BECOMING STEM TEACHERS: EXAMINING CHANGES IN SCIENCE TEACHERS’ CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING ABOUT EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING A Dissertation by BAKI CAVLAZOGLU Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Chair of Committee, Carol L. Stuessy Committee Members, Bugrahan Yalvac Mary Margaret Capraro Jeffrey Liew Head of Department, Lynn M. Burlbaw May 2016 Major Subject: Curriculum and Instruction Copyright 2016 Baki Cavlazoglu ABSTRACT This multi-paper dissertation reports results from three related research studies centered on the development and use of an authentic measure, concept mapping, to assess changes in workshop teachers’ conceptual understanding of earthquake engineering. My review of the literature indicated few research studies examining how traditionally trained science teachers develop STEM-related understandings about the complex relationships between concepts associated with STEM-related contexts, such as those existing within the context of earthquake engineering. STEM researchers currently know little about how teachers develop deep conceptual understanding of complex and interdisciplinary content knowledge. To address the gap I found in the literature, I designed three studies to: (1) conduct a modified Delphi study to create a list of key concepts as a knowledge base in earthquake engineering, (2) examine changes in science teachers’ conceptual understanding of earthquake engineering as a result of their participation to an engineering-oriented teacher professional development (EOTPD), and (3) investigate changes in the quality of science teachers’ argumentation discourse after their participation in a week-long EOTPD. Researchers suggest identification of key concepts in critical engineering content areas for high school science teachers to increase their engineering content knowledge. In my first study, I identified and verified key concepts in earthquake engineering necessary for high school learners to acquire a basic understanding of earthquake engineering. ii Results included a key concepts list and an interdisciplinary strand map with 35 earthquake engineering key concepts in five domains. Furthermore, stakeholders suggest providing opportunities for STEM teachers to improve their conceptual understanding in critical engineering areas within EOTPDs. In my second study, I developed a conceptual framework, Meaningful Conceptual Learning, for successful conceptual understanding of complex and interdisciplinary content knowledge, implemented the framework into an EOTPD on earthquake engineering, used individual and group concept mapping as authentic assessment method. Results indicated science teachers enhanced their conceptual understanding of the earthquake engineering content knowledge after the EOTPD. Stakeholders in science education also emphasize the critical role of using argumentation discourse in teaching science and indicate most science teachers still lack the pedagogical skills to introduce and enhance students’ argumentation discourse skills. In my third study, I implemented argumentation discourse with a procedural guideline involving EOTPD participants’ reasons for the inclusion of various concepts in their concept maps. I used a modified method for collecting and analyzing discourse data and found significant enhancement in teachers’ argumentation discourse levels after the implementation. iii DEDICATION To The Memory of My Father iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Carol Stuessy, for her great support and guidance throughout the course of this research. She has been not only my advisor in this long journey; she also has been a part of my family, grandmother of my sweet daughters, and a great model for me as a researcher, a mentor, and an educator. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Bugrahan Yalvac, Dr. Mary M. Capraro, and Dr. Jeffrey Liew, for their guidance and support throughout the course of this research journey. Thanks also go to my friends and colleagues and the department faculty and staff for making my time at Texas A&M University a great experience. I also want to extend my gratitude to the National Science Foundation, which provided the support and data for my research in the Earthquake Engineering Education Project, and Dr. Dane Bozeman for his help in editing steps of my dissertation. Finally, thanks to my mother, Nuran, and my sister, Inci, for their continued encouragement and patience in reaching my goals, my wonderful wife, Nilgun, for her love, patience and support while working through the challenges of this dissertation, and my precious daughters, Gulnihal and Meryem Nuran, for their unfailing love in this long journey. v NOMENCLATURE AAAS American Association for the Advancement of Science CCSSM Common Core State Standards for Mathematics EEEP Earthquake Engineering Education Project EOTPD Engineering Oriented Teacher Professional Development ITEEA International Technology and Engineering Educators Association MCL Meaningful Conceptual Learning NGACPB National Governors Association Center for Best Practices NGSS Next Generation Science Standards NRC National Research Council NSF National Science Foundation S&E Science and Engineering SSMA School Science and Mathematics Association STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT……. ...............................................................................................................ii! DEDICATION…................................................................................................................ iv! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................v! NOMENCLATURE ......................................................................................................... ..vi! TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................vii! LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... ix! LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1! The Purpose of the Study ............................................................... 4! Conceptual Framework .................................................................. 5! Research Questions ...................................................................... 10! Definition of Key Terms .............................................................. 12! Significance of the Study ............................................................. 14! Organization of the Dissertation .................................................. 15! II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ....................................................... 17! STEM Integration ......................................................................... 18! The NGSS Framework ................................................................. 19! Challenges for Traditional Teachers ............................................ 23! Professional Development for STEM Teachers ........................... 28! Meaningful Conceptual Learning ................................................. 38! Conclusion .................................................................................... 60! III IDENTIFYING AND VERIFYING EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING CONCEPTS TO CREATE A KNOWLEDGE BASE IN STEM EDUCATION: A MODIFIED DELPHI STUDY .... 62! Introduction .................................................................................. 62 vii Page Background .................................................................................. 63! Methodology ................................................................................ 70! Procedures and Results ................................................................. 75! Conclusion .................................................................................... 86! Implications .................................................................................. 87! Limitations ................................................................................... 88! IV EXAMINING CHANGES IN SCIENCE TEACHERS' CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING ABOUT EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING .................................................................................... 90! Introduction .................................................................................. 90! Background .................................................................................. 91! Methodology .............................................................................. 120! Results ........................................................................................ 129! Discussion and Conclusion ........................................................ 135! Implications ................................................................................ 141! Limitations ................................................................................. 143! V EXAMINING SCIENCE TEACHERS' ARGUMENTATION DISCOURSE IN AN ENGINEERING-ORIENTED TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ................................................. 145! Introduction ...............................................................................