One updated ambigram (for Thanksgiving) and one new design for the word “Gratitude.” Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
180 degree rotational ambigram for the word “cybernetic,” ©punyamishra
Here is the next article in our series Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century for the journal TechTrends featuring an interview with Dr. Paul Pangaro, Associate Professor & Chair of the Master of Fine Arts in Interaction Design program at the College for Creative Studies. Dr. Pangaro has a rich, multi-dimensional background that allows him to provide a nuanced and unique perspective. As we write in the article:
[Dr. Pangaro’s] views, influenced by his early work in humanities, computer science, and film, and driven by cybernetics and conversation theory, are a lens for everything he has done and continues to frame the way he sees the world. Our discussion with Dr. Pangaro highlighted several themes that characterize his current work and perspective on creativity. These themes include: creativity as an act of re-seeing the world; cybernetics and design; and the evolving role of technology, creativity, and conversation in our world.
Lot more in the complete article, which is linked to below:
Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., Warr, M. & The Deep-Play Research Group (2017). A Cybernetic Perspective on Design and Creativity: a Conversation with Dr. Paul Pangaro. Tech Trends (61)6. DOI 10.1007/s11528-017-0221-1
The MSUrbanSTEM project was one of the best projects I have ever been part of. We worked with 124 Chicago Public School STEM educators over three years, in an effort to develop their teaching and leadership in the STEM areas. We have written about this project and presented about it at conferences, but this is the first time that we have an entire special issue of a journal (The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching) devoted to the project. As we write in the introduction, there are some significant advantages to having a range of articles on a project:
Research on educational programs faces a fundamental and essential tension. By definition, research tends to be driven by specific theoretical frameworks and research questions, generating their strength from this specificity and narrowness of vision. But educational researchers also understand that there is much more to the project or activity than was or could be captured by one study. Any article that seeks to provide an overview of the project provides breadth but lacks depth and specificity. We believe that this special issue provides the right balance between breadth and depth—by allowing us to construct a richer description of a teacher professional development program through ve articles, each of which use different lenses. It is through these articles that some of the richness of the project can be captured and presented to readers.
Below are the titles and references of all the articles in the special issue, as well as a link to the pdf of the introductory article . Do let me know (by email or in the comments below) if you want copies of the other articles.
Three important questions that we often seek answers for are:
- WHAT is it?
- WHEN should we do it?
- WHERE should it happen?
Turns out these questions can be answered just by replacing just one letter—namely replace “W” with “T.” Here they are:
Here is a visual representation of the same idea that I created while at a meeting the other day.
I am teaching a new masters/doctoral seminar titled Design in the real world. This is the first class I am teaching here after coming to ASU and it is exciting to back in with students engaged in discussions about design, technology, and its role in our lives as educators. More info about the class can be found here. What I want to share below are three podcasts created by the participants in the class. The task was to review a book around design. Below are the three books and the audio files. Enjoy.
How Designers Think by Christiana Bruchok & Kevin Close
Taking Design Thinking to School by Ye (Cherry) Chen & Wendy Wakefield
Science ambigram with 180-degree rotational symmetry
This chapter, published back in 1998, focused on the cognitive science of science. I realized today that I had not uploaded this article onto my website. So, better late than never, here it is. But before jumping into that here are two basic questions: what is the cognitive science of science and how did we approach the topic? Briefly:
The cognitive science of science studies the cognitive processes involved in carrying out science: How do scientists reason? How do scientists develop new theories? How do scientists deal with data that are inconsistent with their theories? How do scientists choose between competing theories? Research on these issues has been carried out by investigators in a number of cognitive science disciplines, particularly psychology, philosophy, and artificial intelligence.ee
[Furthermore] we organize this chapter in terms of a simple heuristic: What do scientists do everyday in their capacity as scientists and what psychological processes are involved in those activities?
Complete citation and link to article given below:
Brewer, W. F. & Mishra, P. (1998) Cognitive Psychology of Science. In Bechtel, W. & Graham, G. (Eds.). A companion to cognitive science. (pp. 744-749). Malden, MA: Basil Blackwell.
I just returned from participating in EDUsummIT 2017, the fifth International Summit on Information Technology in Education. EDUsummIT is a global knowledge building community of researchers, educational practitioners, and policy makers committed to supporting the effective integration of research and practice in the field of ICT in education. It is held every two years and this year it convened in Borovets, Bulgaria, from September 18 through 20 and was co-hosted by the University of Library Studies & Information Technologies, Sofia, Bulgaria, and the Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
EDUsummIT is held every two years and I have been lucky to have been invited to and been part of the past four meetings, in Paris, Washington DC, Bangkok and now Bulgaria. (More info on past EDUsummIT meetings and the results of these meetings can be found here.)
EDUsummIT is not a conference in the typical sense of the word. It is more of an intense working session (spread over two days) where 100+ academics, practitioners and policy makers, form smaller thematic groups and work together on pre-specified topics. It was my privilege to be co-lead one of the Thematic Working Groups with my friend and colleague Dale Niederhauser. Specifically our group (TWG9) focussed on the topic of Supporting Sustainability and Scalability in Educational Technology Initiatives: Research Informed Practice. Other members of the team included (in alphabetical order): Douglas Agyei, Margaret Cox, Sarah Howard, Djordje Kadijevich, Therese Laferriere, Lynne Schrum, Jo Tondeur & Joke Voogt (see below).
It was a fabulous group to work with and the days of the meeting went by in a blur as we worked together as a team to explore the issue of sustainability and scalability in research approaches specifically as they apply to educational technology innovations. A range of products emerged from the meeting, both from the different working groups individually as well as from the conference collectively. Below I list some of these products – for the record.
- A call to action: The document was a summary of the recommendations by all of the groups
- TWG9 Poster: A poster that was presented by the TWG9 group at the end of the meeting (Thanks to Sarah Howard for all her work pulling it together in a really short time).
- Interim report from TWG9: This is a first draft and is the culmination of the work we did together during the meeting.
There will be other products (journal articles and such) that will emerge at a later date, and I will post them here as they appear.
I would like to take a moment to thank all the organizers, sponsors and most importantly all the members of TWG9 for all their hard work and effort in making this such a great meeting.
Finally, I took a lot of photos during my stay at Borovets and then at Sofia. You can find them on a Google photo album here.
Here is the next article in our series Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century for the journal TechTrends. This article features an interview with Dr. Yong Zhao, Foundation Distinguished Professor in the School of Education at the University of Kansas and professorial fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Health and Education Policy, Victoria University in Australia. Zhao has been a good friend and colleague since our graduate student days in Urbana-Champaign, so it is great to have him on this series. In this interview it becomes clear that his
…perspective on creativity is firmly grounded in its relationship to thinking, teaching, and learning within educational systems. He speaks with a forward looking trajectory, focusing his attention to what creativity means to the future of schools and societies
Lot more in the complete article, which is linked to below:
Richardson, C., Henriksen, D., Mishra, P. & The Deep-Play Research Group (2017). The Courage to be Creative: An interview with Dr. Yong Zhao. Tech Trends (61)5. 415-419. DOI 10.1007/s11528-017-0221-1
I have always been intrigued by the idea of how truly random our lives really are. Seemingly minor events can trigger effects, rippling through our lives, effects becoming causes, leading to profound changes and transformations. Ray Bradbury’s short story “The Sound of Thunder” builds on this idea, where the inadvertent death of a butterfly, back in the age of dinosaurs, leads to profound changes in human history.
A similar idea can be seen in the “What if…” genre of historical fiction. The question, “What if the Axis powers had won the war?” leads to Phillip Dick’s novel “The Man in the High Castle.” The question “What if the reformation had never happened?” leads to Kingsley Amis’ novel “The Alteration.” (Incidentally, something interesting I discovered while writing this post was that Amis’ novel mentions an alternate-history novel titled “The Man in the High Castle” by someone called Phillip K. Dick!). This is also the idea behind the film “Sliding doors” though the ending of the film left a lot to be desired (at least in my opinion).
This interest in the the contingent nature of our lives led me to finding other examples (from fiction and film) that aim to capture this idea in powerful and interesting ways. The greatest example of this idea is the novel “Chain of Chance” by Polish science fiction author Stanislaw Lem [Review | Wikipedia page]. Framed as a detective novel or a murder mystery, the novel is actually a philosophical rumination on the role of randomness in our lives and how we seek to find pattern and design even when no such thing exists. As Lem writes:
There’s no such thing as a mysterious event. It all depends on the magnitude of the set. . . Out of the realm of infinite possibilities. . . you chose a certain fraction of cases that exhibited a multifactorial similarity. We now live in such a dense world of random chance, in a molecular and chaotic gas whose ‘improbabilities’ are amazing only to the individual human atoms.
Some of the other examples I have collected from films are included below. One that I could not include is from the film Run Lola Run—partly because I could not find a clip that would capture the ideas since these ideas permeate the entire film. So without further ado, here are my selections that capture the randomness of life, as we know it.
One of my favorite clips is from the 1995 movie City of Lost Children [Wikipedia page]. See the key clip below:
Another great example comes from the 2008 film, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button [Wikipedia page]
Finally, a short film called Spin that speaks of some of the same issue, in a very different manner.
The next article in our series Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century for the journal TechTrends was just published. This article features an interview with Dr. Arne Dietrich, professor of neuroscience at the American University of Beirut in Lebanon. He describes himself as a “tour guide into the bizarre world of brain cells and human behavior.” He has written a textbook on consciousness as well as a more popular book on the neuroscience of creativity. In this interview Dr. Dietrich was quite skeptical…
about what neuroscience offers to complex sociocultural concepts, such as creativity. Dr. Dietrich reminded us that creativity is a complex social phenomenon that is, above all, a created construct. Creativity is difficult to relate to other social constructs, such as certain types of thinking or intelligence, without further reducing it to the mechanisms that make it happen. His reductionist approach may seem ironically positivistic for a topic like creativity, but its repercussions are, in the end, deeply humanizing.
Complete article and citation follows:
Mehta, R., Henriksen, D., Mishra, P. & The Deep-Play Research Group (2017). The Courageous Rationality of Being a Neuroskeptic Neuroscientist: Dr. Arne Dietrich on Creativity and Education. Tech Trends (61)5. 415-419. DOI 10.1007/s11528-017-0217-x
This past April, I delivered the annual E. Paul Torrance Lecture at the University of Georgia. Being invited to give this talk was a huge honor, for two main reasons. First, because of Paul Torrance, the person for whom this lecture is named. Dr. Torrance, known as the “Father of Creativity,” was (and remains) one of the giants of creativity research. The second reason the invitation meant so much were the scholars who had spoken there in previous years (some of whom are listed on this page). They include pretty much every big name in creativity research. I am not sure I deserve to be in this group—but there was no way I could turn down this opportunity.
My talk (which you can watch below) was titled: From the Swampy Lowlands of Practice to Unbearable Lightness of Theory: Navigating Creativity, Technology, and Teaching
Note: The E. Paul Torrance Lecture is sponsored by the College of Education‘s Torrance Center for Creativity and Talent Development at the University of Georgia. I was hosted by two wonderful colleagues Dr. Sarah Summers and Dr. Desiree Sharp – and managed to get a picture with them and a cut-out of Dr. Torrance :-)
The next article in our series Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century just got published by the journal TechTrends. This article features an interview with Dr. Roni Reiter-Palmon, Varner Professor of I/O Psychology and the Director of the I/O Psychology Graduate Program at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. She also directs for the Center for Collaboration Science, an inter-disciplinary program at University of Nebraska. Her research has focused on creativity and innovation in the workplace (for individuals and teams), cognitive creative processes, team decision-making, and organizational adoption of innovative processes. Speaking to the value of creativity she said:
I think we’re seeing more attention to creativity and innovation because we have lot of complex problems to solve, both as a country, in the world, or anything in the political realm that you want to touch. Whether it’s climate change, or poverty, or anything meaningful—and that awareness drips down to organizations. We don’t have a lot of simple problems these days.
Dr. Reiter-Palmon speaks to a range of themes, in response to this need, in her interview. These include: the importance of problem construction as a precursor to creativity; innovation and creativity in organizations, interdisciplinary and team creativity, and technology as building creative bridges. Read the complete article for yourself:
Keenan, S., Henriksen, D. & The Deep-Play Research Group (2017). Organizational Contexts and Team Creativity: An Interview with Dr. Roni Reiter-Palmon on Innovation Within Organizations. Tech Trends (61)4.
The Origins Project at ASU is an attempt to explore humankind’s most fundamental questions about our origins. As the website says, This project brings “together a diverse collection of the world’s leading scientists, scholars, and public intellectuals to discuss, and if possible create, new research opportunities associated with forefront issues ranging from the origin of the universe to the origins of life, modern humans, consciousness, culture, complex systems and technology.”
This weekend the focus is on climate change and a whole series of exciting public events have been announced including a Saturday evening film screening of Werner Herzog’s Salt and Fire followed by a conversation with the director himself! (Lot more details on the website linked above).
So when I got a chance to snag some free tickets to this event I jumped at the opportunity. I could only make the event on Saturday but the website needed input on the Friday event as well. As you can see, from the screenshot below, the interface insisted that I fill in how many tickets I wanted even though I had said that I would NOT be able to make it on Friday. In essence I was answering the question “how many tickets did I not need!” It’s not a big deal at some level, but funny nonetheless.
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance was one of those books that have influenced me deeply. I read it when I was in high school and read it again and again, almost obsessively for a while. It was my companion through college, graduate school and beyond. I assigned sections from it in my master’s and doctoral courses. This is a book that changed me, and its impact on my thinking resonates even today.
Robert Prisig died yesterday. I owe him, and his ideas, a great debt. In his homage, are two images I created today, once I heard the new, from one of my favorite quotes from the book.
Note: I edited the quote a bit when I created the designs. The complete (and accurate quote) is “The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or as the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain or in the petals of a flower.”
The next article in our series Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century just got published by the journal TechTrends. This article features Susan Perry, social psychologist, author (of both non-fiction and fiction), and blogger. Specifically the article focuses on her research on flow, creativity, writing, and thinking. As she said in the interview:
Flow is highly conducive for creativity to flourish. It happens when you’re sufficiently challenged to stay engaged in a task, but not so frustrated by your inability to accomplish the task that you become anxious and quit. You forget yourself, time changes or stops for you, and you feel part of something larger than yourself.
This idea of being part of “something larger than yourself,” in a sense transcending the self, is an insight that Dr. Perry emphasizes and discusses in multiple contexts—writing, teaching and learning. Read the complete article for yourself:
Elwood, K., Henriksen, D., Mishra, P. & The Deep-Play Research Group (2017). Finding Meaning in Flow: A Conversation with Susan K. Perry on Writing Creatively. TechTrends. doi:10.1007/s11528-017-0181-5
Douglas Harvey and Ronald Carol, both at Stockton University in New Jersey have reviewed the 2nd Edition of the TPACK Handbook for the journal TechTrends. You can find the review here. Complete reference and a link to the first chapter of the handbook can be found here. In an overall positive review, they write:
The greatest value of the book is to those seeking to develop their own research utilizing the model, with each contributed chapter providing source material on all aspects of TPACK as applied to educational research… The breadth of the content is the most valuable aspect of the handbook, covering a wide variety of research designs and contexts.
They go on to write:
The reductive seduction of other people’s problems, Illustration by Punya Mishra
Anurag Behar forwarded an article: The Reductive Seduction of Other People’s Problems, which I really think is a must-read for any of us involved in education or development. The points made in the article have particular resonance for us here at the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College as we seek to connect our research and practice with schools and communities.
Below are some thoughts prompted by the article that I shared with my colleagues here at ASU, edited lightly for this posting, though I do recommend reading the entire article it for yourself.
First, the idea of “reductive seduction of other people’s problem,” which I take to mean that the further we are from an issue the easier it seems to solve, is a powerful idea. It is an idea we are familiar with, but it is good to have a phrase to put on it. We know this because we understand that context and perspective matter. This is why the innovation engine work we do is driven by the concerns of the community, or the schools or teachers. This is why we seek to bring all parties into the conversation into the process. This is why we seek to embed ourselves (either through our design work, or through the rethinking of the site coordinators roles) in the contexts we seek to work in. This means that…
… second, we need to think hard about our inclusiveness – and how we define the “other.” Many of us have been challenged by the “tone-deaf” nature of Betsy DeVoss’ comments about public education (wither K12 or higher ed) and the solutions she is seeking to support. I wonder how much of it is due to this process of “reductive seduction” of other people’s problems – the operative word here being “other” – having never been in these contexts, and never having truly understood it, the problem appears simple to solve.
This is akin to something Anurag said a few years ago at AERA regarding the role of data in assessment and evaluation of programs (and I am going to paraphrase him).
The need for data is proportional to the distance we have from the actual context, i.e. the further we are from the situation on the ground, the more we need data to help us understand. The closer we are, the deeper we are embedded, the more we understand nuance, the less the need for a certain kind of data, since we have a textured understanding of what is really happening.
I am not trying to make a political point here – but rather raising it as an issue that we need to be sensitive to. It is this distance we have to be wary about. Which leads to the …
… third point, the need for humility in our own plans and capacities. In this work that we are doing in the innovation engine (and I believe in it and am committed to it) we need to be sensitive that we do not fall into the same trap. That we do not become reductive in our thinking, that we not create that “other” who we can speaking glibly about. Our commitment to collaborative participatory design should never be forgotten. Specifically…
… and finally, there are three sentences from towards the end of the article that I want us to remember as we move forward with this work:
- Don’t go because you’ve fallen in love with solvability. Go because you’ve fallen in love with complexity.
- Don’t go because you want to do something virtuous. Go because you want to do something difficult.
- Don’t go because you want to talk. Go because you want to listen.
I had posted recently a video based on a talk I had given at ASU. In that video I spoke about the role of theory in research through a history of the TPACK framework. You can see the video here.
Now, my TPACK partner in crime, Matt Koehler, has created his own video of the story, this time for a talk he gave at the recently concluded SITE conference in Austin, Texas. Though we cover pretty much the same ground in our our respective talks, I think there are sections in Matt’s version that are quite insightful. You can see Matt’s video (A brief history of TPACK) here.
3.14 looked in a mirror and guess what he saw?
I have been editing a series of articles for iWonder: Rediscovering School Science, a practitioner orientated journal for middle school science teachers, published by the Azim Premji University. Our first article was titled “Why teachers should care of beauty in science education and the next one, authored by doctoral candidate Day Greenberg is about social justice in the science classroom. You can access the complete issue here and the article by following the link below:
Greenberg, D. (2017, March). Why science teachers should care about social justice. iWonder: Rediscovering School Science (1) 1, 70-73.
One of the best parts of this series is creating all the illustrations that go with the articles — a challenge I took on for the first article and now has continued on to this one as well. The three original illustrations used in this article are given below. Click on the image to see a high-resolution version.
Fig. 1. Science and social justice – finding the balance! License: CC-BY-NC.
Fig. 2. Participatory engagement in a classroom context. In the background is a word cloud created from all the words in the Wikipedia page on “Science.” License: CC-BY-NC.
Fig. 3. The dove with an olive branch, a symbol of peace. Made from icons representative of science, flies against a word-cloud created from all the words in the Wikipedia page on “Social Justice.” License: CC-BY-NC.
One of my favorite quotes about learning. From this article, Taking Learning Seriously the entirety of which is worth reading. But for now here is the quote, and a visual (just because):
Learning is least useful when it is private and hidden; it is most powerful when it becomes public and communal. Learning flourishes when we take what we think we know and offer it as community property among fellow learners so that it can be tested, examined, challenged, and improved before we internalize it — Lee Shulman
Five syllables first
Second one has seven more
A failed Haiku!
So close… almost had it.
In keeping with the meta-theme, here is another one, written many years ago, and lightly edited by Danah Henriksen.
Has not the right size
Because the middle two lines are much too long
However, that is the way, although it be wrong
How do we capture a program of scholarship in an image? This is particularly complicated when the work is a tangled web of connections between research, teaching and practice, spread out over multiple publications, presentations and people. One attempt to do this, around our work on creativity is given below. But first some context.
Recently Danah Henriksen and I were invited to the Learning, Literacies & Technology doctoral seminar offered by Frank Serafini to speak about our work around trans-disciplinary creativity. This gave us an opportunity to look back on the broader program of research around creativity we have been engaged in over the past 10 years or so. (Firstly, its amazing to think that we have been working in this area for almost a decade!!). There are many layers to this work – involving research, teaching, and practice and part of it was captured in a handbook chapter we published a couple of years ago :
Mishra, P., Henriksen, D. & Mehta, R. (2015). Creativity, Digitality, and Teacher Professional Development: Unifying Theory, Research, and Practice. In In M. Niess, & H. Gillow-Wiles (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education in the Digital Age (pp. 691-722). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. [Download the article as a PDF]
Towards the end of the paper we wrote:
In conclusion, we must reiterate that this is on-going work and this paper offers just a snapshot of a complex, winding, and non-linear process… If our experience tells us anything it is that building this bridge between theory and action, research and practice is a complex one. Our approach has been to take on all of them somewhat simultaneously allowing us to see just dialogic and transactional this act can be…. [In addition] the vagaries of journal publishing schedules, the immediate pressures of teaching, the intricate negotiations with co-authors, and the contingent, haphazard nature of life itself have sometimes played narrative havoc with what might otherwise be a clear timeline. In some sense, this contingency lies at the heart of the phenomenon we seek to understand: creativity, and its role in teaching and learning.
As a part of writing this chapter we constructed a chart to capture the different strands of work and how they have fed into each other – attempting to untangle this “complex, winding, and non-linear” process. Danah and I took this invitation to present to Frank’s class as an opportunity to update the chart. The updated version, for the record, is given below. Click on the image below to see a larger version. Continue reading →
A paper co-authored with Jon Good and Aman Yadav, building on Jon’s practicum study has received the Outstanding Paper Award at the SITE 2017. Complete reference, link to article and abstract given below.
Good. J., Yadav. A., & Mishra, P. (2017). Computational Thinking in Computer Science Classrooms: Viewpoints from CS Educators. Paper presented at the SITE 2017 Conference, San Antonio.
Abstract: Computational thinking (CT) has been described as a mental activity, a problem solving approach, and a skill fundamental to most disciplines. For teachers, the varied definitions of CT make it difficult to integrate into the curriculum. The purpose of this study was to examine how secondary computer science teachers perceive computational thinking practices and concepts in their own introductory computer science classes. Using in-depth qualitative interviews with CS teachers, we investigated how their existing curriculum was structured, their impressions of computational thinking concepts, and whether they identified computational thinking concepts within their curriculum. The results from the study suggested that computer science teachers are generally not familiar with computational thinking concepts, but when made aware of them, they find them relevant to their curricula. The findings inform CS teacher education, and refine both the theory and practice of CT in K-12 classrooms.
Every educator has had an amazing teaching moment. It is that magical moment, when the topic comes to life and the energy in the classroom is palpable. These are moments that we cannot help but share — we run out and corner the first person we meet and insist on telling them about it. These are the stories that give meaning to our professional lives.
A few years ago we published a book with 49 such amazing stories, as a part of the MSUrbanSTEM project. You can download the book by clicking on the title: Ultimate STEM: 49 Amazing Teaching Moments in STEM.
Of course are researchers we could not stop there. We took these stories and analyzed them for common and overarching themes to help us identify what goes into making an amazing STEM lesson plan. A paper based on that was recently published. Enjoy.
Mehta, S., Mehta, R., Berzina-Pitcher, I., Seals, C. & Mishra, P. (2016). 49 Stories That Make an Ultimate STEM Lesson Plan. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 35(4), 343-353. Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
In this paper we reviewed what 49 large urban public school district STEM teachers enrolled in a year-long graduate certificate and fellowship program at a large Midwestern university considered as their amazing teaching moments. They were asked to share their amazing teaching moments that would make an Ultimate Lesson Plan in STEM. In smaller groups of five, then they were asked to find connections between their amazing teaching moments and to look for the essential components that make these moments amazing. This activity led the teachers to discover 51 key components that made an ultimate lesson plan. We analyzed these 51 key components to find common and overarching themes that were grouped together into a final list of seven key components for an ultimate STEM lesson plan. These key components that make an ultimate STEM lesson plan give us an insight into what working teachers consider to be important for student engagement and learning in STEM content in classrooms.