Assessing Students’ Engagement in Scientific Practices: Implications for Science Education Reform
Keywords:
Scientific Practices, Bibliometric Mapping, Assessment in Science Education., Science Education ReformAbstract
Over the past decade, scientific practices have emerged as a central paradigm in science education, reflecting a broader shift from content transmission toward epistemic engagement and authentic inquiry. This study employs bibliometric mapping to systematically analyze 594 peer-reviewed documents published between 2011 and 2025, aiming to explore how scientific practices have been defined, conceptualized, and assessed in the field. Results reveal a significant conceptual evolution: from the traditional notion of a linear scientific method to a multidimensional framework encompassing epistemic cognition, collaborative inquiry, and socio-scientific reasoning. Five key thematic clusters epistemic cognition, pedagogical models, nature of science, technology integration, and equity dominate the discourse. These clusters underscore the growing focus on student-centered, project-based, and digitally mediated learning environments. Despite growing interest and innovation in pedagogical strategies, assessment remains a persistent challenge. Traditional assessments fail to capture authentic engagement, prompting a call for performance-based and technologically supported tools that align with the complexity of scientific practices. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the increasing emphasis on equity and inclusivity, with citizen science initiatives serving as powerful models for democratizing science education. The findings offer strategic insights into the alignment of curriculum, teacher training, and assessment frameworks, ultimately contributing to global science education reform. By centering scientific practices, education systems can promote deeper learning, critical thinking, and civic engagement among learners worldwide.
References
1) Abd Khalik, S., & Hadi Bunyamin, M. (2024). Epistemic understanding framework for scientific practices. In A. Alamsyah, B. Costu, B. Arymbekov, D. Abdullah, F. C. Wibowo, M. A. H. Bunyamin, S. Prajoko, & L. A. Sanjaya (Eds.), AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 3116, Issue 1). American Institute of Physics. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0210366
2) Admawati, H., & Jumadi, J. (2021). The impact of STEM PjBL on students’ engineering practice, scientific practice, and scientific attitude. In R. Oktavia, E. Yusibani, Mailizar, Suhartono, Rahmi, Elizar, Irwandi, E. Etkina, G. Planinsic, N. Mansour, N. Idris, C. O’Donnell, K. Kagawa, R. Sheffield, V. M. Mistades, & O. Kaosaiyaporn (Eds.), Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1882, Issue 1). IOP Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012151
3) Aridor-Berger, K., Dvir, M., Tsybulsky, D., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2023). Living the DReaM: The interrelations between statistical, scientific and nature of science uncertainty articulations through citizen science. Instructional Science, 51(5), 729–762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09626-8
4) Cabrini, F., Cavallo, C., & Scalenghe, R. (2021). An Early Beginning of Citizen Science: Adolescents Experiencing Urban Energy Usages and Air Pollution. Adolescents, 1(3), 225–251. https://doi.org/10.3390/adolescents1030018
5) Carmel, J. H., Herrington, D. G., Posey, L. A., Ward, J. S., Pollock, A. M., & Cooper, M. M. (2019). Helping Students to “do Science”: Characterizing Scientific Practices in General Chemistry Laboratory Curricula. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(3), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00912
6) Cooper, A. C., Southard, K. M., Osness, J. B., & Bolger, M. S. (2022). The Instructor’s Role in a Model-Based Inquiry Laboratory: Characterizing Instructor Supports and Intentions in Teaching Authentic Scientific Practices. CBE Life Sciences Education, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-07-0177
7) Demir, K. (2016). “Uncooking” a traditional DNA-extraction laboratory from the scientific-practices perspective. American Biology Teacher, 78(7), 582–590. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2016.78.7.582
8) Fisher, K. M., & Greer, K. A. (2024). Teaching Science to Students With Disabilities in Early Childhood Classrooms (pp. 207–232).Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003523932-10
9) Flemming, A., Phillips, M., Shea, E. K., Bolton, A., Lincoln, C., Green, K., Mast, A., & Cubeta, M. A. (2020). Using Digital Natural History Collections in K-12 STEM Education. Journal of Museum Education, 45(4), 450–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2020.1833296
10) Gao, R., Weinstein-Lloyd, J., Emenike, B. U., Quarless, D., Kim, Y., & Emenike, M. E. (2021). Using Guiding Questions to Promote Scientific Practices in Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratories. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(12), 3731–3738. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00003
11) García-Carmona, A. (2020). From Inquiry-Based Science Education to the Approach Based on Scientific Practices: A Critical Analysis and Suggestions for Science Teaching. Science and Education, 29(2), 443–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00108-8
12) Hodson, D., & Wong, S. L. (2017). Going Beyond the Consensus View: Broadening and Enriching the Scope of NOS-Oriented Curricula. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271919
13) Jardim, W. T., Guerra, A., & Schiffer, H. (2021). History of Science in Physics Teaching: Possibilities for Contextualized Teaching? Science and Education, 30(3), 609–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00191-x
14) Kali, Y., Sagy, O., Matuk, C., & Magnussen, R. (2023). School participation in citizen science (SPICES): substantiating a field of research and practice. Instructional Science, 51(5), 687–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09638-4
15) Kimura, Y. (2021). Amateur Scientists: Unique Characteristics and Possible Factors Supporting Japanese Amateur Scientists’ Continuous Scientific Practices (pp. 85–108). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2746-0_5
16) Larasatie, P., Jones, E., Hansen, E., & Lewark, S. (2024). A wake-up call? A review of inequality based on the forest-related higher education literature. Environmental Science and Policy, 162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103942
17) Leowardy, M., Lee, Y.-J., & Ong, Y. S. (2025). A decade of scientific and engineering practices: a scoping review. Studies in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2025.2481356
18) Mayo-Santana, R., Rabionet, S. E., Peña-Carro, L., & Serrano, A. E. (2016). Marvels and shadows: Science and education at the University of Puerto Rico school of tropical medicine under the auspices of Columbia University: An introduction. Puerto Rico Health Sciences Journal, 35(2), 49–52.https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84969940418&partnerID=40&md5=185e5a28739e236f9be7e3d1b2de9b40
19) Nurfadilah, N., Riskawati, R., Fani, F., Ahmad, A., & Nur Fadilah, N. F. (2023). The Analysis of Scientific Practices Skills of Students in Basic Physics Practicum: Authentic Assessment. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 7(2), 299. https://doi.org/10.20527/jipf.v7i2.8062
20) Paek, S., & Fulton, L. (2021). Digital Science Notebooks: A Tool for Supporting Scientific Literacy at the Elementary Level. TechTrends, 65(3), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00579-0
21) Romero-Maltrana, D., Benitez, F., Vera, F., & Rivera, R. (2019). The ‘Nature of Science’ and the Perils of Epistemic Relativism. Research in Science Education, 49(6), 1735–1757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9673-8
22) Saribas, D. (2023). An online laboratory applications course for the development of scientific practices and scientific method. International Journal of Science Education, 45(16), 1340–1367. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2205550
23) Sira, N., Decker, M., Lemke, C., Winkens, A., Leicht-Scholten, C., & Groß, D. (2025). Teaching Scientific Integrity in Academia: What and How Students Want to Learn? Journal of Academic Ethics, 23(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-024-09527-6
24) Sparks, R. A., Jimenez, P. C., Kirby, C. K., & Dauer, J. M. (2022). Using Critical Integrative Argumentation to Assess Socioscientific Argumentation across Decision-Making Contexts. Education Sciences, 12(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100644
25) Tang, K.-S. (2020a). Discourse strategies for science teaching and learning research and practice. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429352171
26) Tang, K.-S. (2020b). The Use of Epistemic Tools to Facilitate Epistemic Cognition & Metacognition in Developing Scientific Explanation. Cognition and Instruction, 38(4), 474–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1745803
27) Thomann, J. (2023). Scientific Textbooks and Their Application in Practice: Interdependencies of Literary and Documentary Evidence of Scientific Activities. In Islamic History and Civilization (Vol. 201, pp. 162–182). Brill Academic Publishers.https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004527874_008
28) Wierzchowski, A., & Wink, D. (2024). Students’ Experiences with the Science and Engineering Practices in a Workshop-Based Undergraduate Research Experience. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(6), 2266–2278. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00035.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Nurfadilah ., A. Muafiah Nur, S.Pd., M.Pd, Dewi Hikmah Marisda, S.Pd., M.Pd (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
