The quality of the teaching provided is a matter of most importance for any educational system, as well as a goal of any educational policy. According to empirical data, it has been observed that teachers who are satisfied with their profession can successfully support the goals of the education system by responding with greater productivity, quality and consistency to their teaching work. The purpose of the present study is to investigate: a) improving students' understanding of applied sciences; b) whether there is a difference in gender understanding. It was carried out using empirical method and bibliographical references related to the particular research area. The sample of pupils used to observe the changes in understanding concerned a Technical School in the field of Electrical Engineering in the Magnesia region. Its results show that students who approached the Ohm's law module with the STEM method, compared to students who attended the same module with the traditional method, understood the subject better. Students at the end of the intervention participated in a joint written test by the classroom teacher. Upon completion of the intervention, it was also found that the students who attended the course using the STEM method as a whole were very satisfied with the approach. Localized knowledge rejects knowledge patterns based mainly on computational processes and structures consisting of symbol systems that are abstract and arbitrarily mapped to the world. The perspective of cognitive knowledge holds that cognitive behavior is integrated and expanding. An integrated approach to knowledge is valuable when combining both theory and practice. Extended knowledge theories go further, arguing that in some cases the social and physical environment, together with the individuals in it, form the cognitive system together.
The Use of Stem in the Educational Process, Education Journal.
Vol. 8, No. 6,
2019, pp. 244-248.
Goldman, R., Zahn, C., & Derry, S. J. (2014). Frontiers of digital video research in the learning sciences: Mapping the terrain. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2nd Ed., Ch. 11., pp. 213-232). Cambridge University Press.
Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT (2013) Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psych SciPublInt 14 (1): 4-58.
diSessa, A. A. (2014). The Construction of Causal Schemes: Learning Mechanisms at the Knowledge Level., Graduate School of Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Songer and Kali. (2014). Science education and the learning sciences as coevolving species. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, second edition (pp. 565–586). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Edelson DP, Abella BS, Kramer-Johansen J, Wik L, Myklebust H, Barry AM, Merchant RM, Hoek TL, Steen PA, Becker LB. (2006). Effects of com-pression depth and pre-shock pauses predict defibrillation failure during cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2006; 71: 137-145.
OECD, WTO e UNCTAD. Implications of global value chains for trade, investment, development and job. Paper prepared for the G-20 Leader Summit. 2013. Disponívelem: http://www.oecd.org/trade/G20Global-Value-Chains-2013.pdf.
Kozma, R. B. (Ed.) (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change: A global perspective. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wells, D. J. 1993 Ecological correlates of hovering flight of hummingbirds. J. Exp. Biol. 178, 59–70.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis, Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge. Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Resnick, L. R., Michaels, S., & O’Connor, M. C. (2010). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. In D. D. Preiss& R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology: Perspectives on learning, teaching, and human development (pp. 163-194). New York: Springer.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Engle, R. A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative account of transfer in a community of learners classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 451–498.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5 (1), 1-24.
Vygotsky, (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, I. Problems of general psychology. Including the volume Thinking and speech. ed. R. W. Rieber and A. S. Carton. New York: Plenum.
Engle, R. A., Nguyen, P. D., &Mendelson, A. (2011). The influence of training on transfer: Initial evidence from a tutoring experiment. Instructional Science, 39, 603-628.
Bowers, J., Cobb, P., & McClain, K (1999). The evolution of mathematical practices: A case study. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 25-64.
Moss, J., & Case, R. (1999). Developing children's understanding of rational numbers: A new model and an experimental curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 122-147.
Greeno, J. G. (2012). Concepts in activities and discourses. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19, 310-313.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Making mathematics and making pasta: From cookbook procedures to really cooking. In J. G. Greeno & S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science education (pp. 299–312). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cussins, A. (1993). Nonconceptual content and the elimination of misconceived com-posites! Mind & Language, 8, 234-252.
NSF Advisory Committee on Environmental Research and Education, http://www.nsf.gov/geo/ere/ereweb/advisory.cfm.
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM Education, STEM mania. The Technology Teacher, December/January, 20-26.
Salinger, G., & Zuga, K. (2010). Background and history of the STEM movement. In ITEEA (Ed.), The overlooked STEM imperatives: Technology and engineering (pp. 4-9). Reston, VA: ITEEA.
Morrison, J., & Raymond Bartlett, V. (2009). STEM as curriculum. Education Week, 23 (March 4), 28-31.
Tsupros, N., Kohler, R., & Hallinen, J. (2009). STEM education: A project to identify the missing components. Intermediate Unit 1: Center for STEM Education and Leonard Gelfand Center for Service Learning and Outreach, Carnegie Mellon University, Pennsylvania.
PCAST (President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology). (2010). Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) for America’s future. Retrieved November 13, 2010, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf.
Morrison, J. (2006). STEM education monograph series: Attributes of STEM education. Teaching Institute for Essential Science, Baltimore, MD.
Heywood, D. y Parker, J. (1997). Confronting the analogy: primary teachers exploring the usefulness of analogies in the teaching and learning of electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 19 (8), pp. 869-885.
Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1, 73-82.
Psillos D., Koumaras P. and Tiberghien A. (1988) Voltage presented as a primary concept in anintroductory teaching on D. C. circuit. International Journal of Research in Science Education, 10 (1), 29-43.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Smart technology for self-organizing processes. Smart Learning Environments, 1, 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0001-8.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26 (1), 48e94.