by Yash Chawla (Wroclaw University of Science and Technology)

At STEM4Humanities project, our mission is to bridge the gap between STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) and the humanities by equipping educators with the skills and knowledge to integrate interdisciplinary approaches into their teaching. One of our flagship initiatives is the development of a mini-course designed for professors across Europe, specifically tailored to meet their professional development needs in STEM education.

The journey to create this mini-course was driven by a comprehensive methodology that started with a needs analysis through a self-assessment tool. This blog explores how the self-assessment survey of professors shaped the course content, and learning objectives, ensuring the course meets the unique needs of the participants.

The methodology: A needs-based approach

The foundation of the STEM for Humanities mini-course rests on a robust data-driven approach, informed by the results of a self-assessment survey completed by university professors from the seven partner countries—France, Georgia, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine. The survey allowed professors to reflect on their proficiency levels across a variety of skills relevant to STEM education. This needs analysis was crucial to identifying gaps in knowledge and areas where further development was most needed.

According to Hu and Guo (2021), a needs-based analysis is a powerful tool for curriculum design, ensuring that educational interventions address the specific competencies required by the learners. In our case, the self-assessment tool helped identify the key areas where professors felt less confident or desired additional training. 

Rather than taking a generic approach to STEM education, the course development team at Wrocław University of Science and Technology focused on designing modules that would directly respond to these self-identified gaps. This focus on targeted professional development aligns with evidence that suggests professional learning is most effective when it is responsive to the particular needs of the educators (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).

Key focus areas: What the analysis revealed?

The data collected from the self-assessment survey pointed to several areas where professors expressed a need for further development. These areas became the cornerstone of the mini-course’s content, ensuring that the training was directly relevant to the participants’ professional contexts.

The key focus areas include:

– Engineering thinking and design thinking: These concepts were highlighted as significant areas where professors sought additional training. Engineering Thinking involves problem-solving using engineering principles, while Design Thinking emphasizes a human-centered approach to innovation. Both skills are vital for professors looking to integrate STEM concepts into their teaching, encouraging students to think critically and creatively.

– Generative AI and innovation: With the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, professors recognized the need to stay updated on how AI can be leveraged within educational settings. The course includes modules that delve into Generative AI, exploring how it can be used to enhance teaching and foster innovation within the classroom.

– Manipulative skills: Practical, hands-on skills were another area of interest. This reflects the growing recognition of the importance of experiential learning in STEM education. The mini-course includes modules that provide strategies for integrating hands-on, manipulative skills into lesson plans, helping students engage more deeply with STEM content.

– STEM pedagogies and STEM fluency: Participants expressed a desire for more training in effective STEM teaching strategies and pedagogies. The course addresses this by providing guidance on how to develop STEM fluency—enabling professors to teach their students not only the content but also how to think and act like scientists, technologists, engineers, and mathematicians.

By focusing on these areas, the mini-course responds directly to the needs expressed by the professors, ensuring that the training is both relevant and impactful. Darling-Hammond et al. (2009) emphasize the importance of pedagogical content knowledge in effective teaching, a concept that is central to the course’s design.

Blended learning: A flexible approach

To cater to the diverse learning styles and preferences of professors, the mini-course adopts a blended learning approach. This format combines online lectures, interactive seminars, and project-based learning, providing a balance of theory and practice. Hoic-Bozic et al. (2008) found that blended learning can enhance engagement and promote deeper knowledge transfer, making it an ideal choice for our course.

The flexibility of the online format also allows professors to access the material at their own pace, which is particularly important given their busy schedules. As Fairman et al. (2022) note, online professional development is becoming increasingly popular in higher education, offering a convenient way for educators to continue their learning without the constraints of traditional, in-person training.

Empowering educators for interdisciplinary teaching

One of the core objectives of the mini-course is to empower professors to integrate STEM practices into their teaching in a way that fosters interdisciplinary collaboration. STEM subjects are often viewed as distinct from the humanities, but in reality, these fields are deeply interconnected. For instance, Engineering Thinking can be applied to problem-solving in literature, and Design Thinking can be used to innovate in historical research.

The mini-course encourages professors to adopt a more interdisciplinary approach to their teaching, helping them break down the traditional barriers between STEM and the humanities. This aligns with the growing call for interdisciplinary collaboration in higher education, which is seen as essential for preparing students for the complex, interconnected world they will face after graduation.

Conclusion: A tailored approach to professional development

The development of the *STEM for Humanities* mini-course is a testament to the power of data-driven design. By starting with a needs analysis and focusing on the specific areas where professors identified a need for further development, we have created a course that is both relevant and impactful. The blended learning approach provides flexibility, while the focus on interdisciplinary teaching ensures that professors are equipped to foster collaboration between STEM and the humanities.

As we move forward, we remain committed to continuously refining and improving the mini-course based on feedback from participants. In doing so, we aim to create a professional development experience that not only meets the immediate needs of professors but also helps them stay ahead in the rapidly evolving landscape of higher education.

References

Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R.C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council, 12(10).

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. *Learning Policy Institute.

Fairman, J.C., Smith, D.J., Pullen, P.C., & Lebel, S.J. (2022). The challenge of keeping teacher professional development relevant. In Leadership for Professional Learning (pp. 251-263). Routledge.

Hoic-Bozic, N., Mornar, V., & Boticki, I. (2008). A blended learning approach to course design and implementation. IEEE Transactions on Education, 52(1), 19-30.

Hu, W., & Guo, X. (2021, October). Toward the development of key competencies: A conceptual framework for the STEM curriculum design and a case study. Frontiers in Education, 6, 684265.