ArticleHeliyon2024
The axiological foundations of innovation in STEM education - A systematic review and ethical meta-analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Values are crucial in decision-making, including processes related to science and technology, despite scientists often being unaware of them. Because a goal of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is to foster innovation, values have become fundamental in directing science and technology policies and shaping organizational cultures to leverage innovation. However, most research on STEM education has focused on improving performance or access to STEM education while overlooking its axiological configuration. This study analyzes the different value systems emerging in the current literature on STEM higher education and identifies the relevant stakeholders. Method: In this systematic review and ethical meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the most prominent studies on STEM education and its core values. We followed a Ricoeur-inspired hermeneutical methodology using Atlas ti 8.4.4. Values are identified and classified using a systematic approach to integrate axiological landscapes. Results: The literature does not explicitly discuss the value of STEM education for innovation. However, social values appear to be at the intersection and the cornerstone of basic, economic, aesthetic, and epistemic values, as most social values also manifest these four systems. The most common manifestation of the value system is the capability approach to justice, followed by the beauty of recognition and success and, in third place, racism and social disparities. The analyzed literature emphasizes STEM education's social, political, and economic determinants. However, there is an epistemic gap in the indispensable value of innovating and assessing STEM education. Conclusions: We propose an organizational culture model for STEM education that considers the goals, ends, values, and behaviors of students, teachers, educational institutions, and the government. This model can help fill the axiological gaps in STEM education.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.