Reframing STEM Education through Ontological and Epistemological Perspectives of Science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33830/ijrse.v8i2.15519Keywords:
Ontology of Science, Epistemology of Science, STEM Education, Inquiry LearningAbstract
Ontological-epistemological convergence plays a significant role in learning science. Therefore, the relationship between ontological and epistemological stances in science was examined to understand the context for integrating STEM education in science learning. A systematic review of the literature was carried out using the PRISMA method. Articles were scrutinised following the inclusion and exclusion criteria and finally, 51 articles were retained. The overall inter coder agreement reached was ICA =88% well above the minimum threshold of 70%. A common agreement resulted in developing a theme/category. The findings revealed that STEM education emphasises epistemic cognition, ontological framing of real-world issues, and the integration of different STEM disciplines. Teacher educators should be equipped to understand how knowledge is validated in science and how designing in engineering and mathematical modelling enable them to guide transdisciplinary inquiry without ignoring STEM discipline.
References
Abegglen, S., & Bustillos, J. (2016). Science education: Beyond a liminal understanding of knowledge production and dissemination. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 2(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.84535
Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science. Perspectives and Resources. St. Paul, MN: SHiPS Education Press. http://shipseducation.net/press/TNOS-preface.pdf
Allchin, D., & Zemplen, G. A. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and Whole Science. Science Education, 104(5), 907-933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21589
Bahcivan, E. (2019). Examining the Structural Relations among PSTs' Scientific Epistemological Beliefs, Epistemic Emotions and Argumentativeness: Sample from Turkey. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology (IJEMST), 7(3), 271-280. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1223839.pdf
Bano, M., Zowghi, D., Kearney, M., Schuck, S., & Aubusson, P. (2018). Mobile learning for science and mathematics school education: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Computers & Education, 121, 30-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.006
Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: there change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 203-221.https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904X22683
Carol-Ann Burke, L. E., Wessels, A., & McAvella, A. (2018). Using theater and drama to expose and expand the epistemic insights of youth regarding the nature of science. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1151-1169.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9782-z
Cheng, C. H., Braten, I., Yang, F. Y., & Brandmo, C. (2021). Investigating structural relationships among upper‐secondary school students’ beliefs about knowledge, justification for knowing, and Internet‐specific justification in the domain of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(7), 980-1009.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21689
Dall’Alba, G. (2009). Learning professional ways of being: Ambiguities of becoming. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41(1), 34-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00475.x
Datta, R. (2016). How to Practice Posthumanism in Environmental Learning: Experiences with North American and South Asian Indigenous Communities. The IAFOR Journal of Education, 4(1), 52-67.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1100625.pdf
Demirbag, M. (2021). Modeling the Relations among Argumentativeness, Epistemological Beliefs and Self-Regulation Skills. International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(4), 327-340.https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.366.20
Ding, L. (2019). Theoretical perspectives of quantitative physics education research. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(2), 020101https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.020101
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science education, 84(3), 287-312.https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
Duncan, R. G., Chinn, C. A., & Barzilai, S. (2018). Grasp of evidence: Problematizing and expanding the next generation science standards' conceptualization of evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 907-937.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21468
Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291.https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Garcia-Moya, I., Bunn, F., Jimenez-Iglesias, A., Paniagua, C., & Brooks, F. M. (2019). The conceptualization of school and teacher connectedness in adolescent research: a scoping review of literature. Educational Review, 71(4), 423-444.https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1424117
Gonzalez-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2020). Acting with epistemic agency: Characterizing student critique during argumentation discussions. Science Education, 104(6), 953-982.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21592
Groff, R. (2004). Critical realism, post-positivism and the possibility of knowledge (Vol. 11). Routledge.
Grushka, K., Hope, A., Clement, N., Lawry, M., & Devine, A. (2018). New visuality in Art/Science: A pedagogy of connection for cognitive growth and creativity. Peabody Journal of Education, 93(3), 320-331.https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2018.1449927
Guo, J., Hu, X., Marsh, H. W., & Pekrun, R. (2022). Relations of Epistemic Beliefs with Motivation, Achievement, And Aspirations In Science: Generalizability Across 72 Societies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(4), 734-751.https://Doi.Org/10.1037/Edu0000660
Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1025
Kirbaslar, F. G., Arıca, B., & Barıs, C. C. (2021). Determination of the epistemological and ontological beliefs of secondary school students: Determination of the epistemological and ontological beliefs. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(2), 986-1005.https://ijci.globets.org/index.php/IJCI/article/view/497
Kizkapan, O., & Bektas, O. (2021). Improving 7th Grade Students’ Epistemological Beliefs by Epistemologically Enriched Argumentation Model. Pedagogical Research, 6(3), em0095.https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/10949
Koponen, I. T. (2021). Nature of Science (NOS) being acquainted with Science of Science (SoS): Providing a panoramic picture of sciences to embody NOS for pre-service teachers. Education Sciences, 11(3), 107.https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030107
Koutsianou, A., & Emvalotis, A. (2021). Unraveling the Interplay of Primary School Teachers' Topic-Specific Epistemic Beliefs and Their Conceptions of Inquiry-Based Learning in History and Science. Frontline Learning Research, 9(4), 35-75.https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v9i4.777
Krajcik, J., Codere, S., Dahsah, C., Bayer, R., & Mun, K. (2014). Planning instruction to meet the intent of the Next Generation Science Standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 157-175.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9383-2
Kuhn, D., Arvidsson, T. S., Lesperance, R., & Corprew, R. (2017). Can engaging in science practices promote deep understanding of them? Science Education, 101(2), 232-250.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21263
Kurasaki, K. S. (2000). Intercoder reliability for validating conclusions drawn from open-ended interview data. Field Methods, 12(3), 179-194.https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X0001200301
Lee, S. W. Y., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). Do sophisticated epistemic beliefs predict meaningful learning? Findings from a structural equation model of undergraduate biology learning. International Journal of Science Education, 38(15), 2327-2345.https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1240384
Lee, S. W. Y., Luan, H., Lee, M. H., Chang, H. Y., Liang, J. C., Lee, Y. H., ... & Tsai, C. C. (2021). Measuring epistemologies in science learning and teaching: A systematic review of the literature. Science Education, 105(5), 880-907.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21663
Limbu, S., Rajbanshi, R., & Kumar, R. (2025). Knowing, doing, and embracing local resources and pedagogical shifts in science education through experiments. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 11(3), 724-744. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.1304
Lopez-Banet, L., & Martínez-Carmona, M. (2021). Preservice Chemistry Teachers' Epistemic Beliefs After a Student-Centered Approach Training Programme. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(12), em2045.https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11359
Marra, R. M., & Palmer, B. E. T. S. Y. (2005). University science students' epistemological orientations and nature of science indicators: How do they relate? Science Education International, 18(3), 165-184.https://www.icaseonline.net/sei/16-03-2005/16-03-2005-165_184.pdf
McNeill, K. L., Gonzalez-Howard, M., Katsh-Singer, R., & Loper, S. (2017). Moving beyond pseudo argumentation: Teachers' enactments of an educative science curriculum focused on argumentation. Science Education, 101(3), 426-457.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21274
Memisoglu, A. S., & Ercelik, B. (2022). Determining Pre-Service Science Teachers' Perceptions of Science, Nature of Science and the Relationship between Them. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 9(2), 378-394.https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.1058181
Ministry of Education. (2020). National Education Policy 2020. Government of India. https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf
Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1),1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris.https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264281820-en
OECD. (2022). Opening knowledge through education and science, Centre for educational research and innovation. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/28ab3f91-en
Ortiz-Revilla, J., Aduriz-Bravo, A., & Greca, I. M. (2020). A framework for epistemological discussion on integrated STEM education. Science & Education, 29(4), 857-880.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00131-9
Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What "ideas‐about‐science" should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692-720.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10105
Ostergaard, E. (2014). How can science education foster students’ rooting?. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(2), 515-525.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9604-1
Ostergaard, E. (2017). Earth at rest: Aesthetic experience and students’ grounding in science education. Science & Education, 26(5), 557-582.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9906-2
Papadouris, N., & Constantinou, C. P. (2017). Integrating the epistemic and ontological aspects of content knowledge in science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 39(6), 663-682.https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1299950
Pluta, W. J., Chinn, C. A., & Duncan, R. G. (2011). Learners’ epistemic criteria for good scientific models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(5), 486-511.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20415
Prasadini, L., Hamid, J. A., Khatibi, A., & Azam, S. M. (2018). The Impact of Scientific Epistemological Beliefs of Sri Lankan Senior Secondary Students on Their Approaches to Learning Science: A Structural Equation Modelling. Asian Journal of Contemporary Education, 2(2), 60-69. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.137.2018.22.60.69
Sandoval, W. A. (2009). In defense of clarity in the study of personal epistemology. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 150-161.https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400802581700
Sandoval, W. A., & Redman, E. H. (2015). The contextual nature of scientists’ views of theories, experimentation, and their coordination. Science & Education, 24(9-10), 1079-1102.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9787-1
Sere, M., Gonzalez, M.F., Gallegos, J. A., Gonzalez-Garcia, F., De Manuel, E., Perales, F. J., & Leach, J. (2001). Images of science linked to labwork: a survey of secondary school and university students. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 499-523.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013141706723
Singer, A., Montgomery, G., & Schmoll, S. (2020). How to foster the formation of STEM identity: Studying diversity in an authentic learning environment? International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1-12.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00254-z
Soysal, Y. (2025). Estimating epistemic practices loads in elementary and middle school science curricula. Science & Education, 34(2), 345–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00599-9
Svedholm, A. M., & Lindeman, M. (2013). Healing, mental energy in the physics classroom: Energy conceptions and trust in complementary and alternative medicine in grade 10-12 students. Science & Education, 22(3), 677-694.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9529-6f
Tan, M., & Koh, T. S. (2023). Learning to become ignorant: Improving the quality of epistemic knowledge in science education. Science Education, 107(1),9-27.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21753
Tothova, M., Rusek, M. (2025). Eye Tracking in Science Education Research: Comprehensive Literature Review. Science & Education https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-025-00644-1
Tsai, C. C., & Liu, S. Y. (2005). Developing a multi‐dimensional instrument for assessing students’ epistemological views toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1621-1638.https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500206432
Verdin, D., Godwin, A., & Ross, M. (2018). STEM roles: How students’ ontological perspectives facilitate STEM identities. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 8(2), 31-48.https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1167
Wei, L., Firetto, C. M., Duke, R. F., Greene, J. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2021). High school students’ epistemic cognition and argumentation practices during small-group quality talk discussions in science. Education Sciences, 11(10), 616.https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100616
Yalcin, V., & Ozturk, O. (2022). Examination of the Effects of Design-Oriented STEM Activities on the 21st Century Skills of Pre-School Children Aged 3-4. Southeast Asia Early Childhood, 11(2), 1-20.https://doi.org/10.37134/saecj.vol11.2.1.2022
Yang, F. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Reasoning about science-related uncertain issues and epistemological perspectives among children. Instructional Science, 38(4), 325-354.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9084-3
Yang, F. Y., Liu, S. Y., Hsu, C. Y., Chiou, G. L., Wu, H. K., Wu, Y. T., ... & Tsai, C. C. (2018). High-school students’ epistemic knowledge of science and its relation to learner factors in science learning. Research in Science Education, 48(2), 325-344.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9570-6
Yucel, R. (2018). Scientists’ ontological and epistemological views about science from the perspective of critical realism. Science & Education, 27(5-6), 407-433.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9983-x
Zorlu, Y. (2017). An Investigation of the Relationship between Preservice Science Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs about the Nature of Science and Their Self-Efficacy Perceptions. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(7), 128-137.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1137567.pdf
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Biswajit Behera, R.R.Koireng, Sreekanth Yagnamurthy, Suchismita Biswal , Himani Naithani , Mukesh Kumar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Content Licensing, Copyright, and Permissions
1. License
International Journal of Research in STEM Education has CC-BY NC or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work for non-commercial purposes. The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons License
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by the stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).
3. User Rights
The International Journal of Research in STEM Education's objective is to disseminate articles published as free as possible. Under the Creative Commons license, this journal permits users to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work for non-commercial purposes only. Users will also need to attribute authors and this journal on distributing works in the journal.
4. Rights of Authors
Authors retain the following rights:
Copyright, and proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
The right to use the substance of the article in future own works, including lectures and books, The right to reproduce the article for own purposes, The right to self-archive the article, the right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal (International Journal of Research in STEM Education).
The author has a non-exclusive publishing contract with a publisher, and the work is published with a more restrictive license, the author retains all the rights to publish the work elsewhere, including commercially, because she/he is not subject to the conditions of her / his own license, regardless of the type of CC license chosen.
5. Co-Authorship
If the article was jointly prepared by other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
6. Termination
This agreement can be terminated by the author or International Journal of Research in STEM Education at two months' notice where the other party has materially breached this agreement and failed to remedy such breach within a month of being given the terminating party's notice requesting such breach to be remedied. No breach or violation of this agreement will cause this agreement or any license granted in it to terminate automatically or affect the definition of the International Journal of Research in STEM Education.
7. Royalties
This agreement entitles the author to no royalties or other fees. To such extent as legally permissible, the author waives his or her right to collect royalties relative to the article in respect of any use of the article by This agreement can be terminated by the author or International Journal of Research in STEM Education upon two months's notice where the other party has materially breached this agreement and failed to remedy such breach within a month of being given the terminating party's notice requesting such breach to be remedied. No breach or violation of this agreement will cause this agreement or any license granted in it to terminate automatically or affect the definition of the International Journal of Research in STEM Education or its sublicensee.
8. Miscellaneous
International Journal of Research in STEM Education‚ will publish the article (or have it published) in the journal if the article's editorial process is successfully completed and the International Journal of Research in STEM Education or its sublicensee has become obligated to have the article published. International Journal of Research in STEM Education may conform the article to a style of punctuation, spelling, capitalization, referencing, and usage that it deems appropriate. The author acknowledges that the article may be published so that it will be publicly accessible, and such access will be free of charge for the readers.
