Impact of STEM on Primary School Students' 21st Century Skills, NOS, and Learning Experiences

Abstract

This study examines the influence of STEM activities on fourth-grade students’ 21st-century skills, their understanding of the nature of science (NOS), and their overall learning experiences. The research was conducted during the autumn term of the 2021–2022 academic year at a public primary school with a relatively low socioeconomic status. Over six weeks, STEM activities were integrated into the “Earth’s Crust and the Movements of Our Earth” unit in the Science curriculum. A mixed-method approach was employed, encompassing a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest control group design for the quantitative phase and a case study approach for the qualitative phase. The sample included 35 fourth-grade students. Data were obtained using the “21st Century Learning and Innovation Skills Scale,” the “Ideas About the Nature of Science Scale,” and unstructured observation notes. The findings indicated statistically significant improvements in the experimental group’s 21st-century skills, particularly creativity, innovation, critical thinking, and problem-solving. Moreover, the activities fostered enhanced cooperation and communication skills. Based on post-test results, the student’s understanding of the NOS also improved significantly. Qualitative analysis of teacher observation notes supported these outcomes, showing heightened student engagement, enjoyment, and active participation. Students produced more creative and reflective responses to scientific concepts, while their collaborative and communicative competencies were notably strengthened. In sum, STEM activities embedded within the 5E teaching model enriched the learning process by promoting scientific curiosity, critical thinking, and sustained motivation. Students’ requests for similar activities in other courses further underscored these interventions' positive impact and enduring appeal.

Keywords

• 21st century skills
• learning experiences
• nature of science (NOS)
• primary school students
• STEM education

References

1. Abernathy, T. V., & Vineyard, R. N. (2001). Academic competitions in science: What are the rewards for students? The Clearing House, 74(5), 269-276.
2. Adbo, K., & Taber, K. S. (2009). Learners’ mental models of the particle nature of matter: A study of 16-year-old Swedish science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 757-786.
3. Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competencies for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD Education Working Papers, 41, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/218525261154
4. Aydın, E., & Karslı Baydere, F. (2019). Yedinci sınıf öğrencilerinin STEM etkinlikleri hakkındaki görüşleri: Karışımların ayrıştırılması örneği [7 th Grade Students’ Views about STEM Activities: Example of Separation of Mixtures]. Ondokuz Mayıs University Journal of Faculty of Education, 38(1), 35-52.
5. Beers, S. Z. (2011). 21st century skills: Preparing students for their future. https://cosee.umaine.edu/files/coseeos/21st_century_skills.pdf
6. Bektaş, O. (2011). 10. sınıf öğrencilerinin maddenin tanecikli yapısı, epistemolojik inanışları ve fenin doğası hakkındaki görüşleri üzerine 5E öğrenme modelinin etkisi [The effect of 5E learning cycle model on tenth grade students' understanding in the particulate nature of matter, epistemological beliefs and views of nature of science] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University.
7. Belet Boyacı, Ş., & Güner Özer, M. (2019). Öğrenmenin geleceği: 21. yüzyıl becerileri perspektifiyle Türkçe dersi öğretim programları [The future of learning: 21st century skills perspective on Turkish language teaching programmes]. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 9(2), 708-738.
8. Boyacı, S., & Atalay, N. (2016). A scale development for 21st century skills of primary school students: A validity and reliability study. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 133-148.

9. Büber-Kılınç, A. (2021). Modellemeden FeTeMM’e: Öğretim uygulamalarının fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının üst düzey bilimsel düşünme becerilerine ve alternatif yaklaşımlara dayalı bilimin doğası anlayışlarına etkisi [From modelling to STEM: The effect of teaching practices on pre-service science teachers’ high-level scientific thinking skills and their understanding of the nature of science based on alternative approaches] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Dokuz Eylül University.
10. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (23rd ed.). Pegem Akademi.
11. Bybee, R. W. (2009). The BSCS 5E instructional model and 21st century skills. BSCS.
12. Bybee, R. W. (2010). What is STEM education? Science, 329(5995), 996-996. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194998
13. Campbell, T., Zhang, D., & Neilson, D. (2011). Model-based inquiry in the high school physics classroom: An exploratory study of implementation and outcomes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 258-269.
14. Cansız, M., Cansız, N., Taş, Y., & Yerdelen, S. (2017). Turkish version of students’ ideas about nature of science questionnaire: A validation study. International Journal of Progressive Education, 13, 42-51.
15. Capraro, M. M., & Jones, M. (2013). Interdisciplinary STEM project-based learning. In STEM- Project-based learning: An integrated science, technology, engineering and mathematics approach (pp. 51-58). Sense Publishers.
16. Chen, S., Chang, W. H., Lieu, S. C., Kao, H. L., Huang, M. T., & Lin, S. F. (2013). Development of an empirically based questionnaire to investigate young students’ ideas about nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(4), 408-430.
17. Çalışkan, A., & Okuşluk, F. (2021). Türkiye’de STEM alanında ve eğitim-öğretim konusunda yapılmış olan lisansüstü tezlerin içerik analizi [Content analysis of postgraduate theses in the field of STEM and education and training in Turkey]. Academia Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 124-136.
18. Dewaters, J., & Powers, S. (2006). Improving science literacy through project-based K12 outreach efforts that use energy and environmental themes. Annual Conference and Exposition, Chicago, Illinois.
19. Ecevit, T., Yıldız, M., & Balcı, N. (2022). Türkiye’deki STEM eğitimi çalışmalarının içerik analizi [Content analysis of STEM education studies in Turkey]. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 22(1), 263-286.
20. Eroğlu, S. (2018). Atom ve periyodik sistem ünitesindeki STEM uygulamalarının akademik başarı, bilimsel yaratıcılık ve bilimin doğasına yönelik düşünceler üzerine etkisi [The effect of STEM applications in atom and periodic system unit on academic achievement, scientific creativity and thoughts about the nature of science] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Erciyes University.
21. Günbatar, S. A., & Tabar, V. (2019). Türkiye’de gerçekleştirilen STEM araştırmalarının içerik analizi [Content analysis of STEM research in Turkey]. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Faculty of Education, 16(1), 1054-1083.
22. Han, J., Kelley, T., & Knowles, J. G. (2021). Factors influencing student STEM learning: Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy, 21st century skills, and career awareness. Journal for STEM Education Research, 4(2), 117-137.
23. Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509-534.
24. Hastürk, G. (2017). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı [Science course curriculum]. In G. Hastürk (Ed.), Teoriden pratiğe fen bilimleri öğretimi [Science teaching from theory to practice] (pp. 3). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
25. Hiğde, E. (2018). Ortaokul 7. sınıf öğrencileri için hazırlanan STEM etkinliklerinin farklı değişkenlere yönelik etkisinin incelenmesi [Examining the effect of STEM activities prepared for middle school 7th grade students on different variables] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Adnan Menderes University.
26. İnce, K., & Özgelen, N. (2015). Bilimin doğası alanında son 10 yılda yapılan çalışmaların farklı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [Analysing the studies conducted in the field of nature of science in the last 10 years in terms of different variables]. Mersin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 11(2), 447-468.
27. Karahan, E., Bilici, S., & Ünal, A. (2015). Integration of media design processes in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 15(60), 221-240.
28. Karasar, N. (2004). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi [Scientific research method]. Nobel Yayıncılık.
29. Keleşoğlu, S., & Kalaycı, N. (2017). Dördüncü sanayi devriminin eşiğinde yaratıcılık, inovasyon ve eğitim ilişkisi [The relationship between creativity, innovation, and education on the threshold of the fourth industrial revolution]. Yaratıcı Drama Dergisi, 12(1), 69-86.
30. Khanlari, A. (2013). Effects of robotics on 21st century skills. European Scientific Journal (ESJ), 9(27), 26-97.
31. Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Tyler-Wood, T., & Periathiruvadi, S. (2013). Impact of environmental power monitoring activities on middle school student perceptions of STEM. Science Education International, 24(1), 98-123.
32. Koştur, H. İ. (2017). FeTeMM eğitiminde bilim tarihi uygulamaları: El-Cezeri örneği [History of science applications in STEM education: The case of Al-Jazari]. Başkent University Journal of Education, 4(1), 61-73.
33. Langdon, D., Mckittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011). STEM: Good jobs now and for the future. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration, 3(11), 2. 3-11.
34. Lederman, N. G., & Zeidler, D. L. (1987). Science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: Do they really influence teacher behavior? Science Education, 71(5), 721-734.
35. MoNE [Ministry of National Education]. (2013). İlköğretim 6., 7. ve 8. sınıf fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programları [Primary 6th, 7th and 8th Grade Science and Technology Curriculum]. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
36. MoNE [Ministry of National Education]. (2005). Fen bilimleri öğretim programı [Science teaching programme].
37. Morrison, J. S. (2006). Attributes of STEM education: The student, the school, the classroom. TIES [Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM]. http://daytonos.com/pdf/stem.pdf
38. National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press.
39. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.
40. OECD (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2012). Connected minds: Technology and today’s learners, educational research and innovation. https://www.oecdilibrary.org/education/connected-minds_9789264111011-en
41. Ozan, F., & Uluçınar Sağır, Ş. (2020). FeTeMM etkinliklerinin ortaokul öğrencilerinin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerine etkisi [The effect of STEM activities on middle school students’ views on the nature of science]. Journal of Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Art (JSTEAM) Education, 3(2), 32-43.
42. Özçelik, A., & Akgündüz, D. (2018). Üstün/özel yetenekli öğrencilerle yapılan okul dışı STEM eğitiminin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of out-of-school STEM education with gifted/talented students]. Trakya University Journal of Faculty of Education, 8(2), 334-351.
43. P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Learning). (2021). Framework for 21st century learning. https://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21
44. Pekbay, C. (2017). Fen, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik etkinliklerinin ortaokul öğrencileri üzerindeki etkileri [The effects of science, technology, engineering and mathematics activities on middle school students] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hacettepe University.
45. Sen, C., Ay, Z. S., & Kiray, S. A. (2018). STEM becerileri ve 21. yüzyıl eğitimi [STEM skills and 21st century education]. In Research highlights in STEM education, 81-101.
46. Sönmez, E. (2014). Müfredat dışı biyoteknoloji etkinliklerinin öğrencilerin biyoteknoloji bilgilerine ve bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerine etkisi [The effect of extracurricular biotechnology activities on students’ biotechnology knowledge and their views on the nature of science] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Kastamonu University.
47. Şahin, A., Ayar, M. C., & Adıgüzel, T. (2014). Fen, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik içerikli okul sonrası etkinlikler ve öğrenciler üzerindeki etkileri [Science, technology, engineering and mathematics after-school activities and their effects on students]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 14(1), 297-322.
48. Şık, N. Ü. (2019). Bilimin doğası unsurlarının fen, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik (FeTeMM) yaklaşımı ile öğretimi [Teaching the elements of the nature of science with science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) approach] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Balıkesir University.
49. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.
50. Turan, K. (2018). Dördüncü sanayi devriminin uluslararası ilişkilere sosyoekonomik etkileri [Socioeconomic effects of the fourth industrial revolution on international relations] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ege University.
51. Türkmen, L., & Yalçın, M. (2001). Bilimin doğası ve eğitimdeki önemi [The nature of science and its importance in education]. Eğitim, 72, 19-40.
52. TÜSİAD. (2014). Fen, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik alanında eğitim almış iş gücüne yönelik talep ve beklentiler araştırması [Demand and expectations research for labour force educated in science, technology, engineering and mathematics]. https://tusiad.org/tr/yayinlar/raporlar/item/8054-stem-alaninda-egitim-almisisgucu-ne-yonelik-talep-ve-beklentiler-arastirmasi
53. Uluyol, Ç., & Eryılmaz, S. (2015). 21. yüzyıl becerileri ışığında FATİH projesi değerlendirmesi [Evaluation of FATİH project in the light of 21st century skills]. Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 35(2), 209-229.
54. Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival skills our children need and what we can do about it. Basic Books.
55. Yaşar, B. E. (2021). Fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin 21. yüzyıl becerileri öz yeterlilik algıları ve STEM tutumlarının incelenmesi [Examination of science teachers’ 21st century skills self-efficacy perceptions and STEM attitudes] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Kırıkkale University.
56. Yavuz, Ü. (2019). İlkokul fen bilimleri dersinin fen, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik (FeTeMM) etkinlikleri ile işlenmesi [Processing of primary school science course with science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Afyon Kocatepe University.
57. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
58. Yıldırım, B., Şahin, E., & Tabaru, G. (2017). The effect of STEM practices on pre-service teachers’ beliefs on the nature of science, their attitudes towards scientific research and constructivist approach. Uluslararası Avrasya Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8, 28-45.