Introduction and Background

The innovation of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education is a widely endorsed pathway to preparing the twenty-first century workforce by nurturing talent and developing innovation and creativity skills. There are calls to introduce STEM-based activities to learners from Early Childhood Education to reap more benefits from implementing instructional innovation (Çiftçi & Topçu, 2022). The benefits of STEM-based activities in primary school include the development of targeted soft skills that can be used in real-life situations. In Turkey, Çetin (2020) explored the views of primary school teachers and learners of project-based STEM teaching and concluded that the activities promoted critical thinking and problem-solving, with some learners discovering their talents. Furthermore, the project-based STEM activities helped the learners develop some manipulation skills.

STEM-based teaching innovation is a pedagogical philosophy that requires teachers to develop innovative instructional strategies (Changtong et al., 2020). STEM education as an innovation in the school curriculum is not a standalone subject; therefore, integrationist approaches are one of the recommended ways to implement it, although very few teachers have been prepared to teach it in authentic ways (Bartels et al., 2019; Marrero et al., 2014). Despite the inadequate preparation of teachers, they are tasked with implementing STEM-based teaching, and it is against this backdrop that the study explored how innovation and its implementation are perceived by final year preservice primary school teachers of natural sciences and technology.

Perceptions regarding STEM-based teaching were explored through a pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) lens that, according to Shulman (1987), distinguishes teachers as professionals in their fields. To implement STEM-based teaching, teachers require relevant PCK, but as Srikoom et al. (2017) assert, putting instructional innovation into practice is not easy. PCK is critical because it determines the quality of the teaching that is provided; PCK refers to the teacher’s ability to simplify and deliver the content in ways that help learners understand (Shulman, 1987). In addition to acquiring PCK, teachers develop perceptions about classroom practices. Srikoom et al. (2017) hold the view that perceptions influence practice.

Hence, it is essential to understand how preservice STEM teachers develop perceptions about teaching and learning. Perceptions play a critical role when teacher educators design intervention strategies to improve understanding and practices in preparing teachers for STEM-based teaching. Accordingly, this paper problematises that eliciting preservice teachers’ perceptions may give insights into how they will be influenced to implement STEM-based teaching in future natural sciences and technology classrooms. The insights are essential for teacher preparation programmes because these programmes need to provide suitable interventions when preparing preservice teachers to implement STEM education. Consequently, the research question for this study was ‘How do preservice teachers perceive STEM-based teaching in natural sciences and technology classrooms?’.

Literature Review

The literature review will be discussed in three sections: preservice teacher preparation and perceptions of STEM education, STEM-based teaching, and the development of a conceptual framework for the PCK of STEM education.

Preservice Teacher Preparation and Their Perceptions of STEM Education

Primary school preservice teachers who participated in this study were being prepared to teach the subject of natural sciences and technology to learners in grades 4–6 in South Africa. The subject consists of two STEM disciplines, namely science and technology. Regarding teaching STEM disciplines in primary school, Bartels et al. (2019) observed that some teachers are less confident and are inadequately prepared. STEM-based education must begin in primary schools to produce a generation interested and skilled in STEM and prepare young people who can actively participate in their future (Kurup et al., 2019). STEM-based education can produce globally competitive students because properly designed instructions improve problem-solving skills and promote higher-level critical thinking skills (Stohlmann et al., 2012). Bunshaft et al. (2015) assert that the traditional curriculum neglects the knowledge and skills necessary for the current job market and the future. McGunagle and Zizka (2020) point out that neglecting the necessary knowledge and skills has led to the gap in employability skills. This means that graduates lack twenty-first century skills. STEM-based education should develop twenty-first century skills, i.e., to communicate ideas, respect a culturally diverse team of peers, and learn how to learn to become lifelong learners in the workplace (Siekmann and Korbel, 2016; Sanchez Carracedo et al., 2018; McGunagle and Zizka, 2020). Furthermore, Bunshaft et al. (2015) and Swafford (2017) add creativity, innovation, critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration, and information/media/technology literacy as some of the vital twenty-first century skills essential to succeed in the future world. Given this background, preservice teachers should be prepared for STEM-based teaching, and the methods courses should be adapted accordingly. One way to ensure that preservice teachers receive the necessary preparation is to integrate STEM-based education materials into existing science methods courses purposefully.

In one intervention by Bartels et al. (2019) with primary school preservice teachers, the instructors in the methods courses for mathematics and science co-designed a STEM unit that was taught for 1 month. The study found that collaboration among the methods course instructors could be one way to achieve the instructional designs for preservice teacher preparation for STEM-based teaching. In another study, by Çinar et al. (2016) in Turkey, preservice science teachers were prepared to teach interdisciplinary STEM-based activities to grade 3 learners. The study results indicate that although preservice teachers could relate science and other subjects before the intervention, they were observed to forge more meaningful relationships between science and the other STEM disciplines of technology, mathematics, and engineering after the intervention. The study’s results seem to point to the importance of STEM-based teaching interventions for preservice teachers.

Teachers and researchers have been observed to have differing conceptions of how to implement STEM curriculum innovation (Ritz and Fan, 2015; Yildirim, 2016; Dare et al., 2019). It can be implied that preservice teachers begin to develop conceptions of STEM-based teaching in line with their perceptions and experiences. In a study by Pimthong and Williams (2018) in Thailand, the participating preservice teachers defined STEM education as the integration of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. However, it was found that they were unable to explain how the integration of disciplines could be achieved in their classrooms. Cooke and Walker (2015) studied the STEM-based teaching perceptions of 698 preservice teachers, focusing on the role and relevance of mathematics in the daily lives of learners. The results show that the preservice teachers believed that mathematics had personal relevance in the lives of learners due to its potential to help decision-making. The use of authentic environments, making teaching and learning relevant to everyday life, and problem-solving are some of the characteristics of STEM education (Bybee, 2010).

Therefore, one of the strategies used to teach STEM in the classroom is engaging learners in activities and projects in which the goal is to develop a targeted set of skills that can be applied in everyday life situations. King and English (2016) also believe that STEM-based activities that learners do in classrooms should reflect real-world problems. Natural sciences and technology at the primary school level in South Africa is an interdisciplinary subject strategically positioned for the use of STEM-based strategies to prepare learners for everyday life.

STEM-Based Teaching

In many countries, STEM-based teaching is part of most school curricula (Bartels et al., 2019). The rationale for including STEM teaching originates from the aspirations of different countries to prepare citizens with the skills to support the growth of economies (Prinsley & Johnston, 2015). The development of skills is recommended to start early in the learner’s life from Early Childhood Education (Çiftçi & Topçu, 2022). Setyowati et al. (2021) confirm that STEM-based teaching spans across the school levels from Early Childhood to secondary school education. Primary schools have a significant role to play in the pursuit of the central goal of successively developing STEM skills throughout the learner’s education.

Although STEM-based teaching is part of most school curricula, teachers and scholars do not understand it in the same way (Marrero et al., 2014). To characterise STEM teaching, Thibaut et al. (2018) conducted a systematic literature review and came up with nine tenets of STEM education, which can be viewed as instructional strategies for facilitating STEM-based teaching: integration approaches, problem-based learning, inquiry, design, teamwork, student-centred hands-on assessment, and a focus on the development of the twenty-first century skills. Dare et al. (2019) agree that despite the absence of a common conceptualisation of STEM-based teaching, there are commonalities in how it is practiced. According to Dare et al. (2019), these commonalities refer to efforts to connect the constituent disciplines of STEM to develop twenty-first century skills in learners by using authentic real-life contexts, problem-solving, and learner-centred pedagogies. Integration appears to be an essential component of STEM education because real-life problems are a combination of several disciplines. Therefore, STEM-based classroom activities can be multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary through content integration, curricula integration, and context integration (Thibaut et al., 2018).

In interdisciplinary approaches, integration may not be limited to the constituent disciplines of STEM, but can include other disciplines, such as social studies, arts, and languages (Sanders, 2009; Bybee, 2010). Including languages helps learners engage in discourses and communication that are particular to STEM and facilitate learning (Lee & Stephens, 2020), suggesting that STEM education should be developed considering the language of instruction. Including the word ‘arts’ in STEM produces STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics). Wang et al. (2018) posit that it is essential to develop high-level talent and innovative skills in citizens to support the needs of growing economies in the twenty-first century. Creativity and talent are believed to have the potential to influence other important skills, such as engineering design and problem-solving. The art component is believed to support creativity and nurture talent when combined with STEM education, resulting in STEAM imperatives (Harris and De Bruin, 2018; Wang et al., 2018). Therefore, there is growing recognition of the role of the arts in developing talent and creativity. However, English (2017) cautions that interdisciplinary approaches should not compromise the integrity of disciplines. There are many other ways interdisciplinary approaches can be used when implementing STEM education, and the few examples discussed were selected for illustration.

Furthermore, interdisciplinary approaches in which STEM education relates to more than one discipline involve integrating technology in other STEM disciplines, merging the learning goals and objectives of two or more disciplines, and integrating the curriculum of two or more disciplines (Dare et al., 2019). For merging the curriculum of two or more disciplines, Dare et al. (2019) describe a continuum of integration, ranging from teaching the STEM disciplines separately, to a situation where all four disciplines are fused into one discipline, with various options of discipline combinations in between. Using multidisciplinary approaches allows learning STEM disciplines separately, with the expectation that the learners will make the necessary connections (Thibaut et al., 2018). The multidisciplinary approach seems to be consistent with how STEM education is taught in schools, as affirmed by Bartels et al. (2019), in that different subjects are taught in different classrooms.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge for STEM

Shulman is widely recognised for describing the kind of knowledge that teachers need for classroom practice. According to Shulman (1987:8), teacher knowledge includes ‘content knowledge, general pedagogical knowledge…, curriculum knowledge…, pedagogical content knowledge…, knowledge of learners and their characteristics, knowledge of educational goals and knowledge of educational ends’. Shulman (1987) indicates that teachers should possess PCK, which is unique and defines professional specialisations for teachers. For instance, in science teaching, Magnusson et al. (1999) proposed a PCK for science teaching anchored in science teacher orientations that influence other types of teacher knowledge, namely, science content knowledge, knowledge of how learners learn science, knowledge of instructional strategies to teach science, the knowledge of assessment in science, and curricular knowledge in science.

However, Kind (2009) says that PCK is an elusive concept, because it is viewed in different ways, either as a combination of content and pedagogy (integrative perspectives), or as another type of teacher knowledge that is separate from subject matter knowledge (transformative perspectives). In recent years, the refined consensus model of PCK was developed which shows that in addition to what was known about PCK as assessment knowledge, curricular knowledge, content knowledge, knowledge of the students, and content knowledge, there are three other dimensions: the collective PCK, personal PCK, and the enacted PCK (Rodriguez & Towns, 2019; Mientus et al., 2022). As Mientus et al. (2022) explain, collective PCK is the knowledge preservice and in-service teachers find in the broader community of practice while they develop the personal PCK over time. The enacted PCK is the implemented PCK as informed by the collective PCK and the personal PCK.

For this study, since we collected data through lesson plans and preservice teachers’ reflections, we felt that we could not determine the enacted PCK without conducting classroom observations. Therefore, the collected data would generate the collective PCK in the form of assessment knowledge, content knowledge, knowledge and knowledge of learners, and the personal PCK in the form of STEM teaching orientations. Therefore, the collective PCK and the personal PCK components of the refined consensus model of PCK will be used as a conceptual framework.

Research Methodology

Using an interpretive paradigm and a qualitative approach, a single explorative case study of a natural sciences and technology teaching methods course at a university in South Africa was purposely selected. The reason for selecting the teaching methods course was that preservice teachers were being trained to teach an interdisciplinary subject called Natural Science and Technology. It was of interest to us to explore the perceptions of preservice teachers about teaching STEM in the subject.

The qualitative approach enabled the researchers to explore the preservice teachers’ perceptions about STEM education through their lived experiences of the methods course and teaching practice in real classrooms (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The interpretive paradigm allowed researchers to subjectively understand the perceptions of the participants about how STEM education influenced by their lived learning experiences (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017). Using a single case study enabled the researchers to explore the preservice teachers’ perceptions, through an in-depth analysis of the data collected through lesson plans and reflections. Case studies are used to study complex issues and help to put the entity or phenomenon of interest in a bound system (Harrison et al., 2017).

Sampling and Ethical Considerations

Purposive sampling of five primary school preservice science and technology teachers from a group of 42 students in the 2020 cohort was carried out based on their ability to provide rich and in-depth narratives of their perceptions of STEM-based teaching. Since the data analysis was in-depth, a smaller sample was preferred, and the responses of the five preservice teachers met the data saturation requirements. The elimination of the responses of the other preservice teachers was based on three reasons: first if they did not complete all sections of the lesson plan in Table 1 and the reflection guide, second, after grouping similar responses, some were discarded, and third, if the activities in the lesson plans were not aligned with STEM teaching, the respondents were excluded.

Table 1 Lesson plan design and development guide
Full size table

The preservice teachers were two men and three women, which was only discovered after the five data sets had been selected. The preservice teachers were coded as PST1–PST5. The 42 preservice 4th-year teachers had given consent for the specially designed project on STEM-based teaching they completed to be used in this research study. The study was conducted under a more extensive project on how teacher training programmes prepare preservice teachers to use innovative instructional strategies in science, mathematics, and technology classrooms; the university issued an ethical clearance certificate.

Data Collection Procedures

The development of the lesson plan and a reflection containing open-ended questions were used as data collection tools. The lesson plan development was preceded by pre-lesson plan preparation reflection. The development of the lesson plan and the reflection were part of a larger project that the final year preservice teachers completed while they were on 12 weeks of teaching practice during September, October, and November 2020. The preservice teachers were placed in township schools in the Free State province of South Africa. This was during the COVID-19 pandemic; therefore, while preservice teachers could go into schools for teaching practice, the university was in a remote learning mode. Data were collected remotely, and therefore using lesson observations as a data collection tool was excluded. In the teaching practice project, the preservice teachers designed, developed, and taught STEM-based activities in mathematics classrooms and natural sciences and technology classrooms. For this study, natural sciences and technology lesson plans were used. The lesson plan was guided by the two dimensions of the refined consensus model of PCK: collective PCK and personal PCK. Table 1 shows the lesson plan design and development guide.

The preservice teachers further completed a reflection which was guided by the following questions.

  • Describe the method/approach/model/way you used to teach STEM through mathematics or natural sciences & technology.

  • What are the anticipated challenges/disadvantages to the teaching of STEM education in mathematics or natural sciences & technology classrooms?

  • What are the anticipated opportunities/advantages for teaching STEM education in the Mathematics or Natural Sciences & Technology classrooms?

  • Reflect on what you have learned as you completed this project for your future classroom in terms of how to teach STEM education through natural sciences and technology.

The two data collection tools generated textual data and narratives that provoked preservice teachers’ perceptions of STEM-based subjects of natural sciences and technology in primary schools.

Data Analysis

In line with the interpretive paradigm, the preservice teachers’ perceptions resulted from their subjective construction of reality with respect to STEM-based teaching. Data analysis sought to make sense of these subjective understandings to present the preservice teachers’ perceptions. The steps for thematic content analysis of qualitative data by Nowell et al. (2017) were used. The lesson plans and reflections of the five preservice teachers were read repeatedly until the researchers were familiar with the data. In the coding process, tags were manually assigned to the texts — either one word, or strings of words. The tags indicated the type of knowledge of the teacher. The coded data was further grouped into categories that were eventually used to build the themes. The themes were reviewed before they were named. The themes were used to present the perceptions and practices of preservice teachers of STEM-based teaching.

Trustworthiness of the Findings

Several steps were taken to ensure the trustworthiness of the study. Nowell et al. (2017) argue that trustworthiness criteria are pragmatic, and researchers should take deliberate steps to ensure that their studies are acceptable and valuable. First, credibility was addressed by ensuring that the development of the lesson plans was guided by prompts based on the PCK conceptual framework as applied to STEM education. The use of reflection as a data collection method was intended to enhance the data’s richness, ensuring that the process had adequate rigour. Peers reviewed the data collection tools and the thematic content analysis process, as part of the debriefing. The findings of this study are supported by the evidence presented to address the confirmability criteria. The excerpts of evidence from the textual data are the best examples of preservice teachers’ perceptions.

Findings of the Study

The preservice teachers’ perceptions of STEM education in primary school natural sciences classrooms are discussed under five themes, namely Orientation towards STEM-based teaching, Knowledge of the STEM-based teaching curriculum, Knowledge of how learners learn STEM, Knowledge of instructional strategies for STEM-based teaching, and Knowledge of assessment in STEM. The themes are in line with the PCK conceptual framework used. We noted from the data that the preservice teachers did not focus on the STEM skills to be developed by the learners, which according to Table 1 would be knowledge of STEM content. It explains why this did not appear as one of the themes.

Orientation Towards STEM-Based Teaching

In the perceptions of preservice teachers, orientations towards STEM education included the notion that the teaching of natural sciences and technology should be learner-centred. Preservice teacher 2 (PST2) explains how she planned to make lessons learner-centred:

My lesson will be learner-centred as I will be giving material to my learners so that they can see how real things are so that they can see their importance and how they can be linked to science (PST2).

The perception that teaching and learning should be learner-centred was also supported by preservice teacher 4 (PST4), who indicated that she would use active methods in her natural sciences and technology classrooms. She said:

In active methods, learners learn actively and construct and apply knowledge in a number of ways, such as answering questions using electronic devices, performing worksheet assignment, debating and solving problems with fellow learners (PST4).

Preservice teacher 5 (PST5) attempted to show how active and learner-centred methods could be applied in the classroom, highlighting that STEM education involves using open-ended questions and inquiry-based activities. She said:

What I have learnt, is that a STEM lesson presents open ended questions. … Lastly, what I have noticed is that STEM teaching supports the inquiry-based learning approach. Students are allowed to explore the materials, ask questions and to also work in groups (PST5).

The orientations of preservice teachers towards STEM education were that teaching natural sciences and technology should involve learner-centred approaches, active methods, open tasks, and inquiry-based activities.

Knowledge of the STEM-Based Teaching Curriculum

One of the aspects that emerged from the perceptions of preservice teachers of the STEM curriculum was that it integrates the disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Preservice teacher 1 (PST1) indicated that STEM education integrates disciplines through activities such as practical science investigations. He said:

What I have learned about STEM is the integration of science, technology, engineering, and maths. STEM can be taught in class by means of practicals [practical work] or investigations whereby learners can do science and technology and do mathematical calculations (PST1).

PST1 presented an example of an activity in which learners could integrate science and technology; it involves building a backbone model, as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Model building provided by preservice teacher 1 (PST1)

Full size image

In support, preservice teacher 4 (PST4) explained how the integration of disciplines could be realised. She indicated that integration happens when learners engage in collaborative activities when building models and experimenting. She said:

They will learn STEM in class as we build a model…experimenting. I will give them an instruction as their teacher to build a model and they will be integrating science, technology, engineering and mathematics as they are experimenting. They will be collaborating with others as they will be sharing knowledge, ideas and information (PST4).

Another perception that the preservice teachers had was that STEM-based teaching is about developing specific skills in learners to improve opportunities for access to further education and jobs later in life. PST1 mentioned that STEM education is about ‘nurturing their [learners’] creativity…collaboration and problem-solving skills’. Preservice teacher 3 (PST3) reflected that STEM education in school curricula improves further education and job opportunities and can bridge the gaps between disadvantaged and advantaged groups of society. He said:

I have learned that STEM is very important to learners as it gives them good quality education. It creates learners who are critical thinkers. STEM has an advantage that it provides good job potential, it promotes gender equality, and it prepares students for college and the workforce (PST3).

Real-world problems that are relevant to learners’ lives were also perceived as part of the STEM curriculum. Preservice teacher 5 (PST5) said the following about STEM-based activities:

They are based on real-world problems so that learners can learn more about things they usually see happening but not knowing the reason behind them (PST5).

The lesson plan of PST5 was on the topic of fuels, and required learners to investigate whether oxygen supports burning by using wax candles and different amounts of oxygen supply. Similarly, the other preservice teachers used topics from the natural sciences to demonstrate how they would teach STEM. PST1 used the topic of skeletons and vertebrates, PST2 used saturated solutions, PST3 used electrical circuits, and PST4, the uses of metals.

Knowledge of How Learners Learn STEM

The preservice teachers gave examples of perceptions developed from their learning experiences through teaching practice and methods courses. Preservice teacher 4 (PST4) indicated how learners could have learned better if group discussions and practical work-related strategies had been used. However, according to her, these strategies could not be used in the 2020 academic year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Learners were attending school only two or three times a week due to the rotational strategies in place. PST4 shared these experiences as follows:

Group discussion was not allowed due to the Corona virus. Learners were not supposed to engage in practical work due to Corona virus. There was a lack of resources. Learners were not attending school regularly. As a result, some concepts were not explained thoroughly. Learners with impairments [learning problems] were struggling to catch up with [the] workload (PST4).

PST4 seemed to understand that handling materials through practical work and group discussions and having sufficient time improved learning opportunities in natural sciences and technology classrooms. Preservice teacher 1 (PST1) supported the perception that STEM learning in natural sciences and technology classrooms is enhanced when learners can manipulate and handle materials. He said:

The benefits of teaching STEM is that learners see something and are able to touch it as you are teaching in class. When they are learning they acquire scientific, technological, engineering and mathematical knowledge and using that knowledge to identify issues [challenges] and acquire new knowledge (PST1).

Preservice teacher 5 (PST5) highlighted the importance of determining learners’ prior knowledge when teaching STEM using questioning techniques. PST5 said,

Before we start with our experiment, I am going to ask them questions to check their prior knowledge about the content. I am going to ask them what is needed for a fuel to keep on burning. And what will happen if the candles are covered with a bottle? By asking these questions, it will become easy for me to notice the learners’ prior knowledge that they already have about this content (PST5).

Preservice teachers’ perceptions of how students learn STEM included the belief that learners should have materials to manipulate and handle, in addition to sufficient classroom time, and that learners’ prior knowledge of the topics should be considered.

Knowledge of Instructional Strategies for STEM-Based Teaching

Preservice teacher 1 (PST1) provided details on how he would use several instructional strategies to achieve a particular STEM education objective in one lesson. The strategies include direct instruction, individual study, indirect instruction, collaboration, and experiments. He said:

Direct instruction: A teacher comes to class with resources like books, videos, pictures, and charts to show learners information about the lesson.

Individual study: This is where a teacher will give instructions to learners for them to do something and they will do individually. Consult the teacher once they are done writing.

Indirect instruction: Learning is more meaningful when learners seek and discover the knowledge e.g. group investigation.

Experimental: Given to learners to experience what they are being taught. They get to see, feel and do the experiment

Collaborative learning: Learners form groups to discuss, share, explore, investigate, experiment and interact with each other (PST1).

Preservice teacher 2 (PST2) emphasised the use of hands-on activities, in which learners manipulate and handle materials as an effective strategy to teach STEM. Figure 2 illustrates the materials she put together for the learners to prepare saturated solutions.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Hands-on activities provided by preservice teacher 2 (PST2)

Full size image

Using worksheets was another way preservice teachers indicated, was to facilitate hands-on activities such as building models and working in authentic environments; Preservice teacher 5 (PST5) suggested the use of a worksheet that would help learners build a model of an electrical circuit, as shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3
figure 3

An activity to build a model by preservice teacher 3 (PST3)

Full size image

PST5 gave an example of a worksheet that could help her learners to investigate whether burning can occur without oxygen — see Fig. 4.

Fig. 4
figure 4

An authentic environment by preservice teacher 5 (PST5)

Full size image

The instructional strategies to teach STEM education were activities driven by hands-on activities such as experiments, building models, and other practical work activities.

Knowledge of Assessment in STEM

The preservice teachers PST1, PST3, and PST5 indicated that they would use learning strategies in which the activities presented learners with opportunities to learn and to be assessed. These activities would include the activities in Figs. 1, 2, and 4. Therefore, as the learners carried out experiments and built models, they learned and completed tasks that could be assessed. For example, PST3’s lesson plan contained an experiment: ‘Aim: To determine the electric circuit which will work between the one with a closed switch and the other with an open switch.’ PST4 indicated some additional assessment strategies for learning when she said, ‘I will assess the learners informally by asking questions. [Learners] write classwork and homework’. PST4 included a summative assessment strategy in the form of a test she would give to learners after completing the metals topic. The test had a multiple-choice section with the instruction, ‘Choose the correct answer from the list given below. Circle the letter of the answer on your question paper’, a true or false section with the instruction, ‘Indicate with a Tick (√) whether the following statements are True or False’, and a section for classification, with the instruction, ‘Use the table below to CLASSIFY the following materials into Metals or NON-METALS. Tick (√) the relevant column’. The preservice teachers were of the view that the assessment should include formal and informal activities for formative and summative assessment. They also believed in the use of assessment for learning strategies.

Discussion

The study explored the perception of preservice primary teachers of STEM education in natural sciences and technology classrooms. Natural Sciences and Technology is a subject taught at the level of grades 4–6 in South Africa. The nature of the subject presents strategic opportunities to teach STEM, through strategies such as merging learning outcomes (Dare et al., 2019) and integration of content and contexts (Thibaut et al., 2018). The perceptions of preservice teachers were explored using the two components of the refined consensus model of PCK, collective PCK, and personal PCK. The described perceptions did not include those of the enacted PCK because the preservice teachers were not observed while teaching. The PCK model was adapted for STEM teaching so that each knowledge component is contextualised for STEM-based teaching in similar ways as Magnusson et al. (1999) did with the PCK for science teaching, and Srikoom et al. (2018) did with the PCK for STEM teaching. The elicited perceptions are still useful because they influence how preservice teachers would teach STEM-based activities in classrooms. Teacher educators need to understand perceptions to improve STEM teacher preparation strategies.

The first finding is about the STEM teaching orientations that the preservice teachers held. We related the teaching orientations with the personal PCK because these perceptions are a choice that preservice teachers may make on whether STEM teaching is learner-centred or teacher-centred. The perception is that STEM should be taught to facilitate active learning. The held perceptions are that learner-centred approaches should be employed, using open-ended tasks, and inquiry-based activities. The findings resonate with what the literature says about STEM-based teaching (Thibaut et al., 2018; Dare et al., 2019). However, the preservice teachers did not mention the skills that learners should acquire when engaging in active learning through activity-based strategies (experiments, model building) and inquiry activities such as investigations. STEM-based teaching is usually associated with the development of soft skills that include problem-solving, critical thinking, and creativity (Çetin, 2020). The finding may mean that the preservice teachers did not consider STEM education goals when planning the learning activities. The second finding is related to preservice teachers’ perceptions of knowledge of the STEM-based teaching curriculum. They used natural sciences topics as an entry point to implement STEM-based teaching. All the suggested lessons were based on natural sciences. One of the preservice teachers, through an activity for learners to build a model of a backbone under the topic of skeletons and vertebrates, created an opportunity to integrate science and technology. However, this integration was not highlighted in the lesson plan. Ryu et al. (2019) point out that preservice teachers have limited interdisciplinary knowledge. The preservice teachers defined STEM education as integrating the disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Pimthong and Williams (2018) confirm that preservice teachers can describe the tenets of STEM education better than they can implement instructional strategies in the classroom. In other instances, the preservice teachers had the perception that the integration would result from teaching a discipline (science) topic or concept in authentic environments.

The third finding is about the preservice teachers’ perceptions of learners’ knowledge. The lessons planned by the preservice teachers were activity-based. The finding suggests that the preservice teachers perceived that learning would happen during hands-on activities. The building of models and conducting experiments were a way to teach STEM, because science concepts were integrated with simulations in the real world context. The real-life context scenarios were electrical circuits, experiments on the role of oxygen in combustion using burning candles, building a backbone model, and practical work activities to prepare saturated solutions using household materials.

The use of authentic environments and real-life examples is consistent with STEM education tenets (Bybee, 2010; Thibaut et al., 2018; Dare et al., 2019). Similarly, Cooke and Walker (2015) observed that preservice teachers in a mathematics methods course considered that teaching the relevance of mathematics in real-life decision-making is part of STEM education. Through the reflections, the preservice teachers expressed that, as the learners engage in hands-on activities, they develop important skills, such as problem-solving, critical thinking, and collaboration; however, the objectives in the lesson plans did not include such outcomes. In the literature, STEM education is linked to authentic, real-life environments, developing the twenty-first century skills, and preparing for STEM careers (Bybee 2013; Nadelson & Seifert 2017; Srikoom et al., 2018).

The fourth finding is about the perceptions of preservice teachers of instructional strategies for STEM teaching. The activity-driven, discovery, and process STEM education orientations seemed to guide the preservice teachers’ selection of instructional strategies based on hands-on activities. The preservice teachers expressed perceptions that STEM education is achieved when learners handle and manipulate materials. Therefore, they suggested that learners do practical work activities that included experiments and model building.

The fifth finding is about the preservice teachers’ perceptions on assessment for STEM. The hands-on activities were perceived as a way to assess learners through assessment for learning activities. Thibaut et al. (2018) indicate that assessment is one tenet that distinguishes STEM education. Forms of assessment should align with the purposes of innovation [ibid]. However, suggesting the use of pen and paper tests, classwork, and homework indicates that the preservice teachers held other, teacher-centred, STEM teaching orientations concerned with making sure that the learners mastered subject matter content. Friedrichsen et al. (2011) classify the academic rigour and didactic orientations by Magnusson et al. (1999), as teacher-centred.

Conclusion

The study explored the perceptions of preservice teachers of STEM-based teaching in natural sciences and technology in primary school. The perceptions of the personal PCK based on the refined consensus model of PCK showed activity-based orientations of STEM teaching. They used natural sciences topics as an entry point to teach STEM, integrated with real-life scenarios, authentic environments, and hands-on activities. There were opportunities to integrate science and technology into model building activities. Natural sciences as an entry point suggests that the preservice teachers were more confident in teaching natural sciences than technology. Hands-on activities were preferred and used for learning assessment in addition to pen-and-paper assessments, showing that preservice teachers also had teacher-centred orientations that could influence classroom practice.

Study Limitations and Recommendations

This study has limitations in that the preservice teachers’ perceptions were elicited through reflections and lesson planning as collected data; findings could have been enriched by observing actual classroom practice. The other limitation relates to the sample size, which could be increased by using multiple case study approaches to explore more contexts. The use of the methods course on the teaching of natural sciences and technology (which are just two disciplines of STEM) could also limit the perceptions of the preservice teachers on STEM-based teaching. The findings of the study cannot be generalised according to the study research design. Despite the limitations mentioned, the study’s findings could be helpful when planning interventions to enhance preservice teacher preparation for STEM education in science and technology methods courses. The study recommends further research on how preservice teachers can improve interdisciplinary STEM education teaching in natural sciences and technology.