Utilizing Context-Based Stem Education Approach on Teaching Science 4

This study used an experimental research design with a one-group pre-test and posttest design to determine the impact of utilizing a context-based STEM education approach on teaching Science to Grade 4 learners of Sultan Naga Dimaporo Memorial Integrated School (SNDMIS), Lanao del Norte. The respondents of the study were thirty-eight (38) Grade 4 pupils from Section A, officially enrolled during the Academic Year 2025–2026. A 20-item multiple-choice test aligned with the Science 4 curriculum was administered before and after the intervention to measure pupils’ performance, and data were analyzed using frequency and percentage distribution and a paired t-test. Findings revealed that pre-test scores were low, with most pupils performing below average, while post-test results showed that most pupils were above average, implying significant improvement from pretest to posttest scores. The mean score increased from 10.92 to 14.32, and the t-test confirmed a significant difference between pre-test and post-test scores (t = 6.83, p < 0.05). This indicates a significant improvement in science performance after utilizing the context-based STEM education approach. Pupils designed and constructed a vertical garden prototype using recyclable and affordable materials, which were evaluated in terms of creativity and neatness, teamwork, and effort, scoring 96.67% and 95.33% respectively and interpreted as Outstanding. These results highlight the efficacy of hands-on learning. The study concludes that the utilization of context-based STEM education and integration of local and relatable situations improves pupils’ motivation, engagement, understanding of scientific concepts, and problem-solving skills in meaningful learning environments.

Context-Based, STEM Education, Experimental Research

1. 21stCentEd. (2023, April 4). The importance of STEM education for 21st-Century students. 21stCenturyEd. https://21stcented.com/the-importance-of-stem-education-for-21st-century-students/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Abu-Rasheed, Hasan & Weber, Christian & Fathi, Madjid. (2023). Context based learning: a survey of contextual indicators for personalized and adaptive learning recommendations. A pedagogical and technical perspective. 10.48550/arXiv.2308.16661. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Admiraal, W., Post, L., Guo, P., Saab, N., Makinen, S., Rainio, O., Vuori, J., Bourgeois, J., Kortuem, G., & Danford, G. (2019). Students as Future Workers: Cross-border Multidisciplinary Learning Labs in Higher Education. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 3(2), 85-94. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Afifah, R., Kuswanto, H., & BN, A. M. (2025). A Bibliometric Analysis of Problem-Solving Skill and STEM Integration in Education (Scopus Database 2004-2024). Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 11(2), 375–380. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v11i2.9432 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Aguilera, D., & Ortiz-Revilla, J. (2021). STEM vs. STEAM Education and Student Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review. Education Sciences, 11(7), 331. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070331 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Aydin-Ceran, A. (2024). Student experiences in context-based STEM instructional design: An investigation focused on scientific creativity and interest in STEM careers. Education Sciences, 15(9), 1218. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091218 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bebek, G. (2021). The effect of STEM based activity designed for gifted students on students’ scientific creativity, cognitive achievement and critical thinking skills: A case study on renewable energy resources [Doctoral dissertation, Trabzon University]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Berger, N., Mackenzie, E., and Holmes, K. (2020). Positive Attitudes Towards Mathematics and Science Are Mutually Beneficial for Student Achievement: A Latent Profile Analysis of TIMSS 2015. Aust. Educ. Res. 47 (3), 409–444. doi:10.1007/s13384-020-00379- [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cabbar, B. G., & Senel, H. (2020). Content analysis of biology education research that used context-based approaches: The case of Turkey. Journal of Educational Issues, 6(1), 203–218. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1255845 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. CEDTyClea. (2024). DepEd eyes better PISA results. BusinessWorld Online. https://www.bworldonline.com/the-nation/2024/07/24/610180/deped-eyes-better-pisa-results/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Cevik, M., & Bakioglu, B. (2022). The Effect of STEM Education Integrated into Teaching-Learning Approaches (SEITLA) on Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis Study. International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(2), 119-135. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Chen, Y. L., Huang, L. F., & Wu, P. C. (2021). Preservice preschool teachers' self-efficacy in and need for STEM education professional development: STEM pedagogical belief as a mediator. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(2), 137-147. doi:10.1007/s10643-020-01055-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Donohue, K., Buck, G.A., & Akerson, V. (2020). Where's the Science? Exploring a New Science Teacher Educator's Theoretical and Practical Understandings of Scientific Inquiry. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(1), 1-13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fajrina, S., Lufri, L., & Ahda, Y. (2020). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) as A Learning Approach to Improve 21st Century Skills: A Review. International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering (iJOE), 16(07), pp. 95–104. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v16i07.14101 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2020). Supporting contextualization: Lessons learned from throughout the globe. In I. S. Tapia (Ed.), International perspectives on the contextualization of science education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27982-0_9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gizaw, Gidele & Sorsa, Solomon. (2023). Improving Science Process Skills of Students: A Review of Literature. Science Education International. 34. 216-224. 10.33828/sei.v34.i3.5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Guerra-Reyes, F., Guerra-Dávila, E., Naranjo-Toro, M., Basantes-Andrade, A., & Guevara-Betancourt, S. (2024). Misconceptions in the learning of natural sciences: A systematic review. Education Sciences, 14(5), Article 497. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050497 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hacıeminoglu, E., Yıldız, N. G., & Şeker, R. (2022). Factors related to cognitive reasoning of pre-service teachers' science process skills: Role of experiments at home on meaningful learning. Sustainability, 14(13), 7703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137703 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hartig, Hendrik & Nordine, Jeffrey & Neumann, Knut. (2020). Contextualization in the Assessment of Students’ Learning About Science. 10.1007/978-3-030-27982-0_6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Havighurst, R.J. (2025). teaching. Encyclopedia Britannica.https://www.britannica.com/topic/teaching [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Hebebci, M. T., & Usta, E. (2022). The Effects of Integrated STEM Education Practices on Problem Solving Skills, Scientific Creativity, and Critical Thinking Dispositions. Participatory Educational Research, 9(6), 358-379. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.143.9.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Holmes K, Berger N, Mackenzie E, Attard C, Johnson P, Fitzmaurice O, O’Meara N and Ryan V (2022) Editorial: The Impact of Place-Based Contextualized Curriculum on Student Engagement and Motivation in STEM Education. Front. Educ. 6:826656.Doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.826656 https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2022.431.8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Jafarov, S., & Aliyev, Y. (2023). The Role of Stem Education in Preparing Students for the Workforce. Migration Letters, 20(6), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.59670/ml.v20i6.3495 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kelly, J., Edgcomb, A., Bruno, J., Gordon, C., & Vahid, F. (2022). Theory to Practice: Reducing Student Attrition in Online Undergraduate Math. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 8(2), 187-206. Doi: 10.46328/ijres.2622 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kim, Y. R., Park, M. S., & Tjoe, H. (2021). Discovering Concepts of Geometry through Robotics Coding Activities. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 9(3), 406-425. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1205 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Kocsis, Z., Alter, E., & Pusztai, G. (2022). The Role of Student Employment in Persistence and Efficiency in STEM Higher Education. International Journal of Education in Mathematics. Science. and https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2177 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Kostol, K.B., Remmen, K.B. A qualitative study of teachers’ and students’ experiences with a context-based curriculum unit designed in collaboration with STEM professionals and science educators. Discip Interdscip Sci Educ Res 4, 26 (2022). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Kristensen, Mette & Larsen, Dorte & Seidelin, Lars & Svabo, Connie. (2023). The Role of Mathematics in STEM Activities: Syntheses and a Framework from a Literature Review. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology. 12. 418-431. 10.46328/ijemst.3357. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Kurniawan, W., Pathoni, H., Muliawati, L., Kurniawan, D. A., Romadona, D. D., Ningsi, A. P., & Dari, R. W. (2020). Relationship of science process skills and critical thinking of students in physics subject. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11), 5581–5588. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081162 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Martynenko, O. O., Pasha Nova, O. V., Korzhuev, A. V., Prokopyev, A. L. Sokolova, N. L., & Sokolova, E. G. (2023). Exploring attitudes towards STEM education: A global analysis of university, middle school, and elementary school perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(3), em2234. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12968 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Melesse, D., Menkir, S., Yemata, G., & Seifu, A. (2025). Effect of context-based instructional approach on students’ science process skills acquisition in environmental concepts. Education Inquiry, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2025.2453256 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Posttest. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved November 15, 2025, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/posttest [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Pretest. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved November 15, 2025, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pretest [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Science. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved April 30, 2025, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Moller, M. (2022, February 2). What characterizes STEM professionalism? https://hal.science/hal-03745390/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Nehm, R. H., Beggrow, E. P., Opfer, J. E., & Ha, M. (2022). Is active learning enough? The contributions of diagnostic assessment and measuring misconceptions. BioScience, 72(2), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biab111 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Ngozi, P. O. (2021). Enhancing science process skills acquisition in chemistry among secondary school students through context-based learning. Science Education International, 32(4), 323-330. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v32.14.7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Olive, K., Tang, X., Loukomies, A., Juuti, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2022). Gendered difference in motivational profiles, achievement, and STEM aspiration of elementary school students. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954325 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Picardal, M. T., & Sanchez, J. M. P. (2022). Effectiveness of Contextualization in Science instruction to Enhance Science Literacy in the Philippines: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research, 21(1), 140–156. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.1.9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Rasyid, A., Rinto, R., Susanti, M., 2023. Project-Based Learning through the STEM Approach in Elementary Schools: How to Improve Problem-Solving Ability. J. Edu. For. Sustainable Inno 1, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.56916/jesi.v1i1.477 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Seidelin, M. F. M., Larsen, C., Moss, M., & Thomass, D. (2021). The voices of children and adolescents in the archives. In Routledge eBooks (pp. 186–207). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003003618-11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Samba, R., Odoh, C., & Benson, A. (2020). Effects of e-leaming on students' performance, confidence level and science process skills acquisition in basic science and technology. International Journal of Science and Research Methodology, 16(1), 107-126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Schriebl, D., Müller, A. & Robin, N. (2023). Modelling Authenticity in Science Education. Sci & Educ 32, 1021–1048.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00355-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Simsek, F., & Hamzaoglu, E. (2023). The Effect of Context-Based STEM Activities on Secondary School Students’ Scientific Literacy and STEM Motivation. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 16(3), 574-595. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.1190159 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Stone, B. (2024, May 28). The impact of authentic early childhood STEM experiences on cognitive development. https://libjournals.mtsu.edu/index.php/ijwc/article/view/2501 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Svabo, Connie & Shanks, Michael & Zhou, Chunfang & Carleton, Tamara & Characiejiene, Gabriele. (2025). Creative Pragmatics for Active Learning in STEM Education. 10.1007/978-3-031-78720-1_1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Svendsen, M. W. H., Larsen, D. M., & Svabo, C. (2025). Expanding the STEM integration model introducing the learning environment. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 12(4), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.4.2379 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Tenney K, Stringer BP, LaTona-Tequida T, White I. (2023). Conceptualizations and Limitations of STEM Literacy across Learning Theories. J Microbiol Biol Educ.24:000168-22. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00168-22 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Verma, K. D., Singh, P. D., Singh, S., Maurya, S., Nerkar, N., & Thapliyal, N. (2024). Revolutionizing education through holistic application of technology: A blockchain-powered framework for smart learning. In 2023 International Conference on Smart Devices (ICSD) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSD60021.2024.10751355 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study