Transforming STEM Pedagogy through Observation-Driven Learning: An Astronomy Case Study

Transforming STEM pedagogy from theoretical education to substantive learning continues to pose a problem, especially in underfunded institutions. This study looks at a hands-on learning method used in an astronomy curriculum to address poor understanding and low student interest in STEM subjects. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of direct celestial observation in enhancing STEM understanding. A descriptive pre–post approach was utilized, employing structured questionnaires delivered before to and during a university-school outreach intervention that included guided telescope viewing and incorporated STEM activities. The data were analyzed utilizing frequency and percentage metrics. The results demonstrate significant enhancements in students' comprehension of STEM subjects after engaging in the program, implying the potential efficacy of observation-based learning in a rural educational setting. The research finds that observation-based astronomy education is an excellent teaching technique for improving STEM education in rural and resource-constrained environments.

astronomy, STEM, pedagogy, observation-driven, secondary student

1. OECD, OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030: Education and Skills for the Future, Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. UNESCO, Reimagining Our Futures Together: A New Social Contract for Education, Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. S. Marginson, J. Tytler, B. Freeman, and K. Roberts, “STEM education and inequality in the twenty-first century,” Higher Education, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. L. D. English, “STEM education K–12: Perspectives on integration,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson Education, 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. S. Freeman et al., “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 111, no. 23, pp. 8410–8415, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. J. D. Plummer and K. J. Small, “Learning astronomy through observation: The role of evidence in conceptual change,” Science Education, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 276–300, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. J. D. Plummer, K. D. Wasko, and T. F. Slater, “Children learning astronomy through observation,” Science Education, vol. 104, no. 2, pp. 1–25, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. J. M. Bailey and T. F. Slater, “Astronomy education research: Development, impact, and future directions,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. J. M. Bailey, E. E. Prather, and T. F. Slater, “Astronomy education research,” Physics Today, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 40–46, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. P. S. Bretones and M. Compiani, “Astronomy education and inquiry-based learning,” Science Education International, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 101–108, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. OECD, Rural Education and Innovation: Improving Learning Outcomes in Rural Contexts, Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y & Froyd, Jeffrey E. (202) Research and trends in STEM education: a systematic review of journal publications. IJ STEM Ed 7, 11 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. J. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. L. Cohen, L. Manion, and K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education, 8th ed. London, UK: Routledge, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. R. K. Yin, Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. J. W. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 6th ed. Boston, MA, USA: Pearson, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. A. Field, Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, 5th ed. London, UK: Sage, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. D. B. Dillman, J. D. Smyth, and L. M. Christian, Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. R. E. Slavin, Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice, 12th ed. Boston, MA, USA: Pearson, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. J. Hattie, Visible Learning: Feedback, London, UK: Routledge, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Othman Zainon (2025). Service Learning in Astronomy Outreach: Engaging Secondary School Students in Malaysia. International Journal Of Research And Innovation In Social Science (IJRISS). ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue IIIS February 2025. Pg 821 - 829 | Special Issue on Education. [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