1. Delegates: Erin Cameron, Christie McClure, Jean-Daniel Doucet, Huguette Thibeault, Wojceick Nawrocik, Han Chau, Robin St-Pierre, Éric Morissette, Dimitri Anastasopoulos, Brigitte Loiselle Moderator: Johanne Patry, To integrate or not to integrate? To better ensure meaningful science teaching and learning, which is the most promising approach between traditional and integrated (ex.:STEM, ESSTEEM or STSE)? March 23rd to 27th, 2012

2. STEM: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics ESSTEEM: Education in Science, Society, Technology, Engineering, Environment, and Mathematics) STSE: Science, Technology, society, and Environment ACRONYMS GALORE

3. Educational programs separate and/or integrate different disciplines at the appropriate time There exists a Common Framework in Canada There is an increasing importance of connections between education and sustainable development Complex problems are not included often in the classroom From the secondary level and up, there are some places where there are teachers who do not have the expertise to teach science. In some places, there are issues regarding math’s applications. There is a need to improve disciplinary connections There are problems in science perception There is a lack of resources (materials, information, time, etc.) We observe that…

4. The integrated approach is most promising because it results in meaningful connections for the student and for the teacher We suggest To expose students to the multiplicity of careers through connections in the classroom with other disciplines That specialization may start after 15-16 y.o. That, even with the best curriculum, teachers need to be well prepared and be accompanied in the teaching process. To have integrated based projects to offer to schools. –Ex.: Centre for the pedagogical development –Inquiry based projects/strategies –To offer attainable challenges for students and teacher To better ensure meaningful science teaching and learning, which is the most promising approaches between traditional and integrated approaches (ex.: STEM, ESSTEEM or STSE)?

5. The integrated approach is most promising because it results in meaningful connections for the student and for the teacher We suggest To have more dialogue between math and science and at many levels –Professional development opportunities within school institutions that focus on science teaching where all levels of teachers are present That there must be coherence in the curricula of different levels –Writing process should have math and science (plus many other disciplines) from different levels of representation To support the ESSTEEM approach to provide a framework of teaching, learning, and project based problem solving (Education in Science, Society, Technology, Environment, Engineering, and Mathematics) To better ensure meaningful science teaching and learning, which is the most promising approaches between traditional and integrated approaches (ex.: STEM, ESSTEEM or STSE)?