ReviewiScience2025
Why online science education falls short.
Review in iScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cloud-connected pluripotent stem cell platform enhances scientific identity in underrepresented students.Stem cell reports · 2026Article
- Cloud-Connected Pluripotent Stem Cell Platform Enhances Scientific Identity in Underrepresented Students.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- The Adaptive Lab Mentor (ALM): An AI-Driven IoT Framework for Real-Time Personalized Guidance in Hands-On Engineering Education.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Remote science education has expanded rapidly, offering access to STEM learning at an unprecedented scale. Yet most online platforms prioritize content delivery through videos, simulations, and assessments, excluding the central experience of live experimentation. Without opportunities to generate data, test ideas, and engage in discovery, students miss chances to develop technical intuition, experimental reasoning, and ownership of the scientific process. This absence undermines inquiry-based learning, which builds understanding through doing rather than watching. Here, I examine how the current structure of online science education falls short, emphasizing the consequences of excluding real-time, hands-on investigation for reasoning, identity, and engagement. I highlight a growing class of cloud-connected platforms that allow students to remotely design, run, and analyze live experiments. By restoring access to real-time inquiry, these systems have been shown to improve learning outcomes and strengthen STEM identity, offering a promising direction for scalable, interactive science education that broadens participation globally.
Indexed as
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.