Research Article

Investigating perceptions of primary and preschool educators regarding incorporation of educational robotics into STEM education

Leonidas Gavrilas 1 * , Konstantinos T. Kotsis 1
More Detail
1 Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, GREECE* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 5(1), 2024, ep24003, https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/14384
Published: 22 March 2024
OPEN ACCESS   356 Views   350 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

STEM education integrates an interdisciplinary pedagogical model that includes rigorous scientific principles across the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics into realistic problem-solving exercises oriented toward real-world challenges, incorporating educational robotics. For the successful integration of quality STEM education, it is crucial to comprehend the perceptions of educators. This study aims to investigate the perception of primary and preschool educators regarding the incorporation of educational robotics into STEM education and the factors that influence their convictions. The research involved 307 (n=307) pre-service teachers. Data collection was carried out using a closed-ended questionnaire with a reliability coefficient of Cronbach’s alpha=.885. It was observed that the respondents largely hold a highly positive attitude regarding the incorporation of educational robotics into STEM, recognizing its fundamental principles while simultaneously acknowledging the need for professional development in this domain. STEM-related courses attended by educators influence their perspectives to a certain degree, while no correlation was found with gender or specialization.
Keywords: STEM education, educational robotics, perceptions, pre-service teachers, preschool education

CITATION (APA)

Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2024). Investigating perceptions of primary and preschool educators regarding incorporation of educational robotics into STEM education. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 5(1), ep24003. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/14384

REFERENCES

  1. Abdurrahman, Ariyani, F., Achmad, A., & Nurulsari, N. (2019). Designing an inquiry-based STEM learning strategy as a powerful alternative solution to enhance students’ 21st-century skills: A preliminary research. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1155, 012087. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1155/1/012087
  2. Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference. Future of Learning Group Publication, 5(3), 438.
  3. Affouneh, S., Salha, S., Burgos, D., Khlaif, Z. N., Saifi, A. G., Mater, N., & Odeh, A. (2020). Factors that foster and deter STEM professional development among teachers. Science Education, 104(5), 857-872. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21591
  4. Al-Balushi, S. M., Martin-Hansen, L., & Song, Y. (Eds.). (2023). Reforming science teacher education programs in the STEM era: International and comparative perspectives. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27334-6
  5. Allen, K. C. (2013). Robots bring math-powered ideas to life. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 18(6), 340-347. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacmiddscho.18.6.0340
  6. Amaran, S., Sahinidis, N. V., Sharda, B., & Bury, S. J. (2016). Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications. Annals of Operations Research, 240(1), 351-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-2019-x
  7. Ansberry, K., & Morgan, E. (2019). Teaching teachers: Seven myths of STEM. Science and Children, 56(6), 64-67. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc19_056_06_64
  8. Anwar, S., Bascou, N., Menekse, M., & Kardgar, A. (2019). A systematic review of studies on educational robotics. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 9(2), 2. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1223
  9. Arocena, I., Huegun-Burgos, A., & Rekalde-Rodriguez, I. (2022). Robotics and education: A systematic review. TEM Journal, 11(1), 379-387. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM111-48
  10. Asghar, A., Ellington, R., Rice, E., Johnson, F., & Prime, G. (2012). Supporting STEM education in secondary science contexts. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1349
  11. Asunda, P. A. (2012). Standards for technological literacy and STEM education delivery through career and technical education programs. Journal of Technology Education, 23(2), 44-60. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v23i2.a.3
  12. Attard, C., Berger, N., & Mackenzie, E. (2021). The positive influence of inquiry-based learning teacher professional learning and industry partnerships on student engagement with STEM. Frontiers in Education, 6, 693221. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.693221
  13. Bas, G., Kubiatko, M., & Sunbul, A. M. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions towards ICTs in teaching-learning process: Scale validity and reliability study. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 176-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.022
  14. Bell, D. (2016). The reality of STEM education, design, and technology teachers’ perceptions: A phenomenographic study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9300-9
  15. Bertacchini, F., Scuro, C., Pantano, P., & Bilotta, E. (2022). A project based learning approach for improving students’ computational thinking skills. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.720448
  16. Blessinger, P., & Carfora, J. M. (2015). Inquiry-based learning for science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programs: A conceptual and practical resource for educators. In Inquiry-based learning for science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programs: A conceptual and practical resource for educators (innovations in higher education teaching and learning (pp. i). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120150000004021
  17. Brawner, B. (2015). Multidisciplinary project-based learning in STEM: A case study. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Technology in Collegiate Mathematics (pp. 101-109). ICTCM.
  18. Bruce-Davis, M. N., Gubbins, E. J., Gilson, C. M., Villanueva, M., Foreman, J. L., & Rubenstein, L. D. (2014). STEM high school administrators’, teachers’, and students’ perceptions of curricular and instructional strategies and practices. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(3), 272-306. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X14527952
  19. Bruner, J. S. (1977). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
  20. Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press.
  21. Cavas, B., Cavas, P., Karaoglan, B., & Kisla, T. (2009). A study on science teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies in education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 20-32.
  22. Chesky, N. Z., & Wolfmeyer, M. R. (2015). Philosophy of STEM education. Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137535467
  23. Costa, M. C., Domingos, A. M. D., Teodoro, V. D., & Vinhas, É. M. R. G. (2022). Teacher professional development in STEM education: An integrated approach with real-world scenarios in portugal. Mathematics, 10(21), 3944. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10213944
  24. Coufal, P. (2022). Project-based STEM learning using educational robotics as the development of student problem-solving competence. Mathematics, 10(23), 4618. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10234618
  25. Crippen, K. J., & Antonenko, P. D. (2018). Designing for collaborative problem-solving in STEM cyberlearning. In Y. J. Dori, Z. R. Mevarech, & D. R. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education: Learning, teaching and assessment (pp. 89-116). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4_5
  26. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
  27. Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. Thorndike (Eds.), Educational measurement. American Council on Education.
  28. Curtis, T. (2014). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education: Trends and alignment with workforce needs. Nova Publishers.
  29. Dare, E. A., Keratithamkul, K., Hiwatig, B. M., & Li, F. (2021). Beyond content: The role of STEM disciplines, real-world problems, 21st century skills, and STEM careers within science teachers’ conceptions of integrated STEM education. Education Sciences, 11(11), 737. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110737
  30. Darmawansah, D., Hwang, G.-J., Chen, M.-R. A., & Liang, J.-C. (2023). Trends and research foci of robotics-based STEM education: A systematic review from diverse angles based on the technology-based learning model. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00400-3
  31. Dewanti, B. A., Santoso, A., & Septaria, K. (2021). Assessment of critical thinking skills in STEM-based science learning through project assignments. In Proceedings of the 6th International Seminar on Science Education. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210326.119
  32. Durbin, E. (2022). The advantages of robotics in early childhood education and how to integrate robotics in the school curriculum and the library. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4279992
  33. Ejiwale, J. A. (2013). Barriers to successful implementation of STEM education. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(2), 63-74. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v7i2.220
  34. Erdogan, N., & Stuessy, C. (2016). Examining the role of inclusive STEM schools in the college and career readiness of students in the United States: A multi-group analysis on the outcome of student achievement. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(6), 1517-1529.
  35. Estivill-Castro, V. (2020). Inviting teachers to use educational robotics to foster mathematical problem-solving. In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, G. Koppensteiner, R. Balogh, & D. Obdržálek (Eds.), Robotics in education (pp. 248-261). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_22
  36. Ferreira, D. J., Ambrósio, A. P. L., & Melo, T. F. N. (2018a). Application of real-world problems in computer science education: Teachers’ beliefs, motivational orientations and practices. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 14(3), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.2018070102
  37. Ferreira, D. J., Ambrósio, A. P., Nogueira, T., Ullmann, M. R. D., & Melo, T. F. N. (2018b). Students’ perceptions of applying real-world problem solving in computer science education: Case study in interaction design. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 1-8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8658458
  38. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2010). Curriculum design for inquiry: Preservice elementary teachers’ mobilization and adaptation of science curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 820-839. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20379
  39. Galanouli, D., Murphy, C., & Gardner, J. (2004). Teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of ICT-competence training. Computers & Education, 43(1), 63-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.005
  40. García-Carrillo, C., Greca, I. M., & Fernández-Hawrylak, M. (2021). Teacher perspectives on teaching the STEM approach to educational coding and robotics in primary education. Education Sciences, 11(2), 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020064
  41. Gavrilas, L. (2019). Future preschool and primary school teachers perceptions about educational robotics and STEM [Postgraduate dissertation, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece]. https://doi.org/10.26268/heal.uoi.481
  42. Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). Assessing elementary understanding of electromagnetic radiation and its implementation in wireless technologies among pre-service teachers. International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2309. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/13191
  43. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2022a). Attitudes and Behaviors of University Students Towards Electromagnetic Radiation of Cell Phones and Wireless Networks. Aquademia, 6(2), ep22009. https://doi.org/10.30935/aquademia/12393
  44. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2022b). Gender Differences in Attitudes and Behaviors Associated with Electromagnetic Radiation of Mobile Phones and Wireless Networks. International Journal of Educational Innovation, 4(5), 25-37. https://journal.eepek.gr/assets/uploads/manuscripts/manuf_672_Ex8aVQhIOe.pdf
  45. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2024a). Assessing teacher readiness for educational robotics integration in primary and preschool education. Education 3-13, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2023.2300699
  46. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2024b). Exploration of the prospective utilization of educational robotics by preschool and primary education teachers. Pedagogical Research, 9(1), em0181. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/14049
  47. Gavrilas, L., Plakitsi, K., & Kotsis K.T. (2020). Perceptions and attitudes of preschool and primary education teachers towards educational robotics and STEM. In K. Plakitsi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Panhellenic Conference, Physical Sciences in Preschool Education: Mapping the New Twenty Years of Research and Teaching Practice (pp. 679-701). Ioannina, Greece.
  48. Gontas, P., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2020). The impact of gender on university students’ perceptions about renewable energy sources. Science Teaching: Research and Praxis, 74-75, 9-24.
  49. Gonzales, M., Andal, E., Ching, D., Gaffud, M., & Tabo, E. (2021). Assessing the efficacy of roboteach extension project on public school teachers. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 2(3), 78-100. https://doi.org/10.53378/348742
  50. Gonzalez, H. B. & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf
  51. Gulen, S. (2019). The effect of STEM education roles on the solution of daily life problems. Participatory Educational Research, 6(2), 37-50. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.19.11.6.2
  52. Gura, M. (2012). Lego robotics: STEM sport of the mind. Learning & Leading with Technology, 40(1), 12-16.
  53. Hakim, L. L., Sulatri, Y., Mudrikah, A., & Ahmatika, D. (2019). STEM project-based learning models in learning mathematics to develop 21st century skills. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Science and Technology for the Internet of Things (pp. 1-6). ICSTI. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.19-10-2018.2281357
  54. Hallström, J., & De Vries, M. J. (2024). Programming and computational thinking in technology education: Swedish and international perspectives. BRILL. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004687912
  55. Harlen, W. (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Association for Science Education.
  56. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
  57. Hue, L. T., Tuyet, V. T., & Ninh, T. T. (2020). Developing the ability to apply knowledge and skills for students under STEM education. American Journal of Educational Research, 8(5), 340-346.
  58. Hughes, C. E., Dieker, L. A., Glavey, E. M., Hines, R. A., Wilkins, I., Ingraham, K., Bukaty, C. A., Ali, K., Shah, S., Murphy, J., & Taylor, M. S. (2022). RAISE: Robotics & AI to improve STEM and social skills for elementary school students. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2022.968312
  59. Ibrahim, M. F., Huddin, A. B., Hashim, F. H., Abdullah, M., Abd Rahni, A. A., Mustaza, S. M., Hussain, A., & Zaman, M. H. M. (2020). Strengthening programming skills among engineering students through experiential learning based robotics project. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(4), 939. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20653
  60. Jackson, C., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Bush, S. B., Maiorca, C., Roberts, T., Yost, C., & Fowler, A. (2021). Equity-oriented conceptual framework for K-12 STEM literacy. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00294-z
  61. Jerrim, J., Oliver, M., & Sims, S. (2019). The relationship between inquiry-based teaching and students’ achievement. New evidence from a longitudinal PISA study in England. Learning and Instruction, 61, 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.12.004
  62. Ješková, Z., Lukáč, S., Šnajder, Ľ., Guniš, J., Klein, D., & Kireš, M. (2022). Active learning in STEM education with regard to the development of inquiry skills. Education Sciences, 12(10), 686. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100686
  63. John, D., Chen, Y., Navaee, S., & Gao, W. (2018). Board 57: STEM education from the industry practitioners’ perspective. In Proceedings of the 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--30062
  64. Jung, S. E., & Won, E. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability, 10(4), 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905
  65. Jurdak, M. (2016). STEM education as a context for real-world problem solving. In M. Jurdak (Eds.), Learning and teaching real world problem solving in school mathematics: A multiple-perspective framework for crossing the boundary (pp. 151-163). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_10
  66. Just, J., & Siller, H.-S. (2022). The role of mathematics in STEM secondary classrooms: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 12(9), 629. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090629
  67. Karan, E. (2023). Discovery-based approach combined with active learning to improve student learning experiences for STEM students. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 11(4), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v11i4.6205
  68. Kartal, B., & Basarmak, U. (2022). Preservice computer science teachers’ beliefs, motivational orientations, and teaching practices. Educational Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2022.2069461
  69. Kelana, J. B., Wardani, D. S., Firdaus, A. R., Altaftazani, D. H., & Rahayu, G. D. S. (2020). The effect of STEM approach on the mathematics literacy ability of elementary school teacher education students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1657(1), 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1657/1/012006
  70. Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International, 25(3), 246-258.
  71. Kerimbayev, N., Nurym, N., Akramova, A., & Abdykarimova, S. (2023). Educational robotics: Development of computational thinking in collaborative online learning. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 14987-15009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11806-5
  72. Kim, J., Liao, Y.-C., Guo, M., Karlin, M., & Leftwich, A. (2022). Why should we be integrating computer science into the elementary curriculum?: Computer science teachers’ perceptions and practices. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 1426-1426). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3545947.3576370
  73. Lachapelle, C. P., Cunningham, C. M., Jocz, J., Kay, A. E., Phadnis, P., Wertheimer, J., & Arteaga, R. (2011). Engineering is elementary: An evaluation of years 4 through 6 field testing. Museum of Science.
  74. Lee, Y.-F., & Lee, L.-S. (2022). Status and trends of STEM education in highly competitive countries: Country reports and international comparison. Technological and Vocational Education Research Center.
  75. Lehman, J. D., Kim, W., & Harris, C. (2014). Collaborations in a community of practice working to integrate engineering design in elementary science education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 15(3), 21-28.
  76. Lesseig, K., Nelson, T. H., Slavit, D., & Seidel, R. A. (2016). Supporting middle school teachers’ implementation of STEM design challenges: Middle school STEM design challenges. School Science and Mathematics, 116(4), 177-188. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12172
  77. Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y., & Froyd, J. E. (2020). Research and trends in STEM education: A systematic review of journal publications. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6
  78. Lunenberg, M., Dengerink, J., & Korthagen, F. (2014). The professional teacher educator: Roles, behavior, and professional development of teacher educators. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-518-2
  79. Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2
  80. McComas, W. F. (2014). STEM: Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In W. F. McComas (Eds.), The language of science education: An expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning (pp. 102-103). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-497-0_92
  81. McGowan, V. C., & Bell, P. (2020). Engineering education as the development of critical sociotechnical literacy. Science & Education, 29(4), 981-1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00151-5
  82. McMullin, K., & Reeve, E. (2014). Identifying perceptions that contribute to the development of successful project lead the way pre-engineering programs in Utah. Journal of Technology Education, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v26i1.a.2
  83. Milaturrahmah, N., Mardiyana, M., & Pramudya, I. (2017). Mathematics learning process with science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) approach in Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895(1), 012030. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012030
  84. Mohd Najib, S. A., Mahat, H., & Baharudin, N. H. (2020). The level of STEM knowledge, skills, and values among the students of bachelor’s degree of education in geography. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1), 69. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i1.20416
  85. Mohd Shahali, E. H., Halim, L., Rasul, M. S., Osman, K., & Zulkifeli, M. A. (2016). STEM learning through engineering design: Impact on middle secondary students’ interest towards STEM. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(5), 1189-1211. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00667a
  86. Morrison, J. (2006). TIES STEM education monograph series: Attributes of STEM education. TIES.
  87. Mury, S. R., Negrini, L., Assaf, D., & Skweres, M. (2022). How to support teachers to carry out educational robotics activities in school? The case of Roteco, the Swiss robotic teacher community. Frontiers in Education, 7, 968675. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.968675
  88. Mwalongo, A. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions about ICTs for teaching, professional development, administration, and personal use. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 7(3), 36-49.
  89. Mwangi, P. N., Muriithi, C. M., & Agufana, P. B. (2022). Exploring the benefits of educational robots in STEM learning: A systematic review. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 11(6), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.f3646.0811622
  90. Nadelson, L. S., & Seifert, A. (2013). Perceptions, engagement, and practices of teachers seeking professional development in place-based integrated STEM. Teacher Education and Practice, 26(2), 242-265.
  91. Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.667014
  92. National Governors Association. (2007). Innovation America: Building a science, technology, engineering and math agenda. National Governors Association.
  93. National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12190
  94. Negrini, L. (2020). Teachers’ attitudes towards educational robotics in compulsory school. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/1136
  95. Negrini, L., Giang, C., Bonaiuti, G., Cascalho, J. M., Primo, T. T., & Eteokleous, N. (2023). Educational robotics as a tool to foster 21st century skills. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1186029. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1186029
  96. Norman, P. D. (2022). Elaborating the effectiveness of collaborative learning experiences on students’ engagement and social & academic success in public school STEM education. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4282015
  97. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
  98. Nur Basyir, R., Rahayu, W., & Yatima, D. (2018). Influence of learning model based on project and inquiry is leading to skin literature ability based on learning in basic school (experimental study by applying STEM-based learning). American Journal of Educational Research, 6(7), 1029-1032. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-6-7-21
  99. Ouyang, F., & Xu, W. (2024). The effects of educational robotics in STEM education: A multilevel meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00469-4
  100. Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Gözüm, A. İ. C. (2022). STEM, STEAM, computational thinking, and coding: Evidence-based research and practice in children’s development. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1110476. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1110476
  101. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. (2023). Enhancing the understanding of preschool-age students regarding water pollution through educational intervention. In G. Stylos, & K. Kotsis (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th Panhellenic Conference on the Teaching of Natural Sciences and New Technologies in Education. https://doi.org/10.12681/codiste.5570
  102. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Gavrilas, L., & Plakitsi, K. (2020). Development of environmental consciousness among preschool students through distance learning. In K. Plakitsi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Panhellenic Conference, Physical Sciences in Preschool Education: Mapping the New Twenty Years of Research and Teaching Practice (pp. 1059-1082).
  103. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Plakitsi, K., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Investigating preschool students’ ideas for science concepts on understanding modern environmental problems. In I. Boikos, K. Stefanidou, K. Tsalapati, & K. Skordoulis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Panhellenic Conference on the Teaching of Natural Sciences and New Technologies in Education: The Role of Science Education in 21st Century Society. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.33312.15369
  104. Papert S., & Harel, I. (1990). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel (Ed.), Constructionist learning. MIT Media Laboratory.
  105. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children’s computers and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
  106. Park, M.-H., Dimitrov, D. M., Patterson, L. G., & Park, D.-Y. (2017). Early childhood teachers’ beliefs about readiness for teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(3), 275-291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X15614040
  107. Parno, Supriana, E., Widarti, A. N., & Ali, M. (2021). The effectiveness of STEM approach on students’ critical thinking ability in the topic of fluid statics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882(1), 012150. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012150
  108. Paucar-Curasma, R., Cerna-Ruiz, L. P., Acra-Despradel, C., Villalba-Condori, K. O., Massa-Palacios, L. A., Olivera-Chura, A., & Esteban-Robladillo, I. (2023). Development of computational thinking through STEM activities for the promotion of gender equality. Sustainability, 15(16), 12335. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612335
  109. Phillips, J. A., McCallum, J. E., Clemmer, K. W., & Zachariah, T. M. (2016). A problem-solving framework to assist students and teachers in STEM courses. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst17_046_04_33
  110. Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271225
  111. Polgampala, A. S. V., Shen, H., & Huang, F. (2017). STEM teacher education and professional development and training: Challenges and trends. American Journal of Applied Psychology, 6(5), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajap.20170605.12
  112. Purwaningsih, E., Sari, S. P., Sari, A. M., & Suryadi, A. (2020). The effect of STEM-PjBL and discovery learning on improving students’ problem-solving skills of impulse and momentum topic. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia [Indonesian Science Education Journal], 9(4), 465-476. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i4.26432
  113. Qasem, A. A., & Viswanathappa, G. (2016). The teachers’ perception towards ICT integration: Professional development through blended learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 561-575.
  114. Rahman, S. M. M. (2021). Assessing and benchmarking learning outcomes of robotics-enabled STEM education. Education Sciences, 11(2), 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020084
  115. Rakhmanina, A., Pinchuk, I., Vyshnyk, O., Tryfonova, O., Koycheva, etyana, Sydorko, V., & Ilienko, O. (2022). The usage of robotics as an element of STEM education in the educational process. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 22(5), 645-651. https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2022.22.5.90
  116. Rao, L. N., & Jalil, H. A. (2021). A survey on acceptance and readiness to use robot teaching technology among primary school science teachers. Asian Social Science, 17(11), 115. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v17n11p115
  117. Sahin, A. (2013). STEM project-based learning. In R. M. Capraro, M. M. Capraro, & J. R. Morgan (Eds.), STEM project-based learning: An integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach (pp. 59-64). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-143-6_7
  118. Samara, V., & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). The use of new technologies and robotics (STEM) in the teaching of sciences in primary education: The concept of magnetism: A bibliographic review. European Journal of Education Studies, 10(2), 51-64. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v10i2.4652
  119. Sanchez, H., Martínez, L. S., & González, J. D. (2019). Educational robotics as a teaching tool in higher education institutions: A bibliographical analysis. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1391(1), 012128. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1391/1/012128
  120. Scaradozzi, D., Guasti, L., Di Stasio, M., Miotti, B., Monteriù, A., & Blikstein, P. (2021). Makers at school, educational robotics and innovative learning environments: Research and experiences from fablearn italy 2019, in the italian schools and beyond. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77040-2
  121. Schmidt, M., & Fulton, L. (2016). Transforming a traditional inquiry-based science unit into a STEM unit for elementary pre-service teachers: A view from the trenches. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 302-315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9594-0
  122. Simarro, C., & Couso, D. (2021). Engineering practices as a framework for STEM education: A proposal based on epistemic nuances. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00310-2
  123. Singh, M. (2015). Global perspectives on recognizing non-formal and informal learning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15278-3
  124. Slavit, D., Nelson, T. H., & Lesseig, K. (2016). The teachers’ role in developing, opening, and nurturing an inclusive STEM-focused school. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0040-5
  125. Smit, R., Waibel, C., & Schmid, R. (2024). Assisting in a computer science education centre as a field-based internship for pre-service teachers. Computer Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2023.2300554
  126. Smith, K. L., Rayfield, J., & McKim, B. R. (2015). Effective practices in STEM integration: Describing teacher perceptions and instructional method use. Journal of Agricultural Education, 56(4), 183-203. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2015.04183
  127. Smith, K., Maynard, N., Berry, A., Stephenson, T., Spiteri, T., Corrigan, D., Mansfield, J., Ellerton, P., & Smith, T. (2022). Principles of problem-based learning (PBL) in STEM education: Using expert wisdom and research to frame educational practice. Education Sciences, 12(10), 728. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100728
  128. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T., & Roehrig, G. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653
  129. Sukarman, S. S., & Retnawati, H. (2022). Teachers’ barriers in implementing integrated STEM education: A literature review. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2575(1), 050026. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0108059
  130. Surahman, E., & Wang, T.-H. (2023). In-service STEM teachers professional development programmes: A systematic literature review 2018-2022. Teaching and Teacher Education, 135, 104326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104326
  131. Susilo, H., & Sudrajat, A. K. (2020). STEM learning and its barrier in schools: The case of biology teachers in malang city. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1563(1), 012042. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1563/1/012042
  132. Tan, M. (2022). Beyond economic goals for STEM education development in the Asia Pacific. In W. O. Lee, P. Brown, A. L. Goodwin, & A. Green (Eds.), International handbook on education development in Asia-Pacific (pp. 1-20). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2327-1_59-1
  133. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
  134. Texas Education Agency. (2021). K-12 statewide STEM professional development teacher participant guide. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/college-career-and-military-prep/texasstemeducationprogramplanningguidelonestar.pdf
  135. Tindall, T., & Hamil, B. (2004). Gender disparity in science education: The causes, consequences, and solutions. Education, 125(2), 282-296.
  136. UNESCO International Bureau of Education. (2019). Exploring STEM competences for the 21st century. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/notice?id=p::usmarcdef_0000368485
  137. Ursachi, G., Horodnic, I. A., & Zait, A. (2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679-686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00123-9
  138. Van Haneghan, J., Pruet, S., Neal-Waltman, R., & Harlan, J. (2015). Teacher beliefs about motivating and teaching students to carry out engineering design challenges: Some initial data. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 5(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1097
  139. Velychko, V. E., Kaydan, N. V., Fedorenko, O. G., & Kaydan, V. P. (2022). Training of practicing teachers for the application of STEM education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2288(1), 012033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2288/1/012033
  140. Wang, H.-H., Moore, T., Roehrig, G., & Park, M. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 1(2), 2. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314636
  141. Wang, K., Sang, G.-Y., Huang, L.-Z., Li, S.-H., & Guo, J.-W. (2023). The effectiveness of educational robots in improving learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Sustainability, 15(5), 4637. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054637
  142. Whitman, L. E., & Witherspoon, T. L. (2003). Using legos to interest high school students and imtrove k12 STEM education. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2003.1264721
  143. Wilson, S. M. (2011). Effective STEM teacher preparation, induction, and professional development. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=b74e0ec1c94043c2765c17c125e4c0f61cde736f
  144. Xie, Y., Fang, M., & Shauman, K. (2015). STEM Education. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 331-357. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659
  145. Yasar, O., Maliekal, J., Little, L. J., & Jones, D. (2006). A computational technology approach to education. Computing in Science & Engineering, 8(3), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2006.37
  146. Yuliati, L., Parno, Yogismawati, F., & Nisa, I. K. (2018). Building scientific literacy and concept achievement of physics through inquiry-based learning for STEM education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1097, 012022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1097/1/012022
  147. Zhan, Z., & Niu, S. (2023). Subject integration and theme evolution of STEM education in K-12 and higher education research. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10, 781. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02303-8
  148. Zhang, J., Zhou, M., & Zhang, X. (2023). Interventions to promote teachers’ perceptions about STEM education: A meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 28(6), 7355-7390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11492-9
  149. Zhou, X., Shu, L., Xu, Z., & Padrón, Y. (2023). The effect of professional development on in-service STEM teachers’ self-efficacy: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00422-x
  150. Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x