STEEEM MODEL: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK TO ASSESS STEM-BASED LEARNING IN SCIENCE EDUCATION
Abstract
The current study aims to propose the STEEEM model for assessing students’ learning in science according to the STEM approach, bridging the gap between authentic assessment practices and traditional classroom methods. The study applied analytical and descriptive methodologies, gathering empirical data via a structured questionnaire and evaluating pertinent literature for the last ten years. The sample consisted of 89 female pre-service science teachers who were enrolled in Sohar University's Teacher Preparation Program during the 2024–2025 academic year. They were chosen based on their solid backgrounds in biology, chemistry, physics, and teaching procedures. A 30-item questionnaire to gather data covering six dimensions of assessment: Scientific skills, Technological skills, Engineering design processes, Entrepreneurial skills, Extended skills, and Mathematical skills. The significance of the study falls in line with the direct potential to guide science curriculum development and equip teachers with practical skills to implement performance-based assessments aligned with STEM philosophy and its educational aspects.
Article visualizations:
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Akiri, E., Tor, H. M., & Dori, Y. J. (2021). Teaching and Assessment Methods: STEM Teachers’ Perceptions and Implementation. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(6). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/10882
Avery, Z.K. & Reeve, E.M. (2013). Developing Effective STEM Professional Development Programs. Journal of Technology Education, 25(1), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v25i1.a.4
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
Chaya, H. (2023). Investigating teachers’ perceptions of STEM education in private elementary schools in Abu Dhabi. Journal of Education and Learning, 12(2), 60–78. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v12n2p60
Christensen, R., Knezek, G. & Tyler-Wood, T. (2014). Student Perception of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Content and Careers. Computers in Human Behavior, 173-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.046
Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2018). Understanding science teachers’ implementations of integrated STEM curricular units through a phenomenological multiple case study. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0101-z
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2019). 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
Dewanti, B. A., Santoso, A., & Septaria, K. (2021). Assessment of critical thinking skills in STEM-based science learning through project assignments. In Proceedings of the 6th International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE 2020) (pp. 824–831). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210326.119
Dogra, B. (2015). Performance-based Assessment for Assessing Science Learning. The Primary Teacher, 40(2-3), p. 48-58. https://ejournals.ncert.gov.in/index.php/tpt/article/view/1225
Elayyan, S. (2021). The future of education according to the fourth industrial revolution. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning. 4(1): pp. 24-30. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.737193
English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K–12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(3), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
English, L. D., King, D., & Smeed, J. (2017). Advancing integrated STEM learning through engineering design: Sixth-grade students’ design and construction of earthquake-resistant buildings. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 255–271. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26586745
Fairhurst, N., Koul, R., & Sheffield, R. (2023). Students’ perceptions of their STEM learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 26(3), 977–998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984 023 09463 z
Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Constructivism.html?id=-pIbAgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
Gao, X., Li, P., Shen, J., & Sun, H. (2020). Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(24). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00225-4
Gay, L., Mills, G. & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications. 10th edition. New Jersey: Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/en-us/subject-catalog/p/educational-research-competencies-for-analysis-and-applications/P200000001512/9780137534944
Green, S. L. (2014). STEM Education in a Competitive and Globalizing Word. Nova Science Publishers.
Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., Harwell, M., & Moreno, M. (2016). STEM integration in middle school life science: Student learning and attitudes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9612-x
Hacıoğlu, Y., Yamak, H., & Kavak, N. (2016). Pre-service science teachers’ cognitive structures regarding science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) and science education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(special), 88-102. Retrieved from https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/625?articlesBySimilarityPage=27
Halawa, S., Lin, T.-C., & Hsu, Y.-S. (2024). Exploring instructional design in K-12 STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00503-5
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (2014). STEM integration in K–12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press. Retrieved from https://www.middleweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/STEM-Integration-in-K12-Education.pdf
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), 686. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100686
Kearney, C. (2016). Efforts to increase students’ interest in pursuing science, technology, engineering and mathematics studies and careers: National measures taken by 30 countries (Report). European Schoolnet (EUN Partnership AISBL). Retrieved from http://www.eun.org/resources/detail?publicationID=783
Lynch, S. J., Peters-Burton, E., & Ford, M. R. (2014). Building STEM opportunities for all. Educational Leadership, 72(4), 54–60. Retrieved from https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/building-stem-opportunities-for-all
Margot, K.C. and Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ Perception of STEM Integration and Education: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2
Maric, D., Fore, G. A., & Nyarko, S. C. (2023). Measurement in STEM education research: A systematic literature review of trends in the psychometric evidence of scales. International Journal of STEM Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00430-x.
Nabillah, T., Hamdu, G., & Ramadhani Putri, A. (2025). Elementary school teacher’s perceptions of STEM-based performance assessment across urban and rural contexts. EduStream: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar, 9(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.26740/eds.v9n2.p189-201
Osin, & Sahoo, M. (2022). Performance-based assessment in science at the elementary school level. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Research, 9(5), 646-650. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363670572_PERFORMANCE-BASED_ASSESSMENT_IN_SCIENCE_AT_ELEMENTARY_SCHOOL_LEVEL
Park, H., Byun, S.-Y., Sim, J., Han, H.-S., & Baek, Y. S. (2016). Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices of STEAM Education in South Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(7), 1739-1753. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1531a
Permanasari, A., Rubini, B., & Nugroho, O. F. (2021). STEM education in Indonesia: Science teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 2(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.46843/jiecr.v2i1.24
Rahman, S. M. M. (2021). Assessing and benchmarking learning outcomes of robotics-enabled STEM education. Education Sciences, 11(2), 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020084
Stevens, R. (2012). Identifying 21st Century Capabilities. International Journal of Learning and Change, 6(3-4), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLC.2012.050857
Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.014
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvjf9vz4
Walker, W. S., Moore, T. J., Guzey, S. S., & Sorge, B. H. (2018). Frameworks to Develop Integrated STEM Curricula. K-12 STEM Education, 4(2), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.14456/k12stemed.2018.5
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v13i2.6533
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Shaher R. Elayyan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2015-2026. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
