Effectiveness of Rasberry Pi-Based Laboratory on Students’ Attitude Towards STEM among Pre-University Students

This study investigated the effectiveness of the Raspberry Pi-Assisted Physics Laboratory for Pre-University Students (Rasphy) in enhancing students’ attitudes toward STEM with a specific emphasis on science, technology, engineering and mathematics. This study employed Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory as the theoretical foundation for a twelve-week intervention involving 134 pre-university students. During this period, participants engaged in five structured, hands-on Electricity experiments using Raspberry Pi microcomputers. The Rasphy learning environment integrated real-world applications such as circuit construction and data logging to encourage active learning and critical thinking. A quasi-experimental one-group pre-test, post-test and delayed post-test design was utilised. Inferential analysis through repeated-measures MANOVA revealed a significant main effect of time (Wilks’ Lambda = 0.376, F(6,128) = 35.48, p < 0.001). Post-hoc Bonferroni tests confirmed sustained improvements in students’ attitudes across all STEM domains. Large effect sizes were recorded for engineering (η² = 0.39), technology (η² = 0.41), science (η² = 0.33), and mathematics (η² = 0.31). Notably, the minimum attitude score in engineering increased from 2.00 to 3.40 after the intervention. The findings demonstrate that the Rasphy laboratory effectively fostered conceptual understanding and more positive STEM attitudes through immersive and experiential activities. This study provides empirical support for integrating low-cost digital technologies like Raspberry Pi in pre-university physics education to cultivate STEM interest, enhance motivation and develop 21st-century skills.

Physics, Raspberry Pi

1. Ariza, M., & Baez, L. (2022). Integrating low-cost microcomputers in science education: Enhancing students’ engagement and understanding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(4), 512–524. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bakar, R. (2022). Student attitudes towards science and technology: The impact of teacher-centred approaches. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 8(1), 25–33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Balon, N., & Simić, M. (2019). Raspberry Pi as an affordable tool for physics education laboratories. Physics Education, 54(5), 055017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Baran, E., Canbazoglu Bilici, S., Mesutoglu, C., & Ocak, C. (2019). Integrating STEM into preservice science teacher education: A grounded theory study. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1–21. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Beier, M. E., Kim, M. H., Saterbak, A., Leautaud, V., Bishnoi, S., & Gilberto, J. M. (2019). The effect of authentic project-based learning on attitudes and career aspirations in STEM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(1), 3–23. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Ceylan, E., & Ozdilek, Z. (2015). A comparative study on integrated STEM instruction and conventional teaching in physics education. European Journal of Physics Education, 6(3), 1–13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chambers, S. K. (2014). Improving student motivation and attitudes towards physics. Science Education International, 25(2), 102–116. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Eugenijus, V. (2023). Interactive STEM integration for enhancing learning engagement: A review of recent evidence. Contemporary Educational Research Journal, 11(2), 101–117. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Faridi, A., Ahmad, N., & Rahman, R. (2021). Active learning and conceptual understanding in science classrooms: A systematic review. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 213–234. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Forbes, A., & Skamp, K. (2015). Secondary students and engagement with science: What are the implications for science teachers? Teaching Science, 61(1), 6–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2013). Towards a new end: New pedagogies for deep learning. Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hacieminoglu, E. (2016). Elementary school students’ attitudes toward science and related variables. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(2), 35–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hair, J. F. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Haroky, A. (2019). Enhancing students’ visualization skills in physics through microcomputer-based learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7(4), 315–326. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hatta, M., & Budiyanto, M. (2021). Microcomputer-assisted physics experiments: Bridging theory and practice. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1805, 012012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hoehn, J. R., Hernandez, P. R., & Koretsky, M. D. (2021). Barriers to implementing open-ended practices in undergraduate STEM laboratories. Journal of Engineering Education, 110(2), 311–333. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Idris, M., & Idris, S. (2020). The role of practical learning in improving 21st-century skills among students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(6), 202–215. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

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

23. Kuo Hung Tseng, K. H. (2011). Students’ attitudes toward STEM: The mediating role of motivation. Research in Science Education, 41(5), 793–813. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Lin, C. H., Yen, C. H., & Chang, W. C. (2015). Exploring Raspberry Pi-based physics experiments in high school education. International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering, 11(6), 45–50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Maison, M. (2020). Students’ attitudes toward science learning: The influence of experiential learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1521, 042043. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Makhrus, M., Wahyudi, W., & Zuhdi, M. (2021). Teacher-centered instruction and misconceptions in physics learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia, 17(1), 37–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Mahmood, S., Shah, A., & Ahmad, M. (2019). Microcomputers in laboratory learning: Opportunities and challenges. Education and Information Technologies, 24(5), 3313–3327. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Mpofu, N. (2019). Bridging the gap between theory and practice in STEM education. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 23(3), 275–287. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Naukkarinen, J., & Bairoh, S. (2020). Integration of physics with engineering contexts in secondary education. Physics Education, 55(5), 055012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Oh, P. S., & Yager, R. E. (2004). Development of positive attitudes toward science through constructivist teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 26(8), 903–918. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Pathoni, M., Alrizal, A., & Febriyanti, D. (2020). The use of Raspberry Pi in physics laboratory learning to improve students’ understanding. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia, 8(2), 101–109. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Prasetya, A., Hirashima, T., & Hayashi, Y. (2020). Students’ preferences for open-ended experimental tasks in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 42(9), 1421–1440. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Purzer, S., Goldstein, M. H., Adams, R. S., Xie, C., & Nourian, S. (2015). An exploratory study of engineering design as a contextual learning approach for STEM integration. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 5(2), 40–53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Rasdi, N. M., Hassan, N., & Mahmud, M. (2021). Evaluating intervention effectiveness using quasiexperimental design. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 18(1), 175–192. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Ravitz, J. (2010). Beyond changing culture in small high schools: Reform models and changing instruction with project-based learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(3), 290–312. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Spaan, D., Kolloffel, B., & de Jong, T. (2022). The role of active learning in developing conceptual understanding in physics. Learning and Instruction, 78, 101505. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Suri, R. (2021). Simplifying physics concepts through low-cost microcomputers. Journal of Science Education Research, 12(3), 215–224. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Valko, N., & Osadchyi, V. (2021). Integrated STEM learning through collaborative projects in physics education. European Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1–12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Voo, L. P., Hemani, A., & Cassidy, P. (2022). Electricity concepts in physics: Bridging theory and realworld applications. Physics Education Research Journal, 18(2), 55–64. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. (2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy-value theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249–263. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. White, R., & Harrison, A. (2012). The impact of experiential learning on science attitudes and engagement. Research in Science Education, 42(2), 287–302. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Unfried, A., Faber, M., Stanhope, D. S., & Wiebe, E. (2015). The development and validation of a measure of student attitudes toward science, technology, engineering, and math (S-STEM). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(7), 622–639. [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