The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 104 Early Childhood Educator Self-Efficacy for Implementing Early Stem childhood teachers The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 2025, Volume 28, Issue 2 https://doi.org/10.55370/thedialog.v28i2.2072 Contact: Dena Harshbarger harshbargedk@unk.edu Copyright © 2025 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (https://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/). RTP EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR SELF-EFFICACY ABSTRACT Research substantiates that providing high-qual- ity STEM activities at an early age is important for young children to become college and career ready (Moore et al, 2016). However, not all educators are as knowledgeable and/or confident in supporting STEM instruction.  Research suggests individuals with strong self-efficacy tend to commit to goals that challenge their current capabilities (Bandura, 1993). Therefore, educators may be more inclined to imple- ment STEM lessons if they feel knowledgeable and confident. The study used a multiple methods design including surveys, and self-reflection logs to explore how intentionally designed professional development impacted early childhood educators’ self-efficacy in planning and implementing early STEM activities for preschool-age children. The findings found a signifi- cant increase from pre-survey to post-survey in early childhood educators’ self-efficacies for supporting preschool-age children’s STEM activities. KEYWORDS Early STEM, self-efficacy, Head Start, STEM instruc- tion, professional development, early childhood educator preparation, preschool S cience and engineering careers are predicted to grow nearly 10% in the United States by 2029 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020). To address the United States’ workforce needs, many professional organizations (e.g., National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Council of Teaching Mathematics (NCTM), National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)) through standards, frameworks, guidelines, and position statements advocate for the inclusion of STEM curriculum during the early years (i.e., birth to age five) while young minds are most malleable and capable of developing lifelong think- ing skills (Sarama et al, 2018). Purposefully designed STEM activities can help young children develop the character traits of curiosity, problem-solving, and perseverance (Lange et al., 2019). Therefore, young children can and should be engaged in intentionally Dena Harshbarger Paula Thompson Jane Strawhecker University of Nebraska at Kearney http://harshbargedk@unk.edu The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 105 designed and developmentally appropriate early STEM activities as a means of developing interests and a foundational background in STEM (Lange et. al, 2019: NAEYC, 2001).   Effective early STEM activities should simul- taneously incorporate many or all four STEM dis- ciplines (i.e., science, math, technology, and engi- neering) using a “play”-based format (Stipek, 2017) to investigate and/or solve phenomenon-based, re- al-world problem (Lange et al., 2019; Sarama et al., 2018). Phenomenon-based problems are observ- able facts or events occurring in young children’s ev- eryday life or world. Common phenomenon-based events for preschool-age children may include understanding changes in the weather or seasons, why stars shine in the sky or make patterns, how cold it needs to be for water to freeze, why soda pop makes a bubbly sound, or what plants need to grow (Penuel & Bell, 2016). In addition, early childhood (EC) educators should design STEM activities that encourage young children to: (a) wonder; (b) use multi-modal senses to observe and explore; (c) no- tice and discover patterns; and (d) learn through trial-and-error (Lange, 2019). These types of expe- riences increase opportunities for children to take the lead, have more ownership in the learning pro- cess, and actively engage in learning.  When EC educators plan early STEM activities such as designing the strongest bridge, tallest tower, or a habitat for a particular animal, children act as engineers, designing and testing possible solutions or prototypes. Based on the results or lack of results, EC educators should encourage children to adjust and/or improve their plan or prototype through trial-and-error (Lange et al., 2019). However, many EC educators report having low self-efficacy re- lated to their ability to design and facilitate early STEM learning due to past experiences and cur- rent attitudes and are thus, less inclined to provide STEM opportunities for young children (Gerde et al., 2018). How educators feel, think, and motivate themselves on the job can be influenced by their self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1993). Therefore, ed- ucators may be more inclined to implement STEM lessons if they feel knowledgeable and confident for planning and implementing early STEM activities. Providing professional development (PD) designed to develop EC educators’ knowledge and/or confi- dence to support STEM learning may increase the likelihood of early STEM implementation. Current Study The purpose of this study was to determine how professional development (PD) designed to support participants’ knowledge for planning and implementing early STEM with preschool-age chil- dren impacted EC educators’ self-efficacy. There were two main research questions: 1. What impact does a targeted professional development have on early childhood edu- cators’ self-efficacy of early STEM instruc- tion?   2. What impact does a targeted professional development have on early childhood ed- ucators’ planning and implementation of STEM instruction? Participants of the study were, thirteen white, English-speaking females, working in Head Start programs as preschool classroom teachers (54%) or managers/coaches supporting preschool class- room teachers (46%) in the same midwestern state. Most participants fell within the 26 –to-35- year age range (54%), with 31% of the participants in the 36-to-45-year age range. All participants held a bachelor’s degree and for the majority (77%), the degree was in early childhood education (ECE). Those without a bachelor’s degree in ECE had de- grees in related fields (e.g., elementary education, social services).  On average, participants had sev- en years of experience working directly with pre- school-age children (e.g., ages 3-5) with a range of 3 to 17 years of experience. The participants were enrolled in the same online graduate-level STEM courses and engaged in an ongoing, collaborative STEM project at a midwestern university. The proj- ect provided a cohort model of instruction with on- line graduate courses over a span of one year: two with early STEM concentration, one math, and one specific to deeper understanding of developmen- tally appropriate practices in ECE. A multiple methods research design involv- ing two sources of information (e.g. a pre- and post-survey and ten monthly self-reflection logs) was used to gather information about participants’ behaviors and self-efficacies associated with plan- RTP EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR SELF-EFFICACY The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 106 -ning and implementing early STEM instruction for preschool-age children. Key Findings  EC educator confidence levels across all four disciplines (i.e., science, technology, engineering, math) increased from pre-survey to post-survey, with a statistically significant difference in the overall survey means (M = 3.3; M = 4.3). The re- sults from the pre-survey (M = 3.3, SD = 0.5) and post-survey (M = 4.3 SD = 0.5) indicate that the participants’ self-efficacies for early STEM changed, t = 25.71, p <.0.0001. Data from the EC educator self-reflection logs revealed six common themes including: 1) Im- plementation of Early STEM Activities, 2) Child Responsiveness, 3) Educator Growth, 4) Educator Responsiveness, 5) Sharing with Colleagues, and 6) Hands-on Exploration. The themes are summa- rized in order of frequency mentioned by the par- ticipating EC educators.  Theme 1: Implementation of Early STEM Activi- ties   Participants most frequently described plan- ning and implementing early STEM activities in which young children engineered structures. Ex- amples included children building or creating houses, towers, musical instruments, a sandbox “mud kitchen”, water pipes, and sprout houses to plant seeds. They also described using STEM box- es or bins [kits containing purposefully provided materials] to conduct outdoor explorations. For in- stance, having the children create different-shaped bubble wands with various materials and testing different types of bubble solutions, figuring out how long it took snow to melt, what kind of food ants preferred eating, and building ramps on the playground using different materials to “...zoom matchbox cars down.”  Theme 2: Child Responsiveness  Participants often shared perceptions of how children responded to planned/implemented ear- ly STEM activities, learning environments, and/ or materials. The participants’ self-reflection logs frequently included the words, “fun” and “enjoyed” when describing children’s responses to planned/ implemented early STEM activities. Enjoyment was noted as a motivating factor that led to the preschool-age children asking if they could do the STEM activities again. Some participants men- tioned the preschool-age children wanted to com- plete the STEM challenge more than once, using their imagination to try to improve upon previous attempts. For instance, “Some of them [children] even got excited when their towers fell because they were able to build it better.” The participants reflection logs also described children engaging in STEM activities by working together and interact- ing with one another. Preschoolers used the mate- rials provided, building upon their peers’ ideas and designs as well as asking and answering questions while learning from one another. Theme 3: Educator Growth  Many participants’ self-reflection logs con- tained statements reflecting teacher growth or increased self-efficacy for planning and/or im- plementing early STEM activities. For instance, one shared, “I love how much easier it is getting to implement STEM into day-to-day activities! I see STEM teaching opportunities in places where I hadn’t thought of before.” Other participants shared that although planning STEM activities takes time, they perceived that it was becoming easier and more attainable with practice. Partici- pants frequently reflected on gains in confidence. One shared, “I am feeling that what I have learned has made me a better teacher and supervisor be- cause now I am able to teach my staff as well which makes me proud.” Theme 4: Educator Responsiveness  According to participants’ self-reflection logs, not RTP EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR SELF-EFFICACY “I love how much easier it is getting to implement STEM into day-to- day activities! I see STEM teaching opportunities in places where I hadn’t thought of before.” The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 107 only did the children enjoy the early STEM activ- ities, but many of the EC educators (participants) reported enjoying them as well. For instance, par- ticipants stated: “I am having a blast teaching the [STEM] lessons!” and “Teachers loved the activities because they were easy to follow and kept students engaged in activities.” After implementing STEM activities and seeing the children’s responsiveness, several shared goals for doing the same STEM ac- tivities again but with improvements or adaptations. Many described wanting to modify and adjust the STEM activity for future STEM implementation. For instance, using a “variety of open-ended mate- rials” was mentioned to enhance young children’s engagement. Theme 5: Sharing with Colleagues  Participants described planning to share or sharing information or ideas for early STEM in- struction with other educators, colleagues, and/ or administrators. Several participants described providing early STEM training for colleagues and/ or team members. Connectedly, coaching was fre- quently mentioned as a means of sharing what they learned about early STEM instruction with col- leagues and/or other EC educators. Several partic- ipants had already coached or planned to coach by sharing specific information and/or resources with colleagues and/or EC educators from the STEM college courses they completed during the study. One participant wrote, “I have encouraged a few of my teaching staff to try and use my STEM kit [cre- ated during courses completed as part of the study] in their classroom.”  Theme 6: Hands-on Exploration When self-reflecting upon early STEM imple- mentation, participants often described how pre- school-age children used hands-on materials and manipulatives (i.e., foam pieces, felt, blocks, card- board tubes, rocks, glue, markers, straws, wooden craft sticks, and clay) to build or create structures or models. Several participants’ self-reflection logs included descriptions of children creating shad- ows, shapes, houses, buildings, teeter totters, and snowflakes with varied materials. Other partici- pants described how the children solved a particu- lar problem or challenge using hands-on materials. For instance, after reading a story about the Three Little Pigs, a participant described children using materials to design a house that could withstand the wolf ’s “huffing and puffing.” Others described children using hands-on materials to build sprout houses for planting seeds, designing catapults, cre- ating shadow towers, making a volcano out of a pumpkin, crafting animal habitats, and fashioning musical instruments so they could have, “their very our own little marching band.” Additionally, some participants described preschool-age children en- gaging in open-ended opportunities in which they used hands-on materials to explore and create with minimal constraints or directions. Barriers and/or Challenges to Early STEM In- struction In addition to the six themes, participants’ self-reflection logs revealed perceived barriers and/or challenges related to implementing early STEM activities for preschool-age children. Some participants mentioned being busy or having oth- er job-related priorities as barriers for implement- ing early STEM activities. Participants mentioned duties such as completing child assessments and/ or preparing for supervisory visits. Others noted the time of the year (e.g., early or late in the school year) as being a challenge, which may be due to teacher home visits and/or parent teacher confer- ences. Time constraints were also mentioned due to staff shortages. Another barrier that was noted pertained to weather conditions being “too cold,” “rainy,” or “hot.”  Implications  There are several implications of this study that educational leaders, institutes of higher learn- ing, and educators can consider, particularly when designing PD opportunities designed for EC ed- ucators’ self-efficacies and instructional practices for supporting STEM learning. Suggestions based upon previous research and/ or the results of our study follow. Increasing EC Educators’ Self-efficacy for Early STEM Learning RTP EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR SELF-EFFICACY The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 108 • Create a community of learners by implement- ing a cohort PD model (e.g., groups of educa- tors receiving similar experiences). EC educa- torsare more willing to share and exchange instructional strategies and/or ideas with others when they are confident and feel ‘safe’ doing so. The cohort model is de- signed to increase confidence by providing structure, various levels of support, and opportunities for EC educators to collab- orate and receive formative feedback in a low-stake format. • Tailor PD opportunities to EC educators’ needs (e.g., time requirements, geograph- ical location, workload, resources, funding, and time of year). Provide multiple meet- ing times as well as face-to-face or virtual options for cohort meetings and/ or one- one coaching.   • Design purposeful, ongoing, and inter- connected PD opportunities connected to personal teaching practice and/ or instruc- tional settings (i.e., preschool educators, instructional coaches, and program direc- tors) to increase content and pedagogical knowledge (Desimone, 2009; McClure et al., 2017).    • Encourage EC educators to engage in on- going self-evaluation and goal setting through use of reflection logs, videos, dis- cussions with colleagues, and other like methods. • Empower EC educators to engage as edu- cational leaders through opportunities to facilitate early STEM PD activities for their teaching teams/colleagues including op- portunities to rehearse, analyze, reflect on instructional practices, and set goals (Sara- ma et al., 2018). Increasing EC Educators’ Planning and Im- plementation of Early STEM Learning  • Align PD with EC educators’ educational settings, allowing for purposefully  plan- ning and implementation of early STEM, meeting the specific needs of the young children they serve. • Identify and address potential barriers and challenges to EC educators’ early STEM implementation (e.g., workload, resources, and busy times of the year). • For outdoor early STEM implementation, consider solutions and resources for chal- lenges related to predictable weather con- ditions (e.g., heat, cold, wind, rain, snow). • Support EC educators’ planning and im- plementation of early STEM activities in which young children simultaneously in- corporate many of the STEM disciplines (e.g., Science,  Technology,  Engineering, and Mathematics).  • Support EC educators’ planning and im- plementation of early STEM activities in which young children investigate and/ or solve phenomenon-based, real-world problems (Sarama et al., 2018). Conclusion  It is essential that EC educators consider how STEM knowledge, skills and experienc- es may impact school readiness and future career choices of young children. In addition, EC educators should self-reflect on their own knowledge, skills, and dispositions for sup- porting early STEM, setting short-term and long-term PD goals toward increased self-effi- cacy. EC educators, particularly those provid- ing care and education to Head Start children, often at higher risk of school failure, need to be well prepared and supported in providing developmentally appropriate and purposefully designed early STEM activities. Preparing the future STEM workforce is not only important for meeting the increased STEM workforce demands, but it can provide pathways toward financial stability through higher compensa- tion and benefits often associated with STEM careers. RTP EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR SELF-EFFICACY The Dialog: A Journal for Inclusive Early Childhood Professionals 109 References Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84. https://doi. org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive de- velopment and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3 Blonder, R., & Vescio, V. (2022). Professional Learning Communities Across Science Teachers’ Careers: The Importance of Differentiating Learning. Handbook of Re- search on Science Teacher Education, 300-312. https://doi. org/10.4324/9781003098478-26 Bureau of Labor Statistics, special tabulations (2020) of the 2019–29 Employment Projections. Science and Engineering Indicators. Chen, Y. L., Huang, L. F., & Wu, P. C. (2021). Preservice preschool teachers’ self-efficacy in and need for STEM education professional development: STEM pedagogical belief as a mediator. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49, 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-020-01055-3 Cudney, E. A., & Ezzell, J. M. (2017). Evaluating the impact of teaching methods on student motivation. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 18(1). https://www. jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/2197 Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving Impact Studies of Teachers’ Professional Development: Toward Better Con- ceptualizations and Measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140 Gerde, H. K., Pierce, S. J., Lee, K., & Van Egeren, L. A. (2018). Early childhood educators’ self- efficacy in sci- ence, math, and literacy instruction and science practice in the classroom. Early Education and Development, 29(1), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2017.1360127 Lange, A. A., Brenneman, K., & Mano, H. (2019). Teaching STEM in the preschool classroom: Exploring big ideas with 3-to 5-year-olds. Teachers College Press. McClure, E., Guernsey, L., Clements, D., Bales, S., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. (2017). How to inte- grate STEM into early childhood education. Science and Children, 55(2), 8-10. https://www.nsta.org/science-and-chil- dren#tab Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 35-60). Purdue University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wq7bh.7 National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) & National Council of Teaching Mathematics (NCTM). (2010). Early childhood mathematics: Promoting good beginnings (A joint position statement). Washington, DC. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/ downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/psmath.pdf National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) & The Fred Rogers Institute. (2012). Technology and interactive media as tools in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (A joint position statement). Washington, DC. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/ default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/posi- tion-statements/ps_technology.pdf National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academy Press. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/ catalog/10019/knowing-what-students-know-the-science- and-design-of-educational Penuel, W. & Bell, P. 2016. Qualities of a good anchor phenomenon for a coherent sequence of science lessons. STEM Teaching Tools initiative, Institute for Science + Math Education. Seattle, WA: University of Washington. Retrieved from http://stemteachingtools.org/brief/28 Sarama, J., Clements, D., Nielsen, N., Blanton, M., Romance, N., Hoover, M., Staudt, C., Baroody, A., McWayne, C., and McCulloch, C., (2018). Considerations for STEM education from PreK through grade 3. MA: Education Development Center, Inc. https://cadrek12.org/sites/default/files/DRK12- Early-STEM-Learning-Brief.pdf Stipek, D. (2017). Playful math instruction in the context of standards and accountability. Young Children, 72(3), 8-13. https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/jul2017/play- ful-math-instruction-standards Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language-Revised edi- tion. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Zee, M., & Koomen, H. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjust- ment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801 RTP EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR SELF-EFFICACY https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003098478-26 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003098478-26 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-020-01055-3 https://www.jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/2197 https://www.jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/2197 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140 https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2017.1360127 https://www.nsta.org/science-and-children#tab https://www.nsta.org/science-and-children#tab http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wq7bh.7 https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/psmath.pdf https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/psmath.pdf https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/ps_technology.pdf https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/ps_technology.pdf https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/position-statements/ps_technology.pdf https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/10019/knowing-what-students-know-the-science-and-design-of-educational https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/10019/knowing-what-students-know-the-science-and-design-of-educational https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/10019/knowing-what-students-know-the-science-and-design-of-educational http://stemteachingtools.org/brief/28 https://cadrek12.org/sites/default/files/DRK12-Early-STEM-Learning-Brief.pdf https://cadrek12.org/sites/default/files/DRK12-Early-STEM-Learning-Brief.pdf https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/jul2017/playful-math-instruction-standards https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/jul2017/playful-math-instruction-standards https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801