Peruvian students demonstrate poor performance results in math, science and reading. Critical thinking and significative learning is avoided or rarely infused in the classroom. Teachers are content-oriented, and it is pretended that all students learn the same material at the same time, ignoring individual interest and motivations. Also, the national curriculum ignores cultural diversity and particular necessities in each town and city. Moreover, there is a strong rivalry among schools and low cooperation among teachers of the same school. The Internet features plenty of resources for engineering education. Also, there is low-cost hardware and free software for a variety of engineering projects in the K-12 level.

This paper describes a framework for an integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education approach considering the current context in the Peruvian education system. An ad-hoc methodology was used to promote students interest in engineering by developing extracurricular workshops with an emphasis in electronic engineering, computer science, and physics experiments. We described some engineering workshops and computer programs developed along many years, including a simulator that is being used around the world for logic circuit design. In our experience, building interests in science and engineering can be addressed with extracurricular workshops in an informal setting. We think we must persist in STEM education by reaching all interested teachers and students.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do – Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science (Volume I). OECD, 2013. www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-volume-I.pdf .
  2. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Committee on Conceptual Framework for the New K-12 Science Education Standards; National Research Council. 2012;. www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id = 13165.
  3. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. NGSS Lead States. 2013. www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id = 18290 .
  4. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. National Academy of Engineering. 2004. www.nap.edu/catalog/10999.html .
  5. Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. Committee on the Engineer of 2020, Phase II, Committee on Engineering Education, National Academy of Engineering. 2005. www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id = 11338 .
  6. Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. Linda Katehi, Greg Pearson, and Michael Feder, Editors; Committee on K-12 Engineering Education; National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. 2009. www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id = 12635 .
  7. MIT OpenCourseWare: Highlights for High School, http://ocw.mit.edu/high-school .
  8. Stanford K-12 Education, http://dschool.stanford.edu/k-12-lab .
  9. U.C. Berkeley Physics Lecture Demonstrations, www.mip.berkeley.edu/physics/physics.html .
  10. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. www.nap.edu/catalog/9853.html .
  11. Simulador de circuitos digitales, www.tourdigital.net/SimuladorTTLconEscenarios.htm .

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error