Dr. Carberry and I discussed findings of my lit reviews from  week 1 and decided to narrow down a search to two things specifically to see if we could find a gap in studies being done about STEM and RET programs and professional development with a connection to leadership/mentorship.  I was particularly interested in researching these aspects because as a science teacher in the middle school setting, I have been very frustrated with the lack of hands on science professional development, PD, offered within my district.  Not only that but so much curriculum emphasis is centered around math, reading, and writing with a neglect to science as a whole.  We still have text books from 2003, Foss kits that are outdated and have VCR tapes for instructions, and a complete lack of rigorous and meaningful standards.  I first looked at the US vs the globe and unfortunately the US is significantly behind in the science and math readiness race.  No surprise to anyone.  I still have 6th graders who cannot multiple 8×7, how am I supposed to teach more complex math within my science classroom?  “To be competitive, the US has to bolster the nation’s STEM work force” (nea.org).  UMM ya! STEM isn’t even offered in most schools, science is rarely even taught at the elementary level yet it is in everything that we do, in everything that exists.    I then went further to look at teachers and experience and education and how this ties into their ability to be effective.  Interestingly enough, “highly skilled math/science teachers is not the norm” (stemeducation.org).  There is an argument that teachers are poorly prepared when you look at primary vs secondary educators. I can tell this just from conversations I have had with Chay and Richard who are both secondary teachers.  What they do in their classes is completely foreign to me yet my goal is to prepare my kids for their curriculum? EEK.  “Most colleges and universities require two math college level courses for a degree in elementary education, there is no central curriculum standards, and teacher preparation is chaotic, incoherent, and uncoordinated” (stemeducation.org).  I then paused to think about my own personal experience and wow…. this research is true for me.  To be an elementary education major, you weren’t required to get into the rigorous subject of math and complete cross curricular lessons as it is advised.  The curriculums even at my current  school are somewhat scattered and the grade level’s standards build somewhat but not enough to challenge my kids.   I think 6th science is harder than 7th.   I felt prepared to write a lesson and do logistical things and teach independent subjects sure, but the standards for learning are different now.  6th graders now learn geometry when for me that was something I did in 10th grade.  Overall it is difficult as an educator to keep up with the pacing and the rigor especially when there is a lack of resources or professional development that can help  in a classroom.  I love RET programs for this very reason but this isn’t the norm.  Most districts cannot offer such things which is why Dr. Carberry and myself want to maybe look into offering PD opportunities so that other science teachers get that exposure and can take STEM or just engineering back into their classrooms.

So, overall I am still in the process of really exploring the route I want to take and the connection I want to make but I have been utterly fascinated to read these lit studies.