case study teaching science

View videos, articles, presentations, research papers, and other resources of interest to STEM Teacher Leaders.  

National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science

• Case Studies

This website provides access to an award-winning collection of peer-reviewed case studies. The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science also offers a five-day summer workshop and a two-day fall conference to train faculty in the case method of teaching science. In addition, they are actively engaged in educational research to assess the impact of the case method on student learning.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Microbiol Biol Educ
• v.16(1); 2015 May

Case Study Teaching Method Improves Student Performance and Perceptions of Learning Gains †

Associated data.

• Appendix 1: Example assessment questions used to assess the effectiveness of case studies at promoting learning
• Appendix 2: Student learning gains were assessed using a modified version of the SALG course evaluation tool

Following years of widespread use in business and medical education, the case study teaching method is becoming an increasingly common teaching strategy in science education. However, the current body of research provides limited evidence that the use of published case studies effectively promotes the fulfillment of specific learning objectives integral to many biology courses. This study tested the hypothesis that case studies are more effective than classroom discussions and textbook reading at promoting learning of key biological concepts, development of written and oral communication skills, and comprehension of the relevance of biological concepts to everyday life. This study also tested the hypothesis that case studies produced by the instructor of a course are more effective at promoting learning than those produced by unaffiliated instructors. Additionally, performance on quantitative learning assessments and student perceptions of learning gains were analyzed to determine whether reported perceptions of learning gains accurately reflect academic performance. The results reported here suggest that case studies, regardless of the source, are significantly more effective than other methods of content delivery at increasing performance on examination questions related to chemical bonds, osmosis and diffusion, mitosis and meiosis, and DNA structure and replication. This finding was positively correlated to increased student perceptions of learning gains associated with oral and written communication skills and the ability to recognize connections between biological concepts and other aspects of life. Based on these findings, case studies should be considered as a preferred method for teaching about a variety of concepts in science courses.

INTRODUCTION

The case study teaching method is a highly adaptable style of teaching that involves problem-based learning and promotes the development of analytical skills ( 8 ). By presenting content in the format of a narrative accompanied by questions and activities that promote group discussion and solving of complex problems, case studies facilitate development of the higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning; moving beyond recall of knowledge to analysis, evaluation, and application ( 1 , 9 ). Similarly, case studies facilitate interdisciplinary learning and can be used to highlight connections between specific academic topics and real-world societal issues and applications ( 3 , 9 ). This has been reported to increase student motivation to participate in class activities, which promotes learning and increases performance on assessments ( 7 , 16 , 19 , 23 ). For these reasons, case-based teaching has been widely used in business and medical education for many years ( 4 , 11 , 12 , 14 ). Although case studies were considered a novel method of science education just 20 years ago, the case study teaching method has gained popularity in recent years among an array of scientific disciplines such as biology, chemistry, nursing, and psychology ( 5 – 7 , 9 , 11 , 13 , 15 – 17 , 21 , 22 , 24 ).

Although there is now a substantive and growing body of literature describing how to develop and use case studies in science teaching, current research on the effectiveness of case study teaching at meeting specific learning objectives is of limited scope and depth. Studies have shown that working in groups during completion of case studies significantly improves student perceptions of learning and may increase performance on assessment questions, and that the use of clickers can increase student engagement in case study activities, particularly among non-science majors, women, and freshmen ( 7 , 21 , 22 ). Case study teaching has been shown to improve exam performance in an anatomy and physiology course, increasing the mean score across all exams given in a two-semester sequence from 66% to 73% ( 5 ). Use of case studies was also shown to improve students’ ability to synthesize complex analytical questions about the real-world issues associated with a scientific topic ( 6 ). In a high school chemistry course, it was demonstrated that the case study teaching method produces significant increases in self-reported control of learning, task value, and self-efficacy for learning and performance ( 24 ). This effect on student motivation is important because enhanced motivation for learning activities has been shown to promote student engagement and academic performance ( 19 , 24 ). Additionally, faculty from a number of institutions have reported that using case studies promotes critical thinking, learning, and participation among students, especially in terms of the ability to view an issue from multiple perspectives and to grasp the practical application of core course concepts ( 23 ).

Despite what is known about the effectiveness of case studies in science education, questions remain about the functionality of the case study teaching method at promoting specific learning objectives that are important to many undergraduate biology courses. A recent survey of teachers who use case studies found that the topics most often covered in general biology courses included genetics and heredity, cell structure, cells and energy, chemistry of life, and cell cycle and cancer, suggesting that these topics should be of particular interest in studies that examine the effectiveness of the case study teaching method ( 8 ). However, the existing body of literature lacks direct evidence that the case study method is an effective tool for teaching about this collection of important topics in biology courses. Further, the extent to which case study teaching promotes development of science communication skills and the ability to understand the connections between biological concepts and everyday life has not been examined, yet these are core learning objectives shared by a variety of science courses. Although many instructors have produced case studies for use in their own classrooms, the production of novel case studies is time-consuming and requires skills that not all instructors have perfected. It is therefore important to determine whether case studies published by instructors who are unaffiliated with a particular course can be used effectively and obviate the need for each instructor to develop new case studies for their own courses. The results reported herein indicate that teaching with case studies results in significantly higher performance on examination questions about chemical bonds, osmosis and diffusion, mitosis and meiosis, and DNA structure and replication than that achieved by class discussions and textbook reading for topics of similar complexity. Case studies also increased overall student perceptions of learning gains and perceptions of learning gains specifically related to written and oral communication skills and the ability to grasp connections between scientific topics and their real-world applications. The effectiveness of the case study teaching method at increasing academic performance was not correlated to whether the case study used was authored by the instructor of the course or by an unaffiliated instructor. These findings support increased use of published case studies in the teaching of a variety of biological concepts and learning objectives.

Student population

This study was conducted at Kingsborough Community College, which is part of the City University of New York system, located in Brooklyn, New York. Kingsborough Community College has a diverse population of approximately 19,000 undergraduate students. The student population included in this study was enrolled in the first semester of a two-semester sequence of general (introductory) biology for biology majors during the spring, winter, or summer semester of 2014. A total of 63 students completed the course during this time period; 56 students consented to the inclusion of their data in the study. Of the students included in the study, 23 (41%) were male and 33 (59%) were female; 40 (71%) were registered as college freshmen and 16 (29%) were registered as college sophomores. To normalize participant groups, the same student population pooled from three classes taught by the same instructor was used to assess both experimental and control teaching methods.

Course material

The four biological concepts assessed during this study (chemical bonds, osmosis and diffusion, mitosis and meiosis, and DNA structure and replication) were selected as topics for studying the effectiveness of case study teaching because they were the key concepts addressed by this particular course that were most likely to be taught in a number of other courses, including biology courses for both majors and nonmajors at outside institutions. At the start of this study, relevant existing case studies were freely available from the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS) to address mitosis and meiosis and DNA structure and replication, but published case studies that appropriately addressed chemical bonds and osmosis and diffusion were not available. Therefore, original case studies that addressed the latter two topics were produced as part of this study, and case studies produced by unaffiliated instructors and published by the NCCSTS were used to address the former two topics. By the conclusion of this study, all four case studies had been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication by the NCCSTS ( http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/ ). Four of the remaining core topics covered in this course (macromolecules, photosynthesis, genetic inheritance, and translation) were selected as control lessons to provide control assessment data.

To minimize extraneous variation, control topics and assessments were carefully matched in complexity, format, and number with case studies, and an equal amount of class time was allocated for each case study and the corresponding control lesson. Instruction related to control lessons was delivered using minimal slide-based lectures, with emphasis on textbook reading assignments accompanied by worksheets completed by students in and out of the classroom, and small and large group discussion of key points. Completion of activities and discussion related to all case studies and control topics that were analyzed was conducted in the classroom, with the exception of the take-home portion of the osmosis and diffusion case study.

Data collection and analysis

This study was performed in accordance with a protocol approved by the Kingsborough Community College Human Research Protection Program and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the City University of New York (CUNY IRB reference 539938-1; KCC IRB application #: KCC 13-12-126-0138). Assessment scores were collected from regularly scheduled course examinations. For each case study, control questions were included on the same examination that were similar in number, format, point value, and difficulty level, but related to a different topic covered in the course that was of similar complexity. Complexity and difficulty of both case study and control questions were evaluated using experiential data from previous iterations of the course; the Bloom’s taxonomy designation and amount of material covered by each question, as well as the average score on similar questions achieved by students in previous iterations of the course was considered in determining appropriate controls. All assessment questions were scored using a standardized, pre-determined rubric. Student perceptions of learning gains were assessed using a modified version of the Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) course evaluation tool ( http://www.salgsite.org ), distributed in hardcopy and completed anonymously during the last week of the course. Students were presented with a consent form to opt-in to having their data included in the data analysis. After the course had concluded and final course grades had been posted, data from consenting students were pooled in a database and identifying information was removed prior to analysis. Statistical analysis of data was conducted using the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance and calculation of the R 2 coefficient of determination.

Teaching with case studies improves performance on learning assessments, independent of case study origin

To evaluate the effectiveness of the case study teaching method at promoting learning, student performance on examination questions related to material covered by case studies was compared with performance on questions that covered material addressed through classroom discussions and textbook reading. The latter questions served as control items; assessment items for each case study were compared with control items that were of similar format, difficulty, and point value ( Appendix 1 ). Each of the four case studies resulted in an increase in examination performance compared with control questions that was statistically significant, with an average difference of 18% ( Fig. 1 ). The mean score on case study-related questions was 73% for the chemical bonds case study, 79% for osmosis and diffusion, 76% for mitosis and meiosis, and 70% for DNA structure and replication ( Fig. 1 ). The mean score for non-case study-related control questions was 60%, 54%, 60%, and 52%, respectively ( Fig. 1 ). In terms of examination performance, no significant difference between case studies produced by the instructor of the course (chemical bonds and osmosis and diffusion) and those produced by unaffiliated instructors (mitosis and meiosis and DNA structure and replication) was indicated by the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. However, the 25% difference between the mean score on questions related to the osmosis and diffusion case study and the mean score on the paired control questions was notably higher than the 13–18% differences observed for the other case studies ( Fig. 1 ).

Case study teaching method increases student performance on examination questions. Mean score on a set of examination questions related to lessons covered by case studies (black bars) and paired control questions of similar format and difficulty about an unrelated topic (white bars). Chemical bonds, n = 54; Osmosis and diffusion, n = 54; Mitosis and meiosis, n = 51; DNA structure and replication, n = 50. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean (SEM). Asterisk indicates p < 0.05.

Case study teaching increases student perception of learning gains related to core course objectives

Student learning gains were assessed using a modified version of the SALG course evaluation tool ( Appendix 2 ). To determine whether completing case studies was more effective at increasing student perceptions of learning gains than completing textbook readings or participating in class discussions, perceptions of student learning gains for each were compared. In response to the question “Overall, how much did each of the following aspects of the class help your learning?” 82% of students responded that case studies helped a “good” or “great” amount, compared with 70% for participating in class discussions and 58% for completing textbook reading; only 4% of students responded that case studies helped a “small amount” or “provided no help,” compared with 2% for class discussions and 22% for textbook reading ( Fig. 2A ). The differences in reported learning gains derived from the use of case studies compared with class discussion and textbook readings were statistically significant, while the difference in learning gains associated with class discussion compared with textbook reading was not statistically significant by a narrow margin ( p = 0.051).

The case study teaching method increases student perceptions of learning gains. Student perceptions of learning gains are indicated by plotting responses to the question “How much did each of the following activities: (A) Help your learning overall? (B) Improve your ability to communicate your knowledge of scientific concepts in writing? (C) Improve your ability to communicate your knowledge of scientific concepts orally? (D) Help you understand the connections between scientific concepts and other aspects of your everyday life?” Reponses are represented as follows: Helped a great amount (black bars); Helped a good amount (dark gray bars); Helped a moderate amount (medium gray bars); Helped a small amount (light gray bars); Provided no help (white bars). Asterisk indicates p < 0.05.

To elucidate the effectiveness of case studies at promoting learning gains related to specific course learning objectives compared with class discussions and textbook reading, students were asked how much each of these methods of content delivery specifically helped improve skills that were integral to fulfilling three main course objectives. When students were asked how much each of the methods helped “improve your ability to communicate knowledge of scientific concepts in writing,” 81% of students responded that case studies help a “good” or “great” amount, compared with 63% for class discussions and 59% for textbook reading; only 6% of students responded that case studies helped a “small amount” or “provided no help,” compared with 8% for class discussions and 21% for textbook reading ( Fig. 2B ). When the same question was posed about the ability to communicate orally, 81% of students responded that case studies help a “good” or “great” amount, compared with 68% for class discussions and 50% for textbook reading, while the respective response rates for helped a “small amount” or “provided no help,” were 4%, 6%, and 25% ( Fig. 2C ). The differences in learning gains associated with both written and oral communication were statistically significant when completion of case studies was compared with either participation in class discussion or completion of textbook readings. Compared with textbook reading, class discussions led to a statistically significant increase in oral but not written communication skills.

Students were then asked how much each of the methods helped them “understand the connections between scientific concepts and other aspects of your everyday life.” A total of 79% of respondents declared that case studies help a “good” or “great” amount, compared with 70% for class discussions and 57% for textbook reading ( Fig. 2D ). Only 4% stated that case studies and class discussions helped a “small amount” or “provided no help,” compared with 21% for textbook reading ( Fig. 2D ). Similar to overall learning gains, the use of case studies significantly increased the ability to understand the relevance of science to everyday life compared with class discussion and textbook readings, while the difference in learning gains associated with participation in class discussion compared with textbook reading was not statistically significant ( p = 0.054).

Student perceptions of learning gains resulting from case study teaching are positively correlated to increased performance on examinations, but independent of case study author

To test the hypothesis that case studies produced specifically for this course by the instructor were more effective at promoting learning gains than topically relevant case studies published by authors not associated with this course, perceptions of learning gains were compared for each of the case studies. For both of the case studies produced by the instructor of the course, 87% of students indicated that the case study provided a “good” or “great” amount of help to their learning, and 2% indicated that the case studies provided “little” or “no” help ( Table 1 ). In comparison, an average of 85% of students indicated that the case studies produced by an unaffiliated instructor provided a “good” or “great” amount of help to their learning, and 4% indicated that the case studies provided “little” or “no” help ( Table 1 ). The instructor-produced case studies yielded both the highest and lowest percentage of students reporting the highest level of learning gains (a “great” amount), while case studies produced by unaffiliated instructors yielded intermediate values. Therefore, it can be concluded that the effectiveness of case studies at promoting learning gains is not significantly affected by whether or not the course instructor authored the case study.

Case studies positively affect student perceptions of learning gains about various biological topics.

Finally, to determine whether performance on examination questions accurately predicts student perceptions of learning gains, mean scores on examination questions related to case studies were compared with reported perceptions of learning gains for those case studies ( Fig. 3 ). The coefficient of determination (R 2 value) was 0.81, indicating a strong, but not definitive, positive correlation between perceptions of learning gains and performance on examinations, suggesting that student perception of learning gains is a valid tool for assessing the effectiveness of case studies ( Fig. 3 ). This correlation was independent of case study author.

Perception of learning gains but not author of case study is positively correlated to score on related examination questions. Percentage of students reporting that each specific case study provided “a great amount of help” to their learning was plotted against the point difference between mean score on examination questions related to that case study and mean score on paired control questions. Positive point differences indicate how much higher the mean scores on case study-related questions were than the mean scores on paired control questions. Black squares represent case studies produced by the instructor of the course; white squares represent case studies produced by unaffiliated instructors. R 2 value indicates the coefficient of determination.

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that teaching with case studies produced by the instructor of a course is more effective at promoting learning gains than using case studies produced by unaffiliated instructors. This study also tested the hypothesis that the case study teaching method is more effective than class discussions and textbook reading at promoting learning gains associated with four of the most commonly taught topics in undergraduate general biology courses: chemical bonds, osmosis and diffusion, mitosis and meiosis, and DNA structure and replication. In addition to assessing content-based learning gains, development of written and oral communication skills and the ability to connect scientific topics with real-world applications was also assessed, because these skills were overarching learning objectives of this course, and classroom activities related to both case studies and control lessons were designed to provide opportunities for students to develop these skills. Finally, data were analyzed to determine whether performance on examination questions is positively correlated to student perceptions of learning gains resulting from case study teaching.

Compared with equivalent control questions about topics of similar complexity taught using class discussions and textbook readings, all four case studies produced statistically significant increases in the mean score on examination questions ( Fig. 1 ). This indicates that case studies are more effective than more commonly used, traditional methods of content delivery at promoting learning of a variety of core concepts covered in general biology courses. The average increase in score on each test item was equivalent to nearly two letter grades, which is substantial enough to elevate the average student performance on test items from the unsatisfactory/failing range to the satisfactory/passing range. The finding that there was no statistical difference between case studies in terms of performance on examination questions suggests that case studies are equally effective at promoting learning of disparate topics in biology. The observations that students did not perform significantly less well on the first case study presented (chemical bonds) compared with the other case studies and that performance on examination questions did not progressively increase with each successive case study suggests that the effectiveness of case studies is not directly related to the amount of experience students have using case studies. Furthermore, anecdotal evidence from previous semesters of this course suggests that, of the four topics addressed by cases in this study, DNA structure and function and osmosis and diffusion are the first and second most difficult for students to grasp. The lack of a statistical difference between case studies therefore suggests that the effectiveness of a case study at promoting learning gains is not directly proportional to the difficulty of the concept covered. However, the finding that use of the osmosis and diffusion case study resulted in the greatest increase in examination performance compared with control questions and also produced the highest student perceptions of learning gains is noteworthy and could be attributed to the fact that it was the only case study evaluated that included a hands-on experiment. Because the inclusion of a hands-on kinetic activity may synergistically enhance student engagement and learning and result in an even greater increase in learning gains than case studies that lack this type of activity, it is recommended that case studies that incorporate this type of activity be preferentially utilized.

Student perceptions of learning gains are strongly motivating factors for engagement in the classroom and academic performance, so it is important to assess the effect of any teaching method in this context ( 19 , 24 ). A modified version of the SALG course evaluation tool was used to assess student perceptions of learning gains because it has been previously validated as an efficacious tool ( Appendix 2 ) ( 20 ). Using the SALG tool, case study teaching was demonstrated to significantly increase student perceptions of overall learning gains compared with class discussions and textbook reading ( Fig. 2A ). Case studies were shown to be particularly useful for promoting perceived development of written and oral communication skills and for demonstrating connections between scientific topics and real-world issues and applications ( Figs. 2B–2D ). Further, student perceptions of “great” learning gains positively correlated with increased performance on examination questions, indicating that assessment of learning gains using the SALG tool is both valid and useful in this course setting ( Fig. 3 ). These findings also suggest that case study teaching could be used to increase student motivation and engagement in classroom activities and thus promote learning and performance on assessments. The finding that textbook reading yielded the lowest student perceptions of learning gains was not unexpected, since reading facilitates passive learning while the class discussions and case studies were both designed to promote active learning.

Importantly, there was no statistical difference in student performance on examinations attributed to the two case studies produced by the instructor of the course compared with the two case studies produced by unaffiliated instructors. The average difference between the two instructor-produced case studies and the two case studies published by unaffiliated instructors was only 3% in terms of both the average score on examination questions (76% compared with 73%) and the average increase in score compared with paired control items (14% compared with 17%) ( Fig. 1 ). Even when considering the inherent qualitative differences of course grades, these differences are negligible. Similarly, the effectiveness of case studies at promoting learning gains was not significantly affected by the origin of the case study, as evidenced by similar percentages of students reporting “good” and “great” learning gains regardless of whether the case study was produced by the course instructor or an unaffiliated instructor ( Table 1 ).

The observation that case studies published by unaffiliated instructors are just as effective as those produced by the instructor of a course suggests that instructors can reasonably rely on the use of pre-published case studies relevant to their class rather than investing the considerable time and effort required to produce a novel case study. Case studies covering a wide range of topics in the sciences are available from a number of sources, and many of them are free access. The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS) database ( http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/ ) contains over 500 case studies that are freely available to instructors, and are accompanied by teaching notes that provide logistical advice and additional resources for implementing the case study, as well as a set of assessment questions with a password-protected answer key. Case study repositories are also maintained by BioQUEST Curriculum Consortium ( http://www.bioquest.org/icbl/cases.php ) and the Science Case Network ( http://sciencecasenet.org ); both are available for use by instructors from outside institutions.

It should be noted that all case studies used in this study were rigorously peer-reviewed and accepted for publication by the NCCSTS prior to the completion of this study ( 2 , 10 , 18 , 25 ); the conclusions of this study may not apply to case studies that were not developed in accordance with similar standards. Because case study teaching involves skills such as creative writing and management of dynamic group discussion in a way that is not commonly integrated into many other teaching methods, it is recommended that novice case study teachers seek training or guidance before writing their first case study or implementing the method. The lack of a difference observed in the use of case studies from different sources should be interpreted with some degree of caution since only two sources were represented in this study, and each by only two cases. Furthermore, in an educational setting, quantitative differences in test scores might produce meaningful qualitative differences in course grades even in the absence of a p value that is statistically significant. For example, there is a meaningful qualitative difference between test scores that result in an average grade of C− and test scores that result in an average grade of C+, even if there is no statistically significant difference between the two sets of scores.

In the future, it could be informative to confirm these findings using a larger cohort, by repeating the study at different institutions with different instructors, by evaluating different case studies, and by directly comparing the effectiveness of the case studying teaching method with additional forms of instruction, such as traditional chalkboard and slide-based lecturing, and laboratory-based activities. It may also be informative to examine whether demographic factors such as student age and gender modulate the effectiveness of the case study teaching method, and whether case studies work equally well for non-science majors taking a science course compared with those majoring in the subject. Since the topical material used in this study is often included in other classes in both high school and undergraduate education, such as cell biology, genetics, and chemistry, the conclusions of this study are directly applicable to a broad range of courses. Presently, it is recommended that the use of case studies in teaching undergraduate general biology and other science courses be expanded, especially for the teaching of capacious issues with real-world applications and in classes where development of written and oral communication skills are key objectives. The use of case studies that involve hands-on activities should be emphasized to maximize the benefit of this teaching method. Importantly, instructors can be confident in the use of pre-published case studies to promote learning, as there is no indication that the effectiveness of the case study teaching method is reliant on the production of novel, customized case studies for each course.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

Acknowledgments.

This article benefitted from a President’s Faculty Innovation Grant, Kingsborough Community College. The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.

† Supplemental materials available at http://jmbe.asm.org

Search form

• About Faculty Development and Support
• Programs and Funding Opportunities

Consultations, Observations, and Services

• Strategic Resources & Digital Publications
• Canvas @ Yale Support
• Learning Environments @ Yale
• Teaching Workshops
• Teaching Consultations and Classroom Observations
• Teaching Programs
• Spring Teaching Forum
• Written and Oral Communication Workshops and Panels
• Writing Resources & Tutorials
• About the Graduate Writing Laboratory
• Writing and Public Speaking Consultations
• Writing Workshops and Panels
• Writing Peer-Review Groups
• Writing Retreats and All Writes
• Online Writing Resources for Graduate Students
• About Teaching Development for Graduate and Professional School Students
• Teaching Programs and Grants
• Teaching Forums
• Resources for Graduate Student Teachers
• About Undergraduate Writing and Tutoring
• Academic Strategies Program
• The Writing Center
• STEM Tutoring & Programs
• Humanities & Social Sciences
• Center for Language Study
• Online Course Catalog
• Antiracist Pedagogy
• NECQL 2019: NorthEast Consortium for Quantitative Literacy XXII Meeting
• STEMinar Series
• Teaching in Context: Troubling Times
• Helmsley Postdoctoral Teaching Scholars
• Pedagogical Partners
• Instructional Materials
• Evaluation & Research
• STEM Education Job Opportunities
• AI Guidance for Faculty and Students
• Yale Connect
• Online Education Legal Statements

You are here

Case-based learning.

Case-based learning (CBL) is an established approach used across disciplines where students apply their knowledge to real-world scenarios, promoting higher levels of cognition (see Bloom’s Taxonomy ). In CBL classrooms, students typically work in groups on case studies, stories involving one or more characters and/or scenarios.  The cases present a disciplinary problem or problems for which students devise solutions under the guidance of the instructor. CBL has a strong history of successful implementation in medical, law, and business schools, and is increasingly used within undergraduate education, particularly within pre-professional majors and the sciences (Herreid, 1994). This method involves guided inquiry and is grounded in constructivism whereby students form new meanings by interacting with their knowledge and the environment (Lee, 2012).

There are a number of benefits to using CBL in the classroom. In a review of the literature, Williams (2005) describes how CBL: utilizes collaborative learning, facilitates the integration of learning, develops students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to learn, encourages learner self-reflection and critical reflection, allows for scientific inquiry, integrates knowledge and practice, and supports the development of a variety of learning skills.

CBL has several defining characteristics, including versatility, storytelling power, and efficient self-guided learning.  In a systematic analysis of 104 articles in health professions education, CBL was found to be utilized in courses with less than 50 to over 1000 students (Thistlethwaite et al., 2012). In these classrooms, group sizes ranged from 1 to 30, with most consisting of 2 to 15 students.  Instructors varied in the proportion of time they implemented CBL in the classroom, ranging from one case spanning two hours of classroom time, to year-long case-based courses. These findings demonstrate that instructors use CBL in a variety of ways in their classrooms.

The stories that comprise the framework of case studies are also a key component to CBL’s effectiveness. Jonassen and Hernandez-Serrano (2002, p.66) describe how storytelling:

Is a method of negotiating and renegotiating meanings that allows us to enter into other’s realms of meaning through messages they utter in their stories,

Helps us find our place in a culture,

Allows us to explicate and to interpret, and

Facilitates the attainment of vicarious experience by helping us to distinguish the positive models to emulate from the negative model.

Neurochemically, listening to stories can activate oxytocin, a hormone that increases one’s sensitivity to social cues, resulting in more empathy, generosity, compassion and trustworthiness (Zak, 2013; Kosfeld et al., 2005). The stories within case studies serve as a means by which learners form new understandings through characters and/or scenarios.

CBL is often described in conjunction or in comparison with problem-based learning (PBL). While the lines are often confusingly blurred within the literature, in the most conservative of definitions, the features distinguishing the two approaches include that PBL involves open rather than guided inquiry, is less structured, and the instructor plays a more passive role. In PBL multiple solutions to the problem may exit, but the problem is often initially not well-defined. PBL also has a stronger emphasis on developing self-directed learning. The choice between implementing CBL versus PBL is highly dependent on the goals and context of the instruction.  For example, in a comparison of PBL and CBL approaches during a curricular shift at two medical schools, students and faculty preferred CBL to PBL (Srinivasan et al., 2007). Students perceived CBL to be a more efficient process and more clinically applicable. However, in another context, PBL might be the favored approach.

In a review of the effectiveness of CBL in health profession education, Thistlethwaite et al. (2012), found several benefits:

Students enjoyed the method and thought it enhanced their learning,

Instructors liked how CBL engaged students in learning,

CBL seemed to facilitate small group learning, but the authors could not distinguish between whether it was the case itself or the small group learning that occurred as facilitated by the case.

Other studies have also reported on the effectiveness of CBL in achieving learning outcomes (Bonney, 2015; Breslin, 2008; Herreid, 2013; Krain, 2016). These findings suggest that CBL is a vehicle of engagement for instruction, and facilitates an environment whereby students can construct knowledge.

Science – Students are given a scenario to which they apply their basic science knowledge and problem-solving skills to help them solve the case. One example within the biological sciences is two brothers who have a family history of a genetic illness. They each have mutations within a particular sequence in their DNA. Students work through the case and draw conclusions about the biological impacts of these mutations using basic science. Sample cases: You are Not the Mother of Your Children ; Organic Chemisty and Your Cellphone: Organic Light-Emitting Diodes ;   A Light on Physics: F-Number and Exposure Time

Medicine – Medical or pre-health students read about a patient presenting with specific symptoms. Students decide which questions are important to ask the patient in their medical history, how long they have experienced such symptoms, etc. The case unfolds and students use clinical reasoning, propose relevant tests, develop a differential diagnoses and a plan of treatment. Sample cases: The Case of the Crying Baby: Surgical vs. Medical Management ; The Plan: Ethics and Physician Assisted Suicide ; The Haemophilus Vaccine: A Victory for Immunologic Engineering

Public Health – A case study describes a pandemic of a deadly infectious disease. Students work through the case to identify Patient Zero, the person who was the first to spread the disease, and how that individual became infected.  Sample cases: The Protective Parent ; The Elusive Tuberculosis Case: The CDC and Andrew Speaker ; Credible Voice: WHO-Beijing and the SARS Crisis

Law – A case study presents a legal dilemma for which students use problem solving to decide the best way to advise and defend a client. Students are presented information that changes during the case.  Sample cases: Mortgage Crisis Call (abstract) ; The Case of the Unpaid Interns (abstract) ; Police-Community Dialogue (abstract)

Business – Students work on a case study that presents the history of a business success or failure. They apply business principles learned in the classroom and assess why the venture was successful or not. Sample cases: SELCO-Determining a path forward ; Project Masiluleke: Texting and Testing to Fight HIV/AIDS in South Africa ; Mayo Clinic: Design Thinking in Healthcare

Humanities - Students consider a case that presents a theater facing financial and management difficulties. They apply business and theater principles learned in the classroom to the case, working together to create solutions for the theater. Sample cases: David Geffen School of Drama

Recommendations

Finding and Writing Cases

Consider utilizing or adapting open access cases - The availability of open resources and databases containing cases that instructors can download makes this approach even more accessible in the classroom. Two examples of open databases are the Case Center on Public Leadership and Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Case Program , which focus on government, leadership and public policy case studies.

• Consider writing original cases - In the event that an instructor is unable to find open access cases relevant to their course learning objectives, they may choose to write their own. See the following resources on case writing: Cooking with Betty Crocker: A Recipe for Case Writing ; The Way of Flesch: The Art of Writing Readable Cases ;   Twixt Fact and Fiction: A Case Writer’s Dilemma ; And All That Jazz: An Essay Extolling the Virtues of Writing Case Teaching Notes .

Implementing Cases

Take baby steps if new to CBL - While entire courses and curricula may involve case-based learning, instructors who desire to implement on a smaller-scale can integrate a single case into their class, and increase the number of cases utilized over time as desired.

Use cases in classes that are small, medium or large - Cases can be scaled to any course size. In large classes with stadium seating, students can work with peers nearby, while in small classes with more flexible seating arrangements, teams can move their chairs closer together. CBL can introduce more noise (and energy) in the classroom to which an instructor often quickly becomes accustomed. Further, students can be asked to work on cases outside of class, and wrap up discussion during the next class meeting.

Encourage collaborative work - Cases present an opportunity for students to work together to solve cases which the historical literature supports as beneficial to student learning (Bruffee, 1993). Allow students to work in groups to answer case questions.

Form diverse teams as feasible - When students work within diverse teams they can be exposed to a variety of perspectives that can help them solve the case. Depending on the context of the course, priorities, and the background information gathered about the students enrolled in the class, instructors may choose to organize student groups to allow for diversity in factors such as current course grades, gender, race/ethnicity, personality, among other items.  

Use stable teams as appropriate - If CBL is a large component of the course, a research-supported practice is to keep teams together long enough to go through the stages of group development: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Tuckman, 1965).

Walk around to guide groups - In CBL instructors serve as facilitators of student learning. Walking around allows the instructor to monitor student progress as well as identify and support any groups that may be struggling. Teaching assistants can also play a valuable role in supporting groups.

Interrupt strategically - Only every so often, for conversation in large group discussion of the case, especially when students appear confused on key concepts. An effective practice to help students meet case learning goals is to guide them as a whole group when the class is ready. This may include selecting a few student groups to present answers to discussion questions to the entire class, asking the class a question relevant to the case using polling software, and/or performing a mini-lesson on an area that appears to be confusing among students.  

Assess student learning in multiple ways - Students can be assessed informally by asking groups to report back answers to various case questions. This practice also helps students stay on task, and keeps them accountable. Cases can also be included on exams using related scenarios where students are asked to apply their knowledge.

Barrows HS. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: a brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 3-12.  

Bonney KM. (2015). Case Study Teaching Method Improves Student Performance and Perceptions of Learning Gains. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 16(1): 21-28.

Breslin M, Buchanan, R. (2008) On the Case Study Method of Research and Teaching in Design.  Design Issues, 24(1), 36-40.

Bruffee KS. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and authority of knowledge. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

Herreid CF. (2013). Start with a Story: The Case Study Method of Teaching College Science, edited by Clyde Freeman Herreid. Originally published in 2006 by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA); reprinted by the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS) in 2013.

Herreid CH. (1994). Case studies in science: A novel method of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(4), 221–229.

Jonassen DH and Hernandez-Serrano J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design: Using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 50(2), 65-77.  

Kosfeld M, Heinrichs M, Zak PJ, Fischbacher U, Fehr E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature, 435, 673-676.

Krain M. (2016) Putting the learning in case learning? The effects of case-based approaches on student knowledge, attitudes, and engagement. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 27(2), 131-153.

Lee V. (2012). What is Inquiry-Guided Learning?  New Directions for Learning, 129:5-14.

Nkhoma M, Sriratanaviriyakul N. (2017). Using case method to enrich students’ learning outcomes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(1):37-50.

Srinivasan et al. (2007). Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions. Academic Medicine, 82(1): 74-82.

Thistlethwaite JE et al. (2012). The effectiveness of case-based learning in health professional education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 23.  Medical Teacher, 34, e421-e444.

Tuckman B. (1965). Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-99.

Williams B. (2005). Case-based learning - a review of the literature: is there scope for this educational paradigm in prehospital education? Emerg Med, 22, 577-581.

Zak, PJ (2013). How Stories Change the Brain. Retrieved from: https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_stories_change_brain

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

The Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning routinely supports members of the Yale community with individual instructional consultations and classroom observations.

Reserve a Room

The Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning partners with departments and groups on-campus throughout the year to share its space. Please review the reservation form and submit a request.

Instructional Enhancement Fund

The Instructional Enhancement Fund (IEF) awards grants of up to $500 to support the timely integration of new learning activities into an existing undergraduate or graduate course. All Yale instructors of record, including tenured and tenure-track faculty, clinical instructional faculty, lecturers, lectors, and part-time acting instructors (PTAIs), are eligible to apply. Award decisions are typically provided within two weeks to help instructors implement ideas for the current semester.

Case Studies in Science Education

A video library for k-8 science teachers: 25 half-hour video programs and guides.

These video case studies take science education reform to a personal level, where individual teachers struggle to make changes that matter. Follow Donna, Mike, Audrey, and other science teachers as they work to adopt one or more research-based interventions to improve science teaching and learning. Each case follows a single teacher over the course of a year and is divided into three modules: the teacher's background and the problem he or she chooses to address, the chosen approach and implementation, and the outcome with assessment by the teacher and his or her advisor. Average running time: 1/2 hour. Program guides and supporting materials (PDF) Program guides and supporting materials (Link)

• Columbia University in the City of New York
• Office of Teaching, Learning, and Innovation
• University Policies
• Columbia Online
• Academic Calendar
• Resources and Technology
• Resources and Guides

Case Method Teaching and Learning

What is the case method? How can the case method be used to engage learners? What are some strategies for getting started? This guide helps instructors answer these questions by providing an overview of the case method while highlighting learner-centered and digitally-enhanced approaches to teaching with the case method. The guide also offers tips to instructors as they get started with the case method and additional references and resources.

On this page:

What is case method teaching.

• Case Method at Columbia

Why use the Case Method?

Case method teaching approaches, how do i get started.

• Additional Resources

The CTL is here to help!

For support with implementing a case method approach in your course, email [email protected] to schedule your 1-1 consultation .

Cite this resource: Columbia Center for Teaching and Learning (2019). Case Method Teaching and Learning. Columbia University. Retrieved from [today’s date] from https://ctl.columbia.edu/resources-and-technology/resources/case-method/  

Case method 1 teaching is an active form of instruction that focuses on a case and involves students learning by doing 2 3 . Cases are real or invented stories 4  that include “an educational message” or recount events, problems, dilemmas, theoretical or conceptual issue that requires analysis and/or decision-making.

Case-based teaching simulates real world situations and asks students to actively grapple with complex problems 5 6 This method of instruction is used across disciplines to promote learning, and is common in law, business, medicine, among other fields. See Table 1 below for a few types of cases and the learning they promote.

Table 1: Types of cases and the learning they promote.

For a more complete list, see Case Types & Teaching Methods: A Classification Scheme from the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science.

Back to Top

Case Method Teaching and Learning at Columbia

The case method is actively used in classrooms across Columbia, at the Morningside campus in the School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), the School of Business, Arts and Sciences, among others, and at Columbia University Irving Medical campus.

Faculty Spotlight:

Professor Mary Ann Price on Using Case Study Method to Place Pre-Med Students in Real-Life Scenarios

Read more  

Professor De Pinho on Using the Case Method in the Mailman Core

Case method teaching has been found to improve student learning, to increase students’ perception of learning gains, and to meet learning objectives 8 9 . Faculty have noted the instructional benefits of cases including greater student engagement in their learning 10 , deeper student understanding of concepts, stronger critical thinking skills, and an ability to make connections across content areas and view an issue from multiple perspectives 11 . 

Through case-based learning, students are the ones asking questions about the case, doing the problem-solving, interacting with and learning from their peers, “unpacking” the case, analyzing the case, and summarizing the case. They learn how to work with limited information and ambiguity, think in professional or disciplinary ways, and ask themselves “what would I do if I were in this specific situation?”

The case method bridges theory to practice, and promotes the development of skills including: communication, active listening, critical thinking, decision-making, and metacognitive skills 12 , as students apply course content knowledge, reflect on what they know and their approach to analyzing, and make sense of a case. 

Though the case method has historical roots as an instructor-centered approach that uses the Socratic dialogue and cold-calling, it is possible to take a more learner-centered approach in which students take on roles and tasks traditionally left to the instructor. 

Cases are often used as “vehicles for classroom discussion” 13 . Students should be encouraged to take ownership of their learning from a case. Discussion-based approaches engage students in thinking and communicating about a case. Instructors can set up a case activity in which students are the ones doing the work of “asking questions, summarizing content, generating hypotheses, proposing theories, or offering critical analyses” 14 . 

The role of the instructor is to share a case or ask students to share or create a case to use in class, set expectations, provide instructions, and assign students roles in the discussion. Student roles in a case discussion can include: 

• discussion “starters” get the conversation started with a question or posing the questions that their peers came up with; 
• facilitators listen actively, validate the contributions of peers, ask follow-up questions, draw connections, refocus the conversation as needed; 
• recorders take-notes of the main points of the discussion, record on the board, upload to CourseWorks, or type and project on the screen; and 
• discussion “wrappers” lead a summary of the main points of the discussion. 

Prior to the case discussion, instructors can model case analysis and the types of questions students should ask, co-create discussion guidelines with students, and ask for students to submit discussion questions. During the discussion, the instructor can keep time, intervene as necessary (however the students should be doing the talking), and pause the discussion for a debrief and to ask students to reflect on what and how they learned from the case activity. 

Note: case discussions can be enhanced using technology. Live discussions can occur via video-conferencing (e.g., using Zoom ) or asynchronous discussions can occur using the Discussions tool in CourseWorks (Canvas) .

Table 2 includes a few interactive case method approaches. Regardless of the approach selected, it is important to create a learning environment in which students feel comfortable participating in a case activity and learning from one another. See below for tips on supporting student in how to learn from a case in the “getting started” section and how to create a supportive learning environment in the Guide for Inclusive Teaching at Columbia . 

Table 2. Strategies for Engaging Students in Case-Based Learning

Approaches to case teaching should be informed by course learning objectives, and can be adapted for small, large, hybrid, and online classes. Instructional technology can be used in various ways to deliver, facilitate, and assess the case method. For instance, an online module can be created in CourseWorks (Canvas) to structure the delivery of the case, allow students to work at their own pace, engage all learners, even those reluctant to speak up in class, and assess understanding of a case and student learning. Modules can include text, embedded media (e.g., using Panopto or Mediathread ) curated by the instructor, online discussion, and assessments. Students can be asked to read a case and/or watch a short video, respond to quiz questions and receive immediate feedback, post questions to a discussion, and share resources. 

For more information about options for incorporating educational technology to your course, please contact your Learning Designer .

To ensure that students are learning from the case approach, ask them to pause and reflect on what and how they learned from the case. Time to reflect  builds your students’ metacognition, and when these reflections are collected they provides you with insights about the effectiveness of your approach in promoting student learning.

Well designed case-based learning experiences: 1) motivate student involvement, 2) have students doing the work, 3) help students develop knowledge and skills, and 4) have students learning from each other.  

Designing a case-based learning experience should center around the learning objectives for a course. The following points focus on intentional design. 

Identify learning objectives, determine scope, and anticipate challenges. 

• Why use the case method in your course? How will it promote student learning differently than other approaches? 
• What are the learning objectives that need to be met by the case method? What knowledge should students apply and skills should they practice? 
• What is the scope of the case? (a brief activity in a single class session to a semester-long case-based course; if new to case method, start small with a single case). 
• What challenges do you anticipate (e.g., student preparation and prior experiences with case learning, discomfort with discussion, peer-to-peer learning, managing discussion) and how will you plan for these in your design? 
• If you are asking students to use transferable skills for the case method (e.g., teamwork, digital literacy) make them explicit. 

Determine how you will know if the learning objectives were met and develop a plan for evaluating the effectiveness of the case method to inform future case teaching. 

• What assessments and criteria will you use to evaluate student work or participation in case discussion? 
• How will you evaluate the effectiveness of the case method? What feedback will you collect from students? 
• How might you leverage technology for assessment purposes? For example, could you quiz students about the case online before class, accept assignment submissions online, use audience response systems (e.g., PollEverywhere) for formative assessment during class? 

Select an existing case, create your own, or encourage students to bring course-relevant cases, and prepare for its delivery

• Where will the case method fit into the course learning sequence? 
• Is the case at the appropriate level of complexity? Is it inclusive, culturally relevant, and relatable to students? 
• What materials and preparation will be needed to present the case to students? (e.g., readings, audiovisual materials, set up a module in CourseWorks). 

Plan for the case discussion and an active role for students

• What will your role be in facilitating case-based learning? How will you model case analysis for your students? (e.g., present a short case and demo your approach and the process of case learning) (Davis, 2009). 
• What discussion guidelines will you use that include your students’ input? 
• How will you encourage students to ask and answer questions, summarize their work, take notes, and debrief the case? 
• If students will be working in groups, how will groups form? What size will the groups be? What instructions will they be given? How will you ensure that everyone participates? What will they need to submit? Can technology be leveraged for any of these areas? 
• Have you considered students of varied cognitive and physical abilities and how they might participate in the activities/discussions, including those that involve technology? 

Student preparation and expectations

• How will you communicate about the case method approach to your students? When will you articulate the purpose of case-based learning and expectations of student engagement? What information about case-based learning and expectations will be included in the syllabus?
• What preparation and/or assignment(s) will students complete in order to learn from the case? (e.g., read the case prior to class, watch a case video prior to class, post to a CourseWorks discussion, submit a brief memo, complete a short writing assignment to check students’ understanding of a case, take on a specific role, prepare to present a critique during in-class discussion).

Andersen, E. and Schiano, B. (2014). Teaching with Cases: A Practical Guide . Harvard Business Press. 

Bonney, K. M. (2015). Case Study Teaching Method Improves Student Performance and Perceptions of Learning Gains†. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education , 16 (1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v16i1.846

Davis, B.G. (2009). Chapter 24: Case Studies. In Tools for Teaching. Second Edition. Jossey-Bass. 

Garvin, D.A. (2003). Making the Case: Professional Education for the world of practice. Harvard Magazine. September-October 2003, Volume 106, Number 1, 56-107.

Golich, V.L. (2000). The ABCs of Case Teaching. International Studies Perspectives. 1, 11-29. 

Golich, V.L.; Boyer, M; Franko, P.; and Lamy, S. (2000). The ABCs of Case Teaching. Pew Case Studies in International Affairs. Institute for the Study of Diplomacy. 

Heath, J. (2015). Teaching & Writing Cases: A Practical Guide. The Case Center, UK. 

Herreid, C.F. (2011). Case Study Teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. No. 128, Winder 2011, 31 – 40. 

Herreid, C.F. (2007). Start with a Story: The Case Study Method of Teaching College Science . National Science Teachers Association. Available as an ebook through Columbia Libraries. 

Herreid, C.F. (2006). “Clicker” Cases: Introducing Case Study Teaching Into Large Classrooms. Journal of College Science Teaching. Oct 2006, 36(2). https://search.proquest.com/docview/200323718?pq-origsite=gscholar  

Krain, M. (2016). Putting the Learning in Case Learning? The Effects of Case-Based Approaches on Student Knowledge, Attitudes, and Engagement. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 27(2), 131-153. 

Lundberg, K.O. (Ed.). (2011). Our Digital Future: Boardrooms and Newsrooms. Knight Case Studies Initiative. 

Popil, I. (2011). Promotion of critical thinking by using case studies as teaching method. Nurse Education Today, 31(2), 204–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.06.002

Schiano, B. and Andersen, E. (2017). Teaching with Cases Online . Harvard Business Publishing. 

Thistlethwaite, JE; Davies, D.; Ekeocha, S.; Kidd, J.M.; MacDougall, C.; Matthews, P.; Purkis, J.; Clay D. (2012). The effectiveness of case-based learning in health professional education: A BEME systematic review . Medical Teacher. 2012; 34(6): e421-44. 

Yadav, A.; Lundeberg, M.; DeSchryver, M.; Dirkin, K.; Schiller, N.A.; Maier, K. and Herreid, C.F. (2007). Teaching Science with Case Studies: A National Survey of Faculty Perceptions of the Benefits and Challenges of Using Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching; Sept/Oct 2007; 37(1). 

Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. Second Edition. Jossey-Bass.

Additional resources 

Teaching with Cases , Harvard Kennedy School of Government. 

Features “what is a teaching case?” video that defines a teaching case, and provides documents to help students prepare for case learning, Common case teaching challenges and solutions, tips for teaching with cases. 

Promoting excellence and innovation in case method teaching: Teaching by the Case Method , Christensen Center for Teaching & Learning. Harvard Business School. 

National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science . University of Buffalo. 

A collection of peer-reviewed STEM cases to teach scientific concepts and content, promote process skills and critical thinking. The Center welcomes case submissions. Case classification scheme of case types and teaching methods:

• Different types of cases: analysis case, dilemma/decision case, directed case, interrupted case, clicker case, a flipped case, a laboratory case. 
• Different types of teaching methods: problem-based learning, discussion, debate, intimate debate, public hearing, trial, jigsaw, role-play. 

Columbia Resources

Resources available to support your use of case method: The University hosts a number of case collections including: the Case Consortium (a collection of free cases in the fields of journalism, public policy, public health, and other disciplines that include teaching and learning resources; SIPA’s Picker Case Collection (audiovisual case studies on public sector innovation, filmed around the world and involving SIPA student teams in producing the cases); and Columbia Business School CaseWorks , which develops teaching cases and materials for use in Columbia Business School classrooms.

Center for Teaching and Learning

The Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) offers a variety of programs and services for instructors at Columbia. The CTL can provide customized support as you plan to use the case method approach through implementation. Schedule a one-on-one consultation. 

Office of the Provost

The Hybrid Learning Course Redesign grant program from the Office of the Provost provides support for faculty who are developing innovative and technology-enhanced pedagogy and learning strategies in the classroom. In addition to funding, faculty awardees receive support from CTL staff as they redesign, deliver, and evaluate their hybrid courses.

The Start Small! Mini-Grant provides support to faculty who are interested in experimenting with one new pedagogical strategy or tool. Faculty awardees receive funds and CTL support for a one-semester period.

Explore our teaching resources.

• Blended Learning
• Contemplative Pedagogy
• Inclusive Teaching Guide
• FAQ for Teaching Assistants
• Metacognition

CTL resources and technology for you.

• Overview of all CTL Resources and Technology
• The origins of this method can be traced to Harvard University where in 1870 the Law School began using cases to teach students how to think like lawyers using real court decisions. This was followed by the Business School in 1920 (Garvin, 2003). These professional schools recognized that lecture mode of instruction was insufficient to teach critical professional skills, and that active learning would better prepare learners for their professional lives. ↩
• Golich, V.L. (2000). The ABCs of Case Teaching. International Studies Perspectives. 1, 11-29. ↩
• Herreid, C.F. (2007). Start with a Story: The Case Study Method of Teaching College Science . National Science Teachers Association. Available as an ebook through Columbia Libraries. ↩
• Davis, B.G. (2009). Chapter 24: Case Studies. In Tools for Teaching. Second Edition. Jossey-Bass. ↩
• Andersen, E. and Schiano, B. (2014). Teaching with Cases: A Practical Guide . Harvard Business Press. ↩
• Lundberg, K.O. (Ed.). (2011). Our Digital Future: Boardrooms and Newsrooms. Knight Case Studies Initiative. ↩
• Heath, J. (2015). Teaching & Writing Cases: A Practical Guide. The Case Center, UK. ↩
• Bonney, K. M. (2015). Case Study Teaching Method Improves Student Performance and Perceptions of Learning Gains†. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education , 16 (1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v16i1.846 ↩
• Krain, M. (2016). Putting the Learning in Case Learning? The Effects of Case-Based Approaches on Student Knowledge, Attitudes, and Engagement. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 27(2), 131-153. ↩
• Thistlethwaite, JE; Davies, D.; Ekeocha, S.; Kidd, J.M.; MacDougall, C.; Matthews, P.; Purkis, J.; Clay D. (2012). The effectiveness of case-based learning in health professional education: A BEME systematic review . Medical Teacher. 2012; 34(6): e421-44. ↩
• Yadav, A.; Lundeberg, M.; DeSchryver, M.; Dirkin, K.; Schiller, N.A.; Maier, K. and Herreid, C.F. (2007). Teaching Science with Case Studies: A National Survey of Faculty Perceptions of the Benefits and Challenges of Using Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching; Sept/Oct 2007; 37(1). ↩
• Popil, I. (2011). Promotion of critical thinking by using case studies as teaching method. Nurse Education Today, 31(2), 204–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.06.002 ↩
• Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. Second Edition. Jossey-Bass. ↩
• Herreid, C.F. (2006). “Clicker” Cases: Introducing Case Study Teaching Into Large Classrooms. Journal of College Science Teaching. Oct 2006, 36(2). https://search.proquest.com/docview/200323718?pq-origsite=gscholar ↩

This website uses cookies to identify users, improve the user experience and requires cookies to work. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's use of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice .

Using Case Studies to Teach

Why Use Cases?

Many students are more inductive than deductive reasoners, which means that they learn better from examples than from logical development starting with basic principles. The use of case studies can therefore be a very effective classroom technique.

Case studies are have long been used in business schools, law schools, medical schools and the social sciences, but they can be used in any discipline when instructors want students to explore how what they have learned applies to real world situations. Cases come in many formats, from a simple “What would you do in this situation?” question to a detailed description of a situation with accompanying data to analyze. Whether to use a simple scenario-type case or a complex detailed one depends on your course objectives.

Most case assignments require students to answer an open-ended question or develop a solution to an open-ended problem with multiple potential solutions. Requirements can range from a one-paragraph answer to a fully developed group action plan, proposal or decision.

Common Case Elements

Most “full-blown” cases have these common elements:

• A decision-maker who is grappling with some question or problem that needs to be solved.
• A description of the problem’s context (a law, an industry, a family).
• Supporting data, which can range from data tables to links to URLs, quoted statements or testimony, supporting documents, images, video, or audio.

Case assignments can be done individually or in teams so that the students can brainstorm solutions and share the work load.

The following discussion of this topic incorporates material presented by Robb Dixon of the School of Management and Rob Schadt of the School of Public Health at CEIT workshops. Professor Dixon also provided some written comments that the discussion incorporates.

Advantages to the use of case studies in class

A major advantage of teaching with case studies is that the students are actively engaged in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples. This develops their skills in:

• Problem solving
• Analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
• Decision making in complex situations
• Coping with ambiguities

Guidelines for using case studies in class

In the most straightforward application, the presentation of the case study establishes a framework for analysis. It is helpful if the statement of the case provides enough information for the students to figure out solutions and then to identify how to apply those solutions in other similar situations. Instructors may choose to use several cases so that students can identify both the similarities and differences among the cases.

Depending on the course objectives, the instructor may encourage students to follow a systematic approach to their analysis.  For example:

• What is the issue?
• What is the goal of the analysis?
• What is the context of the problem?
• What key facts should be considered?
• What alternatives are available to the decision-maker?
• What would you recommend — and why?

An innovative approach to case analysis might be to have students  role-play the part of the people involved in the case. This not only actively engages students, but forces them to really understand the perspectives of the case characters. Videos or even field trips showing the venue in which the case is situated can help students to visualize the situation that they need to analyze.

Accompanying Readings

Case studies can be especially effective if they are paired with a reading assignment that introduces or explains a concept or analytical method that applies to the case. The amount of emphasis placed on the use of the reading during the case discussion depends on the complexity of the concept or method. If it is straightforward, the focus of the discussion can be placed on the use of the analytical results. If the method is more complex, the instructor may need to walk students through its application and the interpretation of the results.

Leading the Case Discussion and Evaluating Performance

Decision cases are more interesting than descriptive ones. In order to start the discussion in class, the instructor can start with an easy, noncontroversial question that all the students should be able to answer readily. However, some of the best case discussions start by forcing the students to take a stand. Some instructors will ask a student to do a formal “open” of the case, outlining his or her entire analysis.  Others may choose to guide discussion with questions that move students from problem identification to solutions.  A skilled instructor steers questions and discussion to keep the class on track and moving at a reasonable pace.

In order to motivate the students to complete the assignment before class as well as to stimulate attentiveness during the class, the instructor should grade the participation—quantity and especially quality—during the discussion of the case. This might be a simple check, check-plus, check-minus or zero. The instructor should involve as many students as possible. In order to engage all the students, the instructor can divide them into groups, give each group several minutes to discuss how to answer a question related to the case, and then ask a randomly selected person in each group to present the group’s answer and reasoning. Random selection can be accomplished through rolling of dice, shuffled index cards, each with one student’s name, a spinning wheel, etc.

Tips on the Penn State U. website: https://sites.psu.edu/pedagogicalpractices/case-studies/

If you are interested in using this technique in a science course, there is a good website on use of case studies in the sciences at the National Science Teaching Association.

Center for Teaching

Case studies.

Print Version

Case studies are stories that are used as a teaching tool to show the application of a theory or concept to real situations. Dependent on the goal they are meant to fulfill, cases can be fact-driven and deductive where there is a correct answer, or they can be context driven where multiple solutions are possible. Various disciplines have employed case studies, including humanities, social sciences, sciences, engineering, law, business, and medicine. Good cases generally have the following features: they tell a good story, are recent, include dialogue, create empathy with the main characters, are relevant to the reader, serve a teaching function, require a dilemma to be solved, and have generality.

Instructors can create their own cases or can find cases that already exist. The following are some things to keep in mind when creating a case:

• What do you want students to learn from the discussion of the case?
• What do they already know that applies to the case?
• What are the issues that may be raised in discussion?
• How will the case and discussion be introduced?
• What preparation is expected of students? (Do they need to read the case ahead of time? Do research? Write anything?)
• What directions do you need to provide students regarding what they are supposed to do and accomplish?
• Do you need to divide students into groups or will they discuss as the whole class?
• Are you going to use role-playing or facilitators or record keepers? If so, how?
• What are the opening questions?
• How much time is needed for students to discuss the case?
• What concepts are to be applied/extracted during the discussion?
• How will you evaluate students?

To find other cases that already exist, try the following websites:

• The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science , University of Buffalo. SUNY-Buffalo maintains this set of links to other case studies on the web in disciplines ranging from engineering and ethics to sociology and business
• A Journal of Teaching Cases in Public Administration and Public Policy , University of Washington

For more information:

• World Association for Case Method Research and Application

Book Review :  Teaching and the Case Method , 3rd ed., vols. 1 and 2, by Louis Barnes, C. Roland (Chris) Christensen, and Abby Hansen. Harvard Business School Press, 1994; 333 pp. (vol 1), 412 pp. (vol 2).

Teaching Guides

Quick Links

• Services for Departments and Schools
• Examples of Online Instructional Modules

• Our Mission

Making Learning Relevant With Case Studies

The open-ended problems presented in case studies give students work that feels connected to their lives.

To prepare students for jobs that haven’t been created yet, we need to teach them how to be great problem solvers so that they’ll be ready for anything. One way to do this is by teaching content and skills using real-world case studies, a learning model that’s focused on reflection during the problem-solving process. It’s similar to project-based learning, but PBL is more focused on students creating a product.

Case studies have been used for years by businesses, law and medical schools, physicians on rounds, and artists critiquing work. Like other forms of problem-based learning, case studies can be accessible for every age group, both in one subject and in interdisciplinary work.

You can get started with case studies by tackling relatable questions like these with your students:

• How can we limit food waste in the cafeteria?
• How can we get our school to recycle and compost waste? (Or, if you want to be more complex, how can our school reduce its carbon footprint?)
• How can we improve school attendance?
• How can we reduce the number of people who get sick at school during cold and flu season?

Addressing questions like these leads students to identify topics they need to learn more about. In researching the first question, for example, students may see that they need to research food chains and nutrition. Students often ask, reasonably, why they need to learn something, or when they’ll use their knowledge in the future. Learning is most successful for students when the content and skills they’re studying are relevant, and case studies offer one way to create that sense of relevance.

Teaching With Case Studies

Ultimately, a case study is simply an interesting problem with many correct answers. What does case study work look like in classrooms? Teachers generally start by having students read the case or watch a video that summarizes the case. Students then work in small groups or individually to solve the case study. Teachers set milestones defining what students should accomplish to help them manage their time.

During the case study learning process, student assessment of learning should be focused on reflection. Arthur L. Costa and Bena Kallick’s Learning and Leading With Habits of Mind gives several examples of what this reflection can look like in a classroom: 

Journaling: At the end of each work period, have students write an entry summarizing what they worked on, what worked well, what didn’t, and why. Sentence starters and clear rubrics or guidelines will help students be successful. At the end of a case study project, as Costa and Kallick write, it’s helpful to have students “select significant learnings, envision how they could apply these learnings to future situations, and commit to an action plan to consciously modify their behaviors.”

Interviews: While working on a case study, students can interview each other about their progress and learning. Teachers can interview students individually or in small groups to assess their learning process and their progress.

Student discussion: Discussions can be unstructured—students can talk about what they worked on that day in a think-pair-share or as a full class—or structured, using Socratic seminars or fishbowl discussions. If your class is tackling a case study in small groups, create a second set of small groups with a representative from each of the case study groups so that the groups can share their learning.

4 Tips for Setting Up a Case Study

1. Identify a problem to investigate: This should be something accessible and relevant to students’ lives. The problem should also be challenging and complex enough to yield multiple solutions with many layers.

2. Give context: Think of this step as a movie preview or book summary. Hook the learners to help them understand just enough about the problem to want to learn more.

3. Have a clear rubric: Giving structure to your definition of quality group work and products will lead to stronger end products. You may be able to have your learners help build these definitions.

4. Provide structures for presenting solutions: The amount of scaffolding you build in depends on your students’ skill level and development. A case study product can be something like several pieces of evidence of students collaborating to solve the case study, and ultimately presenting their solution with a detailed slide deck or an essay—you can scaffold this by providing specified headings for the sections of the essay.

Problem-Based Teaching Resources

There are many high-quality, peer-reviewed resources that are open source and easily accessible online.

• The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science at the University at Buffalo built an online collection of more than 800 cases that cover topics ranging from biochemistry to economics. There are resources for middle and high school students.
• Models of Excellence , a project maintained by EL Education and the Harvard Graduate School of Education, has examples of great problem- and project-based tasks—and corresponding exemplary student work—for grades pre-K to 12.
• The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning at Purdue University is an open-source journal that publishes examples of problem-based learning in K–12 and post-secondary classrooms.
• The Tech Edvocate has a list of websites and tools related to problem-based learning.

In their book Problems as Possibilities , Linda Torp and Sara Sage write that at the elementary school level, students particularly appreciate how they feel that they are taken seriously when solving case studies. At the middle school level, “researchers stress the importance of relating middle school curriculum to issues of student concern and interest.” And high schoolers, they write, find the case study method “beneficial in preparing them for their future.”

National Center for case study teaching in science

Student assessment, evaluating case discussion.

Business school case teachers do it all the time. It’s not uncommon for them to base the final course grade on 50% class participation. And this with 50-70 students in a class! This sends shudders up the spines of most science teachers. Yet, what's so tough about the concept? We are constantly making judgments about the verbal statements of our colleagues, politicians, and even administrators. Why can't we do it for classroom contributions?

Most of our discomfort comes from the subjective nature of the act, something that we scientists work hard to avoid in our work-a-day world. It may be that we are even predisposed to become scientists because we are looking for a structured and quantifiable world. Flowing from this subjective quandary is the fact that we feel we must be able to justify our grades to the students. We are decidedly uncomfortable if we can't show them the numbers. This is one of the reasons that multiple-choice questions have such appeal for some faculty.

But let’s take a look at how the business school people evaluate case discussion. Some of them try to do it in the classroom, making written notes even as the discussion unfolds, using a seating chart, and calling on perhaps 25 students in a period. As you might expect, this usually interferes with running an effective discussion. Other instructors tape-record the discussion and listen to it later in thoughtful contemplation. Most folks, however, sit down shortly after their classes with seating chart in hand and reflect on the discussion. They rank student contributions into categories of excellent, good, or bad, or they may use numbers to evaluate the students from 1 to 4 with 4 being excellent. They may give negative evaluations to people who weren’t prepared or were absent. These numbers are tallied up at the end of the semester to calculate the grade. And that’s as quantified as it gets.

I especially like mathematician/philosopher Blaise Pascal's view of evaluation: “We first distinguish grapes from among fruits, then Muscat grapes, then those from Condrieu, then from Desargues, then the particular graft. Is that all? Has a vine ever produced two bunches alike, and has any bunch produced two grapes alike?” “I have never judged anything in exactly the same way,” Pascal continues. “I cannot judge a work while doing it. I must do as painters do and stand back, but not too far. How far then? Guess ....”

Assignments

The simplest solution to case work evaluation is to forget classroom participation and grade everything on the basis of familiar criteria, say papers or presentations. This puts professors back in familiar territory. Even business and law school professors use this strategy as part of their grades. I’m all for this. In fact, I always ask for some written analysis in the form of journals, papers, and reports. Along with an exam, these are my sole bases for grades. I don’t lose sleep over evaluating class participation.

You can give any sort of exam in a case-based course, including multiple-choice, but doesn’t it make more sense to have at least part of the exam a case? If you have used cases all semester and trained students in case analysis, surely you should consider a case-based test. Too often we test on different things than we have taught.

Peer Evaluation

Some of the best case studies involve small group work and group projects. In fact, I strongly believe teaching cases this way is the most user-friendly for science faculty and the most rewarding for students. Nonetheless, even some aficionados of group work don’t like group projects. They say, how do you know who’s doing the work? Even if they ask for a group project, they argue against grading it. They rely strictly on individual marks for a final grade determination. I’m on the other side of the fence. I believe that great projects can come from teams, and if you don't grade the work, what is the incentive for participating? Moreover, employers report that most people are fired because they can’t get along with other people. Not all of us are naturally team players. Practice helps. So, I’m all for group work including teamwork during quizzes where groups almost invariably perform better than the best individuals. But we have to build in safeguards like peer evaluation.

“Social loafers” and “compulsive workhorses” exist in every class. When you form groups such as those in Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Team Learning (the best ways to teach cases, in my judgment), you must set up a system to monitor the situation. In PBL it is common to have tutors who can make evaluations. Still, I believe it is essential to use peer evaluations. I use a method that I picked up from Larry Michaelsen in the School of Management at the University of Oklahoma.

At the beginning of every course I explain the use of these anonymous peer evaluations. I show students the form that they will fill out at the end of the semester ( Table 1 ). Then they will be asked to name their teammates and give each one the number of points that reflects their contributions to group projects throughout the course. Say the group has five team members then each person would have 40 points to give to the other four members of his team. If a student feels that everyone has contributed equally to the group projects, then he should give each teammate 10 points. Obviously, if everyone in the team feels the same way about everyone else, they all will get an average score of 10 points. Persons with an average of 10 points will receive 100% of the group score for any group project.

But suppose that things aren’t going well. Maybe John has not pulled his weight in the group projects and ends up with an average score of 8, and Sarah has done more than her share and receives a 12. What then? Well, John gets only 80% of any group grade and Sarah receives 120%.

There are some additional rules that I use. One is that a student cannot give anyone more than 15 points. This is to stop a student from saving his friend John by giving him 40 points. Another is that any student receiving an average of seven or less will fail my course. This is designed to stop a student from doing nothing in the group because he is simply trying to slip by with a barely passing grade and is willing to undermine the group effort. Here are some observations after many years of using peer evaluations:

• Most students are reasonable. Although they are inclined to be generous, most give scores between 8 and 12.
• Occasionally, I receive a set of scores where one isn’t consistent with the others. For example, a student may get a 10, 10, 11, and a 5. Obviously, something is amiss here. When this happens, I set the odd number aside and use the other scores for the average.
• About one group in five initially will have problems because one or two people are not participating adequately or are habitually late or absent. These problems can be corrected.
• It is essential that you give a practice peer evaluation about one-third or one-half of the way through the semester. The students fill these out and you tally them and give the students their average scores. You must carefully remind everyone what these numbers mean, and if they don't like the results, they must do something to improve their scores. I tell them that it is no use blaming their group members for their perceptions. They must fix things, perhaps by talking to the group and asking how to compensate for their previous weakness. Also, I will always speak privately to any student who is in danger. These practice evaluations almost always significantly improve the group performance. Tardiness virtually stops and attendance is at least 95%.

© 1999-2024 National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science, University at Buffalo. All Rights Reserved.

National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS)

The mission of the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS) at SUNY-Buffalo is to promote the development and dissemination of materials and practices for case teaching in the sciences. 

Click on the links below to learn more about-

• a bibliography of case studies,
• faculty perceptions on the benefit of teaching case studies, and
• research articles

Below is a sample work flow showing how to navigate the NCCSTS case collection. Enjoy!

1. Start at the NCCSTS homepage ( http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/ ). Then click on Case Collection (red arrow, upper right).

nccsts_front_page.png

2. Clicking on Case Collection takes you to the Keyword Search page. As shown below use the dropdown arrows to narrow your search parameters. As an example I chose Organic Chemistry under Subject Heading.

nccsts_keyword_search.png

3. Below is a partial list (6/25) of case studies categorized under the Subject Heading choice, Organic Chemistry.

nccsts_search_results.png

4. Click on a case study. I chose The Case of the Missing Bees (not shown in the partial list above). Below is a partial screenshot of the case study description. To download the case study click on the DOWNLOAD CASE icon (red arrow, upper right).

nccsts_download_case.png

5. Below is the the top of the first page of the case study, The Case of the Missing Bees .

nccsts_case_front_page.png

6. And of course make sure to review and adhere to the Permitted and Standard Uses and Permissions ( http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/collection/uses/ ).

nccsts_uses.png

National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science

Case study title: The Case of the Missing Bees: High Fructose Corn Syrup and Colony Collapse Disorder

Case study authors: Jeffri C. Bohlscheid and Frank J. Dinan

(Stanford users can avoid this Captcha by logging in.)

• Send to text email RefWorks EndNote printer

Start with a story : the case study method of teaching college science

Available online.

• EBSCO Academic Comprehensive Collection

More options

• Find it at other libraries via WorldCat
• Contributors

Description

Creators/contributors, contents/summary.

• The case for cases: We need a new approach
• What are case studies?
• Types of case studies
• How to teach with case studies: an overview
• Whole class discussion: the classical method
• Small group methods: an overview
• Problem-based learning
• Interrupted case method
• Intimate debate method
• Team-based learning
• Large-class methods
• Individual case study methods
• Hybrid case methods
• The directed case method
• How not to teach with case studies
• How to write case studies
• How to write case study teaching notes
• How to grade students using case-based teaching
• Assessment and evaluation of the case study process
• The future of case teaching.

Bibliographic information

Browse related items.

• Stanford Home
• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Emergency Info
• Terms of Use
• Non-Discrimination
• Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 08 September 2024

Longitudinal analysis of teacher self-efficacy evolution during a STEAM professional development program: a qualitative case study

• Haozhe Jiang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7870-0993 1 ,
• Ritesh Chugh   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0061-7206 2 ,
• Xuesong Zhai   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4179-7859 1 , 3   nAff7 ,
• Ke Wang 4 &
• Xiaoqin Wang 5 , 6  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1162 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

80 Accesses

Metrics details

Despite the widespread advocacy for the integration of arts and humanities (A&H) into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education on an international scale, teachers face numerous obstacles in practically integrating A&H into STEM teaching (IAT). To tackle the challenges, a comprehensive five-stage framework for teacher professional development programs focussed on IAT has been developed. Through the use of a qualitative case study approach, this study outlines the shifts in a participant teacher’s self-efficacy following their exposure to each stage of the framework. The data obtained from interviews and reflective analyses were analyzed using a seven-stage inductive method. The findings have substantiated the significant impact of a teacher professional development program based on the framework on teacher self-efficacy, evident in both individual performance and student outcomes observed over eighteen months. The evolution of teacher self-efficacy in IAT should be regarded as an open and multi-level system, characterized by interactions with teacher knowledge, skills and other entrenched beliefs. Building on our research findings, an enhanced model of teacher professional learning is proposed. The revised model illustrates that professional learning for STEAM teachers should be conceived as a continuous and sustainable process, characterized by the dynamic interaction among teaching performance, teacher knowledge, and teacher beliefs. The updated model further confirms the inseparable link between teacher learning and student learning within STEAM education. This study contributes to the existing body of literature on teacher self-efficacy, teacher professional learning models and the design of IAT teacher professional development programs.

Similar content being viewed by others

Primary and secondary school teachers’ perceptions of their social science training needs

Investigating how subject teachers transition to integrated STEM education: A hybrid qualitative study on primary and middle school teachers

The mediating role of teaching enthusiasm in the relationship between mindfulness, growth mindset, and psychological well-being of Chinese EFL teachers

Introduction.

In the past decade, there has been a surge in the advancement and widespread adoption of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education on a global scale (Jiang et al. 2021 ; Jiang et al. 2022 ; Jiang et al. 2023 ; Jiang et al. 2024a , b ; Zhan et al. 2023 ; Zhan and Niu 2023 ; Zhong et al. 2022 ; Zhong et al. 2024 ). Concurrently, there has been a growing chorus of advocates urging the integration of Arts and Humanities (A&H) into STEM education (e.g., Alkhabra et al. 2023 ; Land 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Uştu et al. 2021 ; Vaziri and Bradburn 2021 ). STEM education is frequently characterized by its emphasis on logic and analysis; however, it may be perceived as deficient in emotional and intuitive elements (Ozkan and Umdu Topsakal 2021 ). Through the integration of Arts and Humanities (A&H), the resulting STEAM approach has the potential to become more holistic, incorporating both rationality and emotional intelligence (Ozkan and Umdu Topsakal 2021 ). Many studies have confirmed that A&H can help students increase interest and develop their understanding of the contents in STEM fields, and thus, A&H can attract potential underrepresented STEM learners such as female students and minorities (Land 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ). Despite the increasing interest in STEAM, the approaches to integrating A&H, which represent fundamentally different disciplines, into STEM are theoretically and practically ambiguous (Jacques et al. 2020 ; Uştu et al. 2021 ). Moreover, studies have indicated that the implementation of STEAM poses significant challenges, with STEM educators encountering difficulties in integrating A&H into their teaching practices (e.g., Boice et al. 2021 ; Duong et al. 2024 ; Herro et al. 2019 ; Jacques et al. 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ). Hence, there is a pressing need to provide STEAM teachers with effective professional training.

Motivated by this gap, this study proposes a novel five-stage framework tailored for teacher professional development programs specifically designed to facilitate the integration of A&H into STEM teaching (IAT). Following the establishment of this framework, a series of teacher professional development programs were implemented. To explain the framework, a qualitative case study is employed, focusing on examining a specific teacher professional development program’s impact on a pre-service teacher’s self-efficacy. The case narratives, with a particular focus on the pre-service teacher’s changes in teacher self-efficacy, are organized chronologically, delineating stages before and after each stage of the teacher professional development program. More specifically, meaningful vignettes of the pre-service teacher’s learning and teaching experiences during the teacher professional development program are offered to help understand the five-stage framework. This study contributes to understanding teacher self-efficacy, teacher professional learning model and the design of IAT teacher professional development programs.

Theoretical background

The conceptualization of steam education.

STEM education can be interpreted through various lenses (e.g., Jiang et al. 2021 ; English 2016 ). As Li et al. (2020) claimed, on the one hand, STEM education can be defined as individual STEM disciplinary-based education (i.e., science education, technology education, engineering education and mathematics education). On the other hand, STEM education can also be defined as interdisciplinary or cross-disciplinary education where individual STEM disciplines are integrated (Jiang et al. 2021 ; English 2016 ). In this study, we view it as individual disciplinary-based education separately in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (English 2016 ).

STEAM education emerged as a new pedagogy during the Americans for the Arts-National Policy Roundtable discussion in 2007 (Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ). This pedagogy was born out of the necessity to enhance students’ engagement, foster creativity, stimulate innovation, improve problem-solving abilities, and cultivate employability skills such as teamwork, communication and adaptability (Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ). In particular, within the framework of STEAM education, the ‘A’ should be viewed as a broad concept that represents arts and humanities (A&H) (Herro and Quigley 2016 ; de la Garza 2021 , Park and Cho 2022 ). This conceptualization emphasizes the need to include humanities subjects alongside arts (Herro and Quigley 2016 ; de la Garza 2021 ; Park and Cho 2022 ). Sanz-Camarero et al. ( 2023 ) listed some important fields of A&H, including physical arts, fine arts, manual arts, sociology, politics, philosophy, history, psychology and so on.

In general, STEM education does not necessarily entail the inclusion of all STEM disciplines collectively (Ozkan and Umdu Topsakal 2021 ), and this principle also applies to STEAM education (Gates 2017 ; Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ; Quigley et al. 2017 ; Smith and Paré 2016 ). As an illustration, Smith and Paré ( 2016 ) described a STEAM activity in which pottery (representing A&H) and mathematics were integrated, while other STEAM elements such as science, technology and engineering were not included. In our study, STEAM education is conceptualized as an interdisciplinary approach that involves the integration of one or more components of A&H into one or more STEM school subjects within educational activities (Ozkan and Umdu Topsakal 2021 ; Vaziri and Bradburn 2021 ). Notably, interdisciplinary collaboration entails integrating one or more elements from arts and humanities (A&H) with one or more STEM school subjects, cohesively united by a shared theme while maintaining their distinct identities (Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ).

In our teacher professional development programs, we help mathematics, technology, and science pre-service teachers integrate one component of A&H into their disciplinary-based teaching practices. For instance, we help mathematics teachers integrate history (a component of A&H) into mathematics teaching. In other words, in our study, integrating A&H into STEM teaching (IAT) can be defined as integrating one component of A&H into the teaching of one of the STEM school subjects. The components of A&H and the STEM school subject are brought together under a common theme, but each of them remains discrete. Engineering is not taught as an individual subject in the K-12 curriculum in mainland China. Therefore, A&H is not integrated into engineering teaching in our teacher professional development programs.

Self-efficacy and teacher self-efficacy

Self-efficacy was initially introduced by Bandura ( 1977 ) as a key concept within his social cognitive theory. Bandura ( 1997 ) defined self-efficacy as “people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives” (p. 71). Based on Bandura’s ( 1977 ) theory, Tschannen-Moran et al. ( 1998 ) defined the concept of teacher self-efficacy Footnote 1 as “a teacher’s belief in her or his ability to organize and execute the courses of action required to successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular context” (p. 233). Blonder et al. ( 2014 ) pointed out that this definition implicitly included teachers’ judgment of their ability to bring about desired outcomes in terms of students’ engagement and learning. Moreover, OECD ( 2018 ) defined teacher self-efficacy as “the beliefs that teachers have of their ability to enact certain teaching behavior that influences students’ educational outcomes, such as achievement, interest, and motivation” (p. 51). This definition explicitly included two dimensions: teachers’ judgment of the ability related to their teaching performance (i.e., enacting certain teaching behavior) and their influence on student outcomes.

It is argued that teacher self-efficacy should not be regarded as a general or overarching construct (Zee et al. 2017 ; Zee and Koomen 2016 ). Particularly, in the performance-driven context of China, teachers always connect their beliefs in their professional capabilities with the educational outcomes of their students (Liu et al. 2018 ). Therefore, we operationally conceptualize teacher self-efficacy as having two dimensions: self-efficacy in individual performance and student outcomes (see Table 1 ).

Most importantly, given its consistent association with actual teaching performance and student outcomes (Bray-Clark and Bates 2003 ; Kelley et al. 2020 ), teacher self-efficacy is widely regarded as a pivotal indicator of teacher success (Kelley et al. 2020 ). Moreover, the enhancement of teaching self-efficacy reflects the effectiveness of teacher professional development programs (Bray-Clark and Bates 2003 ; Kelley et al. 2020 ; Wong et al. 2022 ; Zhou et al. 2023 ). For instance, Zhou et al. ( 2023 ) claimed that in STEM teacher education, effective teacher professional development programs should bolster teachers’ self-efficacy “in teaching the content in the STEM discipline” (p. 2).

It has been documented that teachers frequently experience diminished confidence and comfort when teaching subject areas beyond their expertise (Kelley et al. 2020 ; Stohlmann et al. 2012 ). This diminished confidence extends to their self-efficacy in implementing interdisciplinary teaching approaches, such as integrated STEM teaching and IAT (Kelley et al. 2020 ). For instance, Geng et al. ( 2019 ) found that STEM teachers in Hong Kong exhibited low levels of self-efficacy, with only 5.53% of teachers rating their overall self-efficacy in implementing STEM education as higher than a score of 4 out of 5. Additionally, Hunter-Doniger and Sydow ( 2016 ) found that teachers may experience apprehension and lack confidence when incorporating A&H elements into the classroom context, particularly within the framework of IAT. Considering the critical importance of teacher self-efficacy in STEM and STEAM education (Kelley et al. 2020 ; Zakariya, 2020 ; Zhou et al. 2023 ), it is necessary to explore effective measures, frameworks and teacher professional development programs to help teachers improve their self-efficacy regarding interdisciplinary teaching (e.g., IAT).

Teacher professional learning models

The relationship between teachers’ professional learning and students’ outcomes (such as achievements, skills and attitudes) has been a subject of extensive discussion and research for many years (Clarke and Hollingsworth 2002 ). For instance, Clarke and Hollingsworth ( 2002 ) proposed and validated the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth, which illustrates that teacher professional development is influenced by the interaction among four interconnected domains: the personal domain (teacher knowledge, beliefs and attitudes), the domain of practice (professional experimentation), the domain of consequence (salient outcomes), and the external domain (sources of information, stimulus or support). Sancar et al. ( 2021 ) emphasized that teachers’ professional learning or development never occurs independently. In practice, this process is inherently intertwined with many variables, including student outcomes, in various ways (Sancar et al. 2021 ). However, many current teacher professional development programs exclude real in-class teaching and fail to establish a comprehensive link between teachers’ professional learning and student outcomes (Cai et al. 2020 ; Sancar et al. 2021 ). Sancar et al. ( 2021 ) claimed that exploring the complex relationships between teachers’ professional learning and student outcomes should be grounded in monitoring and evaluating real in-class teaching, rather than relying on teachers’ self-assessment. It is essential to understand these relationships from a holistic perspective within the context of real classroom teaching (Sancar et al. 2021 ). However, as Sancar et al. ( 2021 ) pointed out, such efforts in teacher education are often considered inadequate. Furthermore, in the field of STEAM education, such efforts are further exacerbated.

Cai et al. ( 2020 ) proposed a teacher professional learning model where student outcomes are emphasized. This model was developed based on Cai ( 2017 ), Philipp ( 2007 ) and Thompson ( 1992 ). It has also been used and justified in a series of teacher professional development programs (e.g., Calabrese et al. 2024 ; Hwang et al. 2024 ; Marco and Palatnik 2024 ; Örnek and Soylu 2021 ). The model posits that teachers typically increase their knowledge and modify their beliefs through professional teacher learning, subsequently improving their classroom instruction, enhancing teaching performance, and ultimately fostering improved student learning outcomes (Cai et al. 2020 ). Notably, this model can be updated in several aspects. Firstly, prior studies have exhibited the interplay between teacher knowledge and beliefs (e.g., Basckin et al. 2021 ; Taimalu and Luik 2019 ). This indicates that the increase in teacher knowledge and the change in teacher belief may not be parallel. The two processes can be intertwined. Secondly, the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth highlights that the personal domain and the domain of practice are interconnected (Clarke and Hollingsworth 2002 ). Liu et al. ( 2022 ) also confirmed that improvements in classroom instruction may, in turn, influence teacher beliefs. This necessitates a reconsideration of the relationships between classroom instruction, teacher knowledge and teacher beliefs in Cai et al.’s ( 2020 ) model. Thirdly, the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth also exhibits the connections between the domain of consequence and the personal domain (Clarke and Hollingsworth 2002 ). Hence, the improvement of learning outcomes may signify the end of teacher learning. For instance, students’ learning feedback may be a vital source of teacher self-efficacy (Bandura 1977 ). Therefore, the improvement of student outcomes may, in turn, affect teacher beliefs. The aforementioned arguments highlight the need for an updated model that integrates Cai et al.’s ( 2020 ) teacher professional learning model with Clarke and Hollingsworth’s ( 2002 ) Interconnected Model of Professional Growth. This integration may provide a holistic view of the teacher’s professional learning process, especially within the complex contexts of STEAM teacher education.

The framework for teacher professional development programs of integrating arts and humanities into STEM teaching

In this section, we present a framework for IAT teacher professional development programs, aiming to address the practical challenges associated with STEAM teaching implementation. Our framework incorporates the five features of effective teacher professional development programs outlined by Archibald et al. ( 2011 ), Cai et al. ( 2020 ), Darling-Hammond et al. ( 2017 ), Desimone and Garet ( 2015 ) and Roth et al. ( 2017 ). These features include: (a) alignment with shared goals (e.g., school, district, and national policies and practice), (b) emphasis on core content and modeling of teaching strategies for the content, (c) collaboration among teachers within a community, (d) adequate opportunities for active learning of new teaching strategies, and (e) embedded follow-up and continuous feedback. It is worth noting that two concepts, namely community of practice and lesson study, have been incorporated into our framework. Below, we delineate how these features are reflected in our framework.

(a) The Chinese government has issued a series of policies to facilitate STEAM education in K-12 schools (Jiang et al. 2021 ; Li and Chiang 2019 ; Lyu et al. 2024 ; Ro et al. 2022 ). The new curriculum standards released in 2022 mandate that all K-12 teachers implement interdisciplinary teaching, including STEAM education. Our framework for teacher professional development programs, which aims to help teachers integrate A&H into STEM teaching, closely aligns with these national policies and practices supporting STEAM education in K-12 schools.

(b) The core content of the framework is IAT. Specifically, as A&H is a broad concept, we divide it into several subcomponents, such as history, culture, and visual and performing arts (e.g., drama). We are implementing a series of teacher professional development programs to help mathematics, technology and science pre-service teachers integrate these subcomponents of A&H into their teaching Footnote 2 . Notably, pre-service teachers often lack teaching experience, making it challenging to master and implement new teaching strategies. Therefore, our framework provides five step-by-step stages designed to help them effectively model the teaching strategies of IAT.

(c) Our framework advocates for collaboration among teachers within a community of practice. Specifically, a community of practice is “a group of people who share an interest in a domain of human endeavor and engage in a process of collective learning that creates bonds between them” (Wenger et al. 2002 , p. 1). A teacher community of practice can be considered a group of teachers “sharing and critically observing their practices in growth-promoting ways” (Näykki et al. 2021 , p. 497). Long et al. ( 2021 ) claimed that in a teacher community of practice, members collaboratively share their teaching experiences and work together to address teaching problems. Our community of practice includes three types of members. (1) Mentors: These are professors and experts with rich experience in helping pre-service teachers practice IAT. (2) Pre-service teachers: Few have teaching experience before the teacher professional development programs. (3) In-service teachers: All in-service teachers are senior teachers with rich teaching experience. All the members work closely together to share and improve their IAT practice. Moreover, our community includes not only mentors and in-service teachers but also pre-service teachers. We encourage pre-service teachers to collaborate with experienced in-service teachers in various ways, such as developing IAT lesson plans, writing IAT case reports and so on. In-service teachers can provide cognitive and emotional support and share their practical knowledge and experience, which may significantly benefit the professional growth of pre-service teachers (Alwafi et al. 2020 ).

(d) Our framework offers pre-service teachers various opportunities to engage in lesson study, allowing them to actively design and implement IAT lessons. Based on the key points of effective lesson study outlined by Akiba et al. ( 2019 ), Ding et al. ( 2024 ), and Takahashi and McDougal ( 2016 ), our lesson study incorporates the following seven features. (1) Study of IAT materials: Pre-service teachers are required to study relevant IAT materials under the guidance of mentors. (2) Collaboration on lesson proposals: Pre-service teachers should collaborate with in-service teachers to develop comprehensive lesson proposals. (3) Observation and data collection: During the lesson, pre-service teachers are required to carefully observe and collect data on student learning and development. (4) Reflection and analysis: Pre-service teachers use the collected data to reflect on the lesson and their teaching effects. (5) Lesson revision and reteaching: If needed, pre-service teachers revise and reteach the lesson based on their reflections and data analysis. (6) Mentor and experienced in-service teacher involvement: Mentors and experienced in-service teachers, as knowledgeable others, are involved throughout the lesson study process. (7) Collaboration on reporting: Pre-service teachers collaborate with in-service teachers to draft reports and disseminate the results of the lesson study. Specifically, recognizing that pre-service teachers often lack teaching experience, we do not require them to complete all the steps of lesson study independently at once. Instead, we guide them through the lesson study process in a step-by-step manner, allowing them to gradually build their IAT skills and confidence. For instance, in Stage 1, pre-service teachers primarily focus on studying IAT materials. In Stage 2, they develop lesson proposals, observe and collect data, and draft reports. However, the implementation of IAT lessons is carried out by in-service teachers. This approach prevents pre-service teachers from experiencing failures due to their lack of teaching experience. In Stage 3, pre-service teachers implement, revise, and reteach IAT lessons, experiencing the lesson study process within a simulated environment. In Stage 4, pre-service teachers engage in lesson study in an actual classroom environment. However, their focus is limited to one micro-course during each lesson study session. It is not until the fifth stage that they experience a complete lesson study in an actual classroom environment.

(e) Our teacher professional development programs incorporate assessments specifically designed to evaluate pre-service teachers’ IAT practices. We use formative assessments to measure their understanding and application of IAT strategies. Pre-service teachers receive ongoing and timely feedback from peers, mentors, in-service teachers, and students, which helps them continuously refine their IAT practices throughout the program. Recognizing that pre-service teachers often have limited contact with real students and may not fully understand students’ learning needs, processes and outcomes, our framework requires them to actively collect and analyze student feedback. By doing so, they can make informed improvements to their instructional practice based on student feedback.

After undergoing three rounds of theoretical and practical testing and revision over the past five years, we have successfully finalized the optimization of the framework design (Zhou 2021 ). Throughout each cycle, we collected feedback from both participants and researchers on at least three occasions. Subsequently, we analyzed this feedback and iteratively refined the framework. For example, we enlisted the participation of in-service teachers to enhance the implementation of STEAM teaching, extended practice time through micro-teaching sessions, and introduced a stage of micro-course development within the framework to provide more opportunities for pre-service teachers to engage with real teaching situations. In this process, we continuously improved the coherence between each stage of the framework, ensuring that they mutually complement one another. The five-stage framework is described as follows.

Stage 1 Literature study

Pre-service teachers are provided with a series of reading materials from A&H. On a weekly basis, two pre-service teachers are assigned to present their readings and reflections to the entire group, followed by critical discussions thereafter. Mentors and all pre-service teachers discuss and explore strategies for translating the original A&H materials into viable instructional resources suitable for classroom use. Subsequently, pre-service teachers select topics of personal interest for further study under mentor guidance.

Stage 2 Case learning

Given that pre-service teachers have no teaching experience, collaborative efforts between in-service teachers and pre-service teachers are undertaken to design IAT lesson plans. Subsequently, the in-service teachers implement these plans. Throughout this process, pre-service teachers are afforded opportunities to engage in lesson plan implementation. Figure 1 illustrates the role of pre-service teachers in case learning. In the first step, pre-service teachers read about materials related to A&H, select suitable materials, and report their ideas on IAT lesson design to mentors, in-service teachers, and fellow pre-service teachers.

Note: A&H refers to arts and humanities.

In the second step, they liaise with the in-service teachers responsible for implementing the lesson plan, discussing the integration of A&H into teaching practices. Pre-service teachers then analyze student learning objectives aligned with curriculum standards, collaboratively designing the IAT lesson plan with in-service teachers. Subsequently, pre-service teachers present lesson plans for feedback from mentors and other in-service teachers.

In the third step, pre-service teachers observe the lesson plan’s implementation, gathering and analyzing feedback from students and in-service teachers using an inductive approach (Merriam 1998 ). Feedback includes opinions on the roles and values of A&H, perceptions of the teaching effect, and recommendations for lesson plan implementation and modification. The second and third steps may iterate multiple times to refine the IAT lesson plan. In the fourth step, pre-service teachers consolidate all data, including various versions of teaching instructions, classroom videos, feedback, and discussion notes, composing reflection notes. Finally, pre-service teachers collaborate with in-service teachers to compile the IAT case report and submit it for publication.

Stage 3 Micro-teaching

Figure 2 illustrates the role of pre-service teachers in micro-teaching. Before entering the micro-classrooms Footnote 3 , all the discussions and communications occur within the pre-service teacher group, excluding mentors and in-service teachers. After designing the IAT lesson plan, pre-service teachers take turns implementing 40-min lesson plans in a simulated micro-classroom setting. Within this simulated environment, one pre-service teacher acts as the teacher, while others, including mentors, in-service teachers, and other fellow pre-service teachers, assume the role of students Footnote 4 . Following the simulated teaching, the implementer reviews the video of their session and self-assesses their performance. Subsequently, the implementer receives feedback from other pre-service teachers, mentors, and in-service teachers. Based on this feedback, the implementer revisits steps 2 and 3, revising the lesson plan and conducting the simulated teaching again. This iterative process typically repeats at least three times until the mentors, in-service teachers, and other pre-service teachers are satisfied with the implementation of the revised lesson plan. Finally, pre-service teachers complete reflection notes and submit a summary of their reflections on the micro-teaching experience. Each pre-service teacher is required to choose at least three topics and undergo at least nine simulated teaching sessions.

Stage 4 Micro-course development

While pre-service teachers may not have the opportunity to execute the whole lesson plans in real classrooms, they can design and create five-minute micro-courses Footnote 5 before class, subsequently presenting these videos to actual students. The process of developing micro-courses closely mirrors that of developing IAT cases in the case learning stage (see Fig. 1 ). However, in Step 3, pre-service teachers assume dual roles, not only as observers of IAT lesson implementation but also as implementers of a five-minute IAT micro-course.

Stage 5 Classroom teaching

Pre-service teachers undertake the implementation of IAT lesson plans independently, a process resembling micro-teaching (see Fig. 2 ). However, pre-service teachers engage with real school students in partner schools Footnote 6 instead of simulated classrooms. Furthermore, they collect feedback not only from the mentors, in-service teachers, and fellow pre-service teachers but also from real students.

To provide our readers with a better understanding of the framework, we provide meaningful vignettes of a pre-service teacher’s learning and teaching experiences in one of the teacher professional development programs based on the framework. In addition, we choose teacher self-efficacy as an indicator to assess the framework’s effectiveness, detailing the pre-service teacher’s changes in teacher self-efficacy.

Research design

Research method.

Teacher self-efficacy can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively (Bandura 1986 , 1997 ; Lee and Bobko 1994 ; Soprano and Yang 2013 ; Unfried et al. 2022 ). However, researchers and theorists in the area of teacher self-efficacy have called for more qualitative and longitudinal studies (Klassen et al. 2011 ). As some critiques stated, most studies were based on correlational and cross-sectional data obtained from self-report surveys, and qualitative studies of teacher efficacy were overwhelmingly neglected (Henson 2002 ; Klassen et al. 2011 ; Tschannen-Moran et al. 1998 ; Xenofontos and Andrews 2020 ). There is an urgent need for more longitudinal studies to shed light on the development of teacher efficacy (Klassen et al. 2011 ; Xenofontos and Andrews 2020 ).

This study utilized a longitudinal qualitative case study methodology to delve deeply into the context (Jiang et al. 2021 ; Corden and Millar 2007 ; Dicks et al. 2023 ; Henderson et al. 2012 ; Matusovich et al. 2010 ; Shirani and Henwood 2011 ), presenting details grounded in real-life situations and analyzing the inner relationships rather than generalize findings about the change of a large group of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy.

Participant

This study forms a component of a broader multi-case research initiative examining teachers’ professional learning in the STEAM teacher professional development programs in China (Jiang et al. 2021 ; Wang et al. 2018 ; Wang et al. 2024 ). Within this context, one participant, Shuitao (pseudonym), is selected and reported in this current study. Shuitao was a first-year graduate student at a first-tier Normal university in Shanghai, China. Normal universities specialize in teacher education. Her graduate major was mathematics curriculum and instruction. Teaching practice courses are offered to students in this major exclusively during their third year of study. The selection of Shuitao was driven by three primary factors. Firstly, Shuitao attended the entire teacher professional development program and actively engaged in nearly all associated activities. Table 2 illustrates the timeline of the five stages in which Shuitao was involved. Secondly, her undergraduate major was applied mathematics, which was not related to mathematics teaching Footnote 7 . She possessed no prior teaching experience and had not undergone any systematic study of IAT before her involvement in the teacher professional development program. Thirdly, her other master’s courses during her first two years of study focused on mathematics education theory and did not include IAT Footnote 8 . Additionally, she scarcely participated in any other teaching practice outside of the teacher professional development program. As a pre-service teacher, Shuitao harbored a keen interest in IAT. Furthermore, she discovered that she possessed fewer teaching skills compared to her peers who had majored in education during their undergraduate studies. Hence, she had a strong desire to enhance her teaching skills. Consequently, Shuitao decided to participate in our teacher professional development program.

Shuitao was grouped with three other first-year graduate students during the teacher professional development program. She actively collaborated with them at every stage of the program. For instance, they advised each other on their IAT lesson designs, observed each other’s IAT practice and offered constructive suggestions for improvement.

Research question

Shuitao was a mathematics pre-service teacher who participated in one of our teacher professional development programs, focusing on integrating history into mathematics teaching (IHT) Footnote 9 . Notably, this teacher professional development program was designed based on our five-stage framework for teacher professional development programs of IAT. To examine the impact of this teacher professional development program on Shuitao’s self-efficacy related to IHT, this case study addresses the following research question:

What changes in Shuitao’s self-efficacy in individual performance regarding integrating history into mathematics teaching (SE-IHT-IP) may occur through participation in the teacher professional development program?

What changes in Shuitao’s self-efficacy in student outcomes regarding integrating history into mathematics teaching (SE-IHT-SO) may occur through participation in the teacher professional development program?

Data collection and analysis

Before Shuitao joined the teacher professional development program, a one-hour preliminary interview was conducted to guide her in self-narrating her psychological and cognitive state of IHT.

During the teacher professional development program, follow-up unstructured interviews were conducted once a month with Shuitao. All discussions in the development of IHT cases were recorded, Shuitao’s teaching and micro-teaching were videotaped, and the reflection notes, journals, and summary reports written by Shuitao were collected.

After completing the teacher professional development program, Shuitao participated in a semi-structured three-hour interview. The objectives of this interview were twofold: to reassess her self-efficacy and to explore the relationship between her self-efficacy changes and each stage of the teacher professional development program.

Interview data, discussions, reflection notes, journals, summary reports and videos, and analysis records were archived and transcribed before, during, and after the teacher professional development program.

In this study, we primarily utilized data from seven interviews: one conducted before the teacher professional development program, five conducted after each stage of the program, and one conducted upon completion of the program. Additionally, we reviewed Shuitao’s five reflective notes, which were written after each stage, as well as her final summary report that encompassed the entire teacher professional development program.

Merriam’s ( 1998 ) approach to coding data and inductive approach to retrieving possible concepts and themes were employed using a seven-stage method. Considering theoretical underpinnings in qualitative research is common when interpreting data (Strauss and Corbin 1990 ). First, a list based on our conceptual framework of teacher self-efficacy (see Table 1 ) was developed. The list included two codes (i.e., SE-IHT-IP and SE-IHT-SO). Second, all data were sorted chronologically, read and reread to be better understood. Third, texts were coded into multi-colored highlighting and comment balloons. Fourth, the data for groups of meanings, themes, and behaviors were examined. How these groups were connected within the conceptual framework of teacher self-efficacy was confirmed. Fifth, after comparing, confirming, and modifying, the selective codes were extracted and mapped onto the two categories according to the conceptual framework of teacher self-efficacy. Accordingly, changes in SE-IHT-IP and SE-IHT-SO at the five stages of the teacher professional development program were identified, respectively, and then the preliminary findings came (Strauss and Corbin 1990 ). In reality, in Shuitao’s narratives, SE-IHT-IP and SE-IHT-SO were frequently intertwined. Through our coding process, we differentiated between SE-IHT-IP and SE-IHT-SO, enabling us to obtain a more distinct understanding of how these two aspects of teacher self-efficacy evolved over time. This helped us address the two research questions effectively.

Reliability and validity

Two researchers independently analyzed the data to establish inter-rater reliability. The inter-rater reliability was established as kappa = 0.959. Stake ( 1995 ) suggested that the most critical assertions in a study require the greatest effort toward confirmation. In this study, three methods served this purpose and helped ensure the validity of the findings. The first way to substantiate the statement about the changes in self-efficacy was by revisiting each transcript to confirm whether the participant explicitly acknowledged the changes (Yin 2003 ). Such a check was repeated in the analysis of this study. The second way to confirm patterns in the data was by examining whether Shuitao’s statements were replicated in separate interviews (Morris and Usher 2011 ). The third approach involved presenting the preliminary conclusions to Shuitao and affording her the opportunity to provide feedback on the data and conclusions. This step aimed to ascertain whether we accurately grasped the true intentions of her statements and whether our subjective interpretations inadvertently influenced our analysis of her statements. Additionally, data from diverse sources underwent analysis by at least two researchers, with all researchers reaching consensus on each finding.

As each stage of our teacher professional development programs spanned a minimum of three months, numerous documented statements regarding the enhancement of Shuitao’s self-efficacy regarding IHT were recorded. Notably, what we present here offers only a concise overview of findings derived from our qualitative analysis. The changes in Shuitao’s SE-IHT-IP and SE-IHT-SO are organized chronologically, delineating the period before and during the teacher professional development program.

Before the teacher professional development program: “I have no confidence in IHT”

Before the teacher professional development program, Shuitao frequently expressed her lack of confidence in IHT. On the one hand, Shuitao expressed considerable apprehension about her individual performance in IHT. “How can I design and implement IHT lesson plans? I do not know anything [about it]…” With a sense of doubt, confusion and anxiety, Shuitao voiced her lack of confidence in her ability to design and implement an IHT case that would meet the requirements of the curriculum standards. Regarding the reasons for her lack of confidence, Shuitao attributed it to her insufficient theoretical knowledge and practical experience in IHT:

I do not know the basic approaches to IHT that I could follow… it is very difficult for me to find suitable historical materials… I am very confused about how to organize [historical] materials logically around the teaching goals and contents… [Furthermore,] I am [a] novice, [and] I have no IHT experience.

On the other hand, Shuitao articulated very low confidence in the efficacy of her IHT on student outcomes:

I think my IHT will have a limited impact on student outcomes… I do not know any specific effects [of history] other than making students interested in mathematics… In fact, I always think it is difficult for [my] students to understand the history… If students cannot understand [the history], will they feel bored?

This statement suggests that Shuitao did not fully grasp the significance of IHT. In fact, she knew little about the educational significance of history for students, and she harbored no belief that her IHT approach could positively impact students. In sum, her SE-IHT-SO was very low.

After stage 1: “I can do well in the first step of IHT”

After Stage 1, Shuitao indicated a slight improvement in her confidence in IHT. She attributed this improvement to her acquisition of theoretical knowledge in IHT, the approaches for selecting history-related materials, and an understanding of the educational value of history.

One of Shuitao’s primary concerns about implementing IHT before the teacher professional development program was the challenge of sourcing suitable history-related materials. However, after Stage 1, Shuitao explicitly affirmed her capability in this aspect. She shared her experience of organizing history-related materials related to logarithms as an example.

Recognizing the significance of suitable history-related materials in effective IHT implementation, Shuitao acknowledged that conducting literature studies significantly contributed to enhancing her confidence in undertaking this initial step. Furthermore, she expressed increased confidence in designing IHT lesson plans by utilizing history-related materials aligned with teaching objectives derived from the curriculum standards. In other words, her SE-IHT-IP was enhanced. She said:

After experiencing multiple discussions, I gradually know more about what kinds of materials are essential and should be emphasized, what kinds of materials should be adapted, and what kinds of materials should be omitted in the classroom instructions… I have a little confidence to implement IHT that could meet the requirements [of the curriculum standards] since now I can complete the critical first step [of IHT] well…

However, despite the improvement in her confidence in IHT following Stage 1, Shuitao also expressed some concerns. She articulated uncertainty regarding her performance in the subsequent stages of the teacher professional development program. Consequently, her confidence in IHT experienced only a modest increase.

After stage 2: “I participate in the development of IHT cases, and my confidence is increased a little bit more”

Following Stage 2, Shuitao reported further increased confidence in IHT. She attributed this growth to two main factors. Firstly, she successfully developed several instructional designs for IHT through collaboration with in-service teachers. These collaborative experiences enabled her to gain a deeper understanding of IHT approaches and enhance her pedagogical content knowledge in this area, consequently bolstering her confidence in her ability to perform effectively. Secondly, Shuitao observed the tangible impact of IHT cases on students in real classroom settings, which reinforced her belief in the efficacy of IHT. These experiences instilled in her a greater sense of confidence in her capacity to positively influence her students through her implementation of IHT. Shuitao remarked that she gradually understood how to integrate suitable history-related materials into her instructional designs (e.g., employ a genetic approach Footnote 10 ), considering it as the second important step of IHT. She shared her experience of developing IHT instructional design on the concept of logarithms. After creating several iterations of IHT instructional designs, Shuitao emphasized that her confidence in SE-IHT-IP has strengthened. She expressed belief in her ability to apply these approaches to IHT, as well as the pedagogical content knowledge of IHT, acquired through practical experience, in her future teaching endeavors. The following is an excerpt from the interview:

I learned some effective knowledge, skills, techniques and approaches [to IHT]… By employing these approaches, I thought I could [and] I had the confidence to integrate the history into instructional designs very well… For instance, [inspired] by the genetic approach, we designed a series of questions and tasks based on the history of logarithms. The introduction of the new concept of logarithms became very natural, and it perfectly met the requirements of our curriculum standards, [which] asked students to understand the necessity of learning the concept of logarithms…

Shuitao actively observed the classroom teaching conducted by her cooperating in-service teacher. She helped her cooperating in-service teacher in collecting and analyzing students’ feedback. Subsequently, discussions ensued on how to improve the instructional designs based on this feedback. The refined IHT instructional designs were subsequently re-implemented by the in-service teacher. After three rounds of developing IHT cases, Shuitao became increasingly convinced of the significance and efficacy of integrating history into teaching practices, as evidenced by the following excerpt:

The impacts of IHT on students are visible… For instance, more than 93% of the students mentioned in the open-ended questionnaires that they became more interested in mathematics because of the [historical] story of Napier… For another example, according to the results of our surveys, more than 75% of the students stated that they knew log a ( M  +  N ) = log a M  × log a N was wrong because of history… I have a little bit more confidence in the effects of my IHT on students.

This excerpt highlights that Shuitao’s SE-IHT-SO was enhanced. She attributed this enhancement to her realization of the compelling nature of history and her belief in her ability to effectively leverage its power to positively influence her students’ cognitive and emotional development. This also underscores the importance of reinforcing pre-service teachers’ awareness of the significance of history. Nonetheless, Shuiato elucidated that she still retained concerns regarding the effectiveness of her IHT implementation. Her following statement shed light on why her self-efficacy only experienced a marginal increase in this stage:

Knowing how to do it successfully and doing it successfully in practice are two totally different things… I can develop IHT instructional designs well, but I have no idea whether I can implement them well and whether I can introduce the history professionally in practice… My cooperation in-service teacher has a long history of teaching mathematics and gains rich experience in educational practices… If I cannot acquire some required teaching skills and capabilities, I still cannot influence my students powerfully.

After stage 3: “Practice makes perfect, and my SE-IHT-IP is steadily enhanced after a hit”

After successfully developing IHT instructional designs, the next critical step was the implementation of these designs. Drawing from her observations of her cooperating in-service teachers’ IHT implementations and discussions with other pre-service teachers, Shuitao developed her own IHT lesson plans. In Stage 3, she conducted simulated teaching sessions and evaluated her teaching performance ten times Footnote 11 . Shuitao claimed that her SE-IHT-IP steadily improved over the course of these sessions. According to Shuitao, two main processes in Stage 3 facilitated this steady enhancement of SE-IHT-IP.

On the one hand, through the repeated implementation of simulated teaching sessions, Shuitao’s teaching proficiency and fluency markedly improved. Shuitao first described the importance of teaching proficiency and fluency:

Since the detailed history is not included in our curriculum standards and textbooks, if I use my historical materials in class, I have to teach more contents than traditional teachers. Therefore, I have to teach proficiently so that teaching pace becomes a little faster than usual… I have to teach fluently so as to use each minute efficiently in my class. Otherwise, I cannot complete the teaching tasks required [by curriculum standards].

As Shuitao said, at the beginning of Stage 3, her self-efficacy even decreased because she lacked teaching proficiency and fluency and was unable to complete the required teaching tasks:

In the first few times of simulated teaching, I always needed to think for a second about what I should say next when I finish one sentence. I also felt very nervous when I stood in the front of the classrooms. This made my narration of the historical story between Briggs and Napier not fluent at all. I paused many times to look for some hints on my notes… All these made me unable to complete the required teaching tasks… My [teaching] confidence took a hit.

Shuitao quoted the proverb, “practice makes perfect”, and she emphasized that it was repeated practice that improved her teaching proficiency and fluency:

I thought I had no other choice but to practice IHT repeatedly… [At the end of Stage 3,] I could naturally remember most words that I should say when teaching the topics that I selected… My teaching proficiency and fluency was improved through my repeated review of my instructional designs and implementation of IHT in the micro-classrooms… With the improvement [of my teaching proficiency and fluency], I could complete the teaching tasks, and my confidence was increased as well.

In addition, Shuitao also mentioned that through this kind of self-exploration in simulated teaching practice, her teaching skills and capabilities (e.g., blackboard writing, abilities of language organization abilities, etc.) improved. This process was of great help to her enhancement of SE-IHT-IP.

On the other hand, Shuitao’s simulated teaching underwent assessment by herself, with mentors, in-service teachers and fellow pre-service teachers. This comprehensive evaluation process played a pivotal role in enhancing her individual performance and self-efficacy. Reflecting on this aspect, Shuitao articulated the following sentiments in one of her reflection reports:

By watching the videos, conducting self-assessment, and collecting feedback from others, I can understand what I should improve or emphasize in my teaching. [Then,] I think my IHT can better meet the requirements [of curriculum standards]… I think my teaching performance is getting better and better.

After stage 4: “My micro-courses influenced students positively, and my SE-IHT-SO is steadily enhanced”

In Stage 4, Shuitao commenced by creating 5-min micro-course videos. Subsequently, she played these videos in her cooperating in-service teachers’ authentic classroom settings and collected student feedback. This micro-course was played at the end of her cooperating in-service teachers’ lesson Footnote 12 . Shuitao wrote in her reflections that this micro-course of logarithms helped students better understand the nature of mathematics:

According to the results of our surveys, many students stated that they knew the development and evolution of the concept of logarithms is a long process and many mathematicians from different countries have contributed to the development of the concept of logarithms… This indicated that my micro-course helped students better understand the nature of mathematics… My micro-course about the history informed students that mathematics is an evolving and human subject and helped them understand the dynamic development of the [mathematics] concept…

Meanwhile, Shuitao’s micro-course positively influenced some students’ beliefs towards mathematics. As evident from the quote below, integrating historical context into mathematics teaching transformed students’ perception of the subject, boosting Shuitao’s confidence too.

Some students’ responses were very exciting… [O]ne [typical] response stated, he always regarded mathematics as abstract, boring, and dreadful subject; but after seeing the photos of mathematicians and great men and learning the development of the concept of logarithms through the micro-course, he found mathematics could be interesting. He wanted to learn more the interesting history… Students’ such changes made me confident.

Furthermore, during post-class interviews, several students expressed their recognition of the significance of the logarithms concept to Shuitao, attributing this realization to the insights provided by prominent figures in the micro-courses. They also conveyed their intention to exert greater effort in mastering the subject matter. This feedback made Shuitao believe that her IHT had the potential to positively influence students’ attitudes towards learning mathematics.

In summary, Stage 4 marked Shuitao’s first opportunity to directly impact students through her IHT in authentic classroom settings. Despite implementing only brief 5-min micro-courses integrating history during each session, the effectiveness of her short IHT implementation was validated by student feedback. Shuitao unequivocally expressed that students actively engaged with her micro-courses and that these sessions positively influenced them, including attitudes and motivation toward mathematics learning, understanding of mathematics concepts, and beliefs regarding mathematics. These collective factors contributed to a steady enhancement of her confidence in SE-IHT-SO.

After stage 5: “My overall self-efficacy is greatly enhanced”

Following Stage 5, Shuitao reported a significant increase in her overall confidence in IHT, attributing it to gaining mastery through successful implementations of IHT in real classroom settings. On the one hand, Shuitao successfully designed and executed her IHT lesson plans, consistently achieving the teaching objectives mandated by curriculum standards. This significantly enhanced her SE-IHT-IP. On the other hand, as Shuitao’s IHT implementation directly influenced her students, her confidence in SE-IHT-SO experienced considerable improvement.

According to Bandura ( 1997 ), mastery experience is the most powerful source of self-efficacy. Shuitao’s statements confirmed this. As she claimed, her enhanced SE-IHT-IP in Stage 5 mainly came from the experience of successful implementations of IHT in real classrooms:

[Before the teacher professional development program,] I had no idea about implementing IHT… Now, I successfully implemented IHT in senior high school [classrooms] many times… I can complete the teaching tasks and even better completed the teaching objectives required [by the curriculum standards]… The successful experience greatly enhances my confidence to perform well in my future implementation of IHT… Yeah, I think the successful teaching practice experience is the strongest booster of my confidence.

At the end of stage 5, Shuitao’s mentors and in-service teachers gave her a high evaluation. For instance, after Shuitao’s IHT implementation of the concept of logarithms, all mentors and in-service teachers consistently provided feedback that her IHT teaching illustrated the necessity of learning the concept of logarithms and met the requirements of the curriculum standards very well. This kind of verbal persuasion (Bandura 1997 ) enhanced her SE-IHT-IP.

Similarly, Shuitao’s successful experience of influencing students positively through IHT, as one kind of mastery experience, powerfully enhanced her SE-IHT-SO. She described her changes in SE-IHT-SO as follows:

I could not imagine my IHT could be so influential [before]… But now, my IHT implementation directly influenced students in so many aspects… When I witnessed students’ real changes in various cognitive and affective aspects, my confidence was greatly improved.

Shuitao described the influence of her IHT implementation of the concept of logarithms on her students. The depiction is grounded in the outcomes of surveys conducted by Shuitao following her implementation. Shuitao asserted that these results filled her with excitement and confidence regarding her future implementation of IHT.

In summary, following Stage 5 of the teacher professional development program, Shuitao experienced a notable enhancement in her overall self-efficacy, primarily attributed to her successful practical experience in authentic classroom settings during this stage.

A primary objective of our teacher professional development programs is to equip pre-service teachers with the skills and confidence needed to effectively implement IAT. Our findings show that one teacher professional development program, significantly augmented a participant’s TSE-IHT across two dimensions: individual performance and student outcomes. Considering the pressing need to provide STEAM teachers with effective professional training (e.g., Boice et al. 2021 ; Duong et al. 2024 ; Herro et al. 2019 ; Jacques et al. 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ), the proposed five-stage framework holds significant promise in both theoretical and practical realms. Furthermore, this study offers a viable solution to address the prevalent issue of low levels of teacher self-efficacy in interdisciplinary teaching, including IAT, which is critical in STEAM education (Zhou et al. 2023 ). This study holds the potential to make unique contributions to the existing body of literature on teacher self-efficacy, teacher professional learning models and the design of teacher professional development programs of IAT.

Firstly, this study enhances our understanding of the development of teacher self-efficacy. Our findings further confirm the complexity of the development of teacher self-efficacy. On the one hand, the observed enhancement of the participant’s teacher self-efficacy did not occur swiftly but unfolded gradually through a protracted, incremental process. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the participant’s self-efficacy exhibited fluctuations, underscoring that the augmentation of teacher self-efficacy is neither straightforward nor linear. On the other hand, the study elucidated that the augmentation of teacher self-efficacy constitutes an intricate, multi-level system that interacts with teacher knowledge, skills, and other beliefs. This finding resonates with prior research on teacher self-efficacy (Morris et al. 2017 ; Xenofontos and Andrews 2020 ). For example, our study revealed that Shuitao’s enhancement of SE-IHT-SO may always be interwoven with her continuous comprehension of the significance of the A&H in classroom settings. Similarly, the participant progressively acknowledged the educational value of A&H in classroom contexts in tandem with the stepwise enhancement of SE-IHT-SO. Factors such as the participant’s pedagogical content knowledge of IHT, instructional design, and teaching skills were also identified as pivotal components of SE-IHT-IP. This finding corroborates Morris and Usher ( 2011 ) assertion that sustained improvements in self-efficacy stem from developing teachers’ skills and knowledge. With the bolstering of SE-IHT-IP, the participant’s related teaching skills and content knowledge also exhibited improvement.

Methodologically, many researchers advocate for qualitative investigations into self-efficacy (e.g., Philippou and Pantziara 2015; Klassen et al. 2011 ; Wyatt 2015 ; Xenofontos and Andrews 2020 ). While acknowledging limitations in sample scope and the generalizability of the findings, this study offers a longitudinal perspective on the stage-by-stage development of teacher self-efficacy and its interactions with different factors (i.e., teacher knowledge, skills, and beliefs), often ignored by quantitative studies. Considering that studies of self-efficacy have been predominantly quantitative, typically drawing on survey techniques and pre-determined scales (Xenofontos and Andrews, 2020 ; Zhou et al. 2023 ), this study highlights the need for greater attention to qualitative studies so that more cultural, situational and contextual factors in the development of self-efficacy can be captured.

Our study provides valuable practical implications for enhancing pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. We conceptualize teacher self-efficacy in two primary dimensions: individual performance and student outcomes. On the one hand, pre-service teachers can enhance their teaching qualities, boosting their self-efficacy in individual performance. The adage “practice makes perfect” underscores the necessity of ample teaching practice opportunities for pre-service teachers who lack prior teaching experience. Engaging in consistent and reflective practice helps them develop confidence in their teaching qualities. On the other hand, pre-service teachers should focus on positive feedback from their students, reinforcing their self-efficacy in individual performance. Positive student feedback serves as an affirmation of their teaching effectiveness and encourages continuous improvement. Furthermore, our findings highlight the significance of mentors’ and peers’ positive feedback as critical sources of teacher self-efficacy. Mentors and peers play a pivotal role in the professional growth of pre-service teachers by actively encouraging them and recognizing their teaching achievements. Constructive feedback from experienced mentors and supportive peers fosters a collaborative learning environment and bolsters the self-confidence of pre-service teachers. Additionally, our research indicates that pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy may fluctuate. Therefore, mentors should be prepared to help pre-service teachers manage teaching challenges and setbacks, and alleviate any teaching-related anxiety. Mentors can help pre-service teachers build resilience and maintain a positive outlook on their teaching journey through emotional support and guidance. Moreover, a strong correlation exists between teacher self-efficacy and teacher knowledge and skills. Enhancing pre-service teachers’ knowledge base and instructional skills is crucial for bolstering their overall self-efficacy.

Secondly, this study also responds to the appeal to understand teachers’ professional learning from a holistic perspective and interrelate teachers’ professional learning process with student outcome variables (Sancar et al. 2021 ), and thus contributes to the understanding of the complexity of STEAM teachers’ professional learning. On the one hand, we have confirmed Cai et al.’s ( 2020 ) teacher professional learning model in a new context, namely STEAM teacher education. Throughout the teacher professional development program, the pre-service teacher, Shuitao, demonstrated an augmentation in her knowledge, encompassing both content knowledge and pedagogical understanding concerning IHT. Moreover, her beliefs regarding IHT transformed as a result of her engagement in teacher learning across the five stages. This facilitated her in executing effective IHT teaching and improving her students’ outcomes. On the other hand, notably, in our studies (including this current study and some follow-up studies), student feedback is a pivotal tool to assist teachers in discerning the impact they are effectuating. This enables pre-service teachers to grasp the actual efficacy of their teaching efforts and subsequently contributes significantly to the augmentation of their self-efficacy. Such steps have seldom been conducted in prior studies (e.g., Cai et al. 2020 ), where student outcomes are often perceived solely as the results of teachers’ instruction rather than sources informing teacher beliefs. Additionally, this study has validated both the interaction between teaching performance and teacher beliefs and between teacher knowledge and teacher beliefs. These aspects were overlooked in Cai et al.’s ( 2020 ) model. More importantly, while Clarke and Hollingsworth’s ( 2002 ) Interconnected Model of Professional Growth illustrates the connections between the domain of consequence and the personal domain, as well as between the personal domain and the domain of practice, it does not adequately clarify the complex relationships among the factors within the personal domain (e.g., the interaction between teacher knowledge and teacher beliefs). Therefore, our study also supplements Clarke and Hollingsworth’s ( 2002 ) model by addressing these intricacies. Based on our findings, an updated model of teacher professional learning has been proposed, as shown in Fig. 3 . This expanded model indicates that teacher learning should be an ongoing and sustainable process, with the enhancement of student learning not marking the conclusion of teacher learning, but rather serving as the catalyst for a new phase of learning. In this sense, we advocate for further research to investigate the tangible impacts of teacher professional development programs on students and how those impacts stimulate subsequent cycles of teacher learning.

Note: Paths in blue were proposed by Cai et al. ( 2020 ), and paths in yellow are proposed and verified in this study.

Thirdly, in light of the updated model of teacher professional learning (see Fig. 3 ), this study provides insights into the design of teacher professional development programs of IAT. According to Huang et al. ( 2022 ), to date, very few studies have set goals to “develop a comprehensive understanding of effective designs” for STEM (or STEAM) teacher professional development programs (p. 15). To fill this gap, this study proposes a novel and effective five-stage framework for teacher professional development programs of IAT. This framework provides a possible and feasible solution to the challenges of STEAM teacher professional development programs’ design and planning, and teachers’ IAT practice (Boice et al. 2021 ; Herro et al. 2019 ; Jacques et al. 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ).

Specifically, our five-stage framework incorporates at least six important features. Firstly, teacher professional development programs should focus on specific STEAM content. Given the expansive nature of STEAM, teacher professional development programs cannot feasibly encompass all facets of its contents. Consistent with recommendations by Cai et al. ( 2020 ), Desimone et al. ( 2002 ) and Garet et al. ( 2001 ), an effective teacher professional development program should prioritize content focus. Our five-stage framework is centered on IAT. Throughout an 18-month duration, each pre-service teacher is limited to selecting one subcomponent of A&H, such as history, for integration into their subject teaching (i.e., mathematics teaching, technology teaching or science teaching) within one teacher professional development program. Secondly, in response to the appeals that teacher professional development programs should shift from emphasizing teaching and instruction to emphasizing student learning (Cai et al. 2020 ; Calabrese et al. 2024 ; Hwang et al. 2024 ; Marco and Palatnik 2024 ; Örnek and Soylu 2021 ), our framework requires pre-service teachers to pay close attention to the effects of IAT on student learning outcomes, and use students’ feedback as the basis of improving their instruction. Thirdly, prior studies found that teacher education with a preference for theory led to pre-service teachers’ dissatisfaction with the quality of teacher professional development program and hindered the development of pre-service teachers’ teaching skills and teaching beliefs, which also widened the gap between theory and practice (Hennissen et al. 2017 ; Ord and Nuttall 2016 ). In this regard, our five-stage framework connects theory and teaching practice closely. In particular, pre-service teachers can experience the values of IAT not only through theoretical learning but also through diverse teaching practices. Fourthly, we build a teacher community of practice tailored for pre-service teachers. Additionally, we aim to encourage greater participation of in-service teachers in such teacher professional development programs designed for pre-service educators in STEAM teacher education. By engaging in such programs, in-service teachers can offer valuable teaching opportunities for pre-service educators and contribute their insights and experiences from teaching practice. Importantly, pre-service teachers stand to gain from the in-service teachers’ familiarity with textbooks, subject matter expertise, and better understanding of student dynamics. Fifthly, our five-stage framework lasts for an extended period, spanning 18 months. This duration ensures that pre-service teachers engage in a sustained and comprehensive learning journey. Lastly, our framework facilitates a practical understanding of “integration” by offering detailed, sequential instructions for blending two disciplines in teaching. For example, our teacher professional development programs prioritize systematic learning of pedagogical theories and simulated teaching experiences before pre-service teachers embark on real STEAM teaching endeavors. This approach is designed to mitigate the risk of unsuccessful experiences during initial teaching efforts, thereby safeguarding pre-service teachers’ teacher self-efficacy. Considering the complexity of “integration” in interdisciplinary teaching practices, including IAT (Han et al. 2022 ; Ryu et al. 2019 ), we believe detailed stage-by-stage and step-by-step instructions are crucial components of relevant pre-service teacher professional development programs. Notably, this aspect, emphasizing structural instructional guidance, has not been explicitly addressed in prior research (e.g., Cai et al. 2020 ). Figure 4 illustrates the six important features outlined in this study, encompassing both established elements and the novel addition proposed herein, describing an effective teacher professional development program.

Note: STEAM refers to science, technology, engineering, arts and humanities, and mathematics.

The successful implementation of this framework is also related to the Chinese teacher education system and cultural background. For instance, the Chinese government has promoted many university-school collaboration initiatives, encouraging in-service teachers to provide guidance and practical opportunities for pre-service teachers (Lu et al. 2019 ). Influenced by Confucian values emphasizing altruism, many experienced in-service teachers in China are eager to assist pre-service teachers, helping them better realize their teaching career aspirations. It is reported that experienced in-service teachers in China show significantly higher motivation than their international peers when mentoring pre-service teachers (Lu et al. 2019 ). Therefore, for the successful implementation of this framework in other countries, it is crucial for universities to forge close collaborative relationships with K-12 schools and actively involve K-12 teachers in pre-service teacher education.

Notably, approximately 5% of our participants dropped out midway as they found that the IAT practice was too challenging or felt overwhelmed by the number of required tasks in the program. Consequently, we are exploring options to potentially simplify this framework in future iterations.

Without minimizing the limitations of this study, it is important to recognize that a qualitative longitudinal case study can be a useful means of shedding light on the development of a pre-service STEAM teacher’s self-efficacy. However, this methodology did not allow for a pre-post or a quasi-experimental design, and the effectiveness of our five-stage framework could not be confirmed quantitatively. In the future, conducting more experimental or design-based studies could further validate the effectiveness of our framework and broaden our findings. Furthermore, future studies should incorporate triangulation methods and utilize multiple data sources to enhance the reliability and validity of the findings. Meanwhile, owing to space limitations, we could only report the changes in Shuitao’s SE-IHT-IP and SE-IHT-SO here, and we could not describe the teacher self-efficacy of other participants regarding IAT. While nearly all of the pre-service teachers experienced an improvement in their teacher self-efficacy concerning IAT upon participating in our teacher professional development programs, the processes of their change were not entirely uniform. We will need to report the specific findings of these variations in the future. Further studies are also needed to explore the factors contributing to these variations. Moreover, following this study, we are implementing more teacher professional development programs of IAT. Future studies can explore the impact of this framework on additional aspects of pre-service STEAM teachers’ professional development. This will help gain a more comprehensive understanding of its effectiveness and potential areas for further improvement. Additionally, our five-stage framework was initially developed and implemented within the Chinese teacher education system. Future research should investigate how this framework can be adapted in other educational systems and cultural contexts.

The impetus behind this study stems from the burgeoning discourse advocating for the integration of A&H disciplines into STEM education on a global scale (e.g., Land 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Uştu et al. 2021 ; Vaziri and Bradburn 2021 ). Concurrently, there exists a pervasive concern regarding the challenges teachers face in implementing STEAM approaches, particularly in the context of IAT practices (e.g., Boice et al. 2021 ; Herro et al. 2019 ; Jacques et al. 2020 ; Park and Cho 2022 ; Perignat and Katz-Buonincontro 2019 ). To tackle this challenge, we first proposed a five-stage framework designed for teacher professional development programs of IAT. Then, utilizing this innovative framework, we implemented a series of teacher professional development programs. Drawing from the recommendations of Bray-Clark and Bates ( 2003 ), Kelley et al. ( 2020 ) and Zhou et al. ( 2023 ), we have selected teacher self-efficacy as a key metric to examine the effectiveness of the five-stage framework. Through a qualitative longitudinal case study, we scrutinized the influence of a specific teacher professional development program on the self-efficacy of a single pre-service teacher over an 18-month period. Our findings revealed a notable enhancement in teacher self-efficacy across both individual performance and student outcomes. The observed enhancement of the participant’s teacher self-efficacy did not occur swiftly but unfolded gradually through a prolonged, incremental process. Building on our findings, an updated model of teacher learning has been proposed. The updated model illustrates that teacher learning should be viewed as a continuous and sustainable process, wherein teaching performance, teacher beliefs, and teacher knowledge dynamically interact with one another. The updated model also confirms that teacher learning is inherently intertwined with student learning in STEAM education. Furthermore, this study also summarizes effective design features of STEAM teacher professional development programs.

Data availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during this study are not publicly available due to general data protection regulations, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

In their review article, Morris et al. ( 2017 ) equated “teaching self-efficacy” and “teacher self-efficacy” as synonymous concepts. This perspective is also adopted in this study.

An effective teacher professional development program should have specific, focused, and clear content instead of broad and scattered ones. Therefore, each pre-service teacher can only choose to integrate one subcomponent of A&H into their teaching in one teacher professional development program. For instance, Shuitao, a mathematics pre-service teacher, participated in one teacher professional development program focused on integrating history into mathematics teaching. However, she did not explore the integration of other subcomponents of A&H into her teaching during her graduate studies.

In the micro-classrooms, multi-angle, and multi-point high-definition video recorders are set up to record the teaching process.

In micro-teaching, mentors, in-service teachers, and other fellow pre-service teachers take on the roles of students.

In China, teachers can video record one section of a lesson and play them in formal classes. This is a practice known as a micro-course. For instance, in one teacher professional development program of integrating history into mathematics teaching, micro-courses encompass various mathematics concepts, methods, ideas, history-related material and related topics. Typically, teachers use these micro-courses to broaden students’ views, foster inquiry-based learning, and cultivate critical thinking skills. Such initiatives play an important role in improving teaching quality.

Many university-school collaboration initiatives in China focus on pre-service teachers’ practicum experiences (Lu et al. 2019 ). Our teacher professional development program is also supported by many K-12 schools in Shanghai. Personal information in videos is strictly protected.

In China, students are not required to pursue a graduate major that matches their undergraduate major. Most participants in our teacher professional development programs did not pursue undergraduate degrees in education-related fields.

Shuitao’s university reserves Wednesday afternoons for students to engage in various programs or clubs, as classes are not scheduled during this time. Similarly, our teacher professional development program activities are planned for Wednesday afternoons to avoid overlapping with participants’ other coursework commitments.

History is one of the most important components of A&H (Park and Cho 2022 ).

To learn more about genetic approach (i.e., genetic principle), see Jankvist ( 2009 ).

For the assessment process, see Fig. 2 .

Shuitao’s cooperating in-service teacher taught the concept of logarithms in Stage 2. In Stage 4, the teaching objective of her cooperating in-service teacher’s review lesson was to help students review the concept of logarithms to prepare students for the final exam.

Akiba M, Murata A, Howard C, Wilkinson B, Fabrega J (2019) Race to the top and lesson study implementation in Florida: District policy and leadership for teacher professional development. In: Huang R, Takahashi A, daPonte JP (eds) Theory and practice of lesson study in mathematics, pp. 731–754. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04031-4_35

Alkhabra YA, Ibrahem UM, Alkhabra SA (2023) Augmented reality technology in enhancing learning retention and critical thinking according to STEAM program. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:174. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01650-w

Article   Google Scholar  

Alwafi EM, Downey C, Kinchin G (2020) Promoting pre-service teachers’ engagement in an online professional learning community: Support from practitioners. J Professional Cap Community 5(2):129–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-10-2019-0027

Archibald S, Coggshall JG, Croft A, Goe L (2011) High-quality professional development for all teachers: effectively allocating resources. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, Washington, DC

Google Scholar  

Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Rev 84:191–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bandura A (1986) The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. J Soc Clin Psychol 4:359–373. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359

Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman, New York

Basckin C, Strnadová I, Cumming TM (2021) Teacher beliefs about evidence-based practice: A systematic review. Int J Educ Res 106:101727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101727

Bray-Clark N, Bates R (2003) Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development. Prof Educ 26(1):13–22

Blonder R, Benny N, Jones MG (2014) Teaching self-efficacy of science teachers. In: Evans R, Luft J, Czerniak C, Pea C (eds), The role of science teachers’ beliefs in international classrooms: From teacher actions to student learning, Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, pp. 3–16

Boice KL, Jackson JR, Alemdar M, Rao AE, Grossman S, Usselman M (2021) Supporting teachers on their STEAM journey: A collaborative STEAM teacher training program. Educ Sci 11(3):105. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030105

Cai J (2017) Longitudinally investigating the effect of teacher professional development on instructional practice and student learning: A focus on mathematical problem posing. The University of Delaware, Newark, DE

Cai J, Chen T, Li X, Xu R, Zhang S, Hu Y, Zhang L, Song N (2020) Exploring the impact of a problem-posing workshop on elementary school mathematics teachers’ conceptions on problem posing and lesson design. Int J Educ Res 102:101404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.02.004

Calabrese JE, Capraro MM, Viruru R (2024) Semantic structure and problem posing: Preservice teachers’ experience. School Sci Math. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12648

Clarke D, Hollingsworth H (2002) Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teach Teach Educ 18(8):947–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00053-7

Corden A, Millar J (2007) Time and change: A review of the qualitative longitudinal research literature for social policy. Soc Policy Soc 6(4):583–592. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746407003910

Darling-Hammond L, Hyler ME, Gardner M (2017) Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute, Palo Alto, CA

Book   Google Scholar  

de la Garza A (2021) Internationalizing the curriculum for STEAM (STEM+ Arts and Humanities): From intercultural competence to cultural humility. J Stud Int Educ 25(2):123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315319888468

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Desimone LM, Garet MS (2015) Best practices in teachers’ professional development in the United States. Psychol, Soc, Educ 7(3):252–263

Desimone LM, Porter AC, Garet MS, Yoon KS, Birman BF (2002) Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educ Evaluation Policy Anal 24(2):81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737024002081

Dicks SG, Northam HL, van Haren FM, Boer DP (2023) The bereavement experiences of families of potential organ donors: a qualitative longitudinal case study illuminating opportunities for family care. Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-being 18(1):1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2022.2149100

Ding M, Huang R, Pressimone Beckowski C, Li X, Li Y (2024) A review of lesson study in mathematics education from 2015 to 2022: implementation and impact. ZDM Math Educ 56:87–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01538-8

Duong NH, Nam NH, Trung TT (2024) Factors affecting the implementation of STEAM education among primary school teachers in various countries and Vietnamese educators: comparative analysis. Education 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2024.2318239

English LD (2016) STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. Int J STEM Educ 3:3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1

Garet MS, Porter AC, Desimone L, Birman BF, Yoon KS (2001) What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. Am Educ Res J 38(4):915–945. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004915

Gates AE (2017) Benefits of a STEAM collaboration in Newark, New Jersey: Volcano simulation through a glass-making experience. J Geosci Educ 65(1):4–11. https://doi.org/10.5408/16-188.1

Geng J, Jong MSY, Chai CS (2019) Hong Kong teachers’ self-efficacy and concerns about STEM education. Asia-Pac Educ Researcher 28:35–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0414-1

Han J, Kelley T, Knowles JG (2022) Building a sustainable model of integrated stem education: investigating secondary school STEM classes after an integrated STEM project. Int J Technol Design Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09777-8

Henderson S, Holland J, McGrellis S, Sharpe S, Thomson R (2012) Storying qualitative longitudinal research: Sequence, voice and motif. Qualitative Res 12(1):16–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111426232

Hennissen P, Beckers H, Moerkerke G (2017) Linking practice to theory in teacher education: A growth in cognitive structures. Teach Teach Educ 63:314–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.008

Henson RK (2002) From adolescent angst to adulthood: Substantive implications and measurement dilemmas in the development of teacher efficacy research. Educ Psychologist 37:137–150. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3703_1

Herro D, Quigley C (2016) Innovating with STEAM in middle school classrooms: remixing education. Horizon 24(3):190–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-03-2016-0008

Herro D, Quigley C, Cian H (2019) The challenges of STEAM instruction: Lessons from the field. Action Teach Educ 41(2):172–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2018.1551159

Huang B, Jong MSY, Tu YF, Hwang GJ, Chai CS, Jiang MYC (2022) Trends and exemplary practices of STEM teacher professional development programs in K-12 contexts: A systematic review of empirical studies. Comput Educ 189:104577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104577

Hunter-Doniger T, Sydow L (2016) A journey from STEM to STEAM: A middle school case study. Clearing House 89(4-5):159–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2016.1170461

Hwang S, Xu R, Yao Y, Cai J (2024) Learning to teach through problem posing: A teacher’s journey in a networked teacher−researcher partnership. J Math Behav 73:101120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101120

Jacques LA, Cian H, Herro DC, Quigley C (2020) The impact of questioning techniques on STEAM instruction. Action Teach Educ 42(3):290–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1638848

Jankvist UT (2009) A categorization of the “whys” and “hows” of using history in mathematics education. Educ Stud Math 71:235–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9174-9

Jiang H, Chugh R, Turnbull D, Wang X, Chen S (2023) Modeling the impact of intrinsic coding interest on STEM career interest: evidence from senior high school students in two large Chinese cities. Educ Inf Technol 28:2639–2659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11277-0

Jiang H, Chugh R, Turnbull D, Wang X, Chen S (2024a) Exploring the effects of technology-related informal mathematics learning activities: A structural equation modeling analysis. Int J Sci Math Educ . Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10456-4

Jiang H, Islam AYMA, Gu X, Guan J (2024b) How do thinking styles and STEM attitudes have effects on computational thinking? A structural equation modeling analysis. J Res Sci Teach 61:645–673. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21899

Jiang H, Turnbull D, Wang X, Chugh R, Dou Y, Chen S (2022) How do mathematics interest and self-efficacy influence coding interest and self-efficacy? A structural equation modeling analysis. Int J Educ Res 115:102058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102058

Jiang H, Wang K, Wang X, Lei X, Huang Z (2021) Understanding a STEM teacher’s emotions and professional identities: A three-year longitudinal case study. Int J STEM Educ 8:51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00309-9

Kelley TR, Knowles JG, Holland JD, Han J (2020) Increasing high school teachers self-efficacy for integrated STEM instruction through a collaborative community of practice. Int J STEM Educ 7:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00211-w

Klassen RM, Tze VMC, Betts SM, Gordon KA (2011) Teacher efficacy research 1998–2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise? Educ Psychol Rev 23(1):21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9141-8

Land M (2020) The importance of integrating the arts into STEM curriculum. In: Stewart AJ, Mueller MP, Tippins DJ (eds), Converting STEM into STEAM programs, pp. 11–19. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25101-7_2

Lee C, Bobko P (1994) Self-efficacy beliefs: Comparison of five measures. J Appl Psychol 79(3):364–369. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.364

Li W, Chiang FK (2019) Preservice teachers’ perceptions of STEAM education and attitudes toward STEAM disciplines and careers in China. In: Sengupta P, Shanahan MC, Kim B, (eds), Critical, transdisciplinary and embodied approaches in STEM education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_5

Liu M, Zwart R, Bronkhorst L, Wubbels T (2022) Chinese student teachers’ beliefs and the role of teaching experiences in the development of their beliefs. Teach Teach Educ 109:103525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103525

Liu S, Xu X, Stronge J (2018) The influences of teachers’ perceptions of using student achievement data in evaluation and their self-efficacy on job satisfaction: evidence from China. Asia Pac Educ Rev 19:493–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9552-7

Long T, Zhao G, Yang X, Zhao R, Chen Q (2021) Bridging the belief-action gap in a teachers’ professional learning community on teaching of thinking. Professional Dev Educ 47(5):729–744. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1647872

Lu L, Wang F, Ma Y, Clarke A, Collins J (2019) Exploring Chinese teachers’ commitment to being a cooperating teacher in a university-government-school initiative for rural practicum placements. In: Liu WC, Goh CCM (eds), Teachers’ perceptions, experience and learning, pp. 33–54. Routledge, London

Lyu S, Niu S, Yuan J, Zhan Z (2024) Developing professional capital through technology-enabled university-school-enterprise collaboration: an innovative model for C-STEAM preservice teacher education in the Greater Bay area. Asia Pacific J Innov Entrepreneurship. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-01-2024-0014

Marco N, Palatnik A (2024) From “learning to variate” to “variate for learning”: Teachers learning through collaborative, iterative context-based mathematical problem posing. J Math Behav 73:101119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101119

Merriam SB (1998) Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass Publishers, Hoboken, New Jersey

Morris DB, Usher EL (2011) Developing teaching self-efficacy in research institutions: A study of award-winning professors. Contemp Educ Psychol 36(3):232–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.005

Morris DB, Usher EL, Chen JA (2017) Reconceptualizing the sources of teaching self-efficacy: A critical review of emerging literature. Educ Psychol Rev 29(4):795–833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9378-y

Matusovich HM, Streveler RA, Miller RL (2010) Why do students choose engineering? A qualitative, longitudinal investigation of students’ motivational values. J Eng Educ 99(4):289–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01064.x

Näykki P, Kontturi H, Seppänen V, Impiö N, Järvelä S (2021) Teachers as learners–a qualitative exploration of pre-service and in-service teachers’ continuous learning community OpenDigi. J Educ Teach 47(4):495–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2021.1904777

OECD (2018) Teaching and learning international survey (TALIS) 2018 conceptual framework. OECD, Paris

Örnek T, Soylu Y (2021) A model design to be used in teaching problem posing to develop problem-posing skills. Think Skills Creativity 41:100905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100905

Ord K, Nuttall J (2016) Bodies of knowledge: The concept of embodiment as an alternative to theory/practice debates in the preparation of teachers. Teach Teach Educ 60:355–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.019

Ozkan G, Umdu Topsakal U (2021) Investigating the effectiveness of STEAM education on students’ conceptual understanding of force and energy topics. Res Sci Technol Educ 39(4):441–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1769586

Park W, Cho H (2022) The interaction of history and STEM learning goals in teacher-developed curriculum materials: opportunities and challenges for STEAM education. Asia Pacific Educ Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-022-09741-0

Perignat E, Katz-Buonincontro J (2019) STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. Think Skills Creativity 31:31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.002

Philipp RA (2007) Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and affect. In: Lester Jr FK, (ed), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, pp. 257–315. Information Age, Charlotte, NC

Quigley CF, Herro D, Jamil FM (2017) Developing a conceptual model of STEAM teaching practices. Sch Sci Math 117(1–2):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12201

Ro S, Xiao S, Zhou Z (2022) Starting up STEAM in China: A case study of technology entrepreneurship for STEAM education in China. In: Ray P, Shaw R (eds), Technology entrepreneurship and sustainable development, pp. 115–136. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2053-0_6

Roth KJ, Bintz J, Wickler NI, Hvidsten C, Taylor J, Beardsley PM, Wilson CD (2017) Design principles for effective video-based professional development. Int J STEM Educ 4:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0091-2

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ryu M, Mentzer N, Knobloch N (2019) Preservice teachers’ experiences of STEM integration: Challenges and implications for integrated STEM teacher preparation. Int J Technol Des Educ, 29:493–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9440-9

Sancar R, Atal D, Deryakulu D (2021) A new framework for teachers’ professional development. Teach Teach Educ 101:103305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103305

Sanz-Camarero R, Ortiz-Revilla J, Greca IM (2023) The place of the arts within integrated education. Arts Educ Policy Rev. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2023.2260917

Shirani F, Henwood K (2011) Continuity and change in a qualitative longitudinal study of fatherhood: relevance without responsibility. Int J Soc Res Methodol 14(1):17–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645571003690876

Smith CE, Paré JN (2016) Exploring Klein bottles through pottery: A STEAM investigation. Math Teach 110(3):208–214. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacher.110.3.0208

Soprano K, Yang L (2013) Inquiring into my science teaching through action research: A case study on one pre-service teacher’s inquiry-based science teaching and self-efficacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 11(6):1351–1368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9380-x

Stake RE (1995) The art of case study research. Sage Publication, Thousand Oaks, California

Stohlmann M, Moore T, Roehrig G (2012) Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. J Pre Coll Eng Educ Res 2(1):28–34. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653

Strauss AL, Corbin JM (1990) Basics of qualitative research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California

Taimalu M, Luik P (2019) The impact of beliefs and knowledge on the integration of technology among teacher educators: A path analysis. Teach Teach Educ 79:101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.012

Takahashi A, McDougal T (2016) Collaborative lesson research: Maximizing the impact of lesson study. ZDM Math Educ 48:513–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0752-x

Thompson AG (1992) Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In: Grouws DA (ed), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, pp. 127–146. Macmillan, New York

Tschannen-Moran M, Woolfolk Hoy A, Hoy WK (1998) Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Rev Educ Res 68:202–248. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002202

Unfried A, Rachmatullah A, Alexander A, Wiebe E (2022) An alternative to STEBI-A: validation of the T-STEM science scale. Int J STEM Educ 9:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00339-x

Uştu H, Saito T, Mentiş Taş A (2021) Integration of art into STEM education at primary schools: an action research study with primary school teachers. Syst Pract Action Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-021-09570-z

Vaziri H, Bradburn NM (2021) Flourishing effects of integrating the arts and humanities in STEM Education: A review of past studies and an agenda for future research. In: Tay L, Pawelski JO (eds), The Oxford handbook of the positive humanities, pp. 71–82. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Wang K, Wang X, Li Y, Rugh MS (2018) A framework for integrating the history of mathematics into teaching in Shanghai. Educ Stud Math 98:135–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9811-x

Wang Z, Jiang H, Jin W, Jiang J, Liu J, Guan J, Liu Y, Bin E (2024) Examining the antecedents of novice stem teachers’ job satisfaction: The roles of personality traits, perceived social support, and work engagement. Behav Sci 14(3):214. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14030214

Wenger E, McDermott R, Snyder WM (2002) Cultivating communities of practice. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

Wong JT, Bui NN, Fields DT, Hughes BS (2022) A learning experience design approach to online professional development for teaching science through the arts: Evaluation of teacher content knowledge, self-efficacy and STEAM perceptions. J Sci Teacher Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2112552

Wyatt M (2015) Using qualitative research methods to assess the degree of fit between teachers’ reported self-efficacy beliefs and their practical knowledge during teacher education. Aust J Teach Educ 40(1):117–145

Xenofontos C, Andrews P (2020) The discursive construction of mathematics teacher self-efficacy. Educ Stud Math 105(2):261–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09990-z

Yin R (2003) Case study research: Design and methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California

Zakariya YF (2020) Effects of school climate and teacher self-efficacy on job satisfaction of mostly STEM teachers: a structural multigroup invariance approach. Int J STEM Educ 7:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00209-4

Zee M, de Jong PF, Koomen HM (2017) From externalizing student behavior to student-specific teacher self-efficacy: The role of teacher-perceived conflict and closeness in the student–teacher relationship. Contemp Educ Psychol 51:37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.06.009

Zee M, Koomen HM (2016) Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Rev Educ Res 86(4):981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801

Zhan Z, Li Y, Mei H, Lyu S (2023) Key competencies acquired from STEM education: gender-differentiated parental expectations. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:464. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01946-x

Zhan Z, Niu S (2023) Subject integration and theme evolution of STEM education in K-12 and higher education research. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:781. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02303-8

Zhong B, Liu X, Li X (2024) Effects of reverse engineering pedagogy on students’ learning performance in STEM education: The bridge-design project as an example. Heliyon 10(2):e24278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24278

Zhong B, Liu X, Zhan Z, Ke Q, Wang F (2022) What should a Chinese top-level design in STEM Education look like? Humanit Soc Sci Commun 9:261. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01279-1

Zhou B (2021) Cultivation of Ed. M. to bring up “famous subject teachers”: practical exploration and policy suggestions. Teach Educ Res 33(5):19–26. https://doi.org/10.13445/j.cnki.t.e.r.2021.05.003

Zhou X, Shu L, Xu Z, Padrón Y (2023) The effect of professional development on in-service STEM teachers’ self-efficacy: a meta-analysis of experimental studies. Int J STEM Educ 10:37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00422-x

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by 2021 National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.62177042), 2024 Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. Y24F020039), and 2024 Zhejiang Educational Science Planning Project (Grant No. 2024SCG247).

Author information

Xuesong Zhai

Present address: School of Education, City University of Macau, Macau, China

Authors and Affiliations

College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China

Haozhe Jiang & Xuesong Zhai

School of Engineering and Technology, CML‑NET & CREATE Research Centres, Central Queensland University, North Rockhampton, QLD, Australia

Ritesh Chugh

Hangzhou International Urbanology Research Center & Zhejiang Urban Governance Studies Center, Hangzhou, China

Department of Teacher Education, Nicholls State University, Thibodaux, LA, USA

School of Mathematical Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Xiaoqin Wang

College of Teacher Education, Faculty of Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization - Haozhe Jiang; methodology - Haozhe Jiang; software - Xuesong Zhai; formal analysis - Haozhe Jiang & Ke Wang; investigation - Haozhe Jiang; resources - Haozhe Jiang, Xuesong Zhai & Xiaoqin Wang; data curation - Haozhe Jiang & Ke Wang; writing—original draft preparation - Haozhe Jiang & Ritesh Chugh; writing—review and editing - Ritesh Chugh & Ke Wang; visualization - Haozhe Jiang, Ke Wang & Xiaoqin Wang; supervision - Xuesong Zhai & Xiaoqin Wang; project administration - Xuesong Zhai & Xiaoqin Wang; and funding acquisition - Xuesong Zhai & Xiaoqin Wang. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xuesong Zhai .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This research was approved by the Committee for Human Research of East China Normal University (Number: HR 347-2022). The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in this study before data collection.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Jiang, H., Chugh, R., Zhai, X. et al. Longitudinal analysis of teacher self-efficacy evolution during a STEAM professional development program: a qualitative case study. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1162 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03655-5

Download citation

Received : 27 April 2024

Accepted : 12 August 2024

Published : 08 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03655-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Open access
• Published: 13 September 2024

Understanding disciplinary perspectives: a framework to develop skills for interdisciplinary research collaborations of medical experts and engineers

• Sophie van Baalen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1592-3276 1 , 2 &
• Mieke Boon   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2492-2854 1  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  1000 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Health professionals need to be prepared for interdisciplinary research collaborations aimed at the development and implementation of medical technology. Expertise is highly domain-specific, and learned by being immersed in professional practice. Therefore, the approaches and results from one domain are not easily understood by experts from another domain. Interdisciplinary collaboration in medical research faces not only institutional, but also cognitive and epistemological barriers. This is one of the reasons why interdisciplinary and interprofessional research collaborations are so difficult. To explain the cognitive and epistemological barriers, we introduce the concept of disciplinary perspectives . Making explicit the disciplinary perspectives of experts participating in interdisciplinary collaborations helps to clarify the specific approach of each expert, thereby improving mutual understanding.

We developed a framework for making disciplinary perspectives of experts participating in an interdisciplinary research collaboration explicit. The applicability of the framework has been tested in an interdisciplinary medical research project aimed at the development and implementation of diffusion MRI for the diagnosis of kidney cancer, where the framework was applied to analyse and articulate the disciplinary perspectives of the experts involved.

We propose a general framework, in the form of a series of questions, based on new insights from the philosophy of science into the epistemology of interdisciplinary research. We explain these philosophical underpinnings in order to clarify the cognitive and epistemological barriers of interdisciplinary research collaborations. In addition, we present a detailed example of the use of the framework in a concrete interdisciplinary research project aimed at developing a diagnostic technology. This case study demonstrates the applicability of the framework in interdisciplinary research projects.

Interdisciplinary research collaborations can be facilitated by a better understanding of how an expert’s disciplinary perspectives enables and guides their specific approach to a problem. Implicit disciplinary perspectives can and should be made explicit in a systematic manner, for which we propose a framework that can be used by disciplinary experts participating in interdisciplinary research project. Furthermore, we suggest that educators can explore how the framework and philosophical underpinning can be implemented in HPE to support the development of students’ interdisciplinary expertise.

Peer Review reports

Expertise is highly domain-specific, and learned by being immersed in professional practice [ 1 ]. However, today’s rapidly evolving health care systems require clinicians who are capable of meeting complex challenges [ 2 ], which often requires interdisciplinary and interprofessional collaborations between experts from distinct disciplines. Footnote 1 With the increasingly central role of innovative medical technologies in many medical specialties [ 3 ], health professionals will presumable participate in interdisciplinary and interprofessional research collaborations. But interprofessional and interdisciplinary research collaborations are notoriously difficult (e.g., [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ]). Boon et al. (2019) argue that the complexity of current medical practices requires interdisciplinary expertise , which is an extension of adaptive expertise [ 8 ]. Interdisciplinary expertise involves the ability to understand the role of disciplinary perspectives .

In this paper, we combine insights from the philosophy of science on disciplinary perspectives and practice experience from an interdisciplinary medical research project aimed at the development and implementation of diffusion MRI for the diagnosis of kidney cancer. Based on these insights and practice experience, we propose a framework for mitigating cognitive and epistemological barriers caused by different disciplinary perspectives. In addition, we present a detailed example of the use of the framework to analyse and explain the experts’ disciplinary perspectives in the aforementioned interdisciplinary research project aimed at developing a diagnostic technology. This case study demonstrates the use of the framework in interdisciplinary research projects. The framework can be used by health professionals to facilitate their interdisciplinary research projects, by analysing and explaining their disciplinary perspectives.

Interdisciplinary research

To address the barriers to interdisciplinary research, various authors have developed analytical frameworks to guide the research process and help disciplinary experts understand what it takes to execute projects together with experts from other disciplines [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. Menken et al. (2016), for example, provide a method for interdisciplinary research that is much similar to the traditional empirical cycle, including steps such as “identify problem or topic,” “formulate preliminary research questions,” “data collection” and “draw conclusions” [ 11 ]. Other frameworks describe which steps need to be taken in the interdisciplinary research process . In the literature on team science , several authors also aim to provide a better understanding of the process of interdisciplinary research. For example, Hasan et al. (2023) focuses on the ‘micro’ layers of the team science ecosystem proposed by Stokols et al. (2019) – the layer of individual team members collaborating in interdisciplinary research projects [ 13 , 14 ]. From their analysis of an online collaborations between early academics from different fields, they provide insights into common issues in interdisciplinary research and methods for dealing with them. By applying their framework from the start of the interdisciplinary research process, they argue, interdisciplinary capture [ 15 ] can be avoided.

Although the aforementioned frameworks provide valuable guidance on the process of interdisciplinary collaboration, they do not address the deeper cognitive and epistemological challenges of interdisciplinary research collaboration [ 5 , 16 ], which is the objective of our contribution. A crucial assumption in current frameworks seems to be that interdisciplinary research collaboration is learned by doing, and that the integration of different disciplines will automatically follow. Footnote 2 In our view, however, the integration of different disciplines is both crucial and one of the most challenging aspects of interdisciplinary research collaboration. In previous work we have argued that the inherent cognitive and epistemological (knowledge-theoretical) challenges of integration have been neglected by most authors providing models for interdisciplinary research [ 8 ]. In this paper, our focus is therefore on challenges of using and producing knowledge in interdisciplinary research collaborations that aim at solving complex real-world problems. Examples are collaborations between distinct medical specialists in the diagnosis and treatment of a specific patient (e.g., an oncologist and radiologist), but also collaborations between medical experts and biomedical engineers aimed at innovative medical technology for clinical uses. In this paper, we focus on inter disciplinary research projects, in which two or more academic fields are integrated to solve real-world problems, and not on trans disciplinary projects in which one or more academic fields are integrated with expertise from outside of academia such as policy-making or practice. Footnote 3

The challenge of interdisciplinary research collaborations aimed at solving a shared problem is that each expert is guided by his/her own disciplinary perspective. However, the results produced by experts from different disciplines, although internally coherent, are not mutually coherent, so that they are not easily integrated. Furthermore, approaches and results understood within a contributing disciplinary perspective are not easily understood by experts specialised in other disciplinary perspectives, even though each expert aims to contribute to the same problem.

In short, the way in which experts use and produce knowledge is guided by the disciplinary perspective typical of their own practice. But experts are often unaware of having a disciplinary perspective. We argue that this is an obstacle to participating in interdisciplinary research collaborations focused on using and producing knowledge for complex problem-solving . Moreover, disciplinary perspectives are often considered impenetrable —as they are acquired by doing — which makes dealing with the disciplinary perspective of other experts a difficult learning objective. In this paper, we defend that disciplinary perspectives can be made explicit in a systematic manner, and that their role in ‘how experts in a specific discipline use and produce knowledge’ can thus be made understandable for experts and students in both their own and other disciplines.

To this end, we have developed a framework, based on new insights in the philosophy of science and on practice experience of interdisciplinary research collaboration aimed at the development of a medical technology, which can be used by experts in a particular discipline to analyse different elements of their discipline and, together with collaborators, to analyse the same elements from other disciplines. We believe that this systematic approach to understanding disciplinary perspectives will facilitate interdisciplinary research collaborations between experts from different fields. It will create awareness of one’s own disciplinary perspective and the ability to understand the disciplinary perspective of other experts at a sufficient level. Our framework thus aims to alleviate the challenge of integration in a collaborative research project by providing a tool for analysing disciplinary perspectives . We suggest that the concrete descriptions of disciplinary perspectives that result from the application of the framework, clarify the approaches of experts in a multi-disciplinary team. It thus enables effective communication through improved understanding of how each discipline contributes. Once researchers sufficiently understand each other’s discipline, they will be able to construct so-called conceptual models that integrate content relevant to the problems at hand. Footnote 4

Education in interdisciplinary research

In addition to professionals using our framework to facilitate collaboration in interdisciplinary research projects, we suggest that this framework can also be implemented in medical education. It can be used to teach students what it means to have a disciplinary perspective, and to explicate the role of disciplinary perspectives of disciplinary experts participating in an interdisciplinary research collaboration. We have implemented this framework in an innovative, challenge-based educational design that explicitly aims to support and promote the development of interdisciplinary research skills [ 22 ]. Research into the intended learning objectives has not yet been completed, but our initial findings indicate that the proposed framework effectively supports students in their ability to develop crucial skills for conducting interdisciplinary research projects. We suggest therefore that the framework can also be implemented in HPE as a scaffold for teaching and learning metacognitive skills needed in interdisciplinary research collaborations, for example between medical experts and engineers.

Research has shown that interprofessional education courses for healthcare students can have a positive effect on the knowledge, skills and attitudes required for interprofessional collaboration, but that organising such interventions is challenging [ 23 , 24 ]. In the HPE literature, it is generally assumed that the limitations of interprofessional and interdisciplinary teamwork are due to problems of communication, collaboration and cooperation [ 25 , 26 ], which are linked to barriers and enablers at institutional, organizational, infrastructural, professional and individual levels (e.g., [ 27 , 28 ]). Therefore, interprofessional and interdisciplinary collaborations are discussed extensively in the HPE literature – our focus is challenges of interdisciplinary research collaboration.

The ability to use and produce knowledge and methods in solving (novel) problems is covered in the HPE literature by the notion of adaptive expertise , which encompasses clinical reasoning, integrating basic and clinical sciences, and the transfer of previously learned knowledge, concepts and methods to solve new problems in another context (e.g., [ 1 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]). In previous work, we introduced the concept of interdisciplinary expertise, which expands on the notion of adaptive expertise by including the ability to understand, analyse and communicate disciplinary perspectives [ 8 ]. In this paper, we address the challenge posed by how this ability to understand, analyse and communicate disciplinary perspectives can be learned. The framework that we propose can be implemented in HPE to function as a tool to scaffold metacognitive skills of health professions students, facilitating the development of interdisciplinary expertise.

Aims and contributions of this paper

Our first objective is to show that interdisciplinary collaboration in (medical) research faces not only institutional, but also cognitive and epistemological barriers. Therefore, we first provide a theoretical explanation of the concept of ‘disciplinary perspective’ as developed in the philosophy of science, in order to make it plausible that the cognitive barriers experienced by experts in interdisciplinary collaboration are the result of different disciplinary perspectives on a problem and its solution.

Our second objective is to provide a systematic approach to improve interdisciplinary research, for which we propose a framework, in the form of a series of questions, based on new insights from the philosophy of science into the epistemology of interdisciplinary research. We provide a detailed explanation of the application of the proposed framework in an interdisciplinary medical research project to illustrate its applicability in a multidisciplinary research collaborations, by showing that the different disciplinary perspectives that inform researchers and technicians within a multidisciplinary research team can be made transparent in a systematic way.

In short, our intended contribution is (i) to explain cognitive and epistemological barriers by introducing the concept of disciplinary perspectives in medical research collaborations, (ii) to offer a framework that enables the mitigation of these barriers within interdisciplinary research projects that are caused by different disciplinary perspectives, and (iii) to illustrate the applicability of this framework by a concrete case of an interdisciplinary research collaboration in a medical-technical research setting.

We developed a framework for making disciplinary perspectives of experts participating in an interdisciplinary research collaboration explicit, by combining insights from the philosophy of science with practical experience from a medical research project. Philosophy of science provided the theoretical basis for our concept of disciplinary perspectives. Our detailed case-description stems from an interdisciplinary medical research project to develop and implement a new imaging tool for the diagnosis of kidney cancer, in which the first author participated. We then applied the framework to analyze and articulate the disciplinary perspectives of experts involved in this interdisciplinary medical research project.

The usefulness and applicability of the proposed framework was tested by the first author who, in her role as PI, was able to use it successfully in coordinating an interdisciplinary research project aimed at developing a biomedical technology for clinical practice [ 35 , 36 ]. Below, we illustrate how the framework was systematically applied to this specific case, providing initial evidence of its applicability. However, to test whether the proposed framework reduces the cognitive and epistemological barriers caused by different disciplinary perspectives, experts need to be trained in its use. We suggest that training in the use of this framework requires, among other things, some insight into the philosophical underpinnings of the concept of ‘disciplinary perspective’. Our explanation of the so-called epistemology of disciplinary perspectives in this paper aims to provide such insight.

Developing a framework for analysing and articulating a disciplinary perspective

The framework proposed here is based on insights about disciplinary perspectives in the philosophy of science. These insights concern an epistemology (a theory of knowledge) of scientific disciplines. In other words, the framework is based on an account of the knowledge-theoretical (epistemic) and pragmatic aspects that guide the production of knowledge and scientific understanding by a discipline [ 21 ].

The epistemology of scientific disciplines developed in our previous work is based on the philosophical work of Thomas Kuhn [ 37 ]. Building on his seminal ideas, we understand disciplinary perspectives as analysable in terms of a coherent set of epistemic and pragmatic aspects related to the way in which experts trained in the discipline (and who have thus, albeit implicitly, acquired the disciplinary perspective) apply and produce knowledge [ 38 ]. In our approach, the epistemic and pragmatic aspects that generally characterize a discipline, are made explicit through a set of questions that form the basis of the proposed framework (see Table 1 , and the first column of Table  2 ). The disciplinary perspective can thus be revealed through this framework. In turn, when used in educational settings, this framework can be used to foster interdisciplinary expertise by acting as a scaffold for teaching and learning metacognitive skills for interdisciplinary research collaborations. Footnote 5

The general aspects indicated by italics in each question in Table 1 are interdependent, so that analysis using this framework results in a coherent description of the disciplinary perspective in terms of these aspects. The framework can be used by experts in an interdisciplinary research project not only to make explicit their disciplinary perspective in a general sense, but to also to specify in a systematic way how these aspects relate to the interdisciplinary research problem from their disciplinary discipline (see Table  2 , which contains both the general and problem-specific descriptions for each aspect per discipline). In our view, this approach is productive in overcoming the cognitive and epistemological barriers. It thus contributes to productive interdisciplinary collaboration.

Applying the framework in an interdisciplinary medical research project

To test the applicability of this framework, we applied it to an interdisciplinary medical research project. The interdisciplinary medical research project aimed at developing a new clinical imaging tool, namely, diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (i.e., diffusion MRI) to characterize the micro-structural makeup of kidney tumours, running from early 2014 to mid-2018. The first author was involved in this project as a principle investigator (PI). As an interdisciplinary expert with a background in technical medicine , which combines medical training with technological expertise [ 41 ], she coordinated and integrated contributions from experts with medical and engineering backgrounds. In her role as PI, she applied the proposed framework to analyse and articulate the disciplinary perspectives of other experts involved in the medical research project.

The aim of the interdisciplinary medical research project was to develop a new imaging tool for the characterization of renal tumours, i.e., diffusion MRI. Diffusion MRI allows for visualization and quantification of water diffusion without administration of exogenous contrast materials and is, therefore, a promising technique for imaging kidney tumours. In earlier studies, several parameters derived from diffusion MRI studies were found to differentiate between different tumour types in the kidney [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. Existing imaging methods in clinical practice can detect the size and location of kidney tumours, but the tumour type and malignancy can only be determined histologically after surgery. The purpose of the medical research project was to assess whether more advanced parameters that can be obtained from diffusion MRI [ 35 , 45 ] can differentiate between malignant and benign kidney tumours [ 36 ]. Being able to make this distinction could potentially prevent unnecessary surgery in patients with non-malignant tumours.

The interdisciplinary medical research project needed to bring together expertise (knowledge and skills) from different professionals, academic researchers as well as clinicians. Therefore, the research team consisted of a physicist, a biomedical engineer, a radiologist, a urologist and the principle investigator. The complex, interdisciplinary research object can be thought of as a system that encompasses several elements: the MRI-machine, the software necessary to produce images, the patient with a (suspected) kidney tumour, and the wider practice of care in which the clinical tool should function. In developing the clinical tool, these elements must be considered interrelated, whereas usually each expert focuses on one of these elements.

The PI utilized the framework to coordinate and integrate the contributions from different experts in the following manner. Throughout the project, she had meetings with each of the team members, where she probed them to explain their specific expertise in regard of the research object, as well as their expert contribution to the development of the imaging tool. Her approach in these meetings was guided by the general questions of the framework (Table 1 ). In this manner, she succeeded in getting a clear insight in aspects of each discipline relevant to the research object, and also in the specific contribution that needed to be made by each expert (as illustrated in Table  2 below). The level of understanding gained by this approach enabled her to, firstly, facilitate interdisciplinary team meetings in which disciplinary interpretations and questions from the experts about the target system could be aligned, and secondly, integrate their contributions towards the development of the new imaging tool [ 36 ].

In the presented approach, the framework was exclusively used by the PI, enabling her to acquire relevant information and understanding about the contributions of the disciplines involved. The other team members in the medical research project were not explicitly involved in applying the framework, nor in articulating their own disciplinary perspective or that of others. Hence, the resulting articulation of the disciplinary perspectives and of the contributions per discipline to the research object (in Table  2 ) is crafted by the PI. The level of understanding of the role of each discipline that the PI has acquired thereby appears to be sufficient to enable her coordinating task in this complex medical research project. Our suggestion for other research and educational practices, though, is that clinicians (as well as) other medical experts can develop this metacognitive skill by using the scaffold (in Table  1 ) in order to participate more effectively in these kinds of complex medical research projects.

In the results  section we will first present our explanation and justification of the idea that disciplinary perspectives determine the specific approaches of experts (who have been trained in a specific discipline in using and producing knowledge) when faced with a complex problem. In this explanation and justification, we will use insights from the philosophy of science. Next, we will explain and illustrate the systematic use of the proposed framework (Table 1 ) by showing the results of applying it to the interdisciplinary medical research project.

The insights from philosophy of science on which the proposed framework for the explication of disciplinary perspectives is rooted in insights of the philosophers Immanuel Kant (1794–1804) and Thomas Kuhn (1922–1996). Their important epistemological insight was that ‘objective’ knowledge of reality does not arise from some kind of imprint in the mind, such as on a photographic plate, but is partly formed by the concepts and theories that scientists hold. These concepts and theories therefore shape the way they perceive the world and produce knowledge about reality. This philosophical insight provides an important explanation for the cognitive and epistemological barriers between disciplines. After all, scientific experts learn these concepts and theories by being trained within a certain discipline. In this way, they develop a disciplinary perspective that determines their view and understanding of reality. Based on this philosophical insight, we can imagine how these barriers can be bridged, namely by developing the metacognitive ability to think about their own cognition and how their scientific view of reality is shaped by their specific disciplinary perspective. In order to facilitate this ability, we develop a framework that can be used as a metacognitive scaffold. Finally, we apply this framework to an example interdisciplinary medical-technical research project, to illustrate it’s use in practice.

Insights from the philosophy of science: disciplinary perspectives

Boon et al. (2019) refer to the notion of disciplinary perspectives and their indelible role in how experts approach problems —in particular, the ways in which experts use and produce knowledge in regard of the problem they aim to solve— and provide a philosophical account of this notion based on so-called constructivist (Kantian) epistemology (i.e., knowledge-theory, [ 38 , 46 ]). On a Kantian view, ‘the world does not speak for itself,’ i.e., knowledge of (aspects of) the external world is not acquired passively on the basis of impressions in the mind (physically) caused by the external world (e.g., similar to how pictures of the world are physically imprinted on a photographic plate). Instead, the way in which people produce and use knowledge results from an interaction between the external world, the human senses and the human cognitive system. Crucially, neither our concepts nor our perceptions stem from passive impressions. Instead, ‘pre-given’ concepts ‘in the mind’ are needed in order to be able to perceive something at all and thus to produce knowledge about reality. Conversely, according to Kant, the imaginative (i.e. creative) capacity of the mind is then able to generate new concepts and to draw new connections of which the adequacy and usability must be tested against our experiences of reality. When new concepts (invented by the creative capacity of the human mind) have been tested against experience, they allow us to see new things in the external world, which we would not see without those concepts. This theoretical insight by Kant is crucial to get past naïve conceptions of knowledge, in particular, by understanding the indelible role of concepts in generating knowledge from observations and experiences.

This philosophical insight already makes it clear, for instance, that ‘descriptions of facts’ in a research project involve discipline-specific concepts, making these descriptions not easy to understand for someone who is not trained in that discipline. After Kant, this role of concepts has been expanded to the role of perspectives . For, Kuhn [ 37 ] created awareness that the human mind plays ‘unconsciously’ and ‘unintentionally’ a much greater role in the way scientific knowledge is created than usually assumed in the view that scientific knowledge is objective . Kuhn has introduced the concept of scientific paradigm to indicate in what sense the mind contributes. His idea was revolutionary because the notion of true and objective knowledge, which is the aim of science, became deeply problematic, as knowledge is only true and objective within the scientific paradigm, whereas it may even be meaningless in another.

Our notion of disciplinary perspectives is in many respects comparable to Kuhn’s idea of scientific paradigm, and is certainly indebted to Kuhn’s invention, particularly, with regard to the idea that it is a more or less coherent, usually implicit ‘background picture’ or ‘conceptual framework,’ which constitutes an inherent part of the cognitive system of an expert, and which forms the basis from which an expert thinks, sees and investigates in a scientific or professional practice. Furthermore, the scientific paradigm is not ‘innate,’ nor individually acquired, but maintained and transferred in scientific or professional practices, usually by being immersed in it. The same can be said about disciplinary perspectives. Yet, there are also important differences.

First, Kuhn believed that the paradigm is so deeply rooted in the cognitive structure of individual scientists, and, moreover, is embedded in how the scientific community functions, that it takes a scientific revolution and a new generation of scientists to shift into another paradigm, which is called a paradigm-shift (sometimes explained as a Gestalt-switch ). Kuhn’s belief suggests that humans lack the capacity to reflect on their own paradigm. Footnote 6 Conversely, we argue that humans can develop the metacognitive ability to perform this kind of reflection by which the structure and content of the paradigm or disciplinary perspective is made explicit. We take this as an important part of interdisciplinary expertise . Our suggestion, however, should not be confused with the idea that we can think without any paradigm or disciplinary perspective – we can’t, but we can explicate its workings (and adapt it), which is what we will illustrate in the case-description below.

Second, Kuhn’s focus was science , i.e., the production of objectively true scientific knowledge, in particular, theories. Instead, our focus is on experts trained in specific disciplines, who use and produce knowledge with regard to (practical) problems that have to be solved. Nonetheless, the Kuhnean insight explains why knowledge generated in distinct disciplines often cannot be combined in a straightforward manner (e.g., as in a jigsaw puzzle), which is due to the fact that knowledge is only fully meaningful and understandable relative to the disciplinary perspective in which it has been produced.

Our notion of disciplinary perspectives is similar to Kuhn’s idea of paradigm (which he specified later on as disciplinary matrices ) in the sense that a paradigm functions as a perspective or a conceptual framework , i.e., a background picture within which a scientific or professional practice of a specific discipline is embedded and which guides and enables this practice. But instead of considering them as replacing each other in a serial historical order as Kuhn did, we assume that disciplinary perspectives co-exist, that is, exist in parallel instead of serial. This view on disciplinary perspectives can be elaborated somewhat further by harking back to Ludwik Fleck [ 47 ], a microbiologist, who already in the 1930s developed a historical philosophy and sociology of science that is very similar to Kuhn’s (also see [ 48 ]). Footnote 7 Similar to and deeply affected by Kant, Fleck draws a close connection between human knowledge (e.g., facts) and cognition. Hence, Fleck disputes that facts are descriptions of things in reality discovered through properly passive observation of aspects in reality – which is why, according to Fleck, facts are invented , not discovered . Similar to Kuhn, Fleck expands on Kant by also including the role of the community in which scientists and experts are trained. Instead of paradigms , however, Fleck uses the terms thought styles and thought collectives to describe how experts in a certain professional or academic community adopt similar ways of perceiving and thinking that differ between disciplines: “The expert [trained in the discipline] is already a specially moulded individual who can no longer escape the bonds of tradition and of the collective; otherwise he would not be an expert” ([ 47 ], p. 54). But while Kuhn strove to explain radical changes in science, Fleck’s focus is on ‘normal science,’ that is, on communities ( thought collectives each having their own thought style ) that co-exist and gradually, rather than radically, change, which is closer to our take on disciplines. Importantly, according to Fleck, the community guides which problems members of that communities find relevant and how they approach these problems. Translated to our vocabulary, in scientific and professional practices, experts trained in different disciplines each have different disciplinary perspective, by means of which they recognize different aspects and problems of the same so-called research object , which they approach in accordance with their own discipline.

We propose that disciplinary perspectives can be analysed and made explicit, which we consider a crucial metacognitive skill of interdisciplinary experts. Our proposal for the framework to analyse disciplinary perspectives (in Table 1 ) takes its cue in Kuhn’s notion of disciplinary matrices. Kuhn’s original notion presents a matrix by which historians and philosophers can analyse the paradigm in hindsight, specifying aspects such as the metaphysical background beliefs and basic concepts, core theories, epistemic values, and methods, which all play a role in how knowledge is generated (also see [ 8 , 50 ]). Our framework includes some of these aspects, but also adds others, thereby generating a scaffold that facilitates interdisciplinary collaborations aimed at applying and producing knowledge for complex problem-solving in professional research practices aimed at ‘real-world’ practices, such as medical research practice. Below, we will illustrate the application of this framework in a concrete case.

Interdisciplinary research project: diffusion MRI for the diagnosis of kidney tumour

We will illustrate the applicability of the proposed framework (Table 1 ) for the analysis of disciplinary perspectives using the example of a research project that aims to develop a new clinical imaging tool, namely, diffusion MRI to characterize the microstructure of renal tumours. In our analysis, we focus on experts from four different disciplines: (I) clinical practice, (II) medical biology, (III) MRI physics, and (IV) signal and image processing. As indicated in the methods section, the complex, interdisciplinary research object that these experts have to deal with concerns a system consisting of the MRI-machine, the software necessary to produce images, and the patient with a (suspected) renal tumour, including the broader care practice in which the clinical tool should function.

In the following paragraphs we will first present a general explanation of the four disciplines involved in the project, and next, illustrate how the proposed framework can be applied to analyse and articulate each disciplinary perspective as well as the specific contribution of each discipline to the research object (in Table  2 ). It is not our intention to provide comprehensive descriptions of the fields that are involved, but rather to provide insight into how the fields differ from each other across the elements of our framework. In addition, we do not believe that all (disciplinary) experts only adhere to one disciplinary perspective. For example, clinicians usually combine both a clinical and biomedical perspective to fit together a complete picture of a patient for clinical decision-making concerning diagnosis and treatment [ 51 , 52 , 53 ]. Moreover, MRI engineers will usually need to combine insights from MRI physics and signal processing.

I. Clinical practice concerning patients with renal tumours

Clinical practice concerns the patient with a renal tumour. This practice differs from the other disciplines in our example, because it is not primarily a scientific discipline. Nonetheless, to develop a diagnostic tool, the disciplinary perspective of clinicians specialized in patients with kidney tumours is crucial, for example, to determine the conditions that the technology needs to meet in order to be useful for their clinical practice. The knowledge-base of clinical experts is rooted in biomedical sciences, which means that clinical experts often understand their patient’s signs and symptoms from a biomedical perspective (i.e., in terms of tumour formation of healthy renal physiology). Yet, clinicians will usually focus on their patient’s clinical presentation and possible diagnostic and clinical pathways. In clinical practice, several kidney tumour types are distinguished, each with its own histological presentation (visible under the microscope), tumour growth rate and chance of metastases. Unfortunately, all kidney tumour types, including non-malignant types, appear the same on standard imaging modalities, namely, as solid lesions. When the tumour is not metastasized, treatment consists of surgery removing the whole kidney or the part of the kidney that contains the tumour (i.e., ‘radical’ or ‘partial’ nephrectomy). If surgery is not possible, other treatments include chemotherapy or radiation. After surgery, a pathologist examines the tumour tissue to determine the tumour type. Occasionally, the pathologist concludes that the removed tumour was non-malignant, which is a situation that may be prevented if diffusion MRI can be used to distinguish between malignant and non-malignant tumours prior to surgery.

II. Medical biology

In biology, the structure and working of the body is studied at several levels, from the interaction of proteins and other macromolecules within cells to the functioning of organs. In the case at hand, the organ of interest is the kidney. Functions of the kidneys are excretion of waste materials, control of blood pressure via hormone excretion, balancing the body fluid, acid-base balance and balancing salts by excretion or resorption of ions. Understanding these functions requires insights into the anatomy, tissue architecture and physiology of the kidneys. The main functional structures of the kidney are: (1) the nephron, consisting of a tuft of capillaries (the glomerulus) surrounded by membranes that are shaped like a cup (Bowman’s capsule), responsible for the first filtration of water and small ions, and (2) the renal tubule that is responsible for more specific resorption and excretion of ions and water. The arrangement of small tubes that fan from the centre towards the outside (or cortex) of the kidneys allows maintaining variation in concentrations of ions, which helps to regulate resorption and excretion. The contribution of medical biology to the development of the diagnostic tool is important because knowledge about kidneys such as just sketched provides an understanding of the properties (i.e., microstructural of physiological properties) by which different tumour types can be distinguished from each other, which is crucial to interpreting the novel diagnostic imaging technology.

III. MRI physics & diffusion MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging is based on the physics of magnetism and the interaction of tissue components with radio magnetic fields. The main component of the human body that clinical MRI machines are sensitive to is (the amount of) water molecules or, more specifically, hydrogen nuclei (protons). These protons can be thought of as rotating or spinning , producing (tiny) magnetic fields. By placing tissue in a relatively strong magnetic field (usually 1.5 or 3 Tesla emitted by a large coil that surrounds the body), the tiny magnetic fields of protons (in the water-phase of the tissue) will align themselves with the direction of the strong magnetic field. By then applying a series of radiofrequency pulses, protons will be pushed out of balance and rotate back to their original state, causing a magnetic flux that causes a change in voltage which is picked up by receiver coils in the MRI machine. The rate with which protons return to their original state, the relaxation time, is influenced by the makeup of their environment, and will, therefore, differ for different tissues, resulting in image contrasts between tissues. To be able to form images of the signal, magnetic field gradients are applied, spatially varying the field which enables to differentiate between signals from different locations. Computer software using mathematical formulas ‘translate’ the signal into a series of images.

Diffusion MRI is a subfield of MR imaging, that is based on a contrast between ‘diffusion rates’ of water molecules in different tissues. Diffusion is based on the random (‘Brownian’) motion of water molecules in tissue. This motion is restricted by tissue components such as membranes and macromolecules and therefore water molecules move (or ‘diffuse’) at different rates in different tissues, depending on the microstructure of tissues. To measure this, additional magnetic field gradients are applied, which results in a signal attenuation proportional to the diffusion rate, as water molecules move (‘or diffuse’) out of their original voxel due to diffusion.

The method for acquiring diffusion-weighted images with an MRI machine (i.e., the ‘acquisition sequence’ of applying radiofrequency pulses and switching gradients on and off) is designed to gain sensitivity to the water molecules diffusing from their original location. The measured diffusion coefficient is considered to be related to microstructural properties of the tissue, namely the density of tissue structures such as macromolecules and membranes that restrict water diffusion. Together with other diffusion parameters that can be obtained by fitting the signal to other functions or ‘models’, the diffusion coefficient can be used to characterise and distinguish between different (tumour) tissue types, which is the aim of this new imaging tool.

IV. Signal and image processing

The signal acquired by MRI machines undergoes many processing steps before they appear as images on the screen. Some of these steps are performed automatically by the MRI system while others require standardized operations in the software package supplied by the manufacturer, and yet other, more advanced, manipulations are performed in custom-made programs or software packages developed for specific research purposes. In the field of diffusion MRI, software packages that perform the most common fitting procedures are available but often custom-made algorithms are required. The reason for this is that diffusion MRI is originally developed for brain imaging, while investigating its feasibility in other organs has started more recently and only makes up a small part of the field. New applications generate new challenges. For example, unlike the brain, kidneys (and other abdominal organs) move up and down as a consequence of breathing. Therefore, specific algorithms manipulating the scan to correct for this respiratory motion are required for diffusion MRI of the kidneys. Furthermore, as tissue structure and physiology in the kidneys differ from that in the brain, existing models need to be adjusted to that of the kidney.

In this paper, we have argued that interdisciplinary collaboration is difficult because of the role of experts’ disciplinary perspective, which shapes their view and approach to a problem and creates cognitive and epistemological barriers when collaborating with other disciplines. To overcome these barriers, disciplinary experts involved in interdisciplinary research projects need to be able to explicate their own disciplinary perspective. This ability is part of what is known as interdisciplinary expertise [ 8 ]. We defend that interdisciplinary expertise begins with creating awareness of the role of disciplinary perspectives in how experts view a problem, interpret it, formulate questions and develop solutions.

Analytical frameworks to guide interdisciplinary research processes previously developed by other authors typically focus on the process of interdisciplinary collaboration [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. The approach we propose here contributes to this literature by addressing the deeper cognitive and epistemological challenges of interdisciplinary research collaboration on the role of the disciplinary perspective as an inherent part of one’s expertise [ 5 , 16 ]. Several authors have already used the concept of ‘disciplinary perspectives’ to point out the challenges of interdisciplinary research (e.g., [ 9 , 15 ]). Our contribution to this literature is the idea, based on philosophical insights into the epistemology of interdisciplinary research, that disciplinary perspectives can be made explicit, and next, to provide an analytical framework with which disciplinary perspectives within an interdisciplinary research context can be systematically described (as in Table 1 ) with the aim of facilitating interdisciplinary communication within such research projects.

Our further contribution is that we have applied this framework to a concrete case, thereby demonstrating that disciplinary perspectives within a concrete interdisciplinary research project can actually be analyzed and explicated in terms of a coherent set of elements that make up the proposed framework. The result of this analysis (in Table  2 ) shows a coherent description of the discipline in question per column, with an explanation per aspect of what this aspect means for the interdisciplinary research project. It can also be seen that the horizontal comparison (in Table  2 ) results in very different descriptions per aspect for each discipline. We believe that this example demonstrates that it is possible to explain the nature of a specific discipline in a way that is accessible to experts from other disciplines. We do not claim, therefore, that this table is an exhaustive description of the four disciplines involved. Instead, our aim is to show that the approach outlined in this table reduces cognitive and epistemological barriers in interdisciplinary research by enabling communication about the content and nature of the disciplines involved.

We suggest that educators can explore how the framework and philosophical underpinning can be implemented in HPE to support the development of students’ interdisciplinary expertise. Much has been written, especially in the engineering education literature, about the importance of interdisciplinarity and how to teach it. A recent systematic review article shows that the focus of education aimed at interdisciplinarity is on so-called soft skills such as communication and teamwork. Project-based learning is often used to teach the necessary skills, but without specific support to promote these skills [ 7 ]. In our literature review on education for interdisciplinarity [ 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 ], we did not find any authors who specifically address the cognitive and epistemological barriers to interdisciplinary collaboration as described in our article. One possible reason for this is that current epistemological views on the application of science in real-world problem-solving contexts, such as the research project presented here, do not recognise the inherent cognitive and epistemological barriers philosophically explained in this article [ 78 ]. The novelty of our approach is therefore our emphasis on the epistemological and cognitive barriers between disciplines that result from the ineradicable role of disciplinary perspectives in the discipline-bound way in which researchers frame and interpret the common problem. This makes interdisciplinary communication and integration particularly difficult. Specific scaffolds are needed to overcome these barriers. The framework proposed here, which systematically makes the disciplinary perspective explicit, aims to be such a scaffold. We therefore argue that much more attention should be paid to this specific challenge of interdisciplinary collaboration in academic HPE education. This requires both an in-depth philosophical explanation that offers a new view of scientific knowledge that makes clear why interdisciplinary research is difficult, and learning how to make disciplinary perspectives explicit, for which the proposed framework provides a metacognitive scaffold.

We have implemented this framework in a newly designed minor programme that uses challenge-based learning and aims to develop interdisciplinary research skills. In this minor, small groups of students from different disciplines work on the (interdisciplinary) analysis and solution of a complex real-world problem. A number of other scaffolds focused on the overarching learning objective have been included in the educational design, which means that the framework proposed here cannot be tested in isolation. Although our research into whether this new educational design achieves the intended learning goal is not yet complete, our initial experience of using the framework is positive. Students, guided by the teacher, are able to use the framework in their interdisciplinary communication - first in a general sense to get to know each other’s disciplines and then within their research project. This implies that the framework is useful in education aimed at learning to conduct interdisciplinary research.

This example, where the framework has been implemented in education aimed at developing interdisciplinary research skills, also shows that although it was developed in the context of a medical-technical research project, it is in fact very general and well suited for any interdisciplinary research.

A critical comment should be made regarding our preliminary evidence of the framework’s usefulness. The first author, who was PI of the interdisciplinary medical research project, in which she applied this framework in her role as coordinator, was also involved in the development of the framework [ 35 , 36 ]. She, therefore has a detailed insight into the theoretical underpinnings of the framework in relation to its intended application. The lack of such a theoretical background may make it more difficult to apply the framework in interdisciplinary research. Footnote 8 Which is why we have provided an extensive elaboration of these underpinnings in this paper.

Further research should address the question of whether this scaffold can facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration between disciplinary experts.

Further research is also needed to systematically analyse the value of this framework in HPE education. This starts with the question of what type of educational design it can be successfully implemented in. Other important questions are: Can interdisciplinary expertise be acquired without knowledge of the other discipline (e.g., biomedical engineering)? In other words, how much education in other disciplines should HPE provide to prepare experts to participate in specific interdisciplinary collaborations?

Furthermore, we emphasize that in addition to learning to use this framework as a metacognitive scaffold to gain a deeper understanding of the epistemological and cognitive barriers, students also need to develop other skills necessary for interdisciplinary research collaboration and working in interdisciplinary teams. The frameworks discussed in our introduction that analyse and guide the interdisciplinary research process provide insights into these skills (e.g. [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ] and [ 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 ]).

We suggest that the article as a whole can be used in such educational settings to achieve several goals, provided that students are guided and coached by educators. First, to foster student’s understanding of the epistemological challenges of interdisciplinary collaboration and to recognize that these challenges are usually underestimated and not addressed in most approaches. Second, by providing insights into the epistemological challenges by outlining the philosophical underpinnings, students will be made aware of having a disciplinary perspective and how it guides their work. Finally, by providing a framework that can be used to analyse these disciplinary perspectives and by providing an example from the case description. When successful, this approach encourages students to developing transferrable skills that can be used in research projects beyond the initial educational project.

Conclusions

Interdisciplinary research collaborations can be facilitated by a better understanding of how an expert’s disciplinary perspectives enables and guides their specific approach to a problem. Implicit disciplinary perspectives can and should be made explicit in a systematic manner, for which we propose a framework that can be used by disciplinary experts participating in interdisciplinary research projects. With this framework, and its philosophical underpinning, we contribute to a fundamental aspect of interdisciplinary collaborations.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published.

In this article, we use ‘disciplines,’ ‘fields’ and ‘specialisms’ interchangeably.

Bridle (2013), Klein (1990), Newell (2007) and Szostak (2002) provide activities that are important for interdisciplinary collaborations, such as communication, negotiation and evaluating assumptions. In order to be able to perform such activities, students need to develop the appropriate skills [ 9 , 17 , 18 , 19 ].

Roux et al. (2017) provide a clear characterization of transdisciplinary research: “A key aim of transdisciplinary research is for actors from science, policy and practice to co-evolve their understanding of a social–ecological issue, reconcile their diverse perspectives and co-produce appropriate knowledge to serve a common purpose.” ([ 20 ], p. 1).

Boon (2020, 2023) explains the notion of conceptual modelling in application oriented research [ 21 , 22 ].

i.e., a framework that enables us to think analytically and systematically about our cognitive processes when we use and produce knowledge [ 39 , 40 ].

Yet, we recognize that this belief was plausible in Kuhn’s era, where the idea that humans (including scientists) are inevitably and indelibly guided by paradigms and perspectives was revolutionary and devastating with regard to the rational view of man. But nowadays we have become familiar with this idea, which offers an opening for the metacognitive abilities that we suggest.

To scholars in HPE, we recommend the entry on Ludwik Fleck in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [ 49 ].

The point made here touches on a more fundamental issue that is beyond the scope of this article. Namely, that resistance of students, but also of teachers, to the described approach may have to do with more traditional epistemological beliefs about science that do not fit well with the way scientific research works in practice [ 78 , 79 ]. The philosophical underpinnings of the proposed framework explained in this article suggest alternative epistemological beliefs that are more appropriate for interdisciplinary research aimed at (complex) ‘real-world’ problems.

Abbreviations

Health professions education

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Principle investigator

Mylopoulos M, Regehr G. Cognitive metaphors of expertise and knowledge: prospects and limitations for medical education. Med Educ. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02912.x .

Mylopoulos M, Kulasegaram K, Woods NN. Developing the experts we need: fostering adaptive expertise through education. J Eval Clin Pract. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12905 .

World Health Organization (WHO). Medical devices: managing the Mismatch. An outcome of the Priority Medical devices project. WHO; 2010. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241564045 .

Gilbert JH, Yan J, Hoffman SJ. A WHO report: framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. J Allied Health. 2010;39(Suppl 1):196–7.

Google Scholar  

MacLeod M. What makes interdisciplinarity difficult? Some consequences of domain specificity in interdisciplinary practice. Synthese. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1236-4 .

Hudson JN, Croker A. Educating for collaborative practice: an interpretation of current achievements and thoughts for future directions. Med Educ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13455 .

Van der Beemt A, MacLeod M, van der Veen JT, van de Ven A, van Baalen S, Klaassen RG, Boon M. Interdisciplinary engineering education: a review of vision, teaching and support. J Eng Educ. 2020;109(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20347 .

Boon M, Van Baalen SJ, Groenier M. Interdisciplinary expertise in medical practice: challenges of using and producing knowledge in complex problem-solving. Med Teach. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1544417 .

Klein J. Interdisciplinarity: history, theory and practice. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University; 1990.

Repko A, Navakas F, Fiscella J. Integrating interdisciplinarity: how the theories of common ground and Cognitive_Interdisciplinarity are informing the debate on interdisciplinary integration. Issues Interdisciplinary Stud. 2007;25:1–31.

Menken S, Keestra M, Rutting L, Post G, de Roo M, Blad S, de Greef L. An introduction to interdisciplinary research: theory and practice. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University; 2016.

Book   Google Scholar  

Repko AF, Szostak R. Interdisciplinary research. Process and theory. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage; 2017.

Hasan MN, Koksal C, Montel L, Le Gouais A, Barnfield A, Bates G, Kwon HR. Developing shared understanding through online interdisciplinary collaboration: reflections from a research project on better integration of health outcomes in future urban. Futures. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2023.103176 .

Stokols D, Olson JS, Salazar M, Olson GM. Strengthening the ecosystem for effective team science: a case study from University of California, Irvine, USA. 2019. https://i2insights.org/2019/02/19/team-science-ecosystem/ . Accessed 2 Feb 2024 .

Brister E. Disciplinary capture and epistemological obstacles to interdisciplinary research: lessons from Central African conservation disputes. Stud History Philos Sci part C: Stud History Philos Biol Biomedical Sci. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2015.11.001 .

Boon M, Orozco M, Sivakumar K. Epistemological and educational issues in teaching practice-oriented scientific research: roles for philosophers of science. Eur J Philos Sci. 2022;12(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-022-00447-z .

Article   Google Scholar  

Bridle H, Vrieling A, Cardillo M, Araya Y, Hinojosa L. Preparing for an interdisciplinary future: a perspective from early-career researchers. Futures. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.09.003 .

Newell WH. Decision-making in Interdisciplinary studies. In: Morcol G, editor. Handbook of decision making. New York: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group; 2007. p. 245–65.

Szostak R. How to do interdisciplinarity. Integrating the debate. Issues Integr Stud. 2002;20:103–22.

Roux DJ, Nel JL, Cundill G, O’farrell P, Fabricius C. Transdisciplinary research for systemic change: who to learn with, what to learn about and how to learn. Sustain Sci. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0446-0 .

Boon M. The role of disciplinary perspectives in an epistemology of models. Eur J Philos Sci. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-020-00295-9 .

Boon M, Conceptual modelling as an overarching research skill in engineering education. SEFI2023 2023;  https://doi.org/10.21427/ZDX4-VV41 accessed through https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1074&context=sefi2023_prapap .

Guraya SY, Barr H. The effectiveness of interprofessional education in healthcare: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjms.2017.12.009 .

Darlow B, Brown M, McKinlay E, Gray L, Purdie G, Pullen S. Longitudinal impact of preregistration interprofessional education on the attitudes and skills of health professionals during their early careers: a non-randomised trial with 4-year outcomes. BMJ Open. 2022;12(7):e060066. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060066 .

Clark G. Institutionalizing interdisciplinary health professions programs in higher education: the implications of one story and two laws. J Interprof Care. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820410001731296 .

O’Keefe M, Henderson A, Chick R. Defining a set of common interprofessional learning competencies for health profession students. Med Teach. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1300246 .

Choi BC, Pak AW. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 2. Promotors, barriers, and strategies of enhancement. Clin Invest Med. 2007. https://doi.org/10.25011/cim.v30i6.2950 .

Lawlis TR, Anson J, Greenfield D. Barriers and enablers that influence sustainable interprofessional education: a literature review. J Interprof Care. 2014. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2014.895977 .

Schwartz DL, Bransford JD, Sears D. Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective . Charlotte, NC: Information age publishing. 2005; 3:1–51. Edited by JP Mestre JP.

Mylopoulos M, Regehr G. Putting the expert together again. Med Educ. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04032.x .

Carbonell KB, Stalmeijer RE, Könings KD, Segers M, van Merriënboer JJ. How experts deal with novel situations: a review of adaptive expertise. Educ Res Rev. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.03.001 .

Kulasegaram K, Min C, Howey E, Neville A, Woods N, Dore K, et al. The mediating effect of context variation in mixed practice for transfer of basic science. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9574-9 .

Castillo JM, Park YS, Harris I, Cheung JJH, Sood L, Clark MD, et al. A critical narrative review of transfer of basic science knowledge in health professions education. Med Educ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13519 .

Dyre L, Tolsgaard MG. The gap in transfer research. Med Educ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13591 .

Van Baalen S, Leemans A, Dik P, Lilien MR, Ten Haken B, Froeling M. Intravoxel incoherent motion modeling in the kidneys: comparison of mono-, bi-, and triexponential fit. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25519 .

Van Baalen S, Froeling M, Asselman M, Klazen C, Jeltes C, Van Dijk L, et al. Mono, bi-and tri-exponential diffusion MRI modelling for renal solid masses and comparison with histopathological findings. Cancer Imaging. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-018-0178-0 .

Kuhn TS. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1970.

Boon M, Van Baalen S. Epistemology for interdisciplinary research–shifting philosophical paradigms of science. Eur J Philos Sci. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-018-0242-4 .

Flavell JH. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. Am Psychol. 1979. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 .

Pintrich P P.R. The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Pract. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3 .

Groenier M, Pieters JM, Miedema HAT. Technical medicine: designing medical technological solutions for improved health care. Med Sci Educ 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-017-0443-z

Chandarana H, Kang SK, Wong S, Rusinek H, Zhang JL, Arizono S et al. Diffusion-Weighted Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Imaging of Renal Tumors with Histopathologic Correlation. Invest Radiol 2012. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e31826a0a49 .

Feng Q, Ma Z, Zhang S, Wu J. Usefulness of diffusion tensor imaging for the differentiation between low-fat angiomyolipoma and clear cell carcinoma of the kidney. SpringerPlus. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1628-x .

Rheinheimer S, Stieltjes B, Schneider F, Simon D, Pahernik S, Kauczor HU, et al. Investigation of renal lesions by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging applying intravoxel incoherent motion-derived parameters–initial experience. Eur J Radiol. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.10.016 .

Van der Bel R, Gurney-Champion OJ, Froeling M, Stroues ESG, Nederveen AJ, Krediet CTP. A tri-exponential model for intravoxel incoherent motion analysis of the human kidney: in silico and during pharmacological renal perfusion modulation. Eur J Radiol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.03.008 .

Boon M: Philosophy of science in practice: a proposal for epistemological constructivism. 2015; Helsinki (Finland). Edited by Leitgeb H, Niiniluoto I, Seppälä P, Sober E. Helsinki (Finland): College publications. 2017a:289–310. 2017a.

Fleck L. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1935/1979.

Mößner N. Thought styles and paradigms—a comparative study of Ludwik Fleck and Thomas S. Kuhn. Stud Hist Philos Sci Part A. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.12.002 .

Sady W. Ludwik Fleck. In: the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Zalta EN, editor. 2017. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/fleck/ . Accessed 30 Jul 2020.

Boon M. An engineering paradigm in the biomedical sciences: knowledge as epistemic tool. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2017b. doi:j.pbiomolbio.2017.04.001.

Van Baalen S, Boon M. An epistemological shift: from evidence-based medicine to epistemological responsibility. J Eval Clin Pract. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12282 .

Woods NN, Brooks LR, Norman GR. The role of biomedical knowledge in diagnosis of difficult clinical cases. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2007;12:417–26.

Schmidt HG, Rikers RMJP. How expertise develops in medicine: knowledge encapsulation and illness script formation. Med Educ. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02915.x .

Newell WH. A theory of interdisciplinary studies. Issues Integr Stud. 2001;19:1–25.

Ivanitskaya L, Clark D, Montgomery G, Primeau R. Interdisciplinary learning: process and outcomes. Innov High Educ. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021105309984 .

Nikitina S. Three strategies for interdisciplinary teaching: contextualizing, conceptualizing, and problem-centring. J Curric stud. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500422632 .

Aram JD. Concepts of interdisciplinarity: configurations of knowledge and action. Hum Relat. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726704043893 .

Aboelela SW, Larson E, Bakken S, Carrasquillo O, Formicola A, Glied SA, et al. Defining interdisciplinary research: conclusions from a critical review of the literature. Health Serv Res. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00621.x .

Mansilla VB, Duraisingh ED, Wolfe CR, Haynes C. Targeted assessment rubric: an empirically grounded rubric for interdisciplinary writing. J High Educ. 2009;80(3):334–53.

Spelt EJ, Biemans HJ, Tobi H, Luning PA, Mulder M. Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: a systematic review. Educ Psychol Rev. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z .

Klein JA. A Taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In: Frodeman R, editor. In the oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University press; 2010. p. 15–30.

Terpstra JL, Best A, Abrams DB, Moor G. Health sciences and health services. In: Frodeman R, editor. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010.

DeZure D. Interdisciplinary pedagogies in higher education. In: Frodeman R, editor. In the oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University press; 2010. p. 372–87.

Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5 .

Haynes C, Brown-Leonard J. From surprise parties to mapmaking: undergraduate journeys toward interdisciplinary understanding. J High Educ. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2010.11779070 .

Hirsch-Hadorn G, Pohl C, Bammer G. Solving problems through transdisciplinary research. In: Frodeman R, editor. In the oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University press; 2010. p. 431–52.

Szostak R. The interdisciplinary research process. In: Repko AF, Newell WH, Szostak R, editors. In Interdisciplinary research: case studies of integrative understandings of complex problems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2011. p. 3–19.

McNair LD, Newswander C, Boden D, Borrego M. Student and faculty interdisciplinary identities in self-managed teams. J Eng Educ. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00018.x .

Liu SY, Lin CS, Tsai CC. College Students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in Socioscientific decision making. Sci Educ. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20422 .

Abu-Rish E, Kim S, Choe L, Varpio L, Malik E, White AA, et al. Current trends in interprofessional education of health sciences students: a literature review. J Interprof Care. 2012. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2012.715604 .

Bammer G. Disciplining interdisciplinarity - integration and implementation sciences for researching Complex real-world problems. Canberra: Australian National University E-Press; 2013.

Holbrook JB. What is interdisciplinary communication? Reflections on the very idea of disciplinary integration. Synthese. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0179-7 .

Andersen H. The second essential tension: on tradition and innovation in interdisciplinary research. Topoi. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-012-9133-z .

Andersen H. Collaboration, interdisciplinarity, and the epistemology of contemporary science. Stud Hist Philos Sci Part A. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.10.006 .

Lattuca LR, Knight DB, Bergom IM. Developing a measure of interdisciplinary competence for engineers. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education 2012 Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, Texas, USA; 2013.

Acquavita SP, Lewis MA, Aparicio E, Pecukonis E. Student perspectives on interprofessional education and experiences. J Allied Health. 2014;43(2):e31–6.

Pharo E, Davison A, McGregor H, Warr K, Brown P. Using communities of practice to enhance interdisciplinary teaching: lessons from four Australian institutions. High Educ Res Dev. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832168 .

Boon M. How philosophical beliefs about science affect science education in academic engineering programs: the context of construction. Eng Stud. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/19378629.2022.2125398 .

Bromme R, Pieschl S, Stahl E. Epistemological beliefs are standards for adaptive learning: a functional theory about epistemological beliefs and metacognition. Metacognition Learn. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-009-9053-5 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to three anonymous reviewers who have provided valuable feedback and suggestions that have helped us improve the paper.

This work is financed by an Aspasia grant (409.40216) of the Dutch National Science Foundation (NWO) for the project Philosophy of Science for the Engineering Sciences , and by the work package Interdisciplinary Engineering Education at the 4TU-CEE (Centre Engineering Education https://www.4tu.nl/cee/en/ ) in The Netherlands.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Philosophy, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

Sophie van Baalen & Mieke Boon

Rathenau Instituut, Den Haag, The Netherlands

Sophie van Baalen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

SvB and MB have co-authored the manuscript and have contributed equally to the article.

Authors' information

Mieke Boon (PhD) graduated in chemical engineering (cum laude) and is a full professor in philosophy of science in practice . Her research aims at a philosophy of science for the engineering sciences , addressing topics such as methodology, technological instruments, scientific modeling, paradigms of science, interdisciplinarity, and science teaching. Sophie van Baalen (PhD) graduated in technical medicine and in philosophy of science technology and society , both cum laude. She recently finished her PhD project in which she aimed to understand epistemological aspects of technical medicine from a philosophy of science perspective, such as evidence-based medicine, expertise, interdisciplinarity and technological instruments.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mieke Boon .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

No human participants were involved in this research, so ethical approval and/or consent to participate is not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

van Baalen, S., Boon, M. Understanding disciplinary perspectives: a framework to develop skills for interdisciplinary research collaborations of medical experts and engineers. BMC Med Educ 24 , 1000 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05913-1

Download citation

Received : 14 July 2023

Accepted : 14 August 2024

Published : 13 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05913-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Adaptive expertise
• Interdisciplinary expertise
• Metacognitive skills
• Higher-order cognitive abilities
• Epistemology
• Problem-solving
• Disciplinary perspectives
• Medical technology

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Master's Degree Programs

Part-Time Students

Students may take up to three (3) years to complete their degree. Programs are individually tailored to meet students' interests and professional goals. Students take between 3-6 credits per semester.  Sample Plans Students should work with their academic advisor to map out their part-time schedule for their 2-3 years at CWRU. While students do not need to necessarily know which elective they are taking in a given semester, they should make a plan for when they intend to take an elective slot versus clinical ethics rotations requirements or concentration requirements to ensure they meet the 30 credit hour program requirements.

For Case Western Reserve University Employees or students wishing to study during summer semesters

Sample Plan for students wishing to not study during summer semesters  

Learn more about the Employer Tuition Program at CWRU and the local Teaching Hospitals.

The Role of Digital Technologies in Enhancing Environmental Geography Education: Case Studies From Community Garden Projects

14 Pages Posted: 12 Sep 2024

Tope Gloria Olatunde-Aiyedun

Confluence University of Science and Technology Osara, Nigeria; Department of Science and Environmental Education, University of Abuja

A. A. Daniels

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Date Written: July 03, 2024

This study explores the role of digital technologies in enhancing environmental geography education through community garden projects in Nigeria. The study population consisted of students and lecturers from 2 geopolitical zones (southwest and north central) in Nigeria comprising of urban (Lagos), suburban (Ibadan), and rural (Kogi) universities. The sample size included 300 students and 30 lecturers. By integrating tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), remote sensing, and mobile applications, the study aimed to improve students' knowledge, skills, and attitudes towards environmental stewardship. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study collected quantitative data from pre-and postintervention assessments and qualitative data from interviews, teacher feedback, and observational studies. Results indicated significant improvements in students' understanding of environmental concepts (30% increase), GIS skills (87.5% increase), remote sensing understanding (55.6% increase), and environmental stewardship attitudes (33.3% increase). Key findings highlighted the benefits of digital tools in fostering real-world applications of classroom learning, enhancing student collaboration, and promoting sustainable practices. Recommendations for stakeholders, including educators, school administrators, government bodies, technology providers, and community organizations, focus on providing resources,

Keywords: Environmental geography education, community garden projects, digital technologies, digital tools

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Tope Gloria Olatunde-Aiyedun (Contact Author)

Confluence university of science and technology osara, nigeria ( email ).

Osara Nigeria

Department of Science and Environmental Education, University of Abuja ( email )

Abuja, 00234 Nigeria +2348110747484 (Phone)

affiliation not provided to SSRN ( email )

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on ssrn, paper statistics, related ejournals, teacher education ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Environmental Science & Climate Change eJournal

Earth science education ejournal, environmental education ejournal, geography education ejournal, earth-surface processes ejournal.