The Role of STEM Education in Teacher Training: A Study on Critical Thinking and Technological Attitudes

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of a short-term STEM education on the cognitive and affective development of pre-service teachers. The variables addressed within the scope of the research include pre-service teachers' critical thinking skills, attitude towards robotic technologies, interest in astronomy and general STEM attitude. The research was conducted with a quantitative method and a quasi-experimental design was adopted. The effect of STEM education was evaluated by analyzing the pre-test, post-test and retention test data administered to the participants after four weeks. In addition, in order to collect qualitative data on the learning experiences of pre-service teachers, written feedbacks were obtained through open-ended questions. According to the results of the study, STEM education provided significant improvement in pre-service teachers' critical thinking skills and attitudes towards robotic technologies. This shows that the applied and problem-based structure of STEM positively affects thinking processes and technological interest level. However, there was no statistically significant difference in variables such as interest in astronomy and general STEM attitude. The findings of the retention test revealed that the gains obtained can be sustained in the short term. Qualitative findings that the participants were able to relate their learning experiences to daily life showed that learning became meaningful. In line with the findings of the research, it is emphasized that STEM education should be structured systematically in teacher training programs, the content should be differentiated specific to branches and the importance of supporting pre-service teachers with applied learning opportunities.

Keywords

• STEM education
• pre-service teachers
• critical thinking
• robotics attitude
• interest in astronomy
• learning retention

STEM Eğitiminin Öğretmen Yetiştirmedeki Rolü: Eleştirel Düşünme ve Teknolojik Tutumlar Üzerine Bir İnceleme

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, STEM eğitiminin öğretmen adaylarının bilişsel ve duyuşsal gelişimleri üzerindekietkisini incelemektir. Araştırma kapsamında ele alınan değişkenler arasında öğretmen adaylarınıneleştirel düşünme becerisi, robotik teknolojilere yönelik tutumu, astronomiye ilgisi ve genel STEMtutumu yer almaktadır. Araştırma, nicel bir yöntemle yürütülmüş ve yarı deneysel desenbenimsenmiştir. Katılımcılara uygulanan ön test, son test ve dört hafta sonra gerçekleştirilen kalıcılıktesti verileri analiz edilerek STEM eğitiminin etkisi değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca öğretmen adaylarındanöğrenme deneyimlerine ilişkin nitel veri toplamak amacıyla açık uçlu sorularla yazılı geri bildirimleralınmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, STEM eğitimi öğretmen adaylarının özellikle eleştirel düşünmebecerilerinde ve robotik teknolojilere yönelik tutumlarında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı gelişim sağlandığıtespit edilmiştir. Bu durum, STEM’in uygulamalı ve problem temelli yapısının düşünme süreçlerini veteknolojik ilgi düzeyini olumlu etkilediğini göstermektedir. Ancak astronomiye ilgi ve genel STEMtutumu gibi değişkenlerde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark oluşmamıştır. Kalıcılık testi bulguları, eldeedilen kazanımların sürdürülebildiğini ortaya koymuştur. Katılımcıların öğrenme deneyimlerini günlükyaşamla ilişkilendirebildiklerine dair nitel bulgular ise öğrenmenin anlamlı hâle geldiğini göstermektedir.Araştırma bulguları doğrultusunda, öğretmen yetiştirme programlarında STEM eğitiminin sistematikbiçimde yapılandırılması gerektiği, içeriklerin branşlara özgü olarak farklılaştırılması ve öğretmenadaylarının uygulamalı öğrenme fırsatlarıyla desteklenmesinin önemi vurgulanmaktadır.

Keywords

• STEM eğitimi
• öğretmen adayları
• eleştirel düşünme
• robotik tutum
• astronomiye ilgi
• öğrenme kalıcılığı

References

1. Altun, H. İ. (2024). An Action Research on the Development of Algorithmic Thinking Skills of Preschool Teacher Candidates (Master's thesis, Kırşehir Ahi Evran University-Institute of Science and Technology).
2. Ampartzaki, M., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2016). Astronomy in early childhood education: A concept-based approach. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44(2), 169-179.
3. Burrows, A. C., Borowczak, M., Myers, A., Schwortz, A. C., & McKim, C. (2021). Integrated STEM for teacher professional learning and development:“I Need Time for Practice”. Education Sciences, 11(1), 21.
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2017). Data analysis handbook for social sciences: Statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation (23rd edition). Pegem Academy.
5. Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30-35.
6. Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press.
7. Dogru, M., & Seker, F. (2012). The Effect of Science Activities on Concept Acquisition of Age 5-6 Children Groups. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(4), 3011-3024.
8. English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM education, 3(1), 3.

9. English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(Suppl 1), 5-24.
10. Ertaş Kılıç, H. & Keleş, Ö.(2017).Developing an interest scale for astronomy: validity and reliability studies.Theory and Practice in Education , 13 (1) , 35-54.
11. Fensham, P. J. (2022). The future curriculum for school science: What can be learnt from the past?. Research in science education, 52(Suppl 1), 81-102.
12. Ferdianto, Y., Solehuddin, M. S., Riskiyah, I. P., Amalia, D., & Apriliani, I. P. (2024, November). Komparasi Pembelajaran Matematika di Indonesia dan Negara-Negara OECD: Jepang, Finlandia, Belanda, dan Singapura Menuju Generasi Emas Indonesia. In SANTIKA: Seminar Nasional Tadris Matematika (Vol. 4, pp. 308-314).
13. Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage publications limited.
14. Gülgün, C., Yılmaz, A., & Çağlar, A. (2017). Teacher opinions about the qualities required in STEM activities applied in the science course. Science, 7(1), 459-478.
15. Haatainen, O., Turkka, J., & Aksela, M. (2021). Science teachers’ perceptions and self-efficacy beliefs related to integrated science education. Education Sciences, 11(6), 272.
16. Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089-1113.
17. Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K–12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
18. Karataş Aydın, F. İ., & Sipahi, H. (2023). Investigation of Teacher Education Undergraduate Programs in terms of Training STEM Literate and Entrepreneurial Teachers. Dokuz Eylül University Buca Education Faculty Journal (58), 2830-2858. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1328629
19. Kartal, B., & Tasdemir, A. (2021). Pre-Service Teachers' Attitudes towards STEM: Differences Based on Multiple Variables and the Relationship with Academic Achievement. International Journal of Technology in Education, 4(2), 200-228.
20. Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
21. Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and teacher education, 29, 76-85.
22. Koçoğlu, A. (2017). Investigation of the contribution of science and mathematics teachers' autonomy support to middle school students' critical thinking disposition and problem solving skills perception (Master's thesis, Graduate School of Educational Sciences).
23. Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Exploring teachers’ perceived self efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1-21.
24. Lin, P. L., Chien, Y. T., & Chang, C. Y. (2020). Teachers’ responses to an integrated STEM module: Collaborative curriculum design in Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. In Integrated Approaches to STEM Education: An International Perspective (pp. 491-509). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
25. Lin, K.-Y., Ku, C.-J., Wei, H.-T., Yu, K.-C., & Williams, P. J. (2025). Processes, challenges, and teacher roles in developing and implementing collaborative STEM curricula: Case studies of two Taiwanese schools. International Journal of STEM Education, 12(24).
26. Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers' perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM education, 6(1), 1-16.
27. McPhail, G. (2020). Twenty-first century learning and the case for more knowledge about knowledge. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 387-404.
28. MONE, (2018). Science curriculum (Primary and Secondary School Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8). Ankara: Ministry of National Education General Directorate of Basic Education.
29. MONE. (2024). Türkiye's Century Education Model, Ankara: Presidency of the Board of Education and Discipline.
30. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
31. National Research Council. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. The National Academies Press.
32. Nugent, G., Barker, B., Grandgenett, N., & Adamchuk, V. I. (2010). Impact of robotics and geospatial technology interventions on youth STEM learning and attitudes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(4), 391-408.
33. OECD (2022), Education at a Glance 2022: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en.
34. OECD. (2023). Teaching for the Future: Global Engagement, Sustainability and Digital Skills. Paris: OECD Publishing.
35. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge.
36. Saçkes, M., Smith, M. M., & Trundle, K. C. (2016). US and Turkish preschoolers’ observational knowledge of astronomy. International Journal of Science Education, 38(1), 116-129.
37. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2010). A brief history of knowledge building. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l'apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1).
38. Sheth, M., & Pathak, R. (2023). STEM education: an interdisciplinary and integrated approach of teaching. Interdisciplinary approaches and strategies for sustainable development, 80-87.
39. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 2(1), 4.
40. Şişman, B., & Küçük, S. (2018). Validity and reliability study of Turkish robotics attitude scale for middle school students. Aegean Journal of Education, 19(1), 284-299.
41. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
42. Tan, C., & Ng, C. S. (2021). Cultivating creativity in a high-performing education system: The example of Singapore. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 18(3), 253-272.
43. Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2019). Teachers’ attitudes toward teaching integrated STEM: The impact of personal background characteristics and school context. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(5), 987-1007.
44. UNESCO (2023) lobal Education Monitoring Report Team. (2023). Global education monitoring report, 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms?. Unesco Publishing, https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
45. Verdi, E., & Balım, A. G. (2023). REVIEW OF STUDIES ON STEM PEDAGOGOGICAL FIELD KNOWLEDGE (STEMPACK). Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Faculty of Education, (68), 322-346.
46. Wang, F., Huang, J., Zheng, X. L., Wu, J. Q., & Zhao, A. P. (2024). STEM activities for boosting pupils' computational thinking and reducing their cognitive load: Roles of argumentation scaffolding and mental rotation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1-20.
47. Yıldırım, B., & Türk, C. (2018). Prospective classroom teachers' views on STEM education: an applied study. Trakya University Journal of Faculty of Education, 8(2), 195-213.
48. Yüksel, A. O. (2025). Design-Based STEM Activities in Teacher Education and Its Effect on Pre-service Science Teachers’ Design Thinking Skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-15.
49. Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School science and mathematics, 112(1), 12-19.