ARISE

Advancing Research & Innovation in STEM Education of Preservice Teachers in High-Needs School Districts

NSF

Comparing Robert Noyce Scholars and Non-Robert Noyce Scholars Perceptions of Teaching

Our study investigates how the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program influenced students’ decisions to become high school mathematics or science teachers and their dispositions about teaching in schools. We administered a 70 item survey to 61 participants (29 experimental group, 32 control group) during the summer of 2015. Findings indicate statistically significant differences in three areas: (a) scholarship recipients’ decisions to become a high school mathematics or science teacher, (b) plans for graduate education, and (c) teacher preparation.

First-Year Urban Mathematics and Science Middle School Teachers: Classroom Challenges and Reflective Solutions

This study explored the challenges facing 1st-year alternatively certified teachers of mathematics and science in urban middle schools. Four teachers, participants in the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program, were followed from preservice training through their 1st year of teaching, having taken part in innovative coursework, workshops, and internship training. Through focus groups, interviews, and classroom observations, data were collected to analyze their experiences in economically disadvantaged settings.

The Use of Grounded Theory to Investigate the Role of Teacher Education on STEM Teachers’ Career Paths in High-Need Schools

An inductive grounded theory approach was used to investigate the role of teacher education on the career paths of 38 Noyce scholarship recipients, most of whom were teaching in high-need schools. The emergent research design was guided by the initial research question: “What are Noyce scholars’ reasons for the decisions made on the career paths of becoming and remaining teachers in high-need schools?”

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant Numbers DUE- 2041597 and DUE-1548986. Any opinions, findings, interpretations, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of its authors and do not represent the views of the AAAS Board of Directors, the Council of AAAS, AAAS’ membership or the National Science Foundation.