Ata uhi

Fostering scientific creativity in science education through scientific problem-solving approaches and STEM contexts: a meta-analysis

I tiakina i:
I whakaputaina i:Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research vol. 7, no. 1 (Dec 2025), p. 18
Kaituhi matua: Pinar, Fredyrose Ivan Libosada
Ētahi atu kaituhi: Panergayo, Albert Andry E., Sagcal, Richard R., Acut, Dharel P., Roleda, Lydia S., Prudente, Maricar S.
I whakaputaina:
Springer Nature B.V.
Ngā marau:
Problem solving
Pedagogy
Students
Design of experiments
Teaching methods
Collaboration
Scientific method
Interdisciplinary aspects
Data analysis
21st century
Cognitive ability
Cognition & reasoning
Innovations
Hypotheses
Science education
Knowledge
Creativity
Critical thinking
Problem based learning
Creative process
Educational Practices
Literature Reviews
Influence of Technology
Creative Thinking
Active Learning
Cognitive Processes
Meta Analysis
Innovation
Cooperative Learning
Experiments
Educational Objectives
Scientific Concepts
Evidence Based Practice
Science Instruction
Evaluative Thinking
Outcomes of Education
Interdisciplinary Approach
Learner Engagement
Inquiry
Educational Strategies
Urunga tuihono:Citation/Abstract
Full Text
Full Text - PDF
Ngā Tūtohu: Tāpirihia he Tūtohu
Kāore He Tūtohu, Me noho koe te mea tuatahi ki te tūtohu i tēnei pūkete!
Whakarāpopotonga:Scientific creativity is a critical component of science education, promoting innovative thinking and the ability to address complex, real-world challenges. Despite its importance, quantitative syntheses specifically examining the effects of scientific problem-solving approaches on fostering scientific creativity are scarce. This meta-analysis addresses this gap by evaluating the impact of inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning, and STEM contexts on students’ scientific creativity. Using the PRISMA protocol, 19 studies were analyzed, revealing that PjBL and PBL produced the most substantial effects, with large effect sizes (g = 2.10 and g = 1.49, respectively), while STEM contexts and IBL demonstrated moderate positive impacts. These findings are interpreted within the scientific method, emphasizing critical stages such as problem definition, hypothesis formulation, experimentation, data analysis, and evaluation. The results suggest that these approaches effectively nurture scientific creativity by engaging students in interdisciplinary, real-world problem contexts that demand innovative solutions. However, the limited number of studies and potential publication bias present challenges to broader generalization. Future research should expand the evidence base and explore the integration of these approaches across diverse educational settings. This study contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting the role of scientific problem-solving approaches in cultivating scientific creativity, offering valuable insights for educators and curriculum developers.
ISSN:2662-2300
DOI:10.1186/s43031-025-00137-9
Puna:Science Database