Analyzing 5th Grade Science Textbook Activities in Light of the Turkish Century Education Model: A STEM and Design Thinking Perspective

Abstract

This study examined how the activities in the 5th grade Science textbook, updated within the Turkish Century Education Model (TCEM), were structured in terms of STEM education and the Design Thinking (DOT) approach. Using document analysis, the 2024 Science textbook published by the Ministry of National Education was analyzed. Fifty activities were evaluated based on the four STEM components (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) and five DOT stages (empathy, define, ideate, prototype, test). Findings showed that the activities were mostly science-focused, while technology, engineering, and mathematics were less represented. About half of the activities involved some DOT stages, yet creative production phases such as ideation, prototyping, and testing were limited. Only 40% of the activities included both STEM and DOT components. The qualitative analysis indicated that most activities emphasized observation and information gathering rather than creative thinking or problem-solving. This suggests that the TCEM’s vision of raising productive and versatile individuals is only partially reflected in the textbook. It is recommended that textbook activities be redesigned to more fully integrate STEM and DOT approaches, providing students with interdisciplinary, student-centered, and production-oriented learning experiences that support 21st-century skills.

Keywords

• STEM Education
• Design Thinking
• Turkish Century Education Model
• Science Course
• Qualitative Content Analysis

References

1. Avcu, Y. E., & Er, K. O. (2020). Design Thinking Applications in Teaching Programming to Gifted Students. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 3(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.671621
2. Becker, K., & Mentzer, N. (2015, September). Engineering design thinking: High school students' performance and knowledge. In 2015 International conference on interactive collaborative learning (ICL) (pp. 5-12). IEEE.
3. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. Harper Business.
4. Chang, C.Y., Du, Z., Kuo, H. C., & Chang, C.C. (2023). Investigating the Impact of Design Thinking-Based STEAM PBL on Students' Creativity and Computational Thinking. IEEE Transactions on Education, 66(6), 673-681.
5. Corlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education: Implications for educating our teachers for the age of innovation. Education & Science/Egitim ve Bilim, 39(171).
6. Demirezen, S. (2024). The effect of design-based STEM activities provided with distance education on the development of 21 st century skills (Doctoral dissertation, Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences). Ankara.
7. Frear, L., & Fillip, C. (2019). Delvıng into desıgn: Using design thinking in Stem curriculum envıronments. In ICERI2019 Proceedings (pp. 9226-9226). IATED.
8. Goldman, S., Carroll, M., Zielezinski, M. B., Loh, A., Ng, E. S., & Bachas-Daunert, S. (2014, June). Dive in! An integrated design thinking/STEM curriculum. In 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 24-440).

9. Güneş Varol, D. (2020). Determining the effect of design based STEM education activities on academic success of middle school 7th grade students, attitudes towards STEM and stem profession (Master's thesis, Fırat University, Institute of Educational Sciences). Elazığ.
10. İncikabı, L., & Tjoe, H. (2013). A Comparative Analysis of Ratio and Proportion Problems inTurkish and the U.S. Middle School Mathematics Textbooks. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(1), 1-15.
11. Kavacık, İ. (2019). The effect of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) applications; On students' learning approaches, inquiry learning skills perceptions and attitudes towards STEM (Master's thesis, Mersin University, Graduate School of Educational Sciences). Mersin.
12. Mahil, S. (2016). Fostering STEM+ education: improve design thinking skills, 2016 IEEE Glob. Eng. Educ. Conf. (2016) 125–129.
13. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage.
14. MONE. (2023). Turkey Century Education Model Presentation Book. Ankara: Ministry of National Education Publications.
15. OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing
16. Öztürk, A. (2020). Co-developing STEM activities through design thinking approach for fifth graders. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation), Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
17. Öztürk, A. (2021). Meeting the Challenges of STEM Education in K-12 Education through Design Thinking. Design and Technology Education, 26(1), 70-88.
18. Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (Eds.). (2012). Design thinking research. Berlin: Springer.
19. Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important?. Review of educational research, 82(3), 330-348.
20. Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, V. D. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8–13.
21. Sarıkoç, Z., & Ersoy, H. (2022). Tasarım Odaklı Düşünme Yaklaşımıyla STEM Uygulamaları: SPAM eTwinning Projesi Örneği. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik Ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi, 5(2), 98-122.
22. Siemens Stiftung. (n.d.). Design Thinking in STEM: Education project combining STEM education with design-based education. Retrieved from https://sdgs.un.org/partnerships/design-thinking-stem-education-project-combining-stem-education-design-based-education
23. Şen, C. (2018). Skills used by gifted and talented students in integrated STEM activities based on engineering design. Doctoral Dissertation, Ankara University, Institute of Educational Sciences.
24. Tawbush, R. L., Stanley, S. D., Campbell, T. G., & Webb, M. A. (2020). International comparison of K-12 STEM teaching practices. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 115-128.
25. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.
26. Yildirim, B. (2016). An Analyses and Meta-Synthesis of Research on STEM Education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(34), 23-33.
27. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Qualitative research methods in social sciences (11th edition). Seçkin Publishing.
28. Yücel, M., & Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2020). Ortaokul 5. ve 6. sınıf fen bilimleri ders kitapları hakkında öğretmen görüşleri. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 93-120.
29. 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(1), 1-13.