5

Effective STEM Learning Experiences and Pathways

Over the last several decades, research has provided insights into effective approaches to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning and teaching and these are guiding improvements in STEM education. The evidence shows that learning is not simply transmission of knowledge about a discipline. Rather, people learn through actively making sense of the world and their learning is shaped by social and cultural contexts. This viewpoint differs significantly from the view of learning as knowledge transmission that organized formal schooling, including STEM education, in the United States in the 20th century. Current evidence-based approaches to STEM education that emphasize the importance of relevant phenomena, problems, and engagement in authentic STEM tasks offer opportunities to design STEM education that is more responsive to the priorities and needs of rural settings.

In this chapter we summarize key insights from research on STEM learning and teaching and describe the elements of productive STEM learning experiences. We then discuss strategies for designing STEM education and workforce development that leverage rural assets, including place-based approaches, local rural knowledge, and culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogy. Finally, we present approaches and models for workforce development that can begin as early as middle school and provide rural students with supportive pathways that connect them with opportunities in their community.

Throughout the chapter, when we refer to STEM we mean both the individual disciplines—science, technology, engineering, and mathematics—and

efforts to support interdisciplinary learning experiences that emphasize the connections between them. Effective STEM education combines both discipline-focused and interdisciplinary learning experiences (National Academy of Engineering [NAE] & National Research Council [NRC], 2014).

WHAT DO PRODUCTIVE LEARNING EXPERIENCES IN STEM LOOK LIKE?

Learners’ experiences as they interact with educators and peers in classrooms and other learning environments in and out of school are the heart of STEM education. In this section we briefly review current understandings of how people learn in the STEM disciplines and what they mean for the design of effective STEM learning environments in rural settings. A full discussion of all the recent advances in research on STEM learning is beyond the scope of this chapter; for such discussions see How People Learn II (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine [NASEM], 2018), STEM Integration in K–12 Education (NAE & NRC, 2014), and Nasir et al. (2020, 2021).

How People Learn in STEM

Research on learning over the past several decades upends some traditional views of learners as passive receivers of knowledge, recognizing learners as actively working to make sense of the world (NASEM, 2018; NRC, 2000). These insights also emphasize that learning does not happen only while individuals are in school. Rather, it is a cultural, social, and historical process that takes place over time and across the multiple settings of learners’ lives, including in their families, the natural world, community settings, and schools (NASEM, 2024a). Starting from the very beginning of their life, children work to make sense of the world around them and find solutions to problems that present themselves in daily life. Their varied learning experiences and contexts are important for shaping how people know and understand the world, but they are not always acknowledged or leveraged in formal STEM learning contexts.

Learning is a fundamentally social process. Through interactions and discussions with adults and peers in different environments, learners ask questions, test their ideas, refine their skills, and revise their understanding. Even when a learner is engaging in an individual task they are using tools or engaging with ideas developed by other people. The knowledge and practices of the STEM disciplines themselves have been developed by people participating in disciplinary communities over centuries. When students learn in STEM, they are learning to participate in these communities,

becoming familiar with core disciplinary ideas and engaging in disciplinary practices such as designing investigations in science (NRC, 2012), modeling with mathematics (see Common Core Standards in Mathematics), or applying systems thinking in engineering (see ITEEA standards); information about the mathematics standards and ITEEA standards is presented in Box 5-1.

Learning in the STEM disciplines also involves the development of interest, identity, and sense of belonging (NASEM, 2018; NRC, 2012). Initial interest in a problem or phenomenon might drive initial engagement, but for learners to continue to pursue learning opportunities in science or mathematics or computer science, they need to continue to see the relevance of the learning for themselves. Increasingly, researchers are finding that identity and belonging—feeling welcome, capable of learning in a discipline and of being successful—are important not only for long-term persistence in STEM but also for how learners engage in each learning opportunity (NASEM, 2018, 2024b). This is particularly important for learners who may face barriers to entering STEM disciplines, including women, Black, Latine, and Indigenous people, and people experiencing poverty (NASEM, 2024b).

Decades of research make clear that young children are fully capable of engaging in STEM learning (NASEM, 2022, 2024a; NRC, 2007, 2012). In fact, their curiosity about the world around them is an important asset that can be leveraged in the classroom. In addition, the foundation set during the preschool and elementary grades is critical to children’s success in later grades, in terms of both proficiency with disciplinary concepts and practices, and interest and sense of competence (NASEM, 2022, 2024a). In preschool and across the elementary grades, learners need opportunities to participate in STEM in caring contexts where they can explore, engage in dialogue, and pursue their curiosity and interests (NASEM, 2022, 2024a).

As noted, STEM learning in later grades relies heavily on the foundation set in prekindergarten and elementary grades, as well as on continuing formal and informal learning outside of school (NASEM, 2019, 2022, 2024a). It is most effective with a coherent and carefully chosen sequence of learning experiences in which students revisit topics, are supported in making connections, and revise their thinking based on new information both within and across grades (NASEM, 2022). Yet despite the importance of foundational learning, science and engineering are often short-changed during the elementary grades, with much less time devoted to science instruction than to mathematics (Horizon Research, 2019; NASEM, 2022).

The research on learning and teaching in STEM has informed the standards for curriculum and assessment adopted by states across the country.

These standards in mathematics, science, engineering, and computer science differ from previous standards and are catalyzing changes to instruction at the classroom level including in rural districts (see Box 5-1).

Effective Instruction

The insights about learning described above have tremendous implications for the design of learning experiences and instruction. In productive STEM learning environments, students engage independently and collaboratively in a caring community and through meaningful investigation, problem solving, and/or design experiences. As the students refine their explanations and/or solutions over time, educators monitor learning to inform instruction. In these classrooms, STEM teachers scaffold and facilitate individual and small- and large-group problem solving in a supportive classroom environment that foregrounds culturally sustaining, authentic STEM learning, celebrates mistakes, promotes reflection and revision, and allows for the emotions that accompany their students’ deep learning. Monitoring the progress of all students in order to adjust moment-to-moment instructional moves as well as to plan for future instruction based on varied evidence of student learning enables productive experiences for the students.

This approach to design of learning experiences and instruction differs markedly from more traditional approaches that often emphasized transmission of knowledge with limited opportunities for students to engage in discussion with each other or to explore how what they are learning in school is connected to their local communities or contexts. The shift in instructional approach for science and engineering is captured in Figure 5-1 (NASEM, 2019). Some of the major changes illustrated also apply to the other STEM disciplines. For example, syntheses of research in mathematics education produced by the Institute of Education Sciences and guidance from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics emphasize instructional practices such as helping students identify mathematics in the everyday world, promoting discourse about mathematics, engaging students in small-group problem solving, articulating and comparing different approaches to solving problems, and encouraging time for reflection (Frye et al., 2013; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2014; Star et al., 2015; Woodward et al., 2012). These shifts—to allowing more time for discussion, connecting more clearly to students’ everyday experience outside of school, and promoting shared sense making and problem solving—open up numerous opportunities for designing learning experiences that connect to and leverage the assets of rural communities and settings.

Several instructional approaches or models reflect these shifts. We describe some of these in the following sections together with ways they can be tailored to or used in rural settings.

Centering Instruction on Meaningful Phenomena and Problems

Anchoring instructional experiences in problems and phenomena linked to learners’ previous experiences, knowledge, interests, and identities promotes engagement in disciplinary practices and understanding, and emphasizes the relevance of the STEM disciplines to learners’ daily lives (NAE & NRC, 2014; NASEM, 2019, 2022). In science and engineering, educators can leverage students’ curiosity by choosing locally and/or culturally relevant phenomena and design challenges (NASEM, 2019). Allowing learners to then pose and pursue their own questions and/or develop their own solutions supports students’ sense of competence and sustains their interest. In mathematics, educators can ground problems in real-world situations and support students in seeing mathematics in their everyday lives.

The Working Together Project (WTP), implemented in 11 rural middle schools in Colorado, is an example of centering meaningful, local issues. The three-year curriculum, codeveloped with community members, uses evidence-based pedagogical practices and takes place during the school day (often through elective courses). Through a service learning process called AIM (Assess, Identify, Make It Happen), students pursue academic

learning goals while meeting school needs using disciplinary knowledge and practices to influence changes in policy and social practices to solve a problem. A qualitative case study found that students who completed the courses associated with the WTP were exposed to evidence-based pedagogical practices and showed growth in personal responsibility, collaborative and professional skills, connectedness to school, and program planning skills (Ingman et al., 2022).

Project-based learning (PBL) is another promising strategy for engaging rural students in STEM education. It allows students to work on real-world problems and projects, fostering critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Research indicates that PBL can significantly improve student engagement and achievement in STEM subjects (Holmes, 2012). One exemplary PBL initiative is the Eco-Schools USA program. Implemented in various school districts across the country, it engages students in hands-on, inquiry-based projects focused on environmental sustainability. Students participate in activities such as energy audits, waste management, and water conservation projects, all aimed at making their schools more environmentally sustainable. The program not only enhances students’ understanding of environmental issues but also fosters a sense of responsibility and leadership.¹

Makerspaces and Dream Labs

Emerging STEM programs often incorporate the latest technological tools and pedagogical approaches to create dynamic and engaging learning environments. One such strategy is the use of makerspaces and dream labs, which are collaborative workspaces equipped with tools like 3D printers, laser cutters, and robotics kits, allowing students to design, prototype, and create projects. These spaces encourage creativity, innovation, and hands-on learning (Kurti et al., 2014). For example, the Fab Lab network, supported by MIT’s Center for Bits and Atoms, has established makerspaces in schools worldwide, providing students with access to advanced fabrication technologies and fostering a culture of invention and exploration (Gershenfeld, 2005).

Virtual and Augmented Reality

Another innovative strategy is the integration of virtual and/or augmented reality (VR/AR) in STEM education. VR/AR offers immersive experiences that can make abstract concepts more concrete and engaging. Programs such as zSpace and Google Expeditions provide virtual field trips, interactive simulations, and 3D modeling experiences that enhance

___________________

¹ EcoSchools US, National Wildlife Federation, https://www.nwf.org/eco-schools-us

student understanding and interest in STEM subjects. These technologies are particularly beneficial in rural or underserved areas where access to traditional STEM resources may be limited (Lindgren & Johnson-Glenberg, 2013). STEM industries are also using VR/AR for workforce training and workplace simulations for student and employee development in various STEM careers.²

Role of Instructional Materials

Use of high-quality instructional materials is critical for advancing effective STEM education. Research has shown that their use has positive effects on students’ outcomes (Chingos & Whitehurst, 2012; Koedel & Polikoff, 2017; Steiner, 2017). In science and engineering, high-quality materials facilitate careful sequencing of phenomena and design challenges across units and grade levels to increase coherence as students become increasingly sophisticated S&E learners (NASEM, 2019).

The use of high-quality instructional materials can also save teachers time. In addition, with the shift to more complex instructional approaches such as those outlined above, good instructional materials provide guidance on selection of phenomena and problems, scaffolds for students, and approaches to classroom assessment. At the same time, to ensure that STEM learning experiences are relevant to local rural contexts, the instructional materials chosen need to be somewhat flexible so that teachers can tailor them to their own contexts and students.

Results from the 2018 National Survey of Science & Mathematics Education indicate that in both these subjects teachers in rural districts and schools felt that they had more autonomy over pedagogical and curricular decisions than their peers in urban and suburban settings (Banilower et al., 2018). This finding is encouraging as it suggests that rural teachers may have opportunities to modify instruction and curricula to incorporate phenomena, problems, and issues relevant to the local context (see Chapter 6 for further discussion of teachers’ autonomy).

Instructional resources are most effective when they are accompanied by professional learning for teachers, along with assessment activities (Roschelle et al., 2010). Professional learning that helps teachers understand the underlying purposes and structures of the instructional resources is particularly important. This understanding allows them to select and adapt resources in ways that are coherent and maintain the integrity of the resources as originally intended (Davis & Varma, 2008). (Chapter 6 further discusses educators and professional learning.) Emerging work is exploring how instructional resources can be modified for use in rural contexts.

___________________

² https://www.acteonline.org/tech-changes-how-we-learn/

For example, the Maine Mathematics and Science Alliance is working in collaboration with BSCS Science Learning to test a model to support 3rd through 5th grade teachers in incorporating locally or culturally relevant place-based phenomena into rigorously tested curricular units that are aligned to the Next Generation Science Standards.³

LEVERAGING ASSETS OF RURAL COMMUNITIES FOR STEM LEARNING

As noted in Chapter 2, rural communities have many assets that can be leveraged for STEM education. While classrooms in all communities are connected to the ecological, cultural, historical, geographical, and political contexts in which schooling takes place (Aguirre et al., 2024; Goffney et al., 2018; Greer et al., 2009), rural communities particularly benefit from assets such as deeply rooted values-based education, strengths in community and familial networks, relationship to place, and the resilience and centrality of schools (Carr & Kefalas, 2009; Kastelein et al., 2018; KewalRamani et al., 2018).

Most research at the intersection of STEM and rural education is in the form of small-scale case studies on pilot programs that enhance STEM offerings in rural places or focuses exclusively on the challenges rural students face without empirically examining how the challenges affect the students’ outcomes. Exceptions include studies that have analyzed national datasets to look at rural students in STEM fields, but these are few and far between. Beyond the general dearth of research in this area, there is an important framework missing from most rural STEM research: With few exceptions, studies do not acknowledge rural communities’ assets that make their communities vibrant and strong and can support improvements in STEM education and workforce outcomes if they are better acknowledged, understood, and supported.

Rural communities are often small, and this frequently translates to small class size, which means better student-teacher ratios. These can foster stronger relationships and mean that teachers are likely to be very familiar with a student’s family and interests, which can in turn help teachers work with students to explore burgeoning interests in STEM. Small, often tight-knit communities also mean that students often have very strong ties: “a deep sense of place and pride in their community [. . .] can serve as a powerful incentive to study STEM-related topics that are relevant to real-world challenges and opportunities in the local area” (Lakin et al., 2021, pp. 24–25).

Rural communities can also be rich environments for students to learn about STEM from their natural environment. Because they are often

___________________

³ https://sites.google.com/mmsa.org/pebles2/home

surrounded by nature, tying STEM learning to the local flora and fauna can be an effective way to promote STEM education. “Rural school districts are positioned well, literally, to take advantage of an interdisciplinary [STEM] approach. The rich connection with the local land, culture, and community has been leveraged by numerous rural districts, to varying degrees, in the form of place-based education” (Showalter et al., 2017, p. 39).

There is a substantial body of research on the benefits of place-based education, inquiry-based learning, and culturally informed pedagogy such as culturally responsive and culturally sustaining approaches (Marlowe & Page, 1998), but there has not been sufficient research on how these intersect with the integration of STEM lessons in rural environments. In 2019 the National Indian Education Study found that Indigenous students who attended schools where teaching incorporated knowledge from Native Americans or Alaska Natives were more likely to be high achieving in math and science (De Mars et al., 2022). Another study also found that students in courses that connected science to their everyday lives were able to connect the science they learn inside and outside school, and this enhanced their success in science (Avery & Kassam, 2011).

The following sections highlight three strategies for leveraging rural assets to provide STEM learning experiences that can promote the success of rural students across K–12 and into postsecondary education.

Leveraging Local Rural Knowledge

Students do not come into the classroom as empty vessels waiting to be filled with knowledge from the teacher. Rather, they come to school possessing a vast range of knowledge and skills learned through their daily lives and cultural experiences. These funds of knowledge are “historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being” (Moll et al., 1992, p. 133). Drawing on the funds of knowledge concept, Avery (2013) coined the term local rural knowledge (LRK) to describe the things rural children learn while interacting with their families and environment.

Just by engaging in the day-to-day practices and agricultural activities that are common in rural places, children can gain STEM knowledge across several disciplines (Avery & Kassam, 2011). Activities such as raising and caring for crops and livestock, tinkering on equipment, building and maintaining structures, and exploring local forests, prairies, or wetlands all provide opportunities for deep and thoughtful observation and hands-on learning in the physical, life, and earth sciences, engineering, and mathematics. Unfortunately, the funds of knowledge that children possess are not often recognized or drawn on in formal school classroom settings, despite research showing that connecting such knowledge to teaching practices can

increase student engagement in and understanding of science and engineering in both urban and rural contexts (e.g., Barton, 2002; Mejia et al., 2014; Morris et al., 2021; Rincón & Rodriguez, 2021).

As noted, many rural places are characterized by strong kinship ties and shared values, as well as local schools that serve as hubs for social, cultural, and recreational activities (Miller & Goodnow, 1995; Seal & Harmon, 1995). The deep social and familial ties and sense of place in rural communities can offer powerful opportunities for transforming STEM instruction in schools, particularly by connecting local rural knowledge with formal classroom teaching (Avery, 2013; Goodpaster et al., 2012). To do this, Avery (2013) recommended providing teachers with professional development programs on how to identify LRK, providing students with concrete examples of how their LRK connects to STEM concepts taught in school, and connecting classroom learning to local community experts and elders.

Place-Based Learning Experiences

Place-based education leverages the local community and environment—the physical places where learners and educators live—for learning concepts and practices of a discipline (Yemini et al., 2023). This approach increases academic achievement, helps strengthen students’ ties to their community, and enhances students’ appreciation for the natural world (Sobel, 2004). And by involving community partners and assets in school activities, it also contributes to community vitality and environmental health (Sobel, 2004).

Innovative examples of place-based education can be found in the Teton Science Schools in Jackson, Wyoming, and the Gulf Shores City Schools in Alabama. The former uses the unique natural environment of the Teton Range and Yellowstone ecosystem as a living laboratory for students. Through field expeditions, students engage in ecological research, wildlife tracking, and environmental monitoring. They learn about local flora and fauna, geological formations, and conservation efforts in their community and natural surroundings.⁴ This hands-on approach not only enhances students’ understanding of scientific concepts but also instills a sense of stewardship and connection to their local environment. By collaborating with local scientists, park rangers, and conservationists, the Teton Science Schools provide a rich, immersive educational experience that extends beyond the classroom and deeply roots students in their rural community and environment.

The Gulf Shores City Schools’ place-based Sustainability Initiative offers preK–12 students immersive learning experiences that use local natural and community resources. The initiative includes the Gulf Coast

___________________

⁴ https://www.tetonscience.org/

Sustainability Academy at Gulf Shores High School, which features hands-on STEAM⁵ education that focuses on environmental sustainability. Students engage in projects like oyster gardening, in which they grow and maintain oysters for restoration in Mobile Bay and participate in field experiences and research at sites such as Gulf State Park and Little Lagoon. The program also integrates scuba diving in the marine and environmental science Summer Weekly Accelerated Vocational Experiences curriculum, allowing students to explore underwater ecosystems firsthand.⁶

The Gulf Coast Sustainability Academy further integrates work-based learning through internships and local career exploration, preparing students for careers in marine biology, environmental science, and related STEM fields. The district supports vertical alignment and professional development for educators and has created a team to integrate sustainability practices across the curriculum. This comprehensive strategy enhances academic achievement, fosters environmental stewardship, and promotes community engagement, providing students with valuable experiences and practical skills directly applicable to a future career.

Similarly, the University of Iowa’s STEM Excellence Center and Leadership Project took a place-based approach to supporting out-of-school-time STEM learning with eight rural middle schools in a research practice partnership (RPP; Lakin et al., 2021). Teachers adapted curricula to center community issues and interests: Student projects include creation of a local butterfly garden, an ongoing prairie restoration project, and design of flood-safe buildings with 3D design software in a community affected by recent flood damage. The results from the RPP revealed four keys to successful STEM development in these rural districts:

• The STEM Excellence programs with the most staying power provide agency to students to choose and design their own solutions to problems.
• Teachers actively recruit as many students as possible to participate in out-of-school STEM opportunities.
• Connecting with STEM professionals both in and beyond (but near) the rural community supports students in their STEM identity and pursuit of learning and career goals, and positively reinforces sense of community. For example, teachers worked with local hobby groups to bring horticulture experts to meet with the students and also facilitated virtual meetings with STEM professionals or field trips to university labs to see STEM research.

___________________

⁵ STEAM = science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics.

⁶ www.gsboe.org

• Near-peer mentors support participants in developing more complicated projects, and students mentored by near-peers volunteer to mentor elementary students in their robotics program (Lakin et al., 2021).

Importantly, place-based learning activities that connect to local phenomena and problems can both bolster STEM degree attainment and counter the idea that students must leave rural communities to seek employment in STEM fields (Harris & Hodges, 2018). For example, Humboldt State University, described as “one of the most isolated of the 23 campuses of the California State University system and one of the most northerly Hispanic Serving Institutions on the West Coast” (Sprowles et al., 2019, para. 1), has implemented first-year, place-based learning communities that integrate diverse aspects of their location into the curriculum and student affairs to provide a cross-cultural, validating environment that supports students in their STEM studies. The rural university’s greatest strength—and challenge—is its remote location, which includes redwood forests and beaches. Sprowles et al. (2019) sought to connect the STEM students with each other and with the local environment by emphasizing both a connection to place and various disciplines such as environmental resource engineering, physical and life sciences, natural resource management, and Native American studies. The authors found that students who participated in the program had an increased sense of belonging and were more likely to persevere and to find academic success in their STEM coursework (Sprowles et al., 2019). This example shows the benefits of place-based education for postsecondary student outcomes and opportunities, and the role of rural regional institutions in educating the future STEM workforce in rural locales.

Culturally Competent Instruction

Effective instructional approaches make connections to and honor students’ cultural heritage and cultural ways of knowing. Such approaches include culturally relevant (Ladson-Billings, 1995), culturally responsive (Gay, 2018, 2021), and culturally sustaining (Paris, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2017) models of instruction. These models combine support for the development of competencies in the concepts and practices of the disciplines with support for development of learners’ agency, leveraging students’ cultural and linguistic assets and centering their competence as sense makers (NASEM, 2024b). The models assume that a key goal in teaching is to relate disciplinary ideas to ways of knowing, speaking, and being that are part of students’ everyday practices in their families and communities (NASEM, 2024b).

With increases in racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity in rural communities, these approaches are essential in rural regions in all states.

For example, in migrant communities in rural areas where students and families speak multiple languages, teachers might leverage languages other than English to support students in their learning. Teachers can support students in solidifying their STEM thinking by prioritizing the use of students’ home language, drawing attention to the intellectual contributions students make, and reinforcing STEM learning as making sense of the world both in and out of the classroom through engaging in disciplinary practice (NASEM, 2024b).

These approaches are particularly important for rural districts and schools that serve Indigenous communities. Indigenous knowledge systems are integrated epistemological systems taught through Indigenous pedagogies that support an understanding of an interconnected world and people’s place in it. These systems integrate ideas that are commonly referred to as science knowledge (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005; Cajete, 2000; Michell, 2005) and may be interchangeable with other terms such as ethnoscience, Indigenous science, and minobimaatiwiiwin, an Ojibway expression meaning “the path to the good life” (McGregor, 2009).

Barnhardt and Kawagley (2005) use a two-way street metaphor that calls for western scientists and educators to understand Indigenous epistemologies as knowledge systems rather than relying on the more typical approach of requiring Indigenous students to learn western science and to carry the burden of integrating it with their Indigenous science knowledge. The authors point out that, “although Native people may need to understand western society, this should not be at the expense of what they already know and the ways they have come to know it. Non-Native people also need to recognize the coexistence of multiple worldviews and knowledge systems, and find ways to understand and relate to the world in its multiple dimensions and varied perspectives” (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005, p. 3).

Recognizing the need for deeply collaborative work that centers indigenous knowledge, the Native Earth | Native Sky program builds culturally relevant earth-sky STEM programming for middle schoolers in three Oklahoma Native American nations through coconstruction of the curriculum.⁷ The project seeks to create a holistic curriculum that interweaves Native American stories and language with STEM principles. Lessons are combined with art, culture, and social studies to celebrate each nation’s unique heritage.

___________________

⁷ Oklahoma State University in cooperation with NASA, https://www.nativeearthnativesky.org/

STEM PATHWAYS AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Throughout their academic careers, students may engage in numerous STEM-related learning experiences across a tapestry of contexts including formal preK–12 school settings, community colleges and universities, career technology centers, and informal experiences that often take place outside traditional school settings. Cumulatively, these various experiences influence what students do with their STEM learning and can shape the decisions they make about their future (NASEM, 2024b). The term STEM pathways refers to the diverse formal and informal educational and occupational routes that individuals can take in STEM fields; pathways can vary in how coherent they are and how well they connect to particular careers (Tyson et al., 2007). The term pathways is used instead of pipeline to acknowledge the numerous ways that students can navigate into and through STEM careers, and to signal that choosing to not pursue a STEM career is a valid option rather than a “loss” (NASEM, 2024b).

Theoretical perspectives from economics, sociology, and psychology are useful for understanding and characterizing the STEM pathways of rural students. In human capital theory (Becker, 1962; Heckman, 2000), advanced or rigorous training is an important way to increase a student’s ability to succeed in their academic and future career pursuits. A key component of human capital for advanced studies and career development in STEM is academic preparation in STEM subjects. According to the status attainment model (Blau & Duncan, 1967; Sewell et al., 1969), entering a particular occupation (e.g., agricultural scientist or computer support specialist) involves two major developmental processes: (a) formation of educational and occupational aspirations, and (b) specialized training and (possibly) certificate or degree attainment. For rural students, each of these developmental processes is shaped by their local knowledge, connections to people, and belonging to place. In addition, place-based opportunities (e.g., local job prospects, school-industry partnerships) and barriers (e.g., lack of work-based learning sites, distance to postsecondary institutions) and an individual’s choices about those opportunities and barriers affect these two developmental processes (Pedersen & Gram, 2018; Tieken, 2016).

At least two psychology-based perspectives are helpful in this context. Building on work associated with identity formation, achievement theory, and attribution theory, situated expectancy-value theory (SEVT; Eccles & Wigfield, 2020) posits that STEM pathways are determined by a series of choices and achievements, which are influenced by local contexts and social or cultural norms, from early childhood to adolescence and into adulthood. According to SEVT, achievement-related choices, such as STEM college majors and career choices, are most directly determined by expectancy beliefs (i.e., beliefs about how well one can complete a task) and

task values (i.e., perceptions about the worth of a certain task; Eccles & Wigfield, 2020; Eccles et al., 1983). From the perspective of social cognitive career theory (SCCT), self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, personal goals and interests, and environmental influences and barriers are central to career development (Lent & Sheu, 2010; Lent et al., 1994). Both SEVT and SCCT have been shown to be useful in understanding rural students’ STEM learning experiences and pathways (Blanchard et al., 2023; Crain & Webber, 2021; Gutierrez et al., 2022; Meador, 2018; Saw & Agger, 2021; Starrett et al., 2022).

Collectively, these economic, sociological, and psychological theories suggest that STEM achievement, motivational factors (particularly STEM identity and career aspirations), academic and career preparation, and educational attainment, shaped by changing norms and local contexts across various developmental stages, are important for understanding STEM educational and career pathways of preK–12 students in rural areas.

Building Pathways

Preparing students for the careers of the future requires multifaceted strategies that transcend traditional educational methods. This shift is supported by federal and state policies aimed at enhancing STEM learning, teacher recruitment and retention, and equity and inclusion, such as the Every Student Succeeds Act, Alabama’s TEAMS Act, and the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act (Perkins V). The rapid technological advances and growing complexity of the global job market necessitate the development of a robust STEM foundation from an early age.

An example of translating the diversity and complexity of career pathways is seen in the work of the Southern Regional Education Board’s (SREB’s) 2015 Commission on Career and Technical Education, made up of policymakers, practitioners, and industry leaders from across the United States. The commission’s task was to develop recommendations for career pathways that lead to credentials and degrees in high-wage, high-skill, high-demand careers. The resulting paper, Credentials for All: An Imperative for SREB States, identified eight actions particularly pertinent to the rural context to support the goal of doubling the number of young adults with a relevant credential or degree by the age of 25. According to the report, a rigorous and relevant career pathway

• combines a college-ready academic core with challenging technical studies and requires students to complete real-world assignments;
• aligns secondary, postsecondary, and workplace learning using strategies like dual enrollment and work-based learning;

• creates guidance systems that include career information, exploration, and ongoing career and college counseling beginning in the middle grades; and
• allows students to choose accelerated learning options in settings that provide the extended time needed to earn advanced industry credentials.

Career and Technical Education Pathways

Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs that incorporate career exploration, awareness, and academic preparation play a crucial role in helping students grasp the vast array of STEM-related careers and the various paths to reach them. Through courses in aviation, aerospace, IT, audiovisual, engineering, biomedical, game design, health care, nanotechnology, or robotics, students are introduced to exciting fields they might not have considered previously, opening a world of possibilities, sparking interest, and guiding them toward fulfilling STEM careers and credentialing opportunities.

STEM-intensive courses are integrated in CTE through career clusters, which offer students a comprehensive look at various career fields. Out of 16 career clusters, with 81 unique career pathways, 6 are STEM focused: Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources; Health Science; Information Technology; Manufacturing; Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics; and Transportation, Distribution, and Logistics (Advance CTE, 2024). Students can explore different career options, take personalized career assessments, and understand the advanced math and science courses necessary for STEM careers.

Work-Based Learning/Workforce Development

One of the most effective strategies for enhancing STEM education is through work-based learning (WBL) and workforce development programs, which connect classroom learning with real-world applications to prepare students for careers in STEM fields. WBL is a critical component of workforce development, and WBL-related opportunities can be implemented as early as elementary school and increase in depth through high school.

A broad definition of WBL was developed by a workforce development task force (representing education, industry, government) in Alabama to align efforts: “Sustained interactions with industry or community professionals in real workplace settings, to the extent practicable, or simulated environments at an educational institution that foster in-depth, first-hand engagement with the tasks required of a given career field, that are aligned

to curriculum and instruction” (Alabama State Department of Education, 2023). This definition informed the development of a WBL continuum (see Figure 5-2) that includes

• Career Awareness: Learning about Work. Potential activities: job shadowing, career day, career expo/fair, industry tours, guest speakers
• Career Exploration: Learning for Work. Potential activities: simulated workplace, employability/skill training, externship, cooperative education
• Career Preparation: Learning through Work. Potential activities: field experience, internship, clinical/practicum, registered apprenticeship, on-the-job training/learning

Each year an inventory of WBL opportunities based on the WBL continuum and best practices is published in the Alabama Work-Based Learning Handbook and celebrated with the Governor’s WBL Seal of Excellence.

Developing and Leveraging Partnerships and Networks

One of the most promising strategies for developing robust pathways in STEM involves bridging preK–12 STEM education initiatives, industry, and nonprofits while also taking advantage of STEM-related regional, state, and federal programs. These strategic partnerships are crucial in providing the necessary resources, expertise, and real-world learning opportunities that enhance STEM education (Means & Neisler, 2021).

Partnering with Industry

Across the nation, a growing number of partnerships between K–12 schools, STEM industries, and/or postsecondary institutions seek to better align curriculum and training and offer opportunities for experiential and work-based learning, including internships/externships and apprenticeships for students (Ainslie & Huffman, 2019; Alfeld et al., 2013). For rural students who typically have limited access to informal learning spaces (e.g., science museums) and programs (e.g., STEM fairs, afterschool programs; Saw & Agger, 2021), school-industry partnerships have been shown to enhance STEM career identity, exploration, and preparation, especially in relation to regional workforce opportunities and postsecondary education (Avery, 2013; Nixon et al., 2021).

In Iowa, the STEM Business Engaging Students and Teachers program connects rural schools with local businesses to develop curriculum and projects that address real-world problems.⁸ For example, the Northeast Iowa STEM Hub collaborates with local agricultural companies to integrate agricultural technology in the classroom. Students engage in hands-on learning through projects like drone-based crop monitoring and soil health assessments, preparing them for careers in modern agriculture.

Many rural school districts have successfully created strategic partnerships based on community needs. Putnam County Schools in rural Tennessee have partnered with local manufacturing companies to offer a robust work-based learning program. Students participate in internships, apprenticeships, and job shadowing in various manufacturing settings.⁹

These partnerships illustrate the power of collaboration between schools and industries in enhancing STEM education and providing students with valuable skills and experiences. By leveraging local resources and industry expertise, they help bridge the gap between education and the workforce, ensuring that students are well prepared for STEM-related careers in rural areas and beyond.

___________________

⁸ https://educate.iowa.gov/iowa-stem/stem-best

⁹ Putnam County Schools Work-Based Learning Program, https://www.putnamcountyesc.org/work-based-learning

State and Regional STEM and Workforce Development Hubs and Councils

Regional STEM hubs and organizations in the western United States offer a promising emerging strategy for enhancing preK–12 STEM education by fostering collaboration, providing resources, and creating networks that support both educators and students. They link schools with industry partners, higher education institutions, and community organizations to create a cohesive and supportive STEM learning environment.

The Oregon STEM Hub Network, which has multiple regional hubs (e.g., the South Metro-Salem STEM Partnership, the Lane STEM Hub), works collaboratively to connect schools with industry partners, higher education institutions, and community organizations. These hubs aim to provide hands-on, real-world STEM learning experiences and professional development opportunities for educators. For example, the South Metro-Salem STEM Partnership has developed programs that engage students in STEM fields through project-based learning and mentorship from industry professionals, preparing them for future STEM careers.

STEM East, in eastern North Carolina, was founded to address the lack of both awareness of jobs that exist in the region and understanding of the education and skills required for those jobs.¹⁰ Founders of the program recognized that there are quite a few industries and industry clusters in the regions, but many people, including educators, were unaware of them. The goal is to build awareness to retain young people in the region. STEM East is a cooperative program across economic development, local employers, school districts, and community colleges. Their work includes improving the quality of STEM education in the local schools, engaging with industry, conducting job fairs and promoting early credentialing, and helping community colleges achieve U.S. National Science Foundation Advanced Technology Education grants. The program also holds workshops for teachers to increase their awareness of local industries, which include aviation, smart agriculture, health sciences, green energy, blue economy (sustainable use of ocean resources), and biopharma.

Regional STEM hubs not only enhance educational experiences but also build stronger communities by aligning educational outcomes with local workforce needs. By leveraging local resources and expertise, they ensure that students are better prepared for future STEM careers and that educators have the tools and support needed to deliver high-quality STEM education.

Regional workforce development councils also play a crucial role in aligning education with local economic needs to ensure that students have

___________________

¹⁰ STEM East was described by Patrick Miller, of the North Carolina East Alliance, in a presentation to the committee.

the skills required for the jobs of today and tomorrow. These councils foster partnerships between education, industry, government, and community organizations to develop strategies and programs that address workforce shortages and enhance career readiness.

For example, in Washington, a Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board oversees the state’s 12 Workforce Development Areas, each governed by a local workforce development council.¹¹ The councils work with local industries, educational institutions, and community organizations to create training programs that meet the specific needs of regional employers. Initiatives include career pathways in high-demand fields such as health care, advanced manufacturing, and information technology, as well as efforts to integrate CTE with work-based learning opportunities.

STEM Learning Ecosystems and Alliances

Recognizing the power of partnerships across different sectors in a community, the STEM Learning Ecosystems initiative, established in 2015, has worked to support communities and regions in creating partnerships among diverse organizations and stakeholders to support STEM learning.¹² A STEM learning ecosystem can include many different kinds of partners, including schools, afterschool and summer programs, colleges and universities, businesses, government, and community-based organizations. Ecosystems are intended to help to connect learning pathways for young people, close opportunity gaps, stimulate economic growth, and address talent shortages. There are currently over 100 STEM ecosystems across the country, some of which are centered in rural areas. For example, in Maine a cadre of STEM guides helped students identify and take advantage of STEM learning opportunities across five small communities (Mokros et al., 2017). Other examples include Learning Ecosystems Northeast, which is working to create climate and data learning experiences for youth, and Engine of Central PA, which connects 12 counties in Pennsylvania.

Building on the successes of the STEM Learning Ecosystems approach, a National Academies report called on states and regions to “establish local and regional alliances for STEM opportunity” (NASEM, 2021, p. 47) that would develop an evidence-based vision and plan for improving STEM education. Each plan would include attention to providing high-quality learning experiences and instructional materials, building a robust and diverse educator workforce, and creating pathways for students interested in pursuing STEM-related careers.

___________________

¹¹ https://wtb.wa.gov/

¹² stemecosystems.org

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This chapter describes effective STEM learning experiences based on new insights in this area. Instructional models include phenomenon, problem, and project-based learning experiences that leverage the places, issues, knowledge, culture, and communities of rural areas. High-quality instructional materials expertly adapted by educators to local contexts support both STEM teaching and learning. States and districts can reinforce the continuous and active nature of learning by supporting students as they navigate their educational pathways, which include formal, informal, and in-school and out-of-school learning experiences, ideally supported by local business and industry partners, institutions of higher education, or other local entities. Experiences in these pathways often influence how students perceive the usefulness of STEM in their lives, how they see themselves in STEM, and the degree to which students interested in STEM enter the local workforce.

The ongoing development of STEM pathways and of integrated strategies and approaches in STEM education are essential for preparing students to succeed in the workforce. Continued research and investment in promising and emerging strategies will ensure that students are well equipped to navigate and succeed in future STEM careers. By embracing multifaceted strategies, educators, industry, organizations, and policymakers can create a robust and dynamic STEM education system that meets the evolving needs of an increasingly complex and technology-driven world.

Conclusion 5-1: Rural students’ competencies in STEM build over time beginning in the early grades (preK–2). Learning experiences in the core STEM subjects throughout the elementary grades are essential for building the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that develop STEM literacy and lead to later success including in STEM and related careers.

Conclusion 5-2: STEM learning experiences that connect to and leverage rural students’ local experiences and knowledge are important components of effective K–12 STEM education in rural settings. Place-based learning experiences, often through local partnerships and the adaptation of instructional materials for local relevance, can be especially productive for building rural students’ competence and motivation (e.g., interest, identity) in STEM.

Conclusion 5-3: High-quality instructional materials with connected professional development that can be adapted for local relevance are important for supporting effective K–12 STEM education in rural areas.

Conclusion 5-4: Pathways to and through STEM education in rural communities are enriched by STEM learning opportunities through schools, afterschool programs, summer camps and programs, public libraries, museums, local businesses, and virtual platforms. But these learning opportunities are sometimes constrained by limited funding and availability in rural communities.

Conclusion 5-5: Promising models for designing STEM enrichment education and workforce development programs in rural areas (i) involve partnerships between K–12, local higher education institutions, Tribal Nations and other tribal leaders, and local government and business; (ii) provide students with job-relevant experiences (i.e., internships, apprenticeships); and (iii) target flexible and transferable knowledge and skills that are relevant to STEM education and local job opportunities.

In the next chapter we turn our attention to rural educators and their recruitment, retention, and professional development.

REFERENCES

Barton, A. C. (2002). Urban science education studies: A commitment to equity, social justice and a sense of place. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560186

Becker, G. (1962). Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 70(5). http://www.jstor.org/stable/1829103

Blanchard, M. R., Gutierrez, K. S., Swanson, K. J., & Collier, K. M. (2023). Why do students attend STEM clubs, what do they get out of it, and where are they heading? Education Sciences, 13(5), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050480

Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. Wiley.

Cajete, G. (2000). Native science: Natural laws of interdependence. Clear Light Publishers.

Carr, P. J., & Kefalas, M. J. (2009). Hollowing out the middle: The rural brain drain and what it means for America. Beacon Press.

Chingos, M. M., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2012). Choosing blindly: Instructional materials, teacher effectiveness, and the Common Core. Brookings Institution.

Crain, A., & Webber, K. (2021). Across the urban divide: STEM pipeline engagement among nonmetropolitan students. Journal for STEM Education Research, 4(2), 138–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00046-8

Davis, E. A., & Varma, K. (2008). Supporting teachers in productive adaptation. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn, & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing coherent science education (pp. 94–122). Teachers College Press.

De Mars, A., Taken Alive, J., Ortiz, M. B., Ma, Z., & Wang, M. (2022). Educators’ perspectives on factors impacting STEM achievement in rural Indigenous student-serving schools. The Rural Educator, 43(1), 24–36. https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=ruraleducator

Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 75–146). W. H. Freeman and Company.

Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2020). From expectancy-value theory to situated expectancy-value theory: A developmental, social cognitive, and sociocultural perspective on motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101859

Frye, D., Baroody, A. J., Burchinal, M., Carver, S. M., Jordan, N. C., & McDowell, J. (2013). Teaching math to young children: Educator’s practice guide (NCEE No. 2014-4005). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED544376

Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.

———. (2021). Culturally responsive teaching: Ideas, actions, and effects. In H. R. Milner IV, & K. Lomotey (Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. 212–233). Routledge.

Gershenfeld, N. A. (2005). Fab: The coming revolution on your desktop—from personal computers to personal fabrication. Basic Books.

Goffney, I., Gutiérrez, R., & Boston, M. (2018). Rehumanizing mathematics for Black, Indigenous, and Latinx students. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://math.oregonstate.edu/sites/math.oregonstate.edu/files/2022-03/Rochelle%20Gutierrez%20%20The%20Need%20to%20Rehumanize%20Mathematics.pdf

Goodpaster, K. P., Adedokun, O. A., & Weaver, G. C. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of rural STEM teaching: Implications for rural teacher retention. The Rural Educator, 33(3), 9–22. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ987621.pdf

Greer, B., Mukhopadhyay, S., Powell, A. B., & Nelson-Barber, S. (Eds.). (2009). Culturally responsive mathematics education. Routledge. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781135593346_A24927984/preview-9781135593346_A24927984.pdf

Gutierrez, K. S., Blanchard, M. R., & Busch, K. C. (2022). What effective design strategies do rural, underserved students in STEM clubs value while learning about climate change? Environmental Education Research, 28(7), 1043–1069. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2032611

Harris, R. S., & Hodges, C. B. (2018). STEM education in rural schools: Implications of untapped potential. National Youth-At-Risk Journal, 3(1), 3–12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1269639.pdf

Heckman, J. J. (2000). Policies to foster human capital. Research in Economics, 54(1), 3–56. https://doi.org/10.1006/reec.1999.0225

Holmes, L. M. (2012). The effects of project-based learning on 21st century skills and No Child Left Behind accountability standards. University of Florida.

Horizon Research. (2019). Highlights from the 2018 NSSME+. https://horizon-research.com/NSSME/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Highlights-from-2018-NSSME.pdf

Ingman, B., Lohmiller, K., Cutforth, N., & Belansky, E. (2022). The potential of service learning in rural schools: The case of the Working Together Project. The Rural Educator, 43(2), 1–15. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1362125.pdf

Kastelein, K., Allen, S., Keller, T. E., & Mokros, J. (2018). The 2018 Rural Informal STEM Conference: Final report. Maine Mathematics and Science Alliance. https://www.mmsa.org/projects/RuralConference2018

KewalRamani, A., Zhang, J., Wang, X., Rathbun, A., Corcoran, L., Diliberti, M., & Zhang, J. (2018). Student access to digital learning resources outside of the classroom. National Center for Education Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720956841

Koedel, C., & Polikoff, M. (2017). Big bang for just a few bucks: The impact of math textbooks in California. Evidence Speaks Reports, 2(5), 1–7. https://www.schoolinfosystem.org/pdf/2017/01/es_20170105_polikoff_evidence_speaks.pdf

Kurti, R. S., Kurti, D. L., & Fleming, L. (2014). The philosophy of educational makerspaces: Part 1 of making an educational makerspace. Teacher Librarian, 41(5), 8. https://www.newblankets.org/worth_a_look/philosophy_of_makerspace.pdf

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1163320

Lakin, J. M., Stambaugh, T., Ihrig, L. M., Mahatmya, D., & Assouline, S. G. (2021). Nurturing STEM talent in rural setting. Phi Delta Kappan, 103(4), 24–30.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122.

Lent, R. W., & Sheu, H.-B. (2010). Applying social cognitive career theory across cultures: Empirical status. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (3rd ed., pp. 691–701). Sage Publications.

Lindgren, R., & Johnson-Glenberg, M. (2013). Emboldened by embodiment: Six precepts for research on embodied learning and mixed reality. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 445–452. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13511661

Marlowe, B. A., & Page, M. L. (1998). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom. Corwin Press.

McGregor, D. (2009). Honouring our relations: An Anishnaabe perspective on environmental justice. In J. Agyeman, P. Cole, R. Haluza-DeLay, & P. O’Riley (Eds.), Speaking for ourselves: Environmental justice in Canada (pp. 27–41). University of British Columbia Press. https://doi.org/10.59962/9780774816205-004

Meador, A. (2018). Examining recruitment and retention factors for minority STEM majors through a stereotype threat lens. School Science and Mathematics, 118(1–2), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12260

Means, B., & Neisler, J. (2021). Teaching and learning in the time of COVID: The student perspective. Online Learning, 25(1). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1287125.pdf

Mejia, J. A., Wilson-Lopez, A., Hailey, C., Hasbun, I., & Householder, D. (2014). Funds of knowledge in Hispanic students’ communities and households that enhance engineering design thinking. 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/32/papers/9703/download

Michell, H. (2005). Nēhîthâwâk of Reindeer Lake, Canada: Worldview, epistemology and relationships with the natural world. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 34, 33–43.

Miller, P. J., & Goodnow, J. J. (1995). Cultural practices: Toward an integration of culture and development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219956703

Mokros, J., Atkinson, J., Allen, S., Saunders, A., & Kastelein, K. (2017). Facilitating formal–informal connections in rural STEM ecosystems. Connected Science Learning, 1(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/24758779.2017.12420473

Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, XXXI(2). https://education.ucsc.edu/ellisa/pdfs/Moll_Amanti_1992_Funds_of_Knowledge.pdf

Morris, J., Slater, E., Fitzgerald, M. T., Lummis, G. W., & van Etten, E. (2021). Using local rural knowledge to enhance STEM learning for gifted and talented students in Australia. Research in Science Education, 51, 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9823-2

Nasir, N. S., Lee, C. D., Pea, R., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2020). Handbook of the cultural foundations of learning. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203774977

———. (2021). Rethinking learning: What the interdisciplinary science tells us. Educational Researcher, 50(8), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211047251

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24783

———. (2019). Science and engineering for grades 6–12: Investigation and design at the center. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25216

———. (2022). Science and engineering in preschool through elementary grades: The brilliance of children and the strengths of educators. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26215

———. (2024a). A new vision for high-quality preschool curriculum. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27429

———. (2024b). Equity in K–12 STEM education: Framing decisions for the future. National Academies Press.

National Academy of Engineering & National Research Council (NAE & NRC). (2014). STEM integration in K–12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. www.nctm.org/principlestoactions

National Research Council (NRC). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. National Academies Press. http://nap.nationalacademies.org/9853

———. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. National Academies Press.

———. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.

Nixon, J., Stoiber, A., Halverson, E., & Dando, M. (2021). Making makers: Tracing STEM identity in rural communities. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 11(1), 12. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jpeer/vol11/iss1/12/

Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244

Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.

Pedersen, H. D., & Gram, M. (2018). The brainy ones are leaving: The subtlety of (un)cool places through the eyes of rural youth. Journal of Youth Studies, 21, 620–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2017.1406071

Rincón, B. E., & Rodriguez, S. (2021). Latinx students charting their own STEM pathways: How community cultural wealth informs their STEM identities. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 20(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192720968276

Roschelle, J., Shechtman, N., Tatar, D., Hegedus, S., Hopkins, B., Empson, S., Knudsen, J., & Gallagher, L. P. (2010). Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 833–878. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40928357

Saw, G. K., & Agger, C. A. (2021). STEM pathways of rural and small-town students: Opportunities to learn, aspirations, preparation, and college enrollment. Educational Researcher, 50(9), 595–606. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211027528

Seal, K. R., & Harmon, H. L. (1995). Realities of rural school reform. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED384454.pdf

Sewell, W. H., Haller, A. O., & Portes, A. (1969). The educational and early occupational attainment process. American Sociological Review, 34(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.2307/2092789

Showalter, D., Klein, R., Johnson, J., & Hartman, S. L. (2017). Why rural matters 2015-2016: Understanding the changing landscape. Rural School and Community Trust.

Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and communities. Education for Meaning and Social Justice, 17(3), 63–64.

Southern Regional Education Board. (2015). Credentials for all: An imperative for SREB states. Southern Regional Education Board. https://www.sreb.org/publication/credentials-all-imperative-sreb-states

Sprowles, A., Goldenberg, K., Goley, P. D., Ladwig, S., & Shaughnessy, F. J. (2019). Place-based learning communities on a rural campus: Turning challenges into assets. Learning Communities: Research & Practice, 7(1), 6. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1218557.pdf

Star, J. R., Caronongan, P., Foegen, A., Furgeson, J., Keating, B., Larson, M. R., Lyskawa, J., McCallum, W. G., Porath, J., & Zbiek, R. M. (2015). Teaching strategies for improving algebra knowledge in middle and high school students (NCEE No. 2014-4333). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/docs/practiceguide/wwc_algebra_040715.pdf

Starrett, A., Irvin, M. J., Lotter, C., & Yow, J. A. (2022). Understanding the relationship of science and mathematics place-based workforce development on adolescents’ motivation and rural aspirations. American Educational Research Journal, 59(6), 1090–1121. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312221099009

Steiner, D. M. (2017). Curriculum research: What we know and where we need to go. StandardsWork.

Tieken, M. C. (2016). College talk and the rural economy: Shaping the educational aspirations of rural, first-generation students. Peabody Journal of Education, 91(2), 203–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2016.1151741

Tyson, W., Lee, R., Borman, K. M., & Hanson, M. A. (2007). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pathways: High school science and math coursework and postsecondary degree attainment. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12(3), 243–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824660701601266

Woodward, J., Beckmann, S., Driscoll, M., Franke, M., Herzig, P., Jitendra, A., Koedinger, K. R., & Ogbuehi, P. (2012). Improving mathematical problem solving in grades 4 through 8: A practice guide (NCEE No. 2012-4055). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications_reviews.aspx#pubsearch/

Yemini, M., Engel, L., & Ben Simon, A. (2023). Place-based education: A systematic review of literature. Educational Review, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2023.2177260

This page intentionally left blank.