View PDF VersionPrevious ArticleNext Article
 
DOI: 10.1039/C9RP00021F (Paper) Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 2019, 20, 495-508

Evaluating the effectiveness of Integrated STEM-lab activities in improving secondary school students’ understanding of electrolysis†

Noor Haslina Daman Huri and Mageswary Karpudewan *
School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia. E-mail: n_haslina@hotmail.com; kmageswary@usm.my; mageswary_karpudewan@yahoo.com

Received 17th January 2019 , Accepted 19th April 2019

First published on 24th April 2019

Abstract

STEM education is gaining increasing attention globally to fulfill the acute shortage of STEM workforce. Executing STEM education is frequently viewed as a complex and challenging agenda. The current study proposes Integrated STEM-lab activities in the teaching and learning of electrolysis. The activities use real-world contexts as a platform to exhibit the transdisciplinary nature of integration of the four STEM disciplines. Embedded mixed methods research used quantitative one group pre-test–post-test design, and qualitative interviews were employed to measure the effectiveness of the Integrated STEM-lab activities in improving 50 secondary school students’ (Form Four equivalent to Grade 9) understanding of electrolysis. The Electrolysis Diagnostics Instrument was administered for pre- and post-tests. One-way Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) revealed that the Integrated STEM-lab activities effectively improved the students’ understanding of electrolysis measured in three subscales (Wilks’ lambda = 0.664;F(3,96) = 16.164; p < 0.05; η = 0.336) with 33.6% of the variances in the pre- and post-tests explained by the treatment. The qualitative interview data supported and provided insight into understanding the quantitative findings. In the interviews, the students elaborated their understanding of electrolysis with details, and consistently the activities were referred to in their responses. The findings of this study suggest that Integrated-STEM lab activities are suitable to address the limitation of the existing laboratory activities for knowledge construction. The activities are exemplary for integrating the four STEM disciplines into the standard science curriculum.

Introduction

Teaching integrated knowledge of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) is essential for preparing students for future transdisciplinary career demands and for facing grand challenges due to emerging complex health-issues, climate change, energy and transportation (Nadelson and Seifert, 2017). An integrated STEM education is considered a catalyst for preparing productive and innovative generations and for promoting the economic growth of a country (Gonzalez and Kuenzi, 2012). For these reasons, globally STEM integration has attracted substantial attention in recent years (English and King, 2018) and constituted an integral component of the educational policies of some countries (Akaygun and Aslan-Tutak, 2016). Several countries have begun integrating STEM activities into their school curricula (Lou et al., 2017; Tigner et al., 2017; Chanthala et al., 2018).

Many studies have suggested Integrated STEM as a distinct subject possibly taught using project-based learning (Han et al., 2015; Erdogan et al., 2016; Han et al., 2016; Lou et al., 2017), problem-based learning (Asghar et al., 2012; English, 2017; Lou et al., 2017), and community-based after-school programs (Jho et al., 2016; Sasson, 2018) and through the formation of STEM education centers (Carlisle and Weaver, 2018). Integrated STEM as a separate subject outside the formal education has been successful and the participants have benefited from the initiatives. Having Integrated STEM in isolation as a single subject outside the formal education demands provision of extra time for learning the subject, and often students are less interested in learning outside of the curriculum as it adds on to the overwhelming amount of content learned during the formal schooling hours (Rickinson, 2004; Dyment, 2005; Waite, 2011). In contrast, Integrated STEM Education is well presented if the learning objectives of the standard mathematics and science curriculum (Moore et al., 2014; Moore et al., 2016) are taught at an increasing level of boundary crossings along the continuum of the four STEM disciplines (Vasquez et al., 2013) for meaningful learning. However, integrating the four STEM disciplines into existing subjects frequently has been a challenging task for educators. One of the profound constraints is that teachers lack the knowledge on embedding the four STEM disciplines into teaching the subjects (English and King, 2015; Kelley and Knowles, 2016; Radloff and Guzey, 2016; Chalmers et al., 2017).

The effectiveness of laboratory activities in enhancing conceptual understanding is ambiguous (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004; Abrahams and Millar, 2008; Abrahams and Reiss, 2012). The current science laboratory guide offers a ‘cookbook’ procedure for students to ritually follow without engaging them in thinking and reflecting for making sense of the activities (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004). The laboratory activities offered a little or completely ignored the cognitive demand which is essential for complex knowledge constructions (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004; Abrahams and Millar, 2008; Abrahams and Reiss, 2012). The heavy emphasis of the laboratory activities on manipulating physical objects, less focusing on assisting the students connecting experimental data with scientific ideas, required that the teachers include high learning demand activities to incorporate explicit strategies for generating the link (Abrahams and Millar, 2008) for knowledge construction. This indicates that laboratory activities are the viable platform for integrating the four STEM disciplines, as STEM integrations warrant cognitive challenge in seeking ways to use the knowledge from the four STEM disciplines to solve real-world problems.

Laboratory activities are instrumental in students understanding electrolysis. The erosions of electrodes, accumulation of deposits at the electrodes, and the changing colors of the electrolytes noticed through the activities are associated with the movement of electrons and chemical changes during electrolysis (Hawkins and Phelps, 2013; Supasorn, 2015). The current electrolysis laboratory activities place emphasis on handling equipment and manipulating physical objects to successfully see the changes as reported in theory (Ahtee et al., 2002; Kamata and Yajima, 2013; Davis et al., 2015). The laboratory activities have limited potential for guiding knowledge construction as the relatively low learning demand activities generated a lower degree of cognitive challenge. The low learning demand activities explain the poor understanding of electrolysis among the secondary level students (Sia et al., 2012; Loh et al., 2014; Ghani et al., 2017).

Integrated STEM-lab, when used in the teaching and learning of electrolysis, allows learning the fundamental scientific and mathematical knowledge from handling and manipulating physical objects. The link between the fundamental knowledge and scientific ideas was established when the knowledge (science and mathematics) guided the exploration of technology in engineering designing and thinking in resolving electrolysis related real-world problems. In other words, high learning demand Integrated STEM-lab activities shaped a greater cognitive challenge in linking observations to scientific ideas. Hence, Integrated STEM-lab activities that consolidate both transdisciplinary integration of the four STEM disciplines and the six elements of the “Framework for STEM Integration in the Classroom” were employed to enhance secondary school students’ understanding about electrolysis.

Background of the study

Integrated STEM Education

The definition for Integrated STEM Education is ambiguous as many researchers defined this approach differently (Sanders, 2009; Stohlmann et al., 2012; Moore et al., 2014; Kelley and Knowles, 2016). Because of the vague interpretation, multiple frameworks were used to describe the integration of the four disciplines (Asunda, 2014; Asunda and Mativo, 2016; English, 2016). One study defined that Integrated STEM Education is about learning two or more disciplines of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (Kelley and Knowles, 2016). Another study indicates that Integrated STEM Education constitutes the teaching approaches in the class that combine the STEM disciplines, but it is not obligatory to combine all these four disciplines (Stohlmann et al., 2012). In contrast, Sanders (2009) said that technology and engineering are the essential aspects of Integrated STEM Education to understand the fundamental knowledge of science and mathematics. Moore et al. (2014) extended the meaning of Integrated STEM Education as integrating the four disciplines of science, technology, engineering and mathematics into one lesson. The integrations are displayed when students were provided with an opportunity to employ the fundamental knowledge of science and mathematics in exploring technology while participating in engineering designing and thinking in solving real world problems (Moore et al., 2014).

Besides incorporating the four disciplines, an increasing level of boundary crossings resulting from the greater interconnection and interdependence among the disciplines is the primary feature of Integrated STEM (English, 2016). Different degrees of boundary crossings among the four disciplines result in different forms of integration, with the disciplinary form of integration denoting the lowest form of integration in which the concepts are learned separately in each discipline. The multidisciplinary form of integration signifies that learning the concepts that form the common theme between the two disciplines is the second level of interaction. Learning closely linked concepts to deepen the knowledge is the interdisciplinary form of integration, which is the third level of integration, and applying the knowledge and skills from two or more disciplines to real-world problems to shape the learning is the highest form of integration known as transdisciplinary integration (Vasquez et al., 2013). One of the major concerns in integrating the four disciplines is the unequal representations of the disciplines in STEM education. Predominately, the science and mathematics disciplines form the larger representations, in middle schools the engineering dimension is ignored and most of the time the engineering dimension overshadows the technology dimension (English, 2016, 2017).

Moore et al. (2016) proposed the “Framework for STEM Integration in the Classroom” with six elements as a guide towards performing STEM integration. The first element implies that the integration of the four disciplines should motivate students to engage in learning for the learning to be personally meaningful. The second element postulates that the integration should encourage exploring the technology to participate in engineering thinking and designing in solving real-world problems. The third element specifies that the integration should allow students to learn from failure and engage in redesigning to inculcate engineering thinking skills. The fourth element indicates that the integration should occur in the standard science and mathematics curriculum. The fifth and sixth elements denote that the interaction should be taught in a student-centered manner and emphasize teamwork and communication skills (Moore et al., 2016).

Laboratory activities constitute an integral part of teaching and learning that forms the core component of the secondary school chemistry curriculum (Hofstein and Mamlok-Naaman, 2007). The effectiveness of laboratory activities for knowledge construction is highly dependent on the potential of the activities in linking laboratory learning to real-world applications (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004). Integrated STEM-lab activities introduced in this study that echo the amalgamation of the transdisciplinary form of interaction due to the boundary crossings of the four STEM disciplines with the six elements of the “Framework for STEM Integration in the Classroom” have the potential to link laboratory learning to real-world applications.

Integrated STEM-lab

During laboratory activities, students interact with physical objects and manipulate the given substances and materials, testing and confirming the theories found in textbooks and classroom (Tobin, 1990). Several studies have claimed that laboratory activities effectively enhanced the understanding of scientific concepts (Hofstein and Lunetta, 1982; Hewson and Hewson, 1983; Abrahams and Reiss, 2012; Acar Sesen and Tarhan, 2013; Martindill and Wilson, 2015). In contrast to the above claim, over the years, there has been a growing sense that laboratory activities provide a limited learning experience for knowledge constructions (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004; Abrahams and Millar, 2008; Millar, 2009; Abrahams, 2011; Eilks and Hofstein, 2015).

The construction of scientific knowledge is a complex process. As such, merely manipulating physical objects during laboratory activities does not have the potential to support complex knowledge construction as the students are not given time and opportunities for integration and reflections to make meaning of the inquiry (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004). The authors further said that laboratory activities that engage students in solving authentic problems embark them on interacting and reflecting on the knowledge to solve the problems. The collaborative and cooperative laboratory learning environment that emerged from interacting and reflecting has the potential to support knowledge construction (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004).

Another proponent of laboratory work advocated that science laboratory work in teaching and learning science effectively enhanced students’ abilities to handle physical materials and students were found to be less effective in associating experimental data to scientific ideas (Abrahams and Millar, 2008). Knowledge constructions are not possible if the students simply observe the changes and remember the process. On the other hand, activities requiring students linking data to scientific ideas create cognitive challenges that support knowledge construction. Cognitive challenges are notable in high learning demand activities in which the strategies to develop the link are explicitly incorporated within the activities (Abrahams and Millar, 2008).

Another study revealed that laboratory activities should be more ‘hands-on’ and ‘minds-on’ for effectively developing primary or secondary students’ conceptual understanding (Abrahams and Reiss, 2012). Practical lessons should have equal representations of ‘doing’ and ‘learning’ for allowing students to use ideas associated with the phenomena rather than seeing the phenomena (Abrahams, 2011). Hands-on denotes the manipulation of physical objects and minds-on implies thinking to relate observations to real scientific ideas.

The greater emphasis on the technical aspects of handling objects and limited opportunities for collaboratively participating in integrating and reflecting on connecting observations with scientific ideas contributed to the claim that laboratory activities are less effective in supporting conceptual understanding. Consolidation of the boundary crossings of the four STEM disciplines with the six elements of the “Framework for STEM Integration in the Classroom” in laboratory activities (Integrated STEM-lab) entails connecting observations and scientific ideas, and advances ‘hands-on’ learning in manipulating physical objects and ‘minds-on’ learning in solving real-world problems. Integrated STEM-lab, which constitutes both the transdisciplinary form of integration due to the crossings of boundaries between the four STEM disciplines and the six elements of framework for STEM Integration, produces a complex learning environment that contributes to knowledge construction (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004) as the activities collaboratively engage students in reflecting and making sense of the inquiry. Integrated STEM-lab displays a high learning demand with greater cognitive challenges for knowledge constructions (Abrahams and Millar, 2008) as the activities necessitate linking observations to scientific ideas in solving problems.

Teaching and learning electrolysis in chemistry are highly associated with laboratory activities. Electrolysis involves understanding the movement of electrons from the cathode received by the positively charged ions in the electrolyte to form an element or a molecule. The negatively charged ions from the electrolyte travel to the anode and donate electrons and transform into an element or molecule. The processes in the electrolysis are not visible to human eyes. The processes are best visualized through laboratory activities (Ahtee et al., 2002; Kamata and Yajima, 2013; Davis et al., 2015). The notion that electrolysis is one of the electrochemical processes utilized widely in industries in manufacturing processes (Nagel et al., 2019) by merely observing chemical changes in laboratory activities is inadequate to support the complex conceptual understanding of electrolysis. For constructing knowledge on electrolysis, the activities should trigger cognitive challenges associating observations to real-world applications in a meaningful way. The cognitive challenge which is essential for knowledge construction, evident in the high learning demand Integrated STEM-lab activities, suggests that Integrated STEM-lab is an appropriate strategy for understanding electrolysis.

Electrolysis

Electrolysis is a process of using electrical energy to break down electrolytes. In understanding the electrolytic process, it is essential that students observe and understand changes that occur at the anode and cathode, differentiate between electrolytes and non-electrolytes, predict changes at the anode and cathode, identify the products at the cathode and anode during the electrolysis of molten and aqueous solutions, and understand the application of the concepts to industrial manufacturing processes. Frequently, understanding the theory and application of the process has been a difficult task particularly for secondary level students (Sia et al., 2012). A recent study reported on the necessity of higher-order thinking such as the ability to analyze, evaluate and synthesise in learning the electrolytic process (Ghani et al., 2017). Some other difficulties frequently encountered in learning about electrolysis include the inability to identify the anode, cathode, and reactions that occur at the electrodes; the difficulty in using the half-equation to describe the observations at the electrodes (Bong and Lee, 2016); and the inability to use symbolic representations to explain the processes at the electrodes (Chandrasegaran et al., 2007; Taber, 2013).

Ahtee et al. (2002) asserted that electrolysis is detected through color transformation or bubble formation. As such, learning from observing and visualizing the changes for real using laboratory activities is the best possible way to learn about electrolysis. For instance, laboratory work was performed using bismuth as the anode and cathode by connecting both the electrodes to the power supply in the presence of sodium hydroxide as electrolyte solution (Nagel et al., 2019). Electrolysis of water is visualized through a microfluidic device in a laboratory setting (Davis et al., 2015). Microscale electrolysis of coin-type lithium batteries and filter paper was viewed as useful to understand the associated scientific concepts and encouraged their interest in learning electrolysis (Kamata and Yajima, 2013). Electrolysis of water using solar energy which resulted in building a hybrid car model was used in understanding electrolysis (Zhe et al., 2010). These laboratory works were designed in such a way that they prompt students to follow a recipe like rhetorical procedures. The thinking, evaluating and analyzing skills which are imperative in learning about electrolysis were ignored in designing laboratory work on electrolysis. The low learning demand laboratory work exhibited little evidence of cognitive challenge linking findings and observations to an authentic real-world application. The lacking in laboratory work warrants limited support for complex knowledge construction. The high learning demand Integrated STEM-lab activities designed by the merging of the transdisciplinary form of interaction from the increasing level of boundary crossings between the four STEM disciplines and the six elements of the “Framework for STEM Integration in the Classroom” advance cognitive challenge linking observations to real scientific ideas, offering greater possibility for knowledge construction in electrolysis. Hence, this study was conducted to seek an answer to the research question “What is the effect of Integrated STEM-lab activities in improving students’ understanding of electrolysis?”

Methods

Research design

Following Teddlie and Tashakkori's (2009) recommendation that mixed methods research offers stronger inferences and reasoning, in this study both quantitative and qualitative data were collected to answer the research question. This study employs concurrent embedded mixed methods research design to measure the effect of the treatment, the Integrated STEM-lab activities in improving students’ understanding of electrolysis. Both the data sets were collected in the same week. The quantitative data represent the primary data that indicate the effect of the treatment and the qualitative data serve as secondary data to understand the quantitative findings (Creswell and Clark, 2011). Following Creswell and Clark's suggestions to obtain insights into the quantitative findings, the qualitative findings are embedded within the quantitative findings. In other words, the qualitative findings were used to establish and understand the quantitative findings. For quantitative measures, one-group pre-test–post-test experimental design (Fraenkel and Wallen, 1990) was used. Table 1 illustrates the one-group pre-test–post-test experimental design used in this study.
Table 1 One group pre-test–post-test design
Pre-test Treatment Post-test
Students completed an electrolysis diagnostic instrument with 17 items Integrated STEM lab activities were used to teach electrolysis Students completed an electrolysis diagnostic instrument with 17 items
Qualitative interviews

A pre-test Electrolysis Diagnostic Instrument (EDI) with 17 items was administered prior to the treatment. The pre-test was followed by the treatment using Integrated STEM-lab activities. After completing the treatment, a post-test was administered, and the interview was conducted. The same instrument was employed for both pre- and post-tests.

Instrument

The Electrolysis Diagnostic Instrument (EDI). Students’ understanding of electrolysis was measured using The Electrolysis Diagnostic Instrument (EDI) obtained from Sia et al. (2012). The EDI consisted of 17 2-tier multiple choice questions. The 17 items in the EDI are grouped into four subscales: (a) electrolytes and non-electrolytes, (b) electrolysis of molten substances, (c) electrolysis of aqueous solutions (the concentration of electrolyte, the positions of ions, the type of electrode) and (d) electrolysis in industry (extraction, purification and electroplating processes). However, for these study subscales, one and two were merged and named as electrolytes and non-electrolytes. The purpose of merging is to ensure that the subscales correspond to the curriculum content on electrolysis included in the Malaysian chemistry curriculum specification (CDC, 2005). If tiers 1 and 2 were correctly answered, 1 mark was given. If only any one of the tiers was correctly answered, zero mark was allotted. The maximum score for the EDI is 17. This is possible when all the questions are answered correctly.
Interviews. Interviews were conducted individually with the students. The interviews allowed the researcher to gauge the real understanding of the students. The first author involved in interviewing the students. Each interview session lasted 15 to 20 minutes. The interviews were conducted on the same day after the students answered the quantitative diagnostic test. The responses were recorded using a mobile phone and later transcribed by the authors. The interview questions and the corresponding concepts are listed in Table 2.
Table 2 Interview questions and the corresponding concepts
No. Interview questions Concept
1 What do you understand about electrolytes? Electrolytes and non-electrolytes
Give two examples of electrolytes that you know.
2 In the electrolysis of 0.5 M copper(II) nitrate solution using a carbon electrode, name the ions attracted to the anode Electrolysis of aqueous solutions
Which ion will be discharged?
Explain your answer
3 Explain how to electroplate an iron key with silver. In answering this question refer to the experiment on Integrated STEM-lab that you have performed Electrolysis in industry

Sample

Form Four (equivalent to Grade 9) students enrolled in secondary schools represent the study population. The students were 16 years old at the time of study. The convenient sampling strategy was used to identify the participating school. The school which was conveniently located and easily accessible participated in this study. The school represents the population of secondary schools in this country. This is because secondary schools throughout the country share similarities in terms of the availability of teaching and learning facilities in schools, the appointment and training of teachers, the learning environment and the administration of the schools. The 50 students enrolled in three Form Four classes in the school participated in the research. As such, intact group sampling was used in assigning the students to the research because the researchers do not have the authority to neglect any of the students. The Form Three examination (lower secondary examination) grades determined the streaming of the students at the upper secondary level. Since all 50 students were assigned to the science stream, chemistry was a compulsory subject, and their levels of academic performance were considerably similar. The students’ chemistry knowledge was assessed in the following year when the students were in Form Five during the Secondary School Leaving Examination. The chemistry grade from this exam determines the course students will be enrolling at the tertiary level. As such, it is imperative that this group of students understand the chemistry concepts taught correctly. The students’ usual chemistry teacher conducted the study. He had been teaching chemistry for the past 10 years since graduating with a Bachelor of Science Education degree from a local university. For the qualitative interview, 10 students (5 males and 5 females), were purposively identified from the 50 students to participate in semi-structured interviews. The selection was made by the teacher based on the student's readiness to cooperate with the researcher in completing the interview. The teacher requested the students who were willing to participate in the interviews to come forward. The teacher then selected 10 students whose academic performance ranged from poor to high to be interviewed.

Ethical considerations

Prior to conducting the study, permission was obtained from the Educational Planning and Research Division (EPRD), Ministry of Education. The EPRD is the division that oversees the research conducted in the institutions governed by the Ministry of Education. Hence, it is obligatory to obtain the EPRD's approval to conduct the research in schools. The authors also obtained the school principal's approval to conduct the study. The teacher and the students were informed about the study. The students were given an option to decide on their participation in the study and allowed them to withdraw from the study according to their convenience. The teacher willingly offered himself to carry out the treatment recognizing the timely need for the students to be exposed to STEM education.

Pilot study

A pilot study was conducted with 40 students, also in Form Four, from a different school to measure the validity and reliability of the EDI, the validity of interview questions and the STEM-lab activities. The students were given an hour to answer the questions in the EDI. The Kuder–Richardson 20 (KR-20) test used to measure the reliability of the instrument revealed the rating for the EDI as 0.68 for the overall instrument considering all the items, 0.63 for the subscale electrolytes and non-electrolytes, 0.58 for the subscale electrolysis of aqueous solutions and 0.51 for the subscale electrolysis in industry. According to Kuder and Richardson (1937), the KR-20 values above 0.50 indicate that the items are reliable. As such, all the items in the EDI were used in this study.

The interview questions were provided to the teachers to validate the appropriateness of the questions in measuring students’ understanding of the three concepts. The teachers suggested a few amendments such as ‘includ[ing] statements like referring to the STEM-lab in answering’ to avoid students from providing general answers. For the STEM-lab activities, the teachers suggested using readily available substances that students frequently used to encourage participation of the students. The teachers also suggested presenting more relevant real-world contexts that match the students’ level to ensure participation in thinking and designing processes.

Treatment

The five Integrated STEM-lab activities were conducted from week 2 (after the pre-test in week 1) to week 4. Activity 1 (electrolytes) and activity 2 (electrolysis of molten substances) were performed in week 2, activity 3 (electrolysis of aqueous solutions) and activity 4 (electroplating of metal) in week 3 and activity 5 (metal purification) in week 4. In Table 3 the outline of the activities is presented.
Table 3 Outline of the activities
Week Treatment
1 Pre-test: IDE
2 Activity 1 (electrolytes) and Activity 2 (electrolysis of molten substances)
3 Activity 3 (electrolysis of aqueous solutions) and Activity 4 (electroplating of metal)
4 Activity 5 (metal purification)
5 Post-test: IDE and interview

The five Integrated STEM-lab activities exhibited a transdisciplinary form of integration. The highest level of integration is executed in the activities because real-world contexts provided a platform for the crossings of the boundary between all four disciplines of STEM (Vasquez et al., 2013). During the activities, in the process of seeking solutions to real-world problems, the students consistently moved between the disciplines. The activities started with the students learning fundamental science and mathematics knowledge. The real-world problems posted in the activities required them to participate in engineering thinking and designing. The basic knowledge of science and mathematics guided the students in engineering/reengineering their thoughts in designing solutions. While participating in engineering thinking and designing, the students explored the technology to be used in the engineering thinking and designing process. For instance, in activity 1 students learned the science concepts differentiating between electrolytes and non-electrolytes, the properties of electrolytes as ionic compounds and free moving ionic compounds result in electrical conductivity. Learning about electrolytes denotes the science dimension. The scientific knowledge was used to solve the engineering problem on inventing natural isotonic drinks. Engineering thinking and design was used in relating the ammeter readings to propose the possible combinations of fruit and vegetable juices that result in the best isotonic drinks. Associating the ammeter reading with the masses of fruits and vegetables to decide on the ratio for mixing the juices denotes the mathematics dimension. Exploring the technology in deciding the packaging of the isotonic drink signifies the technology dimension. The details about the four STEM disciplines in the five STEM-lab activities are provided in Appendix 1, ESI†.

The crossing of boundaries not necessarily follows the order of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In contrast, the crossing of boundaries between the disciplines was materialized when the six elements constituting the “Framework for STEM Integration in the Classroom” (Moore et al., 2016) were embraced. The framework requires that the Integrated STEM activities (1) include a motivating and engaging environment for the learning to be personally meaningful, (2) include exploration of technology in engineering thinking and designing using the fundamental knowledge of science and mathematics as a problem-solving strategy, (3) allow participating in engineering thinking through learning from failure to redesign based on what they have learned, (4) be infused into the standard science and mathematics curriculum, (5) be taught in a student-centered manner, and (6) promote collaborative and communicative skills.

The six elements and the crossing of the boundaries between the four STEM disciplines expressed when the five activities were conducted in three stages (learning the concepts, experimenting the concepts and applying the concepts to real-world contexts). In the first stage, the students were introduced to the scientific concepts and mathematical applications inherent to the aims of the activity. In the second stage, the students performed an experiment investigating the concepts. In the third stage, the understanding gained from the first and second stages was applied to a real-world issue, whereby in the third stage the students engaged in engineering thinking, and explored available technologies to develop engineering design with the application of science and mathematics in the context of the given real-world issues.

In stage one of activity 1, the teacher posed questions such as ‘What do you know about electrolytes?’, ‘Why electrolytes are needed and how are they useful in daily life?’, and ‘Give five examples of electrolytes’ to retrieve the students’ prior knowledge on electrolytes which they have learned in previous years. The students in groups collaboratively discussed with the teacher the answers to these questions. The students were provided with substances such as sugar cubes, salt, lemon juice, vinegar, and isotonic drinks available in the market and apparatus such as copper wires, multimeters and crocodile clips. The students used the apparatus and experimented the substances to group them as electrolytes and non-electrolytes. The students in groups discussed the findings, exchanged ideas and reached a consensus. The learning environment appeared to be personally meaningful as they worked in a team communicating the findings. In stage 2, a wider range of substances from fruit and vegetable juices (coconut water, and orange, apple, celery, carrot, and lemon juices) to chemicals such molten lead(II) nitrate and copper(II) sulphate solutions was provided. The students designed an experiment to investigate the behaviors of the substances and identified the best electrolyte based on the current produced. In deciding on the experiment, the students had made several attempts and the first few trials were not successful. They discussed where and why the planning went wrong and finally after a few rounds of discussion a correct experimental procedure was prepared. In each attempt to produce a good mixture of the juices the students related the ammeter readings to the masses of the fruits and vegetables and the volume of water. Learning from failure in designing and redesigning is claimed as a hallmark of engineering thinking (Moore et al., 2016).

Once the electrolyte to be commercialized as an isotonic drink was identified, in stage 3 the students engaged in exploring technologies to design the packaging for the isotonic drink. At this point again, the students communicated and shared their ideas in thinking/rethinking of the design. The students worked in groups and made many attempts towards engineering and reengineering the packaging of the drink. The science and mathematics knowledge inherent to electrolysis which comprises the standard learning objectives of the lessons was investigated in depth in producing the drink. In other words, the Integrated STEM-lab activities do not add on to the current objectives. Instead, the integration resulted in enhancing the teaching and learning of the content in which their increasing interconnectedness and interdisciplinary nature was reflected.

The remaining activities were also executed similarly in three stages. In activities 2 and 3, the students investigated the electrolysis of molten and aqueous solutions. At the first stage, the lesson focused on learning about electrolysis. This includes information about cathodes and anodes and identifying suitable electrodes. In stage 2, the knowledge gained from stage 1 was investigated using the given materials and finally in stage 3 the understanding gained from stage 2, and 3 was applied to the real world problem of developing a prototype of a foot therapy machine which functions using electrolysis concepts. In activities 4 and 5, the students learned about the electroplating of metal and purification of metal. In stages 1 and 2 they learned about the application of the electrolytic process in the electroplating and purification of the metal. In stage 3, the students invented a method of using solar energy to perform electroplating using a water purifier. In activities 4 and 5, the students applied the knowledge gained from all five activities to electroplating a nail and designing a water purifier. Activities 4 and 5 reflect on the industrial application of electrolysis.

Data analysis

Quantitative data from the EDI were analyzed descriptively to obtain the mean and standard deviation values. One-way multivariate analysis (MANOVA) was later performed on the data. Before that, the data were checked for meeting the assumptions. The transcript interview data were then analyzed using the thematic analysis framework proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006). A total of three chemistry teachers and the authors were involved in the analysis. Decisions at each stage were made after the teachers reached an agreement over their discussion. Firstly, the transcript was re-read to familiarize with the data. Secondly, the initial ideas that correspond to each concept were ruled out. Then the codes and categories representing ideas were identified. The codes were reviewed to ensure they match with the categories. In Table 4, categories representing the codes for each concept are presented.
Table 4 Thematic analysis of the interview responses
Code Category Concept
Explain the meaning of electrolytes Salt solutions Electrolytes
Classify electrolytes and non-electrolytes Ionic compounds
Charged particles
Electrical conductivity
Chemical changes
Describe the electrolysis of molten and aqueous solutions Movement of ions Electrolysis of molten and aqueous solutions
Negatively charged ions attracted to the anode
Positively charged ions attracted to the cathode
Discharging of ions at the electrodes
Positioning in the electrochemical series
Observations at the electrodes
Describe the electroplating and purification of metal Name the electrolyte and electrodes Electrolysis in industry (electroplating and purification of metal)
Name the ions present in the electrolyte
Explain the reaction at the electrodes
Note the chemical changes observed

For instance, for the question ‘What do you understand about electrolytes?’, Student 1 (S1) responded, “Electrolytes are ionic compounds that conduct electrical current and undergo chemical changes when electrical current flows through [them].” S1's utterances represent the code ‘explain the meaning of electrolytes.’ The underlined phrases in the codes portray the categories that explain the codes for the electrolytes concept. For the question ‘Explain why the bulb is lighted when using copper(II) nitrate 0.5 M as the electrolyte’, S2 said, ‘The aqueous solution contains freely moving ions, the hydroxide ions will be attracted to the cathode and discharged. Copper ions will move to the anode and [be] discharged here’. S2's utterances imply the code describing the electrolysis of the aqueous solution. The underlined phrases show the categories that explain the codes describing the electrolysis of the aqueous solution. For the question ‘Explain how to electroplate iron key with silver”, S4 said, ‘Silver rod should be placed as an anode and the iron key as a cathode. Both electrodes should be placed in a silver nitrate solution. Silver nitrate solution is the electrolyte. The anode erodes because electrons are donated to form silver ions. These ions received electrons from the cathode, discharged and formed silver deposits surrounding the key.’ The underlined phrases in the responses provided by S4 correspond to the code describing the electroplating of metal. The underlined phrases are the categories that explain the code.

Results

Quantitative analysis

In Table 5 descriptive statistics obtained from the pre- and post-test scores of the EDI for the three subscales (electrolytes and non-electrolytes, electrolysis of aqueous solutions and electrolysis in industry) and the overall mean scores considering all 17 items in the EDI are presented.
Table 5 Descriptive statistics for the three subscales of the EDI
Subscale Test Mean Std deviation
Overall Pre-test 6.90 3.25
Post-test 10.66 2.88
Electrolytes and non-electrolytes Pre-test 2.34 1.26
Post-test 3.40 0.90
Electrolysis of aqueous solutions Pre-test 2.22 1.53
Post-test 3.62 1.32
Electrolysis in industry Pre-test 2.34 1.33
Post-test 3.64 1.34

A gain score of 3.76 is demonstrated for the overall performance in the EDI by comparing the pre- and posttest mean scores. For the subscale electrolytes and non-electrolytes, a gain score of 1.06 is notable. Gain scores of 1.40 and 1.30 are documented for the subscales electrolysis of aqueous solutions and electrolysis in industry. One-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed on the scores to investigate the differences among the subscales further.

Prior to conducting MANOVA, the data were checked for the equality of variance–covariance matrices. Box's M value of 9.24 with a p-value of 0.18 (p > 0.05) indicates that the variance–covariance matrices between the two groups were assumed to be equal. As the assumption was met, one-way MANOVA was performed to investigate whether the differences between the mean scores of the three subscales electrolytes and non-electrolytes, electrolysis of aqueous solutions and electrolysis in industry were significant. The findings (Table 6) revealed that there was a statistically significant mean difference between the pre-test and post-test mean scores combining all three dependent variables (electrolytes and non-electrolytes, electrolysis of aqueous solutions and electrolysis in industry): Wilks’ lambda = 0.67, F(3,96) = 16.16, p < 0.05. The partial eta squared η2 = 0.336 indicates that the treatment explains 33.6% of the differences between the pre- and post-test mean scores for the three subscales explained by the treatment.

Table 6 Results of one way MANOVA
Value F df Error df Sig. Partial eta squared
Pillai's trace 0.33 16.16 3.00 96.00 0.00 0.34
Wilks’ lambda 0.66 16.16 3.00 96.00 0.00 0.34
Hotelling's trace 0.51 16.16 3.00 96.00 0.00 0.34
Roy's largest root 0.51 16.16 3.00 96.00 0.00 0.34

Following the significant findings obtained from the multivariate test, the univariate main effects were examined by a follow-up ANOVA. Before conducting ANOVA, the assumption of the equality of variances was checked. The results of Levene's test are displayed in Table 7.

Table 7 Levene's test results
Subscale F df1 df2 Sig.
Electrolytes and non-electrolytes 13.83 1 98 0.00
Electrolysis of aqueous solutions 6.64 1 98 0.01
Electrolysis in industry 0.22 1 98 0.64

The Levene's test findings’ homogeneity of the variance was not violated for the subscale electrolysis in industry (p > 0.05). For the subscales electrolytes and non-electrolytes and electrolysis of aqueous solutions, the homogeneity of the variance was violated (p < 0.05). As such, following Tabachnick and Fidell's (2007) suggestion, a more conservative alpha level was used to interpret the findings. Further to avoid Type 1 error, Bonferroni adjustments were used (αadj = αexp/3 levels). For this purpose, an alpha-level of 0.05 was divided by three (number of dependent variables). The new adjusted alpha is 0.017. The results of the univariate analysis are presented in Table 8.

Table 8 Univariate findings for each subscale in the EDI
Subscale Sum of squares df Mean F Sig. Partial eta squared
Electrolytes and non-electrolytes 28.09 1 28.09 23.48 0.00 0.19
Electrolysis of aqueous solutions 54.76 1 54.76 29.00 0.00 0.23
Electrolysis in industry 42.25 1 42.25 23.70 0.00 0.20

The univariate findings revealed that significant differences were noticed between pre- and post-tests for all three subscales. For the subscale electrolytes and non-electrolytes the pre-test (M = 2.34; SD = 1.26) and post-test (M = 3.40; SD = 0.90) mean scores were significantly different (F(1,98) = 23.48; p < 0.0013). A partial eta squared of 0.19 indicates that the treatment causes 19% of the variances. The differences identified between the pre-test (M = 2.22; SD = 1.53) and post-test (M = 3.62; SD = 1.32) mean scores of the electrolysis of aqueous solution also appeared significant (F(1,98) = 28.99; p < 0.0013). A partial eta squared of 0.23 reflects that 23% of the differences are due to the treatment. A partial eta squared of 0.19 indicates that the treatment contributes 19% of the variances in the differences between the pre-test (M = 2.34; SD = 1.33) and post-test (M = 3.64; SD = 1.34) mean scores for the subscale electrolysis in industry, which appeared significant (F(1,98) = 23.69; p < 0.0013).

Qualitative interview findings

The notion that the students acquired some understanding of electrolytes is reflected in their interview responses. All 10 students stated examples of electrolytes correctly. They named lead nitrate, zinc nitrate, and silver nitrate as electrolytes. It is notable from their responses that a few students (5 students) indicated that electrolytes are ionic salt solutions. For instance, one student said, “copper sulphate solution is an electrolyte because in the aqueous form it has both positive and negative ions. Some acids such as hydrochloric acids also can be electrolytes”. This student's utterances portray that electrolytes are ionic compounds. Another student responded saying, ‘lead(II) nitrate in the form of molten is an electrolyte. It contains ions’. The vignettes of responses of both students’ common themes indicate that electrolytes exist as ions in salt solution, and the molten form was found. The conceptualization of electrolytes was further rendered in a real-world context when the student said ‘coconut water is an electrolyte because the water contains charged particles. The solutions have minerals. It could be used to replacing other isotonic drinks. People consume coconut water to replace the minerals in the body.’ The knowledge that the materials that we use in our daily life consist of ions indicating coconut water as an example was derived from the Integrated STEM-lab activities. Another student elaborated further on this point saying, ‘coconut water is the natural replacement for the commercially available electrolyte drinks such as 100 plus’. The idea of coconut water as an alternative for isotonic drinks confirms that the students were aware that coconut water has minerals (salts) that replace the electrolytes in the body.

When the interviewer probed further and asked the students to reflect on experiments that they had conducted, the responses appeared to be scientifically explained whereby the students connected electrolytes with electrical conducting and chemical changes. Some just said, ‘electrolyte solutions conduct electricity’, and they were unable to explain why the solutions conduct electricity. One student said, ‘the ions in electrolytes cause the current flow.’ Another student with a slightly deeper understanding stated, ‘the current flow happens because the ions in electrolytes are moving freely.’ The students found that electrical conductivity has got something to do with ions in the electrolytes. The researcher provoked the students asking, ‘what about the chemical changes?’ The excerpts ‘the ions in the electrolyte solutions were separated and discharged because the color of electrolytes changed after some time.’ Reflecting on the same idea, another student said, ‘chemical changes happened because I could see the color of electrolytes changes’. In sum, from the responses provided, it could be postulated that a few students had acquired the understanding that electrolytes contain ions that undergo chemical changes and also conduct electricity. However, some stated examples of electrolytes without providing the details, exhibiting surface level understanding.

In explaining the electrolysis process, notably, the responses constitute common themes such as positively charged ions in the electrolyte attracted to the cathode and negatively charged ions attracted to the anode, discharging of the ions at the electrodes releases gases, copper deposits and positioning of the ions in the electrochemical series. The themes are demonstrated in vignettes ‘ion nitrate will be at the anode, and copper ion will be moving towards cathode’ and ‘nitrate and hydroxide ions will be moving closer to the anode and copper and hydrogen moves to the cathode.’ The interviewer further probed asking where the hydroxide and hydrogen ions were found. One student responded saying, ‘from the aqueous solution. The aqueous solution contains water. Water exists as hydrogen and hydroxide ions’. The researcher continued asking, ‘What will be observed at the anode and cathode?’ There were many mixed answers such as ‘copper metal will be there’, ‘maybe copper because there are no other positively charged ions except copper’, ‘nitrogen gas will be released’ and ‘oxygen gas will be released at the anode, and at the cathode deposits of copper metal can be seen’. The excerpts above suggest that the students acquired the understanding that the ions in the electrolyte moved and discharged at the electrodes. However, confusion was noticed in illustrating the observation. This is commensurate with the observation that they were unsure which ions will be discharged. In the researcher's attempt probing further one student said that ‘ions positioned at the lower level of electrochemical series easily discharged than the top ones’.

The next question assessed how the knowledge on the electrolytic process mentioned earlier was used in the industrial application in explaining the electroplating of a silver key. The understanding was reflected in the ability of the students employing common phrases such as identifying the suitable electrolyte, electrodes, the ions present in the electrolyte, reactions at the electrodes and the observation. A majority of the students were able to provide partially correct answers. Most of them indicated silver nitrate as an electrolyte, and the silver metal is the anode, and the silver key is fixed as a cathode. A total of five students illustrated the presence of Ag+ ions, NO3− ions, H+ ions, and OH− ions, and the negative ions are attracted to the anode and the positive ions to the cathode. However, only three students indicated that at the cathode silver ions will be discharged, and the anode will erode and release silver ions into the solution. At the cathode, the silver metal will be deposited around the key. The remaining students pointed out that OH− will be discharged at the cathode as such oxygen will be released at the cathode. At the anode, H+ will be discharged and produces hydrogen gas.

In summary, the categories and phrases used by the students in expressing the understanding show that only a few students acquired a complete understanding of electrolytes, the electrolytic process, and the application of the process in industry. The findings reveal that the majority of the students partially comprehended the knowledge on electrolysis and its industrial application although they knew what electrolytes are. The students used specific examples from the activities to reason their answers. This implies that the activities are instrumental in understanding electrolysis. For instance, coconut water was illustrated as an isotonic drink that possibly could replace commercial drinks available in the market.

Discussion

A curriculum on electrolysis using an Integrated STEM framework (Moore et al., 2016) consisting of newly designed activities was proposed in this study as the effectiveness of Integrated STEM Education in developing students’ knowledge of core content is less researched (English, 2016). The effectiveness of this newly designed curriculum was measured using a mixed methods embedded design. The quantitative one-way MANOVA findings revealed that the secondary school students exposed to the curriculum exhibited improved understanding on electrolysis measured in the three subscales: understanding of electrolytes and non-electrolytes, electrolysis of aqueous solutions and electrolysis in industry. The partial eta squared values obtained for all the subscales suggest that the treatment, the Integrated STEM-lab activities which the students had followed, resulted in the students understanding electrolytes as ionic compounds that contain freely moving particles. During electrolysis, the electrolyte experiences chemical changes and results in electrical conductivity. The curriculum also informed the students about the electrolysis of aqueous solutions and application of electrolysis in industrial applications.

The qualitative interview findings allowed the researchers to obtain insights into the quantitative outcome. The common phrases used in explaining the answers depict that the students comprehended the knowledge on electrolysis well. However, not all the students included the entire phrases that reveal that they acquired complete understanding. A majority of them exhibited partial understanding. In responding to the interview questions, the students frequently had referred to the curriculum on Integrated STEM-lab. For instance, the students referred to the ammeter readings from the electrolysis of coconut water and defended that coconut is a better isotonic drink than commercially available drinks. Referring to activities in answering the questions provides insights into the effect of the Integrated STEM-lab activities. Perhaps, upon prolonging exposure to the curriculum, more students would be able to express a complete understanding of the concept. It is evident from the study performed by Park et al. (2018) that young children progressively construct understanding while they engage in engineering practices in STEM education.

The amalgamation of the transdisciplinary form of integration due to the boundary crossings between the four disciplines of STEM with the six elements of the integrated STEM framework explains the effectiveness of the Integrated STEM-lab activities in enhancing understanding on electrolysis. In doing the activities, the teacher guided the students in learning the fundamental electrolysis concepts. The students designed experiments to test the concepts and later used the understanding of the fundamentals (electrolysis and calculations), and observations from the experiments in designing (redesigning) in improving real world problems. The technology application was explored throughout the designing and redesigning actions. In this context, the learning appears to be meaningful to the students as the learners engaged in thinking and rethinking of using science and mathematics knowledge in engineering applications to the expanse of the technology. The activities allowed learning the fundamentals (electrolysis) and understanding the applications in industry as well as in everyday events. Throughout the activities, the students collaboratively involved in executing the learning. The cognitive challenge was demonstrated on many occasions throughout the activities. The cognitive ability was tested by designing the experiment at the initial stage to the later stage of exploring technology in engineering thinking and designing to solve the problem. At all these points, the students involved in serious discussions and executed their actions. They learned from failure and repeated the actions until the problem was solved. The activities exhibited high learning demand as the activities compelled the students to reflect and connect observations to real-world applications. The high learning demand activities with an increase in cognitive challenge allow knowledge construction (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004; Abrahams and Millar, 2008; Abrahams and Reiss, 2012).

The findings of this study correspond to some other studies which have documented positive effects of employing STEM education across cognitive and affective measures. Young children's understanding and application of volume through the practices of engineering design in STEM activities were explored (Park et al., 2018). The case study revealed that students understood the concept progressively when they engaged in structuring the volume in engineering design. In a different study, STEM education integrated with problem-based learning in stoichiometry lessons resulted in improving grade 11 students’ analytical thinking abilities and attitude toward science (Chonkaew et al., 2016). STEM learning through engineering design impacted middle secondary students’ interest in STEM (Mohd Shahali et al., 2017). Students who were taught using STEM project-based learning exhibited improved science achievement (Erdogan et al., 2016). High school students developed positive perceptions on STEM with the implementation of STEM integrated robotics (Chen and Chang, 2018). The STEM approaches used in the abovementioned interventions seem to highlight one component of STEM. In engineering-design based initiatives, the engineering component plays the central role. In robotic integrated STEM lessons the technology component is emphasized. Integrated STEM-lab proposed in this study is an example of an integrated STEM approach that projects balanced integration of the four STEM disciplines.

One of the five issues that contribute to the complexity and challenges in advancing STEM education is promoting equitable discipline representations (English, 2016, 2017). The notion engineering dimension is often neglected in the primary and middle school curriculums (English and King, 2015) and engineering is a platform for merging the science, technology, and mathematics as engineering does not exist in isolation, the engineering dimension frequently gains greater recognition in STEM approaches (Katehi et al., 2009). In later years, when computing is perceived inseparable from science and mathematics, computation and computational thinking are acknowledged as a core practice in science and mathematics (Weintrop et al., 2016), technology dramatically overshadows the engineering dimension. One discipline tends to override the other. Additionally, the disciplinary context frequently ignored when the focus is lamented in following procedures in solving problems or engaging in projects (English and King, 2018). The Integrated STEM-lab introduced in this study is a possible solution to address the difficulty in maintaining the integrity of disciplines in integrated STEM activities.

Additionally, Integrated STEM-lab coincides with the perspective of integrated STEM in enhancing the existing curriculum instead of adding to the curriculum (Bryan et al., 2015). The Integrated STEM-lab activities prompt the students to collaboratively involve and communicate their ideas in using engineering design supported by the use of technology in solving real-world issues. The real world problems on the three subscales of the electrolysis topic were infused into the existing laboratory practice. Hence, this results in enhancing the existing curriculum by allowing the students to learn electrolysis integrated with the engineering, mathematics and technology disciplines.

Conclusions and implications

Advancements in science and technology and increasing globalization have developed an enormous demand for the transdisciplinary workforce. Traditional monodisciplinary knowledge is unable to solve complex health- and environment-related problems. Solving these problems requires that science, technology, engineering and mathematics professionals collaboratively engage in arriving at the solutions to these problems (Nadelson and Seifert, 2017). For this reason, teaching integrated STEM in the school curriculum has received increasing attention worldwide. The absence of a specific definition given for integrated STEM coupled with the teachers’ lacking of STEM-related pedagogical knowledge developed confusion among the STEM educators to continue pursuing STEM education. Integrated STEM-lab activities introduced in this study are an example of a STEM education initiative in which all four disciplines of STEM are presented. Presenting all the disciplines of STEM in an integrated manner evades the domination of a single dimension over the others (English, 2016). Given that the new curriculum is consistent with the desired aims of the existing curriculum, the new curriculum enhances the content and learning context of the existing curriculum on electrolysis rather than adding onto the curriculum.

In conclusion, this study endorses that STEM pedagogies are effective in boarding the conceptual understanding as found from the findings of other STEM studies. The findings of this study provide evidence that the Integrated STEM-lab activities are minds-on activities that embrace the nature of meaningful learning as minds-on meaningful learning is the best means to learn about electrolysis (Sia et al., 2012; Benue and Angura, 2017). The findings of the study inform the teachers on using an alternative, integrative STEM lab pedagogy to teach electrolysis and subsequently address the claim teachers lacking STEM education related pedagogical knowledge (Nadelson et al., 2013; Radloff and Guzey, 2016; Ahmad Zamri, 2017). STEM education is one of the key national educational reform agendas, and Integrated STEM-lab activities are resourceful to curriculum developers and policymakers. The activities are expected to serve as guides in professional development sessions for teachers.

The activities serve as an example for STEM educators around the world. Notably, in Malaysia, the country where this study was performed, STEM integration is one of the nation's primary agendas, and the country is progressing with the introduction of various STEM initiatives through school curricula (BPK, 2016). In the Malaysian context, having STEM integration outside formal education is the greatest challenge. Malaysia practices an exam-oriented centralized education system governed by the Ministry of Education. The education system prepares students for the secondary school leaving examination, which the students will be sitting at the end of the secondary education. The teaching and learning processes closely follow the curriculum specification from the Ministry to ensure that the students were taught all the concepts assessed in the examination. On this account, STEM initiatives outside the curriculum context are frequently less attractive to educators. As such, a viable means to have STEM integration in a structured education system is through integrating STEM into the existing curriculum as Integrated STEM as suggested in this study.

Limitations

This study has reported on the effectiveness of Integrated STEM-lab activities in enhancing secondary students’ understanding of electrolysis. In performing this study, stringent measures have been followed to control the threat to the validity of this study. However, this study exhibits several limitations. One group pre-test–post-test experimental design was used to measure the effectiveness of the treatment. The research design using one group is recognized as a weak design because there is no clear evidence to rule out the possibility that the improvement in the understanding was caused by the treatment as there was no control group to compare the findings (Shadish et al., 2002). The qualitative findings that supported the quantitative findings substantiated the improvement in understanding resulted from the Integrated STEM-lab activities the students had followed for five weeks. This study also has limitations in generalizing the findings as the study was conducted with students from one school. Hence, it is recommended that the study be repeated with a comparison group, by involving more schools and by extending the Integrated STEM-lab activities to the learning of other chemistry concepts.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts to declare.

References

  1. Abrahams I., (2011), Practical Work in Secondary Science: A Minds-On Approach, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
  2. Abrahams I. and Millar R., (2008), Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 30(14), 1945–1969.
  3. Abrahams I. and Reiss M. J., (2012), Practical work: its effectiveness in primary and secondary schools in England, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 49(8), 1035–1055.
  4. Acar Sesen B. and Tarhan L., (2013), Inquiry-Based Laboratory Activities in Electrochemistry: High School Students’ Achievements and Attitudes, Res. Sci. Educ., 43(1), 413–435.
  5. Ahmad Zamri K., (2017), Assessing Urban and Rural Teachers’ Competencies in STEM Integrated Education in Malaysia, in MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 87, p. 4004.
  6. Ahtee M., Asunta T. and Palm H., (2002), Student Teachers’ Problems in Teaching “Electrolysis” With a Key Demonstration, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 3(3), 317–326.
  7. Akaygun S. and Aslan-Tutak F., (2016), STEM Images Revealing STEM Conceptions of Pre-Service Chemistry and Mathematics Teachers, Int. J. Educ. Math., Sci. Technol., 4(1), 56.
  8. Asghar A., Ellington R., Rice E., Johnson F. and Prime G. M., (2012), Supporting STEM Education in Secondary Science Contexts, Interdisciplinary J. Problem-Based Learn., 6(2), 85–125.
  9. Asunda P. A., (2014), A Conceptual Framework for STEM Integration Into Curriculum Through Career and Technical Education, J. STEM Teach. Educ., 49(1), 3–15.
  10. Asunda P. A. and Mativo J., (2016), Integrated STEM: A New Primer for Teaching Technology Education, Technol. Eng. Teach., 75(4), 8–13, retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1773220970?accountid=8144%5Cnhttp://sfx.aub.aau.dk/sfxaub?url_ver=Z39.882004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ:ericshell&atitle=Integrated+STEM:+A+New+Primer+for+Teaching+Technology+.
  11. Benue O. V. A. and Angura T. M., (2017), Improving Senior Secondary Students’ Retention in Electrolysis Using Collaborative Concept Mapping Instructional Strategy (CCMIS), Greener J. Educ. Res., 7(October), 87–92.
  12. Bong A. Y. L. and Lee T. T., (2016), Form four students’ misconceptions in electrolysis of molten compounds and aqueous solutions, Asia-Pac. Forum Sci. Learn. Teach., 17(1), 8.
  13. BPK, (2016), Implementation Guide for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) in Teaching and Learning, Ministry of Education Malaysia.
  14. Braun V. and Clarke V., (2006), Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qual. Res. Psychol., 3(2), 77–101.
  15. Bryan L. A., Moore T. J., Johnson C. C. and Roehrig G. H., (2015), Integrated STEM education, in Johnson C. C., Peters-Burton E. E. and Moore T. J. (ed.), STEM road map: a framework for integrated STEM education, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 23–37.
  16. Carlisle D. L. and Weaver G. C., (2018), STEM education centers: catalyzing the improvement of undergraduate STEM education, Int. J. STEM Educ., 5(1), 47.
  17. CDC, (2005), Chemistry Form Four Curriculum Specifications: Integrated Curriculum for Secondary Schools, Ministry of Education Malaysia.
  18. Chalmers C., Carter M., (Lyn), Cooper T. and Nason R., (2017), Implementing “Big Ideas” to Advance the Teaching and Learning of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 15, 25–43.
  19. Chandrasegaran A. L., Treagust D. F. and Mocerino M., (2007), The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 8(3), 293–307.
  20. Chanthala C., Santiboon T. and Ponkham K., (2018), Instructional designing the STEM education model for fostering creative thinking abilities in physics laboratory environment classes, in AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1923,  DOI:10.1063/1.5019501.
  21. Chen Y. and Chang C., (2018), The Impact of an Integrated Robotics STEM Course with a Sailboat Topic on High School Students’ Perceptions of Integrative STEM, Interest, and Career Orientation Robots in the STEM Curriculum, Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., 14(12), 19.
  22. Chonkaew P., Sukhummek B. and Faikhamta C., (2016), Development of analytical thinking ability and attitudes towards science learning of grade-11 students through science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM education) in the study of stoichiometry, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 17(4), 842–861.
  23. Creswell J. W. and Plano Clark V. L., (2011), Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd edn, Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
  24. Davis T., Athey S. L., Vandevender M. L., Crihfield C. L., Kolanko C. C. E., Shao S., Holland L. A., (2015), Electrolysis of Water in the Secondary School Science Laboratory with Inexpensive Microfluidics, J. Chem. Educ., 92(1), 116–119.
  25. Dyment J. E., (2005), Green school grounds as sites for outdoor learning: barriers and opportunities, Int. Res. Geograph. Environ. Educ., 14(1), 28–45.
  26. Eilks I. and Hofstein A., (2015), Relevant chemistry education: From theory to practice, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
  27. English L. D., (2016), STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration, Int. J. STEM Educ., 3(1), 3.
  28. English L. D. and King D. T., (2015), STEM learning through engineering design: fourth-grade students’ investigations in aerospace, Int. J. STEM Educ., 2(1), 14.
  29. English L. D. and King D., (2018), STEM Integration in Sixth Grade: Designing and Constructing Paper Bridges, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 1–20.
  30. English L. D., King D., Smeed J., English L. D., King D., Advancing J. S., Smeed J., (2017), Advancing integrated STEM learning through engineering design: sixth-grade students’ design and construction of earthquake resistant buildings, J. Educ. Res., 110(3), 255–271.
  31. Erdogan N., Navruz B., Younes R. and Capraro R. M., (2016), Viewing How STEM Project-Based Learning Influences Students’ Science Achievement Through the Implementation Lens: A Latent Growth Modeling, Eurasia J. Math., Sci. Technol. Edu., 12(8), 2139–2154.
  32. Fraenkel J. R. and Wallen N. E., (1990), How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
  33. Ghani I. B. A., Ibrahim N. H., Yahaya N. A. and Surif J., (2017), Enhancing students’ HOTS in laboratory educational activity by using concept map as an alternative assessment tool, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 18(4), 849–874.
  34. Gonzalez H. B. and Kuenzi J., (2012), Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): A Primer. Congressional Research Service, (August), pp. 1–34.
  35. Han S., Capraro R. and Capraro M. M., (2015), How Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Project-Based Learning (PBL) Affects High, Middle, and Low Achievers Differently: the Impact of Student Factors on Achievement, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 13(5), 1089–1113.
  36. Han S., Rosli R., Capraro M. M. and Capraro R. M., (2016), The effect of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) project based learning (PBL) on students’ achievement in four mathematics topics, J. Turkish Sci. Educ., 13(Special issue), 3–30.
  37. Hawkins I. and Phelps A. J., (2013), Virtual laboratory vs. traditional laboratory: which is more effective for teaching electrochemistry? Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 14(4), 516–523.
  38. Hewson M. G. and Hewson P. W., (1983), Effect of instruction using students’ prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 20(8), 731–743.
  39. Hofstein A. and Lunetta V. N., (1982), The Role of the Laboratory in Science Teaching: Neglected Aspects of Research, Rev. Educ. Res., 52(2), 201–217.
  40. Hofstein A. and Lunetta V. N., (2004), The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty-First Century, Sci. Educ., 88(1), 28–54.
  41. Hofstein A. and Mamlok-Naaman R., (2007), The laboratory in science education: the state of the art, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 8(2), 105–107.
  42. Jho H., Hong O. and Song J., (2016), An analysis of STEM/STEAM teacher education in Korea with a case study of two schools from a community of practice perspective, Eurasia J. Math., Sci. Technol. Educ., 12(7), 1843–1862.
  43. Kamata M. and Yajima S., (2013), Microscale Electrolysis Using Coin-Type Lithium Batteries and Filter Paper, J. Chem. Educ., 90(2), 228–231.
  44. Katehi L., Pearson G. and Feder M., (2009), Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects, (C. on K.-12 E. Education, Ed.).
  45. Kelley T. R. and Knowles J. G., (2016), A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education, Int. J. STEM Educ., 3(1), 11.
  46. Kuder G. F. and Richardson M. W., (1937), The theory of the estimation of test reliability, Psychometrika, 2(3), 151–160.
  47. Loh A. S. L., Subramaniam R. and Tan K. C. D., (2014), Exploring students’ understanding of electrochemical cells using an enhanced two-tier diagnostic instrument, Res. Sci. Technol. Educ., 32(3), 229–250.
  48. Lou S.-J., Chou Y.-C., Shih R.-C. and Chung C.-C., (2017), A Study of Creativity in CaC[subscript 2] Steamship-Derived STEM Project-Based Learning, Eurasia J. Math., Sci. Technol. Educ., 13(6), 2387–2404.
  49. Martindill D. and Wilson E., (2015), Rhetoric or reality? A case study into how, if at all, practical work supports learning in the classroom, Int. J. Lesson Learn. Stud., 4(1), 39–55.
  50. Millar R., (2009), Analysing practical activities to assess and improve effectiveness: The Practical Activity Analysis Inventory (PAAI). Trends in Genetics, York: Centre for Innovation and Research in Science Education, University of York.
  51. Mohd Shahali E. H., Halim L., Rasul M. S., Osman K. and Zulkifeli M. A., (2017), STEM learning through engineering design: impact on middle secondary students’ interest towards STEM, Eurasia J. Math., Sci. Technol. Educ., 13(5), 1189–1211.
  52. Moore T. J., Stohlmann M. S., Wang H.-H., Tank K. M., Glancy A. W. and Roehrig G. H., (2014), Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel and M. Cardella (ed.), Engineering in precollege settings: research into practice, West Lafayette: Purdue Press, pp. 35–60.
  53. Moore T. J., Johnson C. C., Peters-Burton E. E. and Guzey S. S., (2016), The need for a stem road map, in Johnson C. C., Peters-Burton E. E., Moore T. J. and Selcen Guzey S. (ed.), STEM road map: a framework for integrated STEM education, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. National, 1st edn, pp. 3–12.
  54. Nadelson L. S. and Seifert A. L., (2017), Integrated STEM defined: contexts, challenges, and the future, J. Educ. Res., 110(3), 221–223.
  55. Nadelson L. S., Callahan J., Pyke P., Hay A., Dance M. and Pfiester J., (2013), Teacher STEM perception and preparation: inquiry-based stem professional development for elementary teachers, J. Educ. Res., 106(2), 157–168.
  56. Nagel T., Mentzer C. and Kivistik P. M., (2019), Anodization of Bismuth: Measuring Breakdown Voltage and Optimizing an Electrolytic Cell, J. Chem. Educ., 96(1), 110–115.
  57. Park D.-Y., Park M.-H. and Bates A. B., (2018), Exploring Young Children's Understanding About the Concept of Volume Through Engineering Design in a STEM Activity: A Case Study, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 16(2), 275–294.
  58. Radloff J. and Guzey S., (2016), Investigating Preservice STEM Teacher Conceptions of STEM Education, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 25(5), 759–774.
  59. Sanders M., (2009), STEM, STEM Education, STEMmania, Education, 68(4), 20–27.
  60. Sasson I., (2018), Participation in Research Apprenticeship Program: Issues Related to Career Choice in STEM, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 1–16.
  61. Shadish W. R., Cook T. D. and Campbell D. T., (2002), Quasi-experimental for generalized designs causal inference for experiments causal generalized inference, Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  62. Sia D. T., Treagust D. F. and Chandrasegaran A. L., (2012), High school students’ proficiency and confidence levels in displaying their understanding of basic electrolysis concepts, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 10(6), 1325–1345.
  63. Stohlmann M., Moore T. and Roehrig G., (2012), Considerations for Teaching Integrated STEM Education, J. Pre-Coll. Eng. Educ. Res., 2(1), 28–34.
  64. Supasorn S., (2015), Grade 12 Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Mental Models of Galvanic Cells before and after Learning by Using Small-Scale Experiments in Conjunction with a Model Kit, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 16(2), 393–407.
  65. Tabachnick B. G. and Fidell L. S., (2007), Using multivariate statistics, 5th edn, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.
  66. Taber K. S., (2013), Three levels of chemistry educational research, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 14(2), 151–155.
  67. Teddlie C. and Tashakkori A., (2009), Foundations of mixed methods research: integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences, California: Sage Publications.
  68. Tigner J. A., English T. and Floyd-Smith T. M., (2017), Cultivating the STEM pipeline by translating glucose sensor research into a hands-on outreach activity, Educ. Chem. Eng., 2(I), 17–24.
  69. Tobin K., (1990), Research on Science Laboratory Activities: In Pursuit of Better Questions and Answers to Improve Learning, Sch. Sci. Math., 90(5), 403–418.
  70. Vasquez J., Sneider C. and Comer M., (2013), STEM Lesson Essentials, Grades 3–8: integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  71. Waite S., (2011), Teaching and learning outside the classroom: personal values, alternative pedagogies and standards, Education, 39(1), 65–82.
  72. Weintrop D., Beheshti E., Horn M., Orton K., Jona K., Trouille L. and Wilensky U., (2016), Defining Computational Thinking for Mathematics and Science Classrooms, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 25(1), 127–147.
  73. Zhe J., Doverspike D., Lam P. C., Menzemer C. C., Zhe J., Doverspike D., Menzemer C., (2010), High School Bridge Program: A Multidisciplinary STEM Research Program, J. STEM Educ., 11(1 & 2).

Footnote

† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c9rp00021f
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2019