English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Despite the presence of the Standards for Technological Literacy (STL) in engineering and technology curricula and in scholarly research (e.g., Strimel & Grubbs, 2016; Kennedy, Quinn, & Lyons, 2018; Bers, Seddighin, & Sullivan, 2013; Harrison, 2011), it is now the Framework for K-12 Science Education (National Research Council, 2012) and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013) that are recognized and critiqued by organizations such as the American Society for Engineering Education. This study utilized an analytical content review of scholarly literature published during a recent 6-year period (2011–2016) to identify how engineering and technology researchers, including STEM professionals, position the T and E in the context of the STL in engineering and technology and STEM instruction. Findings revealed that the domains of Design, The Nature of Technology, and The Designed World of the STL provide a rich platform from which researchers and educators can employ evidence-based strategies to promote successful STEM learning.

Positioning the T and E in STEM: A STL Analytical Content Review of Engineering and Technology Education Research