Fostering Elementary Students’ Problem-Solving Skills and Scientific Mindset through Engineering Design: Evidence from a Rural STEM Camp in Thailand
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jsml.vol14.2.5.2026Keywords:
STEM education, problem-solving skills, scientific mindset, engineering design process (EDP) , rural education, science campsAbstract
Despite growing emphasis on STEM education globally, rural regions in developing countries continue to face persistent equity gaps in science learning opportunities. Science camps offer promising yet underexplored approaches to enhance STEM competencies in resource-constrained settings. This pilot study examined effects of a short-term, intensive STEM-based science camp on enhancing problem-solving skills and scientific mindset among elementary students in resource-constrained context. Using a one-group pretest - post-test design, 30 sixth-grade students from a border school in Nakhon Phanom Province, Thailand, participated in a two-day intervention structured around the Engineering Design Process (EDP). The science camp featured three integrated hands-on stations: Wind-Powered Vehicle Design, Solar System Modelling, and Boat Buoyancy Challenge. Problem-solving skills were measured pre- and post-intervention using a 12-item validated test. Scientific mindset was assessed post-intervention using a 14-item scale. Analyses included dependent t-test with effect sizes and thematic analysis of observations. Result from the Problem-solving Ability Test indicated statistically significant improvement from pretest (M=5.50, SD=1.68) to post-test (M=8.07, SD=2.15), t(29)=7.048, p<.01, d=1.33, representing a large effect. Improvements occurred across all dimensions: problem identification, analysis, solution generation, and evaluation. Students demonstrated high scientific mindset levels (M=51.83/70, 74%), with consistent gains observed across problem identification, analysis, solution generation, and evaluation dimensions. Qualitative thematic analysis further revealed that the EDP framework provided a critical scaffold for “productive struggle,” enabling students to engage in collaborative iteration and view failure as a learning opportunity. These findings suggest that well-designed, STEM camps can serve as effective, scalable models for mitigating educational peripheralization in underserved rural communities.
Downloads
References
Archer L, Dawson E, DeWitt J, Seakins A, Wong B. (2013). "Science capital": A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending Bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922-948. doi:10.1002/tea.21227
Avery LM, Reeve EM. (2023). Examination of the sustainability of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(1), 1-23. doi:10.1080/1046560X.2022.2102781
Berland LK, Schwarz CV, Krist C, Kenyon L, Lo AS, Reiser BJ. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082-1112. doi:10.1002/tea.21257
Bevan B, Calabrese Barton A, Garibay C, Penuel WR. (2020). Putting learning at the center: Building a research agenda on informal science learning. Inverness Research.
Braun V, Clarke V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bybee RW. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press.
Carlone HB, Johnson A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187-1218. doi:10.1002/tea.20237
Carlone HB, Huffling LD, Tomasek T, Hegedus TA, Matthews CE, Allen MH, Ash MC. (2014). Unthinkable selves: Identity boundary work in a summer field ecology enrichment program for diverse youth. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1524-1546. doi:10.1080/09500693.2015.1033776
Chinn CA, Buckland LA, Samarapungavan A. (2011). Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 141-167. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.587722
Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Creswell JW, Creswell JD. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 6th Ed., Sage Publications, Inc.
Creswell JW, Guetterman TC. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 6th Ed. Pearson.
Cronbach LJ, Shavelson RJ. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(3), 391-418. doi:10.1177/0013164404266386
Cunningham CM, Kelly GJ. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486-505. doi:10.1002/sce.21271
Dohn NB, Fago A, Overgaard J, Madsen PT, Malte H. (2016). Students' motivation toward laboratory work in physiology teaching. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(3), 313-318. doi:10.1152/advan.00029.2016
Dorie BL, Cardella ME. (2021). Modeling and iteration matter: A case study of one elementary teacher's implementation of engineering design. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 11(1), 77-94. doi:10.7771/2157-9288.1270
Engel S. (2011). Children's need to know: Curiosity in schools. Harvard Educational Review, 81(4), 625-645. doi:10.17763/haer.81.4.h054131316473115
English LD. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 5-24. doi:10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x
English LD, King DT. (2015). STEM learning through engineering design: Fourth-grade students' investigations in aerospace. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 14. doi:10.1186/s40594-015-0027-7
Faikhamta C, Clarke A. (2023). Thai science teachers' beliefs about teaching the nature of science. Research in Science Education, 53(1), 189-210. doi:10.1007/s11165-021-10040-2
Ford MJ, Wargo BM. (2012). Dialogic framing of scientific content: Conceptual and epistemic aspects. Science Education, 96(3), 369-391. doi:10.1002/sce.20482
Furtak EM, Seidel T, Iverson H, Briggs DC. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300-329. doi:10.3102/0034654312457206
Hmelo-Silver CE, Barrows HS. (2015). Problem-based learning: Goals for learning and strategies for facilitating. In A. Walker, H. Leary, CE. Hmelo-Silver, PA. Ertmer (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning. Purdue University Press.
Honey M, Pearson G, Schweingruber H. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/18612
Jirout J, Klahr D. (2012). Children's scientific curiosity: In search of an operational definition of an elusive concept. Developmental Review, 32(2), 125-160. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2012.04.002
Jonassen DH. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203847527
Katehi L, Pearson G, Feder M. (Eds.). (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. National Academies Press.
Kelley TR, Knowles JG. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 11. doi:10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
Lave J, Wenger E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511815355
Lazonder AW, Harmsen R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681-718. doi:10.3102/0034654315627366
Lederman NG, Antink A, Bartos S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285-302. doi:org/10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3
Leon AC, Davis LL, Kraemer HC. (2011). The role and interpretation of pilot studies in clinical research. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 45(5), 626-629. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.10.008
Lincoln YS, Guba EG. (2006). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Maltese AV, Tai RH. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education, 95(5), 877-907. doi:10.1002/sce.20441
Marginson S, Tytler R, Freeman B, Roberts K. (2022). STEM: Country comparisons. Australian Council of Learned Academies.
Maxwell JA. (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11. doi:10.3102/0013189X033002003
Mayer RE, Wittrock MC. (2006). Problem solving. In P.A. Alexander & P.H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. 2nd Ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Means B, Wang H, Wei X, Lynch S, Peters V, Young V, Allen C. (2020). Expanding STEM opportunities through inclusive STEM-focused high schools. Science Education, 104(5), 906-925. doi:10.1002/sce.21580
Moore TJ, Stohlmann MS, Wang HH, Tank KM, Glancy AW, Roehrig GH. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices. Purdue University Press.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2021). Call to action for science education: Building opportunity for the future. National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/26152
National Academy of Engineering, National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/12190
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/13165
National Research Council. (2015). Identifying and supporting productive STEM programs in out-of-school settings. National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/21740
National Statistical Office of Thailand. (2023). The 2023 household socio-economic survey. Bangkok: National Statistical Office.
Nugent G, Barker B, Grandgenett N, Adamchuk VI. (2020). Impact of robotics and geospatial technology interventions on youth STEM learning and attitudes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(4), 391-408. doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782557
OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/5f07c754-en
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results: Factsheets. OECD Publishing.
Office of the Basic Education Commission. (2021). Basic education core curriculum B.E. 2551 (A.D. 2008). Ministry of Education, Thailand.
Oluwadayo AT. (2024). The predictive effects of teaching methods on students' achievement in Mathematics. Sapientia Foundation Journal of Education, Sciences and Gender Studies, 6(1), 1-7.
Oluwadayo AT, Aderibigbe OO, Adebola IS, Ayoola AA. (2024). Effects of heuristic problem-solving strategies on students' achievement and retention in Mathematics in Ogun State, Nigeria. Journal of Science and Mathematics Letters, 12(1), 1-7. doi:10.37134/jsml.vol12.1.1.2024
Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079. doi:10.1080/0950069032000032199
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning. Battelle for Kids.
Penuel WR, Fishman BJ, Cheng BH, Sabelli N. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331-337. doi:10.3102/0013189X11421826
Potvin P, Hasni A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: A systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85-129. doi:10.1080/03057267.2014.881626
Roehrig GH, Dare EA, Ring-Whalen E, Wieselmann JR. (2021). Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 2. doi:10.1186/s40594-020-00259-8
Rohrer D, Taylor K. (2007). The shuffling of Mathematics problems improves learning. Instructional Science, 35(6), 481-498. doi:10.1007/s11251-007-9015-8
Ryan RM, Deci EL. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Saengchai S, Jermsittiparsert K. (2020). Factors affecting educational peripheralization in Thailand. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 11(8), 451-467.
Sawyer RK. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press.
Schoenfeld AH. (2016). Learning to think Mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in Mathematics (Reprint). Journal of Education, 196(2), 1-38. doi:10.1177/002205741619600202
Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton, Mifflin and Company.
Shin N, Jonassen DH, McGee S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 6-33. doi:10.1002/tea.10058
Sinatra GM, Kienhues D, Hofer BK. (2014). Addressing challenges to public understanding of science: Epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 123-138. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.916216
Sternberg RJ, Lubart TI. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press.
Tawfik AA, Graesser A, Gatewood J, Gishbaugher J. (2020). Role of questions in inquiry-based instruction: Towards a design taxonomy for question-asking and implications for design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 653-678. doi:10.1007/s11423-020-09738-9
Toma RB, Greca IM. (2022). Equity and STEM education: Contributions from the specialized literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(6), em2123. doi:10.29333/ejmste/12087
Turner RC, Carlson L. (2003). Indexes of item-objective congruence for multidimensional items. International Journal of Testing, 3(2), 163-171. doi:10.1207/S15327574IJT0302_5
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education - A tool on whose terms? UNESCO Publishing.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. UN General Assembly.
Vygotsky LS. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Walker A, Leary H. (2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 12-43. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1061
Webb NM. (2009). The teacher's role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 1-28. doi:10.1348/000709908X380772
Weisberg SM, Newcombe NS. (2017). Embodied cognition and STEM learning: Overview of a topical collection in CR:PI. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 38. doi.10.1186/s41235-017-0071-6
Wertsch JV. (1991). Vices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard University Press.
Williams JP. (2019). The principles of teaching and learning in STEM education. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2081, 020001. doi.org/10.1063/1.5093996
Young JR, Ortiz N, Young JL. (2017). STEMulating interest: A meta-analysis of the effects of out-of-school time on student STEM interest. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(1), 62-74. doi:10.18404/ijemst.61149
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Thidaporn Souysaart, Pairoh Sohsomboon, Surapong Rattana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
