Teachers’ views on assessment and evaluation methods in STEM education: A science course example
Ferhat Karakaya 1 * , Mehmet Yılmaz 2
More Detail
1 Yozgat Bozok University, Turkey
2 Gazi University, Turkey
* Corresponding Author


There have been significant advances in science and technology in recent years. Therefore, all countries need qualified people who can take on the challenges of life today and compete in the international arena. This has led countries to adopt new approaches to education. STEM education is one of the latest examples of those approaches. This study investigated science teachers’ views on assessment and evaluation methods in STEM education. The study adopted a phenomenology design. The sample consisted of 22 science teachers from public or private schools in different provinces in Turkey in the 2021-2022 academic year. All participants were experienced in STEM education. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview questionnaire developed by the researchers. The study had two significant results. First, participants used process- and outcome-oriented methods to evaluate STEM education. Second, they made some errors and faced some challenges in evaluating STEM education. However, those errors and challenges were of teacher or education system origin. Therefore, schools should provide teachers with in-service training on assessment and evaluation methods in STEM education, and educators should develop different measurement tools to help teachers make fewer errors and overcome the challenges they face in evaluating STEM education.



  • Abdioğlu, C., Çevik, M., & Koşar, H. (2021). Investigating STEM awareness of university teacher educators. European Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 03. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/6559
  • Akgündüz, D. (2018). Okul öncesinden üniversiteye kuram ve uygulamada STEM eğitimi [STEM education in theory and practice from preschool to university]. Anı.
  • 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), em1969. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/10882
  • Asunda, P. A. (2014). A conceptual framework for STEM integration into the curriculum through career and technical education. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 49(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE49.1Asunda
  • Bakirci, H., & Karisan, D. (2018). Investigating the preservice primary school, mathematics and science teachers' STEM awareness. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(1), 32-42.
  • Ball, D. L., & Hill, H. C. (2009). Measuring teacher quality in practice. In D. H. Gittomer (Ed.), Measurement issues and assessment for teaching quality (pp. 80–98). Sage Publications.
  • Çepni, S. (2018). Kuramdan uygulamaya STEM eğitimi [STEM education from theory to practice]. Pegem Academy.
  • Daugherty, M.K., Carter, V., & Swagerty, L. (2014). Elementary STEM education: The future for technology and engineering education? Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 49(1), 45-55. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE49.1Daugherty
  • Department of Commerce. (2012). The competitiveness and innovative capacity of the United States. Retrieved from www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/. . ./compe-tes_010511_0.pdf.
  • Eroğlu, S., & Bektaş, O. (2016). Ideas of science teachers took STEM education about STEM based activities. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 4(3), 43-67.
  • Fan, S.C., & Yu, K.C. (2016). Core value and implementation of the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics curriculum in technology education. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 61(2), 153–183. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2016.61(2).06
  • Fırat, E. A. (2020). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics ıntegration: science teachers’ perceptions and beliefs. Science Education International, 31(1), 104-116. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i1.11
  • Gonzalez, H.B., & Kuenzi, J.J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
  • Hiebert, J. & Grouws, D. A. (2007). Effective teaching for the development of skill and conceptual understanding of number: What is most effective? [Research brief for NCTM]. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • İnançlı, E. & Timur, B. (2018). Science teacher and teacher candidates' opinions about STEM education. International Journal of Science and Education, 1(1), 48-68.
  • Karakaya (2021). Investigating science high school students' STEM iıntegration processes [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Kelley, T.R., & Knowles, J.G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.
  • Kim, G. S., & Choi, S. Y. (2012). The effect of creative problem solving ability and scientific attitude through the science based steam program in the elementary gifted students. Elementary Science Education, 31(2), 216-226. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2012.31.2.216
  • Korbel, P. (2016). Measuring STEM in vocational education and training. National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED570653.
  • Lewis, T. (2005). Coming to terms with engineering design as content. Journal of Technology Education, 16(2), 37–54.
  • Merriam, S. B., & Grenier, R. S. (2019). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. Jossey-Bass.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
  • Ministry of National Education (MEB/MoNE). (2018). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı (İlkokul ve Ortaokul 3,4,5,6,7 ve 8. sınıflar) [ Science Course Curriculum (Primary and Secondary School 3,4,5,6,7 and 8th grades)]. Retrieved from http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=325
  • Moore, T. J., Mathis, C. A., Guzey, S. S., Glancy, A.W., & Siverling, E.A. (2014, October). STEM integration in the middle grades: A case study of teacher implementation. In 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings (pp. 1-8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2014.7044312
  • Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M.S., Wang, H.-H., Tank, K.M., & Roehrig, G.H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In J. Strobel, S. Purzer, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Research into practice (pp. 35–60). Sense.
  • Morrison, J., & Bartlett, B. (2009). STEM as a curriculum: An experimental approach. Retrieved from http://www.lab-aids.com/docs/stem/EdWeekArticleSTEM.pdf
  • National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm revisited, rapidly approaching a category 5. National Academies Press.
  • National Research Council. (2014). Developing assessments for the next generation science standards. National Academies Press.
  • Odabaşı, Ş. Y. (2018). Merhaba STEM: Yenilikçi bir öğretim yaklaşımı [Hello STEM: An innovative teaching approach]. In K. A. Kırkıç & E. Aydın (Eds.), STEM için ölçme ve değerlendirme [Assessment and evaluation for STEM] (s.109-122). Eğitim Pub.
  • Özbilen, A. G. (2018). Teacher opinions and awareness about STEM education. Scientific Educational Studies, 2(1), 1-21.
  • Özcan, H., & Koştur, H.İ. (2018). Science teachers' opinions about STEM education. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(4), 364-373. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.466841
  • Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09332374
  • Potter, B., Ernst, J., & Glennie, E. (2017). Performance-based assessment in the secondary STEM classroom. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 76(6), 18-22.
  • Pringle, R.M., Mesa, J., & Hayes, L. (2017). Professional development for middle school science teachers: does an educative curriculum make a difference? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2016.1277599
  • Saxton, E., Burns, R., Holveck, S., Kelley, S., Prince, D., Rigelman, N., & Skinner, E. A. (2014). A common measurement system for K-12 STEM education: Adopting an educational evaluation methodology that elevates theoretical foundations and systems thinking. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 40, 18-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.11.005
  • Şardağ, M., Ecevit, T., Top, G., Kaya, G. & Çakmakcı, G. (2018). Fen ve mühendislik uygulamaları[Science and engineering applications]. In G. Çakmakcı & A. Tekbıyık (Eds.), Güncel öğretim programlarına uygun ve STEM destekli fen bilimleri öğretimi [STEM-supported science teaching in accordance with current curricula] (pp. 239-264). Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Tekerek, B., & Karakaya, F. (2018). STEM education awareness of pre-service science teachers. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 5(2), 348-359.
  • Thomasian, J. (2011). Building a science, technology, engineering and math education agenda. National Governors Association.
  • Uyar, A., Canpolat, M., & Şan, İ. (2021). Views of teachers and students in STEM center on STEM education: The sample of payastem center. MANAS Journal of Social Studies, 10(1), 151-170.
  • Watson, S. W., Cothern, T. L., & Peters, M. L. (2020). School administrators’ perceptions of STEM awareness and resources. Editorial Review Board, 17(3), 19-40.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin.
  • Yıldırım, B. (2018). Research on teacher opinions on STEM practices. Journal of Education Theory and Practical Research, 4(1), 42-53.
  • Yıldırım, B. (2021). Preschool STEM Activities: Preschool teachers' preparation and views. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(2), 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-020-01056-2
  • Zengin, N., Kaya, G., & Pektaş, M. (2020). Investigation of measurement and assessment methods used in STEM-based research. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 40(2), 329-355.


This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.