ARAB HIGHER EDUCATION SCIENCE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED INNOVATIVE SCIENCE TEACHING AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THEIR SCIENTIFIC PATHWAY CHOICES
Abstract
This article examines how Arab higher education science students perceive the technology-enhanced innovative teaching methods used by their secondary school science teachers and how these experiences influenced their decisions to pursue scientific pathways. It starts from the view that students’ choices of scientific pathways cannot be explained by grades, family expectations, or labor-market considerations alone. These choices are also shaped by the quality of classroom pedagogy, the encouragement students receive from teachers, the way technology is integrated, and the gradual development of a science identity. The study used a qualitative research design. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 30 Arab students enrolled in science-related programs in higher education, including biology, chemistry, physics, medicine, pharmacy, nursing, computer science, engineering, and related fields. The interviews were analyzed thematically in relation to innovative science teaching, technology-enhanced learning, motivation, self-efficacy, science identity, and contextual challenges in Arab education. The interviews show that students often described secondary school as a turning point when science moved from memorized information to active inquiry, experimentation, digital visualization, and project-based learning. Technology was perceived as valuable when it made invisible scientific processes visible, supported experimentation, or enabled data collection and analysis. However, students repeatedly emphasized that the teacher’s role was more important than the digital tool itself: effective teachers used technology to ask questions, encourage inquiry, normalize mistakes, and build confidence. They also show that successful school science experiences strengthened motivation, self-efficacy, and a sense of belonging to science, thereby influencing students’ academic choices. At the same time, students did not ignore the limits of their school context. They identified barriers such as limited laboratory resources, unequal technological infrastructure, pressure from matriculation examinations, insufficient exposure to academic scientific language, and gaps between Arab schools and better-resourced schools. The article concludes that technology-enhanced innovative science teaching can support Arab students’ entry into scientific pathways when it is implemented as a meaningful pedagogical practice embedded in supportive teacher-student relationships and culturally responsive school environments.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Acar Sesen, B., & Mutlu, A. (2014). An action research to overcome undergraduates’ laboratory anxiety. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 546–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.241
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211433290
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Social_Foundations_of_Thought_and_Action.html?id=HJhqAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y
Baptista, M., Jacinto, H., & Martins, I. (2023). What is a good explanation in integrated STEM education? ZDM Mathematics Education, 55, 1255–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01517-z
Batdi, V., Talan, T., & Semerci, C. (2019). Meta-analytic and meta-thematic analysis of STEM education. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7, 382–399. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336567837_Meta-analytic_and_meta-thematic_analysis_of_STEM_education
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books?id=TJMWngEACAAJ&printsec=copyright&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
Britner, S. L. (2008). Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical, and Earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 955–970. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20249
Britner, S. L. (2010). Science anxiety: Relationship to achievement, self-efficacy, and pedagogical factors. In J. C. Cassady (Ed.), Anxiety in schools: The causes, consequences, and solutions for academic anxieties (pp. 79–94). Peter Lang. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288382414_Science_anxiety_self-efficacy_and_self-concept_of_undergraduate_biology_students
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. ASCD. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/In_Search_of_Understanding.html?id=9W_VB5TjxxoC&redir_esc=y
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1962-00777-001
Chachashvili-Bolotin, S., Milner-Bolotin, M., & Lissitsa, S. (2016). Examination of factors predicting secondary students’ interest in tertiary STEM education. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 366–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1143137
Chauke, T. A. (2022). Gender differences in determinants of students’ interest in STEM education. Social Sciences, 11(11), Article 534. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11110534
Chen, Y., So, W. M. W., Zhu, J., & Chiu, S. W. K. (2024). STEM learning opportunities and career aspirations: The interactive effect of students’ self-concept and perceptions of STEM professionals. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00466-7
Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2017). Relationship of middle school student STEM interest to career intent. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 3(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.275649
Cooper, K. M., Downing, V. R., & Brownell, S. E. (2018). The influence of active learning practices on student anxiety in large-enrollment college science classrooms. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(23), 6–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0123-6
Dede, Y., & Yaman, S. (2008). A questionnaire for motivation toward science learning: A validity and reliability study. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(1), 19–37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26594850_A_Questionnaire_for_Motivation_towards_Science_Learning_A_Validity_and_Reliability_Study
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153
England, B. J., Brigati, J. R., Schussler, E. E., & Chen, M. M. (2019). Student anxiety and perception of difficulty impact performance and persistence in introductory biology courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(2), 0284–0290. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-12-0284
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
Halim, L., Shahali, E., & Iksan, Z. (2021). Effect of environmental factors on students’ interest in STEM careers: The mediating role of self-efficacy. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(4), 1394–1411. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.2008341
Han, J. H., Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2021). Factors influencing student STEM learning: Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy, 21st century skills, and career awareness. Journal for STEM Education Research, 4(2), 117–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-021-00053-3
Hiğde, E., & Aktamış, H. (2022). The effects of STEM activities on students’ STEM career interests, motivation, science process skills, science achievement and views. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43, 101000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101000
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. A. (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospectus, and an agenda for research. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18612
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1996). Career development from a social cognitive perspective. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (pp. 373–421). Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from https://www.wiley.com/en-ca/shop/general-introductory-business-management/career-choice-and-development-4th-edition-p-9780787957414
Mallow, J. V. (2006). Science anxiety: Research and action. NSTA Press. Retrieved from https://my.nsta.org/resource/960/science-anxiety-research-and-action
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education, 95(5), 877–907. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20441
Mohtar, L. E., Halim, L., Rahman, N. A., Maat, S. M., Iksan, Z. H., & Osman, K. (2019). A model of interest in STEM careers among secondary school students. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(3), 404–416. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.404
Okumuş, H., Ghorbani, S., & Karatepe, S. (2019). A study on relationship between financial performance and supply chain in the accepted companies in Borsa Istanbul. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 7(3), 417-426. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.uscm.2018.12.005
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitude towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199
Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Arriassecq, I. A. (2022). Theoretical framework for integrated STEM education. Science & Education, 31, 383–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00242-x
Peterman, K., Kermish-Allen, R., Knezek, G., Christensen, R., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2016). Measuring student career interest within the context of technology-enhanced STEM projects: A cross-project comparison study based on the career interest questionnaire. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 833–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9617-5
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. International University Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/11494-000
Rafanan, R. J. L., De Guzman, C. Y., & Rogayan, D. V. (2020). Pursuing STEM careers: Perspectives of senior high school students. Participatory Educational Research, 7(3), 38–58. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.34.7.3
Şahin, A., Waxman, H. C., Demirci, E., & Rangel, V. S. (2019). An investigation of harmony public school students’ college enrollment and STEM major selection rates and perceptions of factors in STEM major selection. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(7), 1249–1269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10017-0
Sellami, A., Santhosh, M., Bhadra, J., & Ahmad, Z. (2023). High school students’ STEM interests and career aspirations in Qatar: An exploratory study. Heliyon, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13898
Shinwell, M., Cohen, H., & Baruch, A. (2021). החברה הערבית: ניתוח השוואתי ועקרונות מנחים | Fostering and utilizing human capital in Israel: The education system as an engine for socio-economic integration of the Arab society. Ministry of Social Equality.
UNESCO. (2017). Cracking the code: Girls’ and women’s education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). UNESCO. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000253479
Vooren, M., Haelermans, C., Groot, W., & Van Den Brink, H. M. (2022). Comparing success of female students to their male counterparts in the STEM fields: An empirical analysis from enrollment until graduation using longitudinal register data. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00318-8
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Zhao, J., Wijaya, T. T., Mailizar, M., & Habibi, A. (2022). Factors influencing student satisfaction toward STEM education: Exploratory study using structural equation modeling. Applied Sciences, 12(19), 9717. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12199717
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v13i7.6869
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Olfat Daher
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).
