Review Article

Teachers as facilitators and innovators in 21st-century 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, 6(2), July 2025, ep25014, https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/17245
Submitted: 10 February 2025, Published: 08 October 2025
OPEN ACCESS   374 Views   154 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This integrative review examines how teachers function as facilitators and innovators in integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) across early childhood, primary, and secondary schooling and identifies the conditions that enable sustained practice using Greece as an illustrative centralized context. Guided by constructivist sociocultural and communities of practice perspectives, we reviewed peer-reviewed studies and key policy and curriculum documents published from 2010 to 2025, together with earlier foundational works. Sources were coded into teacher roles and enabling conditions and synthesized narratively. We find eight recurring roles that characterize effective STEM teaching, including the shift from transmission to facilitation, the design of authentic and context-rich problems, the scaffolding of inquiry, purposeful integration of technology, cultivation of a growth mindset, sustained professional learning, a commitment to equity and inclusion, and partnership brokering with families, industry, and communities. Enabling conditions include alignment among curriculum, instruction, and assessment, protected collaboration time, and supportive leadership and policy, including rules on teacher assignment. Illustrative enactments include play-based robotics in early childhood data-rich projects in primary classrooms and interdisciplinary co-taught design challenges in secondary settings. Persistent tensions involve crowded timetables, limited moderation of common performance tasks, and technology used as an add-on. We outline system-level levers such as moderated common tasks, professional learning communities, protected time for planning, and clearer policy to practice bridges that can help translate integrated STEM from aspiration to routine classroom practice.
Keywords: integrated STEM education, teacher roles, inquiry-based learning, curriculum alignment, professional learning communities, centralized education systems

CITATION (APA)

Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2025). Teachers as facilitators and innovators in 21st-century STEM education. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 6(2), ep25014. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/17245

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, Article 012087. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1155/1/012087
  2. Alrwaished, N. (2024). Mathematics pre-service teachers’ preparation program for designing STEM-based lesson plans: Enhanced skills and challenges. Cogent Education, 11(1), Article 2320467. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2320467
  3. Anderson, J., & Makar, K. (Eds.). (2024). The contribution of mathematics to school STEM education: Current understandings. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2728-5
  4. Arshad, A. Y. M., & Al, E. (2021). A systematic review: Issues in the implementation of integrated STEM education. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(9), 1124–1133. https://turcomat.org/index.php/turkbilmat/article/view/3418
  5. Aslam, S., Alghamdi, A. A., Abid, N., & Kumar, T. (2023). Challenges in implementing STEM education: Insights from novice STEM teachers in developing countries. Sustainability, 15(19), Article 14455. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914455
  6. 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. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.693221
  7. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2016). Practicing engineering while building with blocks: Identifying engineering thinking. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1120521
  8. Barakat, R. (2022). Science and representation: Examining the role of supplementary STEM education in elementary school students’ science identity. SN Social Sciences, 2(3), Article 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00327-6
  9. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674251083
  10. Burrows, A., Lockwood, M., Borowczak, M., Janak, E., & Barber, B. (2018). Integrated STEM: Focus on informal education and community collaboration through engineering. Education Sciences, 8(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010004
  11. Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. National Science Teachers Association.
  12. Campbell, C., Speldewinde, C., Howitt, C., & MacDonald, A. (2018). STEM practice in the early years. Creative Education, 9(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.91002
  13. Capraro, R. M., & Slough, Scott. W. (2013). Why PBL? Why STEM? Why now? An introduction to 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. 1–5). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-143-6_1
  14. Çelik Kaya, B., & Akyüz, D. (2024). Preservice mathematics teachers’ experiences in designing STEM lessons. Journal of STEAM Education, 7(2), 93–126. https://doi.org/10.55290/steam.1404258
  15. Chacko, P., Appelbaum, S., Kim, H., Zhao, J., & Montclare, J. K. (2015). Integrating technology in STEM education. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 5(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.124
  16. Chesloff, J. D. (2013). STEM education must start in early childhood. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-stem-education-must-start-in-early-childhood/2013/03
  17. Chiu, T. K. F., & Li, Y. (2023). How can emerging technologies impact STEM education? Journal for STEM Education Research, 6(3), 375–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00113-w
  18. Chomphuphra, P., Chaipidech, P., & Yuenyong, C. (2019). Trends and research issues of STEM education: A review of academic publications from 2007 to 2017. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1340, Article 012069. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1340/1/012069
  19. 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), Article 3944. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10213944
  20. Dacumos, L. P. (2023). STEM education and project-based learning: A review article. STEM Education Review, 1. https://doi.org/10.54844/stemer.2023.0385
  21. Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
  22. Daugherty, M. K., & Carter, V. (2018). The nature of interdisciplinary STEM education. In M. J. de Vries (ed.), Handbook of technology education (pp. 159–171). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44687-5_12
  23. DeCoito, I. (2024). STEM education: Curriculum and pedagogy. In I. DeCoito, X. Fazio, & J. Gichuru (Eds.), Global perspectives on STEM education: Theory and practice (pp. 51–72). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60676-2_4
  24. Diana, N., Yohannes, & Sukma, Y. (2021). The effectiveness of implementing project-based learning (PjBL) model in STEM education: A literature review. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882, Article 012146. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012146
  25. Dorotea, N., Piedade, J., & Pedro, A. (2021). Mapping K-12 computer science teacher’s interest, self-confidence, and knowledge about the use of educational robotics to teach. Education Sciences, 11(8), Article 443. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080443
  26. Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books.
  27. English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x
  28. Estapa, A. T., & Tank, K. M. (2017). Supporting integrated STEM in the elementary classroom: A professional development approach centered on an engineering design challenge. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0058-3
  29. Fisher, O. J., Fearnshaw, D., Watson, N. J., Green, P., Charnley, F., McFarlane, D., & Sharples, S. (2024). Promoting equality, diversity and inclusion in research and funding: Reflections from a digital manufacturing research network. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 9(1), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-024-00144-w
  30. Foster, K. M., Bergin, K. B., McKenna, A. F., Millard, D. L., Perez, L. C., Prival, J. T., Rainey, D. Y., Sevian, H. M., VanderPutten, E. A., & Hamos, J. E. (2010). Partnerships for STEM education. Science, 329(5994), 906–907. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1191040
  31. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
  32. Fullan, M. (2013). The new pedagogy: Students and teachers as learning partners. Pearson. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v6i2.601
  33. Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206
  34. Gao, X., Li, P., Shen, J., & Sun, H. (2020). Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), Article 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00225-4
  35. Gardner, K., Glassmeyer, D., & Worthy, R. (2019). Impacts of STEM professional development on teachers’ knowledge, self-efficacy, and practice. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00026
  36. 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), Article ep24003. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/14384
  37. Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2025a). Development and validation of a survey instrument towards attitude, knowledge, and application of educational robotics (AKAER). International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 48(1), 44–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2024.2358780
  38. Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2025b). Integrating learning theories and innovative pedagogies in STEM education: A comprehensive review. Eurasian Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 5(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejsee/16538
  39. Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2025c). The evolution of STEM education and the transition to STEAM/STREAM. Aquademia, 9(1), Article ep25002. https://doi.org/10.29333/aquademia/16313
  40. Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2025d). A theoretical framework for the effective STEM educator: Integrating literacy, knowledge, collaboration, and self-efficacy. Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher, 5(4), Article em085. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/16857
  41. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2024). 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
  42. Gavrilas, L., Papanikolaou, M.-S., & Kotsis, K. T. (2025). Exploring electricity in early childhood education: A 5E-based learning approach. Science Activities, 62(1), 53–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2024.2406208
  43. Geesa, R. L., Stith, K. M., & Teague, G. M. (2020). Integrative STEM education and leadership for student success. In The Palgrave handbook of educational leadership and management discourse (pp. 1–20). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39666-4_36-1
  44. Geiger, V., Beswick, K., Fraser, S., & Holland-Twining, B. (2023). A model for principals’ STEM leadership capability. British Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 900–924. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3873
  45. Gilbert, D., Silverberg, L., LaConte, K., Holland, A., Caspe, M., & Hanebutt, R. (2020). Community STEM collaborations that support children and families. Afterschool Alliance. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED602091
  46. Gontas, P., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Prospective teachers’ perceptions of renewable energy sources. Science and Technology Issues in Education, 14, 37–48.
  47. Goos, M., Carreira, S., & Namukasa, I. K. (2023). Mathematics and interdisciplinary STEM education: Recent developments and future directions. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 55(7), 1199–1217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01533-z
  48. Guan, N. H., Bunyamin, M. A. H., & Khamis, N. (2020). Perspectives of STEM education from physics teachers’ points of view: A quantitative study. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11C), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.082309
  49. Gya, R., & Bjune, A. E. (2021). Taking practical learning in STEM education home: Examples from do-it-yourself experiments in plant biology. Ecology and Evolution, 11(8), 3481–3487. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7207
  50. Harris, C. J., Wiebe, E., Grover, S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2023). Classroom-based STEM assessment: Contemporary issues and perspectives. Education Development Center, Inc.
  51. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  52. Hazzan, O., & Ragonis, N. (2014). STEM teaching as an additional profession for scientists and engineers: The case of computer science education. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 181–186). https://doi.org/10.1145/2538862.2538879
  53. Hite, R., Spott, J., Johnson, L., & Sobehrad, L. (2020). STEM challenge: Two years of community-engaged engineering. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 57–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-12-2019-0080
  54. Hsu, Y.-S., & Fang, S.-C. (2019). Opportunities and challenges of STEM education. In Y.-S. Hsu & Y.-F. Yeh (Eds.), Asia-Pacific STEM teaching practices: From theoretical frameworks to practices (pp. 1–16). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0768-7_1
  55. Imad, M., Reder, M., & Rose, M. (2023). Recasting the agreements to re-humanize STEM education. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1193477
  56. 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), Article 686. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100686
  57. Jones, M., Geiger, V., Falloon, G., Fraser, S., Beswick, K., Holland-Twining, B., & Hatisaru, V. (2024). Learning contexts and visions for STEM in schools. International Journal of Science Education, 47(3), 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2323032
  58. Jones, S. (2016). More than an intervention: Strategies for increasing diversity and inclusion in STEM. Journal for Multicultural Education, 10(2), 234–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-12-2015-0046
  59. Kaleva, S., Pursiainen, J., Hakola, M., Rusanen, J., & Muukkonen, H. (2019). Students’ reasons for STEM choices and the relationship of mathematics choice to university admission. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0196-x
  60. Kang, N.-H. (2019). A review of the effect of integrated STEM or STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) education in South Korea. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0034-y
  61. Kazemnia, A. J., Garg, A., Wang, L. Z., Karikkineth, A. C., & Koldobskiy, D. M. (2023). Enhancing STEM education to communities with low access to STEM resources. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (pp. 238–239). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISEC57711.2023.10402262
  62. Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
  63. Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International, 25(3), 246–258.
  64. Kermani, H., & Aldemir, J. (2015). Preparing children for success: Integrating science, math, and technology in early childhood classroom. Early Child Development and Care, 185(9), 1504–1527. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2015.1007371
  65. Kleinschmit, A. J., Rosenwald, A., Ryder, E. F., Donovan, S., Murdoch, B., Grandgenett, N. F., Pauley, M., Triplett, E., Tapprich, W., & Morgan, W. (2023). Accelerating STEM education reform: Linked communities of practice promote creation of open educational resources and sustainable professional development. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00405-y
  66. Kotsis, K. T. (2025). Optimal STEM educators for elementary school: Students from the primary education vs. Science department. EIKI Journal of Effective Teaching Methods, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.59652/jetm.v3i1.360
  67. Kotsis, K. T., & Gavrilas, L. (2025). Review of scientific literacy of pre-service teachers on electromagnetic radiation. European Journal of Contemporary Education and E-Learning, 3(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.59324/ejceel.2025.3(1).05
  68. Kramer, A., Dringenberg, E., Morris, C., & McCarthy, D. (2023). An intervention to promote growth mindset and STEM self-efficacy of high school students: Exploring the complexity of beliefs. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1355
  69. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
  70. Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366
  71. Limeri, L. B., Carter, N. T., Choe, J., Harper, H. G., Martin, H. R., Benton, A., & Dolan, E. L. (2020). Growing a growth mindset: Characterizing how and why undergraduate students’ mindsets change. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), Article 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00227-2
  72. Lin, K.-Y., Hsiao, H.-S., Williams, P. J., & Chen, Y.-H. (2020). Effects of 6E-oriented STEM practical activities in cultivating middle school students’ attitudes toward technology and technological inquiry ability. Research in Science & Technological Education, 38(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1561432
  73. Liu, J., Zhang, Y., & Chen, L. (2024). Leveraging professional learning communities in linking digital PD to classroom technology integration among STEM teachers. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, Article 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00513-3
  74. Madden, M. E., Baxter, M., Beauchamp, H., Bouchard, K., Habermas, D., Huff, M., Ladd, B., Pearon, J., & Plague, G. (2013). Rethinking STEM education: An interdisciplinary steam curriculum. Procedia Computer Science, 20, 541–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.316
  75. Mantzicopoulos, P., Samarapungavan, A., & Patrick, H. (2009). “We learn how to predict and be a scientist”: Early science experiences and kindergarten children’s social meanings about science. Cognition and Instruction, 27(4), 312–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000903221726
  76. Marshall, A. G., Vue, Z., Palavicino-Maggio, C. B., Neikirk, K., Beasley, H. K., Garza-Lopez, E., Murray, S. A., Martinez, D., Crabtree, A., Conley, Z. C., Vang, L., Davis, J. S., Powell-Roach, K. L., Campbell, S., Brady, L. J., Dal, A. B., Shao, B., Alexander, S., Vang, N., … Hinton, A. (2022). The role of mentoring in promoting diversity equity and inclusion in STEM education and research. Pathogens and Disease, 80(1), Article ftac019. https://doi.org/10.1093/femspd/ftac019
  77. May, V. L., & Lopez, M. (2020). Collaborative leverages business and community resources for transformative approach to STEM education. Connected Science Learning, 2(1), Article 12318753. https://doi.org/10.1080/24758779.2020.12318753
  78. Mayes, R., & Rittschof, K. (2021). Development of interdisciplinary STEM impact measures of student attitudes and reasoning. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.631684
  79. McDaniel, J. (2024). Cultivating a growth mindset in elementary STEM: Lessons and activities for teachers. Kindle.
  80. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED505824
  81. National Research Council. (2000a). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853
  82. National Research Council. (2000b). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596
  83. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
  84. Newton, S. H., Alemdar, M., Gale, J., Hernandez, D., Edwards, D., Ryan, M., Helms, M., & Usselman, M. (2023). Student-centered computing: Teacher experiences in a new introductory computer science curriculum. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 23(4), 39:1–39:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3614101
  85. Nguyen, T. C., Nguyen, T. C., & Nguyen, H. B. (2024). The role of information technology in STEM education. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 10(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.20448/edu.v10i1.5326
  86. Nie, J. (2021). Research on STEM curriculum integration technology. In Proceedings of the 2021 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (pp. 37–42). https://doi.org/10.1109/CSTE53634.2021.00015
  87. OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills 2030. OECD Publishing.
  88. Olatunbosun, B. J., & Nwankwo, C. U. (2024). Professional development for STEM educators: Enhancing teaching effectiveness through continuous learning. International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences, 6(8), 1557–1574. https://doi.org/10.51594/ijarss.v6i8.1370
  89. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Childs, J., Fletcher, C., Kim, J., Edwards, K. M., & Hendrickson, K. (2022). Defining computer science teacher qualification pathways. Policy Futures in Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103221123364
  90. Palid, O., Cashdollar, S., Deangelo, S., Chu, C., & Bates, M. (2023). Inclusion in practice: A systematic review of diversity-focused STEM programming in the United States. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00387-3
  91. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Gavrilas, L. & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). Enhancing pre-school students’ understanding of water pollution through educational intervention. In G. Stylos, & K. T. Kotsis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th Panhellenic Conference on Education in Natural Sciences and Technology. https://doi.org/10.12681/codiste.5570
  92. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Plakitsi, K., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Investigating preschool students’ ideas for science concepts on understanding modern environmental problems. In 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
  93. Pattison, N. P., & Petersen, S. (2021). Powerful partnership: An exploration of the benefits of school-industry partnerships in STEM. Science Education International, 32(4), 384–392. https://doi.org/10.15663/tandc.v21i0.367
  94. Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
  95. Ragan, L. C., & Ramirez Villarin, L. J. (2021). Emergent guiding principles for STEM education. In J. Ryoo, & K. Winkelmann (Eds.), Innovative learning environments in STEM higher education: Opportunities, challenges, and looking forward (pp. 107–119). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58948-6_6
  96. Rahman, N. A., Rosli, R., Rambely, A. S., & Halim, L. (2021). Mathematics teachers’ practices of STEM education: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Educational Research, 1(10), 1541–1559. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.3.1541
  97. Roberts, T., & Roberts, A. C. (2023). Promises and perils of STEM education: Synthesizing teacher, student, & research perceptions. In R. J. Tierney, F. Rizvi, & K. Ercikan (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (pp. 262–269). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.13043-X
  98. Roehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Ring-Whalen, E. A. (2021a). Beyond the basics: A detailed conceptual framework of integrated STEM. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 3, Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00041-y
  99. Roehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E., & Wieselmann, J. R. (2021b). Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00259-8
  100. Roopaei, M., & Klaas, E. (2021). Immersive technology in integrating STEM education. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (pp. 159–164). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISEC52395.2021.9764112
  101. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
  102. Sousa, B. J., & Clark, A. M. (2024). Growth mindsets in academics and academia: A review of influence and interventions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 47(1), 38–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2024.2384003
  103. South Australia Department for Education. (2018). STEM school-industry partnerships: A guide to opportunities, challenges and best practice. Adelaide, AU.
  104. Stohlmann, M. (2022). Growth mindset in K-8 STEM education: A review of the literature since 2007. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202213029
  105. Stone-MacDonald, A., Bartolini, V., Douglass, A., & Love, M. (2011). Focusing a new lens: STEM professional development for early education and care educators and programs. Curriculum and Instruction Faculty Publication Series. https://scholarworks.umb.edu/curriculum_faculty_pubs/4
  106. Su, K.-D., & Chen, H.-Y. (2023). Exploring the learning efficacy of students’ STEM education from the process of hands-on practical experience. In Y.-M. Huang, & T. Rocha (Eds.), Innovative technologies and learning (pp. 421–429). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40113-8_41
  107. Sulaeman, N., Efwinda, S., & Putra, P. D. A. (2022). Teacher readiness in STEM education: Voices of Indonesian physics teachers. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 12(1), Article 68. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1191
  108. Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5
  109. Suman, C. (2023). Cultivating a growth-oriented mindset in educational settings. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.8154508
  110. Surahman, E., & Wang, T.-H. (2023). In-service STEM teachers professional development programmes: A systematic literature review 2018–2022. Teaching and Teacher Education, 135, Article 104326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104326
  111. Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintron, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones II, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., … Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate STEM. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
  112. Triplett, W. J. (2023). Artificial intelligence in STEM education. Cybersecurity and Innovative Technology Journal, 1(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.53889/citj.v1i1.296
  113. Tsakeni, M. (2022). STEM education practical work in remote classrooms: Prospects and future directions in the post-pandemic era. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 5(1), 144–167. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.2022.11
  114. Tytler, R., Anderson, J., & Williams, G. (2023). Exploring a framework for integrated STEM: Challenges and benefits for promoting engagement in learning mathematics. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 55(7), 1299–1313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01519-x
  115. Tytler, R., Williams, G., Hobbs, L., & Anderson, J. (2019). Challenges and opportunities for a STEM interdisciplinary agenda. In B. Doig, J. Williams, D. Swanson, R. Borromeo Ferri, & P. Drake (Eds.), Interdisciplinary mathematics education: The state of the art and beyond (pp. 51–81). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11066-6_5
  116. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  117. Wan, Z. H., English, L., So, W. W. M., & Skilling, K. (2023). STEM integration in primary schools: Theory, implementation and impact. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10401-x
  118. Wan, Z. H., Jiang, Y., & Zhan, Y. (2021). STEM education in early childhood: A review of empirical studies. Early Education and Development, 32(7), 940–962. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2020.1814986
  119. Wang, H.-H., Charoenmuang, M., Knobloch, N. A., & Tormoehlen, R. L. (2020). Defining interdisciplinary collaboration based on high school teachers’ beliefs and practices of STEM integration using a complex designed system. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0201-4
  120. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932
  121. Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
  122. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
  123. Yeager, D. S., Hanselman, P., Walton, G. M., Murray, J. S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., Tipton, E., Schneider, B., Hulleman, C. S., Hinojosa, C. P., Paunesku, D., Romero, C., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Iachan, R., Buontempo, J., Yang, S. M., Carvalho, C. M., … Dweck, C. S. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573(7774), 364–369. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1466-y
  124. Zahara, R., Sulastri, & Syukri, M. (2020). Promoting inquiry-based learning for science, technology, engineering, math (STEM) to enhance students’ creative thinking skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1460, Article 012120. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1460/1/012120