This dissertation was an exploratory investigation of four institutions STEM endorsement programs. The investigation was done in three separate qualitative studies that explored each institution's staff and faculty views on developing and implementing their STEM endorsement programs, the views of faculty who developed and taught a STEM methods course or a methods course for the STEM endorsement program, and the views of alumni who graduated with a STEM endorsement. In order to strengthen integrated STEM education, Honey et al., (2014) called for integrated STEM research that would provide detailed documentation of the nature of an integrated STEM program, its curriculum, its methods, and how the program was supported. This dissertation was an effort to answer that call and specifically look at how higher education teacher preparation programs are preparing teachers to teach integrated STEM in the classroom. The first study described how four institution's STEM endorsement programs developed their program, how they have structured their program, and why they chose to structure their program in this way. The participants were the faculty overseeing, developing, and/or leading the STEM endorsement programs and provided multiple data sources which included, survey responses, semi-structured interviews, and digital documents (e.g., program descriptions, program outlines, course syllabi, etc.). Analysis of the data was both within each institution and across the institutions to determine the commonalities and differences of the STEM endorsement programs. Across institutions, each STEM endorsement program offered one integrated STEM course while the other methods courses were focused on single disciplines. Each STEM endorsement program had oversight from one or two vested faculty which may have caused the different rationales to center on the participants own background. Increased collaboration and the use of a STEM advisory committee are recommended for future STEM endorsement programs. The second study involved analyzing multiple data sources from the faculty members who teach a methods course within a STEM endorsement program. Faculty's views on their methods course included the structure of their course, what instructional strategies they use to teach the concepts of their course, and the rationale for the decisions around their course within a STEM endorsement program. Analysis across the four institutions showed all faculty participants utilized reflective and collaborative instructional strategies. However, each institutions' methods courses for STEM endorsement rationales differed based on the faculty's background. More cross-discipline integration within methods courses could support teacher's ability to navigate and implement integrated STEM education. The third study focused on teachers who completed the STEM endorsement requirements in two of the four institutions of the previous studies and were currently full-time teachers in a K-12 classroom. The teachers provided multiple data sources about how they described their STEM preparation program and how they are enacting their integrated STEM education in their current teaching position. Teacher participant's experiences swayed their views on key components of the program, but all participants expressed satisfaction with the STEM endorsement program. Although participants did not describe specific integrated STEM experiences in their program courses, they reported integration of STEM disciplines within their classroom. The combination of these three studies showed a progression from a broad overview of the STEM endorsement programs, to methods course for STEM endorsement in the program and finally to a particular outcome of that program through the views of teacher-graduates. Such a comprehensive look at one state's entire integrated STEM teacher preparation efforts is unprecedented. The results found here will help inform institutions who currently have their own version of integrated STEM programs and institutions who are looking to develop one. The findings of this research also helped to answer the call Honey set forth in 2014 to broaden the research related to integrated STEM education in the literature. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]