Igniting Active Engagement in Pre-Service Teachers in STEM Education: A Comprehensive Systematic Literature Review
Abstract
Active engagement is a topic of research in instructional approaches within education. Research reveals that numerous benefits appear once students seem to be active and gain higher-order thinking skills, increase motivation and are engaged in their learning. Although there are numerous studies on active engagement in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education, the effort to conduct a systematic review of this area of research has been complex due to the lack of review procedures, which presents a significant dispute for authors to clarify. Thus, a systematic literature review regarding active engagement in STEM education will be conducted in this research. Five key methodological steps led the review: research questions formulation, systematic search strategies depending, critical quality appraisal, as well as data extraction and analysis. Relying on the thematic analysis, four major themes were revealed: (1) critical thinking, (2) collaboration, (3) interaction, as well as (4) encouragement. Findings from the four themes further entail four relevant activities: lectorials, exploration, sharing knowledge, and assessment. According to the findings of the papers reviewed, getting pre-service teachers involved in active engagement activities leads to more comprehensive benefits on pre-service teachers' attitudes, problem-solving skills, and achievement in learning activities.
Downloads
References
Ahshan, R. (2021). A framework of implementing strategies for active student engagement in remote/online teaching and learning during the covid-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090483
Almeda, M. V., & Baker, R. (2020). Predicting Student Participation in STEM Careers: The Role of Affect and Engagement during Middle School. Journal of Educational Data Mining, Forthcoming.
Archer-Kuhn, B., Lee, Y., Finnessey, S., & Liu, J. (2020). Inquiry-based learning as a facilitator to student engagement in undergraduate and graduate social work programs. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 8(1), 187–207. https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.8.1.13
Avsec, S., & Jagiello-Kowalczyk, M. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards technology, engagement in active learning, and creativity as predictors of ability to innovate. International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(3), 1049–1059.
Aydeniz, M., & Bilican, K. (2018). The Impact of Engagement in STEM Activities on Primary Preservice Teachers’ Conceptualization of STEM and Knowledge of STEM Pedagogy. Journal of Research in STEM Education, 4(2), 213–234. https://doi.org/10.51355/jstem.2018.46
Baharin, N., Kamarudin, N., & Manaf, U. K. A. (2018). Integrating STEM Education Approach in Enhancing Higher Order Thinking Skills. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(7), 810–821. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v8-i7/4421
Barlow, A., & Brown, S. (2020). Correlations between modes of student cognitive engagement and instructional practices in undergraduate STEM courses. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00214-7
Bates, J., Best, P., McQuilkin, J., & Taylor, B. (2017). Will Web Search Engines Replace Bibliographic Databases in the Systematic Identification of Research? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 43(1), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.11.003
Bickford, N., Peterson, E., Jensen, P., & Thomas, D. (2020). Undergraduates interested in STEM research are better students than their peers. Education Sciences, 10(6), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10060150
Boso, C. M., van der Merwe, A. S., & Gross, J. (2021). Students’ and educators’ experiences with instructional activities towards critical thinking skills acquisition in a nursing school. International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences, 14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijans.2021.100293
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Cakir, H. (2013). Use of blogs in pre-service teacher education to improve student engagement. Computers and Education, 68, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.013
Calderón, A., Meroño, L., & MacPhail, A. (2020). A student-centred digital technology approach: The relationship between intrinsic motivation, learning climate and academic achievement of physical education pre-service teachers. European Physical Education Review, 26(1), 241–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X19850852
Chen, R. H. (2021). Fostering Students’ Workplace Communicative Competence and Collaborative Mindset through an Inquiry-Based Learning Design. Education Sciences, 11(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010017
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Christie, M., & de Graaff, E. (2017). The philosophical and pedagogical underpinnings of Active Learning in Engineering Education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2016.1254160
Cook, K. L., & Buck, G. A. (2017). Pre-service Teachers’ Understanding of the Nature of Science through Socio-scientific Inquiry. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1–21.
Corrigan, D., & Smith, K. (2020). Chapter 2. Complexity, Intellectual Challenge and Ongoing Support: Key Learning Conditions to Enhance Students’ Engagement in STEM Education. In I. Parchmann, S. Simon, & J. Apotheker (Eds.), Engaging Learners With Chemistry: Projects To Stimulate Interest And Participant (1st Editio, pp. 1–299). Royal Society Of Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781788016087-00016
Deák, C., Kumar, B., Szabó, I., Nagy, G., & Szentesi, S. (2021). Evolution of new approaches in pedagogy and STEM with inquiry-based learning and post-pandemic scenarios. Education Sciences, 11(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070319
Dearamae, R., Safkolam, R., & Yacob, M. (2021). An investigation of pre-service teachers’ teaching active learning to be STEM Education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012065
Diamantidaki, F., & Kefalaki, M. (2019). Preface to the special issue: International perspectives and interactions in education. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 2(1), 6–7.
Faust, J. L., & Paulson, D. R. (1998). Active learning in the college classroom. Journal on excellence in college teaching, 9(2), 3-24.
Flemming, K., Booth, A., Garside, R., Tunçalp, Ö., & Noyes, J. (2019). Qualitative evidence synthesis for complex interventions and guideline development: clarification of the purpose, designs and relevant methods. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl 1), e000882. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000882
Fogg-Rogers, L., Lewis, F., & Edmonds, J. (2016). Paired peer learning through engineering education outreach. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(1), 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2016.1202906
Fokkens-Bruinsma, M., & Canrinus, E. T. (2014). Motivation for becoming a teacher and engagement with the profession: Evidence from different contexts. International Journal of Educational Research, 65, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.09.012
Greene-Clemons, C. D. (2016). Perceptions of technology engagement on culturally responsive pre-service teachers. Journal for Multicultural Education, 10(3), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-01-2016-0006
Greyson, D., Rafferty, E., Slater, L., MacDonald, N., Bettinger, J. A., Dubé, È., & MacDonald, S. E. (2019). Systematic review searches must be systematic, comprehensive, and transparent: A critique of Perman et al. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-6275-y
Gusenbauer, M. (2019). Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases. Scientometrics, 118(1). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
Haddaway, N. R., Macura, B., Whaley, P., & Pullin, A. S. (2018). ROSES Reporting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: Pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Environmental Evidence, 7(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0121-7
Higgins, J., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., & Page, M. (2019). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (V. Welch (ed.); 2nd Editio). John Wiley & Sons.
Hong, Q. N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M. P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M. C., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2018). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285–291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221
Jeong, J. S., González-Gómez, D., & Prieto, F. Y. (2020). Sustainable and flipped stem education: Formative assessment online interface for observing pre-service teachers’ performance and motivation. Education Sciences, 10(10), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100283
Kiger, M. E., & Varpio, L. (2020). Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Medical Teacher, 42(8), 846–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030
Kilty, T., Burrows, A., Welsh, K., Kilty, K., Mcbride, S., & Bergmaier, P. (2021). Transcending Disciplines : Engaging College Students In Interdisciplinary Research, Integrated Stem, And Partnerships. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 11(1), 146–166. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1139
Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015a). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers and Education, 91, 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005
Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015b). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers and Education, 91(July 2016), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005
Kim, H. J., Yi, P., & Hong, J. I. (2020). Students’ academic use of mobile technology and higher-order thinking skills: The role of active engagement. Education Sciences, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030047
Knobloch, J., Kaltenbach, J., & Bruegge, B. (2018). Increasing student engagement in higher education using a context-aware Q&A teaching framework. Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering, 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1145/3183377.3183389
Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16, 1023–1042.
Li, Y., Yang, H. H., & MacLeod, J. (2018). Preferences toward the constructivist smart classroom learning environment: examining pre-service teachers’ connectedness. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(3), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1474232
Loan, F. A., & Sheikh, S. (2018). Is Google scholar really scholarly? Library Hi Tech News, 35(3), 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-11-2017-0078
Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015). Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000062
Malmberg, L. E. (2006). Goal-orientation and teacher motivation among teacher applicants and student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.07.005
Mamun, M. A. Al, Lawrie, G., & Wright, T. (2020). Instructional design of scaffolded online learning modules for self-directed and inquiry-based learning environments. Computers and Education, 144(May 2019), 103695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103695
Martín-Martín, A., Costas, R., Van Leeuwen, T., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). Evidence of open access of scientific publications in Google Scholar: A large-scale analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 819–841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.06.012
Maugh, C. (2018). Active engagement strategies: Ensuring active engagement of all students. Elevate Teacher Conference July 23, 2018.
Mohamed Shaffril, H. A., Samsuddin, S. F., & Abu Samah, A. (2020). The ABC of systematic literature review: the basic methodological guidance for beginners. Quality and Quantity, 55(4), 1319–1346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01059-6
Moon, J., & Ke, F. (2020). Exploring the Relationships Among Middle School Students’ Peer Interactions, Task Efficiency, and Learning Engagement in Game-Based Learning. Simulation and Gaming, 51(3), 310–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120907940
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three Types of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
Morais, P., Ferreira, M. J., & Veloso, B. (2021). Improving Student Engagement with Project-Based Learning: A Case Study in Software Engineering. Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias Del Aprendizaje, 16(1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2021.3052677
Nagadeepa, C., Mohan, R., Raji, S., & Raja Kamal, C. (2021). Students’ Understanding and Learning: Mediation Effects of Cognitive Engagement in Online Classes. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(6), 2932–2939. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i6.6077
O’Grady, A., Simmie, G. M., & Kennedy, T. (2014). Why change to active learning? Pre-service and in-service science teachers’ perceptions. European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2013.845163
Okoli, C. (2015). A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(1), 879–910. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.03743
Orduna-Malea, E., Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2017). Do ResearchGate Scores create ghost academic reputations? Scientometrics, 112(1), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2396-9
Pöysä, S., Vasalampi, K., Muotka, J., Lerkkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., & Nurmi, J. E. (2019). Teacher–student interaction and lower secondary school students’ situational engagement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 374–392. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12244
Prince, M., Felder, R., & Brent, R. (2020). Active Student Engagement in Online STEM Classes: Approaches and Recommendations. Advances in Engineering Education, 8(4), 1–25.
Rauch, F., Pfaffenwimmer, G., & Hübner, R. (2022). Networking for Sustainablity in Education. In H. Kminek, A. Geyer, M. B., S. Budrich, & V. Barbara (Eds.), Networking for Sustainability in Education. Transdisciplinary Impulses towards Socio-Ecological Transformation: Engaged Reflections–Reflected Engagements (p. 188).
Robroo, I. (2019). The effect of using e-learning for enhancing active learning of pre-service teachers. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 9(11), 799–804. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2019.9.11.1307
Rosicka, C. (2016). Translating STEM education research into practice. Australian Council for Educational Research, June, 1–20. https://research.acer.edu.au/professional_dev/10
Saeed, N., & Mohamedali, F. (2022). A Study to Evaluate Students’ Performance, Engagement, and Progression in Higher Education Based on Feedforward Teaching Approach. Education Sciences, 12(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12010056
Sahin-Taskin, C. (2017). Effects of active learning environments supported with self- and peer assessment on pre-service teachers’ pedagogical and self-efficacy beliefs. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 46(5), 421–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2017.1355049
Sandrone, S., Scott, G., Anderson, W. J., & Musunuru, K. (2021). Active learning-based STEM education for in-person and online learning. Cell, 184(6), 1409–1414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.01.045
Sari, U., Duygu, E., Şen, Ö. F., & Kirindi, T. (2020). The effects of STEM education on scientific process skills and STEM awareness in simulation based inquiry learning environment. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(3), 387–405. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.34
Sarkadi, Casmana, A. R., & Rahmawati, Y. (2020). Improved learning design for pre-service teacher in a character education course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080126
Schaal, S. (2010). Cognitive and motivational effects of digital concept maps in pre-service science teacher training. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 640–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.077
Silm, G., Tiitsaar, K., Pedaste, M., Zacharia, Z. C., & Papaevripidou, M. (2017). Teachers’ readiness to use inquiry-based learning: An investigation of teachers’ sense of efficacy and attitudes toward inquiry-based learning. Science Education International, 28(4), 315–325.
Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. In Educational Psychologist (Vol. 50, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-9564-0.ch004
Skinner, E., Saxton, E., Currie, C., & Shusterman, G. (2017). A motivational account of the undergraduate experience in science: brief measures of students’ self-system appraisals, engagement in coursework, and identity as a scientist. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2433–2459. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1387946
Struyf, A., De Loof, H., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2019). Students’ engagement in different STEM learning environments: integrated STEM education as promising practice? International Journal of Science Education, 41(10), 1387–1407. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1607983
Supiyati, S., Halqi, M., & Rasidi, A. (2022). Students’ perception of communication and collaboration effectiveness in online learning mathematics during the COVID-19. Jurnal Elemen, 8(1), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.29408/jel.v8i1.4626
Suwarna, I. P., & Rhodiatussholihah, . (2020). Connecting to 21st Century: Improve Students’ HOTS through Integrated STEM Approach in Learning Physics. Icri 2018, 675–680. https://doi.org/10.5220/0009914506750680
Tanak, A. (2020). Developing Preservice Science Teachers’ Teaching Practices with an Emphasis on Higher Order Thinking. Science Education International, 31(3), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i3.2
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Nicole Arroyo, E., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., … Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
Tomas, L., Lasen, M., Field, E., & Skamp, K. (2015). Promoting online students’ engagement and learning in science and sustainability preservice teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(11), 78–107. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n11.5
Topsakal, İ., Yalçın, S. A., & Çakır, Z. (2022). The Effect of Problem-based STEM Education on the Students’ Critical Thinking Tendencies and Their Perceptions for Problem Solving Skills. Science Education International, 33(2), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v33.i2.1
Volet, S., Jones, C., & Vauras, M. (2019). Attitude-, group- and activity-related differences in the quality of preservice teacher students’ engagement in collaborative science learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 73(April), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.05.002
Wahid, N. T. A., Talib, O., Sulaiman, T., & Mohd Puad, M. H. (2018). A Systematic Literature Review on the Problem-Posing Strategies for Biology Problem-Posing Multimedia Module Design. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(12), 1020–1032. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v8-i12/5150
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Wrench, A., & Paige, K. (2020). Educating pre-service teachers: towards a critical inquiry workforce. Educational Action Research, 28(3), 462–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2019.1593871
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2017). Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
