Investigating the Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Navigating Through Integrated STEM Education Spaces: The Case for Robotics Teaching
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.5457Keywords:
Contextualized curricular knowledge, Design-based engineering, Educational robotics, Marine ecosystems, Programming algorithmsAbstract
Since the conception of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in the 1980s, the majority of research on PCK has focused on particular subjects, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and others, with fewer studies shedding light on the nature of PCK needed for integrated STEM (iSTEM) education. This study investigates the development of PCK among early career teachers tasked to introduce robotics to secondary school learners. An exploratory case study within the interpretive paradigm was employed to investigate teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for navigating through the educational robotics curriculum in a model school in Rwanda. Three STEM teachers and nine students were conveniently selected to constitute a team that represented the school in a district robotics competition. Data was generated through observations, semi-structured interviews, and document study. Content analysis is employed to generate themes and ordinal categories that are used to report the findings. The findings revealed that the Education Robotics trainers’ application of composite STEM-PCK ranged from low to moderate. On one hand, the educators demonstrated limitations regarding the contextualization of curricular knowledge to align with local environments, while on the other, applying cross-disciplinary pedagogical knowledge and technological integration knowledge moderately. The study concluded that an iSTEM-PCK demanded shifts from being teachers to facilitators who possess knowledge of engineering design, project-based learning, and the capabilities to steer self-regulated learning.
References
Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1405–1416.
Adeoye‐Olatunde, O. A., & Olenik, N. L. (2021). Research and scholarly methods: Semi‐ structured interviews. Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy, 4(10), 1358-1367.
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of educational research, 81(2), 132-169.
Alam, A., & Mohanty, A. (2024). Integrated constructive robotics in education (ICRE) model: a paradigmatic framework for transformative learning in educational ecosystem. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2324487.
Al Hamad, N. M., Adewusi, O. E., Unachukwu, C. C., Osawaru, B., & Chisom, O. N. (2024). A review on the innovative approaches to STEM education. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 11(1), 244-252.
Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001
Bergen, A., & While, A. (2000). A case for case studies: exploring the use of case study design in community nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31(4), 926-934.
Burnard, P., & Colucci-Gray, L. (2021). Reframing STEAM by posthumanizing transdisciplinary education: Towards an understanding of how sciences and arts meet and matter for sustainable futures. Convergence Education Review, 7(2), 1-29.
Cepni, S., Aydin, M., Ada Yildiz, K., Birisci, S., Ozkan, C., & Yalabuk, C. (2024). Examining the impact of modified P3 task taxonomy-enriched educational robotics PD program on teachers’ STEM content knowledge. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22(1), 81-110.
Council, N. R. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academies Press.
Crippen, K. J., & Archambault, L. (2012). Scaffolded inquiry-based instruction with technology: A signature pedagogy for STEM education. Computers in the Schools, 29(1-2), 157-173.
Demetroulis, E. A., Theodoropoulos, A., Wallace, M., Poulopoulos, V., & Antoniou, A. (2023). Collaboration Skills in Educational Robotics: A Methodological Approach—Results from Two Case Studies in Primary Schools. Education Sciences, 13(5), 468. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050468
Ellebæk, J. J., Larsen, D. M., & Auning, C. (2024). Teachers’ challenges in teaching integrated STEM: In the light of PCK as an analytical lens. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 12(4), 13-13.
Hartelt, T., Martens, H., & Minkley, N. (2022). Teachers’ ability to diagnose and deal with alternative student conceptions of evolution. Science Education, 106 (3), 706–738. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21705
Hussain, S., Lindh, J., & Shukur, G. (2006). The efect of LEGO training on pupils’ school performance in mathematics, problem solving ability and attitude: Swedish data. Educational Technology & Society, 9(3), 182–194.
Hsu, C. Y., & Tsai, M. J. (2024). Predicting robotics pedagogical content knowledge: The role of computational and design thinking dispositions via teaching beliefs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(5), 939-961.
Keiler, L. S. (2018). Teachers’ roles and identities in student-centered classrooms. International Journal of STEM education, 5, 1-20.
Lowell, V. L., & Moore, R. L. (2020). Developing practical knowledge and skills of online instructional design students through authentic learning and real-world activities. TechTrends, 64(4), 581-590.
Mansilla, V. B. (2006). Interdisciplinary Work at the Frontier: An empirical examination of expert. Science, 294, 5547-1651.
Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2016). Epistemic Fluency and Professional Education: Innovation, Knowledgeable Action and Actionable Knowledge. Springer.
Martins, I., & Baptista, M. (2024). Teacher professional development in integrated STEAM education: A study on its contribution to the development of the PCK of physics teachers. Education Sciences, 14(2), 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci14020164
Mientus, L., Hume, A., Wulff, P., Meiners, A., & Borowski, A. (2022). Modelling STEM teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in the framework of the refined consensus model: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 12(6), 385. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060385
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Moraiti, I., Fotoglou, A., & Drigas, A. (2022). Coding with block programming languages in educational robotics and mobiles, improve problem solving, creativity & critical thinking skills. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 16(20), 59–78.
Nathan, M. J., Srisurichan, R., Walkington, C., Wolfgram, M., Williams, C., & Alibali, M. W. (2013). Building cohesion across representations: A mechanism for STEM integration. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(1), 77-116.
Obeng-Odoom, F. (2019). Pedagogical pluralism in undergraduate urban economics education. International Review of Economics Education, 31, 100158.
Ong, Q. K. L., & Annamalai, N. (2024). Technological pedagogical content knowledge for twenty-first century learning skills: The game changer for teachers of industrial revolution .0. Education and information technologies, 29(2), 1939-1980.
Ortiz, A. M., Bos, B., & Smith, S. (2015). The power of educational robotics as an integrated STEM learning experience in teacher preparation programs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(5), 42-47.
Padalkar, S., Ramchand, M., Shaikh, R., & Vijaysimha, I. (2022). Science Education: Developing Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003047506
Ponticorvo, M., Rubinacci, F., Dell’Aquila, E., & Marocco, D. (2022). Coding and educational robotics with peers: The C0D1NC experience to foster inclusion. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 9, 825536. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.825536
Rodriguez, G. M. (2013) Power and agency in education: Exploring the pedagogical dimensions of funds of knowledge, Review of Research in Education, 37, 87- 120.
Schneider, R. M., & Plasman, K. (2011). Science teacher learning progressions: A review of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge development. Review of educational research, 81(4), 530-565.
Shulman, L. S. 1986. Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004 .
Subramaniam, R. C., Morphew, J. W., Rebello, C. M., & Rebello, N. S. (2025). Presenting STEM ways of a thinking framework for engineering design-based physics problems. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 21(1), 010122.
Thyssen, C., Huwer, J., Irion, T., & Schaal, S. (2023). From TPACK to DPACK: The “Digitality-related pedagogical and content knowledge”-model in STEM-education. Education sciences, 13(8), 769.
Tsarkos, A. (2024). Enhancing Teacher Readiness and Retention in STEM Education Through PCK Development. In D. L. Sargent & K. L. Murphy (Eds.), Transforming Teacher Preparation Through Identity, Development, and Effective Technologies (pp. 320-347). IGI Global.
Tyas, R. A., Wilujeng, I., & Rosana, D. (2025). An examination of preservice science teachers pedagogical content knowledge: Development and trends. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 8(9), 2025279-2025279.
Wells, P. R., Goodnough, K., Azam, S., & Galway, G. (2023). Changes in high school distance education science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) during remote lesson study. In R. Huang, N. Helgevold, J. Lang, & H. Jiang (Eds.), Teacher Professional Learning through Lesson Study in Virtual and Hybrid Environments (pp. 203–222). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003286172-15
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3). 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Yang, W., Su, J., & Li, H. (2024). Demystifying early childhood computational thinking: An umbrella review to upgrade the field. Future in Educational Research, 2(4), 458-477.
Yang, W. (2025). A three-phase professional development approach to improving robotics pedagogical knowledge and computational thinking attitude of early childhood teachers. Computers & Education, 231, 105282.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Yip, S. Y. (2025). Transition into teaching: examining the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) development of pre-service STEM career-change teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2025.2471901
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Research in Education and Science
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in the International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
