E. A. New Southbound Policy Guidelines and Action Plan. (Taipei, 2017).

Keywords

STEM, Asia, New Southbound Policy, cross-border cooperation, e-learning

Author Biography

Chun- Yen Chang

Science education scholar in Taiwan. Currently, he serves as Chair Professor in the National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU), Director of the Science Education Center (NTNU), Professor of the Graduate Institute of Science Education and the Department of Earth Sciences (NTNU). Over the past few years, he has been a Visiting Professor at the Taipei Medical University, The Education University of Hong Kong, and the Paris 8 University. He is Editor-in-chief of the Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education; Co-editor of the International Journal of Educational Methodology and Editorial Board Member of the Studies in Science Education, Learning, Media & Technology, & Journal of Science Education and Technology. changcy@ntnu.edu.tw

Pei- Ling Lin

Researcher, Science Education Center, National Taiwan Normal University, 

Nguyễn Thị Tố Khuyên

Ph.D. student at the Graduate Institute of Science Education of National Taiwan Normal University. She holds a bachelor’s and master’s certification from the Faculty of Physics at Hanoi National University of Education. Her Master thesis was related to teaching and learning STEM, namely developing STEM activities on Nano Technology for lower secondary pupils. Currently, her research areas focus on teacher professional development in STEM education, 

References

Ahn, W., Chu, H. E., Martin, S. N., Chien, Y. T., Jen, C. H., & Chang, C. Y, “Development of an instrument to examine Engagement and Participation in Classroom-Science (EPIC-S)”. In 2016 International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education (EASE 2016): Tokyo, Japan.

Beatty , Ian D., William J. Leonard, William J. Gerace & Robert J. Dufresne“Question Driven Instruction: Teaching science (well) with an audience response system”. Audience Response Systems in Higher Education Applications and Cases, 0, 96–115 (2006): https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-947-2.ch007

Beck, Ulrich, (Germany: SAGE, 1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity.

Bransford, John D. et al, (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school.

Breiner, Jonathan M., Shelly Sheats Harkness, Carla. C Johnson & Catherine M. Koehler, “What Is STEM? A Discussion About Conceptions of STEM in Education and Partnerships” School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), (2012): 3–11 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x

Boonruang, Sasiwimon”A Stem education A new method of teaching science, technology, engineering and mathematics in an applied approach is being promoted by the IPST” Bangkok: 14 January, 2015. https://www.bangkokpost.com/tech/local-news/456725/a-stem-education

Burke, Barry N. “6E Learning by Design Model” Technology and Engineering Teacher, (2014): 14–19.

Bybee, Rodger W., (Virginia: National Sciende Teaching Association, 2013). The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities. National Science Teachers Association - NSTA Press.

Bybee, Rodger W. (Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2010) What is STEM education? Science, 329(5995), 996 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194998

Caldwell, Jane E. “Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-Practice Tips”, CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1 (2007): 9–20 https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205

Cannady, Matthew A., Eric Greenwald & Kimberly N. Harris, “Problematizing the STEM
Pipeline Metaphor: Is the STEM Pipeline Metaphor Serving Our Students and the STEM Workforce?”, Science Education, 98(3) (2014): 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21108

Council, British. (2016). STEM Education Programme-Vitnem. https://www.britishcouncil.vn/en/programmes/education/science-innovation/newton-programme-vietnam/stem

Crouch, Catherine H., Eric Mazur, (Maryland: American Journal of Physics, 2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), (2001): 970–977. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249

Chang, Chun-Yen, Chien-Hua Hsiao, James P. Barufaldi, “Preferred-actual learning environment ‘spaces’ and earth science outcomes in Taiwan” Science Education, 90(3), (2006): 420–433. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20125
Chang, Chun-Yen, Yeh, T. K., Lin, C. Y., Chang, Y. H., & Chen, C. L. D, “The impact of congruency between preferred and actual learning environments on tenth graders” science literacy in Taiwan. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(4), (2010): 332–340 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9203-1

Chien, Y. T., Chang, Y. H., & Chang, C. Y, “Do we click in the right way? A meta-analytic review of clicker-integrated instruction. Educational Research Review”, 17, (2016): 1–18 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.10.003

Chung, Chih-Chao. “Analysis of the learning effectiveness of the STEAM-6E special course-a case study about the creative design of IoT assistant devices for the elderly”. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(9), (2018): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093040

Deboer, George E., “Scientific Literacy: Another Look at Its Historical and Contemporary Meanings and Its Relationship to Science Education Reform” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), (2000): 582-601. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::aid-tea5>3.0.co;2-l

Deslauriers, Louis, Ellen Schelew & Carl Wieman, “Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class” Science, 332(6031), (2011): 862–864. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201783

Dufresne, Robert J., William J. Gerace & William J. Leonard “Solving physics problems with multiple representations” The Physics Teacher, 35(5) (1997): 270–275 https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2344681

Engineering and National Research Council, National Academy of (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2014). STEM integration in K-12 Education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research.

English, Lyn. D, “STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration”, International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 3 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1

Freeman, Brigid, Simon Marginson & Russell Tyler. (Eds.). (UK: Taylor and Francis Group, 2014). The age of STEM: Educational policy and practice across the world in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. New York: Routledge.

Jolly, Anne. “Six characteristics of a great STEM lesson” Education Week, 2014. https://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2014/06/17/ctq_jolly_stem.html

Jen, C. H., Chien, Y. T., Martin, S. N., Chu, H. E., & Chang, C. Y, Student participation and perception of social environment in the science classroom. In The European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) 2017 International Conference. Dublin, Ireland.

Kelley, Todd R. & J. Geoff Knowles, “A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education” International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 11 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z

Kolstø, Stein D. “Socioscientific Issues” Science Education, 85(3), (2001): 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011

Lee, Min-Hsien, Ching Sing Chai & Huang-YaoHong, “STEM Education in Asia Pacific: Challenges and Development” Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(1), 1–4 (2019): 1–4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0424-z

Lucas, Bill, Janet Hanson & Guy Claxton, (London, UK: Royal Academy of Engineering, 2014). Thinking like an engineer: Implications for the education system.

L.X, Quang, Hoang, L.H., Chuan, V., Nam, N., Anh, N. and Nhung, V.T “Integrated Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education through Active Experience of Designing Technical Toys in Vietnamese Schools” British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, 11(2), 1–12 (2015). https://doi.org/10.9734/bjesbs/2015/19429

M.-H, Hsu. (2016). From knowledge to practice-Analysis of science education implementation plan (In Chinese). Taipei.

Miller, Jon D.“Scientific Literacy : A Conceptual and Empirical Review” Daedalus, 112(2), (1983) 29–48.

Ministry of Education, Taiwan. The distribution of the new inhabitants children in elementary and middle school (In Chinese). (Taipei, 2017).

OECD, PISA 2015 results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education. (Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2016)

Office of the Chief Scientist, Benchmarking Australian science, technology, engineering and mathematics. (Canberra, Australia: Australian Government, 2014)

Office of Trade Negotiations, executive Yuan, Bureau of Foreign Trade, T. M. of E. A. New Southbound Policy Guidelines and Action Plan. (Taipei, 2017).

Paez, Tobias Martín, David Aguilera, Francisco Javier Perales -Palacios & José Miguel Vílchez-Gónzales (2019). “What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature" Science Education, 103(1), (2019): 799-822 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522

Painprasert, Niramis. “Factors Supporting the STEM Education Learning Management of Leader Teachers in the STEM Education Network of Thailand" In The Twelfth International Conference on eLearning for Knowledge-Based Society (2015): 36.1-36.6

Royal Society Science Policy Centre, Vision for science and mathematics education. (London, UK: The Royal Society, 2014).

Roberts, Amanda “A justification for STEM education”, Technology and Engineering Teacher, 72(8), (2012): 1–5.

Smith, Karl A., Tamara J. Moore, “Advancing the State of the Art of STEM Integration” Journal of STEM Education, 15(1), (2014): 5–10.

Smith, Michelle, William B. Wood, Wendy Adams & C.E Wieman “Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions”, Science, 323(5910), (2009): 122–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.05.104

Srikoom, Wachira, Chatree Faikhamta & Deborah L. Hanuscin, ”Dimensions of Effective STEM Integrated Teaching Practice”, K-12 STEM Education, 4(2), (2018): 313-330.

Taiwan Ministry of Education, 12 Basic Education Curriculum Guideline: Natural sciences, (Taipei, 2018).

Tips”, CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1 (2007): 9–20 https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205

Vasquez, Jo Anne. “STEM--Beyond the Acronym” Educational Leadership, 72(4), (2015): 10–15.