Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40934051›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Assessing STEM differentiation needs based on spatial ability and engagement: implications for making activities.

Ellen Egeland Flø, Jørgen Hammer Smedsrud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ellen Egeland FløDepartment of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Jørgen Hammer SmedsrudBI Norwegian Business School, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Spatial ability is robustly correlated with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) achievement, but schools have generally not differentiated with regard to this ability. Moreover, the level of involvement, focus, and motivation that students exhibit in school activities, specifically their engagement, also plays a central role in overall achievement. Therefore, this study aims to develop a STEM scale to identify differentiation needs based on spatial ability and engagement. These differentiation needs may be addressed by instructional methods such as making activities, where students design and construct physical objects. Because these activities enhance engagement, can improve spatial ability, and allow students to use their spatial skills, this study also aims to discuss the implications of using making activities for differentiation. Methods: To address these aims, 535 students from grades 5 to 10 (9-16 years) from two medium-sized suburban and semi-rural municipalities were randomly split into one exploratory and one confirmatory sample, where participants were students. An exploratory and confirmatory item response theory (IRT) approach was used for the data analysis. Correlations of the latent variable were sought for spatial ability and engagement. Results: The STEM scale demonstrated good psychometric properties, and the underlying factor of the scale correlated positively with engagement and spatial ability. Discussion: Thus, the STEM scale can be useful for educational practice by identifying students needing differentiation concerning their spatial ability level, where their level of engagement is also considered. Making activities could potentially benefit some students more than others, depending on their STEM scale scores.

Indexed as

differentiationengagementmaking activitiesspatial abilitystem

Identifiers

PMID40934051
PMCPMC12419082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.